non-biased pc vs console

[dalekphalm]

9 hours ago, Nena360 said:

But the is console a 8-core Jaguar + HD 7770? All we need is a cheap AMD 8-core with a R7 360 and we beat it right?

 

PC Build Guide – Console Killer: (Less than 450$)

*CPU: AMD FX-8350

*GPU: XFX Radeon R7 360 2GB DD

*Mobo: MSI 970 Gaming ATX AM3+ Motherboard

*RAM: Mushkin Silverline 8GB (2x4GB) DDR3-1333MHz

*PSU: EVGA 500W Power Supply Unit (bronze)

*Storage: Hitachi Ultrastar 500GB 3.5" 7200RPM HDD

*http://pcpartpicker.com/list/dqGDcc

 

 

You're missing the OS. Add another $100 to that to make a fair comparison against consoles.

[Nena Trinity]

3 hours ago, Prysin said:

I know i shouldnt judge.

 

BUT A TRASHCAN IS NOT A CASE!!!

It was not a trashcan it was in a trashcan... o3o

[TriviaBeast]

Console is perfectly fine.  But PC can do about everything a console can for a similar price.  Console can't do 144hz, 4K yet, cheat in Overwatch you jerk I reported you and I hope you get banned in the next wave, and with the addition of powerful gaming laptops, be fully portable gaming and work machines.

 

That being said, i do own a PS4.  It's in the trunk of my car because it got destroyed by lightning.  Durability: PC.

[TheRandomness]

11 hours ago, thatcoolcat1 said:

prefer intel

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i3-6100 3.7GHz Dual-Core Processor  ($110.99 @ SuperBiiz) 
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-H110M-A Micro ATX LGA1151 Motherboard  ($45.99 @ Newegg) 
Memory: G.Skill Aegis 8GB (1 x 8GB) DDR4-2133 Memory  ($30.98 @ Newegg) 
Storage: Seagate Barracuda 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive  ($46.88 @ OutletPC) 
Video Card: MSI Radeon R9 380 4GB Video Card  ($174.99 @ Newegg) 
Case: Fractal Design Core 1100 MicroATX Mini Tower Case  ($28.99 @ Newegg) 
Power Supply: EVGA BQ 650W 80+ Bronze Certified Semi-Modular ATX Power Supply  ($50.98 @ Newegg) 
Total: $489.80
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2016-08-16 22:24 EDT-0400

 

Console overkiller. @Jonnyswboy Gaming PCs aren't as expensive as you think. 

[TheRandomness]

7 minutes ago, Jonnyswboy said:

That PC you linked is $489, not $300. Also it doesn't include windows.

K fine. 

 

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i3-6100 3.7GHz Dual-Core Processor  ($110.99 @ SuperBiiz) 
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-H110M-A Micro ATX LGA1151 Motherboard  ($45.99 @ Newegg) 
Memory: G.Skill Aegis 8GB (1 x 8GB) DDR4-2133 Memory  ($30.98 @ Newegg) 
Storage: Seagate Barracuda 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive  ($46.88 @ OutletPC) 
Video Card: Asus GeForce GTX 950 75W 2GB Video Card  ($113.98 @ Newegg) 
Case: Rosewill SRM-01 MicroATX Mini Tower Case  ($14.99 @ Newegg) 
Power Supply: EVGA BQ 650W 80+ Bronze Certified Semi-Modular ATX Power Supply  ($50.98 @ Newegg) 
Total: $414.79
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2016-08-16 22:42 EDT-0400

 

You're forgetting the cost of subscription on Xbox live and you can get an OS from /r/microsoftsoftwareswap for like $40. 

[dalekphalm]

1 hour ago, TheRandomness said:

K fine. 

 

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

CPU: Intel Core i3-6100 3.7GHz Dual-Core Processor  ($110.99 @ SuperBiiz) 
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-H110M-A Micro ATX LGA1151 Motherboard  ($45.99 @ Newegg) 
Memory: G.Skill Aegis 8GB (1 x 8GB) DDR4-2133 Memory  ($30.98 @ Newegg) 
Storage: Seagate Barracuda 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive  ($46.88 @ OutletPC) 
Video Card: Asus GeForce GTX 950 75W 2GB Video Card  ($113.98 @ Newegg) 
Case: Rosewill SRM-01 MicroATX Mini Tower Case  ($14.99 @ Newegg) 
Power Supply: EVGA BQ 650W 80+ Bronze Certified Semi-Modular ATX Power Supply  ($50.98 @ Newegg) 
Total: $414.79
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2016-08-16 22:42 EDT-0400

 

You're forgetting the cost of subscription on Xbox live and you can get an OS from /r/microsoftsoftwareswap for like $40. 

You can get an OS there for $40 (often much less actually), but you shouldn't, unless you're from a nation with a much lower economy then the collective "west" (Europe, North America, etc).

 

Those keys generally come from non-legit sources, like reselling Dreamspark or MSDN keys. Both a violation of the user agreement of both programs. In fact, abuse of such programs lead to the DIRECT cause of the shutdown of the TechNet program, which was an amazing value for IT Professionals, especially those just starting out who were far enough out of School as to not qualify for DreamSpark.

 

But because people abused the program and sold those TechNet keys on Reddit and ebay and places like G2A/Kinguin, Microsoft shut the program down.

 

That's why I'll never support places like Reddit software swap and G2A, and for the sake of a proper comparison against a Console, you should allocate $100 to the budget for buying a legit copy of Windows.

[TheRandomness]

8 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

You can get an OS there for $40 (often much less actually), but you shouldn't, unless you're from a nation with a much lower economy then the collective "west" (Europe, North America, etc).

 

Those keys generally come from non-legit sources, like reselling Dreamspark or MSDN keys. Both a violation of the user agreement of both programs. In fact, abuse of such programs lead to the DIRECT cause of the shutdown of the TechNet program, which was an amazing value for IT Professionals, especially those just starting out who were far enough out of School as to not qualify for DreamSpark.

 

But because people abused the program and sold those TechNet keys on Reddit and ebay and places like G2A/Kinguin, Microsoft shut the program down.

 

That's why I'll never support places like Reddit software swap and G2A, and for the sake of a proper comparison against a Console, you should allocate $100 to the budget for buying a legit copy of Windows.

Or, you know, get an ISO from the Windows website and activate it later with money.

[dalekphalm]

Just now, TheRandomness said:

Or, you know, get an ISO from the Windows website and activate it later with money.

That's a cost they will have to spend sooner or later. Whether they choose to buy it upfront or later, they will still need to account for it in the budget of any "console killer" comparisons.

[TheRandomness]

2 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

That's a cost they will have to spend sooner or later. Whether they choose to buy it upfront or later, they will still need to account for it in the budget of any "console killer" comparisons.

Buying it later allows you to actually gain the money necessary (if you have a job) But yeah, it's still another $80~

[vorticalbox]

7 hours ago, samcool55 said:

You know, as a person that hasn't touched a new-ish console (ps2 is the latest one i ever properly used) i was very very disappointing by the poor support since xbox 360/ps3.

With the PS2 almost every game had multiplayer, great! But damn went it downhill hard since then. Xbox 360 local multiplayer became rare and a lot of games only supported online multiplayer or another form that required 2 physical consoles.

 

So for pc games yes it usually requires your friend to bring over his rig, but with most console games today your friend needs to bring his console sooo yea... It's almost the same thing.

 

I still use my PS2 btw, for the simple reason that nothing out there matches the local multiplayer support for it.

If a friend comes over, that's where we usually end up on, playing together some old-school badass games on the PS2.

And it's not my pc isn't capable of local multiplayer, i have 3 xbox 360 controllers (and i don't have an xbox 360, go figure :p) all connected to my pc and the bunch of batteries required to keep everything properly going. The system itself is also capable of playing most games in a nice way.

yeah I have noticed that games are slowly moving towards single/online only and that is really poor.

 

guess that is why Nintendo are king of social gaming.

[samcool55]

4 hours ago, vorticalbox said:

yeah I have noticed that games are slowly moving towards single/online only and that is really poor.

 

guess that is why Nintendo are king of social gaming.

No comment on the nintendo side

I have a DS, the very first one and local multiplayer is great (sharing your game or whatever it is is awesome)

Also a WII, but i have like 4 games for it and that's it. I think it might start to become useful later but for now i'll leave it alone. I have plans for it but i think it will take at least 3 years before i can execute them.

[PRTI]

If your building from scratch you NEED a monitor,keyboard,mouse,headphones/headset,table

[PRTI]

8 minutes ago, samcool55 said:

No comment on the nintendo side

I have a DS, the very first one and local multiplayer is great (sharing your game or whatever it is is awesome)

Also a WII, but i have like 4 games for it and that's it. I think it might start to become useful later but for now i'll leave it alone. I have plans for it but i think it will take at least 3 years before i can execute them.

My friend has like 4 DS,WII,gameboy camera (which he does not play because well...who are you running from?),and every time i come over we play like Mario Kart,Mario Hoops etc on the DS...on WII we play a tennis and racing simulator and he also has a Nintendo Entertainment System with 2 controllers (one has a custom picture of mario) and we play Mario all day and i never beat him since he knows all the shortcuts to go over the worlds faster

[vorticalbox]

1 hour ago, keNNySOC said:

My friend has like 4 DS,WII,gameboy camera (which he does not play because well...who are you running from?),and every time i come over we play like Mario Kart,Mario Hoops etc on the DS...on WII we play a tennis and racing simulator and he also has a Nintendo Entertainment System with 2 controllers (one has a custom picture of mario) and we play Mario all day and i never beat him since he knows all the shortcuts to go over the worlds faster

 

1 hour ago, samcool55 said:

No comment on the nintendo side

I have a DS, the very first one and local multiplayer is great (sharing your game or whatever it is is awesome)

Also a WII, but i have like 4 games for it and that's it. I think it might start to become useful later but for now i'll leave it alone. I have plans for it but i think it will take at least 3 years before i can execute them.

Nintendo has it down in this regard.

[PRTI]

1 minute ago, vorticalbox said:

 

Nintendo has it down in this regard.

Nintendo is much more fun to me than like a PS4 or Xbox One (had a PS4)

 

Nintendo to me is not just about gaming and getting the best graphics and best fps while running in 8k,its about having fun with friends and family

[MEC-777]

15 hours ago, vorticalbox said:

imagine. You are at home playing on your console and your friend knocks on your door. After your standard greeting he enters your house and into our roof.

 

there you are playing you're favorite console game and what's this? YES! HE BROUGHT HIS CONTROLLER. He connects it to your console and just like that you're playing a game.

 

if both were pc gamers it requires one to bring their rig to another's house or to take it in turns while the other sits there aimlessly slipping into madness.

 

until PC can give me on the fly split screen then console will always win regardless of specs.

 

I know there are a few games that support it like dungeon defender's and I know mine craft can with a bit of moding.

I'm assuming you're a little older, like me (I'm 33) or you have grown up playing on the consoles of a few generations back (PS2 era or earlier), when local split-screen multiplayer was the bomb. Back then, online multiplayer wasn't a thing yet and the internet was still in it's infancy. 

 

If you wanted to play together with friends, that was the way it had to be done. I remember just like you described. It was great and I've spent countless hours having a blast, playing split-screen with friends. Definitely something I miss in modern gaming. 

 

13 hours ago, samcool55 said:

You know, as a person that hasn't touched a new-ish console (ps2 is the latest one i ever properly used) i was very very disappointing by the poor support since xbox 360/ps3.

With the PS2 almost every game had multiplayer, great! But damn went it downhill hard since then. Xbox 360 local multiplayer became rare and a lot of games only supported online multiplayer or another form that required 2 physical consoles.

 

So for pc games yes it usually requires your friend to bring over his rig, but with most console games today your friend needs to bring his console sooo yea... It's almost the same thing.

 

I still use my PS2 btw, for the simple reason that nothing out there matches the local multiplayer support for it.

If a friend comes over, that's where we usually end up on, playing together some old-school badass games on the PS2.

And it's not my pc isn't capable of local multiplayer, i have 3 xbox 360 controllers (and i don't have an xbox 360, go figure :p) all connected to my pc and the bunch of batteries required to keep everything properly going. The system itself is also capable of playing most games in a nice way.

Times have changed. Everything is online now. Split-screen has, unfortunately, been going the way of the dodo. The mentality now is; why pack up your gaming device or controllers and physically go to your friend's house to play on half a screen when you can stay at home and play the game with your friends online and on a full screen? 

 

It's a different perspective and you can definitely tell who are from the older, pre-internet gaming crowd.

 

Nintendo is the only company still making gaming consoles as they should be, remaining true to the original gaming console recipe; fun, exclusive games with heavy emphasis on local split-screen multiplayer. And I hope they never change that moving forward. 

[vorticalbox]

10 minutes ago, MEC-777 said:

I'm assuming you're a little older, like me (I'm 33) or you have grown up playing on the consoles of a few generations back (PS2 era or earlier), when local split-screen multiplayer was the bomb. Back then, online multiplayer wasn't a thing yet and the internet was still in it's infancy. 

 

If you wanted to play together with friends, that was the way it had to be done. I remember just like you described. It was great and I've spent countless hours having a blast, playing split-screen with friends. Definitely something I miss in modern gaming. 

I'm 27 but my grandad was very much into games and I grew up play mario at his house on a sunday when we went to visit. Me and my brother (-2 years) used to play spilt screen a whole bunch and my friends from school we just to hold halo CE lan parties in different rooms. Super fun.

[samcool55]

1 hour ago, MEC-777 said:

Times have changed. Everything is online now. Split-screen has, unfortunately, been going the way of the dodo. The mentality now is; why pack up your gaming device or controllers and physically go to your friend's house to play on half a screen when you can stay at home and play the game with your friends online and on a full screen? 

 

It's a different perspective and you can definitely tell who are from the older, pre-internet gaming crowd.

 

Nintendo is the only company still making gaming consoles as they should be, remaining true to the original gaming console recipe; fun, exclusive games with heavy emphasis on local split-screen multiplayer. And I hope they never change that moving forward. 

True, sadly everything is online now... I honestly prefer to go to my friend and play some games there than to stay home and sit lonely in front of the sofa playing games.

For some reason just sharing a bowl of chips or whatever and drinking some nice soda's together is awesome imo  (no alcohol for me btw, hate it).

 

Especially games like just dance or stuff with the eyetoy (seems like everyone forgot about that) can be a lot of fun.

[MEC-777]

4 minutes ago, samcool55 said:

True, sadly everything is online now... I honestly prefer to go to my friend and play some games there than to stay home and sit lonely in front of the sofa playing games.

For some reason just sharing a bowl of chips or whatever and drinking some nice soda's together is awesome imo  (no alcohol for me btw, hate it).

 

Especially games like just dance or stuff with the eyetoy (seems like everyone forgot about that) can be a lot of fun.

Totally. For me it was back in my high school days (late 90's) playing Gran Tourismo (1 and 2) or Baldur's Gate co-op on a PS1 at my friend's cottage. Also nothing like playing fighting games like Soul Calibur, shouting at each other while mashing the buttons. Ah, good times, good times....  

[kaiju_wars]

19 hours ago, Prysin said:

PS+

3 free games each month -> inc AAA titles from time to time. Belongs to the account for life (need PS+ to access)

30-80% discounts on most games, even AAA titles.

"season pass" aka online multiplayer on all games.

online cloud backups and stuff.

cost: 50$ a year.....

3 free games (generally 10-40$ value titles) each month, x 12 months = 36 games for a "value" of 360-1440$.... in addition to discounts

 

I have yet to see PC offer shit like that.

Dont get me wrong, Steam sales are a fucking god-sent gift from heaven. Praise lord gaben and all. But games are rarely actually FREE for life.

 

PC also has yearly internet fees... PCs doesnt come with "magic free broadband"...

If you are thinking of leeching off your neighbors WIFI, then consoles can do taht too BTW

PS+ games aren't technically free.  I'm paying $60 extra on top of my monthly internet bill, you better offer me some 'free' god damn games.

 

Also, the monthly Internet fee for PC isn't a good argument.  When people say Internet fee, it's understood one is talking about PS+ or Xbox Live Gold. 

 

You don't have to pay for a service on top of your internet bill to play online for PC.

[Prysin]

3 minutes ago, kaiju_wars said:

PS+ games aren't technically free.  I'm paying $60 extra on top of my monthly internet bill, you better offer me some 'free' god damn games.

 

Also, the monthly Internet fee for PC isn't a good argument.  When people say Internet fee, it's understood one is talking about PS+ or Xbox Live Gold. 

 

You don't have to pay for a service on top of your internet bill to play online for PC.

you dont have to have PS+ either. Yes, you will have to get individual "season passes" for multiplayer play. But if you are only playing single player games, then you dont need it.

you need Xbox Live no matter what AFAIK.

[kaiju_wars]

2 minutes ago, Prysin said:

you dont have to have PS+ either. Yes, you will have to get individual "season passes" for multiplayer play. But if you are only playing single player games, then you dont need it.

you need Xbox Live no matter what AFAIK.

You have to pay for PS+ to play online with PS4, it's required this generation.  

Xlive also offers 'free' games now. Two for each console.  It's about time they start doing that though. 

[Prysin]

19 minutes ago, kaiju_wars said:

You have to pay for PS+ to play online with PS4, it's required this generation.  

Xlive also offers 'free' games now. Two for each console.  It's about time they start doing that though. 

no, PS+ is only required if you DONT buy a "online/Season pass" which is generally 10 bucks a piece. If you do have a "Online/Season pass" you can play online.

 

I know this, because i got a online pass with copy of BF4 and it specifically said so.

[GlassBomb]

The biggest reason why you should want to get one over the other isn't specs or anything.

 

It is friends. Does the majority of the friends that you want to play with use a console? Get a console. Do they use a PC? Get a PC.

[MEC-777]

Just now, GlassBomb said:

The biggest reason why you should want to get one over the other isn't specs or anything.

 

It is friends. Does the majority of the friends that you want to play with use a console? Get a console. Do they use a PC? Get a PC.

For me the big thing is the games. Right now with this latest gen consoles just don't have the quality exclusives to win me over.