What actually bothers me about Console exclusive players

[LogicalDrm]

If you think graphics are what makes games enjoyable, I can already tell you have started gaming after mid-2000s. Because back in the day, PS1 had better graphics than PC. Its was cheaper to buy PS2 with DVD drive than achieve same graphics quality and get DVD drive for PC. Only disadvantage was missing multiplayer over the internet.

[GoodBytes]

I have a gaming PC... or used to.. time for an upgrade.

But I play console games, for the unique experience that they provide. I can play easily on my TV and couch. I don't need to buy 2x high-end PCs for one in my room and one in my coach, and moving that thing is annoying at best.

 

Beside that, the controls. Not everything is great with keyboard and mouse.. and sure "you can plug a controller on PC", but all PC controllers are insult to humanity, with only the XBox 360/One controller being an actual choice. Sure you can plug the PS4 controller, but support isn't official and you need some extra software and isn't plug and play.

More than that, not all games work with it, and you are limited with the experience of the game, and as the game is designed for a controller in mind, you can't use any controller... you need the button layout to match and the number of buttons.

 

On console, as you have defined experience that the game develop adapt their game to it, to give player the best experience. Also, the experience many times can't be replicated. For example, the Switch... you can't do this with a PC. I can't take it with me with ease. The switch offers me the ability to play anywhere I want, home or out.

 

As for GRAPHIXSZZ!!!, sure PC looks nicer... but if you don't have a top of the line PC, you need to spend 2-3h playing with the settings to balance visuals and performance... and you end up with nothing more than console graphics as your.. once amazing PC, is now a potato.

 

As for THE FRAMES!!!!, While it is easy to point console games with shitty devs or shitty publishers not allowing devs to do good work due to rush release date. Normally, games on console provide a solid fps experience. If the game runs at 30fps.. it runs at 30fps all the time... depending on the game it might have dips here and there, but NOTHING like an weak PC that can't deliver 30fps, and so, as you play, every angle and scene and room, as you move the fps fluctuates all over the place, 30, 50, 10, 15, 10, 60, 30, etc... where FRAPS might happily tell you 30fps, as it does an average and not actual current fps, the game is not enjoyable on PC.

 

In the end, what many PC only gamers that complain all day about other choice (and many console fanboys as well), tend to forget is.... is the game fun?

Always the focus on graphics, fps, resolution, epic-ness of a game, and which dad is better than the other... but ultimately... is the game fun? Why game fun factor is forgotten?

I don't care if a game has the best visuals ever created... if the game is not fun, who gives a damn. I'll stick to looking at screenshots, I'll get the same amount of entertainment if the game is horrible. I am not saying that PC games are not fun, I am going on a bit of a tangent here, by asking, why do you care? If the game is fun, does it matter if the person plays it on console or on PC?

 

And for many people gaming PCs are very expensive, even if you consider "cheaper games" (which isn't really true for many titles, unless you wait months even a year for a price drop). You can through me some specifications to me.. sure.. but here are what many "PC Master race" forgets:

1. Many people non PC gamers, don't have a nice monitor on their desk... they have some shit TN panel monitor that was included in some computer they once bough.
2. And as result, their TV is far better display than computer monitor, delivering much better colors, contrast, and details, despite its size and downfalls over a nice monitor which actually costs a lot on PC.
3. Peripherals. You need a decent keyboard and mouse. Membrane is fine, but you have people who have those 8$ keyboard and mouse OEM combo's, where by now the membrane is all dry up or loose, and the mouse has poor tracking and all in all not comfortable, as the computer was designed to be a web and light e-mail machine over anything else.
4. The desk. You think that everyone has a nice properly adjusted for a desktop computer or laptop usage? No. Many have some cheapo desk, too small for anything really, which is too high or too low, causing to not be comfortable after a few hours, let alone 1.
5. The chair... A good chair is expensive. Forget gaming chair.. no one wants to put that in a living room, or what not, and they are not even good to start with. Sure they beat those Staples / Office Depot chair by a long mile, but they are not chair for sitting as you want for 8h plus.... maybe if you have young, i guess, but for many it is an issue.
6. PC requires constant upgrades. If you want fancy visuals, with fancy resolutions, and/or fps, you need to update often.

All together, 'for your typical console gamer", you spend a lot more than on PC, not to mention the fact that on PC, if you have no starting point, you have this heavy up front entry fee (see point 1 to 5). While on console, sure maybe the games a more expensive, but the cost is spread out, and assuming you get the console day one, you know that it will last 5-6 years. So you have an easier time building savings to get the next system.

 

 

[GoodBytes]

29 minutes ago, LoGiCalDrm said:

If you think graphics are what makes games enjoyable, I can already tell you have started gaming after mid-2000s. Because back in the day, PS1 had better graphics than PC. Its was cheaper to buy PS2 with DVD drive than achieve same graphics quality and get DVD drive for PC. Only disadvantage was missing multiplayer over the internet.

NES and SNES had better graphics than on PC. Unless you spend MASSIVE amount on a PC.

 

The SNES was released in 1990.

In 1995 to play 3D games at 800x600 or some very low resolution, with potato fps (10-15-20 fps), and to have to hope that your game was designed for your graphics card, a bug issue back in the days due to graphics card quirks, and their inability to be programmable like today. This means to a certain extent they had circuits to do specific visual things. DirectX was brand new with Windows 1995, assuming you had a compatible graphics card, let alone games for it.  OpenGL didn't exist. It was an exclusive things for Silicon Graphics computers aims for making 3D models for movies. And graphics card where missing a mass amount of graphic technologies to do a good job. In those years Z-Buffer  as still relativly new. That is the system for the graphics card to know which 3D object should be put in front of the other... that is right, before, they didn't have the computational abilities to do this

 

 And all that was like a 3000-5000$ computer, AT THE TIME... That means, spending 4.5k to 7k on a PC.

 

 

 

 

[Princess Luna]

So much salt in here, let OP do a thread without that much bashing gee...

 

He does have a point, who only games on consoles doesn't even know much about hardware capacity, game quality resolution refresh rate all this stuff... so it is a easy to please client... PC gamers are usually more demanding.

 

But any one is entitled to enjoy stuff as they seem fit.

[Princess Luna]

1 hour ago, LoGiCalDrm said:

mid-2000s.

Back at early and mid 2000's MMORPGs were still something enjoyable, non-toxic communities and awesome fun games that were not graphics driven like Tibia, Runescape, Ragnarok, MU and so on... miss those times... nowadays multiplayer is either short lived shooters or hyper toxic mobas

[AshleyAshes]

54 minutes ago, GoodBytes said:

As for GRAPHIXSZZ!!!

 

As for THE FRAMES!!!!

 

 

Pffft.  True gamers don't play games for gameplay mechanics or entertainment!  They play games to move around quality sliders and watch frame rate counters!  Only children play games for 'FUN' like games are supposed to be some kind of TOY or something.  

[divito]

Comes down to the platform and market size ultimately. A console is a closed-box where you're getting a specific experience out of the hardware, and can tailor, control, and leverage your product as a developer.

The size of market is also easily quantifiable because the variance on usage is not the same as with a PC, and they sell a ton. You're also spending a decent amount less for something that provides a solid gaming experience, and now a host of other media consumption options for your living room/bedroom etc...

While you can do all the same things with a PC, even at a similar cost, the experience is wholly different; from programs, to controllers, etc... it's just not a plug in and go. Now, if Microsoft ever turned their Xbox One software into a new Windows Media Center for the PC, giving you the apps and navigational aspects, then that would be pretty compelling.

That being said, I'm a PC enthusiast through and through; for the versatility, potential, performance, and ultimately the keyboard/mouse. That will change soon as Microsoft bakes keyboard and mouse support into the Xbox One; that's going to cause some very interesting decisions going forward for a lot of us on the fence.

[Taja]

Well, I disagree with you almost 100%.

 

First: almost everyone I know likes to play games, but none are GAMERS. They just want to play some games and have fun. For that, a simple console is the way - everyone already has a tv, and you just need to plug it and buy some games. And honestly, thats great. Most people are tech noobs anyway, and a console is intuitive and requires ZERO passion, unlike a PC. It is also cheaper (way cheaper with you account the full cost) and it is GOOD for most people.

 

Now here comes the second problem: PC gamers are kinda idiots. Myself included, though I think I am more rational than most. They always want something better, even when It does not make sense. Reminds me a bit of rich guys and cars - they have a $300k car but want the &500k one, like the first is not "enough". Pc gamers LOVE that, they want to taste the greatest stuff like 4k, and act like that is the default, and its not. It is ULTRA PREMIUM.

 

But the worst is when people start wanting stuff that does not even makes sense (like ultra settings or fast ssds for gaming). 4k vs 1080p or 144Hz vs 60Hz makes a difference, sure, but it is a luxury, not a default. High vs Ultra or sata ssd vs nvme ssd*? Well, that makes no difference, if you feel it does, it is psychological.

 

And I think its bad to ALWAYS want more, people forget that you can be happy with what you have. Im not saying you should stagnate, but you dont always have to go full speed. Just because there is a 1080ti nowadays, it does not mean that the 970 is not a FUCKING BEAST.

 

And I say all that with the mentality of a person who does not live in USA/Europe, where hardware is cheaper(usa) or people have money (europe). Where I live, things are different, and a "shitty" thing for you guys is the premium for us, so that puts things in perspective.

 

Conclusion: although I disagree with most things, I do agree that pc ports should be better, and that consoles should push harder. I hate that economically speaking, shitty games like Fifa for consoles are more worth it than pc masterpieces, but it is what it is. Capitalism has its flaws, I just hope it gets better.

 

*When I said sata ssds and nvme ssds are the same, I was talking about game load times and regular aplications, ofc nvme ssds have their place in the market.

[Crunchy Dragon]

16 minutes ago, Taja said:

And I think its bad to ALWAYS want more, people forget that you can be happy with what you have. Im not saying you should stagnate, but you dont always have to go full speed. Just because there is a 1080ti nowadays, it does not mean that the 970 is not a FUCKING BEAST.

Agreed. I have a GTX 780 and need to upgrade my desktop before I can actually make use of it. But I'm happy with it because I know it'll have no problem at all running any of the games I play. Which is the same reason I'm getting a Core i3, it'll do everything I need it to, and if it falls behind at all, I can upgrade it down the road to a decent Core i5 or i7.

 

That post was really well written btw.

 

 

[Drak3]

1 hour ago, GoodBytes said:

Sure you can plug the PS4 controller, but support isn't official and you need some extra software and isn't plug and play.

Plug and play on OS X. The one good thing about it.

[Mooshi]

I don't think the main issue was addressed. How many people under the age of 20 have a powerful gaming PC, let alone under 18? 

 

Unless at least one of the parents is a PC enthusiast, well off or if the young adult/teen has no responsibility where they are allowed to save for such a system..chances are you are going to get a console.

 

There is also the peer group. If you're still in school (pre college), chances are your friends are going to be playing on consoles too. No point having this baller PC when your friends are on XBox/PS4/Nintendo. 

 

When I was still in middle School, my best friend had an N64 instead of the PS1, guess what I also had. You need to look at the bigger picture.

 

Edit: The above can still apply in adulthood. Gaming PCs are still niche, we can't pretend it's the norm just because we are into them. My GF and I having gaming PCs in the bedroom, but her siblings and nephews are PS4 gamers.

[Frankenburger]

8 minutes ago, Mooshi said:

I don't think the main issue was addressed. How many people under the age of 20 have a powerful gaming PC, let alone under 18?

 

Unless at least one of the parents is a PC enthusiast, well off or if the young adult/teen has no responsibility where they are allowed to save for such a system..chances are you are going to get a console.

 

Quantify "powerful". Are you talking about mid range PCs? High end PCs? I'd venture to say, most teenagers already have a good mid range PC, or at least a good core system to throw in a mid range GPU. You can buy a decent prebuilt i3 and a GTX 1050 for $500 or less.

 

When I was 17, I held down a part time job and earned about $180 a week. I already had a P4 with 1GB of RAM as a birthday present, so all I needed to do was upgrade the Radeon 8500 that I salvaged from our previous system. I eventually bought a Radeon 9800 Pro, and upgraded to a GeForce 6800 a little over a year later, which I unlocked and overclocked to near 6800 GT speeds.

 

Honestly, it's not hard for a teen to get a powerful gaming PC. Most of them just don't care, and the ones that do care don't know where to start.

[Mooshi]

10 minutes ago, Frankenburger said:

Snip

When I was in my teens, I had a crappy P4 HP prebuilt and a full time job. My checks went towards the household and my PC was okay enough for my needs.

 

Granted, I was also an exclusive console gamer still and gamed on that. As far as powerful goes, we don't live in the P4 era anymore. AAA games that are unoptimized are what is getting the push and PCs have their fair share of bad ports. Indie games can be less demanding, but not always the case. ARK was laughably unoptimized when it hit the scene.

 

Even the seemingly low impact game of Minecraft needs a lot of resources if you wish to play it heavily modified. Mid range and low range power doesn't always cut it if you play something super unoptimized.

[AshleyAshes]

19 minutes ago, Frankenburger said:

Honestly, it's not hard for a teen to get a powerful gaming PC. Most of them just don't care, and the ones that do care don't know where to start.

Also, if they already got an Xbox or PlayStation for Christmas or Birthday, they don't exactly have a pressing need to spend what typically low expendable income they have on another thing that plays a lot of the same games their console gets.

 

You have to remember that despite what expendable income you had as a teen, teens as a demographic have generally low expendable income and when you look across different economic classes, many are on even the lower rung than average.

 

And, more over, there is a whole mass of REASONs as to why the gaming industry as a whole has it's largest demographic in consoles, particularly in software sales.  You can tell yourselves 'Oh, people just don't KNOW about how great PC gaming is' as the single reason for the massive success of console gaming but you'd be deluding yourself.

[kaiju_wars]

To the OP:

This is why PC gamers get a bad rap.  Don't bash someone for what they game on, unless they start acting stupid themselves.

You can try and educate and give a light push towards PC gaming... but if they decide they don't want to, don't force it.  It makes the rest of us look bad, and rants like this doesn't help.

Also saying the term, "you should get a $1500 gaming PC" doesn't help.  (Granted I know what I've done is niche), but I've built gaming PCs less than $100.  Using that has helped me push more towards PC gaming.  Used parts and low budget builds helps.  People feel like it's less of an undertaking, and they'll feel less shafted if they don't like PC gaming in the end.

 

 

1 hour ago, Crunchy Dragon said:

Agreed. I have a GTX 780 and need to upgrade my desktop before I can actually make use of it. But I'm happy with it because I know it'll have no problem at all running any of the games I play. Which is the same reason I'm getting a Core i3, it'll do everything I need it to, and if it falls behind at all, I can upgrade it down the road to a decent Core i5 or i7.

 

That post was really well written btw.

 

 

Trust me, the 780 still kicks some ass.  I couldn't fully utilize it on my 860K, but damn, paired with a 1500X is nice.

[Frankenburger]

4 minutes ago, AshleyAshes said:

You can tell yourselves 'Oh, people just don't KNOW about how great PC gaming is' as the single reason for the massive success of console gaming but you'd be deluding yourself.

Nobody here is saying that. We all know that consoles are cheaper and require less effort to get started than on PCs. Then there's the social aspect of console gaming. Many people have friends who play consoles exclusively, and they want to stay with their friends, thus lowering the possibility of them getting into PC gaming. But that's not what I was getting at. Instead, what I was getting at is the fact that the barrier of entry into PC gaming, while higher than console gaming, is not so much higher that a teenager working a part time job couldn't get into it.

[Mooshi]

49 minutes ago, Frankenburger said:

the barrier of entry into PC gaming, while higher than console gaming, is not so much higher that a teenager working a part time job couldn't get into it.

 True. This also assumes the teen can do as they please. Depending on upbringing, not every teen has the privilege of spending how they please if their parents are strict and/or have the mindset of "you work now, you will now contribute".

 

Building a PC is still doable, but part time as an adult doesn't pay well let alone for a teen. Still, if you're passionate about something, you will find a way. 

 

Consoles will always have the lower barrier, but saving helps. What still hurts the PC side regardless are awful ports and unoptimization. 

[Frankenburger]

1 minute ago, Mooshi said:

 What still hurts the PC side regardless are awful ports and unoptimization. 

I sincerely doubt it hurts the PC scene by any significant degree. Most people circlejerk "unoptimized" games for the simple sake of circlejerking, regardless of how true it is. PUBG is a pretty good example of this.

 

Also, console ports aren't immune to poor optimization either. For example, the PS4 version of Fallout 4 was known to drop down to 15 FPS while sighting with a scope, and the fog in the Far Harbor DLC wrecked the system.

[Commodus]

OP: I'm guessing that you're probably in your 20s, without a spouse, kids or a house (please correct me if I'm wrong).  Outside of perhaps a car, your PC is probably the most expensive thing you've ever bought; your biggest non-essential purchases each week probably revolve around games, delivery food and nights out.

 

It's easy to dismiss console gamers as being 'ignorant' when you're in a situation like that, because you have ample time and money to devote to a PC setup.  You can stay informed about what represents the best hardware.  Dropping $1,000-plus on a gaming PC (before the display) is seen as easily worthwhile because there are few other things that are truly pressing in your life.

 

But that's not how life works for many people.  If you have a live-in partner, you may decide that saving up for a weekend trip is better than buying a GTX 1070 Ti; if you have kids, you may not have an afternoon to spend building a new rig, troubleshooting drivers or talking on tech forums; if you have a house, renovating the bathroom may be more important than upgrading your PC.  Hell, there's the simple reality that many people are passionate about things beyond gaming.  They may love playing Destiny or Cuphead, but they may want to spend more time on surfboarding, or photography, or cars.

 

That's why many people gladly play console games.  Not because they're in the dark about PC gaming and would smash their consoles against the wall if they only knew 'the truth,' but because people need or want to devote their energy to other things.  For some, a $300 console means not having to choose between buying the hot new game and taking care of their family or house.  The sit-down-and-play factor means they can squeak in a game or two before picking Junior up from soccer practice.  It means they can commit time to gaming without giving up their other pursuits.

 

Besides, the notion that you're somehow less of a gamer for sitting in front of a PlayStation or Xbox is, well, condescending.  It reminds me of this one debate I got into with a man who insisted you could not take a good photo with a phone -- in both cases, it's confusing technical capability with enjoyment.  Instead of treating gaming as a hierarchy where you need to have hardware X or play game Y to be considered a 'full' gamer, just relax and be happy that consoles have widened the pool of people who play games.

[AverageGamer2017]

I'VE played console since the Xbox 360.But I still think PC gaming is better.That why im building a Ryzen Gaming Pc

[Wolfca]

Let's not blame the group for the words of a few. Devs making console games target console hardware because that's where a majority of the market is. People buy consoles because they're usually cheaper and much less hassle than building/buying and maintaining a gaming PC. It's like audio hardware. There's a bunch of audiophiles who invest in expensive DACs and headphones, and can tell the difference compressed and uncompressed audio. But a lot of the world is rocking whatever they got for $5 at a gas station because they work, and are good enough for what they use them for. Not everyone wants or needs to get the benefits of PC gaming. That doesn't mean the benefits don't exist. They just don't matter to some people. Let's not shove our opinions on people and tell them what they should find important. To each their own. It's not worth the inevitable flame war.

[Crunchy Dragon]

1 minute ago, Wolfca said:

 People buy consoles because they're usually cheaper and much less hassle than building/buying and maintaining a gaming PC.

Consoles take a fair bit of work to maintain as well, I personally think it's easier to blow dust out of a PC case than a console.

 

Also, it's worth mentioning that it's pretty much the same amount of work to buy and set up a PC as it is to buy and set up a console....

[Ithanul]

On 10/27/2017 at 7:02 PM, Valkyrie Lenneth said:

i dont believe in all of that *console bullshit* or *pc bullshit*   ppl who come with that crap just want attention really...  all machines are good they all have their benefits and negatives

That how I am.  Every piece of hardware has pros and cons.

Reason I tend to have consoles and PCs.

Though, the few times I game now is on my consoles most of the time.

[Crunchy Dragon]

Just gonna come out and say it, I have a copy of The Last Of Us for PS3...

 

Haven't got anything to play it on though(bit of a problem)

[William Payne]

I am 29 now but I must say for me when I was really young, consoles are just what we had in my family, Atari's, Sega master system, I remember renting Sega Mega Drives. I then got the original Playstation. I was I think around 12 before my family got a computer. I before that had only used computers at school for work. My hometown did not really have computer hardware stores so back then I didn't know anything about where to buy the stuff. Back then you just brought a complete system from HP or Dell or whatever. My family never had much money so I remember when we needed a 3d Accelerator card (anyone remember those?) it was a huge purchase for my family. 

 

In my teenage years and early adult years back when I really gamed a lot. I happily jumped between console and PC, not that I could ever afford the top end parts back then. Also as soon as I started earning money, I had to start paying my way and contributing financially to the family.