The title of this post is, no doubt, wishful thinking. Although the root of video games lies with the PC, it is the console that is responsible for where gaming is today. The console is here to stay for several reasons, but namely for its market. Console game sales tremendously outweigh PC sales and is the reason why the gaming indusrty is now a multi-billion dollar business. It seems; if you look closely at the trending of the industry; that, eventually, the PC and gaming console will merge to become one. We will have the big companies pushing to sell you the "all in one" home entertainment centre (gaming, internet browsing, multi media playback) rigged to your HD flat screen television.
As for now, the console is here to stay. And by the looks of things from an industry standpoint, the console is definitely winning the race to victory.
Exactly. Over the years consoles have basically been becoming more similar to a PC custom built for gaming, and when you go buy a game for your console, you dont have to worry about much of anything you know its going to run perfectly, since it was built/designed to the exact specs of your console. How many time shave you seen a new PC coming out that looks amazing, and said oh i really want that, only to find out that youre going to need to make some upgrades to your hardware to even be able to run the game period, let alone at its peak performance.
This holds especially true for competetive gaming & pvp focus. Having a standardized system that all users are on, with the game running exactly the same for all makes the competition better, because it will never come down to a matter of someones pc outperforming someone elses pc giving them an unfair edge just because they could spare twice the cash for memory, gfx card, etc.
Of course everyone ha their preferences when it comes to playstyle, controls, etc. Some games truly are better played on a mouse and keyboard than with a console controller, but then whats stopping them from coming out with a console that uses mouse and keyboard, or even some other style of control (which i guess to an extent Wii did, and now 360 has Natal). I see people here saying console sucks because FPS is so much better with a mouse and keyboard, but if there was a console that relied on mouse & keyboard that kind of nullifies your whole argument, and the reality is your opinion doesnt even apply to console vs pc, its just a matter of controller vs keyboard, not the system/hardware itself.
Every game i play except for mmos is on my Xbox 360/Playstation 3 & Wii
and console's is much more social friendly too in my option, playing turns with buddies is fun as well.
If a PC had less bells and whistles and the same functionality as a console in other parts than the technical department, than i would not mind at all..
I think we are forget here what a PC can do that a "Gaming" Console can NOT do. Word Processing, Excel, Photo Imaging, Um... Design those game you play on your consoles!! Yes computers are used to design those games. PCs (computers) have the capability to have more processing power. Console have limitations you can never bypass, short of knowing how to solder your own components onto it. There is always waiting for next gen console, 8 years later. Cheers.
Freaken23 I am under the impression you are not familiar with console gaming.
There is no PC gaming prevalence against Console gaming, on the contrary. Today even games that would represent "PC gaming" in the past are more popular on Consoles (games from Infinity Ward, Epic etc).
Yes, today everyone has a PC, but we all know there is a huge difference between an ordinary PC and a gaming PC. Consoles are more acessible and in some sense a "better" entertainment system than a PC for a lot of people.
Outside World of Warcraft and Sims the dominance of PS3 and XBOX360 against PC gaming is a reality. Multiplataform titles sell much, much more on Consoles than on PC and outside MMOs the dominance of exclusive titles on Consoles is huge.
A "gaming" PC is the most expensive gaming plataform and there is no doubt about it. No one need to buy a new Console every 2 years, the life spam of a Console is usually 5-6+ years and even when a "new" xbox or playstation is released they are more cheap than a top-high end card from ATI or NVIDIA. You will need to buy a new card every 2 year (sometimes 1 year) if you want to keep playing PC games maximized and with full compatibility...Consoles doesn't have this issue.
Talk about hogwash.
"A "gaming" PC is the most expensive gaming plataform and there is no doubt about it. "
A $600 PC will play anything a PS3 will ever handle.
What do you mean by a "PC that will play anything a PS3 will ever handle"?
Most popular games you play on PC you can play on a PS3, but there are a lot of PS3 games that the PC will never handle, not because of hardware limitations, but because most of the real sofisticated and "big" PS3 games will never be on PC.
In the end the comparision you made has only one purpose, so people who only has a PC can feel better. Buy a $600 PC today and you will need to upgrade it in less than 2 years if you want to play every game maximized and with full direct x compatibility.
A low end PC was not able to run GTAIV well, and it was possible to play it flawless on a PS3.
PS3 $ 370,00
XBOX 360 elite $299,00
And then you come here trying to counter my arguments and say that your $600,00 PC can run "every game"... well, so I am right, a gaming PC (even a low end one that will need upgrade soon like yours) IS the most expensive gaming system!
You can almost buy a PS3 and a 360 with the price of one middle/low end PC.
But the point is that $600 can play games that are more intense on the hardware, you say that can't i know your wrong . I make a ton of computers for friends they play games for a long time. And the argument about them not porting the games to PC just proves the point, even more so when it doesn't cost a thing (we know it doesn't for FF13) and there are most likely many others.
"You will need to buy a new card every 2 year (sometimes 1 year) if you want to keep playing PC games maximized and with full compatibility...Consoles doesn't have this issue." I buy video cards for around $100-200 every 2-4 years. In other words about $50 a year, my old video cards are reused. "full compatibility" what does this mean? Regardless, i can tell you dynasty warriors lags my ps2 out son. So i thinks i just proved you wrong, Not only that PC games look much better , don't believe me? TRy playing ff12 on your ps2-3 looks ok at best, with an EMULATOR (ie not as good as a port) i have 1050i, YES for real. (With a game that has no high res option, why becuase ps2 can't handle it).
Ah ok, now you are comparing your new PC with a PS2... I see...
Forget the PS2 (a 10 years old console) and get God of War 3 for the PS3 and compare with what you can play on a $300,00 PC.. (not your $600,00 system)
You know what I mean with full compatibility (direct x) and with full maximized graphics.
You think you just proved me wrong? Not exactly, you just proved you have no idea how Console gaming is today...
Emulators are nice, but never a good excuse to not buy a console... "Hey Lets wait 10 years and play it on a PC emulator forget about Consoles..."
Try to play Bayonetta, God of War 3, Heavy Rain on your low end PC that costs 2x more than a PC...or wait 10 years for an emulator to "proove me wrong".
Try to play GTAIV with good performance with a low end graphic card.
The emulator point was taken wrong, see with consoles you can't get the best picture. The games and consoles have preset limits to what the game will look like. And these are not based on the games development but a setting so that the game runs without lagging awfully. In the case of ff12 the game itself can look wonderful, but on a ps2 it doesn't becuase the ps2 can't hand it. And at the end of the ps3 life the same thing will happen, but with a computer if you have the system you can have the better graphics and if you don't you can scale down the graphics.
You seem to believe those consoles graphics are maximixed, they're not. That was the point of the emulator, showing that games can indeed be played at higher res/graphic than they are on the console.
So you make claims but I have already pointed out they are incorrect.
So yes consoles force you to play the game how they want you to, id rather have the options for rez and texture quality however.
Are you serious?
Well, this is why you see more games on Consoles.
This is why a Console is a much more fair gaming system.
This is why you see exclusive Console games that need less graphical power but look better.
This is why you know you can play every compatible game flawless on a Console and not on a PC.
Really? They "look better", enough said on that (as they may or may not).
And once again they are not flawless, many of the ports from xbox to ps3 has <20 fps frequently.
Other push around 30 fps, which is nothing to write home about.
"Fair" So does it treat you equally or what?
Consoles sell well for three reasons; one controllers with cords, two small little boxes that don't get in the way, and three cuz i had to buy one to pay this game and now i might as well play all my games on them. (Sony and Microsoft are smarter than the average consumer and understand by limiting availability of games to their respective platforms they increase the sales of their platforms).
hmm, well, no cords these days...
So, when a game is a PC exclusive, what argument you use? Should we blame ATI or NVIDIA?
You do know that it is easy and sometimes more profitable to build a good and impressive game for just one plataform right?
The only two things I see in your arguments are the total lack of information about Console gaming and a bit of illusory PC elitism.
"You do know that it is easy and sometimes more profitable to build a good and impressive game for just one plataform right?"
Why? I mean really why ? I think its becuase you then force people to buy that platform, that seems like a good thing for those people selling that product, but and awful thing for me and the consumer, that means i have to pay more for the same entertainment.
As for the lack of understanding of consoles, i believe the accurate technical aspects that i have addressed about the ps3, ps2 and xbox, as well as, PCs show that i do indeed understand them.
Edit- as i read though this thread i see that a good argument to why the console is better than the PC is becuase they purposefully selectively release game for specific systems.
The only problem is this is a very sad argument , it basically like saying they own me and my money becuase if i wanna play i go to pay for not only the game but all the special hardware, that is not required as most PC will run the game, but is required becuase they want to make a lot of money and , me being dumb fail to realize this and thus use this as a argument supporting consoles. Plz just stop buying them and their games and force these companies to treat us better.
Most non gaming PCs will NEVER run a modern game well, the argument you used against Consoles you can use against gaming PC market (and it is a pretty weak one).
Everyone has a PC is not equal to everyone has a PC able to run modern games with satisfatory performance.
PC is also a good gaming system, everyone here plays MMORPGs, so we all agree that a gaming PC is needed if you like this genre. But your arguments are nothing more than opinionated illusions.
Then using your own argument. Why can't i play ps3 games on my PS2, or my xbox games on my wii? Not every console is equal also.
Can I just say....................OMG
This is the most confusing quote in the entire universe.
In regard to the OP. You are right on one thing, eventually consoles will become more PC like. A console, however, will still be a console, and a PC a PC. Sure there are plenty of people who can surf and e-mail on their consoles now, but the majority of business applications will stay on a PC, and consoles will keep a tremendous gaming market.
Consoles are created for gaming, and they always have been. As they progress, they will become more like a PC as far as hardware, but the capabilities will roughly stay the same. Under no circumstance will their be an entire platform merge where a PC and Console will be one and the same. Exclusivities between the consoles generate too much revenue for each company for them to start porting everything to PC only. The increasing use of peripherals that PCs don't utilize that originally was taboo in the old console days is now becoming widely popular. Theres just too much money to be made on consoles for them to go anywhere anytime soon.
On top of that, creating games for a single hardware type is easier then having to troubleshoot hundreds of different hardware or software configurations. Its obvious an Xbox 360 game won't play on the original Xbox, and it wasn't made to. A PC game however, may have to be compatible with Windows XP-7 and then the off person who wants to try it on a linux distribution in some sort of compatibility mode. Then you've got the people who have this old video card, and then those that have the brand new card each of which may be running drivers that are just too old, or haven't been tested with that game.
Consoles are Casual, and there are plenty of people out there that are just looking for a casual, easy going, not staring at a computer screen 2 feet away from you, kind of experience. This will not go away, and it will become more affluent with each new console release. Expect the next gen consoles to be able to run MMOs quickly and easily. Its only a matter of time before console MMOs become the next fad in the genre.
"A "gaming" PC is the most expensive gaming plataform and there is no doubt about it. "
A $600 PC will play anything a PS3 will ever handle.
What do you mean by a "PC that will play anything a PS3 will ever handle"?
Most popular games you play on PC you can play on a PS3, but there are a lot of PS3 games that the PC will never handle, not because of hardware limitations, but because most of the real sofisticated and "big" PS3 games will never be on PC.
In the end the comparision you made has only one purpose, so people who only has a PC can feel better. Buy a $600 PC today and you will need to upgrade it in less than 2 years if you want to play every game maximized and with full direct x compatibility.
A low end PC was not able to run GTAIV well, and it was possible to play it flawless on a PS3.
PS3 $ 370,00
XBOX 360 elite $299,00
Perhaps I'm missing the context of this, but this is a highly biased argument.
For one, a PS3 was NOT $370 when GTA4 released.
For another, a $600 machine bought at the time GTA4 released could have played it pretty well. One bought NOW could smoke the PS3, and the old $600 machine could be upgraded to also smoke the PS3.
Several years from now, a $600 machine will absolutely obliterate a PS3's performance, meanwhile game manufacturers will have to peel off gfx options in order to get adequate performance on a PS3.
We'll not even START about what happens when you spend a few hundred bucks more...
While we both tend to agree that PC's will never "destroy" console gaming, I couldn't let that slide. A console has convenience and overall affordability in its side, while PC provides a potentially better gaming experience. Consoles graphic and processing superiority tends to be extremely short lived(and during that time, the console costs MORE than most PC's), and spends most of its life cycle on the inferior side of the war.
And then you come here trying to counter my arguments and say that your $600,00 PC can run "every game"... well, so I am right, a gaming PC (even a low end one that will need upgrade soon like yours) IS the most expensive gaming system!
Depends on WHEN you buy them.
You can almost buy a PS3 and a 360 with the price of one middle/low end PC.
In your time frame example of GTA4, you seem to think a middle/low end PC costs about $1000.
Most of you are wrong and some of you have mentioned this. THIS IS THE NEXT GENERATION OF GAMING!!!! www.onlive.com/
im pretty sure onlive will just be a small gimmick for just a few thousand people. people will still buy computers for like 1200$, download games for free and play them even when they are offline. onlive is just for people with a fast connection and a crappy computer. i havent read much about onlive though but im pretty sure u have to be online to use it... duh. and after what ive heard it doesnt support the high resolutions or graphics. so my bet is that onlive is for console people who want to be a PC dude.
i bet u cant use BitLord f.ex on maximum effect while playing a singleplayer game on onlive.
Most of you are wrong and some of you have mentioned this. THIS IS THE NEXT GENERATION OF GAMING!!!! www.onlive.com/
Not to mention noone here has tried it, so there is no telling how well the games will actually play. If it works well, GREAT! We have yet to see it work well though.
I think we are forget here what a PC can do that a "Gaming" Console can NOT do. Word Processing, Excel, Photo Imaging, Um... Design those game you play on your consoles!! Yes computers are used to design those games. PCs (computers) have the capability to have more processing power. Console have limitations you can never bypass, short of knowing how to solder your own components onto it. There is always waiting for next gen console, 8 years later. Cheers.
You're missing the point. We are discussing the PC AS A GAMING PLATFORM.
You can do word procesing, spread sheets, photo imaging, programming, etc., on a machine that is way cheaper and less up to date than your average PC gaming rig. In fact, I can do most everyday computing tasks in a web browser now. The auxilary tasks that a computer can perform have no bearing on this discussion.
IMO, the PC is an awful platform for gaming. Ironically, the few game genres that PCs are actually better at handling, excluding flight and racing sims, don't require a top end gaming rig. And yes, I'm talking about MMOs, RTS and turn-based strategy games. There are exceptions but developers that aim at sky high system specs generally don't do as well as games aimed at mid-level hardware.
NOTE: Flight and racing sims require a much higher investment in perpherials than the average high-end game rig. This market is so extremely niche that there are only a handful of small time developers even making these things.
Consoles are becoming more like computers every generation. I don't think either side will crush the other. ...If virtualization ever gets into homes en masse then it won't really matter. You won't even have a console or computer in your home, you'll just pay a service fee and do everything on your TV/monitor through the net.
Until you cancel your subscription, you are only helping to continue the cycle of mediocrity.
Comments
Exactly. Over the years consoles have basically been becoming more similar to a PC custom built for gaming, and when you go buy a game for your console, you dont have to worry about much of anything you know its going to run perfectly, since it was built/designed to the exact specs of your console. How many time shave you seen a new PC coming out that looks amazing, and said oh i really want that, only to find out that youre going to need to make some upgrades to your hardware to even be able to run the game period, let alone at its peak performance.
This holds especially true for competetive gaming & pvp focus. Having a standardized system that all users are on, with the game running exactly the same for all makes the competition better, because it will never come down to a matter of someones pc outperforming someone elses pc giving them an unfair edge just because they could spare twice the cash for memory, gfx card, etc.
Of course everyone ha their preferences when it comes to playstyle, controls, etc. Some games truly are better played on a mouse and keyboard than with a console controller, but then whats stopping them from coming out with a console that uses mouse and keyboard, or even some other style of control (which i guess to an extent Wii did, and now 360 has Natal). I see people here saying console sucks because FPS is so much better with a mouse and keyboard, but if there was a console that relied on mouse & keyboard that kind of nullifies your whole argument, and the reality is your opinion doesnt even apply to console vs pc, its just a matter of controller vs keyboard, not the system/hardware itself.
Every game i play except for mmos is on my Xbox 360/Playstation 3 & Wii
and console's is much more social friendly too in my option, playing turns with buddies is fun as well.
If a PC had less bells and whistles and the same functionality as a console in other parts than the technical department, than i would not mind at all..
I think we are forget here what a PC can do that a "Gaming" Console can NOT do. Word Processing, Excel, Photo Imaging, Um... Design those game you play on your consoles!! Yes computers are used to design those games. PCs (computers) have the capability to have more processing power. Console have limitations you can never bypass, short of knowing how to solder your own components onto it. There is always waiting for next gen console, 8 years later. Cheers.
Talk about hogwash.
"A "gaming" PC is the most expensive gaming plataform and there is no doubt about it. "
A $600 PC will play anything a PS3 will ever handle.
What do you mean by a "PC that will play anything a PS3 will ever handle"?
Most popular games you play on PC you can play on a PS3, but there are a lot of PS3 games that the PC will never handle, not because of hardware limitations, but because most of the real sofisticated and "big" PS3 games will never be on PC.
In the end the comparision you made has only one purpose, so people who only has a PC can feel better. Buy a $600 PC today and you will need to upgrade it in less than 2 years if you want to play every game maximized and with full direct x compatibility.
A low end PC was not able to run GTAIV well, and it was possible to play it flawless on a PS3.
PS3 $ 370,00
XBOX 360 elite $299,00
And then you come here trying to counter my arguments and say that your $600,00 PC can run "every game"... well, so I am right, a gaming PC (even a low end one that will need upgrade soon like yours) IS the most expensive gaming system!
You can almost buy a PS3 and a 360 with the price of one middle/low end PC.
But the point is that $600 can play games that are more intense on the hardware, you say that can't i know your wrong . I make a ton of computers for friends they play games for a long time. And the argument about them not porting the games to PC just proves the point, even more so when it doesn't cost a thing (we know it doesn't for FF13) and there are most likely many others.
"You will need to buy a new card every 2 year (sometimes 1 year) if you want to keep playing PC games maximized and with full compatibility...Consoles doesn't have this issue." I buy video cards for around $100-200 every 2-4 years. In other words about $50 a year, my old video cards are reused. "full compatibility" what does this mean? Regardless, i can tell you dynasty warriors lags my ps2 out son. So i thinks i just proved you wrong, Not only that PC games look much better , don't believe me? TRy playing ff12 on your ps2-3 looks ok at best, with an EMULATOR (ie not as good as a port) i have 1050i, YES for real. (With a game that has no high res option, why becuase ps2 can't handle it).
Ah ok, now you are comparing your new PC with a PS2... I see...
Forget the PS2 (a 10 years old console) and get God of War 3 for the PS3 and compare with what you can play on a $300,00 PC.. (not your $600,00 system)
You know what I mean with full compatibility (direct x) and with full maximized graphics.
You think you just proved me wrong? Not exactly, you just proved you have no idea how Console gaming is today...
Emulators are nice, but never a good excuse to not buy a console... "Hey Lets wait 10 years and play it on a PC emulator forget about Consoles..."
Try to play Bayonetta, God of War 3, Heavy Rain on your low end PC that costs 2x more than a PC...or wait 10 years for an emulator to "proove me wrong".
Try to play GTAIV with good performance with a low end graphic card.
The emulator point was taken wrong, see with consoles you can't get the best picture. The games and consoles have preset limits to what the game will look like. And these are not based on the games development but a setting so that the game runs without lagging awfully. In the case of ff12 the game itself can look wonderful, but on a ps2 it doesn't becuase the ps2 can't hand it. And at the end of the ps3 life the same thing will happen, but with a computer if you have the system you can have the better graphics and if you don't you can scale down the graphics.
You seem to believe those consoles graphics are maximixed, they're not. That was the point of the emulator, showing that games can indeed be played at higher res/graphic than they are on the console.
So you make claims but I have already pointed out they are incorrect.
So yes consoles force you to play the game how they want you to, id rather have the options for rez and texture quality however.
Are you serious?
Well, this is why you see more games on Consoles.
This is why a Console is a much more fair gaming system.
This is why you see exclusive Console games that need less graphical power but look better.
This is why you know you can play every compatible game flawless on a Console and not on a PC.
Really? They "look better", enough said on that (as they may or may not).
And once again they are not flawless, many of the ports from xbox to ps3 has <20 fps frequently.
Other push around 30 fps, which is nothing to write home about.
"Fair" So does it treat you equally or what?
Consoles sell well for three reasons; one controllers with cords, two small little boxes that don't get in the way, and three cuz i had to buy one to pay this game and now i might as well play all my games on them. (Sony and Microsoft are smarter than the average consumer and understand by limiting availability of games to their respective platforms they increase the sales of their platforms).
hmm, well, no cords these days...
So, when a game is a PC exclusive, what argument you use? Should we blame ATI or NVIDIA?
You do know that it is easy and sometimes more profitable to build a good and impressive game for just one plataform right?
The only two things I see in your arguments are the total lack of information about Console gaming and a bit of illusory PC elitism.
"You do know that it is easy and sometimes more profitable to build a good and impressive game for just one plataform right?"
Why? I mean really why ? I think its becuase you then force people to buy that platform, that seems like a good thing for those people selling that product, but and awful thing for me and the consumer, that means i have to pay more for the same entertainment.
As for the lack of understanding of consoles, i believe the accurate technical aspects that i have addressed about the ps3, ps2 and xbox, as well as, PCs show that i do indeed understand them.
Edit- as i read though this thread i see that a good argument to why the console is better than the PC is becuase they purposefully selectively release game for specific systems.
The only problem is this is a very sad argument , it basically like saying they own me and my money becuase if i wanna play i go to pay for not only the game but all the special hardware, that is not required as most PC will run the game, but is required becuase they want to make a lot of money and , me being dumb fail to realize this and thus use this as a argument supporting consoles. Plz just stop buying them and their games and force these companies to treat us better.
Most non gaming PCs will NEVER run a modern game well, the argument you used against Consoles you can use against gaming PC market (and it is a pretty weak one).
Everyone has a PC is not equal to everyone has a PC able to run modern games with satisfatory performance.
PC is also a good gaming system, everyone here plays MMORPGs, so we all agree that a gaming PC is needed if you like this genre. But your arguments are nothing more than opinionated illusions.
Then using your own argument. Why can't i play ps3 games on my PS2, or my xbox games on my wii? Not every console is equal also.
Can I just say....................OMG
This is the most confusing quote in the entire universe.
In regard to the OP. You are right on one thing, eventually consoles will become more PC like. A console, however, will still be a console, and a PC a PC. Sure there are plenty of people who can surf and e-mail on their consoles now, but the majority of business applications will stay on a PC, and consoles will keep a tremendous gaming market.
Consoles are created for gaming, and they always have been. As they progress, they will become more like a PC as far as hardware, but the capabilities will roughly stay the same. Under no circumstance will their be an entire platform merge where a PC and Console will be one and the same. Exclusivities between the consoles generate too much revenue for each company for them to start porting everything to PC only. The increasing use of peripherals that PCs don't utilize that originally was taboo in the old console days is now becoming widely popular. Theres just too much money to be made on consoles for them to go anywhere anytime soon.
On top of that, creating games for a single hardware type is easier then having to troubleshoot hundreds of different hardware or software configurations. Its obvious an Xbox 360 game won't play on the original Xbox, and it wasn't made to. A PC game however, may have to be compatible with Windows XP-7 and then the off person who wants to try it on a linux distribution in some sort of compatibility mode. Then you've got the people who have this old video card, and then those that have the brand new card each of which may be running drivers that are just too old, or haven't been tested with that game.
Consoles are Casual, and there are plenty of people out there that are just looking for a casual, easy going, not staring at a computer screen 2 feet away from you, kind of experience. This will not go away, and it will become more affluent with each new console release. Expect the next gen consoles to be able to run MMOs quickly and easily. Its only a matter of time before console MMOs become the next fad in the genre.
Talk about hogwash.
"A "gaming" PC is the most expensive gaming plataform and there is no doubt about it. "
A $600 PC will play anything a PS3 will ever handle.
What do you mean by a "PC that will play anything a PS3 will ever handle"?
Most popular games you play on PC you can play on a PS3, but there are a lot of PS3 games that the PC will never handle, not because of hardware limitations, but because most of the real sofisticated and "big" PS3 games will never be on PC.
In the end the comparision you made has only one purpose, so people who only has a PC can feel better. Buy a $600 PC today and you will need to upgrade it in less than 2 years if you want to play every game maximized and with full direct x compatibility.
A low end PC was not able to run GTAIV well, and it was possible to play it flawless on a PS3.
PS3 $ 370,00
XBOX 360 elite $299,00
Perhaps I'm missing the context of this, but this is a highly biased argument.
For one, a PS3 was NOT $370 when GTA4 released.
For another, a $600 machine bought at the time GTA4 released could have played it pretty well. One bought NOW could smoke the PS3, and the old $600 machine could be upgraded to also smoke the PS3.
Several years from now, a $600 machine will absolutely obliterate a PS3's performance, meanwhile game manufacturers will have to peel off gfx options in order to get adequate performance on a PS3.
We'll not even START about what happens when you spend a few hundred bucks more...
While we both tend to agree that PC's will never "destroy" console gaming, I couldn't let that slide. A console has convenience and overall affordability in its side, while PC provides a potentially better gaming experience. Consoles graphic and processing superiority tends to be extremely short lived(and during that time, the console costs MORE than most PC's), and spends most of its life cycle on the inferior side of the war.
And then you come here trying to counter my arguments and say that your $600,00 PC can run "every game"... well, so I am right, a gaming PC (even a low end one that will need upgrade soon like yours) IS the most expensive gaming system!
Depends on WHEN you buy them.
You can almost buy a PS3 and a 360 with the price of one middle/low end PC.
In your time frame example of GTA4, you seem to think a middle/low end PC costs about $1000.
Most of you are wrong and some of you have mentioned this. THIS IS THE NEXT GENERATION OF GAMING!!!!
www.onlive.com/
im pretty sure onlive will just be a small gimmick for just a few thousand people. people will still buy computers for like 1200$, download games for free and play them even when they are offline. onlive is just for people with a fast connection and a crappy computer. i havent read much about onlive though but im pretty sure u have to be online to use it... duh. and after what ive heard it doesnt support the high resolutions or graphics. so my bet is that onlive is for console people who want to be a PC dude.
i bet u cant use BitLord f.ex on maximum effect while playing a singleplayer game on onlive.
Not to mention noone here has tried it, so there is no telling how well the games will actually play. If it works well, GREAT! We have yet to see it work well though.
You're missing the point. We are discussing the PC AS A GAMING PLATFORM.
You can do word procesing, spread sheets, photo imaging, programming, etc., on a machine that is way cheaper and less up to date than your average PC gaming rig. In fact, I can do most everyday computing tasks in a web browser now. The auxilary tasks that a computer can perform have no bearing on this discussion.
IMO, the PC is an awful platform for gaming. Ironically, the few game genres that PCs are actually better at handling, excluding flight and racing sims, don't require a top end gaming rig. And yes, I'm talking about MMOs, RTS and turn-based strategy games. There are exceptions but developers that aim at sky high system specs generally don't do as well as games aimed at mid-level hardware.
NOTE: Flight and racing sims require a much higher investment in perpherials than the average high-end game rig. This market is so extremely niche that there are only a handful of small time developers even making these things.
Consoles are becoming more like computers every generation. I don't think either side will crush the other. ...If virtualization ever gets into homes en masse then it won't really matter. You won't even have a console or computer in your home, you'll just pay a service fee and do everything on your TV/monitor through the net.
Until you cancel your subscription, you are only helping to continue the cycle of mediocrity.