Are Consoles Becoming too Powerful for PC

PlayStation 4 and Xbox One are giving PC gamers a run for their money. The current-gen powerhouses have raised the stakes. In order for any PC to match the quality seen on the PS4 and the Xbox One, they have to spend a huge chunk of cash to match it.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
saadd201393d ago

Glad to be an owner of consoles...I stopped playing PC years ago although some old school games and Pro Evo I do play on PC from time to time.

vishmarx1393d ago (Edited 1393d ago )

oh boy this cannot go down well.


uth111393d ago

Same here. played PC games since 94, but got tired of picking up so many games that either did not work without spending hours of research or that forced me to upgrade yet again because they ran like crap on my hardware. Going to consoles helped bring the joy back to gaming because games worked much better on first try. Just like they used to on PC.

LightofDarkness1393d ago

What? Games didn't used to work on PC on their first try, especially not in '94. You had to config everything just so for DOS games, including your exact sound card model, IRQ, VESA mode and much more. Gaming on PC nowadays is just about as easy and convenient as gaming on consoles, with automatic driver and game updates and features like Steam's Big Picture mode and Nvidia Geforce Experience which automatically selects the recommended settings for your hardware configuration. Most games just run straight away, right out of the box/download, with little to no issues. The only time you really run into problems now is if you have exotic hardware or multi-screen/multi-GPU configurations.

uth111393d ago

The worse case in the late MS-DOS days, you ran memmaker and created a special boot configuration for the game to free up enough memory in the 640K space.

There were no drivers to worry about for the most part, it was built into the game. You ran SETUP, and selected yours video and sound cards from the menu.

IRQ conflicts could happen, but if you were careful about setting your jumpers you were good to go. That problem actually got worse when Windows started with the plug and play and could reconfigure IRQs dynamically, it sometimes created conflicts because it didn't do it right.

GameSpawn1393d ago


PC games still have minimum graphics requirements and there is STILL not 100% a guarantee whether the game will run without a hitch and what the quality will be like if you are at the minimum (most likely crap).

PC enthusiasts can try and defend it all they want, but PC's have massive cons over consoles that don't make it worth the while for the pros and can become money pits if you are not careful.

Consoles give you the best compromise for price vs graphic quality and ease of play. It won't be bleeding edge like you'd get with a $5,000+ gaming rig, but it sure will be as good as a $1,000-$2,000 one (right now) and DEFINITELY better than a $500 budget build (they need to STOP cheating on the OS licensing on these BTW - they always exclude it from the build price or don't include other misc components like cases).

Back to the original topic:
Games have become MUCH easier to install since the pre-graphics card DOS days, yes. However, like I said earlier you don't not have a 100% guarantee your game will work without some issue. You will need to tweak the graphic settings to match with your hardware (the auto settings are always crap anyways) and tastes (I personally sacrifice shadows and some particles for better detail elsewhere). Also, there may be driver conflicts that you need to work around or wait out until you manufacturer releases an updated driver. I personally had serious issues with Skyrim only running on one card for months because my system uses a Crossfire setup and it took a later beta driver from AMD before Skyrim would work with both cards and I could up my quality settings.

I still play games one both consoles and my PC, but 80% of my gaming is on consoles for convenience (and choice of games -- a lot of them aren't on PC).

In the end PCs and consoles are not better or worse than the other, because it is really subjective based on how you play and use them and how much time and money you are willing to spend on either one.

Jivesh1393d ago

Consoles offer more than most PC's of the same price but then again there's Steam, nothing beats Steam.

wsoutlaw871393d ago

Steam is fine but I would take psn/xbl over steam because their ui, parties, and updates are better. If you are referring to sales id take ebay/craigslist/gamefly over steam. Steam workshop for mod support is great though.

LAWSON721392d ago (Edited 1392d ago )

Steam gets great updates and has parties. Start chat invite multiple people.

wsoutlaw871392d ago

not saying it doesnt, im saying consoles do it better.

Bladesfist1392d ago

No they don't, consoles have super slow UIs and messaging systems that take forever. Steam is slick and fast.

wsoutlaw871392d ago

steams updates take a long time and yes psn has a bug slowing messaging right now but pulling up the ui in game and joining parties, checking trophies, jumping into a friends game, or inviting a friend, all work much faster on consoles. The whole ui of both consoles is much better than steams.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1392d ago
ElementX1393d ago (Edited 1393d ago )

A PC pays for itself in a year or two when you figure in the cost of the games. PC games are almost always cheaper and even pre-orders are discounted 15-20% sometimes. Steam, Greenmangaming, Gamersgate, and other sites have different games on sale every day for as much as 90% off. I got Shadows of Mordor for $35 back when it was still $60 on consoles. If you look at the indie games on consoles you spend $15 when you can usually find them for half that on PC.

If you buy say 30 games over the course of a console's life for $60 that's $1800. If those were bought on PC with 30% off you'd be spending $1260 and saving $540.

BiggerBoss1393d ago

You act like console owners buy all their games at $60, which just isnt the case. Many console owners (especially casuals) will just buy a game used or wait until its cheaper.

Silly Mammo1393d ago

Console games can also be sold on the Used game market. I hardly ever keep games I've finished. And can get anywhere between $15-$30 back in store credit for Amazon.

uth111393d ago

But that savings goes into hardware which you will likely upgrade a few times over the same 6-8 year period of the life of the console.

You could easily sink that $540 into just a GPU, like this one:
or buy a cheaper one and have to upgrade it in 2 or 3 years time

LightofDarkness1393d ago

You're always in PC articles spreading FUD and misinformation. You CAN choose to upgrade your GPU to something more powerful with your savings if you'd like, or you can save it. At least with PC you have that option, rather than playing increasingly generic and outdated looking console games for 8 years. How many console gamers were crying out for a new generation of consoles by 2012? There's a reason so many people jumped to PC gaming towards the end of the last generation, and it's because it lasted way too long and stagnated. People were craving advancement and you can only get that on the regular from one platform.

uth111393d ago

Upgrading your GPU is often not a choice.
You buy a game, your system meets the minimum specs, you pop it in, and the graphics are so sluggish, or filled with graphics artifacts, like missing water, for instance. Time for a new GPU or not play the game.

You can buy the $500 GPU and get a few years out of it, or buy a $150 GPU and have to upgrade it again after 2 years, but games are always pushing new hardware it's not FUD. It happens to me, and many other PC users will admit it happens to them.

Some people want everyone to believe that you can buy a $500 PC that will run everything on Ultra for the next 6 years. That is the real misinformation.

LightofDarkness1392d ago

My last GPU was a GTX 580 that lasted me 4 years. I only upgraded it to SLI 970s in preparation for the next generation and games like Star Citizen.

More to that, I'm going to do what most enthusiasts do when they upgrade regularly: sell off my old components for a tidy sum and only pay a fraction for my upgrade. If I sell my GTX 970s in 1 year I will likely stand to make about €500 from the sale. That will easily net me a flagship GPU at no extra cost or 2x upgraded equivalents to my old cards for about €100-€150 extra. Not exactly the $400-$500 a year habit you seem to think it is, is it? Do you think people just stock pile GPUs in their homes when they upgrade regularly? No, they just keep trading up and paying only a small amount to stay ahead of the game. I did the same when going from a GTX 260 to a 5870 to a GTX 580. In each case I paid only about €50 and €100 for the upgrades, all within a span of 2.5 years. I kept the 580 for 4 years because until recently when the new generation released, there was no need to upgrade. I still managed to sell it for €150. There are forums dedicated to the resale of computer components, where you can pick up bargains and sell your old/unwanted bits for a fair price.

If you're clever you can keep on a solid upgrade path for very little money, and if you want to just rest with what you have, you can absolutely do that too. It's not nearly as dire a financial situation as you seem to think it is.

wsoutlaw871393d ago (Edited 1393d ago )

That just isnt true anymore. Pc gamers seem to think console gamers buy games through the systems store like they do. Amazon has sales on all games and i think most people got SOM for around 35. Gamefly is also a huge savings over any steam sales. Gaming pcs also use more electricity. Yes though, digital only indies drop price much faster on pc.

Ot: this article is stupid.

Show all comments (41)
The story is too old to be commented.