Icrontic: Forget the console and build a gaming PC, a value comparison.

JsonHenry - 72 days 7 hours ago

Yeah, it cost a little more now. But a year ago it was barely more than the price of a console for a mid to mid-high gaming rig.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

Sarick - 72 days 7 hours ago

Let's assume you're talking about games that run on your PC. I've had so much trouble with PC's that I've given up on them as a gaming rig.

Don't forget. If you own the PC you also need to buy the OS (at least $200 for windows unless you're a pirate) and constantly clean up the mess left over by game software uninstalls. When I'd install demos or games and remove them on a PC they always left directories and registry crap all over the place.

In some cases games like spore installed anti-piracy software garbage too. All that mess makes the PC a hassle. At least with a console you know the games are tested fairly well for your hardware and can be removed relatively simple.

Agree(3) | Disagree(5) | Report

tdrules - 72 days 7 hours ago

may i suggest tune up utilities or ccleaner.
every uninstall ive ever done has removed everything from the game

Agree(4) | Disagree(0) | Report

nycredude - 72 days 6 hours ago

I think all you guys are missing the point. We are gamers because of the games. Fact is there too many games that are available on consoles and NOT on PC for you to just game solely on PC, unless you only care about mmos.

Also anyone who thinks pc gaming is cheaper than console is delusional. On top of initial cost there is just much more maintenance involved.

Agree(4) | Disagree(4) | Report

FarEastOrient - 72 days 5 hours ago

I do graphic design on my computers and for the price of a console in comparison there is no ground. Especially when you are facing facts that a PS3 CELL can compile data faster than a Corei7. There is no major standard to game coding for PCs, hence the numerous patches that comes out in comparison to their console counterparts and the minimum specs are insane (Assassin's Creed PC, Gran Theft Auto PC).

Agree(1) | Disagree(2) | Report

Sarick - 71 days 17 hours ago

"I don't see why game installs and crappy OSs have anything to do with actual gaming. Last time I checked, plenty of console gamers were fine with glitches shipping in their final games, hardware crashes, RRoD, and problems caused by firmware updates..."

Taking into account most of the truths you mentioned. IMHO, it seems the consoles are still more and reliable less technical. I for one didn't stand for the RROD so that point is moot. What I found out with PC is if software wasn't compatible for some reason as a user I had to figure out what the problem was.

Update drivers, download patches, change hardware, research, change driver setting etc. etc. etc. With the console 99% of the time you can put a game in and it'll play with little or no issues.

I play games to enjoy entertainment. Sure there are gamers out there that are willing to work around problems like RROD, or PC compatibility tweaking but I'm not one of those people. I just wish people didn't act like PC fanboys when people tell them why they'd rather play console games. My mother still can't figure or work the PS3 let alone PC.

I think it's something called personal preference. Honestly, was anything in my original statement baseless conjecture? The only response was to install utilities or tools backing up the very claims I made that hurt the PC experience.

BTW: I have CCleaner, I never said I as a computer idiot just that I didn't enjoy cleaning up after the mess leftover by a lot of software.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

tdrules - 72 days 6 hours ago

couldnt agree more

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

LethalToxins - 72 days 7 hours ago

How can a PC "fall old" at a faster rate than consoles when consoles are basically outdated by comparison at the time of their release? At least a PC might get four months as most powerful gaming platform on the market...consoles don't even get a day. Unless you're only comparing the PC's power to other PCs...that's just stupid since one: this article is comparing them to consoles, and two: that outdated PC would still put the console to shame regardless.

When consoles are released there are already more powerful PCs out there, so those PCs will all stay better than that console for the entirety of the console's lifespan.

And the gain for going quad over dual core has largely been negligible since most software doesn't utilize the technology anyway. Not to mention for the same price you can get a more powerful dual core by comparison where many tasks will slow down for the similarly priced quad core. You should read up before posting. Here's a yummy link:

http://www.codinghorror.com...

Don't forget all those people who had to buy another console because it bricked. The cooling options, among others, for PCs make them much less likely to die from heat exhaustion. Every person who's had multiple 360s bricked could have bought the absolute best PC on the market, upgraded it a few times, and they'd break even in terms of cost (exaggeration). Not to mention it's not hard to read up on PCs and learn to avoid viruses. I've gone five years without any antivirus software and never had a problem.

Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report

Pandamobile - 72 days 6 hours ago

PC's may 'fall old' faster, but consoles are old hardware by the time they release.

Agree(4) | Disagree(0) | Report

BlackTar187 - 72 days 6 hours ago

they may be dated upon release but they don't have to be upgraded every month to keep up with the games that come out. sure you can use your same computer to run games for a year but then if you want to stay with the upgrades in graphic etc you are then forced to upgrade your rig and then the price continues to climb since its a rinse and repeat. Im in to PC gaming but you guys arnt getting what he is saying.

Agree(3) | Disagree(3) | Report

LethalToxins - 72 days 6 hours ago

No, I didn't miss the point. I don't like gross exaggerations. Saying you have to upgrade your PC that frequently is a damn lie. The same PC that could play Crysis (max settings) on/near its release date can still play EVERY PC game maxed out today. That's nearly two YEARS ago.

So, how often do I really have to upgrade again? Having the option is not the same as having the necessity. Console gamers use that as a crutch for PCs to talk trash and it's silly at best. Get real.

Agree(3) | Disagree(0) | Report

dirthurts - 72 days 6 hours ago

Is dead wrong.
Maybe if you guy the crappiest card that will barely run the new games, then sure. You may want to upgrade that.
But if you buy a good card, you can play ANY game this gen, easily. And if you guy a great card, you're set for next gen too.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

BlackTar187 - 72 days 6 hours ago

so your telling me i didnt pay alot of money 2 years ago
for dual 9800 gts video cards with 4 gb of ram and the high end dual core procceser?

How much did those cost hell when i bought those video cards they were retailing at $550 each i got them for $200 cus of my discount even at 200 a video card that is rather expensive and yes those are going out dated pretty soon cant wait to see Crysis 2 specs

So what are saying is want and need? So with a console i dont ahve to worry about not runnign a game at full specs thats the thing here yes you can have a game run good but can you have it run at full spec ? I had my ps2 for years lets say 5 yrs can i get a pc that i dont need to upgrade and still put out the best the game offers ? without upgrading for that same time.

Dont confuse me for a console only gamer ive been building and playing computer games since

Kings Quest, and roger wilco etc. UFO defense one on dos i used to mess around as a young kid in 386 and 486 computers

This sint even a high end card
BFG - NVIDIA GeForce GTX 275 OC 896MB GDDR3 PCI Express Graphics Card
and its almost $300 at a normal retailer how long are you saying this card will last on putting all the new games out at the highest specs?

Man so your saying my old 5 yr old computer or 3 yr old computer can run it at top spec is what your saying. Sure i can run alot of games on my old PC at low specs thats not the answer here. Can you run it at high specs on all future games with current middle end Graphics cards at $200 a peice? and how long can i expect those graphics cards to last at full spec?

No one is denying that you can run games on a old computer im not syaing that im also not all in on this either . But i build my own comp. and i have alot of MFG discount due to my job role so i should be getting them much cheaper then most and way over 50% off retail and its still exp. and my comp will last awhile but im not gonna convinvce people ill be able to run all the top end games with out upgrades over the next short period of 4yrs like a console minn life will do

EDIT:

So even a new game like Op flashpoint already ahs its recommend at my GFX card (Well a series under) and its been 2 years when 2 years ago my graphics cards slammed on all new games it seems that even on a game like this there are hitting my graphics cards # for high end specs

Hard Drive Space : 8 GB
Operating System : Windows XP SP2 or later
Processor : Quad Core CPU
RAM : 2 GB
Video Card : Shader 3.0 (GeForce 8800 GT / 512 MB VRAM or higher), DirectX 9.0c

And were only talking about the GFX card here no sound cards no ram now proccesser nothing but one piece of a multi part product

Last edit.

Toxin good point and its works against you with that high end stuff you purchased 2 years ago how far out dated will it be in 2 years? Now thast 4yrs total and requiring a upgrade gen. of more then one peice in 4 yrs with a console the GFX may not be as good(OBV) but you dont need to have anything extra to stay at top of what the game being released is meant to be at.

One more

http://www.product-reviews....

saying that you can play Crysis on a $900 computer that will not last 4 years at top spec on games and thats $900 how much is a 360 and ps3 hell both are still only 2/3 of that and this is a budget comp.

and this is satted its high setting not max settings so that 900 comp is already outdated if you want top of the line.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

dirthurts - 72 days 5 hours ago

Will run on consoles. It will run on any decent computer quite easily.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

BlackTar187 - 72 days 5 hours ago

Im done adding over and over and this messed up where i meant to post anyways

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

LethalToxins - 72 days 6 hours ago

Indeed. That is the trump card for consoles/handhelds. Their exclusives are amazing.

Agree(2) | Disagree(1) | Report

tdrules - 72 days 6 hours ago

so what youre saying is own a ps3 and a pc and thats perfect ;D

Agree(3) | Disagree(1) | Report

pixelsword - 72 days ago

...this is N4G!

:D

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

Pandamobile - 72 days 4 hours ago

It doesn't.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

Jeremy Clarkson - 72 days 3 hours ago

"As for saying the Cell in the PS3 compiles data faster then the new i7? And how does this benefit gaming in anyway shape or form?"

Your ignorance is disturbing.

Faster real time data execution = better lighting, better physics, better A.I etc etc etc...

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

Ninjamonkey - 72 days 2 hours ago

Haha I just read that.

Its good to see these writers which use no real logic get beaten at their own game by people who can be bothered to do the reaserch, and really know what theyre talking about.

Not only that it was just over all written much much better.

Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report

Cliff Forster - 71 days 23 hours ago

Ninjamonkey,

I don't think your seeing the complete argument. Lets just consider this, you are fresh out of college, you have nothing in your new apartment and you decide to invest in video gaming as a hobby. I know, purely hypothetical, but just to create a level playing field go there with me.

So, you have a budget for things that you will need. Is it reasonable to say that everyone needs a PC of some kind? The console does not replace the functionality of the PC correct? I mean you still need a web browser, some productivity applications, those sort of things that a console really is not good at right?

So, if your going to buy the PC anyway, why not spend a little more to get it gaming ready, vs. buying a crappy PC to pair with a console thats going to offer you less visually?

Having a PC either way is part of the value equation, and I felt $400 was a fair representation for what a common OEM box costs these days. Its not an invalid argument.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

tdrules - 72 days 6 hours ago

youre just ignorant, dont worry.
i was until i saw just how good some exclusive pc titles are from the past 5 years.
now im a ps3/pc gamer

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report