In the fall of 2005, a " budget gaming pc" with a pricetag of $79.00 higher (500.00) than an xbox 360 ($421.00) would need 8 times the ram required to run Crysis 3 at absolute lowest required settings. Meanwhile an xbox 360 could run
given it wasnt one of THOSE xboxes...Crysis 3 using only 1/4th of the required ram of its lowest PC counterpart, but sacrificing graphics for compatibility.
This is why I'm a little concerned every time the mustard race brags about their "future-proof" 500-700$ "budget" gaming PC with 8gb of ram during
the very beginning of a new console generation with equal to or less than the specs of a current gen console.....y'know....because PC games will never need more than 8gb of ram ever......
Am I the only one old enough here to notice this over the past 3-4 generations?
The last game you played is getting a movie
The director is the director of the last movie you watched
Will it be great or will it be shit?
Hey Chica, it's Bill. I don't really get what you are saying in your post. You are saying that a budget PC would have difficulty running a high end game at the lowest settings. Then you say that an xbox 360 can run the game at even lower settings. I don't see why this reflects badly on the PC. Also, over the last ten years the rate of growth in pc hardware growth has slowly dramatically. I think it is a bit disingenuous to imply it is as difficult to future proof a pc now as it what nine years ago.
This is what it looked like back when I used to have a horse in this race
Start of each new console gen:
Console gamers: PC GAMING IS DEAD! Theres no difference!
PC gamers: Hey guys, I just built this computer with a whopping 512mb of ram for only 600$, im sure this will play games for just as long as xbox 360/ps3...
Middle of each console gen:
"Consoles are so shitty looking,and they're holding back PC gaming.....but hey! suddenly budget gaming PCs are cheaper than ever to play games
for some totally unknown reason, almost as if game devs are holding back graphics to meet console specs, I can run easily run these current-gen games with 8x the hardware of current-gen consoles, so obviously I'll be able to run games made on next-generation with the exact same hardware!
End of each console generation:
PC GAMING IS GODLIKE, I can run ANY current-gen game for some strange reason, I probably will never have to upgrade again....but im going to anyway for unknown reasons...but its my choice, not a necessity thing. I just so happen to coincidentally upgrade my PC at the exact time minimum requirements will start to increase again.
New Console generation:
PC gaming is dead!
Hey guys, I just built this future-proof 600$ PC with 8gb of ram, I can run games now, which means I can also run games forever without upgrades.
Precisely my point, I just get tired of these discussions from people who seem to have no long term memory (no pun intended).
I mean we can trace it back to the 90's when a game on PC would require 4-16 times the ram required on a console. Yet still, there are people who insist its cheaper for me to buy a 600$ PC (either with or without the implication of upgrading) than just buying a simple console.
Im tripcoding so that the OP (me)can be identified and properly addressed, however it appears as though its no longer needed now that "OP" is highlighted in a new 4chan format.
Hey Bill, Im saying that a game console of equal or lesser price to that of its PC counterpart
sparing an exterior effectwill have the capabilities to play a game that a computer may not be able to thanks to static-console specs each generation.
So while PC Devs focus on graphics and let users adapt, Console devs focus on users and adapt their graphics accordingly (as per the "they're holding us back" cliche').
As for your "growth in pc hardware growth has slowed dramatically".
This is an attempt to provide a forecast of the future, I could say the very same in favor of consoles and it'd be equally unfounded. The best I could grant you is that perhaps for the first time in over twenty years, PC devs will stick with their specs. However the flaw is, if PC devs are sticking with their specs for PC, how would the equivalent console specs still be "inferior"?
Looking at the past trends...
....from 94-2001 for example;
Games released towards the beginning of the Ps1 Console (tail end of 1994)obviously had less variations between the PC counterparts, which is to be expected. Games like "decent" requiring 4mb minimum is only double that of PS1's 2mb.
However, looking towards the end of the PS1 generation, games like Need For Speed High Stakes and Final Fantasy 8 (both 32mb minimum)required up to 16 times the minimum ram requirements as compared to the 2mb on the PS1.
This same trend continues for some 20 years until this very day, the day in which you propose that it will never go up again or if so...in a much slower process.
If you're careful about what you buy, and you're comfortable with a certain level of experience (720p resolution / 30fps) then yes you can build a machine that will provide a comparable experience to a console for around the same price though you're not going to match them feature for feature because the exact SOC with its 8 core cpu and halfway decent integrated graphics isn't available on the general market yet, and you're going to have to live with a more limited set of games than Windows has because SteamOS is still relatively new.
Sure the machine you build now aiming for console equivalence may not last for very long if something unexpected happens, but the same is true of the consoles there's no guarantee that next year Apple won't launch the iConsole and make the Xbone look like the Saturn.
You may be right, op, but this is my experience so far now that im
>buy 2-3 games
>buy ps3 and laptop
>buy 3-4 games for ps3
>play some PC exclusives on laptop
> beat those 3-4 games on ps3
>Keep playing on laptop
>not even touching the ps3
>keep playing on laptop
>"Shit this laptop is a piece of shit"
>Keep playing on shitty laptop
>new games everywhere. Online multiplayer, single player, mods everywhere.
>buy new gaming rig
>maximum graphics everywhere
>not even interested in the ps4
Even though I use the ps3 controller for some PC games,I would totally change any console for my PC. I worked for about 7 months for this baby and I'm loving it every second.
Just my couple of cents.
I think your main point is right - buying a console at the beginning of a generation will probably ensure that you have the compatibility to play new games for a longer time than if you buy a PC for the same cost. Like you said, console developers have a baseline to cater to.
There's a lot of other things to think about when comparing the two, though. IMO since most people need a PC anyway, PCs are easily upgradable, you can easily replace a broken part, and PC games are cheaper, it can end up being a better value depending on your situation. For most people it's the price difference between 'facebook PC' and 'gaming PC' that is relevant, which is pretty much just a $200 video card. Also if you build a $600 PC now and 4-5 years from now you can't play any new games, you won't have to buy another $600 PC, you just need to replace the component that is holding you back. And then you can pretty much repeat that forever until they abandon ATX. On the other hand, half the people I know who bought xbox360's when they came out ended up eventually having them red-ring and then had to buy a whole new console.