Tom

"Tom" <noway@nothere.com> wrote in message
news:a5ednS0V29MTONLWnZ2dnUVZ_rudnZ2d@insightbb.co m...
>
>
> "Morgan" <nospam@nospam.co.uk> wrote in message
> newsoI3n.17252$I67.16040@newsfe16.ams2...
>> The alMIGHTY N wrote:
>>> On Jan 13, 11:08 am, Morgan <nos...@nospam.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> The alMIGHTY N wrote:
>>>>>> I see plenty of PC games advertised on GameStop/EB's frontpage - both
>>>>>> as
>>>>>> retail games, and through Gamestop's digital download store.
>>>>> LOL
>>>>> The only PC games on those homepages are the PC versions of games that
>>>>> are also available for the consoles... and the "PC" link is always
>>>>> last.
>>>> But these games are still available on the PC, the fact that they are
>>>> also available for consoles is immaterial.
>>>
>>> People were able to buy audio cassettes and VHS cassettes for many
>>> years after CDs and DVDs took over. That doesn't mean that those
>>> things *weren't* on the way out.
>>
>> This isn't a very good analogy at all though. Writing a VHS or audio tape
>> incurs negligible extra cost. Tailoring a game to run on a PC requires a
>> lot more time and resources in design coding, testing and will require
>> substantial investment.
>>
>>>>> Now, the only real advantage of PC games is the higher resolutions
>>>>> which Blu-ray has shown is really not important to the typical
>>>>> consumer.
>>>> The PCs graphical superiority goes far beyond screen resolution.
>>>
>>> Of course they are but higher resolutions are the most prominent and
>>> noticeable change.
>>
>> Not true at all, and a very strange comment from the person who climed
>> that most people can't tell the difference in resolution between DVD and
>> Blu-Ray.
>>
>>>If you say "PCs" in general, then it's tough to
>>> include all aspects of better graphics because you need to account for
>>> the cheaper PCs that aren't able to handle much more than one
>>> improvement.
>>
>> Cheaper PCs still have a lot more horsepower than a 360 or PS3, and a new
>> PC game on medium settign will look better than a new console game.
>>
>> >You're not going to be able to run Crysis with higher
>>> resolutions *and* better lighting *and* improved textures *and* better
>>> mapping *and*... etc. and so forth on anything but a higher end gaming
>>> rig.
>>
>> That's one example, Bioshock on the other hand ran fine maxed out on a
>> mid range PC of the day.
>>
>
> I have to mostly agree with Almighty on his comments really. I mean, I am
> an avid PC gamer but only for a niche set of games, and I just built a
> really expensive rig ($4K) and most people are not going to go that route
> because most (typical) gamers feel just fine with the console games, they
> are happy with what they offer (look at Wii sales!!). I am, for the most
> part, one of them, except I am an RPG freak, they are better on PC, but I
> somehow think that won't last much longer going into the next gen. The PC
> market is certainly not dead, but it is a nearly complete shell of its
> former self and game sales and especially hardware sales even reflect
> that.
>
> Hell, even over the past year or so, the console gaming industry has
> suffered a bit from sales, so I don't think that PC sales for gamers are
> going to somehow leap consoles, and I think consoles are the future. They
> are definitely getting better and better with quality graphics, controls
> and performance. I am a niche person to be honest. I do agree with you
> that one doesn't need a rig like I have to enjoy good game on a PC, if you
> do the right math, you actually can save money on PC gaming. I remember
> reading an article not long ago where a gaming site ran down the cost
> effectiveness and then value.
>
> - You can buy a decent rig these days with a decent monitor for about $800
> and it would be good enough for 3-4 years and it would be more powerful.
> Add these in:
>
> -You can customize most games on PC and PC games usually cost $10 less,
> sometimes even less than that, than console games. Add this up for some
> who buy 15-20 game a year, that money adds up over a few years.
>
> - Mouse and keyboards usually last longer than controllers (I've gone
> though 4 controllers on my 360 to date, that's $200 right there) My
> previous gaming rig lasted nearly 6 years with the same mouse and
> keyboard.
>
> -You can mod and always have far superior controls schemes
>
> - Nearly better graphics all of the time and better performance.
>
> - Much more more storage space for saves and content as most PCs today,
> even for my example cost will have two HDDs. You only have one for the 360
> (or PS3) and the 360 rapes consumers by forcing them to use MS approved
> and made hardware add-ons.
>
> - You are not forced to except updates that can (though rarely) have an
> adverse effect on your console or for the games. Don't except an update on
> the 360, you can't play online.
>
> - Being able to multitask while gaming, if needed.
>
> Having listed these, it is a fact that most will still see consoles as
> "good enough" and not fret over aspects of what I want/prefer, or what you
> want/prefer. PC gaming certainly isn't dead, and it will be around for
> years to come, but it is dwindling and the numbers reflect that..

I also forgot to add that with a console, comes the price of buying even a
halfway decent HDTV (if you want HD that is) will cost at least $500.