Pc's or Consoles?

WoW is also extremely boring. Anyways...

mpcrsc562 said:

Someone stated that consoles are cheaper... How?

Because I can pick up an Xbox360 for $199 that plays Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2, Left for Dead 2, and Battlefield Bad Company 2. I've yet to find a PC at this price point that can.

mpcrsc562 said:

More often than not, PC's are upgraded for something that has nothing to do with gaming--so that cost isn't even a factor.

I'm not sure if I agree with that. Many people that I know often buy new PC's to play the newest games. People often buy newer power supplies to power newer video cards and buy extra cooling to help overclock their systems to maximize performance. If people were simply going with PC's for things other than gaming...they would all be simply using onboard graphics. How many people who are regular posters on this board are running boxes with onboard graphics?

mpcrsc562 said:

Whereas most of the mainstream and upper-mainstream cards can be had for less than $400 -- right on par with the cost of a console.

To be fair, $400 is 2x as much as a Xbox360 today. And lots of people are running these $300+ cards in SLI or Crossfire. So that doubles the cost, and often involves having to have stronger power supplies and more cooling to keep the case cool.

mpcrsc562 said:

Matter of fact, I'll go on record to state that my two Radeons will last longer than most of your (first) Xbox360's! How many of those have you all had to go thru yet?

Of course, the Xbox360 is notorious for having hardware issues. This problem with this console is far and away a bigger problem that we have experienced with any of the other consoles in the past.

To answer your question, I am on my 2nd Xbox360 since May of 2006. First one purchased for $299 and second one purchased for $199. Since I don't game a ton, I considered not getting another console...but I already had the games and such sitting there....so it seemed a shame to not have a working console to use them.

mpcrsc562 said:

But what of the games themselves? Every Sunday sales paper I see NEW RELEASE console games going for $60! The same on PC is $30 to $50 -- how is a console cheaper?

Guess it depends upon the context.

Let's imagine a family with a single parent (mom) and a son. Lets say Mom currently has 1 laptop in the house that her and her son use. If the kid gets interested in gaming, she has a choice to make. Either buy her son a console for around $300...or purchase a new computer for around $800-$1,200 (because she will need a monitor, etc) that will play games that are similar or better.

So, lets say Mom gets a PC for exactly $1,000. Let's say she gets a PS3 for $300. So, we have $700 difference on day 1. If the PC version of the game is $30 and the PS3 version is $60, it would take purchasing 24 games at that price difference for the total investment of the console $1740, to exceed the PC at $1720.


Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that PC gaming is bad....but I think there is clearly a market for both platforms. And I still believe that consoles are the best bang for the buck way to get there. If you have more money to spend are and passionate about computers, you may spend more, but it might be more worth it to you in the end.

Product FRED said:

WoW is also extremely boring. Anyways...

I've never played it, but to your comment!

antharr said:

Product FRED said:

StealthyBoss said:

console!!! xbox 360!!!!

Yes, but can it run Crysis?

This is a mute point. Consoles have exclusives too.

It was also an Internet meme...

pparks1 said:

I'm not sure if I agree with that. Many people that I know often buy new PC's to play the newest games. People often buy newer power supplies to power newer video cards and buy extra cooling to help overclock their systems to maximize performance. If people were simply going with PC's for things other than gaming...they would all be simply using onboard graphics. How many people who are regular posters on this board are running boxes with onboard graphics?

If a person is purchasing or building a computer for the sole purpose for gaming, then you got me hands down. I'll use myself as the example / guinea pig... I came into the PC gaming realm from the consoles -- the last console I had was a Gamecube and it got stolen. I bought a computer on a after-Christmas sale at Circuit City. It was crap. Not too long after, I saw a copy of Madden 06 and said, "What the heck." I found that I needed an aftermarket graphics card, though. So I bought one. The price point for that Radeon 9250 was far cheaper than the cheapest consoles of the time. So here I am now with a PC that I built to play games and that I know cost well more than an Xbox, Xbox360, PS2, PS3, and Wii put together. That's me, though.

But one thing that keeps catching my eye, though, is the flashing back and forth in time. Meaning, you are stating that you can get an Xbox360 now for $200, where all along, I'm referring to initial cost. I believe that in initial cost, consoles are more expensive. And adding the actual game into the equation, consoles still stay more expensive.

My opinion, though.

More expensive?
When the new console comes out, do you rid yourself of the old one? If not, what of the games the developer had in development for the old console actually release that game for the old console--and you have the new console too? Do you fork over $60 for a game for a console that is superceded by newer hardware?

As I stated in a previous post, if I want the GTX480 on release day, I'm going to pay a premium. A year and a half later, if I have decided to wait, I can get it for (probably) half off the intial price. That's all you're saying now with the consoles. Everybody who wants a console now can get one for less than $200--everybody--because they have been out and Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo have started to make money on their product. That's why they can sell them cheaper now. At launch, they lost money on the actual consol and made it up with the software.

And, as for those who buy the videocards--yes gaming is probably the main reason, but doen't Windows 7, and Vista for that matter, look better with the fancy Aero interface ... that is gpu accelerated? (the better your gpu the smoother your windows 7 experience will be... i didn't say that! )

mpcrsc562 said:

But one thing that keeps catching my eye, though, is the flashing back and forth in time. Meaning, you are stating that you can get an Xbox360 now for $200, where all along, I'm referring to initial cost. I believe that in initial cost, consoles are more expensive. And adding the actual game into the equation, consoles still stay more expensive.

My opinion, though.

Ok fair enough on the pricing differences at launch versus today.

Looking at it this way, if we take the consoles at their full price on the day of release, the highest end Xbox360 was $399. That was the best and most powerful gaming console in November of 2005 when it was released.

So, if you consider the cost of PC's In November 2005 and the high end gaming video cards that would have been required to play at the same or better levels than the consoles....I wouldn't say that comparing the cost of a Radeon 9250 which is a sub $75 car is a fair comparison for that same level.


I mean if you already invested in the computer and you simply need to add a gaming card to it...you will likely save money. But if the PC that you currently have is older, say a P4....and you wanted to start gaming, you would have to replace the whole thing. That cost would exceed a gaming console. That doesn't mean it's a bad choice...it just is what it is. Clearly nobody is right or wrong here, I think the view of cost comes down to how you look at it and what you currently have.

I prefer consoles. Eliminates most of the setup hassle. Making sure your network configuration will work with the game, making sure your system specs are up to par with whats required to play, etc.

Least with a console theres no worry whether your 'system' can handle it or not.