Gaming pricing breakdown. Why PC gaming is NOT as expensive as you think.. - Page 5 - SRT Forums

smoger · 03-28-2008, 03:47 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by iamxero

Actually I have....

I want to agree with you on all this, I love my PC, you know what I spent on it. But your just wrong.

alright,.. so in someone's world,.. 16 players over a virtual lan is better than 32(or more) players on a dedicated server, missing graphical effects are better than full res, full effect graphics, and modability is worse than no modability.

yep.. you must really be stuck for reasons to agree with me

smoger · 03-28-2008, 03:49 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by charger71

I wasnt comparing the games, simply stating that RTS games of starcraft caliber are so simple they can even be played on cell phones.

Top RTS Game Pocket PC Downloads Guide

..and yet they can't properly be played on current gen consoles.. so what does that tell you?

it's not about power here, it's about input, and a controller will NEVER make the cut for strategy games.

xmdfmk7x · 03-28-2008, 04:05 PM

Smoger, you are fighting a losing battle. Your math is wrong and you should just accept it.

Consoles, in my opinion, are not better than PC when it comes to gaming, but when it comes to price, the consoles are a better option.

But what do I know about shopping for something cheap and performs decently, afterall I did buy a Neon SRT-4 instead of an Evo 8...

iamxero · 03-28-2008, 04:07 PM

The discussion was about price vs graphical effects, Youve already owned up to having to crank it down and definately have more then a 400$ system.

Usability, console wins....

For RTS, yes the keyboard is better, but who has the time.

For the masses (and I know you are the uber god of all gaming) the sales numbers tell the story.

smoger · 03-28-2008, 04:10 PM

the point about "cranking it down" was to preempt the "in 2 years" argument. you're not cranking ANYTHING down on an 8800gt/gts/gtx today.

..and again, in 2 years, "cranked down" will be as good as "cranked up" today.

the sales numbers just show that most consumers are idiots. same reason that walmart is the #1 retailer

smoger · 03-28-2008, 04:13 PM

you guys are hilarious... you can't prove your point so you start throwing out exagerations, taunts, and blanket statements in an attempt to get me to "just accept" that you're telling the truth.

keep it up, i have about 30 min left here

SRTie4k · 03-28-2008, 04:36 PM

I told you dude, console gamers refuse to listen to completely valid statements. They pass off all of the extra costs that it takes to run a console at a similar level as a PC; HDTV, subcription to play online - rofl!, a mediocre computer that they probably paid more for than I have upgrading my computer over the years to post nonsense console fanboism on srtforums, games that are more expensive...the list just goes on and on. If they had the common sense and weren't too lazy to add up all the costs that they've spent, they'd find that a good gaming PC ultimately costs as much if not less than their console in the long run.

Oh and by the way just to clarify, good graphics doesn't imply resolution alone

smoger · 03-28-2008, 04:41 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by SRTie4k

I told you dude, console gamers refuse to listen to completely valid statements. They pass off all of the extra costs that it takes to run a console at a similar level as a PC; HDTV, subcription to play online - rofl!, a mediocre computer that they probably paid more for than I have upgrading my computer over the years to post nonsense console fanboism on srtforums, games that are more expensive...the list just goes on and on. If they had the common sense and weren't too lazy to add up all the costs that they've spent, they'd find that a good gaming PC ultimately costs as much if not less than their console in the long run.

Oh and by the way just to clarify, good graphics doesn't imply resolution alone

exactly,.. shadows, filtering effects, physics processing, etc are usually thrown to the wind when talking about "graphics"

iamxero · 03-28-2008, 04:42 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by smoger

you guys are hilarious... you can't prove your point so you start throwing out exagerations, taunts, and blanket statements in an attempt to get me to "just accept" that you're telling the truth.

keep it up, i have about 30 min left here

Your hilarious, when did you prove your point

smoger · 03-28-2008, 04:44 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by iamxero

Your hilarious, when did you prove your point

Post 1

iamxero · 03-28-2008, 04:44 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by SRTie4k

Oh and by the way just to clarify, good graphics doesn't imply resolution alone

Oh yeah, I know that I was just pointing that out since smoger always wants to play that res game.....

Im looking for a PC game with good graphics, lay it on me PLEASE.....
All I have is crysis, im looking for better then console graphics, what are my options??

Ant · 03-28-2008, 04:46 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by smoger

you guys are hilarious... you can't prove your point so you start throwing out exagerations, taunts, and blanket statements in an attempt to get me to "just accept" that you're telling the truth.

keep it up, i have about 30 min left here

I think you made your point, but you do not get what we are trying to say to you.

Ok so now there is a $200.00 difference between consoles and PCs. Thats the difference of 3 new games and 1 used game. AND if you spend only $600.00 on this new machine, then it will need replacement after 4 years.

When I build a system I will spend more to get more life out of it. With the way technology moves you will really want that new graphics card at 3 years life to get all the enhancements of the new technology.

The PC to me is a money trap when it comes to gaming. Thats why a console will always be the best choice $$$$$wise.

The point of this thread was for you to show the actual cost of PCs versus Consoles but you Phailed to mention that you have to have a "newer" computer to begin with. Which is more money.

I am not saying Consoles rule/PCs suck, I am saying consoles will always be more $$$$$$ friendly.

smoger · 03-28-2008, 04:52 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by Ant

I think you made your point, but you do not get what we are trying to say to you.

Ok so now there is a $200.00 difference between consoles and PCs. Thats the difference of 3 new games and 1 used game. AND if you spend only $600.00 on this new machine, then it will need replacement after 4 years.

When I buuild a system I will spend more to get more life out of it. With the way technology moves you will really want that new graphics card at 3 years life to get all the enhancements of the new technology.

The PC to me is a money trap when it comes to gaming. Thats why a console will always be the best choice $$$$$wise.

The point of this thread was for you to show the actual cost of PCs versus Consoles but you Phailed to mention that you have to have a "newer" computer to begin with. Which is more money.

I am not saying Consoles rule/PCs suck, I am saying consoles will always be more $$$$$$ friendly.

5 pages and you still havent wrapped your feeble mind around the fact that a pc does not have to play future games at optimal settings to match the output of the 360/ps3.

again...

srt-4 with 87 = faster than a corrolla
but the srt-4 can go even faster if you spend more on 93 so the corolla is a better car?

doesnt make much sense, does it?

iamxero · 03-28-2008, 04:53 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by smoger

5 pages and you still havent wrapped your feeble mind around the fact that a pc does not have to play future games at optimal settings to match the output of the 360/ps3.

again...

srt-4 with 87 = faster than a corrolla
but the srt-4 can go even faster if you spend more on 93 so the corolla is a better car?

doesnt make much sense, does it?

But that "get by" pc is going to be worthless in a year, and it cost just as much if not more then a 360

iamxero · 03-28-2008, 04:56 PM

.... I wish I was off in 5 mins