Quantcast
Destructoid - Locke's Community Blog




About Me
I am a PC gamer. I have a water cool completely custom case that I hand crafted from raw materials and PC DIY parts. The case is one of the smallest 3 120mm radiator cases that exists. I have a modest computer inside. The non-water cooling parts cost about $650 dollars and I upgrade the system about every 3 years and the video card about every 2 years.

I have been gaming all my life. I started with simple LCD portable games and we eventually got an Atari which I played the dickens out of. NES was too played until my fingers had blisters. I bought a PC in 1988 and have not looked back since (well except to play karaoke with my ex-wife). Games like Civilization, Battle of Britain, Ultima IV, Leisure Suit Larry, and Wing Commander took my heart.

Sytems I have owned:
Atari 2600
Atari 7200
Nintendo NES
X-Box
PC
Wii

I am also an avid technical scuba diver and have logged dives at 170' deep. I play paintball, softball, football, and all sorts of table tops games that include DnD and Axis and Allies. I am also in the process of writing my own table top RPG and have spent three years working on it. I have a woodworking shop and can make furniture, picture frames and the like.

I have a degree in Industrial Design. This makes me a designer of products, architectural way finding, POP displays, and user interfaces. I have also taught design at the college level.
Gamer Profile
3DS friend code:
Steam: locke913
Battle:
PSN:
Mii:
Gamertag:
Following (9)
ANeM
Boomsling
Exostenza
killias2
lAboMbA
mabman
Nortonantivirus
PutinVGZ - Avatar setup pending
runtheplacered
Which is Cheaper? PC or Console? you might be surprised...
Locke | 9:50 AM on 12.21.2009 50 comments




Now I'm not gonna say that PC's are better. Everyone has to make their own choice when ti comes to gaming, but PC's are better at many many aspects of gaming and are also cheaper. Essentially anything a console can do a PC can do to (except for split screen) plus more.

Here's an article that outlines this:
http://www.tomsguide.com/us/Console-Vs-PC,review-1361.html

Now the idea of being cheaper is based on situation, but for the hardcore or moderate gamer, the PC is cheaper over a 5 year span. I know its hard to believe but I've crunched the numbers and will review them with you.

The rules: Here are a few things that we are gonna assume.
- Console early adopter, for one system
- Owning two consoles
- Nice PC, but not killer
- Early game purchaser
- That everyone already owns some type of PC (you are posting here!)
- A 5 year cycle time
- Not including monitor cost or TV costs

ROUND ONE!!! PC!!
So the new console just released and you decide its time to upgrade your PC. You buy a decent MB, 4 gigs of RAM, a new processor, and a Video Card. The sound and LAN are onboard the MB and you use your old HDD's, OS, and Optical drives. You use the mouse, KB, and head phones(or speakers) you have sitting around.

Cost: $475 dollars

You buy 30 games over the next 5 years ( not including Steam sales): -$300 or more! over console. Steam generally offers nice sales and 4-pack deals, often very close to the time, or during the time of release . I got Borderlands, L4D and L4D2 for $111 while most console gamers paid $180.

In 2.5 years it might be time for a new VC.
Cost: $175

ROUND TWO!!! CONSOLE!!
You own some type or (paid to upgrade your system) of computer: $300?
The two consoles (one was purchased right off): $600 (I'm being very liberal here should cost more...)
Extra controllers: $80 (one for each console)
30 Games: +$300
XBL: $250 (some families will double or triple this!, and and not all games support split screen, like Borderlands. SO int eh end the situation is exactly like PC.)

TOTAL REAL COSTS:
PC: $650 (and you get two video cards!)
CONSOLE: $1530

Even if I'm off a few hundred dollars (or you change the base configurations) the costs are plenty open enough to justify my point.

This still leaves $880 for the PC gamer to get new stuff like OS, new HDD's... or completely buy a new system from scratch. Blu Ray players for PC are only $60. In addition Micro systems can be built that are roughly the size of a console that are just as powerful as standard PC's.



The PC graphics would most likely be able to play at 1680 x 1050 and 1929 x 1080 (OR EVEN BETTER!!), which is SIGNIFICANT over console gaming.

But no split screen for PC. :(

Remember its just as easy to hook a PC to a TV as its is a console, and you can save $$ by watching HULU (over DVR), and can use the XBOX controller while relaxing on your couch. It a shame consoles are so expensive, b/c I might just get one.



Attached photos:

Photo Photo

Is this post awesome? Vote it up!

3

Those who have fapped:  Locke  


Post a comment! You can also post a photo below:

Comment with Facebook





Click connect and comment instantly!

Comment with Dtoid





New? SIGN UP - it takes 5 seconds

48 comments | showing # 1 to 48
prev next

Elsa's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/21/2009 11:59
Elsa
Ah! But what you didn't account for is the cost of frustration for us non-techie types! I have a good basic knowledge of computers... but the part about PC gaming I hated was wanting a game that my video card wouldn't run... buying a game that "should" run on my PC, but doesn't... having to upgrade/downgrade and sideways grade various settings to run a newer game, then an older game... but not both at the same time unless I maintain different hardware configurations on my PC... console gaming is popular not because of cost... more because it's idiot-proof. Put game in slot, play game.
Anonymouse's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/21/2009 12:14
Anonymouse
I would have to agree with Elsa. When I bought Fallout 3 for the PC, I was reduced to tears because it wouldn't play on it. Luckily, I have a newer computer now.
LK4O4's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/21/2009 12:16
LK4O4
Elsa's got a point there. I can't tell you how frustrating it is to buy a PC game, go home, and have it run at half-speed, or have the frame rate fall apart, or any number of weird things happen just because my computer is a few years old. I've upgraded the RAM, but that still didn't fix anything... At least if I want to play Zack & Wiki or No More Heroes or something, I don't have to figure out how to install a new processor.
Waquan's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/21/2009 12:56
Waquan
Well, I'm not really sure why you'd factor 'extra controllers' into the cost, since PCs don't even support split-screen gaming. And why two consoles? The fact of the matter is that if you purchased a PS3 and Xbox 360 you'd have access to more than one type of exclusive set of games; whereas, on the PC you'd only have access to one exclusive set of games (I think we can disregard multiplat talk here). Basically, you'd have to compare costs on an equal level, which you did in some aspects but not in others.

XBL could be avoided by going the PS3 route (but I guess we include it since we're buying "two consoles"?).

The steam argument is probably the only thing that has actual meat here.
HiddenAHB's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/21/2009 13:12
HiddenAHB
Plus, that only works on America and Europe.
Here in Brazil playing by consoles is way cheaper.
Also, i agree with Elsa.
Locke's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/21/2009 13:14
Locke
Okay. there can be problems with PC but FACT:

- No PC gamer I KNOW has ever lost even close to the same gaming time from PC issues as someone with a red ring issue has.

- for the most part PC's now are very plug and play and with a LITTLE research you can eliminate almost all your problems.

- also i never stated the BEST PC stuff, most people with problems are EARLY adopters, you CAN buy gear that has been proven

- the point about split screen is that in a family with 2 or more XBL subs you cannot take advantage of split screen with MANY games. Apparently split scree is a big deal to console gamers, so therefore you are overpaying to split play time on the console

- also console gaming USED to have a stronger leg to stand on, but now consoles games are really PC games just dumbed down, there are many people making points about consoles that are archaic b/c they haven't thought objectively about the situation.
Frohike's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/21/2009 13:20
Frohike
Sure the hardware can be cheaper and of course scalable. If you know what you're doing and you're willing to shop around and also learn how to set up a rig, you end up saving money but... only if you factor in the cost in materials. The cost in time / maintenance / troubleshooting / getting your geek on doesn't always offset the benefits for some folks, especially those who... just don't have a lot of time on their hands.
Locke's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/21/2009 13:36
Locke
I agree its a valid point. It takes some level of expertise to build a computer. But it has nothing to do with cost.

Also once again, the amount of trouble shooting time I spend and most PC gamers spend is far less than what is ASSUMED by those who don't PC game. I'll say it again: PC building is much more friendly now than 5-10 years ago.

Yes there can be problems, but my argument is that PC problems (hardware and software) are equal to console problems from a time sink standpoint.

5 of the 6 people I know who own xboxes and USE them have had red ring. They either lose weeks!!! of time and or have to pay $100+ to fix the problem, or buy a whole new system $$$.

Many of these so-called problems are perceived. My and almost all the PC gamers I know, only have problems with my computer come from very high overclocking or complex system setup. Simple PC's work in general and the stability increases every year, which is the EXACT opposite of consoles.
Locke's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/21/2009 13:38
Locke
@ hiddenAHB

Well go talk to the Australia folk... They pay $120 for a console title which is $50 on Steam...
Kraid's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/21/2009 13:49
Kraid
I love to play my significantly less detailed games on my expensive home consoles.
Waquan's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/21/2009 13:49
Waquan
(1) that can depend though. I went with an ASrock motherboard a few years ago (though I recently upgraded to an ASUS w/ core i5 quad core processor--which fixed everything) that had a lot of problems with the SATA and audio ports. Audio was scratchy and wouldn't correctly play, which forced me to buy a PCI sound card. The SATA ports would OCCASIONALLY detect my SATA HDs, but when they didn't, I had to reboot my computer several times before they would. Needless to say, I had to purchase a SATA PCI card to fix these problems, but, thankfully, when I upgraded to my ASUS everything worked great. Point being: sometimes hardware can be faulty, and after you've already assembled the computer and don't want to pay for return shipping, fixing those problems with alternative solutions seems like a better idea (still a hassle though). Of course I'll never purchase an ASROCK mobo again.

(2)I agree. Motherboard manual also conveniently tells you how to assemble all of the parts you've purchased for your new PC.

(3) Agreed, but the faults can be there. For example, LCD monitors with dead pixels are far more common than LCD TVs with dead pixels (at least, from my experience). A lot of retailers like Newegg won't replace your monitor unless you have 3 or more dead pixels (obviously, this can be frustrating when viewing things up close).

(4) Sure, but you're missing the point. You don't HAVE to purchase XBL accounts for every person if you wish to play online by yourself. You only need one. It's just like with Steam. I don't have to purchase several accounts for everyone in the family to be able to play online. I only need 1.

The issue of multiple controllers and XBL accounts seems silly to me, as you can't PLAY with multiple people at once on the PC.

I'm not really siding with the console fanboys here but your arguments need work. I agree that builing PCs is much more steamlined than it used to be (any motherboard booklet will tell you this; the front panel stuff is probably the most complicated part of the whole ordeal). I also agree that Steam sales will guarantee that you'll be able to purchase games for a lot cheaper than console gamers. I agree that you'll be able to play games with better graphics (with not just higher resolutions, but DX11 support, like in DIRT 2). But you already know what I disagree with here, so that doesn't really need to be restated.
squirrelyg's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/21/2009 14:02
squirrelyg
You know you do make some very good points, but if you're going to make a comparison you should really include all the current gen consoles and not just the 360. I also don't want this to come off as me sounding like a console fanboy, but in the past 5 years I've had more problems with pc downtime compared to console downtime.
Locke's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/21/2009 14:19
Locke
@ Waquan

Thanks for the nice post. My arguments are fine they are just limited. They are what they are. I just build an i5 system with the only problem being I am having trouble with a wireless lan adapter and some weird stripes that creep up do to my high overclock. My friend just built the same system and he hasn't had a single problem. I never said that you MUSt have 2 accounts just that its a valid point even if its a weak points as I KNOW of multiple accounted per household so it DOES exist. At some point the cost does outweigh the hastle.

The point is, that PC gaming is cheaper, no if ands or buts about it. I'm trying to clean up the ignorance that people post one PC issue at a time. There are plenty of segways to distract us along the way. The less people know the more damage is done with mass hysteria and mob mentality. I'm just trying to set the record straight.
Wintersocks's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/21/2009 14:34
Wintersocks
@Darktravesty
Yes. Generic (also stupid) comment is generic.

I agree with what was said here, but first off: I am lazy. Secondly: I tried (oh I tried) build a PC from scratch, and I couldn't do it, so I bought a cheap PC (windows Vista) and expanded it, which came together at about 1000 Euros. Third: You didn't include PC peripherals like backups (or another hardrive for your XBOX, if we are considering five years of use), joysticks/gamepads, keyboards, a mouse, and USB hub (possibly), and an AV/HDMI cable to connect it to your TV.

I like buying built PCs from companies I trust, and I really laptops, which are IMPOSSIBLE to build. (I tried so hard). I still stick to PC gaming because of the awesome online, steam sales, WASD and mouse controls, and because I can work on them as well.
entrager's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/21/2009 14:38
entrager
I have to disagree on several points. Why are you assuming someone needs 2 consoles to get the equivalent of a PC? If someone wants 2 consoles of COURSE it's going to cost more than a PC. Maybe you should re-run the numbers with a PC and a Mac vs just an XBox... that makes about as much sense.

Someone else pointed out the controller thing... for an apple-to-apples comparison you need to assume single-player gaming only and throw out the controller.

Also mentioned prior, but you only need one XBL account (again, if we assume single player). Also, $50 a year is the MSRP, but I've never paid that. You can get 1-year cards (they come with an extra month, so 13-month cards) for under $40.

Also, did you seriously trying to argue that the cost of an existing computer is related to owning a console? If you want to factor that in, fine, but you need to add it to both sides. You assumption was that an existing PC would get upgraded, but you didn't factor in the cost of that existing PC.

You cite Steam sales as being a factor. Console games go on sale too, recently L4D2 and Borderlands have both been $40, and L4D can be found for $20. If I wanted, I could get all 3 for $100 if I'm patient. Of course, Steam is easier... it gets points for that. PC games are cheaper, for sure... but if you want to go bargain hunting consoles win. After all, you can't buy used PC games... at least not as easily.

Using my changes, even if I would agree that $300 is a fair assessment of the extra game cost in 3 years, I come up with $650 for the PC (like you) and for the console:
Console: $300
Games: $300
XBL: $200 (5 years)

Total $800

Yeah, maybe it's more expensive... depending on if you buy the $300 games number. I buy fewer than 6 games a year at retail, so that number is WAY smaller. Probably more like $100, maybe even less.

Depending on the person, one option or the other is cheaper. Your arguments were just way flawed and made consoles sound WAY more expensive. You should have just gone all the way and assumed all 3 consoles with 4 controllers and several accessories each. Throw in a 51" TV vs a 23" monitor to add another $1000.
Waquan's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/21/2009 14:40
Waquan
@Locke
I agree, but, as I've said, I don't think you should factor in two consoles, or extra controllers, or XBL, as these would put the PC at an 'unfair' advantage cost-wise (the goal is to put them on equal ground).

Every other argument is good I think, and what you end up with (going the console route) is $900 (after excluding the extra console, extra controller, and XBL costs). Which is still more expensive than building a new PC. Of course, if we went the X360 route, the cost would be $1150.

So, basically, I'm in agreement, there are just a few things I disagree with. Ultimately, if you already own a computer, upgrading your PC is a better route than going with a new console (cost-wise).
linuxguy's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/21/2009 14:44
linuxguy
Cost is irrelevant if you only like 'console' games
Locke's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/21/2009 14:56
Locke
The reason I chose two console systems is that many moderate to hardcore gamers own two console systems. Look at the editors on this site. Many own 2-3 consoles and no gaming PC's. In fact, by inspection, It seems that you have to own two systems to 90% of the games. 1 system will only get you 80%.

I also used an abstract figure to cost the console. The PC price I sited was accurate with good stuff. lets look at console costs.

AT LAUNCH
PS3: $500 to $600
Xbox: $350
Upgrade Hard Drive: $100-$200?

NOW
PS3: $300
Xbox: $200

SO if you take the median costs of one system from launch and now you get about the $600. This does not include repair. More than 50% of people I know have had issues with Launch consoles both PS3 and Xbox. AND costs are MUCH higher to fix over PC after warranties have run out.

In the 15 years of PC building me and my friends have had only a handful of problems with PC's. I've lost one hard drive, two optical drives, two floppies, and one motherboard (this was the worst since I was running RAID). All of these were after YEARS of use except for the HDD, which was RMA'd and lasted a couple years total.
Locke's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/21/2009 14:58
Locke
@ linuxguy

TO say you only like console games is really to say you like PC games, since almost all console games are made and based on PC game concepts, with the exceptions of some JRPG's, katamari, and Resident Evil, and platformers.

If you mean liking console by sitting on your couch and using your thumbs then you can do that on a PC too.
Waquan's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/21/2009 14:59
Waquan
@entrager
Actually, I'm pretty sure he did 'add' the cost of the computer to both sides, hence the reason he said the word "upgrade" before his $475 cost. Also, the XBL is a good point because you don't PAY to play online games for the PC. But that's the X360 route, not the PS3 route, which is cheaper.

However, I agree on your other points and I've stated those before.
Anonymouse's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/21/2009 15:01
Anonymouse
I've never really understood this whole "PC/Console gaming is better" argument. It's like the Hardcore vs Casual thing.

Who cares? I play games, and that's all that matters.
Waquan's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/21/2009 15:04
Waquan
@Locke
"The reason I chose two console systems is that many moderate to hardcore gamers own two console systems"
Which may be true, but they also have more 'access' to exclusive games than a PC user will. A PC user will only have access to PC exclusives and multiplats; whereas the PS3/X360 combo will give you access to multiplats, and X360/PS3 exclusives. Hence the reason I don't think it's a fair comparison.
Trev's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/21/2009 15:29
Trev
The only thing that surprises me is how slanted the comparison is.
wanderingpixel's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/21/2009 15:58
wanderingpixel
You're right, but I just don't have the money right now.
Locke's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/21/2009 16:32
Locke
@ Trev

Un-slant it. The numbers are an aggregate that's all take it or leave it. I'd like to hear your perspective. RIGHT NOW if you buy a PS3 then it's good deal and cost effective, but most moderate to hardcore gamers would own that piece of hardware for years already.

@ Mouse
True enough, but if 1000 different console players didn't post comments talking about PC cost, then I wouldn't need to write this.
Arkhon's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/21/2009 17:21
Arkhon
That extra controllers bit is where consoles pay off. Until PC at least has the capability of playing splitscreen games, it will never be my primary gaming platform.

And it's really not fair to include two consoles + extra controllers. My 360 came with two controllers, which is perfectly fine for most of my gaming needs, and far better than any PC will ever do.

Fact: Borderlands has splitscreen on consoles. I don't own many games that don't support it, in fact. Most of my games, like Halo: CE, Halo 2, Halo 3, Gears of War 2, Modern Warfare 2, Forza Motorsport 2, Crimson Skies, and Rock Band all have local multiplayer. Again, something PCs simply don't have with all their cheapness.

And if you only PC game, you miss out on a shit-ton of games, so your whole "need two consoles to play 90% of games" argument makes exactly no sense whatsoever, because with a PC you can play even less.

And if you're going to say many console games don't have splitscreen, then you should also mention that most PC games don't support gamepads, which means you can't play on your TV from your couch unless you pay an extra $50 for wireless mouse & keyboard, and I know from playing games on my dad's Alienware that that is not a comfortable way to play games anyway.

You make the assumption that everyone already owns a basic PC, then you go ahead and only factor that cost into the console side of the argument. PC would therefore end up being:

$300 for basic PC
$80-$100 for a decent MB
$100-$150 for a decent CPU so it won't be a bottleneck
4 gigs of DDR2 RAM is about $80ish the last time I checked
$175 for the first video card
$175 for the replacement video card
$200ish for the games (something you forgot to add in)
$40 for a gamepad for playing on your TV
$30 for a decent wireless MK set for playing on your TV
$60 for a BD drive (otherwise it can't really be compared to the PS3)

And that's not even taking into account people who don't own desktop computers, so would have to buy all the new components. Or the people who have computers that can't be upgraded easily, or are really only good for web browsing. I think you'll find you underestimated the price for a PC a bit.

You can also buy used games for significantly less than their initial retail price if you wait a little while, not to mention they go on sale just like games on Steam. It seems like you added in the assumption of buying games right when they come out just to give the PC an extra advantage, when any intelligent person who really cares about saving money will wait a little while and buy used or on sale.
Xzyliac's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/21/2009 17:56
Xzyliac
I'm with Elsa. In my experience building a PC has been a pain in the ass and the "techie" type guys are always so condescening.

I mean the people who offer to help you build a PC, friend or professional, mean well and they're really nice. I've gone to local PC shops for help and I've gone to friends and friends of friends and they've been really nice but rarely have they really been helpful. I don't need to hear "It's really easy," for the millionth time. I get it. I'm not born with hands of the Godess like you.

And I get that there's only so much a person can explain before they might as well do it for you. Hence why building a PC just fucking isn't for everyone. I dunno why that concept is so difficult for PC gamers to grasp.

So assuming you aren't a PC builder by nature or by training you have to buy a legit gaming rig and then you see why a console is viable alternative.
10BobMarleys's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/21/2009 18:06
10BobMarleys
A PC that lasts 5 years. If such a thing existed, I would have bought one.
Dr l0cke's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/21/2009 18:47
Dr l0cke
Console is cheaper, even I'll admit it.
WastelandTraveler's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/21/2009 19:08
WastelandTraveler
I was going to type a 3 page rant on how people use "its too difficult" as a cheap ass scapegoat and dismiss the wonderful gift that was given to us all called 'the ability to read'. So with that...

R.T.F.M. the rest is fucking legos..

Pro Tip: Square does not line up with Circle.

(This is why in a world that is becoming more and more technology driven, computer science courses should be a enforced with all learning curriculum from middle school to college, including finance!)
Arkhon's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/21/2009 19:24
Arkhon
Another thought just struck me:

If any hardcore console gamer will have both consoles at launch, then wouldn't it stand to reason that any hardcore PC gamer will have a high-end gaming computer, costing at least $800?
Xzyliac's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/21/2009 21:11
Xzyliac
Oh yeah another thing:

Especially in this gen fewer and fewer people own two consoles. Shit the PS3 just dropped in the $300 range.
the guy with the hat's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/21/2009 21:22
the guy with the hat
My console cost less and I bought both a Gaming PC and a 250GB Xbox this year. £400 for PC £250 for console. :D my situation probably does not match your criteria but I wanted to say it anyway
Locke's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/21/2009 22:31
Locke
Well it painfully obvious that you can add number of variables to make either side cheaper or more expensive. I took what I know of the people near me who own both PC and consoles. This is a stark evaluation using them as a general populace sample and also I watch what people write here and see.

1. it seems that most people own two consoles. Also by reading game Informer mag I can see that 2 of any 3 systems yield most of the games; it doesn't matter which two really unless you like the Japanese stuff or mmorpg's RTS. So that point is effectively mute. PC seems to get more on average than the other two. Since almost all Microsoft stuff come to PC, and much of the Japanese stuff too. So to have everything you need everything, but to have almost all the PC is pretty good. The only way to get MORE than a PC is to have 2 consoles.

2. Most people I know that own a console have also purchased a PC that cost over $1000 that they only use for webbing, doc-ing, or graphic stuff AT THE MOST!. Many of you have a PC that could have been upgraded gently and have spent that much $$ or more.

3. @ Arkhon. I can understand stand your experience with PC gaming is limited. There is a law of diminishing returns. My computer costs about $1400, About $600 of which is transferable. Most 'hardcore' gamers own a computer at about this expense (which is about $2200 from Alienware). Only the the top 5% do what you are thinking. The reason is that IT IS NOT NECESSARY. The costs listed were what would last 5-7 years with a video card change costing $175. A card change is very easy, even Xzyliac can do it (no offense).

4. Cost of computer is based on framerate @ resolution. Once you understand this you can understand how a PC can last 5-10 years. OHH YES! 10 years! and still outperform the current gen AND next gen consoles.

5. @ Arkhon: I didn't add the games in for the console side either. i only added the above cost to show the relative difference. The same mic u use for anything can be used w/ PC too. i only added the ABOVE costs with the console. The added difference in cost makes up for that. Critical thinking common man! I was just reducing the denominators so I wouldn't have to spell everything out.

6. Yes IF you just bought a PS3 for $300 then gaming will be cheaper for a while. But when you have to upgrade it it completely goes away. With PC you can keep stuff until you don't like it or it breaks which can be many many years plus you aren't bleeding money in games or sub fee.

7. Tell me real costs that you have spent. I told ya mine. What have you and your friends spent. Think about it. I consider that controller charger a NECESSARY purchase too btw. What did you buy that you felt as a gamer you needed? I think most of you own 2 consoles and a PC and have a Sub to XBL. And I think many of you upgraded hard drives, and bought extra controllers and have had repair or FULL console REPLACEMENT costs. So tell me over 5 years what HAVE you spent. A single number will do.
possumwrangler's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/21/2009 22:41
possumwrangler
Since there's been 30+ posts, and no one's mentioned it I guess it's a smaller factor, but all of the math so far seems to assume that there's only one user for either case. In the case that I believe you're arguing, yeah, there's probably only one user, but it seems like preference for one or the other setup outweighs cost.

In the case where cost/entertainment is most significant to the consumer, the number of users can greatly mitigate the console costs, but it's a lot harder to share a PC.
Locke's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/21/2009 22:51
Locke
@ Etanger:

Duh. I agree with everything you wrote. I stated all those caveats in my general description. But what are you typing on and how much did it cost? Also i didn't add in the steam bonus or the REAL console costs. The difference should actually be higher by at least $200. I also didn't add repair costs, b/c PC components blow up to, but many have 3 year warranties and RMA's.

@ All
One thing that console gamers don't know is what ACTUALLY comes out for PC. PC gets almost all of the big titles. Borderlands, LFD2, LFD, Batman, all the spidermans, all COD's (except for 3), Gears, dragon age, resident evil 5, transformers, most halos (not the recent ones), ALL UT's, dead space, Bio-shock, Thief ... And I believe (and many others that post reviews here) that there are more PC exclusive titles of value than any other SINGLE system.

Plus mods and cheaper games that turn into some of the best console games years later!! (GTA, UT, COD, BF, Doom, Serious Sam, Thief)

And yes I lose a FEW titles, but the trade off is enormous.
Arkhon's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/22/2009 00:02
Arkhon
@Locke:

It was about $400 for my 360 Elite with a 120GB HDD, which has had its disk drive break once and was replaced for no charge in about a week or so. An extra $60 for a third controller with a charger, because my brother broke one of our first two. $200 for Rock Band 2. Roughly $300 for the rest of my games. $100 for two years of XBL. $20 for another charger with two rechargeable batteries. $100 for a racing wheel that my dad really wanted to buy to play Forza 2 with (I advised against it because the MS wireless wheel sucks). I got my laptop for free, and it's not fast, but it does what I need.

For me, a gaming computer would end up costing around $600 just for the parts, and I wouldn't be able to play games with my brother or my best friend, because they don't have gaming computers either and have even less money than me. Then there would be an extra $300 for games. And an extra $40-$50 for a controller. And a lot more in terms of electricity. My Xbox 360 uses a lot less power than a gaming PC. My Xbox 360 and my laptop combined use a lot less power than a gaming PC.

My point was that you can't say that any hardcore console gamer must have both a launch PS3 and a launch Xbox 360, and then turn around and say that a hardcore PC gamer will simply have a $475 computer, and then use the difference in the amount of money they spend to say that PC gaming is cheaper than console gaming. That would be like me saying that all atheists are smarter than all Christians because I'm an atheist and I'm smarter than some random fundamentalist redneck. It's not a fair comparison in the least. The hardcore console gamer spends more on consoles because he's obviously an idiot (he'd have to be to buy both consoles at launch, plus buying every single game at the initial retail price, plus paying to replace their Xbox 360 when it was already under warranty), just like the Christian is dumber than me because he's a fundamentalist redneck who believes in the existence of an invisible sky wizard for no other reason than he was told to.

We all know a lot of games come out on the PC, but that list is pretty crap. Borderlands (better on consoles due to splitscreen), L4D1 & 2 (better on PC due to modding), Batman (good, but better with a gamepad and on a PS3), Spiderman (nobody cares, those games are shit), CoD (good on all platforms), Gears of War (not the second, or planned third, and better with a gamepad), Dragon Age (better on PC), Resident Evil 5 (better with a gamepad), Transformers (again, nobody cares because it's mediocre at best), "most halos" (absolutely wrong; only 1 and 2, which you will find is less than half of all the Halo games that have come out/are going to come out), UT (if you play this game with a gamepad you are doing it very wrong), Dead Space (haven't played it), Bio-Shock (better with a gamepad, IMO), Thief (exclusive to PC, if I'm not mistaken). GTA has been primarily a console game since III. Seriously, San Andreas is almost unplayable with a mouse and keyboard. UT sucks ass on a console. Call of Duty is primarily a console game now. Doom can hardly be considered one of the best console games.
Arkhon's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/22/2009 00:13
Arkhon
Oh, and "4. Cost of computer is based on framerate @ resolution. Once you understand this you can understand how a PC can last 5-10 years. OHH YES! 10 years! and still outperform the current gen AND next gen consoles." is complete and utter bullshit. Please direct me to an AGP graphics card that will run games better than a PS3 or Xbox 360. You can't, because they don't exist. Ten years ago they didn't even have multi-core processors. Unless you're talking about upgrading the motherboard, which would mean upgrading the CPU and video card, as well as memory because 512 MB of DDR SDRAM isn't going to cut it; after that long the hard drive would need to be replaced with a SATA drive; it would need a blu-ray drive to compete with the PS3, might need a new case to fit the new video card, will probably need a new PSU to keep all the new components running, in which case you don't even have the same computer anymore.
Xzyliac's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/22/2009 00:38
Xzyliac
@Locke
No offense taken. I actually being told something's easy to do just not a hundred times in one afternoon. Because clearly if it were easy I feel like it would've gotten done the first time.

For the RTFM people I will say this: when I first go into learning the ins and outs of my guitar I was told some similar. "It's easy just know how everything works and read the manual. It's easy, easy, easy." So I bought the best parts money can buy. Even got an on-board tuner. I did my homework, I read the manuals; I cracked open my guitar, and I was bloody lost for months.

People learn different ways. I learn through trial and error but PCs and guitars are fucking expensive trial and error experiments.

At the end of the day I just feel like it's different strokes for different folks. Personally I'm willing to pluck down cash for convience even if I feel like I'm getting the inferior product (and I do). While there are some bold statements in here I can see where it is at least possible to build a PC and keep it running in a consoles lfetime cheaper than a console. Especially with the shoddy manufacturing nowadays.

I've always felt like there's gotta be an exploitable market for this stuff. Like a place where you can toss all your parts in a box that you bought from wherever, ship them to to some magical fairyworld, and have them put the PC together. At the very least learning what on a PC does what and product comparison takes all of an hour or two thanks to Google.
Xzyliac's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/22/2009 00:42
Xzyliac
Clarification: By shoddy manufacturing I mean on the part of consoles manufacturers. It's gotten pretty bad in a small time frame.

Also, I apologize for missing words and such. My laptop took a shit and I've been browsing with my phone and my fingers and brain just don't work at the same speed. I do the same thing on my laptop but it's not usually this bad.
FatherChesz's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/22/2009 08:51
FatherChesz
To be fair, Left 4 Dead and I believe Left 4 Dead 2 both support splitscreen play on PC. But this is by far the exception and not the rule.
WastelandTraveler's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/22/2009 09:16
WastelandTraveler
@Xzyliac - I understand what you are saying.. tho I cant really speak for the comptuer / guitar comparison.. it seems pretty extreme to me but I don't know a damn thing about guitars lol. The only reason why I say that building a system is easy, is because everything that is layed out in front of you along side of the manuals is pretty much like legos. You look at the male end of the part you are putting in, then look at the board.. match the shape. The only point where building a system can be 'challenging' is when buying the right compatible parts. But even then, that has been eliminated with stuff like newegg's compatibility tester. If you can read the diagram of a desk, and put together a pre-configured desk.. you can build a computer, the same rules apply only this time instead of wood, you are using computer parts. I think the biggest thing that intimidates people is the mountain of different terminology in these manuals.. while its good to know what those terms mean.. its not exactly needed to build a system. Hell my first system I built was unassisted, with no manuals, and no previous training.. all my dad told me was.. "this is the cpu, this is the graphics card, this is the ram, and this is your system board, this is your power supply, hard drive, and cdrom. Now here are your cables.. have at it" then he let me on my own to do it.. and really all I did was basic matching plug A with slot A and plug B with slot B. And I did just fine, no issues.. now I'm not saying you will never run into issues, many starting issues usually involve DOA parts, or other factors.. but honestly I have yet to EVER run into issues like this *knocks on wood*

Regardless, I think there is a huge misconception that building a pc equates to rocket science, scale modeling, or ice sculpting. Its intimidating I will agree, because of the terms and whats in front of you. But so much has changed, especially in the last 5 years, that has made pc building WORLDS easier. And now with Windows 7, 'driver hunting' is practically non existent now. Hell I handed my 9 year old nephew an old computer of mine and took it apart, then told him to put it back together, and he was able to do it. And that's really why I use the 'lego' terminology.. because that's all it really is. And its all basic stuff you learn in any computer science course taken in school. Provided.. they teach you true computer science and not 2 semesters worth of MSWord & Powerpoint ;|
Locke's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/22/2009 09:22
Locke
Yes there have been some great points made, and I didn't mention anything multiple users. An extra PC would be necessary for another player, while most households only have one console of each.

@ Arkon

How hardcore a gamer is, technically speaking, has nothing to do with how good the rig is. How hardcore a gamer is has to do with their dedication to trying and playing ALL games. IMHO. I never said the PC was $475! I said it was $475 for the core. Also there are many hardcore PC gamers who have been using their rigs for 5 years at this point (well before the current console gen). And with periodic VC changes are still getting better performance over a console.

It up to everyone to decide what to pay and what exact components to buy. You didn't NEED a wheel. But you decided to get one anyway. I didnt need a gaming mouse, but I got one anyway. Once again I speced the PC out to be decent.

Now thinking about it I undershot by $50 so I'll make the correction.

processor: 150 (quad core)
MB: 120
ram: 80
VC: 175
case: 100
psu: 100
optical drive: 60 bluray or similar
hdd: 90 1 Tb or similar

core components: $525
whole PC: $875
you CAN always add more but this is a GOOD PC. Also most hardcore PC gamers would have a rig like this. Check the forums for yourself. Remember the more geeky the more vocal.

You essentially bought 5 games + the guitar thing and $400 for the box and $20 for the charger and XBL.

SO over 5 years at this rate:
console: 400
3 games a year: +$150
charger: $20
extra controller: $30
5 years of XBL: +250

total: $850

So about the same. So in the end my point over a 5 year period GENERALLY holds true for YOUR case. Also I believe that you buy fewer games and only have one console. Also the PC system speced above could have been built about 2 years ago for about the same price and would easily last 5 years with no VC upgrade.

And no you are correct it wasn't possible over the LAST 10 years but i believe it is possible over the next 10 years. (my next blog)
Locke's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/22/2009 09:24
Locke
BTW in the above i threw in a nice case and PSU and HDD. You could save over $100 in that system by getting worse components. HDD size and Case have nothing to do with performance.
Locke's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/22/2009 09:36
Locke
@ Wasteland Traveler and Xzylic

This is exactly the kind of misconception that I am trying to break.

Here are some PC fallacies that I am attacking:
- PC's are more expensive than consoles
- PC's are hard to build and maintain
- PC have hardware issues that exceed consoles
- PC's have software issues that exceed consoles
- PC's don't get many titles
- PC owners are snobs
- PC dedicated servers have little benefit

What console games need to understand is that PC's are pretty much plug and play. There are just a few more pieces to plug together.
PhazonYoshi's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/23/2009 05:41
PhazonYoshi
I can use my G5 on my PC, that's enough for me. I spent £400 on my PC 3 years ago, never upgraded it once, and can still play any game that comes out today at 60fps on an acceptable resolution (read: 720p is low-res). I don't plan to upgrade in the next 2 years, either - I'm not one for needing DA BEST, I'm happy with my lot. Building a PC is like playing with lego, except where with lego you imagined the awesome shit that happened after, with your PC it actually happens. Plus I can use my G5, that alone is worth any missed exclusives, because quite frankly, if I can't play them with a mouse, I don't want to play them.
Locke's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/23/2009 08:31
Locke
@ Phazon

Alot of people don't understand the longevity of a PC now.
prev next

Comment with Facebook





Click connect and comment instantly!

Comment with Dtoid





New? SIGN UP - it takes 5 seconds

Comments policy

Destructoid is an open discussion community. You don't need to "audition" to post a comment - just speak your mind. We respect differing opinions on the site, so have at it. Be smart, funny, insightful, clueless, or cute -- but back it up with substance. Keep your cool, keep it fun. We only ask that you act respectfully and above all: don't be a troll and ruin it for everyone else. Don't bring down gamers or we'll, you know, gently shoot you in the face and stuff you into a flaming mailbox. Each comment is your opportuntity to make this community awesomer. Is that even a word?

Avoiding the banhammer only requires common sense: spamming, trolling, racism, NSFW stuff, and other forms of sucking will not be tolerated. If anyone is griefing please report abuse. Be good. Don't suck!