The PC is the objectively superior gaming platform.

Yet, cows spend their entire time bitching and complaining about how the xbone has teh watered down version. So, are you admiting cows really don't honestly care about resolution and frame rates? Because it's already pretty obvious.

No, conditioner is better!

1. How is a regular and valid SW thread with no insults or negativity "obnoxious"? I can show you obnoxious threads by looking at any of the dozen or so anti-PC troll flame-bait threads.

2. Waiting for factually inferior version of games like Witcher3, lol. Sales? Are you sure it'll sell more on ps4 when including digital purchase sales? I doubt it. PC has more overall gaming software sales than all 6 consoles combined.

How do you figure that arguing for paying more for more performance (PC vs. consoles) is remotely similar to arguing against paying more for less performance (Xbox One vs. PS4)?

Pretty sure this is common knowledge. Honestly if you are trying to convince those who oppose PC gaming. Copy and pasting a long post isn't going to help since those who oppose it aren't gonna spend 5 minutes to read it.

Lots of facts there, TC.

You must have melted a ton of consolites' brains.

Hard to argue with all those valid reasons.

TC is a bundle of sticks

Nice copy and paste directly from another forum.

http://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/wiki/guide

Because performance is performance. Cows are going crazy over 1080p when PC has been doing it for years. Now suddenly it's some almighty performance benchmark? Yeah right.

People who truly care about 1080p, 60 frames per second, and whichever other point of discussion between the consoles from the technical perpective has probably been pc gaming instead. Who the hell buys a console for the better experience in terms of specs?

Yes, pc costs more, but it also offers more. I'ts not now that consoles finally get an upgrade that 1080p gets to be some extremely important point, expect for fanboys who need something to help show which of these weak, wannnabe pcs is better.

That post is so awesome because console fanboys can't ever come up with factual rebuttals, and it will always just be their opinion.

They'll say bullshit like how rts, mmo, moba, f2p, sim don't count. They'll put on super strict goal posts like "name a PC game that is from quarter 4 2014, has shooting elements, is exclusive, 100million budget, and scored over a 9.5"

Which is why guys like shielder, m3boarder, am-gamer, cranler, etc. won't touch this thread and if they do it'll be an off-topic troll quip.

It is an incredibly well written and researched piece that would be difficult to argue against in most cases but TC's first sentence clearly indicates he wishes us all to believe that's his own writing.

So he can go step on a Lego for all I care. I mean it!

But all the exclusive GOTYs!!!

My whole point was that having the better version is completely irrelevant to gamers. It truly doesn't matter to the majority of gamers if it's better on the PC or not.

Ah, so you do it by misinterpreting the argument. It's never been just about 1080P or 60 FPS, it's that the PS4 could do better than the Xbox One while the latter cost 25% more. You picking and choosing small parts of the argument doesn't change that.

Except they cost the same and the differences are minimal. I've tested them on my own pc. Atleast the current ones. In 2013, it did seem we where going to get a massiv difference, but it got smaller, ironically. But i did misread a part there.

But my point stand. Cows are bitching about the xbone not doing 1080p, when the Playstation hasn't hit for years. 60fps is the same. But now that it gets an upgrade, it matter alot. Better yet, when the PS4 failed to keep 1080p/60fps on BF4, i remember tons of backtracking.

You know when a PC post is full of BS and completely Fanboy written?

When it highlights the infamous $ 400 PC crap.

Considering this is a Shielder7 post. Should I dis warrant it's entirety for BS?

lmao

Driving games.

or you could have just said

Pc superior hardware

Consoles superior games

Are you really that much of an idiot? People don't need "factual rebuttals" to justify their personal preferences. I don't care with how many facts you can come up with that Pepsi is better than Coca Cola. I still hate Pepsi. Of course a PC is a more capable system. And even though I still own a decent gaming PC I mostly game on consoles now. I just enjoy sitting in my beanbag in front of my TV when I want to game for a while. I won't go through the hassle to carry my PC to the living room each time or any sort of streaming crap. Guess what? I still have fun.

Probably I'm just lacking the inferiority complex you obviously need to feel the urge to prove some awkward superiority by gaming on a certain system (lulz). It's okay though. I still have some hope left that you people will grow up one day. By the way, I got The Witcher 2 for the 360 a while back. I already own it on PC but I just couldn't stand playing through it sitting at my desk.

This thread isn't about personal preference. I totally find it fine if you prefer ps4 or xbone one more. Thats not an issue. But thats not what the thread is about.

Please keep up.

Sounds like you need to get a more comfortable chair.

Don't lie:

He stated PC has superior games, and cited metacritic. He could also cite gamespot.

PC has more aaa and aa (8.0+) scoring games at both sites.

sure.

@RoboCopISJesus: I didn't lie about anything. PC came in dead last in the industry in Game of the Year exclusives for generation 7. It hasn't had a game of the year exclusive on GameSpot for 10 years. Enough with the whining. When it comes to games consoles win

He was right though.

You said consoles have superior games, but according to both gamespot and metacritic, PC has more superior games.

How can you prove this? How can you prove that the sale wasn't the sole reason the person bought the game. Steam sales are designed to get people to buy games they didn't plan on buying.

How can you prove that?

Why does PC gaming suck in the living room? You can easily hook up any PC to any display including any TV, and also use any controller you wish including Xbox One, 360, PS3, or PS4 controllers...or all of them at the same time. Not to mention things like Steam Big Picture Mode.

There is functionally no difference between controlling and playing a PC in the living room compared to a console.

Okay as in: Okay, I'll get rid of my consoles and game on PC exclusively ?

:P

PC games - PC exclusive games - have a UI that is designed with the user being 12"-18" from the screen. You go and try to play WoW or StarCraft2 on a TV - it sucks because you can't see the minimap. Secondly, most PC games - PC exclusive games - are designed to be used with a KB/Mouse Combo.

So, to adequately play a PC game in your living room, you have to a) move your furniture around so you are close enough to the screen to see the PC-centric UI, and b) have some sort of desk or lap table in order to use the KB/Mouse. That, vs picking up a controller, turning on a PS4/XB1/Wii U, and sitting on your couch.

I also don't want some ugly PC tower mucking up the looks of my entertainment center.

...then don't buy an ugly PC tower

First off it makes sense. valve is a business not a charity. Games that get the big discounts are the ones that have been out for a long time and are no longer selling.

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/37-percent-of-steam-games-have-never-been-played-report/1100-6419022/

@Cranler: I think you misunderstand the word "prove"

While I switched to PC as my primary platform after having a great time on PS3, I plan on getting the PS4 right at the end of the cycle for the exclusives and hope the price will go down by then. Other than that, I have no reason to get any consoles and I am happy with the PC. You guys can't restrict yourself to a single platform otherwise you will miss out on a lot of games, for many that is not an option as more platforms means more money needed to be spend. But still, if you have the option, never lock yourself to a single platform.

Why else would you put a game at 75% off?

Because Steam sales result in absolute windfall profits for developers, and they LOVE it. Otherwise they would not participate - sales are completely up to the rights holders, for how long and for how much they are discounted.

http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/DavidGalindo/20140109/208337/How_much_do_indie_PC_devs_make_anyways_Part_V.php

Vlambeer's last game made as much in one day during the Steam summer sale as it had the entire six month period leading up to that, taking the game from a loss to being extremely profitable. All because it was 75% off.

Your "arguments" are failing. The bottom four on this triangle are you by the way - not just in this topic, but in essentially every single one you participate in. I could keep wiping the floor with you all day long if you want to keep going.

@mikhail said:

@Cranler said:

@mikhail said:

@Cranler: I think you misunderstand the word "prove"

Why else would you put a game at 75% off?

Because Steam sales result in absolute windfall profits for developers, and they LOVE it. Otherwise they would not participate - sales are completely up to the rights holders, for how long and for how much they are discounted.

http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/DavidGalindo/20140109/208337/How_much_do_indie_PC_devs_make_anyways_Part_V.php

Vlambeer's last game made as much in one day during the Steam summer sale as it had the entire six month period leading up to that, taking the game from a loss to being extremely profitable. All because it was 75% off.

Your "arguments" are failing. The bottom four on this triangle are you by the way - not just in this topic, but in essentially every single one you participate in. I could keep wiping the floor with you all day long if you want to keep going.

And why would selling a game at 75% off result in huge profits if not for enticing those who had no plans of buying said game?

It would be interesting to see how many people actually played vlambeers game that they bought on sale.

Cranler getting owned yet again.

More useless posts. Have you learned your lesson about making threats?

How did I get owned? Mikhail brings up a game making more in one sale than in ever did previously, what does that tell you? That no one had any intention of buying the game until they saw it on sale.

Steam sales are all about getting impulse purchases, that's why 37% of steam users games are unplayed.

PC is first place in every facet, loosing-ends you disappoint me with this cryptic act.

Wrong again. It's because PC gamers have SO MANY games to play, it just takes a long time to get to them. Not to mention that many games come in huge bundles and some are simply unwanted - see Humble Bundles that give Steam keys, publisher packs, sale packs, etc. You're also forgetting that games are easily gifted to others - I give people games all the time because I buy extra copies during sales and they just don't play them, or at least haven't yet. Does that mean there is some insidious, negative thing about Steam sales? Of course not, the two are not mutually exclusive, and again you're reaching as usual. In addition to all of that, I've purchased games during sales simply to support developers that I think are doing a good job in the industry - results which speak for themselves when the same devs post the happiest blogs ever about how much money they're making because of the sales. Then they go on to voluntarily participate in sale after sale, with great results every time. I'll eventually play those games - that's another thing that is fantastic about PC's. I don't have to worry about upgrading my PC and then not being able to play my older games anymore. Backwards compatibility, dude.

Just because a game hasn't been played on a user's Steam account doesn't mean it never will. I routinely stock up on games during sales and then eventually get to them sometimes years later. Your logic is broken.

You're grasping at straws here trying to somehow take a single incorrect point and use that to prove...what, exactly?

It's hard to not suggest PC as the primary platform for anyone who likes games.

If you're not one to play games on a weekly basis then consoles might be sufficient since they get good releases so rarely.

Of course you didn't attempt to explain how I got owned.

Remember that this isn't just steam. Sales in general are about getting people to buy things they didn't plan to.

More proof that steam lures people into buying games they didn't plan to

http://kotaku.com/were-buying-more-pc-games-than-we-can-play-1493402988

Among the data gathered, the study indicates that 36.9 percent of purchased games have never been played at all. Another 17 percent have been played for less than one hour (just enough time to load it up and, maybe, get through a tutorial).

http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2014/04/16/over-one-third-of-purchased-steam-games-have-never-been-played.asp

Here in gaming land our closest equivalent to ASDA’s cheap deals is something like the Steam sale, which is a time where many of us load up on titles we wouldn’t normally take a punt on, just because they’re selling for pennies on the pound.”

http://www.vg247.com/2012/12/21/digital-hoarding-and-the-steam-sale-menace/

@asylumni said:

@miiiiv said:

@scottpsfan14 said:

@miiiiv said:

@mikhail said:

Wall of text

Just skimmed through it and most of it seems correct, maybe not "Faster than a PS4 or XBox One, even if you built one for $400"

I think it's time people stop using that argument. A $400 pc build, including an os, a decent mouse and keyboard will probably not fare well against the ps4 over the coming years.

But pc games are cheaper and online gaming is free so some argue that a S700-800 build against the ps4 is more fair since the cost evens out over the years. With such a pc it's a more valid argument though as it's much more likely to perform pretty well over the coming years.

Although most of the wild claims they make in there are conjecture. No sources to back them up. Yeah, there is obvious truths in there, but hidden among it is a pile of BS. But then that's just the way of teh masterrace.

Like I said, I just skimmed through it, the $400 pc build was the first thing that caught my eyes as evidently false, I'm sure there are more things as the entire post is biased towards pc gaming.

Yeah, I checked the build, choosing the cheaper option when available, and it comes to $475.40 without an O/S or input device. So after you add those, you'd be at about 50% more than a PS4 with only an A10 6800K which can do Tomb Raider at 1080P, low settings at 35.6 FPS average on LOW.

While I still stand by my point that a $400 pc (including os and decent input devices) will not perform as well as the ps4 over the coming years but you showed me a benchmark of the A10 6800K ruining the game with it's integrated graphics, I believe. Are you sure that you don't have room for a cheaper discrete gpu in the budget when you are approaching $500 without an os and input devices?

yeah obviously the bulk of that op is plagiarised from reddit, but even so.

pc is pretty solid and i think one would be unwise to write it off.

my favourite things about it are: how the performance essentially reflects your level of investment, and of course how you can choose your level of investment. utilitarian nature of it. and very high frame rate gaming (120+). load times.

my least favourite thing is actually a new thing (well new to me), and that's how some games can't achieve 120 fps for whatever reason (eg quake 4).

Yeah Like PC gamers are immune to being complete idiots.

Nothing new here. Though I don't understand how can backwards compatibility be counted at the same time as old exclusives. That's bis in idem. It's either better backwards compatibility or one huge exclusive games library. Or did the fat PS3's library count also all PS2 exclusives?

Almost every point you made is actually objectively superior to consoles. Still, may be not enough for many to prevent console gaming, or even enjoying console gaming more than PC gaming. Also, you must not forget one word: it's potentially superior, in many of those aspects. For example, is that Battlefield pic of the game running in many monitors with EyeFinity in your rig representative of the majority of PC demographics? Of course, potentially, everyone could get there. But many can't, and many that can, don't want to. And many that can, still game on consoles. Even sometimes exclusively on consoles. But yes, in almost every aspect, PC gaming is potentially and objectively superior to console gaming.