Yeah fair enough. I was just thinking for a console like build a $40 controller over a keyboard and mouse might make sense.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Potato Masher (console-level used PC) vs PS4/PS4 Pro in Watch_Dogs 2
- Thread starter Sad Affleck
- Start date
No, you said "go buy a monitor", like it's something 100% required and as if somehow consoles came with free TVs or something.
You did not "imply" shit.
MR ARCADE FOREVER
Member
IMO console exclusives are better. However PC's are getting more and more "console exclusives" and more third party games (japanese devs jumping on board). PC gaming has never been better than now.
No. No you did. You clearly stated you need to go buy a monitor and how yours cost $480.
Perhaps it's time to admit defeat on the point and never bring it up again because it doesn't make sense either way.
jonscrambler
Member
but why would you buy steam link and steam controller from Amazon? wouldn't most buy from the Steam store?
You say that but that's exactly the reason I jumped to PC. There are 100s of big name games on PC that aren't on PS4 or XB1. Most importantly to me the vast majority of the FF games.
Spladam
Member
The point was that those millions of PC gamers in the Steam hardware survey (which states 70% of PC gamers us DX12 GPUs and the 970 is the most common) are not gaming with $400 PC's. I wish I had numbers on the amount who are using their TV's, but come on, lets be honest, what percentage of them do YOU think are using their TV's and what percentage are using dedicated monitors. THAT was the point.
-While others debated this intelligently, you kinda went 4chan on me, like I was crazy because you were so right. Hey, if you believe most PC gamers are using their living room TV's, or even a substatial fraction of them are, that's what you believe. I know a lot of PC gamers and build machines for folks that only game on consoles, been doing it a while, and I can't think of one that does M/K FPS (what a PC is awesome for) on their living room TV's. I know one that has a steam controller, but still uses M/K most of the time.
And guys, pointing out that Steam made big picture mode as proof that's it's the common interface for Steam users is kind of gnarly. Steam was ahead of the game, and the searching I've done so far shows that living room PC gaming is still in it's infancy. But we kind of knew that didn't we. Yes, it exist.
PC is an odd situation. With backward compatibility spanning decades, getting older titles running at insane specifications is a huge benefit.
At the same time, lack of standardization has had issues in the past and current with supported devices.
Consoles have a distinct benefit of a closed ecosystem and standardization.
Both have its benefits and drawbacks. Personally i prefer PC, but i accept its not for everyone.
At the same time, lack of standardization has had issues in the past and current with supported devices.
Consoles have a distinct benefit of a closed ecosystem and standardization.
Both have its benefits and drawbacks. Personally i prefer PC, but i accept its not for everyone.
970 has 6% marketshare. The next highest at 5% is a 750ti, which is used in budget setups. You also see 730 and 720m high on the list, which are "dx12" chips. I dont know how a dx 12 budget card is high end.
E: dp, i apologize.
Spladam
Member
I just shipped a 750 Ti to Brazil to help my friend finish her budget PC, as even cheap GPU's are crazy expensive there. It's the ultimate budget PC GPU, that and the 950.
I realised half way through this conversation that that's what you meant. It wasn't clear, though that's not your fault, it's the fault of the medium.
Just a quick question though. How does how much people have actually paid for their pc, relate to how much you can get a "potato masher" for? Because it doesn't really matter how many pc gamers do do that (for the sake of making this cost comparisons), all that matters is that it is possible and realistic to achieve. I realise that most costs people are quoting AREN'T realistic, but still.
jonscrambler
Member
again you still seem to think there's a difference between TVs and monitors
The point of this was never to say that most people have console like PC hardware, it was to point out as a fact that within a console entry budget you can get a PC that do play games ~ the same level.
I'm neither saying you should get a $400 PC, as I don't care and would want the most performance, but come on already. It doesn't matter what you or I think is the most used, none of these require a specific display, they work within the same display category.
A console don't require a TV.
A PC don't require a Monitor.
As such you point is mute. One or the other is enough and they cost the same for both as you can use the same with both.
LordRaptor
Member
But you don't.
So "your feels" are not a useful metric to determine that an additional monitor is a compulsory purchase for every gaming PC.
perfectsil
Member
It really doesn't matter what % use their living room TV, the point is 100% of PC gamers can if they want to.
Spladam
Member
It's very possible, this has always been the go-to point for us PC gamers, but the real world scenario is much different. Most first time PC users don't have the parts laying around that us PC gamers do, most are buying machines off the shelf, as I would think a larger fraction of Steam users are using off the shelf PC's that self built ones, but that is just a guess.
Not many people are using used hardware when it comes to PC's, and I've seen Linus recommend it for budget machines, but I wouldn't. That's just me though, I know PC hardware, and how random silicon can be, I want that warranty or at least a 90 day return policy, and some metal that hasn't been heated or OC'd to crash temps 100 times. There's no way of knowing with used product.
Spladam
Member
No, I don't, that's just you dude. We'll use the term dedicated display from now on to save you the confusion.
jonscrambler
Member
do people use their PCs only for gaming? so their PC display has other uses right? same as their PS4 display?
Spladam
Member
This is how it started.
The number of PC users with PC hardware equivalent to consoles is in the millions according to Steam survey.
Don't be so quick to call bullshit before doing your research.
Very well summarised
Spladam
Member
Hahaha, not dedicated to gaming man, dedicated to the machine. As in it sits on a desk or wall above or besides the machine and displays the output of the computer only. Be it Flat screen TV or Desktop Monitor.
And why does a monitor remain a factor in the PC build price?
You guys can argue steam stats all you want, not my hill to fight, but you keep dodging the issue you made up where a monitor is factored into price on a PC and not vice versa.
Cramoss
Member
Is why I love these threads
Saucycarpdog
Member
Just with Spladam alone we could get close to a blackout.
Most people who play on PC I know IRL use cheap laptops with low end GPU's to play LoL or Dota, in fact I know know one other person who games on a desktop with a 970 GTX, I use a 1060.
Many PC gamers just wana play the games only available on PC tbh, they don't care what it looks like.
Yeah that comes down to opinions, but I really do think part of the reason some people prefer console exclusives is because they have giant marketing campaigns behind them and look pretty.
The era of PC exclusives with bleeding-edge graphics consoles (or pedestrian PCs) couldn't touch is over (unless Star Citizen actually comes out), so the remaining PC exclusives don't really get that visibility anymore. The ones that do are the ones that became massively popular because of their communities, like Counter-Strike GO (in its current form), LoL, DOTA, StarCraft, or WoW. Others just catch word of mouth for interesting gameplay or concepts, like BATTLEGROUDNS, Undertale, Factorio, or Rust.
These differences don't make console exclusives or PC exclusives inherently better, but it does seem to severely split people up over which they prefer.
I bought a PS4 for Uncharted 4 but I'm honestly bored of 30fps slow paced third person action games which seems to be every single PS4 exclusive going forward. First party sony games have incredible production and are pretty as hell but they leave me feeling empty in the gameplay department. PC exclusives these days are much lower budget but they seem to try and set themselves apart and try new angles on things and improve on gameplay ideas over anything else. I get why the majority prefers an Uncharted 4 over let's say a Stalker game but I feel myself becoming less and less interested in these big budget blockbusters.
Maybe I'm just getting old.
Spladam
Member
The 960m does sit in 6th place on the Steam hardware survey, with the 750m at 8th. In all, it would seem laptop based GPU's make up roughly 16 to 17% of total Steam PC users.
The go buy a monitor statement was in regards to the millions of Steam users using Console level PC's. I assumed, without real data granted, that most of those folks are using dedicated displays, so that would have been factored into the $400. I assumed this because living room PC gaming is still in it's infancy, and not yet a large part of PC culture.
Hux1ey made a good point in that a good number of those lower tier machines would be laptops as well. Not to beat a dead horse, but if you're getting a laptop with a 960m in it, it's most likely not $400 (although you can get mobile i7 laptops with halfway decent intergrated graphics for that much, but that would be bellow the console performance level.)
No, you don't have to factor in display into the PC budget, but in the real world, it very much IS a part of that budget for a vast majority of non laptop using PC users. I'm quite sure that the living room solution will at some point become defacto, but we're not there, not even close.
Consoles sell in the many millions BECAUSE of the accessibility due to the fact that most everyone has a TV, but we all know this. The fact that PC gamers always point out that you CAN is different from the reality of if you will. I have a HTPC that I listen to podcast and watch streaming shit while I do shit like post here, and vice versa I listen to music and podcast on my PC (which has it's own sound system as well) while we game on the console.
For reference, Valve had shipped 1 million steam controllers in the beginning of this year, and I assume (don't know) that not all of them are using them in the living room (like me).
They jumped the gun on the living room PC with the Steam machine, it's why I don't think it's yet to be that common (in addiction to my anecdotal observations) but like some pointed out here, the Steam link has been a much bigger success for them. I don't have one and have not gamed on one, but I'd be wary of the added network latency created in the Stream with regards to me gaming with one.
For all the arguing, the truth is, if a budget PC were all the console killer it was made out to be, it would be killing the consoles. Ask Valve about that market though.
Also, in searching for data, it's crazy how many times this thread came up on page 2. Yes, I looked at page 2
That's why PC + Nintendo is the best combination.
Oh yes dolphin is one of my favourite things, I'll probably get a switch too.
The 960m does sit in 6th place on the Steam hardware survey, with the 750m at 8th. In all, it would seem laptop based GPU's make up roughly 16 to 17% of total Steam PC users.
The go buy a monitor statement was in regards to the millions of Steam users using Console level PC's. I assumed, without real data granted, that most of those folks are using dedicated displays, so that would have been factored into the $400. I assumed this because living room PC gaming is still in it's infancy, and not yet a large part of PC culture.
Hux1ey made a good point in that a good number of those lower tier machines would be laptops as well. Not to beat a dead horse, but if you're getting a laptop with a 960m in it, it's most likely not $400 (although you can get mobile i7 laptops with halfway decent intergrated graphics for that much, but that would be bellow the console performance level.)
No, you don't have to factor in display into the PC budget, but in the real world, it very much IS a part of that budget for a vast majority of non laptop using PC users. I'm quite sure that the living room solution will at some point become defacto, but we're not there, not even close.
Consoles sell in the many millions BECAUSE of the accessibility due to the fact that most everyone has a TV, but we all know this. The fact that PC gamers always point out that you CAN is different from the reality of if you will. I have a HTPC that I listen to podcast and watch streaming shit while I do shit like post here, and vice versa I listen to music and podcast on my PC (which has it's own sound system as well) while we game on the console.
For reference, Valve had shipped 1 million steam controllers in the beginning of this year, and I assume (don't know) that not all of them are using them in the living room (like me).
They jumped the gun on the living room PC with the Steam machine, it's why I don't think it's yet to be that common (in addiction to my anecdotal observations) but like some pointed out here, the Steam link has been a much bigger success for them. I don't have one and have not gamed on one, but I'd be wary of the added network latency created in the Stream with regards to me gaming with one.
For all the arguing, the truth is, if a budget PC were all the console killer it was made out to be, it would be killing the consoles. Ask Valve about that market though.
Also, in searching for data, it's crazy how many times this thread came up on page 2. Yes, I looked at page 2
By low end GPU I include integrated, not sure who has what but many game on laptop, even given how non optimal it is. Most people don't want to spend the dosh on the mid/high end PC experience.
pretty done
Member
Have you played Yakuza and Nioh? I don't think you're playing the right games tbh
I've played Bloodborne which I adored, Driveclub which was decent, Uncharted 4 which was left me groaning at every cutscene and Horizon which I was insanely impressed by, but I can't even bring myself to finish it.
I played a yakazu game on PS2 and thought it sucked, but I may look into 0 when it's cheap. Nioh seems like a bit of a poor man's souls game but again i'll probably pick it up when it's cheap or if it comes to PC, 720p 60fps is rather off-putting too considering how close I sit to the screen.
I'm currently playing through Need for Speed Porsche Unleashed atm, so everything else has to wait!
Spladam
Member
I found Uncharted (which came with my slim) to be kind of "meh". The one exclusive I would HIGHLY recommend would be Horizon Zero Dawn. I don't know how they squeezed that kind of fidelity out of the PS4, but it blew me away. It has a great concept and a decent open world, but it's all about the beautiful robot dinosaur fights with a bow and arrow, how sick is that premise. Robot Dinosaur Fights.
Does that run On D3D? i remember having a 3dfx when that was released.
I have Horizon and enjoy it very much but I have a hard time putting the effort in to finishing it.
It's basically an Ubi game done right, but it still has those traits I'm pretty sick of. I also dislike how Aloy mutters to herself every two seconds, it's almost as bad as Tomb Raider. The the load times when fast travelling are absolutely ridiculous and call me a snob but 30fps never stops bugging me, especially when I often play on my friends 144hz monitor, it's actually hard going back to 60fps after that thing. But yea great game I do not regret my purchase one bit.
It can do but I use Glide, much less buggy and with nGlide config you can make it 4k with proper widescreen support. The game is awesome!
Here's a shot of it running.
Spyder_Monkey
Banned
Speaking from experience, no they cannot.
I know, I wasn't being sarcastic or anything. There are genres of games that don't even exist on consoles.
Seriously? My mums 2013 laptop can run Dota 2 like nothing.
It might slightly struggle with overwatch though, but I'm sure it would be playable.
Pretty sure the worst there would be WoW, everything else should run np.
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
Why not? Even Overwatch is playable on ancient Intel integrated graphics chips:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mL7j8sBk6lE
Man I haven't played WoW in so long, I forgot how much they updated it graphically.
Felix Lighter
Member
He owns a year old $400 laptop, he knows how every $400 configuration plays games.
LordRaptor
Member
The GPD Win - a handheld - can play all of those games and is $300 soooooo........
Huge Succeeded
Banned
Like I said. Y'all can keep repeating this, over and over. Doesn't make it true.
You could try backing that statement up, but for every supporting example you could produce, I could produce ten counter examples sourced from the very same thread.
Oh, shit? Didn't realize he was such an expert. I'll defer to him.
Was thinking more along the lines of raids and particle effects flying everywhere.
TheBryanJZX90
Member
You just illustrated part of the problem. You can spend money on a PC and maybe it will run the games you want to play, maybe it won't. Even if there are configurations that will do what you want, you have to educate yourself in order to make the correct purchase. That's time and effort that isn't required to get gaming on a console.
This is true, but what's the problem?
Huge Succeeded
Banned
A $400 laptop isn't the same as a $400 desktop. Everyone knows that.