You would be wrong.

PC exclusives: Pretty much every strategy game (Total War, AirLand Battle, etc.), mmo (Eve, Wow, Guild Wars2 etc.) and space sim (Elite: Dangerous, SC, X series, Eve).
DayZ, Rust, Kerbal Space Program, Legion (*snicker*), Arma2/3 and about one billion other fps games, every hardcore simulator (cars, planes, wood chippers, goats), MOBA's (LoL, Dota etc.) and a metric f**kton of other games I can't remember.

Your turn.

Did you even read your quote? Here let me link it again.

So, it has been shown time and again that a PC will cost you 2-3 times if not more on your electricity bill every month.

I'm not arguing that a PC is cheaper to buy. You are just trying to dodge a statement you know you made with no proof.

Not only that, his argument is really, really stupid. A PS4 is just a mid level gaming PC wrapped in a sony bit of plastic.

Do you think it runs some special power supply? Or video card? Or hard drive? Or bluray player? Probably the only thing even made by Sony in the entire thing is the case.

You would be wrong.

PC exclusives: Pretty much every strategy game (Total War, AirLand Battle, etc.), mmo (Eve, Wow, Guild Wars2 etc.) and space sim (Elite: Dangerous, SC, X series, Eve).
DayZ, Rust, Kerbal Space Program, Legion (*snicker*), Arma2/3 and about one billion other fps games, every hardcore simulator (cars, planes, wood chippers, goats), MOBA's (LoL, Dota etc.) and a metric f**kton of other games I can't remember.

Your turn.

Yet more flawed logic. Consoles and PCs are similar. Let's get that out of the way.

Any game designed for a console is going to be targeted at the console's hardware. Thus, any PC with similar hardware will run the game just as well as the console. Thus, and PC with better hardware will run the game better than the console.

The end.

Ok you two are flooding me with so much stupid it is going to take a second so bare with me here.




Jesus you are dumb.

AVG PC will take well over 300 watts to run

PS4 is under 200 watts when under load.

I am saying SHOW ME A SYSTEM, ANY SYSTEM that is comparable with the PS4 (cost wise) and I will show you a system that takes between 2-3 times more ELECTRICITY than the PS4 you knuckle dragging mouth-breather.


You are just full of all kinds of stupid aren't you? Do I really have to explain just the most rudemntary stuff to you? Ok so which item, the DIY-PC or the PS4 was designed to be power efficient (I'll give you a hint, not the PC)?

The PS4 is ARM based, which means it uses a low power cpu (like a phone or tablet incidentally). Also, it runs at a dismal 1.6 GHz.

However, if you so choose, you can also build an ARM based PC as well if you'd prefer low power consumption. Now in doing so, you'd lose the compatibility associated with Windows OS, but you could go Linux. That's essentially what a steambox is. So, yes, you can make a DIY-PC that is as power efficient as the PS4, and run games on it as well as a PS4. This is precisely because the PS4 is a PC.

LOL, nope, look how just wrong about everything you are.

PS4 runs on an x86-64 processor dummy. That, last time I checked, isn't exactly the same as ARM architecture.

A PC in the same ballpark as the PS4 in terms of price will actually perform worse.

Coding to the metal and all.

It is funny, PCMasterracists have been all over the place posting "PS4 equivalent" builds for ages now, but when I ask for one, all of the sudden they don't want to post them....

It is funny, PCMasterracists have been all over the place posting "PS4 equivalent" builds for ages now, but when I ask for one, all of the sudden they don't want to post them....

Well, what Cat Merc says is true, but the kind of efficiency gains is unlikely to be all that much. The OS on the PS4 has to support all of the same type stuff as a PC - all the same protocols and accessories basically, so coding to the metal will get you some efficiency, but it isn't like these guys are writing assembly.

It is funny, PCMasterracists have been all over the place posting "PS4 equivalent" builds for ages now, but when I ask for one, all of the sudden they don't want to post them....

What you need to understand is this:

- console: they are frozen in time for the duration of that 7 years. Thus, yes they run games, gut allways at the same sstandard of performance and graphical fidelity. Theres no way to see better textures, better post-processing effects, etc.

- PC: if you buy a just as capable machine, it will also b eusable for the same period. BUT, you will progressively have to use less post effects, as the games in the PC environment continues to evolve and push the limits everynew generation of hardware offers.

So what I am saying is, a PS3 game now will run in a quality that would be considered 'medium' by todays PC hardware. And thats fine, if the PC owner didnt chose to upgrade.

And Chosing here is the key.

You dont need to upgrade your PC machine, and if you chose not to, it will peform at "PS3" level of performance and graphical fidelity.

Take my PC.

I still use an E8400 CPU processor. Its just a Dual core. And, after 6, 7 years of use, it still delivers. I play whatever I want without complaints.

Now my GPU. I use a GTX 570. This GPU I bought like 3 years ago as an upgrade froma 9800gtx wich lasted 4 years then broke due a power outage.

So, my system is old if you compare it to the actual platforms.

But I still can play games like the recent released Tomb Rider at pretty much maximum. I play shooters near maximum as well, without complaints.

So far, my machine has not rejected any game I wished to play on it.

I could upgrade now if I wanted, porbably will do so next year by just gettign a new GPU/mobo/Ram, and using the old parts like GPU, case, HDD's, so it wont be a huge investment.

But I will uograde more out of a desire of having a new shinny than because I need to.

LOL, nope, look how just wrong about everything you are.

PS4 runs on an x86-64 processor dummy. That, last time I checked, isn't exactly the same as ARM architecture.

So what is your time frame here? I mean are we talking all time? last few years? be specific.

Mario alone (yes just the mario series) has a larger footprint across gaming, the industry, and our culture as a whole than everything listed above put together 10 times over. (Hey we weren't being specific were we?)

I've heard also that the PS4 might get a shorter life expectancy than the PS3 got. When the PS3 was released, it was a beast. The PS4 isnt all that comparatively, equating to a mid-high experience, so probably its shelf life will be shorter.

Sony will probably have a new console out in 4 or 5 years.

Not even close.

$4,000+ laptop came out within a month of Ps3, without a doubt out-performed by the Ps3. I would wager probably less reliable too (without a doubt).

That is almost 7 of the higher tiered PS3s on launched day.

That laptop isn't actually more powerful than the PS3.

At the time, super high end hardware simply didn't exist, there was no GTX Titan, GTX 780, R9 290X etc'.

I got my first console in 1981 (ping pong with the twiddly knobs), so lets start from there.

Sure, Mario is an influential series, but how about Wolfenstein, Doom, Quake or Counter Strike? Or Battlefield, which was originally a PC exclusive? I guess none of those games had any influence, according to you, or..?

Really? You can do better than FPSes, try System shock 2 at least, Sierra adventure games(Quest for glory, Kings Quest, Liesure Suit Larry, Gabriel Knight, Space Quest, etc..), Civilization, SimCity, Diablo, Warcarft (pre-world), Scorched Earth, FreeSpace, Wing commanders, GalCiv, Descent, X-series, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights.... you know, try to not be a stereotypical PC guy and list some non First Person Shooters.

Now be honest, still pales in comparison to NES,SNES/Genesis, PSX/N64/Satu..well, DreamCast/PS2/XBox, current gen not to mention coleco, atari, packard, hell even the arcades (which were way closer to consoles than computer games)


I am not saying they had no influence, just that the PC exclusive catalog is (while containing tons of games I love) just not anywhere near as impressive in just about any way you want to cut it.

PC gaming just isn't as important to gaming as consoles gaming is, that is the cold hard truth. It is nowhere near as big (Steam doesn't release sales figures, but their profit was only 1 billion dollars), it is not as culturally relevant, and it is not as socially acceptable. Sorry guys..... continue to rage though.

I got my first console in 1981 (ping pong with the twiddly knobs), so lets start from there.

Thanks for proving my point by listing even more awesome PC exclusives. Or don't they count? Do you have any other console exclusives apart from Mario? You also forgot Baldur's gate2, Icewind dale 1&2, planescape, Deus Ex, World of Tanks (Which alone has almost as many players on PC as there are PS3's, and yes, I know it's been ported to xbox).
And I haven't even started on the Chinese and Russian markets.

And if you don't know Steam's sales numbers, how do you know how much they make? Let's assume that number is correct, that would be profit, as in cash in pocket. That's one thousand million dollars. For comparison - EA had net income of $76 million in 2012. They're not even in the same league.

So what is your time frame here? I mean are we talking all time? last few years? be specific.

Mario alone (yes just the mario series) has a larger footprint across gaming, the industry, and our culture as a whole than everything listed above put together 10 times over. (Hey we weren't being specific were we?)

The vast majority of games ever made are PC exclusives, alot of the timeless classics available on steam dirt cheap, all the best indies come on PC, Pretty much all the best free to play are pc only, two decades worth of abandonware for free, emulators for every older console/system (MAME <3).

People who buy alot of games will quickly save ALOT of money thru Steam sales.

There is no comparison on potential value for money comparing PC to Console.

Hi Mr. Brainwashed, what if I told you I never pay above $20 for console games and have every major console release since before sept 2013? Which of course would be much sooner than I get those types of deals on a PC.

What if I also told you that consoles library >>>>>>>>>> PC...Here I will just mention developers with 15+ games a peice that are insanely awesome, most likely million+ sellers, and console exclusive. nintendo games by themselves just completely obliterate the PC exclusive library, square, konami, capcom, EA, ubisoft, Rockstar, Enix, Koei, Sony, bungie, Rare, Sega, TakeTwo Interactive,... I am sure I left out about 50% of the development houses here.

There has never been a year when console's game lineup didn't just crush the PC's lineup, and the fact that Console games market is approx 5 times larger than the non-mmo PC market kind of proves my point.

Oh and if you use ROMs you are pretty much a thief.. have fun with that. (people wonder why developers shy away from the PC crowd lol)

You are right, there is no comparison, just in electricity saving alone I can afford PSPlus (i.e. 24-36 good FREE games per year.. every year)

Consoles are nice but a PC is essential, There are very few good strategy games on console, its pretty much a whole genre you are excluded from, no Civilization, no Planetary Annihilation, no Company of Heroes, NO EVE-ONLINE.

I really like my ps3 but it could never be an alternative to a PC, only a supplement.