Five PC Gaming myths

[schneiderguy]

Text

Myth #1: PC gaming is way too expensive
Myth #2: PC gaming means nothing but broken releases, updates, and patches
Myth #3: PC games don't sell, and are falling far behind console game sales
Myth #4: Online gaming on the PC is a mess, and no match for the likes of Xbox Live
Myth #5: Copy protection on PC games is a major headache

The most interesting part (to me at least) was the part about game sales. He makes a good point about how comparing the PC to the entire console gaming market isnt really fair, and if you compare the PC to just one system it sells as much or more than most consoles.

 

[toughwimp11]

lol, i find 4 funny

 

[Netscorer]

Good article, but author sometimes tries too hard to convince himself that his arguments are correct. For example, in the first myth he goes for several paragraphs justifying the cost of new PC but fails to mention that in 5 years (the typical age of the console) the PC would have to be upgraded several times, bringing total cost of ownership to twice or more of the initial 'meager' $1500 investment.
Plus PCs are too intimidating to the general public and most people have nightmares of their prized possession going nuts on them on day.

 

[gorcorps]

His argument for #2 is god awful. All he says is that the PC has bugs, but so do the consoles. He fails to mention that in general console games will boot initially, even with bugs. But lots of the PC bugs stop the game from starting entirely, or crash in the middle of it all. He says this too: "These days, Windows does a good job of auto-patching itself." That's great pal, but we're not talking about the OS here... we're talking about the GAMES. Other than that he has good points, but nothing we haven't known already.

 

[natep]

His money argument is weak. More expensive at first, sure $1000. According to him I'm going to make up the difference w/ the $10 game price difference and multiplayer fees.

Ok.

 

[RandomFool]

As for #3 pc games are losing shelf space. I went into EB Games the other day and there was only one rack of PC games available. I remember when they used to have a used PC games section that took up that entire rack and a wall of PC goodness.

People have been saying PC gaming is dying for years now anyway.

 

[Schadenfroh]

Originally posted by: natep According to him I'm going to make up the difference w/ the $10 game price difference and multiplayer fees.

Prices drop much faster on PC games than console games... especially if the game sucks.

The price gap of the games will only widen after the release date.

 

[shadowofthesun]

PC gaming isn't exactly dying- we're just getting pushed to the side and forced to accept mindless ports instead of made-from-scratch PC games, like the good old days.

The sad thing is, there is very little we can do. Basically, we can continue buying PC games, and that's about the extent of our power. Pirating hurts PC developers only, which are the very people I want to support, and as such I refuse to pirate PC games. I am looking forward to Crysis for being a PC exclusive (IIRC).

The problem is that the average consumer won't look past the initial purchase price. They see a 400 dollar console versus a $1,500 high-end gaming PC or a $900 mid-range PC. They don't see the $10 price difference in games, the added subscription costs for programs such as Xbox Live, and the hefty cost for controllers and periphrials. In addition, a PC can be incrementally upgraded for 3 years or more, allowing it to span two console lifetimes and still outperform the consoles in almost every instance.

 

[BladeVenom]

Originally posted by: natep
His money argument is weak. More expensive at first, sure $1000. According to him I'm going to make up the difference w/ the $10 game price difference and multiplayer fees.

Ok.

As far as the money argument goes, I would have a decent PC whether I gamed or not. So PC gaming only cost me the price of a good video card. Which is still cheaper than the good versions of the 360 or PS3.

The $10 difference is only MSRP. Anyone who looks for deals can usually find new PC games on sale for $15 to $20 off. Add that to the $10 and PC games are usually $25 to $30 cheaper.

What about content? Look at all the mods you get with a PC game that gives it much greater value and longevity. Sometimes the mods are better the original games. That gives the PC a lot more value per game.

To add it up:
PS3 $600 vs. 8800GTS w/640mb $360
12 console games at $60 vs. 12 PC games at $35
So PC gaming saves me $540 in the first year.

PC games usually look better, play better, and have more content. All at a lower price also.

 

[Soundmanred]

I think BladeVenom makes the best point I've read so far in this ongoing argument.
I don't play PC games much. I have a PC to do many other things, but if I want to play games, it's an option. Only the cost of making an "everyday tasks" PC into a "gaming" PC should be considered. I have the RAM, the CPU speed, the HD space and everything else, all I would need to play today's games is a video card.
I do have a problem with the "anti-piracy" efforts used on PC games however. That keeps me from even trying them.

 

[Wheelock]

PC Gaming is cheap if you're willing to settle for second-best. My athlon 64 3000+ with motherboard cost me just $49.99. All other parts were either salvaged from my prior system or hand-me-downs/cheap used parts.

My system runs Oblivion fairly well. And certainly if I were a World of Warcraft addict, I'd do swimmingly.

 

[tigersty1e]

There's much more money to be made on the console.

#3. He doesn't take into account that 1 game can be made and sold on multiple systems while the PC can be sold only once.

I partly agree with #1, but you have to be smart with your money and upgrade at all the right times.

You could get away with buying a semi-decent computer once and upgrading the video card once after 2 years, letting you use the computer for 4 years, but if you bought the wrong psu or ram or motherboard, your screwed and have to make more upgrades.

 

[Skacer]

Originally posted by: Netscorer
For example, in the first myth he goes for several paragraphs justifying the cost of new PC but fails to mention that in 5 years (the typical age of the console) the PC would have to be upgraded several times,

Several times in 5 years? Wah? I think I upgrade around the 3 year mark usually. Now ask yourself how many consoles last 5 years of consistent use without breaking down. The Gamecube was one, but I know several people who replaced their Xbox 360's. And I know from personal experience that I have owned 3 separate PS2s.

If every console was built as well as the Gamecube, the console market would really have a leg up on the PC. I don't even think the Wii is built as well as the Gamecube was, time will tell though.

Originally posted by: gorcorps
But lots of the PC bugs stop the game from starting entirely, or crash in the middle of it all.

Lot's of PC bugs stop the game from starting entirely? Yea I'd like to see you justify that. Severe bugs of that nature are the minority. The reality is that PC developers can get away with releasing a buggy product and then releasing an early patch as the product hits the street. But now games on the Xbox 360 can do this also. The PC bugs complaint was 1000x more valid back in the SNES -> PSX days, when products for consoles had to be released flawlessly but PC games got patched.

If anything, I would say there is more work for the end user when patching a PC game. That is a valid complaint. Like, there was a problem with BF2 where punkbuster caused issues and you had to manually reinstall punkbuster. It was an easy fix, but a little more work than say, having something tell you a patch is available for BF2 and auto installing it.

 

[Inspector Jihad]

while i generally agree with the article he says that npd only tracks us sales and there are a lot more pc gamers in europe. but he doesnt consider there are a lot of console gamers in japan so its pretty much a wash. the us prolly best represents both console and pc sales.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

As I have been stating for over a year now, the gaming industry is in boom mode, and that includes PC gaming. Furthermore, the article is clearly a reaction to Halo 3, and evidently intended to assuage the fears of those who worry over the fate of PC gaming, particularly in the face of so much mass media marketing and hype for other platforms.

PC gaming isn't going to die, but the primary distribution method does seem to be changing from physical media, to a download based one. Being able to get the content you want hassle-free, from the convenience of home, is a good thing. So loosen your sphincters, and get your game on already.

Originally posted by: toughwimp11
lol, i find 4 funny

Yes it is, and I've never read that posted before by anyone in these forums.

 

[lupi]

The reason you see so much more shelf space for console games is due to the used game market (something the stores stopped doing a few years ago).

They can rebuy a $60 game for 1/3 cost and then sell it again for over 3/4 price.

Go into a BB, CC, or CUSA and the difference in shelf space is fairly marginal.

 

[imported_Section8]

Since some in this thread brought up the difference in PCs versus consoles based on cost of upgrades, I think it is fair to mention that a PC can and is used as a tool to make money. Many ATers have online businesses and game with the same PC. My earnings have more than made up for any upgrades.

 

[PingSpike]

Regarding machine cost: While the article writer is stretching things to get his point across, this is often overblown. The fact is, the cost of a semi-beastly gaming PC has come down over the years and the cost of your average gaming console has gone up. I still people say stuff like "I need a $5000 PC to play those games" sometimes. And while I'm sure they are exaggerating to get their point across, I'm not even sure its possible to build a $5000 gaming PC anymore. I would think $1500 could buy you a pretty impressive high end machine these days.

Back when the el cheapo model PC cost $1200 and the super nintendo cost $120 the price disparity was HUGE and undeniable. But as the prices of consoles has creeped up into the $400-$500 range (and more in some cases) PCs have come down. Without shopping around, I'm fairly confident you could snag a moderately equiped dell, stick a $300 video card in it and have a solid gaming rig for around $800. Developers have offloaded so much of the heavy work onto the video card these days that the rest of the PC almost doesn't matter. And dual cores and 2GB kits of memory are pretty cheap these days.

The price difference is still there, but of course the PC is more of a multi function tool then just a gaming machine. And the consoles are usually sold at a loss. (not that this matters to the consumer obviously!) The point is the disparity has quietly shrunk over the years but not many people take notice of it.

Yeah, that PC is going to have to be upgraded so its not over with there. I'm not saying the console isn't cheaper overall, or that the PC isn't more of a headache to deal with. But they're different beasts with their own quirks due to design.

The shelf space thing is more complicated. I think the PC gaming market has dwindled some myself at least is raw market share. But as mentioned, I think the shelf space thing is as much a function of changing distribution methods for the PC as anything else. I don't think stores like to carry PC games as much either. There's obviously going to be more outside competition in that market from online stores. And those stores main revenue stream is actually the used games market. The used games market is shit for the PC in comparison, profit wise. PC games drop in price faster and that leads to less demand for used games. It isn't really any wonder why they would devote less space to them.

 

[Inspector Jihad]

does even halo 3 compare to cs in terms on online player base? i wouldn't be surprised if more ppl play cs everyday than all online console games combined.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by: Inspector Jihad
does even halo 3 compare to cs in terms on online player base? i wouldn't be surprised if more ppl play cs everyday than all online console games combined.

Halo 3 Players Online:301,371
Unique Players (Last 24 Hours):1,497,682
Matches Logged (Last 24 Hours):4,629,590
UNSC Campaign Kill Count:767,737,901

And it isn't even the weekend yet.

 

[hooflung]

Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER

Originally posted by: Inspector Jihad
does even halo 3 compare to cs in terms on online player base? i wouldn't be surprised if more ppl play cs everyday than all online console games combined.

Halo 3 Players Online:301,371
Unique Players (Last 24 Hours):1,497,682
Matches Logged (Last 24 Hours):4,629,590
UNSC Campaign Kill Count:767,737,901

And it isn't even the weekend yet.

While his point was as exaggerated, your point is somewhat suspect too. So what if a brand new game gets a rush? In 6 years will Halo 3 still have 252,716 unique players playing and 117,275 steam registered servers available for play like CS classic does right now at 12:00pm NOON on a friday EST ? I think not.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: Section8
Since some in this thread brought up the difference in PCs versus consoles based on cost of upgrades, I think it is fair to mention that a PC can and is used as a tool to make money. Many ATers have online businesses and game with the same PC. My earnings have more than made up for any upgrades.

:thumbsup:

That's me.

 

[Acanthus]

#3 has been disproven many times by the numbers.

You cant call a US $2B industry dieing.

Especially one thats setting records year over year...

 

[techwanabe]

With PC gaming, one important point to note is many PC gamers often tend to be PC hardware enthusasts and hobbiests. At least I get that impression from 7 years on Anandtech! If that is a decent assumption then in my opinion many spend more money on their hardward so they can have near the top of line goodies to run their games on. Anyone with a whit of experience knows there is a price premium for having near top of the line graphics cards, CPU's and the rest. One can get a computer that does pretty nicely for alot less if they compromised an purchased below those crazy price point increases. I've gotten along nicely doing that, and often re-using components. My best PC is approaching 3 years of age and its still holding up pretty well. I paid $1048 for it as a set-up with a 19-inch flat screen in Oct 2004.

My secondary computer is in need of some upgrades and additions tho so my daughter can enjoy decent performance. For some reason it is slow and stuttering and the CPU is an Athlon 2500+Barton. One of my 512mb memory sticks started going bad so I'm only on a half gig. Dunno.

Bottom line is that when making comparisons to consoles, it should be included that PC's don't have to be as expensive as some claim, and consoles are replaced with the next better product on the market every 2-3 years too, so there is that factor. PS1 to PS2 to PS3. Nintendo 64 - Gamecube - Wii Xbox, Xbox360 .... on and on it goes.

PC's also have other uses so there is value in having them for email, home work, office work, internet, etc etc. How is that counted in the cost? PC's aren't exclusively for gaming.

 

[IEC]

Originally posted by: BladeVenom

Originally posted by: natep
His money argument is weak. More expensive at first, sure $1000. According to him I'm going to make up the difference w/ the $10 game price difference and multiplayer fees.

Ok.

As far as the money argument goes, I would have a decent PC whether I gamed or not. So PC gaming only cost me the price of a good video card. Which is still cheaper than the good versions of the 360 or PS3.

The $10 difference is only MSRP. Anyone who looks for deals can usually find new PC games on sale for $15 to $20 off. Add that to the $10 and PC games are usually $25 to $30 cheaper.

What about content? Look at all the mods you get with a PC game that gives it much greater value and longevity. Sometimes the mods are better the original games. That gives the PC a lot more value per game.

To add it up:
PS3 $600 vs. 8800GTS w/640mb $360
12 console games at $60 vs. 12 PC games at $35
So PC gaming saves me $540 in the first year.

PC games usually look better, play better, and have more content. All at a lower price also.

Bingo. I'd have a mid-range system anyways, so spending even up to $300 on a video card is not a big deal for me. (Although I tend to buy used for ~$100-$150 range). Although I don't have nearly as much time to game I still enjoy the occasional RTS. The one currently holding my attention is World in Conflict, which runs decently at med-to-high details on my C2D/2GB/X850 XT rig.