• 53 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Posted by scaramoosh (179 posts) -

I mean seriously, they've always been a mess but I cannot even navigate my way through threads any more, who thought this was a good redesign? Just copy Steam forums or any other standard, much better than Giantbomb has ever been.

Anyways the whole way through watching the conf, it was basically tech demo after tech demo of multiplatform games based on hardware that isn't even has good as the top end PCs we have today. You could get excited for a new architecture like Cell or the Emotion Engine because you wondered what people could do with it. However an unnamed x86 CPU...... we already know whatever they have, the PC has better.

Didn't the games all look boring? They all played like what we have today but some how looked worse than Crysis 3 on PC lol. I mean the only game that got my interest was that MM Move based game and that's only really down to their reputation and the fact there has not been a good move game yet.

Maybe I've grown up since the PS2 and PS3 launch, back when I watched both of their debuts, however I just feel like my 680SLI, I7 980 yawns at what this generation offers. Like the hardware doesn't excite me, I know 90% of those games will be multiplatform and now I'm older I see through obvious marketing BS.

I feel like I don't care about the new consoles, just throw it all on Steam and I'll be happy.

#2 Posted by Canteu (2821 posts) -

Click-bait title! You little tyke!

#3 Edited by Branthog (7342 posts) -

I'm not sure what your point is. Consoles are usually as good as the near-top or even top end gaming rigs the year they come out and within a year, they're about half as good as the top-end PC rig. This isn't anything new. However, I wont' be spending $3,500 or $4,000 for the console, like I did on my latest rig.

#4 Posted by OmegaPirate (5523 posts) -

http://instantrimshot.com/

#5 Posted by Barrock (3525 posts) -

You mean the PS4 won't look as good as your $2,500 computer? Color me shocked!

#6 Edited by scaramoosh (179 posts) -
#7 Posted by Branthog (7342 posts) -

@branthog: You were ripped off then...

Yeah, I've only been building rigs since 1989, when I was twelve years old. What the fuck do I know.

#8 Posted by FreakAche (2949 posts) -

K

#9 Edited by TJSmash (83 posts) -

@branthog said:

@scaramoosh said:

@branthog: You were ripped off then...

Yeah, I've only been building rigs since 1989, when I was twelve years old. What the fuck do I know.

You've been getting ripped off since 89 then. It doesn't take anywhere close to $3-4k to make a PC that will run circles around a new console. Exaggerate much?

#10 Posted by peritus (961 posts) -

Sounds like youre turning into a full on PC gamer, and that is valid.

I was very pleased with it though, being a console gamer with a medium pc on the side.

#11 Posted by ArtelinaRose (1839 posts) -

@tjsmash said:

@branthog said:

@scaramoosh said:

@branthog: You were ripped off then...

Yeah, I've only been building rigs since 1989, when I was twelve years old. What the fuck do I know.

You've been getting ripped off since 89 then. It doesn't take anywhere close to $3-4k to make a PC that will run circles around a new console. Exaggerate much?

Depends on what he threw in it. Two 690s would run you at least $2100 and that's just the GPU side of it. Overkill? Sure. But you could do it. Don't be a dick.

#12 Posted by Blu3V3nom07 (4160 posts) -

We should petition to put that Media Molecule thing on Steam. I deserve that, and marshmallows.

#13 Posted by TheManWithNoPlan (5239 posts) -

That's too bad. I'm very excited for the next playstation as someone who can't build a high end PC. I can see that if you already have a high end pc you probably wouldn't care. The good thing for Pc primary users is that developers won't be constrained by the limited console hardware in the forseeable future. So you can still be excited about that.

Online
#14 Posted by Milkman (16531 posts) -

Woah, look out! This guy is dropping some truth bombs! I'm not sure if all of us can handle this!

#15 Posted by TJSmash (83 posts) -

@tjsmash said:

@branthog said:

@scaramoosh said:

@branthog: You were ripped off then...

Yeah, I've only been building rigs since 1989, when I was twelve years old. What the fuck do I know.

You've been getting ripped off since 89 then. It doesn't take anywhere close to $3-4k to make a PC that will run circles around a new console. Exaggerate much?

Depends on what he threw in it. Two 690s would run you at least $2100 and that's just the GPU side of it. Overkill? Sure. But you could do it. Don't be a dick.

You don't need a state of the art top of the line PC to outperform a console. That was my point. A $4000 PC would obviously demolish any console whether it were current or next gen. A solid build that runs $800-$1200 would outperform it too. He said he spent $3.5-4k on his latest rig. That wasn't because that's what he needed to spend to get the performance he want/needed. It's because that's what he wanted to spend. I've been PC gaming for 30 years. I've never spent $4k on a PC. There's a difference between performance and enthusiast. Enthusiast is when you start getting into the $3-4k range.

#16 Posted by PillClinton (3290 posts) -

@tjsmash said:

@artemesia said:

@tjsmash said:

@branthog said:

@scaramoosh said:

@branthog: You were ripped off then...

Yeah, I've only been building rigs since 1989, when I was twelve years old. What the fuck do I know.

You've been getting ripped off since 89 then. It doesn't take anywhere close to $3-4k to make a PC that will run circles around a new console. Exaggerate much?

Depends on what he threw in it. Two 690s would run you at least $2100 and that's just the GPU side of it. Overkill? Sure. But you could do it. Don't be a dick.

You don't need a state of the art top of the line PC to outperform a console. That was my point. A $4000 PC would obviously demolish any console whether it were current or next gen. A solid build that runs $800-$1200 would outperform it too. He said he spent $3.5-4k on his latest rig. That wasn't because that's what he needed to spend to get the performance he want/needed. It's because that's what he wanted to spend. I've been PC gaming for 30 years. I've never spent $4k on a PC. There's a difference between performance and enthusiast. Enthusiast is when you start getting into the $3-4k range.

Yeah, so point is, he's an enthusiast. No ripping off being done here. He never said his goal is simply to outperform consoles and stop right there. One can easily spend in excess of $3000 on a PC if their goal is to run every game maxed at 2560x1600x60.

#17 Posted by Colourful_Hippie (4330 posts) -

lol

#18 Posted by Poppduder (460 posts) -

This thread sucks. top to bottom. Including this post.

#19 Edited by Bourbon_Warrior (4523 posts) -

Actually the PC isn't better, PS4 developers know that everyone on a PS4 have 8gb of GDDR5 ram, EVERYONE. PC developers really hold back their games because they also have to design their games for people with 100 dollar GPU and 1gb of RAM. Having Developers designing games for a specific spec of hardware means they can really unleash and not have to hold back for the low end PC users, if those Unreal 4, Square and Capcom tech demos are really real time running on a PS4, and that's a bit if, the tech is amazing.

#20 Posted by TheSouthernDandy (3786 posts) -

Oh you are just adorable

#21 Posted by Grimluck343 (1148 posts) -

@branthog Pshh I can go to best buy and pick up a slick Hewlett Packard PC for... like.. $200 man. What you need to spend more than $200 on a gaming PC for? It runs Hearts and Solitaire just fine I'll have you know.

@scaramoosh Nice click bait title.

#22 Posted by DonPixel (2585 posts) -

I HATE ALL THINGS BECAUSE ALL THINGS ARE STOOPID, AND I MAKE ARGUMENTS TO PROOBE IT.

#23 Posted by SathingtonWaltz (2053 posts) -

I agree with some of your points OP, but take into account that this conference was probably more for the investors and shareholders than it was for us. Expect more relevant things to be shown at E3 this year. Seriously, shareholders love this kind of showy gimmicky, social crap.

#24 Posted by Rafaelfc (1314 posts) -

this thread is worse than the press conference.

Online
#25 Posted by SlashDance (1804 posts) -

You should go back and watch some previous console unveilings if you think they didn't show much.

#26 Posted by KKGlider (39 posts) -

This thread sucks. top to bottom. Including this post.

Signed

#27 Posted by Grimluck343 (1148 posts) -
#28 Posted by LiquidPrince (15844 posts) -

I had the overwhelming urge to yell GTFO, but I withheld it.

#29 Posted by MariachiMacabre (7051 posts) -

Oh man, OP, you're one EDGY motherfucker. How does one as HxC as yourself live day to day knowing no one will ever be as no-holds-barred as you? This thread is stupid so it deserves an equally stupid response.

#30 Posted by LiquidSwords (2738 posts) -

Pirate Master Race

#31 Edited by the_OFFICIAL_jAPanese_teaBAG (4307 posts) -

Sick burn

So far its 1-0 OP

#32 Posted by Jams (2959 posts) -

suck top to bottom

Mmmm yeah, I like it when you talk dirty

#33 Posted by Clonedzero (4091 posts) -

lol PC is still gonna be hamstrung by consoles :D

theres no profit to be made in making ultra high performance PC games, since not a huge group of people have very high performance PC's, so the install base alone is small. then you gotta split it into genres, and then styles of that genre for a single game.

PC gaming is the rage right now cus its at the end of a long console generation. this time next year, i highly doubt the GB community will have such a huge hardon for PC gaming.

one thing people aren't really thinking about. remember launch 360 games and launch PS3 games? they kinda look like shit compared to whats out now on 360 and PS3. think about a couple years into the next generation of consoles. it'll get nuts.

im excited. im sorry you're not, but i guess your PC gives you a big ego and thats gotta count for something.

#34 Posted by Branthog (7342 posts) -

@tjsmash said:

@branthog said:

@scaramoosh said:

@branthog: You were ripped off then...

Yeah, I've only been building rigs since 1989, when I was twelve years old. What the fuck do I know.

You've been getting ripped off since 89 then. It doesn't take anywhere close to $3-4k to make a PC that will run circles around a new console. Exaggerate much?

I understand that you're just trolling, but I'll bite.

I didn't say it required that much of a machine to compete with the newest consoles (but based on historical data, consoles launch almost on-par with high end rigs). Second, I said high-end rig. I don't consider a rig that can match a console to be particularly "high end" and I don't consider a rig aimed at only 1920x1080 to be "high end". Finally, I was speaking to my specific situation. Yes, I can spend a lot on a gaming rig. And I do. Consoles after great experiences with a lot less hassle, sometimes, for a quite reasonable price. I am not arguing that you need thousands of dollars to make a rig that competes with, say, a 360. Of course not. (Though, you're not going to make a PC that "runs circles around the PS4" for near the same price as the PS4 will likely debut at -- where I assume "runs circles around" means more than just "it looks and performs a bit better".

I build a rig about every 12-18 months and I, obviously, know the value and cost of the components I buy and build from. How much do you figure a high-end PC costs? He was referring to high-end. Not to a fucking e-machine or mid-range system. You can make a decent gaming rig for a reasonable price, but a high end system is significantly more. And it takes significantly more power and expense to pump enough pixels for a high resolution PC (at least 2560x1600), versus 1920x1080.

For example (mind you, these prices are from a year ago, when I put this latest system together): Three 4gb 670s are $1,500 for handling 2560x1600 while gaming and 7680x1600 while not gaming. An ASUS P8Z77-WS is over $330. 16GB low latency RAM is $100. An i7-3770K is $350. The CM Cosmos II (chosen because it provides significant room in a very solid chassis for air-flow focused builds, while giving the option for various 240mm and 360mm radiator choices if you ever want to add water loops to it) runs $350 (and that's significantly cheaper than the Caselabs option I initially planned to go with when I intended to build custom water cooling loops). Enough large, high CFM, low decibel fans to fill the chassis and replace the stock ones runs over $200. A new Leopold tenkeyless keyboard is $100. After months of experimentation with various quality (and shitty) mice for a decent non-gimmicky one appropriate for coding and gaming alike, I found one that ran about $60. A pair of RAIDed 256GB Samsung 830 SSDs is $660. Including tax, that comes out to $3,960. And this is only a high-end rig; not "the top of the line".

The only "over the top" choice in the entire thing (as in, it doesn't serve me any significant benefit in gaming, hosting VMs, compiling code, encoding video, etc) is the third GPU -- which was really just a splurge made on a whim, because the GTX 670 was found to have reasonable scaling up to a third card.

Today, you could probably build the same rig for as much as a thousand bucks less and it would manage to compete with (and somewhat excel) over any of the demonstrations we saw today for the PS4 -- at a worthwhile PC resolution (ie, not the 1920x1080 of the console) with at least 60fps. If you're only looking for enough power to pump out the same resolutions as the console (and the console doesn't need to do anymore than that, because the world isn't and won't be running on 4k screens any time soon), then you would obviously need less power, too. But I don't work or play at a 1920x1080 display.

Which is all a long winded way of saying, PC gaming allows you to spend whatever you want to scale to whatever you want (assuming the software provides the opportunity, which a lot of shitty console->PC ports do not). However, you are not going to build a rig better than the PS4 this year that will cost the same price as the PS4. And even if you did, you're going to have titles on the PS4 (and the other consoles, for that matter) which you won't find on the PC or which are simply better experiences on the console (it happens).

So to so readily dismiss consoles because "that shitty $600 device is only almost as good as my $1,200-$3,000 rig!" is silly. I'm a life-long PC-Master-Race guy, but I have all the consoles and enjoy the fuck out of them (some more than others). They are (if not at launch, then shortly after) decent values for people looking for simplicity, entertainment in their home theater without the complexity of an HTPC, and more social experiences with their circle who is often largely console-focused (and, then, you're talking about building a second decent system since you're obviously not going to use your main desktop and dedicate it for your home theater . . . and heat/sound-proofing an HTPC is not always a simple or cheap process, either).

To just blot out whole sections of gaming over some weird superiority complex is myopic. I enjoy games where good games exist. That's all that matters. While I place a lot of value on graphical fidelity, it isn't always the most important deciding factor in something, either. Sometimes flopping down on a sofa with a great home theater and a $300-$600 console with a controller and a headset and some friends throughout the country is fine enough, even if it isn't hunched over WASD+M in front of a glorious high resolution display.

As someone who does feel that consoles bog down game development too much when they are the primary developer focus and drag on too long like this cycle has, I'm often happy to shit on them for their weak hardware choice. Look at many of my posts over the last few weeks, where I said that anything less than 6gb of RAM in a console that is intended to carry is thorugh a decade is idiotic. I've been pointing out more or less what the original poster's complaint is, myself. . . But what we saw today was a bold statement that power is important. No, it's not going to match high end PCs (and in the long run, even mid-range PCs), a few years from now. It's not going to cost nearly as much, either. But this was exactly what I wanted to see. Consoles embracing more traditional hardware. Powerful hardware (lots of very high speed RAM, for example). Not proprietary stuff that may be incredibly difficult to acclimate a dev team to and produce content for.

People who eschew consoles for PCs are missing out on a lot of stuff. And people who eschew PCs (even just a lower end rig) for consoles are missing out on a lot of stuff. Gaming is a buffet. We don't have to eat at the same restaurant every single night.

Once last thought -- people who love PC gaming should be enthusiastic about this showing by Sony. This is the type of thing we need. I understand some might be underwhelmed by the specific games shown, but there will surely be a wider variety of titles and we'll see more refinement eight months from now, when they go on sale. We can't speak for Microsoft, of course, but if Sony is any indication, we're aiming in the right direction. Core gamers are important, again. Hardware is important again. Power is important again. It doesn't matter what platform that's on -- it matters everywhere and we saw a flag planted that says "there's more to gaming than fucking casual iOS games and fucking wonderbook". That's good for everyone.

#35 Posted by cloudnineboya (764 posts) -

think ya need to grow up some more me thinks

#36 Posted by BabyChooChoo (4287 posts) -

Why do i feel like the glorious PC elitist master race has come out in full force over the past few months...

"The PC can do it better." Blahblahblah we get it. Thing is, most console owners don't give a flying fuck about the PC. That's why they play on consoles to begin with.

#37 Posted by mrcraggle (1823 posts) -

@sathingtonwaltz: Actually, you'll likely see Sony's share price drop. Shareholders aren't exactly fond of product announcements made months before a launch with no price either. This show was intended to have an audience of gamers and media watching it or they wouldn't have put out a live stream.

#38 Posted by Branthog (7342 posts) -

That's too bad. I'm very excited for the next playstation as someone who can't build a high end PC. I can see that if you already have a high end pc you probably wouldn't care. The good thing for Pc primary users is that developers won't be constrained by the limited console hardware in the forseeable future. So you can still be excited about that.

Personally, I've always wanted consoles to embrace more of the PC way of doing things. There is only so much they can realistically do this and still be consoles aimed at a more affordable and broad market, of course. I think Sony really made steps in this direction, though. From architecture to the solid gamer-centric titles they displayed today. I don't get the original poster's angst. I've only embraced consoles in this current generation. I was full-on PC my entire life (and still am, primarily, but love my consoles, too) and saw consoles as something that infringed on and threatened my PC gaming hobby. Recently, we have more things "threatening" PC gaming, like mobile and casual. We're always told PC gaming is dying. We've even been hearing this past year that console gaming is dying. This is the last generation of consoles. Blah, blah, blah.

I think Sony's press conference shows that's anything but the case. A few years ago, a controller felt foreign in my hand and I felt console gamers were simply the unenlightened who didn't know any better. What a shitty way to view things. For this past year, I've felt this ominous sense of dread for the next generation of consoles (which generally sort of signals the direction and emphasis of PC gaming, too -- alongside it). I worried we were going to focus on these being home entertainment machines where the toddler can video chat with grandma and mom can watch her soap operas and you can read your twitter updates.

Instead, Sony came out, dumped two hours of great stuff on us (something even people who don't have or want consoles have to find invigorating for the future of gaming) and all but dropped the mic before walking off stage.

PC gamers who have felt threatened by consoles and the devotion by developers to them for the last several years should be hopeful after this conference. Consoles are the lowest-common-denominator of most gaming (that isn't in a negative sense, just that they serve the broadest audience at the cheapest price with the least amount of investment necessary). When the lowest-common-denominator is raised, that's good for everyone.

The only thing I would still be concerned about is if Microsoft is entirely "home theater" and "social networking" focused. Makes their entire presentation about little kids playing shitty kinect games and families keeping in touch with Skype. And then, if the gaming audience stays loyal to Microsoft at the expense of Sony. If that happens, things get bad. It conveys to everyone who has a financial stake in these things that there's no point taking your balls to the wall and pushing the envelope. It tells them to focus on soccer moms and casual gaming.

You seem to really get it -- that a healthy gaming ecosystem benefits us all.

#39 Posted by Branthog (7342 posts) -

@tjsmash said:

@artemesia said:

@tjsmash said:

@branthog said:

@scaramoosh said:

@branthog: You were ripped off then...

Yeah, I've only been building rigs since 1989, when I was twelve years old. What the fuck do I know.

You've been getting ripped off since 89 then. It doesn't take anywhere close to $3-4k to make a PC that will run circles around a new console. Exaggerate much?

Depends on what he threw in it. Two 690s would run you at least $2100 and that's just the GPU side of it. Overkill? Sure. But you could do it. Don't be a dick.

You don't need a state of the art top of the line PC to outperform a console. That was my point. A $4000 PC would obviously demolish any console whether it were current or next gen. A solid build that runs $800-$1200 would outperform it too. He said he spent $3.5-4k on his latest rig. That wasn't because that's what he needed to spend to get the performance he want/needed. It's because that's what he wanted to spend. I've been PC gaming for 30 years. I've never spent $4k on a PC. There's a difference between performance and enthusiast. Enthusiast is when you start getting into the $3-4k range.

Yeah, so point is, he's an enthusiast. No ripping off being done here. He never said his goal is simply to outperform consoles and stop right there. One can easily spend in excess of $3000 on a PC if their goal is to run every game maxed at 2560x1600x60.

Also, he didn't say "compete with the console". He said "that will run circles around a new console". If you want to "run circles around a new console", which I interpret to mean "blow it out of the water and make it run home to mommy and cry with how much you humiliated it", you're not going to do that for a reasonable price. (I also don't get the original poster's reply to my initial comment, when he doesn't have a cheap machine either, boasting of a GTX 680 SLI setup in comparison to the PS4 -- that means at least $1,000 in GPUs, right there -- which invalidates his whole claim that somehow it is comparable to a much cheaper priced console.

Also, you're correct that I'm an enthusiast (well, an enthusiast and professional) - so I would go overboard, anyway, even if it weren't as he wrote to "run circles around a new console". Most people don't need to run circles around a new console, though. Hell, most people will be more than fine with the new console. Or a PC of equal (or even lower) capacity.

The original posters comment seemed to be that since you can build a PC that kick's the new consoles ass, you would be dumb to buy the new console and Sony is full of fail and yadda yadda yadda. I don't really grok that. They both play games, but they're different beasts. Difference scales. Different purposes and expectations. My desktop blows my laptop out of the water. My laptop blows my iPad out of the water. I still have and use them all for various purposes and for some people, just one of the three devices would suffice. I prefer that technology (and gaming) strive to be heterogeneous in nature.

#40 Posted by Saethir (353 posts) -

I mean seriously, they've always been a mess but I cannot even navigate my way through threads any more, who thought this was a good redesign? Just copy Steam forums or any other standard, much better than Giantbomb has ever been.

Anyways the whole way through watching the conf, it was basically tech demo after tech demo of multiplatform games based on hardware that isn't even has good as the top end PCs we have today. You could get excited for a new architecture like Cell or the Emotion Engine because you wondered what people could do with it. However an unnamed x86 CPU...... we already know whatever they have, the PC has better.

Didn't the games all look boring? They all played like what we have today but some how looked worse than Crysis 3 on PC lol. I mean the only game that got my interest was that MM Move based game and that's only really down to their reputation and the fact there has not been a good move game yet.

Maybe I've grown up since the PS2 and PS3 launch, back when I watched both of their debuts, however I just feel like my 680SLI, I7 980 yawns at what this generation offers. Like the hardware doesn't excite me, I know 90% of those games will be multiplatform and now I'm older I see through obvious marketing BS.

I feel like I don't care about the new consoles, just throw it all on Steam and I'll be happy.

So what you're saying is you grew up, and bought a PC with a high end processor and two great graphics cards. I'm not sure what you were expecting from a console that will be aimed at everyone that plays games (including kids like you were when you got excited about new consoles) and likely will cost a third or less of what your PC did.

The PS4 isn't for you, and that's fine.

#41 Posted by videogamesarenotart (121 posts) -

yeah it wasn't e3, it was a console announcement without even the console being shown

get over it, and stop venting your frustrations of life out on a video game forum populated by children

#42 Posted by Branthog (7342 posts) -

@sathingtonwaltz: Actually, you'll likely see Sony's share price drop. Shareholders aren't exactly fond of product announcements made months before a launch with no price either. This show was intended to have an audience of gamers and media watching it or they wouldn't have put out a live stream.

I didn't expect them to either show the console nor to provide a date and price. I don't think shareholders would expect that, either. Regardless, we'll see the console at E3 and possibly the price, too. It's less than four months away, so it's not like there's a big waiting-chasm.

I expect much of the shareholder reaction to depend on the press coverage in the next few days -- and initial reactions from press seems to be very positive. We've all become so pessimistic about gaming, serious gaming, hardware, consoles, PCs. Everything. We didn't expect much, but we saw an awful lot. And this wasn't even E3. Holy shit, I can only imagine they're holding tightly onto some fantastic things that gamers and shareholders alike will react well to, in June.

#43 Edited by mrcraggle (1823 posts) -

@branthog said:

@mrcraggle said:

@sathingtonwaltz: Actually, you'll likely see Sony's share price drop. Shareholders aren't exactly fond of product announcements made months before a launch with no price either. This show was intended to have an audience of gamers and media watching it or they wouldn't have put out a live stream.

I didn't expect them to either show the console nor to provide a date and price. I don't think shareholders would expect that, either. Regardless, we'll see the console at E3 and possibly the price, too. It's less than four months away, so it's not like there's a big waiting-chasm.

I expect much of the shareholder reaction to depend on the press coverage in the next few days -- and initial reactions from press seems to be very positive. We've all become so pessimistic about gaming, serious gaming, hardware, consoles, PCs. Everything. We didn't expect much, but we saw an awful lot. And this wasn't even E3. Holy shit, I can only imagine they're holding tightly onto some fantastic things that gamers and shareholders alike will react well to, in June.

And as I said it would, Sony's stock price dropped.

#44 Posted by BestUsernameEver (4825 posts) -
#45 Posted by WasabiCurry (422 posts) -

Console vs PC arguments?

*grabs popcorn*

Go ahead, I love seeing people justify their purchase decisions.

#46 Edited by big_jon (5709 posts) -

@tjsmash said:

@branthog said:

@scaramoosh said:

@branthog: You were ripped off then...

Yeah, I've only been building rigs since 1989, when I was twelve years old. What the fuck do I know.

You've been getting ripped off since 89 then. It doesn't take anywhere close to $3-4k to make a PC that will run circles around a new console. Exaggerate much?

Depends on what he threw in it. Two 690s would run you at least $2100 and that's just the GPU side of it. Overkill? Sure. But you could do it. Don't be a dick.

PC versus console arguments are so fucking stupid, it is about as lame as PS3 VS 360 arguments.

I play Console because I like the controller and the games, PC elitists need to get over it and stop worrying about other people's taste.

#47 Edited by Sooty (8082 posts) -

The scope of that Killzone demo looks better than Crysis 3, but aside from that yeah, it didn't seem leaps ahead of what PC has now. (and no not just what $3000 PCs are capable of)

Still, as a console it's pretty great. I love that it'll have instant on/off. Fucking killer feature right there. If the next Xbox doesn't have that there's no way I'd buy one over the PS4.

None of the games shown seemed exciting though, I was hoping to see some examples of superior AI / insane number of things on screen but none of them got that across.

I was so bored during that Killzone demo.

#48 Posted by Hunkulese (2646 posts) -

You have $1000 worth of video cards in your pc and were expecting the ps4 to blow you away with its hardware?

#49 Posted by coribald (310 posts) -

@big_jon said:

@artemesia said:

@tjsmash said:

@branthog said:

@scaramoosh said:

@branthog: You were ripped off then...

Yeah, I've only been building rigs since 1989, when I was twelve years old. What the fuck do I know.

You've been getting ripped off since 89 then. It doesn't take anywhere close to $3-4k to make a PC that will run circles around a new console. Exaggerate much?

Depends on what he threw in it. Two 690s would run you at least $2100 and that's just the GPU side of it. Overkill? Sure. But you could do it. Don't be a dick.

PC versus console arguments are so fucking stupid, it is about as lame as PS3 VS 360 arguments.

I play Console because I like the controller and the games, PC elitists need to get over it and stop worrying about other people's taste.

Wrong argument - this is PC gamers vs PC gaming enthusiasts. Although PC vs console can certainly be found elsewhere (read: everywhere) in this thread.

#50 Posted by jillsandwich (762 posts) -

I like things.