PCGA: Twice as many "Gaming" PCs sold than consoles combined in 2009

Recommended Videos

AcacianLeaves

New member
Sep 28, 2009
1,197
0
0
I'm not trying to 'fight' with you Treb, so I don't want you to think I'm arguing maliciously. It's difficult to express emotion in a text discussion, so just know that I'm engaging you in debate because I'm honestly interested in what you have to say.

Treblaine said:
Why are you obsessed with "accuracy" when it is irrelevant. Gaming CAPABLE computers have outsold ALL consoles by a factor of two. There could be an 70% error and that is still a far larger market than Xbox 360 or Playstation 3.
Something I didn't consider with the "information" in this report - how many PC gamers purchase a discrete card to play just one game? Even games like World of Warcraft and The Sims 3 require a discrete card to be able to operate, and I know many people who play one game exclusively. I really wish they would make their sources public.

Treblaine said:
Have you not considered the benefit of PC's mouse-aim with First or Third person shooters? Remember, the PC pioneered these genres. Consoles are utterly dependant on aim-assist and still is no where close to what's typically capable with mouse.
After my recent PC upgrade I was looking at games to buy on PC that I've missed due to an outdated setup and I really think certain genres are actually better when designed for consoles.

Platformers, for instance. A simple control scheme designed to be used on a controller is beneficial when aim and complexity are not integral to the way a game is handled. If a game requires twitch reflexes, the controller is the superior interface device. Assassin's Creed, for instance.

3rd person shooters are also in the same boat, although somewhat less so due to aforementioned aim/auto-aim problems inherent to an analog stick. However, many 3rd person shooters rely on twitch reflexes and therefore are easier and more fluid to control when played on a console. Resident Evil 5 is a good example of this.

Fighting games also benefit from console controls for the same reasons. You NEED a controller to play a fighting game. Mouse and keyboard just don't cut it. I haven't tried Street Fighter IV on PC yet but I can't imagine playing it with anything but a controller. I also can't imagine playing it without sitting next to the person I'm fighting.

Yes, you can plug a controller in to a PC and set it up to play on your TV to emulate a console - but the controls would never be as tight as the console version. The game is tested, designed, and programmed to work with a specific piece of hardware and control scheme when its created for a console. The controller is a part of the design process, and there will always be something lost when you try to set up your own controller on a PC version of a game.

I own Psychonauts for the PC and Xbox, and even with a controller plugged in to the PC the game handles much better on the Xbox. I also tried out the PC demo of Just Cause 2 and while it looks incredible I felt the 360 version controlled better. I may try out the Arkham Asylum demo with a controller just to see what its like. I felt that Final Fantasy XI was basically unplayable on the PC, but its been a while since I've played that on either platform.

I still think RPGs play better on the PC as well, and to me that's the greatest tragedy when developers move to consoles over PC. Games like Mass Effect, while absolutely incredible, seem to be simplified for the sake of a console control scheme. You get less abilities but more 'levels' of the same ability, there are less things that you can interact with in the environment, games and level maps are smaller to cater to weaker console processors, etc. I just picked up The Witcher and I had almost forgotten what an in-depth RPG was supposed to feel like. It has its flaws but the shear breadth of what you're capable of doing in the game is just astounding.

Again these are just my own personal experiences and opinions, but judging from the way that games are designed and released I'd imagine that I'm not alone in them.
 

Nibiru

New member
Apr 5, 2010
45
0
0
Is this a statistic based on the number of computers sold internationally?

Don't forget that consoles aren't such a big thing in other countries. My friends over in

Germany 'only' have a computer (and they upgrade them non-stop). I was always a loner when it

came to gaming because of my preferences :D

Also, all of these WoW (/MMORPG players in general) and Starcraft 2 players have computers,

mostly new ones.
 

AlanShore

New member
Nov 26, 2009
126
0
0
MaxPowers666 said:
You say you're anal about accuracy yet your post is full of mistakes.

MaxPowers666 said:
Actually its usually free because people pirate it and put it on dedicated servers, not because companies give it away for free.
That's just down right wrong and phrased extremely poorly. There ARE examples where the DLC has been free for the PC version and not for the console version. The Metro 2033 DLC is one example off the top of my head.


MaxPowers666 said:
-no long install times
Metal Gear Solid 4? That game had several minute long, non-optional, waiting periods between chapters while it installed... Anyway, why do people get so put off by installing games on PC? You do it ONCE, then that's it. It's not difficult to do and it drastically reduces in-game load times and, in the case of steam games, means you don't have to put the disk in.


MaxPowers666 said:
-less lag online, games are built to run on these systems so you dont get somebody with a shit pc as host and a really laggy game
This is just plain wrong. You've got it completely backwards. You're much more likely to find yourself in a laggy console based game because almost all console games use peer-to-peer instead of dedicated servers like you do on almost all PC games, so I've no idea where you've got this idea from.


MaxPowers666 said:
You can plug a mouse + KB into consoles and play most games.
Again, this is plain wrong. Yes you can plug in a keyboard and mouse into your console, but you won't be able to actually control the game with it like you would the PC version, with the exception of a few PS3 titles like UT3.

MaxPowers666 said:
Ok, that is one of the downsides to modern PC gaming, but I wouldn't get complacent in thinking that DRM won't come to consoles. Especially with all those pesky used game sales to combat...
 

Treblaine

New member
Jul 25, 2008
8,682
0
0
MaxPowers666 said:
your countering my point my making up facts because you dont have all the info. My point was that when shopping for a chair for work, which I had a $1000 budget I couldnt find any that were really comfortable.
Maybe you should see a doctor or Spinal Specialist as if you have back pain sitting in even the most comfortable $1000 desk chair you can find you were in discomfort. Or are you exaggerating that no desk chair is as comfortable as a couch, get real, what is more important to you: cushions or games?

...

Im an accountant and we have alot and I mean alot of clients who like things because they are expensive. Im talking top of the line pre build $4000 gaming comuters. Hell most of them even have quad core, and 4gb ram and its used for like 3 hours a week.
Hmm, no mention of discrete graphics cards. $$$-loving idiots buy super CPU + RAM but never bother with discrete graphics, you should have read the source I gave you as it discusses how ONLY THOSE INTERESTED IN PC GAMING bother with discrete graphics cards = the subject of this statistical analysis

...

Im an accountant and we are kind of anal about accuracy. When you honestly cant tell in any way if your numbers are within 90% of the actual its a useless study. This servey is basically saying that more computers regardless of their use are being sold then consoles, something that everybody knows. Nomatter what method you use you cant tell how many are actually used for gaming besides facebook. The only thing you can use is game sales and even that cant determine the size of the market but the profitability of it which is far more usefull.
Pure Semantics to dodge the point that The market POTENTIAL is there. Millions buy Wii consoles yet game sales are lackluster. Similar situation with PC showing that more developer should invest in PC gaming and figure out how to REACH this market.

...

I buy them play them and sell them, but I also make enough money doing that that I can buy the games that I actually liked, Between ps2,360, ps3 iv probably got close to 100 games, and about 10 of them came out in 09/10.
Weird, I too find about 10 console games per year are worth buying to keep, though usually I don't buy anywhere close to their launch date/price.

Oh, and $10 to $15 DLC, that sounds fun. It's usually free on PC, AAA games more often go that cheap.
Actually its usually free because people pirate it and put it on dedicated servers, not because companies give it away for free.

LOL! Your ignorance is showing again. You clearly don't know crap about modern PC gaming. Ever heard of Team Fortress 2 updates? Free Left 4 Dead maps? Console gamers will ALWAYS be ripped off with DLC as it it a walled garden, you should know how they are designed to economically exploit consumers en mass

...

First of all the PC mouse-aim isnt exactly a benefit as a preference. Some are better with one others with the other. Just because something pioneered a genre doesnt mean its been overtaked and surpassed by another. All I have ever heard is PC players saying its so superior but iv never actually seen any facts or studies done. Also aim-assist is actually extremely minimal and almost a non factor in most games.
No, mouse IS better, and you have got to be joking if you think consoles have "surpassed" PCs for shooters. Got to be fucking kidding. And aim assist is such an insidious design element, designed to make you actually think you had the skill to make the shots you do. It's a cheat, in every sense of the word.

...

You can plug a mouse + KB into consoles and play most games. But for ones like fighting and flying games joysticks are far superior in everyway to mouse + KB.
No. You can't. Certainly not "most games", just Unreal Tournament 3 and... that's it. Fighting games are superior with keyboard = more keys in rows you need and definite direction buttons compared to thumbstick.

There is virtually nothing consoles can do that PC can't do better. I know this, you don't.

;D
I know what pcs can do, and they cant really do much that consoles cant. Most of the so called benefits arnt really benefits in the end.

As for some things consoles do better:

-every game will work guarenteed well...guaranteed low quality, cut down and locked down.

-no long install times used to be true, now consoles have long installs but STILL burdened with long in game loading compared to PC's proper install.

-split screen That is just one very basic type of local co-op, only suitable for arcade-type gaming with your non-gaming friend(s). LAN is much better.

-less lag online, games are built to run on these systems so you dont get somebody with a shit pc as host and a really laggy game AHHH HA HA HA HA HA!!!! HHHHAAA!!! HAAAA!!!! AAAAHHH!!! You IDIOT! You clearly know DICK ALL about lag! Console games don't even tell you your actual latency. PC is SOO much better with dedicated servers and precise latency measurements

-no DRM ohhh gawd, so blind you are, the entire console framework ITSELF is the most insidious piece of DRM there is! Worse than even ubisoft's worst DRM. You don't even have right to control over your own system!

-its to early to think of others I will probably update it later. So far you haven't thought of any!
 

Chamale

New member
Sep 9, 2009
1,345
0
0
MGlBlaze said:
They're seriously equating "Gaming PC" With "PC that has a dedicated graphics card"?
I know, it's absurd. I'm currently using my grandma's computer as a table for my laptop. Allow me to check...

Yup, Granny has a graphics card. It's still not a gaming computer.
 

Souplex

Souplex Killsplosion Awesomegasm
Jul 29, 2008
10,312
0
0
Considering PC gamers need to buy a new computer every month in order to stay up to date, that's not saying anything on the number of people who actually bought new gaming PCs.
Also: Some people buy top of the line PCs because they think they have to to run anything. They aren't always used for gaming.
All your data is invalidated!
 

Treblaine

New member
Jul 25, 2008
8,682
0
0
MaxPowers666 said:
You do realise the basic PC arguement is that you like them better so therefore they are superior in every way.
No, that is YOUR straw man argument.

More realistically it is the other way around: "PC gaming IS superior, and THAT is why we like it better"

Don't act like graphics don't matter, otherwise you would still be gaming on PS2. I hear this all the time from console gamers "graphics don't matter, so stick it PC" until a CONSOLE game comes along with slightly better graphics and "OMGWTFBBQSAUCE! Dis grafix make dis the best game evar!".

Lies and hypocrisy. Have you no shame?

And for the last freaking time it is NOT all about how pretty games look, even though that obviously is hugely important for appreciating a game's art. 90% of it is how a game PLAYS!

Split Screen is terrible, how can you laud such as cobbled together form of local-multiplayer:
-poor viewing angle
-narrow field of view
-even lower resolution
-screen-peeking
-system slowdown from 2-4 players and viewpoints

Split screen has one main appeal and that is to the CASUAL AND NON-GAMERS! These are people who barely know how to play video games, they don't want a challenge, just a distraction. The appeal comes in:
-ultra easy setup (because they don't care enough to try)
-only one console needed; fine as most of them won't be that interested in gaming to actually own their own system
-screen peeking necessary for them to achieve anything
-the poor controls and interface are accepted as they have nothing better to compare it with
-the social aspect of sitting next to someone is more important than the game itself

I have played and enjoyed split screen, but only with my friends/relatives who have little to zero gaming experience and it's not a "game" and far more just messing around with some vague objective. But my friends who do know their arse from their elbow when it comes to gaming it is not fun to play split-screen with them. Split-screen is for kids.

Split screen has virtually no appeal on PC because of how incredibly strong its online and LAN capability is that so incredibly outstrips the consoles fail-wail attempts at online multiplayer.

I mean I have NEVER EVER playing online with my friends even I co-op thought: "hey gais, wouldn't it be better if you all took like 4 hours out of your day to come to my house so we can all crowd around the same small screen each with only a 4th of the screen for our own viewpoint, be forced to use gamepads, while your own system in your own home goes unused... I mean it'll be worth it just so I can see all your beautiful faces!"

... no. Just no. That is why virtually no PC game bothers with split screen, because it is crap.

Fuck sake, the only reason you value split screen is because it distinguishes console from PC gaming!