299
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] B0NK3RS@lemmy.world 21 points 3 days ago

It's not like there needs to be a winner here. Console or PC gaming is just a personal preference and will always coexist.

[-] Allero@lemmy.today 4 points 2 days ago

Personal preferences and experiences aside, consoles are a big source of e-waste - they come as an addition to your (presumably already existing) PC, can only be used to play certain games (you might need several different consoles to cover all of the exclusives), they can't be upgraded and lose their relevance over time as games stop being released for older models.

[-] B0NK3RS@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

consoles are a big source of e-waste

Surely pc components are an equal source of e-waste? Personally I think PC gaming is in a weird place with all the unnecessary RGB obsession and endless consumerism of upgrades.

presumably already existing

I think you'd be surprised how uninterested the average person is in owning and using a pc nowadays so we can't easily assume that.

lose their relevance over time

Also applies to pc gaming... It's not like consoles stop working when a new one is released.

Anyway I'm not here to argue for one or the other as they can just happily coexist.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Hazzard@lemm.ee 9 points 2 days ago

Exactly. Consoles exist as a super low barrier to entry, value play for casual gaming. If you just want to have something on your living room tv, a console instantly achieves that, with no debugging or technical know-how required whatsoever.

I switched from a Series X to a living room gaming PC last year and absolutely adore it, but I'm also willing to spend hours tinkering with emulators, playnite, settings, etc. I actually enjoy messing with it, so this is way better for me, but I'm absolutely aware that it's been a massive amount of fiddling to get my experience this clean and integrated, and I'll never manage something like Quick Resume.

If you want it to "just work" absolutely go with a console. If you like to tinker, are bothered by nitpicky details, play a lot and need to cut costs, or just really care about features like higher refresh rates, and aren't put off by a lot of settings and performance testing, then 100% go for a PC.

[-] B0NK3RS@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

I have a Series S and quick resume and backward compatibility are the best features. The current generation is generally underwhelming though so I'm not surprised if pc gaming is on the rise.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] turbowafflz@lemmy.world 33 points 3 days ago

Huh, I'm kind of surprised that's a new thing. I would assume way more people own computers than consoles in modern times so you would think that would always mean more sales

Thoughout history a typical gaming machine could run you over $1000, game consoles often cost under $400. Consoles are very often sold as loss leaders to promote software sales, PCs are not. Oh and that's just the cost of the box itself; a console is usually designed to attach to a television which has built-in speakers and consoles usually have at least one controller packed in. Computer monitors are sold separately as are any sound equipment. Normie PCs like Dell ~~Inspiron~~ Basic Plus machines might come with a keyboard and mouse but gaming PCs sometimes don't because they expect you're going to buy premium peripherals. You've got a desk to put this on, right?

Oh also there just isn't much of a PC gaming culture in Japan. It may be increasing now but in the land of Nintendo, Sega and Sony they play console games.

On the other hand, a PC is good for things that aren't gaming, like work or something.

[-] MellowYellow13@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

TVs are also sold separately though if you are gonna count monitors as extra for PC, wtf. Also you literally have to pay to play online for consoles, thats a joke. Ive saved an insane amount of money by gaming on PC for decades and forgoing consoles overall and its not even close.

For most of the history of home video gaming, a television was primarily purchased for viewing broadcast, cable or satellite TV programming and/or watching movies on tape or DVD. A household that was going to buy a video game machine almost certainly already had at least one television and a game console would be one of the things attached to it. The investment would be considered already made.

That has been true of PC gaming for very small stretches of its existence; PCs have rarely worked on the living room couch so you usually set up a desk scenario with a dedicated monitor. The average PC buyer of the last 30 years would buy a monitor along with the computer.

Yes, if you have no AV equipment at all and want to get into video games you will have to buy some kind of monitor. The typical unwashed mass who has absolutely no AV equipment and wants to play video games will likely buy a Nintendo Switch because he hasn't heard of a Steam Deck.

[-] MellowYellow13@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

Your point makes the case for PC gaming, not consoles lol

I'm not sure how you arrive at that conclusion, "most people already have a TV so it's not considered an additional purchase, a computer monitor almost always is."

If you put yourself in the shoes of an average parent Christmas shopping for their 9 year old at some point in the last 30 years, well there's a Playstation 2 for $299, a controller is included, a memory card is $40, and then we'll buy 3 games for $60 each, so that's about $520. We'll hook it up to the living room TV we already own, it comes with the cable we need to do that, that's all we need to buy. Or, let's go over to the computer store and buy a gaming PC. We chose the PS2 era so ~2002, we're looking at a Windows XP machine with probably a Pentium 4 processor, 512MB of RAM, a 256GB hard drive, a CD-RW drive and a DVD-ROM drive, plus an earlier Nvidia graphics card. Buy it from HP, Compaq, Dell or someone like that, you're probably looking at $800 to $1000 for the PC itself, then you're going to need to buy a computer monitor because the graphics card probably only has VGA out and your TV doesn't have VGA in, so that's another few hundred bucks you're going to spend. It likely ships with a basic keyboard and mouse so you'll get by with those.

Here's a picture of a computer catalog circa 2000 of Pentium III grade systems advertising prices just shy of $1500 AFTER a $500 discount for a complete desktop setup, probably including the OS and probably some shovelware. And now it's time to buy some games.

So if you started with the Playstation, you'd have to spend a thousand dollars on a television before you broke even on cost with an equivalent era gaming PC and accoutrements. Oh and you're going to have to set up the OS and install the games you buy from CD, which has a chance of just not working at all because Windows is flaky. Oh no, that Windows 98 era game that's still on store shelves in 2002 doesn't work on Windows XP because of something called NT, you don't know what that means and little Joshua is pissed. Maybe I should have just bought him a Furby.

===

That said, I am a PC gamer, in fact I'm a Linux gamer. I'm typing this on my Ryzen 7700X/Radeon 7900GRE system with a 34 inch 1440p 144Hz monitor and 5.1 surround sound system. I play some hardware intensive games like Satisfactory, I also do my CAD design work on this box. It's a vastly superior toy to any game console ever made and it's also a profoundly useful tool.

I felt the need to reach back to the PS2 era because I don't believe the current crop of game consoles offers the same value proposition. As I think you're trying to point out, TV and movies nowadays are fucktrash and people are abandoning them, and it's increasingly likely you don't own a TV at all because why? The consoles are getting more expensive even though they are still sold as loss leaders, and their making everything they can into a subscription, they're gonna wring the cash out of you somehow.

If someone with no AV equipment at all asked ME how to get into PC gaming, I'm gonna recommend a Steam Deck. It's got everything you need to start playing, no accessories required, excellent UX, repairable hardware, can run LibreOffice, you can plug it into a monitor or television when/if you get one, and you don't have to be a lizard people oligarch to afford it. Oh and at this exact moment in history it isn't the flickering stub of a once tall candle with its successor waiting in the wings like the Nintendo Switch.

[-] taladar@sh.itjust.works 16 points 3 days ago

People are less likely to own a TV already these days though than they used to be so the price calculation for consoles favors them a lot less if you take that into account. Not to mention that console games tend to be more expensive than PC games, especially indie PC games now that triple A is more of a warning label than an indicator of quality.

People have been buying Madden and Call Of Duty reliably for decades now. Doesn't matter if they're good or cheap, there are people who identify as "a person who buys Madden and Call Of Duty."

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Anivia@feddit.org 6 points 3 days ago

Piracy is a lot more accessible on PCs than consoles

Piracy doesn't really decrease sales though, in fact it might increase them since it generates word of mouth from people who wouldn't have bought it.

[-] Katana314@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

How about we equate the nebulous uncertainty of those claims, since piracy arguments never have reliable motivator data.

“Piracy might not decrease sales. In fact it might increase them.”

Here's a source on that claim. The uncertainty here is due to the large margin of error, so the takeaway is that it likely has no effect, or perhaps a small positive effect.

Here's the claim:

the study estimates that for every 100 games that are downloaded illegally, players actually legally obtain 24 more games (including free games) than they would in a world in which piracy didn't exist.

...

points out a number of caveats for this headline number, not least of which is a 45-percent error margin that makes the results less than statistically significant (i.e. indistinguishable from noise). That said, the same study finds that piracy has the more-expected negative effects on sales of films and books (and a neutral effect on music), singling out games as one area where piracy really does seem to work differently.

[-] Katana314@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

The gargantuan margin of error there basically means it's no different from the nebulous phrasing I put.

No, it means we need a better study.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›
this post was submitted on 19 Jan 2025
299 points (97.8% liked)

Games

17130 readers
223 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS