Pc gaming (Pro) vs Consoles (Con)
Debate Rounds (4)
~~ PC gaming has and always will be the number 1 system for gaming. ~~
- Contrary to popular belief, PC's are cheaper then consoles. In the short term and long term.
- A computer with better parts then a console can cost less.
- All though it takes a little effort to build a PC, the end results are more beneficial then a plug-in ready 60$ a year box with limited capabilities.
- PC's CAN be upgraded and the story of having to replace parts every couple months is false. PC parts can last much longer then 3 years before they become a "below average" part which is still capable of play games at a higher setting then a console.
-A high-end gaming PC can be cheaper then a console in the long run. A high-end gaming PC can offer you a system that is capable of running almost every game at high settings for many years, also games can be cheaper while still providing the same or better quality then the AAA games or "Exclusives" on consoles. Also a high-end PC can be more then a gaming system allowing you to do more for less.
-There are more exclusive games on steam then all consoles combined. Steam has allowed new developers to create games and have the community vote on the best ones. Steam has made PC gaming more favorable to gaming community then the limited resources Xbox and PlayStation have to offer and their little section of "Exclusives".
I have kept my arguments short and sweet to allow a rebuttal in which I can later explain my reasoning behind in a more educating/argumentative format.
If I have not given enough information by all means, feel free to add arguments against PC gaming.
"- A computer with better parts then a console can cost less."
Okay, let's compare a PS3, which is currently priced at $399 USD, with the best possible ready-made desktop and the best possible combination of parts for a computer you build yourself. I will use two primary sources: BestBuy and a PC building guide called Logical Increments.
When you visit bestbuy.com and sort all Desktops under the category of "Gaming Desktops" by ascending price, you'll see that they do not have a single gaming computer that is priced under or equal to the PS3. The lowest listed price is $471.98. As you go further down the list, you'll notice that none of the computers have specifications (i.e. available RAM, GPU, CPU) that could compete with the PS3 UNTIL you get to computers in the price range of $700+.
Now to tackle the myth that PCs you build yourself are cheaper AND more powerful than modern day consoles, one can simply use the popular PC building guide over at LogicalIncrements.com, which uses up to date prices and parts. You can see that the only build listed under the recommended builds tab that could compete with a PS3 is the "Good" build that is priced at $536. However, this $536 is only the nominal price; in order to get the real price, we need to account for the opportunity cost of having to set up the PC yourself. It is difficult to put a price tag on labour, but if we consider the time it takes to both set up the PC properly AND understand this through online tutorials/guides, we could see maybe 5-6 hours of extra work multiplied by the minimum wage of ~$7.65. Thus you have an extra ~$40 in opportunity cost added to that $536, which comes up to a total of $576 for purchasing and building that rig.
So in conclusion, no, PCs that can compare with modern day consoles are not cheaper.
"- All though it takes a little effort to build a PC, the end results are more beneficial then a plug-in ready 60$ a year box with limited capabilities"
Whether or not it takes "little effort" to build a PC is purely subjective. As well, there is no obligation for console users to be paying $60 a year for Xbox Live or PSN or any of the other services available. If we assume they do, however, then we also have to calculate the utility of such services: for example, this $60/year actually pays for many services that non-console owners would need a separate subscription for, such as Crunchyroll, Netflix, LIVE sports broadcasts, Skype, etc. So it is imperative that we account the savings a subscriber accrues from these services. On the other hand, PC gamers will still have to pay for these services separately.
"- PC's CAN be upgraded and the story of having to replace parts every couple months is false. PC parts can last much longer then 3 years before they become a "below average" part which is still capable of play games at a higher setting then a console."
The problem with your assertion that PC parts can last longer than 3 years is that it really depends on which PC parts. I can tell you right off the bat that, if the PC user continues a steady practice of daily high-performance gaming, then the longest that the motherboard and CPU can last is at most 2 years, and that is with monthly cleaning and maintenance as well as proper cooling and ventilation systems installed. On the other hand, the PSU, cooling fans and to a lesser extent the GPU are very fragile, and it is recommended that they be replaced every year or so. This is all assuming that the PC user uses their computer on a very frequent basis, and plays high-performance games for the most part, to match the gaming activity of an average console owner. So in the end, it can become much more costly to maintain a gaming PC over a console.
"-There are more exclusive games on steam then all consoles combined. Steam has allowed new developers to create games and have the community vote on the best ones. Steam has made PC gaming more favorable to gaming community then the limited resources Xbox and PlayStation have to offer and their little section of "Exclusives"."
The number of exclusives is not necessarily important, but rather the production value of exclusives. PCs will always have the greater number since there are next to no barriers of entry into the PC market. This in itself is a problem, because it drives down the general quality of PC games. Barring older games, most of the newly released exclusives on Steam that come out every year are actually simple, minimalist indie games that do not drive innovation (especially innovation in graphics, which is what PC gamers often tout about) and are often forgotten after a while. What is more important within the selection of games is quality, and not quantity. This is what you will find within consoles, where the high publisher license fees and barriers to entry ensure only the most highly developed games arrive on consoles.
Dazal forfeited this round.
Topkek forfeited this round.
Dazal forfeited this round.
Topkek forfeited this round.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.