Are consoles a rip off?

[Sovendovah1]

I personally don't think it's a ripoff. I think the most important part of this opinion is the preface. It's important to scale your judgment for the time and place of the birth of console gaming.

The Nintendo 64 was released in 1996. At that time, computer developers were beginning to see the value of PCs in gaming. Early games were mostly text based adventures and other simple games. In 1996 you had games like Quake and Nights come out on PC. Keep in mind Quake was offered on the Nintendo 64. It really feels like gaming consoles were an easier alternative to PCs because game developers saw the purpose behind proprietary software that they could easily control and work with verses the ever-changing properties of PCs.

If you scale it forward to now-a-days, there's hardly a difference in performance between console and PC gaming at comparable hardware. Zelda Ocarina of Time came out in 1998 and was a landmark achievement in gaming. It featured complex mechanics such as 3D movement, day-night cycle, complex particle effects, Z-targeting, and (too an extent) dynamic dialog options. On PC in 1998, you had landmark games such Half Life 1 and Starcraft. While technically impressive games that nobody could argue against the fact that they were key contributors in what gaming has be come in the current era - They offered a different experience then what is comparable to the single player adventure that is Ocarina of Time.

Top downs and FPS were much better suited for PC gaming while single player adventures could be enjoyed on your couch with a controller and friend. It's a really subjective topic and there's no truly correct answer. Both have their places in gamer's hearts and it depends on your personal preference.

That being said, I would say that modern consoles aren't giving you everything you could get on PC. I feel the console exclusive games such as COD and BF5 aren't going to give you a rich fulfilling experience that you'll want to come back to day after day in their modern iterations.

Thanks for reading my post.

[Wolf]

DAAAAAAAAMMMNNNNNNNN! That was a well written piece and I must say, I loved the burn at the end....though be not too harsh on him, our resident thread troll has been good inflight entertainment!

[Aidy]

You, overall, sound like the infamous "console peasants" who will defend their console brand to death. Being a console gamer doesn't make one a console peasant automatically, however this behaviour over there does.

Don't worry if you don't have any intelligent arguments; insults and name calling is just as good.

[Wolf]

Interesting and well reasoned argument that you raise here, I do have a different opinion........but your aregument is compelling.

[ethansito]

I only use my PS4 for Netflix, and my TV can do that too, so...

[BrotherDust]

Maybe it is preference? I built a beast PC 2 years ago and enjoyed gaming on it. Now it needs work and crashes, I just dont have the time to keep up the maintenance. I can get a PS4 Pro or Xbox X for the price of a graphics card. I started out playing on PC when counter strike was a mod and punk buster was the jam. I own all the major consoles and a bunch of retro consoles. I guess I just prefer console gaming cause of the grab and go concept my time seems more valuable to me. Rip -Off maybe? but i guess depends on what you value more.

[Last_Dragoon]

Damn you addressed almost the whole thread lol

[ISP]

I own all the Play stations

O rly How many Play stations do you own? I mean I have the OG audiophile version of the Play station 1, do you have that?

[ISP]

You're coming at it from the viewpoint of "one is and must be superior". You are looking at a fraction of a percent of console games that ship with series issues and judging the entire ecosystem from that, which is just foolhardy. Also where you get the idea that consoles are not "plug and play" (an old Windows 95 feature btw but I think we get what your attempting to say) is just beyond me. They just work, out of the box, all cables and hookups included.

As to being less powerful, well that is a given just due to the nature of the space they occupy yet often in the beginning of their life cycles they can do more than most PCs. Also they are not computers, they play games. No need to worry about antivirus, no need to worry about a OS, no need to make sure you have Office installed to actually get something done. Nah, they take up some cubic inches near the TV and do their job cheaply, easily and for years. They are wonderful devices for many people and without them you wouldn't have even half the games come to market in a given year today.

[Eriixas]

Sorry, but your examples fall very flat. Exclusive games is a very good argument. If the only brand of shoes are sold by a single store, it's a good reason to go to that store. It's not like you can go anywhere else to get them. ---

If there's only one brand of shoes sold only in one certain store then it is bound that someone will emerge in this need of shoes and will start selling it in other stores. If you actually meant that there is one certain brand of shoes sold in one certain store then what stops anyone buying shoes from other stores? Even if that brand of shoes is somewhat preferable one is not required to actually pay to enter that store (in parallel to buying a console), moreover, in this current age of technologies people can order online, therefore cutting the need to even go to that specific store. Your example is extremely flawed.

--- Using your example, if there are exclusive games on PC then buying a PC is a rip off because I should be able to play it on my phone.

Exclusives for PCs is not the very same thing as console exclusives. First of all, consoles are preset pieces of equipment that provide limited variety of ways to experience games. These limitations include tweaking, modding and, as Wolf has mentioned earlier, hardware that does interact with the console. Secondly, PCs aren't bought just for "exclusives". Some may build their PCs with one specific game in mind, but I haven't heard of anyone buying a PC specifically for exact 3 games yet. What does it say? PC gaming isn't, and never was, about exclusives, even with virtually endless variety of indie games.

Also, why would, anyone with sane mind, prefer mobiles over PCs for gaming? This is a completely random argument in sake of having an argument. I can understand that people may want to play some games on the way somewhere or that people from poorer families may not have the funds to purchase a PC, but gaming on mobiles is nothing like on PCs. Mobile "gaming" is all about rubbing the screen for control while the screen itself is miniature, the sound quality is not as good and on top of that majority of mobile phone games are garbage, for the lack of a better word, riddled with microtransactions.

Can't really argue with this logic, even if you want to. Exclusivity sells games, even if you don't like it.

This topic is not about whether exclusivity sells consoles or not, however, it does indeed. If you have read my previous post you would've seen me pointing it out, but of course, you haven't.

I don't think so. There is something to be said for being able to put a game in to play without worrying about compatibility issues like you would have with PC gaming. I will always prefer console gaming over other forms of gaming.

This statement is nothing more than preference and does not even touch the subject of whether consoles are ripoff or not.

I dont think consoles have been a rip off for me. As i still enjoy playing the games they offer and I dont have to worry what is under the hood. I know how good PC gaming has been and still is. I just like to pick up the controller and play?

Yet again, preference of something without arguments whether consoles are ripoff or not. Moreover, PCs do support controllers and it doesn't take forever to set them up therefore "pick up the controller and play" can easily apply to PC gaming as well.

So you're saying that because buying new console games at full price costs more money than buying old PC games on sale means that consoles are a rip-off?

You, overall, sound like the infamous "console peasants" who will defend their console brand to death. Being a console gamer doesn't make one a console peasant automatically, however this behaviour over there does.

[Last_Dragoon]

I'm going to say no because all platforms have pros and cons to them. I'm mainly use console as I don't have a PC that can run many games. I have a PS4 and I made the purchase decision because Sony has first party IP that I enjoy the most especially between Microsoft and Nintendo. PSN is the only thing I would consider a rip off as the free games every month are indie games that tend to be $5-10 on the store, so realistically paying $60 a year is you getting maybe a slight discount per month on the two games they pick.

To me it just comes down to spending habits and how you look at value. With hardcore gamers we tend to spend a good amount so you just have to do careful consideration when investing a lot of money or time into a platform. For me, I like the God of War games, the Uncharted games, and it looks like Sony is looking to bring back old IP like Medieval. With added bonus, Sony gets a lot of JRPG support and since I am a big fan of JRPGs it adds more value for me.

Another example is I bought a 3DS. I got it for a cheaper price and with it I can play 3DS games and DS games, so the value is really good. Vita, which is basically dead, actually has value because it has a huge library of PS one classic games, so if you don't want to get ripped off with the mini PSone classic, I positive you can find a Vita for low cost.

[BrotherDust]

I dont think consoles have been a rip off for me. As i still enjoy playing the games they offer and I dont have to worry what is under the hood. I know how good PC gaming has been and still is. I just like to pick up the controller and play?

[Aidy]

I've owned every console and most handhelds under the sun. Retrospectively, in the long term, I can say they all end up costing much more than my trusty old PC's which I build myself and which typically last me ~4 years for gaming.

Unless you get into console gaming at the ass end of the life cycle, (i.e pick up a second hand ps3 now with a giant batch of bargain bin games for peanuts); a typical console bought on launch or near launch, with a library of ~80+ games you get as they come out will end up costing a few grand. Meanwhile, I have around 800 pc games across steam and gog etc that have all up been had for very little per game thanks to sales . What's more they carry over to my future gaming rigs. My PC's typically always cost under $1,100 to build.

I did the math, during my most enthusiastic console gaming period, I spent ~$8,000 on xbox 360 console and games over the course of 4 years. I bought close to 200 games, close to launch window prices. In the same period (2006-2010) I built a high end gaming rig and bought 300 steam games, all up for less than $3,000. Plus my PC did far more than the xboner360 ever could.

Keep in mind this was the last console generation where console specs vs pc were favourable for consoles. The xbox360 launched with 'high end gpu and cpu' for 2005. When ps4/xbox one launched, they came out with midrange gpu and a low end cpu that doomed them to 30fps for most titles. I did buy both out of simple habit, but they were a complete shitfest value-wise compared to the PC I had built in 2014, just a year later.

So you're saying that because buying new console games at full price costs more money than buying old PC games on sale means that consoles are a rip-off?

[IceWolf]

I don't think so. There is something to be said for being able to put a game in to play without worrying about compatibility issues like you would have with PC gaming. I will always prefer console gaming over other forms of gaming.

[Aidy]

Given that all 3 major platforms now require you to pay for online services, with Nintendo being the last holder out, and games generally costing more due to regularity of Steam discounts, I would argue that consoles are actually more expensive in the long run, especially for the savvy PC buyer who buys individual parts and is willing to sacrifice some visual fidelity for getting a better bargain. You can make a competent PC that can compete with the Ps4 Pro and Xbox One X for less than you'd think.

Yeah but those Steam games are digital downloads, and digital downloads are bad. Well...you said they were bad on consoles, but they're good on PC? Again I'm struggling with your seemingly contradictory views? I mean...it's almost like you don't really believe what you're saying, that you're just saying whatever suits the argument you're making at that time?

I'm slagging off consoles...they're too complicated, they try and force you into digital downloads
I'm defending PCs...they're complex, you get digital downloads

You base your argument that a PC can be cheaper in the long run on the fact that consoles charge for on-line services but I've paid nothing for online services, that PC games are sometimes on sale, but console games are also on sale. So neither of those arguments hold much water. Not when you factor in the cost of the initial PC purchase, and the fact that it needs hardware upgrades over time if you want to maintain the gaming experience. But even if I was to give you the benefit of the doubt and accept your arguments as being true....a PC being cheaper in the long run doesn't make consoles a rip-off.