Xbox 360 Price = $1,710?

[Evil Avatar]

CNN Money's Chris Morris is speculating in his E3 reports (http://money.cnn.com/2005/05/19/technology/personaltech/e3_expensive_gaming/index.htm) that the cost of an Xbox 360 including all the trimmings could run you as high as $1710.00.

Figuring it's better to budget too much instead of too little, we went with the $399 price for the Xbox 360. And following Taylor's guidance, we'll assume nearly $60 per title.

To see your new game in all its glory, you're going to need a high definition television. Microsoft, after all, has insisted all Xbox 360 titles be high-def compatible -- and it's a safe bet many, if not all, PlayStation 3 games will follow that lead. If you've already got a HDTV, you're all set. If not, the average price these days is around $1,000, according to the Consumer Electronics Association.

You'll also need a surround sound system to make the most of the audio effects that are increasingly important in games. You wouldn't want enemies to sneak up from behind, would you? We'll go easy there and assign $250, the typical price of a low-end home theater in a box, to the budget.

Total price: $1,709.Oddly enough, that is still significantly less than the price of a high-end gaming PC.

[thecrazyd]

Except not. You can make a high-end gaming rig for 12-1500 max.

[Taco]

And a high end gaming rig isn't an overrated piece of crap.

Me biased? Nah.

[XxSATANxX]

The X Box 360 is going to retail for $499. (What was mentioned in private at E3)

A modest game system built by myself runs about 900 dollars. Figure 300 for a monitor etc.

I already have an HDTV but at these prices I think waiting is in order.

I think *** is being quiet on the retail waiting to see what key retail partners are going to say about the retail. Since the system has no major game at launch albiet it will have games. I'm guessing that the overall economy at 4th qtr will be the deciding factor on XBOX 360.

[Puresock]

And then you'll need a house to put it in!

http://www.penny-arcade.com/view.php3?date=2003-08-25&res=l

[Rakael]

Then again, you don't have to upgrade your HDTV/consoles every year to two years either. And I think EA was talking about prebuilt high-end gaming PC's, which a lot of people still buy.

[Dirty Harry]

Then again, you don't have to upgrade your HDTV/consoles every year to two years either. And I think EA was talking about prebuilt high-end gaming PC's, which a lot of people still buy. Man i made that mistake one and one time only.

[Draft]

Except not. You can make a high-end gaming rig for 12-1500 max.Build one with a good monitor, speakers and all that jazz for $1500.

[if76]

Using this logic, to play a game for the old xbox that runs at 720 the price would be $1500!!!! For an xbox 1!!!!! oh no!!!!!!!!

[Evil Avatar]

Then again, you don't have to upgrade your HDTV/consoles every year to two years either. And I think EA was talking about prebuilt high-end gaming PC's, which a lot of people still buy.

Actually, I was talking about a regular PC. Gamers are quick to "forget" about all the little things that go into building a PC other than the CPU and the Motherboard.

A high-end video card alone costs $400.00, add in the motherboard, CPU and RAM and you are in the $1200.00 range before you add in the hard disk, mouse, keyboard, operating system, floppy drive, DVD/DVD+/-R drive, speakers, sound card... etc.

PC gamers live under the illusion that PC gaming is "cheap" or that you can build a "good" gaming PC for cheap... this just isn't true and it is most certainly NOT true for anyone who buys into a $700.00 Dell this year and then wants to get a decent PC the following year.

[Evil Avatar]

Using this logic, to play a game for the old xbox that runs at 720 the price would be $1500!!!! For an xbox 1!!!!! oh no!!!!!!!!

The old Xbox didn't really support 720. Only a couple of games support that mode.

[Syl]

And then you'll need a house to put it in!

http://www.penny-arcade.com/view.php3?date=2003-08-25&res=l

Exactly what was on my mind.

Actually, i'm curious. How come none of these consoles (cept for the Revolution , strangely enough) have Computer Monitor connections? I mean, if its the "HD era" then why can't I use my computer monitor which can already support something like 2000x1600 resolution? Yet only cost me around $200?

[Tricky Thumb]

Yes and the PS2 still has that deadly nuclear missle technology in it!

[kid cabelgo]

Exactly what was on my mind.

Actually, i'm curious. How come none of these consoles (cept for the Revolution , strangely enough) have Computer Monitor connections? I mean, if its the "HD era" then why can't I use my computer monitor which can already support something like 2000x1600 resolution? Yet only cost me around $200?


I'm fairly sure I heard that at least the xbox 360 was going to have dvi inputs, so all you would need is a monitor with dvi, or a 5 dollar adapter to go to vga.

[chechenepiphany]

You know, im pretty sure you could play your xbox 360 without all of that expensive crap and still enjoy it.

[Heretic Machine]

The X Box 360 is going to retail for $499. (What was mentioned in private at E3)

Except you're the only person who heard them say it! Oh nooooo!

[Puresock]

You know, im pretty sure you could play your xbox 360 without all of that expensive crap and still enjoy it.

Heh, yeah, call me crazy but I'll be plugging mine into my 21" normal TV. And I'll use the TV's built in speakers. For another few years, anyway :D

Hell, I'll probably even have to reach around the back to swap the scart leads over when I want to change which console I'm playing.

[WileE.Coyte]

1000 bucks? I don't think 1000 bucks will get you true 720p or 1080p for that matter, at a decent screen size. 1000 might get you 480p and 1080i at 30in, (720p then get's squashed in or something, I reallly don't know how it work's?). When I bought mine, retailiers gave me the run around or just did'nt know when I started asking about true 720p. I ended up calling the manufactuer, and confirming it on some super tech head forum's.

[Dirty Harry]

Actually, I was talking about a regular PC. Gamers are quick to "forget" about all the little things that go into building a PC other than the CPU and the Motherboard.

A high-end video card alone costs $400.00, add in the motherboard, CPU and RAM and you are in the $1200.00 range before you add in the hard disk, mouse, keyboard, operating system, floppy drive, DVD/DVD+/-R drive, speakers, sound card... etc.

PC gamers live under the illusion that PC gaming is "cheap" or that you can build a "good" gaming PC for cheap... this just isn't true and it is most certainly NOT true for anyone who buys into a $700.00 Dell this year and then wants to get a decent PC the following year.
So if your hitting high end, you spend 400 on a video card, 150 to 300 for a cpu, then anywhere from 100 to 500 depending on how much ram and then about 150 to 200 for a mobo but the thing is 1200 for just cpu/mobo/ram/video is a bit overboard EA, you can build cheaper than that. ( i say you could put that all together for 800 and it still remain high end)
Also, i think you are either under the illusion that hand built pcs dont outclass a generic cookie cutter pc from dell or compaq or w/e. Or it could be that your own person pc's that you have put together by hand were comprised of shoddy brands and/or parts. fuck to just simplify this, ALIENWARE PC's ARENT ALL THAT AND A BAG OF CHIPS>

[Conner Dain]

Actually, I was talking about a regular PC.


I don't see how anyone could consider a system with a $400 video card a "regular" system. I can build a "regular" pc that will play every game on the market now and most that come out in the next two years (probably) for around $900. (Assuming you already have a monitor, kb, speakers, and mouse.):

Antec SLK3000B $67
Lite-On DVD-R $57
Seagate 120 GB SATA drive $80
AMD Athlon 64 3200\Abit KV-80 MB\1 GB RAM: $342
XFX GF 6600 GT AGP 128 MB $190
Creative Audigy 2 Value: $42
Shipping: $100.

Sure, it's not bleeding-edge, but it is a solid pc.

[MosBen]

I think it's obviously possible to save money building your own PC in any number of ways, but console gaming is still cheaper. Always has been, always will be.

[Draft]

I don't see how anyone could consider a system with a $400 video card a "regular" system. I can build a "regular" pc that will play every game on the market now and most that come out in the next two years (probably) for around $900. (Assuming you already have a monitor, kb, speakers, and mouse.):

Antec SLK3000B $67
Lite-On DVD-R $57
Seagate 120 GB SATA drive $80
AMD Athlon 64 3200\Abit KV-80 MB\1 GB RAM: $342
XFX GF 6600 GT AGP 128 MB $190
Creative Audigy 2 Value: $42
Shipping: $100.

Sure, it's not bleeding-edge, but it is a solid pc.
That build lacks:

Windows XP: $100
Mouse: $30
Keyboard: $30
Monitor: $250 (and that's getting you a no frills 19" flat screen
Speakers: $80 (again, no frills 5.1 system)

Not to mention the 6600 GT is going to be crippled by next gen games.

[MosBen]

And if we're comparing builds that will "get the job done," and we're starting from scratch, the comparison should really be an Xbox 360 and a decent 27" TV, so that package is probably running maybe $600. That is, of course, assuming you go for a pretty decent TV and the prediction that the 360's going to be $500 is correct, which I'm not convinced of.

[Liquidize105]

Somebody build me a PC for 900, because mine's approaching the min req. :)

[Syl]

Yeah, i built a friend a PC for $500 that runs most games out at around 30fps. (No monitor/windows)

I also buid systems for roughly $1000 that run everything out these days with no issues. (No monitor/windows yet again)

My system was $2400 when I got it (about $2000 now) and it can run everything out with extra oomph to give. When my framerate in half-life 2 at 1280x1024, all graphical settings maxed out and 8x AF/4x AA never drops below 60fps - with water (that has reflect all) on screen. I think i'm rather set.
(Every part of the game without water stays above 100fps)
(This actually included monitor/windows)

Ahh, DVI out? I can live with that. I have two DVI-normal monitor converters, as my monitor came with dual DVI-out. (PCI-E 6800GT overclocked to above 6800Ultra speeds)

[PotatoNinja]

You don't need $1500 to build a good PC, but you don't need a large $1000 HD television to enjoy a videogame either. You can easily build a solid gaming PC for around a thousand, but if you want something that you can brag about at LAN parties, you'll need to invest a considerable amount more. $1k could build you a PC that will run every modern game pretty well.

The only price points that really matter to me are the game costs and system cost, the rest is up to the consumer. If games retail at $60, prices don't come down and the system starts at over $299, I'll be waiting for a long time before I grab a 360.

[Demize99]

When I can search the web, do my homework, balance my checkbook, talk to my friends on the internet, and otherwise do all the things I normally do on my PC on a console, I'll listen to the "console gaming is cheaper" theory.

Lets not get into the things you can do with PC games you can't do with consoles, 3rd party mods, maps, content, support, etc... The PC is a better deal because I may spend a bit more cash but I get alot more out of it in the long run. Additionally, I don't have to replace my entire system every time something new comes out.

If you're buying a PC just to play video games, yeah you're wasting money. Either way, both ways of playing games are cheap. I did the math via my Xfire hours, figuring in the # of games I've bought @ $50 and a $1000pc and I devided it by the hours... it was like 5cents per hour of gameplay. I bet a console thats oft played would be similar.

[Draft]

When I can search the web, do my homework, balance my checkbook, talk to my friends on the internet, and otherwise do all the things I normally do on my PC on a console, I'll listen to the "console gaming is cheaper" theory.I can do all that stuff on a $200 eMachine.

Lets not get into the things you can do with PC games you can't do with consoles, 3rd party mods, maps, content, support, etc... The PC is a better deal because I may spend a bit more cash but I get alot more out of it in the long run. Additionally, I don't have to replace my entire system every time something new comes out.Most 3rd party mods are horrible. Consoles now have downloadable maps. "Content?" Pretty broad term. Support = patches that shouldn't have been needed in the first place.

PC gaming is a LOT more expensive than console playing. There is no spin to this issue.

[KarmaGhost]

PC gamers live under the illusion that PC gaming is "cheap" or that you can build a "good" gaming PC for cheap...That's a pretty big generalization; people who pay for their computers to run great games know that it's "expensive," or rather, not cheap. Don't forget all the great things computers do other than play games.

If you really want to find out how much money your spending on a computer that can play games decently, take into consideration that (probably) everyone who has a console also has a computer. Now, find out how much money a computer that would do everything but play games would cost. Then, take the specs on that computer and upgrade the necessary components accordingly: boost the processor, the gpu, ram, etc. The amount of money you pay to upgrade these components (i.e. the difference in price between the low end and high end component) is what you're paying to play games. So if you could surf the web fine with 256 MB of RAM, but you need 1 gig to play games:

1 GB PC3200 RAM ($105.99) - 256 MB PC3200 RAM ($35.99) = $70 spent on "extra" RAM to play games. Do the same thing with the processor:

Dell is putting Intel 2.8 GHz processors into their computers at the moment. Buying this processor by itself would cost ~$150 depending on where you go. This processor would be fairly decent for games, but lets go to an Athlon 64 3500 because they're generally cheaper for ~$250 (you'd need to get a different type of motherboard, but remember, you haven't bought the computer yet). That's $100 extra for a better processor.

You'll pay about $50 "extra" for a better motherboard and about $150 to $200 to $300 "extra" for a better GPU, depending on how crazy you get. That makes the total approximately $400 - $500 "extra" to upgrade the components in your PC to make it game ready. Is that cheap? No. Is it crazy expensive? Depends who you are, but probably not. When they first come out, Xbox 360 and PS3 will cost about $400. If you buy both, you're $800 in the hole. If you get the Revolution as well... well, you get my point.

[Dirty Harry]

I can do all that stuff on a $200 eMachine.

Most 3rd party mods are horrible.


Are you ready to eat your foot?

[Sloth]

I'd still like a 360, but I'm not going to sink 1700 bucks into it.

[abso]

Spending 1700 bucks won't make the bad games play any better though.

[Murtaug]

Yeah, I'll just stick with my $120, 27" standard TV for the time being.

My guess is the system will cost $349 at launch, and in a year when the PS3 is released it will drop to $299. Hell, it could even be less if Microsoft takes a loss to try and take market from Sony before the Playstation 3 hits; $299, with a drop to $199 to $249 for the PS3 launch?

[Deadend]

Oh god. Why do the hardcore PC games try and belive that PC gaming can be cheap?

and why does Chris Morris talk the shit? He started pulling numbers out of his ass, just to make the X360 sound expensive.

See, the amazing thing about these next gen systems is not only can they output in high res, they can output in LOW RES.

[outontheporch]

If the article said the Nintendo Revolution would be $1,700, I wonder what Evil Avatar's response would be...

[doubtingthomas]

Isn't this all kind of silly on both sides? You can use your PC for things beside games, much as you can use a TV and Surround for things besides games as well. You don't have to spend $1500 or $2000 to enjoy games on either platform, but it helps, and you can use that hardware for so much more. So no, playing games on your XBOX 360 or your PC won't cost you $1500-$2000. You could spend less, or you could enjoy things besides games with that cost as well.

[Taco]

PC gaming is cheaper now than it was years ago. No doubt its still expensive though compared to a console. You get what you pay for though.

[TrackZero]

Well if they're going through all this pricing, you could do the same thing witht the PS3 and it'll still ending up costing more in the end (unless it underprices the 360, which I seriously doubt). They're both win-win consoles, I don't see a point in making commentary like this at this point.

[MosBen]

As to all the "extra features" you get with a PC, at this point you're basically getting those for free at this point. Up until pretty recently my parents were still running a P1 133 (that's right, Pentium ONE, and mhz, no ghz on this baby!) that did almost all of the "extra features" the modern gaming PC did (internet, word, etc.). Any computer on the market can do those extra features, so it's not like some portion of the price of the PC goes to that, it's a free feature by the nature of the machine. If you took gaming off the table you could probably find a PC for nearly free that could do the rest.

Including Word as a feature of the setup is like including the ability to watch TV programs as part of the X360 set up; it's not really what we're talking about. You plunk down your three or four hundred dollars for the x360 to play games and you plunk down however much the parts for your gaming pc cost because you want to play games. Yes, everyone agrees that there are ways to build PCs that can play this year's games somewhat cheaply, but building modern gaming PC is simply always going to be more expensive than gaming on the console. But hey, PC gaming allows for upgrading, having a graphical edge a good portion of the time, user made mods, and all the other things that are great about PC gaming. The price of entry just isn't one of those things though.

[doubtingthomas]

As to all the "extra features" you get with a PC, at this point you're basically getting those for free at this point. Up until pretty recently my parents were still running a P1 133 (that's right, Pentium ONE, and mhz, no ghz on this baby!) that did almost all of the "extra features" the modern gaming PC did (internet, word, etc.). Any computer on the market can do those extra features, so it's not like some portion of the price of the PC goes to that, it's a free feature by the nature of the machine. If you took gaming off the table you could probably find a PC for nearly free that could do the rest.



I dunno, I'd love to see a Pentium 1 run Itunes, rip Music , run a bittorrent client, some game and movie trailers, play DVD's, burns CD's, etc. A gaming PC obviously costs more, but I think a PC that runs anything besides a web browser and word will cost you $500. You spend a $1000 on a PC like mine (which while not great, runs Doom 3 and Half Life 2 with some features turned down at 800x600) to play games. That $1000, or however much you spend, goes towards a lot more than playing games.

[Furious Wang]

This article has convinced me to go with PS3 instead of 360. I know I sure won't need that HDTV and Surround Sound system for the PS3. In fact, I'll wind up paying even MORE than 1700 for the 360 because if I were to buy it I'd have to get a gold plated faceplate. I mean, what would the neighbors say if I went with plastic? Add on another 1000 right there. Jesus, what is Microsoft thinking making their console so expensive?

[Chandler]

well im sure xbox360 games will be fine with 480

[Zawath]

This article has convinced me to go with PS3 instead of 360. I know I sure won't need that HDTV and Surround Sound system for the PS3. In fact, I'll wind up paying even MORE than 1700 for the 360 because if I were to buy it I'd have to get a gold plated faceplate. I mean, what would the neighbors say if I went with plastic? Add on another 1000 right there. Jesus, what is Microsoft thinking making their console so expensive?

Newsflash: PS3 is going to cost even more because of BluRay and other fancy gadgets.

[XxSATANxX]

Except you're the only person who heard them say it! Oh nooooo!


No point in arguing cept it is going to be $499.

[bone_matrix]

Newsflash: PS3 is going to cost even more because of BluRay and other fancy gadgets.


I'm not sure, but my sarcasm meter was detecting a high amount of sarcasm coming from Wang's post.

[sTubbs]

Also, remember that to 'fully appreciate' the PS3, you are going to need TWO 1080p displays. Anything less would be uncivilized according to the logic of jackass Chris Morris.

Seriously, I see my games on a no frills 30 inch TV, and I hear them through a nice set of headphones. This suits me just fine, and I am not about to run out and drain my bank account just so that my games can look and sound a little bit better. I am planning on buying a 360 at launch, and I will most certainly enjoy it just as much as someone with a top of the line home theatre.

[Fonz]

all these prices are from newegg.com
all USD
athlon 64 4000+ : $485
Geforce 6800 GT PCI-E: $400
OCZ Enhanced Latency 1GB (2 x 512MB) DDR 400 (PC 3200) Dual Channel Kit: $140
Maxtor DiamondMax 10 200GB 7200 RPM 8MB Cache IDE Ultra ATA133 HDD: $105
BenQ Black 16X DVD+R 4X DVD+RW 4X DVD+R DL 16X DVD-R 4X DVD-RW 16X DVD-ROM 40X CD-R 24X CD-RW 40X CD-ROM 2M Cache IDE DVD Burner : $50
Logitech MX518 Mouse : $45
Logitech Elite Black USB + PS/2 Standard Keyboard : $30
Shuttle SN25P Socket 939 AMD Athlon 64 FX/Athlon 64/Sempron nVIDIA nForce4: $380

Total: $1635

Most 3rd party mods are horrible. Consoles now have downloadable maps. "Content?" Pretty broad term. Support = patches that shouldn't have been needed in the first place.

I have to Disagree considering, Enemy Terroritory, Counter-Strike, Day of Defeat, Natural Selection, CosmosUI mod for WoW, and a butt load of other software we can list is great 3rd party software.

[Taco]

Morrowind, Neverwinter Nights, and about a thousand others offer incredible downloaded content. I could list games for the next hour. Consoles are to computers what Go-Carts are to Lamborghini's ;).

Now if you want to say you just can't afford the bliss of an even $1000 computer, I understand.

[baz]

PC gaming is pretty expensive, but not prohibitively so. Once you have a decent setup, then a $500 injection every 2 years or so keeps you able to play all the new games.

I love my PC, its my media centre, my communications centre, my gaming centre, my development centre. For something that does all that $500 every 2 years is nothing. Thats not to say that I won't get a x360, I will for sure, and a PS3 and a revolution, its just that the price for PCs seems reasonable to me.

Just on a side rant againt the whole PC gaming is dying thing. There will always be people playing games on PCs, and you don't think microsoft is going to support the PC for freaking ages? Games are the one thing that I still boot into windows for. You take the games off of my PC, and I'd only ever boot up into Linux, and I know a lot of other people who feel similarly. Same goes for other gamers I know and apple.

[Syl]

I'm sure that around next year, i'll just spend about $600-700 to update my computer to the point where it can already outgame PS3 and Xbox360.

I mean hell, the PS3 graphics are "equal to two 6800Ultras"
Alright, i'll just shove in another 6800Ultra with my SLI motherboard - set.

And I have a feeling that a dual core Athlon 64 running at 2.4ghz will be just as valuable as a triple core or 8 core Power PC 3.2ghz.

[Adam Blue]

1000 bucks? I don't think 1000 bucks will get you true 720p or 1080p for that matter, at a decent screen size. 1000 might get you 480p and 1080i at 30in, (720p then get's squashed in or something, I reallly don't know how it work's?). When I bought mine, retailiers gave me the run around or just did'nt know when I started asking about true 720p. I ended up calling the manufactuer, and confirming it on some super tech head forum's.

I spent ~$800 on mine a year ago. You can see it in the console setup thread. I only want tube televisions(best color out there right now), and my 32" 4:3 HDTV was larger in 16:9 mode than the 34" widescreen. Not only that but it supports all HD modes, yes, including 720p, and has a DVI port. For buying it a year ago I get a hell of a deal. But I had to do my resaerch, and fortunately research is easy to do.

Not only that but I play my PC on my HDTV. The games look gorgeous. So I totally went away with using computer monitors and just stick with my HDTV. Doom 3, HL2, NVW, etc...all look effin fantastic.

[MosBen]

Well, the cheapest package Best Buy has is $669, which includes a 17" moniter and printer and is far more powerful than the basic requirements we've been talking about. Evidently you can also save up to $330 in rebates, which leaves us at $340 and a pretty powerful machine for all the basic stuff we're talking about. All I'm trying to say is that PC gamers like to talk up the utility of the PC when discussions like this break out, but the cost of all those extras really doesn't account for a very large portion of the actual cost. The real cost in the price of a gaming PC comes from the components that allow it to play modern games.

[Evil Avatar]

(Assuming you already have a monitor, kb, speakers, and mouse.):

That was exactly my point, that people keep leaving out stuff when they talk about building a new PC. Not everyone has a 17" - 19" monitor and one of those little Dell PC's certainly doesn't come with a decent monitor and it is something people often need to buy when moving from the casual PC user into the area of being a PC gamer.

[Evil Avatar]

If the article said the Nintendo Revolution would be $1,700, I wonder what Evil Avatar's response would be...

I would wonder how many games will be available for your $1700.00 system. At least with the PS3 and Xbox 360 you know games will come out on a regular basis.

[Evil Avatar]

No point in arguing cept it is going to be $499.

I think it is quite foolish to assume that it will cost anything higher than $399.99 and I would hazard a guess that it will be $299.99 the same as the first Xbox.

Microsoft isn't going to put themselves in a position where they can be undercut by the PS3 four months later.

[eatme]

I killed about 500 brain cells just reading this crap. Let's see the cost.

* inventing technology to build brain cells: $1.5 billion
* compensating experimental test subjects: $100 million
* paying for procedure for my 500 brain cells: $500,000

Reading this crappy article price = $1,100,500,000?

[thecrazyd]

If the article said the Nintendo Revolution would be $1,700, I wonder what Evil Avatar's response would be...
If it had mentioned the Revolution, it wouldn't be posted on the main site. Unless Evil added a comment saying something flamebaity (which he already did, so whatever).

[Banacek]

now without flamebait, where would the collective intelligence of the internet be? :)

PC's cost more, but can do a lot more than consoles.
Consoles are cheaper, and you never have to worry about your system not being able to play games.

Done. Next? :)

[bobbler]

...
I mean hell, the PS3 graphics are "equal to two 6800Ultras"
Alright, i'll just shove in another 6800Ultra with my SLI motherboard - set.
...


I think some people are forgetting the fact (on both consoles) that ~2x the power of current gen cards != two current gen cards in SLI. SLI has overhead and is done purely through drivers, getting more than 1.5x power from SLI is pretty difficult in most cases (from what I've seen anyway).

I killed about 500 brain cells just reading this crap. Let's see the cost.

* inventing technology to build brain cells: $1.5 billion
* compensating experimental test subjects: $100 million
* paying for procedure for my 500 brain cells: $500,000

Reading this crappy article price = $1,100,500,000?

Seems to me you haven't gotten that procedure yet; 1.5b + .1b + 500k doesn't equal 1.1billion =o

[Mav]

um... the Xbox 2 requires a HDTV?

If so, alot of gamers are fucked. I don't care for HDTV, I think it's too expensive for what it's worth and I for one am not buying a HDTV just to play an Xbox game (or PS3 if it requires it as well). PC gaming still > all

[NACIONAL]

from what i know.. the Xbox 360 won't need an HDTV... all the games must support hdtv... but you can play xbox360 over your regular cathodic tube TV...

[Blue]

I'm not overly concerned either way. My computer can run WoW and most other games just fine (HL 2 is generally low res, but I can still shoot at things) but i rarely play it. I like how my console can play any of the games put out for it and I don't have to worry about system requirements and all that other jazz. I suppose I'm just one of those people too who doesn't really care about HD right now. My 32" still makes things pop up on the screen, just like a HDTV will. Sure it doesn't look as crisp, but when I'm killing Covenant, I don't need crisp, I need a sticky bomb.

[The_Reckoning]

PC gaming is more expensive: there's no two ways about it.

However, PC gaming is much more communal. Think of forums (ah! even this one!). Do you get this on a console. Nope.

Websites, 3rd party mods, discussion, multiplayer.

And to the retard who says most 3rd party mods suck: they're FREE, what do you expect. Also, they're optional, you don't like, you don't play. Also, the cream of the crop are free and excellent. Think of Counter Strike. That was originally 3rd party.

Also, the reason I game on the PC is because console games are always just dumbed-down versions of their desktop counterparts.

I want my CivIII and Alpha Centauri, my Starcraft and my Rome: Total War, my Counter Strike: Source and my Unreal 2004, my Neverwinter Nights and my Diablo II, my World of Warcraft and my Guild Wars.

They're FAR superior to anything the console can offer, and that's why I prefer PC.

[bobbler]

I'm not quite sure I agree with that The_Reckoning. PC and Consoles are a different breed, Consoles have plenty of fun games that would never work on PCs (mainly because keyboard and mouse aren't optimal for all types of games). You won't get your Ninja Gaidens, your God of Wars, your Katamari Damacys, your Final Fantasys, your GTAs, etc. If anything, PCs and Consoles aren't replacements for each other, but suppliments.

[PIPBoy3000]

I'll ditto the "different breed" mantra. Consoles are designed for a single purpose - running games on a single piece of hardware. They can be cheaper and more focused, designed towards simplicity of use.

PCs are more expensive, though they can be used for many different things. Games are often a different experience with patches, expansions, mods, and trainers. These days I use my PC 90% of the time for things besides playing games. This weekend I surfed the web, watched movies, recorded my own movies, worked on a NWN mod, spent a couple hours on KotOR2.

For me, I like being a PC gamer. I'm willing to fiddle with driver upgrades and patches, as well as the costs. The flexibility makes it worthwhile.

[The_Reckoning]

Yeah, but I don't enjoy console type games like those. 'cept GTA, which works better on the PC.

[Pumped'Up]

considering the 360 is essentially an entry level PC, $1,710 is a frigg'n joke.

you xbox fanbois are better off buying a $200 "eMachine" for what the 360 can do.

[A-Team]

considering the 360 is essentially an entry level PC, $1,710 is a frigg'n joke.

you xbox fanbois are better off buying a $200 "eMachine" for what the 360 can do.
While I remain neutral on the Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo debate, I must remind everyone to take Pumped'Up's witty words with a grain of salt. He's obviously just trying to spark another useless flame war.

Really, why waste time and money on the 360? PS3 is superior in EVERY aspect.

Nintendo has Zelda and Mario to always make their systems special.

Microsoft doesn't have anything interesting. Halo...
Talk about relentlessly pathetic.

[Balthasar]

um... the Xbox 2 requires a HDTV?

If so, alot of gamers are fucked. I don't care for HDTV, I think it's too expensive for what it's worth and I for one am not buying a HDTV just to play an Xbox game (or PS3 if it requires it as well). PC gaming still > all

Uh, no, HDTV will not be required for either the PS3 or 360. They will just be standard, meaning if you want your games to look their best, you'll have to get an HD set.

[defiant]

I'm not quite sure I agree with that The_Reckoning. PC and Consoles are a different breed, Consoles have plenty of fun games that would never work on PCs (mainly because keyboard and mouse aren't optimal for all types of games). You won't get your Ninja Gaidens, your God of Wars, your Katamari Damacys, your Final Fantasys, your GTAs, etc. If anything, PCs and Consoles aren't replacements for each other, but suppliments.

Uh scuse me......but GTA actually plays ALOT better on a pc with a keyboard and mouse. And quite frankly there is nothing stopping every console game being ported to pc. The only reason a console game would not work well with a keyboard and mouse is if its poorly ported. :rolleyes:

[*Legion*]

Can we please not post moronic "articles" here on Evil Avatar? I'd like to keep this site as my main source of actual gaming NEWS.

[Citizen Philip]

Don't tell me a gaming rig is "less valuable/viable" because it's more expensive than a cheaper console. The business world runs on PC. Depending on your work and your career field - your PC can be an investment to increase your knowledge of a great many things that has NOTHING to do with games.

My PC is an investment: I play games, I learned software, I learned troubleshooting, I learned hardware. I learned enough from my PC without paying for college courses to get a decent job.

Maybe you weren't too keen with learning all the software/hardware that came with your PC: you've learned how to keep your drivers updated and reading specs off a box - or at least understanding the jist of it - you already hand and fist over someone who only has a console.

If you are reading this you have a PC or access to one and have the option to take all of your PC knowledge for granted, and not remeber the time when you didn't know how to do any of it. And if you really are reading this, remeber - you're an enthusiast, who cares/knows more about games than most of your friends.

[bobbler]

Uh scuse me......but GTA actually plays ALOT better on a pc with a keyboard and mouse. And quite frankly there is nothing stopping every console game being ported to pc. The only reason a console game would not work well with a keyboard and mouse is if its poorly ported. :rolleyes:


You're trying to tell me playing Mario (side scrollers, 3d platformers, etc) and those types of games works better with a keyboard? You have got to be kidding me. A keyboard/mouse is good for some things (RTS games, MMOs, FPS, etc), but a controller gives you far more comfortable control when controlling a character that can't easily be point-n-clicked or first person-ed.

Theres a reason playing old Nes/snes/n64/ps1 games on an emulator totally sucks, because the keyboard is nasty when it comes to most types of games on the console. Theres also a reason you don't see the same types of games on the PC as you do on consoles -- Its not because they just don't feel like it, hell Xbox1 gave PC essentially as a Free port but wasn't often used.

Don't try to tell me the keyboard, a peripheral used for typing (remember this), is better than something made for controlling a game -- often with comfort in mind. You may say that because you have gotten used to the keyboard, but functionally wise the controller is far more suited for a lot of games (some even argue FPS games also). Its the same thing as people who say dvorak keyboards suck, when they are far more suited for faster typing (where as qwerty was designed to slow down typers back when typewriters jammed easily at high speeds, I think).

[Taco]

Um, there are gamepads that are every bit as good as console gamepads for the PC. They even work with emulators!!!

In any case, mouse and keyboard is infinitley better than a gamepad.

[defiant]

You're trying to tell me playing Mario (side scrollers, 3d platformers, etc) and those types of games works better with a keyboard? You have got to be kidding me. A keyboard/mouse is good for some things (RTS games, MMOs, FPS, etc), but a controller gives you far more comfortable control when controlling a character that can't easily be point-n-clicked or first person-ed.

Yes I am telling you that. I have played plenty of emulated games including side scrollers and 3d platformers using a keyboard and am 100% more comfortable with using a keyboard.

And to put things in perspective, I do own a Wingman logitech gamepad which is an awesome gamepad for pc because its comfortable and has plenty of buttons, but hands down a keyboard owns a gamepad when it comes to precise and controlled movements.

Theres a reason playing old Nes/snes/n64/ps1 games on an emulator totally sucks, because the keyboard is nasty when it comes to most types of games on the console. Theres also a reason you don't see the same types of games on the PC as you do on consoles -- Its not because they just don't feel like it, hell Xbox1 gave PC essentially as a Free port but wasn't often used.

Again thats your opinion, and the opinion generally held by console fanboys. The reason that you dont see those types of games on pc has more to do with demographics, branding, exclusivity and marketing. Why you ask have we not seen metroid prime, mario, zelda, final fantasy, etc etc. Well the answer is simple....

(1) demographics - console games generally appeal to an audience that prefers simplicity over complexity. Theres no point porting these games to pc if they are not going to sell well.

(2) branding and exclusivity - sony, nintendo and *** would sell less consoles if they allowed their exclusive brands to be released on pc. How many more xbox 360's do you think *** would sell if they released halo 3 on pc at the same time. Or how many units would nintendo sell if instead of making zelda/metroid/etc exclusive for their system you could buy it for your pc.

(3) marketing and economics - simple fact of the matter is that publishers are likely to sell more copies of a game on console as opposed to pc

And your argument that not many games were ported from the xbox just completely stupifies me. There are so many games that were ported that I cant be bothered taking the time to list them all.

Don't try to tell me the keyboard, a peripheral used for typing (remember this), is better than something made for controlling a game -- often with comfort in mind. You may say that because you have gotten used to the keyboard, but functionally wise the controller is far more suited for a lot of games (some even argue FPS games also). Its the same thing as people who say dvorak keyboards suck, when they are far more suited for faster typing (where as qwerty was designed to slow down typers back when typewriters jammed easily at high speeds, I think)

Again all your opinion, but im sure more people would argue that a keyboard and mouse is far more precise than a gamepad any day of the week. How many competitive PC gamers have you seen using a gamepad? Exactly.....I guarantee that if you put a person on a gamepad up against a person on a keyboard and mouse in any FPS game that the person with the gamepad would get owned every single time.

[WileE.Coyte]

I spent ~$800 on mine a year ago. You can see it in the console setup thread. I only want tube televisions(best color out there right now), and my 32" 4:3 HDTV was larger in 16:9 mode than the 34" widescreen. Not only that but it supports all HD modes, yes, including 720p, and has a DVI port. For buying it a year ago I get a hell of a deal. But I had to do my resaerch, and fortunately research is easy to do.

Not only that but I play my PC on my HDTV. The games look gorgeous. So I totally went away with using computer monitors and just stick with my HDTV. Doom 3, HL2, NVW, etc...all look effin fantastic.

I'm not trying to be a dick or anything but here's a converter chart for 4/3 to 16/9.

http://cnet.com/4520-7874_1-5108580-4.html

32" turns out to be roughly 29". I have a 4/3 36" Sony Triniton, which converts to about a 33" 16/9. Sony makes a monster 40" 4/3 HDTV that converts to about 37", it's the biggest HDTV tube, built so far. Tube is definately the best way to go. The only thing that blow's is watching the anamorphic aspect ratio movies. Too much black,I hope the 360 or PS3 will be able convert from anamorphic to 16/9.

[bobbler]

Um, there are gamepads that are every bit as good as console gamepads for the PC. They even work with emulators!!!

In any case, mouse and keyboard is infinitley better than a gamepad.

The fact remains, you don't get the kind of games consoles have. As I said previously. There are no God of Wars, Ninja Gaidens, Marios, etc, etc.

You and Defiant must be the only two people alive who would rather play Mario with a keyboard than a controller.

[defiant]

The fact remains, you don't get the kind of games consoles have. As I said previously. There are no God of Wars, Ninja Gaidens, Marios, etc, etc.

You and Defiant must be the only two people alive who would rather play Mario with a keyboard than a controller.

Your argument has absolutely no logic, you point to a few "EXCLUSIVE" games as evidence that gamepads are better than a keyboard and mouse.

Well mario isnt available on the xbox and ps2......does that mean that xbox and ps2 gamepads are shit for playing mario?

God of Wars is not available for xbox and gamecube....does that the xbox and gamecube gamepads are shit for playing God of Wars?

Ninja Gaiden (the new version) is only available for xbox...does that mean the ps2 and gamecube gamepads are shit for playing ninja gaiden?

As you can see your argument is complete horse shit. Now please stop posting....I feel dumber every time I read one of your posts

[bobbler]

Yes I am telling you that. I have played plenty of emulated games including side scrollers and 3d platformers using a keyboard and am 100% more comfortable with using a keyboard.

This is not the general public's opinion of the situation, which supports what I said.


....

Again thats your opinion, and the opinion generally held by console fanboys. The reason that you dont see those types of games on pc has more to do with demographics, branding, exclusivity and marketing. Why you ask have we not seen metroid prime, mario, zelda, final fantasy, etc etc. Well the answer is simple....

(1) demographics - console games generally appeal to an audience that prefers simplicity over complexity. Theres no point porting these games to pc if they are not going to sell well.

(2) branding and exclusivity - sony, nintendo and *** would sell less consoles if they allowed their exclusive brands to be released on pc. How many more xbox 360's do you think *** would sell if they released halo 3 on pc at the same time. Or how many units would nintendo sell if instead of making zelda/metroid/etc exclusive for their system you could buy it for your pc.

(3) marketing and economics - simple fact of the matter is that publishers are likely to sell more copies of a game on console as opposed to pc

Its not just held by fanboys. Hell, I prefer PC gaming over Console gaming. Its the stance most people will take if you ask 1000 random gamers. Make a poll on these forums if you want (you'd be hard pressed to argue that this forum is only for consoles). You don't see those kinds of games because they are a different market, as you said, kind of. This doesn't support your view that a keyboard is better suited for gaming in general than a controller.


And your argument that not many games were ported from the xbox just completely stupifies me. There are so many games that were ported that I cant be bothered taking the time to list them all.

Now this is silly... there have been many times (magnitudes more) Xbox games that were not released to PC than there were. Why my statement stupifies you is beyond me. Most Xbox games did not get ported, infact I'd wager a guess that only the type of games suited for the PC got ported. FPS games, and action RPGs, and maybe a few others. You'd be better of naming the games that did than have me name the games that didn't -- my list would be pages longer than yours.



Again all your opinion, but im sure more people would argue that a keyboard and mouse is far more precise than a gamepad any day of the week. How many competitive PC gamers have you seen using a gamepad? Exactly.....I guarantee that if you put a person on a gamepad up against a person on a keyboard and mouse in any FPS game that the person with the gamepad would get owned every single time.

Yes, it is my opinion -- and the opinion of, dare I say, most gamers. People might argue its more precise, but precision != functionality. It would make more sense to claim that this is your opinion (implying that you are alone on this) than you stating this is my opinion -- if you understand what I mean. Maybe I'm wrong, but I have a feeling most people playing console games wouldn't want a keyboard and mouse for them (except when you want to chat, but that has little to do with the actual game usually) -- However, a lot of people playing PC games end up buying joypad thingies. That further proves my point.

This has gotten totally off topic, but I digress. Probably has something to do with the ridiculous nature of this story -- $1,710... I hope nobody actually believes that. It's a silly attempt at trying to get peoples attention by giving out information that isn't technically lying but isn't the entire truth -- nobody has to buy an HDTV and Surround speaker setup to enjoy Xbox2 (or PS3 for that matter). It's stupid.

[bobbler]

Your argument has absolutely no logic, you point to a few "EXCLUSIVE" games as evidence that gamepads are better than a keyboard and mouse.

Well mario isnt available on the xbox and ps2......does that mean that xbox and ps2 gamepads are shit for playing mario?

God of Wars is not available for xbox and gamecube....does that the xbox and gamecube gamepads are shit for playing God of Wars?

Ninja Gaiden (the new version) is only available for xbox...does that mean the ps2 and gamecube gamepads are shit for playing ninja gaiden?

As you can see your argument is complete horse shit. Now please stop posting....I feel dumber every time I read one of your posts

Splitting hairs...

[WileE.Coyte]

Um, there are gamepads that are every bit as good as console gamepads for the PC. They even work with emulators!!!

In any case, mouse and keyboard is infinitley better than a gamepad.

Yeah I'll give you FPS and RTS games but for Fighting games and platformer's? I'm positive I'd destroy anybody in a fighting game if I had a fighting stick or a D-pad and they were using a keyboard and mouse.

[defiant]

Splitting hairs...

of course it is :rolleyes:

[TRiLoGY]

I must of spent around £3,000 GBP on my pc over the past couple of years..

that approximates to $5,500 USD..

[Taco]

Platformers suck, always have and always will, its beyond me how they ever gained any measure of popularity. I used to like fighting games but the DOA games on the XBox and Soul Calibur 2 both bored me before a week. So i guess I have no interest in playing the type of games that work better with a game pad.

Sports games, actually, thats the only type of game out there I currently use a gamepad with.

[TRiLoGY]

Platformers suck, always have and always will, its beyond me how they ever gained any measure of popularity.

I guess you have not played any of the Ratchet & Clank Platformer Series then? Or Lego StarWars?

[Talanvor]

Taco, you might want to give Guilty Gear a spin for fighting. More traditional 2D style. Skill is more important, less button mashing.

[MosBen]

I think it's obvious that there are some people here that just don't like certain genres and that those happen to be the same genres that benfit the most from a game pad. That's fine, game pads may not be very useful to those people, but that doesn't mean they aren't the best tools for certain games.

[Phades]

The whole PC versus Console debate is worthless. You like what you like. Personally, if you only play on one or the other I feel sorry for you as a gamer. There are exceptional console exclusive games and there are exceptional PC exclusive games. As far as where the multiplatform titles are better, that's pure taste. I for one like most games better on consoles. Before Halo I would never had said this, but I now like FPS games better on the console as well. I like playing with a gamepad better, it's more comfortable to me. My couch is also more comfortable than my computer chair.

Conversely I could never imagine playing a RTS game on a console. The control wouldn't feel right. Same with a game like Rome:Total War or Civilization. It'd probably just feel too sluggish and slow.

But again, this is just the way I feel. I'm not trying to convince you and you're not going to convince me. So just give it up.

[MosBen]

Word, Phades.

[Taco]

For the record, I have owned at least 1 console from every generation dating back to the Atari. I just haven't enjoyed playing anything, including the AAA games, since the SNES. I try, they do nothing for me.

I'll tell myself not to get one from this coming generation, but the gamer in me will buy one when I can get a used one for less than 200, I'll try some games, and it will collect dust.

I have played through Halo1, just another clunky console FPS. With bad level design.

[RandomViolence]

Phades and Mosben, right on. Defiant, you completely missed the argument when you 'split hairs.' I'd rather play Mario on a console than a PC. Period. Just because it's not available for PC as the controls would SUCK, doesn't mean it's not available for other consoles for the same reasons. Try playing Chaos Theory on a console, and then a PC, the console experience is vastly superior, at least in single-player. Halo 2 should never be played with a keyboard and mouse. Someone stated earlier that precision isn't functionality. I wouldn't necessarily agree, but I would say that how an input device is precise is important. Keyboard and mouse do not always offer the kind of precision that many console games require, or are designed for.

[defiant]

Phades and Mosben, right on. Defiant, you completely missed the argument when you 'split hairs.' I'd rather play Mario on a console than a PC. Period. Just because it's not available for PC as the controls would SUCK, doesn't mean it's not available for other consoles for the same reasons. Try playing Chaos Theory on a console, and then a PC, the console experience is vastly superior, at least in single-player. Halo 2 should never be played with a keyboard and mouse. Someone stated earlier that precision isn't functionality. I wouldn't necessarily agree, but I would say that how an input device is precise is important. Keyboard and mouse do not always offer the kind of precision that many console games require, or are designed for.

No you missed the point. He pointed to a couple of exclusive games as proof that they werent ported to pc because the control scheme sucks. Well guess what.....they were not ported to any other console either because......they were "EXCLUSIVE TITLES". Fuck some people are thick. So let me spell this out for you.....even in a mythical galaxy far far away, where PC's have the most amazing control scheme ever conceptualized (lets assume you can control Mario by merely thinking his movements) , Mario still would not be released on the PC because IT IS EXCLUSIVE TO THE NINTENDO PLATFORM.

I have played every iteration of the splinter cell series on PC and have not had a problem with the control scheme and nor have I read of anyone having complaints about it in any forum or review.

And again, I laugh at people when they tell me things like a first person shooter should never be played with a keyboard and mouse. Turn off auto-aim and then come and tell me how much fun it is to play halo 2 on a gamepad.

sheesh

[MosBen]

Defiant: Sure, there are some games that work with both a k/m combo as well as a gamepad and Splinter Cell may well be one of those. On the other hand, there *are* genres that are better suited to gamepads and simply not liking a genre like fighting games or platformers, as seems to be the case with Taco, isn't a very convincing way to counter that reality.

And really "better" is a pretty subjective word. Using a mouse may be faster than moving an analog stick, but a mouse doesn't give me the feeling of pulling a trigger like a trigger does. A keyboard may have more buttons, but using it to walk forward isn't quite as organic feeling as pushing an analog stick ever so slightly forward to have your character inch along slowly. Holding a controller in your hand is much more similar to the feeling of holding a wheel in your hand while you're playing a racing game than a k/m combo, though obviously a racing wheel and pedals are the best.

Edit: And seriously, was it really necessary to resort to insults?