In terms of technology, PC gaming will always be way ahead of consoles, (and top end PCs by leaps and bounds, no argument).
This will continue to be true, even with next gen consoles, both of which are effectively affordable mid-range gaming PCs, in standardised living-room friendly formats.
That said, the standardisation and ease of use of consoles seems to count for a lot of us, and certainly help developers optimise games for the majority of players, as with console gaming there are only 2 major platforms with set limitations, as opposed to the scalable nature of PCs, and the many levels of quality on different systems.
Quite how TLOU looks as good as it does on a PS3, with only a total of 512mb split memory (and a Cell processor) goes a long way towards proving how developer expertise counts.
Cost and ease of use are also factors, the first 3 PCs I've owned, were ones I built. They rocked, and though its not rocket science, it takes some time & effort. Downside is you'll end up with a beast that will need to be upgraded in 2 years if you want to make the most of the latest games, and will cost you for the upgrades (and cost you more if you have to upgrade more to accept the upgrades ) The Console life-cycle negates this. You pays yer price and plays yer games (for at least 5+ years).
If you want the best possible cutting edge looking games, can afford it and put the work in, get a PC.
If you don't want a box that sounds like an Apache gunship taking off when you turn it on, costs you £900, needs constant adjustment and eventual upgrades, stick to consoles.
I wasn't going to post in this thread, because I try to avoid threads that look like a manure plant next to a windmill farm, but I just wanted to say that the bold part is wrong. Not to say anything against you and all that, just making an observation on why this incorrect sentiment gets spread all over the place, even by other PC gamers..
I don't understand why people think this. It's like, you pay $500 with a console and are "done with it", but if you pay $900 for a PC that's considered high-end or upper middle, that it'll explode from the games that come out next year, or even the year after that?
You don't have to upgrade a PC every year to keep playing the latest games. That's not a real thing. Consoles don't have that as an advantage over PCs, because the truth is you can play the games the entire console generation long, if you just turn down settings. That's what the sliders are there for. They don't exist on console versions, but that doesn't mean that the console versions are then running on "Ultra" settings with Shadows on and SSAO and AA and 4k textures. The console versions are running on probably the medium settings, with shadows/antialiasing turned "off", and lowered resolutions @ about 30FPS as a best case scenario. Your $900, 5 year old computer would be able to do that as well, maybe even a little more.
It's just that people think that if you have a PC, and the "Ultra" slider is there, you HAVE to use it. Or that if you're on PC, and your screen size is 1920x1080, you HAVE to use that resolution. Then, people go, "for that reason I'm gonna get a box that's locked to Medium Settings, with Shadows and AA off, and 720p or less resolution"... Why not just restrict your games to that resolution on your PC, until you can upgrade during the 5 years consoles take to catch up?
It's exactly like buying the next console iteration, except with a PC, you never lose backwards compatibility with your games, there are tons of mods and edits people make to games to make them more enjoyable, there's no extra fee for online service and no company can ever implement one (in a way that you'd be forced to use it), you never get forced into buying a product you don't want (Kinect 2.0 status), and you have the ability for structured and gradual upgrades, that can be the difference between $600 across 5 years, or $600 all at once.
There's no such thing as "having to upgrade every 3 months or the games stop working". PCs are more cost effective than consoles in the long run. Especially when ignoring everything I said, you just factor in that the games get cheaper faster on the PC, that there's no fee requirement for any extra services to play your PC games, and your entire library remains backwards compatible, forever, so no buying new versions, or paying for a service that gives your own games back to you over time.
The only thing consoles have over PC is a better PR team, so they can trick people into thinking things like yearly upgrades are a necessity. Also, just to be petty, my PS3 is way louder than my PC... Talk about a gunship.
Edited by AllenKS, 21 October 2013 - 08:29 PM.