SONY-Microsoft.com


Consoles may always be catching up to PCs, but you'll be paying roughly £800-£1000 for a hardcore PC, which would buy you a console, a pretty nice tv, and some games.
What is with this zombie dead horse?

Consoles do not warp the laws of economics. Console hardware as a rule will consistently be more expensive per performance metric then mainline computer hardware from a Bill of Materials standpoint. It's custom hardware and the extra R&D is not as spread out as it is in mainline computing. If a console manufacturer decides to sell a console at below the cost of the Bill of Materials, it is because they expect to make the difference up in extra royalties on games, which will be on top of the developer and publisher's cut.


Ergo the only way the sentiment that a console is more cost effective then mainline computer hardware, in serving the functions mainline computer hardware is well suited to handle is if it is a utter commercial failure and the company needs to kill the entire project in response. Ergo Nintendo making the point to have features and concepts divergent from normal computer capabilities at the time they're produced, and often manages to maintain this through an entire product cycle. Ergo it utterly dominates in sales versus set tops whose only stand out factor is the rare exclusive titles that tend to be FPSes that have to be played on a gamepad. Analog joysticks being something that's well known to be a good control if the object is to keep moving in complex ways, but being poorly suit to precise location adjustments which is a mouses area of strength.


The cheapest LED LCD HDTV on Newegg from a reputable brand is a 19" 1333x768 200USD model from Toshiba. A solid Viewsonic 21.5" 1920x1080 LED LCD monitor is around 160USD, and it's TV equivalent is 250USD. The lack of a tuner and other factors insure this secondary hardware is cheaper as a rule.


Consoles have a lot of good attributes, but being power competitive or a more economical system is not one of them. Nor is a non-existent guarantee things will actually "just work." Nor is gamepads at all relevant to a discussion between PC and consoles unless the console controller actually has something that the diverse field of PC gamepads doesn't offer. Of the current offerings the Wii is very strong in this respect, its competition is not.


Consoles don't have bloated OSes, that's a distinct advantage. A PC with the specs of any of the current gen consoles and a "proper" OS would not be capable of what consoles are pushing out. No way in hell, because the OS is sucking up too many resources. That's the biggest strength of consoles, and why a PC has to be more powerful to run the same thing (assuming a PC port was made). So until we get a common PC OS that's stripped down of everything but what's needed to make and play games, PC gaming will be less efficient and unable to realize the full potential of the hardware.


Also, coding practices are horrible today. Get a team together that's good with assembly and today's hardware could perform at least 20% better.
You're right! PCs need to do everything and consoles only play games, mainly.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
How many modern PC games run in Linux with WINE (assuming proper hardware)?

I doubt any do, since DX11 hasn't been reverse engineered yet. I think they're up to almost 100% XP compatibility rate, DX9. Maybe. The best option for running Windows games is simply to run Windows, sadly.
 
How many modern PC games run in Linux with WINE (assuming proper hardware)?

I doubt any do, since DX11 hasn't been reverse engineered yet. I think they're up to almost 100% XP compatibility rate, DX9. Maybe. The best option for running Windows games is simply to run Windows, sadly.
Very few games are DX11 exclusive, I've found. The ones that do usually have a DX10 fallback, I've found, and many even fall to DX9.
 
Back
Top