Every time again ... E3 rant topic.

I cringe everytime someone uses the term "casual gamer" unironically or takes the PC Master race thing seriously.

Considering its demonstratable that PC can handle better games, and games are literally downgraded to fit onto consoles...PC master race is a thing.
 
The PC Master races thing is mostly a joke we PC users make to piss off console fanboys. Anyone who takes it seriously is probably just a kid trying too hard.

Yeah a PC can be built to be more powerful than a console, but gaming seldomly is the focus of a good PC build unless it's built by a rich slacker and even then most games don't even use up all that power unless they are poorly optimized.
 
The PC Master races thing is mostly a joke we PC users make to piss off console fanboys. Anyone who takes it seriously is probably just a kid trying too hard.

Yeah a PC can be built to be more powerful than a console, but gaming seldomly is the focus of a good PC build unless it's built by a rich slacker and even then most games don't even use up all that power unless they are poorly optimized.
You can make a PC as powerful as a console for cheaper...And for the same price as a console, more powerful.

Not to mention they're 100 times more versitile.
 
Yeah, but that has zero effect on gaming because the vast majority of games are made for consoles first, we are a secondary market at best at this point (altho this means that Xbox exclusives now will come to PC too, which eh... maybe it will be cool if western game design gets off Valium in the near future).

So the "PC Masterbate" thing is just a little joke, a jab at console fanboys. Nobody actually thinks it's serious except for try hards.
 
PC master race is a thing
As an ironic joke. Heck, even the originator of the label meant for it to be a jab at the "master race" concept and not to be some rallying cry for try-hard people who did not get the joke:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/art...Discussion-Political-Correctness-vs-Language-

Sure, PCs can be powerful (I PC game over consoles all the time) but most games nowadays don't actually use that power (worse, some dumb down ports to match consoles instead) and most people would rather purchase consoles for playing the kind of games they play (multiplayer sport games, certain exclusives etc.). Consoles are and still will be regarded as the main mode of playing conventional games to the general audience which is a shame.
 
I don't really have anything against consoles. I'm primarily a PC player, but I wouldn't mind getting a console.
Thing is with PC - it's cheaper, offers more functions and can be easily upgraded. Not to mention games run better on it. Simple fact is that for less money you can get a PC that outclasses console's power and people who are pissed of because of downgrading or dumbing down have every right to be so - except that their anger amounts to nothing because consoles dominate the market, so why bother. I mean, I was pissed off when The Witcher 3 got downgraded/parts of it cut because consoles couldn't run it, but what could I change about it?

Besides, best games nowadays are indies which rarely need an expensive machine, so there's that too. Console exclusives are overrated for the most part and a large percentage of them eventually get ported. And in the end, if you have cash, it's no shame to actually get a console. It's not a sin.


That being said, somebody mentioned casual gamers as being a cringy term. Why?
 
You know that Fallout 4 made way more money selling on consoles than PC right? So that still confirms what Atomkilla was saying.
The main gaming market are consoles and PC is the minority.

That's because PC is the ubermensh held down by the untermensh.
 
That's because PC is the ubermensh held down by the untermensh.


Irrelevant.

You need to understand that it's quantity that matters in video game industry, as much as any other industry. Quality is important, but nowhere near as quantity - that is, the amount sold. Fallout vs Fallout 4 comparison is wrong because those are two games from very different periods in the industry, the first being from the time when the demands of the customers were way different than they are today, and more importantly, when the customer base was much smaller.

In any case, quantity is the most important factor here, and numbers are with the consoles, not personal computers. PC, regardless of how advanced or versatile, is the minority here. For the time being, console gaming dictates the business practice and that's the end of it.
 
Irrelevant.

You need to understand that it's quantity that matters in video game industry, as much as any other industry. Quality is important, but nowhere near as quantity - that is, the amount sold. His Fallout vs Fallout 4 comparison is wrong because those are two games from very different periods in the industry, when the demands of the customers were way different than they are today, and more importantly, when the customer base was much smaller.

In any case, quantity is the most important factor here, and numbers are with the consoles, not personal computers. PC, regardless of how advanced or versatile, is the minority here. For the time being, console gaming dictates the business practice and that's the end of it.

Quantity matters if you're a fatcat who wants to line your pocket.

Quality matters if you're a consumer.

Being a consumer, quality matters, ergo PC>Console plebs.
 
Quantity matters if you're a fatcat who wants to line your pocket.

The fatcats being those who head the industry and dictate the way it evolves, yes, quantity matters and is important to everyone who is even remotely interested in games since the amount of income titles make determines how future titles will be developed, marketed and sold - and that affects everyone, from top gaming company CEO to a lowly basement dweller.

Quality matters if you're a consumer.

Exactly, but as you are obviously forgetting, everybody is a consumer - PC or console.
What one determines as quality is largely based on their subjective appreciation of the product. We here at NMA consider Fallout 4 to be a shitty product that lacks quality. Millions of players worldwide don't - they find that the quality of Fallout 4 isn't lacking. Therefore, the game sells well - quantity, and therefore, financial success.

Being a consumer, quality matters, ergo PC>Console plebs.


This statement makes zero sense. For one, PC doesn't necessarily equate to quality, as you have a large number of PC games that are nothing more but pure shit. PC also has a greater variety of games and selection which - as you already know - never sells near as well as most console titles.


So PC fails at quantity, since AAA titles on PC never sell as well as on consoles (and AAA titles and their developers/publishers hold the market by large), and PC doesn't necessarily mean quality in any way. In the end, it's all up to personal preference. Simple fact is that more people buy consoles and play on consoles regardless of quality of the product, so you should do a reality check and stop raging about a thing in which you have absolutely no control or importance whatsoever.


The only real advantage PC has in the gaming market is the indie niche. However, that it is a niche by itself makes it a very small element in the overall industry, at least at the moment.
 
Being a consumer, quality matters, ergo PC>Console plebs.
If that was true everyone would be playing on PC and not consoles. Lo and behold, console game sale numbers beat PC game sale numbers to the punch every single time.
If quality is what matters then why are consumers spending way more money on the least quality product?
Atomkilla is right, quantity is what matters in the gaming industry of today.

I would prefer have good quality games, but I also have eyes to see what has been happening since the early 2000's.
 
Back
Top