Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Really.... Desktops sales are declining faster than Davis Hasselhoff with a few drinks. Get the Clue. Look at your own statement. They don't get updated for years because they don't need too. Sony and Microsoft and Nintendo are not stupid... You think they would just sit on there ass and lose billions because there to lazy? no because they don't need too.
They don't get updated because it's more profitable for them to milk the same console for five years than it is to release three new consoles with better hardware in that same time frame.

And the reason it's more profitable for them to do that is because of the market they target which is either family oriented, or your average 13-22 year old guy who just likes to play some games without buying a screen or putting forth a solid investment.
You can play any game at 1920 X 1080 and look just fine on any big screen. Modern warfare 3 sold over a BILLION dollars BECAUSE of consoles. The most in History.
Yet you can't play any game at 1080p on any console with exception to a few games on PS3. In fact, Crysis 2 runs at a little less than 720p and consoles only ever get 25-30 FPS.
In the front room on the couch. Not huddled at a desk playing by yourself.
How exactly does playing at a desk rather than sitting on a couch mean you're "huddled" and "playing by yourself". You're not any less alone just because you're on a couch.
Look at any gaming store... the P.c. section is pitiful. while gaming consoles cover the whole store. Get a grip. Fact are Facts.
There's a couple of reasons for that. The first is PC gamers are buying the digital copies of games more and more, rather than going and buying physical copies -- it's just so much cheaper.

The second is that there is a section of games, controllers and consoles, and accessories, for each console of which there are three: XBox 360, PS3, and Wii. PC is only one section with just games, so of course it's going to be much smaller in comparison.
Who the hell wants to sink a grand into a behemoth power Hog with a 1000 watt power supply when it look hardly different than the HDTV you already own and only costs 250 bucks to do the same thing. Not to mention most monitors on peoples desktop only do 1920 x1080 or less anyway.... your theory that they will not blur the line... Already happened dude.
----------
Where'd you get this idea that you need to spend $1,000 to build yourself a rig and that it needs this monstrous 1000w power supply? You could build yourself a decent budget gaming rig for as little as $400 or $500 and with a 250-300w power supply, and that rig will perform a lot better than the XBox 360 whilst giving you the option to upgrade over time as well as access to game stores like Steam where you can get some games up to 75% off or more.

That's really why building a PC is cheaper in the long run. You just spend so much on games for the console yet you can get them so cheap on PC. (Not to mention accessories, controllers, XBox Live.)

Oh and it doesn't only cost $250, as I said above, and a console certainly won't come close to matching the quality of even a budget gaming rig. Just compare Crysis 2 on XBox 360 to Crysis 2 on the lowest settings on PC.
And MOST people don't update there computer for years... period.
MOST people aren't gamers. Most gamers however, do update parts in their system and usually at a small loss since you can sell your previous component.
 
U mad bro? :LOL
Read something like this first
http://pc.gamespy.com/articles/119/1196429p1.html

Yes current game consoles help many people to not regularly build/upgrade gaming PC anymore. But PC is dead for gaming console? Not even close. There will always market for hi-end gaming PC. Even me as Mac user can't deny that.

Not everyone fancy or satisfied with their MBA/MBP.
Compare Battlefield 3 on PC and consoles, and you'd know the difference. PC will still catch up sooner or later.

And me using 1000watt gaming PC? Nahh .. I use iMac for games, 300 watts, and can run Battlefield 3 with decent frame rates on 1080p. And still much better than gaming console can do today. You have to see to believe, by the way.

@davidgay .. wow we had the same link, thank you for that :)

I agree that it looks better to me and you... But 95% of people don't give a rats ass.... And just because it look a Little better does not justify a cost of a 300 dollar card. And People are not buying into it either...And I am talking to those people bitching about Apple not upgrading the Mac-pro with a damn 3 or 400 dollar video card when there probably not even gonna keep the Mac pro because of horrible sales. You use a 300 watt in a iMac... Your not who I was even talking about. Obviously. and I guess you both didn't read the One article you came up with.... or the Disclaimer in the article that is not based on ANY current sales but FUTURE predictions.... Also using a 6 year old game as a example. And I quote your article... "Spy Guy says: Predictions and modeling are speculative by their very nature, so the keeper is out on this one. However, one can probably assume that digital distribution and different payment methods will also be a key feature of next-generation consoles, meaning consoles could still retain their profit advantage in the future. Again you crack me up.

----------


Lol... you bother reading it? Guess I have to quote your article for you.

The graphics card developer looks into its crystal ball and offers some predictions...

"We all know that the PC is the most powerful gaming platform on earth, but it's been a long time since our trusty personal computer was also the most profitable"(such as World of Warcraft's subscription model, or the popularity of free-2-play games). A game thats 6 years old...
and the Disclaimer you didn't bother to read...

Spy Guy says: Predictions and modeling are speculative by their very nature, so the keeper is out on this one. However, one can probably assume that digital distribution and different payment methods will also be a key feature of next-generation consoles, meaning consoles could still retain their profit advantage in the future. Should I underline the "Retain there Profit Advantage part?

----------

U mad bro? :LOL
Read something like this first
http://pc.gamespy.com/articles/119/1196429p1.html

And something to think about:
http://www.gamingtruth.com/2011/10/20/the-ultimate-showdown-pc-vs-console-gaming/

Yes current game consoles help many people to not regularly build/upgrade gaming PC anymore. But PC is dead for gaming console? Not even close. There will always market for hi-end gaming PC. Even me as Mac user can't deny that.

Not everyone fancy or satisfied with their MBA/MBP.
Compare Battlefield 3 on PC and consoles, and you'd know the difference. PC will still catch up sooner or later.

And me using 1000watt gaming PC? Nahh .. I use iMac for games, 300 watts, and can run Battlefield 3 with decent frame rates on 1080p. And still much better than gaming console can do today. You have to see to believe, by the way.

EDIT:
@davidgay .. wow we had the same link! thank you for that :)

"The things you own end up owning you.
It's only after you lose everything that you're free to do anything" Like the quote though bro...
 
I agree that it looks better to me and you... But 95% of people don't give a rats ass.... And just because it look a Little better does not justify a cost of a 300 dollar card. And People are not buying into it either...And I am talking to those people bitching about Apple not upgrading the Mac-pro with a damn 3 or 400 dollar video card when there probably not even gonna keep the Mac pro because of horrible sales. You use a 300 watt in a iMac... Your not who I was even talking about. Obviously. and I guess you both didn't read the One article you came up with.... or the Disclaimer in the article that is not based on ANY current sales but FUTURE predictions.... Also using a 6 year old game as a example. And I quote your article... "Spy Guy says: Predictions and modeling are speculative by their very nature, so the keeper is out on this one. However, one can probably assume that digital distribution and different payment methods will also be a key feature of next-generation consoles, meaning consoles could still retain their profit advantage in the future. Again you crack me up.

----------



Lol... you bother reading it? Guess I have to quote your article for you.

The graphics card developer looks into its crystal ball and offers some predictions...

"We all know that the PC is the most powerful gaming platform on earth, but it's been a long time since our trusty personal computer was also the most profitable"(such as World of Warcraft's subscription model, or the popularity of free-2-play games). A game thats 6 years old...
and the Disclaimer you didn't bother to read...

Spy Guy says: Predictions and modeling are speculative by their very nature, so the keeper is out on this one. However, one can probably assume that digital distribution and different payment methods will also be a key feature of next-generation consoles, meaning consoles could still retain their profit advantage in the future. Should I underline the "Retain there Profit Advantage part?

You asked for a solid proof that gaming PC market is still increasing since PS3 and Xbox360 was launched. Well there it is.. yes .. it's still below consoles, but INCREASING indeed. It's not prediction when you see the graph from 2008 up till 2011. That's your proof right there

And people who care enough to buy a MacPro is not 95% or most people. They are demanding person. So yes, GPU upgrade is matter for them.
 
You asked for a solid proof that gaming PC market is still increasing since PS3 and Xbox360 was launched. Well there it is.. yes .. it's still below consoles, but INCREASING indeed. It's not prediction when you see the graph from 2008 up till 2011. That's your proof right there

And people who care enough to buy a MacPro is not 95% or most people. They are demanding person. So yes, GPU upgrade is matter for them.

Apple is not going to sink money into a line that does not sell worth a crap Now. Your also comparing from 2008. And a console has a way longer life span than a computer for the same money... and there not. A computer is at least twice the cost. Another flaw in your article. You can play Modern warfare 3 on a 5 year old console and it still looks damn good at 1920x1080 try that on a desktop... won't happen. Period. and you didn't even address the point. I said Desktops are on the decline. Just because P.C. gaming has gained SOME traction in the last 3 years.... its gained it on Laptops NOT desktops. And your stats don't even distinguish between Discrete graphics and Built on graphics. And Nobody is upgrading Laptop Video cards. So again your article does not connect the dots correctly. "resurgence of PC gaming is mainly due to the growth in digital distribution, as well as the success of new payment models (such as World of Warcraft's subscription model, or the popularity of free-2-play games) and they are using Free games and WOW as a source? Lol... Not to mention the increase in the last 3 years is minimal. and yet another part below the graph you fail to see that blows the graph out of the water...and I quote your article yet again...
"If only developers would take advantage of the PC's alleged "900%" extra power."
 
Apple is not going to sink money into a line that does not sell worth a crap Now. Your also comparing from 2008. And a console has a way longer life span than a computer for the same money... and there not. A computer is at least twice the cost. Another flaw in your article. You can play Modern warfare 3 on a 5 year old console and it still looks damn good at 1920x1080 try that on a desktop... won't happen. Period. and you didn't even address the point. I said Desktops are on the decline. Just because P.C. gaming has gained SOME traction in the last 3 years.... its gained it on Laptops NOT desktops. And your stats don't even distinguish between Discrete graphics and Built on graphics. And Nobody is upgrading Laptop Video cards. So again your article does not connect the dots correctly. "resurgence of PC gaming is mainly due to the growth in digital distribution, as well as the success of new payment models (such as World of Warcraft's subscription model, or the popularity of free-2-play games) and they are using Free games and WOW as a source? Lol... Not to mention the increase in the last 3 years is minimal. and yet another part below the graph you fail to see that blows the graph out of the water...and I quote your article yet again...
"If only developers would take advantage of the PC's alleged "900%" extra power."
You claim a lot of things but where is your proof of what you say?

You can't play MW3 at 1080p on any console. Check out a game like Crysis 2 or The Witcher 2 on XBox 360 and then compare it against said game on PC, on lowest settings and highest. The PC wins out even on low.

You can build a budget gaming PC for as little as $500 which is twice the price of the XBox 360, yet you save in the long run due to the steep prices of games on console.

And you're wrong when you say a console has a longer lifespan. I could hold on to that budget gaming PC for five years or more whilst playing new titles on low which will still look better than on console (unless a new one is released). Plus, I can simply upgrade my graphics card two years or three years along the line and voila I can play on medium or high settings again, at 1080p.
 
Apple is not going to sink money into a line that does not sell worth a crap Now. Your also comparing from 2008. And a console has a way longer life span than a computer for the same money... and there not. A computer is at least twice the cost. Another flaw in your article. You can play Modern warfare 3 on a 5 year old console and it still looks damn good at 1920x1080 try that on a desktop... won't happen. Period. and you didn't even address the point. I said Desktops are on the decline. Just because P.C. gaming has gained SOME traction in the last 3 years.... its gained it on Laptops NOT desktops. And your stats don't even distinguish between Discrete graphics and Built on graphics. And Nobody is upgrading Laptop Video cards. So again your article does not connect the dots correctly. "resurgence of PC gaming is mainly due to the growth in digital distribution, as well as the success of new payment models (such as World of Warcraft's subscription model, or the popularity of free-2-play games) and they are using Free games and WOW as a source? Lol... Not to mention the increase in the last 3 years is minimal. and yet another part below the graph you fail to see that blows the graph out of the water...and I quote your article yet again...
"If only developers would take advantage of the PC's alleged "900%" extra power."

Your increase in P.C. gaming is due to online free games that require No Discrete graphics at all. I.E. Bejewled ...Majong and crap like that.Your increase will not and does not translate into More sales of graphics cards or Desktops. In fact it shows the opposite... People are getting cheaper and more frugal. Free online games have exploded in use while ON a p.c. This is also MAINLY due to Facebook and all the crap people play on their...Period. In that same time frame Nvidia has gained market share... Don't be so Nieve to think That means REAL games on the P.C. have gone up. That study including free2play games is so erroneous its not even funny.
 
First of all About 65% of all computers sold today are not even desktops to begin with... they are Laptops. Crossfire is pointless in a laptop. Now take that 35% of computers sold as a Desktop and only about 10% of those are bought for Gaming. If you can't notice a trend here its that Gaming Desktops are seriously on the decline. You wonder why Apple has Fat stacks of cash... because they know what people want. They pay attention to trends... I love Gaming as much as the next guy... But it is not making Financial sense anymore. Very few people will EVER change or upgrade their graphics card. And honestly if I was gonna spend 300 bucks for gaming... It would be for a PS3 or xbox. And most people would do the same. 95% of people buying computers are not Nerds or Geeks... They could give a crap less how many FPS they get... or spend 300 bucks on a lousy 30% increase in gaming that is not even noticeable in regular use of a computer...Mac or P.C. Apple is just not gonna beat a dead Mule... It makes No sense to Invest in Gaming cards like that anymore. This is why Nvidia has expanded to motherboards, built on graphics and chipsets. And why ATI sold out and AMD is building more SOC and built on graphics solutions... Sorry to be the Bearer of truth. Really? your gonna vote me down? Lol... Guess the truth hurts.

God damn, you are paranoid. I wasn't even at my computer when you wrote all that drivel. And you managed to quote me TWICE.

Is everything alright upstairs?
 
You claim a lot of things but where is your proof of what you say?

You can't play MW3 at 1080p on any console. Check out a game like Crysis 2 or The Witcher 2 on XBox 360 and then compare it against said game on PC, on lowest settings and highest. The PC wins out even on low.

You can build a budget gaming PC for as little as $500 which is twice the price of the XBox 360, yet you save in the long run due to the steep prices of games on console.

And you're wrong when you say a console has a longer lifespan. I could hold on to that budget gaming PC for five years or more whilst playing new titles on low which will still look better than on console (unless a new one is released). Plus, I can simply upgrade my graphics card two years or three years along the line and voila I can play on medium or high settings again, at 1080p.

Anyone can play MW3 on ps3 or xbox360 at 1080p... And show me a 500 dollar pc you built 5 years ago that plays new games worth a ****.... Lol. and that 5 year old monitor.. good luck with that. not to mention your 5 year old version of windows and your old ram. can you play MW3 on that. NO...And did I ever in any of my messages say a console looks better? didn't think so. I said most people don't give a **** about the difference. meanwhile I have had a ps3 for 5 years that cost me 500 bucks. and it still plays MW3 at 1920x1080. Yes a console does have better longevity. Not to mention The Blue ray that your pc never had....
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Anyone can play MW3 on ps3 or xbox360 at 1080p... And show me a 500 dollar pc you built 5 years ago that plays new games worth a ****.... Lol. and that 5 year old monitor.. good luck with that. not to mention your 5 year old version of windows and your old ram. can you play MW3 on that. NO...And did I ever in any of my messages say a console looks better? didn't think so. I said most people don't give a **** about the difference. meanwhile I have had a ps3 for 5 years that cost me 500 bucks. and it still plays MW3 at 1920x1080. Yes a console does have better longevity. Not to mention The Blue ray that your pc never had....

http://www.videogamer.com/ps3/battl..._higher_res_than_modern_warfare_2_on_ps3.html

Edit: I was just going to post the link, but I think it's best if I "try" to explain it to you. Your TV is 1080p, the PS3 is capable of displaying 1080p so long as it's displaying something that doesn't require too much graphic power, but MW3 does not run at 1080p. It runs at 720p 30 frames per second, which is a higher resolution than part 2 which didn't even run at 720p, because the PS3 couldn't handle it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
God damn, you are paranoid. I wasn't even at my computer when you wrote all that drivel. And you managed to quote me TWICE.

Is everything alright upstairs?

Didn't know I was supposed to wait for your ass to be in front of your computer to respond... of course you would think its drivel. it makes sense. Paranoid? funny how you try to insult instead of just commenting on the subject.
 
Didn't know I was supposed to wait for your ass to be in front of your computer to respond... of course you would think its drivel. it makes sense. Paranoid? funny how you try to insult instead of just commenting on the subject.

Do you have any other explanation for assuming i downranked your comment when I was away?

In reference to your 'insult' comment.... pot, kettle.
 
http://www.videogamer.com/ps3/battl..._higher_res_than_modern_warfare_2_on_ps3.html

Edit: I was just going to post the link, but I think it's best if I "try" to explain it to you. Your TV is 1080p, the PS3 is capable of displaying 1080p so long as it's displaying something that doesn't require too much graphic power, but MW3 does not run at 1080p. It runs at 720p 30 frames per second, which is a higher resolution than part 2 which didn't even run at 720p, because the PS3 couldn't handle it.

So show me your screen shot of your five year old computer running MW3.... and it runs at 60fps

----------

Do you have any other explanation for assuming i downranked your comment when I was away?

In reference to your 'insult' comment.... pot, kettle.

I was not referring to you downgrading it...sorry. I should have clarified.
 
So show me your screen shot of your five year old computer running MW3.... and it runs at 60fps

----------



I was not referring to you downgrading it...sorry. I should have clarified.

I don't have a 5 year old computer, but looking at the system requirements it looks like a 5 year old computer can definitely play the game.

OS: Windows® XP/ Windows® Vista / Windows® 7
Processor: Intel® Core™ 2 Duo E6600 or AMD Phenom™ X3 8750 processor or better
Memory: 2 GB RAM
Graphics: Shader 3.0 or better 256 MB NVIDIA® GeForce™ 8600GT / ATI® Radeon™ X1950 or better
DirectX®: DirectX® 9.0c or later
Hard Drive: 16 GB free hard drive space
Sound: DirectX® 9.0c or later
Internet: Broadband connection and service required for Multiplayer Connectivity. Internet connection required for activation.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A406 Safari/7534.48.3)

DroidRules said:
Tired of eating leftovers? Get a PC. ;)
Amen brother!! Sorry but Mac's just aren't gaming machines people.


How about a $200-$250 GPU that is on a 1:1 price ratio for the Mac? I don't need a $500+ card just something modern without an inflated Mac price tag.
You paid a premium for a Mac, why not pay premium for a vid card for that mac?
OMG! Apple is copying Windows.
Not copying, just trying to catch up.... not doing a very good job IMHO but hey, it's a start.
Interesting. I have a 2007 MacPro 8 core 3ghz and just upgraded to a nice ATI 4870 1gb x2 with 2 46" TV's and it runs my Windows 7 Games really well. So I am still trying to figure out where the left overs are? Oh an I am also running Windows 8 DP.
Didn't you buy a mac to run X.... why would you wan't to run PC software on a Mac? Grass not greener?
So you are using a PC thus confirming the statement in the original post.
Bingo!
Pretty much this.
If you are a gamer and you use macbook to play games, then all I can say is that you are an idiot.
I won't call them an idiot but I will laugh at them....
Why not have both?
Why spend the money on both when you can build a PC for half the $$ that will do what both machines will do?
Keeping the same price tag for 2 years old hardware is just fishy.
So yes, if I really need a "Pro" workstation today, I'd get a PC instead. Vote me down you blind fanboys!!
Oh, don't worry, they will. FB can't stand being told the truth.

Sorry guys you can say how great your Mac is and how much better it is than a PC..... Nope, sorry, go to jail and don't pass go. Sure they're great for some things but when it comes to gaming it just can't hold a candle to a PC. PLUS why are all you guys running horrid windows on your mac? I always love when you talk crap about PC's yet mirror windows on your machine. IF it was so great you wouldn't need to run windows. Just saying.

Ouch.
I'm not a gamer and so couldn't give a rats about video drivers. I love my mac as its more reliable, nicer to work on, and looks better in my desk.
Built in software for my photos/movie making.

I alas run windows for one government program fort work. Beauty is that when windows messes up (and it does), I just restore from a snapshot. (I use parallel)

Other than that software. My windows is never used.

Gamers get really screwed with all computers as every latest game requires the latest graphics card to run in the best mode.
Thankfully, my sons Xbox is more than enough for me. ;)
 
Your full of crap... Anyone can play MW3 on ps3 or xbox360 at 1080p... And show me a 500 dollar pc you built 5 years ago that plays new games worth a ****.... Lol. and that 5 year old monitor.. good luck with that. not to mention your 5 year old version of windows and your old ram. can you play MW3 on that. NO...And did I ever in any of my messages say a console looks better? didn't think so. I said most people don't give a **** about the difference. meanwhile I have had a ps3 for 5 years that cost me 500 bucks. and it still plays MW3 at 1920x1080. Yes a console does have better longevity. Not to mention The Blue ray that your pc never had....
Excuse me? I am not. You need to chill out for goodness sakes.

First of all I'm talking about building a budget gaming rig NOW not five years ago. It's impossible for me to know the prices to build such a computer that long ago. However, the 8800 GT is a four nearly five year old graphics card and it's able to play games at 720p better than the XBox 360.

Second, you still haven't shown me your proof that desktop sales are declining. You've also failed to address the fact that in the long run you save more money going with a PC than a console.

What you said was, that you can't tell the difference between the graphics on a console and on a PC which absolute rubbish. Even on low settings the difference is noticeable, yet alone on the highest settings.

It seems you are right about Modern Warfare 3, but only that game. Most are at 720p. Try Crysis 2, or The Witcher 2.
 



I love my mac as its more reliable, nicer to work on, and looks better in my desk.
Built in software for my photos/movie making.



It's not inherently more reliable. OSX has a finicky file system, spotlight bugs, and a bunch of quirks. Windows has more malware, but avoiding it is possible. The reliability gap is often perceived when comparing to bad Windows boxes. Apple has hardware problems too at times. I've had problems with every Apple laptop I've ever owned going back to the G4, and I'm extremely careful with them. They run really well for two to three years, then take a dive. I don't update laptops as frequently, because I don't use a laptop for work purposes (that could always change one day).
 
First of all About 65% of all computers sold today are not even desktops to begin with... they are Laptops. Crossfire is pointless in a laptop. Now take that 35% of computers sold as a Desktop and only about 10% of those are bought for Gaming. If you can't notice a trend here its that Gaming Desktops are seriously on the decline. You wonder why Apple has Fat stacks of cash... because they know what people want. They pay attention to trends... I love Gaming as much as the next guy... But it is not making Financial sense anymore. Very few people will EVER change or upgrade their graphics card. And honestly if I was gonna spend 300 bucks for gaming... It would be for a PS3 or xbox. And most people would do the same. 95% of people buying computers are not Nerds or Geeks... They could give a crap less how many FPS they get... or spend 300 bucks on a lousy 30% increase in gaming that is not even noticeable in regular use of a computer...Mac or P.C. Apple is just not gonna beat a dead Mule... It makes No sense to Invest in Gaming cards like that anymore. This is why Nvidia has expanded to motherboards, built on graphics and chipsets. And why ATI sold out and AMD is building more SOC and built on graphics solutions... Sorry to be the Bearer of truth. Really? your gonna vote me down? Lol... Guess the truth hurts.

They have stacks of cash because the grossly overcharge for their products and nimrods like you and me pay that premium. THAT'S why they have tons of cash, not because they "give us what we want". If they gave the general consumer what they wanted they would corner the market at a resonable price. As it stands what's their laptop/desktop sales numbers? Plus where did you get your % numbers? Not saying they're not correct but I just want to know if you know what you're talking about or just talking out your butt.
 
It's not inherently more reliable. OSX has a finicky file system, spotlight bugs, and a bunch of quirks. Windows has more malware, but avoiding it is possible. The reliability gap is often perceived when comparing to bad Windows boxes. Apple has hardware problems too at times. I've had problems with every Apple laptop I've ever owned going back to the G4, and I'm extremely careful with them. They run really well for two to three years, then take a dive. I don't update laptops as frequently, because I don't use a laptop for work purposes (that could always change one day).

... They still MAKE windows fanboys?
 
Your full of crap... Anyone can play MW3 on ps3 or xbox360 at 1080p...

I'm sorry mate, just because your HDTV show "1080p" sign on your console doesn't mean it runs games on 1080p all the time. In fact, there are only a very very few PS3 games that runs on 1080p natively, let alone Xbox360.

Have some reading here: http://www.gameranx.com/updates/id/...-3-runs-at-sub-hd-resolution-on-ps3-xbox-360/

Here is a list of a few PS3 games with native 1080p resolution:
http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1372598

The rest of it? Well they're just upscaled to fit 1080p TV.
And don't tell me "99% of people don't give a rat ass about games native resolution on consoles as long as it looks good"

Fact is fact nonetheless. And I'm sorry for being a bit off topic here.
 
I'm not sure what you all arguing about. Being a gamer means you have to spend money. Period. This is what it always been, and this is how is going to be in the future, either you are on a desktop PC, on a Mac or a console. Hardware companies are in such agreements with game makers. They push each other's requirements, so they force gamers to spend money in new hardware and/or software in order to catch up.

Consoles: Yes, they have longevity in comparison to the PC, but games are more expensive. So, the game price is the one threating your wallet.

PCs running Windows: They have cheaper games but they need constant upgrades. All the time. And every now and then, upgrading ONLY the graphics card is not an option. So, please, spare me the nonsense "300 $ every five years". You know it's not like that at all. Add to this, the extra power they need (translation: more money), and the fact that you need extra time to maintain them healthy (translation: even more money).

PCs running Linux: Sorry, not even an option. They are not threathing your wallet, but they don't play games either.

Mac: Not a real gaming platform yet, and since things are changing fast on that matter, I'll wait to see how it shapes before I even give an opinion. Having said that, I really like the Wine wrappers projects allowing you to play windows games without even installing windows. I guess we'll have to see how it goes.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A406 Safari/7534.48.3)

thekev said:



I love my mac as its more reliable, nicer to work on, and looks better in my desk.
Built in software for my photos/movie making.



It's not inherently more reliable. OSX has a finicky file system, spotlight bugs, and a bunch of quirks. Windows has more malware, but avoiding it is possible. The reliability gap is often perceived when comparing to bad Windows boxes. Apple has hardware problems too at times. I've had problems with every Apple laptop I've ever owned going back to the G4, and I'm extremely careful with them. They run really well for two to three years, then take a dive. I don't update laptops as frequently, because I don't use a laptop for work purposes (that could always change one day).


It is from my experience.
It's a choice anyway and wasn't my point. My point was that for me as a non gamer, these graphics cards mean nothing to me and I pity too end gamers who constantly need to spend money to have the best graphics.

Casual gamers will be happy with a console which lasts a long time.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.