You can upgrade graphics, enhance game mechanics, and a wider range of titles to play. Are the possibilities endless on a PC? Can you give a reason why PC is not the master race? We are here to settle it once and for all.

Resolutions higher than 1080 higher frame rates than 60 (trained or use to it can notice up to 100 FPS just Google it) we have mods and community made patches when the developers don't bother to fix issues. Multi monitors, we have muic internet and even other games while we game you get none of that with consoles.
We always get the newest hardware which breeds innovation unlike consoles, that uses CPUs and GPUs series made from AMD back in the early 2010s I mean a 28nm 1.6 duo core AMD processor, a low 800MHZ GPU and 8GB of RAM and that's in the PS4 which has better specs than the Xbone! You can make a console killer that plays a steady 1080p at 60FPS for 800 to 1200 dollars.

Of course if you want to game at max you want an Intel CPU and a NVIDIA GPU maybe in SLI so you can max everything out. Don't go with AMD they're a sinking ship.

If anyone is interested this is my Next build already got half of it already saved up.

At 6/30/16 01:27 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote: You can upgrade graphics, enhance game mechanics, and a wider range of titles to play. Are the possibilities endless on a PC? Can you give a reason why PC is not the master race? We are here to settle it once and for all.

No. Upgrading is too expensive (seriously, every PC gamer could buy either the Nvidia or AMD hardware which costs like around $200-$5000). Buying consoles don't need upgrades (unless if you're in dire of more hardware memory space).

At 6/30/16 03:17 PM, Tony-DarkGrave wrote: Resolutions higher than 1080 higher frame rates than 60 we have mods and community made patches when the developers don't bother to fix issues. Multi monitors, we have muic internet and even other games while we game you get none of that with consoles.

Those are all valid reasons why a PC could be the best.

We always get the newest hardware which breeds innovation unlike consoles, I mean a 28nm 1.6 duo core AMD processor, a low 800MHZ GPU and 8GB of RAM and that's in the PS4 which has better specs than the Xbone! You can make a console killer that plays a steady 1080p at 60FPS for 800 to 1200 dollars.

Making your own PC gives you more flexibility than a mass produced console.

Of course if you want to game at max you want an Intel CPU and a NVIDIA GPU maybe in SLI so you can max everything out. Don't go with AMD they're a sinking ship.

AMD has not been good in sometime.

At 6/30/16 03:17 PM, Tony-DarkGrave wrote: If anyone is interested this is my Next build already got half of it already saved up.

Looks like it will be a great PC. Waiting and saving up is always the hardest part.

The PC doesn't cost that much for upgrades once you put in the first investment and you have the most recent hardware (IE your motherboard) everything else can last 5 to 6 years I know people rocking GTX 770s in SLI and still going strong. A good graphics card goes for $400 to $600 bucks and a good Processor $200 to $300. Harddrives and RAM (if your using the recent DDR4) and the case and power supplies can carry over.

It's mostly the motherboard for recent chipset and memory updates processors and graphics cards you upgrade the most and putting away 50 or 100 a month doesn't take that long to get it. Consoles are garbage even the current generation cant get 1080P at a constant 60FPS and that's the been the PC MINIMUM for the last 3 years in the next year or two its going to be 4K for us PC players.

The pc is the best DSB consoles are locked down with outdated AMD hardware that's 4 to 5 years old and by the time developers make games and the end of that consoles generation they get bogged down with limited hardware requirements unlike the PC.

this isn't even debatable.

a pc has the potential to be more powerful than any console. case closed.

At 6/30/16 04:54 PM, DCXME01 wrote: No. Upgrading is too expensive (seriously, every PC gamer could buy either the Nvidia or AMD hardware which costs like around $200-$5000). Buying consoles don't need upgrades (unless if you're in dire of more hardware memory space).

PCs can be more expensive. You are the first vote for consoles.

At 6/30/16 05:25 PM, Tony-DarkGrave wrote: The PC doesn't cost that much for upgrades once you put in the first investment and you have the most recent hardware everything else can last 5 to 6 years I know people rocking GTX 770s in SLI and still going strong. A good graphics card goes for $400 to $600 bucks and a good Processor $200 to $300. Harddrives and RAM and the case and power supplies can carry over.

That is true. If your start off good, PC upgrades can be cheaper to keep up.

It's mostly the motherboard for recent chipset and memory updates processors. Consoles are garbage even the current generation cant get 1080P at a constant 60FPS and that's the been the PC MINIMUM for the last 3 years in the next year or two its going to be 4K for us PC players.

PCs are more advanced than consoles. Consoles are mass produced mini computers that can only perform basic functions.

LOL. PC Master Race "gamers"

What an actual oldschool gamer wants -- challenging, fun games. Who cares about graphics.
What a newschool PC Master Race "gamer" wants -- easy games that have good graphics and require ridiculous hardware resources and where majority of dominance in online play is based on who's running the better gaming rig (read, who threw the most $$$ at their setup), rather than actual skill.

Newsflash! Games requiring more and more out of the hardware don't make them better games.

Consoles are better because the games are better, not because the hardware is better. Just because you're throwing more money at something doesn't mean it's better for gaming. The true masters optimized that stuff for very primitive machines back in the day anyway, whereas game designers these days are typically sloppy. They should concentrate on better optimization rather than trying to squeeze every little graphical enhancement out of the games these days.

Then again there's a huge divide between newschool and oldschool. I'll say this. The oldschool gamers would not consider this new batch to be gamers at all. It used to be being a gamer meant something, and not just anyone who played video games was a gamer. Now everyone just calls themselves gamers. Gaming has been going downhill since at least the mid-90s.

Let's just say if you can't handle Arcade-hard you really shouldn't call yourself a gamer. And, no, not "NES-hard". What the newschool types call "NES-hard" we just called regular difficulty. If you wanted actual hard games you played at the arcade.

At 6/30/16 05:32 PM, Tony-DarkGrave wrote: The pc is the best DSB consoles are locked down with outdated AMD hardware that's 4 to 5 years old and by the time developers make games and the end of that consoles generation they get bogged down with limited hardware requirements unlike the PC.

PC does seem to be superior to consoles. Consoles do have limitations.

At 7/1/16 04:50 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote:

At 6/30/16 05:32 PM, Tony-DarkGrave wrote: The pc is the best DSB consoles are locked down with outdated AMD hardware that's 4 to 5 years old and the end of that consoles generation they get bogged down with limited hardware requirements unlike the PC.

PC does seem to be superior to consoles. Consoles do have limitations.

At 6/30/16 06:28 PM, kanef wrote: they get shit console ports every now and then
but the games made with it in mind are way better anyways

You are saying that PC has more games than a console? That counts as a vote for PC.

PC is earning points and will be declared the Master Race soon.

At 6/30/16 08:50 PM, TOXlCITY wrote: this isn't even debatable.
a pc has the potential to be more powerful than any console. case closed.

Another vote for PC being the Master race.

At 7/1/16 01:57 PM, NeonSpider wrote: What an actual oldschool gamer wants -- challenging, fun games. Who cares about graphics.
What a newschool PC Master Race "gamer" wants -- easy games that have good graphics and require ridiculous hardware resources and where majority of dominance in online play is based on who's running the better gaming rig, rather than actual skill.

It is true that old school are more skilled than the newer ones.

Consoles are better because the games are better, not because the hardware is better. Just because you're throwing more money at something doesn't mean it's better for gaming. The true masters optimized that stuff for very primitive machines back in the day anyway, whereas game designers these days are typically sloppy. They should concentrate on better optimization rather than trying to squeeze every little graphical enhancement out of the games these days.

These are some facts that support consoles over PC.

Let's just say if you can't handle Arcade-hard you really shouldn't call yourself a gamer. And, no, not "NES-hard". What the newschool types call "NES-hard" we just called regular difficulty. If you wanted actual hard games you played at the arcade.

Arcades had to more difficult , so the player would die. The more you die, the more tokens you had to use. It was all about making money.

At 7/1/16 01:57 PM, NeonSpider wrote: What an actual oldschool gamer wants -- challenging, fun games. Who cares about graphics.

Everyone has cared about graphics, always. People argued over which systems offered the best graphics from day one. The only people who aren't excited about what more power can do for gaming in people who arbitrarily decided they only care about one era of gaming and have to justify why their tastes are better than everyone else's. Gaming has always been about the craftmanship of designing gameplay evolving with the artistry of designing them and the technology to power it. Who didn't play Megaman back in the day and get excited at the though of it looking better, having bigger worlds, and not slowing down when you have too many enemies on the screen?

What a newschool PC Master Race "gamer" wants -- easy games that have good graphics and require ridiculous hardware resources and where majority of dominance in online play is based on who's running the better gaming rig (read, who threw the most $$$ at their setup), rather than actual skill.

This is such a dumb mash up of points that I don't even know where to begin disseminating it. The assumption that even a even a small majority of PC gamers have cutting edge hardware is outright wrong. And if there's any proof that someone with a $1000+ rig has more than the slightest advantage over someone who can run the game well with the graphics turned down than I'd like to see it.

Newsflash! Games requiring more and more out of the hardware don't make them better games.

But it does let people make different games. Just because you want to play the same games over and over doesn't mean that technology shouldn't advance and devlopers shouldn't try to discover new genres and types of games.

Consoles are better because the games are better, not because the hardware is better.

Man, PC and consoles are almost the same fucking thing at this point. If you weren't stuck in 1989 you might have noticed. The number of games that are exclusive to either are shrinking. Sony and Microsoft both revealed versions of the PS4 and XBox One with better hardware so now console players can now spend tons of money to get more graphical horsepower if they want.

Then again there's a huge divide between newschool and oldschool. I'll say this. The oldschool gamers would not consider this new batch to be gamers at all. It used to be being a gamer meant something, and not just anyone who played video games was a gamer. Now everyone just calls themselves gamers. Gaming has been going downhill since at least the mid-90s.

Let's just say if you can't handle Arcade-hard you really shouldn't call yourself a gamer. And, no, not "NES-hard". What the newschool types call "NES-hard" we just called regular difficulty. If you wanted actual hard games you played at the arcade.

I'm 30, I've been playing video games for as long as I remember, I still play games on my NES, and that may be the most insanely elitest thing I've ever heard. If someone is mildly interested in games and just wants a simple experience, then that's super-cool, they can be a gamer too. It's not a fucking badge you have to earn by being the King of Kong. The existence of easy games for the masses doesn't mean that there aren't games released that rank among the hardest fucking games I've ever played.

At 7/1/16 05:05 PM, kanef wrote:

At 7/1/16 04:53 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote: You are saying that PC has more games than a console? That counts as a vote for PC.

seems like it. i count the spectrum and C64 as PCs too

PC is doing well is the quest to become the Master Race.

Probably, mostly because PS4 and Xbone are basically PC knockoffs with barely any games that AREN'T also on PC.

At 7/2/16 12:55 AM, SlivvySaturn wrote: Probably, mostly because PS4 and Xbone are basically PC knockoffs with barely any games that AREN'T also on PC.

It does seem that PC has many benefits and reason why it is considered the Master Race.

At 6/30/16 01:27 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote: You can upgrade graphics, enhance game mechanics, and a wider range of titles to play. Are the possibilities endless on a PC? Can you give a reason why PC is not the master race? We are here to settle it once and for all.

Suddenly, is this a response to my PC "Master Race" post I made a couple days earlier?

At 7/30/16 12:27 PM, DCXME01 wrote:

At 6/30/16 01:27 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote: You can upgrade graphics, enhance game mechanics, and a wider range of titles to play. Are the possibilities endless on a PC? Can you give a reason why PC is not the master race? We are here to settle it once and for all.

Suddenly, is this a response to my PC "Master Race" post I made a couple days earlier?

This is the original topic about PC's status of Master Race. Is it or is it not?

At 7/30/16 01:43 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote:

At 7/30/16 12:27 PM, DCXME01 wrote:

At 6/30/16 01:27 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote: You can upgrade graphics, enhance game mechanics, and a wider range of titles to play. Are the possibilities endless on a PC? Can you give a reason why PC is not the master race? We are here to settle it once and for all.

Suddenly, is this a response to my PC "Master Race" post I made a couple days earlier?

This is the original topic about PC's status of Master Race. Is it or is it not?

Well, I simply made the "Master Race" in quotes because it's not really that great. So it's the status.

At 7/30/16 02:03 PM, DCXME01 wrote: Well, I simply made the "Master Race" in quotes because it's not really that great. So it's the status.

I understand. This is the topic to list pros and cons. Give us some cons , if you think it's not really that great.

At 7/30/16 05:03 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote:

At 7/30/16 02:03 PM, DCXME01 wrote: Well, I simply made the "Master Race" in quotes because it's not really that great. So it's the status.

I understand. This is the topic to list pros and cons. Give us some cons , if you think it's not really that great.

Well, besides the annoying Elitists that they really hate consoles...
-Little to no love for Mac users (Self-explanatory. Hardware is kinda inferior, imo)
-Compatibility or technical issues (Example: You're unable to play DOS games without DOSbox or older Windows games without some sort of compatibility patch)
-Risk of getting malware n' shit (depends if you have antivirus software)
-Plethora of inferior PC ports (Arkham Knight is one such example)
-Plethora of mediocre indie games (Take a good look at Steam's Greenlight section)
-iTunes updates (just an excuse)
-Godforsaken Multiplayer hackers
-Forcing to use clients these days (Steam, Origin, UPlay...).

At 7/30/16 04:11 PM, TheQuietGamer wrote: I don't believe in a "master race." Each option has their pros and cons. People just need to play whatever they want and shut up.

Its okay if you are neutral. Let others decide the status of PC.

At 7/30/16 04:11 PM, TheQuietGamer wrote: I don't believe in a "master race." Each option has their pros and cons. People just need to play whatever they want and shut up.

I was about to say the same thing, except with an added "you do you booboo."

At 7/30/16 10:10 PM, DCXME01 wrote: Well, besides the annoying Elitists that they really hate consoles...

-Little to no love for Mac users (Self-explanatory. Hardware is kinda inferior, imo)

People still use Macs?

-Compatibility or technical issues (Example: You're unable to play DOS games without DOSbox or older Windows games without some sort of compatibility patch)

That can be a hassle.

-Risk of getting malware n' shit (depends if you have antivirus software)

Malware is the worst.

-Plethora of inferior PC ports (Arkham Knight is one such example)

That is never fun.

-Plethora of mediocre indie games (Take a good look at Steam's Greenlight section)

You could just avoid them.

-Godforsaken Multiplayer hackers

Hackers try to ruin everything

-Forcing to use clients these days (Steam, Origin, UPlay...).

Can't avoid those clients.

If you think that PC is the best console in every way, then there is reason to believe you might also think that Lamborghinis are the best cars in every way.

This is a do-not-reply post. Do not reply to it.

At 7/31/16 03:00 PM, Oddlem wrote:

At 7/30/16 04:11 PM, TheQuietGamer wrote: I don't believe in a "master race." Each option has their pros and cons. People just need to play whatever they want and shut up.

I was about to say the same thing, except with an added "you do you booboo."

Glad that we can all have a civil discussion. Sometimes, you get rabid fans and name calling.

For certain genres like FPS/RTS/flight-sims, PC has always been the master platform. I kinda think PC is the overall master platform now (with Steam I just don't see myself buying any more consoles in the future), but that it's a more recent development. If you go back about a decade or so, it was tough to find a PC controller that worked halfway decently for a reasonable price. My workaround at that time was a PS2-to-USB converter unit to play emulators with, and even that thing was pretty buggy. The indie market wasn't really much of a thing yet, and a lot of console games didn't have PC ports. Not to mention no digital distro. I think that even aside from all the hardware-supremacy angles, that's been the biggest game-changer (no pun intended).

At 7/31/16 05:09 PM, FinaLee wrote: If you think that PC is the best console in every way, then there is reason to believe you might also think that Lamborghinis are the best cars in every way.

That is an interesting point.

This is a do-not-reply post. Do not reply to it.

Posts were made to be replied to. lol

PC is master race in theory; but since most game developers make their games with shitty console hardware in mind, you're not always able to get the most out of your high-end PC hardware.

At 7/31/16 05:09 PM, FinaLee wrote: If you think that PC is the best console in every way, then there is reason to believe you might also think that Lamborghinis are the best cars in every way.

★ +1