you can tell the difference in input delay easily by just playing jedi fallen order on console vs on pc. The consoles have very very noticeable input lag vs pc. The Wii U was so infamous for input lag on the tablet controller as well.
There are couple of game what do have 120fps/hz option, but the selection is small and they frame rate isn't stable locked 120fps. The only thing what comes in my mind is maybe he thinks because consoles can now hit 120fps sometimes they do above, sure if you unlock the frame rate cap of 120 maybe you would see frame rate between 90-130fps but there aren't even TV's what support frame rates above 120 and even the 120hz TV's are ridiculously expensive.
yea with the average melee or project M player being well many pro's range from 20's to freaking 30 but i know smash players can hit some teen age as fortnite's player base does kinda funny.
@@thajazzzprovidaaa26Some even claim the next gen consoles can hit 4k 120 fps, but to be real, in most of the games they don't even hit 120 fps at 1080p and 4k is 4 times the pixel count of 1080p.
Consoles always have a limit to how much performance you can get out of them. They have never matched what PC can do and will most likely never be able to match them. And Sony has the balls to introduce a price hike nearly 2 years into the life cycle? I think now is the time for me to get onto PC and never look back to my consoles.
correction; there was ONCE when consoles could do more than a PC; consoles were the first to have true 3D models in games and good performance at the same time. a PC could only have "3D" models which were 2D models with different sprites at different angles. after that one time, they have been worse xD
@@MiaSangold No, wtf, the first 3d game ever created was Maze War, created for the system called "Imlac PDS-1", it was literally a pc exclusive (a pc of the time, which is nothing like those of now, but it was a pc), and the referent in 3d is wolfenstein, a game created mainly for pc and ported for ps3 and og xbox 17 YEARS AFTER IT WAS RELEASED ON PC
@@onezcer2938 that's not 3D, that's "3D". It's all 2D made to look like it has depth. It's an illusion. There's a HUGE difference between that, and true 3D. I was saying (and you can look it up) consoles were the first with TRUE polygonal 3D models for characters and environment. I, Robot (1984 arcade cabinets) So actually yes, I was wrong about the first to have true 3D, but it's still technically correct because an arcade cabinet is not a home PC.
@@MiaSangold If you are talking about "true 3d" the first is Descent in 1994 and next quake, another exclusive of PC, in both cases the first 3D game in history was on pc...
The consoles will try to and aim for as best they can spec wise, but they will always seek to be "fair" price wise but..... they deff won't stay "cheap" (lookin at you sony) Then dev's gotta work with the dev kits and fine tune the game for the pre set hardware of these consoles, while all PC's are different as we can change settings when we want to games adjust for us on first boot up normal PC things. It's so cute seeing console players learn terms PC gamers known for years to sony & microsoft using them in marketing then all think consoles are PC's to dare think pre set consoles can beat dedicated GPU's of all things! I was playing fortnite alright with a RX 550, to better on a used 580 with more head room as i got a better CPU (R5 3600) and 16 GB of RAM from having only 8 GB, consoles can't (or maybe will try to be modular soon) but consoles are a "all in one" hub for media and gaming while PC's are well PC's for work, play and it all! Shadows are GPU heavy as their consistently rended so main reason for competitive games most turn them off or if you seek to make your game look pretty many turn them up just a bit. Then Antialiasing, FXAA and all those are for graphical fidelity if your rig can handel them.
He chose 240 and 360 FPS because that is how high the highest end monitors go in terms of refresh rate. So he is only half way wrong. But IRRC ASUS revealed a 500Hz monitor a few months ago?
It can do 120 when not connected to a display. also if you are treating/ buying PC like consoles then yes you are expected to see 3000+ dollars but that is not how you do Pc gaming. you buy if you feel like it, i do that. first i bought a case+mobo+CPU/APU run them for a while till you save some money for a GPU. run them for a while which probably a year or 2 and you can change CPU if you see low enough frames that your GPU is starving. storage solutions are cheap enough. for example i went from a kaveri series AMD APU to now using a Ryzen 5 5600x with a RX580 and last spending was just shy under 400$ in 8 years.
You can build easy a 950-1000 dollar pc and play better than the consoles, spending 3000+ is a fkn waste of money, if you spend 3000+ and need to change something in less than 10 years you litheraly build something wrong. For arround 980-1050 (depend of the parts) you can build 3060 ti-12400f...and playing much better than the consoles. What is the reasson of payin +3000 dollars on a pc if you want to play better than the consoles? If you need to work with it I understand, but for normal use and for gaming with settings to the maximum you do not need 3000 dollars, and if what you want is exactly what the consoles give you, need even less, with a 3060 you go over performance (not by much but it already performs better than the 3 consoles under the same settings). I love consoles, I think it's a wonder what you get to do with them and their hardware considering how limited it usually is and how soon it usually falls short, but NEVER, in any generation has needed a pc of $ 3000 to play better than consoles, with a pc of 650-700 you played better than the ps4 by far, even today that pc performs better than the ps4 and xbox one, and currently for more or less than 980 you have much better performance than ps5 and series x. To say that you need +3000 is to have a lot of ignorance about hardware, it is not bad not to know something specific or to be wrong in something, nobody knows everything and it is totally fine. But do not say that you need 3000 dollars to have a pc only like the consoles, because not even putting a 3080ti you get to that price with a complete build
Well the consoles can do 120 fps. Some games are 4k. Ori and will of wisps. Etc. Now pc outperforms them but the dollar for performance is mind boggling. Of course a ps5 or xbox can't outdo a 3090 or 4090. Those are thousands of dollars.
I'm sure most console games that are "4k" is upscaled 4k which isn't real 4k. the PS5 and series X can't outdue a 3070 to even a 3060 nice you jump to the most expensive cards for whatever reason.
@@M4TTYN well technically no they don't do 100% 4k bc no TV does full 4k. But I'm just saying the console are equivalent to 2080 or 2060 super. Which can easily go over 120 fps. Lower graphic settings
Yeah all of these videos make irrelevant arguments and points, they shouldn't be arguing on a technical level. The biggest argument for choosing a console over a pc would be that PCs are for nerds and virgins, yet none of these 'console' guys ever make that point. If you're trying to convince people to go console, you should really stress the point that the guys who go out of their way to build a gaming pc are generally nerds. Consoles are just for regular guys who want a simple, single purpose machine to chill out and play games on once in a while and don't have time to get into any nerd stuff. These 'console' guys just get into a bunch of irrelevant technical stuff nobody cares about, none of them focus on the main selling point of console gaming, it's gaming for people who aren't nerds and virgins. I have no doubt that pc gaming is superior by almost every metric, but it's just not viable if you're not a nerd type guy.
Joefromseattle is wrong he is so old school stuck in his ways that he is mad that pc gaming is dying out because everybody is moving from a open ecosystem to a close ecosystem because better graphic Fidelity better battery life. Look at Nintendo switch. Gabe newell is already moving to a close ecosystem with the steam deck. Tesla proved it Apple proved it and gabe Newell .
what on earth you going on about, the switch is a Nvidia shield with a nintendo logo on it a weak tablet that plays smash. "pc gaming is dying out because everybody is moving from a open ecosystem to a close ecosystem because better graphic Fidelity better battery life." the switch last like 4 - 5 hours or so on BOTW iirc or if your lucky the steam deck last around 3 or so given the game. "Tesla proved it Apple proved it and gabe Newell" Tesla "proved" what exactly? and apple can prove nothing that anti consumer company and nice left that last part unanswered what did gaben prove?
@@M4TTYN gabe Newell is about to launch a arm chip set with better battery life like the Nintendo switch and arm is better than x86. Apple prove it. have you seen the rtx 4090 taking as much power as a Tesla model 3. Arm can hit rtx 4090 level of performance at 100 to 200 watts tdp. I’m talking about arm chipsets and the company that control the ecosystems gives the consumer more with less freedom.
This guy got his first PC for gaming a week before making this video lol
you can tell the difference in input delay easily by just playing jedi fallen order on console vs on pc. The consoles have very very noticeable input lag vs pc. The Wii U was so infamous for input lag on the tablet controller as well.
Call us when you console plebs get minesweeper.
They can. It mostly depends on the game and dev optimization.
no they cant
It seems that after snorting a line of coke he began to make a video...that would explain many things
I'm going to be a REAL adult, and play BOTH melee and Multiverse. What's you gonna do about it, Joe?
Haha, when you said "what does that have to do with anything?", I said the exact same thing out loud at the exact same time, haha.
There are couple of game what do have 120fps/hz option, but the selection is small and they frame rate isn't stable locked 120fps. The only thing what comes in my mind is maybe he thinks because consoles can now hit 120fps sometimes they do above, sure if you unlock the frame rate cap of 120 maybe you would see frame rate between 90-130fps but there aren't even TV's what support frame rates above 120 and even the 120hz TV's are ridiculously expensive.
console peasants logic is that you need to buy monitor as part of the PC build, but for some reason, its doesnt include it on console gaming,....
I regularly play at 240fps, and several of my games are capable of going well beyond that. (Not that my monitor can manage more than that)
"Grow up and play melee like an adult"
More like a redditor and/or discord moderator more like.
yea with the average melee or project M player being well many pro's range from 20's to freaking 30 but i know smash players can hit some teen age as fortnite's player base does kinda funny.
Final Fantasy XV and VII remake did not have many graphical settings you can change. Kind of a trend with some PS to PC ports.
They can barely do 60 fps, they can't do 120 fps, let alone more than that.
They can do 120 fps at 1440p.
@@patrickmoore4651 depending on the game though.
@@thajazzzprovidaaa26 Yeah. The issue is people listening to bullshit marketing hype and ignorant falsehoods from fanboys. It's pathetic.
@@thajazzzprovidaaa26Some even claim the next gen consoles can hit 4k 120 fps, but to be real, in most of the games they don't even hit 120 fps at 1080p and 4k is 4 times the pixel count of 1080p.
Consoles always have a limit to how much performance you can get out of them. They have never matched what PC can do and will most likely never be able to match them. And Sony has the balls to introduce a price hike nearly 2 years into the life cycle? I think now is the time for me to get onto PC and never look back to my consoles.
correction; there was ONCE when consoles could do more than a PC; consoles were the first to have true 3D models in games and good performance at the same time. a PC could only have "3D" models which were 2D models with different sprites at different angles. after that one time, they have been worse xD
level up my dude! and also start emulating nintendo games (cue salty nintendo fanboys here) but gaming is gaming no matter where you do it!
@@MiaSangold No, wtf, the first 3d game ever created was Maze War, created for the system called "Imlac PDS-1", it was literally a pc exclusive (a pc of the time, which is nothing like those of now, but it was a pc), and the referent in 3d is wolfenstein, a game created mainly for pc and ported for ps3 and og xbox 17 YEARS AFTER IT WAS RELEASED ON PC
@@onezcer2938 that's not 3D, that's "3D". It's all 2D made to look like it has depth. It's an illusion. There's a HUGE difference between that, and true 3D. I was saying (and you can look it up) consoles were the first with TRUE polygonal 3D models for characters and environment.
I, Robot (1984 arcade cabinets)
So actually yes, I was wrong about the first to have true 3D, but it's still technically correct because an arcade cabinet is not a home PC.
@@MiaSangold If you are talking about "true 3d" the first is Descent in 1994 and next quake, another exclusive of PC, in both cases the first 3D game in history was on pc...
nice video and btw you're aim is god tier
Don't hate on Tom And Jerry. lol
This guy's voice is like nails on a chalkboard
The consoles will try to and aim for as best they can spec wise, but they will always seek to be "fair" price wise but..... they deff won't stay "cheap" (lookin at you sony)
Then dev's gotta work with the dev kits and fine tune the game for the pre set hardware of these consoles, while all PC's are different as we can change settings when we want to games adjust for us on first boot up normal PC things. It's so cute seeing console players learn terms PC gamers known for years to sony & microsoft using them in marketing then all think consoles are PC's to dare think pre set consoles can beat dedicated GPU's of all things!
I was playing fortnite alright with a RX 550, to better on a used 580 with more head room as i got a better CPU (R5 3600) and 16 GB of RAM from having only 8 GB, consoles can't (or maybe will try to be modular soon) but consoles are a "all in one" hub for media and gaming while PC's are well PC's for work, play and it all!
Shadows are GPU heavy as their consistently rended so main reason for competitive games most turn them off or if you seek to make your game look pretty many turn them up just a bit. Then Antialiasing, FXAA and all those are for graphical fidelity if your rig can handel them.
Oh FFS, can we ban that guy from owning a PC? Is that a thing? It should be. Just like vote him out of his windows license LOL😂
He chose 240 and 360 FPS because that is how high the highest end monitors go in terms of refresh rate. So he is only half way wrong.
But IRRC ASUS revealed a 500Hz monitor a few months ago?
Betraying the Martyrs did it better. Jkjk
they can't do 120 fps haha maybe if they have a not AAA but with AAA you can't go 120fps
It can do 120 when not connected to a display. also if you are treating/ buying PC like consoles then yes you are expected to see 3000+ dollars but that is not how you do Pc gaming. you buy if you feel like it, i do that. first i bought a case+mobo+CPU/APU run them for a while till you save some money for a GPU. run them for a while which probably a year or 2 and you can change CPU if you see low enough frames that your GPU is starving. storage solutions are cheap enough.
for example i went from a kaveri series AMD APU to now using a Ryzen 5 5600x with a RX580 and last spending was just shy under 400$ in 8 years.
You can build easy a 950-1000 dollar pc and play better than the consoles, spending 3000+ is a fkn waste of money, if you spend 3000+ and need to change something in less than 10 years you litheraly build something wrong. For arround 980-1050 (depend of the parts) you can build 3060 ti-12400f...and playing much better than the consoles. What is the reasson of payin +3000 dollars on a pc if you want to play better than the consoles? If you need to work with it I understand, but for normal use and for gaming with settings to the maximum you do not need 3000 dollars, and if what you want is exactly what the consoles give you, need even less, with a 3060 you go over performance (not by much but it already performs better than the 3 consoles under the same settings). I love consoles, I think it's a wonder what you get to do with them and their hardware considering how limited it usually is and how soon it usually falls short, but NEVER, in any generation has needed a pc of $ 3000 to play better than consoles, with a pc of 650-700 you played better than the ps4 by far, even today that pc performs better than the ps4 and xbox one, and currently for more or less than 980 you have much better performance than ps5 and series x. To say that you need +3000 is to have a lot of ignorance about hardware, it is not bad not to know something specific or to be wrong in something, nobody knows everything and it is totally fine. But do not say that you need 3000 dollars to have a pc only like the consoles, because not even putting a 3080ti you get to that price with a complete build
Well the consoles can do 120 fps. Some games are 4k. Ori and will of wisps. Etc. Now pc outperforms them but the dollar for performance is mind boggling. Of course a ps5 or xbox can't outdo a 3090 or 4090. Those are thousands of dollars.
I'm sure most console games that are "4k" is upscaled 4k which isn't real 4k. the PS5 and series X can't outdue a 3070 to even a 3060 nice you jump to the most expensive cards for whatever reason.
@@M4TTYN well technically no they don't do 100% 4k bc no TV does full 4k. But I'm just saying the console are equivalent to 2080 or 2060 super. Which can easily go over 120 fps. Lower graphic settings
Yeah all of these videos make irrelevant arguments and points, they shouldn't be arguing on a technical level. The biggest argument for choosing a console over a pc would be that PCs are for nerds and virgins, yet none of these 'console' guys ever make that point. If you're trying to convince people to go console, you should really stress the point that the guys who go out of their way to build a gaming pc are generally nerds. Consoles are just for regular guys who want a simple, single purpose machine to chill out and play games on once in a while and don't have time to get into any nerd stuff. These 'console' guys just get into a bunch of irrelevant technical stuff nobody cares about, none of them focus on the main selling point of console gaming, it's gaming for people who aren't nerds and virgins. I have no doubt that pc gaming is superior by almost every metric, but it's just not viable if you're not a nerd type guy.
Joefromseattle is wrong he is so old school stuck in his ways that he is mad that pc gaming is dying out because everybody is moving from a open ecosystem to a close ecosystem because better graphic Fidelity better battery life. Look at Nintendo switch. Gabe newell is already moving to a close ecosystem with the steam deck. Tesla proved it Apple proved it and gabe Newell .
what on earth you going on about, the switch is a Nvidia shield with a nintendo logo on it a weak tablet that plays smash. "pc gaming is dying out because everybody is moving from a open ecosystem to a close ecosystem because better graphic Fidelity better battery life." the switch last like 4 - 5 hours or so on BOTW iirc or if your lucky the steam deck last around 3 or so given the game.
"Tesla proved it Apple proved it and gabe Newell" Tesla "proved" what exactly? and apple can prove nothing that anti consumer company and nice left that last part unanswered what did gaben prove?
@@M4TTYN gabe Newell is about to launch a arm chip set with better battery life like the Nintendo switch and arm is better than x86. Apple prove it. have you seen the rtx 4090 taking as much power as a Tesla model 3. Arm can hit rtx 4090 level of performance at 100 to 200 watts tdp. I’m talking about arm chipsets and the company that control the ecosystems gives the consumer more with less freedom.