PC Gamers: Are they the biggest Graphics Whores?

[GodofHardcore]

People frequently criticize video game developers like Square Enix for focusing on graphics at the expense of gameplay and for pandering to the "graphics whore" crowd (whether these claims are true or not). This is a complaint commonly made on many gaming forums (including this one).

Well, I just had an epiphany.

Isn't PC gaming the epitome of graphics whoring and that PC gamers should truly hold the title of graphic whores? I'm sure you have read the opinions of self-proclaimed "PC gamers" or PC gaming magazines or just PC general magazines where they join the console gaming vs PC gaming "war" and their position mainly boils down to "PC games have better graphics/resolution." (for example, see the Dark Souls PC/console release comparisons)

Maybe people buy new Final Fantasy games not because of gameplay but because they are graphics whores who only care about graphics. I can't prove or disprove the statement and I can't ascertain their intentions when buying a FF game.

In contrast, it may be possible to prove the existence and the extent (large) of PC gaming graphics whoring: the PC gaming graphics cards market. People who spend $500-$1000 on a graphics card so that they can push the graphics to the limits and to squeeze more FPS out of it. These are people who can detect the difference between 60 and 70 FPS and who regularly use advanced graphics terminology/jargon when examining the graphical quality. I'm differentiating between those who buy expensive graphics cards for PC gaming and those who buy it for professional video/graphics editing though. I assume that there is very little overlap and that the former outnumbers the latter.

By all means, point out the possible negative side effects of console games focusing too much on graphics to pander to the graphics crowd.

But I feel that we are ignoring the elephant in the room: That PC gamers are by far, the biggest graphics whores of the gaming community and that Final Fantasy graphics whores or graphic whoring (or whatever console game is being criticized for having good graphics) are a mere microcosm in comparison.

It's a symbiotic relationship between:

1) Graphic whore PC gamers who demand the best graphics out of their games
2) PC game developers who pander to the graphic whores
3) Video card manufacturers who rely on the first two in order to facilitate the graphics card market

Like I said, it's the elephant in the room that no-one is talking about. I don't have to venture far to read criticisms about Square-Enix's graphics whoring or Square-Enix graphic whore fans. But because PC gaming graphics whoring is more entrenched, systemic, widespread, and the status quo, it is harder to find dissenting voices.

Well, that's what I have to say about it. What about you?

[dsheinem]

[AppleQueso]

ballz 3D

I was trying to think of something to reply to this with but I think you've got it covered pretty well.

[fastbilly1]

Not really. There is a subset of PC gamers who are, but it is much smaller than the console equivalent. Personally I consider myself a pretty big PC gamer and will have a 10-17 computer lan setup in my house soon. All computers will run Half Life and its mods, and a couple other late 90s PC games that my friends and family love to play.

GOG is a glorious thing.

[Frag Mortuus]

I voted for PC Gamers, however, the term Graphics Whore implies that we only play games for the good graphics. With PC Games in mind, its generally the case that the graphics are better than on console. This is just a bonus that happens to come with PC gaming. I myself play about 90% PC games and 5% console and 5% handheld. PC gaming won me over simply due to the convenience and game pricing through Steam. Example: right now you can get Dishonored for $29.99, The Witcher 2 for $7.50, and Batman Arkham City GOTY for $7.50. I usually wait until the big sales that happen 3 or 4 times a year and load up on games. Especially with the Steam Big Picture mode, PC gaming is far more attractive to me. The better graphics and Physx happen to be just a bonus to me.

[LugNutX]

What Frag said.

I grew up with consoles, but I'm primarily a PC gamer these days. This has a lot less to do with graphics and more to do with pricing and options. The graphics are typically better on PC, but I consider that an additional bullet point rather than a requirement. If you're looking at the same game, where visuals are really the only difference, why wouldn't you want to play it in the best available format? It's no different than seeking out a game on Console A vs. Console B, just because one has something more beneficial.

However, I don't need new releases to have the latest and greatest DX14 features and run at 580000000x10900000 resolution to enjoy them. In fact, it's easier on the wallet when you don't have to buy a new card every year just to keep up. I appreciate the fact that developers are concentrating less on pushing the graphics envelope these days, and more on the ideas behind it.

I think graphics whores exist on both sides of the track, but really only represent a subset of gamers. Though, clearly, on a retro gaming site...graphics are probably not what define good games for most of us, so take that with a grain of salt.

[Curlypaul]

The reason I prefer consoles to PC's is that I can play consoles on my TV while sat on my sofa. Sat at a desk looking at a monitor just reminds me of being at work.

[RyaNtheSlayA]

Because wanting a framerate above a palty and nearly unplayable 25, tons of control options, and cheap games after the initial investment is totally insane.

Graphics are often used for comparison simply because it's one of the few things we can objectively see in a certain platform. The PS3 has obviously better graphics than the PS2. Sure game library is debatable, but graphics aren't. That's why graphics are brought up all the time, by owners of all platforms. This "graphics whoring" isn't a PC exclusive thing.

I'm not sure if this thread is a troll or just plain ignorance. For $500 you can get a PC that's leaps and bounds better than a console at comparable resolutions, can do all the things a console can do (yes, you can in fact hook almost any PC to a TV with a wireless controller) plus all the utility a PC has. There is a definite appeal to PC gaming. It's not for everybody, but it's not just the graphics.

Also, to quote LugNut

If you're looking at the same game, where visuals are really the only difference, why wouldn't you want to play it in the best available format?

Just some other points I'd like to make to people out of the PC gaming loop:

Hardware upgrades are not a yearly thing. 3 even 4 year old graphics cards and processors will run games just fine. It wont be best of the best mind you, but, neither will your 3 or 4 year old console.

Patching and updates are smoother than consoles at this point with most digital services. Games at this point just auto-update themselves. Usually in the background while you do other things.

It does not take a $2000 PC to play games. Try a purpose build at around $500.

Almost every PC built in the last 2 years has an HDMI port. It's easy to game on your TV.

[Curlypaul]

I know that I can plug the PC into the TV in the living room, but as I can't afford 2 of either, it would mean that no one could watch the TV while I checked my emails or worked.

My PC would have probably cost the equivalent of $500 dollars and there is no way that it could match the PS3 on any kind of level.

[isiolia]

Not really.

Honestly, I think utilizing a term with negative connotations isn't particularly great in the first place. There's nothing wrong with enjoying cutting edge graphics, sound, or whatever else. Video games are about fun.

To me, saying someone is a graphics whore would imply that they will compromise other aspects of a game for them. Thing is, great graphics and great gameplay are not mutually exclusive. Claiming that a game is great purely on graphics is different, but few people do that.
There are also practical reasons to like better graphics - can make the game world easier to navigate, objects easier to discern, reduce motion sickness, and so on.

A fair number of PC gamers that are also PC hardware enthusiasts. Games are demanding applications that can reflect the performance of their machine. There's nothing saying the guy who overclocks his rig and demonstrates the improvement with maxed out Crysis framerates only actually cares about that. It's just a performance metric. He may just as easily quit out of that and fire up a decade old game to play. The hardware side is a separate, yet related hobby. People tune computers just like they tune cars.

PC games, and PC gamers, reflect more the full range I would say.

While the gameplay of newer FF games might be different, many of them are simply that. Not necessarily better or worse, objectively speaking. SE does try to hit a high mark with their graphics and sound teams, but I see that less as being "graphics whores" and more just a partial success on their part.

The only people I would really negatively label, again, are those who excuse other aspects of a game purely due to nice graphics, and even then, to each their own.