Just a note: I’m not a lawyer or market analyst. This article represents my opinions as a gamer.
The PC gaming versus Console argument is old, really old. There are a slew of obvious pros and cons when it comes to choosing your platform for gaming. But when it really comes down to it, which will actually win out? When it comes down to it, what platform is the best, not strictly because of hardware and software capabilities, or games released; but rather what platform is best for the consumer?
While it’s certainly arguable that, in terms of costs over time, consumers might spend less sticking to console gaming because they’re not constantly upgrading their equipment. But is that actually the case? Lets look at some things here.
The costs associated with maintaining your hobby and your equipment on both sides of this scale are pretty hefty. The determining factors for making a per consumer argument based on costs associated with this stuff is difficult because everyone’s level of gaming interest is different. The only way to make a sound judgement is to look at market data, and account for averages. For example, my previous PC rig (because this one is pretty new), handled a whole slew of competitive top-developer released games, but the machines cost was eclipsed 3-4 times by the amount of money I dumped into my console(s).
But even such talk of who is dumping how many dollars into what platform won’t win this argument ladies and gentleman. Those of you console fanatics who run around praising consoles and yelling that PC gaming is on the up and out can just get a needle and fishing thread and sew your lips up. Consoles are starting to look like a bad choice. Two major console vendors, Sony and Microsoft, now have clauses within their platforms Terms (which is, when agreed to, a binding contract between yourself and the vendor) which prevent you from taking part in consumer class-action lawsuits against the organization.
Many of you might not understand the implications about what they’re (the console vendors) are doing. Lets take a look at some of the reasons for previous class action lawsuits against Microsoft(XBOX 360):
And lets look at some class action lawsuits against Sony(Playstation):
Now, you don’t need to read them in full, just merely get an idea of the reasons behind the lawsuits in the first place. These lawsuits are generally filed because the console makers either failed to live up to their own advertisement and policies, failed in providing a safe product, or engaged in some dubious practices themselves. While some class action lawsuits might just be silly, it doesn’t mean that they all are, or that something worse may happen. If your hardware suddenly caught on fire and burned your home down, and then reports started trickling in that other peoples homes were catching on fire because of the same hardware….well you see what I’m saying?
Sony’s new terms have an opt-out for agreeing not to engage in class action suits against the company, but they don’t make it easy. You literally have to send ‘snail’ mail to the company. Have you ever sent a fan letter to a celebrity? How about a letter to your politician? Well, if you have you know that large organizations and people with any certain amount of fame tend to receive shit loads of mail, and some of it is never processed or its lost “easily“.
Microsoft’s recent inclusion of similar preventive class action suit terms are worse. There’s actually no opt-out at all.
Personally, I think this is complete and utter bullshit. This kind of ”forced-agreeable” terms are intended to prevent these organizations from being held accountable for damages they may have, or might, inflict due to the failure of the organization to provide quality products and services.