I don’t think you want that. The availability of consoles at different price points (all lower than a typical PC setup) lowers the barrier to entry for games and makes it viable for new games to be developed. Eliminating consoles would have severe implications to the industry.
Im not getting a console instead of a PC. I have a PC, that I use for many things other than games. If I had no PC, I’d still have my dirt cheap pre-paid phone, that’s still plenty capable of playing surprisingly demanding games. And I need this phone at a bare minimum, for work and emergencies, this is the lowest barrier to entry I can go for games. Every generation of every console is an unecessary, additional barrier to entry for whatever corner of gaming they’re gating off. PC isnt trying to gate off anything, PC price is purely selling the capability to play more demanding games, run more demanding software, and I can pay for whatever level of gaming thats right for me. And there is no “typical” PC setup, you’re thinking of the most up to date and modern PC’s that are overkill for anything. Graphics card from 7 years ago and you can play Elden Ring. I dont need or want an iPhone 14, and I dont need or want a 3080. Imagine every single game out or announced so far was available for PC, any game I would want to play, my PC could handle.
We’re not talking about you (1 consumer). You’re reading too much into this and you’re missing (or purposely ignoring) the general economics of purchasing a console versus a computer.
Im an exemplary consumer if you care about financial barriers to entry. I do not make much money, and thus i do not get to play many games that are gated by console exclusivity, if you care about barriers to entry. I do not think you do.
A console will offer higher performance at similar price points
Building a PC evens out the cost (or pushes it in the consumer’s favor), but requires both knowledge and time to plan and execute a build
Improper hardware purchasing decisions (which is likely given unfamiliarity with PC setups) can render certain games impossible to play without additional investment
Maintaining a gaming PC involves managing OS updates, driver updates, chipset and hardware compatibility troubleshooting, navigating increased security risks (uninformed users accessing online services through their web browsers; scams, phishing, viruses)
Non-standardized hardware configurations means manually tweaking settings of every game, which means again an investment of time and knowledge
Lack of cross-platform support leading to separation from friends
Lack of standardized support: going on sparse tech help forums versus contacting Microsoft or Sony’s customer service
I could go on. The point is, there’s a LOT that makes consoles a much more feasible option for someone who does not own a gaming-capable PC and lacks knowledge about PCs. These people are the majority of people, because people who invest time and effort into learning a topic are naturally the minority. Of course PC is the superior choice - IF and only IF you already are ingrained into the PC hobby, or are willing to invest significant time and effort into learning it. To someone who isn’t into tech spheres and just wants to play games, it’s console or nothing.
Now if you want to argue that gaming as a whole would be less toxic and more consumer-friendly without the patronage of console gamers, feel free, but don’t insist that it’s likely (or even possible) that console gamers would simply convert to being PC gamers if consoles went away. They would switch to other hobbies that require similar [minor] levels of investment. They only have so much time and effort to spare, after all.
The main wedge here is you are only considering the most advanced systems to be “gaming capable”. I dont have a PC that you would certify as “gaming capable” yet I play surprisingly modern games. It’s a bullshit term that doesn’t exist in reality, any PC can play games, pre-built sub $100 mini PC’s can play games. And again, and you completely ignored, my cheap ass phone can play games, you cannot get lower than that.
I don’t think you want that. The availability of consoles at different price points (all lower than a typical PC setup) lowers the barrier to entry for games and makes it viable for new games to be developed. Eliminating consoles would have severe implications to the industry.
Im not getting a console instead of a PC. I have a PC, that I use for many things other than games. If I had no PC, I’d still have my dirt cheap pre-paid phone, that’s still plenty capable of playing surprisingly demanding games. And I need this phone at a bare minimum, for work and emergencies, this is the lowest barrier to entry I can go for games. Every generation of every console is an unecessary, additional barrier to entry for whatever corner of gaming they’re gating off. PC isnt trying to gate off anything, PC price is purely selling the capability to play more demanding games, run more demanding software, and I can pay for whatever level of gaming thats right for me. And there is no “typical” PC setup, you’re thinking of the most up to date and modern PC’s that are overkill for anything. Graphics card from 7 years ago and you can play Elden Ring. I dont need or want an iPhone 14, and I dont need or want a 3080. Imagine every single game out or announced so far was available for PC, any game I would want to play, my PC could handle.
We’re not talking about you (1 consumer). You’re reading too much into this and you’re missing (or purposely ignoring) the general economics of purchasing a console versus a computer.
Im an exemplary consumer if you care about financial barriers to entry. I do not make much money, and thus i do not get to play many games that are gated by console exclusivity, if you care about barriers to entry. I do not think you do.
Barriers to entry, PC vs Consoles:
I could go on. The point is, there’s a LOT that makes consoles a much more feasible option for someone who does not own a gaming-capable PC and lacks knowledge about PCs. These people are the majority of people, because people who invest time and effort into learning a topic are naturally the minority. Of course PC is the superior choice - IF and only IF you already are ingrained into the PC hobby, or are willing to invest significant time and effort into learning it. To someone who isn’t into tech spheres and just wants to play games, it’s console or nothing.
Now if you want to argue that gaming as a whole would be less toxic and more consumer-friendly without the patronage of console gamers, feel free, but don’t insist that it’s likely (or even possible) that console gamers would simply convert to being PC gamers if consoles went away. They would switch to other hobbies that require similar [minor] levels of investment. They only have so much time and effort to spare, after all.
The main wedge here is you are only considering the most advanced systems to be “gaming capable”. I dont have a PC that you would certify as “gaming capable” yet I play surprisingly modern games. It’s a bullshit term that doesn’t exist in reality, any PC can play games, pre-built sub $100 mini PC’s can play games. And again, and you completely ignored, my cheap ass phone can play games, you cannot get lower than that.