Are Consoles Holding Back PC Gaming?

[swaaye]

I was reading an old '96 issue of Next Generation last night. The mag covered PC and console gaming as if they were basically one and the same. Previews of Diablo on the page before the latest Virtua Fighter. An article comparing the upcoming game hardware of the PC, M2, DC rumors, N64, etc. They were saying the PC probably couldn't keep its technological advantage for long.

It's interesting because this was during the supposed heyday of PC gaming for a lot of people out there but it really wasn't at all like they like to think. It was just like today except some of the games were different and more fresh because the genres hadn't been nailed down as much yet. And of course a lot of the games ended up being crap back then too.

One thing's for sure though and that's that the industry was much more experimental back then. Today we get mostly clones and the indie games are often "retro remakes" that we are supposed to nostalgia-buy-and-love. Back then there was more wild stuff that ended up sucking but at least made you go "hmmm can I wrap by brain around that?".

 

[green.pixel]

Yeah, where is today's Interestate '76 or POD.


Subversion, for example, looks promising.

 

[Neb]

Yaw was goin on here brahs?

 

[green.pixel]

Yaw was goin on here brahs?

This post doesn't have enough graphics.

 

[homerdog]

It also doesn't support AA, though I can force it through the driver at a 50% perf hit.

 

[AlNom]

Also a dumbed down post

 

[Mobius1aic]

If there is any solace, it's that the console market rides a teeter totter knife edge of profitability and losses. Things tend to turn on a dime (with thrust vectoring!) in that part of the gaming industry. We will always have personal computers of some kind that are open in a software sense. I find it interesting enough that the phone market parallels the development of personal computers. While the components are much more carefully chosen and kept to specific combinations (and no individual component upgrading except mass storage, ie SD cards), the software has to be able to run on a possible myriad of actual devices even with the same OS. Much like desktop computing, we will continue to see huge gains in performance.

So all in all, desktop/laptop computing and phone/tablet computing have a permanent place in our society, gaming consoles really do not. They have no practical application as far as non-entertainment usefulness goes. While consoles get all the attention these days, I think their days are numbered unless they go directly after the PC market by getting practical software, but at that point they will be a PC, but probably with closed/restricted standards that nobody will like and they'll fail anyways.

 

[Dave Glue]

Anyway I think MS needs to team up with dell , hp , acer and whoever and create a gamer line of computers. Start them at $500 and ramp them up to whatever they want.

This will never happen because:

1) MS has a lot sunk into the Xbox. They cut a cut from every game. It's a closed platform they control.

They promote the PC to the extent that they want PC gaming to still be somewhat of a draw for Windows over other OS's, but if there was no threat to their platform dominance I doubt they would even bother with GfW (the minimal effort they've put into it demonstrates the shallow level of commitment).

2) OEM's sell "Gamer PC's" as high-ticket items. Where's the incentive for them to advertise a $500 box as a great-gaming choice, when they're trying to push $1500 systems?

Sure, from a long-term investment in the industry to really grow PC gaming, and just from a consumer satisfaction perspective for Windows and MS in general (which breeds loyalty in the long run, ask Apple) - those are wise recommendations.

Which is why they'll never happen. MS and their OEM's just don't think long term until a competitor is knocking at their door. The only reason you hear that MS is willing to push gaming - yet again - with Windows8 is because they see Apple's growing impact in the market, not to mention the plethora if tablets than will run iOS/Android/WebOS that will soon be able to do the vast majority of what consumers use for a PC, if they're not doing it already. They will continue to grow as gaming devices as well.

I've always said that MS is being extremely shortsighted with their half-assed efforts on PC gaming since the 360's debut, as you never know with a new console generation who will come out on top, and PC gaming has been a significant consumer draw for Windows in the home for years. The 360 and the PC can co-exist, and do so far better than their doing now without significant fears of cannibalization IMO.

There are many ways the PC could have acclimated to the living room better, with MS working with OEM's. But I don't see that happening any time soon, there's no long term vision.

 

[function]

Consoles die out the day that there are no advantages to a closed platform.

PCs die out the day that there are no advantages to an open (or more open) platform.

So all in all, desktop/laptop computing and phone/tablet computing have a permanent place in our society, gaming consoles really do not.

Humans have been making dildos* for thousands of years. Sure, you could use a hammer** as a dildo, but there will always be people who want something made for the job that's more suitable for use on a comfy couch.***

* joypad
** mouse and keyboard
*** I am not applying this analogy to me personally

 

[AlphaWolf]

Consoles die out the day that there are no advantages to a closed platform.

PCs die out the day that there are no advantages to an open (or more open) platform.

ya, neither is going anywhere.

 

[Mobius1aic]

Consoles die out the day that there are no advantages to a closed platform.

PCs die out the day that there are no advantages to an open (or more open) platform.



Humans have been making dildos* for thousands of years. Sure, you could use a hammer** as a dildo, but there will always be people who want something made for the job that's more suitable for use on a comfy couch.***

* joypad
** mouse and keyboard
*** I am not applying this analogy to me personally

Good analogy

Though I would put the analogy of the PC being like a penis, the console like a dildo. One is completely for pleasure (dildo/console), the other for both reproductive necessities and pleasure (penis/personal computer).

I guess it's up to you (if you're a woman, or uh....lol) to figure out which one you find to be more suitable. Though it's funny, one would have less control over a dick than a dildo if you're on the receiving end.........*ends this semi-philosophical/evolutionary discussion*

 

[Neb]

Also a dumbed down post

To much handholding has made me incapacitated.

This post doesn't have enough graphics.

Keeping it non XXX rated. Dont want anyone chokin on their cafe while at work.

It also doesn't support AA, though I can force it through the driver at a 50% perf hit.

My muscles and body are so tesselated the perfomance hit is massive. All those micropolygons.

 

[swaaye]

This will never happen because:

Dave whenever you stop in I feel the urge to head to Usenet and read about Rendition cards and that weird upcoming exciting 3dfx Napalm thing. Oh and it's fun to read the old usenet video card fanboy flame fests too.

 

[Squilliam]

My muscles and body are so tesselated the perfomance hit is massive. All those micropolygons.

It isn't the size of your micropolygon which counts, its how you use it right?

 

[Frank]

What is holding back PC gaming most, is that there is little incentive in making the technically best game, but a whole lot in making lots of money from all parts involved.

Like with everything else.

 

[green.pixel]

but a whole lot in making lots of money from all parts involved.

Nickle and diming, money hatting?

 

[Sobek]

Nickle and diming, money hatting?

Why is it that when I read that sentence, all that appears in my head is Team Fortress 2

I tried playing CMR Dirt (the GOOD one, you know, the first one?) last night with my rumblepad dual-stick logitech gamepad thing... Terrible. Couldn't finish a single race in the green. I find it just lacks the precision the keyboard offers. All that tap-tappity-tap precise correcting.

And to think I used to kick arse at Goldeneye. I bet if I tried that, I'd first break my hand, then my mind.

 

[Dave Glue]

Dave whenever you stop in I feel the urge to head to Usenet and read about Rendition cards and that weird upcoming exciting 3dfx Napalm thing. Oh and it's fun to read the old usenet video card fanboy flame fests too.

I remember the wild-west style 3DFX newsgroups. Man I was an obnoxious turd in those days (albeit some targets definitely deserved it).

 

[Pixel]

$287 vs $100/$110 is the difference spent on the Xbox 360 CPU/GPU vs the new 8th gen consoles CPU/GPU(APU). A $177/187 drop. That drop alone is far more than the apus are worth.

Consoles have far less expensive hardware than last generation, and even more so when you factor in inflation:
BOM = bill of materials

In 2005 Microsoft spend an estimated $247 ($287 with inflation in 2013 dollars) on the CPU/GPU of the Xbox 360 Launch BOM.
Sony spent an estimated $100 on the APU in 2013. Microsoft spend an estimate $110 on their apu. Of course you can factor in MS/Sony got a better deal by going with a single chip solution from one single chip maker.

How do we get these numbers:

Xbox 360 BOM = $525 ($606 in 2013 dollars via factoring in inflation)
CPU/GPU = 20.2%/26.9% = 47.1% of $525 ($606) = $247 ($287)

sources: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/11/24/xbox360_component_breakdown/
http://electronics360.globalspec.com/article/2210/xbox-360-teardown
http://www.alphr.com/news/hardware/80708/isuppli-reckoning-the-xbox-bill-of-materials

PS4 BOM + manufacturing cost is at $381.
Xbox One minus Kinect2 BOM = $396 ($396 in 2013 dollars). Alot less spent on the console internals this time around.

A less important stat, but just for the fun is comparing Xbox 360 adjusted to inflation to Xbox One/PS4 there is a $210 and $225 drop respectively in hardware component cost this generation. Of course getting to the heart of the matter is they spent less on the cpu/gpu.

 

[Arwin]

I thought it was also very interesting that the Oculus Rift guys said that the cost of including an Xbox One controller was negligible. So that $15 estimate seems realistic to high, almost.

I am surprised that the difference between the PS4 controller and the Xbox One controller is estimated to be so small. Either that touchpad button, gyro, led, speaker and microphone are really cheap to add (which I can believe actually as they are all extremely common parts nowadays thanks to cars, phones and laptops), or those rumble triggers are relatively expensive.

And yeah, I wanna bet that they cost Microsoft and Sony less than this, probably a little under $349.