Why PC's Will Overtake Consoles: An Opinion and a Prediction

  • 95 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for KC_Hokie
KC_Hokie

16099

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#51 KC_Hokie
Member since 2006 • 16099 Posts

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]

To future proof a PC to have to run the best games on half decent settings without upgrades means you're spending a good $2000 new.

Consoles last 6+ years and are about $350 on average for the lifespan of that console.

PC gaming is a long ways off from retaking the gamers they lost. When Bill Gates decided to put DirectXon a console he took away a huge percentage of the PC gaming market. And it will be at least a decade before it starts coming back in large numbers. Bill Gates really is a genius.

jedikevin2

I'm just using your logic here.. If I was to take a new 2500K intel build, pop in somthing like a AMD6970 and play on a 20 inch monitor at 1650x1080p spend about 1000 dollars for it it will not be playing playing the "best games on half decent settings" in a year and a half?

I must not be adding things up right or something. We've gone from, year and a half, to 1500 dollars to 2000 dollars? I'm beyond confused right now.

I'm saying to future proof a gaming PC (that can run the newest games on decent settings) for multiple years without constant upgrades you're going to have to spend roughly $2000. If you only spend $1000 for a new PC you are having to upgrade within a 1.5-2 years to play the best games on good settings.

Again, in terms of costs and longevity, the PC just can't keep up with consoles. Not yet at least. After a decade of APU's that might change but for another console generation they won't retake the market share they lost.

Avatar image for Cranler
Cranler

8809

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#52 Cranler
Member since 2005 • 8809 Posts

[QUOTE="arbitor365"]

unfortunately (for you), your hypothesis is not supported by any statistics or numbers. console sales and popularity are not in a decline, but rather the contrary. Consoles have been consistently growing since...... oh, I dont know........ the beginning of video games.

PC_Otter

There was already one major crash. It could happen again.

games sucked back then. it would take a full on depression for this to reoccur

Avatar image for jedikevin2
jedikevin2

5263

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 26

User Lists: 0

#53 jedikevin2
Member since 2004 • 5263 Posts

I'm saying to future proof a gaming PC (that can run the newest games on decent settings) for multiple years without constant upgrades you're going to have to spend roughly $2000. If you only spend $1000 for a new PC you are having to upgrade within a 1.5-2 years to play the best games on good settings.

Again, in terms of costs and longevity, the PC just can't keep up with consoles. Not yet at least. After a decade of APU's that might change but for another console generation they won't retake the market share they lost.

KC_Hokie

I find that pretty hard to believe. This 1.5-2 year thing sounds very off considering i've given you specific examples of computers people play that is FAR older then 2 years and plays games just fine.

Avatar image for Medic_B
Medic_B

3375

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#54 Medic_B
Member since 2005 • 3375 Posts

Nooo consoles will never die PCs maybe but not consoles

Avatar image for shadowchronicle
Shadowchronicle

26969

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 66

User Lists: 0

#55 Shadowchronicle
Member since 2008 • 26969 Posts
I think the casual gamer would choose a console over a pc.
Avatar image for Cranler
Cranler

8809

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#56 Cranler
Member since 2005 • 8809 Posts

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]Most gamers don't like constantly upgrading to the best hardware to play the best games. That's why console gaming has taken away a significant PC market share over the last 10 years or so. I don't see PC gaming reclaiming those gamers. jedikevin2

When did Pc gamers have to "constantly upgrade to the best hardware to play the best games"?

late 90's til the current console gen required frequent upgrades. requirements were much more demanding then

Avatar image for KC_Hokie
KC_Hokie

16099

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#57 KC_Hokie
Member since 2006 • 16099 Posts

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]

I'm saying to future proof a gaming PC (that can run the newest games on decent settings) for multiple years without constant upgrades you're going to have to spend roughly $2000. If you only spend $1000 for a new PC you are having to upgrade within a 1.5-2 years to play the best games on good settings.

Again, in terms of costs and longevity, the PC just can't keep up with consoles. Not yet at least. After a decade of APU's that might change but for another console generation they won't retake the market share they lost.

jedikevin2

I find that pretty hard to believe. This 1.5-2 year thing sounds very off considering i've given you specific examples of computers people play that is FAR older then 2 years and plays games just fine.

For sake of argument lets say ok on that. A console, on average, costs $350 (over the lifespan of that console), lasts 6+ years and plays all games on top settings during that time.

I just think PCs are at least a decade away from taking back the market share they have lost since the Xbox came out. It's going to take some serious increase in APU technology for that to happen.

Avatar image for jedikevin2
jedikevin2

5263

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 26

User Lists: 0

#58 jedikevin2
Member since 2004 • 5263 Posts

[QUOTE="jedikevin2"]

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]Most gamers don't like constantly upgrading to the best hardware to play the best games. That's why console gaming has taken away a significant PC market share over the last 10 years or so. I don't see PC gaming reclaiming those gamers. Cranler

When did Pc gamers have to "constantly upgrade to the best hardware to play the best games"?

late 90's til the current console gen required frequent upgrades. requirements were much more demanding then

Your late bro.. Me and hoke discussed that already.
Avatar image for thom_maytees
thom_maytees

3668

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#59 thom_maytees
Member since 2010 • 3668 Posts
[QUOTE="arbitor365"]

unfortunately (for you), your hypothesis is not supported by any statistics or numbers. console sales and popularity are not in a decline, but rather the contrary. Consoles have been consistently growing since...... oh, I dont know........ the beginning of video games.

PC_Otter
There was already one major crash. It could happen again.

That "major" crash affected only the United States, not worldwide. It did not affect Europe nor Japan or else Nintendo would have never decided to bring the Famicom overseas in the first place.
Avatar image for rpgs_shall_rule
rpgs_shall_rule

1943

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#60 rpgs_shall_rule
Member since 2006 • 1943 Posts

[QUOTE="jedikevin2"]

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]

I'm saying to future proof a gaming PC (that can run the newest games on decent settings) for multiple years without constant upgrades you're going to have to spend roughly $2000. If you only spend $1000 for a new PC you are having to upgrade within a 1.5-2 years to play the best games on good settings.

Again, in terms of costs and longevity, the PC just can't keep up with consoles. Not yet at least. After a decade of APU's that might change but for another console generation they won't retake the market share they lost.

KC_Hokie

I find that pretty hard to believe. This 1.5-2 year thing sounds very off considering i've given you specific examples of computers people play that is FAR older then 2 years and plays games just fine.

For sake of argument lets say ok on that. A console, on average, costs $350 (over the lifespan of that console), lasts 6+ years and plays all games on top settings during that time.

I just think PCs are at least a decade away from taking back the market share they have lost since the Xbox came out. It's going to take some serious increase in APU technology for that to happen.

That's the problem with what you're arguing. It's not really top settings. It's just at what developers believe to be an optimal balance between performance and visuals for that specific console. It's definitely worse than a game that is at max settings on the PC.

Avatar image for KC_Hokie
KC_Hokie

16099

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#61 KC_Hokie
Member since 2006 • 16099 Posts

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]

[QUOTE="jedikevin2"]

I find that pretty hard to believe. This 1.5-2 year thing sounds very off considering i've given you specific examples of computers people play that is FAR older then 2 years and plays games just fine.

rpgs_shall_rule

For sake of argument lets say ok on that. A console, on average, costs $350 (over the lifespan of that console), lasts 6+ years and plays all games on top settings during that time.

I just think PCs are at least a decade away from taking back the market share they have lost since the Xbox came out. It's going to take some serious increase in APU technology for that to happen.

That's the problem with what you're arguing. It's not really top settings. It's just at what developers believe to be an optimal balance between performance and visuals for that specific console. It's definitely worse than a game that is at max settings on the PC.

It's a cost and value issue. PCs are at least a decade away in this aspect before retaking their market share away from consoles running programs like DirectX.

And, again, APU technology looks like the key but is also a long ways off.

Avatar image for mitu123
mitu123

155290

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 32

User Lists: 0

#62 mitu123
Member since 2006 • 155290 Posts

Nooo consoles will never die PCs maybe but not consoles

Medic_B
With Steam around good luck with that.
Avatar image for Cranler
Cranler

8809

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#63 Cranler
Member since 2005 • 8809 Posts

[QUOTE="Cranler"]

[QUOTE="jedikevin2"]

When did Pc gamers have to "constantly upgrade to the best hardware to play the best games"?

jedikevin2

late 90's til the current console gen required frequent upgrades. requirements were much more demanding then

Your late bro.. Me and hoke discussed tshat already.

so he already educated you on the fact that there was a new crysis every year up until this gen

Avatar image for jedikevin2
jedikevin2

5263

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 26

User Lists: 0

#64 jedikevin2
Member since 2004 • 5263 Posts

[QUOTE="jedikevin2"][QUOTE="Cranler"]late 90's til the current console gen required frequent upgrades. requirements were much more demanding then

Cranler

Your late bro.. Me and hoke discussed tshat already.

so he already educated you on the fact that there was a new crysis every year up until this gen

No idea what your talking about with that one but he was talking about soe huge timeline of gaming.

Avatar image for Cranler
Cranler

8809

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#65 Cranler
Member since 2005 • 8809 Posts

[QUOTE="Cranler"]

[QUOTE="jedikevin2"] Your late bro.. Me and hoke discussed tshat already. jedikevin2

so he already educated you on the fact that there was a new crysis every year up until this gen

No idea what your talking about with that one but he was talking about soe huge timeline of gaming.

you spoke as if there was never a time when pc gamers had to upgrade often, i would have brought the fact that there was a game like crysis almost every year before this gen. some were even more demanding for their time than crysis, like quake 2

Avatar image for jedikevin2
jedikevin2

5263

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 26

User Lists: 0

#66 jedikevin2
Member since 2004 • 5263 Posts

[QUOTE="jedikevin2"]

[QUOTE="Cranler"]so he already educated you on the fact that there was a new crysis every year up until this gen

Cranler

No idea what your talking about with that one but he was talking about soe huge timeline of gaming.

you spoke as if there was never a time when pc gamers had to upgrade often, i would have brought the fact that there was a game like crysis almost every year before this gen. some were even more demanding for their time than crysis, like quake 2

No.. I asked a question to see what timeframe he specifically was arguing. Check the thread so see what is being discussed.

Avatar image for Cranler
Cranler

8809

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#67 Cranler
Member since 2005 • 8809 Posts

[QUOTE="Cranler"]

[QUOTE="jedikevin2"]

No idea what your talking about with that one but he was talking about soe huge timeline of gaming.

jedikevin2

you spoke as if there was never a time when pc gamers had to upgrade often, i would have brought the fact that there was a game like crysis almost every year before this gen. some were even more demanding for their time than crysis, like quake 2

No.. I asked a question to see what timeframe he specifically was arguing. Check the thread so see what is being discussed.

then ask what timefram, dont say when did pc's have to be constantly upgraded since it sound like youre saying their wasnt a time.

Avatar image for jedikevin2
jedikevin2

5263

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 26

User Lists: 0

#68 jedikevin2
Member since 2004 • 5263 Posts

then ask what timefram, dont say when did pc's have to be constantly upgraded since it sound like youre saying their wasnt a time.

Cranler

Ok.. Well seems he knew where I was going since he gave me a time frame for the discussion.. Sorry you misunderstood lol. You would think after reading the thread and what I typed to Hokie you would now understand but........... Now back to the subject... educated what?

Avatar image for topsemag55
topsemag55

19063

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 16

User Lists: 0

#69 topsemag55
Member since 2007 • 19063 Posts

with Intel and AMD's newest integrated graphics on their processors.

Tennisobsessor1

Integrated graphics won't run uber-games. You need a discrete GPU in its own slot on the mobo.

Avatar image for Cranler
Cranler

8809

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#70 Cranler
Member since 2005 • 8809 Posts

[QUOTE="Cranler"]

then ask what timefram, dont say when did pc's have to be constantly upgraded since it sound like youre saying their wasnt a time.

jedikevin2

Ok.. Well seems he knew where I was going since he gave me a time frame for the discussion.. Sorry you misunderstood lol. You would think after reading the thread and what I typed to Hokie you would now understand but........... Now back to the subject... educated what?

i gave you a time frame too. obviously you seem to think that pc gaming was never more expensive than it is now until we educated you on the subject

Avatar image for clone01
clone01

29845

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#72 clone01
Member since 2003 • 29845 Posts

Consoles have their place. PCs have theirs. I think the console companies need to back off trying to be like PC and be more focused on games, otherwise they'll just end up as limited PCs with less overall practical application and performance.

PC_Otter

Absolutely. Excellent answer.

Avatar image for theBeorn
theBeorn

1378

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#73 theBeorn
Member since 2003 • 1378 Posts

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="jedikevin2"]

When did Pc gamers have to "constantly upgrade to the best hardware to play the best games"?

jedikevin2

Is that a serious question? I was a PC first gamer from 1987-2008 and can't even begin to count the number of PCs and hardware upgrades I had to go through to play the top games.

So your bases is 1987-2008? Ok.. I thought you were talking within the realm of this generation of games. So the argument is buying new consoles vs upgrading in a 11 year span you presented. So in the end we are argueing from pretty much the:

  • Nintendo
  • Sega Genesis
  • Neo Geo
  • Atari Jaguar CD
  • Panasonic 3DO FZ-10
  • Sega CD for Genesis 2
  • Sega CDX
  • Sega Genesis 2
  • Sega Genesis 32x
  • Sega Saturn
  • SNK NEO-GEO CD
  • Sony PlayStation
  • Nintendo 64
  • Sega Dreamcast
  • Sony PlayStation 2
  • Sony PlayStation PS1
  • Ps3
  • Xbox
  • Gamecube
  • 360
  • Wii

LOL this guy just got served. This is what System Wars is all about, bringing down stupid arguments with evidence. Hahahah

Avatar image for James161324
James161324

8315

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#74 James161324
Member since 2009 • 8315 Posts

If consoles come out as high as a price point as it appears they may. PC's already has been growing. They did overtake consoles last year to take 51 percent of what considered the gaming marketplace in na

Consoles have there place. But if were seeing consoles being the same price as a decent pc, i wouldn't be surpised if a good chunkof the core audience came to pc

Avatar image for yellosnolvr
yellosnolvr

19302

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 24

User Lists: 0

#75 yellosnolvr
Member since 2005 • 19302 Posts

[QUOTE="PC_Otter"][QUOTE="arbitor365"]

unfortunately (for you), your hypothesis is not supported by any statistics or numbers. console sales and popularity are not in a decline, but rather the contrary. Consoles have been consistently growing since...... oh, I dont know........ the beginning of video games.

arbitor365

There was already one major crash. It could happen again.

alot has changed since the atari age. thats like saying

"well...... the Spanish Inquisition happened once. it could happen again. watch out, Spain."

i lol'd. not gonna llie
Avatar image for jaqulle999
jaqulle999

2897

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#76 jaqulle999
Member since 2009 • 2897 Posts

Eventually things will be so fast and powerful that it won't even matter if you are using a console or a pc since they will both probably be able to do anything you can possibly think of.

Avatar image for rpgs_shall_rule
rpgs_shall_rule

1943

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#77 rpgs_shall_rule
Member since 2006 • 1943 Posts

Eventually things will be so fast and powerful that it won't even matter if you are using a console or a pc since they will both probably be able to do anything you can possibly think of.

jaqulle999

At that point where even baseline computers are that powerful, consoles will likely disappear, as there would be virtually no incentive to buy or develop for any consoles.

Avatar image for SkyWard20
SkyWard20

4509

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#78 SkyWard20
Member since 2009 • 4509 Posts
[QUOTE="lowe0"]As we are oh-so-frequently reminded, you already can get PCs in the $400-$500 range that can play games at the same resolution and with the same settings as consoles. That's the cost of a console plus a cheap netbook for regular PC usage. And yet, your convergence has not happened. Face it, consoles exist for a reason, and it's not because we're all blinded by marketing (your insulting suggestion aside). If we wanted to be PC gamers, it's not like we can't find a Fry's.

Then if you get bad performance in your games the elitists tell you to buy a better rig or switch to consoles. :lol:
Avatar image for metal_zombie
metal_zombie

2288

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#79 metal_zombie
Member since 2004 • 2288 Posts
I always wondered why monitors never had speakers inside? Just very inconvenient. Wherever the image is produced there will be gaming.LOXO7
mine do both of them actually
Avatar image for HaloPimp978
HaloPimp978

7329

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 1

#80 HaloPimp978
Member since 2005 • 7329 Posts

I think its a balance of the two. These days you have tablets for gaming platfroms so I guess that could be in the PC caterogy. And conosles have their thing. So I guess it depends what people want.

Avatar image for jedikevin2
jedikevin2

5263

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 26

User Lists: 0

#81 jedikevin2
Member since 2004 • 5263 Posts

[QUOTE="jedikevin2"]

[QUOTE="Cranler"]

then ask what timefram, dont say when did pc's have to be constantly upgraded since it sound like youre saying their wasnt a time.

Cranler

Ok.. Well seems he knew where I was going since he gave me a time frame for the discussion.. Sorry you misunderstood lol. You would think after reading the thread and what I typed to Hokie you would now understand but........... Now back to the subject... educated what?

i gave you a time frame too. obviously you seem to think that pc gaming was never more expensive than it is now until we educated you on the subject

No idea what you are talking about as I asked a question to get exactly what timeframe he was discussing. He gave it and we went from there.. Seems you educated yourself or something.. Who is this we? LOL... guess when someones argument doesn't hold they have to play this trivial game of circular logic lol.

Avatar image for shakmaster13
shakmaster13

7138

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#82 shakmaster13
Member since 2007 • 7138 Posts

It's 3:30am so I didn't bother reading all that... but, what do you mean "will" overtake... they already have. There are more PC gamers in the world than consoles.

arto1223

This. There are more gaming PC's in the world than consoles.

Avatar image for flashn00b
flashn00b

3961

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#83 flashn00b
Member since 2006 • 3961 Posts

Personally, I think the prolonged existence of PC gaming is currently being threatened, and honestly, I'm convinced that PC gamers need an individual who they can call a hero. I mean, how long will it be until we see Garry's Mod, STALKER, ARMA, Minecraft, and Mount&Blade on the consoles?

Avatar image for PC_Otter
PC_Otter

1623

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#85 PC_Otter
Member since 2010 • 1623 Posts
[QUOTE="arbitor365"]

[QUOTE="PC_Otter"] There was already one major crash. It could happen again.yellosnolvr

alot has changed since the atari age. thats like saying

"well...... the Spanish Inquisition happened once. it could happen again. watch out, Spain."

i lol'd. not gonna llie

*Looks at Iran and Sudan*
Avatar image for Gauloisess
Gauloisess

305

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#86 Gauloisess
Member since 2010 • 305 Posts

Personally, I think the prolonged existence of PC gaming is currently being threatened, and honestly, I'm convinced that PC gamers need an individual who they can call a hero. I mean, how long will it be until we see Garry's Mod, STALKER, ARMA, Minecraft, and Mount&Blade on the consoles?

flashn00b

sorry but Pc doesn t need a mascotte lol.

Avatar image for PC_Otter
PC_Otter

1623

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#87 PC_Otter
Member since 2010 • 1623 Posts

The PC's identity is created by it's users, unlike the consoles where identity is provided. Pretty obvious when consoles are not for the sake of creativity. They are a machine for consumption.

On a PC, the same machine I consume on is the same one where I create do some communicating, and I can use the three capabilities together to do quite groundbreaking and wonderous things. I'm not limiting myself to just Photoshop and email here, engineering, science, programming, the internet as you know it....... That's total added value. Even if a machine was built for the purpose of consumption (gaming, HTPC), it is nice to have the creative and communitive capability there when you need it.

Avatar image for Cyburr_Police
Cyburr_Police

119

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#88 Cyburr_Police
Member since 2011 • 119 Posts

ITT: My opinion is fact!

Avatar image for UnrealLegend
UnrealLegend

5888

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

#89 UnrealLegend
Member since 2009 • 5888 Posts

Why can systems never live in peace; side-by-side? :(

Avatar image for Ravenlore_basic
Ravenlore_basic

4319

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

#90 Ravenlore_basic
Member since 2003 • 4319 Posts

its the oppsite. Computers are no longer necessory for many people as they use phones for web searching as many other devices that can search the web. email, chat, Im... the reasons that MOST people use a computer.

True for people who use it for say CAD or other business programs then yes those people will continue to use their computers for multipurposes.

BUT people are migrating from PC to others devices which is ONE reason why MS is trying to get college students to buy a PC.

PCs are just to OPEN and Complacated. ALSO, though more powerful than Consoles too much Updating will cost too much for most people. THINK about it. most people will get a mid ranged card say from 2005 when Xbox 360 launched. THAT mid ranged card was having problems with games in 2008/2009 and then need to pay another 100$ to up date to the next low mid ranged Video card, all the while knowing that what you have is not the latest and greatest. While A console there is nothing to keep up on to know about... PLUG and PLAY.

Consoles sell at a loss, while PCs need to bring in a profit. Consoles sell for less than a high end Video CARD!!!!!

Im not saying PC is dying. NO not at all. Some people do not mind working on PCs and enjoy all there is with PCs but it is not the masses.

Avatar image for lowe0
lowe0

13692

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#91 lowe0
Member since 2004 • 13692 Posts

On a PC, the same machine I consume on is the same one where I create do some communicating, and I can use the three capabilities together to do quite groundbreaking and wonderous things. I'm not limiting myself to just Photoshop and email here, engineering, science, programming, the internet as you know it....... That's total added value. Even if a machine was built for the purpose of consumption (gaming, HTPC), it is nice to have the creative and communitive capability there when you need it.

PC_Otter
This is where Sturgeon's Law kicks in... 95% of everything is crap. I spend quite a bit of time writing code, and I'm not under the illusion that I'm doing anything wondrous or groundbreaking. Given all the creation and communication tools in the world, how many people will actually create something of consequence?
Avatar image for flashn00b
flashn00b

3961

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#92 flashn00b
Member since 2006 • 3961 Posts

[QUOTE="flashn00b"]

Personally, I think the prolonged existence of PC gaming is currently being threatened, and honestly, I'm convinced that PC gamers need an individual who they can call a hero. I mean, how long will it be until we see Garry's Mod, STALKER, ARMA, Minecraft, and Mount&Blade on the consoles?

Gauloisess

sorry but Pc doesn t need a mascotte lol.

What I mean by a hero is someone who's willing to step up for us PC gamers and do anything that is necessary for the prolonged existence of the PC as a gaming platform.
Avatar image for skrat_01
skrat_01

33767

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#94 skrat_01
Member since 2007 • 33767 Posts
[QUOTE="Gauloisess"]

[QUOTE="flashn00b"]

Personally, I think the prolonged existence of PC gaming is currently being threatened, and honestly, I'm convinced that PC gamers need an individual who they can call a hero. I mean, how long will it be until we see Garry's Mod, STALKER, ARMA, Minecraft, and Mount&Blade on the consoles?

flashn00b

sorry but Pc doesn t need a mascotte lol.

What I mean by a hero is someone who's willing to step up for us PC gamers and do anything that is necessary for the prolonged existence of the PC as a gaming platform.

New IPs. The PC is a hotbed for creativity and now that development tools are more accessible than ever, funding and developing is more flexible than ever, and of course people can actually put a product out there to an intended audience without the necessity of a publisher acting as an expensive middle man (as well as the risk of competing in a high budget retail market), things are better then ever in this regard. Which I'm very comfortable with, all of those games bar STALKER and ArmA (for most of the part, digital has supported the IP immensely) reflects this.
Avatar image for Tennisobsessor1
Tennisobsessor1

55

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#95 Tennisobsessor1
Member since 2008 • 55 Posts

A few things need mentioning.

First is accessibility. Let's be honest. The majority of people who play on consoles do so because it is easy, shiny, fast, conforms to what their friends are doing, and it is marketed like hell. The PC platform isn't like that quite yet, but I feel confident that accessible solutions like consoles will become more mainstream as time goes by. There is already evidence of this happening. Think of Microsoft Windows. Apple's Mac OS has always been the easy-to-use operating system for people who don't *want* to tinker with the OS much to make it work. Windows has been far more cryptic, but is becoming very much the standard in ordinary middle-class households due to its excellent compatibility and also due to how much easier it has become to use. Its new graphical layout is easier to navigate, and things are put in more conspicuous places.

This leads me to my next point. A lot of people do *not* *want* to know all about their PC's hardware, they just want the simple solution so they can plug and play. This is why consoles are popular. This is what makes the audience so large, and the large audience makes developers and publishers very interested in the platform. The reason consoles have exclusives is not to *make* it a good option economically, exclusives come to consoles because they are *already* the most economical option for the businessmen who require a profit to stay in business. it usually is not the other way around, even though that may occasionally be the case (to a certain extent). People will subscribe to TiVo or buy a new Macintosh computer because, even if it is more expensive, it is easier to use. Accessibility has become a commodity, unfortunately for consumers.

My next point is that integrated graphics would be better than dedicated graphics if they had the power to play high-end console-like games, because integrated graphics take up *much* less space, and are cheaper to build and sell. A computer with good integrated graphics would cost less than a computer with a dedicated graphics card of equivalent performance.

Another point is that some people believe consoles will always be popular due to 'exclusive' features, instead of exclusive games. They make arguments along the lines of " Well, the Xbox 360 has LIVE, and PCs don't have LIVE, so Xboxes are better!" This is not true in the slightest. The PC has Steam, Windows LIVE, EA Online Store/ EA online accounts, BioWare's social network, and so on. The PC actually has FAR MORE options in terms of accessible and elegant online solutions. Plus they don't require a subscription. Or, of course, there is the option of simply buying a game without using any type of online platform, playing through the game's own servers without bells and whistles. There you have it. The network isn't a good reason to become a console gamer. It's a reason to be a PC gamer.

Of course educating the consumer can make a huge difference with some people, leading them to discover that there are good options outside of the console world they did not know of, but I believe not everyone *wants* to learn about all the hardware in a PC and what it does. They just wanna play, and who can blame them? This is yet one more reason why PCs that cost at least $300 and are made for regular home use should come with good integrated graphics, so as not to confuse people and/or create a lack of interest.

Some people say that exclusive features like motion controls will keep the consoles on top, but I do not believe in this. Motion controls have already come to the PC, even though they have not yet been officially supported by any modern PC games. For now, PC players may hook up WiiMotes when playing HL2 or something just as highly modifiable, but the official versions will come. Microsoft and Sony have expressed interest in putting their motion products on the PC. One day I am sure PC games will support motion controls, if they truly add any value to the game.

I bet that if HP or Dell, or any of the other major computer-making companies, put enough resources, research, and interest into it, they could create products in a joint effort with Intel or AMD that can play video games very well on integrated graphics for the price of a console. If they marketed it well enough, possibly even getting celebrities to endorse it, it could be very profitable and possibly eliminate the need for gaming consoles.

Avatar image for PC_Otter
PC_Otter

1623

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#96 PC_Otter
Member since 2010 • 1623 Posts
[QUOTE="PC_Otter"]

On a PC, the same machine I consume on is the same one where I create do some communicating, and I can use the three capabilities together to do quite groundbreaking and wonderous things. I'm not limiting myself to just Photoshop and email here, engineering, science, programming, the internet as you know it....... That's total added value. Even if a machine was built for the purpose of consumption (gaming, HTPC), it is nice to have the creative and communitive capability there when you need it.

lowe0
This is where Sturgeon's Law kicks in... 95% of everything is crap. I spend quite a bit of time writing code, and I'm not under the illusion that I'm doing anything wondrous or groundbreaking. Given all the creation and communication tools in the world, how many people will actually create something of consequence?

When you just about can't do anything as such on a console, there is no comparison. And of course there is consequence, we make spreadsheets, write emails for personal and business use, explore the internet to consume knowledge, among many other things. Their is plenty of consequence in computing technology. Creating things that have a lasting impact is where the 95% comes in, but to simply just think of the computer as only for the creation for others to consume is a bit narrow minded (and I should've clarified). Plenty of people create for themselves, interest, or for family.