PC gaming now dead?

bonkrowave said:
Not to mention no console, ever, has surpassed the 500$ mark.
Click to expand...


Remember the Neo Geo? That was $500 for the basic unit, and $800 for the "Gold" System. The 3DO was around $500 at its release as well. They have been that high. At that time no one wanted to spend that kind of cash. Not to mention Mom and Dad weren't spending that kind of cash for the systems. Granted they could outdo anything on the market at the time.

So they have been that high.
 
Qwertyman said:
wrong..the 3do i believe was over the 500 mark when it debuted.
Click to expand...

Wrong ... its was 400$

Notice I said no has console ever gone over 500$

If a console is 500$ for the basic system that means it did not go over 500$ There are always bundles that have additional features / games included, extra controller, of course these can go over 500$.

THe point is ... no system has gone over 500$ for the basic system.

It is also rumoured that the XBOX 360 with the hardrive (the more costly of the 2 bundles) will be just under 500$.
 
I'm sure, in time, there will be a software suite made that can compare the abilities of the xbox360, PS3 and PCs. However, I don't think there will be PC gaming machines in the next year to 2 years that will be able to compete with either new console, based on what I have seen of the new consoles potential.

Do I know for sure? No, it's my opinion.

I hope these consoles mean lower prices. I hope it means ATI and NVidia will put more effort into brining us more powerful GPUs at lower prices. I'll always have a PC, at least for as long as I am a web developer.

Maybe though I would change my mind if software was developed that could allow for Windows to be emulated or run virtually on the 360 or PS3. That's an impossibility, or so I have been told though.
 
Spaceninja said:
The rep also said at $499.99 M$ was taking a hit of almost $300 per unit. So if M$ wanted to make a profit the machine could easily be priced at $999.99, and you would still have to buy a game.
Click to expand...

LMAO @ a $1k system. 360 and PS3 will be around the $300-400 range.
 
bonkrowave said:
The next generation may well overcome console graphics, but this is what 8-12 months down the road.

IN addition the price/performance ratio is clearly better for consoles then it is for PC hardware.
Click to expand...

Um, that's KINDA what I'm trying to say...when do the next gen cards come out? Not the speed bumps/Ram soldering cards, but the NEXT gen cards? If you're lucky, you'll get an xbox360 by Christmas...that's 7 months away. Minus Manufacturing issues that will surely follow suit: supply will not equal demand, etc. Then as mentioned, you need a a library of games that will take advantage of all this "power". And this is just xbox.

From what I read of Playstation3, and mind you I'm not splitting hairs and POURING into techno babble, but I'm guessing performance is probably similar, you're looking at slightly more power then an Ultra SLI setup today, if I recall the Nvidia rep in the press conference. Granted, that's a chunk of change, NOW...but if things follow suit, buying an Ultra SLI system is going to be chump change by the "2006" launch date, no? From what I understand, there's little difference between a top end PCI Express and a top end AGP card NOW, is that incorrect? But the specs are vastly different as far as bandwidth are concerned? Does that mean the PCI-Express is BS? Or that they have not quite tapped the power yet on the bus due to drivers, video card architecture, etc.

IMO, this is just waving shiny objects in front of your nose (and by "your", I don't mean you specifically Bonk). The computer PC market is driven to new depths...not by how fast you can open Microsoft Word, but how far the games push the envelope. As I said, the only thing this is doing is dropping off the people who have not the ability, desire, or financial means to keep up with the jonses in the PC world...its tapping my wallet too, especially since I'm a dual platformer (Mac and PC). And maybe when I get older, I won't want to do this any more...but someone is going to have to, otherwise Kyle and Steve can turn this into a game review site instead of hardware, Dell can lop off their "top end" PC's and we can watch the entire market fold into econo dumb terminals. Not going to happen. ;)
 
Nasty_Savage said:
Um, that's KINDA what I'm trying to say...when do the next gen cards come out? Not the speed bumps/Ram soldering cards, but the NEXT gen cards? If you're lucky, you'll get an xbox360 by Christmas...that's 7 months away. Minus Manufacturing issues that will surely follow suit: supply will not equal demand, etc. Then as mentioned, you need a a library of games that will take advantage of all this "power". And this is just xbox.

From what I read of Playstation3, and mind you I'm not splitting hairs and POURING into techno babble, but I'm guessing performance is probably similar, you're looking at slightly more power then an Ultra SLI setup today, if I recall the Nvidia rep in the press conference. Granted, that's a chunk of change, NOW...but if things follow suit, buying an Ultra SLI system is going to be chump change by the "2006" launch date, no? From what I understand, there's little difference between a top end PCI Express and a top end AGP card NOW, is that incorrect? But the specs are vastly different as far as bandwidth are concerned? Does that mean the PCI-Express is BS? Or that they have not quite tapped the power yet on the bus due to drivers, video card architecture, etc.

IMO, this is just waving shiny objects in front of your nose (and by "your", I don't mean you specifically Bonk). The computer PC market is driven to new depths...not by how fast you can open Microsoft Word, but how far the games push the envelope. As I said, the only thing this is doing is dropping off the people who have not the ability, desire, or financial means to keep up with the jonses in the PC world...its tapping my wallet too, especially since I'm a dual platformer (Mac and PC). And maybe when I get older, I won't want to do this any more...but someone is going to have to, otherwise Kyle and Steve can turn this into a game review site instead of hardware, Dell can lop off their "top end" PC's and we can watch the entire market fold into econo dumb terminals. Not going to happen. ;)
Click to expand...

XBOX has already been announced to be released by christmas. The hardware in either conosle != a pair of SLI 6800 Ultras, the preview of the PS3 clearly states it has performance greater then a pair of 6800 SLI Ultras.. Even if this were the case, even a year from the release of the XBOX 360, a pair of 6800 ultras + SLI mobo + processor which does not bottleneck the SLI'd cards is not going to be chump change.
 
PC gaming will never die. There is no way it could ever happen. The PC is more flexible for upgrading therefore it wont make you buy a completely new system every time. You just upgrade it piece by piece over the years.

...Dan
 
lol
PC gaming will always be around. There has always been consol games where there was pc games and prices %wise was always comprable. This "discussion" is a waste of time. :rolleyes:
 
Spaceninja said:
Remember the Neo Geo? That was $500 for the basic unit, and $800 for the "Gold" System. The 3DO was around $500 at its release as well. They have been that high. At that time no one wanted to spend that kind of cash. Not to mention Mom and Dad weren't spending that kind of cash for the systems. Granted they could outdo anything on the market at the time.

So they have been that high.
Click to expand...

The reason Neo Geo failed though was because each GAME cost about $120 too! The basic unit would have probably sold better if it weren't for that. But that system was for a small niche anyway that wanted arcade quality games now (back then :) )
3DO just never had any real support or games.
 
To me PC gaming is going down hill (for me) as i am tired of upgrading to play the next best thing. I'm also tired of putting up with buggy games and then depend on patches to make them somewhat playable. The xbox 360 seems to be my choice so far due to the fact that as a PC gamer AA is really important to me, The xbox 360 has been the only one to anounce it's AA capabilties. Not having AA is what turned me off from h=this last gen.
 
Netrat33 said:
The reason Neo Geo failed though was because each GAME cost about $120 too! The basic unit would have probably sold better if it weren't for that. But that system was for a small niche anyway that wanted arcade quality games now (back then :) )
3DO just never had any real support or games.
Click to expand...


Yeah the Neo Geo wasn't a good seller... when your games are $150 to $300 each it kinds keeps people away from them.
 
bonkrowave said:
Much the same way, not everyone can afford a 700$ videocard 500$ processor, and 300$ worth of ram.
Click to expand...

That is a seriously biased and misleading statement....

You can run every game out there today at 1280x1024, and many at 1600x1200 on a PC that cost $1300, (with a 20 inch LCD!):

Case: $50
PSU: $110
Mobo: $120
CPU: $180
Videocard: $200
RAM: $100
DVD Drive: $40
Monitor: $400
Accessories: $100

Total: $1300

When you want to upgrade, which you only need to do every 2 years or so, a lot that stuff can be dropped from the list... Case, PSU, DVD Drive, Monitor, and Accessories.

So total cost every 2 years for upgrades after the initial purchase is about $600.

Yes, it's more than a console (assuming you don't count the HDTV), but it's still only an average of $300 or so a year after the initial purchase.... I know plenty of people who blow way more than that for the basic supplies of their hobbies.
 
bonkrowave said:
Wrong ... its was 400$

Notice I said no has console ever gone over 500$

If a console is 500$ for the basic system that means it did not go over 500$ There are always bundles that have additional features / games included, extra controller, of course these can go over 500$.

THe point is ... no system has gone over 500$ for the basic system.

It is also rumoured that the XBOX 360 with the hardrive (the more costly of the 2 bundles) will be just under 500$.
Click to expand...
http://www.google.com/search?num=50&hl=en&en-US:official&q=3do+price+release+$700&btnG=Search

Also,
Unfortunately the 3DO console itself was priced at $700,
Click to expand...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_3DO_Company

I had a friend who bought one. He paid $700 + tax, retail.
 
PC gaming has always been better not only in graphics but even the games. Somone posted that if they buy a console they won't have to upgrade for 4+ years. Yea thats true but you don't have to upgrade your PC all the time either. I'll bet right now a GF3 video card can still play every game abiet in a lower resolution. But thats fine who cares. Even 640 resolution is still better then most CRT TV's with a higher re-fresh rate and that = less eye strain. I can play games on my PC all day and night but can only handle a console game for an hour then my eyes bleed from the bloddy shity TV res and re-fresh.

I don't know why but most people think if you buy a PC you have to upgrade it two times a year to play PC games. Thats retarted LOL
 
spyderz said:
To me PC gaming is going down hill (for me) as i am tired of upgrading to play the next best thing.
Click to expand...


This statement is usually alot "just in your head" mentality.
Many older video cards and processors can play many of today's games. But people on computer always for some reason feel like they need to play at highest possible resolutions all the time when if they just lower the resolutions and details would probably still look better than a console version of the game. Consoles have the limitation set so you can't really compare it to anything. So there goes into the "just in your head" mentality. The higher resolutions, eyecandy, shadows whatever are the "treat" of the game. The game itself is supposed to be fun.
 
maleficarus said:
PC gaming has always been better not only in graphics but even the games. Somone posted that if they buy a console they won't have to upgrade for 4+ years. Yea thats true but you don't have to upgrade your PC all the time either. I'll bet right now a GF3 video card can still play every game abiet in a lower resolution. But thats fine who cares. Even 640 resolution is still better then most CRT TV's with a higher re-fresh rate and that = less eye strain. I can play games on my PC all day and night but can only handle a console game for an hour then my eyes bleed from the bloddy shity TV res and re-fresh.

I don't know why but most people think if you buy a PC you have to upgrade it two times a year to play PC games. Thats retarted LOL
Click to expand...

heh. exactly!
 
Qwertyman said:
wrong...the 3D0 debuted for $700-$800.

http://www.playerschoicegames.com/3DO.htm
Click to expand...

I call B$ on this. I paid cash for my 3DO on launch day and it was only $400.

Edit: I just noticed that the figure was already rebutted. Too slow on my part! :p


But to actually contribute to this thread, I have to say that as a general rule of thumb, people have less and less free time these days, and to compare console gaming, where the experience is simply plug and play to PC gaming, where there is an infinite amount of configuration, tweaking and patching, not only to the games but to the OS as well; why would anyone choose the longer/harder route just to enjoy some entertainment. Not only that but as of the X360/PS3/Revolution generation, consoles functionality will be rivaling that of the home computer. The only thing they won't be able to do at this point is run buisness apps and actually support multiple protocol internet functionality, HTTP/FTP/IRC/etc...
 
bonkrowave said:
XBOX has already been announced to be released by christmas. The hardware in either conosle != a pair of SLI 6800 Ultras, the preview of the PS3 clearly states it has performance greater then a pair of 6800 SLI Ultras.. Even if this were the case, even a year from the release of the XBOX 360, a pair of 6800 ultras + SLI mobo + processor which does not bottleneck the SLI'd cards is not going to be chump change.
Click to expand...

Alright, forget about all this for a second. I think you're overstating a bit, but that's beside the point. Do you truly believe that ATI and nVidia are going to STOP making top end video cards and develop SOLEY for consoles that are redesigned every 5 years and completely abandon their "bread and butter" market? If they TRULY developed these console graphics that would TOTALLY "destroy" PC gaming and their economic model they would be retards. They may make scrapes in the chipset markets, but I would have to say the only way they can possibly maintain stockholders intrests would be to develop their own consoles so they get the piece of the pie they lose with the games being sold.

No....I would think its more likely that both companies are keeping a bit quiet on their long term roadmaps to let the hype sink in. Besides, we have not really seen what 64 bit gaming and multi threading gaming will be capable of yet. You want cutting edge, I think you're going to have to stick with the PC. If I were ATI or nVidia, I would look into developing a dumbed down gaming operating system with their own gaming SDK with OpenGL or a DirectX type interface. This way they dictate what features their hardware supports, rather then let Microsoft tell them what the limits are :D
 
aBSoLuT_0 said:
I call B$ on this. I paid cash for my 3DO on launch day and it was only $400.
Click to expand...
The Goldstar, right? The Panasonic was $700. The Goldstar was crippled in some way or other, can't recall exactly.

In any event, I'm pretty sure it came out after the Panasonic.
 
Diseaseboy said:
I don't think that PC gaming is going to offer an experience that is worth 3 or 4 X (or more) the money over the new consoles any more. A mouse/keyboard and the "intimacy" of the monitor is not going to be enough to justify spending $1000.00 or more over what a console costs. I personally feel this is going to trickle down and eventually hurt the hardcore gaming pc market. Developers will soon ignore the PC as a market for their games. This may explain why Nvidia has diversified it's product offering outside of just GPU's the last few years- they see this coming.
__________________
Click to expand...
PC gaming will never die. How can you even say that? I'm more of a console person, and I don't agree with this at all.

I like PC gaming because of mods and the ability to make home-brew games a hell of a lot more easier than a console game. I like the PC gaming market because I don't have to pay some EA-ish company to publish my games.

Developers will NEVER ignore the PC market if they develop for multi-platform.
 
I won’t get into the merits of PC's vs. Consoles as a hardware discussion, but I do see a disturbing issue from the software standpoint.

Some of the most fulfilling gaming I have ever played have been MODS of games. Battlefield 1942 = Desert Combat, Tribes = Renegades, Half-life = Counterstrike. This is just to name a few. It takes a $50 game and extends its replayability to almost infinite possibilities.

I don't think I have ever seen anything like this on a console (From a game playability standpoint). That is disappointing. From what it sounds like the Xbox360 has hints of this, but I doubt it will be left to the skills and ingenuity of dedicated game playing individuals with a great idea, but rather some marketing person that doesn’t see the $ potential for a different game based on the same engine.

With consoles they almost demand conformity. This in some cases is a good thing... You get consistency. With that you also get complacency which is not good.

Without consoles allowing people to MOD the games, I dread the day where we are not allowed to drive the content of a game past its original Intent.
 
bipolar said:
The Goldstar, right? The Panasonic was $700. The Goldstar was crippled in some way or other, can't recall exactly.

In any event, I'm pretty sure it came out after the Panasonic.
Click to expand...

Nope, I bought it from Babbage's (prior to the GameStop conglomerate) and it was the Panasonic 3DO FZ-1.

Edit: Perhaps I didn't purchase it at launch, but if my memory serves me correctly, and it usually does... but I certainly can't argue with the overwhelming evidence found on the internet. :p
 
It really is just repeating what happend when the first Xbox came out it had Geforce 4 tech when the PC only had Geforce 3. Now i know that NVIDIA and ATI have come out with the 512mb cards but not much has changed for awhile for the cores. I believe (and hope) that the companies will now be able to put more effort into a new GPU cores for PC's. As for PC gaming dead Nahhhhhhh. I don't see PC gaming leaving anytime soon. If worse comes to worse it'll just become an integration of the the two.
 
aBSoLuT_0 said:
Nope, I bought it from Babbage's (prior to the GameStop conglomerate) and it was the Panasonic 3DO FZ-1.
Click to expand...
Every source on the web and wikipedia says $700. Perhaps you got a special deal... traded in games or something.
 
Trepidati0n said:
I believe the problem is that you are taking a $400 console that is being sold WELL below its actual cost and comparing it to todays hardware. However if you wait a year you won't need a $700 vid card, $500 process, and $300 worth of RAM to rival it. The PS2 and the XBOX both were better than PC's the day of their release but it didn't take long before PC's again were back in front.

We will all bask in the glory of the PS3/360 for about 6-9 months then we'll start bitching again that a PC's are better.

-tReP
Click to expand...

Well said.
 
arentol said:
That is a seriously biased and misleading statement....

You can run every game out there today at 1280x1024, and many at 1600x1200 on a PC that cost $1300, (with a 20 inch LCD!):

Case: $50
PSU: $110
Mobo: $120
CPU: $180
Videocard: $200
RAM: $100
DVD Drive: $40
Monitor: $400
Accessories: $100

Total: $1300

When you want to upgrade, which you only need to do every 2 years or so, a lot that stuff can be dropped from the list... Case, PSU, DVD Drive, Monitor, and Accessories.

So total cost every 2 years for upgrades after the initial purchase is about $600.

Yes, it's more than a console (assuming you don't count the HDTV), but it's still only an average of $300 or so a year after the initial purchase.... I know plenty of people who blow way more than that for the basic supplies of their hobbies.
Click to expand...

To be fair start from scratch for the console.

Console: $300
extra controler: $40
1 Game: $75
TV: For your average size $400

All said and done a console will set you back $800+ and thats with only buying 1 game. So as you can see the $$$ difference isn't as bad as it once was. But here is the kicker. You go to sell that PS2 a few years later and you will be lucky to get enough for a case of beer. You sell a 2 year old PC and your good for several hundred easy.
 
maleficarus said:
To be fair start from scratch for the console.

Console: $300
extra controler: $40
1 Game: $75
TV: For your average size $400

All said and done a console will set you back $800+ and thats with only buying 1 game. So as you can see the $$$ difference isn't as bad as it once was. But here is the kicker. You go to sell that PS2 a few years later and you will be lucky to get enough for a case of beer. You sell a 2 year old PC and your good for several hundred easy.
Click to expand...

These is just one example. I know in my case I would only buy the console and 1 game, which would cut the cost by more then half. Your example is not typical.
 
First I would like to say that these numbers are pure bs.
The people who collect them ONLY collect from retail store sales.
SO nothing on steam was reported...nothing purchased online was collected.

you need to remember that you can make anything you want out of numbers.
84% of the researchers will tell you that. and the other 23% won't.
these numbers are accurate + or - 7%
7% of what we won't know until we get the full data collected.
then since we will no longer be using a sample but a population
ok who stole chapter 8 ?

you also need to remember that pc people are purchasing more and more online to save money, while console people don't care how bad mom and dad get it up the ass, they just know that billy has this game and I WANT IT!!!
 
Netrat33 said:
This statement is usually alot "just in your head" mentality.
Many older video cards and processors can play many of today's games. But people on computer always for some reason feel like they need to play at highest possible resolutions all the time when if they just lower the resolutions and details would probably still look better than a console version of the game. Consoles have the limitation set so you can't really compare it to anything. So there goes into the "just in your head" mentality. The higher resolutions, eyecandy, shadows whatever are the "treat" of the game. The game itself is supposed to be fun.
Click to expand...

Whats wrong with wanting it all? I mean you pay more for a GFX than you would for a console but yet a console you can play with shadows, etc. Make a poll most people playing on PC's do it because for the graphics in the first place. This trend was set years ago, first visuals then gameplay. You don't see developers saying "this year we're bringing to the pc next gen gamplay" do you? How far do you think far cry would've gotten without it's visuals. But you do have some what of a point, i just hope you understand mine.
 
Well its pretty clear that PC gaming will never die because consoles are just becoming more and more like PCs. So if they eventually merge does this mean I can play the little halo boys with their gimpy controllers with my mouse and keyboard and show them how bad they actually are at FPS's? :)
 
Alright everyone, I'll sum this up real quick.

Pc gaming will not die because there will ALWAYS be pc gamers, and there WILL ALWAYS BE MONEY TO BE MADE BY SELLING PC GAMES! Even though it's rare there are pc games that sell a million copies...
 
bonkrowave said:
The PS3 and XBOX 360 are a much greater leap in terms of performance, and technology then their previous generations were. It will be at least 12-16 months before there is any sort of Hardware for the PC that can rival the power of these consoles. And at that point it will be new and pricey, so it will cost very near the figures I quoted earlier.

And anyone who is quoting prices for either of the consoles, at this point, is clearly making figures up.
Click to expand...
This is such a ridiculous supposition. Why ? Because the XBOX 360 graphics chip is made by ATI and the PS3 graphics chip is made by nVidia. You really think they won't come out with a comparable card for your PC in the near future ? Please.
 
PC gaming will never die simply because of two reasons: keyboard and mouse :D I dont know about you guys, but I hate trying to play a console FPS with one of those bulky, shitty controllers. Ditto for RTS games, which are basically unplayable on consoles.
 
If these consoles have so much freaking power, I don't understand how these things could possibly sell for 500 dollars. They seem to trump any personal computer hardware ten-fold and its suppose to sell for 500 wtf. I don't understand how they will even come close to covering the costs of the system,
 
maleficarus said:
To be fair start from scratch for the console.

Console: $300
extra controler: $40
1 Game: $75
TV: For your average size $400

All said and done a console will set you back $800+ and thats with only buying 1 game. So as you can see the $$$ difference isn't as bad as it once was. But here is the kicker. You go to sell that PS2 a few years later and you will be lucky to get enough for a case of beer. You sell a 2 year old PC and your good for several hundred easy.
Click to expand...


Don't forget 3000$ for a HD TV if you don't want it to look like crap.
 
mrmagoo_83 said:
Yea because how many people use their PC for soley gaming. AND I MEAN JUST GAMING. You turn it on for a game, and turn it off when you are done with it, nothing else, no surfing, music no nothing.

That is why there will always be PCs, and always be games for the PC. They are a multipurpose environment. People will always give a little extra so that their wordprocessor will play the latest games.
Click to expand...

True true. If anything, my computer saves me money.

Here's why:

1) I'm going to have a fast enough computer anyway so i can enjoy doing all the other multimedia stuff i do on it. The only extra expense for gaming would probably be a video card which only costs me about $100 to upgrade every 2 years after i sell my old one.
2) Computer games are relatively inexpensive. I can't recall spending more that $10 on any game in the last year (buying used or on special)

So I'm not dumping a ton of "extra" money into my computer. Considering how much i save on games, and just the fact that i would have a nice computer around anyway, I'll come out ahead using the computer.
 
deadrody said:
This is such a ridiculous supposition. Why ? Because the XBOX 360 graphics chip is made by ATI and the PS3 graphics chip is made by nVidia. You really think they won't come out with a comparable card for your PC in the near future ? Please.
Click to expand...

If you just look at their respective roadmaps you will see, quite clearly, that the next gen cards are not going to be comparable.

MY supposition is ridiculous ? why because I base it on both those companies future roadmaps ? what is yours based on ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top