Sony has formed the ‘PlayStation PC’ label for its PC games push.

[DukenukemX]

PC gaming includes browser games and free to play gambling like games. These are popular in places like Asia. They make large amounts of money. However, they're a very different experience from AAA or even AA games like Fallout, Battlefield or The Witcher. Consoles still sell more of those types of games than PC.

Doom Eternal sales on PC is far greater than that on consoles. Witcher 3 sold more copies on PC than all the consoles combined. Neither Call of Duty or Battlefield have any info on PC vs console sales, and Fallout 4's sales numbers are from 2016 at best with a reported 12 million sold but according to SteamSpy it sold 5million to 10 million copies, making it hard to determine how many were actually sold. Horizon Zero Dawn sold 700k on PC while PS4 sold 7.6 million but that's to be expected with a 3 years release window. Generally if the developers release the sales numbers it's usually PC equaling or surpassing Playstation sales.

That's a fair point I should have mentioned, and it reinforces the argument. Thanks! PC diehards like to pretend every gamer has a speedy system with a dedicated GPU and a hefty Steam library, but the truth is that many gamers are playing web titles or using budget machines with integrated graphics. They might not even know what Steam is.

Web browsing based games make up a fraction of gaming on PC. LukeTbk already posted the numbers showing that browser PC gaming is like 2% of the overall market with AAA games being 21% of the overall market. While the console market is 28% overall, but you can figure out that Sony doesn't have anywhere near the sales that PC gaming has, unless you think Sony owns 100% of console sales? How much copium are you guys taking in?

Hell, the Steam hardware survey as of October 2021 shows that 8.9% of users are running Intel graphics, and a significant portion of AMD's 15.2% are using integrated GPUs. In other words, a significant chunk of Steam users don't even meet the minimum requirements for Sony's PC ports.

Believe it or not but the PC gaming market has been struggling for a while when it comes to GPU prices. The GTX 1060 is like 10% of the Steam hardware survey and that's like a 5 year old GPU, going onto 6. Basically most gamers are broke, and going console won't fix it. I just looked on Ebay and the PS5's are still going for well over $1k. Also don't underestimate the capabilities of integrated GPU's.

 

[Aurelius]

Web browsing based games make up a fraction of gaming on PC. LukeTbk already posted the numbers showing that browser PC gaming is like 2% of the overall market with AAA games being 23% of the overall market. While the console market is 28% overall, but you can figure out that Sony doesn't have anywhere near the sales that PC gaming has, unless you think Sony owns 100% of console sales? How much copium are you guys taking in?

That's revenue, not market share, but it still makes the market smaller for these games smaller (21%, not 23% as you claim). And again, you're incorrectly assuming that all of the revenue attached to 'conventional' PC gaming is spent by people buying AAA games for PCs with reasonably capable hardware. We'd need more detailed stats to be sure, but even if the Steam stats were a perfect microcosm of PC gaming at large (they're not) they'd shrink the addressable audience further still.

Of course Sony doesn't own the full console market. I never said it did. But it's certainly a large portion of that market; PS5 sales actually overtook the Switch in the US. And importantly, unlike the PC gaming market, there's very little fragmentation based on hardware capability. The original PS4 will run virtually any PS4 game properly, even titles released in 2021; a $300 Best Buy sale PC can't (realistically) play many 3D games from the past few years. In other words, Sony may well have a larger potential customer base than the PC gaming world, if just because every existing PlayStation owner can consider the company's games where only a fraction of PC gamers could do the same.

Believe it or not but the PC gaming market has been struggling for a while when it comes to GPU prices. The GTX 1060 is like 10% of the Steam hardware survey and that's like a 5 year old GPU, going onto 6. Basically most gamers are broke, and going console won't fix it. I just looked on Ebay and the PS5's are still going for well over $1k. Also don't underestimate the capabilities of integrated GPU's

I know it has, but that doesn't change the reality: even on Steam, where many hardcore gamers live, a large chunk of users can't actually play a game like Horizon Zero Dawn. Their GPU is insufficient whether it's dedicated or not. And yes, I know integrated graphics are getting better, but even Intel's Xe gets clobbered by the GTX 780 you need to run a game like HZD. Many PC gamers may be broke... but that often means they can't play those Sony titles on any platform, not just on a console.

I'm not factoring chip and product shortages into this because they apply to everyone and aren't always the determining factor. You can still score a PS5 at MSRP if you play your cards right, even if it's unlikely at the moment. As it is, the point remains the same: it's disingenuous to claim Sony is "seeing the light" and shifting much of its attention to PCs, because the portion of PC gamers who can actually play its games (and haven't already bought them on PS4/PS5) is likely much smaller than that total PC market share. There's a large-enough market to justify PC ports, but not enough for Sony to prioritize PC gamers. You are the afterthought.

 

[GoodBoy]

It's about numbers. PC is a minority. High end PCs that can really make a PC better than a console are even a more fringe minority. You're making the "why don't they design downtown NYC streets for super cars. Everyone knows the super car is the superior car" argument here.

Minority??? LOL.

There were 650 million pc gamers as of 2020, data from one of the JR Peddle reports.

How many Xbox X have been sold? 8 million as of October 2021, so 10 extra months compared to the PC numbers. Playstation 4, 113.9 million, so lets just say 114 million. Thing about consoles and console players, there is a lot of overlap. So those 114 million playstation owners? Probably 7 million of them also own an Xbox. So rough guess, there are 115 million console players vs 650 million pc players.

Why are you ever here? This is the "fringe minority" according to you.

 

[GoodBoy]

(Finally read the rest of the thread)
You know, lots of arguments about hardware and pc vs console.. Sony will make games for pc, I assume this mostly means, porting their console exclusive games to pc. Ok, great. But. Are there even any Playstation exclusive games I will care to play?
Someone will have to educate me, as I have never owned a playstation, ever.

 

[DukenukemX]

That's revenue, not market share, but it still makes the market smaller for these games smaller

It's generally free games anyway.

(21%, not 23% as you claim).

Yea sorry I fixed that.

And again, you're incorrectly assuming that all of the revenue attached to 'conventional' PC gaming is spent by people buying AAA games for PCs with reasonably capable hardware. We'd need more detailed stats to be sure, but even if the Steam stats were a perfect microcosm of PC gaming at large (they're not) they'd shrink the addressable audience further still.

In the end it's revenue that companies care about, not sales. We care about sales not revenue. The more people buying games that we love then the more games like that will get developed. Also, there's a reason why the mobile market is huge because a lot of people don't have the money to buy a console and the game as well. Which is why free games generally do better and usually target those with Intel and AMD APU's.

And importantly, unlike the PC gaming market, there's very little fragmentation based on hardware capability.

So when did Sony announce that the PS5 can play PS1, PS2, and PS3 games? As a PC user I can play those console games, but the PS5 cannot. Xbox Series can which is credit to Microsoft, but not Sony. Nintendo now charges a $50 yearly fee to play N64 games and some games are priced higher than their original price. Sony was also quick to try and shutdown the PS3 network as well as the Vita. So there maybe no fragmentation but then again you really can't play your old games without pulling out your old hardware. PC has hardware fragmentation but honestly that's to the PC's advantage. Again, how much is the PS5 now on Ebay? PC users can at least use a 5+ year old GPU to play modern games and avoid the insane pricing while Demon Souls needs a new expensive PS5 to play a game that could easily run on a PS4 with some graphics downgrades. That same 5+ GPU can also play older games including emulators for older consoles.

I know it has, but that doesn't change the reality: even on Steam, where many hardcore gamers live, a large chunk of users can't actually play a game like Horizon Zero Dawn. Their GPU is insufficient whether it's dedicated or not. And yes, I know integrated graphics are getting better, but even Intel's Xe gets clobbered by the GTX 780 you need to run a game like HZD. Many PC gamers may be broke... but that often means they can't play those Sony titles on any platform, not just on a console.

Ok and a PS3 owner can't play Horizon Zero Dawn. For the same reason why someone with integrated graphics can't because they're broke.

I'm not factoring chip and product shortages into this because they apply to everyone and aren't always the determining factor. You can still score a PS5 at MSRP if you play your cards right, even if it's unlikely at the moment.

My cousin was able to score a EVGA RTX 3060 for MSRP but he was on a waiting list. That doesn't mean it's easier on PC or console it just means it's insane.

As it is, the point remains the same: it's disingenuous to claim Sony is "seeing the light" and shifting much of its attention to PCs, because the portion of PC gamers who can actually play its games (and haven't already bought them on PS4/PS5) is likely much smaller than that total PC market share. There's a large-enough market to justify PC ports, but not enough for Sony to prioritize PC gamers. You are the afterthought.

I'm not saying that Sony is going to prioritize to PC but they want to see how releasing games on PC will effect their brand. They like money and releasing games on PC is more money. The question they have is will this effect PS5 game sales and will the return on PC outweigh the loss on console? Maybe new games on PS5 might take 3 years or 1 year or no years to port to PC, depending on how profitable it is on PC. PC gaming is not in a good spot right now due to insane GPU prices so of course many PC gamers are waiting for a market shift. When RTX 3070 performance GPU's are $250, then we'll see a massive market shift, but who knows when and if it'll happen. For all I know we all go APU and forget discrete GPU's.

 

[Aurelius]

In the end it's revenue that companies care about, not sales. We care about sales not revenue. The more people buying games that we love then the more games like that will get developed. Also, there's a reason why the mobile market is huge because a lot of people don't have the money to buy a console and the game as well. Which is why free games generally do better and usually target those with Intel and AMD APU's.

Revenue is important, but it also matters where that revenue comes from and how likely you are to tap into it. We can't assume that PC gaming revenue is coming from a horde of people who would happily buy Horizon or God of War, but somehow haven't grabbed on a PlayStation years ago.

So when did Sony announce that the PS5 can play PS1, PS2, and PS3 games? As a PC user I can play those console games, but the PS5 cannot. Xbox Series can which is credit to Microsoft, but not Sony. Nintendo now charges a $50 yearly fee to play N64 games and some games are priced higher than their original price. Sony was also quick to try and shutdown the PS3 network as well as the Vita. So there maybe no fragmentation but then again you really can't play your old games without pulling out your old hardware. PC has hardware fragmentation but honestly that's to the PC's advantage. Again, how much is the PS5 now on Ebay? PC users can at least use a 5+ year old GPU to play modern games and avoid the insane pricing while Demon Souls needs a new expensive PS5 to play a game that could easily run on a PS4 with some graphics downgrades. That same 5+ GPU can also play older games including emulators for older consoles.

Bootleg copies of games in an emulator isn't exactly true backward compatibility, and not something I'd rely on. It's handy for hardcore fans who know what they're doing, but not really a big market. Sony could just as easily swoop in and shut it down overnight.

We're talking about the new games market here. If you put out a new PS4 game, the clear majority of active PlayStation owners can play it right away. The Demon's Souls PS5-only limitation was a choice for the developer, not the fault of the platform. And no, the PC's hardware fragmentation isn't much of an advantage. It lets developers push some boundaries, but it also means game developers are chasing after smaller pieces of the pie or spend more time testing a wide range of hardware. You're gonna make sacrifices if you have to support everything from that $300 bargain-basement PC through to a $3,000 monster machine.

I'm not saying that Sony is going to prioritize to PC but they want to see how releasing games on PC will effect their brand. They like money and releasing games on PC is more money. The question they have is will this effect PS5 game sales and will the return on PC outweigh the loss on console? Maybe new games on PS5 might take 3 years or 1 year or no years to port to PC, depending on how profitable it is on PC. PC gaming is not in a good spot right now due to insane GPU prices so of course many PC gamers are waiting for a market shift. When RTX 3070 performance GPU's are $250, then we'll see a massive market shift, but who knows when and if it'll happen. For all I know we all go APU and forget discrete GPU's.

There is a degree of testing the waters. I just don't think you should get your hopes up between Sony's obvious hardware incentives and the market factors I've described. Unless there's runaway demand for these PC ports, and there likely won't be, you'll likely have to get used to PlayStation titles being "second hand" on PC. Great if you insisted on holding out, but won't do much if you want day-and-date simultaneous releases.

 

[Flogger23m]

Doom Eternal sales on PC is far greater than that on consoles.

That link provides no hard numbers, just a "we think" without even bringing up how they came to that guess.

Witcher 3 sold more copies on PC than all the consoles combined.

Not sure how you're getting that. It took over 3 years post release for PC sale numbers to reach parity with console numbers. It doesn't show 2020 to 2021, but going by the chart, more copies were sold on consoles. And what matters most is revenue. PC sales started to pickup and maintain higher as time went on which is typical. But Selling a game at $60 will net you more profit than selling a game at $10, even accounting for store fee differences.

Likewise, Witcher 3 was the first game on console. They had a delayed Xbox port which was fairly terrible for Witcher 2. It sold great considering it was the final game of a trilogy that was the first real entry on those platforms. Playstation still doesn't have Witcher 1 or 2. I'm sure it would've sold better had it Playstation players been able to play the series from the start. You'll often see that for many game series. Games that have been historically Playstation exclusives do exceptionally well there compared to other platforms as well. Typically takes a few releases on other platforms to grow their fan base there.

Fact is that game development is getting more expensive. Why sell 10 million games when you can sell 13-14 million games? As stated by Sony this is to capture other markets. The Asian gaming landscape is quite odd. You have countries that essentially only game on console (Japan) and countries that essentially only game on PC (Korea, Taiwan). Sony is trying to tap into those markets and make profits from them. They've stated this plainly in the past. Of course, they'll sell thousands if not millions of copies to PC gamers in the West to. Sony could use some wins. It seems like outside of gaming they've been on the loosing end for a good 15+ years. I can see why they want to expand their gaming markets.

 

[cybereality]

It's definitely a good thing. I just don't think we can expect day-and-date releases. Sony makes a lot of money off PlayStation, and putting all the games on PC day one doesn't make sense financially.

However, once a game has been out on PS and sold what it was going to sell, they can make some easy money porting to PC. There are many PC gamers that don't own a console and would never have the option to purchase if it weren't ported.

And you also have double-dippers, who played on console but will buy the game again for PC to get real 4K, high refresh, ultrawide, mods, etc. And this is with no lost sales for Sony, as the game is old at that point and sold what it was going to sell.

I mean, if the sales on PC were really booming, maybe they would consider releasing a big game on day one as an experiment. It seems to be working for Microsoft, but we never get any real clear numbers.

 

[Aurelius]

It's definitely a good thing. I just don't think we can expect day-and-date releases. Sony makes a lot of money off PlayStation, and putting all the games on PC day one doesn't make sense financially.

However, once a game has been out on PS and sold what it was going to sell, they can make some easy money porting to PC. There are many PC gamers that don't own a console and would never have the option to purchase if it weren't ported.

And you also have double-dippers, who played on console but will buy the game again for PC to get real 4K, high refresh, ultrawide, mods, etc. And this is with no lost sales for Sony, as the game is old at that point and sold what it was going to sell.

I mean, if the sales on PC were really booming, maybe they would consider releasing a big game on day one as an experiment. It seems to be working for Microsoft, but we never get any real clear numbers.

That's my thinking. As much as the PC diehards want this to be a tidal shift, it's not so long as Sony has a successful PlayStation business (and it does). It's Sony realizing that it can extract more profit from a game with a relatively small additional investment... that is, a PC port.

My concern with Microsoft is that we're not really sure if the strategy is working, or if there are other factors at play. If it's technically easy to release a game simultaneously for Xbox and Windows, it becomes a "why not" decision where strategy is almost incidental. And Microsoft is notorious for trying to push strategies regardless of whether or not they work (see: the Steve Ballmer era).

 

[Lakados]

Minority??? LOL.

There were 650 million pc gamers as of 2020, data from one of the JR Peddle reports.

How many Xbox X have been sold? 8 million as of October 2021, so 10 extra months compared to the PC numbers. Playstation 4, 113.9 million, so lets just say 114 million. Thing about consoles and console players, there is a lot of overlap. So those 114 million playstation owners? Probably 7 million of them also own an Xbox. So rough guess, there are 115 million console players vs 650 million pc players.

Why are you ever here? This is the "fringe minority" according to you.

There may be 5x more PC gamers than Console gamers, but console gamers outspend PC gamers by a significant amount those 650 million PC gamers spent a collective $37B in 2020, but those 114M console gamers spent $45B in the same time frame, both dwarfed by Mobile gaming which pulled in $98B. Development time and effort go where the money is, and consoles/mobile offer far better returns on investment than PC gaming so while the PC market is too big to die, it isn't going to be the focus for a lot of developers.

I am really happy though that Sony is putting out a PC division, architecturally there is not a lot that differentiates a PS5 from a modern gaming PC, at this point they don't really even need to "port" their games, with many of the features of Windows 11, and newer game engines it is easier than ever to cross launch titles across all sorts of platforms. Let me play on my PC and I will gladly shell out for an official Sony wireless controller and happily use whatever new store they decide to launch their titles.

 

[DukenukemX]

That link provides no hard numbers, just a "we think" without even bringing up how they came to that guess.

I believe them more than your comment that "Consoles still sell more of those types of games than PC". It's also their business to track activity in games so yea. Again it's not like ID Software or Bethesda released any information on how many copies they sold of Doom Eternal, so we are forced to figure this out ourselves most of the time.

Not sure how you're getting that. It took over 3 years post release for PC sale numbers to reach parity with console numbers.

Yea all 3 consoles.

It doesn't show 2020 to 2021,

Because the article was made in 2020.

but going by the chart, more copies were sold on consoles.

It shows that 53% were sold on PC so I don't get how you conclude more were on console?

And what matters most is revenue. PC sales started to pickup and maintain higher as time went on which is typical. But Selling a game at $60 will net you more profit than selling a game at $10, even accounting for store fee differences.

More importantly it shows that PC users are willing to wait for the price of games to drop before buying it. Also Witcher 3 is $40 on Steam and $50 for GOTY Edition right now.

Likewise, Witcher 3 was the first game on console. They had a delayed Xbox port which was fairly terrible for Witcher 2. It sold great considering it was the final game of a trilogy that was the first real entry on those platforms. Playstation still doesn't have Witcher 1 or 2. I'm sure it would've sold better had it Playstation players been able to play the series from the start. You'll often see that for many game series. Games that have been historically Playstation exclusives do exceptionally well there compared to other platforms as well. Typically takes a few releases on other platforms to grow their fan base there.

It just sounds like you're making excuses with extra steps. While I can agree with the idea that games typically sell better on a platform they've been known to sell on, I believe that the Witcher 3 is one of those exceptions. Especially since it sold more on PS4 at first and then later on PC. Dark Souls series sold 40% on PC which is rather impressive since it was later released on PC. Point is PC is selling very well in general which is why we're seeing Sony porting their games to PC.

 

[GoodBoy]

There may be 5x more PC gamers than Console gamers, but console gamers outspend PC gamers by a significant amount those 650 million PC gamers spent a collective $37B in 2020, but those 114M console gamers spent $45B in the same time frame, both dwarfed by Mobile gaming which pulled in $98B. Development time and effort go where the money is, and consoles/mobile offer far better returns on investment than PC gaming so while the PC market is too big to die, it isn't going to be the focus for a lot of developers.

PC Gaming is still not a "minority of gamers".

Those numbers don't tell the whole story. How many games were given away on Epic for free, how many bought on sale? The number of sales is probably the same or higher vs console sales. Regardless, it's definitely not a "minority".

The mobile number is due to a much much larger installed base of hardware, but it's smaller sales - microtransactions. Sure its making money, but if every pc game developer dropped the pc market and developed solely on mobile, they would lose money... many billions. PC Gamers are not going to all suddenly become "mobile gamers", and the existing user base of mobile gamers, a lot of whom can be described as your grandma and mine, are not going to suddenly spend more money because now iD software is exclusively makes mobile games.

 

[Aireoth]

Why do people keep circling this wagon, PC gaming is here to stay, console gaming is here to stay.

One day consoles will probably be 100% pc as well.

 

[Lakados]

PC Gaming is still not a "minority of gamers".

Those numbers don't tell the whole story. How many games were given away on Epic for free, how many bought on sale? The number of sales is probably the same or higher vs console sales. Regardless, it's definitely not a "minority".

The mobile number is due to a much much larger installed base of hardware, but it's smaller sales - microtransactions. Sure its making money, but if every pc game developer dropped the pc market and developed solely on mobile, they would lose money... many billions. PC Gamers are not going to all suddenly become "mobile gamers", and the existing user base of mobile gamers, a lot of whom can be described as your grandma and mine, are not going to suddenly spend more money because now iD software is exclusively makes mobile games.

Free is not free, Epic pays the developers for every free title they give away, a reduced rate I’m sure but the developers still get a cut. This was shown to us in the Epic/Apple lawsuit, so those free games are “gifts” to is from their Fortnight players.

PC gaming isn’t dead or dying, it’s currently just not a priority for most studios, they are going to prioritize consoles first it has cheaper development and better chances of returns. Probably have a mobile tie-in, then a PC release a few months after. Or you will see them come to PC first, then when they put out the first big DLC or expansion it launches with a console release and the DLC is in the base game there. Things like that, PC gaming is too big to die, and has all the best peripherals letting developers do things they can’t do elsewhere and $35B is no small number. It just means there is less room and n the PC market for substandard launches.

But the new Dev kits for the new consoles, make it easier than ever to launch on the modern consoles and pc at the same time. Most of the unique hardware design features in the new consoles is replicated directly or indirectly on PC’s built in the last 2 years. Which is why Sony is now able to seriously look at a PC platform.

 

[cybereality]

PC is huge, and I doubt it will ever die (at least any time soon).

It's where the experimentation happens, so new features like ray tracing, adapative-sync, high refresh monitors, 4K, etc. will be created first before they come to consoles years later.

Even if the revenue numbers are not quite as huge as other platforms, it's still a lot of money.

 

[Aurelius]

PC is huge, and I doubt it will ever die (at least any time soon).

It's where the experimentation happens, so new features like ray tracing, adapative-sync, high refresh monitors, 4K, etc. will be created first before they come to consoles years later.

Even if the revenue numbers are not quite as huge as other platforms, it's still a lot of money.

Oh, this is certainly true for the most part... we just need to remember Sony isn't going to wake up one day and say "y'know what? Forget PlayStation sales, let's make all our console exclusives available day-and-date on PC." Sony is going to prioritize console sales, and that means PC ports are neither guaranteed nor likely to come soon after a PlayStation debut.

 

[Krenum]

PC is huge, and I doubt it will ever die (at least any time soon).

It's where the experimentation happens, so new features like ray tracing, adapative-sync, high refresh monitors, 4K, etc. will be created first before they come to consoles years later.

Agreed, all of that is great, when & if you can buy it, this chip shortage is depressing, its like an artist who can't buy paintbrushes.

Anyway, There are some titles I look forward to on PC, Sony should have done this a long time ago.

 

[DukenukemX]

Oh, this is certainly true for the most part... we just need to remember Sony isn't going to wake up one day and say "y'know what? Forget PlayStation sales, let's make all our console exclusives available day-and-date on PC." Sony is going to prioritize console sales, and that means PC ports are neither guaranteed nor likely to come soon after a PlayStation debut.

Xbox is already going through this right now. It's bad when Halo Infinite has a release date for both PC and console at the same time. Nobody wants to admit that Xbox has died during the Xbox One era and that Microsoft has shifted the market from console hardware to platform based and they're doing this through PC and cloud gaming. Despite Microsoft giving no shits about PC gaming for nearly 2 decades, it has thrived without Microsoft. Valve sees this and this is why Valve released the Deck which is honestly a better buy than a Nintendo Switch.

This will happen to Playstation as well, but it will take much longer since Playstation does have good exclusives. As long as Sony time gates their exclusives for PC then they still have more time with their console hardware. Sony may also pull a Microsoft and put more resources on cloud and PC gaming to ensure they have a future. You may even see their games make it to Switch as Microsoft has done. The era of the console will end eventually.

 

[cybereality]

Despite Microsoft giving no shits about PC gaming for nearly 2 decades, it has thrived without Microsoft.

This is simply not true.

Microsoft designed DirectX, which like 95% of game developers use to make PC games (at least on Windows), as well as XInput and other technologies (for game controllers, of which the Xbox controller is the PC standard).

They created Visual Studio (and even have a free version for hobbyists) which is what nearly all game developers use to make games. It's also been updated to allow better game development, previewing 3D models, optimization, etc.

In the past few years, Microsoft has been adding gaming features to Windows, like the Game Bar, Xbox Integration, video capture, optimizations to reduce latency, work better with adaptive sync, etc.

They have been releasing Xbox games on PC for years, like Gears 5 and Forza 4, which came out on Steam (though I think were originally only on the Windows Store).

Honestly, they've done more for PC gaming than just about any other company, especially with regards to providing tools and support for game developers (which is why almost all games come out Windows and very little for Mac and Linux).

 

[Aurelius]

Xbox is already going through this right now. It's bad when Halo Infinite has a release date for both PC and console at the same time. Nobody wants to admit that Xbox has died during the Xbox One era and that Microsoft has shifted the market from console hardware to platform based and they're doing this through PC and cloud gaming. Despite Microsoft giving no shits about PC gaming for nearly 2 decades, it has thrived without Microsoft. Valve sees this and this is why Valve released the Deck which is honestly a better buy than a Nintendo Switch.

This will happen to Playstation as well, but it will take much longer since Playstation does have good exclusives. As long as Sony time gates their exclusives for PC then they still have more time with their console hardware. Sony may also pull a Microsoft and put more resources on cloud and PC gaming to ensure they have a future. You may even see their games make it to Switch as Microsoft has done. The era of the console will end eventually.

Lots of wishful thinking and basic factual errors here, I'm afraid.

Microsoft is pushing the PC and cloud gaming not just because the Xbox One struggled, but because it profits from PC sales and cloud gaming (Windows and Azure). Sony doesn't make a computer OS and only offers the gaming service, not the cloud platform it runs on. Also... have you paid attention to Microsoft since 1995? DirectX was designed with gaming in mind. Many of its revisions were meant to improve gaming. It has been pushing in-house games for much of that period (sometimes more than others); even during the Xbox One era, there was some synchronicity between the PC and console sides.

I also have to snicker at claiming the Steam Deck is a better buy than the Switch. It may well be a fine machine, but it's not even out yet (thus any declarations of value are premature) and, more importantly, we don't know how well many PC games will work in practice on the device. The Switch has been out for four years with a huge library of fully-optimized games, including plenty of hits, and it costs less to start with. The Steam Deck only promises to be a strong value if you're already an avid PC gamer and insist on those titles being portable; otherwise, a Switch is just fine.

I wouldn't rule out long-term shifts for Sony, and maybe even consoles in general, but it's not nearly in as much of rush to court PC gamers as Microsoft is. Its PlayStation business is much more successful; it depends more on hardware sales; and like I mentioned, it doesn't have an OS or cloud infrastructure to sell.

I can't see consoles winding down in the foreseeable future; eventually, maybe, but that's true of everything. The problem is that you need a device that fits certain criteria people still very much want: an easy-to-use (as in actually easy, not a PC diehard's definition of easy) living room or handheld machine with tactile controls, an abundance of highly optimized games and an affordable price. That's not a phone; Steam Deck doesn't quite fit the bill, at least not yet; and that's definitely not a conventional PC. Maybe AR and VR, in the long run. But for now, consoles do the job very nicely.

 

[Flogger23m]

I also have to snicker at claiming the Steam Deck is a better buy than the Switch. It may well be a fine machine, but it's not even out yet (thus any declarations of value are premature) and, more importantly, we don't know how well many PC games will work in practice on the device. The Switch has been out for four years with a huge library of fully-optimized games, including plenty of hits, and it costs less to start with. The Steam Deck only promises to be a strong value if you're already an avid PC gamer and insist on those titles being portable; otherwise, a Switch is just fine.

And the Steam Deck is a console. Even if you can run an OS on it, you're not doing work or writing on that thing. I'm sure you'll be able to connect a mouse, keyboard, and l screen, but no one will buy it for that explicit reason when you can get a modular desktop or a laptop.

 

[Aurelius]

And the Steam Deck is a console. Even if you can run an OS on it, you're not doing work or writing on that thing. I'm sure you'll be able to connect a mouse, keyboard, and l screen, but no one will buy it for that explicit reason when you can get a modular desktop or a laptop.

Careful, if DukenukemX realizes it's a console he'll spend the rest of his days boycotting it and predicting Valve's downfall.

 

[cybereality]

And the Steam Deck is a console. Even if you can run an OS on it, you're not doing work or writing on that thing. I'm sure you'll be able to connect a mouse, keyboard, and l screen, but no one will buy it for that explicit reason when you can get a modular desktop or a laptop.

Steam Deck supports cheap USB-C docks, you can easily connect a mouse/keyboard/monitor and have a full KDE Linux desktop experience.

Though it's not the most powerful computer (like I wouldn't do video editing or game development on it) it should be fast enough and comparable to many cheaper laptops and definitely better than Chromebooks.

So for an average person, yes, they can buy a Steam Deck and that can be their one device to replace both their console and PC.

Most people don't do much on the computer, being able to use a web browser and some basic office software would work fine.

 

[Derangel]

Steam Deck supports cheap USB-C docks, you can easily connect a mouse/keyboard/monitor and have a full KDE Linux desktop experience.

Though it's not the most powerful computer (like I wouldn't do video editing or game development on it) it should be fast enough and comparable to many cheaper laptops and definitely better than Chromebooks.

So for an average person, yes, they can buy a Steam Deck and that can be their one device to replace both their console and PC.

Most people don't do much on the computer, being able to use a web browser and some basic office software would work fine.

Most people just use their phones. That’s why PC system sales keep steadily declining.

 

[cybereality]

Most people just use their phones. That’s why PC system sales keep steadily declining.

While that is true, phones can be very limited for anything other than casual web browsing and checking your email.

 

[vegeta535]

While that is true, phones can be very limited for anything other than casual web browsing and checking your email.

As long as they can check Twitter, FB and YouTube then most people are perfectly happy with just a phone.

 

[Derangel]

While that is true, phones can be very limited for anything other than casual web browsing and checking your email.

They’re also fine for watching video, listening to music, and so on. Phones cover everything the average user wants these days.

 

[Flogger23m]

Steam Deck supports cheap USB-C docks, you can easily connect a mouse/keyboard/monitor and have a full KDE Linux desktop experience.

Though it's not the most powerful computer (like I wouldn't do video editing or game development on it) it should be fast enough and comparable to many cheaper laptops and definitely better than Chromebooks.

So for an average person, yes, they can buy a Steam Deck and that can be their one device to replace both their console and PC.

Most people don't do much on the computer, being able to use a web browser and some basic office software would work fine.

And the amount of people buying the console for that is somewhere between 0-2%. When laptops exist, which practically everyone owns, the idea of a mobile computer with a built in controller that needs to be docked is pointless. If you're going to do that most will get a regular laptop which works on the move and you can plug into a monitor/mouse/keyboard at home.

It is certainly a cool device but it won't be filling the role of a mobile computer. It will end up being a console with a more open OS and hopefully can run all Steam games without issue.

 

[OFaceSIG]

Funny how every year there is a high profile article about how PC gaming is dead. Yet, the capabilities and possibilities keep expanding.

 

[DukenukemX]

Microsoft is pushing the PC and cloud gaming not just because the Xbox One struggled, but because it profits from PC sales and cloud gaming (Windows and Azure).

I don't see how Azure plays into this?

Sony doesn't make a computer OS and only offers the gaming service, not the cloud platform it runs on.

Doesn't matter who makes the OS just who makes the store. Who exactly uses Microsofts store to buy anything?

Also... have you paid attention to Microsoft since 1995? DirectX was designed with gaming in mind. Many of its revisions were meant to improve gaming. It has been pushing in-house games for much of that period (sometimes more than others); even during the Xbox One era, there was some synchronicity between the PC and console sides.

If this were the case then Microsoft wouldn't limit DX10 to Vista and DX12 to Windows 10. We were stuck with DX9 games for a long time because of this. I'm sure we're better for it instead of OpenGL and Vulkan, you know universal standards. Microsoft was so big into DirectX that AMD had to release Mantle as Microsoft sat and did nothing. Now DX12 and Vulkan are both derived from Mantle.

I also have to snicker at claiming the Steam Deck is a better buy than the Switch. It may well be a fine machine, but it's not even out yet (thus any declarations of value are premature) and, more importantly, we don't know how well many PC games will work in practice on the device. The Switch has been out for four years with a huge library of fully-optimized games, including plenty of hits, and it costs less to start with. The Steam Deck only promises to be a strong value if you're already an avid PC gamer and insist on those titles being portable; otherwise, a Switch is just fine.

Remind me again on how many games are available on Steam vs Switch?

I can't see consoles winding down in the foreseeable future; eventually, maybe, but that's true of everything. The problem is that you need a device that fits certain criteria people still very much want: an easy-to-use (as in actually easy, not a PC diehard's definition of easy) living room or handheld machine with tactile controls, an abundance of highly optimized games and an affordable price. That's not a phone; Steam Deck doesn't quite fit the bill, at least not yet; and that's definitely not a conventional PC. Maybe AR and VR, in the long run. But for now, consoles do the job very nicely.

Talk about wishful thinking. You serious believe that PC gaming is not easy to use? Might as tell me that you can't use gamepads and hook it up to a TV with that old tired trope.

 

[Aurelius]

I don't see how Azure plays into this?

Microsoft runs its gaming services (cloud gaming, store, Xbox Live, etc.) on its own cloud platforms. The more people use gaming services, the more they help both refine the cloud platforms and sell them to prospective customers.

Doesn't matter who makes the OS just who makes the store. Who exactly uses Microsofts store to buy anything?

It absolutely matters. If a game is available on both Xbox and PC, Microsoft wins whichever platform the customer buys into. You're either directly supporting the Xbox or indirectly strengthening your Windows lock-in (as you're more likely to buy a Windows PC in the future). Sony doesn't have that luxury; it either makes money from first-party

If this were the case then Microsoft wouldn't limit DX10 to Vista and DX12 to Windows 10. We were stuck with DX9 games for a long time because of this. I'm sure we're better for it instead of OpenGL and Vulkan, you know universal standards. Microsoft was so big into DirectX that AMD had to release Mantle as Microsoft sat and did nothing. Now DX12 and Vulkan are both derived from Mantle.

That's splitting hairs, and you know it. That doesn't change that Microsoft created DirectX with gaming as a major focus, and that it has delivered new features throughout that history for the sake of gaming. Besides, this supports the point I made just a moment ago — that Microsoft indirectly profits from PC gaming through the OS, whether it's through paid Windows upgrades (in the past) or PC sales (from Windows 10 onward).

Remind me again on how many games are available on Steam vs Switch?

How many Steam Deck-friendly games are there? Steam's catalog size helps, but no one's going to play a 10-year-old strategy game that's a PITA to use with a 7-inch screen and no keyboard. However, I can safely say every Switch game ever made (even the ports) is optimized for the Switch.

Talk about wishful thinking. You serious believe that PC gaming is not easy to use? Might as tell me that you can't use gamepads and hook it up to a TV with that old tired trope.

It's not back-breakingly difficult, but pretending that it's as easy as a console is also disingenuous. Like I said, actually easy to use, not a PC diehard's misguided notion of ease-of-use. Console gamers don't have to boot into a desktop OS, grapple with hardware drivers, launch game clients, think about setting up a voice chat app for their party, worry about background processes... why do you think the Steam Deck will jump into a simplified, console-like front end? It's to get away from the usual complexity of PC gaming.

 

[Aireoth]

Modern PC gaming is far from complex, if people can't handle the very basic setup of install game, click launcher the education system has royally failed.

 

[Aurelius]

Modern PC gaming is far from complex, if people can't handle the very basic setup of install game, click launcher the education system has royally failed.

You know there's more to it than that, right? PC gaming has gotten easier over time, but you're grossly oversimplifying things here.

 

[DukenukemX]

Microsoft runs its gaming services (cloud gaming, store, Xbox Live, etc.) on its own cloud platforms. The more people use gaming services, the more they help both refine the cloud platforms and sell them to prospective customers.

I think you're reading into this more so than Microsoft is.

It absolutely matters. If a game is available on both Xbox and PC, Microsoft wins whichever platform the customer buys into. You're either directly supporting the Xbox or indirectly strengthening your Windows lock-in (as you're more likely to buy a Windows PC in the future). Sony doesn't have that luxury; it either makes money from first-party

Windows lock-in matters as much as iOS lock in. Valve's deck proves that can be worked around. You don't exactly see an Android lock in when Microsoft will include an Android layer into Windows 11. I'm sure that's what Microsoft wants but I don't see Valve putting their games onto the Microsoft Store.

That's splitting hairs, and you know it. That doesn't change that Microsoft created DirectX with gaming as a major focus, and that it has delivered new features throughout that history for the sake of gaming.

DirectX was created before Xbox was and versions that came afterwards hasn't been great. DX9 was released in 2002 and we were stuck on it until DX11 because DX10 sucked and it was only available on the then terrible Vista. Even still we didn't get DX12 until after Mantle was released, but now we have Vulkan and DX12 is just working against the consumer, much like how Apple's Metal API is working against the consumers best interest. Lets also not forget about Games For Windows Live. Exactly who's best interest was that for?

Besides, this supports the point I made just a moment ago — that Microsoft indirectly profits from PC gaming through the OS, whether it's through paid Windows upgrades (in the past) or PC sales (from Windows 10 onward).

Since Windows 10 and Windows 11 will be free upgrades and you can easily buy a Windows key for $3, I would assume the profits come from telemetry data collection. That and the pop up I get once in a while to remind me to buy Office 365.

How many Steam Deck-friendly games are there? Steam's catalog size helps, but no one's going to play a 10-year-old strategy game that's a PITA to use with a 7-inch screen and no keyboard.

Yea, who would play 10 year old games today amiright? Oh wait...

However, I can safely say every Switch game ever made (even the ports) is optimized for the Switch.

Valve has thought of this and will rate games in how playable they are on the Deck.

It's not back-breakingly difficult, but pretending that it's as easy as a console is also disingenuous. Like I said, actually easy to use, not a PC diehard's misguided notion of ease-of-use.

Double clicking on that icon to play a game sure is hard.

Console gamers don't have to boot into a desktop OS, grapple with hardware drivers, launch game clients, think about setting up a voice chat app for their party, worry about background processes...

You do know what the Nintendo Switch uses for voice chat right? I don't think pulling out a phone to talk to people in a game is easy.

why do you think the Steam Deck will jump into a simplified, console-like front end? It's to get away from the usual complexity of PC gaming.

If a desktop is considered complex to you in 2021 then I have bad news for you. I agree with a simplified UI for the Deck since that's the Deck's primary function, which is to play games. Do the same thing for Windows 11 then we have problems.

 

[cybereality]

You know, I agree that PC gaming is not easy. I am an advanced user, used to work IT, and I spend most of my time troubleshooting weird issues with the computer. Like I just bought Forza 5, and it's great, but there is a problem where the game starts fine and then after 3 minutes the audio stops working if you use a Bluetooth headset. I spent about 2 hours trying to fix it, and finally found a Reddit thread where someone told me to disable this specific Bluetooth service on Windows. I did that, and then it worked. But you know what, I bet if I had bought it for Xbox the audio would have worked fine.

 

[Aireoth]

You know there's more to it than that, right? PC gaming has gotten easier over time, but you're grossly oversimplifying things here.

Not really, only in so much as you are grossly overstating your position.

I just setup a new system and it is so easy now. Insert windows install media (usb) windows installs and sets up in 30ish minutes, with 90% of the drivers installed and ready to go. Download latest flavour of gpu driver, it auto installs. download game through prefered platform and go.

Sure you have to download a few things, but really there is no other setup. If you complain about account generation well you have to generate an account on consoles as well.

90% of games have their own voice chat, so if you really are such a luddite that you cannot navigate discord, you can use in game voice no problem. You also have the option of various chat tools tied to platform like steam, origin, and battlenet.

Consoles are like this: plug in hardware, setup internet if required, install updates, install game, start game. Hope you rarely need to use text chat functions.

really the number of steps are very close, the main difference is level of control on a pc (even when compared to Apple) and UI.

 

[Flogger23m]

How many Steam Deck-friendly games are there? Steam's catalog size helps, but no one's going to play a 10-year-old strategy game that's a PITA to use with a 7-inch screen and no keyboard. However, I can safely say every Switch game ever made (even the ports) is optimized for the Switch.

Yeah the idea of playing DCS or Supreme Commander on a 7 inch screen is idiotic. Of course you can dock it and hopefully all your peripherals and their required software works on SteamOS, but doubting it will be very smooth. Certainly unplayable in handheld mode, which makes the device pointless if you have to drag along 30+ pounds of hardware. The idea that every game on Steam will work flawlessly on the Deck is hilarious in of itself.

In under 5 years the Switch sold almost 100 million consoles. We'll see if the Deck gets anywhere near that. My guess is probably not. At the price range it hits most people will be better off spending a few hundred more and getting a laptop.

 

[DukenukemX]

You know, I agree that PC gaming is not easy. I am an advanced user, used to work IT, and I spend most of my time troubleshooting weird issues with the computer. Like I just bought Forza 5, and it's great, but there is a problem where the game starts fine and then after 3 minutes the audio stops working if you use a Bluetooth headset. I spent about 2 hours trying to fix it, and finally found a Reddit thread where someone told me to disable this specific Bluetooth service on Windows. I did that, and then it worked. But you know what, I bet if I had bought it for Xbox the audio would have worked fine.

Probably would work just fine on the Xbox but is this problem specific to Forza 5? Who published Forza 5 to PC? If using a Bluetooth headset with Forza 5 a Microsoft Published game on a Microsoft Windows OS then I see this as a Microsoft problem. Why is a Windows service causing issues on a Microsoft game?

Yeah the idea of playing DCS or Supreme Commander on a 7 inch screen is idiotic.

Do you have the option to play those games on the Switch?

Certainly unplayable in handheld mode, which makes the device pointless if you have to drag along 30+ pounds of hardware. The idea that every game on Steam will work flawlessly on the Deck is hilarious in of itself.

Valve seems committed to make every game work on the Deck. Which is more than I can say for Sony with PS1/PS2/PS3 compatibility. How does it feel to pay $50 per year to play old n64 games worse on the Switch than community made emulators?

In under 5 years the Switch sold almost 100 million consoles. We'll see if the Deck gets anywhere near that. My guess is probably not. At the price range it hits most people will be better off spending a few hundred more and getting a laptop.

Probably won't come close but hopefully the Deck starts a chain reaction where others will start making handheld portable gaming PCs. The Deck is probably more about pushing for Linux over Windows.

 

[Lakados]

this were the case then Microsoft wouldn't limit DX10 to Vista and DX12 to Windows 10. We were stuck with DX9 games for a long time because of this. I'm sure we're better for it instead of OpenGL and Vulkan, you know universal standards. Microsoft was so big into DirectX that AMD had to release Mantle as Microsoft sat and did nothing. Now DX12 and Vulkan are both derived from Mantle.

DX12 went into production before or around the same time as Mantle. Developers had been all over Microsoft for years prior to get them lower levels of access DX11 was too limiting. We were stuck with DX9 for so long because of consoles, end of story.

And even now PC’s are only getting as much attention as they are because of the similarities between the platforms. Modern development environments let developers cross compile from Windows, PS5, XBX, and Switch with the press of a few buttons. At this point excluding PC releases is just leaving money on the table and publishers are realizing this.

 

[Lakados]

Probably won't come close but hopefully the Deck starts a chain reaction where others will start making handheld portable gaming PCs. The Deck is probably more about pushing for Linux over Windows.

I wish Valve the best but I hope it doesn’t, AMD is now responsible for 2 major consoles, the computer chips for Tesla, and if they were to throw a third console in there I would honestly fear for the general consumers ability to purchase their hardware to actually build a PC with.