PC Gaming Renaissance on the Horizon?

Monty Burns

Well-known Member
CAS FAN said:
...games better than a PC as it's dedicated to gaming and not a multi tasking machine like the PC (My PC uses up system resources and around 200mb of memory to run just Windows XP). The fact that when my PC was far more powerful than my X-Box, yet struggled to even play Halo (when the X-Box played it flawlessly) is an example of this.

... At £280 you just can't go wrong with a 360 IMO.
Gota agree with a lot of that. No surplus services running can only make things quicker.

The other big thing is that all things on a console are "standard" this meaning its much easier to program for. How many variations of hardware are there in the world? Drivers can only compensate so much for the diference in models or hardware.


I have to wonder though, when I used to hack away on the Commodore Amiga and C64, because it was all standard, we used to just bypass a lot of the O/S and program directly into the memory/chips etc ... I wonder if there are games that do this on the Xbox or X360. No reason technical reason they can't, wonder if MS block this? Doing this we could get results out of the copper (gfx co-pro) that official routines were just incapable of doing. Indeed even, what language(s) are used to program these consoles?
 

CrispyXUK

Well-known Member
There aren't enough major genres on the PC anymore, all the new games need serious horsepower to run, I think this is madness, Imagine how a modern 2D point'n'click game would look on you average pc these days? it would be ace, someone need to do something quick
 

Tojal City

Standard Member
CAS FAN said:
Crikey! Can I have one of your days please. I presume that you do sleep in which case (assuming say 7 hours in the pit) that leaves you around 5 hours to do everything. Are you married or do you have a partner? To be honest if I was to start playing one of the games you mention then a mere couple of hours playing time just wouldn't cut it. I like to give those sort of games a really good 8 hour + session and I just can't fit that time in now. I'd say that I have a couple of hours each night when I can game and that timescale lends itself more to a few good games on the X-box than a Civ4 session.
Obviously I’m not married and don’t have any children yet, only that way I can have time to do the things I said I do, and still sleep 7 hours a day ( 8 in the weekends ), work and arrange some time to my friends. But it’s no easy, we have to organize our time the best way we can. Of course the day I’m married, and especially the day I have children everything will cut lose.
 

CAS FAN

Distinguished Member
Tojal City said:
Obviously I’m not married and don’t have any children yet, only that way I can have time to do the things I said I do, and still sleep 7 hours a day ( 8 in the weekends ), work and arrange some time to my friends. But it’s no easy, we have to organize our time the best way we can. Of course the day I’m married, and especially the day I have children everything will cut lose.
Well that's thing you see, more and more of the hardcore gamers that grew up with gaming and used to be huge PC gamers are now married with kids and just don't have the time to spend on PC games any more. Consoles appeal strongly to that growing market.
 

Monty Burns

Well-known Member
CAS FAN said:
Well that's thing you see, more and more of the hardcore gamers that grew up with gaming and used to be huge PC gamers are now married with kids and just don't have the time to spend on PC games any more. Consoles appeal strongly to that growing market.
I definetley get less agro if I power up the xbox for a quick 20mins than if I try to play Eve for any proper length. And mines just a girlfriend!
 

overkill

Well-known Member
I wasn't suggesting that PC gaming was older than console gaming just that you only really had your "hardcore gamer" in the past and they played on both PC's (Home computers before that) and Consoles. It was the Playstation that really brought about the casual gamer by making consoles "cool" (Sony and it's marketing machine sticking them in nightclubs and having house tunes as soundtracks etc.). Since then this bread of casual gamer has developed further and they play soley on consoles (generally the PS2 these days).
There were plenty of hardcore gamers then, as the early consoles sold by the millions. They have always appealed to a wide market, and a much wider market than PC. PC gaming machines, as before, only became as 'mass market' tool in the mid to late 90's, long after consoles had been selling by the 22 wheeler load. Sonys PSX series came along as SEGA were fumbling the ball and the Nintendos were looking old. It rinkindled, rather than 'created' a new market, and while I would agree they made consoles cool, that market is fairly small compared to the mass market of kids they are hooking and always have done.

PC will probably return to it's old niche for certain games rather than being cutting edge for gaming per sa. It will also appeal to those of us who aren't allowed to take over the sitting/dining room/lounge with a console when other members of the family are wanting to watch TV/read/chill and all the normal things people use their lounge for. :D Believe me there are plenty of us.......... and when you have kids you'll be among them! ;)
 

Tigerblade

Well-known Member
CAS FAN said:
The 360 can play at the res you state and 4x AA is enabled as standard.
That's rubbish sorry. Just seen a 360 booth at meadowhall and wasn't impressed at all. COD2 looks like it's lucky if it even has 2xaa running. Plus show me a tv that will run 1600x1200....

There is no way a 360 can run any game at 1600x1200 with 4xaa enabled at 60fps. It isn't gonna happen. Plus what has happened to M$'s recommendation of running games at 1280x720 with 2x aa? I'm sure they know what the optimal settings are for best performance.

I agree with the price tho. Alot of power for the price you pay. And it will sell by the bucket load, plus the plug and play ease of use. I'm not arguing agaisnt the 360, I'm arguing the fact that ppl think it's an all powerful behermoth (sp?) that will crush all in its path.

I'm telling you now, when it's released, a top end rig will be faster. But you will pay for it.
 
CAS FAN said:
The 360 has been confirmed to be more powerful than any PC you can currently buy. There is also the fact that a console of less power can still produce games better than a PC as it's dedicated to gaming and not a multi tasking machine like the PC (My PC uses up system resources and around 200mb of memory to run just Windows XP). The fact that when my PC was far more powerful than my X-Box, yet struggled to even play Halo (when the X-Box played it flawlessly) is an example of this.

The 360 can play at the res you state and 4x AA is enabled as standard.

COD2 has already been compared on the PC and 360 and the 360 has received glowing reports running at a stable 60fps.

My final point is that is you are building a PC to even compete with the 360 over the next 6 months (i.e. the absolute top end PC that money can buy) then how much would a rig like that cost? At £280 you just can't go wrong with a 360 IMO.
its a shame that the titles lined up and demo'd don't support the hardwares potential .....

From all the industry press and demo's i've seen ( apart from simple video stream ) the games graphics are pretty terrible when compared to the 'hype'

Industry insiders speculate it will be3 to 6 months before developers are competent in creating engines that fully utilise the processing power.

- "The 360 has been confirmed to be more powerful than any PC you can currently buy." -

I can't buy and xbox360 atm ;) ... but what do you expect hardware wise to be available in 6 months time ( when xbox360 etc will actually be using that power ).

The console and the PC's share a middle ground of gamers that may well flit between the two, however generally speaking they cater for different markets.
**warning: stereo types follow that don't mean 'everyone'**

Consoles:

Platformers
Raceing
Simple shooters
Fighting games

.... everything seems geared towards pickup and play - low attention span gaming. The games are designed for kids to come in an pickup and have nothing more complicated that learning special move key combos.
Flashy graphics and colourful movie and famous characters / people tie ins.

There are more envolved titles out there ... but they are not the norm.

PC:

envolved FPS
RTS
God sims
RPG
online gaming communities and mmorpg's

There are plenty of people who play raceing games and such on PC's and online fps on consoles .... but from my observations, they make up a small percentage of the gamers on that particular medium.

If you want something you can come in and turn on and pickup quickly without much thought - and just as simply switch off then consoles are the best solution. if you like to play beatemups or racing games again consoles are great - especially with a few mates around.

If you prefer more indepth and involved gameing experiences then PC's generally are the better option. ( especailly if you want 1 unit to also do your web browsing and homework on )

although i am very biased, I have to conceed that we are all gamers, just different types. I have never liked console games in general, but a few titles have been great - and I have played them with the same gusto as I do with my PC titles.
I however am a Hardcore gamer ... of the indepth and time consuming kind - and I find that as a whole, the PC has more titles and options available so thats the root I will stick with.
I may however buy an xbox360 simply to have it for a 'toy' ... but it is not going to be my main gaming platform at least atm.

Note: I'm planning on an major upgrade 'just because' ... rather than need, and I would expect when I do, it will knock the pants off anything an xbox can process in raw speed.
Just have to see what happens over the next 6 months or so.
 

CAS FAN

Distinguished Member
Tigerblade said:
That's rubbish sorry. Just seen a 360 booth at meadowhall and wasn't impressed at all. COD2 looks like it's lucky if it even has 2xaa running. Plus show me a tv that will run 1600x1200....

There is no way a 360 can run any game at 1600x1200 with 4xaa enabled at 60fps. It isn't gonna happen. Plus what has happened to M$'s recommendation of running games at 1280x720 with 2x aa? I'm sure they know what the optimal settings are for best performance.

I agree with the price tho. Alot of power for the price you pay. And it will sell by the bucket load, plus the plug and play ease of use. I'm not arguing agaisnt the 360, I'm arguing the fact that ppl think it's an all powerful behermoth (sp?) that will crush all in its path.

I'm telling you now, when it's released, a top end rig will be faster. But you will pay for it.
The PC Resolutions are for use with a PC monitor. For TV the standard HD format has been applied (720p (1280x720) & 1080i).

The 360's GPU can do 4x ay 1280 x 768 with no performance hit at all - see here with the relevant bit quoted below.

The really fascinating thing here is the design of that daughter die. Feldstein called it a continuation of the traditional graphics pipeline into memory. Basically, there's a 10MB pool of embedded DRAM, designed by NEC, in the center of the die. Around the outside is a ring of logic designed by ATI. This logic is made up of 192 component processors capable of doing the basic math necessary for multisampled antialiasing. If I have it right, the component processors should be able to process 32 pixels at once by operating on six components per pixel: red, green, blue, alpha, stencil, and depth. This logic can do the resolve pass for multisample antialiasing right there on the eDRAM die, giving the Xbox 360 the ability to do 4X antialiasing on a high-definition (1280x768) image essentially for "free"-i.e., with no appreciable performance penalty. The eDRAM holds the contents of all of the back buffers, does the resolve, and hands off the resulting image into main system memory for scan-out to the display.
PC's have to draw on normal system resources for their AA so when you also consider that the PC is running windows XP, the architecture of the PC (even one with a focus on Gaming) isn't as optimised for gaming as a console is and developers have to procuce games that will work for a range of different hardware requirements on a PC then you can see the need for a PC to be a much more powerful machine than a console to generate a similar gaming performance.
 

Tigerblade

Well-known Member
Ok so you just changed what you said earlier. Like I said, the 360 will never do 1600x1200 with 4xaa. As a pc can, along with all the other progs running in the background like you point out, i assume that the pc is faster.

Still not impressed tho, think I'll wait for PS3.
 

CAS FAN

Distinguished Member
Tigerblade said:
Ok so you just changed what you said earlier. Like I said, the 360 will never do 1600x1200 with 4xaa. As a pc can, along with all the other progs running in the background like you point out, i assume that the pc is faster.

Still not impressed tho, think I'll wait for PS3.
I didn't say that it couldn't do it, especially as it can do 1280 x 768 with 4 x AA with no performance hit at all.

Also the games shown in the booths are not final versions and have the AA disabled. The 360 can outperform any PC technology currently available today and games like COD2 which were developed to make the most of multi core cpu technology are better on the 360 than the PC according to reports. It's not simply a matter of comparing the speed of a GPU & CPU and the amount of memory as the 360 works in a completely different way to a PC with unified memory and multi core support from the off. Nobody is denying that PC tech will soon catch up but when the 360 costs just £280 then that's an absolute bargain for what you get.
 

Tigerblade

Well-known Member
CAS FAN said:
I didn't say that it couldn't do it, especially as it can do 1280 x 768 with 4 x AA with no performance hit at all.

Also the games shown in the booths are not final versions and have the AA disabled. The 360 can outperform any PC technology currently available today and games like COD2 which were developed to make the most of multi core cpu technology are better on the 360 than the PC according to reports. It's not simply a matter of comparing the speed of a GPU & CPU and the amount of memory as the 360 works in a completely different way to a PC with unified memory and multi core support from the off. Nobody is denying that PC tech will soon catch up but when the 360 costs just £280 then that's an absolute bargain for what you get.
I agree with you 99% lol I just think that when it is finally released, pc tech will have supassed it already. :D
 

NicolasB

Well-known Member
It's always the case that, at launch, consoles are more powerful than a high-end PC and cost about one fifth of the price. Equally well, it's always the case five years later that a high-end PC leaves the same console gasping in the dust.

There was an exception to this about 10 years ago when the release of the original voodoo 3D card meant that PCs suddenly leaped ahead of console state-of-the-art (the PS1) much earlier in the cycle than usual, but this is not typical.

Consoles also have an advantage over PCs in that the hardware is standardised - so the developers can put in very specific optimisations tuned to that hardware, and they can predict exactly what the results will be. On a PC, games have to be able to run on a non-cutting-edge machine, which means the software tends to be anything up to a couple of years behind being able to take full advantage of leading-edge hardware. (This does seem to be changing, though, which is a good thing). And even on leading-edge hardware, an optimisation that works with an NVidia graphics card may not work as well on an ATI graphics card, etc.
 

CAS FAN

Distinguished Member
Tigerblade said:
I agree with you 99% lol I just think that when it is finally released, pc tech will have supassed it already. :D
It's out in 3 weeks time, 2 weeks in the US, can't see there being many major PC developments in the next few weeks. ;)

I guess previously PC's have always had the resolution issue over consoles but with consoles becoming HD then that isn't really much of an issue now.

At the end of the day I am a gamer and I would have a top end PC, 360, PS3 & Revo (when they come out) if I had the brass. Unfortunately I don't and as such the 360 offers basically the top end of gaming at a budget price then that's the path for me.
 

Tigerblade

Well-known Member
OK, I played on the 360 booth instead of watching from a few ppl back with cod2 and I gotta say this time that i'm a *little* impressed ;) . Razor sharp visuals compared to current consoles, but no aa on that demo. I gotta say that for the price of the console you are getting some top kit. Can't say the same for King Kong tho :confused: Crisp visuals but ***** game. NFS Most Wanted looked pretty good too, but I don't expect the game to look like the promo movie....

The console itself is a alot smaller than i expected too, as are the pads. Nice bit of kit :D
 

Rasczak

Distinguished Member
The XBox 360 is not a world apart from the original XBox - it's an updated version. Will the XBox 360 sell millions of units and probably become the most successful next gen console? Yes. Will many games producers make games for the XBox 360? Yes. Will all this kill the PC games market? No, of course not. The gamers who buy XBox 360 games will be the same as who brought XBox games, i.e. users who want a plug in and play games using a joypad. The XBox 360 will be no more appealing to FPS fans and Flight Sim fans and Strategy fans than any other console. So ultimately the net effect on PC gaming will be no more significant than the other consoles. And the same is entirely true for the PS3...

The new Windows Vista will only goto help advance PC gaming as well. Aside from the promotion push mentioned in the original post the sheer fact it requires decent 3D graphics performance will mean PC sellers will not get away with flogging machines with shoddy graphics support. This, coupled with the fact that mid range graphics cards can easily cope with the latest games (albeit not at the highest frame rates), means that the potential market for PC games will only grow.

Previously gaming wasn't that mainstream and your hardcore gamers would play on consoles and PC's. Things have become more and more mainstream in the console world ... thus the ratio of console to PC gamers is increasing. Developers will favour the most popular formats and if the PS3, 360 & Revo have say 90% of market share then I can't see many developers continuing to develop PC style games (such as the indepth strategy & simulation type games that the PC is so good at).
Half Life 2, the best selling PC game so far, has sold well over a 1.7 million copies (Source)- so I would suggest that the PC gaming market can still be very profitable if you make the right game. All the time the 'top' games are selling this well there is no question whatsoever of the PC being sqeezed out of the games market - or of developers not bothering with the PC - it's simple too profitable. And whilst games are selling this well development of software engines (such as the Doom III and Unreal engines) are guaranteed ensuring a steady supply of games tailored for the PC. It is quite clear then that the PC games market is absolutely massive - not as large as the video games market granted - but then it never has been. Of course producers will continue to make their games for the cross-platform market including the PC - the financial benefits and combined resources are simply too great not to. But even here the PC benefits greatly - we get the best games from all consoles.

PC gaming isn't for everyone. Young children are probably best sticking to consoles (I actually make a point of encouraging PC gaming in my kids as it ensures they have the basic PC useage skills for the future but I appreciate not all parents will do this). Likewise those on tight budgets are, unfortunately, excluded from the market. And those people who get frustrated when something isn't as easy as switching on the TV may also need to look elsewhere. But for those willing to spend a reasonable sum of cash and invest a little bit of time/patience then the rewards are fair in excess of the gaming experience being offered by consoles.

The major benefit of X-Box live is the consistency that is carried through every live game (every game full stop on the 360). You have one identity and can see what your mates are playing at any time, hop into that game or even just chat with them whilst you stay in your game or continue watching your film
...all of which is possible on a PC. I have used the name 'Rasczak' since I first started playing online (Quake 1). And plenty of games these days allow you to keep stats of how well you perform (etc). And virtually every game has a built in equivalent of Gamespy these days! There are also plenty of programmes that allow you to discover whether your friends are online and in which servers they are playing. From your description it sounds as if XBox Live spoon feeds much of this to you - but certainly doesn't offer anything above what is common and easy to get on a PC. And of course the PC is perfectly integrated into the wider internet community which not only offers GBs of downloads for many games but also with chatrooms, webboards etc.

In conclusion then: whilst PC gaming will never reach the mass market appeal of XBox and other plug and play consoles it will still remain popular and viable. Not only does it provide a wide variety of controllers but it also offers in-depth gaming far beyond that found in console games many of which are aimed primarily for the teenage market. It is also still a highly profitable market and likely to become more so as powerful graphics become more and more widespread. Bottomline: PC gaming has a long, long time to go yet ;)

CAS FAN, it seems to me as though you feel you have be excluded from the PC market due to cost and a 'lack of time'. I sympathise but ultimately feel it is colouring your opinion on PC gaming - and if you look back on some of the phrases you have used I think you may agree with that. Convincing yourself that limited free look (a joypad) is better and more realsitic than continious free look (mouse/keyboard) is probably a good example - it's subjective but most people will not agree (including many, such as myself, who have used both systems). Ultimately if you didn't miss PC gaming and the experience it offers why would you read a thread such as this in a forum of which you claim you have no interest?
 

CAS FAN

Distinguished Member
You get me wrong Rasczak, I have been a keen PC gamer for sometime and all that I am saying is that you need a decent amount of spare time and money (IMO) to get the most out of PC gaming. Consoles are generally more accessable and the dedication that you give to console games can be a lot (such as with games like Forza, Virtua Fighter 4 evo and Pro Evo still appealing to hardcore gamers) or you can just stick them on for 10 mins for a quick bash (games like FIFA, Outrun 2, Burnout 3 etc. appealing to the more casual gamer). I guess it's console gaming's almost universal appeal that will see it grow and grow and whilst I am a big fan of PC games I also accept that your average gamer will not sit down and learn a game like Hearts of Iron 2 say.

I don't think that the PC's life as a games machine is up as there is still a strong user base out there and although consoles games already sell far more copied than PC games. You mention that HL2 (the best selling PC game so far) sold 1.7 million copies and then compare that with Halo2 which sold 2.38 million units in the first 24 hours (see here ) and had sold 6.4 million copies 2 months after launch in Jan 05 (see here). GTA:San Andreas sold even more and was the top selling game in 2004.

Infact the console games market in 2004 generated just below $10 billion with the PC market generating $1.2 billion (here's the source for that). There was a 14% drop in PC sales last year as well, whilst the console market saw a decline of less than 1%.

This isn't a discussion about me and my gaming habits as I would love to play PC games still if I had the time & money (as I have said previously) but more about the future of PC gaming. Personally I can only see console gaming increasing in popularity whilst I feel PC gaming will continue to decline in popularity.
 

Tejstar

Distinguished Member
CAS FAN said:
Personally I can only see console gaming increasing in popularity whilst I feel PC gaming will continue to decline in popularity.
I see both types of gaming converging myself. Over the next 5 years we will see HD screens creep into consumer conscience and more hard-drive based consumer electronics under the tv. I'm sure products like Media Centres will become more common place especially once online movie distribution kick starts. I think the next-next-gen of ‘consoles' will offer this convergence and may see many of the standalone PC functions used in these media devices. It seems the definition of console vs pc gaming will become increasingly blurred as time goes on.
 

CAS FAN

Distinguished Member
Tejstar said:
I see both types of gaming converging myself. Over the next 5 years we will see HD screens creep into consumer conscience and more hard-drive based consumer electronics under the tv. I’m sure products like Media Centres will become more common place especially once online movie distribution kick starts. I think the next-next-gen of ‘consoles’ will offer this convergence and may see many of the standalone PC functions used in these media devices. It seems the definition of console vs pc gaming will become increasingly blurred as time goes on.
I must say that was my view a couple of years ago but I personally don't feel things will go that way now. There is and always will be snobbery about PC gaming to some extent and PC gamers often think that they are above console gamers (who they deam as just casual gamers after a 5 min gaming kick when they get back from the pub :rolleyes: ) and that hardcore gamers are really only interested in PC games with manuals in excess of 300 pages. I guess there will always be a need for a PC type device to do the more specialist tasks that they will never include in a specific home media & entretainment centre. Things like photo and video editing, web designing, spreadsheet & Database packages etc. will always remain the domain of the PC.

As such I also see the PC gaming market continuing at least to some extent and feel that it will still be a market for the type of games that the PC does best (Strategy, In depth Simulation, RTS etc.). I do see console gaming expanding vastly over the next 10 years and really do feel that people will play games just as they watch films & TV in 10 years time. Developers & console manufacturers are now putting a real effort into capturing the non gamer as the market is huge! Consoles will offer more and more and I feel that they will eventually become an entire media hub where you can stream games, films, TV, music to from remote servers when every you wish to. It makes massive sense to integrate all these media into one delivery form that all comes through one box and whilst i'd say the technology is 5-10 years off to realise this fully, I am sure it will happen.
 

Tigerblade

Well-known Member
Just to add fuel to the 'PCs are getting too expensive/out of hand' fire, check out Nvidia's new offering....

http://www.vr-zone.com.sg/?i=2927

Now this is insane. Dual core 7800GT's in SLi. The card is HUGE, its just about the size of the motherboard and I don't even wanna know what PSU you need to run that rig :eek:
 

CAS FAN

Distinguished Member
Tigerblade said:
Just to add fuel to the 'PCs are getting too expensive/out of hand' fire, check out Nvidia's new offering....

http://www.vr-zone.com.sg/?i=2927

Now this is insane. Dual core 7800GT's in SLi. The card is HUGE, its just about the size of the motherboard and I don't even wanna know what PSU you need to run that rig :eek:

OMG :eek: They are massive!! They take up the entire motherboard :eek: . I also dread to think of the power that a rig like that would take to get stable, probably need 2 PSU's!
 

Monty Burns

Well-known Member
Would it possibly need its own industrial sized air-conditioning unit should you even dream of trying to put a case round it?
 

AML

Well-known Member
I knew this would eventually happen. Surely if you have a dual core Graphics card theres no need for SLI?

If these dual core cards come out ill probably just get one of those and expect to see the same sort of performance we can get now from single core SLI.
 

Tigerblade

Well-known Member
That's what the link is showing. Dual core cards in SLi. There is no bridge connector between them altho with that amount of power who cares if you see a slight drop in performance.

All this dual core gfx card stuff is old news tho tbh, ATi was at it about 6-7 years ago with the Rage Fury MAXX. Again BIG cards for the time and the first card with 64mb if I remember correctly. Still got mine :)
 

AML

Well-known Member
Well, for me the next card I buy will be a 512mb card with 2 cores.

That with a 64bit dual core CPU and a 64bit OS like Vista.

Hopefully then we will see some real 64bit computing and some sort of real change in performance and graphics.

Once developers start using 64 bit for gaming then im sure we will see something.

Till then, stuff like SLI is just a waste of time and most of all money.
 

Tigerblade

Well-known Member
You'd buy a dual core gfx card yet you think SLi is a waste of money :confused: Dunno what you think dual core is but it in essence a 'space saving' SLi setup......

At the end of the day by using that philosophy why bother buying a dual core cpu now because only a handful of games use them at present...

why stop there? no use buying a 64bit cpu because there is nothing to use that to it's full potential yet....

Your logic confuses me.. :confused:

Why buy a Ferrari when the speed limit is 40mph? I'm guessing your a 'The glass is half empty' type of guy ;)
 

Rasczak

Distinguished Member
You mention that HL2 (the best selling PC game so far) sold 1.7 million copies and then compare that with Halo2 which sold...6.4 million copies
...and I don't dispute that console games sell more at all. All I am saying is that whilst a product is selling as well as some PC games are there is no question of developers opting out the market. Indeed the PC gaming market is bigger now that is ever has been - it is enjoying the same/similar growth that video gaming as a whole it.

As the original article states - the release of the next-generation consoles has inevitably brought with it the doomsayers who say the death of PC gaming is nigh [but] we can see from this report that some of the industry's heavy hitters continue to see the PC as a viable gaming platform and worthy of continued support.
 

CAS FAN

Distinguished Member
Rasczak said:
...and I don't dispute that console games sell more at all. All I am saying is that whilst a product is selling as well as some PC games are there is no question of developers opting out the market. Indeed the PC gaming market is bigger now that is ever has been - it is enjoying the same/similar growth that video gaming as a whole it.

As the original article states - the release of the next-generation consoles has inevitably brought with it the doomsayers who say the death of PC gaming is nigh [but] we can see from this report that some of the industry's heavy hitters continue to see the PC as a viable gaming platform and worthy of continued support.
According to that article I posted the PC market did decline by 14% last year compared to 2003. When you consider that Farcry, HL2 & Doom 3 all came out in 2004 then that is concerning as the drop wasn't caused by a poor selection of games. The console market dropped by less than 1%.

I'm sure we'll have PC gaming for as long as there are PC's but perhaps with small companies not with mainstream developers producing games.
 
J

JayList

Guest
AML said:
Well, for me the next card I buy will be a 512mb card with 2 cores.

That with a 64bit dual core CPU and a 64bit OS like Vista.

Hopefully then we will see some real 64bit computing and some sort of real change in performance and graphics.

Once developers start using 64 bit for gaming then im sure we will see something.

Till then, stuff like SLI is just a waste of time and most of all money.
Not sure how 64 bit will help games. 64 bit generally helps applications that use over 4 gb of Ram. Such as databases.

32 bit can't efficiently address memory above 4 gb as it doesn't have the address space without some memory swapping techniques.

Extra wide buses 128 and 256 bit can help with memory transfer between gpu and cpu, but this has nothing to do with 64 bit computing. :lesson:

If you;ve got more than 4gb of ram then I'm in awe! :smashin:
 

Similar threads

Trending threads

Latest news

NOW TV Boost adds Full HD and 5.1 audio
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Hisense Roku TV gets Black Friday launch in UK
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Netflix now using HDR for all its movie productions
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Amazon Music free tier now available on mobile platforms
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
McIntosh adds C53 and C2700 to its Roon Tested products
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Top Bottom