Is pc gaming dying?

microchip246

Distinguished
Jul 9, 2006
57
0
18,630
0
I was browsing news articles online and saw one about pc gaming and how it has been seeing a steady decline since 1999. I know that the next gen consoles are out and they do kick ass, I would like to know why pc gaming is dying. I know it is expensive, but what I don't understand is why does the pc have to be so powerful to run the same game my xbox 360 can play flawlessly? The resolution might me one thing, but that can not all be it. I love pc gaming, always have, also it seems like lately the technology for computers has been changing more rapidly than ever. Will we see it steady out when vista is out?
 

microchip246

Distinguished
Jul 9, 2006
57
0
18,630
0
Yea the torrents/piracy do have a huge impact on it. When do you think dual core support will be full blown? I do know that some of the best game sare on the pc eg: half life 2, and FEAR is better on pc that say the xbox.
 

tool_462

Distinguished
Jun 19, 2006
3,020
0
20,780
0
Personally, I would rather play my games that are available for console and PC on my PC. Except sports games and games that are only available for consoles, PC gaming is just better for me. I used to like console gaming until I got a good enough PC to appreciate the games more. I sure hope PC gaming isn't dying, I like building PCs more than building consoles :p
 

Vindicoth

Distinguished
Jul 27, 2006
55
0
18,630
0
theres a genre with over 15 million people in it that can only really be done with PC gaming, thats MMORPGS. A current gen console could probably run World of Warcraft, but due to the vast amounts of memory an MMORPG needs, something like EQ2 and Vanguard would not run satisfactory (i.e. more than 20FPS)

That and the fact that PC gaming not only is better than consoles, control wise, graphics wise, but they have a community that really isn't available on the console, the modding community. That and the fact that PC's can accomplish more than one task, video editing, email, photo editing, have the ability to burn media and other things like that. I don't see PC gaming dying, but rather evolving. Theres still plenty of games out there that you can enjoy without having the latest and greatest DX10 gfx card, Core 2 duo system with 2 gigs of DDR2 memory. As a matter of fact you can play a good majority of the newer games out there on a 6600GT AMD 3000+ system, and for a little more upgrade to a 7900 system which plays almost eveyr pc game out there flawlessly besides Oblivion.
 

Bluefinger

Distinguished
Mar 10, 2006
531
0
18,980
0
FPS, MMORPGs and RTS games only really shine on PC... Age Of Conan, Crysis, Supreme Commander, and C&C Tiberium Wars being a taste of what PC gaming will get with DX10, and much more. PC gaming may decline, but it won't die. Sure, Developers may have to produce games which can support a wide variety of machines each with varying performance abilities, but at least they don't get screwed by extortionate licensing fees when making games for the PC. Consoles will play a bigger part nowadays, but the PC will fill its niche and will do just fine, because come on! DX10 and Vista! Should make things better for PC in terms of a platform.
 
I remember an article at gamespot... ah here it is

NPD paints mixed picture of PC gaming in 2005 @ gamespot[/url]"]How can PC gaming be going down in flames when World of Warcraft is topping five million players by itself? The short answer: it isn't. NPD's numbers are based on the number of boxed retail PC games sold. It doesn't cover games sold via digital download or the subscription fees that massively mutliplayer online role-playing game users pay each month. It also doesn't address the numerous smaller units of content--both free and paid--with which publishers like Blizzard Entertainment and Sony Online Entertainment update their MMORPGs regularly.

By NPD's own account, it will be changing how it defines PC gaming revenue in 2006. "While we have seen retail sales of PC games decrease for several years now, we know from talking to consumers about their online gaming behaviors that playing games on the PC, whether it's via online casual sites or through MMO subscription play, has been increasing," said NPD analyst Anita Frazier in a statement. "As a result, NPD will be launching its new definition of the US PC game market this spring, which will include a combination of sales from retail, downloads, and both casual and MMO subscription revenues. We expect this will add significant dollars to the PC game market size."
The Moore's law effect is much higher in PC hardware - my favorite quote:

NVIDIA's GeForce 8800 (G80) review @ anandtech[/url]"] Back when Sony announced the specifications of the PlayStation 3, everyone asked if it meant the end of PC gaming. After all Cell looked very strong and NVIDIA's RSX GPU had tremendous power. We asked NVIDIA how long it would take until we saw a GPU faster than the RSX. Their answer: by the time the PS3 ships. So congratulations to NVIDIA for making the PS3 obsolete before it ever shipped
 

microchip246

Distinguished
Jul 9, 2006
57
0
18,630
0
The Moore's law effect is much higher in PC hardware - my favorite quote:

NVIDIA's GeForce 8800 (G80) review @ anandtech[/url]"] Back when Sony announced the specifications of the PlayStation 3, everyone asked if it meant the end of PC gaming. After all Cell looked very strong and NVIDIA's RSX GPU had tremendous power. We asked NVIDIA how long it would take until we saw a GPU faster than the RSX. Their answer: by the time the PS3 ships. So congratulations to NVIDIA for making the PS3 obsolete before it ever shipped
[/quote]

LOL!! I love my PC and will always keep upgrading it and such. Some people just do not realize the tremendous power a pc really has. I cant wait for the ATI's DX10 cards, got sick of nvidia, and yes the mmorpg community is huge and i like it. I do play wow and it is fun and addicting. My question is why does it take so much power to run a game on a pc vs. a console on a 42 inch screen vs the computers 19 inch screen?
 

LordBelial

Distinguished
Jan 18, 2006
155
0
18,680
0
listen, im a pc gamer, and by that, i mean i play video games on my pc. i dont care what else it can run that a 360 or ps3 cannot..im talkinga bout gaming...and just because im a pc gamer doesnt mean i cant say when pc's have been defeated by consols. Pc gaming is defenetly, as of now, NOT better in any way than consols. the graphics are flat out flawless and they run perfectly smooth at all times. and everytime i say that i always get the same over excited respsonse from geeky pc gamers " BUT BUT BUT IT CAN DO OTHER THINGS TOO!" i dont care what other things the pc can do, we are talking about gaming, nothing more, and for gaming, pc has defenetly gone down hill...from delay in games up to and over a years worth of waiting, over expensive hardware (650 bucks for a video card?!?! 1500 bucks for a quad core processor!?!) new technology or not, thats way over priced considering that this will drop in price over months. iv been a pc gamer, for 5+ years now, and before these new consols came out, i swore by the graphics, the playability in games, and controls of the pc...personally, the only reason im staying with my pc for now, is because of the simple fact that i have a keyboard and mouse for my controls, nothings better..."BUT BUT BUT YOU CAN TURN UP THE RESOLUTION ON YOUR CUNTPUTER MONITOR TO 1900x1200" ...you know what, i dont care, i dont visually see a difference between 1024, 1280, or 1600x1200..let alone going up that high. gmaes like fear and counter strike is what kept me a pc gamer for right now, but , hey what do you know, fear is out for the 360, so are alot of other games. "BUT BUT YOU NEED A HIGH DEF LCD 2000 DOLLAR TV TO PLAY THEM ON"..ehem, if youv forgotten, i can easily hook a 360 up to my monitor, but i wont, cuz again, keyboard and mouse is the best. theres prolly only a few games in 2007 im looking forward to, half or most are coming out for the consols that cost as much as a single video card. (assassins creed, bioshock, stalker, ut2007, brothers in arms HH and a few others i might have forgotten) but all and all, Pc gaming is just becoming too expensive, enough is enough with these insanely high prices, all the hype about how powerful the new video card is to make it sound like its worth the 650 bucks. dont forget about buying a high end processor, esxpensive sticks of ram to go with your video card. So , i most defenetly think pc gaming is dying...when prices go down on these new video cards it will start all over again. now once again, i AM a pc gamer and i dont own any consols, im not taking sides, but, not using scientific garble, or nerdy hardware specs of the consols versus pc specs...i can simply say this...iv seen how good games look on the 360 and how good they run, and it just looks flat out amazing "BUT BUT BUT THE PCS VIDEO CARD DOES 9823432 GIGAFLOPS OF INFORMATION A MICROSECOND! SO IT HAS TO BE BETTER" ....that doesnt tell me shit, iv seen with my own 2 eyes, teh graphics power of these consols, and pc's , as of now, have lost the battle...crysis was the only game that looked like it could graphically annihilate the consols..but guess what, to no surprise, it got pushed back till september!!!!! :evil:
 
My question is why does it take so much power to run a game on a pc vs. a console on a 42 inch screen vs the computers 19 inch screen?
Not sure what you're asking... I know my PC will run higher frames connected to a 42" hdtv running 720p (1280x720) than running 1600x1200 on a 19" LCD monitor. I am not even sure if you can connect a plain old LCD monitor to a console, so I am probably the wrong person to ask...
 

microchip246

Distinguished
Jul 9, 2006
57
0
18,630
0
listen, im a pc gamer, and by that, i mean i play video games on my pc. i dont care what else it can run that a 360 or ps3 cannot..im talkinga bout gaming...and just because im a pc gamer doesnt mean i cant say when pc's have been defeated by consols. Pc gaming is defenetly, as of now, NOT better in any way than consols. the graphics are flat out flawless and they run perfectly smooth at all times. and everytime i say that i always get the same over excited respsonse from geeky pc gamers " BUT BUT BUT IT CAN DO OTHER THINGS TOO!" i dont care what other things the pc can do, we are talking about gaming, nothing more, and for gaming, pc has defenetly gone down hill...from delay in games up to and over a years worth of waiting, over expensive hardware (650 bucks for a video card?!?! 1500 bucks for a quad core processor!?!) new technology or not, thats way over priced considering that this will drop in price over months. iv been a pc gamer, for 5+ years now, and before these new consols came out, i swore by the graphics, the playability in games, and controls of the pc...personally, the only reason im staying with my pc for now, is because of the simple fact that i have a keyboard and mouse for my controls, nothings better..."BUT BUT BUT YOU CAN TURN UP THE RESOLUTION ON YOUR CUNTPUTER MONITOR TO 1900x1200" ...you know what, i dont care, i dont visually see a difference between 1024, 1280, or 1600x1200..let alone going up that high. gmaes like fear and counter strike is what kept me a pc gamer for right now, but , hey what do you know, fear is out for the 360, so are alot of other games. "BUT BUT YOU NEED A HIGH DEF LCD 2000 DOLLAR TV TO PLAY THEM ON"..ehem, if youv forgotten, i can easily hook a 360 up to my monitor, but i wont, cuz again, keyboard and mouse is the best. theres prolly only a few games in 2007 im looking forward to, half or most are coming out for the consols that cost as much as a single video card. (assassins creed, bioshock, stalker, ut2007, brothers in arms HH and a few others i might have forgotten) but all and all, Pc gaming is just becoming too expensive, enough is enough with these insanely high prices, all the hype about how powerful the new video card is to make it sound like its worth the 650 bucks. dont forget about buying a high end processor, esxpensive sticks of ram to go with your video card. So , i most defenetly think pc gaming is dying...when prices go down on these new video cards it will start all over again. now once again, i AM a pc gamer and i dont own any consols, im not taking sides, but, not using scientific garble, or nerdy hardware specs of the consols versus pc specs...i can simply say this...iv seen how good games look on the 360 and how good they run, and it just looks flat out amazing "BUT BUT BUT THE PCS VIDEO CARD DOES 9823432 GIGAFLOPS OF INFORMATION A MICROSECOND! SO IT HAS TO BE BETTER" ....that doesnt tell me ****, iv seen with my own 2 eyes, teh graphics power of these consols, and pc's , as of now, have lost the battle...crysis was the only game that looked like it could graphically annihilate the consols..but guess what, to no surprise, it got pushed back till september!!!!! :evil:
LOL That was the answer i was looking for!!! I feel the same exact way. I do like pc gaming, but when it comes down to holding a 600$ graphics card in one hand vs. ps3 in another you guess which one ill get. Personally i do think it is a tad expensive and don't tell me "pay to play" crap!!! WHY DO PC"S GAMES NEED SO MUCH POWER??
 

PSYCHoHoLiC

Distinguished
Oct 10, 2006
246
0
18,680
0
obviously your have a crappy setup.. if you cant see the difference between 1024X768 and 1600X1200.. either that.. or you need better glasses.. lol


Im not going to take part in this argument though.. just thought i'd comment on that.. I will say that Consoles have a long way to go before they can compete with a high end PC.
 

LordBelial

Distinguished
Jan 18, 2006
155
0
18,680
0
obviously your have a crappy setup.. if you cant see the difference between 1024X768 and 1600X1200.. either that.. or you need better glasses.. lol


Im not going to take part in this argument though.. just thought i'd comment on that.. I will say that Consoles have a long way to go before they can compete with a high end PC.
i have plenty good set up, i see no difference, im sure there is, i cant see it, not enough to make me wanna buy 55384537 dollars worth of new hardware to go up to retarded high resolutions. simply put 7900gtx fx55 2 gigs of ram. over clocked.and i think you mean, high end pcs have a long way to catch up to the cheaper, more powerful, better games..consols.
 

resiroth

Distinguished
Nov 24, 2006
30
0
18,530
0
FPS will always be better on PC. Also, torrents etc. crack PC games pretty easily, so that is a contributing factor. To my knowledge you can't torrent a free console game. Sports and racing games are probably better on console imo, but FPS is always going to be dominant on PC.
 

Heyyou27

Splendid
Jan 4, 2006
5,164
0
25,780
0
Console games are carefully tweaked to maximize performance and image quality. Seeing as Windows is such a broad platform, it's harder for a developer to optimize any title to any specific piece of hardware as they would be limiting the enjoyment of some other users.
 

microchip246

Distinguished
Jul 9, 2006
57
0
18,630
0
Yes they are better, but 2nd up would be the 360 controller. I also heard that the performance of source games are going to be better when the release the dual core update.
 

PSYCHoHoLiC

Distinguished
Oct 10, 2006
246
0
18,680
0
Anyways.. back on topic, i hope this answers your question about PC Gaming dying.. It's sunday night.. Probably a Slower evening for gaming in general.. at this moment there are over 260,000 Gamers online, 55,000 in Half life 2 alone.

There are a couple of PS2 games included.. but they are a very small percentage of the list.

Check it on a saturday night.. the numbers are quite a bit higher.

Gamespy live stats
 

PSYCHoHoLiC

Distinguished
Oct 10, 2006
246
0
18,680
0
You mean 1280X800?

Yeah, WS is a little different.. it basicly comes down to screen size, 1280X1024 will look just as good on a 17" as 1600X1200 does on My 20"
 

microchip246

Distinguished
Jul 9, 2006
57
0
18,630
0
No i play at 1280 by 1024 on my standard 19inch, I was just saying in general that wide screen is a little different overall. For wide screen i would like the best resolution i could get.
 

KTev

Distinguished
Aug 26, 2006
109
0
18,680
0
Consoles have two advantages: standardized specs and sales at a loss.

A console game is written to use only what the console can use. If a game is under performing they just shut off a some features. On a PC it is left up to the user to be smart enough to do the same.

A year after the release of the 360 ms still sells the unit at a loss. The money comes from games. GPU developers don't get to do that. As far as cost a lower end card will handle it just fine and in a year for half the cost you will have even better performance.

On the res issue I read that both ps3 and xbox 360 use some form of pixel doubling to get to the hd output. On a computer if you if you set a game to use 1080p output it gives the full res. You also run into the problem of a 19" monitor having more pixels then your hd tv.
 

microchip246

Distinguished
Jul 9, 2006
57
0
18,630
0
On the res issue I read that both ps3 and xbox 360 use some form of pixel doubling to get to the hd output. On a computer if you if you set a game to use 1080p output it gives the full res. You also run into the problem of a 19" monitor having more pixels then your hd tv.
True... But whats the deal with a 24 in monitor being cheaper than a 24inch hdtv??
 

KTev

Distinguished
Aug 26, 2006
109
0
18,680
0
On the res issue I read that both ps3 and xbox 360 use some form of pixel doubling to get to the hd output. On a computer if you if you set a game to use 1080p output it gives the full res. You also run into the problem of a 19" monitor having more pixels then your hd tv.
True... But whats the deal with a 24 in monitor being cheaper than a 24inch hdtv??

Well there is the tv tuner and speakers, but from a pure display side the the computer monitor is far better.

My guess is that a HD tv is still considered a high end item.

You could also ask why does a 42" LCD cost more then the 42" plasma when LCDs are much cheaper to manufacture? It is just market forces.
 

purplerat

Distinguished
Jul 18, 2006
1,519
0
19,810
6
listen, im a pc gamer, and by that, i mean i play video games on my pc. i dont care what else it can run that a 360 or ps3 cannot..im talkinga bout gaming...and just because im a pc gamer doesnt mean i cant say when pc's have been defeated by consols. Pc gaming is defenetly, as of now, NOT better in any way than consols. the graphics are flat out flawless and they run perfectly smooth at all times. and everytime i say that i always get the same over excited respsonse from geeky pc gamers " BUT BUT BUT IT CAN DO OTHER THINGS TOO!" i dont care what other things the pc can do, we are talking about gaming, nothing more, and for gaming, pc has defenetly gone down hill...from delay in games up to and over a years worth of waiting, over expensive hardware (650 bucks for a video card?!?! 1500 bucks for a quad core processor!?!) new technology or not, thats way over priced considering that this will drop in price over months. iv been a pc gamer, for 5+ years now, and before these new consols came out, i swore by the graphics, the playability in games, and controls of the pc...personally, the only reason im staying with my pc for now, is because of the simple fact that i have a keyboard and mouse for my controls, nothings better..."BUT BUT BUT YOU CAN TURN UP THE RESOLUTION ON YOUR CUNTPUTER MONITOR TO 1900x1200" ...you know what, i dont care, i dont visually see a difference between 1024, 1280, or 1600x1200..let alone going up that high. gmaes like fear and counter strike is what kept me a pc gamer for right now, but , hey what do you know, fear is out for the 360, so are alot of other games. "BUT BUT YOU NEED A HIGH DEF LCD 2000 DOLLAR TV TO PLAY THEM ON"..ehem, if youv forgotten, i can easily hook a 360 up to my monitor, but i wont, cuz again, keyboard and mouse is the best. theres prolly only a few games in 2007 im looking forward to, half or most are coming out for the consols that cost as much as a single video card. (assassins creed, bioshock, stalker, ut2007, brothers in arms HH and a few others i might have forgotten) but all and all, Pc gaming is just becoming too expensive, enough is enough with these insanely high prices, all the hype about how powerful the new video card is to make it sound like its worth the 650 bucks. dont forget about buying a high end processor, esxpensive sticks of ram to go with your video card. So , i most defenetly think pc gaming is dying...when prices go down on these new video cards it will start all over again. now once again, i AM a pc gamer and i dont own any consols, im not taking sides, but, not using scientific garble, or nerdy hardware specs of the consols versus pc specs...i can simply say this...iv seen how good games look on the 360 and how good they run, and it just looks flat out amazing "BUT BUT BUT THE PCS VIDEO CARD DOES 9823432 GIGAFLOPS OF INFORMATION A MICROSECOND! SO IT HAS TO BE BETTER" ....that doesnt tell me ****, iv seen with my own 2 eyes, teh graphics power of these consols, and pc's , as of now, have lost the battle...crysis was the only game that looked like it could graphically annihilate the consols..but guess what, to no surprise, it got pushed back till september!!!!!
Flawless and perfectly smooth? WTF games are you playing. I've seen some incredibly crappy looking next-gen games, especially those designed for PC. LOTR battle for middle earth 2 on 360 looks like a friggin PS1 game. Sure a game like Ping-Pong looks incredible but give any real depth and the graphics either suck or the games tend to lag. For example Madden 07, the game looks incredible inbetween plays when there's nothing else going on, but as soon as you start to play again the game lags. I cant count how many times I've selected the wrong play because of the game stuttering while I'm picking a play. And as far as money goes, these next-gen systems look no better then there predecessors unless you have a high-def TV which cost a lot more then a decent monitor.
 

chaynz

Distinguished
Jan 29, 2006
17
0
18,510
0
In general, PC gaming will always be the "showpiece" of technology. It may not have the quantity of games (by far!), but in GENERAL the quality is much better.

I've been a computer gamer since the days of Commander Keen. There was a period in the mid to late 90's where it peaked. Since then, I've noticed a steady decline in the amount of games. Lately, the handful of games for the PC have been nothing short of blockbusters (Oblivion, FEAR, Prey, HL2, etc...), no doubt about that. But now they're trickling down to the new consoles. Not only that, but the current-gen PC games that are being ported to consoles have more content than their PC counterparts (FEAR for example).

Do they look as good as on a PC? Not even a little bit. 1080p or not, my 19" monitor from 1998 can still go up to 1600x1200. But, look at what's required to play that game: at most, a $600 console and a $2000 1080p monitor.

Honestly, if I had the ability to GUARANTEE my computer wouldn't be obsolete for ~5 years, I'd plop down $2,500 on it. But look at what most of us do within a 5-year period; we upgrade constantly. $300 here, $100 there, it all adds up, usually above $2,500.

But that's not the point of PC gaming. PC gaming isn't about the money; it's about the satisfaction of knowing that you can surf the 'net, play nearly every video game conceived since the beginning of games (emulators!), store your life on it's gigantic hard drives, watch some movies and burn some music to listen to in your car. For me, games or not, it's fun! And for all the console fanatics out there, remember this: PC's still set the benchmark. Just like AMD and Intel, it's a race to the boundless end of technology.

Consoles are (the majority of the time) faster at playing games for many reasons. They have very closely engineered CPUs, GPUs, RAM, and data buses to make it all work. A game console is not (yet?) a general purpose machine. They don't have standardized components, they don't have (much) expandability; their ONLY purpose is PLAYING GAMES. Another way to think about it:

The expensive video cards we all own. They're miraculous pieces of engineering. Even a meager Geforce4 4200Ti is substantially faster than ANY modern CPU at floating-point, parallel tasks. But that's because video cards are not LIMITED BY ARCHITECTURE. Our computers, to this day, are still limited by x86 (or x64). It's a constant balancing act; floating-point VS. integer. Constrained by PCI-E, PCI, you name it.

Consoles eliminate these problems. Since they don't do much integer operations, they usually have a dedicated integer CPU and a much faster parallel floating-point CPU. Then, since there is no defined transfer protocol, they can link them together however they want to. No limiting PCI-Express, no bottlenecked HT Bus, none of that. They can run all 512 I/O's directly to one another, have dedicated ram per unit, and purpose-build a matrix pushing/popping machine.

Which one is better? It just depends on what you do, what you like, and what you want. Personally, instead of arguing that one is better, I just buy whichever console has the best games (quality-wise), and upgrade my PC so I can see the future of consoles.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS