Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Hardware Manufacturers Making PC Gaming Too Elite?

Posted by simoniker on from the priced-out-of-market dept.

Thanks to AVault for its editorial discussing whether PC hardware/graphics card manufacturers are fragmenting PC gaming too much with constant hardware upgrades, thereby "making it a sport for only the serious few." The author argues: "With the impending release of Valve's Half-Life 2 and id's Doom 3, we're looking at the first required hardware upgrade in gaming history... the reported minimum requirements for these two heavy hitting titles include fully DirectX9 compatible video cards. This demand excludes all low-end and many medium-level computers out there today." He discusses the "partnership" of "hardware manufacturers turning over reference equipment that won't see the retail market for some time to software developers to use in the creation of their games", and queries the "expensive process of habitual upgrades" by suggesting: "If everybody turns to an Xbox or a PlayStation for entertainment, who's going to need new PC equipment?"

6 of 172 comments (clear)

  1. What? by Pluvius · · Score: 5, Interesting

    He says that this is the first required hardware upgrade in gaming history (boldfaced lie), then implies that consoles don't have this problem? Excuse me?

    Rob

    1. Re:What? by Pluvius · · Score: 5, Interesting

      BTW, it wouldn't be the hardware manufacturers causing the fragmentation of PC gaming, but the game developers themselves. That should be obvious.

      Rob

    2. Re:What? by Dirus · · Score: 5, Insightful
      He says that this is the first required hardware upgrade in gaming history (boldfaced lie), then implies that consoles don't have this problem? Excuse me?

      Yes this is a lie. I find it rather ironic that Doom 3 is being used as an example. People had to upgrade their hardware (ie purchase a 3d card) to play Quake 3. id has always been ahead of others in the area of requirements, this should be no surprise to PC gamers.

      While other upgrades, such as processor and ram upgrades, are not always required, they are sometimes "required" to play a game at a reasonable level of quality. Afterall, all games have "minimum requirements" (as a side note, these are usually too low).

      Slightly offtopic, but a good example that comes to mind is Diablo 2. I remember when it came out I had to buy more ram because I'd go down the stairs into a dungeon and it would hit the hard drive. The server wouldn't pause for you so before I could even load the dungeon my guy would die. Sure the ram wasn't required to start the game, but as it was a requirement nonetheless, as there was no way to play the game without it.

  2. So? by maeka · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I haven't, and won't spend money on PC hardware just so that I can play a new game. I still play the original Half Life, and haven't upgraded my video hardware past my TNT2.

    The high prices he is complaining about are the price you pay for the biggest and the best. His comparisons to console systems are way off the mark.

    People buy consoles for the steady stream of games w/o hardware upgrades, knowing full well that the state of the art will leave them behind.

    People buy PC gaming hardware so they can keep up with the state of the art, at their own pace. If I want to plunk down $$ for the latest video card to play the new games, I can. But I can also be like a console owner and stand by and watch my equipment slowly become obsolete.

  3. Software developers want less eye candy. by MiceHead · · Score: 5, Interesting
    One might think Valve would aim lower, given the results of its System Survey:

    Video Card Description:
    NVidia GeForce4 MX Series -- 15.35 %
    NVidia GeForce4 Series -- 12.47 %
    NVidia GeForce2 MX Series -- 10.86 %
    NVidia GeForce FX 5200 Series -- 7.02 %
    ATI Radeon 9600 Series -- 6.11 %
    ATI Radeon 9800 Series -- 4.93 %
    .
    .
    .

    CPU Speed:
    1.5 Ghz to 1.7 Ghz -- 14.00 %
    1.7 Ghz to 2.0 Ghz -- 18.33 %
    2.0 Ghz to 2.3 Ghz -- 13.82 %
    2.3 Ghz to 2.7 Ghz -- 16.62 %
    .
    .
    .

    As a software developer, I actually don't want to have to produce a game with that much eye candy. But I feel compelled to concentrate on that, given that gamers and press go (in part) by screenshots and aesthetics.

    Regardless of what I'd like to concentrate on, I think the hardware vendors, the software developers, the press, and the consumer are all in cahoots together. You, me, everyone -- we all want to see prettier games.
    --
    We're indie. We're working on our 14th game.
  4. Other Historical upgrade points by cgenman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    CD Rom drives.
    Sound Cards.
    VGA cards (like DOS was using it).
    Color Monitors.
    Joystick ports.

    All of the above upgrades were essentially driven by gaming. What use was a sound card before Roberta Williams started supporting them in King's Quest? What did a CD Rom drive do before Myst? Sure, windows would eventually come to rely upon 2D graphics processing, much like the plan is to integrate 3D processing into Longhorn, but the cart in this case did not lead the horse. All of these were driven by gaming, with the operating system and applications expanding to take advantage of these new additions.

    If anything, this upgrade generation is the first in the past few years that has been driven by gaming because people started jumping on the Internet and buying machines. People had a more compelling reason to upgrade for a while: I.E. was a dog, and you need really fast hardware to run it satisfactorily. Now, I won't say how Firefox or Opera might fit into this equation more cheaply, but this did mean that people were upgrading their hardware and it had little to do with gaming. We are, of course, back on the gaming upgrade cycle.

    It's not a new phenomenon, it just took the back burner for a little while.

    --
    The ______ Agenda