Slashdot Mirror
Will Next-Gen Consoles Kill Off PC Gaming?
An anonymous reader writes "CNET is predicting that next-generation consoles will drive the final nails into the already half-closed coffin of mainstream PC gaming. The root of their argument isn't one of power, but of price: 'The bottom line is that console manufacturers often heavily subsidize their new machines, swallowing huge losses up front in hopes that they'll make it all back selling games... Other things being equal, the DIY-heavy PC gaming industry can't hope to compete in that kind of market.' Which is to say that once the 18-34 demographic starts buying $400 PS3s instead of $400 video cards, developers may have no choice but to follow suit." Will there still be a market for PC games, or are the graphics of the next generation of consoles going to make PC games unnecessary?
Lets put it this way:
Consoles will take over PC gaming when they get the advantages of PC Gaming like bigger harddrives, better memory, better quality graphics...
And to get that, what do they have to be? Modern day PCs with rigid hardware. Basically a laptop.
I'm guessing within the next 5 generations, the console and PC market will converge...
Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
I'd just like to mod this article -1 Flamebait.
Thank you,
Slashdot Reader
Im dreaming ofa big bndwdth, That can resist the
IMHO, the problem has never been about price, performance or convience (well, maybe a little). Its been mainly about titles. What games are actually available and if those games are solely for a specific platform. In the early 80s, Ataris were nice, but lost their luster with the availability of the C64. In the late 80s, most of the best games available where for the console systems, in the early 90s we started to see a switch back to computers and when Doom came out, it seemed like everyone was picking up a PC. Then Quake came out and with the Internet boom everyone bought new computers. Now people are going back to consoles because there are so many good games there that aren't available for computers. If someone made a game for Linux that really kicked ass, I imagine that suddenly a lot of people would be running Linux. Take for instance, Frozen Bubble. Great game play and highly addictive, got a lot of people to use Linux who didn't before.
This can be especially said of the 18-34 demographic which surprisingly always seems to have the money to get something that they really want. Like a new $400 video card to play Half-Life 2.
Someone needs to write a unique and really great game that is only available for Linux.
Well,
There are games that make sense on a console (driving sims, fighting games, etc.) and games that work better on a PC (first person shooters (arguable), MMORPGs, RTS, etc.). I know that personally, I will want to have both for the forseeable future. I love driving on my high def TV, but I despise playing first person shooters on the console, due to the lack of control.
People are always trying to be the first to drive a nail in some coffin. In this case, it is highly premature, IMO.
Willie
You know, you can buy video cards that are well under $100 that have enough power to play any PC game out there. Only a fool spends $400 on a video card for their home gaming rig.
PC games are about a lot more than just the graphics. And there are still going to be a lot of people who own a PC- to do PC things, who wont own a console. PC games may not be the top money maker but they will still be around for a long time.
It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
I had an Intellivision and then an Atari 2600. After that, I felt that if it deserved to be a computer game, it deserved to be on a computer. Then, over the past few years, it became a headache. My wife would buy some new game and I knew that I would have to spend a few hours downloading updates and configuring it to work properly. I just got sick of it and bought a PS2. Now, you just pop in the disk and play - no driver updates and no configuration. I think that the ease-of-use will be a major factor in getting people to move from PC to console.
The previous comment is purposely vague and generalized, but all of the facts are completely true.
I ran Half-Life 2 on my 1600x1200 flat panel at its native resolution with no problems on my Radeon 9600 Pro (128MB). I paid more than $100 for it at the time, but it now sells for about $75-$80 on Newegg.
I'd be really curious to find out what details were on while you were running this?
~S
You know, some people value visual quality enough to justifiably shell out the money without being fools. You're correct in your assessment that cheap cards exist for casual gamers, but then you decided to be a jerk.
Console gaming is for those who just want a plug-and-play gaming experience at a reasonable cost.
PC gaming is never going to go away. Simply put, there is an installed base of several hundred million users. Is any rational CEO of a software company (gaming or otherwise) simply going to pack up and leave all that money on the table? Absolutely not.
I know there are people who like to have the best at any cost. But really, by the time you hit the $200 mark, you're already pretty close to the top of the line. The differences between the $200 and the $400 video card are pretty small.
Other things being equal, the DIY-heavy PC gaming industry can't hope to compete in that kind of market. Which is to say that once the 18-34 demographic starts buying $400 PS3s instead of $400 video cards, developers may have no choice but to follow suit.
A $400 video card is a red herring. They are only for early adopters who want to win pissing contests. The latest games are written to run well on far more modest cards. A DIY'er could buy a $150 video card when building the system and then upgrade to a different $150 card 18-24 months later and not miss out on any games. Been there, done that. In comparison my console is stuck in time for 5 years.
Also some games just seem to work much better on PCs, RTS for example. Even with games that do work well on consoles, FPS for example, my personal feeling is that FPSs designed to work on both PCs and consoles seemed "dumbed down" compared to FPSs that were designed to work only on PCs.
I'm sure others will mention the more obvious reasons why PC gaming will not die so I'll only mention an offbeat on. It is a much easier market to enter. A startup can develop a game and market it themselves. No need to get blessings from some arbitrary authority.
PC gaming will only go away when PCs themselves go away.
My father in law spends a lot more than that on a golf club... Hell, the greens fees here are over $300 (with a discount).
If you can't afford it, sure, it's a waste. If you can, and this is how you choose to enjoy yourself, why not?
m-
You catch enchiladas by picking them up behind the head and holding them underwater until they don't kick anymore -VeGas
Do not worry my friend. As a fellow Radeon 9600 Pro owner, your shame^H^H^H^Hecret is safe with me.
-- Dan
Funny, I usually classify someone as a fool if they ever use the term 'gaming rig' in a non-ironic way.
:)
I know, right?? When will these people learn?
The proper term is "Wintendo".
All movements for social change begin as missions, evolve into businesses, and end up as rackets.
The next-generation will be even more dramatic, both in the disappointing launch titles, and in the shocking improvement over the next 5 years.
PCs will always be anchored by widespread adoption of legacy systems, but this can be an advantage for them. The next-generation of console games will cost so much money to develop and cost so much to the consumer, that this opens up a big market in low-cost not-bleeding-edge PC gaming. That's the direction I see their future going.
After all, there are many more PCs than consoles in the world.
There goes the usual /. response again: "You know, you can buy video cards that are well under $100 that have enough power to play any PC game out there. Only a fool spends $400 on a video card for their home gaming rig."
Know what? I bought the BFG 6800 Ultra when it first came out and Half-Life 2 running in 1600x1200 on my LCD display looks friggin awesome with all of the eye candy turned on. In fact, all games look awesome compared to when I used to play them with my old $100 card. Don't knock it just because you can't afford it.
If you're broke and can't spend the money, then don't. But don't call me a fool because I want everything I run to be very nice and fluid.
Especially because my LCD native is 1920x1200, I want a high end card. I won't pay $1000 on one, but I did pay close to $400 for my BFG 6800GT card when they first came out.
Now, I can skip at least one new major GPU release from both ATI and nVidia, and still have plenty of power to play the games, if I wanted to. Sure, I could buy a $200 card now, and then another $200 in another year.. Might as well pay $400 now and have cutting edge for awhile, right?
Every time a new game console hits the market, there's another story about how it will kill PC gaming. It's not going to happen. It never has, and it never will.
When the first Xbox and the PS2 hit the shelves, they were touted as "PC Game killers" just the same. The hardware was strong and easily could compete with what PC's had going at the time. Then, six months passed, and PC games easily out-gunned consoles in terms of sound, graphics, and speed.
Will anything be different this time around? I don't think so. The XBox 360 has three PowerPC chips in it, or a multi-core CPU, or whatever. It's got a (currently) top of the line ATI chip in it for video. This machine will be very cool, but multi-core CPU's and SLI technologies are already making strong headway on PC's now.
Do you really think the Xbox 360 will be more powerful then a high end PC a year later? I don't.
Don't get me wrong, I like game consoles. I've owned the Xbox for a long time, and I still use it (although this could be because it's modded and a modded xbox is the shit) and there's some games that are only fun if you play them on a gamepad in front of the TV with some friends.
PC Gaming will be around for as long as people keep buying PC's for gaming. Visit any of the big PC gaming forums and you'll find the most active (albiet annoying) forums on the Internet.
No, the PC games will keep coming.
- It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
First of all, ignore Yahoo! games etc., because that's a different market, and no one buys a PC specifically for Yahoo! Games (I hope).
1. You need A-list titles like Half-Life to sell PC gaming rigs, garner interest, make big money.
2. The last half-life took YEARS to develop, and there's nothing wrong with the development team.
3. Game graphics will flat-line to the point you can't tell real TV from videogame TV.
4. The new consoles are on High-Def- often higher Def than computers.
5. More people are buying laptops.
6. Game and computer companies are getting serious about IP, and the computer is their weak point. You can't copy anything on a console. How many original copies of Starcraft are left? When it's so much easier to pirate computer games and get the same experience, it really diminishes profits and enthusiasm. Even Blizzard is moving to consoles. That's also why online games are popular with publishers- besides the subscription prices, you can't play without paying.
I think real PC gaming is done. My friends still play Starcraft, all own PS2s, don't want to learn the difference between NVidia and ATI, AMD FX and Intel EE, or spend hours setting up LANs, toting computers around, troubleshooting technical problems. Once the A-list titles disappear, the investment goes elsewhere, and this is already happening.
You're not a fool, but you're on the wrong side.
So let me get this straight...
Someone who waits a year or two to save money on a video card is making a good buy. Yeah, I can agree to that as long as the person doesn't care about waiting a year or two.
Someone who buys a nice video card today to play games that come out today are responsible for all the horrible marketing that goes on and are just plain idiots for buying nice stuff. Errr, you lost me there.
How about this:
-If you want to wait a year or two to buy a video card, that's cool as long as you don't mind waiting. You aren't any better/smarter than anyone else, you just don't mind waiting. You'll most likely spend your money on something else in the meantime.
-If you DON'T want to wait a year or two to buy a video card, that's cool too as long as you don't mind paying a higher price. You aren't any better/smarter than anyone else, you just like gaming enough to spend the money. You'll most likely spend less money on other things because you have a strong interest in gaming.
You know... maybe we could all try and not be assholes? Just a thought.
The differences between the $200 and the $400 video card are pretty small.
Yeah... about 3 months.