The Big Picture: PC Gaming Is Dead - Long Live PC Gaming!
- Thread starter MovieBob
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I don't agree I'm afraid. If I could afford a top of the range gaming pc and be able to keep it running at tip-top well I'd gladly leave my 360 to gather dust. Also PC easily dominates strategy games.
Looking forward to it. Plus it has competition with League of Legends.Void(null) said:
So I guess my setup doesn't meet the expected for a PC setup then. Using a PC as a centralized way to manage all of my content and being able to access it from most places.
The PC left its position at just the desk a long time ago. Its part of so much other things now that its hard to think about. You can find bits of what you use your PC in tons of devices. However it is the fact that the PC is supposed to be able to handle what ever you want to throw at it that makes it different to people. The range of specifications that devices have currently means that you can alwayhave the best solution for a situation if you look.
The PC and PC gaming aren't going to die, the form of PC gaming may change but it is what you get out of it that makes it special. Everything goes through theses cycles of death and rebirth. Video game consoles already died once, *looking at Atari*. The PC has been able to survive with relatively few changes to its form over the years, there will come a time with all technology where things are deemed unnecessary. However there are always those who wish to continue what they enjoy.
The allure of PC gaming is a difficult thing to see from the outside and just as difficult to explain.
The PC left its position at just the desk a long time ago. Its part of so much other things now that its hard to think about. You can find bits of what you use your PC in tons of devices. However it is the fact that the PC is supposed to be able to handle what ever you want to throw at it that makes it different to people. The range of specifications that devices have currently means that you can alwayhave the best solution for a situation if you look.
The PC and PC gaming aren't going to die, the form of PC gaming may change but it is what you get out of it that makes it special. Everything goes through theses cycles of death and rebirth. Video game consoles already died once, *looking at Atari*. The PC has been able to survive with relatively few changes to its form over the years, there will come a time with all technology where things are deemed unnecessary. However there are always those who wish to continue what they enjoy.
The allure of PC gaming is a difficult thing to see from the outside and just as difficult to explain.
First, there is one thing that was overlooked by Bobby. The fact that desktop gaming is busy driving the technology. If it wasn't for pc gaming, then we would still be sitting with P2 CPU's and 500Mb ram. More than that is really not needed to work with data. So, if pc gaming does die out and consoles take over. Just think how slowly the technology will advance. How long does it take for a new console to be released? Face it, you will always have a pc at home with the leading technology and high performance, while your mobile devices will follow suit a couple of generations later.
Second, I do not buy this cloud computing idea. I think it is just a push from corp's so that later down the line they could charge us to store our data or just to have our details in one place, much easier to data mine one location than to search the internet for potential spam victims. Sorry, but I would rather prefer to have my data in my house with my firewalls protecting it.
Second, I do not buy this cloud computing idea. I think it is just a push from corp's so that later down the line they could charge us to store our data or just to have our details in one place, much easier to data mine one location than to search the internet for potential spam victims. Sorry, but I would rather prefer to have my data in my house with my firewalls protecting it.
Whoa bob, minus respect. PC gaming is not dead, and will live on. These were all some crazy opinions, with no evidence.
Therefore, I disagree. I do think social gaming and smartphone gaming will peak, but people who game on the PC will NOT move over to that, and will probably do both if anything. The PC is still the centre of innovation and freedom, and we've yet to see half of the creativity that comes from it.
The things I can do on my xbox and PS3 are nice and all, but I can do them all on my PC, and usually 10x better.
Therefore, I disagree. I do think social gaming and smartphone gaming will peak, but people who game on the PC will NOT move over to that, and will probably do both if anything. The PC is still the centre of innovation and freedom, and we've yet to see half of the creativity that comes from it.
The things I can do on my xbox and PS3 are nice and all, but I can do them all on my PC, and usually 10x better.
I find it funny that people just go along with their old arguments of how PC gaming isn't dead because of all the sales and what not as they completely ignore the actual message of the video. Your attacks aren't very effective.
I see it more as the PC being split up into multiple different outlets rather that it outright dying. Most computing control can be given to things like the Ipad in the future. Social aspects are dominating the handheld and phone markets. Gaming is being spread far and wide. Cords are being replaced by wireless and easy to use recharge stations. Printers will just get smaller and smaller until you can carry them with you. As for keyboard and precision mouse control I can only imagine what kind of innovations will be made in the future.
Very nice video Bob. It's unfortunate that so many people just read the 1st half of your title and typed out one of their tired and generic responses.
I see it more as the PC being split up into multiple different outlets rather that it outright dying. Most computing control can be given to things like the Ipad in the future. Social aspects are dominating the handheld and phone markets. Gaming is being spread far and wide. Cords are being replaced by wireless and easy to use recharge stations. Printers will just get smaller and smaller until you can carry them with you. As for keyboard and precision mouse control I can only imagine what kind of innovations will be made in the future.
Very nice video Bob. It's unfortunate that so many people just read the 1st half of your title and typed out one of their tired and generic responses.
Wow, just, wow. There's easily a dozen games on that list that send my mouth salivating.Laxman9292 said:
I'm going to echo much of what has been said before, I fear, but I still felt like sharing my two cents.
We've been hearing 'PC Gaming is dead' for years now. And the claim has just as often been discredited. Frankly, when I read the title for the episode I thought Bob was being ironic and he'd be making fun of the latest bunch of people that have been parroting the slogan.
Part of the argument is semantics. Certainly, the computers of today are not the computers of 30 years ago, and the computers of the future will look nothing like what we have available to us today. But will we still call them computers, or something else?
In the video, Bob says the computer is being replaced by Notebooks, amongst others. To me, and many people in this thread it seems, and everybody else I know, Notebooks, Laptops and Netbooks are essentially the same except for size and power, and they are all computers. They have the same operating systems as computers, run the same software, and you interact with them the same way. It seems nonsensical to say that computers are being replaced by something that does everything exactly the same, but is more portable.
Sure, the convenience of mobile computers is clearly superior to the convenience of one you can't move. But if they do the same things in the same ways, the software is certainly not going to change. Notebooks can't kill computers because they ARE computers. Just to make this point clear, I have a gaming computer, and a gaming laptop. I play the same games on both (Steam copies my games to each). When I travel I use the laptop. When I'm at home, I like my 28", 1920x1200 resolution monitor. The desktop has a bit more horse power as well, since it's not limited to having to be portable.
In the same vein, most devices are growing in complexity and power. If consoles, TVs, mobile phones and tablets continue following this trend, they will in time become computers. Certainly, they will have different input methods (touchscreens for smartphones and tablets, remotes for intelligent tvs, gamepads for consoles), and different times when using them is appropriate, but they won't be replacing computers. They will be adding to what a computer can be, and how you can interact with them.
It comes down to what a computer is, and the reason why we still call the machines we use today the same name as the machines we had 10, 15 or 30 years ago. A computer is a multipurpose device, that can run any sort of code you input into it.
When they were introduced, consoles were specialized machines. As the generations passed, they gained more and more flexibility. PS3s can now run linux. At that point, they become a computer. Same for the 360. How could they kill computers, when they are becoming them?
Mobile phones used to be limited to making calls and sending text messages over cellphone networks. We now have smartphones capable of connecting to wifi networks, running fairly complex OSs with hundreds of thousands of applications. They're tiny computers, more powerful than any computers we had back in the day. Motorola has even released the Atrix, a smartphone with a dual core processor, GeForce integrated graphics and 1GB of ram. With a dock that turns it into a netbook, complete with keyboard, 11" screen and touchpad.
If that wasn't blurring the lines enough, any computer with speakers and a mic can now also make calls, through Skype or Google Voice, to land lines. And if you really want to get convoluted, you can tether your computer to your smartphone, connect to the internet through the cellular network, then place a phonecall with Skype. If you don't think that's crazy enough, call your own phone you're using to tether the computer.
Far from dying, the computer is encroaching on the grounds of every other electronic component. Because so much of what we want can be achieved just by moving information around, and nothing is better at moving information around than a computer.
A different subject to tackle is how the cost of keeping up to date with the latest games has historically driven the cost of PC gaming up through the roof. Even as people complained about the expense of a PS3, enthusiast PCs dwarfed them in cost. But then, enthusiast PCs were always aimed at the enthusiast market, while consoles aim for the mainstream. And PCs could claim to do anything, while consoles did a fraction of that, so the cost seemed more justified for the PC.
But rather than kill computers, this latest generation of consoles came to the rescue. Because they are so much like computers, games can be ported from one console to another, and back to the computer. This is a very lucrative proposition for game designers, since it means they can access the whole market, and great for console owners as well since the number of exclusives (and so the number of games they can't play) also decreases.
On the computer side, it means that graphics can give computer owners time to catch their breath between upgrades. Since the games have to run on their stunted little brothers (sorry, a bit of the pc gamer in me crept in there), the developers aren't constantly pushing the limits of what the graphic hardware and processing power of the computers can do.
But while consoles remain frozen in time, graphics hardware and processing power do continue to march on, and prices continue to fall. So anyone can pick up today an inexpensive computer that runs the console ports with far better visual quality and smoothness than the consoles do.
Consoles use HD gaming as a selling point. Computer gamers had HD resolutions years before, and the latest craze is multi-screen gaming, offering resolutions of up to HDx6. Sure, hella expensive, since buying up to six monitors isn't cheap, but enthusiast gamers are used to paying a premium.
As for the last point, that computers take up space. Mobile computers have one problem, screen size. We all love big screens, but until we come up with holographic displays big screens are going to be heavy and take up a lot of space. Consoles get around this with using TVs as their screens. But TVs are designed for the resolution that is available to their input channels. 760p a few years back, moving up to 1080p now. Essentially, the resolution that can easily be streamed to the device or stored in discs.
Computers mop the floor with all other media devices in terms of resolution and pixel density. Pixel density is important because it's what leads to smooth graphics when you're up close. It's why the guys at apple where so happy with their 'retina display' on the iPhone 4. Resolution also limits how much information can be placed in the screen at once. When you watch a movie, you don't really need a lot of information. You need to be able to tell the actors apart, see what they're wearing, what they're holding, etc. But you don't need to know how many pimples they have. In fact, as news anchors are learning in the age of HD broadcasting, it's much better when we can't see them clearly.
But computers need to show a lot of information. You need to be able to read each character in this post clearly, for example, and there are a lot of characters here. You need to have space for the advertisement on the sides, links to other stuff, the taskbar below, etc. And it all has to look nice while you're sitting there up close. So when working on a computer, you want to have as large a screen as possible, with as high a pixel density as possible. Screen real state measurably improves productivity. Specially for people working on graphic design, for example, but even being able to have two word documents open side by side can be a great help.
That means that so long as you need a computer to work, you're going to need a computer monitor. And if you need the monitor, tacking on the computer is no great waste of space. You might be tempted to use a tv or something, but as I said before, monitors are over-designed for the needs of tv usage. TVs want to be as big as possible, so you can watch them from far away with friends. Monitors want high pixel density, so you can see everything in there smoothly when working up close.
You could use an HD TV to work, if you wanted to sit far away, but then you still need a desk to put the keyboard on, and whatever papers you have lying around. The set up is not ideal since you'd have to move the desk to be able to sit comfortably to watch a movie later.
So, since you are still stuck working at a desk, and having a monitor, the computer is not going to lose it's appeal.
To sum up an overly long post: Long live PC Gaming. It has a bright future ahead.
We've been hearing 'PC Gaming is dead' for years now. And the claim has just as often been discredited. Frankly, when I read the title for the episode I thought Bob was being ironic and he'd be making fun of the latest bunch of people that have been parroting the slogan.
Part of the argument is semantics. Certainly, the computers of today are not the computers of 30 years ago, and the computers of the future will look nothing like what we have available to us today. But will we still call them computers, or something else?
In the video, Bob says the computer is being replaced by Notebooks, amongst others. To me, and many people in this thread it seems, and everybody else I know, Notebooks, Laptops and Netbooks are essentially the same except for size and power, and they are all computers. They have the same operating systems as computers, run the same software, and you interact with them the same way. It seems nonsensical to say that computers are being replaced by something that does everything exactly the same, but is more portable.
Sure, the convenience of mobile computers is clearly superior to the convenience of one you can't move. But if they do the same things in the same ways, the software is certainly not going to change. Notebooks can't kill computers because they ARE computers. Just to make this point clear, I have a gaming computer, and a gaming laptop. I play the same games on both (Steam copies my games to each). When I travel I use the laptop. When I'm at home, I like my 28", 1920x1200 resolution monitor. The desktop has a bit more horse power as well, since it's not limited to having to be portable.
In the same vein, most devices are growing in complexity and power. If consoles, TVs, mobile phones and tablets continue following this trend, they will in time become computers. Certainly, they will have different input methods (touchscreens for smartphones and tablets, remotes for intelligent tvs, gamepads for consoles), and different times when using them is appropriate, but they won't be replacing computers. They will be adding to what a computer can be, and how you can interact with them.
It comes down to what a computer is, and the reason why we still call the machines we use today the same name as the machines we had 10, 15 or 30 years ago. A computer is a multipurpose device, that can run any sort of code you input into it.
When they were introduced, consoles were specialized machines. As the generations passed, they gained more and more flexibility. PS3s can now run linux. At that point, they become a computer. Same for the 360. How could they kill computers, when they are becoming them?
Mobile phones used to be limited to making calls and sending text messages over cellphone networks. We now have smartphones capable of connecting to wifi networks, running fairly complex OSs with hundreds of thousands of applications. They're tiny computers, more powerful than any computers we had back in the day. Motorola has even released the Atrix, a smartphone with a dual core processor, GeForce integrated graphics and 1GB of ram. With a dock that turns it into a netbook, complete with keyboard, 11" screen and touchpad.
If that wasn't blurring the lines enough, any computer with speakers and a mic can now also make calls, through Skype or Google Voice, to land lines. And if you really want to get convoluted, you can tether your computer to your smartphone, connect to the internet through the cellular network, then place a phonecall with Skype. If you don't think that's crazy enough, call your own phone you're using to tether the computer.
Far from dying, the computer is encroaching on the grounds of every other electronic component. Because so much of what we want can be achieved just by moving information around, and nothing is better at moving information around than a computer.
A different subject to tackle is how the cost of keeping up to date with the latest games has historically driven the cost of PC gaming up through the roof. Even as people complained about the expense of a PS3, enthusiast PCs dwarfed them in cost. But then, enthusiast PCs were always aimed at the enthusiast market, while consoles aim for the mainstream. And PCs could claim to do anything, while consoles did a fraction of that, so the cost seemed more justified for the PC.
But rather than kill computers, this latest generation of consoles came to the rescue. Because they are so much like computers, games can be ported from one console to another, and back to the computer. This is a very lucrative proposition for game designers, since it means they can access the whole market, and great for console owners as well since the number of exclusives (and so the number of games they can't play) also decreases.
On the computer side, it means that graphics can give computer owners time to catch their breath between upgrades. Since the games have to run on their stunted little brothers (sorry, a bit of the pc gamer in me crept in there), the developers aren't constantly pushing the limits of what the graphic hardware and processing power of the computers can do.
But while consoles remain frozen in time, graphics hardware and processing power do continue to march on, and prices continue to fall. So anyone can pick up today an inexpensive computer that runs the console ports with far better visual quality and smoothness than the consoles do.
Consoles use HD gaming as a selling point. Computer gamers had HD resolutions years before, and the latest craze is multi-screen gaming, offering resolutions of up to HDx6. Sure, hella expensive, since buying up to six monitors isn't cheap, but enthusiast gamers are used to paying a premium.
As for the last point, that computers take up space. Mobile computers have one problem, screen size. We all love big screens, but until we come up with holographic displays big screens are going to be heavy and take up a lot of space. Consoles get around this with using TVs as their screens. But TVs are designed for the resolution that is available to their input channels. 760p a few years back, moving up to 1080p now. Essentially, the resolution that can easily be streamed to the device or stored in discs.
Computers mop the floor with all other media devices in terms of resolution and pixel density. Pixel density is important because it's what leads to smooth graphics when you're up close. It's why the guys at apple where so happy with their 'retina display' on the iPhone 4. Resolution also limits how much information can be placed in the screen at once. When you watch a movie, you don't really need a lot of information. You need to be able to tell the actors apart, see what they're wearing, what they're holding, etc. But you don't need to know how many pimples they have. In fact, as news anchors are learning in the age of HD broadcasting, it's much better when we can't see them clearly.
But computers need to show a lot of information. You need to be able to read each character in this post clearly, for example, and there are a lot of characters here. You need to have space for the advertisement on the sides, links to other stuff, the taskbar below, etc. And it all has to look nice while you're sitting there up close. So when working on a computer, you want to have as large a screen as possible, with as high a pixel density as possible. Screen real state measurably improves productivity. Specially for people working on graphic design, for example, but even being able to have two word documents open side by side can be a great help.
That means that so long as you need a computer to work, you're going to need a computer monitor. And if you need the monitor, tacking on the computer is no great waste of space. You might be tempted to use a tv or something, but as I said before, monitors are over-designed for the needs of tv usage. TVs want to be as big as possible, so you can watch them from far away with friends. Monitors want high pixel density, so you can see everything in there smoothly when working up close.
You could use an HD TV to work, if you wanted to sit far away, but then you still need a desk to put the keyboard on, and whatever papers you have lying around. The set up is not ideal since you'd have to move the desk to be able to sit comfortably to watch a movie later.
So, since you are still stuck working at a desk, and having a monitor, the computer is not going to lose it's appeal.
To sum up an overly long post: Long live PC Gaming. It has a bright future ahead.
And there's the stupidity in what he's arguing. His suggestions are either:seydaman said:
a) Buy 10 gadgets at way more than the cost of a PC to be able to most (well, "most") of the things you can on a PC
Or
b) Make the likes of consoles into PCs anyway
He was completely one-sided to fit his own viewpoint. He used poor logic (see the above quote and my response), and completely ignored a number of factors that show the PC isn't on its way out (again: consistent rise in Steam membership, PC revenue was up 19% last year).Tankichi said:
Not to mention his random surmising, like gaming is only a secondary function. What, pray tell, is the primary function of a PC then? Programming? Word processing? Web surfing? Designing (be it games, buildings, films, whatever)? Watching porn?
The answer? All of them and none of them. There is no primary function, except for it to do what you built it/bought it to.
Yes, instead of using one thing to do anything, we should have 4-5 devices which can do some of the things (only worse) while still having the first one for some things the others cannot do. Computing is still done primarily on the computer, smartphones etc. are just to be able to use them for minor things, or when away. I doubt anyone thinks "I need to get some work done. To the iPad!" anytime soon. Or late. Or ever, really.
Also, modding.
Also, modding.
Are laptops and tablets not PCs? Do they not still use a keyboard and mouse? (okay tablets don't sorta.) is a laptop anyless a Personal computer than the big box not a foot away from me? sure it's smaller has a battery and different kind of mouse but saying PC gaming is dying because of laptops and tablets is like saying stove top cooking is dying because of grills.
Also It isn't about internet access. PS, xbox and Wii internet all suffer from the same problem of not being IE or firefox or really a browser. I can watch netflix on my wii but i can't watch them at netflix.com. i had to download a whole other thing to do that.
PC gaming dying? ehhhh... not really. Look at f-ing steam.
Also It isn't about internet access. PS, xbox and Wii internet all suffer from the same problem of not being IE or firefox or really a browser. I can watch netflix on my wii but i can't watch them at netflix.com. i had to download a whole other thing to do that.
PC gaming dying? ehhhh... not really. Look at f-ing steam.
It's hard to maintain my level of civility when people come in and completely miss the point.Legendairy314 said:
Yes, many of us understand the issue was not on whether PC and it's gaming software was in decline. The argument is split between both semantics and the likely function of PCs, and their appropriate functions, in future. There is a whole 15 pages explaining that right here in front of you-most of us have been on board the whole time.
PC gaming will never die so long as console and hand-held manufacturers hold on to their SDKs with a death grip. The main advantage PCs will have and always will have is the ability for communities of gamers to develop and make third-party patches and updates for games that were great but dated. Take a look at games like Counter-Strike, it may not be your first choice of gaming but the fact that new maps and mods are still coming and out is a testiment to the power that PC gaming has.
Now try and go play Halo2 online... oh wait, cosole companies got you guys by the balls.
Now try and go play Halo2 online... oh wait, cosole companies got you guys by the balls.
Wow, all the hundreds of posts with people pointing out that all of Bob's alternatives combined were basically doing the same thing as a single PC, just with closed software/hardware paths and more restrictions on capabilities... they just flew over your head, didn't they?Legendairy314 said:
What is pathetic is your straw arguments. People here have been very articulate in their constructive criticisms - even more so than the flamebait that Bob posted.
I gotta say, Bob makes some really good points here. Sure, right now your PC as a gaming platform may be cool because you can mod it and use it for other stuff, but all that's really left is for Microsoft and Sony (and maybe even Nintendo) to come out with decent operating systems for their next generations.
I have a Wii that I use to play Brawl (and... that's about it).
I have a PS3 that I use to play my RPG's, fighting games, and shooters.
And I have a PC that I use to play my strategy games (and since that's my favourite genre, that's more than enough reason to have a decent PC).
We'll see where it goes, but I think denying that PC gaming is circling the drain is just a silly thing to do.
I have a Wii that I use to play Brawl (and... that's about it).
I have a PS3 that I use to play my RPG's, fighting games, and shooters.
And I have a PC that I use to play my strategy games (and since that's my favourite genre, that's more than enough reason to have a decent PC).
We'll see where it goes, but I think denying that PC gaming is circling the drain is just a silly thing to do.
Bob's point was great. However I see a problem with it expect its his argument but for consoles.