Xbox 360 and PS3: Death to PC Gaming?

[Evil Avatar]

C|Net has an article online (http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-6449_7-6233821-1.html) talking about the impact of the upcoming Playstation 3 and Xbox 360 on PC gaming.If you buy the hype, the PS3's Cell processor--combined with an Nvidia-based RSX graphics processor--will offer stronger graphical performance than just about anything you can get in a current gaming PC. That means you're getting a whole system for less than what it would cost to buy a cutting-edge, high-end graphics card. But you don't have to take my word for it or even Sony's: the claim that the PS3 will offer the equivalent graphics performance of two GeForce 6800 Ultra cards working in tandem came from Jen-Hsun Huang, president and CEO of Nvidia. Current cost of those cards: about $500 each. Cost of Alienware's Aurora ALX SLI, which incorporates a dual 6800 Ultra configuration: nearly $5,000. And how many consumers are willing to pay hundreds extra for PC graphics cards that the manufacturer's own CEO admits are inferior? I'll let you do the math.This comes hot on the heels of NVIDIA's announcement (http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/06/02/news_6126883.html) of their next generation line of video cards, the GeForce 7800 GTX.

[Heretic Machine]

PC gaming is not dead, it didn't die the last time people said this, it's not going to die the next time people say this.

[thecrazyd]

Dude. Six months. At most. Then PC gaming will retake its rightfull spot at the top of the heap.

[Chagrinful]

Who lets these "journalists" write this shit anyway, PC gaming isn't dead and it isn't going to die to the hands of some stupid little consoles.

[novicius]

Point of parlimentary procedure: hasn't nVidia admitted that the PS3's GPU will be available this Xmas and by the time the PS3 launches, they'll have a more powerful PC card on the market?

Predicting the sky is falling is tricky business.

[vornskr]

Heh, I like how the basic arguement in the quoted selection focuses soley on the GPU's.

When they can start putting good AI on consoles, then there might be something to worry about.

Consoles are devices to play arcade-style games on. Anything deeper than that lies within the realm of the PC. And maybe a few Mac titles ;p

[AspectVoid]

This stuff comes out with the start of every new generation of consoles. This is nothing more then the same junk that always comes out.

[Draft]

I think PC gaming is going to move away from multimillion dollar production cycles that require multimillion dollar sales to make a profit. More independent games. Probably a cool thing, in the long run.

[Draft]

Also, of course Huang's going to say that. I'd be shocked if nVidia sold more than a million 6800GTs. They'll sell 20 million RSXs over the next 5 years.

[ElectricMonk]

yawn. another generation, another group of articles about the death of this or that.

[grunter]

Wish I had a dollar for everytime I've read that PC gaming will die. I remember it being said by many when the PS2 was to be released and the same again with the xBox and funnily enough it's still going strong.

I'll be worried about my PC gaming becoming obsolete when my one console can easily surf the internet, do my word processing, spreadsheets, allow me to maintain my websites, store and manipulate (PS) my photos, edit and burn my videos, play my DVDs, play and burn my music, and also allow me to be able to play the latest games.

I pay $1000-$2000 for most of the above, and I pay another $300-$500 for the graphics card to play those games.

Also 6800 Ultras at the time the PS3 is released will be getting damn cheap and I'm sure that the latest range of video cards will make some of the PS3s abilities look a little flat.

[Draft]

I wonder if the following numbers are available, cause I think they'd be pretty telling:

1. Number of PC users in the world now, and 10 years ago.
2. Number of PC games sold now, and 10 years ago.

[Taco]

Wow. I didn't hear this the last three new console generations, nope.

[bobbler]

This generation things are a bit different, I think we'll see more people slowly going towards consoles from PCs (hell, it started happening this current generation). The real advantage PCs have is the resolution advantage -- this is going away (consoles have always been stuck with garbage resolutions of 320x240 / 640x480). My PC gaming days are being reduced more and more with this generation alone -- MMOs are slowly coming to consoles now and there isn't much stopping other genres (with the various connector types they could just as easily have an RTS game and allow you to use your keyboard/mouse). While I love PCs and upgrading hardware and overclocking stuff, it's just not a very feasible gaming platform when compared to consoles -- especially if you don't have a lot of money to spend. Call it a stupid little console if you want, but when I spend 300 dollars and get a similar amount of hardware as a $1500-2500 dollar PC, I call it a good value.

PCs will always surpass consoles, at a cost. You can pay $2500+ for a PC that plays games as well as a console when its first released -- You'd be hard pressed to get a PC any time during the life of the console that plays games as good for the same price (you still can't get a PC for 150 that will play as good as a PS2, let alone an Xbox). Consoles succeed because they are so cost effective (to the consumer at least). PC market will probably never die (maybe just merge with consoles as they become more and more PC like in their abilities, who knows), but it's a niche market -- it won't get any bigger than the niche it still has, but I don't forsee it dying any time soon.

The reasons that were once obvious to choose PC gaming are slowly disappearing. Besides the type of games on the platform there really is none -- there used to be more advantages, but they are gone (resolution and other abilities mainly). Until consoles can feasibly find a way to capture the few genres that PC does better, PC gaming will continue to live.

You guys put little importance on cost, when in actuality that is the main focus of most average consumer when choosing a product (especially when cost differences are upwards of a thousand dollars). Sure you can get a graphics card that'll beat the consoles within 6 months of their release, but that graphics card will cost nearly 2x the console alone -- that's stupid. So while PC gaming remains 'king' in performance, it also remains 'king' in price (by a huge margin).

How much are you willing to spend just to play RTS' and some RPG's?

[Rafer]

Well I found this quote here (http://philsteinmeyer.com/modules/xoopsfaq/index.php?cat_id=1) interesting.

Note that PC sales have been in a fast-fade from 1999 to 2004 (declined from $1.9 billion to $1.1 billion). Looking only at console and handheld sales , the growth from '99 to '04 (from $4.2 billion in '99 to $6.2 billion in '04) is better, at 8.1%

So the PC market is declining dramatically. Though Valve and Blizzard and others are doing okay keep in mind there's less competition for them.

I don't think the PC market will die but it is becoming more of niche. Actually services like Steam might breathe new life into the PC market. If developers get $50 per game sold instead of what's leftover after reproduction, shipping, retailers and the publisher, well that's a major incentive to go after that market.

[Klade]

The PC market will never die so long as people have PCs in their houses. That is pretty simplistic statement but its true. Developers are putting games on cell phones because everyone has one, they sure as hell are going to put them on PCs.

Also since most PC's only need a graphics card to ensure being able to play games the actual cost to play modern day games is the cost of a capable video cards (about 100 to 150$ at any one point in time) which beats the hell out of console prices. Especially when you take into account all the crap you have to buy with a console (extra controllers etc).

Whats really stupid about this article is how this guy compares prices. He uses an Alienware PC! Who in their right mind pays 5000$ for a gaming PC? If you want the best don't pay 5000$ for someone else to make it. For 2000$ or less you can make yourself a PC that is better then anything Alienware has for 5000.

Another point is that though many would argue it doesn't really affect anything piracy really does cut into PC game sales much heavier then console game sales. One reason being that people that play PC games are more likely to know how to copy a game then those playing consoles. Plus dual layer dvd burning has only recently come onto the market.

If this wasn't enough then microsofts XNA if it lives up to its name will greatly enhance PC gaming since what 3rd party developer would make a game for the Xbox 360 and not for the PC when there is no effort in porting it? I mean even the controllers will be interchangable.

And finally no console made in the next 10 years will give developers the freedom that a PC can give them when designing a game. Which means the best developers will always be attracted to it.

[bobbler]

And finally no console made in the next 10 years will give developers the freedom that a PC can give them when designing a game. Which means the best developers will always be attracted to it.

Actually... Consoles offer a far better development environment for games. Their best case and worst case scenario are the same -- theres no worrying about minimum requirements -- they can push the limits of it and know that the experience will be the same for everyone. PCs only attract people because the IDEs are far better overall (they've been around for 20 some years now) -- with consoles using chips from IBM and Nvidia/Ati instead or proprietary ones (like PS2 had) the ease of programming is getting near PC.

As for the rest of what you said, I basically agree with it. Except (like I said in my other post -- confirmed by Rafer with some data it seems) the PC market isn't going to get bigger.

[lpmiller]

the pc market declined because in that same time period, the build your own market soared. Currently though, buying vs building is losing out to buying again, as companies like Dell make it almost cheaper just ot buy the damn thing.

But PC gaming will die only when there are no more needs for PC's. Which means turning consoles into PC's. Which means, PC gaming will never die.

[Crabby]

Declaring the decline of PC gaming using the justification of graphical power alone is pretty dumb considering NO ONE is fully utilizing what power is being offered. Console OR PC. Take the GTX launching on the 21st as an example. Why is it even needed when most games don't accomodate to the potential of current cards? SLi? We're getting it before developers are going to start to use it. Well before then.

How is this supposed to affect me as a consumer? The PS3 will theoretically be more powerful than PCs? Wow, okay, let's see that power used.

And to top it off, the reported specs of the next GeForce are a marginal improvement over the 6800. At this point it is my opinion that hardware makers are moving a lot faster than software and they're really only making these things for the sake of having something new to sell.

[XenonCJ]

Power is irrelevent, it's all about the interface and game design.

PCs excel at:
MMROPGs & RPGs
RTSs
FPSs
Simulators
Solitare
Porn

Consoles excel at:
Fighting Games
Driving Games
Sports Games
Simple Arcade\Reflex Games
DDRMAX

It's basically been this way since the Atari 2600... Unless something dramatic happens there will be plenty of market to share for both concepts...

[mister_slim]

I don't think PC gaming will die, but the bleeding edge games are going to be moving to the consoles. Let's face it, the vastly increased expense of development and the reduced market, combined with the expense of supporting such a large variety of hardware configurations and the general messiness of consoles is making them less attractive. The strengths of the PC are now cheap distribution, different control inputs, and the massive install base (for games with low system requirements). Playing to those strengths is the best route for success.

[Frogleg Special]

Death of PC Gaming -> Death of Geeks, Multiplication of the "Duh, I don't have any idea + money" generations -> Dumbication of America (It's starting now with American college programmers getting 20th place in programming competition)

Yup in 10 years, IBM and Microsoft might want to relocate to Europe, India or China solely there are no brain power left in America.

[if76]

PC gaming will be around until the mouse and keyboard are actually replaced by a better interface or adopted universally by consoles. Right now there are legions of hardcore gamers that refuse to play an RTS or FPS with anything else.

[Klade]

Actually... Consoles offer a far better development environment for games. Their best case and worst case scenario are the same -- theres no worrying about minimum requirements -- they can push the limits of it and know that the experience will be the same for everyone. PCs only attract people because the IDEs are far better overall (they've been around for 20 some years now) -- with consoles using chips from IBM and Nvidia/Ati instead or proprietary ones (like PS2 had) the ease of programming is getting near PC.

I disagree with these statements. Console games have tons of loadtimes where the same game ported to PC has far fewer. Consoles have crapy AI cause they don't have the power to calculate it. Currently theres a move in the PC market to bring in physics processing units. This is something that won't make it into the next console cycle but PCs could be taking advantage of it in the next year or so.

Where consoles are constantly changing chips every 4 or 5 years forcing developers to learn anew how to make games, PC's are much more constant making it easier to teach and take advantage of experience.

In every single way save one PCs are better game development platforms. The one way is important I will grant and you mention it. Console hardware is all the same and developers know this going in. So testing, bug squashing and optimizing should be easier. Still PCs do follow some standards and I think the other considerations outweigh this one.

[mkelehan]

It sure is a good thing this argument isn't held every... single... time a new console comes out.

[Jukey]

For 2000$ or less you can make yourself a PC that is better then anything Alienware has for 5000.

Latest P4EE CPU is $1000 and two $500 video cards gets you to your total. Add custom case, RAID array, 2GB DDR2 etc etc etc.. Yes, $5000 is overpriced, but $2000 isn't going to get you the same performance as Alienware.

[Heretic Machine]

Latest P4EE CPU is $1000 and two $500 video cards gets you to your total. Add custom case, RAID array, 2GB DDR2 etc etc etc.. Yes, $5000 is overpriced, but $2000 isn't going to get you the same performance as Alienware.

Or warranties, or tech support. Those guys will send you a new monitor if yours breaks, even after the warranty has expired most of the time. Same with Dell. Buying a computer gets you much better support than building one.

[Heretic Machine]

I disagree with these statements. Console games have tons of loadtimes where the same game ported to PC has far fewer. Consoles have crapy AI cause they don't have the power to calculate it. Currently theres a move in the PC market to bring in physics processing units. This is something that won't make it into the next console cycle but PCs could be taking advantage of it in the next year or so.

You are so very, very wrong... The PPU's have a VERY small chance of catching on in the PC market within the next ten years. To program a game to take advantage of it, you almost have to assume that someone has one, and most aren't going to. The PPU is definetly something I could see catching on in the next gen consoles (the generation AFTER XBOX 360, Revolution... etc) since a programmer would know that the console has one.

PPU's just aren't going to hit it big in PC's, and if they do it's not going to be for quite a while.

[The_Reckoning]

The thing about PC games is that they're incredibly cheap to develop. Not necessarily easy, but cheap.

Of course there are high-budget PC games, but the low budget one can sometimes be more popular and successful. Look at Runescape. That was made by a few students, and now it's worth millions.

They were harbinging the same dogma about the PC market when the Xbox came out, the PS2 came out, the PS1, N64 and so on till before the very first Doom and Dune.

PC gaming willl never die, unless consoles find a way to emulate all the extra functions of a PC. In which case, they'd just be like pre-built, unmodifiable PCs. Which would suck balls.

[lpmiller]

Or warranties, or tech support. Those guys will send you a new monitor if yours breaks, even after the warranty has expired most of the time. Same with Dell. Buying a computer gets you much better support than building one.


yes, but you do not need the latest P4, nor 2 video cards. In fact, pretty much no one needs that.

[Klade]

You are so very, very wrong... The PPU's have a VERY small chance of catching on in the PC market within the next ten years. To program a game to take advantage of it, you almost have to assume that someone has one, and most aren't going to. The PPU is definetly something I could see catching on in the next gen consoles (the generation AFTER XBOX 360, Revolution... etc) since a programmer would know that the console has one.

PPU's just aren't going to hit it big in PC's, and if they do it's not going to be for quite a while.

Since I obviously have no information about whats going to happen in the PC market over the next year this is going to have to be a wait and see kinda thing. But personally I think it would only take 1 good game and well priced PPU to bring the whole thing into industry standard. And obviously I think both are going to happen within a year of the PPU being released which I believe is supposed to happen this summer or fall?

I have to run right now so I can't price out a system. But I believe you can equal the performance of a 5000 alienware for 2000$. You might not have the same parts but the benchmarks would equal it. But thats going to have to remain untested for today.

[51|RandoM]

PC gaming will die a few years after the death of the PC.

Anybody predicting the death of the PC? I didn't think so, lol.

Consoles usually have a 6-12 month window where they've got better graphics than a top-end PC, after that, they're farther and farther behind for 3-4 years.

People need to stop saying that one platform(pc or console)is more suited to a type of game. That is poor logic. It isn't the platform, it is the interface. The console interface is supported on the PC, fyi. You can get adapters for your ps2 pads, or you can get usb made-for-pc equivalents, if you want. The reverse is usually not true for a console. Even for consoles where you can attach a mouse and keyboard, the games usually don't support that method of control. I've got a smartjoy interface for xbox to play halo/halo2 with mouse and keyboard with. It works, but because the game expects you to use a control, the turn rate is limited, which means you can do those quick mouse-flicks for a 180 degree turn, etc., like you really want to.

Anything a console can do, a PC can do better, when you get right down to it, barring that short window of graphics superiority at the start of each new console generation. Not only that, but a PC does so much more than just gaming. Which is as it should be, I suppose, considering the cost of a PC.

Lol, don't buy alienware, unless you like throwing money away, and need to pay for shitty support. If you need external support, buy a good pc, one that isn't billed as a 'gaming pc' and you'll game just fine, have better support, and spend much less money than alienware will shaft you for. You're spending $1000 on that stupid alien head logo alone, lol.

If the console games I wanted to play were ported to PC in a timely fashion, or even ported at all, I wouldn't own any consoles.

[Goronmon]

I swear, people will just keep repeating statements like "PC gaming is coming to an end" forever and ever just on the off chance that one of the times they say it, it might come true. None of this is ever based on actually logic, its more just the hope that they might be right this time around.

[Beelzebud]

The key words of this article: IF YOU BUY THE HYPE

Say no more. PC Gaming's death was predicted when the Sega Dreamcast came out, for crying out loud!

[Mobeus Chronox]

The PS3 will be locked into its specs for at least five years after its released, the PC is ever changing and upgrading, supposing the PS3 provides superiror performance than current top of the line PC's it will only offer that for at most 18 months.

[Jetherik]

Every year after E3 comes an article about the death of the PC. Sometimes two or three articles. Since everyone is typing on a PC and not a console, we can see how true those articles have been. When the death of the PC comes, it will be the death of the console as well, because the machine that replaces the PC will replace the console as well.

[trip1eX]

Lot of misinfo out there. Here's my view on things.

First off. Both ATI and Nvidia will be introducing next gen vid cards very soon. These cards will probably be equivalent to the gpus on next gen consoles. MOre so for the 360. And cpus in the 360 aren't directly comparable to say an Athlon 64. 3 3ghz in order cpu cores that share cache and other functionality aren't equal to 3 Athlon 64 3000 cpus.

SEcond. Memory. PCs still will trump consoles in this dept. Larger enviroments. More AI. Physics calculations. Loading times. Memory helps everything.

Third. Hardware cost. Everytime someone quotes the cost of the pc it's always something like $2000 or $5000 or higher. I'm guessing most people can upgrade for $500 or less and have a decent gaming rig. Not to mention upgrades benefit more than just games.

4th. Software cost & value. I generally find pcgames to be less money. If console game prices rise this will be more true. I also generally find pc games lasting me longer than console games.

5th. Games. The pc can play any game a console can but there is no vice versa here. I can't see games like AOE3 and Civ4 making it to a console without keyboard/mouse support or a new controller.

6th. IT's also a pc. Yeah your pc isn't just for playing games.

7th. Pc market size vs console market size. OK the console market is $6.2 bil. The pc market is $1.1 bil. How come when folks compare market size it's always vs all three consoles but when they compare price it's always vs the cost of just one console??? Also did ya know they don't figure in mmorpg revenues when estimating the pc market size? Nor do they or did they count any Steam revenue.

8th. Control Systems. Well I touched on it before but the pc has the more accurate control system with the mouse and the one with the most buttons with the keyboard. The pc also has the flightstick. A must have for sim and games like BF42 and the upcoming BF2. The mouse's advantage again is obvious. More accuracy. Smoother aiming. The keyboard's advantage isn't it's learning curve but rather it's quick access to functions once you've rode out the learning curve. The controller is nice for learning a game. But once you've learned you often wish you had the keyboard to quickly access menus and weapons and functions etc. (AT least I do, in the games I really get into.) Some genres just feel better to me with these control systems and some aren't really possible in all their glory without them when compared to the traditional console controller.

Anyway the pt really is that things aren't so black & white like they are potrayed in the gaming media. And the PC provides an experience that consoles can't match as much as the other way around.

[Rifter]

This is the first set of next gen consoles, that I believe have a decent chance of collapsing the PC Gaming market.

The ATI/Nvidia boards cost a crap load of money... as much as a console. Video cards used to be affordable for the average consumer, when they came out. Now, you have to wait 1-2 years for high end video to come down in price.

In the memory department, the PCs have more memory... or at least the potential to have more memory. I know a lot of people still run 512 on their PCs. The PCs also run a LOT more in the background, that takes up memory resources. Consoles just run the game, and a really basic OS over that.

On the hardware cost, a single console kicks a PCs ass. The Xbox came out end of 2001. 4 years later, we are getting the 360. The Xbox still runs games (say... Half Life) pretty damn well. That is kind of the benchmark to compare a game against a PC, right now. This is 4 year old hardware. When is the last time you have held onto a piece of performance computer parts, for 4 years? There really is not competition here. Also, on the PCs, we are seeing diminishing returns on faster processors. I will agree, you can put together a PC for $500... but you are looking at at least 1 full upgrade cycle in that time, which puts the cost closer to $1000.

New PC games cost just as much as new Console games. $50 each. There has been talk about a $60 price point for new console games, and I think that could potentially bite them. I will admit, PC Games drop in price faster, because they do not have the holding power. A PC game that is more than 3 months old, is usually dead. They just do not have a long life. Your opinion about playing PC games is just that. I find I play the same console games longer, because I take my Xbox to my buddy's place, and we play the same genera MP games. On my PC, there are a VERY select few games that get played past 3 or 4 months.

The PS2 allows Mouse keyboard. From what I have heard, it sounds like the Xbox 360 also has USB ports in the back to allow mouse keyboard. Once that happens, the VERY decisive advantage that the PC has... comes to an end. From what I understand, both PS3 and Xbox 360 have USB ports.

We are talking about the gaming market. I agree, the PC can do a lot more than just play games, that doesn't mean people will use their PC for gaming. They are aiming the next gen consoles to do more than play games. The last gen played DVDs, so you didn't have to have a DVD player... the next ones, sounds like they may be moving into the home entertainment area, deeper. We will have to see.

As for revenues, I still don't believe the PC market can touch the console market. That is just as simple truth. That doesn't mean it is bad.

Controls. As I said before, the decisive advantage that PCs have, is the mouse/keyboard. It sounds like the next gen consoles are going to allow them, all of the sudden that advantage goes away. There will still be things to make the PC better along these lines, IMO. I don't think there will be as many, though.

Here is another thing to think about. Wouldn't it be nice, to head to a LAN party, snag your monitor, mouse, keyboard, and just a little Xbox to play, instead of lugging around your PC? THAT, to ME, has a lot of potential. The last gen Xbox blurred the line between PC and console... this gen looks to be stepping over the line. What worries me, personally, is getting a bunch of dumbed down games, that console gamers want. I like deeper, richer games. That has always been the problem with PC ports of console titles. You can always feel the simplicity. If developers make richer games for the console, I think you will see more people going that direction.

I agree, things are not black and white. There is a lot of potential for the next gen consoles to take a major bite of the PC market. This is the first generation of consoles that I have felt concerned about. Though, I am a gamer, and play on PC and consoles. I like playing good games, reguardless of where I play them.

[Kyle Jones]

This whole thing is turning into a "punk rock is dead!" arguement...

PC Gaming Forevers!

[trip1eX]

This is the first set of next gen consoles, that I believe have a decent chance of collapsing the PC Gaming market.

The ATI/Nvidia boards cost a crap load of money... as much as a console. Video cards used to be affordable for the average consumer, when they came out. Now, you have to wait 1-2 years for high end video to come down in price.

WEll I just got a $300 vid card. I sold my 3 yr old 9700 pro for $90 which by the way plays HL2 and Doom3 fine. Also one doesn't have to buy the latest and greatest.



In the memory department, the PCs have more memory... or at least the potential to have more memory. I know a lot of people still run 512 on their PCs. The PCs also run a LOT more in the background, that takes up memory resources. Consoles just run the game, and a really basic OS over that.



Well the pc market is varied so of course you know people with 512mb of ram or even 256mb of ram. But 1gig now is common. And games can use that 1 gig. This is not even mentioning the vid card memory pcs have. Windows is getting smaller and smaller compared to the total amt of memory in the pc.


On the hardware cost, a single console kicks a PCs ass. The Xbox came out end of 2001. 4 years later, we are getting the 360. The Xbox still runs games (say... Half Life) pretty damn well. That is kind of the benchmark to compare a game against a PC, right now. This is 4 year old hardware. When is the last time you have held onto a piece of performance computer parts, for 4 years? There really is not competition here. Also, on the PCs, we are seeing diminishing returns on faster processors. I will agree, you can put together a PC for $500... but you are looking at at least 1 full upgrade cycle in that time, which puts the cost closer to $1000.


Of course a console is cheaper but pcs aren't as expensive as made out to be. That was my point. Every article like the one that's the topic of this thread always says $2000 pc or $5000 pc. They always use the most extreme price available. btw, my 3 yr old 9700 pro plays HL2 and Doom3 at 1024x768 res just fine. Also don't forget to add in the $200 it cost you to play online with the xbox over 4 years. I still agree that a console is cheaper. But folks act like the pc is like 10x the cost just cause there $5000 pcs exist.



New PC games cost just as much as new Console games. $50 each. There has been talk about a $60 price point for new console games, and I think that could potentially bite them. I will admit, PC Games drop in price faster, because they do not have the holding power. A PC game that is more than 3 months old, is usually dead. They just do not have a long life. Your opinion about playing PC games is just that. I find I play the same console games longer, because I take my Xbox to my buddy's place, and we play the same genera MP games. On my PC, there are a VERY select few games that get played past 3 or 4 months.

Pc games are generally cheaper. And it sounds like you don't play pc games longer cause your buds don't have a pc not cause of the games.



The PS2 allows Mouse keyboard. From what I have heard, it sounds like the Xbox 360 also has USB ports in the back to allow mouse keyboard. Once that happens, the VERY decisive advantage that the PC has... comes to an end. From what I understand, both PS3 and Xbox 360 have USB ports.


I'd welcome keyboard/mouse for a console. Personally I don't care about the platform as much as about the games. The platform does seem to influence the type of games made for it tho. Anyway pure speculation. No one has said they are making games for keyboard/mouse input as of yet.



We are talking about the gaming market. I agree, the PC can do a lot more than just play games, that doesn't mean people will use their PC for gaming. They are aiming the next gen consoles to do more than play games. The last gen played DVDs, so you didn't have to have a DVD player... the next ones, sounds like they may be moving into the home entertainment area, deeper. We will have to see.


Well obviously that's a crappy first argument there as anyone who replies in this thread is using their pc for more than games. IT's very true next gen consoles will have more multimedia functions. They may very well cost more than before as well. Anyway I've never met anyone that only uses their pc for gaming.


As for revenues, I still don't believe the PC market can touch the console market. That is just as simple truth. That doesn't mean it is bad.


Very true. But that wasn't my point. My point was that folks always compare the size of the pc market to the entire console market. But on price only compare it the price of one console. Take the size of the pc market, add in mmorpg revenues and some STeam revenue and I bet the size of the pc market is very similar to that of the xbox. The PS2 of course blows everyone away. The Gamecube also probably is nearly equal to that of the pc maybe smaller. You don't get that from the media tho. They always compare $6 bil to $1 bil. And the $5000 pc to the $300 console.



Controls. As I said before, the decisive advantage that PCs have, is the mouse/keyboard. It sounds like the next gen consoles are going to allow them, all of the sudden that advantage goes away. There will still be things to make the PC better along these lines, IMO. I don't think there will be as many, though.

Actually it sounds like no games have mentioned keyboard/mouse support. Sure last gen the ps2 had a mouse/keyboard. How many games were really made for it? 0? 1?


Here is another thing to think about. Wouldn't it be nice, to head to a LAN party, snag your monitor, mouse, keyboard, and just a little Xbox to play, instead of lugging around your PC? THAT, to ME, has a lot of potential. The last gen Xbox blurred the line between PC and console... this gen looks to be stepping over the line. What worries me, personally, is getting a bunch of dumbed down games, that console gamers want. I like deeper, richer games. That has always been the problem with PC ports of console titles. You can always feel the simplicity. If developers make richer games for the console, I think you will see more people going that direction.

Yes as I said above it's actually not the platform that I care about. IT's the games. The platform does seem to dictate tho the type of games made for it. Personally I don't see why a 'pc game' couldn't be made for a console if it had mouse/keyboard and high res. They could even market these games under a different label like the '360 in-depth series' game.

Anyway I think we agree that we wouldn't mind having a console that plays more pcish types of games besides the usual ones. And that mouse/keyboard would be a great option to have.

[Mason]

This article became a parody the second it assumed that you need a bloated Alienware system to do any PC gaming.

[DeadPixel]

They are comparing next year's gaming console to today's PC. Such idiots!

[mulligan]

PCS ARE NOT FOR GAMING ONLY!

let's start with some a facts: 98% of those who post on EvilAvatar have PC's/Mac's 2.
if you have $400 dollars to spend on a console and thousands to spend on HDTV's (as many of you claim) you should be able to buy a US $ 600 dell PC (many of them have 2.4 GHZ Celeron D and over 256 or RAM), 3. everyone needs a computer for many reasons (Taxes, Email, Web Browsing, School Projects etc. ) and for about 160 dollars you can get a nvidia 6600 GT, more than enough for Console Quality gaming.

NO ONE in their rigth mind will buy a 4,000 PC for gaming only...

[splatstick]

I think Doom 3 might have hurt PC's overall. Before I get lynched, let me explain. All my friends, as poor college students, do not have decent computers. Couple of plasma runs later, they come home with Doom for PC and pop it in, only to realize it runs choppy as fuck at the lowest setting. They run to the resale store immediately to ditch their copy and wait for the Xbox port.
Aside from maybe three of my friends who know computers, this seems to be the case.
Most people already have a console, and most people have an outdated P.C. Most people will pay 50 bucks for a console game instead of a couple hundred to upgrade. I think this is why PC is shrinking.
This is a fucking shame, but I doubt there is a way around it. No, PC gaming isnt dying, but it's going to be seeing a lot less action than it did, which isn't a good thing for anyone but console makers.

EDIT: I could have sworn this same thread was up a month or so ago, with the same exact responses...

[B_Money]

PCS ARE NOT FOR GAMING ONLY!

let's start with some a facts: 98% of those who post on EvilAvatar have PC's/Mac's 2.
if you have $400 dollars to spend on a console and thousands to spend on HDTV's (as many of you claim) you should be able to buy a US $ 600 dell PC (many of them have 2.4 GHZ Celeron D and over 256 or RAM), 3. everyone needs a computer for many reasons (Taxes, Email, Web Browsing, School Projects etc. ) and for about 160 dollars you can get a nvidia 6600 GT, more than enough for Console Quality gaming.

NO ONE in their rigth mind will buy a 4,000 PC for gaming only...

How do the 2% who don't have a PC/Mac post here?

[Rifter]

How do the 2% who don't have a PC/Mac post here?

I believe he was talking about the non-gaming PCs. They probably post from work/school/etc.

[KamenGamer]

As much as I like gaming on the PC, I can't ignore the trend that console gaming is definitely continuing to be in the spotlight, and gaming on the PCs have, once again, been relegated to the smaller core of niche/hardcore market, as it always was (I'm talking about "real" games as opposed to Solitaire).

Will gaming ever die on the PC? Probably not: MMO's, RTS's and arguably FPS's (but Halo has shown that even this bastion of PC gaming isn't invulnerable). I believe console gaming will continue it's rise to become the de facto standard for "video gaming". What I mean by that is when people think gaming, they will first think about console gaming. And that translates to what publishers will focus their $$ and efforts on.

[MosBen]

As has been noted, as matter of pure logic, PC gaming can never truly "die" because there will always be solitare or some derivation thereof. That's not what we're really talking about though. Back in the day, PC gaming took up a major chunk of the entire gaming world. There wasn't nearly as much, if any, specialized hardware to buy and consoles were targetted pretty exclusively to the kid's market. Then you had to start buying video cards, and also got all the fun driver tweaking that came with it, and now we're talking about dedicated physics cards. On the other hand, console gaming has broadened its scope to include an rather adult audience while maintaining the ease of use that was always one of the strengths of consoles. Some people like upgrading and modding, but you have to recognize that these are not the majority and are in fact a rather small niche.

The size of the varying parts of the industry (that 1.6 billion vs. 1.1 billion figure) is important because it's important to developers and for spotting trends. The console market grew a ton while the PC market shrunk, that's important. Developers are going to be increasingly more likely to develope for the console market than the PC market based on figures like this, that's important.

Again, PC gaming isn't going to die completely, especially with thing like XNA making it easy to port to the PC, but all the things PC gamers trumpet as the strengths of the platform (mouse control, upgradeability, etc.) just don't seem to be nearly as important to the average gamer. It's like cars, sure, some people really like tuning and tweaking to get the best performance they can, but most people just like a comfortable ride that can get them from place to place with as little trouble as they can. Sure, it's nice it you car can go fast, and most people like that, but most people don't want to spend time and money tweaking to squeeze a little extra juice out.

As games get more and more expensive to make and as PC become more complex to maintain, or even if they simply remain at their current level of complexity, more people are going to seek out the easy to use and cheap to buy consoles to play, even if they don't have the most cutting edge graphics (just look at the sales of GTA), and more developers will make games for the platform with the most gamers.

[Shifteh]

While the PS3 sounds great, so did the PS2 - until you found out about the tiny pipeline everything went through.

Frankly, if what's in those consoles is what they say, how much is this stuff going to cost? And how will they stay in business?

[PacerDawn]

The PS3 will be locked into its specs for at least five years after its released, the PC is ever changing and upgrading, supposing the PS3 provides superiror performance than current top of the line PC's it will only offer that for at most 18 months.
This is exactly why console games will always sell better than PC games. *ANY* brand new game created today for the PS2 can be run on a PS2 unit that was bought when it was first released. You cannot say that about PC games over that same time period. Technology advances with PCs are just way to fast for the average consumer to keep up with. And they are EXPENSIVE. If you want to play a game 5 years from now on a PC, and play it decently (i.e. not turned all the way down and still get lag) you WILL have to upgrade. Meanwhile, people who purchase the PS3 will be able to play a new PS3 made game 5 years from now just fine. That is the key.

While hard core computer geeks like us have no problem with it, the average consumer does not want to have to constantly upgrade their machines to keep up with software. It's too expensive and too time consuming, and in most cases unnecessary... especially since that old laptop they bought back in 1998 still browses the web, checks e-mail, and runs Word just fine. It's way more economical to purchase a cheap $300 console which they only have to upgrade every 5 years (if that).

It's not consoles that are killing the PC game market, it's the developers themselves who force the consumer to upgrade. The consoles have it right in keeping developers corralled into set specifications. The hard core gamers are going to keep PC gaming from dying, but due to them being in the minority, consoles are always going to do better profit-wise.

Plus, do not underestimate the power of children and game purchases. The population of teens has gone up exponentially since, say, 10 years ago. And since most parents don't understand about PC upgrades, much less what SLI, GPU, or what a "pipe" is other than that thing hanging out of Dad's mouth, it's much easier to understand "get me that Xbox".

(Edited for grammar and punk'tuation)

[retsudo]

What some tools seem to be forgetting in this piece is that, while a console released today can play a game for the same console released in 5 years time, the game released in 5 years time will look shit compared to whatever is on the PC at the same time.. . and the PC user with a shit PC can turn down the details, but the game will still look better, and another with a decent PC can turn up the details.

[MosBen]

Retsudo, now was there really a need to turn to insults? Anyway, just look at game and console sales compared with PC sales, it just doesn't matter that much to the average gamer to be on the bleeding edge of graphics; certainly not as much as it does to the hardcore PC gamer community. This isn't a conversation about which platform is "better" or does the things you want the most, it's about how each platform will perform in the market. While being on the bleeding edge is a value most hardcore PC gamers share, it's not that important to most gamers.

[retsudo]

Oh, I did forget to say.. and the same game on the PC won't be cursed with shitty controls and terrible resolution. And can be modded.