The State of PC Gaming

[Rand{CLR}]

I think we'll continue to see consoles "convert" more and more PC gamers. Or at least the more casual ones; the hardcore ones are too in love with their PCs to give them up.

I've always felt kind of cramped by the resolution of TVs, which is the main reason I've typically stuck with PC games. However, as you've mentioned, with high definition TVs this isn't really an issue. The only catch is I've already got a nice computer with a 20" widescreen 1680x1050 monitor, whereas my "gaming" TV is a 20" 4:3 tube TV that I got a couple of years ago (at least it's flatscreen!). I have a PS3, but it's torture to play the latest and greatest games on such an outdated screen. I'm not ready to dump the money I need to to get a good LCD TV, and I'm too picky to buy a cheap one. I'm looking for a quality 32-37" 720p LCD TV with a 120Hz refresh rate so I don't have to worry about ghosting. I've done a bit of searching, and the cheapest set that best matches my needs is the Panasonic Viera 32" TC32LX700, which currently runs for $1100-1300 (plus 14% tax and the $200+ HD cable box I'd need to buy) up here in Canada. When the fancy new "fast-motion" 120Hz screens come down in price, I can see myself playing more console games.

Just make sure you keep up the research and do a lot of in-person testing (Best Buy just loves it when you walk around tinkering with all the TVs they've adjusted to make everything except the highest end models look like crap ), and be careful you don't end up paying for a brand name. My $1100 Vizio outperforms my brother-in-law's $2800 Sony. I was initially worried about ghosting and trailing but have honestly never seen any evidence of either, despite lots of gaming and lots of sports watching.

One more thing: at the price range you're looking at, you should really, really wait for another four-six months. Several 32" models are starting to include 1080p, including a Sharp Aquos that's about in that general price range on sale.

1080p whips 720p's ass. Take it from someone with a 32" Aquos with 720p who gazes enviously at the 1080p setups in stores. I would expect a ton of models at the 32" size with full 1080p in just a few months.

I think the Panasonics are about mid-range in performance and reliability. Sony's are going to likely be beyond your price point, but look for Samsungs and Sharps. Great quality all around for the big 3 "S" companies.

-Rand

[mapes]

Bah


I hear this every few years. This is a cyclical event. PC games seem to dominate then console games start to rise. I don't think the nature of this is going to change ever and on some level I really don't think it matters. I think PC gamer and console games occupy differing markets. I do not agree with MS being the savior of PC gaming. I believe the independent developers (other than EA) are.

[CarbonFire]

Re: The State of PC Gaming

First person shooters are no longer the sole purview of the PC. Modern consoles deliver graphics and multiplayer that equals and in some cases surpasses most PC shooters. The only remaining strengths of the PC in this arena are the control scheme (WASD + mouse), and the mod community. Considering the mod community has largely been rendered irrelevant by companies hiring the creators of popular mods and then selling the once-free mods for profit, and the enormous time commitment involved to make a quality mod on current games, is this still a factor?

Modding is dying for more reasons than just good talent getting gobbled up. Several things are at play here which are all contributing to the decline in the modding community:

As games get more complex, the amount of time required to create content for them increases as well. While these big studios have the manpowere and resources to crank out the shiny new stuff, average joe modder is going to need months/years to reach the same/similar level of content quality. Few are willing to put that much time into it for free, and if they do have the skills, they do tend to get scooped up.

As development costs skyrocket, publishers continue to look for ways to milk the customer for every penny to maximize their investments. One of the chief ways to do this is to lock out the mod community. Why pay $5 for horse armor if someone will come along and make a free version via the mod tools? It's not in the best interest of most publishers to allow this sort of custom content because it undercuts their lock on content needed to force people to keep paying them. How do they solve that? Ranked servers.

Most publishers have gotten wise to the fact that the majority of gamers out there are grade-A stat whores. People love tracking stats, especially those that spend obsessive amounts of time playing. By locking out the mod community by forcing ranked only in a "pure" environment, publishers can effectively nullify the impact user-created content has on their bottom line. Exhibits: 2142, ET:QW, etc.... :P

This is a huge blow to PC gaming in general. Without modding, there is little outside a superior control scheme to attract developers to the platform. In ages past, the PC was head and shoulders above anything consoles could muster. These days, your average joe consumer with his store-bought crapbox can't match what his lower-priced console can achieve. That along with the fact that the installed user-base is so much larger given the lower barrier to entry (consoles are far more idiot-proof than PCs, not to mention their cost), the choice it pretty clear as to which platform is more likely to return a profit.

And of course, piracy has also become a souring factors most game developers decry as a big reason for their primarily console-centric focus. It's unclear how big of a factor this is, whether it is an actual concern or just a scapegoat to mask their true profit-driven plans. Either way, the real threat that some piracy does occur is enough to scare all but the most entrenched developer from the platform. While this problem does exist in one form or another on the other platforms, the difficulty for accomplishing such a task along with the steep ramifications for console modification (no online or warranty once modded) means this primary concern is mitigated.

Unfortunately, as gaming gets bigger and bigger, the consoles will continue to gain in popularity while the PC will be more and more relegated to table scraps. I don't think it will die completely, but I do think it will eventually get pushed down to boutique status, rather than a premier platform for development. IMO, this is a sad (but realistic) outlook for pc gaming.

[Cold Catalyst]

I have to say, I'll probably be slowly merging towards the console considering PC upgrades are just way out of my leauge and a real huge expense considering you have to put out A LOT of money to have a high end computer and keep up with gaming every couple of years.

Where as you can just put out ~300-500 for a console and have outstanding graphics for awhile. I mean what's the time gap between PS2 and PS3? Xbox and 360 is a shorter time period, but still. It's cheaper console gaming then computer gaming.

But don't get my wrong, I'll never abandon the PC world, I just don't have the money to keep upgrading. I love the PC world and the little things you can get from it.

[BlackArrow]

With the graphics catching up and online play now a common part of console play it really comes down to one thing....................


High End Gaming PC = $4,000

High End Console = $400


Wow. I wonder who will have more demand

[CarbonFire]

With the graphics catching up and online play now a common part of console play it really comes down to one thing....................


High End Gaming PC = $4,000

High End Console = $400


Wow. I wonder who will have more demand

$1500-2000 is honestly enough to build a rig that will run everything out today at decent resolutions. It won't "crush" everything, though it will be able to keep up with all but the fastest machines.

And while those numbers might be slightly high, your point is still very valid BA. And not only that, consoles are also plug'n'play, which means your average joe technophobe can start playing on it with minimal effort. Put a less-than-tech-savvy person in front of that $4,000 monster and tell them to play games on it. It MAY work (for a while), but at the first sign of trouble they'll be crying foul and jumping ship for the nearest console.

[mapes]

Re: The State of PC Gaming

As development costs skyrocket, publishers continue to look for ways to milk the customer for every penny to maximize their investments. One of the chief ways to do this is to lock out the mod community. Why pay $5 for horse armor if someone will come along and make a free version via the mod tools? It's not in the best interest of most publishers to allow this sort of custom content because it undercuts their lock on content needed to force people to keep paying them. How do they solve that? Ranked servers.

Personally I think game companies should open up more to the modding community. I mean look at what some of the mods have accomplished... Look to Valve for what I'm talking about. I'm pretty sure CS has sold more copies of HL than HL by itself has and CS started out as a free mod. Thats the way to do it. Hell check out Desert Combat was way more fun the BF1942 for that matter.

Most publishers have gotten wise to the fact that the majority of gamers out there are grade-A stat whores. People love tracking stats, especially those that spend obsessive amounts of time playing. By locking out the mod community by forcing ranked only in a "pure" environment, publishers can effectively nullify the impact user-created content has on their bottom line. Exhibits: 2142, ET:QW, etc.... :P

This is a huge blow to PC gaming in general. Without modding, there is little outside a superior control scheme to attract developers to the platform. In ages past, the PC was head and shoulders above anything consoles could muster. These days, your average joe consumer with his store-bought crapbox can't match what his lower-priced console can achieve. That along with the fact that the installed user-base is so much larger given the lower barrier to entry (consoles are far more idiot-proof than PCs, not to mention their cost), the choice it pretty clear as to which platform is more likely to return a profit.

And of course, piracy has also become a souring factors most game developers decry as a big reason for their primarily console-centric focus. It's unclear how big of a factor this is, whether it is an actual concern or just a scapegoat to mask their true profit-driven plans. Either way, the real threat that some piracy does occur is enough to scare all but the most entrenched developer from the platform. While this problem does exist in one form or another on the other platforms, the difficulty for accomplishing such a task along with the steep ramifications for console modification (no online or warranty once modded) means this primary concern is mitigated.

Unfortunately, as gaming gets bigger and bigger, the consoles will continue to gain in popularity while the PC will be more and more relegated to table scraps. I don't think it will die completely, but I do think it will eventually get pushed down to boutique status, rather than a premier platform for development. IMO, this is a sad (but realistic) outlook for pc gaming.

While I tend to agree with your statements I have to say what are we debating? Perhaps the title of this thread should be called "Which will win? Hard Core PC games or Consoles?". If your talking about games that require and only support the latest and greatest of hardware then yes PC gaming will probably not be the driving force it is today. Forcing hard core gamers to upgrade is one thing forcing average joe gamers to do so will seriously dampen the market. However PC games will never really go away. The reason..... Add up every current console and then realize that the number of computers out there dwarf that. So prolly what you'll see is more and more games that don't push the envelop of high end hardware.

[th3st1ck]

[short response]

hmm, well i still <3 my PC to death, i love to code, *cough* hack, etc.
and i believe its much easier for me to stay where i am when i want a break, than to go and pick up a console to play

[/short response]

[mapes]

[short response]

hmm, well i still <3 my PC to death, i love to code, *cough* hack, etc.
and i believe its much easier for me to stay where i am when i want a break, than to go and pick up a console to play

[/short response]

Yep thats the exact point I'm trying to make. The sheer amount of computers out there used for things other than gaming mean that there will always be a market for PC games.

[RobotBanana]

One more thing: at the price range you're looking at, you should really, really wait for another four-six months. Several 32" models are starting to include 1080p, including a Sharp Aquos that's about in that general price range on sale.

1080p whips 720p's ass. Take it from someone with a 32" Aquos with 720p who gazes enviously at the 1080p setups in stores. I would expect a ton of models at the 32" size with full 1080p in just a few months.

I think the Panasonics are about mid-range in performance and reliability. Sony's are going to likely be beyond your price point, but look for Samsungs and Sharps. Great quality all around for the big 3 "S" companies.

-Rand

[Off-Topic: TVs]
Heh, don't worry... with my recent purchases, it'll definitely be another few months before I even consider getting a new TV.

When I was more interested, I did a bunch of research around the AVS Forums. The Sharp 62U (the 1080p one) was actually the other set I was considering. It was 120Hz vs 1080p. But the general consensus was with only a 32-37" screen, 1080p vs 720p is only noticable from a foot or two away from the screen. At most "normal" distances, you can't tell much of a difference. I'll have to see how that works out. It would definitely be nice to actually look at the two side by side though.

Regarding Panasonics, they're up there with Sony as well. When I was doing my research, that Panasonic model was Best Buy's second most expensive unit in the 32-27" range, beaten only by one Sony. It was one of the first 120Hz sets. Of course, it's dropped since then; it was $1600 when I first looked at it. Everyone on the AVS Forums said it was an amazing LCD. It's getting older now though, so I doubt it still has the same status.

Anyway, there's my off topic speech.
[/Off-Topic]

[Devilguns]

Re: The State of PC Gaming

Add up every current console and then realize that the number of computers out there dwarf that. So prolly what you'll see is more and more games that don't push the envelop of high end hardware.

That pretty much sums it up right there.

[Premonition]

While I tend to agree with your statements I have to say what are we debating? Perhaps the title of this thread should be called "Which will win? Hard Core PC games or Consoles?". If your talking about games that require and only support the latest and greatest of hardware then yes PC gaming will probably not be the driving force it is today. Forcing hard core gamers to upgrade is one thing forcing average joe gamers to do so will seriously dampen the market. However PC games will never really go away. The reason..... Add up every current console and then realize that the number of computers out there dwarf that. So prolly what you'll see is more and more games that don't push the envelop of high end hardware.

Thats a issue in itself of what i was trying to say. You can`t do it! It takes a year to 2 to make a great game and harware changes to fast. So pc game devs have to code the game first then wait for the tech to catch up. By that time new tech is already replacing that tech and its considered outdated. Its the trasition and why i say microsoft plays a key role. If microsoft drags their feet with 1)vista 2) dx-10 then computer gameing will remain in this stalled state. We are stuck between generations at the moment. Much like when consoles upgrade to this gen. Pc does the same with its OS. Right now the good is about = to the bad on why not to upgrade and that leave game devs in limbo.

PC gaming will never go away or die so to say but it might not be mainstream either as consoles strive to do what pc games have did for years. This gen marks the online play and microsoft set that standard. Sony sees it and isnt far behind. But as console games strive to be better than pc games. PC games seemed stalled with rushed releases, drm infested disks, bugs, etc etc. Maybe piracy is part of the issue but like any issue there is others as well. But the rate that harware comes out and the tech changes is proof that its not the gamers but more the makers who dont know how to appeal to the masses. Like nintendo went outside the box to attract "others" besides hardcore gamers. PC and hardware makers need to bite the bullet and find away to make affordable gaming pc`s that dont cost as much as a car. The average joe doesn't know how to upgrade their system yet buying pre built = upgrades right out the box just to play todays games. Thats not talking future games.

While pc games may never die, it sure can be crippled and it seems to be now. I spent 100 bux to buy a video card to play 2142 decent. Now i need another 1 because it struggles with ut3. Thats retarded. If consoles can run games without needing hardware upgrades pc should be able to as well. But its been this way for ever and not likely to change. Until someone breaks down to offer affordable gaming on pc it will cont. to struggle.

[TheSilentAssassin]

wonder how much money they spend on their set ups and how much time they are on the computer...

[random_id]

If consoles can run games without needing hardware upgrades

So I could actually play teh "Gears of War" on teh original Xbox??? Why the heck did I waste so much money on teh new XBox360 to play this game, then? What a fool I am!

[random_id]

Until someone breaks down to offer affordable gaming on pc it will cont. to struggle.

"Affordable"? What does it even mean? Are you trying to directly compare the console gaming to PC gaming in terms of $$$ spent on a gaming hardware only? Or are you trying to judge affordability of the total gaming experience on both platforms (such as counting in the price difference between PC games and the similar console games (take a look at the price difference of "Overlord" game at Amazon), the extra fee you have to pay to play console multiplayer games (like with XBox Live Gold service), the extra fees that you sometimes have to pay for extra online maps or items in some console games, etc.)? Because if you count the total gaming experiences, I wouldn't be so sure that the console gaming would be significantly cheaper or more "affordable" :-P