Have Next Gen Killed The PC?

[WhiteX]

As I have said before, PC gaming is way more expensive than console gaming, now that all 3 next (now current) consoles are out there, the PC have a big challenge to be a worthy gaming alternative.

With GeF prices as high as a PS3...

The XLR8 GeForce 8800 GTX will feature 768 MB of high-speed GDDR3 frame buffer memory and a 575 MHz core clock. It will include DVI + DVI + HDTV/S-Video outputs sell for an MSRP of $599.99.

The XLR8 GeForce 8800 GTS will have 640 MB of high-speed GDDR3 frame buffer memory and a 500 MHz core clock. It will include the same outputs as the GTX and retail for $449.99.

And mandatory processor and memory upgrades, besides the fact that many genres do not touch the PC, do you think that PC gaming is over?

 

[cooliscool]

Nope, it's always been this way. It's all about the target audience.

 

[Miretank]

Don't think so. Doesn't matter how much a GPU will cost, PC addicts will still buy it. And I believe PC hardware is more capable/power-flexible than a last-gen console, what will make difference in overall game performance, etc. DX10 is also there, we can wait for good features coming from it.

Never played on those new consoles but I don't think their FPS will drop the mouse-keyboard combo from the throne.

(And it is Miretank defending PC gaming... the things change lain.

 

[t0rek]

8800 GTX hello? that's double the GPU performance of the PS3. There are a lot of games that are playable on the PC. Also new directx10 cards with cheaper prices are coming on 2007, 8600GT everyone?

 

[Doomulation]

8800 GTX hello? that's double the GPU performance of the PS3. There are a lot of games that are playable on the PC. Also new directx10 cards with cheaper prices are coming on 2007, 8600GT everyone?

A PC can still not keep up with the raw power of the CPU's in both 360 & PS3. Even crippled as they are, they can show graphics the PC cannot handle. Perhaps it's just because the PC architecture is inferior to theirs, but...
No. PC Gaming is not dead nor will it be. But I do prefer the games on the consoles as they will run flawlessly and what's more is that you don't have to upgrade all the time.

 

[revl8er]

Graphics are not always the best thing in gaming. But anyways, pc gaming is not dead and will probably never die. There will always be games such as WoW that will keep pc gaming alive. There are also those numerous FPS games that just play better with a mouse and keyboard.

 

[Doomulation]

But that's basically what the PS3 & 360 is all about--graphics and pysics. More realistic games.
And the PC can do neither at this stage. We need a physics accelerator, which will come in some time now. But the graphics aren't up-to-date. And we sure can't do 720p let alone 1080p with the games expecting good performance (with newer games anyway).

 

[Stezo2k]

I do think the PC is pretty much doomed now with consoles being more powerful and not that many must have games. I cant think the last time I played a game on my PC which wasnt emulated

 

[t0rek]

AGEIA cards sucks, the differences they can do is minimal, haven't you checked the videos or screenshots? Videocards soon will do physics as well. Haven't you checked the upcoming Crysis game videos?

When next gen consoles are released, the PC has always needed some time to reach their level, but it's only a matter of time...

 

[smcd]

I prefer computer to console gaming. Controls (especially RTS, FPS) are much more comfortable to me on PC. As far as power is concerned... it's not a good comparison because consoles are made for only gaming and PC's are general purpose computing.

 

[Doomulation]

I do think the PC is pretty much doomed now with consoles being more powerful and not that many must have games. I cant think the last time I played a game on my PC which wasnt emulated

Ummm... usually, consoles have always had up-to-par graphics with PC games and then the PC took over in time. PC Gaming will probably never die...

AGEIA cards sucks, the differences they can do is minimal, haven't you checked the videos or screenshots? Videocards soon will do physics as well. Haven't you checked the upcoming Crysis game videos?

When next gen consoles are released, the PC has always needed some time to reach their level, but it's only a matter of time...

Oh right... they suck...
Honestly, I don't believe they do. If they do, then they're doing something terribly wrong. It's dedicated for physics and is pretty good at it.
And if not, there will come better hardware for physics in time. Ati and nVidia is already trying to do it with their GPUs.

IAs far as power is concerned... it's not a good comparison because consoles are made for only gaming and PC's are general purpose computing.

That's what I would call nonsense. It's true that a computer draws a lot of power, but... there are processors that can draw as little as 35 watt and still pick a punch. AMD's quad cores will only draw 65 watt. Now that is impressive. PCs (and other general computing hardware) could draw as little or as much as gaming consoles, should they choose to. They just need to get their heads out of the water and invent the technology.

 

[Clements]

PC gaming will probably remain niche simply because it is expensive, not particularly user friendly, and the genre diversity simply is not there compared to consoles. I personally happen to like a good fighting or party game from time to time. It's extremely hard for me to get excited about FPS games that offer nothing new but updated graphics, so what's left for PC isn't that much. I have my PC mainly for the RTS titles and to emulate many systems (almost all of which are consoles).

 

[swaaye]

From the comments in here, I can only surmise that many of you are new gamers.

Look at it this way. In 1996, Nintendo 64 was top 3D hardware. In 1997, Voodoo2 and Pentium II annihilated it technically.

Now, the current "next gen" nonsense:
PS3 has a GPU made of a crippled 2006 GeForce 7900. Xbox 360 has a 1st generation unified shader design sure to be riddled with inefficiencies. Both have mere 128-bit buses to their small RAM allotments. Both have CPUs that are crippled in many ways to be cheap enough for a $400-600 machine. But, the CPUs have good potential performance (if it's even possible to achieve).

On the PC, in 2007, we'll have GPUs 3-4X faster than either console. G80 is already there. R600 will be equal or better. They have 384-bit buses to more RAM than either console has total. We'll be getting quad core CPUs more robust across the board than what's in either console. So, technically, consoles are history in a few months.

Now, consoles sure do seem to be getting some nice games. But, they are games that have historically been on PCs (FPS is stupid popular on consoles now). There are still a gazillion PC games on the horizon. Some of their thunder has been stolen by the console launches of late. But, in a year or so, when PS3 and 360 are old news, PC popularity will come back as usual with anticipation for new titles that the consoles can't possibly run without large sacrifices.

Even current console games are showing the limitations of the machines. Gears of War is choppy (CPU/GPU limits) and has a lot of low resolution textures and lots of mip map / LOD levels (cuz of RAM limitations no doubt).

IMO, we're just seeing the same 'ol cycle of console vs. PC. Same as any other console launch in history.

 

[Doomulation]

Even current console games are showing the limitations of the machines. Gears of War is choppy (CPU/GPU limits) and has a lot of low resolution textures and lots of mip map / LOD levels (cuz of RAM limitations no doubt).

Quite, but you must remember that each new console takes time to get used to. The hardware is different and the API is different and the possibilities are different, etc. In a year or so more, I'm sure we'll find more complex games for the consoles. But eventually they do max out, like you imply.

IMO, we're just seeing the same 'ol cycle of console vs. PC. Same as any other console launch in history.

Totally agree.

 

[swaaye]

Quite, but you must remember that each new console takes time to get used to. The hardware is different and the API is different and the possibilities are different, etc. In a year or so more, I'm sure we'll find more complex games for the consoles. But eventually they do max out, like you imply.


Totally agree.

If you look at the original Halo and then look at the final Xbox releases, you don't see a ton of difference IMO. I'd say that GoW is probably the peak of what you'll see on 360 for the most part. Especially because of Epic's technical competence. UE3 isn't exactly some half-wit game engine. And that 512 MB RAM is a huge limitation on a machine driving these effects.

The biggest issue with these new consoles is their CPUs. They are very complicated. But, the CPU is mostly responsible for game speed, not graphics. Most of what the GPU does can't be offloaded to the CPU. So, IMO, graphics will stay where they are for the most part but framerates may increase as time goes on.

We'll see, of course.

 

[JKKDARK]

No, there are still some great games that can be used in both, the PC and the console. Like Phantasy Star Online Blue Burst and Phantasy Star Universe.
Also, some games like Grand Theft Auto Vice City and the San Andreas one look better on the PC than on the PlayStation 2.

 

[Doomulation]

...look better on the PC than on the PlayStation 2.

That's kinda previous generation. Of course it looks better on PC. But the question is: will it look better on PC rather than the 360 or PS3?
That is the question this thread is asking.

 

[Cid]

If PC gaming were to go away, it would hurt the PC emulation's of current and next gen systems However, I doubt PC gaming will disappear. There are gamers that just don't want to play console games and will continue to stick to PC games only.

 

[t0rek]

Oh right... they suck...
Honestly, I don't believe they do. If they do, then they're doing something terribly wrong. It's dedicated for physics and is pretty good at it.
And if not, there will come better hardware for physics in time. Ati and nVidia is already trying to do it with their GPUs.

Haven't you checked AGEIA reviews? The thing is very expensive and is not the bid deal, that's why is not selling well. As you and me already said, ATI and nvidia are currently adding pshysics stuff in their GPUS. Also, Valve has stated that will make use of dual core (eventually quad core) for optimizing things like pshysics so that is not a problem.

Also with AMD's upcoming Agena quad core, things are likely to be interesting next year in terms of processing...

But the question is: will it look better on PC rather than the 360 or PS3?
That is the question this thread is asking.

Just a mather of time, let's say when the first generation of DX10 games come. Just check out Crysis stuff

 

[Beaner(lui)]

Well, I gots Connections, So I Have A lot of Free(illegal) Stuff.
Which i Appreciate.
I have many Friends