The Death of PC Gaming

[FeralCom]

For me it is gasping its last breath.

I rebuilt 4 systems in the past 2 months. I think I have at least 30 diffrent game titles, but not a one is installed. Two months..no games.

What future game am I looking forward to? None.

Last game I spent any real time with. C&C Generals

Last game I was excited about its release? Duke Nukem Forever. (no longer excited)

 

[BigDan3131]

There is always some sadsack whining about pc gaming is dying. To those I say wake up and smell the roses. Vista on the other hand is new to new to be judging it yet. I too was unsure of XP but once I got used to its quirks and removed features I didnt like it was fine. Im sure once Vista gets in the hands of "certain people" they will find ways to get around Vista's annoying junk. MS claims this is a clean sheet of paper with all these new features...sounds like MS's marketing peoples bs. Every new OS from MS seems to be bloated. They never seem to utilize anything they have in an OS to its max potential. In other words they only see the $$$ sign and could care less about gamers as o/c'ers and gamers are a small part of the big picture...for now.

 

[BigDan3131]

Feral you might get excited about games if you sold off all your junk and built a modern gaming machine. Unless of course your one of the little kids with no job and too many hobby's.

 

[stratcatprowlin]

Move on? No. Whining sadsack? No.


Why? I dont have the money for all this!

 

[InThrees]

There is always some sadsack whining about pc gaming is dying. To those I say wake up and smell the roses. Vista on the other hand is new to new to be judging it yet. I too was unsure of XP but once I got used to its quirks and removed features I didnt like it was fine. Im sure once Vista gets in the hands of "certain people" they will find ways to get around Vista's annoying junk. MS claims this is a clean sheet of paper with all these new features...sounds like MS's marketing peoples bs. Every new OS from MS seems to be bloated. They never seem to utilize anything they have in an OS to its max potential. In other words they only see the $$$ sign and could care less about gamers as o/c'ers and gamers are a small part of the big picture...for now.

I remember a time when I would always choose "run in opengl" if faced with the choice of selecting dx-y and opengl. That choice is pretty much gone now.

What was great about opengl was that it was likely to work on a wide variety of operating systems and hardware - something Microsoft has never been particularly good at delivering. This latest development is just more of the same, yet is a LOT more of the same, in a never seen before way.

The 'gaming PC' is being turned into a really expensive console that also happens to be able to browse the web and create spreadsheets.

Between the consolidation of game developers into big publishing houses and Microsoft's stranglehold on the 3d api, I see a decline in variety coming - a big one. Fewer vendors selling peripherals (gpu and otherwise) and fewer games being developed. We'll be faced with the likes of Madden 2k8, 9, 10, 11... and similar, but very few original, creative offerings. Actually, that trend has already been established.

I don't know when you started gaming on a PC, but I started decades ago on a 286.

It's changed a great deal, and not for the better. Sure, the graphics are prettier, but the market is no longer a good place for a roomful of people with an idea for a great game to put it out there. The hardware and software requirements are firming that up, too.

 

[gt24]

Consoles take ideas from PC... PCs take ideas from consoles... it gives and takes...

I'm really interested in this next generation of consoles. We have a pretty darn cheap and innovative solution (Wii), a standard and standard cost solution (Xbox 360), and an expensive solution (PS3). Each device is aiming for the market in a different way, each device is saying that the market will do different things (spend a little to spend a lot).

I think that whoever sells extremely well will infulence the PC side of things. If it is the PS3, then expensive everything should be fine on the PC. If it is the Xbox then there still should be a midrange but also a highend. If it is the Wii then people are getting a little thin on the pay a ton for pretty graphics approach. This little competition should prove interesting.

On the PC side though, there is much less competition. Vista is what we shall have and it is aiming high. Even if it isn't all that successful, there isn't really any competition for the PC gaming market at least. However, seeing what is going on in console land and seeing how many people completely jump ship (to a mac or alike) may cause some rethinking.

In the end, Microsoft isn't exactly threatened by this. OEMs will continue to buy Windows and ship it with their generic boxes and many copies will be sold. The geek can go Windows, Mac, or Linux and while a change will hurt Microsoft somewhat... it will only be somewhat. Microsoft doesn't exactly sell high end PC components. Besides, it "is a Microsoft world" so the geek will come along... even if it has to be a side neglected box.

The above rant is assuming that the EULA is correct and will be enforced. In that case, the geek isn't Microsoft's concern... and they don't greatly care where we go.

As for gaming, games will adapt to whatever people are wanting. If it is PS3s then highend PCs will be needed... etc etc. However, I think the pretty graphic end of things is going to get hit hard if Microsoft wants to toss away the geeks...

 

[FeralCom]

I do have too many hobbies, but that really doesn’t impact my gaming. My system is current and will run all but maybe 2-3 titles to my standards. It is rarely and issue of having the money, but rather if it worth it to me. Going from $300 to $500 for a 5% performance increase does not add up to me.

Also understand that I am saying it is about dead “for me”. I do not know why other than I am a very busy person and getting old and crusty. I look at games about the same way I look at network sitcoms….(yawn). I have a PS2 that has only been used as a DVD player. I have an X-Box that sat on a shelf for 4 months before I set it up. I played Halo2 for a few hours and never turned it back on.

Again, I think I am just getting old. I remember a time when I would wake up at 4 am so me and my friend could ride our bikes to Radio Shack to buy the newest Sierra game. We would split the cost because they usually came with both 51/4 and 31/2 floppy versions. Today, I won’t even take the time to download a pirated copy from my desk chair.

 

[Krogen]

I do have too many hobbies, but that really doesn’t impact my gaming. My system is current and will run all but maybe 2-3 titles to my standards. It is rarely and issue of having the money, but rather if it worth it to me. Going from $300 to $500 for a 5% performance increase does not add up to me.

Also understand that I am saying it is about dead “for me”. I do not know why other than I am a very busy person and getting old and crusty. I look at games about the same way I look at network sitcoms….(yawn). I have a PS2 that has only been used as a DVD player. I have an X-Box that sat on a shelf for 4 months before I set it up. I played Halo2 for a few hours and never turned it back on.

Again, I think I am just getting old. I remember a time when I would wake up at 4 am so me and my friend could ride our bikes to Radio Shack to buy the newest Sierra game. We would split the cost because they usually came with both 51/4 and 31/2 floppy versions. Today, I won’t even take the time to download a pirated copy from my desk chair.

I have no idea how old are you but I have a few uncles that are around 40 years old. They can't stop playing any game they touch.

 

[DeadSmiley]

I got a version of vista that I am still a little scared to even install. I saw in someones signature about needing a nuclear reactor to power the OS

I installed RC2 on an old box that I wasn't using. I think the whole hardware requirement thing is getting blown way out of proportion.

AMD 1800+ XP
1GB DDR 3200
80GB HD 7200 rpm, 2MB cache
Geforce 3 Ti200 64MB

It seemed Ok. I installed the Ultimate version too. I didn't install any games. I should have installed Quake 3 and tried it out because I know I can run that game well with that hardware and WinXP. I might have to try that, just to see. That system isn't used for anything at the moment anyway.

 

[orionlion82]

i loved this article.
ed couldn't have said it better. has he got a new pen name or something?

its all about the bubble.

in the old days we used to hear about how a computer is not an appliance, but a complicated machine that must be maintained.
hear the roar of the geek. i even used to buy it and repeat it.

but its time we wake up to the fact that computer-as-applience is exactly where the market is going. and that actually started a while back with the movie recording computers ive heard about now and then.

think about it: "appliance-as-service" keeps the cashflow going for tech companies more than "we sell you a box, and you call us if it breaks"
now of course, i see this as something just now beginning, bus i see that strategy lasting less then 10 years before people put their foot down.
customers dont like being turned upside down and shaken just to keep the stipid #^% &(*$#^ thing running.

with that in mind:

remember the dot-com bubble?

how about 2 more years MAX for the "WEB 2.0" bubble to burst.

okay then. stay with me.

how about microsoft?
intell?
AMD?
Dell?

guess what?
tech is a mature market.
they arent going anywhere but down.

theyll keep trying to stretch it and milk it...
and then hit the wall.
this article demonstrates THAT time is now.
we are ALLREADY starting to see it begin. right here and right now.

and games arent the half of it.
its a dead horse sort of thing.
the verge of a tech-wide implosion.

i can see that and the bubbles havnt even begun to break on the second round.

but then -
what happens next?

the world gets bored with computers once and for all.
they will just be something that is there, something to be used and utterly taken for granted, just like a microwave.

and what about us? we? the overclockers?
the hot-rodders of the digital age?
where do we go? what do we do?
a hobby with four wheels?

remember, computers were cool because they were new. and WOW, and LOOK - it does everything! Windows 95 must be from outer space!...

there are people out there though who arent much younger than me that have grown up with computers from an early age. these are the ones who will take it for granted. these are the people who -dont- think digital watches are a pretty neat idea, and guess what?

some of them, are allready beginning to buy them. another purchace, another handy little box that makes life better.

with a big red "overclock" button in the desktop software.

that part of the market will soon be in place, just waiting for the end of tech as we know it up till now.
theyll inherit the aftermath of our looming disaster, and reap the benifits as well.
i would guess the problems of today will be stood on their head by then.

 

[Audioaficionado]

The deal breaker for me is the EULA #15 limiting you to only one transfer. Sorry but I want more than two uses out of a copy of Vista Ultimate Retail.

The blogging on the Vista Beta site is all anti ELUA at the moment and the MS guy there is just hunkering down as he has no authority to do anything about it and those that do have already put away their stone chisels.

 

[greenmaji]

The deal breaker for me is the EULA #15 limiting you to only one transfer. Sorry but I want more than two uses out of a copy of Vista Ultimate Retail.

The blogging on the Vista Beta site is all anti ELUA at the moment and the MS guy there is just hunkering down as he has no authority to do anything about it and those that do have already put away their stone chisels.

I can only assume they are looking to perform a price descrimination stratagy.
People that don't care how much they spend will pay out the big bucks, then once they can't sell the one-transfer retail copy anymore the price will come down.
So.. whats the price point we're ready to pay for a single transfer OS, $75

 

[hafa]

I can only assume they are looking to perform a price descrimination stratagy.
People that don't care how much they spend will pay out the big bucks, then once they can't sell the one-transfer retail copy anymore the price will come down.
So.. whats the price point we're ready to pay for a single transfer OS, $75

The real irony of this whole situation is that Microsoft's onerous policies regarding activation will be driving many otherwise honest folks right into the hands of the crackers.

 

[3line]

The real irony of this whole situation is that Microsoft's onerous policies regarding activation will be driving many otherwise honest folks right into the hands of the crackers.

Well, look at it this way. At least the crackers ARE honest about what they do, unlike M$.

 

[klingens]

I like what MS does. We finally need a working and unbreakable WGA. That plus builtin DRM, onerous, irreal licenses is just simply wonderful.

 

[Chaos_Being]

I'm in no rush to buy Vista. Once it matures (think SP1) and actually becomes required to play new games (a lot of the "dx10" titles are supposed to run on dx9 also,) then yeah I'll probably get it. Right now I am more than comfortable with XP. The new hardware coming out doesn't really bother me, I have no issues running huge power supplies and power-eating cards (after all, power requirements have been going up for a while now, even if the new stuff coming out is a tad on the hungry side ) However, an OS that uses 750-800mb of ram in an idle state is somehow offensive to me... I mean, I'm all for a "prettier" os I suppose, but being all showy isn't really what an os is supposed to be about in my opinion, its supposed to be a fast, efficient base for your other programs to run on. Vista just smacks of ineffiency and sloppy coding to me, from everything that I've heard about it. Tons of ram used to a fancy 3d desktop with transparency effects? Pass.

An interesting side note- quite a few of my clients, most of whom are the epitome of "six packs," have heard the negativity surrounding Vista and are not planning to upgrade to it any time soon. It wouldn't run worth a damn on most of their PC's anyways.

 

[mdameron]

No, there wasn't a single game the REQUIRED XP, all games ran on XP as well as 95/98/2K/ME. The other way around wasn't true tho, a lot of old games can't run in XP.

AOE3 requires XP. And I haven't encountered an old game that can't be run in XP. There's almost always an update or patch out there, or a simple tweak in XP itself to make it run. I played Sid Meyer's Gettysburg a few months back on XP. That game is older than sin.

 

[speed bump]

BF2 can't run on anything other than XP and I believe BF2142 won't either.

 

[Bad Maniac]

There are a lot of old DOS games that won't run on XP, mostly due to legacy soundcard drivers the games need. Even newer games like Need For Speed 3 can't run in 2K/XP.

 

[aaronjb]

Great article, it says pretty much everything, except you forgot to add a few things:
If you already have a good PC that can run all the current games with no effort, you'll still need to upgrade because Vista will make those games run up to 40% slower on the exact same hardware.

Oh, and you know that Soundblaster Xi-Fi you just bought to get nice 3D EAX sound in your games? Err, well, not in Vista. Basic 2D software sound is all you're gonna get in any pre Vista games. Which means you either get no 3D sound, or you will be forced to use some software sound system that will use CPU cycles, translating to even lower framerates.

So if you have good hardware now, just installing a new OS means it'll suddenly be crap and in dire need of spending more money on it. Which, ironically means you need to buy another Vista because you blew your single reactivation on that first hardware upgrade you needed just to run games as well as your pc used to in XP.

I'm no Microsoft apologist, but PC gaming isn't dead. I've been reading this same thing since the early 90s.

Please show me a source for that "40% slower" figure. Yes, Creative's beta Vista drivers suck, but there will be full support once Vista ships.

The original article is fear-mongering and FUD. I want facts, sources and real information, not opinions based on conjecture. Rhetoric has no place in a serious technical discussion.