it's a joke.
it's a joke.
and that's the PC gaming master race people.
Yes. I know how to plug a laptop to a tv. Does that mean that's going to be an enjoyable experience? Jeez you PC people sure have no reading comprehension.
The answer is no. Duh. I've done it. I'm not going to do it long term because that experience sucks.
Yeah but the budget isn't the sole factor. Does it sit cleanly and neatly next to my tv? Is it quiet? Is it cool to the touch? Is the performance going to be consistent? Are the games going to always play nice with a controller?
Like, I don't care if it can do more than play games. I have a computer for that but it doesn't sit nicely next to my tv and it's an iMac with a four year old GPU so it doesn't run MGS V. It also does everything else I want to do well enough that I don't want to replace it with another desktop PC. I also don't like Windows either(I also don't like the fact that my options are Windows, a Mac or some form of Linux either; but that's neither here nor there).
This is not to say that PC gaming isn't without its merits, but honestly, I don't understand the hubris PC gamers have. The entire ecosystem is likely to fly apart at the seams. Valve is fucking up steam, Microsoft is fucking up windows, OEMs are fucking up the consumer side, consoles are still an attractive alternative to PCs despite the last decade plus of hearing about the greatness of PC gaming.
It's not us, the console playing proletariat, that are loud and obnoxious and full of ourselves. We know our place. We aren't the ones proclaiming ourselves to be the master race. We know our limits. I am not a religious woman but pride does go before the fall.
They trampled people trying to pay homage to a prophet who said things like, "don't treat women like cattle" and "look after the poor; even non Muslim poor"
Here we trample people so we can buy 29 dollar movie players.
PS4 and XB1 share the same x86 cores as most pcs these days(aside from oddballs like RMS' old Lemote Yeelong), but using a nearly commodity CPU has been true for all of gaming history.
The 2600, NES(and the SNES, except with a 16bit variant) used a 6502 CPU(same family as the Apple 2 and the Commodore 64), the PlayStation and Nintendo 64 used MIPS, used in SGI machines and the like, the Genesis used the same 68k CPU the Macintosh did, the only time things get weird is that for two and a half generations, what constituted commodity got weird. The first Xbox shipped with an x86 CPU, but the one after and the ps3 used POWER cores. The other half of the Xbox's first gen, the PS2 used a custom MIPS chip.
Given that software matters just as much, not having to run Windows means that you can do neat things like have the GPU and CPU's ram can be unified and run on GDDR5.
Plus since everything is now completely customized, we can have the box be tiny and consume as little power as possible.
Show me a PC that fits inside of a 12x12x2 block of space, use less than 150 watts of power, that is also completely silent and runs metal gear solid v at 60fps at 1080p with a controller in box for less than 400 bucks.
Granted there might be a point when you can cram that much compute capacity at that little power consumption and with nice cooling into that space, but that's not now. Nor will the software ever be as consistent as a console.
What's given up in raw compute power is made up for with consistency and ease of livability.
A lot of game logic is in Lua or Python. Breaking the game out of that logic level just isn't a problem. So I don't think that running unapproved code(IE: Cheating and piracy and making sure that they get a cut for games that that are being played on their platform) is their primary reason why there's no mod infrastructure.
I mean, the PS3 version of UT3 supported a bunch of Unreal Tournament 3 mods.
The problem is is that Sony and Microsoft and Nintendo just don't believe there's any gains to be made supporting mods. and given what kind of cost it takes to support mods, something drastic would have to happen.
Should the tides move where modding is important like streaming was on the PS4 and XB1, I can imagine Sony and Microsoft moving in that direction.
BTW, it's not just making sure that piracy and cheating don't become problems. It's also things like space management, making sure that mods don't do something stupid like lock the console or make the base game unplayable. For consumers, mods are a very large gun in which to shoot their feet off with.
Not to mention the unbelievable nightmare of having to worry about things like IP rights violations and other such problems.
You know it's always you PC gaming assholes who need to have your egos reassured.
So rest reassured, the PC probably isn't going anywhere for awhile, and yes, you're probably getting a more powerful system that's cheaper blah blah blah.
I don't understand why your lot feels so threatened by console gaming.
But there's things to consider.
First, the death of console gaming might not happen due to strengths in the PC industry. Lack luster financial performance from Sony isn't due to the PS3 and PS4 not selling well. It's that their other arms of business aren't doing so well. Microsoft as a whole probably doesn't care where you game. The sound/graphics APIs are going to be the same on both machines and the real difference is the details like UI and the ability to mod(which; given USB is available on all consoles; if modding were that important; we'd have it on consoles). Also, let's face it, no matter what happens, Nintendo's probably going to be a massive outlier either way.
Second, the decline of PC gaming probably would have nothing to do with the strengths of console gaming. It's not that people have no need for PCs anymore, it's that they have no need for *new* PCs. The PC these days are as good as it's going to get for awhile due to the nature of physics. PCs just aren't getting more powerful. We can shove more cores and more RAM in machines, but ultimately, we're up against a wall here. Plus OEMs have been chasing after marketshare and razor thin margins for so long I don't think the OEM industry is sustainable and I don't think that expecting people to build their own PCs is a reasonable way to keep the PC gaming market healthy. Also the UX for using PCs sucks. Windows is terrible. OS X is less terrible but still not even close to acceptable for gaming when any number of things outside of your control might cause framerate drops and crashes.
Third, is that at some point there's a human output problem too. At some point, we're going to reach the peak of the ability for games developers to produce high quality assets and no matter how powerful your CPU or GPU are, asset generation is going to become more costly as it's going to take more time and more people to develop maps and character models and so on.
Fourth, is that no matter how ubiquitous mobile gaming gets, there will always be a demand for games with physical controllers and the strongest GPUs on the market. As long as mobile devices are also bound by batteries, the raw power available to mobile isn't going to be great. Which not only limits graphical fidelity but also things like AI and so on.
The near future of gaming is probably going to continue on. If I had to spitball on the future, either Sony's going to make it out of this mess alive or Microsoft is going to consolidate the market between the two. Either way, what's probably going to happen is more of the same. Although the next few console generations are probably going to scale up with display technology. The PS1 was the console of the standard def CRT. The PS2 era was the console of the 480p rear projection CRT days. The PS3 was the console of the 720p era and the PS4 1080p. Quite frankly, given the human cost of generating nicer and nicer assets, I really don't think that pushing graphics is all that important. Not to the bleeding edge at least. What's the point of a 4K games console if my TV isn't even receiving other 4K content for it? Next generation's going to be hardware that can push 4K displays.
I think that there might be a day when Windows stops sucking for gaming. Maybe some kind of special execution mode that somehow puts the game in near 100% priority and sleeps anything not necessary for gaming with a smart enough scheduler to not make the whole system grind to a halt. I'd also hope that Microsoft finally makes device makers stop shipping awful drivers. Maybe also shore up a lot of their OS problems; but not likely. I wish, a girl can dream, right?
There's never been one true way to engage with video games and I'm really shocked to see how much time and effort has been spent by PC gamers to demand deference. Not now, and not in the near future.
The only form of gaming that has "died" or been supplanted has been arcades and that's due to really awful cultural reasons related to arcades. Nothing technical or even "consoles made arcades irrelevant." It's all bad business decisions on the part of operators who marketed towards children(who, funny enough, have no money of their own) and western cultural traditions where adults just didn't pop by the arcade for a little while before going home from work. We didn't have the equivalent to Mahjong games or horse racing games or other adult with job friendly games that Japan, Korea and China have. Not in graphics or terms of subject matter. Mahjong games are great because the experience is largely the same. Also games like Star Horse and Derby Owner's Club allowed you to play a few games and leave and enjoy yourself. It's just not culturally accepted as a past time here in America. Arcades are closing in Japan(not sure about Korea or China), sure, but this downward swing for Japanese arcades is largely economical.
So if we don't have PC or console or mobile gaming in the future, it'll probably be because of awful business decisions or economic pressure or maybe cultural problems. I'm not a PC gamer because the weaknesses in the PC platform and the culture around PC gaming make it unpalatable to me. If Sony goes under and there's no next gen Xbox, I'll probably start gaming on the PC but also probably game a lot less too.
not because games are terrible. Games are great.
Everything around them sucks.
They did. They knocked a hundred bucks off the iPhone 6/6+ and the 5s.
Yes... And? You're accusing apple of being in business to make money.
While it's neat that OEMs sell pcs near price of what you'd build it, relatively, the margins are so thin I'm not sure what PC vendor is going to be around in ten years.
After the Lenovo Rootkit incident, I'm pretty sure that most Windows OEMs are too stupid to live. Make better built machines, sell it at a sustainable price. How hard is that?
If I had to buy a PC, I'd still give Lenovo a chance, but this is why I don't buy windows pcs.
They bought a struggling music streaming service with a highly successful headphone brand.
Hell. They've owned them for two years now and they still don't have nicer headphones in the box.
I don't think it's about pure profits. If it was, they'd sell 8 gig iphones at a price point of like, free/99/149 on contract. They don't. Not this cycle. Not since the 5c dropped off the lineup. Now the 5s, the bottom end for Apple, ships in 16 or 32.
Not only that, but given that the 32 tier no longer exists for most devices, and that tier's occupied by 64 gig devices, I doubt that selling price is the reason here. If that were true, the 128 gig iphone would've been priced at $100 more than the 64. Instead, they dropped the price on the 64, eliminated the 32 and introduced the 128.
I think instead they imagine that some users just don't actually use more than 16 gigs of space on their device. So they've laid out a trajectory with their supply chain that matches. Granted, this is in terms of future pricing and guaranteed stock, not in terms of the technical ability for flash suppliers to supply such modules(although I touch on that later).
Unfortunately, we don't have actual numbers to back anything up at this point. So, I'm making an extremely wild guess here and thinking that a lot of people just don't use or feel the pressure at the 16 gig size. Aside from when it comes time to upgrade iOS that is. I mean, the things that take up the largest amount of space on iOS devices are either hardcore games or video. I'm pretty sure that games like the GTA iOS games aren't sold in such huge numbers that the average user who plays games on iOS will even notice.
In an ideal world with uniform excellent signal, no congestion and no usage caps where we could just stream all of our content and upload anything we create directly into some kind of cloud storage. iCloud's pricing tiers suck compared to the competition, but even if you consider it's relatively crappy price structure, for the same price as an upgrade to the next tier, you could pay for ~33 months of 200 gig storage.
I'm assuming that most people don't have tens of hundreds of gigabytes of music or sync that much too. Obviously some do, and I get to read about it at length whenever anyone comes out with a phone with out an SD card. But I don't think that's the average case.
I'm also willing to bet that there might be a technical reason, and it's in such a super boring way I saved it for last.
That's yields on flash memory.
At Apple's scale, I don't think that the market can bear out having to supply 32 gigabyte modules. I don't think that they sell large enough quantities of 64 and up iPhones or iPads.
The 32 gig iPhone 5s and the new Apple TV model are the only iOS devices Apple ships these days with 32 gigs. So I think the supply chain for those modules is pretty well supplied.
I'd love it if we got something concrete, because when I see the iPhone 6s being sold at the 16 gig level, I just want to eat my own brain. Even though I know there are probably good reasons for it, it still bugs the ever loving shit out of me.
If Apple or LG or Samsung put out a new phone and it's got a 4K display, that's fine. If battery life and screen clarity don't change. However, I'm not going to actively seek out the highest DPI phone I can get. So yes, I'm paying for the 4K display, but I'm not doing it *because* it has a 4K display. If there's two phones in a given lineup, I'm going to just get a phone with a higher screen resolution, I'm going to get the one I want.
because your photos will look nicer when the image has to downscale.
Plus Facebook doesn't necessarily downscale that much these days.
With the way Samsung's promotional budget has been going they may buy the naming rights to the Milky Way at some point.
you're assuming an OS and related software that can't run in high DPI modes. iMac with 5k display is beautiful, and it's only 27".
"What the scientists have in their briefcases is terrifying." -- Nikita Khrushchev