Is this the decade PC gaming bounces back?
Posted on 26th Jan 2010 at 10:25 by Antony Leather with 41 comments
I noticed a rather interesting trend in the uptake of the latest generation of consoles over the last few weeks. I don’t usually take much notice of them to be honest. I haven’t bought a new console since PC upgrades started being affordable to me, and it’s been that way since the N64 started showing its age.
However, the majority of ‘what was great in 2009' and general 'over the shoulder glance' articles about the previous decade's tech meant I couldn’t really avoid reading about the PS3 or Xbox 360. What I read lead me to an interesting idea.
Having read a good handful of these articles, what I found was that there’s a longer and longer gap between console releases with more and more money being spent on them with a longer period needed for companies - especially Sony - to so much as break even.
This means that for console gamers, there’s now up to a staggering decade between releases of new hardware. What does this mean for the PC gaming industry competition, with users upgrading their entire PCs several times in the same period?
The main argument for Console vs PC is that consoles don’t need to be upgraded. They're easy. You buy the thing for probably the same cost as a good graphics card and processor then you only pay a premium on games. The fact that console releases are now so few and far between, with manufacturers needing many years to break even after all those R&D bills, means that consoles are becoming ever more futureproof.
So does this mean that buying a PC and upgrading it will become significantly less popular in future, as people switch to consoles where they’re guaranteed a decade of use from their one-off purchases?
Console fans might smell blood here but the issue with this is that people like to buy things and get a boost in graphics and gameplay. Part of the reason behind Project Natal for the Xbox 360 is that Microsoft, according to an article I read in The Guardian recently, doesn’t think the 360 has even reached the mid-point in its lifecycle.
That’s a pretty amazing statement considering it’s already in its fifth year of sales. The PS3 is still a way off breaking even although production costs are finally getting close to selling prices. If this is true then, while it's nothing new that a decent gaming rig is built with hardware that is superior to current consoles, this gap will become much bigger than ever before. The question is: How will the consumer respond when the likes of Microsoft is only able to offer owners something new in the form of games and add-ons like Natal?
Graphics are already far superior on the PC with current hardware and in five year’s time, things will be even more in the PC’s favour with things like 3D gaming already a reality. If we’re not likely to see a new console until 2015, this could see many people return to the PC to get a visually better experience amongst other things.
Unless projects like Natal for the 360 can really hold on to the user base by providing new and exciting times, coupled with the ever-popular Windows 7, the 'teens' could see the PC gain some significant market share.
If no new consoles appeared for another five years, would you be more likely to upgrade your PC? Would you make the migration to it for a majority of your game time if it offered a much better gaming experience? Let us know in the comments.
However, the majority of ‘what was great in 2009' and general 'over the shoulder glance' articles about the previous decade's tech meant I couldn’t really avoid reading about the PS3 or Xbox 360. What I read lead me to an interesting idea.
Having read a good handful of these articles, what I found was that there’s a longer and longer gap between console releases with more and more money being spent on them with a longer period needed for companies - especially Sony - to so much as break even.
This means that for console gamers, there’s now up to a staggering decade between releases of new hardware. What does this mean for the PC gaming industry competition, with users upgrading their entire PCs several times in the same period?
The main argument for Console vs PC is that consoles don’t need to be upgraded. They're easy. You buy the thing for probably the same cost as a good graphics card and processor then you only pay a premium on games. The fact that console releases are now so few and far between, with manufacturers needing many years to break even after all those R&D bills, means that consoles are becoming ever more futureproof.
It seems the PS3 and XBox 360 are going to be flagship consoles for many years to come
So does this mean that buying a PC and upgrading it will become significantly less popular in future, as people switch to consoles where they’re guaranteed a decade of use from their one-off purchases?
Console fans might smell blood here but the issue with this is that people like to buy things and get a boost in graphics and gameplay. Part of the reason behind Project Natal for the Xbox 360 is that Microsoft, according to an article I read in The Guardian recently, doesn’t think the 360 has even reached the mid-point in its lifecycle.
That’s a pretty amazing statement considering it’s already in its fifth year of sales. The PS3 is still a way off breaking even although production costs are finally getting close to selling prices. If this is true then, while it's nothing new that a decent gaming rig is built with hardware that is superior to current consoles, this gap will become much bigger than ever before. The question is: How will the consumer respond when the likes of Microsoft is only able to offer owners something new in the form of games and add-ons like Natal?
If people start migrating to the PC because there are no new consoles, upgrades could become more popular.
Graphics are already far superior on the PC with current hardware and in five year’s time, things will be even more in the PC’s favour with things like 3D gaming already a reality. If we’re not likely to see a new console until 2015, this could see many people return to the PC to get a visually better experience amongst other things.
Unless projects like Natal for the 360 can really hold on to the user base by providing new and exciting times, coupled with the ever-popular Windows 7, the 'teens' could see the PC gain some significant market share.
If no new consoles appeared for another five years, would you be more likely to upgrade your PC? Would you make the migration to it for a majority of your game time if it offered a much better gaming experience? Let us know in the comments.
41 Comments
Discuss in the forums ReplyI think the same thing still exists today. With a console, you pop the disc in and you're off. Occasionally you're forced into a system update to play the newest games, but on the whole it's not very intrusive. There's no worry about installing the game, having the latest drivers, having hardware beefy enough, etc. Graphics have got to the point where, for most people, it doesn't really need to get much better (of course, this is anathema to most PC gamers). And, once you've bought the hardware that's all you need - you don't need to worry about the possibility of having to shell out for a new graphics card or more memory to be able to run a game well.
Even I get a little frustrated by PC games these days. I recently installed GTAIV, UT2004 and Mass Effect having bought them from Steam; each one has had some kind of additional set up program that needs to run. Whether it's Visual C++ redistributables, Direct X updates, etc, I haven't been able to just install it and jump straight in. You don't need to do that on a console, it's far more accessible. Even Steam, which - along with other digital download services - has done wonders for PC gaming, requires an always-on internet connection. Consoles don't always need that; many system updates are included on game discs, magazine cover discs, direct from manufacturer, etc. Of course not to mention the DRM that gets lumbered in with many big game titles; DRM is there on most consoles too (in the form of firmware), but it's more subtle - it doesn't make itself so utterly apparent as some PC systems do.
PC gaming has got a bit of an image problem IMO. But you will never match the experience you get on a PC with a console. For a while, PC gaming fell out of my favour; as soon as I played Fallout 3 on decent PC hardware my flag was firmly back in the PC camp, where it should have always stayed. Even the precision of using the simple mouse & keyboard combo for FPS games is still unrivaled - gamepads are getting better, but they're still a long way from being the best.
Regardless of whether PC gaming "bounces back" to the "mainstream", it will always be my mainstream.
If you consider that everyone need a computer. Fact. I can't imagine anyone who plays any sort of digital game who doesn't need one (unless that person is 6 and then, it's debatable)
Assuming a computer costs £400 minimum, if you add the cost of a PS3, say, you get a budget of £600. Which you can build a pretty decent system with.
After all, most games don't require the 'latest' in technology and most games will run fine on a sub-£100 graphics card and CPU. You can then buy a console controller for your PC and viola, it can do anything a console can. And the games are cheaper :D
Sorry to point this out, but it's not a fact that "everyone" needs a computer. I "want" a computer (Which is why I have many) but everything I "need" to do, I can do from my iPhone. There's an alternative to everything else (Phone banking etc)
Can anyone name something which everyone needs a PC for?
Could I live without a PC? Yes, of course, but I don't need to, and I like my computers :)
However, consoles are cheaper, and constantly flashier graphics are not the be-all and end-all of gaming. On top of that, people have less spare money to spend on new consoles, so the current generation will definitely be around a lot longer than usual.
I guess the challenge is for console games to remain interesting without relying on an up-coming hardware refresh to inject new eye candy into the same old franchise. We could actually see some innovation this decade!
you wont see a crysis type game been released if theres no market for it. Mw2 will run on intergrated graphics to some extent if your willing to accept low settings. Even to run it on high only requires a 4850 if you keep the resolution within normal.
Assuming you run every game in full hd. Will you really need more than 5870 in 2 years time to do it. I just cant see how the pc market will be pushed.
Im playing at 1920 by 1080 on a 5870 i cant see my buying another graphics card for 2-3 years if nothing pushes it to do it.
game companys are pushing sequels more than anything else using a small updated engine ( see mass effect 2 )
no real point to push the boat out if its not needed
ps if there isnt a new generation of consoles out by 2013 i'll eat my 260gtx
Well, the IPhone can probably be considered a computer :D (as far as the Internet is considered)
I'd like to see you work exclusively on an IPhone's office suite though.
Isn't this the same as with every console generation? The first years they're ahead, the last years they're behind.
Also, it's a question of resolution.
For gaming on a PAL CRT, the XBOX or PS2 are sufficient.
For gaming on HD-TV, the XBOX360 or PS§ is sufficient.
For gaming at higher resolutions (or 3D-gaming*) Next-Next-Gen consoles or current PC :D
Xir
*not that I believe in 3D gaming as such...tried it in the nineties, it sucked, not trying again.
And yes, 3D-gaming has been possible at least since the first generation GeForce256 ;)
however I dont know how many people there are or indeed how many there are that dont simply pirate the games....
I think you'll find that a home computer is now either absolutely needed for kids' homework, Facebook and e-mail etc at a non-headache-inducing screen size, or it's only "wanted" but is considered a pretty basic "want." I could shower under the garden hose, crap in a hole in the back yard, do all of my washing and washing up by hand and walk to a phonebox to use the phone, but I don't think you'll find many people that do. Lots of life's 'necessities' are only luxuries when you get right down to it, but most people own a home computer because it would be a severe inconvenience not to.
This man, he speaks the truth! PC gaming has been saved in part at least by my least-liked genre of games, the mass-market MMO. If it wasn't for Warcraft there would be millions of people that didn't know about gaming on their PCs. It shows that people do still do it and that means we still have games made for our platform. That said...
...Sometimes I'm happy that PC gaming is a small market. If I got the hostility playing CS:S that I do playing Halo's variants I wouldn't play much. If PC gaming's bounce back, as implied, only involves a shift of console players to their computers, I'm not sure I want in. If it's 3D games that are great to play and look brilliant (and are exclusives, screw you consoles) I'm up for that. I'm happy to pay a premium for GPUs and the like in exchange for bleeding-edge technology, and if the PC can continue to provide that, I'll stick with it.
I can think of a list as long as your arm of tasks that I would by far and away prefer to do on a PC most of which can only be done on a PC. Does everyone do them? Maybe not, I'm talking about photo editing, web browsing with countless addons to firefox, a bit of web design here and there and lots of work stuff. I guess maybe everyone does some word processing from time to time and the PC has to be the best medium to do this.
The amount of times I hear the state of PC gaming being talked about, it makes you wonder why there is so much concern.
If a console such as the PS3 brought out a mouse and keypad to use on FPS how do you think it would effect sales of a PC game with the same title.
Because most games have multiplayer modes these days and it would make them ridiculously unbalanced (more often than not, the guy with a keyboard and mouse is going to win).
They did do this - on the PS2 and, to a lesser extent, the PSX (PS1, PSOne, whatever). Barely any games supported it and fell by the wayside. There was even, if I remember correctly, a mouse and keyboard released for the original Xbox; the controllers use a USB port which, while being physically modified, are signal compatible with standard USB protocols. That was hardly supported by games either. Besides, consoles aren't really suited to mouse & keyboard control; I did try it way back on the PS2 - I believe it may have been Red Faction, though I could be wrong - as it supported standard USB keyboards/mice. I had to put my TV, PS2 and the keyboard and mouse on the same desk as the PC in order to use the mouse & keyboard properly. This was a bit of a farce when you consider that all I had to do to use the gamepad was slump on my bed in front of the TV - no moving stuff around. Also, this particular game didn't let you remap the keys - so if you don't like the standard control layout then tough. If a PC developer did this they would be slaughtered for it (some have, but that's not my point).
It's still possible to plug in a mouse & keyboard to a PS3 - how do you think people run Linux on it? (Linux that is sanctioned by Sony and not hacked, I hasten to add) The hardware clearly supports it, it's just the software (i.e. games) that need to be programmed to accept it. I have no basis in experience or fact for this, but I would also imagine that it puts extra pressure on developers to support a feature that hardly anyone will use - this means more time and more money. Why spend money coding a non-standard control scheme from a different system when you've got a perfectly good one right there?
EDIT: It was a Red Faction game I tried mouse & keyboard on PS2.... Red Faction 2, specifically.
Hmmm.. dear friend. your iPhone is a computer
Internet access?... check
mail access?... check
instant messaging?... check
Photo sharing?... check
Music, Movie playback?... check
SDK's for custom app's?... check
I dont mean to be rude or anything, but honestly i cant see how is possible that aperson who visits this kind of sites can ask something like "name something which everyone needs a PC for?" now days.
Its not risen to being extremely popular but its never exactly died away either.
Personally i dont think it needs to bounce back from anything because it never went anywhere.
+1
I was just about to post the same thing :)
Also, if PC gaming is to get MASS attention by the mass public, then it needs proper advertizing to the masses and not just small bits of ads directed to existing PC gamers.
Just the other day, I spoke to an old friend and he discovered that I played AAA games on the PC. He said to me that he didn't know it was possible to play xbox games on a PC, and he wanted to know how he can put his own xbox games on his PC. Then I introduced him to the fact that there are Games For Windows.
To cut the story short, I have found hundreds more people over the years who are not aware that AAA level PC gaming exists than people who know about it but prefer consoles.
This is so true. I used to be a predominantly console gamer back when the PS2 was first released (mainly because I didn't have my own PC so had to share it with the rest of the family), but now whenever someone asks me whether I play on Xbox or PS3 and I say (usually hesitantly and slightly embarrassed) that I play on PC, I either get total silence and looks of bemusement or hushed gasps followed closely by personal ridicule. But then I think how awesome PC gaming is and I feel all smug again :D
Sometimes I try to explain PC gaming to people who's first gaming experiences have been on the current or last generation of consoles if I think they have the cranial capacity for it, and have successfully converted a couple of people (at least partly), but most people just don't want to know and see it as being too 'geeky'.
My daughter bought an iphone on sunday.
She had to bring it round to my house.
Have you tried getting a new iphone recently? It will only make emergancy calls until it is registered. Which you do on a PC.
You have to make an account for the Appstore and itunes store, which you do on a PC.
If you have music on a CD that you want on your iphone you have to rip the CD...ON A PC!!!
Honestly! Its like saying that if you lived on the moon you wouldn't need space travel! An iphone is useless without a pc.
Back on topic for a sec, I think the point about most households owning a (probably poor) pc and a gaming console is a good one. If people put the console money and PC money together, they would get a decent PC.
Why do I think PC gaming is not as popular as console?
Ignorance.
If you buy a mid range PC from Dell these days the motherboard is usually poor. And its often a small form factor. Which all means that if people wanted to play games on their PC's and buy a GPU, it doesn't fit. Even if it did the PSU wouldn't have the 12v rail (or PCI-E power plugs) to support it.
Imagine you know nothing about PC's for a sec and you are buying one for your house.
Deal 1) 2.8Ghz quad core with 4gb ram and 1TB HDD and 1gb "dedicated graphics"................. £400
Deal 2) 2.8Ghz i5 with 4gb DDR3 ram and 1TB Samsung F3 HDD and 1GB HD5850 Graphics ............£600
The specs are the same. Deal 2 is the PC I would want. Deal 1 is the PC everyone who knows little about the hardware wants. It looks the same for less. Bargain!!!!!
In my personal experience, the best way to introduce people to PC gaming is to show them your system.
I have found the general response to be incredibly positive - once people see it with their own eyes.
On the other hand, trying to explain AAA level PC gaming to the average person brings up blank faces; strange faces; alien faces; along with too many misconceptions, myths and strange questions, such as: "How can you play it on a big screen HDTV?" or "How can you play a racing car game with a keyboard?". Then I have to explain that you don't, you play it with a steering wheel or dual analog gamepad.
For quite a few of my console friends who have gamed on my system, I have since gone on to build them their own gaming PCs. These are people who previously only knew about console gaming.
In my opinion, contrary to what a lot of existing PC gamers think, PC gaming can be very attractive to the mass console public if only it was properly advertized to these people like console and console game TV ads.
So true! and so sad.... :( I blame PC vendors for not properly educating consumers and giving all the info.
also, there's the laptop, "gaming laptop" means a brick that can't play any game at reasonable setting at all.
Let the PC do what it needs to do in the form of updates for hardware, drivers, C++ and DirectX et al and simply let the game ask the system to check for appropriate software, driver versions etc and then let the PC itself go and get them if it needs them.
The end result will be something more console like and more immediately playable, a little less time spent installing and more time spent playing the games we enjoy.
On the flip side, it could be that the consoles themselves start to become upgradeable with some possible new hardware options becoming available to further increase their lifespan.
Not too sure where you're looking, but it's certainly more than 2-5FPS, especially at higher resolutions where the 8800 is starting to show its age:
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2009/10/01/autumn-2009-graphics-card-buyers-guide/1
That's more than a 100% improvement in all games at today's standard resolution of ~1920x1200. and the less said about the Crysis performance the better.
Fortunately the Amiga was kind of a direct competitor to the PC. Amiga / PC is similar to Xbox 360 / PS3.
PC gaming can never die simply because people will always have a general purpose PC. With a market that large, at the very least there will be a casual gaming market. PCs don't have licensing fees which further adds to the charm for devs just starting out.
This is why I think consoles like the Wii have their days numbered. When TVs have built-in internet connections and the ability to play games - then it would make for the ideal casual platform. The question is - where will the enthusiast market go to. Will consoles house the hardcore gamers, or the PC?
JANUARY 29, 2010, 9:31 AM - VALVE - PRESS RELEASE
Leading Platform for PC Games Now Serving Over 25 Million Accounts
January 29, 2010 Valve® today announced extraordinary 2009 growth data for Steam, a leading platform for PC games and digital entertainment, with major increases in accounts, concurrent players, unit sales and more. The year also marked tremendous adoption of the Steamworks suite of publishing services in the tangible and electronic versions of many of the year's biggest releases.
During the last calendar year the platform surpassed 25 million active accounts, up 25% from the prior year. Of the 25 million accounts, over 10 million of those have profiles in the Steam Community.
In addition to the millions of new accounts created during the year, the peak number of concurrent users eclipsed the 2.5 million mark during the month of December, pushing Steam's average monthly player minutes to more than 13 billion.
Meanwhile, Steam now offers over 1,000 games from over 100 developers and publishers around the world. Unit sales for 2009 increased by more than 205%, marking the fifth straight year the platform has realized over 100% year-over-year growth in unit sales.
2009 also delivered a wave of titles supported by Steamworks, in tangible and electronic versions, including Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, Dawn of War II, and Empire: Total War. Empire also used Steamworks for the delivery and management of its paid downloadable content releases.
Steam turned five years old in March 2009, said Gabe Newell, president of Valve. With the introduction of each new platform feature released over the years such as the Steam Community, Steam Cloud, and Steamworks we've seen corresponding growth in account numbers, concurrent player numbers and developer support for the platform. As such, we plan to continue to expand and grow the platform to better serve the developers supporting the open platform and millions of gamers logging in each day.
THE LINK
Man that would be the day.
I won't even think of a console at this point because all I ever read about is how the games have framerate issues on either the PS3 or Xbox 360. Obviously developers aren't coding the games for the consoles and just expecting them to keep up.
Sorry but I'd call that a BS. As for the iPhone, if by "everything I need" means browsing the internet, chatting, social networking, even my $99 Samsung SGH-J200 could do that; you don't need an overpriced "ai-ai" phone for all that things (that's includes all sort of things that start with an "i" in front of it ;-).
And like the others have said, your iPhone is a computer too (albeit a limited one). It have a memory, processor, OS, and a power-supply, so can you say it once more that you don't need a computer? ;-)
Easy. Doing spreadsheet in Excel, doing anything [insert your company name here] need you to do, playing an MMO, downloading (and playing) your usual p0rn videos, writing a software, etc. There's a lot of things that NEEDS a PC to accomplish.
Another BS. In this day and age, you can't live without a PC, unless if you're a caveman living in the Amazon jungle, LOL. There's so many things needs to be done in a PC, especially for those who are working.
Heres one recent example.
http://www.hardforums.com/showthread.php?t=1491848
So I'd say YES! PC gaming is on the upswing again. Not that it ever left. I've personally never lost a step. There are aways more great PC games to play than I have the time to play. I am serious backlogged to the 90s. :)
It would just be the hugest pain in the rear end ever.
Take your basic premade system from Best Buy that a modern person will have. It'll probably be some sort of i3/5 with your basic smattering of 4GB RAM and integrated graphics. For the price of buying a PS3 you could slap a 5770 and Blu-ray player in your PC and have a nice gaming rig of quality equal to or greater than your PS3 with all of the same functionality plus the expandability of a PC should you decide to grow with the times. Or if you don't you'll still be equal to/greater than the PS3 which also doesn't change.
Call it a cycle if you want, but at the moment PC gaming is as affordable as console gaming for the modern lifestyle.