PC gaming should adopt a console approach to regain momentum.

Quoting this for the new page so people look at actual industry wide data instead of OP's fud

Note that MMO and social also means PC in this chart:

That puts PCs with higher market share than consoles overall. PC revenue is also higher than consoles.

Global_Games_Report_Infographic_v1_tn.png
 
I keep hearing about the amazing playerbases across the board on console titles, compared to PC titles.

Do we have any actual data on that? Is there any kind of breakdown of PS4/XB1 populations - a'la Steam Stats, or are we simply speculating, and trying to draw a correlation between units moved and a predicted playerbase?

Because, outside of console staples like CoD, Battlefield, and now Destiny, I'm not sure where those numbers would be. Does, I don't know, Sniper Elite 3 really have a playerbase where one doesn't exist on the PC?

Anyone got any hard data on that?

That's the problem. There are a large population of casual "dude bros" that only play CoD, Madden, Nba 2k, Star Wars, Destiny, Halo which have a very large user base on consoles. PCs are just not for them. I bought cod advanced warfare on PC and had a hard time finding games for certain play types and this was a month after launch. Also who wants to use a controller against k+m?
 
This thread rocks.

One good thing to come out of OP is the idea of industry standards for performance benchmarks. It would be cool if Steam checked your hardware and gave your configuration a grade, and instead of vague Min/Recommended specs, developers could give you a concrete idea of what kind of experience to expect according to your performance tier. It could also help streamline in game performance tweaking, kinda like GeForce experience and Gaming Evolved try to do.
 
Wait 1 gen. Is there really any manufacturer that is going to be interested in selling anything that's even remotely capable at $399? Don't kid yourself, inflation or not, that's the accepted price for hardware.

One way or the other, and I don't want it, but console manufacturing has a very specific shelf life.
 
That's the problem. There are a large population of casual "dude bros" that only play CoD, Madden, Nba 2k, Star Wars, Destiny, Halo which have a very large user base on consoles. PCs are just not for them. I bought cod advanced warfare on PC and had a hard time finding games for certain play types and this was a month after launch. Also who wants to use a controller against k+m?

Yeah - I guess that's what I'm curious about; we keep hearing a lot of talk about the massive console playerbases compared to the miniscule PC playerbases. I get that for CoD and Destiny and the sports stuff - but outside of those mega franchises, where is the majority of the console playerbase located? We don't seem to have any readily available data - does, for example, the multiplayer of Dying Light or something like Dungeon Defenders II have radically larger playerbases than on the PC?

I'm just interested in some clarity around those numbers. Say that something like Payday 2 pulls 25k concurrent at peak - is a mid-tier shooter on the PS4 pulling 100k concurrent at peak? Where are the comparisons of the numbers - or are we all just making up shit as we go along, based on highly contestable sales data?
 
I've never heard this community (Neogaf) talk more actively about PC games than they have recently.

I think it's fine.
 
The situation doesn't seem nearly as dire as it used to, but the barrier of entry still seems a tad high.

PC building is basically following a recipe, which is simple enough, but unfortunately the ingredients were named by a robot. I don't mind doing the research and teaching myself each step of the way, but some standardized naming schemes for parts, namely for CPU and GPU, would go a long way in removing the initial intimidation. Not sure how that would work, but there has to be a simpler way than what Nvidia and Intel do.
 
actively trying to pace PC with consoles is a fool's errand, though i think stuff like alienware is a step in the right direction. PC will always be about a quarter of the pie until streaming devices/living room PCs become norm
 
Which publisher is that data from?

Ubisoft.

actively trying to pace PC with consoles is a fool's errand, though i think stuff like alienware is a step in the right direction. PC will always be about a quarter of the pie until streaming devices/living room PCs become norm

It's all about willing to pay a price for convenience.

I'm willing to shell out $2700 for my Alienware for that console feel.
 
But... Steam already has that: http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey



GPU growth in november:


Intel HD Graphics 40004.13%+4.13%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 3.84% +3.84%
Intel HD Graphics 3000 2.46% +2.46%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760 2.38% +2.38%
Intel HD Graphics 4400 2.24% +2.24%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 Ti 2.04% +2.04%
Intel HD Graphics 2000 1.93% +1.93%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 1.91% +1.91%
NVIDIA GeForce GT 620M 1.91% +1.91%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 1.82% +1.82%
AMD Radeon HD 7900 Series 1.79% +1.79%
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 1.62% +1.62%


Developers can take a lot of info from these stats. You can bet that many have tried to aim for silkysmooth maxed out settings with 970 as their benchmark due to its popularity.
It's interesting to see the growth for 760.

People often forget that older cards flow around at cheaper price points in various markets, and prebuild gaming PCs that are older gets sold at more competitive pricepoints in many markets.






Windows 7 64 bit35.63%-1.04%
Windows 10 64 bit28.81%+2.39%
Windows 8.1 64 bit16.50%-0.96%
Windows 77.84%-0.35%
Windows XP 32 bit2.16%-0.10%
Windows 8 64 bit2.14%-0.14%
Windows 101.04%+0.04%
Windows 8.10.42%-0.02%
Windows Vista 32 bit0.32%-0.02%
Windows 80.18%-0.01%
Windows Vista 64 bit0.18%+0.02%

Windows 10 64 bit grows aggressively. regular Windows 10 is dead. Nice. Kill 32 bit OS!!
Bizarre that Vista 64 bit has a 0,2% increase when 7,8 and 8.1 are all falling??



1 cpu2.24%-0.13%
2 cpus 47.93% -0.41%
3 cpus 2.76% -0.01%
4 cpus 45.12% +0.53%
5 cpus 0.01% 0.00%
6 cpus 1.61% +0.02%
7 cpus 0.00% 0.00%
8 cpus 0.31% 0.00%

Developers have no incentive to make games for 6 or 8 core CPUs yet. 6 core CPU support is going slow. and dual-core support is slowly dying but it goes slow.

Hypothosis: Many steam users have laptops with dual core cpus. We still don't have quad core CPUs in sub-45 watt machines. We dont have quadcores in ULV or in ultrabook formats. that would rig the statistics.
 
Which publisher is that data from?



Oh, this is one of those threads tackling a completely flawed premise based on incomplete/cherry-picked data.



Quite.

I actually think this is a joke/bait thread considering the poster. It has got a lot of biters.... Who will probably walk away thinking this is a completely serious thread.
 
I think in regards to sales that this is actually not a bad idea. Especially at big box retailers like best buy. You would have a badge that would indicate what it can run and by having a badge that says "2016 ready" does definitely help. You could have a chart that explains what it means and that being "2015 ready" doesn't necessarily mean it's not 2016 ready. Something to that effect. We are going to have steam machines that have oculus ready badges so why not this?

Only thing to fix after that is the pricing. Someone needs to bite the bullet and sell these at a loss.
 
Wake me up when PC has a healthy multiplayer user base for casual mainstream games like CoD, Star Wars battlefront, Madden, FIFA, NBA 2k, Mk and SF4. I have no interest in playing CS go or TF2 or dota. Hopefully the trend for cross platform play like sf5 and killer instinct continues and we have a larger player base with other casuals.

You're naming games that have been traditionally played on consoles.

Those titles you mentioned have never moved PC hardware, why would it start now.

GTA V and Rocket League have healthy PC communities, among others.
 
At Valve's developer conference, they pressed the point that many PC users are only going to go as far as Intel HD graphics chipsets and that their survey data shows an extremely large market with that chipset. These are those base users who don't understand the need for a GPU vs CPU, or what those acronyms even mean.
You know, I'm perfectly aware of all the benefits of a GPU, but I'm still not interested in investing in a graphic card. I'll get a good CPU because I use it a lot, but currently, either it run on integrated graphics, or I buy it on console, or I'll just play it in half a dozen years...

It's even more the case with laptops...

I think there's definitively a market for Intel HD Graphics, and not only for the casual market.
 
I totally agree, the future IS consoles. There's no getting around it, You can buy a PlayStation™4 for only $299.99 MSRP which is more powerful than most p c's plus it has exclusives like Bloodbourne, and others while the p c doesn't really have any that aren't already going to be PlayStation Plus games that I can get totally free.

Ha... not even going to waste my time debating this. Carry on.
 
Well the problem is simple to me.

It's cheaper to buy the parts seperately and build yourself.

Beginners are daunted with selecting parts and building. They don't want to take the risk on themselves. And they don't want to pay extra to have someone build it.

Until somebody comes out with a system where it's cost is close to what it would take to make yourself PC isn't going to take off like consoles.

Then they also have to contend with PS4 and Xbox One and this hardware is sold at a loss and made up for in software sales.

Valve were the only ones who could have done something about this and they fluffed their lines.
 
I totally agree, the future IS consoles. There's no getting around it, You can buy a PlayStation™4 for only $299.99 MSRP which is more powerful than most p c's plus it has exclusives like Bloodbourne, and others while the p c doesn't really have any that aren't already going to be PlayStation Plus games that I can get totally free.

Wholeheartedly agree. When your exclusive games are hipster indies that look like something straight out of 1995, and anything that looks barely acceptable is funded by Kickstarter, it's pretty obvious that your platform is in shambles. PC is stuck in the past, while console developers have already stepped into the future. Just look at The Order 1886. Let me know when your $5000 indie machine can achieve that.
 
Wholeheartedly agree. When your exclusive games are hipster indies that look like something straight out of 1995, and anything that looks barely acceptable is funded by Kickstarter, it's pretty obvious that your platform is in shambles. PC is stuck in the past, while console developers have already stepped into the future. Just look at The Order 1886. Let me know when your $5000 indie machine can achieve that.

My sarcasm-o-meter just blew up. You owe me ten grand.
 
1) Very few want to hook up a PC to their big ass TV. Not because it's hard, but because they don't want the PC in the same room. Yes, we're getting bridge boxes now, but those are an additional cost nobody feels like adding to their already expensive PC, and keeping them going 24/7 vs laziness of going to set up the connection each time you want to play is an issue
2) A lot of PC games also expect a keyboard and mouse. Yes, we're working on solving that issue, particularly with the steam controller, but it isn't nearly easy enough yet and the selection of games that do it is small and hard to find (just finding "big picture approved" on steam isn't simple enough for the public). And even when you can find them, you'll always have in mind those huge masses of games you're constantly seeing that aren't available to your comfy couch control setup and it feels bad.
3) Even buying games on Steam is often too complicated simply because it is a process people are unfamiliar with. They know "go to the store and buy game on disc" not the whole profile system and downloading and managing hard drive space and steam credit gift cards and such. Even console disc games installing to hard drive has been an issue.
4) PC gaming is a whole different crowd. A huge amount of people play games for community, and community is both an actual relation between parties on the same platform and tribalism in brand fidelity. Joining the PC crowd also puts you in multiplayer with those who have full KB/M setups, which is painful.
5) Most people don't give a shit about the difference in console and PC graphics, if they can even see them. Console is close enough, and best of all they don't have to fuck around in graphics settings tweaking performance vs image quality for every game. Yeah, a lot of games have pretty good auto-setting now, but not always, and not as efficient as console tuning developers manage. To be considered an immediate advantage of platform it has to be utterly painless to get the best result possible.
6) Just overall learning curve. Most don't want to mess with learning, and everything about gaming on PC is learning. Learning how to set up, to buy and install, to configure, to play, to find people. Unless "everyone is doing it" it's too much trouble.
7) The cost is going to throw off a lot of people. Yes, you can build/get a PC for cheap, but in-store options are sub-optimal and deciding between them is confusing. Setting things up for comfy couch is an additional layer of learning and and effort and costs that nobody in the store will be able to help them with.

I've been PC gaming since DOS text adventure games and even I still find consoles exceptionally simple and impulsive and fun compared to the trouble involved with PC, and the quality tradeoff really isn't that bad to me.
 
until you try to actually play games, then you are screwed having to deal with drivers, except now it might not have a fix yet

I haven't even upgrades my drivers on my win 10 install. Everything runs fine.

Man threads like these make me wonder what people are doing with their computers. Or if they're from 1999
 
I haven't even upgrades my drivers on my win 10 install. Everything runs fine.

Man threads like these make me wonder what people are doing with their computers. Or if they're from 1999


Oh I'm also from master race, I just don't think win10 is a good OS for gaming yet. For many it works perfectly but for others not so much. If a newcomer sees someone praise w10 as the third coming of XP and ends being one of the bad luck ones he wont be touching pc gaming ever again
 
Oh I'm also from master race, I just don't think win10 is a good OS for gaming yet. For many it works perfectly but for others not so much. If a newcomer sees someone praise w10 as the third coming of XP and ends being one of the bad luck ones he wont be touching pc gaming ever again

XP is fucking terrible. For better or worse, modern windows do their own care taking. Mostly better. Especially for people who aren't as familiar with computing.
 
XP is fucking terrible. For better or worse, modern windows do their own care taking. Mostly better. Especially for people who aren't as familiar with computing.

to today standards yeah XP sucks. Yet on this very page you can see it is above 8 on steam usage percentage.
I think in a few months, maybe half a year, that care taking will be awesome. Until then its just too coin-tossish
 
Why not just buy a console? The only thing PCs are good for gaming-wise are RTSs and MOBAs. MOBAs aren't even considered real games by the majority of gamers anyway.
 
PC gaming was in dire straits around 2009.

But luckily I saved PC gaming by igniting passion and imagination around the world with my screenshots.

2009-2012 was the era where I had to do the heavy lifting. Now things are more self-sustained but we have to remain vigilant.
 
Top Bottom