"PC industry is betting big on gamers", Gaming PC hardware >2x revenue console sales

It doesnt work that way, sorry.

The power of Hardware and the qualities of ports are like 2 different topics. Especially considering that the Bamtan port is a very damn rare exception.

Nope.

Many ppl i know had Witcher 3 on release day and had nothing but blue screen crashes along with many others. So it isnt rare sorry.

So it's not a different topic when someone clearly states that it is becoming more common when PC have better ports than console on relative hardware. Which is what i was referring too.
 
I had a rig that used that same cooler master case prior. The Antec ISK 600 is much smaller, especially if you can see the two side by side on a shelf at, say, fry's.

My ISK has an i7 4970k, a GTX 980, and a 256 gb SSD along with a 2 TB 7200 RPM HDD.

Hmm, I may have to swap cases then, I did wish the Elite 130 was a little smaller. Any issues with mounting your cooler? Room for water cooling?
 
Hmm, I may have to swap cases then, I did wish the Elite 130 was a little smaller. Any issues with mounting your cooler? Room for water cooling?

no room for water cooling, but assuming you route your wires carefully, the middle of the case is wide open for a typical cooler. The design of the ISK 600 is to mount everything onto the sides of the case and leave a core pocket in the middle of the case for the CPU to breath. The direction you mount the PSU directs the airflow.
 
Thats the reason why the PC is the platform for Indie games, exactly.

Expanding on that, the PC is the exact reason why many indie games ended up getting the support and exposure it needed to thrive else where. Look at Shovel Knight, it hit 312k when it was in its kickstarter campaign. Now look at it, it's on most systems, has an amiibo on the way as well as a sequel / side game.

Many indie companies are seeing this, more and more.
 
For the small form factor debate - I'm a huge fan of this prototype case and its form factor. With a paint job and maybe some tweaking of some edges, it would be perfect for me.

valve-steam-machine-100160491-orig.jpg
 
Nope.

Many ppl i know had Witcher 3 on release day and had nothing but blue screen crashes along with many others. So it isnt rare sorry.

So it's not a different topic when someone clearly states that it is becoming more common when PC have better ports than console on relative hardware. Which is what i was referring too.

Many people you know personally were getting BSODs while playing the Witcher 3? No wonder your view on PC gaming seems so skewed. By the way, blue screen crashes wouldn't have been directly caused by the game, it would have only possibly exposed some other issue with their system. In the case of the Witcher 3, i'd assume the vast majority of BSODs would have been caused by unstable overclocks but in those cases, BSODs would be rare. Most unstable overclocks would have just resulted in a graphics driver crash, then a crash to the desktop.
 
Nope.

Many ppl i know had Witcher 3 on release day and had nothing but blue screen crashes along with many others. So it isnt rare sorry.

So it's not a different topic when someone clearly states that it is becoming more common when PC have better ports than console on relative hardware. Which is what i was referring too.

Not to derail this and I'm not calling anything or anyone out, but those BSOD's were related to the gpu drivers, especially nvidia's at that time. There was a huge issue where rolling back was the only way to correct it, until nvidia came out with drivers.
 
Nope.

Many ppl i know had Witcher 3 on release day and had nothing but blue screen crashes along with many others. So it isnt rare sorry.

So it's not a different topic when someone clearly states that it is becoming more common when PC have better ports than console on relative hardware. Which is what i was referring too.

I... really dont understand you last paragraph, sorry.

It could be far more than currently.

So, once again. What exactly has that to do with the chain of quotes saying that "the majority percentage of revenue is seen by the minority of games"
 
I'm actually fairly partial to the Silverstone RVZ01 and RVZ02 cases, but that's because I want something that sits horizontal for my media room TV setup and fits full length video cards.
 
Need to see more console games on the PC.

They're slowing coming over. More fighters, japanese RPGs and action/adventure games. DMC got a re-release, MG:V, GTA5, MGSV, just to name a few. There's more and more being announced every month.

Though if I ever seen Persona or something that is super console exclusive come over, then you know the tide of change is upon us.

Edit - and just like that, Arcana Heart 3: Love MAX!!!!!! was announced for steam.
 
I guess but 750 ti can barely play witcher 3 on medium. I have a 760ti and I can barely get it to 30+fps on high. I can get that out of a console for cheaper price (most people have a PC for everyday use anyway). But I think f2p games and games like CS:GO, and lot of fps horror games are pushing the PC sales for sure, They dont require demanding specs and thanks to lets players they are extremely popular. I am sure minecraft alone brings in millions of players. and Can be played on a toaster.

Might be your CPU or motherboard that's holding your 760 back. My old system played the witcher 3 pretty well and I mean it was old from 2010. I had a 760 in it and it was very playable.
 
you can't, no way, in no EU country is this possible that I know of, 980 alone costs ~600€, 970 ~400€, unless you mean that kick ass PC is a videocard alone.

980 is overkill and the least cost efficient gpu if you don't count power per watt.


You only need a 950 or Radeon 285 to firmly have better than console performance.

60 fps 1080 p high settings.
 
It's a pretty good indicative number. It's about the same number as in 2012 when the recession started to hit.

Also, in 2012 the same Peddie research had in their figures that there was 54 million performance and enthusiast (1000 dollars and up) PC gamers worldwide.

I'm not sure but I think the other numbers where about 2-300 million mid-end, and about one billion casuals.
 
Having to spend more money more frequently will have that effect on sales figures.
 
Awesome in general, but this bit stood out to me

Why can't gaming PC look elegant and simple instead of ostentatious and garrish? I know there are custom PC case manufacturers who actually know how proper design works, but why is this "sports car" motif pushed by pretty much every big company?

For some reason PC manufacturers don't think gamers want a laptop that looks like a MacBook Pro.

Unfortunately, almost everyone wants a laptop that looks like a MacBook Pro. Some are paying attention, but most are not unfortunately. I don't know anyone old enough to pay for their own gaming laptop that wants the tacky bling shit...but the options are few if you have a preference for manufacturer and don't want a Sager/Clevo-based system.

Not to say that plenty of gamers don't want tacky bling with glowing lights everywhere. Some people still need to learn that sometimes less is more. But by and large, I think people would prefer something that looked mature but performed like a god with a nice, attractive logo on the back. You know, like a MacBook Pro.
 
It's more like PC hardware is getting 2x more expensive.

Goddamn video card prices!

At the same time, those expensive video cards seem to be lasting longer than they ever have though. Both in the "this shit breaks less often" and "this shit still plays my games pretty good" sense.


Lian-Li is hilarious in that their designs are either the most sleek, elegant chassis on the planet, or they're the most gaudy atrocities mankind has ever seen.
 
In a comparison of non-subsidized hardware to subsidized hardware, is comparing revenue really the best metric?
 
I guess there's a reason Sager/Clevo comes up in every gaming laptop conversation ever, even though they aren't the epitome of build quality or anything. People want something that, for a lot of people, is kind of a pain in the ass to get. And the rest of the market ignores that style.

And with those, we're not even talking about ultrasleek Macbook-esque hardware. You have to go out of your way just for plainness. Or more specifically, a lack of gaudiness.

Agreed. It's frustrating. I'd like to have a laptop capable of high-level gaming that I can take to the board room with me. Right now, that limits me to only a handful of options. None of which I trust all that much as far as brands and reliability goes.
 
In a comparison of non-subsidized hardware to subsidized hardware, is comparing revenue really the best metric?

Is anybody actually currently subsidizing hardware though? The PS4 was rumoured to cost less than $400 at launch and they've made significant cost reductions to the console since.
 
Awesome in general, but this bit stood out to me

Why can't gaming PC look elegant and simple instead of ostentatious and garrish? I know there are custom PC case manufacturers who actually know how proper design works, but why is this "sports car" motif pushed by pretty much every big company?

I'd say that Acer and Lenovo do a pretty good job with their laptops, though the best card you can get is a 960m. Hp does a pretty good job with their desktops. If you byo there are lots of classy options.
 
You also have examples like the PS3 and Dreamcast which were not saved from making royalties or having software, but because the actual systems were not profitable.

How much money did Sony earn through Blu-Ray royalties and such because the PS3 won the the Blu-Ray/HD DVD battle?

That won't appear in a profit report strictly talking about the gaming division, and is frankly so muddled I wouldn't even know where to begin.
 
At the same time, those expensive video cards seem to be lasting longer than they ever have though. Both in the "this shit breaks less often" and "this shit still plays my games pretty good" sense.



Lian-Li is hilarious in that their designs are either the most sleek, elegant chassis on the planet, or they're the most gaudy atrocities mankind has ever seen.
Gaudy?

nautillus-02.jpg


latest
 
Quite easy to spend $1500+ on a PC also depends where ya from too

So which is it?

You guys can't have it both ways. on the one hand consoel fanboys claim that no one has high end PC gaming gear, it's all integrated intel crap and low end desktops for us PC gamers.... and now, all of a sudden the story changes, and the reason the market looks to have huge revennues is because all PC gamers are rocking $1,500 PC's with SLI 970's.

Make up your mind console Gaf.
 
How do posts like these still happen

There's still a lot of people who are mis-informed and uneducated regarding actual builds. I feel that every time a new build is made, the pricing should be included for reference. I mean normal builds also, not over the top, 3x Titan and 3x 4k screen setups, mind you.
 
Nothing really surprising here.

Of course PC hardware revenue is going to surpass consoles as long as the two are even remotely close in number of consumers. Even a mid-tier PC is going to run around the same price as a console or more. But the 'mainstream' market is only about one third of PC gamers. The rest of the market is spending $1000+ on their rigs, when you include monitors and peripherals. So that's really just common sense when you consider all the variables.

But publishers still don't target PC for the most part. Why is that? Well, first is that it's much harder to target and market to PC gamers. When 'enthusiasts' and the like are almost 60% of the consumer base, they demand higher quality products and lower price points. A PC game can't be 'just as good' as its console counterpart, it must be better. Yet, the vast majority of PC sales don't come from the first few months when the game is $50-$60. (Or as low as $35-$40 at discount digital stores) They come over the entire lifetime of the product when it's selling for $20, $10, and $5. So even if a game sells as much or more on PC, the publisher actually makes significantly less revenue and profit from PC sales. The math is pretty simple. What's better, selling 3m units at an average consumer price of $45 or selling 6m units at an average consumer price of $15? Don't bother answering that, because it's not common for a PC game to sell double it's total console numbers, even over the entire lifetime of the product. Your typical AAA game sees somewhere between 50%-20% of their total sales from PC, even after a few years of $10-$5 sales.

Plus, PC gamers are spread out everywhere. The largest PC market is actually Asia, whereas the biggest console market is NA/EU. And what works for everything from marketing, to business models, to design standards in Asia doesn't necessarily work in US or Europe.

And, there is near-unlimited competition. If I release a game on PS4, I'm competing against other PS4 games - which is, comparatively, an extremely limited number of titles (even if you were to consider I'm also competing against, say, Xbox One games as well, it's still a relatively short list). If I release on PC, I'm competing against nearly every PC game ever made, many of which are $5 or less. I'm competing against League of Legends and World of Warcraft, as well as nearly every AAA port, as well as hundreds of thousands of indies, as well as free to play games, as well as games from 3, 5, even 10 years ago. The market is not only spread out geographically, but also across every genre, style and type of game. Consoles are a much more focused and cultivated market.

Then there's also compatibility and testing. With a console, you are targeting a known specification. On PC, who knows what the hell kind of a Frankenstein configuration the user has.

And until all that changes, or becomes easier for a publisher to swallow, PC ports are going to remain a secondary concern for most major AAA publishers.
 
Then there's also compatibility and testing. With a console, you are targeting a known specification. On PC, who knows what the hell kind of a Frankenstein configuration the user has.

I believe a large portion of the PC gaming community agrees with this and has always asked there a baseline configuration be met. Not this "minimum configuration" mess, as that is more of suggestion. It has to get to the point where it's you don't meet this configuration, so you can't play. It has to be enforced, no different than you can take your Xbox 360 disc and put it in a Xbox One.

This is without a doubt one of PC gaming's biggest issue.
 
Then there's also compatibility and testing. With a console, you are targeting a known specification. On PC, who knows what the hell kind of a Frankenstein configuration the user has.

And until all that changes, or becomes easier for a publisher to swallow, PC ports are going to remain a secondary concern for most major AAA publishers.

I believe a large portion of the PC gaming community agrees with this and has always asked there a baseline configuration be met. Not this "minimum configuration" mess, as that is more of suggestion. It has to get to the point where it's you don't meet this configuration, so you can't play. It has to be enforced, no different than you can take your Xbox 360 disc and put it in a Xbox One.

This is without a doubt one of PC gaming's biggest issue.
The whole purpose of mature APIs, standards, and cross platform middleware (engines, sound solutions, physics, whatever) is to make sure this is not a problem at all. The way you are talking about it is as if having gigabyte mothrboard A vs gigabyte motherboard B prevents you from playing a game and this causes devs a major headache. It has not been that was at all for quite some time. The whole standardisation of the PC industry that occured inthe last 20 years is devoid from your posts.

Rather, the only thing getting in the way for most people in terms of "configuration" compatibility is having the proper OS and fast enough hardware... not frankstein pcs..
 
Which is just a box. I wish there were more options that had a bit more personality... but without being shaped like a snail.

The In Win 901 mini-ITX has a nice mix of stylishness and sensibility that I always liked. Were it not made of glass I would get one myself:

DSC_0312_0.JPG
 
The whole purpose of mature APIs, standards, and cross platform middleware (engines, sound solutions, physics, whatever) is to make sure this is not a problem at all. The way you are talking about it is as if having gigabyte mothrboard A vs gigabyte motherboard B prevents you from playing a game and this causes devs a major headache. It has not been that was at all for quite some time. The whole standardisation of the PC industry that occured inthe last 20 years is devoid from your posts.

Rather, the only thing getting in the way for most people in terms of "configuration" compatibility is having the proper OS and fast enough hardware... not frankstein pcs..

There's a breadth of difference between APIs mitigating the issue and it 'not being a problem at all'. Anyone who's worked in cross-platform development can tell you it's still a major hurdle. Every major API and middleware component sees constant updates because it's still a fairly large problem. It's why Nvidia releases new drivers with almost every major game release. And half the time they don't work for a percentage of the user base.

With consoles, I know every single user can run my software if one of them can. That isn't remotely true for PCs, even today.
 
I guess there's a reason Sager/Clevo comes up in every gaming laptop conversation ever, even though they aren't the epitome of build quality or anything. People want something that, for a lot of people, is kind of a pain in the ass to get. And the rest of the market ignores that style.

And with those, we're not even talking about ultrasleek Macbook-esque hardware. You have to go out of your way just for plainness. Or more specifically, a lack of gaudiness.
Hmmn, regarding gaming laptop, which brands are better than Clevo based stuff? I'm using a Mac now (blah) as I have a gaming PC at home but I used to have a Sager laptop, loved the build quality. It was definitely better than whatever Asus or Alienware were offering at the time (860m era)
 
Top Bottom