Digg

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Valve's Doug Lombardi: PC Gaming Is Not Dying

shacknews.com — What does Valve think of the PC Gaming Alliance? Are they as tired of the PC gaming "problem" as we are? What is at the root of the issue, anyway? Read on for some answers.

Bury

liqker 142 days ago, made popular 142 days ago

992 diggs
digg it

273 Comments
Who Dugg It?
Blog It
Email It

mattyice11, on 05/23/2008, -5/+28Good read, but just give me the whole interview rather than trying to make me come back tomorrow to read the rest.
- SteveGibson, on 05/23/2008, -5/+1The second part of the interview is not related to PC Gaming at all.
- Woknblues, on 05/23/2008, -1/+4it was a good interview, and long enough to work across two articles to bring in more traffic I guess? Is that wrong?
  - mattyice11, on 05/23/2008, -0/+5Yes, it is wrong. The best way to get me to return to a site is by consistently posting good content, not by trying to string me along.
m4sterofmurd3r, on 05/23/2008, -6/+9Really interesting interview that raises a lot of good points about pc gaming
charlescheese, on 05/23/2008, -34/+16Wow you mean one of the biggest PC centric game makers with the best game digital game distribution systems out there thinks PC gaming isn't dead? In other news Oil execs don't see what the problem is with the oil industry.
- noobeffect, on 05/23/2008, -3/+41You mean one of the developers that actually chose to innovate the way PC Games are sold instead of whining about the market and going straight to console developing thinks PC Gaming is fine because their digital distribution software is actually working? Wow.
- MaxMWood, on 05/23/2008, -9/+10You had a good point, don't see why you are being buried. Obviously PC Gamer developers arn't going to say the industry is dead.
  - troglodytejb, on 05/23/2008, -2/+8Especially not when they're wildly successful, and their digital distribution system is kicking ass and taking names.
    
    He's absolutely spot-on about the perception problem. The NPD numbers are horribly misleading, and it leaves out some really solid numbers for making money. Do you know what the most popular games in HISTORY are? The Sims and WoW. Both PC games, both wildly successful in retail and DD.
    
    Unfortunately, valve doesn't release numbers on Steam sales, except in rare instances. HOWEVER, we can extrapolate based on the sales numbers they did release for Audiosurf and it's ranking in sales, and realize that they're selling a lot of games.
    
    And in many cases, PC developers DO say that PC gaming is dead (Epic SAID it, Infinity Ward has all but abandoned the platform-- CoD4 was a port from the 360 and lacks many features and has horrible patch support) and move to consoles. Piracy is an issue, and it's the companies that innovate that succeed. Steam is successful, and Sins of a Solar Empire is still rocking out in the NPD lists, DRM free. Consoles don't have the same issue, and don't require DRM innovation to be successful.
- Stupidumb, on 05/23/2008, -2/+3You're right, you can't be successful AND have an opinion on the industry, let alone a positive one. They should say PC gaming is dead, if if they think it's not and they have reasons for it.
- dbsmoker, on 05/23/2008, -7/+2Exactly what I was thinking, charlescheese. If he's anything like Gabe Newell then he's got a HUGE bias against the console market as well. PC gaming is in a HUGE slump but he'll never admit it.
  - eddie72, on 05/23/2008, -1/+1He's not though, they also released all their biggest successes on the console as well as the PC.
- heresy_fnord, on 05/23/2008, -1/+3What does the game industry and the oil industry have in common? If anything console gaming companies are more like big oil in the respect that console games stupidly cost more for the same or less refined product. Half-Life2 for the xbox was a horrible joke for example. Deus Ex was a brilliant PC game but the part 2 is console and PC and it's horribly stripped down and dumbed down for the dumb console market because you don't want to make it too hard.
  
  Ugh, me only know how go forward and jump and me only want one type of bullet because me think different ammo types too hard.
  
  $60 for a PS3 / xbox 360 game AND I get to pay for upgrades through a "live" marketplace AND I get to pay for new maps / vehicles / multiplayer / weapons / etc? AWESOME. Especially when PC games cost $20-50 and upgrades, addons, and multiplayer are all FREE (barring MMO's which are an exception to the rule).
  
  Jackass...
terminalpariah, on 05/23/2008, -12/+4Very interesting read. But check out the NPD top ten boxed PC games for May (so far):
http://kotaku.com/392601/npds-pc-sales-charts-may- ...
I'd love to see Steam's stats but Valve doesn't publish them. PC gaming isn't going to die and I think it'll accelerate, but I think the high-end gaming systems will go away. Most of those players have already spent their software budget on hardware. It's becoming a smaller and smaller niche.
I mean, nothing in the Orange Box pushed a computer that hard. You could definitely play it all on a cheap Dell from Best Buy. That's the market that you'll have to aim for to be successful.
- noobeffect, on 05/23/2008, -2/+9NPD doesn't take into account digital distribution sales (Steam, Direct2Drive), it also doesn't include subscriptions sales. They have however reported the value of the subscription based game market: http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_conte ...
  
  Valve reported in the past that the Orange Box sold more on the PC than on the consoles:
  http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/news/36952/The-Orange ...
  
  PC Gaming is fine.
  - terminalpariah, on 05/23/2008, -1/+2Half-Life isn't well known to console players. The box and the name aren't going to encourage many impulse buys, either. They would have had to call it "The Complete Half-Life" and run a TON of TV ads to get any traction on consoles.
- lacronicus, on 05/23/2008, -1/+12Seriously? You cited NPD stats for a comment about an article that goes to great lengths to explain why NPD stats are an inaccurate representation of PC game sales?
  - terminalpariah, on 05/23/2008, -2/+2Great lengths? It says that in Germany, PC games "crush" everything at retail. That's it. How about some stats? How many games get sold in total? I know that the most popular genres in Germany are management titles (Tycoon games, etc.) I expect that their list wouldn't look very different from the NPD figures.
    I know that digital distribution is kicking ass, but this guy controls the world's most popular DD system. He refuses to give any kinds of figures on how well these games are selling. Is it enough to say, "oh yeah, we're kicking ass, trust me." Do Steam sales of The Orange Box beat CoD4 on 360/PS3? I don't disbelieve it, but I'd like to know for sure.
- latova, on 05/23/2008, -0/+5RTFA
Varz, on 05/23/2008, -6/+32Shack: Do you guys ever get tired of the same old "PC Gaming Is Dying" stories?
Doug Lombardi: I mean, I think, we sort of laugh at it.

I'm sure anyone who actually plays PC games laughs too.

PC gaming isn't going anywhere, there may not be as many single player PC games out there nowadays but online games are becoming more and more popular. Games like CSS, COD4, TF2, SC, C&C3, BF2, BF2142, WoW etc.... all have massive amounts of players. Also, almost all gaming competitions focus on PC games, not console games.
- StealthTomato, on 05/23/2008, -17/+6'cept Brawl tournaments. And Halo tournaments (those are actually typically XBox-centric.) And anything DDR. And...
  - TVarmy, on 05/23/2008, -1/+5Gotta have my Brawl online (/sarcasm).
    
    PCs are inherently the best machines for online gaming. Complete with a full sized keyboard, and modern and versatile network equipment, it's just easier going online with a PC. Plus, no friend codes. And I don't care what Halo fanboys say. Mouse and keyboard are the best interface for a first person shooter, which is the funnest type of online game, so fun that it justifies using a fake word.
    
    Also, ever hear of stepmania? It's like DDR, but free and with the ability to use songs you actually like. But yeah, I understand the appeal of consoles. There's less to set up, and less to go wrong. However, I think PCs have a certain charm consoles will never have. PC gamers can really make their machines and their games their own, from minor things (custom sprays in shooters, updating components so that they can get a slightly better framerate, possibly enabling them to squeeze in one more kill) to huge things (total conversion mods, case mods). A lot of these things are possible to a certain degree on console games, especially the best ones, but you still get a walled garden feel from the consoles.
  - staticneuron, on 05/23/2008, -1/+4The reason why it'd funny is his company and its success is what makes the industry seem like it is a failure. PC sales have been declining for years now. The make up a 14% of sales and this is od because they used to take up a much larger percent. But people are using the numbers from NPD and other chart trackers and the numbers is skewed because they don't count valve's numbers or wow subscriptions.
    
    Does this prove PC "isn't" going down? Of course it doesn't. Thats like asking a blizzar employee if PC gaming is dead. Of course neither a valve employee or a blizzard employee can rightfully say so because they are doing well. But what about the others? If a few companies make up the majority of sales on any console or PC then it is NOT a good thing.
    
    I have never seen such a large denial. Pc sales went up 1% last year only to drop again this year.
- chanop, on 05/23/2008, -1/+12Go ahead and take cod4 off there. IW does not care about their PC user base anymore.
  
  correction......they're having a user-map contest, so they can sell the maps to the consoles....and won't ever release as official maps for pc
  - popfrogs, on 05/23/2008, -0/+1Yeah I think it blows that they had a public competition then sell us 3 maps for $10 on the PS3 and Xbox. It's not like they put their own time/effort/resources into those maps. I could be wrong, maybe IW made them, but what's the point of the public contest if they didn't?
    
    And if you think they don't care about PC users, try being a console user. Month after month glitches and bugs go unfixed, DLC comes late or not at all, etc. IW just sucks at supporting their game, period.
    - chanop, on 05/23/2008, -0/+3Those maps they release were the ones they made. They're currently still taking submissions for the map competition...... They're definately not taking care of either the consoles or PC the way they should, but they're especially screwing the PC. We haven't seen a patchin almost a year, let alone not getting any of the maps(which were made on a PC, so it would be easy ***** to just give it to us)
    - Biznarie, on 05/23/2008, -2/+1Plus theres no prestige on PC :'(
- BearinG, on 05/23/2008, -0/+7I mostly play consoles nowadays, and even I laugh at these claims.. sure consoles might have had a good last few years of expansion, which is great too, but in no way does that translate to "PC gaming is dying".
  
  Like Varz said, online games are getting a lot more attention now too and in most cases (if not all) the multiplayer experience will be on par and mostly better on the PC when you consider that you can usually have more players (maximum) on a server (not that this could not be done eventually on consoles) and the mod community is always strong..
  
  Anyone who is a bit "in the know" will not take these claims seriously.
- dn11, on 05/24/2008, -0/+1Help us Doug Lombardi, you're our only hope. In all seriousness some games will never be able to be played on console, and true innovation has always come from the PC. I think the difference going forward is that the PC needs to start innovating in the area of gameplay again and stop worrying about constantly pushing the edge on graphics. I want to see more lower budget games with unique concepts and less games that take 5 years to develop and require $1000 graphics cards.
MaxMWood, on 05/23/2008, -65/+23I hate to say it but PC Gaming is dying. I do own an Xbox 360, yes I would rather have a Mouse and Keyboard. But at the end of the day I cant afford a new PC everytime they bring out a stupidly specced game. Perfect example: Assassins Creed, runs fine on the Xbox so why does it have to require insane specs for a PC?

At the end of the day I think that most people just cant afford to update their PC all the time when they could spend a one off £300 tops on an Xbox and get most of the games they want.

On a side note WoW is so popular worldwide because it runs on high settings on my piece of ***** computer, plus its an amazing game really.
- theshizzler, on 05/23/2008, -3/+37I really think that needing a hugely tricked out PC for gaming is a myth. I've been building my own computers for years now, and I generally spend about $400-500 every four years, if that.
  - troglodytejb, on 05/23/2008, -0/+21Absolutely correct. An initial investment runs about $1000, and I average about $200 a year (in bursts every few years) to keep a machine that will run ANYTHING. You can go a LOT cheaper than I do, obviously.
    - BearinG, on 05/23/2008, -0/+4I do agree that its not that bad, but the experience on different PCs varies greatly though because of that. In a way its good because more people have access to one game with different degrees of quality, but then sometimes, you just can't be sure what to expect.
      
      I know my PC will run most if not all games but I know that some games, I definitely don't get the full experience because of the hardware or settings. I know you can tweak and I do, but sometimes its just annoying to spend 30 minutes installing a game, and then finding out that it runs pretty badly, having to go back and tweak etc..
      
      One thing I think should be included in all PC games, is some kind of benchmark (which i have seen) that evaluates your system and setups your game for optimal performance, for YOUR hardware. Not having to determine if its the trees that are stalling your machine or if its the shadows, or the terrain detail etc...
  - dbsmoker, on 05/23/2008, -9/+1Good luck playing something like Bioshock on your $400 PC. I'm sure it won't look as pretty as it does on my Xbox 360.
    - nonymous666, on 05/23/2008, -0/+9All that you need to do is take the money you'd spend on that Xbox and put it towards a graphics card.
      
      Everybody has PCs these days just for general use. The cost to make those PCs *gaming* rigs costs about the same as buying a gaming console.
    - theshizzler, on 05/23/2008, -0/+5Ahh...but Bioshock was the reason I upgraded most recently, last year. Sure, I reused a harddrive and the dvd drives, but Bioshock, Assassin's Creed, and Crysis look great and it'll handle anything else I might want for the next couple of years.
    - grumbel, on 05/23/2008, -1/+1@nonymous666: Yes, everybody has a PC now, what you however ignore is that many of those PCs are *old*. For just Internet and Office even a 10 year PC will do fine and you don't upgrade that by just sticking a graphics card in it. And even if you have a more current PC you may end up being stuck with one that can't be properly upgrade due to lack of PCI-e or AGP port (hint: lots of people by laptops these days).
  - oxdeltaxo, on 05/23/2008, -1/+3You can get a decent gaming rig fully loaded pre-built for about $600 nowadays. Upgrading ultimately costs less than buying a console every time they come out.
    
    Specifically an nvidia sli computer 3.0 ghz 2 gb of ram 300 gb hdd.
  - carlosos, on 05/24/2008, -0/+2I spend about the same amount as you theshizzler. My current PC was build in 2004 (Athlon 64 3000+) and the only upgrade that I have done since than other than hard drives (which isn't part of the gaming aspect) is a graphics card that died that needed to be replaced. If I had a console than I would have needed to replace the console even if just one part died.
    I can still run most games well enough with this PC (HL2, DOD:S, WiC, UT3, etc.). I have only installed one game that didn't run well enough (Supreme Commander) but I don't upgrade my PC just for one game. I will wait probably till about the end of this year or early next year before I will do my next upgrade that will probably be again in the 400-500 dollar range. I'm also not one of the people that buy a new console as soon as it comes out to play every new game, so why would I do the same with my PC just because one game that I wanted to play doesn't play so well?
- ortucis, on 05/23/2008, -11/+32I hate to say it, but you are a moron.
  - DarthTurducken, on 05/23/2008, -1/+2Maybe true, but I wish Digg comments were a little more articulate.
- latova, on 05/23/2008, -0/+9RTFA, they talk about the high requirements.
- ZeroFive1, on 05/23/2008, -2/+26Don't buy prebuilt computers.
  
  They suck.
  
  That might be your problem.
- masterkenobi, on 05/23/2008, -2/+27Real gamers build their own PCs. You can do incremental hardware upgrades over time afterwards.
  - popfrogs, on 05/23/2008, -4/+1Well, to a certain degree. PC manufacturers switch paradigms every few years to keep up with hardware. For example, the transition from one socket type to another (admittedly AMD is the biggest victim of this), transition from PC-133 to PC-3200, now DDR2 with DDR3 on the horizon, from AGP to PCI-Express, etc. etc.
    
    It's really tricky keeping up and since I got my PS3 I've found it's not worth it anymore. I got off the PC treadmill and couldn't be happier.
  - Biznarie, on 05/23/2008, -0/+3You don't always have to buy the latest thing to be able to play games well. Here are some decent AGP cards that are still available, http://www.tigerdirect.ca/applications/category/ca ...
  - grumbel, on 05/23/2008, -1/+1Yes, and there you have your problem, you have to be a "PC gamer" to play a PC game, most people don't care about games enough to go the extra route to build their own PC, they want games that just work, which is why consoles and World of Warcraft sells and Crysis not so much.
- Tempest261, on 05/23/2008, -1/+32You're only looking at one side of the cost: the core hardware.
  
  I own a 360 as well, but don't trick yourself into thinking that you're getting a deal with the hardware. They aren't subsidizing that cost for nothing. You need to take into consideration that console games cost $10, $20- sometimes up to $30+ more than their PC counterparts (even simultaneous releases) in order to compensate for that subsidy and make further profit from there.
  
  Then you have to pay for online service. And THEN, you're also paying for "bonus packs" and other DLC that is traditionally free on the PC.
  
  The key theme here is that you're paying a lot less up front for a console, but then they milk you for all you have as you pay for these little things. And then, when the next console comes out, you gotta buy this ***** (controllers, cables, other peripherals, etc.) all over again.
  
  He who thinks that console gaming is truly cheaper is a fool.
  - dbsmoker, on 05/23/2008, -7/+2I'd rather be spending money on games that I know will run properly than spend money on a video card that will only give me a slight performance improvement and will be out-dated in a few months. I'm done with PC gaming.
    - Woknblues, on 05/23/2008, -1/+3a slight performance increase? two of these in SLI will run pretty damn quick for $100 after rebates.........for BOTH
      http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8 ...
      
      or two of these after rebates in SLI for $260 for both.
      http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8 ...
      
      either choice would be night and day difference over a once respectable 3 year old 7800 gt...
    - Tempest261, on 05/23/2008, -0/+2I can understand where you're coming from, but I respectfully disagree. You have complete control over what resolution and graphics settings your games run at. For consoles, it's the developers that make that call, and often times they need to cut corners later in the lifecycle of the console (Halo 3 and GTA 4 (ps3 anyway) don't run at 720p). You're probably using a monitor that has a far higher res compared to your TV- I know my 1920x1200 (that's 1200p vs. 720p.. almost double the resolution) crams in quite a few pixels. The 360 would CHUG at this resolution.
      
      If you compare apples to apples, run all of your games at 1280x720, and fine tune the shader settings in your game, then you won't have a problem on the PC. The problem with this is that most people don't have that level of knowledge or self control, and that's how they fall into being strictly console gamers.
    - dbsmoker, on 05/24/2008, -0/+1Actually, I was using my HDTV. I was running all my games at either the native 1360x768 or 1280x720. Heck, that's not even true because only a handful of the games ran well at that resolution, like HL2, FarCry, FEAR, and Doom 3. But when new games came out, like Crysis, even though I was rockin SLI it still only ran at the lowest settings. Then it crashed, which is another reason I can't stand PC gaming, nothing is released as a finished product. Sure, they patch games on 360, but it's not nearly as bad. I used to love toying with settings and all, but believe me, I understand how video memory relates to screen resolution and all that, but I could run some games at 640x480 and not get a solid frame rate. That just blows. PC gaming is dead to me.
    - Slaco, on 05/25/2008, -0/+0Perhaps you should post your PCs specs?
    - Zyphron, on 05/27/2008, -0/+1And you should post whether you were playing a pirated version of Crysis. The majority of the reports of crashes on Crysis were found to be pirated copies, whereas the legal ones were quite stable...
  - happycat, on 05/23/2008, -2/+6Exactly. Funny how console gamers seem to ignore the fact that they need to purchase new consoles every few years, plus subscription, plus extra controllers, etc etc. All that to experience non-upgradeable mediocre graphics for years to come.
    
    Really, the only console worth getting is the Wii. After playing Oblivion and BioShock on my Xbox 360 thinking how wonderful they looked, I later played them on the PC and could not believe how much better they looked on a PC, and that's on medium-level hardware too. Since then I haven't turned on my 360 in months.
    - Tahiri, on 05/24/2008, -0/+2every 7 years or so. pcgaming costs far more. ps3 requires no subscription. and controllers? pcs dont even have local multiplayer
    - dbsmoker, on 05/24/2008, -0/+1When you buy a console, you KNOW it's going to play EVERY GAME RELEASED FOR IT!
  - Zyphron, on 05/27/2008, -0/+1I would like to hear from anyone on here who ended up spending LESS than 400 dollars when they initially bought an xbox.
    My first xbox buying experience:
    Console system - 350
    Extra Controller - 40
    Wireless adaptor - 75 (HOW CAN THIS COST THAT MUCH!?!?!?)
    Charging Kit - 20
    Total: 485
    THEN, I had to buy the games.
    Also, let me remind everyone that you all generally have a computer anyway. (you are on digg, and I doubt you are using a browser on a ps3/wii to post here) which at a minimum costs around 250-300. Instead of paying 300 bucks for a crappy computer, you could spend the money that you would spend on an xbox (lets just say 300) and get a decent computer. 600 bucks is fine to build a decent gaming rig now adays. If you need help with components, there are lots of websites out there that give guides on how to buy gaming computers on a budget.
- bobbarkerbilly, on 05/23/2008, -6/+7I'm sure the price you paid on your Xbox360 is probably the same, if not more, than what I spent on my last new video card. My video card before that lasted for a good two years.
  
  How long until you upgrade your Xbox360 to the next newest, and greatest system? One year?
  - Enochrewt, on 05/23/2008, -1/+3Uhh the 360 was released in 2005, next Xbox is supposed to be released in 2010. 5 years, not 1 year.
    
    And the next playstation won't hit shelves until 2012, Sony is doing a 7 year cycle.
    
    Nice try throwing in out arbitrary numbers.
    - bobbarkerbilly, on 05/23/2008, -1/+2Depending on if you stick to one brand or not, but if you're buying the newest systems, the gaps are few.
      
      North American release dates (various wikipedia sources):
      
      PS2 October 2000
      Xbox1 November 2001
      Gamecube November 2001
      Nintendo DS November 2004
      PSP March 2005
      Xbox360 November 2005
      PS3 November 2006
      Wii December 2006
      
      I'm sure there will be plenty more systems coming out between now and the PS3.
  - dbsmoker, on 05/24/2008, -1/+2I've had my 360 for three years and haven't had to worry wether or not it would play a game. It just does.
    - Darkx1337, on 05/27/2008, -1/+1Have fun dealing with rrod's. :P
    - Zyphron, on 05/27/2008, -1/+1I never "worry" about whether my computer will play a game. It is not all that hard to figure out. But then again, I am not a moron.
- Woknblues, on 05/23/2008, -2/+11I have had the "same" PC since 2004. The only original part in it is the HD and the case. everything has slowly been upgraded. Meaning, I have spent about $1300 in the past 5 years, or $260 per year to have a competent computer to play any game that I was interested in. Also, all of the old parts went into "new" computers that were either used by my girlfriend, or my mother... I got out of gaming around the time I reentered school, and now that computer is way more powerful than I really need, so it will likely serve me for another 2-3 years at zero cost, putting my total contribution from the day I first bought it, to the day before I buy my next complete set up in 3 years at $185 per year, and 3 functional computers, (though the 2200+AMD/fx5600 system is showing it's age, it is fine for mom's word processing and image/music, and the XP3000 with a gt6600 plays WoW just hunky dory, and my current 3800X2 with a 7800 gt and 3 gigs of ram blasts through hardy64 like a hot knife through butter. so, three PC's, $1300, 7 years.... thats like $1300/3 computers/7years= $61 per year, per PC.
  
  Or to put it in another way, every time I get a new part, like a video card, 3 PC's get a large upgrade. Do that with a console.
  - Wartz, on 05/23/2008, -0/+3You just described my house.
  - dbsmoker, on 05/24/2008, -1/+1I hate Windows, so that wouldn't cut it for me.
    - Woknblues, on 05/25/2008, -0/+1who is using windows?
    - Zyphron, on 05/27/2008, -0/+1How does talk about upgrading systems automatically imply windows?
- haterofps3, on 05/23/2008, -2/+10Just so we are all clear the reason you believe that PC Gaming is dying is because you can't afford it anymore?
  
  Self centered much
  
  PC games have to be designed to work on all sorts of different types of hardware while the XBOX360 is a single platform to develop for.
  
  WoW's popularity has nothing to do with the piece of ***** computer you are using(probably why Assassins Creed is sluggish)
  
  In the end you need to shut up and not spread your retarded slander.
  - Andrwmorph, on 05/23/2008, -5/+3Yeah! How dare he slander your precious PC with his opinion!
    - haterofps3, on 05/23/2008, -0/+2That is all it is an opinion it is not fact it has no basis in fact, thus he is slandering and being a fanboy.
      
      I did not bad mouth the consoles why would I, I paid for them why would I bad mouth something I bought and didn't return?
      
      He stated that his PC was ***** so how is a ***** PC a good benchmark for the quality of a platform?
- crackedlogic, on 05/23/2008, -0/+10I own a PS3 and a wii, I also used to have an xbox 360. I've spent above and beyond more time gaming on my pc than all 3 of those systems combined.
- digdig, on 05/23/2008, -0/+10The cost factor is not really an issue with PC gaming. You can invest $1000 in a rig that will last you 3 years. However you are also getting a computer. A computer that you can use to perform other functions than games. You can do homework, design stuff, chat to friends, you know the regular computer stuff. Yes a console costs less. However you are buying a proprietary platform that can usually play a limited a library of games and perform a limited variety of functions. With a PC you have access to any game that came out since DOS days, and more through emulators and mods.
  
  Lets take a 360.
  
  Console: $350
  3 Extra Controllers: $120 - You need em if you have friends.
  3 Years of Xbox LIVE: $120 - Need it when your friends are away
  Wireless Networking Adapter (a must in my situation): $87 - Need it cause wired networking is so 1998
  
  Total without games for 3 years: $677
  
  Now in order to get a 360 I would also need to get a nice HDTV and some games. Total after all that prolly would be 2 grand. So I pay 2 grand and in return I get a white box that can play games. ONLY GAMES. Well an occasional DVD as well.
  
  How sweet.
  
  If you prefer to turn off your brain and just play some games. Consoles are great. However if you want more options and flexibility you choose PC. But please dont whine about the "cost".
- TVarmy, on 05/23/2008, -0/+4I disagree, actually. I'd say these things move in a sine wave of sorts. Late in a console generation's cycle, PC games look better, and a reasonable PC (~$500-600) that will last a good 4-5 years will out perform any console. Then, a new console comes out which is heavily subsidized by the manufacturer in hopes of selling games that are licensed. It looks much better than a PC for the same price, but its configuration never changes. About a year or two after, a few simple upgrades to the PC (graphics card and/or ram) which don't cost much will bump up the PC to better quality than the console.
  
  If you're frugal, the two break even. Of course, you can spend a lot with a console (buying every stupid peripheral for the thing, get a ton of controllers, buy the version with the big, marked up hard drive, buy a second console for exclusive titles, etc) or a PC (top of the line graphics cards/cpus, physics processors, liquid cooling). Overall, I think I prefer PCs because they're easier to modify to suit your needs, both in terms of hardware and software. However, something like the Wii is hard to resist for it's uniqueness, so I bought one this generation. Plus, the price was right.
- ShawnD, on 05/24/2008, -0/+0sorry bud, but if you haven't noticed, Age of Conan is on fire right now, and GPU sales are through the roof. Right now, the PC offers an outstanding lineup. The only thing that's going to die is your Xbox 360 in about 3 years when MS replaces it and you have to buy another.
  
  PC Gaming is in obvious transition, but it's certainly not dying. I also don't think non-PC Gamers can even gauge the community on PC, which is massive
n0odles, on 05/23/2008, -15/+35Because Crysis may look shinny, but is a ***** game. I still play old Valve games like Day of Defeat.
- MaxMWood, on 05/23/2008, -10/+9How do you know if Crysis is *****? No one can run it.
  
  But on a serious note, yes it is *****. The demo was a big pile of penis, and it's just Far Cry but you play as some superhuman ironman type guy. Wank.
  - reconflux, on 05/23/2008, -4/+1Because we all know we can judge a game by the demo like COD4... .right....
- renegadeafk, on 05/23/2008, -2/+18I thought crysis was an alright game, sort of average but fun. I wouldn't say it's a "bad" game.
- LMN8R, on 05/23/2008, -7/+14How the ***** did this ***** of Crysis being a ***** game start? My god, cut the ***** hyperbole already. Was it the best shooter ever released? No, not by a long shot. But was it a great game in its one right, with tons of open-ended options, a fantastic presentation, and great gameplay? Yes. Yes it was.
  
  Just another case of "the supermodel is hot so she must also be stupid." If Crysis' graphics were on par with an Unreal Engine 3 game instead of completely blowing them away at every turn, I swear, none of this hate would exist.
- SOS84, on 05/23/2008, -2/+16Crysis is a great game. In all honesty, the first time through, I thought it was fairly average, pretty, but average. The second and third time through when I started getting creative is when the fun really kicked in. This game has real replay value, and along with Portal, was the greatest game released in 2007 for any system, period.
- ho0ber, on 05/23/2008, -5/+4Meh, I agree with n0odles. Crysis just got lame after a while. Once you figure out a few tricks, you end up doing the same thing over and over and over.
  
  The other issue is simply hype. The engine only half-lived up to the hype. It looked amazing, but it was challenging to get running smoothly on even the target requirements. The gameplay itself only half-lived up to the hype as well, as it was only fun for about half of the game before I got bored.
  
  If you guys still think it is a great game, then I guess I owe it another shot sometime when I'm not expecting more from it, but I felt pretty let down.
  - Wartz, on 05/23/2008, -1/+7'Once you figure out a few tricks, you end up doing the same thing over and over and over."
    
    maybe you should, you know, use your brain and try something new?
- eyefork2, on 05/24/2008, -0/+4Why does every game have to be ***** or badass? Can't it just be an average game, like entertaining for the most part, but not something you'll be running to tell your friends about.
- Zyphron, on 05/27/2008, -1/+1I would put Crysis on the same level as I do Halo. It is an average shooter with nothing really amazing on innovated, but also nothing really bad or wrong with it.
  The high system requirements are what annoys people the most, but honestly, that doesn't really bother me. It just means they sell fewer copies since not as many people can run it. If you cant run it, wait till you upgrade your computer a year or two down the line, then pick up Crysis from the bargain bin.
sk11, on 05/23/2008, -3/+14"It is absolutely a perception problem. I mean one of the things that happens is--Microsoft has an army of PR people that work for Microsoft. They have at least two agencies that are additional armies."

Hmm, I wonder if any of them are active at digg?
/rhetorical question.
sk11, on 05/23/2008, -0/+89"Gameplay is king, performance is second, and graphics are somewhere after that. People have said to us, you know, Portal is cool, but it wasn't the prettiest game. Well, okay, it sold a whole lot, it was named game of the year by over 30 outlets, and many of the people who played it told me they finished it and had a great time. I would much rather have that than have people tell me it was the prettiest game that came out last year."

Awesome stuff. Completely agree.
- hexydes, on 05/23/2008, -0/+4Portal is one of the only two games I played through to completion (the other being Call of Duty 4) in the last five years or so. Whatever it is about it, Valve got it right. Also, it doesn't hurt they released the standalone game at $19.99, available now at Circuit City for $9.99. I'm sorry, but $50 is too much for a game (I rarely buy console games for the same reason). If games were in the $10-20 range, I would probably be buying one or two per month; as it is now, I buy maybe 3-4 games per year.
  
  P.S. Why isn't Portal available for the Wii?! It's literally the perfect platform. I already own the PC version, and would instantly buy it again for the Wii, and play all the way through.
- BearinG, on 05/23/2008, -2/+3I agree, but it can be both fun AND pretty...
  - sk11, on 05/23/2008, -1/+2It's not fun or pretty if your computer isn't powerful enough. Don't ignore performance.
    - palehorse864, on 05/28/2008, -0/+1Then they need to make it scale down. Crysis for example scales down really well. Everybody just feels they need to run it on very high, which is more for future proofing the game to look good later (Though I can play it in that mode now)
- battletrax, on 05/23/2008, -0/+3Very true. Id prefer a fun game over a pretty one any day.
- dn11, on 05/24/2008, -0/+1But portal actually looked pretty good IMO, and the art direction was perfect..
LimeParrot, on 05/23/2008, -7/+13That's a cool picture of Gordan Freeman...
- TVarmy, on 05/23/2008, -0/+1I don't remember him looking so muscular. I always thought of him as a trim scientist type. No, this isn't player insertion. I'm a fatass :(
  - housemaster49, on 05/23/2008, -1/+0I believe on some of the wikis about half life it described him as "wiry". meh i dont care...
MikeMigs, on 05/23/2008, -6/+34If XBOX360/PS3 came out with keyboard/mouse I feel as if it could steal some loyal PC Gamers
- caLt, on 05/23/2008, -1/+10afaik, ut3 on ps3 supports keyboard and mouse. I home more games follow it. (Maybe Bioshock on ps3, which uses the same engine?)
  - caLt, on 05/23/2008, -3/+2*I hope*, not home..
  - Matt2k, on 05/23/2008, -0/+3I would love more keyboard and mouse support on consoles.
    
    Nintendo has shown us that the interface is an often overlooked, and important part of the whole experience. If Nintendo (or anyone) would just come out with an immersive motion tracking head mounted display, I could finally get that feeding tube I always wanted and never move from the chair. Can you imagine a game like GTA with a headset and a wiimote?
  - TVarmy, on 05/23/2008, -0/+2Halo 3 needs an adapter for keyboard and mouse support, and it's not officially supported :(
- MaxMWood, on 05/23/2008, -2/+1Well someone who was connections could get a company who could make that possible.. to make that possible.
  Something similar does exist but its only got old connectors (Non USB - I cant remember the exact name, might be PS2) and it's actually impossible to set up and work properly. So it would need easy configuration.
- Fuzi, on 05/23/2008, -6/+1I use to be a big fan of pc gaming since the quake era and i loved upgrading every 2 years or so but recently I gave away my computer rig to my family and now just have my consoles and a laptop... and I don't miss it one bit.
- bigbadgoat, on 05/23/2008, -0/+3as caLt said,
  
  the PS3 dev kit allows devs to use keyboard and mouse as a control option. Its all up to the developers, though.
- TVarmy, on 05/23/2008, -0/+2I'd like that, but the big problem is that consoles tend to live in the living room, not the desk. So, you'd need to find a good place to put the keyboard and mouse. I remember seeing the Phantom's lapboard and thought it looked cool, but I don't know how well it'd work in practice. Coffee tables aren't that good, either, because you'd need to be really hunched over to play it.
  
  Oh yeah, and there was one company that made a dual shock controller complete with a trackball for moving the camera. That looked like a good option, because it would adjust visibility precisely rather than trying to approximate what the user wants from jerking an analog stick. (What she said.)
- BearinG, on 05/23/2008, -0/+2I'm just wondering, do people use joysticks or gamepads for some PC games ?
  
  I understand that for all FPS and Strategy, it would just be an handicap but what about other games? I'm just curious, the only gamepad i ever had for my PC was a Gravis Super NES clone.
  - stuffradio, on 05/23/2008, -0/+1Gamepads are useful for Sports games like the NHL series
  - CorrosiveMan, on 05/23/2008, -0/+1I'm using the xbox360 controller to play Dirt on windows. It's way better than a keyboard it can still be used to play other kinds of games.
  - carlosos, on 05/24/2008, -0/+1I was using gamepads already with DOS games. You needed that for some games and especially if you wanted to play on a split screen with friends (sometimes used two mice instead of gamepads).
    I use gamepads now much less because of online play or network play instead of split screen but some games still are more fun with the gamepad.
- eddie72, on 05/23/2008, -2/+1The PS3 already has mouse/keyboard support out of the box I have a Bluetooth keyboard w/ a built in tracking pad. I like playing on it but I still play my PC games too. You can surf on it, download and play music on it along with movies and play games as well as check e-mail. But still there are PC games out that I still play and still buy on the day they are released as well as some console games.
  
  Places like Worst Buy and other stores pretend PC gaming is dead and so others think it is too as this ups their sales on their consoles and their low end PC's for the old folks. So it completely helps businesses like that and those businesses pretend that PC gaming is dead to up their own profit margin.
  - Kmap, on 05/23/2008, -0/+1You can play music, watch videos, play games, browse the web and check email on a ps3.
ElAssoWipo, on 05/23/2008, -15/+6All I know is:

I USED to be a pc gamer. Every friend I have at work USED to be a PC gamer and my kids have absolutely no interest in Pc gaming.

All of us are on consoles now.

The worst part is, I would still much prefer to play with a mouse and keyboard. But the cost of a good gaming rig just isn't worth it anymore. In the last years I was playing, the games just plain sucked and there were very few interesting titles. I just plain got bored and bought a console.

I got about 9 games I like to play on any given day with the console. With the PC I'd play the same game for months until something else interesting showed up.

And my last PC cost 600 instead of 2,000.
- ssn697, on 05/23/2008, -4/+1One word is going to get me back playing PC Games: Spore
  
  My son still plays a few PC games, but the console has won.
  - StealthTomato, on 05/23/2008, -0/+6You mean the console has won in your household. It's not necessarily true for others.
    
    And I don't think you're refuting his argument very well by only naming one PC game. That's exactly his point; according to him, there is usually only one high-profile title worth mentioning at a time.
    - ssn697, on 05/23/2008, -1/+2I think that is exactly what I said. Are you just repeating my comment for me? Yes, in my house, the console has won. But, We have a high end PC, because their are a few games we like to play.
      
      I wasn't trying to refute his argument. I think you need the weekend off...
  - renegadeafk, on 05/23/2008, -0/+11You can build a fine gaming rig for 600...
    
    My PC cost 600 and I can play crysis on high fine at 1440x900
    
    5000+
    4GB RAM
    9600GT
    250GBHDD
    
    If you spend 2000 on a pc you have a lot of money to blow or you're an idiot.
- Zyphron, on 05/27/2008, -0/+1I actually don't understand the games point at all. Most games at this point are being release cross platform, and PC has always had the biggest cross section of games. This generation has actually been the first where the PC is lagging, often it would be PC and one console (such as with oblivion) or one console and then PC (such as with GTA:III through San Andreas)
  
  Add to that the PC Gaming exclusives, or titles that are released on console, but are not quite as good (UT3, Quake wars, Crysis, Orange Box) and you have a ton of reasons for PC.
  
  As for cost, if you paid 600 dollars for your last PC, why are you complaining? You need a PC (you are reading THIS on a PC, are you not) which has to cost at least 300, and you bought an xbox, which costs at least 300. 300+300 = 600... I don't get how that costs too much.
duggtodeath, on 05/23/2008, -0/+80At least PC users don't have to whine about backwards compatibility, useless peripherals or paying for the privilege of playing online with 12-year old racist homophobes.
- ho0ber, on 05/23/2008, -3/+9Instead we get to whine about games sometimes just not liking our systems, punkbuster not updating, and *maybe* paying for the privilege of playing online with hacking 12-year old racist homophobes.
  
  Still better than the former, though.
  - getbusyliving, on 05/23/2008, -0/+3Depends on if you play WoW. If so I guarantee you'll be playing with a majority of 12-year old racist homophobes.
    
    I love WoW but the community is awful.
    - oxdeltaxo, on 05/23/2008, -0/+4Start playing on the horde, the kids always play on alliance.
    - Wartz, on 05/23/2008, -0/+5the idea in any game with factions is start playing on the "uncool" side.
Kamael, on 05/23/2008, -3/+21This has happened before, and will happen again. It's a cycle. When the PS3 & 360 graphics get outdated in 3 years, the PC gaming will get more steam again... (no pun intended)... and when the new consoles arrive, the same thing will happen...ppl will say that PC gaming is dead.

I'm quite happy with my new 9600GT, and there are good titles coming (Starcraft 2, Mafia 2, Mass Effect, Spore, GRID, just to name a few).

The only title from consoles that I want on PC is GTA IV, and that will happen sooner or later, imho,.
- sodade, on 05/23/2008, -1/+11"The only title from consoles that I want on PC is GTA IV, and that will happen sooner or later, imho"
  
  sure, and just like GTA SA, the PC version will be filled with the same crappy console functionality like having to go to a disc to save the game and 4 fixed view settings rather than a PC style zoom. Console gaming conventions are ***** lame.
  - BearinG, on 05/23/2008, -1/+1"...having to go to a disc to save the game and 4 fixed view settings"
    
    Seriously, are those your only gripes? Cause that seems pretty minimal.. anyhow, what does going to a disc to save have to do with consoles? You can save anywhere in Oblivion, and it was on both PC and consoles.. I'm pretty sure Bioshock too..
  - Aplmf, on 05/23/2008, -0/+2Don't forget the buying of clothes, that really sucked. On pc it was bad but on ps2 it was really horrible because of longer loadings. I just finished the story line again on my new pc and it was great, on ps2 there are some framerate problems and it doesnt look very good, also bully, great game but it has some serious framerate issues.
    Bottom line is i like my ps2 but when the game is not optimized it pisses me off i cant do anything about it PC > consoles
    And to the article - I love valve,
  - Zyphron, on 05/27/2008, -0/+1PC Games do not believe in limited save functionality. The idea of save points, or going to an area to save is something consoles came up with and it is dumb.
    Games such as Oblivion and Morrowind come from the Elder Scrolls series which started on the PC.
    
    If they were to adopt those silly console stuff, the community would have bitched up a storm that they dumbed it down for consoles. Actually, the community STILL bitched that they dumbed it down for consoles, but the dumbing was minor enough that most people just kinda lived with it.
- ZeroFive1, on 05/23/2008, -0/+6All the good PC game companies understand that their games should be playable. For example, WoW may look a bit crappy, but runs on most systems. Same with Portal.
  - Lazydriver, on 05/23/2008, -0/+3I think WoW itself - the buildings, the landscapes, the sky especially- look gorgeous even today, minus the player models & weapons, oh, and the repeatability of the WarCraft buildings. McCastles and McTents are like real life McMansions instead of being individually made and cared for.
    - ho0ber, on 05/23/2008, -0/+2The attention to detail in WoW is really phenomenal, especially as far as landscape and building design and layout goes. Mmmmm, I could go for a McTent right about now.
    - BearinG, on 05/23/2008, -0/+2I think WoW looks that good too because you can max out all the settings and still have very smooth gameplay.
      
      I think its a little "old" in style but fits perfectly for the game.. nothing wrong with that.
- duggtodeath, on 05/23/2008, -0/+5Yeah, a PC version of GTA IV should be a guarantee. The series started on the PC and the versions of 3, Vice City, and San Andreas were excellent titles kept alive by endless mods. SA even had multi-player on the PC!
ColorBlind, on 05/23/2008, -10/+11I play outside....
- dondara, on 05/23/2008, -3/+3By yourself I bet. But being tan and thin gets chicks so you are way ahead there. Enjoy it.
- ho0ber, on 05/23/2008, -1/+3Noob doesn't have a computer!
  
  ...wait
imabot, on 05/23/2008, -6/+10Here's a view from outside the western world, where consoles/HDTV are bloody ***** expensive. Seriously, all developers or publishers rather see ***** loads of money from their console deals compared to giving a ***** about PC gamers, its not like they USED A PC TO CREATE THE GAME!..oh wait, THEY ***** DO.

a Wii costs as much as a Xeon 3350.
a 360 costs 3times are much as a Wii, and the PS3 alittle bit more. And thats not to mention a blue-ray disc C2D E2200.

They just want money, thats the bottom line, and they want all of it. Its not like they give a ***** on whats going on OUTSIDE their target audience's country. So here's a big GO ***** YOURSELF to all those developers.

I'm sorry to go completely off topic, but being void of games/technology is not fun. At all.
- SLD89, on 05/23/2008, -0/+1of course they don't care about their outside target audience....they care about the people that will make them a profit. that what company's are in the business for. profit. thats it nothing else.
- colincornaby, on 05/23/2008, -2/+3A 360 costing 3 times as much as a Wii? What part of the world are you in? The 360 is only $50 more than a Wii...
  - HolyChimp, on 05/23/2008, -0/+2Or less than a Wii in Europe!
  - imabot, on 05/24/2008, -1/+2A stupid backward ass third world country run by ***** religious idiots.
Misinformant, on 05/23/2008, -0/+13PCs may slump but they'll never die. FPSs, RTSs, complex RPGs (every RPG not made in Japan) and MMOs will always need a home and said home will never be on a console.
- Fuzi, on 05/23/2008, -1/+1with hard drives on consoles and if keyboard/mouse gain a wider acceptance on it .. you will see those genres hitting the consoles.
  
  FF11, COD4, several RPGS on consoles that arent J-RPG
  - Lazydriver, on 05/23/2008, -0/+6You ever try using a keyboard and mouse on the couch? It ain't easy!
  - Misinformant, on 05/23/2008, -0/+4The only people playing CoD4 on xBox are people who don't have a computer that can handle the PC version. FF11 just blows.
    
    And the only good console RPGs I can think of off the top of my head that weren't from Japan are Mass Effect (which, while awesome, was just as much a 3rd-person-shooter as it was an RPG) and Skies of Arcadia which I remember being stunned to learn was an American game considering it looked like 'hyper-dynamo anime explodeytime' threw up in there.
    
    Both great games though.
    - Wartz, on 05/23/2008, -0/+3mass effect on the 360 lagged worse than crysis on my $600 PC
macweirdo42, on 05/23/2008, -0/+9The only way in which PC gaming lags behind console gaming is in the high variability of systems. When you buy a console game, unless it's a ***** game, you know you're not going to have to worry about things like framerate issues, and you just don't have that luxury on the PC. That said, that problem has existed since the dawn of PC gaming, and it's always done fine.
JosefH, on 05/23/2008, -13/+1TL;DR
freezerburn666, on 05/23/2008, -0/+14i've never been more into pc gaming than i am right now. i finally have a pc that can play all the latest games, and i have way more NEW games than i ever did for consoles. my desktop is full of game icons. why are people saying its dead anyways? new games are constantly coming out for pc, and they are really good, whether they are pc ports of console games or not.
- latova, on 05/23/2008, -0/+6They say its dead because companies like Epic and Ubisoft are making ***** console ports and releasing them on PC and blaming it on piracy and pc gaming being dead when their game doesn't sell well as a scapegoat. Meanwhile companies like Blizzard and Valve are sweeping in and cashing in on the PC gaming fanbase by making quality games while the ***** developers whine.
TremorX, on 05/23/2008, -19/+1Doug Lombardi: Sky is most certainly green, grass probably orange, Hillary to be president.
HubbertWins, on 05/23/2008, -0/+15Gameplay and great graphics are not mutually exclusive.
- BearinG, on 05/23/2008, -0/+2but its possible to have both so why not.. Performance and Reliability in cars are not mutually exclusive..
  
  Crappy voice-acting can ruin a great game..
  
  I still agree with your point, but today, PCs can handle way more than they used to so there's no need to sacrifice very much anymore..
- stockjones, on 05/24/2008, -0/+1Its not that you cant have both. Great graphics are wonderful, but far too many console games are eye candy with mediocre gameplay.
dalittle, on 05/23/2008, -0/+9I have always thought the "PC games are dying" myth was being pushed by the console manufactures (PS2, Xbox, etc) to push their lock-in DRM laden crap. Even though it may not be true, if they can convince a bunch of naive people to buy consoles, because they believe this then they get a few more people they can gouge. If they don't build it for the PC it must not be worth playing for the games I typically like.
- Zyphron, on 05/27/2008, -0/+1That is a really great point. Why is it that the people on this board, who normally hate closed systems controlled by "The Man" (see RIAA/MPAA) love things like consoles and Apple.
  
  Now, I own an iPod, and I own an X-Box 360/Wii, but I would much rather I could get a great music player that was part of an open system. I also would love it if all the games available for those systems were available for others as well. Why do you fanboys support a closed, DRM based, corporate controlled system? I tolerate it, but I wish it were different.
killdashnine, on 05/23/2008, -13/+2Thank you Doug Lombardi!

PC gaming always gets a bad rap, but to be blatantly honest PCs can produce the most vivid and exciting experiences over any console. The problem is the pricetag ... the video card for a smoking computer costs upwards of $500, making the machine expensive as hell.

I have all systems, PC, Wii, XBOX 360, PS3 and of all of them I have to say that the PC is better quality. The PS3, however, is one hell of a kick ass machine. I'm not impressed with the 360 as far as noise and heat, and the Wii is just plain fun.

On another note, Steam still sucks.
- ZeroFive1, on 05/23/2008, -0/+10God, I wish people stopped saying every half decent graphics card cost 300 upwards. There are plenty of good graphics card around $100. Computer parts get exponentially more expensive as they get better. Don't shoot for the bleeding edge and you won't break your wallet.
- latova, on 05/23/2008, -1/+4Steam used to suck. Now its really nice. You can chat in games, see what your friends are doing, manage all your games, keep games up to date, eliminates need for any physical media to play the game, and so on.
  
  And don't give us the money excuse. First, you obviously have money since you managed to buy every console. Second, everybody has a PC anyway, so you can at least play about 95% of the games out there right now as it is. If you choose to upgrade you typically upgrade your computer regularly anyway, and at that point you have access to all the games you've been missing out on (consider them launch titles for your new PC).
  - killdashnine, on 05/26/2008, -0/+1No, Steam still sucks .. particularly if you try to do any kind of LAN-based event. I like some things about it, but XFire does most of that too. It's a resource hog and still needs to be refined.
    
    I think you all missed my point though about PC hardware. As compared to console systems, your PC is going to be more expensive, particularly if you have a decent one.
- bobbarkerbilly, on 05/23/2008, -0/+4You don't need a bleeding edge card to get great graphics. The options are out there, but be smart about your purchases. A 8800GT will now cost you between $150-200 and plays most games at the highest settings.
Panda200x, on 05/23/2008, -1/+22Valve FTW.
richito, on 05/23/2008, -2/+2damn... he's good!
BryanG412, on 05/23/2008, -3/+4I didn't like how he essentially measured the success of PC gaming by the popularity of Wow.
- technoticau, on 05/23/2008, -1/+4he didn't, so you should be happy
- futimazar, on 05/23/2008, -0/+3Did you even read the article or just one of the pulled out quotes? He cited WoW as one particular example of one huge revenue stream not reported in NPD data. It also represents one example of a highly devoted fan base that existed for years which doesn't exist on consoles. He then lists or alludes to like 10 other reasons that demonstrate the success of PC gaming. Try reading the article.
jbeardsl, on 05/23/2008, -2/+9PC gaming > ( console gaming * 10 )
TheHayze, on 05/23/2008, -1/+8Who said PC gaming is dying? I think both console and PC gaming is still kinda, you know.. staying strong.
SOS84, on 05/23/2008, -0/+12It is all about perception. Hardware costs are at their lowest all time level. Building a computer is ridiculously easy. Insert tab a in slot b easy. they are basically infantry proof. Newegg's advanced search feature makes it easy to pick components that are compatible. Then there is the PC audience, which is different. PC gamers want great games with great stories, complex and challenging game play, something that most consoletards do not care about. PC gaming is hear to stay and will hardware prices at record lows, it is actually increasing in market size.
- omikun, on 05/23/2008, -0/+3Infantry proof?
  
  But yeah I hear ya, PC gaming all the way! (especially for people like me that don't have TV's)
cubicledrone, on 05/23/2008, -7/+5So what's World of Warcraft making every 60 seconds now?

'nuff said.
- Lasereth, on 05/23/2008, -7/+1When my friend's mom and grandma play WoW it's not a PC game anymore.
  - Lazydriver, on 05/23/2008, -1/+3No, it's a PC game still. It just appeals to all audiences, which is as it should be. Icebreakers like WoW and The Sims can lead people into playing more PC games.
- MemeWarrior, on 05/23/2008, -0/+3Around $4,000
a1lazydog, on 05/23/2008, -0/+8"People have said to us, you know, Portal is cool, but it wasn't the prettiest game. Well, okay, it sold a whole lot, it was named game of the year by over 30 outlets, and many of the people who played it told me they finished it and had a great time. I would much rather have that than have people tell me it was the prettiest game that came out last year. "

Amen
LMN8R, on 05/23/2008, -2/+34Anyone that is a "PC Gamer" and is older than oh....13...might remember a time when he or she would enjoy many things about PC games that could not be found anywhere else.

Things like....higher resolution...60+ FPS frame rates...online game play...patches...add-ons...and so on.

Any of these advantages were, however, GARBAGE to the hardcore (typically single console owner) console gamer.

How I remember such arguments as "PC games need patches!" yet...to my dismay....I had to have a patch downloaded for my PS3 copy of GTA4!

OH NOES!

Being able to play at 1280x768 at 60 FPS....who needed that?!?! Not any console gamer....at the time that it couldn't be done....

Now console owners complain when a game is in "640 or 540p" and scoff at games that don't run at a constant 60 fps!

Free mods? Who needs that amateur garbage...

Well...apparently the free part...they didn't need...but now they eat up $2 song add-ons, $10 map packs, and $5 horse armor...oh wait...

And of course...online gaming. Before PC gamers were nerds with no real friends...and that is the only reason to play online. Split screen gaming while banging chicks with their buds was the ONLY way to game.....now they eat up pay to play rights like it's the bees knees.

What's next....people will be asking for the ability to upgrade the hard drive in their PS3.....err umm....

Old school console fanboy...killed by Xbox Live and HDTVs capable of 60 FPS!

who would have thought it would have been so simple.
- ZombieKiss, on 05/23/2008, -0/+9I have a friend who was a hardcore console gamer for the last 20 some odd years.
  
  Me and some other friends pitched in and got him a decent rig for his bday and he's been PC gaming for the past few months -- granted he has a lot to catch up on, but he's been playing Oblivion on the PC with mods and swears up and down it blows the console version out of the water hands down.
  
  Not to mention get a DVI to HDMI converter, hook it up to your HDTV and finally see a 1080p game in full resolution.
LimeParrot, on 05/23/2008, -2/+1I guess I'm alone in thinking that...
prezzy, on 05/23/2008, -6/+14I'm sorry but I am a huge PC gaming fan and have been for over 10 years. PC gaming now is in a huge slump. In the last year we have had lots of quality titles on the consoles, what have we had on PC, COD4 and Crysis? COD4 was available on 360 and I bought it on the PC because I feel a mouse and keyboard are way better for accuracy. Meanwhile all my friends bought COD4 on 360...

We have had GTA4, COD4, Bioshock, Mario Kart, Mario Galaxy, Rock Band, Guitar Hero 3, Mass Effect, Halo 3 among many more games on consoles. Just because we love PC gaming doesnt mean we have to be ignorant and not see reality. I hope that PC gaming picks up in the near future but if it doesnt I will go where the good games are.
- thegoldenavatar, on 05/23/2008, -0/+7BioShock was on the PC.
  - prezzy, on 05/23/2008, -2/+1Yeah im aware Bioshock was on PC also. Even if we add that, the ratio of new quality games still goes to consoles.
  - BearinG, on 05/23/2008, -0/+2Still, i think its just a "slow" time for the PC right now, that's all.. you guys don't really believe that there was never a "slow period" on the PC before this year.. Same with consoles.. there were times where great games were far and in between too..
    
    I am a console gamer (i did game on PC for years) and would never say that PC gaming is "dead".. it might have lost a bit of business to consoles, but gaming overall has seen a huge increase in main stream, and i'm sure that PCs have gained from it too.
- Lazydriver, on 05/23/2008, -0/+3Slump? Not really. I just bought WarCraft III, a game made in 2003.
  
  Addons and mods keep games alive for decades, look @ Half Life, the mods of Half Life are being played insanely to this day, doesn't Counter-Strike come to mind (okay, the Source update doesn't count, it's the same damn game with a prettier package!)
  - prezzy, on 05/23/2008, -3/+3You made my point pretty much. You bought a game made in 2003 not a game made in 2007 or 2008.
    
    There aren't that many new games coming out for PC.
    - Wartz, on 05/23/2008, -0/+5whats better
      1.) firehose of *****
      2.) slow stream of fine wine.
- MemeWarrior, on 05/23/2008, -1/+4Umm... Bioshock was on the PC too and was a far better experience that way. Mass Effect probably would have been on the PC had Microsoft not thrown giant gobs of money at Bioware for an 'exclusive' deal. And it doesn't help when one of the most anticipated PC games of the year turns out to be total dud and a system hog to boot. And to add insult to injury the developer of that game throws a temper tantrum and blames the pirates for the poor sales of their game that only looks as good as they advertise it on a small number of machines; and then vows tp never develop a PC game again. Sounds to me like someone is in denial and doesn't cope well with failure. It's amazing how quickly they forgot how PC gamers were the ones who made their previous game a huge sucess. And then you have the gigantic ego's of some industry people who think they're cool enough to sport rap star like names and claim that gaming on the PC is dead and fails to realize that one of the major reasons for a slump in PC game sales lies directly on the shoulders of developers like him. No, they blame us the for not buying enough copies of games they make that have been on other systems for a year or more than a year and didn't bother to do enough quality testing to make sure it ran well on the average gaming system. So here we are, we're still PC gamers and we've still got cash to burn, the question us consumers are left asking is. "Where the ***** is everyone else?"
  - MrTulip, on 05/23/2008, -2/+1pray tell, memewarrior, where picked you up that meme "crysis is a ***** game"?
    - MemeWarrior, on 05/23/2008, -1/+1Because I've played it and beneath the pretty graphics and the new 'kewl powerz' it's nothing more than a rehash of Fry Cry. Boooorrrring!
  - Planets, on 05/23/2008, -0/+2Mass Effect is coming out for the PC next week.
- stmyers, on 05/23/2008, -0/+1Funny how you avoided Valve games.
  While Orange Box did come out for 360...c'mon, Portal with custom maps alone beats anything that came out on consoles last year.
- Slaco, on 05/25/2008, -0/+0Bioshock, Guitar Hero, Mass Effect, and COD 4 are all on the PC. Don't forget the PC only games either (the many, many excellent RTS games).
  
  And then there's Portal ;).
TimeLincoln, on 05/23/2008, -5/+1That gives me a boner!
jesushitler, on 05/23/2008, -0/+5pc gaming is alive in my house. my wife plays the sims 2 while i play ninja gaiden. we both win.
DougVitale, on 05/23/2008, -0/+3I am very disappointed that Star Wars: Force Unleashed is not going to be available on the PC.
dbsmoker, on 05/23/2008, -8/+2Hey PC gamers, can you name ONE exclusive game that's coming out this year for PC? Spore? Rage? Left 4 Dead? All coming out for consoles.

Name ONE game that would be worth owning a PC for this year that's NOT coming out for Xbox 360.
- natastna2, on 05/23/2008, -0/+2I built a quad core gaming PC not long ago and I have to agree with you. Most of the games coming out on PC have already been released on the Xbox 360 and are ***** ports. I can play games with much better graphics, and with a mouse and keyboard on the PC but I find myself playing the 360 a lot more because there simply isn't a large amount of good games coming out on the PC anymore. As much as I'd love PC gaming to not be dying, it really is. The lack of cheaters, the inbuilt friends system, easy voice chat, it all makes the 360 a better choice. Steam is OK and Xfire isn't bad but neither are close to Xbox Live. Added to that, about 15 of my friends have 360s and i only know 1 guy with a PC capable of playing the latest PC games at anything other than 640 by 480.
  - stmyers, on 05/23/2008, -2/+0Apparently, you've never heard of Steam, or XFire.
    - natastna2, on 05/23/2008, -0/+2You really should learn how to read.
- Vzylexy, on 05/23/2008, -1/+3What a retarded point, lots of games are cross platform nowadays.
  - dbsmoker, on 05/24/2008, -0/+1What I am saying is what games would make me want to buy a PC just for games. That used to be a craze you know, people building PC's just to play the latest games at the highest settings and whatnot? So my POINT is that PC gaming IS in trouble. Add to that the fact that not many PC gamers actually PAY for their games and then you've got a REAL mess on your hands. Developers are plenty aware of the fact that they can make a LOT more money on consoles than they can on PC's. Why do you think so many PC game developers of old are now making games for 360 and PS3? So you sir are the retarded one.
  - dbsmoker, on 05/24/2008, -0/+1Let me explain it in simple terms so you might understand. No exclusive PC games is BAD for PC gaming. It used to be that games were made for PC first then ported to console, now it's the other way around, making console to PC ports run like CRAP on anything but a CRAY COMPUTER!
- thanakar, on 05/23/2008, -0/+1Spore at one time was going to be a PC only exclusive but then the developers bent to pressure and are not making a console port. Which is the why the game has been delayed forever! Blasted ports.
  
  I started PC gaming a long long time ago. Games like Rat Race on my Vic 20, then I moved up to a Commodore and started playing the TSR D&D games. Nothing like having stacks of graph paper filled with your own hand drawn maps.
  
  Sure there were consoled out at the time like the Odyssey , Atari and Intelivision systems but they were also much more expensive.
  
  Currently I hown a Wii, PS2, XBOX 360, and my gaming computer and I spent much more time on my computer than the other three combined. There are tons of nice games out there for the PC, you just need to know where to find them. Most of the games that I've enjoyed don't come from US developers, but from smaller little known european developers. These guys put out great games that rival anything the main developers put out in the US. This is something that I have not seen for the console platforms.
  - dbsmoker, on 05/24/2008, -0/+1"Most of the games that I've enjoyed don't come from US developers, but from smaller little known european developers. These guys put out great games that rival anything the main developers put out in the US. This is something that I have not seen for the console platforms."
    
    I doubt that very much. I love games from Europe and all, but I only play triple A titles. I'm very picky, and the last game I played from a little known European developer was STALKER and it was pretty cool, yet it wasn't good enough to make me want to keep my PC. Not to mention I hate Windows, which is why I use a Mac for a computer and a 360 for games.
- ceraphin, on 05/23/2008, -0/+3The Total War Series
- stmyers, on 05/23/2008, -1/+0Your point is moot. Those multiplatform games will have the superior characteristics of the PC platform, for less money ($50 vs. $60+). I own a 360, but I'll be buying L4D, Spore, etc... for PC. I have the 360 for the exclusive games, and I often regret my decision of buying the 360 because most of the exclusives are disappointing.
  - dbsmoker, on 05/24/2008, -0/+1That USED to be true, but now that PC games are usually ports of console games they run like crap on anything but high-end hardware, and I can't afford to spend a crap load of money on a new video card every 6 months.
- lacronicus, on 05/23/2008, -0/+3Let's see here:
  Arma 2
  BF3 (possibly)
  Age of Conan
  Starcraft 2
  Demigod
  Guild Wars 2
  BF heroes
  Those are just the notable mainstream games; there are countless lesser known games set for release, along with free games and mods.
  - dbsmoker, on 05/24/2008, -2/+1I wouldn't look twice at any of those games if I was flipping through a magazine. No disrespect to Starcraft fans, I just can't get into RTS. It's FPS or TPS action/adventure for me.
    - Slaco, on 05/25/2008, -0/+0Oh, so you've admitted you can't stand RTS (an entire, very popular genre), but then you make a sweeping statement saying PC gaming is dead based on that fact. You DO realize that not everyone hates RTS games.
    - dbsmoker, on 05/27/2008, -0/+1I said it was dead to me, and that PC gaming in general is not doing as well as it used to. That's my point. And actually, I'm okay with that.
- Planets, on 05/23/2008, -1/+3Name one worthwhile console game that's not coming out for the PC.
  
  GTA4? (Even though I hate GTA) Check
  Mass Effect? Check
  All the Halo games? Check
  Gears of War? Check
  
  Etc.
  
  Oh, and they usually come out with more content than their console counterparts.
  - dbsmoker, on 05/24/2008, -0/+1Okay, you threw me off with your wording, but I assume you're trying to make a point against my argument.
    
    GTA IV is coming out for PC? I didn't hear that announcement.
    
    Mass Effect? It's being ported to PC from 360 so good luck meeting the system req's. Oh, and the game sucked anyways.
    
    ALL the Halo games? I heard Halo 2 went over like a wet fart on PC. Halo 3 hasn't even been announced for PC so please, go ahead and hold your breath.
    
    Gears of War? I'll give you that one. But the SEQUEL is coming out this year for 360, so I'd say the PC is falling behind the consoles from the looks of it.
    
    Oh, and to name that ONE console game that's NOT coming out for PC, how about Fable 2, Gears of War 2, Resident Evil 5, Far Cry 2, Star Wars: The Force Unleashed... do you want me to go on? I could throw in PS3 games like Metal Gear Solid 4 and Gran Turismo 5.
    
    Have I made my point?
    - Planets, on 05/24/2008, -0/+1Fable 2, Gears of War 2 and Far Cry 2 are all coming out for the PC, just like the originals did, even though they weren't announced with their console releases.
darkfus, on 05/23/2008, -6/+1Yes, PC gaming is dying and I already don't miss it. Especially with the Mac exodus ongoing, the potential market is shrinking as they talk about it coming back. lol

And I'm loving the "mature audience" argument surfacing here in the comments. I played MMOs for years and most adults acted like bigger tools than the kids that logged on.

Flame on.
- thanakar, on 05/23/2008, -1/+1But its not dying and if you think it is you are very dilusional.
- Vindicoth, on 05/23/2008, -1/+2Mac Exodus? Mac still has less than 10% of the market share. Dream on.
- aznhomig, on 05/23/2008, -1/+2I logged in just to digg you down. That's how much your comment sucked.
  
  "Mac exodus", lol.
  - darkfus, on 05/24/2008, -0/+1Guess you haven't been reading Digg. People are switching to OSX, Ubuntu and laptops that won't run these hardware hogging games. Apple alone has more than doubled their market share in the past year.
    - Slaco, on 05/25/2008, -1/+0Uhhh.... You fail high school math or something? 8.1/6.2 does NOT equal "more than double". 6.2% was last year's Q3 market share numbers, 8.1 is this year's (according to AppleInsider).
neofreakiii, on 05/23/2008, -0/+2I kind of agree with Kamael. It's almost like a cycle, but I think developers will always make sure their games will be suitable for the current consoles. It is quite unlikely for developers to release a game for consoles that is overly taxing on the console system. Also, I think it kind of gets expensive if the PC or Mac versions of the game are too intensive for the PC or Mac to handle, and then upgrades are required so as to enjoy the full glory of the game. I don't think it's really fair for the PC or Mac, but then again a PC or Mac can do so many things a console can't.
MrESaulved, on 05/23/2008, -0/+9The push to move people to consoles is motivated by greed. Your PC is under your control, your console is under industry control.

PC gamers and enthusiasts make mods for PC games to share with others, some of them impossibly impressive and artistic (Flying mounts in Oblivion?) and free. Console gamers must buy (with microtransactions ostensibly) mods and add-ons.

Lastly, the push is for in-game advertising. PC gamers will have none of it and even when fored upon them they will find a way to disable that intrusion. Console gamers will have zero choice in that capacity.
RumaruDrathas, on 05/23/2008, -0/+5The Grand Irony of the Console vs. PC debate is that the overall success of the current generation of Console games revolved around the fact that it emulated a lot of the features and offerings that were readily available to the PC gamers for the past decade. PC gaming had great multiplayer support and voice chat well before XBL came out. As someone mentioned before, HD gaming on the console is a fairly recent phenomenon. Well, I've been enjoying near-HD gaming on my old LAPTOP 3 years ago.

One thing to consider is that, and this is especially true of the 360 and the PS3, is that, architecturally speaking, a console is nothing more than a PC in disguise, whose retail price is heavily absorbed and subsidized by the hardware maker.

Having owned Cod4 for both the PC and the 360, I do see both sides of the argument. I recently bought my low-mid line PC six months ago, and I had to sacrifice a lot of the graphical eye candy in CoD so I could play it online. Though all the "shiny stuff" has been disabled, I still found the overall game experience enjoyable. Multiplayer was undoubtedly a major selling point in the game, and the PC's ability to let me choose my own server, according the ping and "enabled features" (something that the console will never give full control to the player, IMO), made it a good "pro" for PC gaming

Oh, and aside for paying for my broadband connection, the experience was free

Now, looking at the 360 side, I was floored by the eye-candy that I was missing out on the PC. My local brick-n-mortar was doing this promotion with CoD 4 at the time, and I managed to snag a complimentary free month on XBL Gold. I figure, what the hell, I should try it on.

Aside from the transition in the controller area, I found the playing on the 360 was, overall, not so different from playing in the PC. I mean, yeah, playing made me finally justified the quad-digit price tag we payed for our HDTV, and the eye-candy was oh-so-gorgeous, but the "game play" was so different in single player, that I haven't bothered playing through the 360's single player campaign, having already done so in my PC.

What was different from the either the platform was that playing on the 360 seemed "easier" in multiplayer. It must be the auto-aim feature, but I find that I was able to squeeze off a lot more headshots, with frightening consistency. It could also be the fact that the mouse-keyboard combo allows for a bit more skill to shine through. Also, the 360 does have built in voice chat, which was cute for about 2 minutes. The PC has built in voice chat too, but most people would just eschew that and type, which though cumbersome, is a far better option compared to having a prepubescent boy/girl screaming on my ear because I sound like a dirty mexican...

And why is it that muting someone on XBL consists doing a whole lot of archaic button mashing and menu navigation? First, I have to hit the xbox button, then go to player list, scroll through "recently played with", and select the proper name, granting I remember it through the constant *****-racial yelling of a person who's nutsack clearly hasn't dropped yet.

Then again, this problem seems to creep up once in a while in the PC too...

Look, is PC gaming dead? I highly doubt it. WoW is the premier case study in this. What is happening is an evolution of a market, in the worst case, or a cyclictical economic process in the most common case. That is to say, when one Rise in "selling power", the other will undoubtedly fall, and vice versa. Also, as already mentioned in the article, the movement from the physical retail to digital retail has affected PC gaming moreso than the console arena. I'm just not talking about indie game, but also full-fledged mainstream games. What Steam has done for the PC can not be implemented in the same degree in the Console arena for sometime. XBL market place has began to offer "game on disc" as a digital purchase/download, but the degree of that success is currently unknown to me...

The PC will have it's day on the sun again, whether that be by the end of this year, on in another year (during the "cool-off" period of console gaming), or hell, it could squash the next generation of console gaming. But, I do believe that the PC game-makers should not sit on their collective asses and wait for the changes to come to them. A culture/design shift needs to happen first, such as the vast implementation of highly scalable game engines. Also, a de-emphasis of pushing the envelope of higher end graphics and instead an emphasis of good game design and maximum hardware compatibility, without the sacrifice of playability nor user functionality.

Again, the WoW is a prime example of this. My first generation p4, with a 64mb GeForce card, could run the game perfectly, albeit it with the majority of its graphics features turned off. Nevertheless, it never robbed the game of its fun. I was still able to kill the same goddamned boar 15 times to get my starting weapon, or participate in the occasional trudge through any given dungeon. Though running the game on this new PC of mine made me realize what I've been missing, has that changed my overall gameplay? The answer is a contentious "meh".

Anyways, I don't see PC gaming going the way of the Intellivision anytime soon. If anything, PC gaming has taught a lot of things to the console market, and vice versa. All I do know is that, as part of the previous generation of gamers, that the current environment for gaming in general is one of the best we've seen so far. It makes an old vet like me look forward to our collective gaming future.
- prezzy, on 05/23/2008, -1/+4Holy ***** man thats a ***** comment
- Unearthly, on 05/23/2008, -1/+3Wall of Text crits you for 6,749,490 damage (crushing)
  You die.
  Your items lose 10% durability.
highlyhigh, on 05/23/2008, -0/+1as there are with every form of electronic products, there are intelligent consumers and average consumers. average consumers go with console. intelligent consumers go for pc. we will thrive in the masturbation of our own brain.
dbsmoker, on 05/23/2008, -1/+2Here's a quote from another article on the subject that brings up a good point.

"Valve Software survey people using its Steam service, and the results make for interesting reading. First up is system RAM (or memory). From 729920 unique samples (different systems) taken between today and November 13 (just over one month ago), the stats show that more than 60% of systems include less than 2GB of RAM - a figure that is becoming more or less essential for cutting edge PC games.

Processing speed stats are quite similar, with approximately 60% of systems running a CPU clocked lower than 2.3 Ghz. The real killer as far as gaming goes, though, is the video card, and it's here that Valve's stats are most telling. Based on our own judgement of which video cards will run modern PC games acceptably, only 25% of systems in the survey fall into that category. So 75% of systems don't cut it when running the likes of Crysis. With many modern PC titles claiming to have DirectX 10 GPU support under Windows Vista, the fact that only 7.7% of systems can support it is also quite interesting. Is it any wonder then that these GPU melting blockbusters aren't selling well?"

So, only approximately 25% of PC gamers are able to enjoy a game like Crysis the way it was intended to be played? If you buy a video card that costs as much as a Xbox 360 or PS3 and it still doesn't play a game at it's best settings, that's a rip-off IMO. I gave up on PC gaming when I built a kickass machine only for ONE exclusive PC game to come out ALL YEAR and it didn't even play on my expensive dual video card PC.

Crysis killed PC gaming for me.
- thanakar, on 05/23/2008, -2/+4"I gave up on PC gaming when I built a kickass machine only for ONE exclusive PC game to come out ALL YEAR and it didn't even play on my expensive dual video card PC."
  
  Pretty lame excuse when there are literally 100's of kick ass titles out there that will run nicely on your dual card system.
  - dbsmoker, on 05/24/2008, -0/+2100's of kick ass titles? *****. Name some please. Every one of the games that came out for PC came out on 360 and ran better on 360. I remember playing Call of Duty 4 for PC and thinking it was just another generic war game, then playing it on 360 when my friend brought it over and being blown away by the graphics and frame rate compared to my PC that was over twice the price I paid for my 360.
    - Slaco, on 05/25/2008, -1/+0You have posted many comments about how the 360 bests your "dual card" system, but fail to elaborate on what that system is. You DO realize that two 8500GTs in SLI are still crap, right?
- MrTulip, on 05/23/2008, -0/+2err..just buy it when you happen to have the hardware.
  how are high hardware specs a rip-off? explain.
  - dbsmoker, on 05/24/2008, -0/+1I only built my PC for gaming yet all the games I played on both PC and 360 ran better on 360. That's unacceptable to me. I spent a ***** load of money on a pretty beefy PC that was dedicated to games. I'm an expert when it comes to optimizing PC games to run great and look great, but the games were running worse and worse on my system. I wasn't about to blow more money on upgrading processors and video cards after spending all sorts of money on a PC that had nothing but 2 year old games to play on it. I waited for all the new games to come out, and NOTHING BUT CRAP came out. FINALLY the only game that looked promising that was EXCLUSIVE to the PC was Crysis. I downloaded the demo, my PC could only run it at the lowest settings before it CRASHED and I said ***** PC GAMING!!! End of story.
skeeterbug84, on 05/23/2008, -2/+3Maybe people are sick of updating their entire computer to play a new game? I bought a GeForce 9600GT when they first came out, I can play AoC in a lower resolution with MEDIUM graphics, and get around 40-60 FPS. What the ***** are they thinking? Do they expect people to buy the latest motherboards with SLI and purchase TWO high end graphics cards?
- thanakar, on 05/23/2008, -0/+3I'm finding SLI isn't all that its cut out to be. I replaced my 2 7800GTX 256 cards with one 8800GTX 756 card and saw no noticeable drop in graphics quality.
  - Slaco, on 05/25/2008, -0/+0I don't understand you. Graphics "quality"? Usually, that's not the biggest factor in video cards anymore (unless there are broken driver issues). If you mean performance, the 8800GTX is pretty much the top-of-the-line card right now, so saying SLI sucks because one 8800GTX beats two 7800GTX (old, old card in case anyone doesn't know) is ridiculous. SLI isn't great (30-45% improvement vs. single card), but it's not useless.
carlvjack, on 05/23/2008, -1/+0Consoles are emulating PC advantages in many ways and makes it simpler due to standardized hardware, ease of use, etc, etc. I play games on both and have been for 15 years and even I can see the writing on the wall as well as investors. PC gaming is becoming a niche market and consoles have always been mass market. Investors are going to see rampant piracy and low sales PC side and gigantic profits console wise so the guess where the money for research and development will go?

Either way in 10 years the convergence will be more a reality
ceraphin, on 05/23/2008, -0/+3No way is it dieing, mature audiences exist in all the games except the MMOs like world of warcraft, I've played the COD4 PC and 360 version and I swear every player in there was prepubescent and threw flashbangs at teammates and then laughed after then called everyone ***** then said penis over and over again.

only thing i play on my ps3 and 360 are sports games, slash and hack games, and rock band all of which were definately worth buying a console for i'll admit, but when i wanna play my mmos or my FPS games or the RTS's theres no other place than my PC, although the wii has added a whole bunch of new types of games that are so freaking awesome i'll admit, i can now do yoga and not feel ashamed

in other news theres a new Total war game coming out in november is that gonna be on a console?
TwoLOUD, on 05/23/2008, -3/+1Pc gets ruin b/c the online servers are full of piece of ***** hackers and people that ruin gameplay. Who wants a server that everyone has speed hacks and jump hacks? Gets rather annoying. Download Warrock and youll see what I mean, that game is so full of hackers and dumbass players it is one of those worst free online games out.
- Gogogo111, on 05/23/2008, -0/+4Because its a free game. Warrock is a piece of *****, simple as that.
  - Slaco, on 05/25/2008, -0/+0Darn you beat me to it. Free games suffer the worst from this problem. Myself playing BF2, I have perhaps encountered 5 cheaters/hackers/glitchers in the past month.
Enochrewt, on 05/23/2008, -1/+2Expense isn't the end-all for PC gaming. For most, it's the time involved in getting the game up and working.

A few days ago my 360 got the RROD (+1 for PC gaming ;P) and I decided I'd re-install WoW and play it while the 360 was going in for repairs. I had to download the actual game (Direct2Drive), and reinstall the patches. It took like 8 hours. Granted if I had DVDs of the game, it would have only taken 5, but still. After the ease of buying a game, popping it in a console and playing it, it's hard to go back to installations, hardware troubleshooting, performance tweaking and all the stuff that comes with playing a game on a PC.
Show 51 - 68 of 68 discussions
Login or register to add a comment

Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.

Valve's Doug Lombardi: PC Gaming Is Not Dying

Login or register to add a comment