Well imo you do have to include the price of a monitor if a person has not had a PC before or if the current monitor is some 17" piece of crap. Everyone has a TV and most are a lot bigger than 17" so no you DO NOT have to also include the price of a TV since TVs are in just about every household (even people on the lower economic ladder have a TV and you DO NOT need an HDTV) but that is not true of PCs. I know tons of folks who don't have a PC but have a console .... they use the net at the library or local Junior college.
Tim Sweeney: PCs Are Good For Anything, Just Not Games
- Thread starter _Lynx
- Start date
-
Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.
Well imo you do have to include the price of a monitor if a person has not had a PC before or if the current monitor is some 17" piece of crap. Everyone has a TV and most are a lot bigger than 17" so no you DO NOT have to also include the price of a TV since TVs are in just about every household (even people on the lower economic ladder have a TV and you DO NOT need an HDTV) but that is not true of PCs. I know tons of folks who don't have a PC but have a console .... they use the net at the library or local Junior college.
I'd not generalize being them. For a lot of (broken) promises they deserve a lot of critics and they are often frustrated because we (frustrated fans) have hardly reason to praise them for good engine+gameplay(questionable though) with sub-par UI, missing features, no linux client, ... - broken promises simply.
But yes, in this case Tim did not deserve title stupid as this. Jerkoff it is (journalist - not Tim ;-)).
Nothing is sometimes the right thing to do, but always a smart thing to say.
And there's the proof that Epic is going into the fortune cookie business.
"...IN BED"Nothing is sometimes the right thing to do, but always a smart thing to say
omg it's true lol
![[SAS]Solid Snake](/data/avatars/s/30/30541.jpg?1424422840){kind=avatar}
In a lot of ways I do agree with Tim here. PC gaming is never going to die, because there will always be people who will enjoy PC gaming (and eventually, we'll play console games ON the PC anyways .. i.e NeoGeo, SegaMaster system, Nintendo). However, I have recently been reading a book the talks about the paradox of choice. It essentially says, having too much choice is a bad thing, and in a lot of ways it is.
Let me explain it a little bit, say you went to a store and you saw four video cards for sale. The top end one cost $200 more than the second one available, so you buy the second one. You'll be pretty happy with the product because you will feel like you have bought the second best card available. If you went to another store, and saw ten video cards, with your one being in the middle, suddenly, your purchase doesn't feel so good because now you feel you could have gotten better.
People who play games, may not necessarily want to have the responsibility of how well they will be able to play their game, and this is where consoles fit that (and fit it well). The only options available for consoles are for it to do more things, but even the bare bones console option will still be the same computing strength as every other console option.
For PC's, this is not true. There are massive ranges between awful, bad, good and superb. People who also aren't interested in the sheer details aren't going to be pleased to read, "DirectX 9.0c video card required" or "Pixel Shader Model 3.0 is required". They are not going to know what this is, and shop keepers will probably have just a hard time explaining it.
Finally, you've got consoles that look and perform just as well as most PC's now. Sure the levels are a smaller, lower resolution textures and so forth, but attach it to a HD TV and it plays well and can look better than your average PC game. As any body knows, the visual aspect of game will be forming people's first opinions (for proof, just check out the Damnation thread. No one knows what the true game play is like, but they are already forming opinions of it through screen shots).
As I've said many times, for PC games to excel, they need to target their market. Unfortunately, the market for consoles just happens to be bigger.
Let me explain it a little bit, say you went to a store and you saw four video cards for sale. The top end one cost $200 more than the second one available, so you buy the second one. You'll be pretty happy with the product because you will feel like you have bought the second best card available. If you went to another store, and saw ten video cards, with your one being in the middle, suddenly, your purchase doesn't feel so good because now you feel you could have gotten better.
People who play games, may not necessarily want to have the responsibility of how well they will be able to play their game, and this is where consoles fit that (and fit it well). The only options available for consoles are for it to do more things, but even the bare bones console option will still be the same computing strength as every other console option.
For PC's, this is not true. There are massive ranges between awful, bad, good and superb. People who also aren't interested in the sheer details aren't going to be pleased to read, "DirectX 9.0c video card required" or "Pixel Shader Model 3.0 is required". They are not going to know what this is, and shop keepers will probably have just a hard time explaining it.
Finally, you've got consoles that look and perform just as well as most PC's now. Sure the levels are a smaller, lower resolution textures and so forth, but attach it to a HD TV and it plays well and can look better than your average PC game. As any body knows, the visual aspect of game will be forming people's first opinions (for proof, just check out the Damnation thread. No one knows what the true game play is like, but they are already forming opinions of it through screen shots).
As I've said many times, for PC games to excel, they need to target their market. Unfortunately, the market for consoles just happens to be bigger.
[SAS]Solid Snake;2097385 said:
You could not be more correct here. When was the last time someone went to buy a console game and worried whether their "system" could handle it.
I think what's got everyone's panties in a bunch (mine included) is how Epic tries to play both sides of the fence. If you're going to focus all of your energy on console games then say it. Quit being wishy-washy. UT3 is not the issue here. It's where Epic is headed for the future that has PC users/fans in an uproar.
Well, I have built several systems that play all the games out including Crysis on PC's less than 600.00 USD. Plus at the end of playing I can send email, browse the web, and all the other things only a PC can do, and upgrade as prices come down instead of buying a brand new console every year or 2 consoles so I can play exclusive games. Epic sounds like it wants to get out of the PC Games business and is thinking up reasons why to do so. I 'm sure that all of the people releasing their games a Steam will be happy to pick up the Market share.
What that guy says is true to an extent, but I wouldn't call it much of a cop-out.
The hardware between an integrated chip and a stand alone GPU is vastly different. It does the same task, but one has quite a bit less power and is built differently. Its like comparing an x86 CPU to an IBM PowerPC CPU or the Cell CPU. All the same, but different architectures.
The integrated graphics chip is just a very weak GPU because of its design. It was designed for basic graphics and nothing more. So its limited in what it can do for games.
A lot of what Sweeny was also talking about is how uneducated people cannot make the distinction between what can and cannot run a high end PC game. He mentions how Best Buy sells PC games, but also sells run-of-the-mill average PC's with integrated graphics. So some guy is going to pick up Crysis thinking its a good looking game, go buy a piece of crap PC and not be able to run the game.
In an ideal world the Best Buy employees would inform the person how it wouldn't work, but we don't live in an ideal world.
Only a small margin of people buy high end PC's for gaming. That leaves a huuuge market for just basic computing needs which Intel floods with their integrated chips, OEM's use to make PC's out of, and then customers buy all because it is a lot cheaper.
The evidence of all this is very apparent just by looking at how the casual games market has exploded.
[SAS]Solid Snake;2097385 said:
After a lot of reading of various opinions on PC gaming and where it is going, I think I finally realized what needs to happen. The PC needs to have a unified hardware/driver architecture of some sort for gaming if it wants to remain a viable system. There are a million variations of the same GPU, CPUs with cryptic naming schemes, various driver and software components that no-one knows what they are and then there are drivers that a lot of people simply forget to update, or don't want to update.
This all causes normal to casual PC gamers who get frustrated by all this stuff to jump to consoles. It's just easier. And cheaper.
Hardware costs are another thing. They're all over the place! Again adding to the confusion of what a consumer should get. That high end chip will be half as expensive in a month, so should they wait? But then another even better chip will be out in 50 different forms, should I wait for that? Who knows!
The problem with this is simply capitalism. It would require arch enemies to work together. It would result in a single system that would end up having communistic qualities. Why would nVidia want to develop that next killer GPU, when it has to adhere to guidelines and work with ATI to create the same thing? I'm not sure how to resolve this honestly. As long as we have different companies we'll have different variations on things, different drivers, and therefor problems.
Hardware is the key issue here in my opinion. Second to hardware is software, specifically windows. Its a bloated piece of vomit when it comes to games. Ditch it. Someone needs to create some form of system that completely unloads the OS in the background when games are running. They need to create a micro OS, just like the consoles have, to operate when games are running. Just doing this alone would probably drastically reduce system requirements on games. There has got to be a reason why games like UT3 can run on the PS3 but require nearly double the system requirements on a PC just to run at the same level of quality. In my opinion it is the OS.
Last edited:
Game Boxes do have a part that explains the required and recommended hardware so I don't have any sympathy for anyone who buys some $600 PC bundle at Best Buy or Circuit City and then decides that the extra writing on the box is just for show ... doesn't read them and then complains that the PC can't play his game. That is just stupidity on that person's part. It's like complaining that you are allergic to an ingredient in a packaged food product but you didn't even bother to read the ingredients info they put on the can/box.
Basically ... a console?
One of the few things I still enjoy about PC's is the fact that choice is available. I'm not terribly phased by choice on computer parts as I have enough will and time to do my research.
The difference is knowledge. I just pulled out my UT2004 box, and here it is word for word.
Processor: Pentium III 1.0Ghz or AMD Athlon 1.0Ghz or faster (1.2 Ghz or faster recommended).
What the hell does this mean to an average user. At best they will know they have an Intel / AMD inside their box, but I doubt they'll know they have a Pentium III / 4, Athlon, Athlon XP off the top of their heads. No one brings in the computer manual to a computer game store to see if the things match, and even if they did, what happens when they get words like AMD Athlon X2 DualCore ... that's just going to confuse them. Also the Ghz ratings are off. 1.2ghz recommend? 1.2ghz what ... AMD / Intel processing? They both have different strengths.
Memory: 128 MB Ram minimum (256mb MB Ram recommended). People often confused ram with video memory, or hard disk space. Its not uncommon. People aren't going to know sometimes if they have enough or too little. Also 128mb ram? For UT2004? Maybe just for the game itself, but your going to need more if you want to run WindowsXP + UT2004.
Video: 32MB Windows 98/Me/2000/XP-Compatiable video card (64MB NVidia GeForce 2 or ATI Radeon Hardware T&L card recommended). This is down right wrong information. People will go on the basis of what they read first. I have some old 32mb VGA non 3d accelerated cards that work in Windows. It doesn't actually say that it requires a GPU, it's just recommended. Sure you could try playing UT2004 with software rendering, but based on the CPU and Ram details, I doubt it'd run very fast or look anywhere as nice as the box screenshots.
... I think I'll stop, I don't need to go on, as this already proves my point.
As for a console game requirements:
Requires XBox360 / Playstation 3 to run.
It's not a matter of people being stupid. It's a matter that people simply not knowing. Imagine your going in for surgery. Doctors explains that you can have three options, and he talks in standard issue medical speak and jargon. No way can you make a valid decision not because your stupid, it's because half the time you don't know what he's saying.
Lastly, if people are ever unsure about a product and its purchase, they won't buy. People will buy next thing to get what they are looking for, and that is going to be console games.
Last edited:
I work at Walmart... no offense to the customers any -- but several even confuse that...[SAS]Solid Snake;2097445 said:
As for the topic.
Tim Sweeney was talking about 600$ PCs at Best Buy!
He wasn't talking about *PCs* in general -- he was talking about *Over the shelf PCs*
For the love of God the sky isn't falling Chicken Little!
Last edited:
Ummz I was kinda suggesting the petition go with Epic and other devs going into intel, you know like developers and gamers need to work together on this one. The petition would hold sweet **** all, as intel wont listen to anyone on forums who you kidding!
Wow just wow, here I was thinking PC's were as common as TV's. Perhaps thats only in this country! Seriously though not everyone needs to buy a completely new PC each time around and thats where you save the money, being smart with your upgrades. Hell Ive got PC cases which have lasted me longer than 2 consoles combined
Also, anuban you can plug PC's into TV's as well!
PC gaming needs some leaders, some faces people recognize. If Tim Sweeny is gonna bail and move to consoles at the first sign of trouble then perhaps my suspicions about Epics motives are correct, I would sure love to be proved wrong!
Last edited:
I wish someone would have told that to me much earlier in my life. I would have avoided a lot of stupid situations.Nothing is sometimes the right thing to do, but always a smart thing to say
...some of the wisest words written in any forum.
(did you come up with that, or was it a quote?)
[SAS]Solid Snake;2097445 said:
Well yeah, and thats the sad part. You mention the luxury and enjoyability of choice, and I like that too because I know a bit about computers and I'm a computer nerd as it is.
However then you talk about system requirements and the average user.
Thats where the problem lies. The average user makes up the larger installment in PC use. The average user may not enjoy such choices and does not care. They don't want to have to read reviews and do lots of research to make sure one part works with another. The average user is the speedy 'gotta get stuff done' type person who just wants a computer that works so they get their information from the local minimum wage lackey at Best Buy.
And thats why consoles are becoming more popular for games because you do not have to make that choice.
The only way to alleviate that is to make hardware and component selection less confusing a time consuming. Its the only way as far as hardware is concerned.
Maybe what needs to happen is a simpler naming convention for parts? Maybe folks like nVidia, Intel, and 3rd party companies need to talk to each other more to afford a greater level of compatibility. Maybe Microsoft needs to create a less bloated OS, which is another catch-22 issue altogether because people want all this extra stuff and features but they don't want any extra overhead. That is why I say ditch the OS when gaming.
But I digress.
I think AMD is at the forefront right now in creating a unified architecture. They call their version Spider. AMD is in a good place right now because they have the chipset production, CPU production and now GPU production all sitting in one company. This means they have huge potential in getting their parts unified.
I don't know how else to fix the PC gaming issue. People say 'yeah well the developers need to make better games..bla bla bla' and thats true, but there are good games coming out, just not as many as bad games so they become hidden.
They can make better games, but if the underlying hardware is what is keeping people from gaming on the PC then it won't matter. The solution needs to start at the very bottom level and work its way up.
The PC gaming initiative is a good start. It has all the right companies involved. It needs more developers involved though and I think it is sad to see Epic, a company that built itself on the PC, jumping ship because they saw a puddle of water at the bottom. I'm glad Valve is sticking it out though.
Actually, come to think of it, maybe this is a good position right now for PC developers. Its a transition of sorts, a cleaning out of the closet. All the old classic developers are going to consoles, and that leaves a big vacant space for, young, idea-filled, new companies who aren't polluted with business and publishers and money and all the junk, developers who don't know defeat, who don't know that they cannot do certain things. Just seeing the independent games section and all the attention its getting as well as all the new game development schools is a good sign.
Its also a great position for the open source or internet communities to get on board and start making their own games. PC gaming will be kept alive through modding, and community game development projects. The skill is there, it just needs to be brought together on a larger scale.
Thats my opinion anyways.
tl;dr
Last edited:
True , about some opinions , im working right now on a support center, and is quite very often to see many people complaining about "Oh i bought a pc of $ 2000 !!! (VAIO Sony, HP, for example ) and i can` t run properly UT3 or games like CALL OF DUTY 4 or CRYSIS!!! " OMFG!!! They don` t know many of the times what kind of stuff is on their PC`s !!! and then i asking all the time : "OK aaaah please tell me, if you want to able to play this kind of games mmmm you already knew the system requirements right? can you tell me about the stuff of your computer please? cpu ? ram ? vid card????? " the costumer says : "Oh yes my pc have windows xp !! no ! windows vista yes that is!!! " OMG! shaaaaame many people doesn` t now NOTHING about the capacity or the parts of their computers! and some retards do the easy way "ok im sick of this im going to buy a console is to hard to me to understand the PC !! DOH ! lazy people or i don` t now maybe they don` t want to know the marvelous world of the pc have to offer no just games many many more!!!!
I have just lost a part of the respect I had in our Tim right here. Totally dissagree. PCs have their tools and their own UPs, if games weren't meant for PC we wouldn't have so much players on games like CS:S and WoW CoD4. It's mainly about marketing and price range. Buying a xbox 360 is much cheaper than say, a really decent computer. It just turned out that Consoles makes their way better. But saying they are only good for multimedia is the biggest **** of March 10 2008.
The whole thing that piss me off is that he's the one who basically started over Epic Games. It's not "news" but it's always disappointing to hear.
Wow just wow, here I was thinking PC's were as common as TV's. Perhaps thats only in this country! Seriously though not everyone needs to buy a completely new PC each time around and thats where you save the money, being smart with your upgrades. Hell Ive got PC cases which have lasted me longer than 2 consoles combined
I got my second PC case ever (not counting the prehistorical first 2-3 PCs I had) about 4 months ago. The last one lasted me about 15 years
But I'll have to agree with Solid Snake here: Most people have no clue how a computer is built, or how they can upgrade them, or that they can keep using old parts in a new rig. And even if they do, they don't care, because all they want is a working system and everything inside the black box that sits under their desk is scary hitech stuff. Most people have no clue what a motherboard is.
Please read that quote in your post again. He said right there that "if you buy a cheap PC, you can't expect that it runs the latest games", it's what the entire interview (except the headline) is about. CS:S and CoD4 won't run on integrated graphics, maybe WoW will if you turn down the details a big notch
Of course PCs have their fields of expertise, and good gaming PCs are a lot better than consoles and that difference will stay that way, but a cheap Wallmart PC is no gaming PC, and that's poorly communicated, and there are no cheap gaming computers available unless you build them yourself (although I agree that for a reasonable gaming rig, you need to have a bigger budget than $600).On the other hand you could think that people realize that on their own.
Last edited:
Please read the article title, it says that "PCs Are Good For Anything, Just Not Games". So we're back to point 1. Pretty much like hitting the dead horse again.
Please read the article title, it says that "PCs Are Good For Anything, Just Not Games". So we're back to point 1. Pretty much like hitting the dead horse again.
As we found out already, it's what the headline says, after the interviewer thought "hm, now how do I twist that message that cheap PCs suck into something that will give me loads of clicks - oh wait, I can just rip that last sentence out of the context and place it as a general statement about all PCs, that'll call for attention"...
And obviously, media has people conditioned that headlines are more important than actual interviewee statements. I've talked with several people who gave interviews, and it is hillarious how journalists can twist messages by very selectively quoting.
Last edited: