Yeah you cant even tell if theres a start or an end of a sentence in that headline, I tend to stay away from quotes like that and read things for myself.
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.
![[SAS]Solid Snake](/data/avatars/s/30/30541.jpg?1424422840){kind=avatar}
Honestly, I'm quick to jump on people who slag PCs, but reading the interview didn't seem to give me the same negative impression that other people are getting. Might be just that he keeps reaffirming things that have, for me, been longstanding sore points, and I punch the air dramatically when I hear them talked of. As a longstanding 64-bit partisan, I loved this bit:
Now personally I hate Vista, and it's one of the reasons I switched to Linux almost exclusively awhile back. However, I had been hoping that Vista would push people to finally have to code for 64-bit, I mean we've had the hardware for years. But Microsoft backtracked and weaseled out.
....But back on track. Have you people even read the article? Actually, to be honest, the headline is probably to blame (I don't blame BU, since the headline is from TG Daily). To anyone worried about Tim Sweeney's view of PC games, read this!
Honestly, let us go over that again:
Keep that in mind if you think he has a low opinion of PC gaming.
Tim Sweeney said:
Now personally I hate Vista, and it's one of the reasons I switched to Linux almost exclusively awhile back. However, I had been hoping that Vista would push people to finally have to code for 64-bit, I mean we've had the hardware for years. But Microsoft backtracked and weaseled out.
....But back on track. Have you people even read the article? Actually, to be honest, the headline is probably to blame (I don't blame BU, since the headline is from TG Daily). To anyone worried about Tim Sweeney's view of PC games, read this!
Tim Sweeney said:
Honestly, let us go over that again:
Tim Sweeney said:
Keep that in mind if you think he has a low opinion of PC gaming.
Yeah actually I see alot of people saying how people think he's slagging off PC but alot of people who replied seemed to read the article and understand what he's saying. I didnt see much of the usual misinterpretation until people people egged on the trolls, so its certainly coming from all sides of the fence, keep that in mind 
U
Unregistered
Guest
Maybe something will change when Intel's Larrabee comes out.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larrabee_(GPU)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larrabee_(GPU)
Pretty much. They're trying to drive readers to their site. Which headline gets people worked up and ready to click? "Tim Sweeney Analyzes Integrated Video Hardware's Impact on High End PC Gaming" or the overly sensationalized one they used?
That rung true with me as well. I could have sworn that MS said 64-bit XP was the last time they would do two separate versions. However, I think it was the driver writers being lazy to implement 64-bit code for hardware that is holding them back from going full on 64-bit. I tried to do 64-bit XP a few years back, and I know Palm wasn't even going to bother coding 64-bit drivers at the time, and that revelation is what prevented me from sticking with 64-bit Windows. I didn't get to see if the iPod has 64-bit drivers. But it was annoying since every other piece of hardware I was using had 64-bit drivers, and this was at least a year or two after XP 64-Bit was released.
I think Tim is right on the money here. With out some change we will only see more of a flocking to the consoles. I for one and tired to have to upgrade my PC all the time so I can enjoy good frame rates with a decent amount of IQ on. I am tired of having to trouble shoot my friends PC to see why it can not run game X, which driver Y is needed to play this other game, etc. Its much more stress free to walk into a store, grab a xbox360/ps3 game and go home knowing that I am all set to enjoy this new game.
I blame a lot of the hardware and driver constant upgrade requirements on this perpetuating need to have OMG GRAPHICS!!1 - I actually blame that need on consoles, where this has long been their easiest means of competing against one another, especially once we passed the Ps1 / N64 era - it's proliferated through the games industry completely. Noone has compared UT3 to Crysis on merits of game differences, it's always the visuals. Isn't there more to a game than that? They both look fantastic, and that's what counts - the actual differences are marginal in terms of user experience.
It's getting to the point where games look more acceptable than ever, and the differences are just increased "realism" or special effects. The cost is the user - the hardware requirements are staggering (especially Crysis) and pointless.
Back in the day when we were software rendering everything, all you needed was a reasonable machine and if you're hardcore, a nice graphics card. Now it's this driver, that forceware, this chipset, and selling your wife. It's too specific, too pedantic, and too unreliable.
Developers need to get this into their heads. You just can't do that any more, or console gaming will indeed win out, in all it's head-up-arsed ignorance.
It's getting to the point where games look more acceptable than ever, and the differences are just increased "realism" or special effects. The cost is the user - the hardware requirements are staggering (especially Crysis) and pointless.
Back in the day when we were software rendering everything, all you needed was a reasonable machine and if you're hardcore, a nice graphics card. Now it's this driver, that forceware, this chipset, and selling your wife. It's too specific, too pedantic, and too unreliable.
Developers need to get this into their heads. You just can't do that any more, or console gaming will indeed win out, in all it's head-up-arsed ignorance.
This sums it up.
But this problem showed already earlier, but not as hard as nowadays.
I remember when id made one of their Quakes (forgot which one; 3 or earlier) on a Macintosh first because they had one working platform to get the game right and after that port it to the various PC components and make sure it runs there (Interview was in a German Mac print Magazine).
Last edited:
Actually id tech5 was shown first at the mac convention as well wasnt it?
I agree though specific chipset requirement do kinda suck, it was alittle better when they were changing sockets n slots willy nilly atleast then people knew whether or not something worked. Now days you basically have to be an electronics engineer or something stupid to work it all out, so I usually stick to knowing the numbers for my brands of choice and thats it.
I guess it does have its upside in a way that people can fit older processors in newer motherboards in intels lga775 case but you cant put a newer processor in an older motherboard which makes it pretty pointless since the mobo can be fairly expensive.
Now days not only is there specific graphics type slots (moving on from agp) but theres a version on the slot just like there is with sata. Its just not obvious unless you know all the numbers what kind of performance benefits these things will bring. I mean shader model and spi is bad enough without all this stuff compounding the issue, like say nvidia and their love of their own chipsets.
I agree though specific chipset requirement do kinda suck, it was alittle better when they were changing sockets n slots willy nilly atleast then people knew whether or not something worked. Now days you basically have to be an electronics engineer or something stupid to work it all out, so I usually stick to knowing the numbers for my brands of choice and thats it.
I guess it does have its upside in a way that people can fit older processors in newer motherboards in intels lga775 case but you cant put a newer processor in an older motherboard which makes it pretty pointless since the mobo can be fairly expensive.
Now days not only is there specific graphics type slots (moving on from agp) but theres a version on the slot just like there is with sata. Its just not obvious unless you know all the numbers what kind of performance benefits these things will bring. I mean shader model and spi is bad enough without all this stuff compounding the issue, like say nvidia and their love of their own chipsets.
This video makes me think AMD has gotten their stuff together and PC gaming could see a jump once this kind of integrated performace makes it to retail.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kd0Of4PnpQk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kd0Of4PnpQk
When I bought an AMD64 about 4 years ago I tried to install 64bit windows xp. I couldn't even install it because windows xp didn't accept any driver for my sata controller, none. So I installed the 32bit version. I also installed the 64bit version of Debian (which wasn't finished yet, and didn't feel like installing any of the other 64bit Linux distros like RedHat or SUSE). It installed without a single hitch within 30 minutes. Took me 30 more minutes to completely hook up a 32bit subsystem to run 32bit programs ().
That was a clear sign that MS ****ed up. Pretty much all software can simply be compile for either 32bit or 64bit x86 systems. AMD specifically designed their architecture this way to make the conversion to 64bit as painless as possible. Just recompile the software with a 64bit compiler and you're done*.
*) of course it would be best to look at some parts of your program where you can optimize the code to take advantage of the 64bit stuff.
But then...
As a tech support dood, in REAL life, I agree that onboard intel graphics are for the lose... the newer Nvidia and ATI on board video solutions are definitely better.
Intel is not a name I quickly associate with gaming anyways, lately, being in an Intel town, I see a lot of frustration and stress. Personally I think that if Intel was more about gaming and more about graphics, Sweeny would be singing a diff tune.
I have a ps2 and an X-Box 360, and I have played Gears Of War (Loved it, once.) They rest in the living room for the kids to play with.
I prefer to play on my PC, with my graphics card, my build. I built my pc and I take a genuine thrill in playing games, editing video, working on my rig. VS the consoles, which are for gaming. Period.
I like the Wii too, but I can't imagine using it for all of the things I use my pc for.
This is an old argument, this PC vs Console, and it is silly. Silly. And I don't feel that the article was about that, just kind of implied by the front page post.
Personally, I look forward to the days when it isn't an either or.
I look forward to the days when PCs and Consoles play the same games, against each other, at the same time. Maybe these Video Game Artists can take this rockstar status and change the industry.
Maybe.
Or maybe we will.
As long as it has an editor, it is cool in my book.
^o^
As a tech support dood, in REAL life, I agree that onboard intel graphics are for the lose... the newer Nvidia and ATI on board video solutions are definitely better.
Intel is not a name I quickly associate with gaming anyways, lately, being in an Intel town, I see a lot of frustration and stress. Personally I think that if Intel was more about gaming and more about graphics, Sweeny would be singing a diff tune.
I have a ps2 and an X-Box 360, and I have played Gears Of War (Loved it, once.) They rest in the living room for the kids to play with.
I prefer to play on my PC, with my graphics card, my build. I built my pc and I take a genuine thrill in playing games, editing video, working on my rig. VS the consoles, which are for gaming. Period.
I like the Wii too, but I can't imagine using it for all of the things I use my pc for.
This is an old argument, this PC vs Console, and it is silly. Silly. And I don't feel that the article was about that, just kind of implied by the front page post.
Personally, I look forward to the days when it isn't an either or.
I look forward to the days when PCs and Consoles play the same games, against each other, at the same time. Maybe these Video Game Artists can take this rockstar status and change the industry.
Maybe.
Or maybe we will.
As long as it has an editor, it is cool in my book.
^o^
Like you said this discussion isnt really pro n cons of PC and console gaming but this is a very good point. UT3 apparently sold much better on PS3 so how much better would it have sold on PC perhaps if cross-platform multiplayer was the go?
A big argument people like to bring up is the lack of people in servers, well thats certainly one way to fix that.
If a title is made more cross-platform compatible as well it does make you wonder if you need a separate copy for PC/PS3 etc, thats been another of my arguments in the past. Is that people who buy a game on console would be more likely to pirate the PC version since the feel ripped off having to buy it twice. Like if I bought a 360 and gears of war when it was released what would be the odds I bought it on PC whether I pirated it or not?
There is alot of dual gamers out there so it is easier to think the console market is stronger when infact its just like the swing voters. Like Im a die hard PC gamer but Ive owned plenty of consoles and played plenty of console games. I just dont really like being forced to play on one platform or the other, I like to have that choice for myself.
Even if games require different versions for PS3, 360 and PC I rekon it would be much better if it supported all of those platforms in the one copy. Just like a game which can support PC, linux and Mac!
Last edited: