Support NeoGAF

[Self]

So guys, I'm genuinely interested to find out if and how the PC market will slow down radical technical advancements in the upcoming console gereration.

We heard several comments from insiders, programmers and technical experts that all point to the same conclusion: The PC market has become the lowest common denominator.

- How will this influence technical progression?
- Is it even true or merely a hypothesis?
- Are PC gamers now considering to move over to the console market?

Personally I'm looking forward to the next generation and I'm eager to see new technical stuff which was not possible before. But if this shit is true, then my hopes have come to a halt. It would mean that only exclusive titles would profit from this upcoming technology.
It would mean that we could only profit from this technology in small and homeopathic dosages.
A real bummer.

So guys, proof my fears wrong, give me some hope.

So, what do you think?

 

[fran.fernandez]

Pc was always the lowest common denominator.

 

[fermcr]

Are you drunk?

 

[Self]

Pc was always the lowest common denominator.

Yes, but that's a whole other level of lowest common dominator, isn't it?

 

[Self]

Are you drunk?

Sometimes, yes

 

[Optimistic Gamer]

The PC market has become the lowest common denominator.

I feel like you pulled that quote from LTT in his apology video and you don't understand that consoles being ahead in some departments (because of new technologies emerging) is most probably a thing only for a time, as the PC is a platform that can constantly evolve.

If not, you're shitposting and I fell for it.

 

[Self]

I feel like you pulled that quote from LTT in his apology video and you don't understand that consoles being ahead in some departments (because of new technologies emerging) is most probably a thing only for a time, as the PC is a platform that can constantly evolve.

If not, you're shitposting and I fell for it.

Yes, that video made me think about it in the first place.

Ok, so we talk about what?
Few months, years?

 

[Psykodad]

It'll probably put an end to the expectations of PS5 1st party exclusives releasing on PC day 1 for the foreseeable future.

Probably can't even run on the vast majority of PCs.

Edit: nuance

 

[Optimistic Gamer]

Yes, that video made me think about it in the first place.

Ok, so we talk about what?
Few months, years?

There would be several ways to tackle this performance discrepancy. I have no idea how "serious" the industry would take this as first we need to see whether it actually makes a difference we can't simply squash with brute force.
If it was to result in new technology standards, I'd assume a couple of years? I'm just guessing.

Don't know whether GAF has people who could give and experienced, informed point on this at all.

Edit:
I seem to remember Cerny making a point of how some cooperations with AMD might make it to the market of pc via new products.
Maybe AMD is even working on solutions already?

 

[-YFC-]

Pc is, was and always will be a superior platform. It's upgradeable, versatile and it's not owned or constrained by any owner (msoft, sony etc).
I'm not sure why people still think ps5 and xses are something revolutionary, they're really not. They are revolutionary for consoles, sure.
Don't believe the marketing spiel from msoft and Sony, it's the same shit every generation. I remember when ps3 was released, that Pachter guy was saying how hardly any pc can come close to ps3's level of power. It turned out to be a lie. Same as this new upcoming generation.

 

[CuteFaceJay]

What is this fluff thread all about?

 

[Hendrick's]

I do think it is interesting. In a year or so when the current gen is abandoned, all console games (not including Switch of course) are going to be running on SSD. Will PC games also abandon the huge install base that has HDD's still? My thinking is that some games will require SSD, but it will take the PC side much longer to come around to that being a requirement.

 

[Graciaus]

Pc gamers aren't going to switch to consoles. I could see the opposite being far more likely.

People need to keep their expectations in check for the upcoming consoles.

 

[GametimeUK]

Multiplatform games will be designed to run on everything. PC will be ahead in many other ways. I'm going to go as far to say the PC can be massively inferior in many ways when it comes to the technology and I still wouldn't commit fully to consoles as long as I can keep customising my experience and having the freedom PC brings to the table.

 

[The Bloody-Nine]

What is this stupid shit?

 

[Self]

Pc is, was and always will be a superior platform.

I think nobody is arguing that high end PC's will always be technically more advanced then consoles in most cases.

But for me as a laymen it appears that something has changed in the upcoming generation: the elimination of severe bottlenecks. It sounds like a paradigm shift to me.

 

[-YFC-]

I think nobody is arguing that high end PC's will always be technically more advanced then consoles in most cases.

But for me as a laymen it appears that something has changed in the upcoming generation: the elimination of severe bottlenecks. It sounds like a paradigm shift to me.

This is where they got you. You're starting to believe their marketing spiel.

It's not a paradigm shift, it's still a 500 usd plastic box constrained by those very same 500 usd it costs to make. Don't be expecting miracles and full on ray traced 3A games on ps5/xsex, otherwise you're gonna be very dissapointed.

 

[VFXVeteran]

This is a click bait thread post.

If you think that an SSD that's not available on the PC currently automatically makes the PC a lowest common denominator platform when all of it's 3rd party games were superior to the console equivalents the entire generation last gen then you are really going to be disappointed.

 

[PropellerEar]

Awyiss!

 

[Self]

This is a click bait thread post.

C'mon, obviously it's to get attention.
It can be changed to anythink of your liking. Make a suggestion.
Maybe I should have used a '?' instead of a '!'.

 

[NeoGiffer]

MASTER RACE...

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

C'mon, obviously it's to get attention.
It can be changed to anythink of your liking. Make a suggestion.
Maybe I should have used a '?' instead of a '!'.

Thread title is fine don't you worry about the inferiority complex of the mustard race

 

[Frederic]

So guys, I'm genuinely interested to find out if and how the PC market will slow down radical technical advancements in the upcoming console gereration.

We heard several comments from insiders, programmers and technical experts that all point to the same conclusion: The PC market has become the lowest common denominator.

- How will this influence technical progression?
- Is it even true or merely a hypothesis?
- Are PC gamers now considering to move over to the console market?

Personally I'm looking forward to the next generation and I'm eager to see new technical stuff which was not possible before. But if this shit is true, then my hopes have come to a halt. It would mean that only exclusive titles would profit from this upcoming technology.
It would mean that we could only profit from this technology in small and homeopathic dosages.
A real bummer.

So guys, proof my fears wrong, give me some hope.

So, what do you think?

oh boy. This will not age well. Some people really fell for the SSD marketing.

every multiplatform game will look and run better on PC. Every single game.
Don’t be so delusional.

 

[Guilty_AI]

OP, this talk about PC becoming obsole or dying has always been a thing every time a new gen comes around, don't just gobble it up. There are some things I want you to think about:

-Some of the issues the tech 'solves' can often be countered with sheer brute force. The whole instantaneous SSD thing from the PS5 for example could be mimicked by simply throwing shitloads of RAM on a machine.
-There are already talks on how all this new new tech can make into PC anyway. No way a tech company like sony would develop groundbreaking technology just to not sell it, or MS for that matter.
-To start with, contrary to popular belief, the biggest attractive of PC for a large portion of its userbase isn't power, but its customizability and open nature. Just go on Steam most played and you'll see very few of them are hardware demanding games.

One last thing. Keep your expectations in check. With this kind of thing, not everything goes as expected, especially with loads of hype and PR involved.

 

[molly14]

Hard to say yet as we still haven't seen any gameplay from the consoles yet, just a lot of marketing talk, so far..., when the games are shown, then we can discuss if the pc has fallen behind the consoles, too early to know yet..

 

[GHG]

Well good thing that unlike with consoles PC developers are free to raise the minimum requirements for games as and when they want.

 

[TLZ]

They'll all have to jump on the gen4 nvme train.

Don't slow us down now!

 

[ROMhack]

Well, PC isn't flawless - the competitive nature of consoles compels more original IPs at the high-end. It's a big reason why consoles typically dominate that market, with them coming to PC later. It's not totally one way though as games like Half Life: Alyx have recently shown (or have they? It was designed to shift VR units above all).

I also don't think PC's invitation for newbie game makers is quite as strong as it used to be. That's something I find quite sad as there used to be a strong draw to PC - it meant finding and playing games you wouldn't be able to play on consoles. These still exist but not to the extent they once did.

Furthermore, certain PC-specific genres have died a bit of a slow death (e.g. point and clicks; the genre that was once).

Obviously PC still has plenty of appeal - fancy graphics; upgradable components; the cult of the e-peen. Loads of good qualities.

 

[Self]

-Some of the issues the tech 'solves' can often be countered with sheer brute force. The whole instantaneous SSD thing from the PS5 for example could be mimicked by simply throwing shitloads of RAM on a machine.

I see, sounds legit.
RAM is ultimately limited on console.

every multiplatform game will look and run better on PC. Every single game.

That's not the thing I'm referring to.
When games/ideas/creativity has to be cut/downgraded because of insufficient tech, the loss is already there.

 

[martino]

New gen, pc dying again...ZzzZzz
People expect gains of tech that will take years to leverage to be there in less than 6 months.
We already know that ssd of this year will be capable enough to replace SSD + custom controler of ps5.
pc only need directStorage.
All this will be there when really needed.

and for those who think pc will stay the photography of config we have now:
https://www.jonpeddie.com/news/amd-shipped-a-lot-of-gpus
amd alone sold nearly as much gpu than ps4 during the gen (imagine with Nvidia numbers)
i doubt cpu are different.
if storage change is needed you can expect this kind of number for them next gen

 

[Dontero]

It will be fascinating to watch developers and people pushing this garbage when they get their games and all of them will be running unstable 28fps with tearing while PC players will be rocking 60-100-140fps playing same games.

I see, sounds legit.
RAM is ultimately limited on console.

Pretty much. Notice that none of those people talk about random read from those SSDs. Aka single most important thing for gaming. For folks who don't know: Random read performance of NVME drives is about the same as for those "old" normal SSDs and it won't change much with PCIE4 gen nvme drives nor with "special souse" PS5 is using.

Everytime anyone speaks about SSD in context of consoles it is always sequential read aka something you will never use in games.

Getting SSD is huge improvement over HDD for consoles and this is something people WILL notice. But jerking off to SSD gods seems to be new trend that Sony/MS fanboys started to care with Sony/MS leading it because they don't actually have anything else that is actually innovative.

Reminds me a lot of Cerny "galic" bus that "totally changes everything" completely with articles written about it in and then games came out running at horrible framerates barely competing with mid range gpus at the time.

 

[Md Ray]

This is a click bait thread post.

If you think that an SSD that's not available on the PC currently automatically makes the PC a lowest common denominator platform when all of it's 3rd party games were superior to the console equivalents the entire generation last gen then you are really going to be disappointed.

We are talking about its (PS5's) SSD architecture, not the SSD itself. PC will become the lowest common denominator in that department when full-fledged PS5/XSX 3rd party games start to come out.

EDIT: There's no doubt that PCs will have way faster CPU, GPU (they already do) than next-gen consoles. So this isn't an issue. As a result, PC will be capable of better graphics, higher framerates just like they are now compared to current-gen consoles. PC Players will most likely have to ditch their HDDs going forward for gaming.

 

[cormack12]

Pc was always the lowest common denominator.

I mean yeah ultimately. I think the problem is that people are trying to make this a platform argument rather than a component debate. For instance, let's get rid of consoles for a minute - developers aren't going to suddenly just target the high end PC market only. They will still be targeting non current GPU's and last generation components. If they want their game to scale back to a 7850 or prior then they build to that target. They target the biggest markets to get most return on their investment. And it's insane to imagine they would.

However, consoles have usually contained the lowest common denominator in terms of component - the weak CPU. So that was the baseline dragging down a lot of multi-platform titles. The GPU was immaterial as far as being a limiting target to all games.

Now that's been flipped on its head. The lowest targeted component has to be a spinning disk. Developers can't - well won't - make an SSD a mininum requirement on PC games so developers will have to cater for that component. Loading screens will have to be injected etc. Games will still need optional asset packs instead of shipping with 4K as default, as spinning disks can't move that much data that quickly. Flight sim is a perfect example (SSD is ideal but NOT minimum), that has been dragged down to being built with spinning disk limitations in mind.

As an example the COD campaign won't be rebuilt for SSD and HDD. So if during a mission, they still need to dump assets and reload via a lift loading screen because they hav to cater for 7200rpm HDD then that will also be in the console version. Console players will still have to sit there and wait it out even though technically they wouldn't need to.

But this is the same as high end PC users now compared to mid range and below. The problem is everyone is too defensive to even give a little to common sense. PC's can make a game look really pretty and always upscale certain aspects, but it can't magically change how the game was designed. It can't take out winding passages because they have an SSD and don't need them.

The real question is are developers going to abandon the HDD market in the PC space, and I'm guessing not. Why would they shrink their possible market/revenue streams? Especially when the workflow scales across all platforms. However, where it may affect is this PS5 games appearing on PC. I'd try and get a rename on the thread - something like 'has the traditional PC HDD become the lowest denominator for 3rd party titles'.

Also just as an aside, it's doubtful whether 3rd parties would target only SSD in the consoles for at least two years post release for the same reason as market size. It doesn't make financial sense. So for 3rd party cross gen games the lowest targets will still be:

This gen consoles (CPU and GPU)
PC HDD
General CPU/GPU benchmarks for the 'sweet spot'

With the top item aging out as 3rd parties stop supporting current gen.

 

[Orta]

But for me as a laymen it appears that something has changed in the upcoming generation: the elimination of severe bottlenecks. It sounds like a paradigm shift to me.

How about waiting until these magical earth shattering consoles are actually out and we see what's on them. Before every new hardware launch we are fed unutterable bollocks about this console being more powerful than the computers that put man on the moon or that console being capable of launching nuclear weapons

The specs are nice, that infamous UE5 demo looks nice but as is always the case, two three years down the line, minus the latest AAA Naughty Dog or whoever title these consoles are going to be nothing special against not even a high end but a half decent PC and we'll be all wondering what the PS6 and next Xbox have in store for us. It's always been the way and it'll continue to be.

 

[Gamerguy84]

What is this stupid shit?

Came here for this comment.

 

[Airola]

It's not even true and merely a hypothesis.

 

[Empire Strikes Back]

I'm curious on how things will pan out. What will be next-gen's minimum requirements? Will it require an SSD? How high the read bandwidth would be for that? Will developers hold back game design due to PC?

My guess is that games will require at least a SATA III SSD and maybe more RAM on the worst case scenario. We could see some games being ported by 3rd parties if the process becomes too hard due to difference on streaming between PC and console. All in all, I don't think the PC will be more of a lowest common denominator than Xbox One/PS4.

However, I can see some games requiring some crazy bandwidth and being released only on XSX/PS5 for some years. My reasoning is that even the UE5 demo had some pop-in, and that was the fastest SSD available for a game. It will certainly be interesting to look at games only possible with SSD, I'm hoping the PS5 event will deliver on that promise.

 

[Skyr]

I need to save this thread, to pull it up a year from now for a good laugh.

 

[Helios]

I've not heard of one person that's not a flaming redditor refer to themselves as part of the "PC Master Race" unironically or in a serious manner.

 

[TheAdmiester]

If PC so good why there no PC2??!

Really makes you think

 

[Self]

So for 3rd party cross gen games the lowest targets will still be:

This gen consoles (CPU and GPU)
PC HDD
General CPU/GPU benchmarks for the 'sweet spot

Yes, that's understandable.
Actually both platforms (PC/console) will in some sense prevent each other from going full power.

People seem to agree at least, that it will take some time for PC to catch up. The question is not if, but when.
I think that everybody can agree that it should happen as fast as possible.
Then everybody wins.

 

[martino]

Yes, that's understandable.
Actually both platforms (PC/console) will in some sense prevent each other from going full power.

People seem to agree at least, that it will take some time for PC to catch up. The question is not if, but when.
I think that everybody can agree that it should happen as fast as possible.
Then everybody wins.

it should happen when it needs to happen not because ps5/xsx can do it.

 

[Self]

it should happen when it needs to happen not because ps5/xsx can do it.

Since I'm a full fledged console gamer, the appropriate time is obviously now!

 

[LazyParrot]

PC will be the bottleneck for storage, at least for a while. Consoles will remain bottlenecks for CPU and GPU processing power.

 

[molly14]

Your will have to spend at least twice the cost of the consoles for the pc to beat them, which some posters repeatedly forget to mention, and until they get the same speed of ssd then this will be a first generation where the pc is not miles ahead at the start.

 

[Self]

Your will have to spend at least twice the cost of the consoles for the pc to beat

That's not the point. People can spend as much money on their gimmicks as they want. I mean who cares as long as old tech is not blocking progress.
I think high end PC gamers know very well of what I speak of.

 

[bhunachicken]

Amusing story:

Back in the late 1990s, I posed as a video game journalist and called up the developers of Alien Trilogy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_Trilogy) seeking to find out more information.

I remember the developer that I spoke to on the phone at the time told me that the PC was the *minimum* platform for the game.

"Minimum?!"

"Yes, it's not the lead platform. We're focusing on the PlayStation, as it's capable of much, much more than the PC can do."

I was shocked. Back then, I was still a PC gamer. How could this silly Japanese console, this ... toy be better at running the game than a PC worth hundreds of pounds?!

He explained to me then that the PC simply didn't have the grunt to play the game as well as the PlayStation; they were using software rendering on the PC, whereas the PS1 had dedicated 3D hardware that was tearing through everything they were throwing at it. The Saturn version was decent, better than the PC, but still couldn't hold a candle to what the PlayStation was capable of.

Probably, the PC were was also running in MS-DOS, as Windows 95 was far too new. No DirectX, no Windows, no hardware 3D acceleration ... Yeah, actually makes sense. Looking back, I suppose a lot of PC owners would still be running 386s and 486s. Pentium processors had been available for a couple of years, but were likely to have been frighteningly expensive.

 

[Miles708]

Amusing story:

Back in the late 1990s, I posed as a video game journalist and called up the developers of Alien Trilogy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_Trilogy) seeking to find out more information.

I remember the developer that I spoke to on the phone at the time told me that the PC was the *minimum* platform for the game.

"Minimum?!"

"Yes, it's not the lead platform. We're focusing on the PlayStation, as it's capable of much, much more than the PC can do."

I was shocked. Back then, I was still a PC gamer. How could this silly Japanese console, this ... toy be better at running the game than a PC worth hundreds of pounds?!

He explained to me then that the PC simply didn't have the grunt to play the game as well as the PlayStation; they were using software rendering on the PC, whereas the PS1 had dedicated 3D hardware that was tearing through everything they were throwing at it. The Saturn version was decent, better than the PC, but still couldn't hold a candle to what the PlayStation was capable of.

Probably, the PC were was also running in MS-DOS, as Windows 95 was far too new. No DirectX, no Windows, no hardware 3D acceleration ... Yeah, actually makes sense. Looking back, I suppose a lot of PC owners would still be running 386s and 486s. Pentium processors had been available for a couple of years, but were likely to have been frighteningly expensive.

Nice post.
Isn't it theoretically this same situation, now?

If PS5 launches in 6 months, it's pretty safe to assume the PC Gaming audience won't get an SSD en masse in that time (or maybe it will?) so developers won't use the advantages of the PS5 architecture anyway.
But isn't this what PC gamers usually complain about, when looking at multiplatform games?

Of course, this peculiar gap will be closed and overturned, but it will happen when gamers will pretty much abandon HDD drives for gaming. That's gonna happen, the question is when exactly.
Currently you can't even release a physical game on PC, since no one has a blu-ray drive anyway, so you're always limited to your audience average specs.

That's the advantage of PC gaming, but also the advantage of custom hardware too.

 

[Lanrutcon]

We're going to be getting shitposts like these until the new consoles are actually released, aren't we?

 

[Nikana]

Good God I didn't think next gen shit posting could get any worse. These machines need to release tomorrow just so we can stop the nonsense. Save us M$ and Sony.