Support NeoGAF

[Zathalus]

I'm not sure if some people don't realize that these cards are not as powerful as the raw TFLOP numbers indicate. The 2080 is 10 TFLOPs, the 3080 is 30 TFLOPs, yet the latter is only 70-80% faster then the 2080. Dual FP32 execution is greatly increasing performance, but bottlenecks remain in other areas of the GPU.

 

[llien]

GOW, Infamous were nothing to write home about.

If GOW stands for "God of War", how dare you!

Seriously, I don't remember which other games, besides GoW and XCOM series (original) were so great that after finishing them, there was that feeling of emptiness and lack of interest towards other games, they were that great.

 

[Ogbert]

No. It's hilarious.

We've had about 12 months of Sony gimps e-peening about their precious PS 5 (a great console I'll be picking up) only to get tera-tebagged at the final hurdle.

It won't even hit current GPU performance.

 

[MilkyJoe]

You could argue it diminishes the platform he chooses to play on. I for one would 100% go PC if it was the place I could play all and future Sony first party games.

PC and X-Box are of lesser value proposition than Sony and Nintendo in terms of games because the latter two add value to their ecosystems by having such good exclusives.

Also you could argue that a game developed with one console in mind will get the best experience out of the parts, like Last of Us Part 2 on a 1.8tf machine (although PC is probably the exception as it can be brute forced).

It wouldn't make a dent in the market, they are not the same market

 

[Torrent of Pork]

Why the hell would anybody want to hobble technology? These cards look badass, and I'm still not building a rig.

 

[Bryank75]

Seriously, lets have the answer once and for all. Why does someone else being able to play a game diminish your ability to enjoy said game ?

Because exclusives are made to attract people to a platform. If you then turn around and put those on another platform it feels like you've been duped, the reason you bought the hardware in the first place is no longer there.

It undermines the strength of the platform and the identity it has cultivated over the past 25 years.... imagine Nintendo just put their games everywhere 10 or 15 years ago! They would never have had the success of Switch.


The biggest strength of consoles IMO is that it has one large corporation with a vested interest in providing the best content for its customers and they can leverage the entire userbase to fund excellent exclusives, the money to fund the games didn't come from PC gamers.

Still loads of other reasons.... will add later.

 

[MilkyJoe]

Because exclusives are made to attract people to a platform. If you then turn around and put those on another platform it feels like you've been duped, the reason you bought the hardware in the first place is no longer there.

It undermines the strength of the platform and the identity it has cultivated over the past 25 years.... imagine Nintendo just put their games everywhere 10 or 15 years ago! They would never have had the success of Switch.


The biggest strength of consoles IMO id that it has one large corporation with a vested interest in providing the best content for its customers and they can leverage the entire userbase to fund excellent exclusives, the money to fund the games didn't come from PC gamers.

Still loads of other reasons.... will add later.

But you seem offended by the notion. You don't see Xbox people crying into their cornflakes because those games are on PC. I really don't think it['s as big a deal as you think. The markets are not competing/;

 

[Bryank75]

But you seem offended by the notion. You don't see Xbox people crying into their cornflakes because those games are on PC. I really don't think it['s as big a deal as you think. The markets are not competing/;

Xbox is a dead platform outside the US, it will be the start of a new generation and the first time it doesn't have ANY exclusives.

Treating your biggest customer base and most loyal core gamers as second class is a surefire way to lose them.

PlayStation has very little to gain by bringing anything to PC, they don't make their money on exclusives, just look at the breakdown of last quarters revenue and profits.... it's mostly from DLC and microtransactions from 3rd party games.
Exclusives are just an incentive to attract people there in the first place, all the real money is made from other things. Things they cannot get money from on Steam or other platforms.

Undermining PlayStation is the death of the brand and if the brand shrinks there will be no exclusives cause they are expensive to fund.

For instance, I just bought an OLED in anticipation of PS5, I will drop at least 1500 euro on PS5 launch... I could easily go PC, I am one of there more lucrative customers and there are many like me..... do they want a customer base of low expenditure people or do they want to embrace both casuals and more high spending core gamers like me?

Would be foolish to lose the highest spending customers I think. I feel it is pure arrogance to take me as a customer for granted.

 

[MilkyJoe]

Xbox is a dead platform outside the US, it will be the start of a new generation and the first time it doesn't have ANY exclusives.

Treating your biggest customer base and most loyal core gamers as second class is a surefire way to lose them.

I couldn't get past here without thinking of experts in Japanese culture

 

[Bryank75]

I couldn't get past here without thinking of experts in Japanese culture

I don't know too much about Japanese culture compared to anyone else... I don't even watch manga or anime, I thought Akira was confusing nonsense.

I know more about Korea, because I have a bb in ITF taekwon-do and used to fight internationally. But that's beside the point.

Only game that I could see being worth porting is MLB The Show.

 

[VN1X]

Another thread so dumb it goes on the ol' ignore list.

How this has even reached 10 pages of stupidity is beyond me. Ok that's it for my drive-by. Enjoy!

 

[Ulysses 31]

I'm sure PCMR is not sad at all to remind consoles what the status is.

 

[Uncle Obscure]

At that price point? Hell, no. I work on a computer all day, every work day, and the last thing I want to do when I sit down to play a game at night is be on the computer. I much prefer relaxing on the couch in front of my 65" LG-OLED with a full-range Dolby ATMOS sound system feeding floor-standing and ceiling speakers. As always, YMMV.

 

[Optimistic Gamer]

No? "Power" doesn't really guarantee I will get the games I want.

Sometimes you gotta marry that ugly chick if you want to secure your ass to mouth.

 

[DonJuanSchlong]

Am I one of them???

Actually, no. Your more level headed and at least willing to discuss things, rather than those who just plain out fanboy and troll. You at least bring things to the tables at times. Just don't forget the silverware this time!

 

[Krappadizzle]

Xbox is a dead platform outside the US, it will be the start of a new generation and the first time it doesn't have ANY exclusives.

Treating your biggest customer base and most loyal core gamers as second class is a surefire way to lose them.

PlayStation has very little to gain by bringing anything to PC, they don't make their money on exclusives, just look at the breakdown of last quarters revenue and profits.... it's mostly from DLC and microtransactions from 3rd party games.
Exclusives are just an incentive to attract people there in the first place, all the real money is made from other things. Things they cannot get money from on Steam or other platforms.

Undermining PlayStation is the death of the brand and if the brand shrinks there will be no exclusives cause they are expensive to fund.

For instance, I just bought an OLED in anticipation of PS5, I will drop at least 1500 euro on PS5 launch... I could easily go PC, I am one of there more lucrative customers and there are many like me..... do they want a customer base of low expenditure people or do they want to embrace both casuals and more high spending core gamers like me?

Would be foolish to lose the highest spending customers I think. I feel it is pure arrogance to take me as a customer for granted.

You're trying so hard to keep that PS5 somewhere in the conversation and I think people have just come to accept that it's bottom tier now. The sooner you realize that the sooner you can move on and heal bud. XBox has been incredibly successful and turned around a lot of terrible business decisions since Phil took over, it's not a zero-sum game or some highlander shit where there can be only one. There's so much money to be made from all corners of the market that MSFT or Nintendo can come in 2nd place or 3rd place and still be a successful, money making brand.

Your $1500 means about as much to Sony as my $60. They don't give a shit about you. They love money, whether they get it from you a "hardcore" fan or me a "casual" it makes no difference. They aren't gonna bend over backwards to appease your feelings. They will release PS5 games on PC and there's not much you can say or do that will mean more to them that what their shareholders and executives have to say. They are a money making business and won't leave that free PC money just sitting on the table.

 

[Woo-Fu]

The only people saddened by this are those perpetually divorced from reality.

 

[Lanrutcon]

Gaming thread quality this year continues to drop at a steady pace.

Tomorrow's Thread of the Day: "I think Nvidia's new range is bad for developers, gaming and the fight against cancer"

 

[Rippa]

Lol, not at all! I fully expect a machine that requires a GPU to cost as much as console to outperform it in every conceivable way.

It's always been this way so I don't get why anyone would be upset.

A built machine that cost upwards of $2K vs a pre-fabbed machine that cost A fraction of that price better do everything better!

The real question to ask is, are people upset it cost so much money to get essentially the same experience on a pc than one would on a console?

I mean, why in the hell does PC gaming have to be so fricken expensive?

Price of entry is the only thing holding me back from building a gaming PC.

 

[aries_71]

I suspect that the future entails cloud-computing/gaming, so it doesn't really matter. MS/Sony are taking steps in that direction (xCloud, PsNow).
Right now, you can play a number of Steam games with an RTX2080 in GeForce Now for something like 6 bucks a month. In a few month you will probably get RTX3080 in Nvidias's servers. Console hardware is going to be irrelevant in little time, what's important are the platforms/ecosystems.

 

[Bryank75]

You're trying so hard to keep that PS5 somewhere in the conversation and I think people have just come to accept that it's bottom tier now. The sooner you realize that the sooner you can move on and heal bud. XBox has been incredibly successful and turned around a lot of terrible business decisions since Phil took over, it's not a zero-sum game or some highlander shit where there can be only one. There's so much money to be made from all corners of the market that MSFT or Nintendo can come in 2nd place or 3rd place and still be a successful, money making brand.

Your $1500 means about as much to Sony as my $60. They don't give a shit about you. They love money, whether they get it from you a "hardcore" fan or me a "casual" it makes no difference. They aren't gonna bend over backwards to appease your feelings. They will release PS5 games on PC and there's not much you can say or do that will mean more to them that what their shareholders and executives have to say. They are a money making business and won't leave that free PC money just sitting on the table.

Xbox as a business is a complete and utter failure. Only MSFT bankrolling their incompetence has kept them going.

PlayStation is the biggest gaming company in the world, makes more than Xbox and 5 times more than Steam does in it's best year.

PlayStation also has the best games and if you're a true gamer, that is waht matters and that is what makes them number 1.

 

[Krappadizzle]

Xbox as a business is a complete and utter failure. Only MSFT bankrolling their incompetence has kept them going.

PlayStation is the biggest gaming company in the world, makes more than Xbox and 5 times more than Steam does in it's best year.

PlayStation also has the best games and if you're a true gamer, that is waht matters and that is what makes them number 1.

 

[Bryank75]

Glad you can laugh at the truth, you need a sense of humor in these things.

Also look at this....

The average Steam game makes 47% less revenue in 2019, according to indie CEO

The market sure isn't getting any less crowded

www.pcgamesn.com

Steam is shit for publishers.


Steams best year ever: 4.3 Billion revenue

Steam Earned an Estimated $4.3B in 2017, but Benefits Flow to Handful of Titles - ExtremeTech

As the number of games released on Steam continues to explode, a tiny fraction of the total games are responsible for more and more of the revenue.

www.extremetech.com

PlayStation revenue: 20.8 Billion

PlayStation drives Sony's $78 billion earnings in 2018

PlayStation is a big reason for Sony's record FY2018 earnings.

www.tweaktown.com

PlayStation made more revenue last quarter than Steam does in a year too.

 

[me0wish]

PlayStation made more revenue last quarter than Steam does in a year too.

So that makes their games more enjoyable Mr."True gamer"? I have to admit, you gave me a good laugh so thank you.

Anyway, according to this threads logic, a new GPU should make my console experience sad, but I'm enjoying NES games just fine, is there something wrong with me?

 

[Graciaus]

Glad you can laugh at the truth, you need a sense of humor in these things.

Also look at this....

The average Steam game makes 47% less revenue in 2019, according to indie CEO

The market sure isn't getting any less crowded

www.pcgamesn.com

Steam is shit for publishers.


Steams best year ever: 4.3 Billion revenue

Steam Earned an Estimated $4.3B in 2017, but Benefits Flow to Handful of Titles - ExtremeTech

As the number of games released on Steam continues to explode, a tiny fraction of the total games are responsible for more and more of the revenue.

www.extremetech.com

PlayStation revenue: 20.8 Billion

PlayStation drives Sony's $78 billion earnings in 2018

PlayStation is a big reason for Sony's record FY2018 earnings.

www.tweaktown.com

PlayStation made more revenue last quarter than Steam does in a year too.

A much larger company with many more users makes more then a smaller one? Who would have guessed. Did you also bother to read the first article outside of the title? Literally the first sentence would tell you why.

 

[Krappadizzle]

Glad you can laugh at the truth, you need a sense of humor in these things.

Also look at this....

The average Steam game makes 47% less revenue in 2019, according to indie CEO

The market sure isn't getting any less crowded

www.pcgamesn.com

Steam is shit for publishers.


Steams best year ever: 4.3 Billion revenue

Steam Earned an Estimated $4.3B in 2017, but Benefits Flow to Handful of Titles - ExtremeTech

As the number of games released on Steam continues to explode, a tiny fraction of the total games are responsible for more and more of the revenue.

www.extremetech.com

PlayStation revenue: 20.8 Billion

PlayStation drives Sony's $78 billion earnings in 2018

PlayStation is a big reason for Sony's record FY2018 earnings.

www.tweaktown.com

PlayStation made more revenue last quarter than Steam does in a year too.

I'm laughing because again, IT'S NOT A ZERO-SUM GAME! The fact that this shit is important to you in the first place is what is hilarious and sad. Even with Sony being on top, everyone else can and does make profit. So literally everyone wins. The only losers are the people that think it matters. Even still you wanna boil the shit down, who makes more money? MSFT or Sony?

 

[ChrisB]

A much larger company with many more users makes more then a smaller one? Who would have guessed. Did you also bother to read the first article outside of the title? Literally the first sentence would tell you why.

PC (Steam) has less users than Playstation?

 

[Rentahamster]

Because exclusives are made to attract people to a platform. If you then turn around and put those on another platform it feels like you've been duped, the reason you bought the hardware in the first place is no longer there.

I don't feel duped, I feel grateful that I have more options. Consoles have other reasons for existing, like accessibility and price/performance value. My console decisions don't live and die on exclusives.

imagine Nintendo just put their games everywhere 10 or 15 years ago! They would never have had the success of Switch.

That would be frickin' awesome! That would turn my currently lukewarm opinion of Nintendo into a definite positive one.

 

[Bryank75]

I don't feel duped, I feel grateful that I have more options. Consoles have other reasons for existing, like accessibility and price/performance value. My console decisions don't live and die on exclusives.


That would be frickin' awesome! That would turn my currently lukewarm opinion of Nintendo into a definite positive one.

Consoles depend on growth, they cannot grow without more exclusive content.... more people on one console means they can get better prices on higher grade components and get better economies of scale. That is why it matters in the long run, they can't do that by losing customers to PC or giving PC users reason not to buy a PlayStation.

 

[StateofMajora]

I saw doom running on 3080 vs. the 2080ti. Nvidias new teraflop rating is even more misleading than amd Vega.

it wasn't even, or barely a 50% improvement which makes the 30tf rating complete bunk.

 

[Rentahamster]

Consoles depend on growth, they cannot grow without more exclusive content.... more people on one console means they can get better prices on higher grade components and get better economies of scale. That is why it matters in the long run, they can't do that by losing customers to PC or giving PC users reason not to buy a PlayStation.

Consoles also depend on being a good product for growing. This is reason for any consumer good to exist. If the main reason for consoles to grow is anti-consumer tactics like artificially enforced scarcity, then I'd say that is a poor product. Fortunately, there are many other consumer-friendly reasons to buy consoles.

 

[squallheart]

 

[Thugnificient]

Is Bryank75 joking and some sort of known pranksters? Because he's still around while I got banned for much less.

 

[Bryank75]

Consoles also depend on being a good product for growing. This is reason for any consumer good to exist. If the main reason for consoles to grow is anti-consumer tactics like artificially enforced scarcity, then I'd say that is a poor product. Fortunately, there are many other consumer-friendly reasons to buy consoles.

 

[Bryank75]

Is Bryank75 joking and some sort of known pranksters? Because he's still around while I got banned for much less.

I'm just a stimulating conversationalist, I enjoy a good chat with emotional highs and lows. I wouldn't call it trolling or anything like that.
Would you care to take a roller-coaster ride with me through gaming?

 

[martino]

I couldn't get past here without thinking of experts in Japanese culture

 

[Rentahamster]

I didn't say anything about being entitled to first party content. My point was about whether artificial scarcity is good for the consumer or not.

 

[Bryank75]

I didn't say anything about being entitled to first party content. My point was about whether artificial scarcity is good for the consumer or not.

Who's doing that now? Nintendo?

Never heard PS doing it.

 

[Rentahamster]

Who's doing that now? Nintendo?

Never heard PS doing it.

Exclusives, are by definition, artificially limiting availability. From a business standpoint, I can totally see why they do what they do, but that doesn't change the nature of the beast.

 

[EDMIX]

Kinda sad? Nah...not really.

They had that power for years though and what came of it? What PC exclusives came out that needed those fancy cards to run as minimum or something? So PC has had those high end cards for a long time, but it means very little if they are just making current gen games look slightly better. So you won't see much happen with those cards anymore then you'd see a exclusive game on PS4 Pro or XONE X or something. So from PS4 to Pro and from XONE to X, its multiple times more powerful, but you'll find that doesn't really mean much if they are basically just using just using the head room to make it look slightly better.

So I see nothing to really be "sad" about as they've had that power for years.

Doesn't mean shit when they are basically just used for current gen games though.

 

[Bryank75]

Exclusives, are by definition, artificially limiting scarcity. From a business standpoint, I can totally see why they do what they do, but that doesn't change the nature of the beast.

They would have no reason to make the games in the first place...

The only reason they make the games in the first place is because they have hardware to support.

There is competition between platforms, due to this we get more games, more studios are built, more money comes into the industry and more people have jobs.

Eroding competition in the industry will result in less people buying PC's and consoles.... people just buy PC now instead of buying a PC and an Xbox for instance.

I really don't understand the mindset.... I mean, I don't go to McDonalds and scream at them that they are 'anti-consumer' for not selling double-whoopers....

I don't complain to Netflix that they don't have The Mandalorian...

So, you think Sony shouldn't own and fund games, just shutdown all their studios cause having exclusives is 'anitconsumer'?

(Anyway I'm way off-topic, so I'll just add that the RTX 30 series looks like a great step up and should really give competing platforms pause to think about their strategies for the future)

 

[EDMIX]

Exclusives, are by definition, artificially limiting availability

Nah, just stop..... A company has no ode to sell their product on their competitors platform. By default their job is to make money FOR THEM, not other companies.....

 

[Rentahamster]

They would have no reason to make the games in the first place...

There are reasons to make games.

The only reason they make the games in the first place is because they have hardware to support.

That one reason. And it's a big one and important one. It's not the only one.

There is competition between platforms, due to this we get more games, more studios are built, more money comes into the industry and more people have jobs.

Eroding competition in the industry will result in less people buying PC's and consoles.... people just buy PC now instead of buying a PC and an Xbox for instance.

Easing up on exclusivity restrictions does concede some competitive aspects. Sometimes, things that aren't good traditional business strategies are that way because they are too pro-consumer. However, that doesn't mean that pro-consumer goodwill won't have other, indirect positive externalities.

I am not convinced that being more pro-consumer is the pathway to product death. If Product X dies on the sole reason that it eliminated its anti-consumer tactics, then I'd say that was a shitty product if that's the only reason why it was kept alive.

In other words, if Playstation dies just because they offer exclusives on other platforms (which I doubt, but we'll assume this premise is true) then it didn't have any other positive qualities to its name to justify its existence. The argument you're making makes it sound like the Playstation 4 and 5 aren't fantastic systems on their own merits, regardless of exclusives, and that exclusives are the only thing that's keeping PS from the abyss.

I really don't understand the mindset.... I mean, I don't go to McDonalds and scream at them that they are 'anti-consumer' for not selling double-whoopers....

Apples to oranges comparison

I don't complain to Netflix that they don't have The Mandalorian...

A little more relevant comparison. You don't complain, but others do. Again, I can see why they want to keep things exclusive, but no matter how you slice it, it's still enforcing artificial scarcity. For them, it's great. For consumers, not so great.

So, you think Sony shouldn't own and fund games, just shutdown all their studios

I don't know where you're getting that part from. I never said that. I don't even agree with any of that.

 

[Rentahamster]

A company has no ode to sell their product on their competitors platform.

I didn't say it did.

By default their job is to make money FOR THEM, not other companies.....

The merits of my argument has nothing to do with whose job it is to make money.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Lol artificial scarcity

The product doesn't exist on your platform in the first place. There's nothing artificial about that

 

[Bryank75]

There are reasons to make games.


That one reason. And it's a big one and important one. It's not the only one.


Easing up on exclusivity restrictions does concede some competitive aspects. Sometimes, things that aren't good traditional business strategies are that way because they are too pro-consumer. However, that doesn't mean that pro-consumer goodwill won't have other, indirect positive externalities.

I am not convinced that being more pro-consumer is the pathway to product death. If Product X dies on the sole reason that it eliminated its anti-consumer tactics, then I'd say that was a shitty product if that's the only reason why it was kept alive.

In other words, if Playstation dies just because they offer exclusives on other platforms (which I doubt, but we'll assume this premise is true) then it didn't have any other positive qualities to its name to justify its existence. The argument you're making makes it sound like the Playstation 4 and 5 aren't fantastic systems on their own merits, regardless of exclusives, and that exclusives are the only thing that's keeping PS from the abyss.


Apples to oranges comparison


A little more relevant comparison. You don't complain, but others do. Again, I can see why they want to keep things exclusive, but no matter how you slice it, it's still enforcing artificial scarcity. For them, it's great. For consumers, not so great.


I don't know where you're getting that part from. I never said that. I don't even agree with any of that.

You absolutely do... you are saying their hardware should stand on it's own merit.

So there is no need for them to do any software, just put all that investment into hardware, focus on that... anything more is 'anticonsumer'.

Nobody is stopping anyone from buying a PlayStation to play these games. You need to spend money to gain access to things.... why don't Xbox offer Game Pass as a free service? Games are not their main business and it costs them nothing to host games on their servers......
They should focus on their business and OS software and let people play their games for free on PC because they benefit from people being on PC anyway.

 

[Rentahamster]

Lol artificial scarcity

The product doesn't exist on your platform in the first place. There's nothing artificial about that

Doesn't change what it is.

Artificial scarcity - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Could product X be more widely available? Yes. Is it being restricted because of a business decision? Yes.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Doesn't change what it is.

Artificial scarcity - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Could product X be more widely available? Yes. Is it being restricted because of a business decision? Yes.

Well that's fantastic but your blanket anti-consumer stance on it is just nonsense

 

[Rentahamster]

You absolutely do...

No I don't, read my words again.

you are saying their hardware should stand on it's own merit.

I didn't say they "should". I said that they could. These are two different concepts. I completely understand why they don't do it. But as a consumer, I don't have to like it.

So there is no need for them to do any software, just put all that investment into hardware, focus on that... anything more is 'anticonsumer'.

That is also not what I'm saying.

Nobody is stopping anyone from buying a PlayStation to play these games.

That's right, but the cost of a PS is higher than many people's budgetary threshold.

You need to spend money to gain access to things....

That's right. I agree with that. And the less money you need to access something, the more consumer friendly it is.

why don't Xbox offer Game Pass as a free service?

Because that would cut off their revenue stream entirely, all things being equal. Not a good example.

Games are not their main business and it costs them nothing to host games on their servers......

Not a good justification for your bad example, and not what I'm talking about either.

They should focus on their business and OS software and let people play their games for free on PC because they benefit from people being on PC anyway.

Also not what I'm saying. You keep arguing against what you think I'm saying rather than what I'm actually saying.

 

[Rentahamster]

Well that's fantastic but your blanket anti-consumer stance on it is just nonsense

It's not a blanket statement. I'm working within the definition. If you have an issue with the definition, then that's not my problem.