[gamegpu.ru]Assassin Creed III GPU Benchmark

[MrK6]

Hardware to play games- games sold.

For consoles this called a tie rate. It is pretty much the defacto standard used when looking at how the industry is trending. Core PC gaming has a *negative* tie rate(the 360 and PS3 are in the >10:1 range). My source is nVidia's financial reports.

You didn't list units sold, you listed revenue. Furthermore you didn't list how many of those units sold went into viable gaming PC's and had at least one brand new game played on them. Almost everyone who buys a console does so to play games. The majority of the people who buy PC's don't play games, and even fewer play the type of games we're talking about (modern, AAA titles, etc.). Considering there's a >50% chance the discrete graphics card in every new PC or laptop is a nvidia part, this disproportionately and inaccurately tilts the "tie rate." That's why tie rates are used to discuss consoles, not PC's. Your argument is poor.

It is interesting that you use that as an example as it so happens that iPod revenue is down sharply. The difference is the scales of importance for the respective business sector for each company. Obviously your example is a stretch for correlation, using PC gaming cards compared to PC gaming revenue isn't. If iPod sales increased by a factor of ten and iTunes(and music sales overall) dropped sharply then there would certainly be a good reason to expect that piracy was a large factor. Not quite as relevant as you don't need a new iPod to play a song released this year, an eight year old model will work just fine.

You don't need a new graphics card to play a new game either. In fact, very few people own a new graphics card. Look at the Steam Hardware Survey or any others. Now apply the same critical reasoning you just used to figure out why my facetious "Apple shares are down, no one must be listening to mp3's" was false, and you'll figure out why your argument was poor as well.

 

[BenSkywalker]

You didn't list units sold, you listed revenue. Furthermore you didn't list how many of those units sold went into viable gaming PC's and had at least one brand new game played on them. Almost everyone who buys a console does so to play games. The majority of the people who buy PC's don't play games, and even fewer play the type of games we're talking about (modern, AAA titles, etc.). Considering there's a >50% chance the discrete graphics card in every new PC or laptop is a nvidia part, this disproportionately and inaccurately tilts the "tie rate." That's why tie rates are used to discuss consoles, not PC's. Your argument is poor.

Heh, it just isn't worth continuing. My job is to analyze sales data, there are hundreds of different reference points to bring up, overall market growth versus sub category, discrete versus integrated distribution breakdown between the quarters compared, segment breakdown to the comparative segment per sub sector and how all that breaks out, but really it just isn't worth trying to explain it to you. All of the data is out there, all you need is to spend a couple hundred hours pouring over the information that is publicly available- break down the financials for all the companies involved and map out the sales per segment yourself. I could go point by point and we could go for months, but I know what I'm talking about, and you want to believe in the Easter Bunny. I don't tell little kids he isn't real, maybe I shouldn't bother with the developmentally youthful around here either

 

[GaiaHunter]

League of Legends.
CoD4:MW
CoD2
WoW
GW2

That is the list of the top 5 games played in XFire for the last 3 months.

D3, PlanetSide 2, World of Tanks, MineCraft, Dota 2, SWTOR, SC2 are other titles regularly in the top 20.

All games about graphics.

Fact is the PC gaming industry changed but most of the developers/publishers haven't adapted to the change of landscape.

And of course most of the sales charts just completely ignore digital sales that in many cases outnumber retail sales 2:1 or 3:1.

Also there is few reasons to buy games @$60/€60 when you can buy them a few months later at half price or lower- after all the graphics won't become outdated, so unless it is a game you are hitching to play, you might as well just pick it up at a more reasonable price.

All the games above are a much better price/hour than the typical mass seller console game.

http://www.vg247.com/2012/06/09/stu...it-70-billion-by-2017-pc-largest-contributor/

“Digital distribution, already widely accepted among core gamers globally, is clearly broadening access to products and driving much of the industry growth,” said DFC Intelligence CEO David Cole, who expects digital to make up 66% ($46.2 billion) of revenues by 2017.

Cole feels more firms focusing on browser and social titles need to gain core support in order to grow revenue

“The bottom line, is core gamers spend money on products they like and right now the game offerings on sites like Facebook are simply not appealing to that demographics,” he said.

In order to compile its figures for the study DFC pulled numbers from Xfire, Live Gamer, and GamerDNA over the last five years for its study.

DFC found during its study titles played on PC will make up the largest percentage of the revenue with 39% ($27.3 billion), due to the metrics pulled from the aforementioned gaming networks. The firm found titles such as Diablo III, Minecraft, and League of Legends easily pulled in 1 million DAU despite little or zero retail presence.

 

[MrK6]

Heh, it just isn't worth continuing. My job is to analyze sales data, there are hundreds of different reference points to bring up, overall market growth versus sub category, discrete versus integrated distribution breakdown between the quarters compared, segment breakdown to the comparative segment per sub sector and how all that breaks out, but really it just isn't worth trying to explain it to you. All of the data is out there, all you need is to spend a couple hundred hours pouring over the information that is publicly available- break down the financials for all the companies involved and map out the sales per segment yourself. I could go point by point and we could go for months, but I know what I'm talking about, and you want to believe in the Easter Bunny. I don't tell little kids he isn't real, maybe I shouldn't bother with the developmentally youthful around here either

This translate to: "you're 100% right K6, that is a poor argument and I can't defend it." The sad part is I did that in 5 minutes at 4:00AM after I got out of the operating room; if this was really your career, you could easily summarize it.

League of Legends.
CoD4:MW
CoD2
WoW
GW2

That is the list of the top 5 games played in XFire for the last 3 months.

D3, PlanetSide 2, World of Tanks, MineCraft, Dota 2, SWTOR, SC2 are other titles regularly in the top 20.

All games about graphics.

Fact is the PC gaming industry changed but most of the developers/publishers haven't adapted to the change of landscape.

And of course most of the sales charts just completely ignore digital sales that in many cases outnumber retail sales 2:1 or 3:1.

Also there is few reasons to buy games @$60/€60 when you can buy them a few months later at half price or lower- after all the graphics won't become outdated, so unless it is a game you are hitching to play, you might as well just pick it up at a more reasonable price.

All the games above are a much better price/hour than the typical mass seller console game.

http://www.vg247.com/2012/06/09/stu...it-70-billion-by-2017-pc-largest-contributor/

I agree. The market is always evolving and with digital distribution (and the lack of solid reporting) it's difficult to assess trends without the data. I don't think consoles were ever a better bang-for-your-buck investment, but are one of convenience. However, with digital distribution and a wider selection of games, that balance of convenience might be competitive in the PC arena.

 

[Arzachel]

In the second quarter of 2000, nVidia had $78 million in revenue.

In the second quarter of 2012 nVidia had $1.04 billion in revenue.

Core PC gaming revenue is down from that time era. Everyone can try to downplay piracy all they want, it is decimating the PC gaming industry.

PC gaming died at it's conception because, you see, PC gaming is dead. It died because the hardware costs were obscene and no one bought a computer to play games, Amiga killed PC gaming. It died because no one was going to tweak their setup to clear as much memory as possible without killing their mouse drivers to play those demanding games, AUTOEXEC.BAT, demanding games and frequent hardware releases killed PC gaming. Because everyone would rather play games in a comfy couch in front of their TV, consoles killed PC gaming. Because no one would spend money on new games anymore due to the wealth of free content available, modding, demos and freeware indie games killed PC gaming. Because no one would pay for a product they can get for free, piracy killed PC gaming. AAA studios turning away from PC centric genres killed PC gaming. I'm not sure what the current killer is, f2p, casual games, maybe Steam or Kickstarter?


A small team can make games that blow AAA stuff out of the water. I can get hundreds of hours of entertainment for the same money I'd spend on a single movie ticket. I can give my money directly to the developer instead of paying for some rich white old guy's yacht. I can even fund a game before it's done so the developer can make it as good as possible. I can follow the development and give feedback to games while they're still in development. Hell, I can even make something cool myself within hours thanks to the wealth of free/cheap frameworks, SDKs, modding tools, libraries and assets. PC gaming might be dead, but it has never been better.

Unless you're the rich white old guy, I guess?