Why Gameworks is detrimental to Pc Gaming

[railven]

Every gamer who decides PC gaming isn't worth the effort is a loss. The market is shrinking that's not good for PC gaming.

Where did you get this silly idea from? Unlike consoles, PC hardware sales != software sales. Just because people are holding on to their hardware longer (dem AMD users ) doesn't mean software sales are declining.

Shoot, I'd love it if you can find one single article to back up your claim that PC gaming is shrinking (note, software sales, not hardware).

Even Japanese developers are getting in on the PC market growth. For the the first time ever you can buy Tekken (TEKKEN!!!) for PC. And Capcom is releasing SF5 on PC day 1. Squaresoft is bring their catalog along...even companies like Idea Factory. Man, it's a great time to be a PC gamer! Even the niche of niches are getting their games released on PC.

These companies must have miss the memo that the market is shrinking.

EDIT: Namco Bandai is bring TALES to PC!!! Come on!

 

[Enigmoid]

You all missed the point of me saying using the 7850. I say that because back then, it was mid to low tier, but still able to play most games at near max settings. Now you need a 290/390 which is undoubtedly high tier to play games at near max settings. The cost of the same settings has gone up which gameworks played a major part in.

The 7850 even at launch was not a low end card. Mid range certaintly but never low end.

The 7850 launched to a year or two of console ports. As expected with the PS4 and XBONE game requirements rose.

The tech hasn't advanced much at all! What games look better than c3 besides maybe tw3? Why is tw3 so much harder to run than crysis 3 when the I.q upgrade is so little ? Gameworks. You guys say it's because of consoles, but the iq upgrade consoles have brought have been very little. The biggest upgrade I've seen the consoles bring is in nba 2k.

Turn off gameworks on TW3. It runs like craps because as more and more GPU power becomes available devs optimize less and less.

 

[3DVagabond]

I feel like I'm in the same boat. I've been buying a new GPU once every year for what feels like the last two decades. It was always a $500-600 expense, until AMD graced us with HD 4870, but that only lasted three Generations (HD 5870 another gem and I had to skip HD 6970 do to an agreement) before HD 7970 brought AMD back to that price point (which I accepted with open arms).

As a PC gamer, I'm use to the chicken littles. PC game has been on the ropes and about finish since, shoot the 6th console generation and everyone was positive the 7th would be the lights for PC with the growth of mobile.

I'm sure we'll still be here when Gen 9 roles around

So you are saying that having only one vendor in the market who is able to manufacture hardware profitably is fine? If AMD were to be bought by say Samsung, as some have suggested, I can virtually guarantee that they would drop the desktop dGPU. It's not worth the effort for the return to a big company like Samsung who can sell a mobile phone for a grand.

 

[Sabrewings]

And when you end up with even buggier games than batman you'll know why because more people will stay with consoles versus going to pc. One youtuber just sold his 980ti because of subpar pc support.

That's his problem. I bought my 980 Ti primarily for VR as I will be a first adopter of both the SteamVR and Oculus. Not going to get that experience on consoles. Morpheus, you say? Oh, please.

I don't have any issues with buggy PC games. I wouldn't have even bought AK if it didn't come with my 980 Ti for over a year and by that point it'll be fine. I have that much of a back log.

There isn't about to be a mass exodus nor is PC gaming going anywhere. It's a shame that some PC developers are going where the money is and developing console first, sure. At least now they're x86 based so in theory ports should be better (thanks for screwing that up AK). Similar arguments have been floated as long as I've been active on PC gaming which is at least 12 years. Every time a new console gen comes out there is some sort of reason to think PC gaming is nearly dead.

If anything, I think the era of large developers and publishers in the PC space is going to start to come to its twilight. I find myself enjoying the finished products of early access and indie games more than AAA anymore, anyway. Sure, AAA can be fun at times but I hardly get excited about them anymore. Usually it's regurgitated crap like CoD7 shoot your nuts edition! Basic console crap as it is.

 

[3DVagabond]

Where did you get this silly idea from? Unlike consoles, PC hardware sales != software sales. Just because people are holding on to their hardware longer (dem AMD users ) doesn't mean software sales are declining.

Shoot, I'd love it if you can find one single article to back up your claim that PC gaming is shrinking (note, software sales, not hardware).

Even Japanese developers are getting in on the PC market growth. For the the first time ever you can buy Tekken (TEKKEN!!!) for PC. And Capcom is releasing SF5 on PC day 1. Squaresoft is bring their catalog along...even companies like Idea Factory. Man, it's a great time to be a PC gamer! Even the niche of niches are getting their games released on PC.

These companies must have miss the memo that the market is shrinking.

EDIT: Namco Bandai is bring TALES to PC!!! Come on!

This is the VC&G forum. We're talking hardware not software.

 

[railven]

So you are saying that having only one vendor in the market who is able to manufacture hardware profitably is fine? If AMD were to be bought by say Samsung, as some have suggested, I can virtually guarantee that they would drop the desktop dGPU. It's not worth the effort for the return to a big company like Samsung who can sell a mobile phone for a grand.

Where did I say that? You got a lot of projection issues. Should fix that.

This is the VC&G forum. We're talking hardware not software.

I get that, but I will assume you Googled it and only found articles about the explosive growth of PC gaming thus you have to switch your argument.

 

[postmortemIA]

I got 7850 and 1440p display. Works great with indie games, and ones few years old. Chasing latest most demanding titles surely helps nVidia execs with their yachts payments :d

 

[The Alias]

Where did you get this silly idea from? Unlike consoles, PC hardware sales != software sales. Just because people are holding on to their hardware longer (dem AMD users ) doesn't mean software sales are declining.

Shoot, I'd love it if you can find one single article to back up your claim that PC gaming is shrinking (note, software sales, not hardware).

Even Japanese developers are getting in on the PC market growth. For the the first time ever you can buy Tekken (TEKKEN!!!) for PC. And Capcom is releasing SF5 on PC day 1. Squaresoft is bring their catalog along...even companies like Idea Factory. Man, it's a great time to be a PC gamer! Even the niche of niches are getting their games released on PC.

These companies must have miss the memo that the market is shrinking.

EDIT: Namco Bandai is bring TALES to PC!!! Come on!

What happens when said software requires the latest hardware to play at reasonably high settings? You end up having to buy new cards every year. Do you think that's positive for pc gaming? The reason we're getting such a boom in software now is because of Pc gaming's newfound accessibility and yet here you are defending Gameworks when it's main function has been crippling performance on older cards for small I.q gains. Hurting the same accessibility that made pc gaming so popular the last few years

 

[3DVagabond]

Where did I say that? You got a lot of projection issues. Should fix that.

As a PC gamer, I'm use to the chicken littles. PC game has been on the ropes and about finish since, shoot the 6th console generation and everyone was positive the 7th would be the lights for PC with the growth of mobile.

I'm sure we'll still be here when Gen 9 roles around.

So, this is not meant to defend the state of PC gaming?

I get that, but I will assume you Googled it and only found articles about the explosive growth of PC gaming thus you have to switch your argument.

You would be wrong. If we were in the gaming forum I could understand you thinking that's what I meant.

 

[railven]

What happens when said software requires the latest hardware to play at reasonably high settings? You end up having to buy new cards every year.

Are you new to PC gaming? Or do you only remember Gen 7 from the consoles? For a while, PC gaming had accelerated progression. It was normal for new games to make old hardware feel obsolete. Then we got to the dark Console 7th gen when MSFT started it off by paying a lot of companies to focus on their console first. And we got the dreaded console ports people here hated. You didn't have to upgrade your PC for what felt like 2-3 years because the ports we were getting weren't very demanding. Hell, everyone here must remember Crysis 2 and how it was a DX9 Console Port for the first 3-4 months of it's existence?

Do you think that's positive for pc gaming? The reason we're getting such a boom in software now is because of Pc gaming's newfound accessibility and yet here you are defending Gameworks when it's main function has been crippling performance on older cards for small I.q gains. Hurting the same accessibility that made pc gaming so popular the last few years

As a long time PC gamer, it was normal to scale settings back. So, for me, it's sort of returning back to a time when we had to upgrade more frequent. I don't mind it because I can afford it and I was use to it.

Is it bad for PC gaming? Oh hell no, unlike what someone claimed PC gaming is growing at a huge rate. Why? because it is so versatile. Unlike consoles where you HAVE to drop that $400-450 to buy a PS4/Xbone to play the new Batman, for PC users (such as yourself) still using a GPU from 2012, you can just scale the settings down and enjoy it.

Visual fidelity != Enjoyment. The fidelity is the little icing PC gamers long for, the enjoyment/gameplay is still the core of the product. Whether you get burst particles blinding you in Borderlands from PhysX or not, you are still playing the same game.

Gameworks is only going to segment the PC users, and from what I've been seeing and reading it's working to give Nvidia a freaking cartel. People accept this, so be it.

 

[railven]

So, this is not meant to defend the state of PC gaming?

I didn't know PC gaming was in such dire straits. When I follow Gaming as a hobby I only see positive things for PC gaming in articles and sales trends.

What is the state of PC gaming? Do you mean one vendor struggling to sell their product? That is more their issue than an issue of PC Gaming. Because people holding on to their older AMD/Nvidia hardware can still enjoy new games. Nothing is stopping them from doing that, long as they can accept the settings they'll have to use. And those that wish to upgrade, swapping from the AMD side to Nvidia is also not hurting PC Gaming. It just hurts AMD.

You would be wrong. If we were in the gaming forum I could understand you thinking that's what I meant.

Every gamer who decides PC gaming isn't worth the effort is a loss. The market is shrinking that's not good for PC gaming.

That is a factual lie, you can't back it up without trying to correlate hardware sales to software sales. People not buying new hardware != they are leaving PC gaming, now is it?

 

[The Alias]

Are you new to PC gaming? Or do you only remember Gen 7 from the consoles? For a while, PC gaming had accelerated progression. It was normal for new games to make old hardware feel obsolete. Then we got to the dark Console 7th gen when MSFT started it off by paying a lot of companies to focus on their console first. And we got the dreaded console ports people here hated. You didn't have to upgrade your PC for what felt like 2-3 years because the ports we were getting weren't very demanding. Hell, everyone here must remember Crysis 2 and how it was a DX9 Console Port for the first 3-4 months of it's existence?



As a long time PC gamer, it was normal to scale settings back. So, for me, it's sort of returning back to a time when we had to upgrade more frequent. I don't mind it because I can afford it and I was use to it.

Is it bad for PC gaming? Oh hell no, unlike what someone claimed PC gaming is growing at a huge rate. Why? because it is so versatile. Unlike consoles where you HAVE to drop that $400-450 to buy a PS4/Xbone to play the new Batman, for PC users (such as yourself) still using a GPU from 2012, you can just scale the settings down and enjoy it.

Visual fidelity != Enjoyment. The fidelity is the little icing PC gamers long for, the enjoyment/gameplay is still the core of the product. Whether you get burst particles blinding you in Borderlands from PhysX or not, you are still playing the same game.

Gameworks is only going to segment the PC users, and from what I've been seeing and reading it's working to give Nvidia a freaking cartel. People accept this, so be it.

This isn't like before, because back then we actually got markedly better looking games. Now we're giving up half of our fps for small gains in fps.

Also do note the pc gaming didn't happen when you needed to upgrade often. It happened when high end gaming was still available to a wide range of hardware not just the top bracket

 

[railven]

This isn't like before, because back then we actually got markedly better looking games. Now we're giving up half of our fps for small gains in fps.

Giving up half our FPS for small gains in FPS? I'll assume you mean visual fidelity.

Switch shadows from High to Ultra in a game, and tell me if you're blown away first by the visual different or the performance difference.

Ultra settings have always been some fringe setting for a small portion of users. It was never a norm. Heck, the top echelon of PC gamers is still a small subset of PC gamers.

Also do note the pc gaming didn't happen when you needed to upgrade often. It happened when high end gaming was still available to a wide range of hardware not just the top bracket

I don't understand what you mean. You seem to come off as someone that expects top tier performance at middle or lower price brackets. That was never a reality for PC gamers. Sure, during the port brigade, middle bracket handled better, but even then those users were still scaling back settings. I mean, here is your HD 7850 in a popular game from it's launch:

Already at popular resolution that card was making compromises. So I really don't understand your argument.

 

[SPBHM]

7850 is fine, if you look at Digital Foundry it still delivers a slightly better experience than a PS4 on most games (if you have a good CPU)... and the PS4 is the main platform for new games;

I've played Witcher 3 on my 5850 and was impressed, the visuals far surpassed what I expected from the card, it's not even the best card possible from 2009! even the 7850, it's mid range from over 3 years ago... in the past, 3 years would easily make your card garbage (like really slow or simply incompatible, unplayable) for new games;

being a cheap PC gamer now is pretty good.

 

[3DVagabond]

That is a factual lie, you can't back it up without trying to correlate hardware sales to software sales. People not buying new hardware != they are leaving PC gaming, now is it?

http://jonpeddie.com/publications/market_watch

Overall GPU shipments dropped 13% in Q1’2015 from last quarter
AMD slipped 17%, Nvidia fell 13.5%, and Intel saw a 12% slip
Year-to-year total GPU shipments dropped 2.9%—Desktop graphics down 12.6%, notebooks up 4.2%

I'm talking hardware. This is VC&G. Not the gaming forum.
I thought everyone here knew this. Maybe not the precise numbers but the overall trend.

You need to be very sure of yourself before you accuse someone of lying. That goes beyond a debate or simple difference of opinion.

Now, if you go back to the original preface it was that console gamers are of the opinion that PC gaming is too expensive and complicated. I responded to a post that said (paraphrasing) "Let the eat cake." I was commenting that in a shrinking market (the dGPU market) that's not a good attitude nor is it healthy for the PC gaming industry.

 

[ImpulsE69]

You all missed the point of me saying using the 7850. I say that because back then, it was mid to low tier, but still able to play most games at near max settings. Now you need a 290/390 which is undoubtedly high tier to play games at near max settings. The cost of the same settings has gone up which gameworks played a major part in.

But gameworks really adds little to the equation and definitely isn't necessary to still be better than consoles. I'm running on an ancient 480 and Witcher 3 runs great with med-high settings (gameworks off). I don't feel I'm missing anything and the graphics are at least on par with new gen consoles with aprox same framerates...still not seeing your point.

You don't have to buy the highest end cards to play games. Only if you think you have to have the ultimate settings across the board. Also, gameworks will get better over time (one would hope) - as well as drivers.

PC gaming is growing, even though it is growing towards the moba/mmo sector more than anything else. Those gamers still play other games on occasion.

 

[The Alias]

Giving up half our FPS for small gains in FPS? I'll assume you mean visual fidelity.

Switch shadows from High to Ultra in a game, and tell me if you're blown away first by the visual different or the performance difference.

Ultra settings have always been some fringe setting for a small portion of users. It was never a norm. Heck, the top echelon of PC gamers is still a small subset of PC gamers.



I don't understand what you mean. You seem to come off as someone that expects top tier performance at middle or lower price brackets. That was never a reality for PC gamers. Sure, during the port brigade, middle bracket handled better, but even then those users were still scaling back settings. I mean, here is your HD 7850 in a popular game from it's launch:

Already at popular resolution that card was making compromises. So I really don't understand your argument.

Way to cherry pick benchmarks and time frames. Look at how the 7850 only got better with time. Also you guys act like no new games pushed the boundaries during that time. Far cry 3 and deus ex came out during that period too and crysis 3 and bf3 were available on 360 too. The new consoles haven't done much for us at all!

 

[railven]

Way to cherry pick benchmarks and time frames. Look at how the 7850 only got better with time. Also you guys act like no new games pushed the boundaries during that time. Far cry 3 and deus ex came out during that period too and crysis 3 and bf3 were available on 360 too. The new consoles haven't done much for us at all!

Okay, Far Cry 3:

A 280X is still faster than a HD 7850.

Still required to make a few sacrifices. Again, I don't see what you're trying to say.

EDIT: Even more relevant, since 270X is basically an HD 7870, which is still faster than the 7850:

 

[railven]

http://jonpeddie.com/publications/market_watch

Overall GPU shipments dropped 13% in Q1’2015 from last quarter
AMD slipped 17%, Nvidia fell 13.5%, and Intel saw a 12% slip
Year-to-year total GPU shipments dropped 2.9%—Desktop graphics down 12.6%, notebooks up 4.2%

I'm talking hardware. This is VC&G. Not the gaming forum.
I thought everyone here knew this. Maybe not the precise numbers but the overall trend.

You need to be very sure of yourself before you accuse someone of lying. That goes beyond a debate or simple difference of opinion.

Now, if you go back to the original preface it was that console gamers are of the opinion that PC gaming is too expensive and complicated. I responded to a post that said (paraphrasing) "Let the eat cake." I was commenting that in a shrinking market (the dGPU market) that's not a good attitude nor is it healthy for the PC gaming industry.

Do I need to quote you again? You are trying to make the conclusion that people upgrading less often is reducing PC Gaming, which it is not.

Those numbers only reflect that hardware sales are decreasing. Hardware Sales != PC Gaming. But keep trying, it's entertaining

 

[The Alias]

Okay, Far Cry 3:

A 280X is still faster than a HD 7850.

Still required to make a few sacrifices. Again, I don't see what you're trying to say.

Firstly I said near max settings (occlusion penalty is nuts), secondly if you compare fc4 maxed to fc3 maxed the I.q difference is no where near the penalty in fps which has been my counter point to everyone saying it's normal for consoles to do this to pc. Back in the day, when a new console came out,games looked markedly different than their last gen counter parts thus explaining the fps penalty. Games don't look that much different this gen yet we're still paying huge fps penalties.

 

[railven]

Firstly I said near max settings (occlusion penalty is nuts), secondly if you compare fc4 maxed to fc3 maxed the I.q difference is no where near the penalty in fps which has been my counter point to everyone saying it's normal for consoles to do this to pc. Back in the day, when a new console came out,games looked markedly different than their last gen counter parts thus explaining the fps penalty. Games don't look that much different this gen yet we're still paying huge fps penalties.

Okay, because I don't know what else to link:
A HD 7850 would be between a GTX 660 Ti and GTX 670

And it's still getting relatively the same FPS it got in FarCry3.

 

[3DVagabond]

Do I need to quote you again? You are trying to make the conclusion that people upgrading less often is reducing PC Gaming, which it is not.

Those numbers only reflect that hardware sales are decreasing. Hardware Sales != PC Gaming. But keep trying, it's entertaining

No point. I can see that you understand what I'm saying. You just don't want to have a hardware conversation in VC&G. That's up to you.

 

[railven]

No point. I can see that you understand what I'm saying. You just don't want to have a hardware conversation in VC&G. That's up to you.

Okay, sure, start a thread about it

 

[The Alias]

Okay, because I don't know what else to link:
A HD 7850 would be between a GTX 660 Ti and GTX 670

And it's still getting relatively the same FPS it got in FarCry3.

Note 4x msaa was enabled in fc3 in fc4 it's not. Secondly 7850 was between 650ti boost and 660

 

[railven]

Note 4x msaa was enabled in fc3 in fc4 it's not. Secondly 7850 was between 650ti boost and 660

Okay, if you don't get the concept that as new gamers come out old hardware gets less efficient, I guess there is nothing really to discuss. You came in here acting like HD 7850 couldn't run games today and some how NV made your purchase obsolete. You got various posters saying "turn off settings, it's normal" you flip it saying "nah, I bought mid-range I should be able to get max settings!"

So have at it. Enjoy your card.