will the cubicle die along with the PC ? ill we conduct business on our cell phones ?
because there's a regular phone in my office...sitting there on my desk. Why do we need one of those when we have cell phones ?
i was just thinking businesses will replace PC and laptops with xbox and playstations. And Wiis for the janitors to sweep the floor with wiimotes.
Actually that's quite true in some cases, just look up FBI purchases playstation 3's (ok it's not a business in maybe the form your speaking of ), before they got locked down that is.
Recently Square Enix released some information about profitability, sobering reading.. makes you wonder which 'platform' is really in decline, at the moment i'd say its the console platform thats suffering, although the fact that the hardware of consoles is like, a decade out of date probably has a lot to do with it, and then there is the ps4 and xbox 720, details out there now, show them to have far more in common with a PC than their previous versions, now, adopting PC architecture is hardly a sign that PC's are on their last legs, it is however a sign that their previous incarnations are perhaps not doing so well, and further development along those lines was a dead end. Instead we have the next gen consoles with hardware thats, not really all that next gen.. lets face it, if somebody built a computer with 8 cores and a processor speed of 1.6ghz the first thing people would ask is, why its so underpowered, although, i could totally see a laptop/notebook using that kind of hardware, but a high end gaming machine, never in a million years, seriously i doubt it would even make it as a medium range gaming machine. The only things the PS4 has going for it, is DDR5 ram and a halfway decent graphics card, kind of makes you wonder why though, that the 720 seems to be using DDR3 ? maybe they'll change that by the time see official spec's for the 720
To me, its not whether or not the PC is dying, its whether or not the next gen Consoles will revive the console market which imo, is dying, no question about it.
Recently Square Enix released some information about profitability, sobering reading.. makes you wonder which 'platform' is really in decline, at the moment i'd say its the console platform thats suffering, although the fact that the hardware of consoles is like, a decade out of date probably has a lot to do with it, and then there is the ps4 and xbox 720, details out there now, show them to have far more in common with a PC than their previous versions, now, adopting PC architecture is hardly a sign that PC's are on their last legs, it is however a sign that their previous incarnations are perhaps not doing so well, and further development along those lines was a dead end. Instead we have the next gen consoles with hardware thats, not really all that next gen.. lets face it, if somebody built a computer with 8 cores and a processor speed of 1.6ghz the first thing people would ask is, why its so underpowered, although, i could totally see a laptop/notebook using that kind of hardware, but a high end gaming machine, never in a million years, seriously i doubt it would even make it as a medium range gaming machine. The only things the PS4 has going for it, is DDR5 ram and a halfway decent graphics card, kind of makes you wonder why though, that the 720 seems to be using DDR3 ? maybe they'll change that by the time see official spec's for the 720
To me, its not whether or not the PC is dying, its whether or not the next gen Consoles will revive the console market which imo, is dying, no question about it.
Yeah one of the huge driving factors for the current consoles not being as profitable as the last generation is the digital distribution, in the era of the playstation 1/2 and before, every game was sold through retail, now you can say ok "but the current console generation has digital distro", to that I would say, yeah but it's got such huge hardware limitations, its like the gimped version of what we have on PC. This next generation though, it's going to be really good, Ps4 will have digital distro loading in the background, onlive like replays using Gaikai and many more cool features.
What we are seeing is consoles coming more in line with PC's, and to be truly honest, the PS4 is a beast ! It's the first console I've looked at and thought, wow this is worth developing for.
Tablets and phones are digging into both console and PC gaming.
But people are missing the point. PC sales ARE in decline. That decline is excellerating.
Developers go to investors for funding for their ideas. Investors tend to not throw money at shrinking industries. It is just a fact. That is why we are seeing more and more indy titles and kickstarters starting to emerge. Long term the only way PCs make a comback is if they morph into something else, perhaps a console/PC hybrid. The idea of having a desk somewhere in a house with a bg clunky metal box is something from the 90's. Laptop markets have been dug into by tablets even harder than PC.
I like my PC, but I see the signs, especially when you read wall street tech reports. The PC industry, particularly in the west, is vanishing faster than people here want to admit.
Consoles have become a laughing joke,they are everything they said was the problem with PC's.
Consoles are replaced about ev ery couple years,where as my PC's are lasting many years.
Developers have not been advancing with technology,they are still making XP DX9 games,so all this new tech is a waste,however it makes ytour PC still relevant for many years.
Consoles are just whipping out new ones without really making any better games,so they are just a wasted money soak.I have seen games on the old Sega CD system that easily rival the graphics of new systems.Consoles games are still as linear as ever.
I feel the whole problem is with the developers because they claim the PS3 is powerfdul,yet they can't do anything with it.Example Square struggled badly with a couple games for the PS3,they eventually gave up and delivered a lower quality game.The games still look good,as i said the problem is with the develoeprs,they are just not using available tech,they are designing bare minimum games.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Consoles have become a laughing joke,they are everything they said was the problem with PC's.
Consoles are replaced about ev ery couple years,where as my PC's are lasting many years.
Developers have not been advancing with technology,they are still making XP DX9 games,so all this new tech is a waste,however it makes ytour PC still relevant for many years.
Consoles are just whipping out new ones without really making any better games,so they are just a wasted money soak.I have seen games on the old Sega CD system that easily rival the graphics of new systems.Consoles games are still as linear as ever.
I feel the whole problem is with the developers because they claim the PS3 is powerfdul,yet they can't do anything with it.Example Square struggled badly with a couple games for the PS3,they eventually gave up and delivered a lower quality game.The games still look good,as i said the problem is with the develoeprs,they are just not using available tech,they are designing bare minimum games.
That's really the same with PC's, When I look back and see the purchases of my PC's I've personally noticed the slow down, the jumps in the early days from 286 to 486, to Pentiums was the real leaps in performance, now its just added instruction sets and cores (in a basic view). That's how performance will carry on for quite a few years, especially when concerning GPU's, GPU's are still in infancy in possible uses.
Really mentioning previous tech is a "so so", cell architecture on the ps3 was a real pain tbh, but the PS4, serious bit of kit that most dev companies will be able to jump right into, since its well aligned to current development methods and pipelines akin to PC's.
Tablets and (smart) phones ARE PCs. I mean i can add a bluetooth keyboard/mice to my tablet and connect it to a monitor or TV. Considering the applicationg diversity on them and their web abilities(html 5 etc) that already makes them far more of a PC than any console.
Originally posted by Panther2103 Originally posted by DamonVileI own an xbox. It's over there sitting under my TV collecting dust. I don't even watch movies on it anymore. I guess I do use it to watch netflix....but I don't think that counts.
Same here. We have an Xbox 360, PS3 and WII U sitting under our TV, and we use the xbox for hulu, and the ps3 for netflix and blu rays. Other than that they collect dust because we game on our PC's 99% of the time.
Yes, this describes my family situation too. I personally grew up on consoles in the 80's-90's and finally completely lost any interest in them. I knew this when the next gen machines were announced lately and I didn't even raise an eyebrow.
PC gaming "per se" wont ever die. Sooner rather than later PCs could be gone as we know it, but the platform of gaming will all be done on "devices" that connect to a server that houses the hardware and you will play your "PC" games via a device that simply connects to the server which houses all the high tech hardware. You buy the device (very inexpensive thing -- kind of like a ROKU device), you still have your mouse and keyboard, you connect to a server provided by a service company (like Steam ) and you are set. The company I work for no longer uses PCs for the most part, I have a "device" that simply connects to the companies secure server and I still have my monitor, and mouse and keyboard. Steam is already trying to push this type of device out for gaming with the Steam box. Regardless, PCs more than likely got another 10 years plus.
Try to think a little here though folks, the PC as we know it may die, but PC class gaming isnt going anywhere. How you access and play the games will undoubtedly change.
The declining sales of new desktops are not because no one uses desktops anymore. Rather, they're because fewer people see the need to replace their old desktop by a new one. If desktops last twice as long as they used to and there are the same number in use everywhere, then that will cut new desktop sales in half.
One of the attractions of manufacturing chips for cell phones and tablets is precisely because they have such short lifetimes, which means that buyers need to buy something new once again very often. That's a big deal if you manufacture processors. But from a consumer perspective, it's a reason to stay with desktops.
This and it has got a lot easier in recent years for people to either build their own system or have someone build it for them. This makes it even harder to track PC usuage by sales.
Now I bet if you look at peripherial sales, they're going to be quite a lot higher than desktop sales. Right now PC's just last so much longer since display quality is more or less at a standstill for the affordable future. This obviously doesn't apply to enthusiasts but for most people they see no reason to upgrade.
A lot depends on where you're tracking sales. If you count CPU sales from Intel and AMD, then you pick up both OEMs and also the built-it-yourself people. Those numbers say that desktop sales are down somewhat, but hardly dying.
You know i could totally see that. Some mobiles can already output games at HD, i't would totally make sense to dock them into a station and add keyboard, mice and a big screen to it. Or a TV and a controller, you know instead of a console. Next gen mobile chips will have full opengl 4.2 support includng tessellation at full HD.
...
Personally i see the future of consoles alot more skeptic though, they are expensive considering you can "only" game with them(contrary to lets say a smartphone) and even the actual games themselves are the most expensive of any platform. They are also mostly closed platforms(access controlled by manufacturer), making them hard to get into for smaller game companies. And all of their precious power is wasted once game streaming enters the picture(The game gets rendered on a serverfarm, you only need to be able to playback the HD stream that gets send to you, we are talking about a 50$ hardware investment here...).
The way things are going the low game prices on iOS and android have already pretty much hurt the console manufacturers(think psp etc), once you get to add a big screen and a controller to the phone/tablet ... Give them them a further generation or two and they will have plenty of power to handle some really pretty gfx all the while boasting content prices in the single digits.
It's one thing to be able to output a 1080p image to the screen. It's quite another to be able to render 60 complex 3D images per second and have them available to output to the screen. Cell phones are a long way from being able to do that with anything more than rudimentary 3D graphics.
There is kind of a minimum performance threshold that you need for heavy use of tessellation to make sense, and the threshold depends some on how complex of a scene you're trying to render. But above that, tessellation is a performance optimization, as it lets you use few vertices for faraway objects--which in most scenes, means nearly everything. If you're using tessellation to drag your frame rates way down, you're doing it wrong.
Imagination has promised that at least one variant of PowerVR Rogue (6 series) graphics would support OpenGL 4, but I don't know if vendors will use that. Even if they do for tablets, it might not make it into cell phones. And I don't know if that's only 4.0, or if they're going to support the full 4.3. AMD already supports the full OpenGL 4.3, but won't make chips for cell phones anytime soon.
Other mobile vendors (Qualcomm, ARM, Nvidia) aren't yet supporting the full OpenGL, but only OpenGL ES. Apple meanwhile doesn't support anything later than OpenGL 3.2 on Mac OS X, even in Macs that ship video cards that would support OpenGL 4.3 on either Windows or Linux. So it's far from clear that Apple will bring the full OpenGL to iOS anytime soon.
-----
Streaming games as you describe is only for the ultra low end. I recently helped a friend pick out a $400 laptop (based on an A8-4500M), and while he's not a gamer, if he were, I'm not aware of a single game where he'd get a better gaming experience from streaming the game than rendering it locally. Even if OnLive or some analogous service offered every single game ever made, it's likely that the only games that would ever make sense to stream are those that flatly won't run at all on Windows 8.
And it's not just that game streaming needs to get better. If he still uses the laptop five years from now, it will likely be about the same scenario, where all or very nearly all games that will run on Windows 8 at all are better off rendered locally.
Now, what percentage of gamers do you think have a computer that is at least as good as today's $400 laptop? What percentage of gamers three years from now do you think will have a computer that is at least as good as today's $400 laptop? Whatever it is, it's surely going to be a large chunk of the market. And game streaming is irrelevant to them, outside of some niches where people really want things to run on a cell phone or some such.
Recently Square Enix released some information about profitability, sobering reading.. makes you wonder which 'platform' is really in decline, at the moment i'd say its the console platform thats suffering, although the fact that the hardware of consoles is like, a decade out of date probably has a lot to do with it, and then there is the ps4 and xbox 720, details out there now, show them to have far more in common with a PC than their previous versions, now, adopting PC architecture is hardly a sign that PC's are on their last legs, it is however a sign that their previous incarnations are perhaps not doing so well, and further development along those lines was a dead end. Instead we have the next gen consoles with hardware thats, not really all that next gen.. lets face it, if somebody built a computer with 8 cores and a processor speed of 1.6ghz the first thing people would ask is, why its so underpowered, although, i could totally see a laptop/notebook using that kind of hardware, but a high end gaming machine, never in a million years, seriously i doubt it would even make it as a medium range gaming machine. The only things the PS4 has going for it, is DDR5 ram and a halfway decent graphics card, kind of makes you wonder why though, that the 720 seems to be using DDR3 ? maybe they'll change that by the time see official spec's for the 720
To me, its not whether or not the PC is dying, its whether or not the next gen Consoles will revive the console market which imo, is dying, no question about it.
The current generation consoles are really showing their age. People say that Xbox 360 games still run fine on an Xbox 360, but NES games still run fine on an NES, too. Compare it to what you can do on a modern PC and there's a huge chasm. The next generation should age much better, as there probably aren't any revolutionary graphics API changes coming soon and hardware isn't improving as fast anymore now that it's limited by power rather than transistor count.
The PS4 uses GDDR5 memory, not DDR5. There is no such thing as DDR5. The Xbox 720 or whatever it will be called is rumored to use DDR3 memory, though the 2133 MHz clock speed makes me wonder if it will actually be DDR4 and not DDR3. At the very least, even if the first Xbox 720 uses DDR3, Microsoft will probably move to DDR4 at the first die shrink a year later or some such.
Year to Date Sales Comparison (Same Periods Covered)
vs
The post-PC era is in full effect. According to market research firm IDC, global PC shipments dropped nearly 14-percent in Q1, totaling 76.3 million units.
Tablets and phones are digging into both console and PC gaming.
But people are missing the point. PC sales ARE in decline. That decline is excellerating.
Developers go to investors for funding for their ideas. Investors tend to not throw money at shrinking industries. It is just a fact. That is why we are seeing more and more indy titles and kickstarters starting to emerge. Long term the only way PCs make a comback is if they morph into something else, perhaps a console/PC hybrid. The idea of having a desk somewhere in a house with a bg clunky metal box is something from the 90's. Laptop markets have been dug into by tablets even harder than PC.
I like my PC, but I see the signs, especially when you read wall street tech reports. The PC industry, particularly in the west, is vanishing faster than people here want to admit.
Game developers tend to care about game sales, not hardware sales. If it used to be that people needed a desktop from within the last three years to run your game, and now the last six years is good enough, and gamers are keeping their computers twice as long as a result, then from the perspective of a game developer (or investor), that's a good thing, not a bad thing.
And sales of PC games are still strong, and if anything, increasing. AMD's recent projections are that PC game sales will continue to increase in coming years--and remember that AMD is providing the hardware for both the PS4 and the next Xbox. It's only hardware sales that are going down.
only way for the PC die is if they make a new kinda of PC and change the name lol
serious its true the pc arquiteture is at his limit and they are working on a new kind, but a PC will never disapear, remember even if they stop making games for PCs we still have emulators who run console games on it, and even so we use PC to work, comunicate, play, and anything else we can make the thing do.
so again are you really thinking PC will go obsolete? disapear? guess again
You know i could totally see that. Some mobiles can already output games at HD, i't would totally make sense to dock them into a station and add keyboard, mice and a big screen to it. Or a TV and a controller, you know instead of a console. Next gen mobile chips will have full opengl 4.2 support includng tessellation at full HD.
...
Personally i see the future of consoles alot more skeptic though, they are expensive considering you can "only" game with them(contrary to lets say a smartphone) and even the actual games themselves are the most expensive of any platform. They are also mostly closed platforms(access controlled by manufacturer), making them hard to get into for smaller game companies. And all of their precious power is wasted once game streaming enters the picture(The game gets rendered on a serverfarm, you only need to be able to playback the HD stream that gets send to you, we are talking about a 50$ hardware investment here...).
The way things are going the low game prices on iOS and android have already pretty much hurt the console manufacturers(think psp etc), once you get to add a big screen and a controller to the phone/tablet ... Give them them a further generation or two and they will have plenty of power to handle some really pretty gfx all the while boasting content prices in the single digits.
It's one thing to be able to output a 1080p image to the screen. It's quite another to be able to render 60 complex 3D images per second and have them available to output to the screen. Cell phones are a long way from being able to do that with anything more than rudimentary 3D graphics.
There is kind of a minimum performance threshold that you need for heavy use of tessellation to make sense, and the threshold depends some on how complex of a scene you're trying to render. But above that, tessellation is a performance optimization, as it lets you use few vertices for faraway objects--which in most scenes, means nearly everything. If you're using tessellation to drag your frame rates way down, you're doing it wrong.
Imagination has promised that at least one variant of PowerVR Rogue (6 series) graphics would support OpenGL 4, but I don't know if vendors will use that. Even if they do for tablets, it might not make it into cell phones. And I don't know if that's only 4.0, or if they're going to support the full 4.3. AMD already supports the full OpenGL 4.3, but won't make chips for cell phones anytime soon.
Other mobile vendors (Qualcomm, ARM, Nvidia) aren't yet supporting the full OpenGL, but only OpenGL ES. Apple meanwhile doesn't support anything later than OpenGL 3.2 on Mac OS X, even in Macs that ship video cards that would support OpenGL 4.3 on either Windows or Linux. So it's far from clear that Apple will bring the full OpenGL to iOS anytime soon.
-----
Streaming games as you describe is only for the ultra low end. I recently helped a friend pick out a $400 laptop (based on an A8-4500M), and while he's not a gamer, if he were, I'm not aware of a single game where he'd get a better gaming experience from streaming the game than rendering it locally. Even if OnLive or some analogous service offered every single game ever made, it's likely that the only games that would ever make sense to stream are those that flatly won't run at all on Windows 8.
And it's not just that game streaming needs to get better. If he still uses the laptop five years from now, it will likely be about the same scenario, where all or very nearly all games that will run on Windows 8 at all are better off rendered locally.
Now, what percentage of gamers do you think have a computer that is at least as good as today's $400 laptop? What percentage of gamers three years from now do you think will have a computer that is at least as good as today's $400 laptop? Whatever it is, it's surely going to be a large chunk of the market. And game streaming is irrelevant to them, outside of some niches where people really want things to run on a cell phone or some such.
Actually i was talking about the tegra SoCs coming after Logan. Only got the new roadmap in hardcover form from a magazine here, but it will support full OpenGL 4.3 and have about 100x the computational power of the tegra 2. The magazine isn't known for hyperbole and they back those statement as probable(with some usual minor help along).
Also look at this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSJAEGQJZCM "Old" gameplay footage running on 2 generations old hardware and tell me it couldn't pass as console footage. Sure gameplay wise with the focus on only 1 enemy on screen etc you'll notice, but the gfx alone? But then again this is actually running on well beyond full HD resolution aswell as being old AND based on OpenGL 3.2 i think, and OpenGL went pretty far since then as far as optimisation goes.
Compared to PCs and consoles smartphone SoCs develop at a rapidly faster pace, its a question of when they catch up, not a question of if. Atleast until we move to 4k resolution screens. But like someone pointed already pointed out, if you stay at full HD resolutions that last two generations of CPU and GFX hardly added anything for you.
Personally i think you underestimate the power of current days specialized SoCs running optimzed code(which i assume games made for phones/tablets are). For example i have a 35$ RPi that plays H.264 Video at FullHD with the CPU ideling, which is something my 6 core desktop PC with a decent nvidia card doesn't manage. Also when i read things like nvidia improving the framerate in game xy by over 40% ... that tells me everything i need to know about the state of drivers on PC and their efficency. Who knows, if they didn't want to sell new GFX they might be able to tickle out another couple dozen percent points.
What about softwares and hardware i can use on my PC and on my MAC and maybe on Linux,big maybe.
which is absolutely brilliant.
Do they think like that on console world ? it would be awesome if i could play my PS game ,which i just bought ,on XBox ?
im sure many thinks that it would be awesome,but i have bad news for you it only happens on pc side.
At some point when you buy your super mario 100 ,you will get versions for all console platforms,something like that must happen or many consoles will die and when theres only 1 console in the market,imagine that Mario 100 ,only 500$ cheap.
You know i could totally see that. Some mobiles can already output games at HD, i't would totally make sense to dock them into a station and add keyboard, mice and a big screen to it. Or a TV and a controller, you know instead of a console. Next gen mobile chips will have full opengl 4.2 support includng tessellation at full HD.
...
Personally i see the future of consoles alot more skeptic though, they are expensive considering you can "only" game with them(contrary to lets say a smartphone) and even the actual games themselves are the most expensive of any platform. They are also mostly closed platforms(access controlled by manufacturer), making them hard to get into for smaller game companies. And all of their precious power is wasted once game streaming enters the picture(The game gets rendered on a serverfarm, you only need to be able to playback the HD stream that gets send to you, we are talking about a 50$ hardware investment here...).
The way things are going the low game prices on iOS and android have already pretty much hurt the console manufacturers(think psp etc), once you get to add a big screen and a controller to the phone/tablet ... Give them them a further generation or two and they will have plenty of power to handle some really pretty gfx all the while boasting content prices in the single digits.
It's one thing to be able to output a 1080p image to the screen. It's quite another to be able to render 60 complex 3D images per second and have them available to output to the screen. Cell phones are a long way from being able to do that with anything more than rudimentary 3D graphics.
There is kind of a minimum performance threshold that you need for heavy use of tessellation to make sense, and the threshold depends some on how complex of a scene you're trying to render. But above that, tessellation is a performance optimization, as it lets you use few vertices for faraway objects--which in most scenes, means nearly everything. If you're using tessellation to drag your frame rates way down, you're doing it wrong.
Imagination has promised that at least one variant of PowerVR Rogue (6 series) graphics would support OpenGL 4, but I don't know if vendors will use that. Even if they do for tablets, it might not make it into cell phones. And I don't know if that's only 4.0, or if they're going to support the full 4.3. AMD already supports the full OpenGL 4.3, but won't make chips for cell phones anytime soon.
Other mobile vendors (Qualcomm, ARM, Nvidia) aren't yet supporting the full OpenGL, but only OpenGL ES. Apple meanwhile doesn't support anything later than OpenGL 3.2 on Mac OS X, even in Macs that ship video cards that would support OpenGL 4.3 on either Windows or Linux. So it's far from clear that Apple will bring the full OpenGL to iOS anytime soon.
-----
Streaming games as you describe is only for the ultra low end. I recently helped a friend pick out a $400 laptop (based on an A8-4500M), and while he's not a gamer, if he were, I'm not aware of a single game where he'd get a better gaming experience from streaming the game than rendering it locally. Even if OnLive or some analogous service offered every single game ever made, it's likely that the only games that would ever make sense to stream are those that flatly won't run at all on Windows 8.
And it's not just that game streaming needs to get better. If he still uses the laptop five years from now, it will likely be about the same scenario, where all or very nearly all games that will run on Windows 8 at all are better off rendered locally.
Now, what percentage of gamers do you think have a computer that is at least as good as today's $400 laptop? What percentage of gamers three years from now do you think will have a computer that is at least as good as today's $400 laptop? Whatever it is, it's surely going to be a large chunk of the market. And game streaming is irrelevant to them, outside of some niches where people really want things to run on a cell phone or some such.
Actually i was talking about the tegra SoCs coming after Logan. Only got the new roadmap in hardcover form from a magazine here, but it will support full OpenGL 4.3 and have about 100x the computational power of the tegra 2. The magazine isn't known for hyperbole and they back those statement as probable(with some usual minor help along).
Also look at this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSJAEGQJZCM "Old" gameplay footage running on 2 generations old hardware and tell me it couldn't pass as console footage. Sure gameplay wise with the focus on only 1 enemy on screen etc you'll notice, but the gfx alone? But then again this is actually running on well beyond full HD resolution aswell as being old AND based on OpenGL 3.2 i think, and OpenGL went pretty far since then as far as optimisation goes.
Compared to PCs and consoles smartphone SoCs develop at a rapidly faster pace, its a question of when they catch up, not a question of if. Atleast until we move to 4k resolution screens. But like someone pointed already pointed out, if you stay at full HD resolutions that last two generations of CPU and GFX hardly added anything for you.
Personally i think you underestimate the power of current days specialized SoCs running optimzed code(which i assume games made for phones/tablets are). For example i have a 35$ RPi that plays H.264 Video at FullHD with the CPU ideling, which is something my 6 core desktop PC with a decent nvidia card doesn't manage. Also when i read things like nvidia improving the framerate in game xy by over 40% ... that tells me everything i need to know about the state of drivers on PC and their efficency. Who knows, if they didn't want to sell new GFX they might be able to tickle out another couple dozen percent points.
The next generation Nvidia Tegra GPU (Tegra 5) will use Kepler graphics. But we already basically know what the energy efficiency of Kepler is, from desktop parts. Maybe they'll make a variant with 24 shaders and run it at 300 MHz and stick it in cell phones, but that's not going to match the performance of a GTX 680. You scale down power consumption and you scale down performance with it.
As for claims of 100x the performance of Tegra 2, Nvidia is known for wildly overestimating the performance of future products. Imagine if AMD were to claim that a Radeon HD 7970 would offer 10 times the performance of a Radeon HD 6970. And by that, they meant, it would offer so much more performance at atomic counters (where it genuinely does offer that sort of boost), not general gaming performance--but without explicitly specifying that. That's the sort of thing that Nvidia marketing does in their claims of future products.
Now, if Nvidia wanted to make a next generation Tegra product that had a 384-shader Kepler part clocked at up to 600 MHz with four ARM Cortex A15 cores clocked at 2.5 GHz, they could. And they'd need a laptop form factor for it, because it would be something like a 35 W part. Nvidia might well do that and make laptops that run either Android or Windows RT, but such a part isn't going in cell phones.
The video that you linked for me doesn't work. Regardless, if it's using OpenGL 3.2, then there aren't any cell phones at all that it will run on, and the only tablets it will run on are a few Windows 7 or 8 tablets that run an AMD Hondo or Desna chip. Just because you can make an OpenGL 3.2 game run great on a desktop doesn't automatically mean that it will run well on a cell phone. OpenGL 3.2 is roughly equivalent to DirectX 10.
-----
I don't think you understand what "you're limited by power, not transistor count" means, even though I said it earlier. If you did, then you wouldn't make the ridiculous claims about phones catching up to desktops. You can scale performance for a given architecture quite a bit. If you design a particular processor core, then having 4 of them running at a given clock speed will use twice as much power as having two of them at that clock speed. Having 16 of them means you use vastly more power than if you only have one. Likewise, if you have a given CPU core running at 4 GHz, it uses vastly more power than if it's only running at 1 GHz. It's probably more than a factor of 4 here, as you'd use a higher voltage for the higher clock speed.
It's the same thing with graphics. A Radeon HD 5870 and a Radeon HD 5450 are basically the same architecture. But one chip has 20 SIMD engines and the other has 1. A Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition has 32 GCN CUs typically running at 1.05 GHz, while the Temash dual core tablet chip will have 1 GCN CU running somewhere around 300 MHz. They'll be the same architecture, but the former will offer around 100 times the graphical performance of the latter.
So why offer the latter? Power consumption. Typical high end desktop parts can put out about 200 W for the video card and 100 W for the processor. In a high end gaming laptop, you can do more like 75 W for the video card and 45 W for the processor. In a relatively high end tablet, you probably want to stay under 10 W for both of them added together. In a cell phone, you want something closer to 1 or 2 W. What happens when you reduce the power budget available? You have to scale back performance accordingly.
Now, unless you think that we're soon going to have cell phones that can use 300 W, they're not going to catch up to gaming desktops.
-----
I'm not underestimating what you can do with a chip built for a special purpose. You're overestimating what special purposes chips can be built for. When you're doing video decode for a given file format, you do the same computations in the same order a zillion times. You can handle that by making a video decode block that is built to do those computations in that order and can't do anything else. And yes, you can make this a lot more efficient than using some general purpose software.
But GPUs are already as heavily specialized for general gaming performance as is practical. It's been that way for a long time. Different games will want to run different instructions in different orders. Different programs (in the technical OpenGL sense, not as in an application that you'd launch from your desktop) within the same game will want to run different instructions in different orders. Different shaders within the same program will want to run different instructions in different orders. Even different invocations of the same shader may run different instructions in different orders if the shader has any branching at all--which many don't. You can't optimize a GPU for game performance to nearly the same degree that you can optimize for video decoding.
While you could build a GPU around being optimized for one particular shader used in one particular game and see big gains for that particular shader, you'd end up with a GPU that can't run any other games at all, and can't even run the game that the one shader is part of because it can't run other shaders in the same game.
-----
If a driver update improves performance in a given game by 40%, then it probably means that the previous drivers were basicaly broken and they fixed it. 5% here or 10% there as a one-time performance improvement for a given can happen, but 40% is pretty rare. And you might be able to improve performance by 10% in this game one month, then 10% in a different game the next month, then 10% in yet another game the month after, but that doesn't add up to a cumulative 30% performance improvement in anything.
What about softwares and hardware i can use on my PC and on my MAC and maybe on Linux,big maybe.
which is absolutely brilliant.
Do they think like that on console world ? it would be awesome if i could play my PS game ,which i just bought ,on XBox ?
im sure many thinks that it would be awesome,but i have bad news for you it only happens on pc side.
At some point when you buy your super mario 100 ,you will get versions for all console platforms,something like that must happen or many consoles will die and when theres only 1 console in the market,imagine that Mario 100 ,only 500$ cheap.
Your doing it wrong. Your supposed to buy all three consoles. You know, because exclusive titles rock.
@ Quizzical:
Ok this is getting to long to quote but what your posting is contrary to my experience. The computer i started with 20 years ago had a tiny tiny fraction of the power my PC today has while actually having an higher energy footprint(sure it was a mainframe but still). So obviously you completely discount technological progress. Also i explictly said i was talking about the Tegra chip AFTER Logan(which is tegra 6 since apparently your not overly familiar with nvidias roadmap). The codename is parker btw, and it will be based on the maxwell architecture not kepler.
So let me put this really simple 2 SoC generations from now(Logan --> Parker) we will be able to run OpenGL 4.3 games(full OpenGL support, actually even with Logan) at full HD on them. Maywell is estimated at 32 GFlops/W btw, which puts last generation games right into reach. Sure consoles and PCs will have way more raw power, but you won't notice at 3-4m distance on your couch besides wether a game runs at 40fps or 400fps is largely unimportant. Not to mention their games won't cost in the single-low double digits.
If you think this is all bullshit, sure be my guest. But im saying this guy is heralding a new era(and thats running a tegra 3, while im talking about tegra 6). 99$, every game free to test atleast, quality controller included. This is what parents will give their kids(instead of 700$ console that won't even be able to run previous gens games. Freaking brilliant MS), you know to go with their android phone since they are in the ecosystem already, so they can play angry birds 4 and infinity blade 4. And when that thing doesn't perform anymore ... you switch it out for the newest version, its only 99 bucks after all.
And yeah PC and expensive consoles will suffer, because frankly these new devices will cut into their profits and their market share is already falling rapidly anyway if compared to the growing smartphone/tablet market. Cause thats what people forget, publishers don't look at a absolute numbers they look at relative numbers and profit relative to licensing and production costs. And how do you think a Android game f.e. compares to a PC/console title there? Hell even i am considering buying one of those ouya's and i never owned a console in my life. But at that price? Even if i just use it as a media server and for some streaming its worth it.
if a person is ok with only having what is currently available quality-wise, then the mediums can become smaller and smaller, but people want what is better. Better requires more power. More power generates more heat, and requires more electricity (battery life). The mere fact that people want bigger and better implies that PC's will not die because it is the only consumer medium that has the ability to upgrade components to suit increased demands.
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
What about softwares and hardware i can use on my PC and on my MAC and maybe on Linux,big maybe.
which is absolutely brilliant.
Do they think like that on console world ? it would be awesome if i could play my PS game ,which i just bought ,on XBox ?
im sure many thinks that it would be awesome,but i have bad news for you it only happens on pc side.
At some point when you buy your super mario 100 ,you will get versions for all console platforms,something like that must happen or many consoles will die and when theres only 1 console in the market,imagine that Mario 100 ,only 500$ cheap.
Your doing it wrong. Your supposed to buy all three consoles. You know, because exclusive titles rock.
Thats even bigger problem if we think like OP thinks,then in the future there would be 20 different consoles,gotta catch em all.
Maybe i should start Kickstarter project 10-in-one mega console,super smash hit! play all games in 1 console.
Catchphrase "You only have 2 hands,respect them" or "my home,1 console inside 19 outside"
Comments
Actually that's quite true in some cases, just look up FBI purchases playstation 3's (ok it's not a business in maybe the form your speaking of ), before they got locked down that is.
Recently Square Enix released some information about profitability, sobering reading.. makes you wonder which 'platform' is really in decline, at the moment i'd say its the console platform thats suffering, although the fact that the hardware of consoles is like, a decade out of date probably has a lot to do with it, and then there is the ps4 and xbox 720, details out there now, show them to have far more in common with a PC than their previous versions, now, adopting PC architecture is hardly a sign that PC's are on their last legs, it is however a sign that their previous incarnations are perhaps not doing so well, and further development along those lines was a dead end. Instead we have the next gen consoles with hardware thats, not really all that next gen.. lets face it, if somebody built a computer with 8 cores and a processor speed of 1.6ghz the first thing people would ask is, why its so underpowered, although, i could totally see a laptop/notebook using that kind of hardware, but a high end gaming machine, never in a million years, seriously i doubt it would even make it as a medium range gaming machine. The only things the PS4 has going for it, is DDR5 ram and a halfway decent graphics card, kind of makes you wonder why though, that the 720 seems to be using DDR3 ? maybe they'll change that by the time see official spec's for the 720
To me, its not whether or not the PC is dying, its whether or not the next gen Consoles will revive the console market which imo, is dying, no question about it.
Yeah one of the huge driving factors for the current consoles not being as profitable as the last generation is the digital distribution, in the era of the playstation 1/2 and before, every game was sold through retail, now you can say ok "but the current console generation has digital distro", to that I would say, yeah but it's got such huge hardware limitations, its like the gimped version of what we have on PC. This next generation though, it's going to be really good, Ps4 will have digital distro loading in the background, onlive like replays using Gaikai and many more cool features.
What we are seeing is consoles coming more in line with PC's, and to be truly honest, the PS4 is a beast ! It's the first console I've looked at and thought, wow this is worth developing for.
Tablets and phones are digging into both console and PC gaming.
But people are missing the point. PC sales ARE in decline. That decline is excellerating.
Developers go to investors for funding for their ideas. Investors tend to not throw money at shrinking industries. It is just a fact. That is why we are seeing more and more indy titles and kickstarters starting to emerge. Long term the only way PCs make a comback is if they morph into something else, perhaps a console/PC hybrid. The idea of having a desk somewhere in a house with a bg clunky metal box is something from the 90's. Laptop markets have been dug into by tablets even harder than PC.
I like my PC, but I see the signs, especially when you read wall street tech reports. The PC industry, particularly in the west, is vanishing faster than people here want to admit.
Consoles have become a laughing joke,they are everything they said was the problem with PC's.
Consoles are replaced about ev ery couple years,where as my PC's are lasting many years.
Developers have not been advancing with technology,they are still making XP DX9 games,so all this new tech is a waste,however it makes ytour PC still relevant for many years.
Consoles are just whipping out new ones without really making any better games,so they are just a wasted money soak.I have seen games on the old Sega CD system that easily rival the graphics of new systems.Consoles games are still as linear as ever.
I feel the whole problem is with the developers because they claim the PS3 is powerfdul,yet they can't do anything with it.Example Square struggled badly with a couple games for the PS3,they eventually gave up and delivered a lower quality game.The games still look good,as i said the problem is with the develoeprs,they are just not using available tech,they are designing bare minimum games.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
That's really the same with PC's, When I look back and see the purchases of my PC's I've personally noticed the slow down, the jumps in the early days from 286 to 486, to Pentiums was the real leaps in performance, now its just added instruction sets and cores (in a basic view). That's how performance will carry on for quite a few years, especially when concerning GPU's, GPU's are still in infancy in possible uses.
Really mentioning previous tech is a "so so", cell architecture on the ps3 was a real pain tbh, but the PS4, serious bit of kit that most dev companies will be able to jump right into, since its well aligned to current development methods and pipelines akin to PC's.
Tablets and (smart) phones ARE PCs. I mean i can add a bluetooth keyboard/mice to my tablet and connect it to a monitor or TV. Considering the applicationg diversity on them and their web abilities(html 5 etc) that already makes them far more of a PC than any console.
The rest really is just software.
Yes, this describes my family situation too. I personally grew up on consoles in the 80's-90's and finally completely lost any interest in them. I knew this when the next gen machines were announced lately and I didn't even raise an eyebrow.
PC gaming "per se" wont ever die. Sooner rather than later PCs could be gone as we know it, but the platform of gaming will all be done on "devices" that connect to a server that houses the hardware and you will play your "PC" games via a device that simply connects to the server which houses all the high tech hardware. You buy the device (very inexpensive thing -- kind of like a ROKU device), you still have your mouse and keyboard, you connect to a server provided by a service company (like Steam ) and you are set. The company I work for no longer uses PCs for the most part, I have a "device" that simply connects to the companies secure server and I still have my monitor, and mouse and keyboard. Steam is already trying to push this type of device out for gaming with the Steam box. Regardless, PCs more than likely got another 10 years plus.
Try to think a little here though folks, the PC as we know it may die, but PC class gaming isnt going anywhere. How you access and play the games will undoubtedly change.
A lot depends on where you're tracking sales. If you count CPU sales from Intel and AMD, then you pick up both OEMs and also the built-it-yourself people. Those numbers say that desktop sales are down somewhat, but hardly dying.
so PC side is doing better than console side so PC is dying breed ?
Let's internet
It's one thing to be able to output a 1080p image to the screen. It's quite another to be able to render 60 complex 3D images per second and have them available to output to the screen. Cell phones are a long way from being able to do that with anything more than rudimentary 3D graphics.
There is kind of a minimum performance threshold that you need for heavy use of tessellation to make sense, and the threshold depends some on how complex of a scene you're trying to render. But above that, tessellation is a performance optimization, as it lets you use few vertices for faraway objects--which in most scenes, means nearly everything. If you're using tessellation to drag your frame rates way down, you're doing it wrong.
Imagination has promised that at least one variant of PowerVR Rogue (6 series) graphics would support OpenGL 4, but I don't know if vendors will use that. Even if they do for tablets, it might not make it into cell phones. And I don't know if that's only 4.0, or if they're going to support the full 4.3. AMD already supports the full OpenGL 4.3, but won't make chips for cell phones anytime soon.
Other mobile vendors (Qualcomm, ARM, Nvidia) aren't yet supporting the full OpenGL, but only OpenGL ES. Apple meanwhile doesn't support anything later than OpenGL 3.2 on Mac OS X, even in Macs that ship video cards that would support OpenGL 4.3 on either Windows or Linux. So it's far from clear that Apple will bring the full OpenGL to iOS anytime soon.
-----
Streaming games as you describe is only for the ultra low end. I recently helped a friend pick out a $400 laptop (based on an A8-4500M), and while he's not a gamer, if he were, I'm not aware of a single game where he'd get a better gaming experience from streaming the game than rendering it locally. Even if OnLive or some analogous service offered every single game ever made, it's likely that the only games that would ever make sense to stream are those that flatly won't run at all on Windows 8.
And it's not just that game streaming needs to get better. If he still uses the laptop five years from now, it will likely be about the same scenario, where all or very nearly all games that will run on Windows 8 at all are better off rendered locally.
Now, what percentage of gamers do you think have a computer that is at least as good as today's $400 laptop? What percentage of gamers three years from now do you think will have a computer that is at least as good as today's $400 laptop? Whatever it is, it's surely going to be a large chunk of the market. And game streaming is irrelevant to them, outside of some niches where people really want things to run on a cell phone or some such.
The current generation consoles are really showing their age. People say that Xbox 360 games still run fine on an Xbox 360, but NES games still run fine on an NES, too. Compare it to what you can do on a modern PC and there's a huge chasm. The next generation should age much better, as there probably aren't any revolutionary graphics API changes coming soon and hardware isn't improving as fast anymore now that it's limited by power rather than transistor count.
The PS4 uses GDDR5 memory, not DDR5. There is no such thing as DDR5. The Xbox 720 or whatever it will be called is rumored to use DDR3 memory, though the 2133 MHz clock speed makes me wonder if it will actually be DDR4 and not DDR3. At the very least, even if the first Xbox 720 uses DDR3, Microsoft will probably move to DDR4 at the first die shrink a year later or some such.
Year to Date Sales Comparison (Same Periods Covered)
vs
The post-PC era is in full effect. According to market research firm IDC, global PC shipments dropped nearly 14-percent in Q1, totaling 76.3 million units.
..............................
Let's internet
Game developers tend to care about game sales, not hardware sales. If it used to be that people needed a desktop from within the last three years to run your game, and now the last six years is good enough, and gamers are keeping their computers twice as long as a result, then from the perspective of a game developer (or investor), that's a good thing, not a bad thing.
And sales of PC games are still strong, and if anything, increasing. AMD's recent projections are that PC game sales will continue to increase in coming years--and remember that AMD is providing the hardware for both the PS4 and the next Xbox. It's only hardware sales that are going down.
only way for the PC die is if they make a new kinda of PC and change the name lol
serious its true the pc arquiteture is at his limit and they are working on a new kind, but a PC will never disapear, remember even if they stop making games for PCs we still have emulators who run console games on it, and even so we use PC to work, comunicate, play, and anything else we can make the thing do.
so again are you really thinking PC will go obsolete? disapear? guess again
Actually i was talking about the tegra SoCs coming after Logan. Only got the new roadmap in hardcover form from a magazine here, but it will support full OpenGL 4.3 and have about 100x the computational power of the tegra 2. The magazine isn't known for hyperbole and they back those statement as probable(with some usual minor help along).
Also look at this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSJAEGQJZCM "Old" gameplay footage running on 2 generations old hardware and tell me it couldn't pass as console footage. Sure gameplay wise with the focus on only 1 enemy on screen etc you'll notice, but the gfx alone? But then again this is actually running on well beyond full HD resolution aswell as being old AND based on OpenGL 3.2 i think, and OpenGL went pretty far since then as far as optimisation goes.
Compared to PCs and consoles smartphone SoCs develop at a rapidly faster pace, its a question of when they catch up, not a question of if. Atleast until we move to 4k resolution screens. But like someone pointed already pointed out, if you stay at full HD resolutions that last two generations of CPU and GFX hardly added anything for you.
Personally i think you underestimate the power of current days specialized SoCs running optimzed code(which i assume games made for phones/tablets are). For example i have a 35$ RPi that plays H.264 Video at FullHD with the CPU ideling, which is something my 6 core desktop PC with a decent nvidia card doesn't manage. Also when i read things like nvidia improving the framerate in game xy by over 40% ... that tells me everything i need to know about the state of drivers on PC and their efficency. Who knows, if they didn't want to sell new GFX they might be able to tickle out another couple dozen percent points.
Some more nails in the consoles coffin.
What about softwares and hardware i can use on my PC and on my MAC and maybe on Linux,big maybe.
which is absolutely brilliant.
Do they think like that on console world ? it would be awesome if i could play my PS game ,which i just bought ,on XBox ?
im sure many thinks that it would be awesome,but i have bad news for you it only happens on pc side.
At some point when you buy your super mario 100 ,you will get versions for all console platforms,something like that must happen or many consoles will die and when theres only 1 console in the market,imagine that Mario 100 ,only 500$ cheap.
Let's internet
The next generation Nvidia Tegra GPU (Tegra 5) will use Kepler graphics. But we already basically know what the energy efficiency of Kepler is, from desktop parts. Maybe they'll make a variant with 24 shaders and run it at 300 MHz and stick it in cell phones, but that's not going to match the performance of a GTX 680. You scale down power consumption and you scale down performance with it.
As for claims of 100x the performance of Tegra 2, Nvidia is known for wildly overestimating the performance of future products. Imagine if AMD were to claim that a Radeon HD 7970 would offer 10 times the performance of a Radeon HD 6970. And by that, they meant, it would offer so much more performance at atomic counters (where it genuinely does offer that sort of boost), not general gaming performance--but without explicitly specifying that. That's the sort of thing that Nvidia marketing does in their claims of future products.
Now, if Nvidia wanted to make a next generation Tegra product that had a 384-shader Kepler part clocked at up to 600 MHz with four ARM Cortex A15 cores clocked at 2.5 GHz, they could. And they'd need a laptop form factor for it, because it would be something like a 35 W part. Nvidia might well do that and make laptops that run either Android or Windows RT, but such a part isn't going in cell phones.
The video that you linked for me doesn't work. Regardless, if it's using OpenGL 3.2, then there aren't any cell phones at all that it will run on, and the only tablets it will run on are a few Windows 7 or 8 tablets that run an AMD Hondo or Desna chip. Just because you can make an OpenGL 3.2 game run great on a desktop doesn't automatically mean that it will run well on a cell phone. OpenGL 3.2 is roughly equivalent to DirectX 10.
-----
I don't think you understand what "you're limited by power, not transistor count" means, even though I said it earlier. If you did, then you wouldn't make the ridiculous claims about phones catching up to desktops. You can scale performance for a given architecture quite a bit. If you design a particular processor core, then having 4 of them running at a given clock speed will use twice as much power as having two of them at that clock speed. Having 16 of them means you use vastly more power than if you only have one. Likewise, if you have a given CPU core running at 4 GHz, it uses vastly more power than if it's only running at 1 GHz. It's probably more than a factor of 4 here, as you'd use a higher voltage for the higher clock speed.
It's the same thing with graphics. A Radeon HD 5870 and a Radeon HD 5450 are basically the same architecture. But one chip has 20 SIMD engines and the other has 1. A Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition has 32 GCN CUs typically running at 1.05 GHz, while the Temash dual core tablet chip will have 1 GCN CU running somewhere around 300 MHz. They'll be the same architecture, but the former will offer around 100 times the graphical performance of the latter.
So why offer the latter? Power consumption. Typical high end desktop parts can put out about 200 W for the video card and 100 W for the processor. In a high end gaming laptop, you can do more like 75 W for the video card and 45 W for the processor. In a relatively high end tablet, you probably want to stay under 10 W for both of them added together. In a cell phone, you want something closer to 1 or 2 W. What happens when you reduce the power budget available? You have to scale back performance accordingly.
Now, unless you think that we're soon going to have cell phones that can use 300 W, they're not going to catch up to gaming desktops.
-----
I'm not underestimating what you can do with a chip built for a special purpose. You're overestimating what special purposes chips can be built for. When you're doing video decode for a given file format, you do the same computations in the same order a zillion times. You can handle that by making a video decode block that is built to do those computations in that order and can't do anything else. And yes, you can make this a lot more efficient than using some general purpose software.
But GPUs are already as heavily specialized for general gaming performance as is practical. It's been that way for a long time. Different games will want to run different instructions in different orders. Different programs (in the technical OpenGL sense, not as in an application that you'd launch from your desktop) within the same game will want to run different instructions in different orders. Different shaders within the same program will want to run different instructions in different orders. Even different invocations of the same shader may run different instructions in different orders if the shader has any branching at all--which many don't. You can't optimize a GPU for game performance to nearly the same degree that you can optimize for video decoding.
While you could build a GPU around being optimized for one particular shader used in one particular game and see big gains for that particular shader, you'd end up with a GPU that can't run any other games at all, and can't even run the game that the one shader is part of because it can't run other shaders in the same game.
-----
If a driver update improves performance in a given game by 40%, then it probably means that the previous drivers were basicaly broken and they fixed it. 5% here or 10% there as a one-time performance improvement for a given can happen, but 40% is pretty rare. And you might be able to improve performance by 10% in this game one month, then 10% in a different game the next month, then 10% in yet another game the month after, but that doesn't add up to a cumulative 30% performance improvement in anything.
Your doing it wrong. Your supposed to buy all three consoles. You know, because exclusive titles rock.
@ Quizzical:
Ok this is getting to long to quote but what your posting is contrary to my experience. The computer i started with 20 years ago had a tiny tiny fraction of the power my PC today has while actually having an higher energy footprint(sure it was a mainframe but still). So obviously you completely discount technological progress. Also i explictly said i was talking about the Tegra chip AFTER Logan(which is tegra 6 since apparently your not overly familiar with nvidias roadmap). The codename is parker btw, and it will be based on the maxwell architecture not kepler.
So let me put this really simple 2 SoC generations from now(Logan --> Parker) we will be able to run OpenGL 4.3 games(full OpenGL support, actually even with Logan) at full HD on them. Maywell is estimated at 32 GFlops/W btw, which puts last generation games right into reach. Sure consoles and PCs will have way more raw power, but you won't notice at 3-4m distance on your couch besides wether a game runs at 40fps or 400fps is largely unimportant. Not to mention their games won't cost in the single-low double digits.
If you think this is all bullshit, sure be my guest. But im saying this guy is heralding a new era(and thats running a tegra 3, while im talking about tegra 6). 99$, every game free to test atleast, quality controller included. This is what parents will give their kids(instead of 700$ console that won't even be able to run previous gens games. Freaking brilliant MS), you know to go with their android phone since they are in the ecosystem already, so they can play angry birds 4 and infinity blade 4. And when that thing doesn't perform anymore ... you switch it out for the newest version, its only 99 bucks after all.
And yeah PC and expensive consoles will suffer, because frankly these new devices will cut into their profits and their market share is already falling rapidly anyway if compared to the growing smartphone/tablet market. Cause thats what people forget, publishers don't look at a absolute numbers they look at relative numbers and profit relative to licensing and production costs. And how do you think a Android game f.e. compares to a PC/console title there? Hell even i am considering buying one of those ouya's and i never owned a console in my life. But at that price? Even if i just use it as a media server and for some streaming its worth it.
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
I don't hate much, but I hate Apple© with a passion. If Steve Jobs was alive, I would punch him in the face.
Thats even bigger problem if we think like OP thinks,then in the future there would be 20 different consoles,gotta catch em all.
Maybe i should start Kickstarter project 10-in-one mega console,super smash hit! play all games in 1 console.
Catchphrase "You only have 2 hands,respect them" or "my home,1 console inside 19 outside"
Let's internet