PC Gaming no future. vendor fighting

[sweets1]

PC Gaming no future. vendor fighting

I'm beginning to wonder if PC gaming is still worth it over console.
Some aspects of NV Game Works deliberately gimp the performance if you have an AMD GPU, there maybe aspects of this with AMD too tho right now I can't think of any examples.
My point is PC gaming is becoming increasingly devided.
What is starting to happen is if you buy a game on PC you dont get all the features of that game unless you have one brand of GPU, or the developer is lock out from optimizing for one brand.
So even tho you pay the same as everyone what you are actually getting is less, penalized for having one brand instead of another.
What to do, have two PC's, one for one game and one for another?
Or should we just get consoles?
I cannot see PC gaming surviving for long where you are forced to consider what games you buy based on what vendors hardware you have.

Your thoughts please.

 

[Netero]

I think you are completely overreacting if you think that Nvidia and AMD having a few fancy proprietary technologies is going to lead to the end of PC gaming. Most of the important technologies work on all cards. A part from anything else if you play on console then you definitely won't get any of these features.

 

[sweets1]

I think you are completely overreacting if you think that Nvidia and AMD having a few fancy proprietary technologies is going to lead to the end of PC gaming. Most of the important technologies work on all cards. A part from anything else if you play on console then you definitely won't get any of these features.

You dont get hairworks on console?

 

[Kinley]

You dont get hairworks on console?

No, consoles will use CDPR's proprietary hair tech.

 

[sidspyker]

Moved since it's not really TW3 specific.

What is starting to happen

Starting to? We've already had several "API wars" over decades already, it's not something new in that regard. If you believe "PC Gaming" is some ' completely standardized' platform you're on the wrong platform or were only around for the last few years where it was mostly stagnant, it's almost always been about having the right hardware for the right software and it will most likely remain like this forever. You want a smooth consistent experience throughout without having to hassle with both hardware and software? Consoles really are the only way.

Fun fact: back in the old days some games wouldn't even run on certain cards so if you wanted to play everything you needed to swap out GPUs. If anything has PC gaming evolved away from that.

THIS.

In AGEIA PhysX games you needed a separate PhysX card called a PPU.

 

[HellKnightX88]

Some of this proprietary tech is based on unique hardware nvidia has developed that developpers can choose to use or not. it doesn't limit the game, it's basically an extra that devs can use. That's called progress through competition. If anything it's consoles that do limit this because their hardware is static, they have paid for exclusives, and this latest generation is lacking in power it seems with the 30fps cinematic experience :^)

Fun fact: back in the old days some games wouldn't even run on certain cards so if you wanted to play everything you needed to swap out GPUs. If anything has PC gaming evolved away from that.

 

[shawn_kh]

I'm sure PC gaming will be fine.
Plus competition is good.
Competition forces AMD and Nvidia to keep making better products and it also keeps their pricing in check, because they have to compete with each other.
Monopoly is the worst thing for and industry and its consumers.

 

[Gilrond-i-Virdan]

I don't care for consoles and wouldn't ever care. If I need a controller / gamepad experience, I can connect them to my general purpose computer all the same

 

[sweets1]

its direct compute, Microsoft.
Someone said its all fine because its always been like this.
I wasn't PC gaming in 1998 and as far as im aware there was a much larger choice of vendors back then, now we have two going on one with AMD making losses in GPUs.
There is no competition.

Pretty soon at least we wont have to make a choice, there will only be one, thats good right?

There are technology's that work equally on all vendors that do the same thing as these proprietary technology's.
So why use those which lock the other out?

Using features to slow the performance of your rivals is not you competing its a copout. Its underhand nonsense that shows you are trying to avoid real competition.

Why would developers even involve themselves with this, the fact is someone running one vendor does lose out despite paying the same.

 

[volsung]

Ultimately people play on the PC because of the games, not just the graphics. And being an open platform with increasingly more Linux games, the ability to choose between gaming operating systems.

If anything is segmented it's the console market, with all and exclusive games.

 

[dragonbird]

I think that a lot of the problem at the moment is that PC users have become accustomed to thinking that a fairly-high-end PC is "better" than a console because it was for the last few years. Now consoles have jumped forward in technology and, for a while, it's no longer true.

But in a few years time, it WILL be true again - PC's will continue to advance, in small steps. Consoles will stay as they are until the next generation. Unless something radical happens in the console market.

The only problem I see is if AMD does go down, and Nvidia no longer has competition.

 

[GuyNwah]

It is probably safe to say AMD is not going down in the foreseeable future. However, they really need big wins in the three lines of business that still work for them: semi-custom (which includes the console chips), servers (where they've been hammered in x86 and are betting on ARM), and graphics cards to dig out of the hole they dug themselves into with the Phenom and the ATI acquisition.

 

[sweets1]

AMD have what is rumored to be the worlds first HBM GPU, PCPer have a video up interviewing a man who has one. While being very coy about it he is optimistic it will beat the Titan-X.
The problem is AMD isn't going to sell enough with nvidia playing dirty with their API's deliberately slowing AMD cards to a crawl.

This is not competition, AMD only have 20% GPU market share and falling rapidly.

Who will buy an AMD GPU if the most expensive ones runs an increasing number of games features like nvidia entry-level GPU's?

If AMD can't get the market share back to about 40% they cannot sustain themselves.

Straight up AMD do compete and very well, nvidia are using their increasing API monopoly to push them out of the market just like Intel did when AMD were at a competitive level.

---------- Updated at 11:38 AM ----------

Moderated, ^^^^^^ deves don't like any sort of criticism.

 

[dragonbird]

Moderated, ^^^^^^ deves don't like any sort of criticism.

There's been a lot of posts in the forum that say similar things and did NOT get moderated. However, that doesn't mean you're welcome to spread it across into other threads. So stay on topic please. If your intention when starting the thread was to seque into this, you may want to rethink.

---------- Post merged on 17-05-2015 at 12:35 AM ----------

It appears that the OP did intend this to be a thread complaining about the use of Nvidia tech in TW3, and not a general discussion about the future of PC Gaming, so it's probably best continued in the existing thread:
http://forums.cdprojektred.com/threads/35146-Are-AMD-users-left-high-and-dry
Locking this one.