PC Gaming is Not Dead (.com)

Status
Not open for further replies.
http://www.pcgamingisnotdead.com/



I'm a little intrigued as to what this is all about. I really dig their products, the Black Widow Mechanical Keyboard is my absolute favorite keyboard I've ever used and their mice are generally perfectly functional and affordable and I've had no real complaints.
 
Reading up, they've been talking about the Switchblade for a while, this whole countdown, mystery thing can't be about it. If it is, well, fuck you Razer.
 

figmentPez

Staff member
Right there. Netbook? For gaming? Really? Really?

Unless it's a $2500 netbook that rates a 7.7 across the board on the WEI.
Even though I meant "netbook" as a reference to it's size, not power, I'm still going to laugh in your face for even referencing the WEI.

Second, if it cost $2,500, it wouldn't be a netbook anymore. Part of the definition of a netbook is price.

Third, there's more to gaming than just what can be done on the latest high-end system. If this little thing were to have an AMD Fusion chip powering it, then it would be able to run lower requirement games at a playable frame rate. It might not run Crysis 2 or Deus Ex: Human Revolution, but it could run Team Fortress 2, World of Warcraft, Torchlight and a lot of "casual" and F2P games.
 
I can't really comment on this because I'd NEVER use it. Why would you? Do you really "game" that much on the "road" (2-3hr drives) or spend weeks at a time at hotels? (If you do either of these, then I can see the appeal) but if you're not in that niche, why would you choose this over sitting at a massively more powerful machine? I'm just not sold.
 
I actually do the majority of my PC gaming on my laptop, which can run WoW, Torchlight, Half-Life 2, etc perfectly. And to my surprise, I do most of that gaming at home. The convenience of having it on the laptop means I can game while on the couch, or at a friend's house, or even on the porch (though not now, fuck summer) without being tied to my desk. Really, the only games I play currently on my stationary PC is Dragon Age and Rift.
 
i do all of my PC gaming on my Alienware laptop because the uncertainty of where I might be a year from now or when/if I ever pack up and head back to the states keeps me from buying a desktop which would be a pain in the ass to lug around. So personally I tend to buy high end laptops and assuming I have the money, replace them every 2 years.
Added at: 14:06
Though, as an afterthought, Shego isn't wrong. If I had $2500 to dump on a Desktop or $2500 to dump on a laptop, I'd take the desktop.
 
Again, this was just a personal response. I've hated every gaming experience I've had on any sort of portable system with the exception of a hacked PSP that I only used to play RPGs on. An Alienware/Top of the line laptop is probably the only thing I'd even consider giving a chance, but even then, the lack of a full keyboard and mouse? I'm just not feeling it, never have. (If you add on a keyboard and mouse, it's not a portable system anymore, it's a lightweight desktop.)
 
Well, I add the mouse at least. I couldn't imagine using the touchpad for anything other than point and click or turn based strategy games.

Also it doesn't help that Alienware touchpads suck.
 
If I have to dumb all the settings down to get a game to be playable, plus limit myself to a small subset of games, then I don't consider that to be a system fit for gaming.

My laptop is far more powerful than the desktop I bought in 2006, but is totally unfit for gaming. The 5 year old video card in the desktop can still kick the onboard video in the nuts and take it's wallet.

To me, PC Gaming is defined by speed and outstanding graphics. Few laptops can get close. Tablets and netbooks? Forget it.
 
Yeah, I'm an avid desktopper myself. I always get flack because I'd rather play a game in my (rather comfortable) desk chair on a monitor than in the living room on my tv. I get WAY more immersed in games when I play on a desktop, being so close to it draws me in way more than if I was 8 feet away from my tv. With a nice set of headphones on, it's gaming bliss. This is why I'm a PC gamer.
 
Honestly speaking, I don't make too much of a distinction between a laptop and a desktop. PC gaming falls under both for me. I rarely, if ever, use my laptop to play outside of home so maybe that's way.

That said, I give props to consoles for more or less one reason---when I pop in a game, I don't have to worry about system requirements and tweaking with settings. Now that my laptop is over a year old, I gotta start looking a little closer to system requirements. My alienware is by no means slow, but it will probably hit a point--by next year most likely where the games outpace the system and it's time to invest in a new one. I love PC gaming to death but there has been instances where I went with the Xbox360 version of a game over the PC version so I wouldn't worry about framerates or weird Direct X issues (I'm looking at you, DA2).
 
I'm a laptop gamer these days.
Graphic quality is nearly a non factor in my immersion of a game anyway so a desktop just takes up unnecessary space. I might pick up the next generation of consoles even, to get rid of even the laptop. Though with some games just being immensely better playable with keyboard/mouse I might not be able to ditch it completely.
 

GasBandit

Staff member
I'm both. I like gaming at my desktop PC, but I've got a friend who I visit every couple weeks that also likes to game, and I like taking my laptop over there for some multiplayer. We tore the hell out of Saints Row 2, it was a blast. But I was definitely grateful I did not have to lug my extremely heavy and large home system over there. Same went for borderlands, and so on.

Also, he isn't a desktop gamer anymore, he's 100% laptop, because that way he can be on the couch with his wife when she wants to watch her "stories" and thus she doesn't feel ignored cause he isn't sequestered off in another room. Even though they're doing 2 separate things, they're doing it sitting side by side and that's enough to keep her happy.
 

Necronic

Staff member
There are a handful of games I will play on my laptop, and the only reason I play it on that is because I am nowhere near my desktop. If I was on my desktop I would play better games.
 
O

Overflight

Razer must have bribed someone at Kotaku:

http://kotaku.com/5834795/i-cant-be...uture-of-pc-gamingit-may-be-the-future-of-pcs

After seeing this morning's reveal of their new creation, the Razer "Blade" gaming laptop, I think I'm ready to go one better: I think Razer may not just save PC gaming—I think they may save Windows laptops entirely.
But Razer's got a big scrap ahead of them. The Blade doesn't go up against other gaming PCs—it's going toe to toe with the world's best hardware manufacturer. They're going to fight Apple.
...OK, PC gaming dying is SOMEWHAT plausible, but the death of the WINDOWS LAPTOP? We're off to a good start.

You can build a perfectly decent gaming PC for less than a grand. The new Razer Blade costs $2,800. (I'll get to the price in a bit. It's a big deal—and something Razer is going to have to bring down.)
Way to undermine your own point on your FOURTH PARAGRAPH.

But here's something that PC gamers don't want to hear (and I say this as an owner of a shit-hot gaming tower of my own): PC gaming hardware is approaching a dead end.
PCs aren't going to die, but they are fast on their way to a niche industry. And it's not smartphones and iPads that are killing them—it's the lack of systemic innovation in the PC hardware space itself.
Look, it's not the ‘90s anymore. There aren't dozens of companies making PC hardware anymore, especially the sort that gamers need with real graphics horsepower. There are three: Intel, Nvidia, and AMD.
And really, if you want to get right down to it, there's just Intel. They're the only company with the capital, resources, and engineering prowess to move forward in the industry. (Nvidia may get there if their mobile Tegra platform finds customers in smartphones and tablets; they could use the revenue.)
But for years, Intel has been operating as a company fearful of accusations of monopoly, even though they largely have had no real threatening competition. But oops, here comes Apple using lovely mobile hardware that is fast approaching Good Enough status for even "real" computing in their mobile hardware.
Guess what? In another generation or two, those iPhone chips are going to be fast enough to power a decent laptop. It won't be long before the MacBook Air and the iPad meet in the middle, not just in interface, but in hardware.
...so we would get a a laptop with similar power to today's laptops? And THIS would destroy PC gaming?

So where does that leave the PC hardware world? HP just bailed on PC hardware. Dell's a rounding error for mid-sized corporate bulk computers. Apple's moving through the consumer space like crazy, becoming the laptop of choice for not just students and creatives, but everyone but PC gamers.
Oh really? What about the umpteen MILLION applications that only run on Windows that serve as the backbone of several industries? What planet does this guy live in?

What PC gaming needs are platforms. I know many of you gamers out there don't want to see it—the varied choice and the ability to customize your hardware is part of why you love PC gaming. (And Android phones, I'm sure.) But it's holding back one of the things that made PC gaming so wonderful for years: raw power.
...so having unreplaceable components in EVERY computer will somehow make computers more powerful? What moon logic is this?

Why do Xbox games running on six-year-old hardware look nearly as good as a modern PC games? Don't quibble with me about resolution, texture quality, etc. You'd be missing the forest for the trees. Console games look close enough to PC games, despite PC gaming hardware being ten times as computationally powerful.
..."look nearly as good"...WHAT DRUGS ARE YOU ON?

It's time to buck and realize that the Apple model of hardware isn't just one way to do it—it's the way hardware has to go to move forward. There will still be competition, but the competition is between platforms, not within the platforms itself.
So the PC will turn into uncustomizable black boxes. I admit there is the frightening possibility of Apple causing this via market pressure but this isn't supposed to be a GOOD THING.

The Razer Blade is the first credible competitor to Apple from the PC hardware world in five years. Don't get me wrong—I'm not sure that Razer even knows what they have on their hands or if they're committed enough to the product line to see it through. But I'm sure Intel knows; the dedicated an entire engineering team to the project with Razer, after all.
Here's what the Razer Blade is doing right:
It has a real brand.
Define "real". And it's meant to compete with APPLE? I'm starting to think this guy is trolling us.

It's a compromise machine in the best way.

It's a fast machine, with powerful hardware. But not too powerful. (There's a reason its screen is only 1080p, a relatively low resolution for PC gaming these days—mobile hardware can push that just fine.) At five pounds, it's light for such a big screen.
It's really not compromised at all—it's purpose built. It's built for gaming. That's wonderful.
...you do know that gaming laptops have existed for YEARS, right?

It actually has an innovative hardware solution.

That fancy multi-touch trackpad screen off to the right of the keyboard? That's the sort of stuff that makes consumers perk up and take notice. It's the kind of thing that people who have never heard of Razer before will notice in a coffee shop and ask, "What is that? Who makes that? How much does that cost?"
That a multi-touch screen is right in Apple's wheelhouse is just icing on the cake. Take that, MacBooks!
...or it can be just a stupid gimmick.

It has the potential to turn into its own platform.

The Razer Blade will always be a Windows + Intel project. There aren't going to be games or other software that runs only on Razer Blades, at least not for the foreseeable future.
But by consolidating into a single product line, Razer opens up the opportunity for game makers to create custom builds that more readily access the power of the hardware inside, just as the unified, standardized hardware of consoles allow programmers to continue to squeeze performance out of chips that would be laughed at if they were inside of modern gaming PCs.
...OK, I'll give it that. Guess a broken clock can be right twice a day.

Support and updates will be easier.

One set of hardware, one set of drivers, one less thing to have to wonder about when you're trying to run games. I love PC hardware's power and potential—I don't love screwing around with drivers and such to get things running. If you do, more power to you (and yes, it's better than it used to be), but that's not what normal, mass market folks want. It's just not. If Razer's support for the Blade is as good as it should be, they should be able to operate a platform that has the It Just Works nature that Apple's Macs tend to have. (Most of the time!)
...or it could start mimicking your average laptop makers approach to drivers which is "Update once in a blue moon"

The price is painful.

As of today, there are two laptops worth getting excited over, that set themselves apart from the pack via design and performance: the MacBook Air and the Razer Blade.
The MacBook Air is a low-powered, beautiful designed and perfectly built subnotebook; the Razer Blade is a monster gaming rig with a touchscreen interface unlike anything else out there.
I can walk into a store today and buy that MacBook Air for a grand. To get a Razer Blade, I have to spend almost three times that much.
Ouch.
They appeal to very different markets, granted. A fully kitted out MacBook Pro 17 will get you up to or over three grand, as well. But the Razer Blade has the mass market potential that most PC laptops don't have.

$2,800 is fine for now. But let's hope that next year's model gets down closer to $2,000—and $1,500 would be even better.
NO IT ISN'T "FINE". It's hideously expensive and no one in their right mind would pay for one in the middle of a friggin ECONOMIC CRISIS!

It's tough, even with Intel in the mix. Nobody has a supply chain like Apple. Nobody can get the cutting-edge hardware as inexpensively as Apple.
Except, perhaps, for Intel. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised to see Intel buy Razer outright in a couple of years if this really takes off. There's no need to worry about monopoly any longer. There's no reason to worry about pissing off vendors like HP and Dell. (Where else are they going to go? Apple? AMD?)
The death of PC hardware might be the rebirth of PC gaming. Don't get me wrong—PC gaming is doing alright. I'm not a doomsayer. But I'm tired of the enthusiast market holding back the innovation in the space. It's just like what happened to cars over the last 15 years. They became more difficult to work for the shade tree mechanic, sure, but they also became faster, more fuel efficient, and cheaper.
I want that for PC gaming. And if they play their cards right, Razer might actually be the company to do it. I'm just as shocked as you are.
Oh I'm SHOCKED all right, but at something else...

This might turn out to be a fine product and if I had money to burn (I'm talking lottery levels) I could see myself getting one but acting as if this is the savior of PC gaming is just insane.

/rant
 
Sadly that is not the dumbest article I've seen at Kotaku. Probably the first in a while that didn't come from "let the commentors write us articles for free""Speak up Kotaku"

Still the entire Gawker network is nothing more than trashy link bait. I think the NY Post and Daily News have more journalistic integrity and ethics.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top