PC Gaming Alliance Formed

Top technology companies form gaming alliance (thanks Mike Martinez) officially announces the formation of the gaming alliance first revealed last week (story) to help promote/revive the PC gaming scene. Here's word:
Some of the top technology companies, including Intel, Microsoft, Dell, and Advanced Micro Devices joined forces Tuesday to form the PC Gaming Alliance, which will try to promote the PC as a gaming platform.

The alliance will bring hardware makers, software companies, and game publishers under one roof to "accelerate innovation, improve the gaming experience for consumers and serve as a collective source of market information and expertise on PC gaming," the alliance said in a statement.

The companies will work together on challenges facing the PC gaming industry, including piracy and the establishment of hardware requirements for PC games, the alliance said. PCGA also hopes to accelerate growth of the PC gaming industry and standardize the development of gaming PCs and software by developing and promoting guidelines.

The alliance comes at a time when PC video game sales are falling. PC games sales in the U.S. were $910.7 million in 2007, down from $970 million in 2006, according to research from NPD Techworld. PC game sales in 2007 dwarfed in comparison to the sale of software for video game consoles like Sony's PlayStation and Nintendo's Wii, which were $6.6 billion.

Unit shipments of PC game software totaled 36.4 million in 2007, compared to video game software unit shipments of 153.9 million, according to NPD.

The U.S. gaming industry already has the Entertainment Software Association, which represents vendors that publish games for both computers and consoles. About 90 percent of the $7.4 billion revenue of PC and console gaming software in 2006 belonged to ESA members, giving the association a dominant presence.

Other PCGA members include Acer, Epic, Nvidia and Razer USA.

The announcement comes during the Game Developers Conference, which is being held in San Francisco. During the show PCGA member Intel launched a new gaming platform formerly code-named "Skulltrail." The Intel Dual Socket Extreme Desktop Platform includes two quad-core microprocessors, totaling eight-processing engines, and supports graphics cards from ATI or Nvidia.
View : : :
42.
 
Re: No subject
Feb 20, 2008, 15:36
42.
Re: No subject Feb 20, 2008, 15:36
Feb 20, 2008, 15:36
 
o rly? On what point? Care to explain?

1. Inerior Hardware - For the price you can't beat it. You might be able to today but when the console was released the graphics it offered were not possible on a PC costing $400 and software continues to look better.

2. Inferior Control Scheme - I think it's fair to say that console games are less complex. Making a game complex does not make it fun and Consoles have found a way to maximize what people find fun and trim all the rest of the stuff away. If you compare a game like Crysis with it's multiple weapon attachment interface in game and CoD4 which lets users customize their weapons before games (multiplayer) you can see similar things approached from different directions.

3. Retarded Audience - Lumping everyone together who uses consoles is ignorant and inflammatory. There is as much variety there as anywhere else in the gaming community.


PC gamers are on the defensive right now because the Consoles have basically muscled them out of FPS's, RPG's, and it's looking like RTS's and MMO's are next. And to add insult to injury they show no appreciation for the creation and growth of those genre's to the pc community. It wouldn't be that hard to build in Keyboard and Mouse support and allow people to re-map the controls but this hasn't happened yet. It's sad that that those games have basically been robbed from the PC platform but the console versions of those games are growing and improving.

I'll be the first to tell anyone that BF1942 and BF2 were worlds better than Battlefield: Modern Combat on the Xbox and 360. And so was BF2142 for that matter, but the state of games today is so much better. CoD4 is a masterpiece in my opinion. So was Bioshock. The Orange box was great as well. All formly titles you'd only find on PC's and done exceptionally well on consoles.

The gaming industry is changing and consoles are likely going to be the only place to buy big budget video games in the future. They offer an easy all in one package for new customers, a standard set of hardware to design on, protection from Piracy (this is a much bigger issue in companies eyes than it is to us), and a marketing/retail juggernaut to push the software. When you start considering the cons of the PC as a gaming platform both from a new users standpoint (cost, compatibility issues, stability) and from a developer stand point of trying to design software that runs on as many machines as possible it's easy to see why game companies want to design on a console.

Date
Subject
Author
1.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
2.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
3.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
6.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
16.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
17.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
     Our savior!
68.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
      Re: Our savior!
75.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
       Re: Our savior!
37.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
     Re: No subject
25.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
4.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
7.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
18.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
20.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
     Re: No subject
21.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
     Re: No subject
5.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
9.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
10.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
11.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
  hm
12.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
14.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
15.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
    No subject
22.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
26.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
30.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
     Re: No subject
36.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
      Re: No subject
39.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
       Re: No subject
40.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
        Re: No subject
41.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
         Re: No subject
62.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
          Re: No subject
69.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
           Re: No subject
44.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
         Re: No subject
 42.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
      Re: No subject
48.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
       Re: No subject
49.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
        Re: No subject
55.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
         Re: No subject
56.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
          Re: No subject
57.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
           Re: No subject
59.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
           Re: No subject
60.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
            KEYBOARD & MOUSE FTW!!
58.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
          Re: No subject
8.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
13.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
19.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
63.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
23.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
24.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
29.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
65.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
67.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
28.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
31.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
32.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
34.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
33.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
35.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
38.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
43.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
50.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
51.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
53.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
61.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
66.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
45.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
46.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
54.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
64.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
84.
Feb 21, 2008Feb 21 2008
47.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
52.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
70.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
71.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
72.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
76.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
96.
Feb 27, 2008Feb 27 2008
73.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
74.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
77.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
78.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
79.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
80.
Feb 20, 2008Feb 20 2008
81.
Feb 21, 2008Feb 21 2008
93.
Feb 23, 2008Feb 23 2008
94.
Feb 25, 2008Feb 25 2008
     Re: No subject
95.
Feb 25, 2008Feb 25 2008
      Re: No subject
82.
Feb 21, 2008Feb 21 2008
83.
Feb 21, 2008Feb 21 2008
85.
Feb 21, 2008Feb 21 2008
87.
Feb 21, 2008Feb 21 2008
     Re: No subject
88.
Feb 21, 2008Feb 21 2008
      Re: No subject
89.
Feb 21, 2008Feb 21 2008
       Re: No subject
90.
Feb 21, 2008Feb 21 2008
        Re: No subject
86.
Feb 21, 2008Feb 21 2008
91.
Feb 22, 2008Feb 22 2008
92.
Feb 23, 2008Feb 23 2008