Sweeney: PCs Good for Anything... But Games

Unreal creator: Tim Sweeney PCs are good for anything, just not games” on TG Daily is a Q&A with the Epic CEO which, as the title of the article suggests, features some negative comments about the PC as a gaming platform. This is actually just the age-old complaint about PCs with integrated graphics, as he says that mainstream PCs are not suited to gaming:
Retail stores like Best Buy are selling PC games and PCs with integrated graphics at the same time and they are not talking about the difference [to more capable gaming PCs]. Those machines are good for e-mail, web browsing, watching video. But as far as games go, those machines are just not adequate. It is no surprise that retail PC sales suffer from that. Online is different, because people who go and buy games online already have PCs that can play games. The biggest problem in this space right now is that you cannot go and design a game for a high end PC and downscale it to mainstream PCs. The performance difference between high-end and low-end PC is something like 100x.
View : : :
56.
 
Re: Read the article
Mar 12, 2008, 20:26
56.
Re: Read the article Mar 12, 2008, 20:26
Mar 12, 2008, 20:26
 
Intel could have improved their graphics cards to keep up with games, but they didn't.

Ofcourse they didn't. They knew they weren't competitive in the top of the line graphics market, so they never bothered to try. They focused on their end of the market, which is cheap motherboards with integrated graphics for the business and home user. And made an absolute fucking FORTUNE in it.

But somehow it's now Intel's fault? What benefit is it to Intel if they make an onboard integrated graphics controller that the equivalent of, say, a Geforce 7900? Great, their motherboards now cost a hundred bucks extra. Which gets them how many extra customers?

Or let's say that Intel decides to offer high end integrated video in addition to keeping the low end. How many gamers are going to buy integrated video, even if it's supposedly on par with Nvidia/ATI's latest offerings? Would you?

Intel knows its market. Its market is not in high end graphics. For Tim Sweeney to bitch and moan about it won't make a fucking difference.

Neither will the PC Gaming Alliance. Because in the end, even 500 developers whining and crying, I still don't see what benefit there is for Intel to try to compete in a market they can't compete in.

Okay, let's see, that's Rein, and that mongrel cliffy, and now Sweeney. Who else does Epic have that can come and bitch about PC gaming. How about the intern? Maybe they have a janitor? Coffee lady?

Creston

Avatar 15604
Date
Subject
Author
1.
Mar 10, 2008Mar 10 2008
2.
Mar 10, 2008Mar 10 2008
3.
Mar 10, 2008Mar 10 2008
7.
Mar 10, 2008Mar 10 2008
8.
Mar 10, 2008Mar 10 2008
4.
Mar 10, 2008Mar 10 2008
5.
Mar 10, 2008Mar 10 2008
6.
Mar 10, 2008Mar 10 2008
26.
Mar 11, 2008Mar 11 2008
33.
Mar 11, 2008Mar 11 2008
34.
Mar 11, 2008Mar 11 2008
35.
Mar 11, 2008Mar 11 2008
67.
Mar 16, 2008Mar 16 2008
9.
Mar 10, 2008Mar 10 2008
10.
Mar 10, 2008Mar 10 2008
12.
Mar 10, 2008Mar 10 2008
11.
Mar 10, 2008Mar 10 2008
13.
Mar 10, 2008Mar 10 2008
16.
Mar 10, 2008Mar 10 2008
17.
Mar 10, 2008Mar 10 2008
18.
Mar 10, 2008Mar 10 2008
19.
Mar 10, 2008Mar 10 2008
20.
Mar 10, 2008Mar 10 2008
22.
Mar 10, 2008Mar 10 2008
23.
Mar 11, 2008Mar 11 2008
14.
Mar 10, 2008Mar 10 2008
15.
Mar 10, 2008Mar 10 2008
21.
Mar 10, 2008Mar 10 2008
57.
Mar 12, 2008Mar 12 2008
24.
Mar 11, 2008Mar 11 2008
25.
Mar 11, 2008Mar 11 2008
27.
Mar 11, 2008Mar 11 2008
28.
Mar 11, 2008Mar 11 2008
31.
Mar 11, 2008Mar 11 2008
29.
Mar 11, 2008Mar 11 2008
30.
Mar 11, 2008Mar 11 2008
32.
Mar 11, 2008Mar 11 2008
36.
Mar 11, 2008Mar 11 2008
37.
Mar 11, 2008Mar 11 2008
44.
Mar 11, 2008Mar 11 2008
48.
Mar 11, 2008Mar 11 2008
49.
Mar 11, 2008Mar 11 2008
55.
Mar 12, 2008Mar 12 2008
38.
Mar 11, 2008Mar 11 2008
39.
Mar 11, 2008Mar 11 2008
40.
Mar 11, 2008Mar 11 2008
 56.
Mar 12, 2008Mar 12 2008
 Re: Read the article
58.
Mar 12, 2008Mar 12 2008
59.
Mar 13, 2008Mar 13 2008
60.
Mar 14, 2008Mar 14 2008
41.
Mar 11, 2008Mar 11 2008
42.
Mar 11, 2008Mar 11 2008
43.
Mar 11, 2008Mar 11 2008
45.
Mar 11, 2008Mar 11 2008
46.
Mar 11, 2008Mar 11 2008
47.
Mar 11, 2008Mar 11 2008
50.
Mar 12, 2008Mar 12 2008
51.
Mar 12, 2008Mar 12 2008
52.
Mar 12, 2008Mar 12 2008
53.
Mar 12, 2008Mar 12 2008
54.
Mar 12, 2008Mar 12 2008
61.
Mar 14, 2008Mar 14 2008
62.
Mar 14, 2008Mar 14 2008
63.
Mar 15, 2008Mar 15 2008
64.
Mar 15, 2008Mar 15 2008
65.
Mar 15, 2008Mar 15 2008
66.
Mar 16, 2008Mar 16 2008
     Re: No subject