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 : : :
57.
 
Re: ...
Mar 12, 2008, 20:42
57.
Re: ... Mar 12, 2008, 20:42
Mar 12, 2008, 20:42
 
PCMCIA does a similar thing for laptops - you'd just need to expand the scope quite considerably.

Erm. A large number of laptops require you to remove the frakking KEYBOARD before you can even get at the slot the memory is in.

Sure, we could make an easily upgradeable PC. We as in the PC industry as a whole. It'd also be completely incompatible with all the parts that currently exist. So who's going to be the first to take a gamble? Build an entirely new manufacturing line, do millions of dollars worth of R&D, millions more of testing, get the word out on the street with a massive ad campaign, etc.

It's really easy to sit here and bleat "Hardware manufacturers should just do blablablabla".
But if you take five seconds, ask yourself why THEY would do it?

Btw, things like that have been tried before. Back in the 80s, a bunch of manufacturers combined to form a standardized hardware base. All computers were identical, and the idea was that they could be easily upgraded etc.

MSX it was called. It was a great idea, until they realized that nobody was buying them. So which manufacturer is now going to take a hundred million dollar gamble, for what in the end will amount to zero extra profit?

What's in it for the hardware manufacturer? The answer is : Nada.

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
 Re: ...
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
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