Playstation 5 root keys obtained
twitter.com
twitter.com
Are consoles cheaper “per transistor” or sth? If so, why? Is it about the vendor locking you in and charging more per game? That would seem even more skewed against the buyer: buy this pseudo-pc so we can sell you expensive, limited-choice software.
The only pro I can see at the moment for any console is the ability to place it in the living room for the family to share a casual gaming / entertainment experience.
I do have a PC and, while not a "gamer", I enjoy hitting back on the old classics (Age of Empires 2 DE) from time to time.
But that is a personal gaming experience, not to be shared with others in my home.
Another factor is you're far less likely to encounter modders. First thing I do is disable PC crossplay, if the game lets me.
I was a “PC gamer” for years, but consoles are better for plug and play group/sofa gaming.
I don’t want to setup and configure yet another computer.
I have consoles and a powerful gaming PC. I use both regularly. For me they’re good for different things.
My Nintendo Switches get the most use.
Once you buy a prebuilt machine you're losing a good chunk of the savings that people talk about when buying a PC. You also don't just install steam, you have to install drivers, and maintain an OS (which doesn't have a controller friendly input method) so you need a keyboard and mouse around for windows update time or driver update time.
You mean you buy them from Steam, you launch a third-party launcher from Steam and launch your game through that launcher. I know that at least EA and Rockstar force you to use their launcher even if you buy on Steam and Microsoft also requires you to have Xbox stuff (at least for Forza Horizon).
You’ve just demonstrated one of the reasons people get consoles.
And you can always run this the other way around: All modern games that run on console and PC support controllers on PC. It's games that are very old that sometimes need a manual intervention. BUT consoles can't even play those games at all, so they basically have no controller support too, just with zero recourse.
I'm sure it's perfectly possible but some people don't want another thing to configure and troubleshoot if that's their day job.
You might get your PC setup to do almost that, but it will require tinkering with keyboard and mouse to update OS and install games. It's not what I want when I get home. The console occasionally have issues too, but far far less often than PC in my experience.
100% this.
It gets even better when you realise that modern consoles support sleep too. You can go from "off" to "exactly where you were last night" in a matter of seconds.
I say this as a primarily 95% 3+ decade PC gamer. The other 5% goes to Nintendo exclusives such as Zelda or Mario.
Exactly. It just works and saves time. Just buy the game, plug it in and play it. Simple.
No 'swap this GPU inside step', 'installing additional drivers step' or 'incompatible hardware errors', or 'run it in 32 bit mode' etc.
- It just works. Games can have bugs but no hassle with installation, drivers etc. Games are more or less better optimzed because all the devs are working on the same hardware. No 100s different CPU and GPU. And one operating system
- Exclusives. Studios are moving away from it to some extent but some games can still be only played on consoles
- Home entertainment system. Youtube, Netflix, blurays etc.
That being said I have a gaming PC and consoles too mostly becasue of the exclusives
They're subsidised by the game prices. You still pay for it in the end.
> Home entertainment system. Youtube, Netflix, blurays etc.
You can use a PC in the same way. If you position it well, you can even have a dual purpose work/entertainment PC.
How much is a half-decent game PC ? €2000 ? Compare to a €500 console. For €1500 I can buy a lot of 'overpriced' games.
How many games can you buy for 500€ max? About 10 or so. Maybe.
It's entirely fair as there is more possibility of free PC games, or them being of negligible cost since you pay lower platform fees.
This is in addition to the opportunity costs you incur of not buying a PC or having a lower powered PC as a PC can be used for other things (ie, office work, taxes, other productivity tasks).
> since you pay lower platform fees
The platform fees (not required by the way) are roughly the cost of one game per year, if not cheaper. Gamepass being a very different discussion (and is available on PC too)
> This is in addition to the opportunity costs you incur of not buying a PC or having a lower powered PC as a PC can be used for other things (ie, office work, taxes, other productivity tasks).
I don't know about you but I don't want my work PC to be where I relax in the evenings, and many people don't want their employers software or information on their personal devices. I also live in a country where I don't have to fill in my own taxes, and almost all of my personal computing needs are met by my phone.
Work related stuf I do on my work-provided MacBook Pro, that costs me €0. For browsing the web, e-mail and taxes I just use my iPad.
Less than a PC
And PC games also cost money, at least if we're talking about similar types of games as on the consoles.
Also keep in mind that consoles are subject to the very same price increase, it's nearly impossible to obtain a console for the advertised price.
And the GPU prices have been rather expensive, if not as outright insane as right now for years. So PC gaming in general has become less attractive from a financial point while console prices are pretty much the same (though with some difficulty in getting them, for sure).
Same for all other components, it's no longer true that you need current-gen technology to be able to play with Graphics put on High.
And the PS5 won't be able to match the PCs capability of doing productive things when not gaming.
No, not really.
https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_nkw=vega+56&_saca...
currently it would be 1.5k+€, but thats because of the silicon shortage and scalpers. and fwiw, a ps5 was going for 1.4k just a few month ago too.
[0] https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2021-call-...
[1] https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2020-assas...
If that's what you care about then buying a modern console is a terrible idea, however you can buy a "retro" console (xbox 360) with dozens of games ver practically nothing (The first match on gumtree near me was a 360, 2 controllers and 35 games for £60)
On PC they even have BotW DLC. https://www.nintendolife.com/news/2021/03/introducing_second... there’s no comparison for functionality.
The new Xbox can emulate (very poorly, less than a weaker computer can, but it’ll get better) too, it’s why the xbone with dev mode for homebrew was never hacked. https://www.ggrecon.com/articles/emulate-playstation-2-xbox-...
If I had to buy a console, form factor is the most important, I love my PSP. Could play NES, some SNES and very slow N64, perfect compatibility PS1 emulator, GB+GBC,GBA and of course PSP games. The homebrew on it for apps was amazing too with music players, ebook readers, cheats for every game, ability to change clock for battery life or performance, really a game changing device.
Only if you buy new games at launch.
Consoles still have physical media, so from few days to few weeks you can grab games at a large discount.
The cost of new releases on steam or the epic store is very close to the cost of a new release on console, so if you are jumping on new releases straight away the savings are very very slim
It is also a huge kinda expensive PITA to setup a PC to handle Blu-rays and do Netflix and YouTube as well as a console. UHD drives are not cheap and you need paid software like PowerDVD to actually watch the disc. Getting a good remote interface is tough and when swapping between games, blurays and Netflix/YouTube and games requires entering mouse land. On console its all designed to be used from the couch and works well that way and you can easily get a compatible remote for $20-30 if your TV's doesn't work over HDMI CEC.
But subsidizing doesn't necessarily mean unequal pricing. It does not follow from equal pricing that a part of the $60 for a PS5 game didn't go into subsidizing the platform. For example, for all we know, a comparable amount of money for the PC game could have gone into extra development and QA effort necessary to support the more varied PC ecosystem so in the end the prices could be the same anyway, even without the game vendor willing to give up some profits for one or the other.
Initial game prices can be higher, but you can sell the games. Here in Australia it's common for new games to be $100 on console and $80-90 on PC. A month after release I can still sell a console game for $80, and often do, since I prefer single-player adventure/RPG type games which I will take 5+ years to replay if I ever do. That effectively means that games cost me $20 to play on a console or $80-90 to play on a PC. I prefer playing on PC for all the other reasons but it's really hard to justify the extra cost now that used PC games are no longer a thing.
Not without significantly more work. A console you just plugin to your TV and you're good to go, with a PC you want to use for both work and entertainment you'll need to finagle all sorts of things. One major hurdle I've yet to overcome seamlessly is playing on my TV/Home Theater from a computer in my office. When I game I prefer to get full immersion, but there really aren't any great, easy to use solutions that allow such a setup. I could get a separate computer for the Home Theater purpose, but now again it's easier/cheaper to just get a console.
Might as well buy a better PC to do everything.
A lot of people I know use console + Mac.
That's one of the reasons I hate consoles on an ideological level. Unless there are technical reason that make porting the game so hard that it's just not worth it, the only reason for "exclusives" to exist is to fuck over consumers.
Some of those games are funded and developed wouldn't of been made if it wasn't for the fact they wanted to have games to sell the console. They are not fucking you over by not having it on your system, you just feel annoyed that it's not.
It's simply a business decision and marketing tool and because it's valuable you get more and better games than you would of gotten before. If there weren't such exclusives you wouldn't have such incentives and they wouldn't always exist in the first place.
At the end of the day, very few games on available on everything, and they shouldn't be required to be.
- At the beginning of the release cycle consoles are often sold at a loss, the money is made back from game sales (a $60 PC game costs $70 on console)
- It's much easier to optimize for the known hardware configuration of a console than for "all PCs". Console hardware isn't high-end, the heavy lifting is done by heavy optimization of the games for the specific hardware
Sometimes with significant quality downgrades, I remember texture quality of early Skyrim being abyssal because the whole game was console optimized. On the other hand there is cyberpunk which apparently didn't even reliably run on some of the consoles it was released on, no idea if it was because of released date agreements or if it was just a shitty money grab.
As far as I understand the great upside of consoles in the past was that the manufacturers strictly vetted the quality of games you could release for them. There have been a few "scandals" where they obviously rescinded those controls to get a game out in time for a specific season only to have it crash and burn. Not sure how strict the controls are now, do they still vet the games strictly or is it just an app store with minimal quality checks?
- even cheaper, and not a case of paying later for $70 games
- exclusives: by far the biggest draw to switch
Interesting enough to spur Valve to launch a portable competitor so it'll be interesting to see how those pros hold up.
Insane amount of value, I haven’t purchased a game other than bf2042 in past two years.
That's before you get into the "openness" of PC - if you want to play a game on steam but your friend has bought it on the Microsoft store how do you play together? How do you voice chat? What do you do when the Xbox services don't work when docker is installed?
Both services support adding non platform games through their shortcut/executable.
They also support voice chat for groups and players not in game.
> What do you do when the Xbox services don't work when docker is installed?
File a bug report? Or you just came up with some hypothetical issues?
That only launches the game through the correct store. If the game doesn't implement cross play, you can't play together.
> They also support voice chat for groups and players not in game.
But you're trying to be in game with the person, and again if the game doesn't do in-game voice chat, you have to find alternatives. On a console you join a party and the software correctly handles the cases around "do I want to put you in a voice chat channel for your game" (because it has to to pass certification).
> File a bug report? Or you just came up with some hypothetical issues?
Really helpfully closed after 30 days of inactivity. https://github.com/docker/for-win/issues/42. (I didn't make this bug, but I found it, and just logged onto my xbox instead).
I haven’t used in game voice for more than a decade now. discord, teamspeak, steam chat, Xbox live all work well and are used by quite a lot of people.
Can’t comment on that single issue, but it does look like there was barely any information provided to repro the issue.
That is very much game specific. As an example, Deep Rock Galactic doesn't support playing between Steam and the MS store [0]
> I haven’t used in game voice for more than a decade now. discord, teamspeak, steam chat, Xbox live all work well and are used by quite a lot of people.
All of those options require you to coordinate your play outside of the game and the platform. If you are playing Sea of Thieves on Steam with friends using steam voice chat, and one person joins via the MS store, you need to figure out out how to get them into the correct place. If you're all on xbox, they just join your party.
> Can’t comment on that single issue, but it does look like there was barely any information provided to repro the issue.
So it's not just file a bug report, it's file a bug report and provide follow up information. As a programmer, that's fine, but what if my kids want to play minecraft with their friends?
I’d say your kids pc doesn’t need docker on it.
You can’t eat the cake and have it too. If you’re technically skilled to be using containers and virtualization, least you could do is file a helpful bug report.
And docker misconfiguration causing issues in unrelated services is one another reason why I'd suggest they have their own.
Same would go for any console, phone etc. You can’t just install stuff with known issues from 3rd parties, not file report with any diagnostics and then blame it on the platform. Would you blame iOS for a badly behaving app that makes it hard for the kids to use the iPad?
So again, for the huge number of people whose life involves technology there are a lot of things that can throw a wrench into that PC for gaming, and in those cases a console makes a lot of sense. It's a little odd to me that this bothers you so much; surely it is expected that consoles have a good usecase given their popularity?
xbox apps on Windows do not care about virtualization, in fact they probably can't - because xbox os is essentially a subset of windows as host and guest.
None of this is relevant. Maybe Docker's interface is "improperly configured" for the gaming use case. It remains a headache, and using a console is a viable solution that allows you to work with buggy instances of Docker without disrupting your gaming.
I have nephews who are tinkering with Java and python, and I assume will be hitting docker at some point.
You're being incredibly nitpicky over a reasonable example of why PC is not as plug-and-play as a console. On a console, the game will work. On a PC, there are a lot of factors that may prevent it from working.
The entire "use a PC" premise is that the PC can be useful for gaming as well as for non-gaming uses, and the counter-argument is that those non-gaming uses can easily cause problems for the gaming uses. Docker is not the only example, tools like fiddler or wireshark or ghidra could cause problems. But heaven forbid that a gamer on hackernews be a tech enthusiast, right?
No, heaven forbid they want to tinker then complain but don't want to spend 5 minutes to file a bug report or follow the hacker way of actually figuring the issue out and proposing a fix.
The multiplayer services are independent and crossplay is an exception, that's what I think they were getting at. Being able to launch an executable from a different store doesn't matter if your copy uses Steamworks for multiplayer and the copy from the MS store doesn't support that.
> File a bug report? Or you just came up with some hypothetical issues?
It's not a hypothetical issue or a bug, it's a common problem for games that use anti-cheat software. Refusing to run when virtualization features are turned on or virtualization software is installed/present is a common tactic they use and if you file a report it'll usually get immediately closed as wontfix, because it's a tradeoff they decide to make. E.g. https://support.faceit.com/hc/en-us/articles/360019809319-Yo...
But that’s not the case from the games I’ve played unless you’re getting into hypotheticals.
I’ve played on Xbox live with my cousins on steam in F1 2020, age of empires, gta 4, halo.
The only friction is initial invites from the specific platform but once we’ve played in the same server, it’s very easy to send in-game invites.
As for the issues with virtualization, it’s an understandable issue with concerns around cheating in pc multiplayer games. COD4 was absolutely ruined because of it. Virtualization isn’t very widespread but I’m sure they’ll be more accommodative soon as WSL and Android ship by default on Windows.
No need for hypotheticals, Deep Rock Galactic [0] doesn't support play between the MS store and steam. Minecraft [1] has two versions that say they support cross play, except you can't play between the two (and depending on how you purchase the version you're playing, this is not clear, e.g. [2]). Marvel vs capcom Infinite doesn't supoort play between the MS Store and Steam [3]. You mentioned Age of Empires and F1 2020, but googling for those two seems to suggest that both of those games suffer from the same issue; [4] [5]
> As for the issues with virtualization, it’s an understandable issue with concerns around cheating in pc multiplayer games.
I understand the issues, virtualisation was an example of an issue I faced. (and it's actually not even a virtualisation issue, it's a virtual network adapter issue!) In the last few years I've had issues with Graphics drivers that are apparently too old, drivers that are too _new_, crashes when changing audio devices, windows update blocking game installs, anticheat failing to install/update, problems with performance on a very high end PC due to third party software (chrome). They're the issues I've had, and in my group of 8 or so friends that I play with regularly, the above are common, and everyone has their "own" set of issues.
[0] https://www.deeprockgalactic.com/crossplay-info [1] https://www.minecraft.net/en-us/get-minecraft [2] https://www.microsoft.com/store/productId/9NBLGGH2JHXJ [3] https://www.xbox.com/en-gb/games/store/marvel-vs-capcom-infi... [4] https://www.reddit.com/r/F1Game/comments/i3th2e/steam_x_micr... [5] https://www.reddit.com/r/pcgaming/comments/dyk1ut/the_crossp...
Minecraft is inherently different here because they went for a re-write and chose to have two different "editions" of the game.
As for F1 and Age of empires, I play it with my cousins weekly - you're welcome to join us through live or steam (I'm UranicAlloy580 on xbox live). Links you posted are questions/troubleshoot from 1+ year ago.
Of course it is, but that doesn't matter to a player who owns the game because microsoft say "Play anywhere" and "Crossplay" on their official marketing materials [0]
> Minecraft is inherently different here because they went for a re-write and chose to have two different "editions" of the game.
It doesn't really matter _why_, the fact is that it's the reality of being on an open platform that doesn't enforce these criteria. Being on a console you have to play by the rules of the platform which means that a bunch of things "just work", and those rules _mostly_ apply on PC, except when they don't.
> Links you posted are questions/troubleshoot from 1+ year ago. The AOE2 one, sure. F1 2019 doesn't work between the MS store and Steam still. That doesn't change the fact that these issues exist on PC, and they don't on console.
[0] https://news.xbox.com/en-us/2020/08/19/preview-deep-rock-gal...
The new Alder Lake CPUs apparently breaks a bunch of games, since their DRM thinks that the new Intel efficiency-cores are a second PC trying to play on the same license.
Some games will only work if you upgrade to Windows 11, and all games should work if you find a BIOS option and enable it, but only some CPUs support that BIOS option.
Source: https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2021/11/faulty-drm-breaks-doz...
And there's also all the other older horror stories of DRM, like the Denuvo DRM adding a huge performance hit on some games. Or not being able to play your offline single-player games at all, since the Denuvo DRM servers have temporarily offline due to a DNS issue.
(Disclaimer, despite all the issues, I do personally prefer PC gaming over console gaming, but I'm biased that I already have a powerful PC for CUDA/C++ programming and development, so I've already spent a bunch of money and time into PCs already).
2. Hardware convenience - just a box you put next to your TV that works from the second you take it out of the packaging.
3. Software convenience - no need to deal with a million compatibility issues, buggy drivers, and all the problems that come with Windows and gaming hardware.
And even more great games will never be available for console so that point is invalid.
2 I agree with. I'm hoping Steam Deck might make a big difference.
3 It's also gotten better in general, AND consoles seem to have more bugs than they used to, because things can just be patched now. Think Cyberpunk! Consoles are still better, I just think the difference is way smaller now.
But the main reason for me is the controller: It's just so much better than any other controller I've connected to a PC. The back triggers have excellent force feedback and in some games the vibrations tell you on what type of surface you're walking. This might not count for XBox users, which can use the controller on their PC.
Also, I use a Mac, and I don't want to bother with setting up a gaming only Windows PC. If I factor in time spent, $500 is worth it.
I did play Forza Horizon 4 on the PC with a Xbox Series X controller and it worked fine. But had bad experience if I tried to use an PlayStation 4 controller. Which controller did you use?
But for Forza Horizon 5 I do play it on a Xbox Series X and currently prefer it for two reason: 1.) Its just works without any major issues (a friend of mine has on the PC currently constant crashes) 2.) My PC hardware can run the game but not pretty well
One big benefit I see on the Xbox side is that you can play the games on your PC too. And I hope that "exlusives" die as its just annoying.
But in short if you just want to play games a console might be less friction compared to a PC. No need to fiddle with graphics settings and so on.
I use PS4 controllers with my PC(linux), pretty sure they work with windows too. What controllers cannot be connected to a PC?
Also I don’t think the target demographic would care much about it not being a pc (otherwise they would buy a pc). There’s a convenience of having a gaming box already set up, plus Playststion can have exclusive titles
Whereas on PC I have to go upstairs, usually switch out my work cables and keyboard/mouse, power up the thing, then fire up my game. Definitely less comfortable than the console experience, but on the other hand, there's games that just don't work on consoles (strategy, text-heavy games, etc).
At the moment I play Sekiro on the console and FFXIV on the PC. Both work on the other platform, but both are stronger on the ones I prefer to play them on.
- I have to unplug and replug my headset (an official Xbox-compatible Astro headset) from my xbox about 33% of the time to get it to recognize my microphone, and this is a common complaint among owners.
- When I try to play Minecraft with a friend, about 50-60% of the time we can't connect, and one or both of us needs to completely restart our console.
- A recent heavily-promoted game, "The Ascent", was actually throwing video memory errors on Xbox consoles for a lot of people:
https://old.reddit.com/r/XboxSeriesXlS/comments/p4losy/the_a...
https://external-preview.redd.it/8wPHr4M1TrBuG8qon6YO2WkrM_V...
- One of Xbox's flagship games, Sea of Thieves, due to creative choices in the world lore, has tied respawn time to your console horsepower. So if you have an Xbox One, you now have to compete against Xbox Series S/X players, or people who have bought an external drive, who respawn much, much faster than you. And the game pushes you strongly towards PVP most of the time. And even if you avoid that, it's still not uncommon to die due to PVE circumstances and "lose" because of the unacceptably long respawn times. So rather than just enjoying the game, you're often cursing your inferior console, or spending time thinking about upgrading its storage just to be competitive.
Newer console games often make you feel pressure to buy the newest console iteration when the older iteration is nearing its end, but Sea of Thieves was released years ago on the Xbox One. Now it's a litany of performance complaints whose answers are just "get a Series X." These days consoles are earlier and earlier becoming advertisements for their newer generations.
I for one hate using controller, and consoles don't support M+K (ok, xbox does, but not all games do).
Playing 3d shooter on controller is just like playing it using arrow keys, possible and I was doing that when I played DOOM (the original). Tried it and hated every minute of it because of inprecise shooting.
And strategy games? Moving pointer with controller?
RTS? Is there any on consoles?
And the last but not least, what to do when one doesn't have a TV? Those are not popular nowadays :)
> Playing 3d shooter on controller is just like playing it using arrow keys, possible and I was doing that when I played DOOM (the original). Tried it and hated every minute of it because of inprecise shooting.
That's true, but there'a a similar argument to be made about movement -- controllers use an analog stick for movement (or steering) and at least for me (PlayStation gang) it's always a weird feeling only being able to control my character in a binary way (moving/not moving) by typing letters. It's not as game breaking as not being able to aim properly, but it always feels like I'm doing it the wrong way.
For the price it would've taken me to upgrade my aging gaming PC to be able to play AAA games smoothly would've cost about the same as getting both a PS4 Pro and Xbox One X.
That combined with the fact that I don't need to upgrade the consoles for years made the choice really simple.
I still play a few games on my PC (Valheim, Factorio etc), but I'm hoping the Steam Deck will allow me to retire the old beast completely.
So for gaming i choose an xbox console and for the 70$ Price I subscribed to xbox game pass ultimate (it’s 15$/mo) but I have access to all 1st party games day one with more than 200 games in the backlog which I don’t have time to play them
Valve has improved the Steam experience for Steamdeck, along with the Proton compatibility layer. Then they added "Great on Steamdeck" that will encourage devs to aim for better controller support.
Now there are rumours Valve is working on a new "console".
Imho once there is a "console" that is basically Steamdeck with builtin Steam store and a powerful GPU... in otherword a fully capable PC with desktop performance + the console user experience (or almost there) there is strictly no reason to buy a Sony/Nintendo console anymore.... especially since SEGA, Sony & al are porting more and more games to PC.
I think we are all in a better place if those platforms converge, and Sony/Nintendo just focus on making great games. But it doesn't matter anyway, since if Valve can release an actually good "console" experience, with builtin Steam store... Nintendo and Sony have nothing more to offer bar a few exclusives.
I've heard that for every console generation for the last 15 years. I don't think the arguments are any stronger now than they were in 2013.
1) with Valve's Steam Deck and the console-like experience for the Store on their Steam OS, PC GAMING is going to reach a broader market : you no longer need to install Windows, figure out driver updates or even how to use Windows, etc. in order to benefit from STEAM. edit: I have seen these type of gamers in the reddit discussions : they know about PC GAMING, they want a part of it, to enjoy it like their friends, but they never really got into the whole "building a pc" .. but now they are looking at the possibility finally of playing "PC games" on the Steam Deck (which is "good enough") ... not to mention the countless discussioons comparing the Switch and the Deck
... which ties right into #2 :
2) now you benefit from HUGE sales all year long. Every weekend games go on sale. Every holiday season there are huge sales.
You might argue there are also sales on PS/Nintendo, but I don't think they are as good there?
Plus, with Steam you get access to a huge catalog of "pc gaming", including so many smaller and super cheap games, many of which are actually quite decent.
Basically, if Valve gets thing right with the Steam Deck OS and their rumored "console"... pc gaming is reaching into the console market which they could never do before. And over the years the PC could become a platform to converge to since it is now on handhelds (Steamdeck) and games developed for it can provide a console experience.
And since SONY & al are already porting more of their games to PC, with controller support etc... their games are pretty much already "steam deck verified" and will be a premium experience on the future Valve console, so they've kinda already dug themselves into this "converging towards PC architecture" hole.
Imho the only question left in this scenario, is whether Linux platform + PROTON will be able to support AAA games consistently... but it looks like Valve is confident about it.
To me the real question left is one of price. Will Valve be able to release a 'Steam Console' at the same price and performance as an Xbox? Or will people buying Xboxes today be willing to pay significantly more for a Steam Console than they are currently paying? As cool as the Steamdeck is, it's also twice the price of a Switch.
I've been playing Forza Horizon 5 during the weekend on my gaming PC. If I look it up on ProtonDB, I'm greeted with a red "BORKED" text for "won't start or is crucially unplayable". Forza Horizon 4, which is now three years old, is given a "Silver" rating. Looking through the comments, it varies between "Single player runs great", "Having minor issues" and "Won't run at all".
2) I think you're way overestimating the amount of money people spend and the amount of titles they buy. I'd wager that most people do not care about massive sales that much and they have a handful of titles they will play per year. And of course, there are the people who just buy FIFA / Madden / whatever when it comes out and play it for a year.
Deus Ex Mankind Divided: PSN: $5.99, Steam: $5.24
Mortal Kombat 11: PSN: $17.49 Steam: $17.49
Call of Duty 4 Remastered: PSN: $19.99 Steam: 24.99
Far Cry 5: PSN: $11.99 Steam: $11.99
Resident Evil 4: PS3: $4.99 PS4: $9.99 Steam: $4.99
Oh and for whatever reason PSN doesn't charge taxes in my region but Steam does so PSN is actually 15% cheaper.
Obviously this is just a tiny sample of games I could think of and more comparison could be done but IME PC prices are not significantly lower if at all. Humble Bundles might be an exception on a per game basis but you also get a lot of crap you may not have otherwise bought...
Games go on sale on PSN/Live/eShop all the time, every weekend and week there's usually something. Might not be the best deal ever on a game but that applies to Steam too.
Of course, Valve can design and release their own console with fixed hardware and they could perhaps out-compete Sony/Nintendo/Microsoft. But a customizable PC, especially one where you can install any Linux-based OS you want, will never be able to destroy the console market.
Not to mention, nothing that Valve has done indicates that they are willing to create a full Console OS, that would hide all of the desktop OS complexity from users and developers: headache free updates where you don't assume the user can just drop to a root shell if something breaks, network config utilities that can be used with a controller, fully standardized drivers, libc, OpenGL/Vulkan version etc.
Not to mention, part of the advantage of consoles is that they offer some amount of trusted computing: the fact that it's mostly impossible for users to install anything on a console is a major advantage even to end-users for Online games, where you have almost 0 problems with cheating compared to PC where it is a constant struggle.
I don't understand your argument either.
I think it's logical to assume when they already introduced "Steam Deck verified" (cf. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PL0NIhJpHg0 ) that Valve will release a fixed config, and that developers will be able to finetune their game to run great on it.
Where I follow you is that in theory Valve allows other manufacturers to build a Steam Deck compatible hardware, and hence there may be third party alternatives to their rumored console, which indeed could have perhaps different GPU / CPUs...
In that case first thing comes to mind, is when you hear of all those 30 FPS games on today's consoles.. what are we losing here? Some mythical "console experience"? When consoles today do have all kind of lags and stuttery gameplay since games engines nowadays are more complex than ever? There's basically no downsides.. I mean even Nintendo I was watching someone play a simple game like Animal Crossing and the loading times were so long... where is the mythical console experience? Seems like it's been gone for a long time. Now you get a polished experience, and a platform that (in theory) doesn't crash, and doesn't require you to figure out drivers and whatnot.
Next thing comes to mind is, for those people who are new to PC GAMING, they don't need to touch anything. They are not going to "install any Linux-based OS they want". Why would they do that? That scenario is strictly for the advanced users like us who would already have a capable "gaming PC" and are confident about hacking things.
The cheating part is partially addressed by Valve, they're working with anticheat developers.
Regarding cheating it seems like consoles are no longer a "pristine environment" due to crossplay:
https://www.pcgamer.com/on-behalf-of-pc-gaming-sorry-about-a...
I suspect if MS takes another generational shellacking from Sony they will try a similar maneuver, combining the Xbox and Surface brands to make a single SKU gaming PC. The Xbox already runs Windows 10 with a custom ui. They won't drop out off the console race without trying this. (It would be a compelling student device.)
Sony is stuck selling dedicated TV attachments but luckily they command the biggest audience and have "won" the console war against MS three of the four generations. The PS5 has done so well there's no reason to believe there won't be a PS6. Sony plans the obsolescence on a 10 year timeline. They refused to put an SSD into the PS4 era consoles knowing that adding it would be a generational leap for the PS5, more than graphics.
If Valve effectively releases a Valve "console" (a fully fledged desktop PC with the Steam Deck experience + powerful GPU)... who are we kidding? Who will buy a walled garden after that? Seems to me like Microsoft will at best be just competing...
If you follow the discussions on reddit about Steamdeck people are SUPER excited, and some gamers are alreadsy asking questions about linux and whether their next PC could be linux ; since Valve's endoresement of Proton on the Steam deck and the "Steam Deck verified" experience is making them confident that Linux will replace Windows.
Tons of gamers nowadays really only need a PC for gaming and general entertainment... meaning Windows is completely optional.
NihongoGamer has really good commentary on related topic:
About the "Steam Deck verified"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PL0NIhJpHg0
I don't know , I'm 47 and honestly Steam Deck + their rumored console that comes after it; is the most exciting news I've heard in gaming for a LONG time...
I'm a casual as you might expect at 47... I still want to play A game like NMS occasionally, but I don't want to spend all day updating Windows and tweaking GPU drivers and all the bullshit that is "pc building" today.
Last AAA game I bought was Assassin Creed Oddyssey. I paid 50 EUR during a Steam sale. Still pricey but it was pretty new. ... I played the game for few hours and realized I didn't like it all that much. This is the reason why I never bought into PS and Nintendo for the past fifteen years.. pretty much since the Dreamcast: is is hugely expensive. if you pay 70 EUR for a game you have to be really committed not just to like it, but to get your money's worth. I can"t afford to buy a 70 EUR game when I get bored of most games after a few hours.
Having a console like experience with the Steam store is hugely exciting for me... so many silly / smaller games, that you pay pennies and still can have fun for a few hours.. it opens up a whole new genre of games that consoles aren't well suited for, or that are just not easy to consume on the console. I mean, just browsing steam is fun in and of itself.
Sony has not one but two subscription services with free games. Like USD $50/yr for access to 24 best sellers. You play them some time after launch. You can play recent releases on their more expensive subscription, I forget the price, but it's competing with the Xbox service I mentioned earlier.
So there's plenty of ways to play best sellers and fresh games for less than launch day full price. And even though the gardens are walled to their respective ecosystems, Sony and MS are targeting the same audience so the consumer still benefits from competition.
If Steam enters the arena with Steamdeck, they will be the ones competing against two established console makers who have steam's desired audience already bought in to subscription services.
I'm not convinced Valve moves to the front by default. I think it makes a three company race and Valve is going to have to lean HARD on the steamdeck form factor their first generation to establish themselves.
I don't think Valve is ready for the fiercity of the console wars at all. They couldn't even keep Epic game store at bay when they started dropping Fortnite money on exclusives. I'm sure they've learned their financial lesson on that one... now imagine inviting two more companies to bid on exclusives against you!
Four out of four generations if we go by (current) sales. The PS2 outsold everything, the PS3 had a narrow sales advantage compared to the Xbox 360, the PS4 pummeled the Xbox One and the PS5 has gotten a pretty considerable lead over the Xbox Series. Obviously the latter one is still an on-going matter and maybe the Series S will get a sudden boost in popularity later in the race (it's currently basically the only current-generation console you can find in stock easily, so it's probably not that popular now).
I'm not sure I understand. What kind of device are you waiting for? The way I see it, a "fully capable PC with desktop performance + the console user experience" already exists, it's called a gaming PC with Steam Big Picture.
> But it doesn't matter anyway, since if Valve can release an actually good "console" experience, with builtin Steam store... Nintendo and Sony have nothing more to offer bar a few exclusives.
If Valve releases a console with an actually good console experience, then great, one more console with good console experience to choose from. So what does it bring to the table that other consoles don't have? Their PC-gaming oriented game catalog full of games that are either also available on consoles or are for some reason unsuitable for the usual couch+controller style? Because if I wanted that, I would've bought a gaming PC with Steam Big Picture, a thing that already exists.
Using a controller in front of my PC, while sitting at a desk, has never felt right for me. Always was awkward, when I have a keyboard and mouse in front of me.
So there is the form factor, plus all the hassle that goes with maintaining a PC.
For 300€ I got a computer (PS4 Pro) dedicated to nothing else but gaming. And that's mostly just because I can help it, crave Skyrim and Fallout 4 once or twice a year, anyway.
A worthy PC would cost me at least 800€. Right now, I'd say it's even impossible, because of the graphics card situation and APUs don't match the consoles.
While games can look better on PC, you would also pay another PS4 in electricity costs to run a fancy system, over here.
The fact that a game might be 69.- instead of 59.- on release and for a much longer time without sales on this platform is then suddenly not so important anymore.
A console is cheaper, and can be left permanently attached to your TV; and the UX is more focussed than a general purpose PC, and optimized for controller as single input; you probably want a PC—probably a laptop—for other things, but unless you are going to buy a second PC for living room gaming, it isn't really a console substitute.
> Are consoles cheaper “per transistor” or sth?
Yes.
> If so, why? Is it about the vendor locking you in and charging more per game?
Actually, its about the vendor charging developers for access to you; at release AAA game prices are pretty similar console vs. PC (over time, I think PC game prices fall further and faster, but like films games live or die by earlier sales. If you are a buyer that tends to buy games long after release, then PC is much more attractive.)
Yes. Because of scale and optimization.
But that's more of a side-effect than the real reason. It's mostly about having a device you can switch on and instantly play. No installing drivers. No picking parts. No incompatibilities.
I've been building my own PCs for over a decade but I'm losing interest. It's such a hassle. I do 90% of my gaming on my Switch. Games I had on Steam for years and barely touched I suddenly play through in a week on the Switch. Why? Convenience.
There are console-exclusive games, depending on which types of games you like those exclusives can be extremely interesting.
A PC is more expensive, almost always has been. If you need a desktop PC anyway, that might not matter much as you only need to factor in the better GPU for gaming. But with the GPU prices right now even a mid-range card is more expensive than a full next-gen console.
Bloodborne was released in 2013 and I am still waiting to play it.
Console exclusives are often funded by manufacturers, so the game may not exist without the console.
"If you build it they will come", doesn't work. Look at the PS Vita, which very quickly stopped getting Sony support for games and languished. It shouldn't be up to all game developers to release on Vita, it is up to Sony to attract developers.
The PS3 even supported 7 controllers and is still used for some Bomberman Ultra. The PS4 and PS5 sadly max out at 4...
And these are still half the size and weight of my PC. Of course there are mini-itx gaming rigs out there but those cost as much or more than all my consoles and controllers together.
I dont really see the issue of suboptimal experience to worry about. Modern games autodetect optimal options to play out of the box.
I'm not a console gamer, but I can see the appeal.
The whole pc vs console is like arguing what mode of transportation is better. Apples to oranges, use what you like and be happy about it.
But I don't recall ever having to configure a game because it doesn't work.
As a counter point though, there used to be stories of people buying a game on console and had to download 30GB patches in order to play it.
Also paying for subscription to play online games always irk me the wrong way.
Ether way PC or console there are pros and cons
Also, I find Windows updates much more annoying than I find PlayStation updates.
I think when I'm at my desk there's always this nagging feeling telling me I could be doing something more productive (code, music, learning) whereas on the sofa with a console I don't feel that.
I much prefer gaming on consoles because I can't be bothered with all the mental overhead that comes with PC gaming. Like most of us I don't have much time. I turn the console on and I'm instantly playing a version optimised for this hardware. More than happy, even eager, to pay for a version that doesn't have me forever tweaking graphical settings or have me thinking about what the latest advancements in RAM or whatever is.
I'm actually looking forward to Steam Deck as ideally it'll give a much closer to console experience for some PC games I've missed out on.
Edit: I was reminded by another comment that the couch experience of desktop gaming isn't for me either. If I can't operate the whole thing from a gamepad I'm not interested, and last time I gave this a go with a little Lenovo I used for emulation, this still wasn't possible.
> Big Picture is a mode of Steam designed for use with your TV and game controller, so you can enjoy your Steam games from the comfort of your couch. With the press of a button, Steam displays a full-screen user interface which has been completely redesigned for readability and interaction on TV. It can also be used on your usual computer display.
It wont solve the hardware/ram/compatibility problems, but in my experience there are not many of those on the latest Ubuntu. If it works, it works well, and if it doesn't it doesn't at all. And mostly it does.
Additionally, Big Picture mode lets you remap controller buttons to basically anything you like (other buttons, keyboard keys, entire sequences of actions, mode shifting, overlay menus, different actions depending on if you press/double press/hold, etc). And, you can browse controller configurations that other people have made, too. Often there are lots of solutions for games that don't officially support controllers, and even in those that do, often there are improved mappings with added features like gyro aiming, or using a combination of gamepad and mouse input (all on the controller of course) to improve in game aiming.
The first time you try to unlock the PC this way, Steam will prompt for elevated permissions to be able to do so.
You can of course also set up the user to be automatically logged in.
In my experience it's best to have Steam launch via the Task Scheduler with elevated permissions so that you can approve UAC requests, etc.
However, yes it's worth having a keyboard connected (even if it's just one of those tiny wireless touchpad+keyboard combos) in case things go wrong.
I'd expect the game developer to provide an good default controller layout of the box, as that's what I'd expect from a console game.
[1]: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.valvesoftw...
You just need to install the app on your Android TV/TV box, and if you've got a fast intranet connection, you can stream Steam games from your desktop/laptop PC via your Android TV (it also works on Android tablets/phones, but you'd probably need a high-end WiFi router).
The input latency might hurt for action games, especially since TVs tend to have pretty bad latency already compared to computer monitors. And, loads of Android TVs aren't very powerful; I've seen quite a few struggle with even the Netflix app, so I doubt streaming 4K 60FPS games with low latency will work well.
On a modern system you buy in the next electronic store that is ready to use the mental load is the same as using any Sony OS.
The advantage I see in consoles is that they are more multiplayer friendly. It is mostly more comfortable to share a large couch, but PC maintenance is as easy as it is on console. You cannot play instantly. I use a console 3 times a month when friends come around to play. I often have to wait for a fairly long update of OS and games. Can happen on PC too, but with modern boot times, there really isn't much difference anymore aside from input/output.
It's really really not. Ever had the scenario where anticheat for a game has failed to install because of a pending windows update?
> I use a console 3 times a month when friends come around to play. I often have to wait for a fairly long update of OS and games.
Both xbox and playstation have supported background updates for the last couple of years, both for the OS and for games.
Most console games are designed to be played like this. I can just leave the game and come back tomorrow.
For PC games I have to open it, make sure it's saved, close it. And so on.
Sitting in the couch and being in the game in 15 secs Max is amazing
It's something I struggle with a bit, because locked-down hardware is evil in every other respect. But it's clearly advantageous for online gaming.
I remember the day. I was playing Battlefield 3 I believe. I kept getting sniped across the map with headshots. Went to search and typed in 'BF3 cheats' and the very first hit was a youtube video with a working aimbot link in the description.
That being said, every time my PS4 would update and the only patch notes were 'security updates', the only thing that actually changed were their ads on the home screen.
Then they began removing functionality.
Then the weekly OS updates, with notes never saying more than 'security'
Nowhere to go that hasn't been shit upon by either the player base, or the evil manufacturers.
I used to love online gaming, have made some lifelong friends from it. But I'm over it and these days I look for single pmayer games with enough content to be worth the purchase without ebdless DLC.
With a console you don't have that option, you would need to buy a new one, so that's not comparable.
It’s a death by thousand cuts: problems in some games, occasional popups from whatever that can’t be dismissed without a mouse, Windows updates etc. had to have a keyboard and mouse nearby. Every time I started the machine after not playing for a few days, I ended up dealing with such things for the 30 minutes I had for gaming…
I can't game on PC anymore because of RSI when using mouse. Even for cross platform games, the console version usually has far superior controller support.
Plus there's still a culture of buying and selling hard copy console games which can make the net running cost next to nothing.
I’m really looking forward to the Steam deck. It may not have the power of current-gen consoles, but it takes so many good things about current consoles and combines them together. Openness of a PC, not Windows, portable + docking, etc.
I got a switch as a present recently and while I don't like Nintendo's eStore software, pricing and console power, I found myself just picking it up and playing randomly in off time much more than opening a laptop and getting a separate joystick or mouse to play a game. I only played it docked once.
If the steam deck came out earlier I probably wouldn't have bought my g14.
I think that streaming from a desktop is probably the best way to go, if you’re just playing at home it’s great, but if you’re mobile a dedicated device is better. The deck is too heavy for being a good handheld, and I have plenty of fun with older games: newer games might have better graphics but they’re often not as fun. The best CoD for me was BO2, and the best classic games don’t need good hardware, although I’d find very little reason to play some like SS2 on the go. The idea of playing computer games on the go is enticing but most require more attention, so streaming at home is the best compromise and it’s a solved problem with network streaming. I don’t have bias against AMD I just use nvidia and know the software for it. They might have a better solution.
> I’m really looking forward to the Steam deck.
Uhm, the Steam deck is literally running Linux and using the same compatibility "hacks" for non-native games. Which are not hard to "deal with" these days btw - Steam handles all that for you with Proton, you just press play.
With a console, you buy the latest one and play the games until there's a new one (in the case where money is no object). You never have to worry about settings or optimisation, it just works. You also know exactly when your hardware is out of date because there's a new generation console.
Personally I'm a PC gamer, I currently run an RTX 3070 and I still wonder whether my CPU or RAM are limiting performance because I'm not getting the performance I expected (but wasn't guaranteed by any single vendor for my custom build). This is a problem I can solve, but it would be worth it to me to pay someone else to deal with it because I just don't have the time/inclination.
Maybe I should buy a console...
Since sony sells console hardware at a loss (only Nintendo doesn't do this), jailbreaking PS5 will create demand for the devices in clusters. Lots of research was done on PS3 and PS4 clusters where you could get GPU (and at one time CPU!) for cheaper than anywhere else. In modern times, I suspect people will mine crypto on them.
If so, this is actually really bad news for gamers because it will put the hottest current gen console into the same bidding war with miners as GPUs have been in the past few years.
So why buy a mid range sports car if you can buy an SUV for the same price that you can also go grocery shopping with, or a pickup that you can also haul stuff with?
In the end it always comes down to the use case of the thing, and the people buying consoles are not just interested in playing games, they’re also not interested in the stuff a PC offers.
As soon as you introduce choices, you introduce complexity. People buy consoles because they want to play games with the least amount of complexity involved, and they’re willing to sacrifice those choices because often they don’t even want them in the first place.
Also, consoles often have some games that only come out for that console, so if you’re really interested in a game, sometimes buying the console is your only choice.
1. Console games are initially more expensive, but you can sell them used when you're done, which isn't possible on PC. I regularly buy games for $100 (Australian pricing) and sell them a month or two months later for $80. (I'd rent them, but rentals don't exist anymore. I keep the ones I really really loved, but sell on most.) On PC, the same game might launch for $10-20 less, but that doesn't make up for not being able to get $80 back from every purchase.
2. Many games are unfortunately exclusive to a particular console, including many of the most popular franchises, e.g. Mario, Pokemon, Animal Crossing, and The Legend of Zelda are only on Nintendo consoles. If those are your favorite games, then none of the other factors really matter. And it's much more common for games to be exclusive to a console than exclusive to PC; there's virtually nothing these days that doesn't end up on the consoles, there are usually a couple of major blockbusters every year that don't make it to PC.
3. PC graphics card prices have absolutely skyrocketed due to cryptocurrency mining. I paid $130 for my graphics card seven years ago; the same model regularly sells for $150 on eBay now and when I look at replacing it, I can't find anything that significantly beats it for under $300. I looked at spending my tax return on a multi-part PC upgrade, but to match the performance of the new PlayStation I'd have to spend nearly double its price, and most graphics cards would require me to join a waiting list. (As it is, I went with neither and I'm waiting to see what happens next year.)
4. Formerly, playing games together with friends in the same room. Sadly, this is less and less well-supported on consoles with every year that goes by, but it used to be practically exclusive to them, and not something PC games ever implemented. This was especially important for kids (who make up a huge portion of the market and often have siblings to share the console with) and students (who would hold multiplayer game nights in dorms etc). It matters even for online multiplayer, though. You want the system your best friends have so you can all play together. And that's more likely to be one of the major consoles, and you'll rarely get your whole friend group to switch, especially if it's to a more expensive (at least upfront) option.
In the PS3 and early PS4 era, yeah you were missing out on PC gaming but nowadays consoles are plenty fast. Plenty fast indeed.
No bullshit. PC's have compatibility issues, weird hardware edge-cases where you have to debug with multiple drivers to achieve stable performance (I wish I had only one of those per year of gaming...), etc. Quite simply consoles have issues sometimes, but broadly they are just far too small to really be items. Consistency is king when you just want to play videogames.
Also, people don't need any of the "other stuff", so there is that.
PC has the biggest game library though if you don't have boundaries (include emulators and stuff). You can't get anywhere close. And if stuff is broken, you can fix it. And if stuff is boring, you can cheat to the fun part (single player games!).
If I have to have a separate machine for gaming to have some privacy I'm going to just buy a console.
As an example, I bought a PS4 late 2013 or early 2014 (honestly can't recall the exact date), and it was performing pretty well for games released, um, whenever I last bought a new game (late 2020, I think). I doubt that a PC from 2013 would have been able to play a "beefy" PC game released late 2020.
I mean, I guess I could chase the forefront of PC hardware, just to support gaming. But, then I'd also have to dual-boot (it is still the case that a substantial amount of PC games need Windows to run on), and lock myself in to updating the PC hardware every 2-3 years, just to keep up with new titles.
Meanwhile, my primary desktop was purchased before my PS4 and still runs linux admirably. Would I get more oomph if I upgraded it? Sure, more (much more) RAM and probably 2x - 4x the number of cores. But, I don't actually have to, it does what it needs to.
Whatnow. There are more games that run on Linux than anyone will have the time to play. Then there is also Proton. A lot has changed since 2010.
I'm not in the jailbreaking space, but I guess that what it means here is that some people may find flaws in the code and leverage them to potentially bypass the signature verification, although this might prove very difficult to do. It might also help emulating the PS5 behavior which in turns could lead to some modding/cheating for some games. Who knows ?
With symmetric encryption, both the encryptor and decryptor need a copy of the same key- that's what makes it 'symmetric'.
But with asymmetric encryption, the keys do not match. This means you can encrypt or sign the data with your private key, and then keep it private. The matching pubic key will decrypt or verify.
The device would not have a copy of the private key in it, so it's unlikely it will ever leak.
The hackers will come up with a workaround, they always do. I eagerly await the 33c3 presentation.
What this does is increase the possibility of someone finding how to bypass the signature verification check and then running their own code.
Secondly, yes, asymmetric encryption is slower, so you almost always use hybrid scheme: asymmetric scheme (ElGamal, for instance) for encrypting the symmetric key, and then a symmetric scheme (e.g. AES) for the bulk of the data.
Only in very exotic protocols such as digicash blind signatures or anonymous credentials with "algebraic MACs", you want your actual content encrypted directly via ElGamal or RSA, so that you can do some operations or proofs about the ciphertext — in those cases you can't encrypt symmetrically as that would erase all the algebraic relations.
Sure, but we might (potentially) be interested in the encryption part later on too, and having a symmetric key will make that easier (though of course it won't get you past any signature checks.
I've never come across those more exotic protocols, but I'm familiar with symmetric kex under public/private encryption.
Of course, there are still advantages to having the symmetric key not be used as is, but there are many solutions other than asymmetric encryption.
Typically to securely encrypt a message you use symmetric key encryption. Then to allow a third party to decrypt that message, you encrypt the symmetric key using the third party's asymmetric key.
> It means ultimately that decrypted firmware files will be available for hackers. This would make reverse engineering of the PS5 firmware possible, and from there, open possibilities for finding future exploits and/or write custom firmwares or Homebrew enablers.
[0] https://wololo.net/2021/11/08/ps5-exploit-fail0verflow-show-...
Interesting. I don't own a PS5, but Xbox seems to be pretty much a PC [1] (weeeell, like a Chromecast-style PC anyways). The main reason to legitimately jailbreak a PS4 back in the day was to get back the Linux functionality Sony took away from its users, and to run emulators possibly.
It's interesting that the hacker communities acknowledge that the legitimate reasons for jailbreaking your PS5 are not many, at least not yet.
If my memory serves me correctly, the PS3 for comparison had a custom Cell CPU which was used for supercomputer clusters. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_3_cluster So they must have had some kind of edge compared to normal PCs.
They did, but the Cell SPUs were hard to program and that edge quickly eroded as the Cell proved to be a dead end and x86 CPUs continued to evolve.
That's not quite true. Every architecture iteration brought an increase in IPC, while every process improvement allowed for higher clocks and lower power dissipation. It's true that GPUs evolved a lot more - but that's mostly by getting bigger, wider, and having wider, faster pipes to its own RAM and the shared PCIe bus, as well as bigger heatsinks and fans.
It didn't work too well from my understanding, difficult to develop anything that could make use of those streaming cores that was worth it over a traditional multicore chip with more cores.
Useful for scientific community though.
If anyone knows what the spe cores were used for in games, I'd be very interested to know.
The SPU cores were basically used heavily for any background data processing that might align well with what GPU compute is used for today.
Naughty Dog - Uncharted - Pages 33 - 39, 49, 54 - https://github.com/hww/game_programmer_reading/raw/master/nd...
Gorilla Games - KillZone 2 SPU Case Study - All of it - https://ubm-twvideo01.s3.amazonaws.com/o1/vault/gdc09/slides...
Insomniac Games - Insomniac’s SPU Best Practices Hard-won lessons we’re applying to a 3rd generation PS3 title Slides 46 - 48 https://www.slideserve.com/aldona/insomniac-s-spu-best-pract...
You couldn't run PS3 games via OtherOS, but hackers didn't care because running their own code really is all they care about.
+ They wanted to region unlock it (this is particularly true in Europe where there is a big demand for Japanese games that weren't released over here)
+ They wanted to run the console at 60hz rather than 50hz (this is true for the much older consoles and again mostly a thing in Europe because some PAL games would run slower than NTSC games. eg Sonic 1 on the Mega Drive)
+ Linux. This was a big incentive behind the PS3 cracks because of the PS3's interesting Cell Processor design. Later the removal of "Other OS" added to the incentive to jailbreak the PS3
+ Media Centres. The reason I've soft modded my Xboxes was to run XBMC
+ Retro gaming. Plenty of systems have been jailbroken so that their owners could play classic Nintendo / Sega / Atari / Amiga / NeoGeo games from the 80s and 90s. Technically it's still breaking copyright laws but given the age of those games some turn a blind eye because it isn't hurting the developers of new games (I'm not saying I agree with their argument either for or against, just presenting their views)
+ Some systems wouldn't allow you to play homebrew games (3rd party titles that are unlicensed from the console manufacturer but granted copyright licence by the games developer). So they're legal to play but the only way to do that was via hacking the console
+ Some jailbreak simply because they want to exercise their right to hack their own hardware. And this isn't just uber nerds either, I've met a surprising number of people who have done it just because they read an article somewhere and thought it sounded fun.
+ ...and yes, some do it to pirate modern games too. But the risk there is always that your device doesn't support future software updates and thus no longer supports modern games online. So it's a bit daft buying a console if you know you're going to pirate modern games; you're much better off with a PC (this was as true 15 years ago as it is now).
As it happens, I welcome the lack of DRM on the Sega CD because I have a few discs that are scratched and thus don't play properly. So I can keep the original discs and cases around but play CD-R copies. I can imagine needing this option more and more if/when disc rot sets in on my other disc-based retro consoles too.
We didn't officially have PlayStation in our country (India) at the time. The only way to get original games instead of pirated ones was to import, usually when a friend was traveling. But region locking was a curse.
I'm so glad region locking is pretty much dead. I believe the 3DS was the last mainstream region locked console? Which again was ridiculous given its the one people would take when traveling.
There may be some ARM fun in the future, as thermals are a huge thing now (the PS5 is mostly a heatsink with a computer attached and the newest Xbox is kind of a chimney).
https://linustechtips.com/topic/1383323-why-is-amd-selling-b...
I remember, however, some benchmarks on motherboards with console CPUs that were somewhat disappointing because the GDDR6 memory has high bandwidth at a higher latency cost that the internal caches couldn’t hide.
Still, if you can tune your workload for it, it may be an interesting compute box.
That was the PS3, through the OtherOS feature[1].
And it’s not like you will be able to install windows on a ps5 and use it as a replacement PC even if it is theoretically possible.
This is what general computing is about these days. Most consumer devices these days are powerful enough to do most general computing tasks. Even watches! But it's all the additional stuff you need to do to expose that power that prevents it from being a good general purpose device.
Whereas consoles are can be well suited in other domains outside of gaming even without installing additional peripherals nor hacking the OS.
With around the same graphics power as a Radeon 5700xt/6700 card, with the whole PS5 system costing around the same as that card, a jailbroken console actually looks like pretty good value right now. If it could be broken enough to run a general purpose OS with acceleration enabled.
> Can these be rotated easily?
> No.
We might get lucky.
This was because the ps3 had a very strong processor made by ibm, using rhe powerpc isa.
This meant that ibm started losing sales of their powerpc systems.
So the story i know is that ibm "asked" sony to stop allowing linux on the ps3.
That new firmware lasted for more than a year, too.
They're right, its just a PC now. Its crazy, I can't think of anyone who wants a console that has a rough computer equivalent of a Ryzen 7 3700X, 5700 RT with ray tracing, shares 16GB GDDR6 ram, a blu-ray drive, with a 1GB NVME drive for $500+tax (in store stock and not scalped, and even scalped at $900 its not easy to match PC hardware). Who wants to hack such a device for legitimate reasons like using it as a computer? Nobody, its not worth it!
The way I view it is as paying a subscription for support, I bought a PS4 at launch and the fact it can play the newest Call of Duty at 60fps looking decent is absolutely worth the price. I'm not a PC gamer so I'm curious if a PC from 2013 that cost like $400 would hold up as well.
Now the PS5 is out I view it as time to pay the next sub of $500 to have a guaranteed level of performance for the next console cycle
At the same time, I don't really recommend building a fancy gaming PC, most games are not exciting and having an APU for playing fun older games makes the most sense to me, I used my GPUs way more before, but since 2017 for Prey I haven't felt like I cared for them since I care to play AoE II and Starcraft more, and new games that are exciting are all indie, and don't need good graphics like into the breach, or Factorio don't exist on console. The PS store irritates me because they resell to me the same games again except on a different console, PC just runs everything. Heres the performance of an 3400G APU ($150 CPU+GPU on one chip. You can also upgrade the hardware if you see a good deal, unlike a PS4 where you'd have to buy a completely new one.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B0p5fbW5odY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7yxPtHuyPJo
I think you should consider a low end PC for gaming, its got tons of cool stuff you can run, they even cloned PS3's PT, you aren't getting better support for gaming by buying a console. https://www.polygon.com/2018/7/2/17519118/pt-remake-windows-...
Been a long while since I built a PC.
On top of that, you can't get various PC components easily right now due to chip shortage. With PS5, you're getting it all in a 100% working box.
Nah. As long as you don't sell many, you can get away with just marking as gift and putting a value of 20 USD on the package.
I'd send close to 500 packages a month to destinations all over the world, and tracked items almost never go missing.
For those that do go missing, it's always to a few hotspots that I would simply avoid if selling an item this valuable (pretty much just Brazil and South Africa now; Russia and Italy are much better than they used to be).
So yes , "nobody cares" as long as you don't get caught.
I ordered a lot of stuff from the US throughout the years. It takes at least a month to get here, and shipping costs from $50 (for the smallest items like Kindles), to $150-200.
So it's not really practical.
Looking at retail:
— the cheapest 3080 Ti 12GB I see is around $2500, the most expensive one is $3200 (there are 10 models in total).
— PS5: from $1000 to $1350
— 3080: from $2000 and up.
If you have the right connections you can get them individually with bulk prices, but it's not easy to do because of pervasive corruption.
(Unless Australia also has an oversupply...)
How many people do you think they have dedicated only to supply chain management ? This is such a wide domain, we don't see it all from here: they have engineers dedicated to sourcing, to manufacturing, testing, evaluating new sources; people in charge of a given supplier; people in charge of the various type of transport, of recycling, etc. All this is in-house expertise, and definitely gives them an edge.
If you look at most big auto manufacturers; they too are suffering from shortages. So it seems tech giants must be doing something better.
So while the stock doesn't hang around, it seems like it is now at least possible to get one without too much fuss.
https://press-start.com.au/news/playstation/2021/11/08/eb-ga...
Worked for us, we really weren't expecting it. We were even given a choice of which version of the console we wanted, at the point they got the delivery in.
(Maybe things have got worse in the last month? Maybe WA is special...)
For instance https://m.euro.com.pl/konsole-playstation-5/sony-playstation...
It says "up to 7 days delivery" but when I ordered one few weeks ago it arrived next day anyway.
In your example, it's like if you were selling an RTX3900 bundled with a PS5 for $2000 - is that over MSRP, or not? What a riddle!