Print
It's been a month since Windows 8 launched to the public, and in that time, Asus hasn't been particularly impressed with the demand for the touch-friendly OS and devices that are built around it. That evaluation comes as Microsoft announces it sold 40 million Windows 8 licenses during the first month, though there's some conflicting data on exactly how well the OS has been able to penetrate the desktop market.
Data from Net Applications shows that Windows 8 accounts for just 1.2 percent of all desktop-based web traffic, whereas Windows 7 managed 4 percent during its first three weeks of availability.
"Demand for Windows 8 is not that good right now," Asus CFO David Chang told The Wall Street Journal.
What's interesting to note about this is that Asus owns the best selling Windows 8 touch notebook on Best Buy's website, the Asus Vivobook. Nevertheless, Chang contends that demand for Windows 8 touch notebooks has been lackluster, though he stopped short of serving up any specific sales figures.
Follow Paul on Google+, Twitter, and Facebook
Comments are closed on this article
fcorona
December 03, 2012 at 8:31am
In every article I have read regarding upgrading, the comments never seem to address this question: If you have a non-touch system be it either desktop or laptop are there any real benefits to using Windows 8 over Windows 7? I personally would only upgrade if I were getting a touch screen or if the upgrade was free of charge.
MarioJP
November 29, 2012 at 3:54pm
I think windows 8 is not going to flop, but could take awhile for most to get used to. But overall. All the complaints i hear from people is to laugh at. I been the first early adopter to windows 8 from day one. I can say that, while it is a change. Windows 8 is impressive than 7 in some other ways.
I've noticed that this new OS is very optimized, such as the new task Manager.
Windows 8 is improved from 7. I do like the apps in windows 8. Some of these Apps are very useful too. With that said. For those that wants to hang on to 7, then do not upgrade. Simple as that.
TrollBot5000
November 29, 2012 at 11:55am
You ever notice that when there is a win8 article the majority of people commenting voice their disdain for the OS but theres always a few that praise it's glories like its' the best OS ever to be released. I swear the latter are microsoft employee plants. Only a moron would think windows 8 is a viable computing choice and certainly the crowd that maxpc draws aren't jumping off the windows 7/linux/mac ship for windows 8.
Teh_tourist
December 04, 2012 at 6:21am
Or maybe the maxpc readers are fools who blindly take the opinions of maxpc editors as gospel? Maybe maxpc readers used the developer build a year before the OS was released and decided it was crap based on beta software? It doesn't really matter what your reason is, Windows 8 is objectively better than Windows 7. Doesn't mean you have to sue it, but you can't call it crap.
Cregan89
November 29, 2012 at 12:31pm
I praise Windows 8, and I am not a Microsoft employee.
I rarely used the Start Button because all of my frequently used applications are pinned to my taskbar. The few times I did use the Start Button were to launch rarely used applications through the search feature, which still works exactly the same in Windows 8 but is faster and more accurate. The Metro interface also separates my work flow on the Desktop interface from my play in the Metro interface. Performance is noticeably improved. Battery life better. Live Tiles and notifications are a workflow Godsend.
For me, Windows 8 is much more productive and a significant upgrade from Windows 7.
steven4570
November 29, 2012 at 1:23pm
but wouldnt it be a much better idea to have the tile UI an option if there is no touch screen involved? I mean really, it makes no sense if there is no touchscreen on the computer nor was it designed for it. Isn't that part of the reason Microsoft failed at their first attempt at tablet pcs?
Granite
November 29, 2012 at 3:28pm
As has been said...you have the option.
But for me, Win8 is perfect...because I have two monitors.
Cregan89
November 29, 2012 at 3:01pm
It is an option, it's always just one click away to switch between the Tile UI and the Desktop UI. And I don't have a touch screen notebook, but I use the Tile UI with my mouse and keyboard just fine.
steven4570
November 29, 2012 at 5:25pm
Mouse and keyboard don't work well with it, its not designed nor optimized for it and it feels clunky. And i was referring to an option to not see it at all(other than installing start8)
kuebel33
November 29, 2012 at 9:24am
I upgraded my desktop to Windows 8 and I freaking love it. It's mind blowing to see all the complaints. Did these people even spend time using Windows 8? Granted, I played with it during pre-release on a VM for a while so I was more familiar with it, but it's so fast and smooth. The live tiles are awesome once you customize them and it just works better so far. I also feel like they improved remote desktop functionality as it even cooks while I'm connected remotely.
big_montana
November 29, 2012 at 6:36am
The main reason for the so called lackluster sales figures of Win 8 is that stores have an inventory glut of Windows 7 machines. When Windows 7 hit the market it did not face that problem with the retail market place having a glut of unsold Vista computers as retail did not but into either. Retail will, and is, discounting their Win 7 machines to move them out of inventory before you see any movement on Win 8 computers. The sales numbers for Win 8 are more than likely for upgrades as retail outlets such as MicroCenter are selling the physical media for $38, of which I purchased two myself. There are still no compelling Windows 8 desktops, laptops or tablets on the market that make me go "I got to have that!" as I can wait until next year to see how the market shakes out before deciding to, or if, I want to replace my desktop and non-touch laptop with a touch laptop or tablet or both. This is the message that Asus' CEO should be getting, build a better product, and deliver it on time, and we will buy it, otherwise shut up about it.
Cregan89
November 28, 2012 at 3:53pm
This is unbelievable! What the hell do they expect!?
Sounds to me like MS isn't having too hard of a time selling Windows 8 licences themselves, but nobody is impressed with the hardware being built around Windows 8.
There's literally not one single interesting Windows 8 device even available for purchase right now (in Canada at least). The only Windows 8 devices available right now are Windows RT devices, which are slightly underpowered at this point until the next generation of ARM SOCs are released and are critically restricted by the currently limited number of Windows 8 apps. Or there's Clovertrail devices which have even worse performance than the Windows RT devices. Or there's crappy notebooks with touchscreen displays, which makes no ergonomic sense.
The small handful of devices that are even remotely interesting: MS Surface Pro, ASUS Taichi, ASUS Transformer Book, Dell XPS 12; Are all either unavailable for purchase, have horrible reviews generally resulting from the same single issue that has plagued PCs forever (horrible design and engineering), poor specs in key areas like display quality, display resolution, GPU performance, battery life, and weight, and worst of all, even with all of these major downfalls, these devices are all still priced wayyyyyy out of contention!
I'm a big Windows 8 fan, and I personally applaud the direction Microsoft has chosen for the future of Windows. But I have not purchased a new Windows 8 device and don't plan on it at any point in the future in respect to the current marketplace offering. And I wouldn't recommend to ANYONE right now to purchase a new PC as the current market offering is uncreative, very poorly engineered, and massively overpriced!
DeltaFIVEengineer
November 28, 2012 at 10:37pm
Are you saying that people were more impressed with the hardware that was being built around Windows 7 than Windows 8?
I think your assumptions on the reasons why Windows 8 PC sales are lackluster are completely off base. People are much more fickle than you think.
Cregan89
November 29, 2012 at 12:18pm
Windows 7 came at a different time to a different market. Windows 7 was the peak of the high powered hardware and mouse/keyboard interface era. Windows 7 basically only had Apple's OS X to compete with. All Windows 7 devices were basically the exact same thing, either desktop or notebook with varying internal components, even the cheapest of which are capable of performing everything that 99% of consumers want from their PCs (web browsing, social networking, looking/organizing/editing photos, listening to music, and watching videos). The market is now flooded with Windows 7 era PCs, and for the majority of consumers there is no reason to buy a new Windows 7 PC because their 5 year old PC is still fully capable of doing everything they want it to do.
Then came the mobile revolution. Windows 7 PC sales were quickly stagnating while people turned to smartphones and tablets which were quickly becoming capable of all of the same tasks as PCs, but in smaller and lighter packages, with simpler interfaces, cost less money, and could be carried with you and used on the go. That's why MS developed Windows 8, to compete with this new mobile media consumption market shift. The software, Windows 8, brings some interesting and good ideas to the table, but the hardware to capitalize on their ideas is completely non-existent!
Windows 7 was all about the same old PC form factors just with more power under the hood. This worked for the first couple of years, but the market has changed and Windows 7 PC sales stagnated. Windows 8 is all about empowering creative new PC form factors. These creative new PC form factors have simply yet to materialize.
imagonex
November 28, 2012 at 3:49pm
Today's OS and hardware ecosystem has changed. Had Windows8 been released in a period where no other type of PC existed other than towers and desktops, it would be selling at a faster rate. Today's OS ecosystem isn't the same it was 10 years ago.
In the long run, it's the hardware & OS ecosystem that will win. For example, if Win8 is integrated into the future Xbox system, Microsoft can create a product line similar in philosophy to the iPod, iPad and iPhone line. They'll be able to offer different levels of performance in Xbox hardware yet keep the Window8 landscape and capture their core audience into their locked marketing, hardware and all. They choke STEAM out of business, capture the gaming sector to themselves and can follow the same route with other competitors to win their sectors.
It's all about money in the end, whether the GUI is on a PC, console, mega-console, etc. As long as they get your money.
TommM
November 28, 2012 at 1:33pm
Kinda funny - every time there's an MS publicity "we're selling tons of Win8," article, 2 or 3 third-party "it ain't selling so well" articles show up right on the heels.
Pyrophorics05
November 28, 2012 at 1:05pm
This is a shame. As a quick adopter, I was shocked at how quick and well put together the OS actually is. Granted, I resisted the metro UI at first, I kind of enjoy it now ... something different.
Between keyboard shortcuts and left clicking the corner window for options, I am perfectly happy with the new OS.
Ghost XFX
November 28, 2012 at 1:02pm
Stores are still selling W7 for $30 more than W8.....
Hello? MS better call Bill Gates for some advice before it's too late.
TinyVK
November 28, 2012 at 12:58pm
ASUS has announced a number of products that would be ideal for Win8 but frankly no one "has been particularly impressed" with their ability to deliver them: Taichi, Transformer Book, where are they? ASUS delivery is very unimpressive!
kitsunekaji
November 28, 2012 at 12:09pm
As said before, I think Win8 would have had a better launch and been more attractive if you had more choices.
Examples would be:
Desktop or Metro/Modern UI?
Traditional Input Mode or Touch-screen Enhanced Mode?I am sure you could think of more, but these are just the start of what seems to be irking people, and keeping some (like me) away. I also ask myself, "what will I gain by switching to WIn8?" Faster boot times is nice, but not enough of an incentive.
Granite
November 28, 2012 at 11:58am
I think Asus will see an increase in demand as soon as they release the machines, that they've announced, that people want.
When they finally come out with the Transformer Book, their demand will instantly increase by at least one.
ilfipian
November 28, 2012 at 10:43am
Touch does not integrate well with keyboard and mouse. It just adds another motion that does not yet add real functionality. It poses problems with screen distance from the user, adds ergonomic issues.
Plus it gunks up your productivity screen so you're cleaning all the time.
Touch productivity hasn't arrived yet. Touch/gesture and voice have potential, but that's not a system that will play well in cube farms or some of the newer open design offices. Too much shared space and other ambient noise and motion.
Warrior247
November 28, 2012 at 10:38am
This just proves the dominance of the tablet over the PC then. As I personally don't see the PC being anything than a work machine (very little gaming or anything else) than this just dooms it. The new next gen systems are gonna crush it in gaming and everything else can surf the web and is portable.
ApathyCurve
November 28, 2012 at 5:12pm
I was not aware that "warrior" was a synonym for "troll."
Hrmph. Learn something new every day.
tekknyne
November 28, 2012 at 12:11pm
You think that the new consoles are going to crush PC gaming? And very little gaming happens on PC? I don't want to suggest that you are out of touch, but that seems a little out of touch.
Warrior247
November 28, 2012 at 3:43pm
"You think that the new consoles are going to crush PC gaming?"
Yep!
"And very little gaming happens on PC?"
Yep!
"I don't want to suggest that you are out of touch, but that seems a little out of touch."
Nope!
wolfing
November 28, 2012 at 11:49am
the new next gen systems will play the same games they've played in the last 12 years: Madden 20XX, Call of Duty XX, Halo X, , etc. In fact, I don't see how the 'next gen' will be much better for gaming compared with the current ones. In fact, with Steam and Kickstarter we're actually seeing a resurgence of PC gaming which has nothing to do with the current consoles being 'old', and more with a much cheaper pricing, and a much greater variety of game types.
Warrior247
November 28, 2012 at 3:37pm
First, so called "PC gaming" is dead...DEAD! It's on a life support system called the console, pull that plug and it's gone. Pure "PC gaming" can't survive on it's own without that console cord. The yearly 1-2 game release can't sustain it. There are more games made for pads than the PC. You have to play the same game for 5-10 YEEEEAAAARS on the PC. You complain about Madden? What about WoW, Guild Wars 2, Diablo 3, Starcraft 2, ect, ect ect!! I've been playing Guild Wars 1 for the last 7 years, the game was already old when I got it!! Guild Wars 2 launched "this" year!! There ain't $h!t on the PC, so don't give me that. You're playing games that are decades old rehashes and console ports! I'll give Steam some credit here because it's THE ONLY place to find a decent selection of games! Try buying retail and you'll find more Windows programs and anti-virus software than games!
froggz
November 29, 2012 at 9:11am
PC Gaming has been "dying" way back when Nintendo released their first NES console, and has been "dying" ever since. That was back in 1985. That's 27 years of hearing the media spout that bullshit, 27 years of console trolls repeating the same crap. While I do remember the day I could go to a retail store and the PC game section was larger than the console section, and now it's the total opposite, it is not a sign that PC gaming is dying. PC gaming it's evolving. There are currently over 40 million users in STEAM alone, so to me that's a pretty good indication that PC gaming is not going anywhere anytime soon. When Windows and Linux are dead, and PC's are no longer upgradeable, the graphic cards manufacturers go out of business and intel stop making CPU's then we can safely say PC gaming is dead.
So in conclusion...You're a f'ng moron..nah just kidding :)
steven4570
November 28, 2012 at 6:58pm
As much as i hate comparing cars to computers, its like saying Ferrari will go of business because Toyota sells far more cars than them. Your ignorance of the PC as a gaming platform is appalling. You want to complain about decades old rehashes? The industry in general is based off that anymore. Occasionally you'll get some big game publisher to do something new and creative but a lot of the popular releases on both platforms are sequels and rehashes (COD, Halo, Most sports games, Medal of honor, etc etc) Small developers on the PC are the only place you'll find new creative games because big companies would never let them run with some of their ideas. Day Z, Chivalry, Nehrim(complete conversion mod for Oblivion) just to name few this year. So don't be ignorant.
Warrior247
November 29, 2012 at 7:59am
Car comparisons? Since they both do the same thing, which is more practicle, a Ferrari or a toyota? Which gets better gas milage, which one cost more, which one is more efficient, which one sells more, which one actually realizes it's potential, the 200mph Ferrari or the Toyota? Which has a better price per perfomance ratio, the $300,000+ Ferrari or the $25,000 Toyota which is used every-single-day? Indie devs? Who do you think is making Pad, phone and Xbox Live games? Sounds familiar doesn't it. Point made, case closed.
steven4570
November 29, 2012 at 1:37pm
Point being, Ferrari will still be around and people will still buy it and drive, just like the PC...ITS NOT GOING ANYWHERE! And what innovative and new things has the Xbox indie devs put out that comes even close to what has been achieved with the PC?
Nimrod
November 28, 2012 at 3:53pm
Your a fucking moron. PC game sales are larger than all the consoles combined.
Blues22475
November 28, 2012 at 11:08am
This is just showing the OS is flopping on the PC. Especially an OS that wasn't really meant for a PC (specially really meant for a touchscreen machine) but rather a Tablet. Tablets are only popular (as far as I know) because it allows you to do common tasks at much more ease of use.
Also, if PC was being used for "very little" gaming I doubt that Steam would be flourishing at this point in time.
Lastly, Consoles have never over-powered a PC by any means. The only thing that makes the consoles appealing is ease of use. The common gamer isn't gonna want to know the difference between an Intel CPU and AMD CPU: they wanna to play their crap.
Had a friend of mine who has an Ipad and he still complains he wants to be able to do the things on it like he would on his pc (but can't).
gogochicken
November 28, 2012 at 10:53am
I think you are a little misguided, just because Win 8 flopped here doesn't mean it's the death of PC gaming. Next Gen consoles are not going to stack up to the power of PC gaming, and tablets are no where near as popular as you think. Best all around experience playing games, Browsing the web, and productivity is still a PC.
Warrior247
November 28, 2012 at 3:53pm
You're living in a world of your own creation. "Today's" consoles already stack up to the [sic] so called "power" of PC gaming and smack it in the face! There is no "power" here...none! You can browse the web on your TV now, no PC needed. You can browes, AND play games on your TV through your console with no PC needed. You can work, browse, play games, and travel anywhere and everywhere now with your pad, phone, handheld... no PC needed! Get the point? This so called "PC power" is all in your imagination.
Gezzer
November 29, 2012 at 4:25am
I had a "friend" like you, every time he'd spark up he'd get all hyper aggressive and start blabbering about all sorts of bull sh@t.
A word of advice, just say no to drugs before you lose what brain cells you have left.
steven4570
November 28, 2012 at 7:10pm
They technically "CAN" do these things...and i use that term very loosely. So consoles stack up to the power of the pc huh? Ever seen BF3 (or any other game for that matter) side by side next to a PC? Obviously you haven't...get out of here you stupid troll troll troll.
Paper Jam
November 28, 2012 at 4:53pm
I think you're not getting why everyone is being so contentious. The PC offers options for gaming that consoles will never match. When the next generation is released it will already be behind the raw power of PCs. As for everything else, yes you can browse the web, play games, and pretty much do PC stuff on TVs, tablets, consoles and smartphones. But even though there is a lack of big releases, PC will always hold the performance crown. Graphics cards, RAM , SSDs, and CPUs give you multiple avenues for upgrade that just can't be done anywhere else. Your TV, tablet, console and smartphone are just as powerful as they will ever be the day you buy them. And as for net results, you'll just have to see the difference. Increased frame rate, physics, etc., etc., have to be seen, otherwise you can't know that your console is kind of crap. BTW, I have an Xbox 360.
I'm not calling the Wii U next gen because it's really just catching up to its current gen competitors.
Warrior247
November 29, 2012 at 7:36am
I totally understand why everyone is being so contentious. They're looking at this from a purely fanboy perspective and nothing else. They view PC gaming in some kind of vaccume. They can't understand why the console is so dominate, why PCs are getting smaller and more "console like", why nobody wants huge, energy sucking, hot boxes anymore, or why the vast majority of gamers don't want to constantly upgrade, or spend huge amounts of money on a rig. Why the console versions of the same game outsell it's PC counter part..."every-single-time", or a game like angry birds outselling BF3, Zumba outselling Crysis 2, ect. Why every single major "hardcore, PC only" developer jumped ship. To underscore that point, Call of Duty was just used to attack the console (can you believe that?), a so called "PC gamer" not realizing that COD "used to be" a PC game. It started it's life on the PC! Infinity Ward "used to be" a hardcore PC only developer! But once they jumped ship the rest is history! The COD series has taken on an almost cult like status and those games have become the best selling games of all time...because of the console AND NOT THE PC for which they were created for! THAT is the kind of mind f*k that has taken place. Those kind of sales numbers couldn't have happened on the PC and NEVER HAVE! The PC has "potential" NOT power, and until that potential is realized, there is no power.
steven4570
November 29, 2012 at 1:07pm
And you aren't looking at this from a console fan boy perspective? I dont have a problem with consoles or their players except when ignorant people like you spew the garbage. The COD of today sums up everything that is wrong with the games of today. The original COD (which i played at a lot as a kid) was a mediocre game to start with. But looking at were it was then and where COD is now just make me want to puke. Cryis 2 in comparison to the first is horrible. The console is dominant because its 200 bucks and provides "adequate" experience for the masses. It's ok to like and play games on consoles, I don't have a problem with that. But at the same time to not recognized how the PC is dominant in terms of power and what you can do with it. Devs see this clear as day(you'd have to be a moron not to see it) but the problem is most are lazy and would rather crank out mindless drivel like COD or whatever that the masses eat up. The thick of PC players have a low tolerance for crap games. Do console sales trump pc? Obviously yes, but if you'll notice the better the game the closer the gap is between the console and pc version of the title(Look at Skyrim)
Warrior247
November 29, 2012 at 2:25pm
I'm a gamer first, loyalty to a system is stupid IMO. I have or have had all of the systems. Wow, you played COD as a kid huh? So that means you weren't even born or were still shittin' on yourself when Doom, Unreal, Diablo, Starcraft, or WoW made they're debuts! So what do you know about games of "today" since you know VERY little of games of yesterday? Crysis was never a great game to begin with, It didn't work for THE VAST MAJORITY of PC gamers because it was full of problems, DX10 was a joke, and the game was stolen waaay more than it was purchased...by PC GAMERS!!! Crysis IS the reason why Crytek jumped ship to the console after saying that they wouldn't! Both COD and Halo 2 (or 3, forget which) bent it over and raped it, right at the sales counter...in front of the WHOLE ENTIRE INDUSTRY! It was a disaster. Crysis 2 had the power of multi-platform sales ability, but again HALO and COD ruined it's day. Hell, Zumba out sold it, frikin ZUMBA!!!! The PC is dominant in terms of power and what you can do with it? Really, what power? Who is doing something with it? Where is this "ultimate", game changing (pun intended) PC game? Exactly, it doesn't exist. Granted, there are games better suited for play on the PC just like the console. But that doesn't mean one is better than the other. I have 'em all.
Paper Jam
November 29, 2012 at 6:07pm
If playing Angry Birds quality graphics on touch screens and Kinect are the games you are into, then I can see why you see no need for PCs. And I haven't seen any "ultimate game changing consoles games" either, unless you're talking about Fruit Ninja on the Kinect. Because sales aside, COD and Halo are the same COD and Halo, just with different guns. Same gameplay, slightly different story.
And I cut my teeth on an Atari 2600 Vader (all black). My first FPS was Wolfenstein.
steven4570
November 29, 2012 at 4:55pm
started gaming around 98, played some of the popular titles of that time like like doom and later diablo 2. Thats like saying that i cant know about old games because i wasnt born or old enough to play them at that time regardless if I've played them at all. You're right, Crysis was not the best game ever, it was mediocre in terms of game content but it was fun and showed you what you could do with the PC. Beside the fact that it was horribly optimized it was also 3-4 years ahead of its time in terms of graphics, which is why it shouldn't have been released when it was. What made crysis a fun game was how open the environment was, rarely did i ever have the same fire fight twice(unlike Crysis 2) I'm not denying consoles make hand over fist more money than the pc but COD halo and crysis all turned to garbage games when they went cross platform or console only. Did someone create on the consoles create a multiplayer mod for just cause 2 like they did the PC? Wheres the game changing game for consoles? The best game i played this year was Nehrim, it was a PC MOD for oblivion and it was FREE! If you want to see what the PC can do in terms of graphics, I suggest you look at the video trailer for a game in pre alpha stages called "Reset" its on youtube. And its made by 2 dudes and not some big box publisher.
Paper Jam
November 29, 2012 at 8:35am
Don't look at it as fanboyism, look at it as devotion. As for sales and developers, you're right. Consoles have made game consumption easy for the masses. Parents aren't going to buy their kids expensive high end PCs when they can get consoles so much cheaper. And that pretty much goes for anyone on a budget. But you keep throwing around the word "power" and therein lies the problem. This is MaxPC, a site dedicated to performance. When you say power I think of frame rates and particle physics and NPCs on screen at the same time. I am not thinking about the billions of copies of COD that have been sold. Power is performance, and the PC still holds the crown. Now is the PC gamer crowd a smaller market than their console counterparts? Of course. But using cars as an analogy, some people like muscle cars and rice rockets. Tweaking and upgrading to get the most power they can. A lot more people drive stock 4 cyl. and V6 sedans and coups. Both get you where you need to go, but no one would say the sedans have more power than the muscle. Consoles are the sedans, PCs are the muscle. Consoles have the sales figures, PCs have the benchmarks. And as for those benchmarks, consoles are always handicapped down to the lowesst common denominator. They have to be. The majority of people are only willing to pay so much for a console, and MS and Sony can only afford to lose so much per device. PC gamers seek performance over pricetag. Thus they are only limited by how much they are willing to spend at a given moment. And then they can upgrade to more powerful components down the road. You cannot upgrade a console. The current XBox can only perform at the level of the of the ones released in 2005. If they make them any better then games made now might not work on consoles produced 7 years ago. This is the opposite of power.
So please quit saying consoles have power. They have sales. This is compelling, but this is not the argument I am making. When you have games made for PCs and consoles, the PC version will always look better because of the PCs performance power. If you think otherwise then you don't understand how far tech has advanced in 7 years. Because 7 years is ages in tech, and current gen consoles are handicapped to the performance level of 6-7 year old devices.
Warrior247
November 29, 2012 at 12:36pm
The word "power" is thrown around quite a bit from the PC side of the argument to justify the thousands spent to play a $50.00 or less game. But power is relative and there is no better case then this debate. The power to push a game lies within the components of a PC to a point. But the power to push the industry lies in the sales of the console. I've said it before, the console is all about software first, the console itself is just a means to an end. Software (or lack thereof) has destroyed consoles in the past. It didn't matter if it was the most powerful system on the market or not. The PC is about hardware first. So I 100% agree with you about the hardware side of PC gaming. People like upgrading and pushing their systems. Hell, I've done it! So if Maximum PC's yearly $15,000.00 Dream Machines are your goal or cup of tea, so be it. But the law of diminishing returns starts to come into play real, real, REAL fast! There is no getting around it. There are ALOT more problems with PC games and hardware than consoles. Graphics are made in the studio, NOT the video card! A $1000 690 won't make Angry Birds look any better than it does on an iPad, ('We often have at least ten times as much horsepower as an Xbox 360 or a PS3 in a high-end graphics card, yet it's very clear that the games don't look ten times as good-Richard Huddy, AMD.) Put that same machine on a TV and you're only getting 60hz, 1080p, or whatever the TV/monitor is capable of producing! You have $1000, DX11, GPUs running DX9 games, are you getting what you paid for? Nope! As long as you keep this about upgrading and tweeking hardware, fine. But the minute it becomes about games then that changes the debate entirely! Maybe you should read this about the "so called" power of PC gaming.
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2011/03/16/farewell-to-directx/1
steven4570
November 29, 2012 at 1:12pm
Well lets talk about games then, are we talking about what has more sales?, whats more innovative?
Warrior247
November 29, 2012 at 5:02pm
All of it. Obviously consoles have more sales, so whats to talk about? Consoles and pads are also driving innovation, the PC is not. We now have motion and touch introduced and it didn't come from the PC. But PC gamers are hating all over both, hence this thread! They're content to play the same 'ole games, the same 'ole ways, over and over again. Just buy a bigger video card. The PC is copying consoles and pads right now because the huge sales numbers justify the risk and are telling the devs what people want. Just look at Razer's console's products, Alienware, Falcon Northwest, and now even STEAM'S Big Picture Mode and console ambitions. Ask yourself why? If the PC was kicking all of this @$$, then why is everybody trying to turn it into a console?!!
