alessandro

joined 2 years ago
182
submitted 3 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) by alessandro@lemmy.ca to c/pcgaming@lemmy.ca
 

I’m taking inspiration from this thread

As you know, the Mac platform has been exclusively ARM for quite some time. Cyberpunk 2077 was recently released for Switch 2, which is also an ARM-based platform. The release of Cyberpunk 2077 seems to be made possible because much of the game’s libraries and binaries have already been ported to ARM; by publishing on Mac (i.e., ARM), CD Projekt appears to be trying to recoup some of their investment. The point I want to raise is whether we’re approaching a paradigm shift where PC gaming genuinely opens up to RISC platforms.

For those unfamiliar, here’s the short version: at the moment, the fundamental pillars of PC gaming are called x86. Globally, only two companies have the right to define this standard: Intel and AMD. Furthermore, the standards that govern graphics (GPUs) on x86 are basically a triopoly: Intel and AMD, with Nvidia—by far the dominant force—added to the mix.

On the ARM side, we have over 10 companies developing CPUs and around 8 developing GPUs (Intel abstains because they profit more from x86, but that’s really an ideological reason).

What’s interesting is that Steam is already, in essence, an ARM store: there’s a native Steam client for ARM that distributes ARM games (for Mac). Valve has historically been slow to innovate consistently (just look at the long wait for Steam Deck/Index 2), but it’s undeniable that the foundations for a PC industry switch towards RISC (ARM or, hopefully, also RISC-V) are all in place. There are already Micro-ATX mainboards with ARM and RISC-V CPUs available on the market.

With Nvidia being “super-hyped” by CryptoCurrency and AI and not appearing interested in supporting the PC gaming industry… am I the only one who thinks that introducing 10–15 new companies into the development of core PC gaming tech (CPU and GPU) is exactly what we need?

hyphen ( "—" ) and shit were added by AI translation

[–] alessandro@lemmy.ca 23 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Epic profittability is on Fortnite; there will be lot of skin based on Alan Wake franchise and, also, Fortnite ads everytime you launch AW2 form their launcher etc.

...as for Alan Wake franchise itself, well it goes in the epic games store marketing black hole

[–] alessandro@lemmy.ca 3 points 6 months ago

I don't see why you may need/wait for my permission: go straight away and link as much relevant content you find, it will improve lemmy fediverse community overall

[–] alessandro@lemmy.ca 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Google/Alphabet is working its magic to protect youtube from being for what it became successful freely available to everyone from everywhere; so it's getting difficult to solve a redirect with a clean link. Anyway, I always place the original youtube link in case something don't work; but still looking for a better solution.

[–] alessandro@lemmy.ca 15 points 6 months ago

I think GTAV was sold... 3, 5 times to the same person? PS3, Xbox360, PS4, XboxOne, Epic Exclusive, PS4pro, PC, XboxS, PS5, PS5pro

They can arise the price to whatever they want; I am now only interested into Indie or "patient gamers" things; between GTA and CoD franchises the AAA gaming looks more like some sort of onlyfans for a very specific group of paying simp.

[–] alessandro@lemmy.ca 1 points 6 months ago

That implied a interesting question, which are the other 95% content on rule34 it is fine with.

[–] alessandro@lemmy.ca 130 points 6 months ago (1 children)

jiggle physics daughters, to be precise.

[–] alessandro@lemmy.ca 2 points 6 months ago

People who say "it was never the case" are misremembering history.

Yes, consoles are sold at a loss initially. However, the price-to-performance ratio (in terms of frames per second) consistently decreases over time, regardless of what console manufacturers do.

For example, the original PlayStation was released in 1994 at a cost of $600. By the end of 1999, just six years later, you could emulate its games on a fairly inexpensive, older PC. In 1994, while the first Doom ran on a relatively costly i386/i486, it was impossible to match the arcade-quality graphics of PlayStation games like Tekken 1 to 3. However, by the time the PlayStation 2 was released, it became feasible to use an affordable older PC with a low to mid-range GPU to exceed the graphical capabilities of any console available at that time.

The only period when consoles were truly cheap—meaning they were sold at a loss—was during the first few months after their release. If you already owned a PC, you could easily surpass the performance of newly released consoles by simply upgrading your GPU.

[–] alessandro@lemmy.ca 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

By the way. that was settled long time ago...

[–] alessandro@lemmy.ca 6 points 6 months ago (1 children)

If you buy and Nvidia card you "pay" for DLSS, since it works by using specific material hardware inside the GPU for the job.

If you buy a Intel or AMD GPU you don't neither pay for FSR and XESS

[–] alessandro@lemmy.ca 3 points 7 months ago (2 children)

They shouldn't exclusive of each other. You can reach more people to join lemmy by reminding people on reddit they have options if they are honestly (some people just randomly complain to feel special, avoid them) feed off with their platform.

[–] alessandro@lemmy.ca 1 points 7 months ago

If Valve would release Deadlock for any of those... they would need to.

[–] alessandro@lemmy.ca 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Unreasonable expensive stuff will sold out by rich people, scalpers and extra rich people who buy from them.

Screwing the economy "frames per $/€" for everyone.

view more: ‹ prev next ›