PC gaming will be fine even without 8K 120fps raytracing. It will be fine even if limited to iGPUs. Maybe even better off if it means new titles are actually playable on an average new miniPC.
More realistically I guess we get an AMD/Intel duopoly looking quite similar instead.
It will probably be a bigger blow to people who want to run LLMs at home.
That doesn't sem very plausible, how many people are driven away from CounterStrike or like League of Legends because the graphics weren't as good as Cyberpunk or whatever?
Theres a LOT of games that compete with AAA-massive-budget games on aggregate like Dwarf Fortress, CS, League, Fortnite, people are still playing arma 2, dayz, rust, etc Rainbow Six: Siege still has adherents and even cash-payout tournaments. EvE: Online, Ultima Online, Runescape, still goin'
These games have like no advertising and are still moneymakers. Eve and UO are like 20 and 30 years old. Heck, Classic WoW!
Dunno (maybe wow?) but is it the most expensive graphics hardware giving AAA all the money/air or because they have a great reputation as games, solid consistent advertising, a strong network effect and a spot on the top of new release lists?
I feel like league of legends has, wrt the genshin $s, I honestly haven’t checked!
Huh? No? It means that the overall platform is already at 'good enough' level. There can always be an improvement, but in terms of pure visuals, we are already past at a point, where some studios choose simple representations ( see some 2d platformers ) as a stylistic choice.
It is not a question of want. Gaming will exist in some form so I am simply uncertain what you are concerned about.
Can you elaborate a little? What, exactly, is your concern here? That you won't have nvidia as a choice? That AMD will be the only game in town? That gpu market will move from duopoly ( for gaming specifically ) to monopoly? I have little to go on, but I don't really want to put words in your mouth based on minimal post.
Not a locked ecosystem console or a streaming service with lag!
I think if nvidia leaves the market for AI, why wouldn’t AMD and intel, with the memory cartel. So DIY market is gone. That kills lots of companies and creators that rely on the gaming market.
It’s a doom spiral for a lot of the industry. If gaming is just PlayStation and switch and iGPUs there is a lot less innovation in pushing graphics.
There was no DIY market on 8 and 16 bit home computers with fixed hardware, yet bedroom coding (aka indies) not only did thrive, they were the genesis of many AAA publishers, and to this day those restrictions keep the Demoscene alive and recognised as World culture heritage.
PC was largely ignored for gaming, until finally EGA/VGA card, alongside AdLib/Soundblaster, became widespread in enough households to warrant development costs.
Interesting. Does nvidia offer control? Last time I checked they arbitrarily updated their drivers to degrade unwelcome use case ( in that case, for crypto ). It sounds to me like the opposite of that.
Separately, do you think they won't try to ingratiate themselves to gamers again once AI market changes?
Do you not think they are part of the cartel anyway ( and the DIY market exists despite that )?
<< So DIY market is gone.
How? One use case is gone. Granted, not a small one and one with an odd type of.. fervor, but relatively small nonetheless. At best, DIY market shifts to local inference machines and whatnot. Unless you specifically refer to gaming market..
<< That kills lots of companies and creators that rely on the gaming market.
Markets change all the time. EA is king of the mountain. EA is filing for bankruptcy. Circle of life.
Edit: ALso, upon some additional consideration and in the spirit of christmas, fuck the streamers ( aka creators ). With very, very limited exceptions, they actively drive what is mostly wrong with gaming these days. Fuck em. And that is before we get to the general retardation they contribute to.
<< It’s a doom spiral for a lot of the industry.
How? For AAA? Good. Fuck em. We have been here before and were all better for it.
<< If gaming is just PlayStation and switch and iGPUs there is a lot less innovation in pushing graphics.
Am I reading it right? AMD and Intel is just for consoles?
<< It will kill the hobby.
It is an assertion without any evidence OR a logical cause and effect.
Ahaha are you trolling for entitled gamers? Yeah wouldn't want the real world having to face those. No worries: as long as there are people willing to drop money into expensive gear, somebody will sell it.
That's one hell of a long shot. Are your views applicable to the rest of the entertainment industry? There's plenty of people wasting away in front on Netflix, after all. Or why just entertainment, any "useless" hobbies that are repeatedly done for fun but have no real productive output. Is any comparable "pleasurable" activity that also hooks a minority of people in an unhealthy way bad, or just gaming?
But what's most insane is trying to draw any parallels between gaming and these other things - something that was literally engineered to ruin human lives, biologically (hard drugs) or psychologically (gambling). The harm and evil caused by these two industries is incomprehensible (especially the legal parts of them, like alcohol and casino gambling/sports betting/online gambling), and trying to fit gaming in among them both downplays the amount of suffering inflicted by gambling and hard drugs, as well as villainizes normal people - like the hundreds of millions of people who play games in a sane, non-problematic way or indie game devs who make games because they want to express themselves artistically.
Anyways, I gotta log off HN for a while. I can feel my gaming withdrawal kicking in. I've bankrupted myself four times by only spending my money on gaming, and I've been in and out of rehab centres and ERs as I've been slowly destroying my body with gaming in a spiral of deadly addiction. I think I'll have to panhandle and threaten strangers on the street to buy some Steam cards.
I worked as a buyer in edu, oh the grease is built in to the system from the vendors who will frequently shower you with coffee and donuts to much friendlier offers to get sales.
Why is it so hard to imagine people who work in education would have flexible ethics for personal gain?
>shower you with coffee and donuts to much friendlier offers to get sales.
If I was working a cushy admin job, I'd need way more bribery than $5 worth of coffee and doughnuts to intentionally select a worse vendor, especially if the decision would negatively impact my colleagues and get me flak.
>Why is it so hard to imagine people who work in education would have flexible ethics for personal gain?
Because if you read the other comments, there are perfectly reasonable explanations that don't involve graft. Jumping to "bribe" every time there's bad behavior is just lazy thinking and means you don't actually figure out what the root of the problem is.
>Because if you read the other comments, there are perfectly reasonable explanations that don't involve graft. Jumping to "bribe" every time there's bad behavior is just lazy thinking and means you don't actually figure out what the root of the problem is.
Right. I'm sure, in spite of this and the decades of overwhelming evidence, this was all just a silly coincidence, and they can lower food prices now.
Edit: I'm shitlimited to five posts per X number of hours, so I'm going to respond here: the evidence is in TFA, thanks.
>in spite of this and the decades of overwhelming evidence
Where's all this "overwhelming evidence"? So far the only that's presented is "my university is pepsi only so there must be something shady going on" and "vendors buy me coffee so there must be administrators corrupting themselves and risking their 6 figure jobs for $5 worth of inducements"
edit:
>Edit: I'm shitlimited to five posts per X number of hours, so I'm going to respond here: the evidence is in TFA, thanks.
Searches for "bribe" and "kickbacks" don't turn anything up. If you're talking about the unsealed FTC complaint, that's anti-competitive behavior, but not the "kickbacks" that OP was talking about (ie. some administrator abusing their position of trust to personally enrich themselves). Both are bad, but they're not remotely comparable. For one, in the case of kickbacks, the organization and its members are harmed (through worse contracts), whereas for whatever walmart and pepsi agreed to, both benefited.
But a lot of people are poorly paid and free coffee is nice.
It might not be enough to select a worse vendor but if two are equal it’s easy to pick the one with the cute sales representative who knows how you like your coffee.
Then there is the leadership who plays golf together and use the company card to buy gifts (booze) for the deciders.
It’s not bribery it’s just subtle influence;)
And it’s everywhere, it’s the same at the various higher education colleges I worked at.
> shower you with coffee and donuts to much friendlier offers to get sales.
By bringing this up in a thread talking about kickbacks, it sounds as if you're trying to equate the two. Please don't equate this to a "kickback." It's not what that is. There's real standards to what denotes bribes and kickbacks and that's not what those are.
> flexible ethics for personal gain?
If you let the donuts influence your judgment, that is an ethical problem -- I agree. But if you operate in your organization's best interest you can enjoy the coffee and donuts without remorse.
I don’t drink coffee or eat donuts (allergies) so I wasn’t influenced by the sales people but I understood what was happening and saw it happen to more senior people in the organization who were influenced and cost the organization a lot of money because of “friendship” with a leader at a client who was very generous to the executive.
I'd equate it more to ass-kissing than bribing. Kissing ass isn't a crime. Questionable if it's ethical, since you're basically pretending you like someone more than you do, which is dishonest.
Sounds similar to university applied research arms too.
GTRI locally hires a lot of non-students to work in its various labs. Its labs then pitch ideas to private companies and the DoD. Sometimes they're solicited directly if the lab is well-known and has a track record of delivering good research-oriented results. They research and build prototypes around various capabilities: robotics, avionics, even classified stuff.
They're always pitching, because contracts end or fall through, and that's the source of everyone's payroll. The labs can even be competitive with one another, and the individual researchers might spend time split between labs.
Cinema used to be a really good shared experience. I don't go to cinema anymore because we have a newborn at home, but we used to pre-order tickets in advanced for movies we really wanted to see (like Wicked last year, Fantastic 4 this year) and the theater was almost empty at opening night for both of those.
Contrast a few years ago when avengers endgame came out, and Spiderman far from home came out shortly after that, and No Way Home a few years after that... They were lively events. People dressed up, the theater handed out free swag and merch, and it was just a really cool shared experience, almost akin to a live concert.
I don't know exactly what's changed in that time, considering No Way Home came out after Covid and it was still a spectacle of an event, but I don't think cinema will get its magic back.
A few years ago I did go to a "Stranger Things" experience and I think that might be the future of shared experiences/narratives. It was essentially a week-long pop-up event, you'd get tickets, and it was basically a "walking simulator" that took you through a narrative within the Stranger Things universe. This wasn't just a bunch of people looking at a screen, it was live actors, holographics, sound design, lights, a lot of crazy stuff for a pop-up venue.
As a fan of the franchise it was really well done. A friend of mine want to a similar "Experience" for the Bridgeton universe, which I care nothing about, but she really enjoyed it as well.
So I think if Netflix were to reimagine cinema, it would probably be in that direction.
Let's be real, the twitch FPS CoD players aren't going to give that up and play a boring life simulator.
This has the potential to harm a lot of businesses from hardware to software companies, and change the lives of millions of people.
reply