Valve: Sandy Bridge = a console like experience on pc

CptStern

CptStern

suckmonkey
Joined
May 5, 2004
Messages
10,303
Reaction score
62
With the studio developing Portal 2 with the "Sandy Bridge" specifically in mind, Valve boss Gabe Newell took to the stage at the Consumer Electronic Show and said "It's a real game changer for us. This allows for a console like experience on the PC."
Click to expand...

I took it to mean this right away:

What he likely means is that the chip, which is so powerful it combines a regular processor's functionality with that of a graphics card, goes a long way towards doing away with PC hardware specifications
Click to expand...

however this feels like a "developing for the lowest common denominator" sorta thing

http://kotaku.com/5726127/half+life-devs-say-new-processor-will-bring-console+like-experience-to-pcs
 
It won't replace what we have now (i.e. dedicated graphics cards). But it'll make buying games easier for some people. If the game is designed to play on that processor (probably at low settings) then all it'll need is a label on the box saying this and people will know it'll probably play on their PC.

If you want to play games at super sexy high-res graphics you'll still need a graphics cards. It's just another way for developers and publishers to advertise and get their games out to more people.
 
Ren.182 said:
It's just another way for developers and publishers to advertise and get their games out to more people.
Click to expand...


ya I dont think it's a bad thing but gamers tend to jump to conclusions:

console-like experience on the PC.

umm? why would I want that again?
Click to expand...
 
sandy bridge sounds like some pornstar name

"I am sandy bridge"

"why bridge?"

"cuz everyone rides over me"

*chikky chikky bow bow*
 
It's only even vaguely revolutionary because, for years, Intel have produced the world's crappiest onboard graphics chipsets, making it pretty much a requirement to buy a discrete graphics card to play games. Now it seems that this won't be necessary. Probably.
 
CptStern said:
ya I dont think it's a bad thing but gamers tend to jump to conclusions:
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's nothing but a good thing really. More computers able to play these games = more sales.
 
I feel like this is something that will be more like the Mac's whole tiering thing where, if your computer isn't able to run something, you need the next tier.
"Oh this game doesn't run in the Intel 1x, time to buy an Intel 2x"

Probably a way to wrestle the video market from Nvidia and ATI. Yeah it will make it easier for programmers if they only need to meet one set of specifications, but it's gonna suck when you basically have to get a new computer if you want to play new games instead of just upgrading a processor or a video card.
 
Ren.182 said:
It won't replace what we have now (i.e. dedicated graphics cards). But it'll make buying games easier for some people. If the game is designed to play on that processor (probably at low settings) then all it'll need is a label on the box saying this and people will know it'll probably play on their PC.

If you want to play games at super sexy high-res graphics you'll still need a graphics cards. It's just another way for developers and publishers to advertise and get their games out to more people.
Click to expand...
Exactly. "Console-like experience" means install the game and it'll work. The graphics will probably be terrible.
 
I can't really say much about this without knowing more about the processor, but several concerns pop into my head right away. The first being that this processor could eliminate the edge pc has in gaming. If developers stop designing games with better technology in mind, then every game is going to be limited by the capabilities of this new processor. The games would all be like shitty console to pc ports are now. There would be no point in not just having a console, since that's what this processor would turn the computer into
 
No need to get all Sandy Vagina over this.
 
After Newell left the stage, Eden stated that in four years, the keyboard/mouse combo for interacting with games will look “medieval,” and had another assistant demo Portal 2 using a Wiimote-like pair of controls that allowed him a greater level of control in the game, rotating a box in midair.
Click to expand...
http://www.appletell.com/apple/comment/ces-2011-intel-shows-off-new-processor-demos-portal-2/

:|

Yet another company not knowing shit about the wants of the PC gaming community.
 
If they want to have shit for a console DO IT ON A ****ING CONSOLE. The PC is not a console because it is a PC.

That being said I think they want to get in on another market that's all "herp derp how do i pc gamez?" And to that end I think it will work.
 
Like Ren said, it won't replace what we have at the minute, it'll just make it easier and cheaper for people who aren't necessarily interested in playing high performance video games, dedicated graphics cards and processors will still be there, but they'll still be just as expensive.
 
It's quite poorly phrased. All they mean is you may not have to worry about compatibility which although it would be nice isn't really going to make PC games like console games. Also, Sandy Bridge is a terrible name.
 
A console like experience for the PC
So, they're making the PC more like a system dedicated to playing certain games?
I thought they already did that. Several times. In fact, I think we're in the seventh generation or so now?
 
I thought with all the ****ing console ports these days, things weren't going to be any different.

Krynn72 said:
http://www.appletell.com/apple/comment/ces-2011-intel-shows-off-new-processor-demos-portal-2/

:|

Yet another company not knowing shit about the wants of the PC gaming community.
Click to expand...

What the **** does the PC gaming community want? Whenever something profoundly bad happens to PC gaming, everyone just /sunglasses and deals with it and the standard changes - who's to say that guy is wrong?
 
Danimal said:
I thought with all the ****ing console ports these days, things weren't going to be any different.



What the **** does the PC gaming community want? Whenever something profoundly bad happens to PC gaming, everyone just /sunglasses and deals with it and the standard changes - who's to say that guy is wrong?
Click to expand...

The standard doesn't change, we're simply left with no choice. ****, I'm still mad about the regenerating health bullshit.
 
When the next ship of fresh-faced gamers roll in and they don't know any better, Krynn D-oh-Double-G, the standard changes.

Just talk to a dudebro about Black Ops - it's apparently the best FPS in history. :/
 
The adaptive keyboard looks neat, though. I'd like to have a proper one like that which displays actions on each key, assuming it can be re-programmed. Would be pricey, no doubt.

Regarding the combined chip thing, haven't they been developing something like this for years? I'm sure I heard about it a while back, and they were talking about how much it'd "break down the walls" between console and PC gaming back then too. Frankly, I should think the walls are there for a reason in most cases, but I suppose it's a nice alternative to crappy onboard graphics.
 
Danimal said:
When the next ship of fresh-faced gamers roll in and they don't know any better, Krynn D-oh-Double-G, the standard changes.

Just talk to a dudebro about Black Ops - it's apparently the best FPS in history. :/
Click to expand...

Except I'll be a big time hot shot game designer and will show those doughy faced newbies (thats what you called them, right?) the light. Mark my words, Krynn72 is going to be the last bastion of true gaming in the world.
 
CyberPitz said:
Put your hand in front of your face. Now imagine playing a game on a screen that big.

No thanks.
Click to expand...

you're a "the glass is half empty" kinda guy

weird-laptop-uses14.jpg
 
I'm sick and tired of the PC's bullshit difficulties. I've stuck with the PC since I got into computer games age 10, and since then there's been, when you add it all together, maybe six months where I could hope to buy and play a new game that came out. My experience of computers in the last four years has pretty much been solely comprised of them not working as they should. Anything that makes things easier, I'm all for.
 
Bad^Hat said:
The adaptive keyboard looks neat, though. I'd like to have a proper one like that which displays actions on each key, assuming it can be re-programmed. Would be pricey, no doubt.
Click to expand...
Yeah, this is ****ing cool...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svjLIZKAHQI
(this one is $2,400 USD though - but the price could come down... see video below)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSFRaRuIHFg

Bad^Hat said:
Regarding the combined chip thing, haven't they been developing something like this for years? I'm sure I heard about it a while back, and they were talking about how much it'd "break down the walls" between console and PC gaming back then too. Frankly, I should think the walls are there for a reason in most cases, but I suppose it's a nice alternative to crappy onboard graphics.
Click to expand...
Yes, they already had integrated graphics (IG). The fact is, they have never been all that capable. With the introduction of the Intel i3 CPU with IG you are able to play 1080p video with no video card. So, it's capable.

Note: you can also purchase their chips in versions without the Integrated Graphics.


Related:

I like Intel chips, but I don't like what they are up to. They have been ****ing with Nvidia for a long time now, and obviously AMD for even longer. Notice that all recent Intel chips don't benefit so much from more than one video card. (The bandwidth is limited). This has got to be intentional, to keep people from buying 2 , 3, and 4 video cards (Crossfire/SLI), to keep Nvidia/AMD sales down. And with an increasingly prevalent Intel integrated graphics, this will only further reduce sales of Nvidia/AMD video cards.
 
All I can think is that hardware-level security the next gen of Intel is including turning PC games into locked-down, unmoddable, DRM-crippled games that consoles have. Then a pirate/homebrewer will smash it wide open and all the devs will get sand in their vaginas about it.

Yet another reason to avoid Intel like the plague.
 
What I take it as, is they are going to dumb down the game to sell to consoles. And they are, for free, allowing us to have the same dumbed down experience.
 
ríomhaire said:
It's quite poorly phrased. All they mean is you may not have to worry about compatibility which although it would be nice isn't really going to make PC games like console games. Also, Sandy Bridge is a terrible name.
Click to expand...

This^

Fundamental problem with the PC as a platform at the moment is (and why consoles get the fly girls and PC gets the hood rats in terms of AAA development) is just plain down to the fact that there are hundreds of PC hardware skews Vs the 360 & PS3, and therefore as a platform it's a lot harder to develop for. Sticking a genuinely game capable IGP (Vs the existing intel PoS) in every future £300 laptop or Dell tower, potentially opens up a much larger sales base to developers for AAA titles (albeit they might not run with all the bells & whistles on, they will run). The big issues facing that happening though are: -

1) Adoption rates. Your £300 laptop/Dell purchaser is probably after a PC that allows them to run Office, surf the web, and little else. If they've a machine capable of that now, there's not much incentive for them to buy a new one for quite a few years.

2) The disappearance of the retail PC game. Albeit not necessarily the case everywhere, but certainly in the UK the PC game on the high street has taken a significant beating in terms of shelf space Vs the console titles. Sure, big AAA titles can be found, but the days of game shops having hundreds of titles to choose from seem to be on the decline (not helped by retailers being squeezed as a result of the recession). Albeit PC game sales have been steadily moving over to digital distribution or e-tailers like Play & Amazon, that decrease of high street visibility is a big issue. Quite a few of my non gamer friends have PCs (or macs) but by and large the most PC gaming they do is Facebook, or casual games. I can't think of many who even know about Steam. Albeit there are 30 million registered Steam users, it's still a bit of a fightclub style situation Vs general public awareness.

Albeit Steam (with Portal) ships with Dells Alienware machines, the ideal scenario is Steam shipping with every Dell. I think for that to happen though. Steam needs to start selling more than games. The fact that Valve have started to list user software in their hardware surveys is not without some significance I feel: -

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey

I don't think it would be a huge jump for Valve to start selling applications, and I don't think it would hurt say the Adobes of the world to start thinking about that. Right now Adobe products get pirated to hell and back (albeit probably only to a small degree by the commercial sector Vs the wider public), principally down to the fact that the software is prohibitively expensive for the casual user/student. Slash the price of a Photoshop C5 from £550 to £55 and stick it up on Steam though and you are going to make significantly more unit sales than you might otherwise have, enough to probably offset the much lowered price point (your profit lies in sheer volume). Because I think ultimately the majority of people favour legal ownership over piracy, and the differential lies in which path offers the least long term resistance.
 
Kadayi said:
I don't think it would be a huge jump for Valve to start selling applications, and I don't think it would hurt say the Adobes of the world to start thinking about that. Right now Adobe products get pirated to hell and back (albeit probably only to a small degree by the commercial sector Vs the wider public), principally down to the fact that the software is prohibitively expensive for the casual user/student. Slash the price of a Photoshop C5 from £550 to £55 and stick it up on Steam though and you are going to make significantly more unit sales than you might otherwise have, enough to probably offset the much lowered price point (your profit lies in sheer volume). Because I think ultimately the majority of people favour legal ownership over piracy, and the differential lies in which path offers the least long term resistance.
Click to expand...

Not a bad idea. And further, Adobe could go with something like '55 for consumers, 550 for a business/commercial License'. That would be ideal for Adobe because if they can get millions of people using their software at $55 (software which takes a lot of training), then businesses would be wise to have that software.
 
VirusType2 said:
Not a bad idea. And further, Adobe could go with something like '55 for consumers, 550 for a business/commercial License'. That would be ideal for Adobe because if they can get millions of people using their software at $55 (software which takes a lot of training), then businesses would be wise to have that software.
Click to expand...

Well, they already have millions of people using their software, just only a small percentage who aren't commercial users bother paying for it at the moment. 'Photoshopped' is synonymous with image manipulation to the extent that it's entered public conciousness, in the same way that 'Hoover up' was synonymous with vacuum cleaners.
 
Kadayi said:
Well, they already have millions of people using their software, just only a small percentage who aren't commercial users bother paying for it at the moment. 'Photoshopped' is synonymous with image manipulation to the extent that it's entered public conciousness, in the same way that 'Hoover up' was synonymous with vacuum cleaners.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I don't really like to go into detail on any pros and cons of piracy (of which there are both). But I definitely know what you are saying is true.

I'm just reinforcing your idea - that they could still get paid for it. 55 pounds is what - like $80USD? So, $80,000,000 (80 mill) from just one million consumers. And they sell new versions every couple of years for those that are interested.

And what I'm adding is, again, that they could still charge full price for the business license. For example, MS Visual Studio 2010 is $12,000. Only a business could afford that. The Express version is free, however, and quite capable.
 
@Virus

Yeah I really don't understand Adobes reasoning tbh. Elements is such a gimped PoS Vs full Photoshop. As far as I can see it only exists so it can be bundled with scanners etc. Getting in on Steam wouldn't be a bad thing.
 
As much as I detest DRM, I don't think publishers have any intention of doing anything but charging forward with it. Except for choice indie developers, services like Steam and Cloud services are probably the only way in the future. I'd rather Steam than some retard-o shit that UBI cooked up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

-smash-
Using Unity at Valve - Vision Summit 2016
Replies
5
Views
6K
Ennui
Ennui
-smash-
Valve and Microsoft are Working to Standardize VR APIs
Replies
4
Views
5K
Otto-Grainer
O
Omnomnick
Valve Announces Source 2 + Steam Link [GDC 2015]
2
Replies
67
Views
37K
Skyace65
S
B
Community Interviews: Tony Newton, co-creator of Redemption
Replies
0
Views
5K
Barnz
B
-smash-
Valve and The Road to GDC 2015
Replies
10
Views
44K
Engineer123
E
Back
Top