NVIDIA Stock Tumbles Amidst Analyst Talk of Gaming's Decline

[medi01]

what you see happening on PC is that almost half of the playerbase on PC is actually also driving a high-end system, only 25% is on low-end

Hell no.
Only about 15% of the PC gamers were on 970/290 or better cards as of June 2016.

Majority of upgrades to outrageously priced mid/high end cards would happen within that very group.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Consoles suffer from simplified games, and as a result, they cater to a different part of the market. Console gamers jump from one triple-A spoonfeeder title to the next, no wonder concurrent players on recent games are higher.

Also on that point, a lot of PC gamers have more games than they have time to play. Because of the backlog, they're more likely to play a variety of games than beat one game to death (e.g. Call of Duty or Battlefield). Case in point: in the last week I played The Crew (uPlay), The Divison (uPlay), Assassin's Creed Rogue (uPlay), and Starbound (Steam, self-run dedicated server). I also briefly started Consortium (Steam) to check some things.

You'll only see huge numbers of PC gamers playing most games soon after release (e.g. Skyrim) or after a major update (e.g. Skyrim Special Edition). Then it tapers off as people play something else in their library.

 

[Manu_PT]

Yes, and what you see happening on PC is that almost half of the playerbase on PC is actually also driving a high-end system, only 25% is on low-end, and year-over-year there is a trend towards an ever growing % of high end systems. So your assumption about PC gaming and high end is flawed in that sense. Again: this is a very diverse population, but it is also a flexible one, and since a half-decent gaming PC from five years ago can actually still compete today, (and also: realistically does compete today with current gen consoles) the definition of high end or 'triple A gaming' is a very difficult one to make so clearly.

I remember the outrage when No Man's Sky wouldn't run on many a gamers' old Phenom CPU. That alone speaks volumes of the diversity of systems in the PC market. A decline in PC gaming is very easy to see because there is no fixed upgrade cycle for ANYONE - it depends not on the release of a new console, not on a new iteration of API's like DX12 (you don't see everyone building new PCs all of a sudden) or a new OS like Windows 10. It does not even depend on the release of new hardware, because as we've seen with Intel's offerings but also on GPU, new hardware does not mean a faster machine, it just means that similar performance is available at a lower price point, and a new tier of performance gets added on top.

And this, is why a release such as Star Citizen is extremely relevant as an indicator of the popularity of PC gaming. PC gamers upgrade their rigs according to only ONE motivation: the release of a new game that requires it. A slow year for PC gaming, riddled with console ports on dated hardware, is a slow year for PC hardware. Now, with the updated console specs ánd 4K, the resolution bump on monitors as a whole, a handful of PC exclusives, ánd the return of competition on CPU, we will likely see a new surge in PC gaming for 2017.

No, that´s false. According to steamstats majority of PC gamers own low to mid-spec system at best with 1366x768 and 1080p being the most used resolution on 92%, and with only 2% using 1440p and above. And Intel HD4000 and GTX760 and 960 beind the most used graphics cards. You can´t just take numbers out of your mouth, is all on steamstats.com

Also on that point, a lot of PC gamers have more games than they have time to play. Because of the backlog, they're more likely to play a variety of games than beat one game to death (e.g. Call of Duty or Battlefield). Case in point: in the last week I played The Crew (uPlay), The Divison (uPlay), Assassin's Creed Rogue (uPlay), and Starbound (Steam, self-run dedicated server). I also briefly started Consortium (Steam) to check some things.

You'll only see huge numbers of PC gamers playing most games soon after release (e.g. Skyrim) or after a major update (e.g. Skyrim Special Edition). Then it tapers off as people play something else in their library.



8 months old at this point...

So according to your logic, why do PC gamers "beat League of Legends and Dota 2 to death"?

http://steamcharts.com/app/393100

All time peak on CoD MWR -> 6000 players. This was the peak. So your logic is wrong. For your logic to be right it should have a lot more peak players. 6000 compared to console numbers are a joke

You guys can write all kind of excuses you want. Stats say AAA gaming on PC is weaker than consoles, period.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Hell no.
Only about 15% of the PC gamers were on 970/290 or better cards as of June 2016.

Majority of upgrades to outrageously priced mid/high end cards would happen within that very group.

No, that´s false. According to steamstats majority of PC gamers own low to mid-spec system at best with 1366x768 and 1080p being the most used resolution on 92%, and with only 2% using 1440p and above. And Intel HD4000 and GTX760 and 960 beind the most used graphics cards. You can´t just take numbers out of your mouth, is all on steamstats.com

8 months old at this point and remember, Steam hardware survey is optional and not scientific.

There's nothing wrong with gaming on 1366x768. My newphew does that on an HD 5870. It's more than powerful enough to meet his needs (Euro Truck Simulator 2, American Truck Simulator, and Farming Simulator 15). Most casual gamers, like him, don't notice or even care about resolution which translates to low end GPUs being able to get acceptable framerates.

 

[Manu_PT]

"Steam hardware survey option"? So what? So You are basically telling me that by "accident" only people with weaker hardware did the survey... that doesn´t go well with maths law about statistics.

If on the next USA president elections, the first stats say that after 1 million inquiries, Trump leads by 2%, you can expect some margin error sure, when you count with 20 million. But don´t expect anything more than 5% to 7%, max.

So no one can assure you that if every one completed steam survey that high-end hardware would have more %. Why is that? lol makes no sense. Is a statistic, sure may not be 100% correct, but it isn´t also 50% incorrect. Simple Maths.

And a HD5870 is not on "high-end" GPU zone anymore.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

So according to your logic, why do PC gamers "beat League of Legends and Dota 2 to death"?

Because it's multiplayer. I know of a lot of people that addictively play BF1, DOTA2, PD2, and so on. Most gamers don't pound on singular titles like that.

"Steam hardware survey option"? So what? So You are basically telling me that by "accident" only people with weaker hardware did the survey... that doesn´t go well with maths law about statistics.

If on the next USA president elections, the first stats say that after 1 million inquiries, Trump leads by 2%, you can expect some margin error sure, when you count with 20 million. But don´t expect anything more than 5% to 7%, max.

So no one can assure you that if every one completed steam survey that high-end hardware would have more %. Why is that? lol makes no sense. Is a statistic, sure may not be 100% correct, but it isn´t also 50% incorrect. Simple Maths.

And a HD5870 is not on "high-end" GPU zone anymore.

The pollsters said Clinton would win by a major margin. Why were they wrong? Polls were overwhelmingly done via land line phone numbers, which people are getting rid of or ignoring.


You're also missing the point that most people, like my nephew, don't want nor demand the latest and greatest hardware. They're happy as long as it works.

 

[Manu_PT]

Yeah and CoD, Titanfall 2, Battlefield 1, Doom aren´t multiplayer too? So why consoles have like 5 or 6 times more players on those games? Why are 84% of gamers on Dota 2, LoL and CS:Go? Broken Logic

 

[FordGT90Concept]

You're average PC gamer has access to hundreds of games. Your average console gamer has access to 10-15 games. Console gamers are going to put more hours into the games they have.

84% of gamers aren't playing the competitive multiplayer games. On Steam, maybe, but hell, look at Witcher 3 where only like 17% of PC sales were the Steam version. Most were retail -> GOG. Everyone playing anything from GOG, uPlay, and Origin are completely excluded from Steam's numbers.

 

[Manu_PT]

Sure, so why is 84% of the userbase on Dota 2, LoL and CS:GO? If you have a massive library on PC..... shouldn´t them be well divided?

So you´re basically telling me that no one cares about cod, doom or titanfall 2 because they have more 2000 games to play, but 84% care about Dota 2, LoL and CS:GO even having other 2000 games to play.

Nice logic... but I will tell you what really happens. Dota2, LoL and CS GO doesn´t requite good hardware and are the best games for low spec machines, while most people play AAA more demadning titles on consoles, because most of the people DO NOT OWN good enough machine to play them on PC. You can go around the way you want, this is what really happens

Also you are talking like consoles have a tiny library of games. I reccomend you to visist PSN store on your web browser, you might get surprised. Sure isn´t nowehere big as pc library, but isn´t small enough to justify what you´re saying. Like everyone´s option on consoles is only playing 2 or 3 aaa games lol

PS4 has 1124 games and 61 million units sold in 3 years: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_PlayStation_4_games this is not counting with PS1, PS2 and Indie games.

But you say "console gamers have access to 10-15 games". Reasonable enough...

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Steam is the only way to play Dota 2 and CS:GO so Steam has their entire player base since forever. Pretty sure the same is true of Skyrim (because Steam DRM). DOTA2 is also four years old now and still has a player base mostly because of eSports.

Unlike console games, PC games have settings sliders so even the most demanding games can run on low end hardware. About the only thing that will prohibit a game from running is the graphics card/operating system not supporting a hardware feature level that the game requires (e.g. DX10 games won't run on DX9 cards). Those kinds of big shifts are what force upgrades.

I was talking about how many games a typical PC gamer has compared to a typical console gamer. It wasn't long ago that I played the original Thief and Thief 2 on my PC. That's two decades worth of playable games on one platform.

 

[Manu_PT]

Sure, so show me Watch Dogs 2, Mafia 3, CoD IW, Battlefield 1, Titanfall 2 and For Honor running on one of the most used GPUs on steam: Intel HD4600, and running on the most used CPUs on steam: Single/Dual Core 2,1ghz cpu. Go on.

You are contradicting your self. If most of the PC gamers use low end machines and they can run those AAA titles anyway by "adjusting sliders" like you said, so why aren´t those games populated?

I don´t care how much games PC library has, that has nothing to do with the fact AAA gaming is weaker. If the community was well divided across all games I could agree with you, but is not the case. The community is clearly more on the low demanding games, is a massive difference. And by watching steamstats hardware surveys you can clearly see what´s happening.

Most players: low demanding hits like Dota 2, CS GO and LoL.
Most machines: low spec

 

[FordGT90Concept]

PS4 has 1124 games and 61 million units sold in 3 years: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_PlayStation_4_games this is not counting with PS1, PS2 and Indie games.

I have about that many games, myself, on PC, and I know people that have over 2000 games on Steam alone. That said, we are the exception, not the norm.

Sure, so show me Watch Dogs 2, Mafia 3, CoD IW, Battlefield 1, Titanfall 2 and For Honor running on one of the most used GPUs on steam: Intel HD4600, and running on the most used CPUs on steam: Single/Dual Core 2,1ghz cpu. Go on.

You are contradicting your self. If most of the PC gamers use low end machines and they can run those AAA titles anyway by "adjusting sliders" like you said, so why aren´t those games populated?

Watch_Dogs 2: https://blog.ubi.com/watch-dogs-2-pc-specs-system-requirements-revealed/

Supported OS – (64-bit versions only)
Windows 7 SP1, Windows 8.1, Windows 10

Processor
Intel Core i5 2400S @ 2.5 GHz | AMD FX 6120 @ 3.5 GHz

RAM
6GB

Video Card
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 (2GB) | AMD Radeon HD 7870 (2GB) or better

Hard Disk Space
50 GB

Peripherals
Windows-compatible keyboard and mouse, Microsoft Xbox One Controller, Dual Shock 4 Controller

Multiplayer
256 Kbps or faster broadband connection

Mafia 3: https://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/555g85/mafia_iii_minimum_system_requirements_classy_af/

Battlefield 1: https://forums.battlefield.com/en-us/discussion/19282/battlefield-1-minimum-pc-requirements

OS: 64-bit Windows 7, Windows 8.1 and Windows 10
Processor (AMD): AMD FX-6350
Processor (Intel): Core i5 6600K
Memory: 8GB RAM
Graphics card (AMD): AMD Radeon HD 7850 2GB
Graphics card (NVIDIA): nVidia GeForce GTX 660 2GB
DirectX: 11.0 Compatible video card or equivalent
Online Connection Requirements: 512 KBPS or faster Internet connection
Hard-drive space: 10Gb

etc.

GTX 660, rings a bell don't it? Developers are targeting popular hardware as their minimum.

 

[Manu_PT]

ahah minimum requirements, I asked you to show me actual footage because Mafia 3 and Watch Dogs 2 can´t even run well on a GTX 1070

Simple fact they are comparing a FX6350 with a 6600k says enough about minimum requirements. For running Watch Dogs 2 with a gtx660 and a dual core you would be getting 30fps at 720p low details, that´s why this happens: http://steamcharts.com/app/447040

peak, 1000 players lol..... because most gamers don´t have hardware good enough... as I said

I think I can find 1000 console watch dogs 2 players in just my small city where I live. lol

 

[FordGT90Concept]

So? It's playable. For most people, that's enough.

I don't have Mafia 3 yet (because I bargain shop, backlog too long to pay full release price), I'll never buy Battlefield 1 because it doesn't interest me, and Watch_Dogs 2 is free to play which I haven't touched because those words scare me.

Watch_Dogs 2 is a uPlay title as far as I know. These are likely people that opt'd to play the game through Steam instead of uPlay.

 

[Manu_PT]

http://www.pcgamer.com/pc-gaming-market-worth-36-billion-in-2016/

"Once again, free-to-play leads the way." and "while the free-to-play and esports markets are expected to see continued healthy growth over the next three years, the "premium" PC games market is predicted to decline", where the facebook and f2p games lead the revenue numbers, AAA games decline.

 

[DRDNA]

Well in my opinion the loss of profits for Nvidia are in fact from the loss of the contract to make Gaming consoles GPU's then the news of AMD releasing an upcoming GPU that is rumored to be outstanding and the fact that they are about to release Ryzen which just adds gas to the fire as it will increase AMD profits . With all of this coming in for AMD it would only make sense that Nvidia be concerned....But I don't think gaming itself was the cause at all. Maybe the original author didn't really understand the scenario.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

http://www.pcgamer.com/pc-gaming-market-worth-36-billion-in-2016/

"Once again, free-to-play leads the way." and "while the free-to-play and esports markets are expected to see continued healthy growth over the next three years, the "premium" PC games market is predicted to decline", where the facebook and f2p games lead the revenue numbers, AAA games decline.

Crying shame, that. Guess I'll just go indie then.

Well in my opinion the loss of profits for Nvidia are in fact from the loss of the contract to make Gaming consoles GPU's then the news of AMD releasing an upcoming GPU that is rumored to be outstanding and the fact that they are about to release Ryzen which just adds gas to the fire as it will increase AMD profits . With all of this coming in for AMD it would only make sense that Nvidia be concerned....But I don't think gaming itself was the cause at all. Maybe the original author didn't really understand the scenario.

NVIDIA scored Nintendo Switch though. That said, it's a cheap chip compared to Xbox One and PlayStation 4.

 

[rtwjunkie]

http://www.pcgamer.com/pc-gaming-market-worth-36-billion-in-2016/

"Once again, free-to-play leads the way." and "while the free-to-play and esports markets are expected to see continued healthy growth over the next three years, the "premium" PC games market is predicted to decline", where the facebook and f2p games lead the revenue numbers, AAA games decline.

Because 7 guys and one woman whose main skill is writing articles are so in tune with actual business cycles of gaming. If they were that good, they'd get paid a lot more than PCG pays them. You are one of those that read too much into what you read, and don't think of your own conclusion based on the predominance of what you both see and read, aren't you?

You would burn down in your house in the middle of a firestorm while swearing the owner's manual that said your house was fireproof was correct.

 

[Vayra86]

http://www.pcgamer.com/pc-gaming-market-worth-36-billion-in-2016/

"Once again, free-to-play leads the way." and "while the free-to-play and esports markets are expected to see continued healthy growth over the next three years, the "premium" PC games market is predicted to decline", where the facebook and f2p games lead the revenue numbers, AAA games decline.

Since you're on that article, I'll quote another line from it.

"Premium game revenues on the PC hit $5.4 billion for the year, not too far off of the $6.6 billion earned across consoles. Overwatch led the way, earning $586 million, followed by CS:GO, Guild Wars 2, Minecraft, and Fallout 4. But the real money remains with free-to-play games: League of Legends once again tops that chart at $1.7 billion, followed by Dungeon Fighter Challenge, Crossfire, World of Tanks, and Dota 2, which brought in a relatively paltry $260 million. "

Two consoles (X1 + PS4) are required to top the sales revenue on PREMIUM games of the PC alone. How does that correlate with your Steam Survey now?

Could it be possible that the Steam Survey is really not worth anything when drawing conclusions on PC gaming? Could it??? Is it possible that the majority of ESPECIALLY triple A games are actually played outside of Steam, because people don't fancy stacking up two layers of DRM like Uplay / Origin + Steam? Boy... I don't know.

You really gotta let go of the tunnel vision buddy.

There is more though. The article also shines light on the relation between sales revenue and *actually played games*. Check this out:
"League of Legends once again tops that chart at $1.7 billion, followed by Dungeon Fighter Challenge, Crossfire, World of Tanks, and Dota 2, which brought in a relatively paltry $260 million. "

The top title of Steam Survey charts is only a sliver of the total revenue of F2P. Conclusion: there is no correlation between revenue and playtime.

Now for another source, to completely throw you off guard.

http://jonpeddie.com/publications/pc_gaming_hardware_market_report

Check that pie.

I'll leave you with one final thing to consider:
- the profit margin on PC gaming is lower than it is for the same game on a console
- consoles are a closely guarded ecosystem where ONE company has a 100% stake in its success, while every console game publisher is effectively also a stakeholder.

The reality is that good press on the success of consoles and the decline of PC gaming, is beneficial to the console ecosystems, while there is no single company behind PC gaming 'wagging the dog' in the media. This matters, as we've seen countless times in the past that news and media are far from neutral. Even game publishers would prefer you play their crappy triple A junk on a crappy console rather than they would have you play it on PC. It helps their profit margin and they won't have to worry as much about keysellers or piracy. Hell, they don't even have to consider DRM because Sony or MS builds the firmware.

On top of that, optimization for PC costs money too, but it simply still is a target audience they CANNOT ignore. Economy forces them to keep porting to PC, and they will only do this because the PC revenue is too important to lose. Based on last year, it represents more than 40% of the total revenue made on ANY multiplatform game. Another important question: why do you think the absolute AND relative number of console exclusives is so low compared to previous console generations? Yeah. That's right

 

[FordGT90Concept]

The reality is that good press on the success of consoles and the decline of PC gaming, is beneficial to the console ecosystems, while there is no single company behind PC gaming 'wagging the dog' in the media.

Remember back when the hack exposed the "hot coffee" scene in GTASA and politicians lost their minds in favor of censorship? That was the most recent time the gaming industry mobilized against Congress and mobilize it did. Those censorship ambitions literally stopped inside of a week. Rockstar, Electronic Arts, Vivendi, Ubisoft, Zenimax, Square Enix, Blizzard, and so on represent a multi-billion dollar industry that's bigger than TV, film, and music. Let that sink in for a bit. When the gaming industry mobilizes, they represent a bigger voice than the RIAA and MPAA combined. They're not really for a singular platform because they all are predominantly concerned about their own investments but when something threatens them all, watch out.

 

[rtwjunkie]

Since you're on that article, I'll quote another line from it.

"Premium game revenues on the PC hit $5.4 billion for the year, not too far off of the $6.6 billion earned across consoles.

Yeah, I mentioned that figure from that article, much like you did, since it is one of his sources, and both times he seemed less than impressed that PC and Console game income is nearly equal. Maybe your quote will be more effective.

 

[Vayra86]

Yeah, I mentioned that figure from that article, much like you did, since it is one of his sources, and both times he seemed less than impressed that PC and Console game income is nearly equal. Maybe your quote will be more effective.

It seems like @Manu_PT went from topic spamming to AWOL.

Typical !

 

[DEFEATEST]

LoL is people like you trying to make it seem as if people like me can't afford these things. You keep bending over, Intel & nVidia will keep feeding it to you.

Just so you know, I could buy both A4 & A8. At the same time. How does that change anything? Some peoples children.

There has never been a better time with more options for anyones budget to be a pc gamer. Heck you can find 22 inch monitors just sitting around these days as door stops. You don't have to buy the high end stuff but it is going to come out because peeps want the best and are willing to pay for it ( not me). And in the end the high end tech trickles down and makes the medium and low end all the better right? It's way easier and cheaper now to get into pc gaming.