this post was submitted on 10 Mar 2024
92 points (80.7% liked)

Games

16728 readers
596 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Kinglink@lemmy.world 15 points 8 months ago (3 children)

Honestly... they don't. I think Microsoft will eventually go to a PC pre-built with a OS on it. "But isn't that a Console?" I mean I had an alpha, On my alpha I had a versions of windows that immediately booted into the Alpha program for ease of use. I stopped the alpha program and my wife uses it as a work computer (a weak one so she can pull up documents).

I don't see a future where Microsoft makes a different OS than Windows, makes a hardware setup that isn't off the shelve parts. MAYBE a specialized motherboard with a chip set. But ultimately, I think IF they make a "Console" it's going to be a Windows machine with set specs that don't change, and an OS that is just for gaming, maybe with some way to dockerize the software so you always get the same experience every time you run it.

Sony and Nintendo will keep making Consoles, for sure, but Microsoft has no benefit in making a console. And before someone says what I described is a console, Xbox can't play PC games, what I'm describing is a windows machine playing windows software. When you make Xbox software currently you make software that ONLY can run on an Xbox... but why? You already are making a Windows build so you can ship a Windows version, so why not only make the windows version and have your console just be a windows machine in an OS that will giver players a consistent experience.

[–] 4am@lemm.ee 8 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Not sure why the downvote, this is almost exactly my take as well. “Big Picture Mode” but for windows. Streaming apps and video management software for local titles. Desktop mode. Containers to run services for your household (like a NAS, or HomeAssistant).

Devs target Windows, and the specs of this media PC; no more need to make a special console version.

What can a console do that a PC doesn’t? Even the things that made the PS5 special when it came out can all be done by a PC now, which is way more useful in the home media center (and therefore can sell more than games).

[–] Kinglink@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I'm not even saying "Xbox is dead" I'm saying "Xbox won't run a unique OS". Even if there is a "Xbox approved version" it's just a game optimized for the specific hardware that the Xbox console will have (and maybe ship with a somewhat specialized container too). I doubt you'll see Steam on this hypothetical system, but it's still possible.

[–] femtech@midwest.social 1 points 8 months ago

I wonder if that would help or hurt the licensing for games. Like this is made for Xbox, but is not on PC, or it is on PC but only on epic store.

[–] Son_of_dad@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago (2 children)

How I wish for a gaming PC that can run games at console level and doesn't cost $2k. I hate PC gaming cause for the price it just doesn't make sense, just to make the graphics slightly better, I'm paying like triple the cost of a ps5 or Xbox. And then the games may or may not run well, run into issues. I will always prefer a console cause I can pop a game in and know it'll work.

If PC can do this, a baseline where I know my PC will run all the new games at a decent rate and I won't be outdated in a year, I'd go for PC.

[–] Dudewitbow@lemmy.zip 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

the reason it wont happen is because the components of a pc is a conglomerate of different companies selling parts for profit. virtually none of these companies can take a loss because they get 0 sales in the aftersales market, because PC isnt a closed garden where the company can arbitrarily sell you a service or subscription because you basically dont have a choice, else receive limited functionality (on a device that already on its own has limited functionality vs a pc)

for instance, its completely silly that console users have to PAY for a sub to get online service for paid games, invluding for games the console company doesnt even pay server hosting for.

[–] Kinglink@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

I bought a Alienware Alpha for around 500 bucks, it was a great investment and lasted me a decent amount of time.

Kind of sad that idea and the idea of a steambox died because it made it possible to have a great experience on a budge. STill my 1000 dollar computer is holding up after 8 years or so, I feel like people overvalue FPS performance to the point they over spend on PC hardware.

[–] Donjuanme@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I think they'll make a video game streaming machine.

[–] Kinglink@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago

That feels out of place. We already have those, any computer laptop phone and many tvs already do that. I don't see a reason for them to make their own device... After all Chromecasts and Fire sticks exist. But you might be right.