Changing fortunes for PC gaming..??

I did not say it was 200 mil strong. I do not even have an opinion how big it is. I only quoted studies, articles and Nvidia spokesperson. Which converged on 80-200 million.

You, on the other hand, quote only you own ideas of how many PCs there arn't. How many are there?

Still! The number of PCs is irrelivant. You can't prove how many gamers there are from it at all. There's no telling how many people have multiple machines, or how many people that own machines without any interest in games.

Even if it's just 80 million which you're now saying. Are you seriously saying we bought one game for every two and a half gamers?
 
@orderoftheflame

How many people have multiple or broke Xboxes, PS3. How many Xboxes are not used and gather dust in the atticks...

The number of PC/xboxes/ps3s IS VERY important because it give us an idea of what the user base is ,what the size of the market is, and IMPORTANTLY for this topic what is the conversion rate of number of customers into number of sales. If there are 3 million PC gamers then generating 14% of Crysis2 sales is not too bad when compared to 56% of 20 millions of xboxers. If there are 100 million PC users that generate 6% - than we have massive problem!
So user base is important.
 
@Orderoftheflame

How many people have multiple or broke Xboxes, PS3. How many Xboxes are not used and gather dust in the atticks...

I didn't say that there weren't any. It's still an irrelivant number as it doesn't tell you how many users there are. I've had three Xbox 360s, two PS3s and access to half a dozen PCs that could be counted as "gaming capable" but I am still just one gamer. You'd be counting me multiple times.

The number of PC/xboxes/ps3s IS VERY important because it give us an idea of what the user base is ,what the size of the market is, and IMPORTANTLY for this topic what is the conversion rate of number of customers into number of sales. If there are 3 million PC gamers then generating 14% of Crysis2 sales is not too bad when compared to 56% of 20 millions of xboxers. If there are 100 million PC users that generate 6% - than we have massive problem!
So user base is important.

User base is important. But hardware count is still meaningless to find that value out.

I posted a big list of questions that would create duplicates from basing the user count on the values and "statistics" that you've been quoting.

How many of the people buying a PC already had one and were already gamers?
How many people buying a card were just upgrading a machine they already owned?
How many people bought one or two cards more for SLI or crossfire?
How many people bought a graphics card for modelling and graphics?
How many people bought a graphics card to run a second monitor?
How many people bought a PC with a graphics card with no intention of playing games whatsoever?
How many people own more than one machine anyway?

Can you seriously answer these questions, then tell me that you can take the number of PCs and cards sold and tell me how many PC gamers there are? Not a chance in hell I say. One "hardware" sale is not one user, for PC or console.

This is why Microsoft and Sony tend to quote active user accounts when saying how many users they have.
 
Last edited:
These sales are actually misleading as they don't include steam sales.

Getting true sales numbers for PC sales is extremely hard to do and thus it is always very hard to really know how the PC is doing comparatively.

I know, I do not like Vgchartz for that very reason. Chronictank dug out these charts, I 've only said that they are not painting a rosy picture after all.

The best/easiest source of accurate sales figures for PC is the game devs/publishers themselves. They collate all the numerous distributors and tell their overall profits.
I found such numbers for MW3 (54% Xbox, 40% PS3, 6% PC) and Crysis2 (14% PC, the rest consoles) - these are accurate and include ALL forms of distribution -digital, retail, ASDA, steam, yuplay- everything.
 
Last edited:
User base is important. But hardware count is still meaningless to find that value out.

I posted a big list of questions that would create duplicates from basing the user count on the values and "statistics" that you've been quoting.

Can you seriously answer these questions, then tell me that you can take the number of PCs and cards sold and tell me how many PC gamers there are? Not a chance in hell I say. One "hardware" sale is not one user, for PC or console.

This is why Microsoft and Sony tend to quote active user accounts when saying how many users they have.

Let me answer with a quote from an article on the subject:

PC vs. Console Install Base

Estimates of the total number of gaming consoles sold to date worldwide can be gathered from a range places including VGChartz, Wikipedia articles, NPD, as well as by those who compile their own data from various sources. Taking all these into consideration, the breakdown of 'next-gen' gaming consoles sold to date around the world is approximately:

Wii: 36 million
XBox 360: 23 million
PlayStation 3: 17 million

That's a total of around 76 million 'next-gen' consoles currently in use globally.

In the other corner, while the total number of PCs can only be approximated, Gartner Inc. places the figure at just over 1 billion PCs currently in use globally.

In both cases, it is recognized that the figures are not completely accurate, but they provide a very clear sense of the relative proportions of the install base of PCs vs. consoles - the ratio is at least 10:1 in favor of PCs. However to truly compare PCs to consoles, we need an indication of what proportion of the PCs would have sufficient graphics power to run the latest games.

Publicly available data from reports by Jon Peddie Research published in articles such as this one and this one provides us with sufficient information to deduce that sales of add-in graphics cards made by Nvidia and ATI total around 20-24 million units per quarter in 2008. Extrapolating the quarterly figure to an annual one equates to roughly 80-100 million graphics cards sold each year. This is the figure for only one year of sales, so it's a very conservative estimate of the base number of PCs with modern graphics cards. Of course some of these cards will be low-end, however since the data pertains to add-in graphics cards sold by Nvidia and ATI in the past year, not onboard graphics solutions such as Intel chipsets, then virtually all of them would be capable of some level of gaming. For example even low-end and two year-old cards can pump out over 30FPS or more in Call of Duty 4. Furthermore, since even cards released two years ago, such as the 8800GTS/GTX, can still game very effectively, it's still a low-end estimate of the total number of 'gaming' PCs in total. To add to the rough calculations above, this study claims that approximately 196 million gaming PCs were shipped between the third quarter of 2005 and the third quarter of 2008. One last piece of valuable information comes from Roy Taylor of Nvidia who recently stated that: "...there is a very large installed base of GeForce gamers. We estimate that we have over 180 million active GeForce users. That's a much bigger installed base than PS3 or Xbox 360."

In summary, looking at the data we wind up with what appear to be roughly equal proportions of machines capable of gaming in the console market vs. the PC gaming market: there are approximately 76 million or more 'next-gen' consoles currently in use around the world; and of the 1 billion PCs globally, we can state with a reasonable degree of confidence that at least 80 million, possibly as many as almost 200 million of them are capable of gaming with the latest titles. If we want to refine the figures down to which machines are capable of 'hardcore' gaming, then we can exclude the Wii from the console stats, bringing us down to 40 million consoles (XBox 360 and PS3); and even if we halve the number of PCs with add-in graphics cards to 40-100 million to account only for medium and high-end graphics cards, we still wind up with at least a 1:1 ratio in terms of the number of gaming consoles vs. the number of gaming PCs. What we can say with a high degree of certainty is that at no point does it look like gaming PCs are being outgunned in terms of sheer volume of console hardware by a 4:1, 5:1 or higher ratio as game sales ratios would suggest.

Very well reasoned, very in depth article, thoroughly recommend it (all of its 10 pages). Full of research data, and good arguments from people who base their opinions on good knowledge of this subject: http://www.tweakguides.com/Piracy_5.html
 
I know, I do not like Vgchartz for that very reason. Chronictank dug out these charts, I 've only said that they are not painting a rosy picture after all.

The best/easiest source of accurate sales figures for PC is the game devs/publishers themselves. They collate all the numerous distributors and tell and tell us their profits.
I found such numbers for MW3 (54% Xbox, 40% PS3, 6% PC) and Crysis2 (14% PC, the rest consoles) - these are accurate and include ALL forms of distribution -digital, retail, ASDA, steam, yuplay- everything.

Like I said before MW 3 is one of the worst comparisons you can level, it's just not a game that is even meant to appeal to PC gamers at all. However looking at Crysis 2 14% is far from a meaningless percentage and actually represents a figure that the developers should be more then satisfied with.

If PC sales carry on up in the same trends of late we should start to see 20% of sales start to come in.

Skyrim sold 500,000 on the PC in its first 2 days of sale, did it sell more on the consoles? Sure, but that large amount of sales made Bethesda sit up and really take note of the PC. A few patches soon followed plus the HD pack and development tools.
 
Let me answer with a quote from an article on the subject:



Very well reasoned, very in depth article, thoroughly recommend it (all of its 10 pages). Full of research data, and good arguments from people who base their opinions on good knowledge of this subject: http://www.tweakguides.com/Piracy_5.html

That's the same gumpf you've quoted parts of before. It still mentions nothing about user base, and answers none of the seven questions I put to you. You said yourself that it's user base thats the important factor.

How do you equate number of PCs/cards sold to number of actual single gamers with that data without falling foul of counting individuals three, four or more times? Answer that simple question and the others I posted without dodging them. If you can..

We know as a fact a console is bought to play games. You can't say that every "capable" PC is bought with gaming in mind. People don't all buy even high end PCs for gaming, so counting them as gamers to pad statistics is stupid.
 
Last edited:
Like I said before MW 3 is one of the worst comparisons you can level, it's just not a game that is even meant to appeal to PC gamers at all. However looking at Crysis 2 14% is far from a meaningless percentage and actually represents a figure that the developers should be more then satisfied with.

MW3 is a hugely popular game, so I dont know. Just because a person has bought a 8800gtx instead of an Xbox360, doesnt transform his taste to a different level. Are PC gamers some sort of elite? (I wouldnt play MW3 if they paid me, but it was one of the biggest selling games of all time let remember).

14% for Crysis - I do not think they were satisfied, and here awe are back to user base size again. If PC user base is bigger than Xbox's how can a developer be satisfied with 14% profit generated from PC compared to 50% on xbox? THe size of the difference is due to piracy, and people who own both gaming PC and an Xbox were more likely not to buy for any platform, so PC piracy would hurt Xbox sales as well...

Skyrim sold 500,000 on the PC in its first 2 days of sale, did it sell more on the consoles? Sure, but that large amount of sales made Bethesda sit up and really take note of the PC. A few patches soon followed plus the HD pack and development tools.

It'd be good to see the full numbers again, how they compare across formats.
 
MW3 is a hugely popular game, so I dont know. Just because a person has bought a 8800gtx instead of an Xbox360, doesnt transform his taste to a different level. Are PC gamers some sort of elite? (I wouldnt play MW3 if they paid me, but it was one of the biggest selling games of all time let remember).

14% for Crysis - I do not think they were satisfied, and here awe are back to user base size again. If PC user base is bigger than Xbox's how can a developer be satisfied with 14% profit generated from PC compared to 50% on xbox? THe size of the difference is due to piracy, and people who own both gaming PC and an Xbox were more likely not to buy for any platform, so PC piracy would hurt Xbox sales as well...



It'd be good to see the full numbers again, how they compare across formats.

Not gonna delve too far into MW3 other then to say its just a tired format badly implemented on the PC. Remember the CoD franchise is enjoying its heyday on consoles but the format it follows has been on the PC for a far longer time, it's badly optimized on the PC. More importantly PC gamers still feel betrayed by the lack of server support in MW2 and it gets constant bad press on PC media sites.

Year on year PC sales are increasing. Steam as a platform is getting stronger and stronger. It's pretty clear that for better or for worse steam is pretty much the sole reason for the turnaround in PC gaming, but it's hard to argue that PC as a platform isn't getting more popular.

I expect PC sales to continue to rise all the way up till the next xbox/ps consoles are released, then that is where PC gaming faces its next big test.

So has PC fortunes changed for the better? Yes.
 
That's the same gumpf you've quoted parts of before. It still mentions nothing about user base, and answers none of the seven questions I put to you. You said yourself that it's user base thats the important factor.


We know as a fact a console is bought to play games. You can't say that every "capable" PC is bought with gaming in mind. People don't all buy even high end PCs for gaming, so counting them as gamers to pad statistics is stupid.

I disagree that its "gumpf" - its qualified opinion based on market research and experts' knowledge. When random OCUK user states his opinion it is often based on his intuition that is supported by his own experience. When you read Nvidia guy say something, you can be sure that his opinion is based on more solid founding (and yes, he needs to press his case so he is biased, but he also cant come across foolish with some vastly outlandish crap- because he would just destroy PR of his company).

When market research is conducted, statistical techniques are used to make sense of distributions of people with say 40 gaming PCs in various palaces/mansions that they only visit once a year, and people who buy lowly nongaming Dell and stick a £100 Radeon/GeForce in there... Bell shaped curve - few people at both ends of spectrum -some buy HD7970 to draw architecture renders for work, some buy 580gtx to play online poker because they can afford it and "want the best". All of your questions/possibilities fit under that curve. But the height of the bell curve is representing people who buy gfx cards to game. Who own one card. Who are not rich. etc etc etc And then you just apply those found averages to the number of purchases and you get your numbers of gamers - numbers with some error margins (like this 80-200 million).
 
Last edited:
Not gonna delve too far into MW3 other then to say its just a tired format badly implemented on the PC. Remember the CoD franchise is enjoying its heyday on consoles but the format it follows has been on the PC for a far longer time, it's badly optimized on the PC. More importantly PC gamers still feel betrayed by the lack of server support in MW2 and it gets constant bad press on PC media sites.

Year on year PC sales are increasing. Steam as a platform is getting stronger and stronger. It's pretty clear that for better or for worse steam is pretty much the sole reason for the turnaround in PC gaming, but it's hard to argue that PC as a platform isn't getting more popular.

I expect PC sales to continue to rise all the way up till the next xbox/ps consoles are released, then that is where PC gaming faces its next big test.

So has PC fortunes changed for the better? Yes.

As I was replying to this thread, reading the replies, reading some more articles, data, etc I now understand that I WAS wrong to call Steam a non factor in combating Piracy/making PC gaimg good for developing for again. Steam is like Itunes, inst it- pirate MP3s are easy (dont even need cracked .dll) but people do pay for convenience if the price is not too high. SO steam (and other digital distributors) does work.

BUT

I still think that similarities with Itunes are not many- music does not cost tens of millions to make. Tracks/albums do not cost £30 on release day. Much better DRM is unavoidably necessary, so that Steam's convenience would be multiplied by pirating inconvenience.
 
Last edited:
I disagree that its "gumpf" - its qualified opinion based on market research and experts' knowledge. When random OCUK user states his opinion it is often based on his intuition that is supported by his own experience. When you read Nvidia guy say something, you can be sure that his opinion is based on more solid founding.

When market research is conducted, statistical techniques are used to make sense of distributions of people with say 40 gaming PCs in his various palaces that he only visits once a year, and people who buy lowly nongaming Dell and stick a £100 Radeon/GeForce in there... Bell shaped curve - few people at both ends of spectrum -some buy HD7970 to draw architecture renders for work, some buy 580gtx to play online poker because they can afford it and "want the best". All of your questions/possibilities fit under that curve. But the height of the bell curve is representing people who buy gfx cards to game. Who own one card. Who are not rich. etc etc etc And then you just apply those found averages to the number of purchases and you get your numbers of gamers - numbers with some error margins (like this 80-200 million).

You've still dodged the questions with a non-sensical statement. Presumably because your article doesn't address them..

The article you quoted states that it's 80-200m machines, not users. So it doesn't take those points into account does it? It's not even mentioning users, just gaming capable hardware. That leap from machines to individual users is only being added by you.

You're still not grasping the simple fact that the number of gamers is less than the number of capable machines. It is not a 1:1 ratio, you must surely realise that millions and millions of these "capable" machines are not bought with gaming in mind.

The average can only go down with people contributing multiple times and machines not being used for games. You can't have gamers without a PC reversing the trend and bringing the number back up...

Tbh I give up. You're so stuck on that one article you've read that you're dodging any thing contrary and failing to grasp simple logical concepts. Fine, whatever. There's 200 million gamers on 200 million machines buying 0.1 games a year and pirating the rest.
 
Last edited:
Not gonna delve too far into MW3 other then to say its just a tired format badly implemented on the PC. Remember the CoD franchise is enjoying its heyday on consoles but the format it follows has been on the PC for a far longer time, it's badly optimized on the PC. More importantly PC gamers still feel betrayed by the lack of server support in MW2 and it gets constant bad press on PC media sites.

Year on year PC sales are increasing. Steam as a platform is getting stronger and stronger. It's pretty clear that for better or for worse steam is pretty much the sole reason for the turnaround in PC gaming, but it's hard to argue that PC as a platform isn't getting more popular.

I expect PC sales to continue to rise all the way up till the next xbox/ps consoles are released, then that is where PC gaming faces its next big test.

So has PC fortunes changed for the better? Yes.

I'd argue that it could potentially get weaker with EA restricting games from it, which will only increase further.
EA, as much as I hate them, are a massive player.
Although, can't really say how that's going to go yet, they allow kingdoms, but restricted ME3 etc.

EDIT : Borsch is a troll, no one can be that....... Stupid?
 
Last edited:
You've still dodged the questions with a non-sensical statement. Presumably because your article doesn't address them..

The article you quoted states that it's 80-200m machines, not users. So it doesn't take those points into account does it? It's not even mentioning users, just gaming capable hardware. That leap from machines to individual users is only being added by you.

You're still not grasping the simple fact that the number of gamers is less than the number of capable machines. It is not a 1:1 ratio, you must surely realise that millions and millions of these "capable" machines are not bought with gaming in mind.

The average can only go down with people contributing multiple times and machines not being used for games. You can't have gamers without a PC reversing the trend and bringing the number back up...

Tbh I give up. You're so stuck on that one article you've read that you're dodging any thing contrary and failing to grasp simple logical concepts. Fine, whatever. There's 200 million gamers on 200 million machines buying 0.1 games a year and pirating the rest.

THe article talks about consoles and PC in the same vein - machines. The ratio of machines to persons is not defined for any of them. BUT. It talks of "user base"- are those users not persons, but machines? Nvidia statement about "active geforce users"- machines?

I tell you that statistics takes care of this ratio, because median gfx card buying PERSON is not rich, does not buy top of the line, has one card etc. People buy 80-100 million gfx cards EACH year. Median will use them for gaming, very small outliers use them for work. Median people buy ONE card for its prime purpose - Which means the average user base will not adjust all the way down to being less than both consoles MACHINE park (40mill).

How is buying a separate video card like 8800gt and not gaming on it is different from buying an PS3 and not gaming on it? If there is no difference, then the adjustment of machine:user ratio is symmetric.

Meanwhile games sales suggests that PC gamers are several times smaller in number than console gamers, which is strictly not true.
 
Last edited:
I'd argue that it could potentially get weaker with EA restricting games from it, which will only increase further.
EA, as much as I hate them, are a massive player.
Although, can't really say how that's going to go yet, they allow kingdoms, but restricted ME3 etc.

i wouldnt be surprised if they allowed steam to sell ME3 at a later date...they probably just want to give origin exclusivity to force people to create origin accounts.


and yes he is
 
Back
Top Bottom