Jonathan Blow's presentation

[Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) via Digitalmars-d]

On 05/09/2017 07:47 PM, Era Scarecrow wrote:
> since the console hardware
> is seriously behind PC hardware.

Side nitpick: Console hardware is behind *gaming-PC* hardware. Important 
distinction.

Heck, my most powerful PC is a little behind PS3 (in terms of game 
performance, anyway) and does everything I need it to do and then some 
(including the vast majority of indie games, which I usually prefer anyway).

And ok, yea, that's just my own stuff but still, take a look at the 
laptop market: For anything that *doesn't* have Intel graphics, you're 
looking at easily around double the price. You can get a quite good 
latptop for $400 or less. But want one with an ATI or NVIDIA (and not 
their budget "comparable with Intel Graphics" lines)? Then you're 
looking at around $1,000. But what good does that ATI or NVIDIA chipset 
do (over an Intel) for anything other than 3D modeling/animation and 
non-indie gaming? Nada (but maybe suck the battery dry).

You could say "yea, well, that's for laptops, any serious gamer's gonna 
want a desktop". But then again you'd simply be talking "gaming PC" 
again. And these days, how much point is there really in a desktop (as 
opposed to laptop) for non-gaming, non-3dsMax/Maya purposes? Minimal.

Point being: There's a big difference between "PC" and "gaming PC". In 
the context of AAA gaming, it tends to get falsely assumed that all PCs 
are gaming-PC spec. Not so. Console hardware is only behind "high-end" 
PC hardware (what I mean by "high-end" in that sentence isn't so much 
"top of the line" but simply "costs more than the highest-end console 
available").