I love the post, I am a fan of video games and I agree with you in many aspects, the videogame industry has been involved in selling and selling each year becoming the industry with the most money to win, but they do not reflect the most important thing. videogame? much of the current video games are for more say cheap game with boring stories and nothing innovative, the worst of all is that they are only interested in graphics and improve the visual section.
As for the FPS if you want to play with better graphics and details at a higher FPS rate you must have a powerful PC; a 7700k i7 with a gtx 1080ti and SSD, and they are a few thousand dollars for many gamers the consoles are economically a viable option since they play at 30 fps at a resolution and the cost difference is impressive, it is there where AMD Console processor leads the way for its quality at low cost. Imagine a console with a powerful intel and a 1080ti video card ?? is also the question of how much do players want to pay for a console? I think AMD is slowly learning from its mistakes and it's going to bring us fantastic things.
In the section of video games I did not like the comparison of Assassin's Creed Unity and Sindicate since Ubisoft always has problems with the performances of video games in a few words many bugs, I play (Rainbow Six, The DIvision and wildlands) which I have always had Performance problems on PC. And that without saying that Assassin's has lost the charm with which he began that bright and beloved saga. Videogames with good performance in recent years; GTA V, Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain, Overwatch.
There are actually quite a few innovative games this generation with brilliant storytelling. But yes, there's very little advancement in gameplay or immersion.
You really don't need a GTX 1080 Ti. It depends on your screen resolution, firstly. A vast majority still game at 1920x1080. All you need to get to 60 fps on that is a RX 570 or GTX 1060. While the miners have ruined the markets temporarily, RX 570 is a $180 graphics card. CPU - Ryzen 3 or Core i3 is good enough - $120 or so each. So it's actually possible to build a $500 PC for 1080p 60 fps gaming. For 1440p, a GTX 1070 or RX Vega 56 is quite good enough. It's only for 4K and high frame rate gaming and all settings maxed out where a GTX 1080 Ti becomes necessary, but that's pretty much an extremely niche thing at this point. With Vega 56 (which I use) even 4K on a Freesync monitor is achievable with minor tweaks to settings which you'll never notice.
Sure, Ubisoft has had a reputation for buggy games, but it's a fair comparison for frame rates. Unity runs like shit. Syndicate is not perfect, but it mostly holds 30 fps at least.
You're right the miners unfortunately ruined the video card market, especially for those who are fans of AMD and buy their cards. You're also right if you can build a low-cost PC but not for any game, and the question would be how long would be your life, although the video game industry is advancing by leaps and bounds especially the video cards that are increasingly more powerful. A friend has an i7 7700k and 2 gtx Gygabyte 1080 sli which played Wildlands ran at about 100 fps on his 144 Hrz monitor and in many cases playing in very high details it would freeze for seconds, as the vegetation caused something in the video card and made it freeze a little, if you deactivated a video card the rate of fps stayed the same and the same thing happened. It is one thing that I have always criticized in the video card industry, in commercials they place 4 cards in sli or 2 in sli but in practice it is totally different since in many cases it is null, since videogames have not yet they are adapted for Sli and in many cases it is something that fools the novice gamers (which always prefer a console since you only place the game and play has been said.) In my case I am a PC gamer and it is the maximum.
I was reading the PUBG and this is shameful, as much as possible to fix it with an update that lowers visual quality to the game.
A pleasure to talk with you, my friend, write about the new technologies of VR in videogames I would like to read it. A hug
There was a time when SLI and Crossfire were doing pretty well, but with the new generation games support for those is often off the cards. With DX12 and Vulkan, the onus is on the game developer rather than GPU manufacturer (AMD/Nvidia) to build mGPU support. So far, few have bothered. So, currently, it makes no sense to get 2 GPUs, unless you play only a few games over and over again and sure they have support.
Very true, every year the GPU industry presents something much better, I would like that on the part of AMD improve your CPU and that the fight with Intel is better.
The more competition the better the variety and the better prices.
Well said. I make due with a GTX 1060. However, it is an MSI with easy OC settings if I so choose. That being said. My PC started as a $500 build capable of playing most AAA games at 60+fps, and I've added to it over time. Changed from AMD to Intel CPU's for ease and stability, added an SSD for a few extra frames and added liquid cooling for stability over long time periods. I'd like to say I'm surprised that folks still buy into consoles, but the ease of use goes a long way I suppose.
The consoles will always be important for the videogame industry no matter how much we hate it, besides that it is an industry that gives a lot of money, I hate the exclusivity of videogames, the great part of those who do not have experience with the PC or who They do not know which hardware is better than another or they just do not know anything, it's much easier for them to choose a console where they just play.