ExtremeTech has an article out today on “How To Fix PC Gaming Once and for All” that caught my eye. I may not exactly be a fan of PC gaming as it stands now, and although the author makes a lot of valid points (fix piracy problem, more PC gaming companies should vocally advocate the platform, and stop being fanboys), one of his suggestions is simple ridiculous: “OEMs: Stop Using Intel Onboard Graphics.”

This isn’t the first time I’ve heard PC gaming advocates denounce Intel’s graphics chipsets. Truth be told, they are probably just about the worst chips for 3D games out there. But does that really mean there is no place in the PC market place for adequate 2D graphics chips?

This is asinine on so many levels that I don’t even know where to start, but I will anyway. First, it is ridiculous to think that even 10% of all PCs would get used for somewhat demanding 3D games if they had capable hardware. According to Gartner, by the end of this year the worldwide install base for PCs will 1.1 billion units. That would mean that at least one billion discreet graphics cards would have been sold to people/companies/organizations that they would never use.

If you account for the fact that a decent gaming graphics card costs at least $150 (probably $200 or more really) then that would be $150,000,000,000 (or more) that would have been wasted. To put that in perspective, that is $25 billion more than Microsoft, Apple, Google, Yahoo, nVidia, Intel, AMD, and Comcast combined made in the last six years! Or said another way, we could fuel 61 million cars in the U.S. for an entire year. Saying every computer should have a capable 3D gaming video card in it is as ridiculous as saying every TV needs to have an Xbox 360/PS3/Wii built-in; it is just rhetoric.

Here is the other major problem, a $150 video card won’t be able to play any current games in three years. How many people keep their computers for three years or longer (outside of our techie circle obviously)? My parents have had the same computer for four years, and they have no plans on getting a new one any time soon. My not-even-three-years-old computer and GPU are much nicer than anything my parents, or my brother, or any of my in-laws, etc, would ever buy and even my machine chokes on any game released in the last year.

What about the power consumption on discreet graphics chips? With laptops outselling desktops, and everyone becoming so concerned with being “green” these days, does it make sense to put a power hog GPU in every computer? I like having as much battery life as possible. I also like having a quiet computer (I bought a special passively cooled graphics card in fact). Having a dedicated GPU works against both of these factors.

If you really want to fix PC gaming it needs to become more approachable. Here are my tips.

• PC gaming needs a unified platform; think Games for Windows Live and Steam together on steroids, in an “open” and extensible way. It should manage patches for every game you have installed, know what the recommended drivers are, and even update all of them for you. It should have a unified messaging/communication system. It should have all of the copy-protection mechanisms built into it.Basically it should be kind of like what Xbox Live is for the Xbox plus additional hardware management functions. It should make the PC less of a moving target platform-wise.
• Developers should put more time into optimizing the performance of their games. It is ridiculous how developers constantly put the onus on the player to upgrade (to hardware that doesn’t even exist yet, yes I’m looking at you Crytek).Think of how much more raw power you need in a gaming PC versus an Xbox 360 to get comparable performance. On consoles the developers are forced to do more with less. They can do better on PCs than they have been doing.
• There needs to be more games to fill the gap between 3D games like Crysis/CoD4/UT3 and Freecell or flash games. Current Intel 3D hardware could probably keep pace this segment of games. The XNA Game Creators Club may be able to do the trick. After playing the demo of The Dishwasher: Dead Samuri, I’d bet a lot of “casual” gamers would be enticed to buy it for $10-$15; I’d probably pay $30 or more even. It is that fun/cool/fresh.

• Get OEMs to position PC gaming machines in a much less hardcore way. Right now you have XPS, Alienware, Falcon Northwest, etc, all trying to position themselves as the fastest things out there, like a Ferrari maybe. How many Ferrari’s do you see around town? Yeah, not many.

  If people could get a $500 computer that couldn’t play games, or you could get it slightly upgraded in a simple easy-to-understand gaming package for $150-$200 more, I think you’d see more people upgrade. Every “gaming” PC package should include an Xbox/Games for Windows controller as well. Outside of first-person-shooters, most people like a dedicated gaming controller more; especially in the less hardcore segments.