Gaming hardware, software spending falls again as consumers wait for next-gen consoles

[midian182]

In a nutshell: It’s been another depressing month for the video games industry, with spending across hardware, software, and accessories all down by double digits compared to the same period one year ago. As has been the case for a while, consumers are holding back their spending in anticipation of the PS5 and Xbox Series X.

According to industry-tracking firm the NPD group, total video game sales for February 2020 totaled $755 million, a 29 percent year-on-year decline. Hardware saw the most significant percentage change, down 34 percent from $277 million to $183 million, while software was down from $477 million to $307 million (31 percent). Accessories and game cards, meanwhile, fell 11 percent from $308 million to $265 million.

Last month was a quiet one when it came to new game releases, with February’s most popular new title—The Yakuza Remastered Collection—only managing to place 33rd on the best-seller list. The dry spell was in contrast to February 2019, which saw Anthem, Far Cry: New Dawn, Metro: Exodus, and Jump Force all launch.

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare remains the best-selling game for another month. It’s also the best-selling game over the 12-month period ending February. We saw Tom Clancy’s The Division 2 return to the charts at number five, thanks to its recent promotion that dropped the price down to $2.99. Nintendo’s Ring Fit Adventure was up one place, and it could quickly rise higher after reports of it selling out as people avoid gyms and outdoor exercise during the coronavirus outbreak.

While sales of the PS4 and Xbox One consoles continue to fall as their successors get closer, the Nintendo Switch beat the older competition in terms of both units sold and dollar sales. “And [it] remains the best-selling hardware platform of the year.” Said NPD analyst Mat Piscatella, via VentureBeat.

Top 20 games from February based on dollar sales:

1. Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2019

2. NBA 2K20

3. Grand Theft Auto V

4 .Dragon Ball Z: Kakarot

5. Tom Clancy’s The Division 2

6. Mario Kart 8*

7. Ring Fit Adventure

8. Madden NFL 20

9. Super Smash Bros. Ultimate*

10. Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order

11. Minecraft#

12. Luigi’s Mansion 3*

13. Red Dead Redemption II

14. The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild*

15. Pokemon Sword*

16. Just Dance 2020

17. FIFA 20

18. Tom Clancy’s Rainbow Six: Siege

19. Need for Speed: Heat

20. New Super Mario Bros. U Deluxe*

* Digital sales not included
^ Steam sales not included
# Minecraft digital sales on Xbox and PlayStation included

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/84387-gaming-hardware-software-spending-falls-again-consumers-wait.html

 

[Gotit4cheap16]

I cant wait for the next gen systems. I haven't bought or played a current gym system at all. I still have my playstation 2. I just wasn't impressed by the current gen anything.

 

[Squid Surprise]

I love how the writer jumps to the conclusion that sales are down because people are "waiting for next-gen hardware"...

Perhaps they are down because hardware sales ALWAYS GO DOWN as the years go by? There are only a certain amount of people who are going to buy a PlayStation / XBOX...

After the first 3-5 years of ANY console, sales will always drop. Yes, part of the reason is that there is a new console... but another part is simply that the market gets saturated as almost everyone who wants a console HAS a console...

 

[pcnthuziast]

I won't be upgrading my pc until the quarter after the quarter when the console is released.

 

[QuantumPhysics]

I saw nothing in the last gen or from the next gen that remotely compares to what you get out of a $800-$1500 gaming computer.

All I’m hearing is big promises about sub-2080Ti power

 

[Irata]

It does make sense to not purchase a current console unless it‘s one of those 150 or less bundles that still offer good value for money.

Other than that, why spend 300-400 on a console now when you can get something much better for only a little more in a few months?

 

[pencea]

I saw nothing in the last gen or from the next gen that remotely compares to what you get out of a $800-$1500 gaming computer.

All I’m hearing is big promises about sub-2080Ti power

Mate give it a rest. You've been dissing consoles in almost every articles.

8 cores Zen 2 processors, 16GB or possibly more DDR 4 ram, Very fast SSD solution, GPU with 13 teraflops give or take. Sure it's no high end but I'd say that compares very well to a lot of gaming PC.

 

[Irata]

Mate give it a rest. You've been dissing consoles in almost every articles.

8 cores Zen 2 processors, 16GB or possibly more DDR 4 ram, Very fast SSD solution, GPU with 13 teraflops give or take. Sure it's no high end but I'd say that compares very well to a lot of gaming PC.

And for a lot less.

If you look at consoles even now, they all still compare very favorably to a PC in terms of value for money.

That whole discussion is a bit like saying „Hey, my new Ferrari kicks a Supra‘s butt“.

 

[mattferg]

I love how the writer jumps to the conclusion that sales are down because people are "waiting for next-gen hardware"...

Perhaps they are down because hardware sales ALWAYS GO DOWN as the years go by? There are only a certain amount of people who are going to buy a PlayStation / XBOX...

After the first 3-5 years of ANY console, sales will always drop. Yes, part of the reason is that there is a new console... but another part is simply that the market gets saturated as almost everyone who wants a console HAS a console...

Software sales, buddy.

 

[mattferg]

I saw nothing in the last gen or from the next gen that remotely compares to what you get out of a $800-$1500 gaming computer.

All I’m hearing is big promises about sub-2080Ti power

I saw nothing in the last gen or from the next gen that remotely compares to what you get out of a $800-$1500 gaming computer.

All I’m hearing is big promises about sub-2080Ti power

I saw nothing in the last gen or from the next gen that remotely compares to what you get out of a $800-$1500 gaming computer.

All I’m hearing is big promises about sub-2080Ti power

Obviously, because the next gen systems are $400-500... and easily beat PCs costing that much... and probably PCs at $800 too.

 

[Squid Surprise]

Obviously, because the next gen systems are $400-500... and easily beat PCs costing that much... and probably PCs at $800 too.

Next gen hardware is $400-500? You got a source for that?
And if you build properly, you can almost always build a PC with better specs for the same price as a console... the difference is the software is designed specifically for the consoles...

Software sales, buddy.

How is that relevant to what I posted?

 

[Irata]

Next gen hardware is $400-500? You got a source for that?
And if you build properly, you can almost always build a PC with better specs for the same price as a console... the difference is the software is designed specifically for the consoles...

Imho, the point is more gaming performance. If this is due to optimizations does not really matter.

If the next gen consoles are in the 500-600 range (or even if they cost a bit more), there is no way you can build something even remotely close for the same price.

Even with the current gen, a PC for the same price does not allow you the same gaming experience as a console. I‘d say for the same price you get no meaningful gaming experience at all.

As an example, my XBox one S was purchased for 160ish including a contoller and a game two years ago. Games like SW Battlefront play and look very nicely at full hd. Same for other titles. Curious what a complete PC for that price would allow.

 

[Squid Surprise]

Imho, the point is more gaming performance. If this is due to optimizations does not really matter.

If the next gen consoles are in the 500-600 range (or even if they cost a bit more), there is no way you can build something even remotely close for the same price.

Even with the current gen, a PC for the same price does not allow you the same gaming experience as a console. I‘d say for the same price you get no meaningful gaming experience at all.

As an example, my XBox one S was purchased for 160ish including a contoller and a game two years ago. Games like SW Battlefront play and look very nicely at full hd. Same for other titles. Curious what a complete PC for that price would allow.

Actually, you can... this is a couple years old already... https://www.techspot.com/guides/buying/page2.html
but that gives you a $400 build (would be far cheaper now) that is just as powerful as a PS4....

 

[Irata]

Actually, you can... this is a couple years old already... https://www.techspot.com/guides/buying/page2.html
but that gives you a $400 build (would be far cheaper now) that is just as powerful as a PS4....

I don‘t really care about „as powerful“ (in terms of spec sheet numbers) but the actual gaming experience.

To add: the price neither includes keyboard or mouse or even a controller, OS is not included either. Even if you get those for cheap, it still adds to the total price. All of this is only an option if you can / want to build your own PC. That‘s not an option for most consumers. They want plug and play.

319 USD gets you a PS4 pro with all the cables and a controller at Walmart right now. You hook this up to the large TV that most people already have anyhow.

I did build a PC recently but about two years ago I faced the same dilemma: Kid wanted to play AAA games and my Bulldozer based office type PC could not cut it. It was fine for Fortnite and similar lighter games after adding a 100 dGPU but the 160 XBox one S that also serves as a media / blu ray player offers a much better gaming experience imho.

 

[neeyik]

Actually, you can... this is a couple years old already... https://www.techspot.com/guides/buying/page2.html
but that gives you a $400 build (would be far cheaper now) that is just as powerful as a PS4....

CPU-wise, certainly, but it's not so clear cut GPU-wise - while the 2200G does use GCN 5.0 as the GPU architecture, it only has 512 shader units, 32 TMUs, and just 8 ROPS; the GCN 2.0 powered PS4 GPU offers 1152 shader units, 72 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. It's definitely a much older GPU design but it's fundamental capabilities are surprisingly high for something that's over 7 years old.

The 2200G's GPU is also restricted by having to use system memory. The same is true for PS4 GPU, but that interface is GDDR5 256-bit wide running at 1375 MHz, giving a peak bandwidth of 176 GB/s - to get that same level of throughput, you'd need to be running dual channel DDR4 running at 11 GHz; the best DDR4 you can get right now is something like 5 GHz.

Like-for-like comparisons between PCs and consoles is full of variables that are, at best, uncontrollable, or more usually, just unknown. One can take the same game and test it across multiple platforms, tweaking the PC's graphics settings until it 'looks' the same as that on the console, but unless the developers have explicitly stated all of the rendering changes done between the platform versions, one cannot determine what workload the system is actually doing.

 

[Squid Surprise]

CPU-wise, certainly, but it's not so clear cut GPU-wise - while the 2200G does use GCN 5.0 as the GPU architecture, it only has 512 shader units, 32 TMUs, and just 8 ROPS; the GCN 2.0 powered PS4 GPU offers 1152 shader units, 72 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. It's definitely a much older GPU design but it's fundamental capabilities are surprisingly high for something that's over 7 years old.

The 2200G's GPU is also restricted by having to use system memory. The same is true for PS4 GPU, but that interface is GDDR5 256-bit wide running at 1375 MHz, giving a peak bandwidth of 176 GB/s - to get that same level of throughput, you'd need to be running dual channel DDR4 running at 11 GHz; the best DDR4 you can get right now is something like 5 GHz.

Like-for-like comparisons between PCs and consoles is full of variables that are, at best, uncontrollable, or more usually, just unknown. One can take the same game and test it across multiple platforms, tweaking the PC's graphics settings until it 'looks' the same as that on the console, but unless the developers have explicitly stated all of the rendering changes done between the platform versions, one cannot determine what workload the system is actually doing.

Nice reply - but it was just an example (and 2 years old).... you can get the AMD 3200g (Faster and a better GPU) for the same price now... and 16GB of faster DDR4 RAM as well... and a better SSD....

I’m not arguing that a console isn’t better for certain people - those who don’t build their own PCs for one! - but to say that consoles are the best choice for budget gamers simply isn’t true.

 

[CharmsD]

Nice reply - but it was just an example (and 2 years old).... you can get the AMD 3200g (Faster and a better GPU) for the same price now... and 16GB of faster DDR4 RAM as well... and a better SSD....

I’m not arguing that a console isn’t better for certain people - those who don’t build their own PCs for one! - but to say that consoles are the best choice for budget gamers simply isn’t true.

Blanket statements rarely hold up to minimal scrutiny; "most people like x" statements should (probably) be disregarded.

The costs for the components listed aren't lower, the items I checked are higher than the Techspot price. And that system is a dog, sporting a Ryzen 3 four core with Radeon Vega 8 graphics, it's a turd for gaming wrapped inside a pretty box. PC's with the performance for gaming are $1100+ (easily rising to $1500).

At the current date I think Techspot should slide the "recommended" gaming CPU to a Ryzen 7, paired with nothing less than a 1070.

Budget :gamers:? It's better to stick with consoles, gaming PC's Performance = $$$.

TechSpot PC Buying Guide: Early 2024

For gamers and mainstream users, it's a great time to build a PC. The TechSpot PC Buying Guide includes four builds for different budgets and purposes.

www.techspot.com

 

[neeyik]

Nice reply - but it was just an example (and 2 years old).... you can get the AMD 3200g (Faster and a better GPU) for the same price now... and 16GB of faster DDR4 RAM as well... and a better SSD....

I’m not arguing that a console isn’t better for certain people - those who don’t build their own PCs for one! - but to say that consoles are the best choice for budget gamers simply isn’t true.

It's the 2400G/3400G APUs that have the better GPU - a Radeon Vega 11, which is only a little better than the Vega 8: 702 shaders, 44 TMUs, 8 ROPs.

One can certainly build a pretty capable PC for less than $500 (minus OS and monitor), and it might hold up against the likes of a PS4 or better it, depending on the game being played. However, the PS4 is 7 years old, and we're talking about PC components (and prices) of today - a fairer reference point would be the PS4 Pro, as it is only 3.5 years old and no integrated GPU is going to match that console's graphics processor (2304 shader units, 144 TMUs, 64 ROPs, 218 GB/s bandwidth).

At the time of their launch, and to within a few years of that period, $500 consoles will certainly outperform a $500 PC in games of the same time. The hardware in consoles dates quickly but they're kept relatively competitive through the improvements that the development kits receive on a regular basis. Of course, a $500 PC is going to be far more flexible that a $500 console, and easier to upgrade.

If one is truly a budget gamer, surely the recommendation shouldn't be 'build a cheap PC' nor 'buy the latest console' - it would be to purchase the last, or older, generation console. Here in the UK, one can get a standard PS4 Slim for £250.