Wednesday, July 26, 2006

AMD/ATI Merger

While browsing BetaNews the other day, I saw the announcement of the merger of ATI Technologies and AMD. First impression: very interesting... and probably good for gamers and future gamers, in the long run.

Of course, the announcement says little about the company's long- or even mid-term strategies for providing compelling solutions to the PC gaming and general PC-using population. However, I think the possibilities are interesting. The merger certainly brings to mind thoughts of the "shuttle" computers of the near future -- now at bargain prices?

I also think it's interesting to hear official word of combining graphics back into the CPU system at a time when physics accelerators are starting to get serious consideration and (some) marketing. Many gamers may breathe a sign of relief at knowing that they won't necessarily have to juggle two extra cards in their systems just to play the modern marvels of gaming that come across their fancy.

Sure, it may seem worrisome that yet again large, games-related companies are merging, but given the circumstances and who the two companies are, it seems much more like a match made in heaven than an omen of darks times to come. Both companies have a lot of experiences fighting to gain recognition at times when their primary competitors are almost completely dominant of a market. Both companies have also shown that, by and large, they can produce some seriously well-designed hardware that can often offer a better "bang for your buck" than their competitors.

I know that some have been quick to express distress with the idea (presumption?) that the new, larger company would only offer their products along with one another. I don't think this will be the case, however. Both companies have always known well that their customers tend to prefer to design their own custom creations. Gamers desire choice and flexible pricing options keeps the upgrade market lubricated and constantly moving. Of course, they will try to make their joint systems look so lovely that we simply can't resist, but I think they'll realize that it's too risky to bet the whole company on completely replacing all the options that their competitors will offer.

Finally, this merger makes me once again reconsider the future of technological advancement for PC games. We all know that pure graphical improvements are no longer enough to captivate players, and many are beginning to speculate on what the next big advancements will be, with physics and AI as the most obvious candidates. A coworker of mine commented, upon hearing the news of this merger, that the joint systems won't make sense because PC gamers tend to upgrade their graphics cards much more often than their CPUs. While this has roughly been the case in the past 7-8 years, I'm not so sure it will continue to be the case. If AI and physics (both non-GPU-intensive aspects of PC game processing) are the waves of the future, it would seem that simply buying a new video card is unlikely to the focus of gamers' upgrading strategies. Perhaps, then, the new ATI+AMD offerings will be able to find the perfect balance of graphics processing power and raw CPU power that game developers need to make their visions a reality in our computer rooms and bedrooms of the near future.

At any rate, I'll remain hopeful that this will help spell a future where a prospective PC gamer can purchase a suitable rig for an even lower price than they can today. It may be a key component to allowing the PC gaming scene to stay afloat with its own strong sense of identity and, of course, a fair market share.

2 comments:

David Ludwig said...

"I'll remain hopeful that this will help spell a future where a prospective PC gamer can purchase a suitable rig for an even lower price than they can today."

This statement confuses me a bit. Perhaps I'm missing something here. What do you mean by a "suitable rig"? Is there some genre of game that cannot be played on a machine costing more than, say, a few hundred dollars?

Darren Torpey said...

I'm not sure what you're asking. I made no statement about expensive machines not being able to play some games, as your question implies.

I'm saying that I'd like to see the cost of a "suitable" machine go down. By suitable I mean it will play games that are new but not necessarily bleeding-edge in terms of graphics. So for example, a machine that would play Half-Life 2 decently well and on which Sid Meier's Pirates!, Sim City 4, etc. would run very well.

Right now I think that machine would cost a bit too much for most people, although perhaps not if all that's needed is a graphics card update to their existing machine.

I guess the other thing I should mention is that one likely future for this kind of vision is a PC that is designed to be hooked up to your TV, so that you can play PC games (and play movies and surf the web, etc.) in any room of the house, easily.