Cloud gaming, like it or not, is the future.
The reason I didn't go anyway is because I don't think it's going to be the only thing in the future.
So I can't go that. But I also can't deny that it is rising rapidly in popularity.
I think we're going to have a hybrid market where the sounds mean to say, but the people who can't afford it will be doing cloud gaming.
And then the elitists who have all the money will be doing physical hardware gaming.
It sounds terrible to say it that way, and I hate wording it, but we've seen the trend already.
NVIDIA doesn't care about the poor people anymore. It's why they make $2,000 GPUs.
Yeah, I mean, I've got the same sort of sentiments, but I'm in the disagree because I think there's always going to be a future for physical in your hands gaming.
Whether that be a tower or a console or just a handheld.
Yeah, my thought is that I don't think that we're going to see cloud gaming in its current incarnation.
Sure. I think what we might be trending towards is the cloud gaming of like, play any game you want while you're online.
But you can also cash and download a couple of games to play locally, right?
That makes the device a lot more expensive again, though. But this is what I'm saying is I don't think that there's I think that the they're going to keep trying to chip away at ownership.
100 percent. Yes, subscriptions more regular, it's better, more beneficial.
But there's always going to be the need to be offline at some point.
Like bottled water exists, even though I can get water from the tap any day.
If the K shaped economy continues, will there even be a physical option like that for the lowest end of the economy?
Will they even bother making products for those people when it comes to games?
Or will they just focus all their effort on the high end?
Volume is still huge. That's why I'm still in the middle.
Like, I definitely don't think it's only going to be cloud gaming, but I definitely see the trend where it is kind of doing that.
And I'm not happy about it. And so I think it might eventually, but I don't I'm not certain.
I don't think you can be certain about it. There's been a return to lower spec gaming, though, too.
Over the last five years, especially some of the best games like Bellantra, one game of the year, didn't it?
Play the Spire has like 500,000 concurrent users and it's an early access.
You can play that on something from literally 15 years ago.
To be clear, I hope that we don't go the route of full subscription.
I want people like Intel to rise up on the lower end GPU and give people an option at entry level computers again.
Yeah, we need more stuff like ours. This is why people are on their phones. Phones are commodity almost.
They're you can get cheap games on them and you already have them. You can get online like that's going to be people's people's form.
But you're always going to need a need. There's a reason why people still buy decks of cards, mechanical keyboards, kind of overrated.
And I need to think without looking behind me at the people see where they're moving. So I'm not influenced.
I know. Yeah, kind of overrated.
I think that there are a lot of communities that overhype how great mechanical keyboards are.
However, almost every single time someone I know tries a mechanical keyboard for the first time, especially if it's a nice one.
They agree. It's awesome. The only reason I'm in the middle still is because it's is it like a more performant experience?
Not really. And I still like chiclet style keyboards for like, you know, whatever, they're totally fine.
So I'm in the middle. I don't know. I think they're great, but also I don't think they're overhyped.
The reason I went disagree was I don't think that they're overhyped, but I feel that the communities can push the expectations on spending too much on a mechanical keyboard too far.
Those keyboards that we recently got for the sets are great.
Those were ninety nine dollar keyboards, which when you're talking about a decent keyboard, it's not actually that much, but also like even then ninety nine dollars is a lot of money.
It is a lot of money for things that lots of people assume. I will 100% agree that if you're just trying to put keys into a terminal or whatever and you need it on like a server rack, you get your Logitech twenty dollar keyboard.
That's fine. But if you are living with it every day and using it every day, I take the mechanical keyboard.
Made me go this way was I tried to think of the difference of like a higher quality keyboard or mouse.
And ultimately, I think I'm like, if I had to, I could live with a garbage keyboard over a garbage mouse that has like poor tracking or something.
Right. And I think it's still worthwhile investment.
Like you mentioned, if you're going to be using it every single day, maybe spend the hundred bucks on a really nice keyboard for yourself.
But I don't know. I overrated for sure.
For me, it's just like, look at how many laptop keyboards are out there that aren't mechanical that are really good.
Yeah, I think it's a really a missing, like it's a missed opportunity in the desktop market.
Because if you want, there's like no good non-mechanical keyboards, like it's very hard to find like a good membrane style or chicken style keyboard.
Like the app, well, and that's pretty good because it's basically the one on their laptop.
But like, that's not really a thing in the window side. So mechanical keyboards make a ton of sense because that's where like doesn't take a lot of money anymore to get a nice mechanical keyboard.
But there's just like a lack of good membrane options. So I think that they're kind of overrated because like, I think a lot of people are used to just typing on a laptop.
But I think that like, I mean, I've built my own and I have two nice mechanical keyboards.
I have one at my work desk, one at home, and they are nicer.
They're nicer for sure. You know, I think is overrated. 8000 Hertz polling rights.
Oh, so sure. So true. The GTX 1080 is still a good gaming GPU.
Once a goat, always a goat. I think if you're talking modern gaming, yeah, it's showing its age, but there's more older games than modern games.
Sure. I think you got to define good is the problem.
Even like a few years ago, like three years ago, I would have agreed.
But I think that like at this point, I mean, does a 5050 beat a 1080?
I don't even know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know either.
But I bet you if it doesn't beat it, it comes really close. And then also going to be using so much more power.
And and the 5050 is going to include like modern DLSS and the ability to ray trace, whether it can do it or not, it can at least try.
He will probably still be twice the price, though. Then yeah, sure.
And the VRAM, if you really need those extra 1080 only is like eight gigs.
But I thought it was what was it? Or was it 10 or 10? T.I. T.I. had a lot.
Yeah. See, it's a regular 1080. It's not a.
I agree. 1080 T.I. Yes, I would change my tune.
I'd at least be neutral if not agree. But the 1080 itself is just it's really getting old now and it's starting to show.
It was starting to show its age a couple of years ago at this point. I mean, they dropped the driver support for a while ago now.
Yeah, it's also like all nine years old now. It's very old.
It's just getting old, but a goat is always a goat. Gretzky is not a bad hockey player.
OK, just maybe I guess now. So then he's put Michael Jordan on the court today.
See how good he is, I guess. Probably not very.
Yeah, just because you're good at something at some point in time doesn't mean you always stay good at something.
For forever, it's now I'll stay on my ground here. I think that there's still the option to play other games.
I know playing the modern games is cool and you should and it's fun.
But I think if what if it's what you have, that's fine, right?
There's nothing wrong with that. I'm so sorry that what happened to you that made it so that you could afford a 1080.
And no longer afford it now. That's a good point, actually.
But maybe you bought a second and 1080 like five years ago. That's the thing. That's fine.
I wouldn't go out now and buy a 1080. But if you had one or if you have one in your shelf and you're just like,
I want to make a media PC, I think it's still a goaded card. Is a media PC a gaming PC?
I think it's a specialized gaming GPU. You could probably play like overcooked and like couch games.
Sure. But then what happens when you want to play a newer game?
Well, just don't. Well, I know I hate that argument. Also, what if you have kids that just you hand them down the 1080?
That was once amazing. And they're like, but dad, my computer can't run this modern game with it.
Suck it up, child. Yeah, then you tell them about how hard it is to walk to school or whatever.
Yeah, from the media perspective as well.
Like just the HDMI version that goes out on the 1080 is not enough.
I didn't even think of HDMI. So even if you're going to take the streaming standpoint,
you're not going to get your 4K 120. I owe is a great point, David.
I hadn't even thought of that. Oh, you guys are slowly pulling me back that direction.
Nope. All right. Stay on my ground. A nice PC case is a worthwhile investment.
If I was like anywhere other than neutral, I'd be like, right here.
I'm really, really close. I just I think if you're at the point where you're needing to save money on every
build, the best investment is to just get a garbage case.
Like you don't need then you don't have to save money on the future builds. Like you.
Yeah, but a good PC case lasts a lot of forever. I totally agree forever.
That's like it's it's it's I've been burned.
By both, I've been burned by spending way too much on a PC case and I've been
spurned burned by spending not enough because when you buy, when you get a
crappy PC PC case, socks, you stop like, it's not ready to accept newer hardware.
Like it won't might not like back in the day. I bought a case that didn't have an SSD mount.
It only had three and a half inch mounting points.
What if there's not enough room for cable management? Which like isn't necessary, but building and that sucks when you're trying to
push the bulge. And I think with the amount of selection that we have in the modern day cases,
there are good and nice cases at pretty much every budget.
100% agree that you shouldn't while you can cut corners.
You don't have to. And I think that you will enjoy it in the long run, but I agree.
Like if I'm like trying to scrape under a budget, if there is a hard line that I
need to get at her, I don't think I'm going to be able to do that.
The case is the first thing that's going, but I think it is a worthwhile
investment, even if it might be the first thing to cut.
And I think that's why I'm so torn on moving that way is the moment you reach
a certain budget of building your first computer or something with a really nice
case, it absolutely is justified to go that way. If I'm just trying to get in a PC gaming to start out, you sort by price,
you sort by price, lowest price to get into gaming, maybe not even.
I'll build it on the motherboard box, like, you know, and keep it there.
But that's what I think. And at that point, I would rather build it without a case than by a cheap case.
And then I would rather buy a nicer case later. And to be clear, nice doesn't necessarily mean expensive.
Sure. Yeah, you can get a really good case for like $60 these days.
Yes, yes. There's some solid options around the 60 to $70.
Yeah. And like, really, you're that you're that broke that you can afford.
I mean, sure, some people, but like, if you're building a gaming PC for a thousand
dollars, you can't spend $60 on a case. If not, build it outside the case and then buy a $60 case later.
If not $100, if you want something nicer than that, because I think that's worth it, like rubber grommets are nice to have, like the cable routing.
Some come with fans, so you don't have to buy new fans for whatever.
People like RGB, whether you do or not. And like, that can make the big difference between looking at your
hunky pile of crap that's in the, you know, $30 case that sucks versus looking
at a sick, like, I don't know, like a Sama V2 or something. That's a $60 case.
It looks beautiful. It's like a good bed frame, right? Yeah. Everything between you and the ground is if it's like a good bed frame, maybe
it's the thing you cheap out on to so you can spend more money on a good mattress, but when you get the, when you have the money to get a good
bed frame or it's, it'll be worth it in the long run. A quality monitor is more important than a top tier GPU.
Can we change the question? Nope. That's the question.
Oh man, this sucks.
You don't need a quality monitor. I will, like, what if, what if, what if, what if I do need a top tier GPU?
Are you, what if I'm doing simulation work? I don't need a quality monitor.
If this was for gaming, if this is a top tier monitor is more important than a
top tier GPU for gaming GPUs over here. Sure.
If you said a quality monitor is more important than a quality GPU, I'm over here
still. Yeah. But the fact that this is like a, it's a different factor.
Yeah. I think this question sucks. I agree.
I do. My problem is, um, where is the line for quality monitor?
Because like even simulation work, would you want to do it on a 60 Hertz, 24
inch, 1080p panel? Like you could. Yeah. But do you, it's a simulation work.
It's running at like one frame a year. Man, but even like mousing, when you have to do stuff on a 60 Hertz monitor.
Oh my God. You're such a pain in the Donna. That's pretty spoiled.
Being a 60 Hertz like sucks. I don't know.
I'm thinking of gaming too. Not like work. I'm thinking of gaming, even just general media consumption.
Sure. If you're watching videos or anything like that, even if you don't go to the point
of having an HDR monitor, having something that has good color reproduction,
which you can get for like a couple hundred bucks now, your $200 monitor will
get you a decent panel that has sometimes a hundred Hertz.
My friend had a 40 70 TI and he was like, oh, I want to buy like a 50 90.
I was like, don't like you could, but don't buy a new monitor first because he
had some old VA panel. And I was like, get a new OLED for like a thousand dollars or less.
That's less than half the price of the 50 90 you want.
You're going to notice an immediate effect because you're not just going to see
number go up when you look at your frame rate counter. You're going to see the game literally look better.
I think the trouble I have with this question is I immediately think about a
lot of people in my life who overspec their monitors for their GPU.
And I think the word quality, you know, can range on what that means,
whether that's color accuracy, maybe it's the type of panel, whatever it may be.
But I know so many people that buy like a 4k something monitor.
And then they're like, why am I 40 70 struggles on AAA games?
And I'm like, why'd you buy a 4k monitor? But that's a resolution thing.
You can get a really good 1080p or 14 40p monitor. This is just people being stupid and buying a higher resolution
because of 4k marketing that's been happening for the last 10 years. And again, I think that's a whole other issue potentially.
But I think you can get a 4k monitor for 200 bucks, but it's not going to be good.
Totally. Yeah. I just think that like having a dope ass GPU on a dinky ass monitors,
you're having more fun than having a dinky ass GPU. Have the placebo of it looking better.
Yeah, I have a good GPU. I just think that like top top tier is doing a lot of heavy lifting.
I know it stops. That's why I say the question is like 50, 90, 40, 90.
Most people don't need them. But like, do they mean top tier is like if it's like the literal top price tier?
I mean, it's called top tier. Or do they mean like that's a bang up GPU? Like the 4070 was a good GPU.
That's a mid tier GPU. Shut the f**k up. Sorry. It's literally a mid tier price wise, but it's also just like
in the higher GPU. They go from 50, the numbers go from 50 to 90.
90, 70, 70 is in the middle. Top tier value. Removing the headphone jack from phones was a mistake.
My leg is pulling me this way. I have to.
It was not a mistake. It was a choice.
Okay. They did it intentionally to sell more wireless earbuds and screw over consumers.
How does the phone benefit from not having the headphone jack? They're still like the same size as they were before when they had headphone jacks.
They're still definitely room to put one in there. And it's cheap.
It's not an expensive component. And like you said, I had wired earbuds.
I can't use anymore. So now they're just a dead product sitting on.
They could generate any waste. I find the convenience of just having my Bluetooth, whatever it may be,
my AirPods, whatever. It's already paired and being like pop them in when I'm in the bus.
I don't need to untangle anything or plug it in. Like I like some of the convenience that comes with not having a headphone jack.
You had that with the headphone jack. There was always Bluetooth connectivity.
I totally agree with you on that. When I saw the headphone jack first being removed,
I was very hopeful that it was going to lead to,
Hey, there's a little bit more battery room that they can do. And they never ended up doing it.
No. So I think for this question, we're all in alignment,
but we're in disagreement on how the interpretation of the question is.
High quality TVs these days are wasted.
Now that so much of our content is streamed.
I only agree with this statement for the people that are buying a very high-end TV
and then only streaming Netflix or whatever on it.
I don't do that. I have a nice TV and I use my own Plex server with proper 4k stuff,
running at high bit rate and everything. With a cable. Yeah.
And it looks fantastic, but I do think that there are a lot of things that I don't want to do.
I don't want to do that. I'm running at high bit rate and everything. With a cable.
Yeah. And it looks fantastic, but I do think that there is a large number of people
who just buy the most expensive or like nicest, even just like, you know, a $2,000, $3,000, $60 inch Sony or something.
And then yeah, they just go watch like Netflix or YouTube videos on it or something.
Even cable. Yeah. Right.
Like there's just a mass amount of people that just get high quality, fancy TV because they want to watch their NFL game.
And then they watch it on cable. What's wrong with that?
That's like, what's wrong with watching on cable? Cable has an incredibly high resolution feed.
The quality that you can get over 4K digital cable is really good.
Yeah. Okay. Fair enough.
I'm thinking like satellite. Like cable. Maybe I'm outdated because maybe it's my parents because my parents like refuse.
Like I know a lot of people that still only pay for the 1080p cable.
I thought that you've got the 4K channel. You get the 4K no matter what.
It's been upgraded by the network. Okay. Then I'm going to talk to my parents after this because like you can,
I would say that like sports is the best reason to get a high quality TV for the average person.
Oh, I agree with that. And like the 4K networks, especially now that pretty much every sports network is going
to have a digital cable channel. Sometimes you only, people only pay for like baseline TSN,
but almost everyone's getting 4K included. And if you're watching it for sports, that actually makes a huge difference.
Streaming, I would also say that having a high quality TV means that you're more likely
to have better processing on that TV that's going to better handle the artifacts that
come from streaming and will in general make your stuff look better.
And when you're streaming at a high bandwidth, stuff looks really good these days.
Windows has crossed a line and become real adware.
I'm surprised I'm the only one in strongly agree.
This is where it gets weird because like do you count all the stuff that comes with Windows
or are you just talking about Windows as its own thing?
That's part of Windows. Like unless you jump through a bunch of hoops to do a low space install of Windows
with all that stuff ripped out, like, no, that's part of Windows.
Can we like time out and get like a definition of adware?
Sure. Something that will show me an ad at some point.
It doesn't have to be super... Bro, that's every... Well, yeah.
And I hate that almost everything is basically becoming adware in my opinion.
You can get the IoT version of Windows which does have that stripped out.
That's not what most people's experience is though.
It was very recently where I was reinstalling or I wasn't even doing a full reinstall.
I was just doing like a quick restore and it made me go through all this stupid telemetry stuff
where it's like, oh, do you want this? And to be clear, I see.
You convinced me. And like I am a big office user.
I pay for Office 365. I don't like that it's a subscription, but yeah, I pay for it.
I love Word and I love Outlook. I hate Gmail. Outlook is the superior product.
100%. It's annoying seeing ads for anything Microsoft related come up or...
Ads on your screen. Ads on your lock screen. Yeah.
Ads on your Windows search. Yeah. Ads on the side pane.
Yeah. Ads for like their software. Ads in edge.
Yeah. And it's only going to get worse. I have activated Windows.
I'm not saying I paid a full price for a key, but I have activated Windows.
At that point, I shouldn't get ads for things. I'm paying for Office.
And you think it's bad now? Wait until they start spying on you and they're always...
Wait until they start? Wow. Okay.
Yeah. But you know what I mean? What was the update called?
Recall. Yeah. Once recall.
Well, yeah. But once it's forced onto everyone and not just an option, look at how much you're going to get targeted ads for things just because you looked at this website for 20 seconds.
I mean, that already happens, but as soon as Windows can start doing it to me on top of
like whatever else I'm already looking at. Like, oh my God.
And it's... I don't know. It's already there and it's only going to get worse.
I don't know. I don't have any questions that are going to give us like happy answers. Yeah.
These are all depressed. Yeah. We're going to be like, yay.
16 by 9 is better for gaming than Ultra Wide.
It's only better for specific games, I think, like racing games.
I think Ultra Wide looks incredible, but for most games, man, 16 by 9 is just...
I don't need the Ultra Wide space. I don't want to be looking all the way when I'm looking for my tiny mini-map or something.
But you don't do that. You get a screen that's the right size with Retina and then you stay back so you can see
everything at once. So the issue I'd say is the reason why I wouldn't say it's better for gaming in general is just
that there's still a bit of a lack of support and poor implementation.
For example, a lot of times you want... If you have that extra field of view, a good implementation will bring that UI in to be
closer to the middle so that you can still see all your information while getting the
benefit and the immersion of having the periphery filled in.
But some stuff just doesn't translate well to Ultra Wide. Still.
You're an Ultra Wide gamer though, right? Yeah. No, I mean, I got...
I remember the first panel. It was 2560 by 1080 on a 34-inch, which was not good in terms of PPI at all.
But I still love that more than the 24-inch 1080p monitor that I had before.
Even in games that don't have great support, like the Last of Us will do Ultra Wide, but
it will then... The animations will get weird. You'll see Joel's ARM get all messed up because they're not meant to be in frame at that point
and stuff. I just ignore that stuff. When you're walking through somewhere and you have that extra field of view on the sides
and all of a sudden a landscape looks amazing, and first person or third person, I just almost
always prefer Ultra Wide.
The only reason I went back to a 16-by-9 monitor is because I was doing more work at home and
I wanted the vertical 32-inch 16-by-9 screen space.
I also have an Ultra Wide monitor, and I had a super Ultra Wide monitor before that.
So I like Ultra Wide. I just don't know if I would say it's better for gaming.