6 ms·

> Yes I'm sympathetic but there is no solution here other than increasing the supply of GPUs or decreasing the demand. Complaining about scalpers isn't going to

> Yes I'm sympathetic but there is no solution here other than increasing the supply of GPUs or decreasing the demand. Complaining about scalpers isn't going to help with either one. Scalpers don't set the price. This feels like the "There Is No Alternative" (TINA) and I have never been a fan of that kind of unwillingness to explore. Video card makers have been running lottery systems. Those systems might need better defense against scalpers, better identity verification to function adequately. Sure the exploiters will keep escalating, keep trying to get the money they can & resell; we can't make perfect the enemy of the good though. We just need to keep iterating, keep trying to do the good job of getting good equipment into actual humans that want them's hands. I'm not going to just throw my hands up & say "improvement is impossible!" > In fact, what you should be willing to do is argue that NVidia and AMD should sell all their GPUs direct to consumer at an auction, Again this absolute refusal to acknowledge that consumer surplus is allowed to exist. GPU makers need to get cards into actual consumers hands. They need to keep the PC gaming market alive. What you propose would destroy the entire industry these card makers exist in. Only the rich being given access to these products would destroy the market, end the product segment entirely. No one would make PC video games. Insisting we obliterate consumer surplus, milk every last oz of profit, is a shortsighted, profit-motivated view of the world, & fails to provide essential essentials. Endless doubling down on how profit must be extracted, how it's the only possible option: it just totally misses the entire ecosystem of computing that's getting shredded to bits by inaction & exploitation. Simply saying, we need to move those profits to the GPU maker is not going to do anything to help the ecosystem.

avalys 5y ago
If there are only 10,000 graphic cards available to sell - what difference does it make if these end up in the hands of 10,000 rich gamers who can afford to buy them at market price - as opposed to 10,000 randomly selected gamers who won a lottery system? The fundamental problem is that there are only 10,000 cards. If the PC gaming market is destroyed, it will be because there are not enough cards, not because they got distributed to the wrong gamers. You are focused on the wrong end of the problem. (In fact, you could certainly argue that the PC gaming market will be better off overall if the limited supply of cards goes to rich gamers who are more likely to spend more money on games and keep the industry alive).
- rektide 5y ago
  You're using stupidly insulting low numbers to make a point that isn't valid. There's not like, no, cards. There's just not a lot. Your other point about gamers not needing good/fast cards (in a follow up post) is also not super interesting to me, since all cards are at super-inflated values. Even old/used cards. For a long time RX580's were around $200. Not a blisteringly fast flagship even in it's day (spring 2017). Now they're $400. Just getting started with a basic card costs what a console does, and that's messed up. Obviously messed up. There is for sure a supply issue here, absolutely. But with gpu miners and scalpers savaging the market, I think it's reckless beyond belief to pretend that we should just let this ride out, that we shouldn't try to help this market stay healthy. I just cannot believe what protest there is against doing a basic good deed, trying to fight pernicious forces off. What makes you feel so strongly this way?
  - avalys 5y ago
    I'd appreciate you not calling me stupid. I could say that your attitude here comes across like a 14-year-old whose parents told him he won't be getting a new GPU for Christmas. The 10k number was just an example, is there a number you could substitute that you think makes my point less effective? Please do. > I just cannot believe what protest there is against doing a basic good deed, trying to fight pernicious forces off. What makes you feel so strongly this way? I think your opinion here is fundamentally wrong-headed and short-circuiting the market in the manner you are advocating for causes worse outcomes for everyone in the long term, and often in markets that are a lot more important than GPUs and PC gaming. So I get a little bit of satisfaction from pushing back against this viewpoint where I can.
    - rektide 5y ago
      Wow man. Ouch! Some ultra-cruel shit being flung over here. Ok, so some technicals. I don't think I called you stupid at all. I said the numbers you chose were stupidly low. Please be able to differentiate. You are not the points you make! I asked very genuinely to try to understand some of your perspective. I don't ask that of people I call stupid! I've been rebuffed, and told your only interest is because I am so "wrong-headed", which isn't really helping anything along here... I'd like to see better, I think you deserve to show a better side of yourself than that. > I could say that your attitude here comes across like a 14-year-old whose Look man, I've found this attempt to discuss to be super distateful un-willing to engage honestly. I already said that. You're just upping the game again and again & not replying earnestly. Please try to say something useful, please try to help the discussion engage? This is huge flame-bait. I don't think I've ever been so brash or rude. I specifically think one specific number you said is way way way off base. You're making this super nasty. While telling me I am being nasty, and a little child? I really disagree, heavily; I don't think this is called for. But that's not even my real interest here. I don't care what you have to say about me. I'm not making that the new argument. You've refused to clash again & again. That's the most interesting thing to me, trying to explore & understand & gain & share insight. I raise points & you float off. C'mon man. Your view has not been kind to people just trying to get products without being exploited. I patently don't get it. What drives you to such strong beliefs? Why are you throwing such flame around at me? What's going on here? Tell me about yourself, how you come to feel this way. I genuinely want to know. > I think your opinion here is fundamentally wrong-headed and short-circuiting the market in the manner you are advocating for causes worse outcomes for everyone in the long term, How? Why? Nvidia & to a degree AMD have been trying to prevent cryptocurrencies from treading on the gaming market. There's been lotteries to try to insure broader access, but which gets gamed. Everyone else seems to agree, seems to want to try to help the regular plain old non-hostile non-money-grabbing folk get cards, at a rate somewhat like what they could. Except you. You keep insisting the market must serve itself, maximize profit. Or face vague foreboding "or else" consequences. You speak here of bad outcomes, of horrible ills, but fail to define these ends. And not defining or explaining why. (And using very personalized inappropriate senses of conflict to deflect.) Not saying anything to actually defend or explain your position. I patently don't get it. And you don't seem at all sympathetic to how hard you are hitting, which hurts. Why not be a little bit more moderate my man?
avalys 5y ago
Also I reject your claim that lack of access to the latest and greatest GPUs is going to shred the PC gaming industry. Graphics are nice but they don't make a game fun. If people have to spend another year playing games with the settings turned down a bit, so what?

avalys 5y ago

If there are only 10,000 graphic cards available to sell - what difference does it make if these end up in the hands of 10,000 rich gamers who can afford to buy them at market price - as opposed to 10,000 randomly selected gamers who won a lottery system? The fundamental problem is that there are only 10,000 cards. If the PC gaming market is destroyed, it will be because there are not enough cards, not because they got distributed to the wrong gamers. You are focused on the wrong end of the problem. (In fact, you could certainly argue that the PC gaming market will be better off overall if the limited supply of cards goes to rich gamers who are more likely to spend more money on games and keep the industry alive).

rektide 5y ago
You're using stupidly insulting low numbers to make a point that isn't valid. There's not like, no, cards. There's just not a lot. Your other point about gamers not needing good/fast cards (in a follow up post) is also not super interesting to me, since all cards are at super-inflated values. Even old/used cards. For a long time RX580's were around $200. Not a blisteringly fast flagship even in it's day (spring 2017). Now they're $400. Just getting started with a basic card costs what a console does, and that's messed up. Obviously messed up. There is for sure a supply issue here, absolutely. But with gpu miners and scalpers savaging the market, I think it's reckless beyond belief to pretend that we should just let this ride out, that we shouldn't try to help this market stay healthy. I just cannot believe what protest there is against doing a basic good deed, trying to fight pernicious forces off. What makes you feel so strongly this way?
- avalys 5y ago
  I'd appreciate you not calling me stupid. I could say that your attitude here comes across like a 14-year-old whose parents told him he won't be getting a new GPU for Christmas. The 10k number was just an example, is there a number you could substitute that you think makes my point less effective? Please do. > I just cannot believe what protest there is against doing a basic good deed, trying to fight pernicious forces off. What makes you feel so strongly this way? I think your opinion here is fundamentally wrong-headed and short-circuiting the market in the manner you are advocating for causes worse outcomes for everyone in the long term, and often in markets that are a lot more important than GPUs and PC gaming. So I get a little bit of satisfaction from pushing back against this viewpoint where I can.
  - rektide 5y ago
    Wow man. Ouch! Some ultra-cruel shit being flung over here. Ok, so some technicals. I don't think I called you stupid at all. I said the numbers you chose were stupidly low. Please be able to differentiate. You are not the points you make! I asked very genuinely to try to understand some of your perspective. I don't ask that of people I call stupid! I've been rebuffed, and told your only interest is because I am so "wrong-headed", which isn't really helping anything along here... I'd like to see better, I think you deserve to show a better side of yourself than that. > I could say that your attitude here comes across like a 14-year-old whose Look man, I've found this attempt to discuss to be super distateful un-willing to engage honestly. I already said that. You're just upping the game again and again & not replying earnestly. Please try to say something useful, please try to help the discussion engage? This is huge flame-bait. I don't think I've ever been so brash or rude. I specifically think one specific number you said is way way way off base. You're making this super nasty. While telling me I am being nasty, and a little child? I really disagree, heavily; I don't think this is called for. But that's not even my real interest here. I don't care what you have to say about me. I'm not making that the new argument. You've refused to clash again & again. That's the most interesting thing to me, trying to explore & understand & gain & share insight. I raise points & you float off. C'mon man. Your view has not been kind to people just trying to get products without being exploited. I patently don't get it. What drives you to such strong beliefs? Why are you throwing such flame around at me? What's going on here? Tell me about yourself, how you come to feel this way. I genuinely want to know. > I think your opinion here is fundamentally wrong-headed and short-circuiting the market in the manner you are advocating for causes worse outcomes for everyone in the long term, How? Why? Nvidia & to a degree AMD have been trying to prevent cryptocurrencies from treading on the gaming market. There's been lotteries to try to insure broader access, but which gets gamed. Everyone else seems to agree, seems to want to try to help the regular plain old non-hostile non-money-grabbing folk get cards, at a rate somewhat like what they could. Except you. You keep insisting the market must serve itself, maximize profit. Or face vague foreboding "or else" consequences. You speak here of bad outcomes, of horrible ills, but fail to define these ends. And not defining or explaining why. (And using very personalized inappropriate senses of conflict to deflect.) Not saying anything to actually defend or explain your position. I patently don't get it. And you don't seem at all sympathetic to how hard you are hitting, which hurts. Why not be a little bit more moderate my man?

avalys 5y ago

Also I reject your claim that lack of access to the latest and greatest GPUs is going to shred the PC gaming industry. Graphics are nice but they don't make a game fun. If people have to spend another year playing games with the settings turned down a bit, so what?