Being an avid follower of software and hardware sales in the industry (
NPD FTW), I personally feel that PC gaming is in critical conditional. The following argument will highlight so. Feel free to retort
First of all, using NPD to assess the sales of PC compared to consoles is a classic mistake. NPD does not take into account web sales, i.e. sales through Steam and other programs.
Piracy:
Yes. Piracy. We've all contributed in some way or another. Given how easy it is as opposed to the draconian protection policies ala Half life 2 and Bioshock, consumers are forced to pirate games. Two install limit? How about no. Forced online registration. **** that. The point is that sales have plummeted far below that which costs to make a profitable high end game. Sure Crysis did alright (compared to Halo 3 and Super Mario Galaxy? Ha!), but how many new developers that are not Valve or Crytek can penetrate the market now?
The protection policies of Half Life 2 can hardly be considered draconian. Steam merely brought something new to the table, a simple account based activation. Of course, not everyone has the internet but you only need to hook up once, also broadband penetration wasn't as strong four years ago as it is now. Steam has also elimanted day-zero piracy.
"Day zero piracy is where a game is released for free by pirates before the official release. It's disastrous for the developer and publisher because whatever route gets the game out to the gamer first will be the favoured choice, so a game uploaded to the internet before the release date will have a huge impact on sales."
The "bits on the disc" are useless untill release day, when through steam the exe is 'released'. Not the Holy Grail however, as there are still pockets of no broadband, so you can either miss them completely and get less sales, or get less sales due to piracy. It's true Steam wasn't well received when it first came out, but it now seen as one of the greatest tools in PC gaming. It's worth noting Bioshock gave you an install back after you uninstalled it (instead of just deleting the files), not fantastic or something I agree with, but they at least realised the mistake. As for their forced online registration, that's actually been removed and was just for a period of time after the release.
As for sales, look at Football Manager (incase you're wondering, it's called 'Worldwide Soccer Manager' in the US) in the UK, The Sims in both the UK and everywhere else. While those are guaranteed to sell well, you also have to bare in mind the PC doesn't have or need flagship games to sell the platform. The only reason I believe for Microsoft to delay PC versions is to try and push as many Xbox sales as they can, when I look at their Xbox titles saying "Xbox exclusive" I laugh inside. You can name a console and someone will likely be able to name to a few 'must-have' titles. With so many titles catering to different areas, and no true 'flagship' games, it's not really comparable. Consoles are periodic whilst the PC is continous. As for titles coming out on console and then later, PC (with added content), it goes the same way. Look at UT3, on it's way to xbox360
without mods (but with added content).
Plus there are plenty of other developers who can penetrate the PC market. How about a little tricolon of Relic, id and Blizzard. Not to mention the PC is great for indie developers, going back to Steam their game can be distributed online, without Day-Zero piracy, taking 100% of the profits. All their game won't cost as much as others, that will only generate a larger amount of sales.
Admittedly where there's a lock, someone will make a key.
Rigs:
Too many graphics cards. Too little money. Only two graphics cards out on the market right now can play Crysis on 30 fps or more. 30 fps. That is laughable. When high end console games are reaching for 60 frames, you know there's a problem. It's very easy to highlight. Given how fast processing power increases and coupled with the fact that graphics cards evolve so quickly, top game developers spend considerable time, effort and money on making a high end game. This alienates all the gamers with that are not running NASA. Resulting in low sales of the game. What is happening now? PC games are being ported over from console counter parts. What does this mean? Gaming on PC is not able to advance as fast as it could, graphic cards sales decrease, the hassle of managing a PC is seen as a turn off when you can attain similar levels of detail on the console. Hence, the console become more reliable and more convenient.
Graphics cards don't evolve as quickly as people think. Many new cards slot in the middle ground somewhere. Not to mention 'low cards' are just top cards that are either defective or have software in place to limit functionability. Providing it isn't a defective card, you can literally upgarde your graphics card for
free. Besides it takes a bit more than daddy's 8800 GTX to run Crysis amazingly. I'm pretty sure there are more than two setups that can run Crysis at 30fps, which for the game itself, is still pretty **** playable, and as Livvers pointed out, there are. It's games like Unreal Tournament where you want to shoot higher, around the 50-60 mark. Maybe it's worth noting that Halo 3 ran at 30fps and wasn't exactly laughed out of the house by xbox 360 owners. Give it a few years when affordable PCs cruise through Crysis on optimal settings and have consoles have minimally advanced in terms of graphical offerings, how long before the consoles exceed their safe number of pixels again aswell, giving a choppiness illusion, as in Nascar 2005: CftC (xbox) and Gran Turismo 4. Wouldn't be surprised if Crysis just capped at 30fps for gameplay stability either.
Picking on Crysis is either ignorant or an attempt at spinning to try and prove your point. Afterall, PC counterparts of console versions often look better and, of course depending on the spec of your machine, can match and exceed console fps. Apparently "one single GeForce 8800 GTX has been reported to play F.E.A.R. at up to 386 fps (at a low resolution)". Couldn't be bothered finding a source for that, but given the bull**** myth you perpetuate, didn't think I'd need to.
PC Gaming rigs are cheaper than ever. You can get rig that can run all the current games (Crysis on low) on mid-high settings for just under the price of a PS3 at launch over here. An extra two hundred or so pound will see some quad core, 4gb ram desktop behemoth running your games. Both of those machines come with 'free online' gaming (as with everything you have to pay your monthly subscription), which brings me to the xbox. UK launch of £279.99, 280 for ease. £40 for 12 months of xbox live. I believe you said the average life of a console was 7 years, so 40 x 7 = 280. £280 (rounded up from the pennies saved). The price the console cost you in the first place. Feature for Feature then, the Xbox 360 costs £580 whilst the PS3 costs £425. And that's the cheapest option I might add, paying one month at a time is around £420, add the console itself than that's a good £700. Happy cheap and affordable gaming brought to you by Microsoft. The xbox doesn't even come with word! Again give in that you will most likely have a PC
anyway (as opposed to a gaming one) means it would be alot cheaper to actually just have gaming PC as opposed to the double.
It's also hilarious you say consoles, given this generation, are more reliable (Red Ring of Death) and convenient ($599, or alternatively $850 UK equivalent (£425)).
Besides this is off the topic of PC gaming actually being dead or dying and more of a tech vs price comparison between the PC and Consoles. Portal, which won numerous game of the year awards, runs great on just about any moderate PC of the past 4 years. To continue arguing on this topic would be to accept that PC gaming is fine.
The Hive:
Console gaming is all the rave. No PC game gets the marketing treatment that console games do. This creates the gamer hive mind. Word soon travels faster by word of mouth. Online console gaming is doing brilliant despite services like LIVE charging as opposed to free PC Gaming. This is testament to the power of a strong marketing strategy and committed publishers.
Again consoles run in cycles. New generation means fresh, a new experience from your couch. A few years drift by and that gleaming white (well actually it's more of a beige colour) Xbox 360 or slick black PS3 has become nothing more than an ornament, the only games worth purchasing are the next installment in your favourite series. Do you prefer PES6 or PES2008 etc. But the PC soldiers on, a hulking war machine, neither fresh nor stale, but eternal and endless. Rhetoric bull**** that gives perhaps the only link between PC gaming and death. As for marketing, most games that come with massive marketing are also released on PC. Games come on platforms, more often than not, the PC is one of them.
Games released on consoles are almost always released on PC. Ergo, visa v, concordantly, PC Gaming is neither dead nor dying.
Patches:
PC games are being rushed out. Developers such as Epic are no longer giving PC gamers the same treatment they once had. Developers feel they can get to fixing the games at their own time and pace even after the game has gone gold. This leaves gamers forced to buy half baked games and to settle all of their complaints over gradual patch release. It's a disgusting habit. Hellgate London anyone?
Hellgate London: Independant company that tried to do too much. Online nature of game allowing them to fix plenty of problems.
Other games release fine, and generally only require patches to fix maybe one major bug, maybe a major bug that applies to a specific setup, and couple minor ones that do not affect gameplay. Patches are generally a beautiful thing, it's a shame that consoles have only just hopped on board. Previously shipping with major bugs that they couldn't fix. I've been pretty pissed about Gears of War (for Windows) and how the numerous problems, but it's definitely playable as I spoke to one person who finished it on PC. Save game wipe would be a major problem if it didn't take one sitting to finish. I find GoW **** though, don't see what all the hype was about. Maybe it was those great graphics.
This problem applies to both console and PC. Are console games also "half-baked"? Patches strengthen gaming more than anything.
Those are my points. I have to meet my boyfriend in a bit and I'm already kind of late so maybe I'll get to all my other points soon. If anyone feels like they can contribute, please do
Hope you had a good time with your boyfriend
In short, he's right. PC Gaming is as good as it's always been.
I won't disagree with you on the mod community. However, dwindling sales prove a very serious and very real point. Is it a surprise Crytek just announced they are no longer going to make exclusive PC games due to relatively lower profit they make on the PC?
PC gaming in many ways is much better than console gaming. The keyboard-mouse combination is unparalleled. However, do you honestly believe PC gaming is fine? Major PC exclusive games come out every once in a blue moon. Spore is taking its time. Optimization problems then go on to plague those games. Developers are moving their resources to the consoles. DLC prolongs games through expansion packs. In fact even the modding community is now on the PS3.
I know you're a mod, and I am new here, and I don't mean to be disrespectful but I thought it would be more conducive to the thread if you could address the problems I highlighted.
For sales counts see my point on NPD. Crytek complained about piracy killing their sales, other companies say piracy isn't an issue. Besides developing for another platform and PC does not mean PC gaming is dying. Now if a developer stopped developing for PC entirely... that would be more towards your point. Otherwise the
expansion of Crytek means nothing. Who doesn't want to make even
more money? Optimisation plague? strong words. It's that name again. There are few games that do not come out on PC, 'major exclusives' usually end up on PC, especially in the case of xbox. Exclusivity is for petty console squabbles, not the PC. The only real difference is the games Nintendo make, which do not come to PC. Apart from that, fighting games. And whilst I love a bit of Tekken and Smash Bros., I also love RTS, which would be a counterpart if it didn't completely outweigh fighting games. That said if a game is more suited to controller, you can always just buy one for your PC. The only area here that the consoles beat PC in is the social experience (read: not online).
I severly doubt the modding community will reach the heights of the PC mod community on PS3, but I'm willing to be proven wrong here.
DLC is nowt but a fancy bull**** term for what the PC has been doing for ages.
No, but it doesn't mean this
either.
I agree. The PC is a great platform for indie developers. However, indie developers soon get contracts. I would love for them to become PC developers but unfortunately that's not where money is made. Also, $5 games don't allow me to flex my GeForce 8800 GTX. It's just really frustrating how consoles get so much attention. Graphic card producers have little reason to advance technology now at the pace they can as games are not being developed as fast that can actually push these cards. It's an infinite regress. PC gaming is killing itself and stunting its own growth.
Indie developers come, they get contracts.
New Indie developers come, they get contracts. It's an endless cycle. You of all people should understand Indie given your music thread. Unless of course you meant the 'genre' which is no more Indie than Indiewood.
I'll come to the tech later. "Stunted growth" as you so delicately put it contradicts your earlier 'point' about having to constantly upgrade your rig to play the latest games. Again, the case of Portal. Doing more to keep gaming alive rather than killing itself, wouldn't you say?
At this point Livvers made some decent observations.
hmm...there seems to be a problem in your argument. We have already agreed that PC gaming is expensive and that it could be the reason people are losing interest. As PC gaming becomes less of a priority, so too will developer interest in producing games on the PC. This means that that segment of developers will no longer require cutting edge technology. In terms of consoles, an average console life is around 7 years. The PC rigs are already far ahead of the PS3 and the XBOX 360. It would seem rather redundant to have an awfully strong PC to develop games on those consoles and to continuously upgrade your rig when the console power remains the same.
You now both have to retract your statements about PC gaming being expensive. Unless you want to admit console gaming is just as expensive. If console power remains the same for 7 years, and games are released on multiple platforms (inc. PC), given average PCs can run that of the consoles, then why would you need to continously upgrade the rig? Oh that's right, you don't have to.
Blizzard is one company that does not rely on bleeding edge technology. Which proves my point that PC gaming is holding itself back.
Also the entire problem stems from the fact that PC gaming is not making the same margins of profits as it once was. Developers are having to rely on profits from consoles. This means any extra effort that can be put on multi platform games is not exerted for the PC versions as there is little to no incentive for doing so. So the PC is not leading the graphics race as much as it has the potential to. This gives consumers little to no reason to support the platform as consoles are much more convenient. No optimization required. No installation problems. No hassles requiring tech knowledge. Sure you will have a Crysis type game every few years but is that really worth the investment of a new rig?
Are you saying PC gaming is holding itself back? Or that PC Gaming is dying/dead? Given the consequences of each, they are mutually exclusive.
As long as RTS games and TRUE FPS games still exist, the PC gaming community will exist. Imagine playing Starcraft II on a controller... Or Quake/UT without aim assist and be as fast as PC players.
Also MMO's play a large role in keeping computer gaming alive. I would never try to play WoW on a controller. Ever.
What I would do to see a console gamer attempt to play UT online
I believe PC gaming has never been better before, sure it has gone expensive, but the games that are really really good in almost every aspect don't have the impossible system requirements that those other, over-hyped games have.
EA started the trend of neglecting PC gamers as much as possible, constantly releasing unfinished games or completely ditching us from the big proyects.
Piracy also affects console gaming greatly, the only thing that can stand up against piracy is online services, seeing how many games only offer real replay value through multiplayer.
Oh yes, I may or may not be legally or illegally acquiring Company of Heroes. But it
won't wouldn't have online. Which is probably more than half the fun I imagine. Also, piracy isn't all bad, some people use it to get a taste of whether a game (or other media) is worth purchasing. Why not get the demo? Because you 'don't miss anything if you leave the Sixth Sense five minutes early'.
So maybe PC developers need to learn that you shouldn't always try to beef out a game with graphics. This is something easy to learn(Blizzard has), and therefore I think PC games will be awwwwright for a very long time.
Also, about Crysis, were you talking about these cards only running the highest resolution on the highest possible settings? Because I think a lot of people won't find it necessary to fully enjoy the game, or even care that what they have looks slightly less pretty than everything maxed out. The only people that do care will be the super hardcore PC fanboys. I found a site saying there are four graphics cards that can play Crysis at more than 30 fps on the highest settings when the game is played on a resolution of 1280x1024.
Anyways, I agree with your points Dash_Fox.
Edit: Also, the points brought up about piracy are what makes me loathe people who pirate games. Pirating games obviously has a pretty big effect on sales.
More good stuff. To add however, plenty of other developers know games don't need to be beefed out with graphics and co. Valve being one. I mention them because I also want to point out they want to make a game for the Wii.
Piracy, like most things, has it's good points. Yes, sales are lost meaning less profit from companies. But some people would only play if it was free and they will add to the community (e.g. Me trying out Company of Heroes). Bear in mind that if piracy is such a big problem, then there is obviously a rather large market for PC gaming. This means PC gaming is neither dead nor dying. It's not as though consoles aren't affected by piracy either, in Pakistan you buy your console chipped! That's a ****ing big loss of sales. Console gaming must be dying.
When gamers realize that a high end rig is not worth the money it costs (as you have already agreed), they revert to games that do not require high specs. This is a horrible lesson for developers to learn. The one main advantage PCs have over consoles (raw power) is now looked down upon. This has given more people reason to pick console over PC as:
1. The games made for the consoles are already optimized to run as best as they can on the console,
2. Console gaming requires less hassle. No installation problems. Throw in the disc and play. Any patches install automatically without one having to look for them.
Desktops offer better value for money than consoles (or at least xbox360), perhaps after acknowledging this PC gaming shall bloom into wonderful, magnificent, expressive life whilst consoles, catch a cold that turns into a deadly flu, weakening and crippling their sales. Sales wise, the PC takes home just over 30% whilst not much against consoles as a whole, it is more than any single console. Showing gaming on PC to be alive and well.
Ask a group of developers whether they would rather make a game with great gameplay or a game with great graphics, and I will gladly put money on the former if you think the latter.
The one main advantage PCs have over consoles being raw power? unless all you care about is how a game looks then this is most certaintly not the one main advantage PCs have over consoles. Many things come before it, the huge mod community, keyboard and mouse (my personal choice), the fact the PC is a proper multimedia machine (although the PS3 and Wii are catching up, the xbox360 still lags behind) among many others that are not simply 'raw power'.
And for your points:
1) I agree. Games made for consoles do run well on consoles. Games made for PC run well on PCs too. And if you want to wave Crysis around again I'll point out you said "best as they can". Get a case study aside from that game.
2) When have you ever come across a problem installing a game? The installation process has never been a problem. Infact the wizard has been so nice as to inform me
before installation that Quake 4 has issues with vista. Saving me a lot of time. As for the vista compatability discrepancy, not all consoles are backwards compatible (which is pretty much the same thing), I imagine it can be fixed through service packs and it does not in any way show PC gaming to be dying. Once installed it's also as easy as throw in the disc in play, infact, why not just get a crack/iso and play the game without even needing to do that! And no one needs to look for patches anymore. If you do, you are most likely going about it the wrong way. Steam even installs patches automatically for your steam games, just like consoles do now! Infact that's the reason Steam was invented. If it's such a hassle to do those things .. get someone else to do it for you. Only on a console do I have to sit through crap about memory cards. And then they go corrupt..
For the above reasons, it is obvious why casual gamers would pick console gaming over PC gaming. No longer does the PC hold on to that steep difference in graphical fidelity as it once had over consoles since no longer are 'OMG' games being churned out on the PC as they once were. Case in point: Compare the year 2004 to 2007 for the PC gamer.
You have backtracked on your earlier comment about PC being so much better then? Once had? you'll find it still does. And if you want to compare years..
here are alot of ****ing reasons why it's worth it to be a PC gamer in 2008. Including a link to the 2007 edition, also with lots of reasons.
As more casual gamers flock to consoles, online gaming is becoming more important and lucrative to gamers and developers alike. This would mean that the game genres that do make money on the PC like MMOs and RTS will give incentive for more developers to produce those type of games, thus alienating the FPS and action adventure gamer who is now given even more reason to jump to the console. The problem is self perpetuating.
Multi-platforming, it happens. Maximum profits? incenting. You have already admitted yourself that the keyboard and mouse combination is better than the controller. There will always be an FPS market on the PC. Don't be so fast to drop other genres either, could you imagine Sam & Max on console? what about DEFCON?
I know that this will probably get me flamed but...PC gaming has never been ALIVE. I've NEVER thought, "Oh, I must play this, but it's on the PC." Every game that has ever been on the PC is available for another system or in an arcade. The other ones aren't worth playing.
Ignorance is bliss. Aside from the fact you're completely ****ing wrong and couldn't be further from the truth, I could say the exact same about consoles with the twist that everything comes out on pc so it's all I need. To be honest a strong enough PC can do anything. One word; emulators.
Nice Assassin's Creed avatar as well. You obvisouly have a great taste in games.
****er.
Oh, you mean like World of Warcraft, The Sims (the original not the console rip-off), and Myst (original again)?
Yeah, no one wanted to play those ever.
And many more!
The fabrication that PC gaming is dying or dead is laughable at best, but as you can see, it does get me a little pissed. Nothing but a herd mentality following a silly, unverified, notion enforced by heuristics. Anyone willing to bet their pension, or children's fortune that PC gaming will still be around 50 years from now, get in touch.
There was alot about low end PCs being a problem. Actually it's really just people buying integrated graphics cards. Hopefully will no longer be a problem with Intel getting with nVidia and AMD getting with ATi.
And in case anyone brings it up, UE4 will be on PC.
I also noticed you're now part of the debate hall Jen, if you talked the same amount of unbacked up bull**** that you did here, either CK or EE must have rather low standards for the place.
