PC Gaming

[Tac]

Consoles do not offer the flexibility or the expansiveness that a computer allows a game to have (as a product).

If anything, consoles are trying to become gaming-specific super-laptops (like xbox and ps3 atm).


The problem with pc games today is mostly due to development time vs profit. I know a couple of indy game designers, one of which works at one of EA's puppet companies and they all tell me the same thing. It takes too much time, too much cost and when you release the product the return is nowhere as big as a console would.

Simply because of the market. Nowadays almost everyone has a computer (in the USA). But... not everyone has a computer that can run the game you're developing. On the other hand, a console is standard across the board and you are guaranteed that if you release Megaman XIV for a console, then everyone that bought that console (and in almost all cases, an advanced version of it.. aka PS2 plays PS1 games) will play it. And any company making the console game can port it to another console rather easily compared to porting it to a pc or viceversa.

Whereas if you release a new pc game you pretty much have to choose whether to dump the low end computer owners (likely a bulk of potential customers) to sell the game based on its max performance.. or compromise the potential of the product by making it available to both low and high end. How many people complain about WW2OL's bad graphics (Voodoo era) the first week they in game? How many of those never keep the subscription? First impressions are what makes the sale. That is why console games can deliver much higher end graphic games, consistently than pc games and why the 'new' generation prefers a gamepad to a HOTAS stick setup. Friggin' nooblets.

So.. more money in Medal of Honor type games with 16 multiplayer support than making a high end graphics, inmensely superior product, 1000's of online players support version of WW2OL. and it costs a lot more to make the WW2OL type game too.

[mg1942]

PC gameing is still alive and well... at least in Japan (and maybe its east and southern neighbors). 
Many of those PC games are visual/interactive novels.  They are no-frills type of game.  All the user have to do is just click... and read... 

Computers made in 1998 should be able to run these new games with ease
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MFFZ9-0qUm4&fmt=18 (this one talks to God in vain... )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfhZlDZ0p-k&fmt=18 

[Engine]

I've been a PC Gamer since... well, since Zork, Moria, and Hack. I've seen the industry shift towards consoles, and I understand the reasons why... but it ain't piracy. It's a blend of a few factors, but like Saxman says, it boils down to the fact that devs aren't taking advantage of the PC's biggest advantage: the complexity and depth of gameplay that you just cannot get on consoles. Instead, they try to develop a game for multiple platforms, and wind up with a mediocre, shallow, soulless creation.

Stardock is a fantastic company that doesn't believe in DRM and the sham excuses offered by other devs on why they're developing console trash. Their president is a badass... He made a great post on the Sins of a Solar Empire official forums which debunk the "piracy made us develop for consoles!" excuse by other devs, and I think it's a great summary of the state of the industry (especially the media part... most major review sites and magazines are swill. they gave Spore a great rating, whereas almost all reviews by real gamers agree that it's not meant for actual gamers).

I can't post the whole post due to length, so here's a link: http://forums.sinsofasolarempire.com/post.aspx?postid=303512

An excerpt:
 

Piracy & PC Gaming
By Draginol Posted March 10, 2008 20:48:46
Recently there has been a lot of talk about how piracy affects PC gaming. And if you listen to game developers, it apparently is a foregone conclusion - if a high quality PC game doesn't sell as many copies as it should, it must be because of piracy.

...


PC game developers seem to focus more on the "cool" factor. What game can they make that will get them glory with the game magazines and gaming websites and hard core gamers? These days, it seems like game developers want to be like rock stars more than businessmen.  I've never considered myself a real game developer. I'm a gamer who happens to know how to code and also happens to be reasonably good at business.

So when I make a game, I focus on making games that I think will be the most profitable. As a gamer, I like most games.  I love Bioshock. I think the Orange Box is one of the best gaming deals ever. I love Company of Heroes and Oblivion was captivating.  My two favorite games of all time are Civilization (I, II, III, and IV) and Total Annihilation. And I won't even get into the hours lost in WoW.  Heck, I even like The Sims.

So when it comes time to make a game, I don't have a hard time thinking of a game I'd like to play. The hard part is coming up with a game that we can actually make that will be profitable.  And that means looking at the market as a business not about trying to be "cool".

Making games for customers versus making games for users
So even though Galactic Civilizations II sold 300,000 copies making 8 digits in revenue on a budget of less than $1 million, it's still largely off the radar. I practically have to agree to mow editors lawns to get coverage. And you should see Jeff Green's (Games for Windows) yard. I still can't find my hedge trimmers.

Another game that has been off the radar until recently was Sins of a Solar Empire. With a small budget, it has already sold about 200,000 copies in the first month of release. It's the highest rated PC game of 2008 and probably the best selling 2008 PC title.  Neither of these titles have CD copy protection.

And yet we don't get nearly the attention of other PC games. Lack of marketing on our part? We bang on the doors for coverage as next as the next shop. Lack of advertising? Open up your favorite PC game publication for the past few months and take note of all the 2 page spreads for Sins of a Solar Empire. So we certainly try.

But we still don't get the editorial buzz that some of the big name titles do because our genre isn't considered as "cool" as other genres.  Imagine what our sales would be if our games had gotten game magazine covers and just massive editorial coverage like some of the big name games get.  I don't want to suggest we get treated poorly by game magazine and web sites (not just because I fear them -- which I do), we got good preview coverage on Sins, just not the same level as one of the "mega" titles would get. Hard core gamers have different tastes in games than the mainstream PC gaming market of game buyers. Remember Roller Coaster Tycoon? Heck, how much buzz does The Sims get in terms of editorial when compared to its popularity. Those things just aren't that cool to the hard core gaming crowd that everything seems geared toward despite the fact that they're not the ones buying most of the games.

I won't even mention some of the big name PC titles that GalCiv and Sins have outsold.  There's plenty of PC games that have gotten dedicated covers that haven't sold as well.  So why is that?

Our games sell well for three reasons.  First, they're good games which is a pre-requisite. But there's lots of great games that don't sell well.

The other two reasons are:

Our games work on a very wide variety of hardware configurations.
Our games target genres with the largest customer bases per cost to produce for.
 

We also don't make games targeting the Chinese market
When you make a game for a target market, you have to look at how many people will actually buy your game combined with how much it will cost to make a game for that target market. What good is a large number of users if they're not going to buy your game? And what good is a market where the minimal commitment to make a game for it is $10 million if the target audience isn't likely to pay for the game?

If the target demographic for your game is full of pirates who won't buy your game, then why support them? That's one of the things I have a hard time understanding.  It's irrelevant how many people will play your game (if you're in the business of selling games that is). It's only relevant how many people are likely to buy your game.

Stardock doesn't make games targeting the Chinese market. If we spent $10 million on a PC game explicitly for the Chinese market and we lost our shirts, would you really feel that much sympathy for us? Or would you think "Duh."

...

The problem with blaming piracy
I don't want anyone to walk away from this article thinking I am poo-pooing the effect of piracy.  I'm not.  I definitely feel for game developers who want to make kick bellybutton PC games who see their efforts diminished by a bunch of greedy pirates.  I just don't count pirates in the first place.  If you're a pirate, you don't get a vote on what gets made -- or you shouldn't if the company in question is trying to make a profit.

The reason why we don't put CD copy protection on our games isn't because we're nice guys. We do it because the people who actually buy games don't like to mess with it. Our customers make the rules, not the pirates. Pirates don't count. We know our customers could pirate our games if they want but choose to support our efforts. So we return the favor - we make the games they want and deliver them how they want it. This is also known as operating like every other industry outside the PC game industry.

...

When you blame piracy for disappointing sales, you tend to tar the entire market with a broad brush.  Piracy isn't evenly distributed in the PC gaming market. And there are far more effective ways of getting people who might buy your product to buy it without inconveniencing them.

Blaming piracy is easy. But it hides other underlying causes.  When Sins popped up as the #1 best selling game at retail a couple weeks ago, a game that has no copy protect whatsoever, that should tell you that piracy is not the primary issue.

In the end, the pirates hurt themselves. PC game developers will either slowly migrate to making games that cater to the people who buy PC games or they'll move to platforms where people are more inclined to buy games.

In the meantime, if you want to make profitable PC games, I'd recommend focusing more effort on satisfying the people willing to spend money on your product and less effort on making what others perceive as hot.  But then again, I don't romanticize PC game development. I just want to play cool games and make a profit on games that I work on.

[Saxman]

Ps3s use Blu Ray discs which gives you something like 50 gig of data. I know that MGS4 used most of that, so there's your 5 dvd game on one disc. I wouldn't be surprised if we start seeing 2 disc Ps3 games in the future, they did multiple disc games on PS1 back in 2000 iirc.

Yes, but how much of that 50GB of space is used just for the technology? Twilight Princess on Game Cube used a disc rather than Ocarina of Time's cartridge for the N64. It had a lot more data storage space, but its game world and dungeons were no more expansive (in fact, it's been a while since I played but TP may have been one of the shortest primary quests of any title in the series).

All those flashy graphics and coding for HD sound and visuals take up a LOT more space, so the game may use the full 50GB of data, but you may not be getting any more content than a game built using the technology of 3-4 years ago.

[crockett]

Look at COD4 and Halo 3 for the XBOX, they made a big deal out of H3 because it was new and all, but all it is is new graphics, updated mods weapons etc. PC gaming will never die.

COD4 is one of the rare console cross over games that didn't end up with a crappy PC version. But the PC version doesn't get the same support as the console versions. Take for example the last map pack, the only reason it was released to PC is because Nvidia sponsored it. Hell and even then it was released several months after the consoles got it.

Halo is another example.. The game was originally developed for the PC, then Microsoft got on it's binge about producing games for the Xbox and it was totally dropped for the PC for a long time. Hell look at M$ and their PC game controllers, they totally stopped producing them soon as they released the xbox.

I think it's safe to say the devlopers are pushing for the consoles first now days and building ports back to the PC as a after thought. There will however be the few smaller companies that will focus on PC only like CryTeck for instance. They built FarCry before it was sold to Microsoft but now they have Crysis which is PC only and far as I know they plan to stay a PC only company, even though there are rumors it will be ported to the xbox.

So while there are PC game developers it's becoming less and less and eventually that's going to effect the publishing side of things. These game companies need a publisher who can get the games in the store, other wise they have to go Internet delivery only, which drastically reduces the sales.

[RTHolmes]

they did multiple disc games on PS1 back in 2000 iirc.

Resident Evil *shudders*

[Fulmar]

When they can put WOW on the PS3 or Xbox is the day I will dread.  This is maybe the one game advantage PC has right now.  FPS games have always been better on PC than console.  Mouse + keyboard > game controller pad.  You watch people play CS or something fast past and the reaction time and competitiveness is so much great that an FPS on console.  I've played COD4 on PC and Xbox, though I've grown bored of that ADHD spam fest, they are completely different games.  The PC version is much quicker and not as laxed as console, especially with the reaction time of other players.

The only console I own is a Wii and this is because of the Wii remote and the styles of game you can play than you can't on PS3 and Xbox.  It's a whole new genre (almost) in gaming and that's the main reason why I own one.  I don't foresee myself buying a PS3 or Xbox (or their future generations) any time soon.

[Saxman]

Agreed on FPSes. GoldenEye and Metroid Prime were great games, but the console controller just doesn't have the same level of precision available with the mouse and keyboard. Now the Wii COULD potentially give PCs a run for their money in an FPS because of the potential capabilities of the motion control, but I don't think this has been fully explored yet.

[Ack-Ack]

hmmm ....well the Walmart down the street currently carries 0 PC games ....if that's not a bad sign...I don't know what is
...and I DO NOT live in the sticks ...but a major city ....it cant be a good sign

The majority of PC games sold today are not sold out of retail walk-in stores.  The majority of sales have been through digital downloads, that is why the PC gaming market has been moving to the digital download business model.

Having worked in the gaming industry for awhile now, believe me, PC games are not on their way out nor are console games going to replace PC games anytime soon.


ack-ack

[Ack-Ack]

I think it's safe to say the devlopers are pushing for the consoles first now days and building ports back to the PC as a after thought.

I think it's safe to say that you are incorrect or are you basing your knowledge of actually working in a game development/publishing house?


ack-ack

[Denholm]

With the ability to make HD games through DX10 I'd say games will be on the PC for a while to come.

[Gh0stFT]

what i see here is, most (but not all games) will be simple ports in the future, i.e. availible
for PC and different consoles too.
i worked for 4 years in the PC Gaming industry, creating a new game just for the PC market is
way to risky. Just think about the costs, working for aprox 3 years on a title with lets say 10-15 people,
thats alot of money you have to pay before the game starts to sell, and if the game flops you can imagine.
Minimize the risk and sell the game on consoles too, and beside that, Consoles simply just pay off more,
lot less pirate copies, thats is simply the truth, the selling numbers dont lie.

Speaking for myself, i'm not a console type, i preffer a PC.
I just bought a new dual core PC for just aprox €700! and this machine runs Crysis absolute perfect on
Vista 64bit under DX10. And beside the gaming i can work with Graphic & Sound software too.

No panic folks

[lasersailor184]

To be honest, my biggest temptation into consoles is the XBox 360 for Forza and Forza 2.



Anyone know a good game like that?  I liked Gran Tourismo 2/3 for PS2 as well.  Something where you had a lot of cars you could mod through suspension control, downforce, engine mods...

[Engine]

Supposedly Grid is awesome, but I haven't played it myself (and also I hear it's best played with a controller, not mouse/keyboard). It's available on Steam.

http://store.steampowered.com/app/12750/

[indy007]

To be honest, my biggest temptation into consoles is the XBox 360 for Forza and Forza 2.



Anyone know a good game like that?  I liked Gran Tourismo 2/3 for PS2 as well.  Something where you had a lot of cars you could mod through suspension control, downforce, engine mods...

GT Prolgoue, and the next eventual GT release... but besides that & Forza, you're kinda hurting for solid racing games. Project Gotham Racing is actually an amazing amount of fun, especially online... but there's no adjusting your car unless they added it to the latest 360 version.