What can we do to save PC gaming?

[Stanley]

I think you're confusing an optimised console game being lazily ported by a team with nothing else to do for a while, with one game that has no console version yet, and a game that isn't out yet.

I don't see the point in paying for an expensive PC to play games, when for a fraction of the price you will get the same/similar experiences on console. There just isn't that technical gap that use to exist to make it worthwhile. Back in the day I bought a PC just to play Quake.

Factor into it that consoles are now online too, and the amount of piracy on Pc, devs are seeing it as much less viable.

[Gwynster]

I do thing Doom was advanced but this topic has got onto hardware influencing the consoles and PC leading the way. I was just pointing out that back in the day only one place lead the way in graphics and that was the arcade. Comparing Doom to Daytona is like comparing snes to playstation.

No, actually, it's like comparing a 386 PC to a $15k arcade machine.

[layten]

I do thing Doom was advanced but this topic has got onto hardware influencing the consoles and PC leading the way. I was just pointing out that back in the day only one place lead the way in graphics and that was the arcade. Comparing Doom to Daytona is like comparing snes to playstation.

I would consider Doom to be more of a technical accomplishment that Daytona. Daytona just took hardware already used in military simulators and added a coin slot. Doom gave us hyperfast (almost)3D on consumer level hardware.

I am not saying Daytona was anything other than gobsmackingly impressive, just that it did not give us anything new.

[Gwynster]

I don't see the point in paying for an expensive PC to play games, when for a fraction of the price you will get the same/similar experiences on console. There just isn't that technical gap that use to exist to make it worthwhile. Back in the day I bought a PC just to play Quake.

Factor into it that consoles are now online too, and the amount of piracy on Pc, devs are seeing it as much less viable.

For a fraction of the price you'll get a similar experience on a PC too. Stop saying misleading and pointless things.

We've also killed the PC piracy argument too. Valve, Introversion and Stardock would probably disagree that piracy makes their successful businesses less viable. Valve's steamworks will likely put a stop to it entirely.

[Stanley]

True, but then Gears of War for the PC will still be commercially available in 8 years time, to play on whatever gaming rig you have at the time and it will still be a good game.

Gears Of War on Xbox has sold way more than PC. Game development is costly, and you need recoup those costs as quickly as possible and make a profit in order to continue the cycle.

[Rudi von Starnberg]

Gears Of War on Xbox has sold way more than PC.

Yes'm, that'll happen when a game is released to much the same audience on a different platform more than a year later.

[Gwynster]

Gears Of War on Xbox has sold way more than PC. Game development is costly, and you need recoup those costs as quickly as possible and make a profit in order to continue the cycle.

It's been out on the 360 for a little bit longer, I dunno if you knew.

Porting UE3 games from 360 to PC isn't really that costly either.

[Stanley]

For a fraction of the price you'll get a similar experience on a PC too. Stop saying misleading and pointless things.

It's not misleading at all. If you want to play high end games like Gears, Assassin's Creed, or Crysis, it's a lot more expensive than buying a £200 console. The graphics card alone would set you back more.

We've also killed the PC piracy argument too. Valve, Introversion and Stardock would probably disagree that piracy makes their successful businesses less viable. Valve's steamworks will likely put a stop to it entirely.

So why are developers dropping the PC/concentrating on consoles?

[TehStu]

Surely Epic have optimised UE3 engines for PC, 360 and PS3? Given it obviously started life on the PC, like.

edit - I'd stop including Crysis as a console game; it's on neither of them. I don't think, anyway

[Stanley]

It's been out on the 360 for a little bit longer, I dunno if you knew.

Well obviously, but do you think eventually it will achieve anywhere near amount 360 has, and over what time scale?

[layten]

Has any game on the 3 current consoles sold as many copies as WoW?

Console gaming = DOOMED!

[RubberJohnny]

We've also killed the PC piracy argument too. Valve, Introversion and Stardock would probably disagree that piracy makes their successful businesses less viable. Valve's steamworks will likely put a stop to it entirely.

Those developers all have business models different from the majority of the industry, business models that aren't easy or particularly desirable to adopt, and are pretty impossible to use in any form of PC+console combination.

Also, there isn't a rolleyes large enough for 'putting a stop to piracy entirely', the music industry are kicking themselves for not seeing such a simple answer.

[whizzo]

Reasons why I think that:

It offers fucking stunning value for money. They might have been tempted to split it all up.

Team Fortress 2 is a highly stylised game with a wonderful sense of humour, aimed at the kind of humourless players of hardcore team based online FPSes.

Portal is nuts. It's a game with no guns, about cake.

It separates out, almost completely, the single and multiplayer aspects of the package. You might get people that like HL2, those that like TF2 and those that want Portal, but would they really be willing to part with that much cash for the bit of game that they want?

Team Fortress 2 was in development for 8 years, but they waited and waited.

Super Mario Galaxy is a worthy competitor for that accolade, certainly. But it had Mario, it was always going to sell.

ok. I was under the impression that bunging togethor sequels to two massivly succsesful games along with a few extras and selling at the same price as a normal game is about as risk free as it is possible to get. Maybe thats just me.

Particularly the 360 version as that included the first decent console version of the edge 10 half life 2.

[Gwynster]

It's not misleading at all. If you want to play high end games like Gears, Assassin's Creed, or Crysis, it's a lot more expensive than buying a £200 console. The graphics card alone would set you back more.

What £200 console would that be, then?

And what graphics card, needing only to play DX9 in poxy 1280x720 would set you back more?

So why are developers dropping the PC/concentrating on consoles?

'Developers' are, are they? All of them? Like the tide going out?

Meanwhile Sega and Capcom are releasing more on PC than ever before.

[whizzo]

What £200 console would that be, then?

I would hazard a guess he means the xbox 360 core.

EDIT: apart from Crysis obviously.

by the way is crysis actully good? all Ive heard about is the engine and the graphics?

[Gwynster]

Those developers all have business models different from the majority of the industry, business models that aren't easy or particularly desirable to adopt, and are pretty impossible to use in any form of PC+console combination.

Also, there isn't a rolleyes large enough for 'putting a stop to piracy entirely', the music industry are kicking themselves for not seeing such a simple answer.

Valve has an undesirable business model? Yeah, they must hate all that success. Keeps them awake, like.

Funny you should mention the music biz, it's another sector that's incredibly poor at adapting to the convenience that customers demand from their technology.

[Gwynster]

by the way is crysis actully good? all Ive heard about is the engine and the graphics?

It's a bit crap, if I'm honest. No idea why people think it's a good example for arguing that everyone needs a £2k PC in order to keep up to date nowadays. Maybe because they don't play PC games and are just typing without thinking?

[RubberJohnny]

'Developers' are, are they? All of them? Like the tide going out?

iD, Epic, Infinity Ward, Bioware, Lionhead, Irrational, Monolith all have moved from being PC centric to being console focused, with PC ports coming after the fact.

Valve has an undesirable business model? Yeah, they must hate all that success. Keeps them awake, like.

I imagine their aren't many developers or publishers willing to set up their own direct-download infrastructure, with all the associated costs, just to avoid people stealing their games. Judging by the fact there is just one - Steam.

[whizzo]

I think it may be because some PC gamers use crysis as a great example of a game that couldnt be done on a console.

If a game is used to further an argument there should be no problem if its used against it.

[Rudi von Starnberg]

Infinity Ward? Really? Haven't they been steadfast in keeping focus on the PC side of the Call of Duty series, while Treyarch or whatever they're called have handled the console-exclusive titles? Also, Irrational and Monolith? Really?

PC ports coming 'after the fact' seems an interesting way of saying 'simultaneous and well-optimised releases', too.

[RubberJohnny]

Infinity Ward? Really? Haven't they been steadfast in keeping focus on the PC side of the Call of Duty series, while Treyarch or whatever they're called have handled the console-exclusive titles? Also, Irrational and Monolith? Really?

You may have seen the headlines about them having a console focus, and being surprised by how pirated CoD4 was on PC.

[Marzipan Travolta]

Well obviously, but do you think eventually it will achieve anywhere near amount 360 has, and over what time scale?

No, I don't. But it will certainly be sweetened by the fact that it will have a longer sales life on PC and that a greater percentage of the money from sales will go in their pocket. 10 years from now? Who knows.

[Gwynster]

iD, Epic, Infinity Ward, Bioware, Lionhead, Irrational, Monolith all have moved from being PC centric to being console focused, with PC ports coming after the fact.

Most of them were simply bought out, though. Except iD, which is a peculiarly misleading thing to say, as they've yet to release a single game first on a console.

and being surprised by how pirated CoD4 was on PC.

Ah, so they just don't understand the market then. Fair enough.

[Marzipan Travolta]

You may have seen the headlines about them having a console focus, and being surprised by how pirated CoD4 was on PC.

I think it's almost always going to be the case that a short, linear single player game will be more pirated than anything else. Anyone that has played CoD4 is sure to agree that it is a console game, no matter what system they played it on.

[RubberJohnny]

Most of them were simply bought out, though. Except iD, which is a peculiarly misleading thing to say, as they've yet to release a single game first on a console.

They're 360, PS3, PC like the rest now. Their iDtech5 was designed for multiplatform at the start, as opposed to past versions which have always been about putting new PC technology through its paces. They seem to have left that to Crytek.

I think it's almost always going to be the case that a short, linear single player game will be more pirated than anything else. Anyone that has played CoD4 is sure to agree that it is a console game, no matter what system they played it on.

Except for all the multiplayer and healthy PC userbase?

[Gwynster]

I imagine their aren't many developers or publishers willing to set up their own direct-download infrastructure, with all the associated costs, just to avoid people stealing their games.

Piracy is either a big deal or nothing to worry about. Best make your mind up.

[Rudi von Starnberg]

I think it's almost always going to be the case that a short, linear single player game will be more pirated than anything else. Anyone that has played CoD4 is sure to agree that it is a console game, no matter what system they played it on.

I'm struggling to understand what that means.

It felt like the natural progression for the Call of Duty series ever since its PC-exclusive first incarnation, with the same control system and everything. At the same time, its 360 version (can't speak for the PS3 one) had controls that fit like a glove for the platform. How was it a console game no matter what system it's played on?

[RubberJohnny]

Piracy is either a big deal or nothing to worry about. Best make your mind up.

I've said it's a big deal from the start, so have many, many devs based on stats like how many copies they've sold compared to how many people they have online. It's just you who says it isn't.

[Gwynster]

They're 360, PS3, PC like the rest now. Their iDtech5 was designed for multiplatform at the start, as opposed to past versions which have always been about putting new PC technology through its paces. They seem to have left that to Crytek.

Or perhaps they saw how much money Epic were making from Unreal Engine and thought they'd like a piece of that pie? You've got DirectX on one machine, and OpenGL on the other, meaning this 'shift' is pretty meaningless.

Except for all the multiplayer and healthy PC userbase?

Except for all the, uh, competition.

[Gwynster]

I've said it's a big deal from the start, so have many, many devs based on stats like how many copies they've sold compared to how many people they have online. It's just you who says it isn't.

You just said that piracy isn't a big enough incentive to organise a digital distribution framework, or to use someone else's. I never said it wasn't, and I'd appreciate it if you'd not tell lies. I'm sure your mum taught you better... because I asked her last night.