The PC is Dead! Long Live the PC!!
by Jerane Alleyne · in General Discussion · 07/22/2004 (3:19 pm) · 6 replies
Contrary to the thread title, I don't think the PC is dead, I just thought it was a catchy title :P
I came across this article yesterday regarding why the PC industry is behind consoles:
www.joeuser.com/index.asp?c=1&AID=21895&u=0
While I agreed with this article to a point, I think that it is somewhat incomplete. CD keys and checks I've found to be more of a minor annoyance than a reason not to buy a game. I really can't see them as a reason to pirate a game either. Really, if you want a game, don't have the money or just don't want to pay for it and have the resources to find it, thats enough incentive for some IMO. CD Key or not, 60 bucks or 9.99, nothing can beat free. In any case, there are issues that the PC faces that I believe stand out more than anti-piracy invention:
First, price. I think this is among the biggest obstacle for PC gaming. With the coming of more advanced consoles that aren't even half the cost of a top of the line, or even a middle-road PC, competition is tough. Even with the costs of PC hardware dropping, there is still too wide a gap costwise, and a shortening gap technologically.
Second, related to the first a bit, hardware/performance curve. I think that, for what would be the hardcore PC gamers, your average Dell isn't going to cut it performance-wise with your Far Crys and Doom 3s. You're faced with getting a $3000 Area 51 Alienware system, or building your own, which leads to the next issue...
Technical savvy. I've built about 3 PCs in my time, and consider my self pretty capable around one...but I hate doing it. I hate having to put it together in order for it to be obsolete in 6 months. I have fiddling with Windows and its myrad updates and tweaks inorder to keep it from sucking the RAM of which Inever have enough of. Things like this can turn off some people from getting a PC, and some don't have the technical ability to put one together, or just don't want to. Why do that when you can just get an XBox?
Fourth...I've started seeign this more and more lately, and its a little disturbing. It seems either subversive or blatant...handicapping the PC version of multi-platform games. Its usually something like removing a game mode from the PC version, like co-op. Most recently Doom 3's Tom Hollensend (sp?) gave his reasoning behind why there was no co-op in the PC version of the game, and quite frankly it felt like such a B.S. excuse to not have a feature that so many would actually enjoy, at least to me. I would like there to be something mroe to look forward to in the PC version of my game than higher resolutions that I don't play at because of reasons number 1 and 2 that I gave. More drastic, its the case of Spiderman 2. While I don't much like criticizing the work of other developers, why did we get....this, and not the game that was released on other platforms? In other cases, a game might not even be released to the PC at all, that was released for every other platform. It sometimes seems that there is a silent movement to sabotage the PC, or at least minimize support by the bigger establishments. This is to say nothing about the number of development teams that got killed, the majority being PC developers if I'm not mistaken?
I don't think that PCs are ever going to die out, especially with us little guys trying to carve out a piece for ourselves. Hmmm, I wonder what it would be like to have the PC be a platform that becomes independent developer-majority.....
Ah sorry, that was a bit much wasn't it. Well, if you agree disagree, annoyed, please comment :)
I came across this article yesterday regarding why the PC industry is behind consoles:
www.joeuser.com/index.asp?c=1&AID=21895&u=0
While I agreed with this article to a point, I think that it is somewhat incomplete. CD keys and checks I've found to be more of a minor annoyance than a reason not to buy a game. I really can't see them as a reason to pirate a game either. Really, if you want a game, don't have the money or just don't want to pay for it and have the resources to find it, thats enough incentive for some IMO. CD Key or not, 60 bucks or 9.99, nothing can beat free. In any case, there are issues that the PC faces that I believe stand out more than anti-piracy invention:
First, price. I think this is among the biggest obstacle for PC gaming. With the coming of more advanced consoles that aren't even half the cost of a top of the line, or even a middle-road PC, competition is tough. Even with the costs of PC hardware dropping, there is still too wide a gap costwise, and a shortening gap technologically.
Second, related to the first a bit, hardware/performance curve. I think that, for what would be the hardcore PC gamers, your average Dell isn't going to cut it performance-wise with your Far Crys and Doom 3s. You're faced with getting a $3000 Area 51 Alienware system, or building your own, which leads to the next issue...
Technical savvy. I've built about 3 PCs in my time, and consider my self pretty capable around one...but I hate doing it. I hate having to put it together in order for it to be obsolete in 6 months. I have fiddling with Windows and its myrad updates and tweaks inorder to keep it from sucking the RAM of which Inever have enough of. Things like this can turn off some people from getting a PC, and some don't have the technical ability to put one together, or just don't want to. Why do that when you can just get an XBox?
Fourth...I've started seeign this more and more lately, and its a little disturbing. It seems either subversive or blatant...handicapping the PC version of multi-platform games. Its usually something like removing a game mode from the PC version, like co-op. Most recently Doom 3's Tom Hollensend (sp?) gave his reasoning behind why there was no co-op in the PC version of the game, and quite frankly it felt like such a B.S. excuse to not have a feature that so many would actually enjoy, at least to me. I would like there to be something mroe to look forward to in the PC version of my game than higher resolutions that I don't play at because of reasons number 1 and 2 that I gave. More drastic, its the case of Spiderman 2. While I don't much like criticizing the work of other developers, why did we get....this, and not the game that was released on other platforms? In other cases, a game might not even be released to the PC at all, that was released for every other platform. It sometimes seems that there is a silent movement to sabotage the PC, or at least minimize support by the bigger establishments. This is to say nothing about the number of development teams that got killed, the majority being PC developers if I'm not mistaken?
I don't think that PCs are ever going to die out, especially with us little guys trying to carve out a piece for ourselves. Hmmm, I wonder what it would be like to have the PC be a platform that becomes independent developer-majority.....
Ah sorry, that was a bit much wasn't it. Well, if you agree disagree, annoyed, please comment :)
#2
That good enough? Geez...
07/23/2004 (12:14 am)
For your information I saw that thread and saw that the subject was on another area of that article. Rather than hijack the thread, I discussed something else.That good enough? Geez...
#3
As for whether or not the PC is dead, I would disagree with that statement and argue that it is currently not the flavour of the month. There is obviously a market for PC games, or else none of us would be here, but what the market is is the real question :)
I feel that the real problem that we have with PC games are as follows:
1) There is a real lack of innovative and enjoyable game play. It seems that a lot of the AAA guys who dictage this market have forgotten that games are supposed to be fun and they can be fun without the latest wizz-bang graphics which limit the target hardware that they can run on. They rely on eye candy to give them an edge instead of just trying to make a great game.
2) Development time & costs have skyrocketed. PC gamers demand a hell of a lot more in their games than console gamers do and they expect the next game to be better than the last. This in turn equates to increased production time & costs (when you factor in that you need to do additional testing as well for various hardware) to develop the software since you need more bodies to do the work. This is the reason why doing cross-platform (console & PC) development is so appealing because the developer and publisher can get more bang for their buck.
3) One-upping the competition. PC Game development works harder and longer to deliver a program that will defeat what its competition or potential competition can offer.
4) Install routes. Installing games for the PC can be convoluted requiring multiple steps or clicks to just install the software and then having to upgrade other items such as video drivers, DirectX, audio codecs, etc..
5) The whims of the market. We have seen a lot of great games perform poorly because it wasn't what the market wanted at that exact time (ie. Tribes versus Battlefield). With the longer development cycles of PC games its difficult to tell if the game will be a hit or a miss simply because the attitude of the market can change in the midst of development.
Also one additional though. With this new wave of eCommerce and online distribution for games, I wonder if companies like GarageGames, Shockwave, RealAracade and others who sell/distirubte games electronicly were included in the report or if it was just the traditional publishing route? This would be interesting to find out IMHO because there is nothing worse than scewed results adjusting the market.
Those are my thoughts on the subject at least.
Logan
07/23/2004 (7:44 am)
Makes sense to me Jerane to create a new post, the subject that is being discussed between the two threads is entirely different IMHO.As for whether or not the PC is dead, I would disagree with that statement and argue that it is currently not the flavour of the month. There is obviously a market for PC games, or else none of us would be here, but what the market is is the real question :)
I feel that the real problem that we have with PC games are as follows:
1) There is a real lack of innovative and enjoyable game play. It seems that a lot of the AAA guys who dictage this market have forgotten that games are supposed to be fun and they can be fun without the latest wizz-bang graphics which limit the target hardware that they can run on. They rely on eye candy to give them an edge instead of just trying to make a great game.
2) Development time & costs have skyrocketed. PC gamers demand a hell of a lot more in their games than console gamers do and they expect the next game to be better than the last. This in turn equates to increased production time & costs (when you factor in that you need to do additional testing as well for various hardware) to develop the software since you need more bodies to do the work. This is the reason why doing cross-platform (console & PC) development is so appealing because the developer and publisher can get more bang for their buck.
3) One-upping the competition. PC Game development works harder and longer to deliver a program that will defeat what its competition or potential competition can offer.
4) Install routes. Installing games for the PC can be convoluted requiring multiple steps or clicks to just install the software and then having to upgrade other items such as video drivers, DirectX, audio codecs, etc..
5) The whims of the market. We have seen a lot of great games perform poorly because it wasn't what the market wanted at that exact time (ie. Tribes versus Battlefield). With the longer development cycles of PC games its difficult to tell if the game will be a hit or a miss simply because the attitude of the market can change in the midst of development.
Also one additional though. With this new wave of eCommerce and online distribution for games, I wonder if companies like GarageGames, Shockwave, RealAracade and others who sell/distirubte games electronicly were included in the report or if it was just the traditional publishing route? This would be interesting to find out IMHO because there is nothing worse than scewed results adjusting the market.
Those are my thoughts on the subject at least.
Logan
#4
07/29/2004 (12:39 am)
I think 1,2 and 3 are directly related. I dont see a reason for fantastic artwork that takes god knows how many man-hours/$$ if the gameplay sucks. All of the titles are relying on fantastic artwork to be the next slice of wow, but I think that they have forgotten that originally it was the artwork combined w/ the play and music that made early good 3d games be fantastic. Just doing good on only one of those is just not enough. I do think that once pixel shaders are the norm we will be seeing more innovative graphics that dont rely on great models/textures, and that will be another boom in games.
#5
As far as online distribution being totalled into those numbers I would doubt it since the data usually comes from NPD. Currently online revenue has been the domain of casual games and not worth comparing to shelf driven console and PC sales numbers.
I think those targeting fan bases online for casual or hardcore gamers need to pay attention to a clear modding path (read level editor), supporting game play in niches where larger publishers can't make money. The other lesson is to think about how your gameplay could be migrated to other platforms like handheld and possibly console play.
07/29/2004 (10:48 am)
Jerane it will be interesting with Doom3 and HalfLife2 pushing us back to the hardware store for shader enabled 3D graphics cards how sales in the PC market of these titles will be effected. Multiplayer, modding and higher quality graphics have sustained the hardcore PC game market. Its clear that consoles makers are going to overcome those issues. For larger developers having reduced support for a single hardware profile and less chance of warez makes it so that the PC is a port that in most cases becomes a least cost issue rather than increased performance issue to continue to have revenue from the PC platform.As far as online distribution being totalled into those numbers I would doubt it since the data usually comes from NPD. Currently online revenue has been the domain of casual games and not worth comparing to shelf driven console and PC sales numbers.
I think those targeting fan bases online for casual or hardcore gamers need to pay attention to a clear modding path (read level editor), supporting game play in niches where larger publishers can't make money. The other lesson is to think about how your gameplay could be migrated to other platforms like handheld and possibly console play.
#6
07/31/2004 (10:55 am)
@Jay: I too am interested in seeing how Doom3 and HL2 affect hardware sales. I'm sure you can bet that the video hardware creators are practically salivating at the release of these games. I wonder how the arrival of those PC "consoles", Phantom and Apex, will affect hardware or other factors of PC sales. I really wish that they had a better public face, among other things.Quote:As far as online distribution being totalled into those numbers I would doubt it since the data usually comes from NPD. Currently online revenue has been the domain of casual games and not worth comparing to shelf driven console and PC sales numbers.I really do wonder, that as indie developers create more games aimed at the hardcore gamer set, will those players migrate towards the online distribution path? They are already used to the +200mb download, this might be just a step up :)
Torque Owner Gonzo T. Clown
www.garagegames.com/mg/forums/result.thread.php?qt=20180
.....