Is PC Gaming Dying?

I've been a PC gamer for over 10 years

For as long as I can remember people have been asking this same question, is PC gaming dying? And yet despite that it continues to grow.

PC gaming isn't DYING, exactly. Consoles are just becoming more like PCs.

Originally Posted by Fod
PC gaming isn't DYING, exactly. Consoles are just becoming more like PCs.

But will there be room for three increasingly-PC-like consoles AND a PC?

well, I read the article, and I must say I appreciate the pages with nice links.

However, since I just listened to the podcast (which as a sidenote I tell ya, the podcasts are getting better and better and the banter is really nice and refreshing - even though your audio issues are appalling) makes it hard to read this article as a separate entity. Joe reiterates most of what was discussed in the cast here, but to a somewhat greater detail. I found it hard to appreciate this by itself for what it is, and wish that I had listened to the podcast after reading this instead.
My suggestion is that when the two are similar themed, can you release the article before the podcast, as the podcast format supports the more conversational tone as 'two friends talking' and makes it easier to follow the highlighted points in the article. Vice versa it just felt like repetition, can't really explain it more than that, just my impression.

Otherwise - thank you for the article and I look forward to more Joe segments!

Originally Posted by CardJoe
But will there be room for three increasingly-PC-like consoles AND a PC?

yes, because you can never put a good RTS game onto console controls without dumbing it down.

and console controls will never become keyboard and mouse, because the mass market want simple colourful controllers. putting in good keyboard and mouse will unbalance multiplayer FPS games.

the other games genre, however will probably be ports. as said in the article, publishers want to make the most money, and it's only achieved by dumbing down for the console crowd.

in short, large AAA titles won't be PC exclusive at all in the future :( in a way, i see this as death of PC gaming.

this was almost a poetic reading...

Originally Posted by wuyanxu
yes, because you can never put a good RTS game onto console controls without dumbing it down.

Yeah neither of this gens consoles could have coped with SupCom they had neither the ram nor graphical horse power to do it justice and that is of course ignoring the control issue.

Tbh i'd be happy with multi-platform releases if they just tried a bit harder even just the menu interface in some cases would be nice. Batman AA looks like its on the right track for a well done multiplatform release. Despite my dislike of the UE3 engine they seem to have done a good job in the port and integrated some cool PC only stuff.

Regarding the review code, you can see there point in sending the x360 version when they can track a lot of 0 day releases to pre-release code from unscrupulous web sites.

It will never die. You will never do your office work on a console so while the platform is there, developers will exploit it. Anyway, keyboards and mice are far superior to duel sticks :D.

Originally Posted by wuyanxu
yes, because you can never put a good RTS game onto console controls without dumbing it down.

and console controls will never become keyboard and mouse, because the mass market want simple colourful controllers. putting in good keyboard and mouse will unbalance multiplayer FPS games.

I'd question that, purely as devil's advocate. I think most of the mass audience doesn't care about the interface as long as it looks simple and just works, so a keyboard may be acceptable. I'd also say that an RTS would would VERY well with a good implementation of a motion sensitive or camera-based interface.

Also, as discussed in the article, that single point isn't enough and there's nothing to stop developers from "just dumbing it down" (or abandoning the genre altogether, for the larger publishers) if they make more money from consoles.

It's like with keyboards. The DVORAK layout is much better than a QWERTY layout, but the QWERTY is the one which became standard and which everyone would claim to prefer (in a mass market). It doesn't matter if the keyboard is better, not if the dual sticks or motion controller is 'good enough' for the mass audience that publishers are increasingly targeting.

dying? more like consoles destroys the pc gaming industry
why?, just look at wolfenstein, its more made for crappy consoles than the PC, many other games also goes after consoles instead of the superior graphics technology and performance of PCs

a good example of superior PC games like crysis
http://www.bit-tech.net/gaming/pc/2007/11/16/crysis/1

a Radeon HD 4870 class graphics card is 2 times faster than Radeon HD 2900 (Xbox 360) and faster than Geforce 7800 (Playstation 3)

so consoles are outdated, PCs for the WIN!

Regarding the piracy part: i must admit i was quite disappointed you totally missed mentioning the fact that DRM is ineffective.

Do you honestly believe the piracy rates for World of Goo would have been any different if DRM was added? I don't think so at all myself.

I'm not advocating piracy, but it's going to happen regardless to a certain extent.
Publishers should be looking at ways to encourage people to buy the game, not punishing everyone with DRM (which gets removed on pirated copies, arguably making the pirated copy a superior product)

which leads to the next point:

There are people who use pirated games as demos, but they’re likely such a minority it’s hardly worth considering.

I think you're underestimating this part.

PC demos (or more precisely, the lack of) are quite a big problem at the moment. On top of testing whether you like the game or not, demos can be quite essential for testing if a game will run on your PC.
I must admit i've downloaded a game in the past to test if it'll run, and it takes a great deal of willpower to go buy the game afterwards when you have a 'free' copy downloaded and installed already. whereas if there was a demo, you'd not have the full game, so the hassle to download vs buying stacks the odds more in the legal side's favour.

That said, it is getting a little better of late (i've racked up quite a few purchases on steam after trying demos)

I do very much agree on the digital distribution thing. Steam is a very dangerous thing for my bank balance (curse you steam weekend deals! *shake fist* :) )

Those niggles aside, i did like this article a lot :)

Gotta admit, this is probably the first article I have fully read all the way through and I must say I found it amazingly good.
So two thumbs up for the article.

I personally believe that it isn't dying, just slowing down a tad. I'm a PC gamer purely because I can get most console games on my PC but with better graphics. If I want FPS' and Graphically demanding games then I use my PC.
If I want new, old school games (Mario, Zelda, Metroid, blabla) I use my Wii.
Can't be bothered with a PS3, never have liked sony and and Xbox is basically a downgraded PC (or upgraded depending on your PC :P). So as long as PC games are out, I'm still in.

I have a Xbox 360 and love playing the games that are supposed to be played on the console and its great fun with the xbox. I do PC game but not that often and it is cheaper to own a console as games on the PC require alot more if you don't want to be playing it in low settings.

I don't mind buying games for the PC as long as it worth it! But on consoles for Map packs for Call of duty i hate it that you have to pay for them but I've done it i think that when you buy a game that part of the game should be a FREE update.

for me its not a question of whether pc gaming is dying, its all about what kind of an industry we will have a few years from now?

are we looking at increasingly homogenised console ports and casual games or will there be something left for the hardcore gamer? In the end i would hate to see companies that make good, well thought out rpg/rts/fps start dumbing down content so that it works with a controller.

all in all though i think the future is generally bright, look at the games due to come out this year. we've got a lot to look forward to and plenty of reasons to own games on the pc rather than a console. games like Dragon Age, Batman, MW2 all of them are going to look better, be easier to play and cheaper on PC

Originally Posted by wiak
dying? more like consoles destroys the pc gaming industry
why?, just look at wolfenstein, its more made for crappy consoles than the PC, many other games also goes after consoles instead of the superior graphics technology and performance of PCs

a good example of superior PC games like crysis
http://www.bit-tech.net/gaming/pc/2007/11/16/crysis/1

a Radeon HD 4870 class graphics card is 2 times faster than Radeon HD 2900 (Xbox 360) and faster than Geforce 7800 (Playstation 3)

so consoles are outdated, PCs for the WIN!

I would type a wall of text in response to this but... i don't think it's really worth the effort and i'm in a hurry anyways.

Originally Posted by cyrilthefish
Regarding the piracy part: i must admit i was quite disappointed you totally missed mentioning the fact that DRM is ineffective.

Do you honestly believe the piracy rates for World of Goo would have been any different if DRM was added? I don't think so at all myself.

I'm not advocating piracy, but it's going to happen regardless to a certain extent.
Publishers should be looking at ways to encourage people to buy the game, not punishing everyone with DRM (which gets removed on pirated copies, arguably making the pirated copy a superior product)

which leads to the next point:

Quote:

There are people who use pirated games as demos, but they’re likely such a minority it’s hardly worth considering.

I think you're underestimating this part.

I don't think it is ineffective - just ineffective for a large portion of the market. There's never been any big investigation into piracy rates that I know of, so it's dangerous to assume one way or the other. So I didn't.

The point is that, yes, piracy is going to happen regardless - but likely because of people who never would have bought the game anyway and who should be utterly discounted from any statisitcs. The sensible reaction isn't to argue against DRM, it's alert publishers to the fact that gaining a pirate doesn't equate to losing a sale, not always.

I agree with you about the lack of demos being a pain - but, on the other hand, that's no excuse and I have zero sympathy or time for the people who pirate a game to just try it out. Not only do they usually not buy the game anyway (and often just play the pirated version past any reasonable demo points, spoiling their own arguments) because, as you say, it takes a lot of willpower - but they are also adding figures to 'the piracy side'. It doesn't matter if they THEN buy the game as well, because at best their figures just come out at zero sum in the eyes of publishers. It's all about the figures and, at the end of the day, if you're bolstering piracy figures in any way, you're only making it worse for yourself and (worse) everyone else in the long run.

That said, as I point out in the article, anonymity and the disregarding silence of most likely pirates means that not only will the not read any of this, but they'd not reply or care either - so I can't expect my opinion to change anything if put across like that. Like the publishers, I'm too trying to think of reasonable approaches to combat piracy - only I have to think from a journalistic point of view and find a way to attack attitudes, not defend software.

Originally Posted by crompers
and cheaper on PC

For me - that really is going to be a critical point in the future. If PCs stay cheaper, things could improve massively.

Theres still too many downsides to the consoles hardware and software side to become superior. Like the netcode for Gears of War 2 wich seems to favor the host all the time, and suck for everyone else.

And here I go buying a £100 wireless adapter for my console, only to hear that it's mostly useless in competitive gaming on the xbox, not to mention the lag in the wireless controllers, and terrible response on the buttons themselves, and don't get me started on the headsets.

Still I see no problem for the consoles in the future to fix all this, and actually embrace the mouse as an aiming-device. However the developement of motion-sensitive controllers for the consoles seems not to favor this view.

For some titles I can't even see the point in developing it for the consoles. They are just too perfect on the PC and would become useless on a technically inferior machine. Take most FPS games for instance, CS 1.6, Stalker, Left 4 Dead and Team Fortress 2, all games that are in my view, utilizing the computer and mouse to perfection.

Originally Posted by wiak
a Radeon HD 4870 class graphics card is 2 times faster than Radeon HD 2900 (Xbox 360) and faster than Geforce 7800 (Playstation 3)

so consoles are outdated, PCs for the WIN!

Must admit this concerns me too.

With all the console makers rambling about 'this console generation being a long one' and that the next revision won't be for 4-5 years or more, the fact most games are made for consoles then ported is really starting to hold things back :(

consoles are struggling to keep up now, whats it going to be like in 4years?

Originally Posted by CardJoe
For me - that really is going to be a critical point in the future. If PCs stay cheaper, things could improve massively.

particularly with the price of MW2 and people talking in the media about £70 videogames and the like. if the rise of digital distribution and cheap broadband is anything to go by PC games could be getting cheaper in comparison to console games by the year.

I know this is a tad bit off topic but I see no problem with the price of MW2. I expect to pay maximum £40 and play have got it for £35. I paid £40 for GTA:VC back in 2003 so maybe it's just me but I see no problem with the pricing of PC games.
Infact Ignore that. I would delete it but it'd make more sense if I kept it. I've just rephrased that sentence in my head and came out with :- I don't mind paying £40 for games but, only if I know they're gonna be good. Recently I have seen myself not buying many PC games due to this. So Yeah I agree with you crompers but I'll still pay for MW2.

Originally Posted by El Rando
I know this is a tad bit off topic but I see no problem with the price of MW2. I expect to pay maximum £40 and play have got it for £35. I paid £40 for GTA:VC back in 2003 so maybe it's just me but I see no problem with the pricing of PC games.
Infact Ignore that. I would delete it but it'd make more sense if I kept it. I've just rephrased that sentence in my head and came out with :- I don't mind paying £40 for games but, only if I know they're gonna be good. Recently I have seen myself not buying many PC games due to this. So Yeah I agree with you crompers but I'll still pay for MW2.

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/gaming/2009/07/17/call-of-duty-modern-warfare-2-to-cost-55/1

Originally Posted by CardJoe

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fod
PC gaming isn't DYING, exactly. Consoles are just becoming more like PCs.

But will there be room for three increasingly-PC-like consoles AND a PC?

consoles will never really become like PCs becasue of the reduced functionality. you just cant make something as functional at that price

2 cents

Everyone here in asia has a computer and no console (excluding japan) an arcade xbox360 costs 1966 rmb = 290$ in china

any country in asia can show that pc gaming isn't dead

any person can show you that pc gaming isn't dead because they own a computer. however the crysis market will always be niche' don't you think?

Piracy is a problem, no doubt about it. Arguments as to why it happens don't stack up against the figures. But equally the figures widely reported are wrong. There is no good data on piracy rates for most games they are often just guesses.

I think the PC game sellers are doing themselves no favours spending 3 times as much money on marketing than development. That might work on the console but on the PC (are far older and mature market) games need to be original first, as we have seen it all before. The Xbox 360 is making money out of old games ported to it on a fairly regular basis, trying to rehash old games on the PC with slightly spiffy graphics doesn't work at all well.

The Xbox/PS3 likely have younger gamers than the PC and its this difference that means the games are more novel there. PC gamers expect more from their releases now, since they have played that genre over and over. The resurgence of the indie studio is all about re-injecting the trial of new ideas for games and has a good chance of making those studios a big success. Introversion recently has completely lost its way, trying to sell Multivinia into as many markets as it can. That game sucked so why are they doing it?!

Equally selling movie tie ins on the PC is always going to fail because the audience knows they are rubbish and has seen it all many times. They vote with their feet. The teenagers however tend to want these games, despite how bad the mechanics of the game actually is.

So really my point more than anything is that games that are good sell well, and bad games don't. If you want success on a PC the game has to be novel, whereas the consoles can make money selling old popular PC games as its not on that platform already.