bit-gamer.net

Blizzard: PC gaming is not dying

Blizzard: PC gaming is not dying

Blizzard reckons the PC games industry has enjoyed steady growth despite concerns of atrophy.

Blizzard's Rob Pardo has claimed that, contrary to the constant doom-saying, the PC games industry isn't dying and has actually enjoyed steady growth.

Speaking to GI.biz, Pardo said that 'The PC is as healthy as ever.'

'From our experience our games continue to sell better than the last ones,' said Pardo. 'I always laugh because as long as I've been in the games industry, every year I'm asked 'is PC gaming dead?' But it keeps on growing despite the fact it's been pronounced dead 20 times.'

Blizzard are reaping all the benefits of the market size too and has sold three million copies of StarCraft 2: Wings of Liberty already this year. Check our StarCraft 2 review for more information.

Oh, and there's World of Warcraft too, which has grown to 12 million paying subscribers this year and is about to get a new expansion, Cataclysm. Check our World of Warcraft: Cataclysm preview for more info on that.

'The PC games industry and the gaming industry is super healthy,' he said. 'It's always been tough to do metrics in any industry and especially once you start having a lot of digital distribution it's hard to capture the real metrics of the health of the industry. Even if you look at something like NPD there's still an estimation involved there, they don't really have real-time data from every retail chain. By necessity they're guessing.'

Discuss in the forums.

66 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply
Phalanx 26th October 2010, 11:41 Quote
Well, now I don't feel so bad after getting lambasted on these forums earlier in the year ;)
robots 26th October 2010, 11:50 Quote
I wonder how he accounts for PC sales of New Vegas being only 10%.
Fractal 26th October 2010, 11:55 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by robots
I wonder how he accounts for PC sales of New Vegas being only 10%.

Just because consoles account for a large part of the market doesn't mean that PC gaming is dying. Besides, 10% of what?
l3v1ck 26th October 2010, 12:00 Quote
You need two things to make a success of PC gaming.
1) Know your target market
2) Produce good innovative games.

Companies that complain have usually produced uninspiring dross.
Kúsař 26th October 2010, 12:04 Quote
PC gaming isn't dead, but it's golden era is gone. Lack of LAN support, crappy controls and user interface, dumbed down games...that's rather unfortunate state of PC gaming.
Centy-face 26th October 2010, 12:05 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by l3v1ck
You need two things to make a success of PC gaming.
1) Know your target market
2) Produce good innovative games.

Companies that complain have usually produced uninspiring dross.

Might I add a supplement to #1? Don't treat us all like leeching pirates.

Blizzard have ruffled my feathers a bit recently with their actions towards cheating in solo and a few other things but I don't really care as WoW and SC2 don't interest me I'm patiently awaiting WarCraft 4. Diablo 3 not so much either because Torchlight 2 and at some point GrimDawn will keep me more than happy.
CardJoe 26th October 2010, 12:07 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by robots
I wonder how he accounts for PC sales of New Vegas being only 10%.

Source?
xaser04 26th October 2010, 12:09 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fractal
Quote:
Originally Posted by robots
I wonder how he accounts for PC sales of New Vegas being only 10%.

Just because consoles account for a large part of the market doesn't mean that PC gaming is dying. Besides, 10% of what?

10% of total sales (for the game) I would assume.
sotu1 26th October 2010, 12:10 Quote
[QUOTE=Centy-face]
Quote:
Originally Posted by l3v1ck
Diablo 3 not so much either because Torchlight 2 and at some point GrimDawn will keep me more than happy.

Did you really find Torchlight that great a game? I found it a fun blast but I never went back to it. TL2 might be different....
robots 26th October 2010, 12:14 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fractal
Quote:
Originally Posted by robots
I wonder how he accounts for PC sales of New Vegas being only 10%.

Just because consoles account for a large part of the market doesn't mean that PC gaming is dying. Besides, 10% of what?

10% of all sales, in the UK at least. Pretty pathetic, and doesn't look good for the PC, especially considering the game is so perfectly suited to PC. It works great on mouse and it doesn't even require top end hardware.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CardJoe
Source?

"Bethesda's new Fallout game has entered the UK all-formats chart at number one. A considerable 60 per cent of New Vegas' sales were made on Xbox 360, with 30 per cent attributed to PS3 and 10 per cent to PC. "

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2010-10-25-uk-chart-fallout-new-vegas-wins-big
Autti 26th October 2010, 12:22 Quote
Just because console gaming is bigger than PC gaming doesn't make PC gaming dead.
tad2008 26th October 2010, 12:25 Quote
I still prefer playing games on the PC anytime over that of a console and being able to add no-cd patches to my games so I don't have to hunt around for a disk just to play a game and make us of an xbox controller that uses a standard USB connection to play some specific titles that suit that control method over keyboard and mouse (e.g. Fahrenheit). FPS and RTS games will always be better on PC because of the keyboard and mouse. At least on my PC I have a choice of control methods I wish to use for a game, at least where games support them.

As for Fallout: Las Vegas only supposed to have contributed to 10% of sales, I really am not at all surprised since it is using such an old engine, 2006 wasn't it? Sounds like developers got lazy to me and wanted an easy earner earner, if they had at least upgraded the engine or built upon it to make Las Vegas a much better game than Fallout 3 was itself, then maybe it would have sold more all round.
MiNiMaL_FuSS 26th October 2010, 12:31 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by robots
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fractal
Quote:
Originally Posted by robots
I wonder how he accounts for PC sales of New Vegas being only 10%.

Just because consoles account for a large part of the market doesn't mean that PC gaming is dying. Besides, 10% of what?

10% of all sales, in the UK at least. Pretty pathetic, and doesn't look good for the PC, especially considering the game is so perfectly suited to PC. It works great on mouse and it doesn't even require top end hardware.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CardJoe
Source?

"Bethesda's new Fallout game has entered the UK all-formats chart at number one. A considerable 60 per cent of New Vegas' sales were made on Xbox 360, with 30 per cent attributed to PS3 and 10 per cent to PC. "

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2010-10-25-uk-chart-fallout-new-vegas-wins-big

Dosn't help that New Vegas looks awful by PC standards - I've got it at 1900x1200 with ultra on everything and can't stand it....console gamers wont even reliase bless um
nukeman8 26th October 2010, 12:32 Quote
Personally i think PC gaming is just ahead of the time compared to consoles.
Digital downloads will be the main source of purchasing games in the future and is most likely the main source of pc game downloads now.

The last 10 pc games i have brought have all been via digital downloads, infact i can't remember the last time i went and brought an actual hard copy of a pc game.
I reckon consoles will suffer as a result eventually, very easy to download games onto your 1tb hard drive on your pc but try and do that to an xbox's 120gb hard drive, soon fills up and the cost of hard drives for consoles is ridiculous too.
Paradigm Shifter 26th October 2010, 12:37 Quote
Even if the big PC gaming industry "dies" because all of the big publishers decide that consoles are better... indie games will still go strong.

Aside from Just Cause 2, which has had me hooked from the moment I loaded it up, every single PC game this year that has held my attention and kept be going back to it has been a little indie release. They might not be the most graphically impressive, but indie devs seem to put a passion into their games that just doesn't seem to be there for the big ones any more.
Jezcentral 26th October 2010, 12:38 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by robots
"Bethesda's new Fallout game has entered the UK all-formats chart at number one. A considerable 60 per cent of New Vegas' sales were made on Xbox 360, with 30 per cent attributed to PS3 and 10 per cent to PC. "

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2010-10-25-uk-chart-fallout-new-vegas-wins-big
That's UK retail figures, then?

Considering over 50% of PC sales are supposed to be digital now, that makes their sales 20%, not too shabby in a market that is console dominated, unlike, say, Germany or the Asian markets.
Dead4life 26th October 2010, 12:39 Quote
I would expect that NV's initial sales reaching only 10% on PC is because fallout 3 was dross.

Console gamers don't recognise dross, for them its all spelt in leet, with copious amounts of case mixing and itlaics.
[USRF]Obiwan 26th October 2010, 13:08 Quote
Console gamers accept that graphics now is the same as 5 years ago. PC gamers demand better/latest graphics technology in games. PC gamers invest in hardware to run these games so it is absolutly logical that PC gamers 'require' a higher standard, as in not console ported games.

The cause (to me) for the downfall of PC gaming (if there is any) is game developer/publishers that make games for consoles are expecting the same result on the PC when porting the game to a PC. Fact is that they deny the fact that PC gamers are demanding high quality games on their expensive hardware setups.
Guinevere 26th October 2010, 13:21 Quote
This 10% figure... and that includes steam sales yes? That's where I got my copy from, and yes I know it cost me a fiver more than from play, but having it just working from the get-go is worth the money in my book.
crozon 26th October 2010, 13:24 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by robots
I wonder how he accounts for PC sales of New Vegas being only 10%.

Good god, really, really. You do know it does not take DD into account.

Its the number one seller on Steam and Direct2Drive.

Most gamers don't buy physical copies anymore. Everyone i know buys the digital copies.


15,784 (online now) 38,145 (peak today) Fallout New Vegas

Thats the stats off the Steam page right now.

Now show me how many concurrent players on the 360 and PS3. I bet the PC has more players than the PS3 but maybe less than the 360
BRAWL 26th October 2010, 13:33 Quote
So when are we going to get all the digital download stuff added straight to our graphs and watch console gamers go "oh right.... so they aren't dead".

While many people I know have consoles, they play PC games just as much.

How can anyone say "PC gaming is dead because the games are bad..." Sorry? The console generation have annihilated games by making Call of Duty 9001... Halo: Combat Amobea and other games that are so generic, fast-paced, point and 'tap' games that most developers now aim for this as the accepted thing.

Give me STALKER on the PC (Bugs included), Fallout 3, A mod of CoD4 that gives us Zombies any day over the crap that is forever spouted onto the consoles of this planet.

Rant over, PC forever! Like Duke forever... we'll never go down!
TWeaK 26th October 2010, 13:40 Quote
I think PC game sales have changed dramatically, what with Steam sales and the like. We know that we don't have to pay £30-40 for a new game if we're willing to wait. While traditionally the vast majority of a game's sales would be within the first week or first month, I think this is less true for PC games now, while still expected for consoles.

As for Fallout: New Vegas, I reckon most people are waiting for the inevitable Steam sales (not long till Xmas and New Year's) and/or mods to improve and fix the game. I know I am.
Fizzl 26th October 2010, 13:46 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guinevere
This 10% figure... and that includes steam sales yes? That's where I got my copy from, and yes I know it cost me a fiver more than from play, but having it just working from the get-go is worth the money in my book.

An interesting side note for you here, I got my copy from Game (for a fiver less than steam) using the free shipping and it arrived the day before release and when I put the disk in it triggered a steam install. It's a good thing Gabe Newell is into games not world domination! :)

When ever people say PC gaming is dying I look at all the multiplay events and the sponsorship they attract, I look at all the great games currently in development and the big names like Blizzard, EA, Valve, Bethesda and Microsoft all publishing exclusive and cross platform titles for the PC and doing well. An industry that is still generating millions of sales during a recession is doing fine.

Sure there are a lot of junk games these days, it's the same with consoles, just don't buy the crap ones!

PS Go buy New Vegas, it's far better than Fallout 3 and don't forget hardcore mode!
cgthomas 26th October 2010, 14:10 Quote
I blame Microsoft and OEM's for not marketing the PC as a powerful and a more superior gaming-platform.

It's much cheaper, more efficient more powerfull than consoles and has always been a all-in-one media system.
GravitySmacked 26th October 2010, 14:30 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guinevere
This 10% figure... and that includes steam sales yes? That's where I got my copy from, and yes I know it cost me a fiver more than from play, but having it just working from the get-go is worth the money in my book.

Out of interest why was it not working from the get-go for boxed copies? They're tied to Steam anyway so got patched immediately.
heir flick 26th October 2010, 15:21 Quote
Ive lost count of the number of times ive read pc gaming is dead and here i am still playing games on the pc, after 10 years or so of the old pc game dead rubbisb its quite boring now. ( the pc is dead long live the pc )
digitaldunc 26th October 2010, 15:57 Quote
PC Gaming certainly isn't dying for Blizzard, being in possession of some of the most lucrative IP in the gaming industry.
Mattmc91 26th October 2010, 16:03 Quote
PC gaming isn't dying, it's just stuck.


P.S Dunc, you suck <3
Er-El 26th October 2010, 16:32 Quote
PC gaming is the single most popular gaming platform in the world. More popular than the DS and PS2 was. So how could it be dead!?
kornedbeefy 26th October 2010, 17:21 Quote
The only people who say PC gaming is dying are ex-PC gamers who want it to die becuase they decided to go console, their fail and devs like EPIC (Cliffy B) who are just dicks. EPIC loves to put out negative press releases concerning PC gaming.

PC gamers know better. If your the type of gamer who looks beyond hyped AA titles there are dozens of worthwhile games released every year for PC. There was a downturn when the 360 released but over the past 2 years the PC has been back on the rise to popularity. As soon as it clears the shadow of consoles and some devs realize PC is where it's at again we should see more exclusives for PC...at least developed first with PC in mind then downgraded for console. In the meantime I there are still

The biggest issue facing PC games is the removal of classic PC gaming features like LAN play, dedicated server and draconian DRM. It's up to us to write and complain to these devs/publishers stating our concerns.
Showerhead 26th October 2010, 17:40 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by TWeaK
I think PC game sales have changed dramatically, what with Steam sales and the like. We know that we don't have to pay £30-40 for a new game if we're willing to wait. While traditionally the vast majority of a game's sales would be within the first week or first month, I think this is less true for PC games now, while still expected for consoles.

As for Fallout: New Vegas, I reckon most people are waiting for the inevitable Steam sales (not long till Xmas and New Year's) and/or mods to improve and fix the game. I know I am.

This along with DLC. I think the last game i bought on release was Mass Effect 2. I know that if I wait a few months to a year i get it far cheaper, the bugs are fixed, there will be well developed mods of it and possibly the edition I buy will include all the DLC
supermonkey 26th October 2010, 17:50 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by nukeman8
I reckon consoles will suffer as a result eventually, very easy to download games onto your 1tb hard drive on your pc but try and do that to an xbox's 120gb hard drive, soon fills up and the cost of hard drives for consoles is ridiculous too.
Can you cite any figures for the percentage of PC gamers that have a 1TB or greater hard drive? I know I don't, and neither do any of my friends, if I recall. Furthermore, how many average PC gamers use up that much space with game files? When you're talking about console gaming, the hard drive is typically filled with game files, and perhaps a some media files as well. Your average PS3 is not filled with 2TB of video and music files.

Although you first mentioned the XBOX, you went on to state that the cost of hard drives for consoles was ridiculous. The XBOX and PS3 use standard hard drives, and while the XBOX does require a hack to upgrade the drive yourself, anyone can upgrade the PS3 hard drive using a standard 2.5" notebook drive. Again, how much space does the average gamer use to store game information on the console, compared to all the other files that comprise the contents of the average computer hard drive?

But that's all beside the point, really. "PC gaming is dying," "Console gaming is dying," and "PC gaming is so much better because of ________" are all such blanket statements that fail to take into account any number of factors. Are the graphics in PC games necessarily better than console games? Perhaps. In some cases they may be, provided your PC is powerful enough to max out all the details. But that ignores one the basic aspects of a good - and top selling - game: the game play itself. A lot of people love to deride the Wii as a childish toy with stupid games with poor graphics. But for the millions of people who bought one, making it a best-selling console, it provided good bang for the buck. The Wii was so ineffective with it's party game culture and motion-translating controllers that Sony later produced the Playstation Move and Microsoft is now pushing the Kinect.

In my opinion, the whole PC vs Console debate is about as useful as the PC vs Mac debate. I happily play games on the PC, PS3, and Wii. I think all 3 have their strong points.
nukeman8 26th October 2010, 18:01 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by supermonkey
Can you cite any figures for the percentage of PC gamers that have a 1TB or greater hard drive? I know I don't, and neither do any of my friends, if I recall. Furthermore, how many average PC gamers use up that much space with game files? When you're talking about console gaming, the hard drive is typically filled with game files, and perhaps a some media files as well. Your average PS3 is not filled with 2TB of video and music files.

Nope no figures to quote but at the rate of hard drive development is 1tb hard drive far off from being pretty standard? doesn't seem long ago that 30gb hard drives were pretty good.

I didn't realise ps3's used standard 2.5" hard drives so my point about cost is only valid for the xbox360 then.
Basically my point was aimed at standard users, you go into a shop and compare a xbox 360 120gb drive to a pc 120gb drive, the price difference is shocking.

Also im not on about average users, im on about gamers, both pc and console gamers.
An average user will have his hard drive filled up music/documents/videos etc not needing much space but you take a peek into a pc gamers hard drive and i bet a lot of it is games/game related.
Sensei 26th October 2010, 18:36 Quote
PC gamers pay a lot of money for their rigs. Most of our graphics cards cost as much as a console so for any developer to snub the pc market then I say they are fools. Yes sir, fools. The problem pc gamers are having is that there is so much piracy, some developers are getting so fed up with being stolen from that theyre taking extreme measures. Ubisoft for example are pretty much digging their own pc grave in my opinion. Anybody in this industry knows that pc gaming will never die out, they just need to figure out how to get more money from us without pissing us all off as were fussy *******s when it comes to good quality.
I dont see the problem with online activation or a telephone call to activate a game so why are some companies wasting milions in creating crappy new drm tools only to have them hacked on the day of release. Steam is the way forward imho.
billysielu 26th October 2010, 18:53 Quote
There are so many games that suck hard - that's why it seems like it's dying. But if you're Blizzard, able to make games that are actually worth playing - then you're fine.
Sloth 26th October 2010, 20:02 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by nukeman8
Nope no figures to quote but at the rate of hard drive development is 1tb hard drive far off from being pretty standard? doesn't seem long ago that 30gb hard drives were pretty good.

I didn't realise ps3's used standard 2.5" hard drives so my point about cost is only valid for the xbox360 then.
Basically my point was aimed at standard users, you go into a shop and compare a xbox 360 120gb drive to a pc 120gb drive, the price difference is shocking.

Also im not on about average users, im on about gamers, both pc and console gamers.
An average user will have his hard drive filled up music/documents/videos etc not needing much space but you take a peek into a pc gamers hard drive and i bet a lot of it is games/game related.
Look at the latest Steam Survey and you'll see that being a "gamer", even on PC, quite frequently has nothing to do with being a PC enthusiast or having the latest hardware. There's a fair chance that this elite breed of gamer will still have some terrible Dell with a 250GB hard drive, and that it will still be cluttered with music/documents/videos.

Or you'll be cool like me and get an SSD and have to cram only your favorite games onto it ;)
thelaw 26th October 2010, 20:23 Quote
Before the playstation consoles came out consoles died after sega....consoles will eventually die again, there is one thing for sure is the PC remains steady through and through..
Star*Dagger 26th October 2010, 20:38 Quote
PC Gamer until we have Holodecks, consoles are for Beer and Pretzel gamers who will never compete with PC Gamers.

CCP has the right idea, make consolers the biatches of the Pc Gamers, ala Dust, lol.

Yours in Superior PC Gaming Plasma,
Star*Dagger
frontline 26th October 2010, 21:31 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sloth
Quote:
Originally Posted by nukeman8
Nope no figures to quote but at the rate of hard drive development is 1tb hard drive far off from being pretty standard? doesn't seem long ago that 30gb hard drives were pretty good.

I didn't realise ps3's used standard 2.5" hard drives so my point about cost is only valid for the xbox360 then.
Basically my point was aimed at standard users, you go into a shop and compare a xbox 360 120gb drive to a pc 120gb drive, the price difference is shocking.

Also im not on about average users, im on about gamers, both pc and console gamers.
An average user will have his hard drive filled up music/documents/videos etc not needing much space but you take a peek into a pc gamers hard drive and i bet a lot of it is games/game related.
Look at the latest Steam Survey and you'll see that being a "gamer", even on PC, quite frequently has nothing to do with being a PC enthusiast or having the latest hardware. There's a fair chance that this elite breed of gamer will still have some terrible Dell with a 250GB hard drive, and that it will still be cluttered with music/documents/videos.

Or you'll be cool like me and get an SSD and have to cram only your favorite games onto it ;)

Yes, it is fun trying to move games around to and from a backup HDD onto an SSD based Steam folder to play - i need a second SSD just for steam... :)

Steam forums do make interesting reading whenever a new game comes out - it isn't long before someone asks why the game won't run smoothly on their laptop with integrated graphics.
thehippoz 26th October 2010, 23:34 Quote
think blizzard is going to have some competition for warcraft finally when guildwars 2 releases.. I hate anet is doing the duke nukem 'it's ready when it's ready'

blizzard is so rich.. I mean imagine- you have monthly income and a set server/staff cost.. reminds me of oil
StoneyMahoney 26th October 2010, 23:34 Quote
I think PC gaming is dying.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to London to tell the Queen that the sky is falling.
nukeman8 26th October 2010, 23:44 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sloth
Look at the latest Steam Survey and you'll see that being a "gamer", even on PC, quite frequently has nothing to do with being a PC enthusiast or having the latest hardware. There's a fair chance that this elite breed of gamer will still have some terrible Dell with a 250GB hard drive, and that it will still be cluttered with music/documents/videos.

Or you'll be cool like me and get an SSD and have to cram only your favorite games onto it ;)


Disagree there but that's off topic.
Digital downloads will be the main way of acquiring games in the future, it most likely already is for the PC, as far as im aware there's no easy way of telling how many games have been brought for the PC other than from retail shops?
Like i mentioned earlier i have stopped buying hard copies of pc games and i know many other people have to.
Partly reason why you see either no or very little pc games in retail shops these days,
It's normally cheaper to buy them online, normally get access to play them quicker to and of course the fact you cant sell 2nd hand pc games.

I also think 2nd game sales will eventually be the ruin of console's as we know them but that's for another topic :D
wafflesomd 27th October 2010, 07:13 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kúsař
PC gaming isn't dead, but it's golden era is gone. Lack of LAN support, crappy controls and user interface, dumbed down games...that's rather unfortunate state of PC gaming.

That's why I got a PS3. Now my games just work.
robots 27th October 2010, 07:20 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by crozon
Quote:
Originally Posted by robots
I wonder how he accounts for PC sales of New Vegas being only 10%.

Good god, really, really. You do know it does not take DD into account.
Says who?! How do you know?

And just because it's the number one seller on steam and d2d, doesn't mean it's a good seller. There is a lot of blind denial in this thread which is sad for a supposedly high tech forum.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MiNiMaL_FuSS
Dosn't help that New Vegas looks awful by PC standards - I've got it at 1900x1200 with ultra on everything and can't stand it....console gamers wont even reliase bless um

I'd have thought it would help. Look at WoW. Old school looking with basic graphics, but does incredibly well because anyone can play it, even on laptops.
veato 27th October 2010, 08:17 Quote
I started gaming on a 486DX2/66 with 4MB RAM and a Cirrus Logic 5428 1MB VLB graphics card. I moved onto a Voodoo2 and over time and many upgrades arrived at a Q6600, 4GB and GTX275 OC. I've ploughed many years and a lot of money into gaming over the years.

Not being a self righteous, up my own arse, elitist, self proclaimed "hardcore" gamer though I have over this same period owned a MegaDrive/MegaCD (which I sold to help buy my first PC), Saturn, Dreamcast, PS1, PS2, Xbox, Xbox360 and PS3 - the missus had a Wii and DS too.

I consider myself to be a gamer. Someone who plays - and can enjoy - games on a variety of platforms regardless. If you chose a single platform (PC) that doesnt make you "hardcore" or more of a dedicated gamer than someone who plays on console. Of course consoles can be more accessible to certain gamers who simply want to play the lastest (console) games but so what. Are they less of a gamer because they didnt build their own rig!

The platform does not make a gamer. The PERSON is the gamer.

And the suggestion that consle gamers do not know dross is a load of crap too. I bought NV on 360 and yes it uses an old engine, still has the same old bugs, is limited graphically on the 360 too. But you know what, as an experience its a pretty good one. I'm 13 hours in and really enjoying it.

What do I know though. I'm playing it on 360 so I'm just not "hardcore".
wafflesomd 27th October 2010, 09:50 Quote
Seems like pc gaming is kind of in a rut.

We have some pretty powerful GPU's and CPU's out now, but developers really aren't making games to take advantage of it all. Developers need to start using all this hardware to create more intricate experiences for players to become immersed in.

I think that a platform is only as good as the titles that are released on it. For me, that means that the PC is lacking right now. The number of good titles coming out on consoles outweighs PC releases right now. I would really love to play No More Hereos or GoW2 but I don't own any consoles ATM (I have a PS3 but the BD is dead...).

Seems to be a lack of new IP's these days. I'd like to see more NEW and original games, not sequels.
impar 27th October 2010, 10:35 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Originally Posted by supermonkey
Can you cite any figures for the percentage of PC gamers that have a 1TB or greater hard drive?
http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/
StoneyMahoney 27th October 2010, 11:23 Quote
People get caught up focusing on all kinds of things that have little to do with the actually practical aspects of PC vs Console gaming. Generally they argue about processing power and storage and networking and expandability issues, but considering how they constantly evolve over time and hardware generations to allow space for increasingly hungry and feature-laden games no matter what platform you're on, let's ignore them for the moment. Let's also ignore anything but gaming as well and take all the extra crap all these platforms are capable of (web browsing, video processing, work etc) as read.

A PC typically has a keyboard, mouse, monitor and speakers. A games console sits under a TV somewhere and has a custom-designed controller. That's the difference. It's entirely practical. Everything else is transient.

PCs are more suited for FPS and RTS games, anything that needs a complex control system or unassisted aiming, and are best suited for a single user. Consoles are more suited for multiplayer games where all the players are in the same room. When you boil the arguments down and generalize the whole argument (which you should - we're talking about the entire market here, not just personal preferences) that's what you're left with.
impar 27th October 2010, 11:38 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
The Many, Many Deaths Of PC Gaming

Join us for a nostalgic look back at a decade of waiting for PC gaming to die.
Noostroi 27th October 2010, 15:43 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by robots
Says who?! How do you know?

http://www.chart-track.co.uk/index.jsp?c=p/about/methodology/index.jsp
Quote:
Chart-Track reports are based on over-the-counter retail sales where the data is captured electronically each day from retailers' EPoS systems.
supermonkey 27th October 2010, 15:44 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by impar
Greetings!

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/
I figured someone would link to the Steam survey. According to their survey, just under 18% of their users have 1TB or more.

The next question is how that percentage can be expanded to generalize the entire PC gaming market. For that, we need to create a clear set of guidelines so that we know exactly what we're trying to measure. What is PC gaming? Is it just the hardcore titles? does it include all the fun LEGO games? What about all the casual games, such as Plants Vs. Zombies?

Like I said, it's kind of a fruitless debate.
connos 27th October 2010, 16:33 Quote
For New Vegas, note that Steam sales can not be reported. For sure is much more than 10% as at some country's PC gaming is bigger than consoles. Germany for example.
Yslen 27th October 2010, 17:04 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kúsař
PC gaming isn't dead, but it's golden era is gone. Lack of LAN support, crappy controls and user interface, dumbed down games...that's rather unfortunate state of PC gaming.

I'd say that's the unfortunate state of gaming as a whole. As it has become more mainstream it has also been dumbed down, in the same way everything must be to become mainstream. Personally I'd like to see more developers taking a risk with deep and complex games, they might just be surprised by how well they sell. Look at stalker, which has done well despite the numerous (understatement alert) bugs.
Sloth 27th October 2010, 19:28 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by supermonkey
I figured someone would link to the Steam survey. According to their survey, just under 18% of their users have 1TB or more.

The next question is how that percentage can be expanded to generalize the entire PC gaming market. For that, we need to create a clear set of guidelines so that we know exactly what we're trying to measure. What is PC gaming? Is it just the hardcore titles? does it include all the fun LEGO games? What about all the casual games, such as Plants Vs. Zombies?

Like I said, it's kind of a fruitless debate.
Personally, I feel it's fair to assume that anyone with Steam is a PC gamer, regardless of their purchases. I say purchases are unimportant because "PC gamers", as defined by only those who buy hardcore titles for PC, are roughly equivalent to the term "hardcore gamer" anyway since console games of all types are rarely considered to be hardcore. So the "PC gamer" group would include all of those who purchase games for the PC, games which run as their own application or through a digital distribution application. This cuts out browser based games such as Farmville or online poker.

With that definition, Steam is obviously not required to be a PC gamer, however the nature of all Steam users being PC gamers (by my view) shows that Steam can be used to determine the approximate hardware and games purchases of PC gamers who do not have Steam based on the hardware an games purchases of those who do. There's little reason to believe that being a PC gamer without Steam has any impact on a person's hardware.

In addition, Steam has a very large number of users. A survey of millions covers so many different potential users that its data can be safety applied to similar users outside the survey. Those with an inclination towards playing games of all sorts on their PC will likely be well described by the Steam survey.
supermonkey 27th October 2010, 21:53 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sloth
With that definition, Steam is obviously not required to be a PC gamer, however the nature of all Steam users being PC gamers (by my view) shows that Steam can be used to determine the approximate hardware and games purchases of PC gamers who do not have Steam based on the hardware an games purchases of those who do. There's little reason to believe that being a PC gamer without Steam has any impact on a person's hardware.
That's certainly fair enough, but it does bring something else to mind. The steam survey was brought up as a reference to the point about a PC gamer's hard drive. It was suggested that PC gaming benefits from larger hard drives, and consoles suffered because their hard drives were small and not easily upgraded.

It's interesting that in the context of this debate, one has to distinguish between being a PC gamer and being a console gamer. In reality, as demonstrated in this thread, a person can be both.

Perhaps the reality is that as some game developers have been opening up the casual gaming market over the last few years, the distinction between gamer and non-gamer isn't as clear as it once was. It's more of a gray area as casual gamers go on to try out the occasional big title. Quite a few of my friends play WoW, but don't really engage in any other gaming save for the odd party game on the Wii.
robots 27th October 2010, 21:58 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by wafflesomd
We have some pretty powerful GPU's and CPU's out now, but developers really aren't making games to take advantage of it all. Developers need to start using all this hardware to create more intricate experiences for players to become immersed in.

This is a known issue, and it's because of the consoles. There are very few PC exclusive games anymore. Most stuff comes out on all formats so graphically it all gets dragged down by the lowest common denominator, which is the Xbox 360. If they make the graphics too good, it just wouldn't run on the X360. The only alternative is to make multiple versions and that is far more costly.

With a PC exclusive it's far better for us. Look at Crysis for example, it's still better looking than most games out there.
Quote:

Fair enough. I still think it looks bad though.
SMIFFYDUDE 28th October 2010, 04:24 Quote
Does the great unwashed even know PCs are capable of gaming? Seriously.
nukeman8 28th October 2010, 10:19 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by supermonkey
The steam survey was brought up as a reference to the point about a PC gamer's hard drive. It was suggested that PC gaming benefits from larger hard drives, and consoles suffered because their hard drives were small and not easily upgraded.

Not that they suffer right now but unless something changes then i think they will suffer.
mastorofpuppetz 28th October 2010, 16:09 Quote
With regards to actually getting TRUE PC games, it is in bad shape. Low res graphics, console inerfaces, yadda, yadda, yadda. No one in their right mind thinks PC is in good shape. Not dying, but its surely not in a good position.
supermonkey 28th October 2010, 17:03 Quote
I'm curious as to why "low res" graphics are indicative of a decline in PC gaming. While I understand the visual appeal of hyper-realistic graphics, surely the hardcore gamer community is smart enough to appreciate good, quality game play over bloom and real-time water reflections.

Then again, I'm still a bit confused as to why gamers even care what platform they use. Current consoles are already glorified desktop computers, and I suspect the next generation will look and function even more like a PC. It's not hard to imagine plugging a mouse and keyboard into a PS4 or a Nintendo Whoopty-Doo. I think, from a gamer's perspective, there should be more emphasis on good gaming titles, full stop. Nevermind the distinction between consoles and PCs.
Jaberw0cky 28th October 2010, 22:44 Quote
In the past I've been a console gamer, largely because 10 years ago all I had was a Dell with integrated graphics that refused to run anything particularly sparkley. Since then I've gone through 3 PS2s, a Wii, a DS, untill my 360 exploded in firey death. While I had my 360 I built my current PC to be a multipurpose gaming rig. I've had both 360 and PC copies of the Orange Box, Fallout 3, and Oblivion. Given the option, I would pick the PC every time for these games. On the PC the Orange Box, TF2 in particular, enjoys almost constant updates via Steam, and both my FO3 and Oblivion installs have been modded far beyond thier vanilla installs, my Oblivion folder is currently somewhere around 4Gb. This sort of modding simply isnt possible on consoles.

I have also played the PC and 360 versions of Mirrors Edge, and I would actually take the 360 version, simply to cut down on the farting around that comes with booting my PC, and while the PhysX enhancements look sparkley, to me they didnt actually add anything to the game.

Going on a tangent, I can still play my PS2 games on my PC, using a wired 360 controller and an emulator. As far as I'm concerned, the PC isn't going anywhere, and where there are PC's, there will be PC gaming.

I think cross platform games should be made for PC first, then scaled down for console hardware. It's got to be easier to cut features out than add features to something that didn't have them to begin with.
Sloth 28th October 2010, 23:25 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by supermonkey
That's certainly fair enough, but it does bring something else to mind. The steam survey was brought up as a reference to the point about a PC gamer's hard drive. It was suggested that PC gaming benefits from larger hard drives, and consoles suffered because their hard drives were small and not easily upgraded.

It's interesting that in the context of this debate, one has to distinguish between being a PC gamer and being a console gamer. In reality, as demonstrated in this thread, a person can be both.

Perhaps the reality is that as some game developers have been opening up the casual gaming market over the last few years, the distinction between gamer and non-gamer isn't as clear as it once was. It's more of a gray area as casual gamers go on to try out the occasional big title. Quite a few of my friends play WoW, but don't really engage in any other gaming save for the odd party game on the Wii.
Shh, you're bringing up tough questions ;)

Fallout: New Vegas is a title that also seems to walk the line. On one hand, it's the latest in the traditionally hardcore Fallout franchise. On the other hand, it's a AAA title that is becoming very popular with even the more casual gamers, PC and console alike. Its relatively low system requirements even allow for traditionally "casual" gamers to play the PC version.

Or MW2, or the Halo franchise. I've heard cases of people actually buying a 360 for the sole purpose of playing MW2, and never playing any other games. What does that make a person?

PC gamer or console gamer are easy to define, particularly if you don't consider them to be mutually exlcusive, but you bring up a very interesting point about how hard it is to define the raw term "gamer".
Quote:
Originally Posted by supermonkey
I'm curious as to why "low res" graphics are indicative of a decline in PC gaming. While I understand the visual appeal of hyper-realistic graphics, surely the hardcore gamer community is smart enough to appreciate good, quality game play over bloom and real-time water reflections.

Then again, I'm still a bit confused as to why gamers even care what platform they use. Current consoles are already glorified desktop computers, and I suspect the next generation will look and function even more like a PC. It's not hard to imagine plugging a mouse and keyboard into a PS4 or a Nintendo Whoopty-Doo. I think, from a gamer's perspective, there should be more emphasis on good gaming titles, full stop. Nevermind the distinction between consoles and PCs.
The reason for the console bashing, at least my reason, is exactly what you say. They're slowly becoming PCs. At first, when computers were not nearly as functional as they are today, consoles made sense. However, as both PCs and consoles have evolved we are now able to see that the console's evolutionary path is headed to where PCs already are. It makes little sense to walk the steps in between when we can jump straight to the end.

The only strong reasons I see for console development to continue are these:
-Proprietary peripherals allow for games to be more smoothly designed around their controls. A quick look at any third party USB controllers for PC quickly shows how problems could arise if standards were not set.
-Standalone hardware setups on the PC side are still slightly behind consoles. The increase in mITX hardware is helping, but it's still not quite there.
-PC operating systems are not currently designed with "plug and play" gaming in mind. Console operating systems are much better designed for running games off discs, or easily installing them off discs.

As you say, a gamer's priority should be the game, not the medium. Placing all games on one medium helps increase the focus on the game. It eliminates the frustrations that come with platform exclusives which hurt the gamer in the interest of making money for the console manufacturer. The PC, being something which most modern families already own and simply don't apply to gaming, becomes the logical choice for the single gaming platform.
smc8788 29th October 2010, 01:06 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by supermonkey
I'm curious as to why "low res" graphics are indicative of a decline in PC gaming. While I understand the visual appeal of hyper-realistic graphics, surely the hardcore gamer community is smart enough to appreciate good, quality game play over bloom and real-time water reflections.

PC gamers are used to PC games continually pushing the boundaries when it comes to graphical quality. Of course we want our games to look good, who doesn't? There's nothing wrong with that, it's just that instead of still moving forward, it seems we're moving backwards (or at least stagnating) due to something that isn't related to PC gaming at all...console hardware. That's not necessarily the fault of the consoles themselves, more the developers who aren't putting in the same time and effort to make PC games stand out from the consoles. You can't really blame them either to be honest, since games take so much longer to make and/or are made by a much larger group of people that making an AAA game these days is a huge investment, so it isn't worth it to them financially.

The vast majority of the big titles released in the last few years are released on all the major platforms (PS3, 360 and PC), which contrasts with say 10 years ago when a lot more games were either made for console or for PCs and could be optimised accordingly. When you're making a game for all plaforms you have to go by the lowest common denominator and, if you're particularly nice, scale the graphical quality up to PCs accordingly (it's pretty obvious when they haven't taken the time to do this - i.e. Fallout NV). It's this platform homogenisation which is particularly frustrating, because there is still a massive hardware gap between PCs and consoles just like there was 10 years ago...we just aren't seeing it reflected in the games we buy. To some people this isn't a problem since it means they won't have to upgrade their graphics card every 12 months, but if you feel that way you might as well buy a console anyway. It's not too much to expect some kind of development IMO, but it seems there's very little incentive for developers to spend time and money on it now when the current generation of consoles aren't up to it, and the result is that there is less and less incentive to choose the PC as your gaming platform of choice. How can PC gaming be expected to thrive or grow when most developers are effectively pushing people away from it?

It's not just about graphics either, you can tell when a developer has just been plain lazy and ported things straight over from the console code. Things like menus or in-game control systems which have been clearly developed for consoles have been barely - if at all - changed for the PC version.

Being a PC gamer these days is like being the forgotten child who has to just stand by and watch as their parents lavish the younger sibling with attention and expensive gifts. No wonder we have come to resent them...
robots 29th October 2010, 01:34 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by SMIFFYDUDE
Does the great unwashed even know PCs are capable of gaming? Seriously.

I think they know, but I think the average person can't be bothered with a PC. They do require some amount of hassle compared to a console. They also require some knowledge how to run them and maintain them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by supermonkey
I'm curious as to why "low res" graphics are indicative of a decline in PC gaming. While I understand the visual appeal of hyper-realistic graphics, surely the hardcore gamer community is smart enough to appreciate good, quality game play over bloom and real-time water reflections.
Well we all like nice graphics and as said above, PC gamers are used to games pushing the boundaries year after year. This has almost stopped though now. It was a reliable trend since PC's began, and now for the first time ever, it has reached some roadworks.

I think most PC gamers appreciate gameplay over graphics, and you can tell that by looking at the popularity of games like Portal, and New Vegas which use old-ish engines, and even moreso, games like Minecraft and WoW. But when new games that are reaching us are dumbed down for dumb gamers, simplified for console controls, and are not even good looking either.. then yeah, we are very bothered.
Quote:
Originally Posted by supermonkey

Then again, I'm still a bit confused as to why gamers even care what platform they use. Current consoles are already glorified desktop computers, and I suspect the next generation will look and function even more like a PC. It's not hard to imagine plugging a mouse and keyboard into a PS4 or a Nintendo Whoopty-Doo. I think, from a gamer's perspective, there should be more emphasis on good gaming titles, full stop. Nevermind the distinction between consoles and PCs.

That is exactly what I predict, and hope, for the future. Consoles are always going to be cheaper than PC's, simply because they are mass produced. An Xbox is basically a PC packed in to a nice box, and uses all standardised components. I only haven't switched yet because it lacks a keyboard and mouse. It also lacks an OS flexible enough to allow me to work on it. Give me those three things, and pack it all in a console that I can no doubt buy for half the price of my current PC, and I will happily stop being a PC gamer and become a console gamer.

But for now, I can't switch. I can't play MMO's on consoles, I can't work on them, I can't store mass quantities of data internally, and I can't play games like RTS's and FPS's with a mouse which is pretty obviously superior to a gamepad for those kinds of things.
memeroot 29th October 2010, 01:56 Quote
its not about the hardware its about the OS... duh!!!!

anything else its about the barrier to entry

phones cost $800 but 'free' with contract... consoles cost 200$ but games cost xxx

sh*t my insert button just fell off.... thank you cherry! (stuck it back on - cherry = easy)

has anyone moved out of the 70's?
Speculant 30th October 2010, 22:06 Quote
Um, "Consoles" ARE "PCs". The only difference is the operating system.
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums