By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - PC Discussion - Great PC Gaming/Console Gaming Editorial by Brett Thomas (Bit-Tech)

Check this out its a wonderful read.

 "There are three types of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics."
- Samuel Clemens


Have you seen the news? We're doomed! Doomed, I say! Clearly, we've lost the fight - PC gaming is going down.

The sky, it is a-falling. Or something like that.

Many of you reading this are shaking your heads. What, you don't believe me? You mean our games aren't truly disappearing in a puff of smoke? But, but...I read it on the label! The headline said it! And the study said...

"Nine tenths of all studies performed are severely lacking in rational grounding, planning or design."

Whoops! Wrong study. That one is totally made up, anyhow. Ignore that. What I meant to give you was this one, right here:

"PC Games account for only 14 percent of total game sales."

There we go. That's some pretty heavy stuff. Only 14 percent - that means 86 percent of games sales are consoles! Clearly, we are going down, ladies and gentlemen. Like the Titanic. Or a ton of bricks. Or a Xenon-filled balloon.

Needless to say after looking at some of the responses in our own forum thread (amongst others who published this 'news'), you're still not buying it. And by the look of it, most of you didn't miss a trick when you looked at how the study was conducted. There's one very obvious flaw, but before we get to that I'd like to touch on some of the less obvious implications.

First of all: what are we counting as PC games? It's a pretty broad topic, don't you think? What about Internet-based Flash games? Things like Bejeweled, Sudoku and countless other little brain-teasing, time-wasting gifts of productivity loss courtesy of Popcap, Pogo, et al. What, you don't think they're paid for? Advertisers salivate over those things like a Pavlovian dog!

"First of all: what are we counting as PC games? It's a pretty broad topic, don't you think?"

This type of game has massive user bases and tremendous amounts of play-time. They show up in bunches of workplaces, or as time-wasters for many non-savvy computer users at home. And for the most part, you'll only find them on the PC. Games like this rely on the flexibility and availability - the ubiquitous computer and Internet means nearly permanent availability.

Many people will argue that these don't constitute "video games" proper - but I strongly disagree. After all, one of the top sales for the Nintendo DS is the Brain Age series. And another great release, Puzzle Quest, is Bejeweled on steroids with a plot. So why are these things ignored when they're on PC, but counted on consoles?

And while we're on the "console" point, isn't it about time we separate handheld from home-based? After all, I can't exactly tote either my PS3 or my PC around. Therefore, buying decisions for my handy DS aren't really going to be influenced by what I have on the shelf for the big systems. Adding these in doesn't even make sense - they're not direct competition at all.

So, that drops our list of consoles down by two, one of which just happening to be the biggest seller in games and units - the Nintendo DS. Suddenly, PC sales may look a little rosier. But if not, you also have to keep in mind that there are still five different entries in the "console" market - the Xbox, Xbox 360, PS2, PS3, and Wii - each entirely different from the next in terms of purchases.

Suffice it to say, there are a lot of missed factors in this "study" (we'll continue calling it that for lack of a better name that isn't insulting). But one aspect completely stood out to pretty much everyone - it didn't even look at digital distribution. Allow me to repeat this in a more meaningful way:

A study that examines PC video game sales does not include the Internet - which has already been chosen as the method of choice for nearly all PC-related content delivery from music to movies to software. And games are starting to catch up, too.

How relevant is digital distribution to PCs? Well, let's think about this. When was the last time that you brought home a disc of updates for your operating system? Maybe browsed the Internet via CD copies of the sites? Perhaps you've recently sent email by copying the text to a floppy and mailing it?

No? Why is that? Oh, it's probably because the Internet has been so thoroughly integrated into the PC that it is impossible to ignore its impact any further. In fact, it's plain old dumb. We buy everything through the Internet these days - some people even buy groceries via the web.

"...The Internet has been so thoroughly integrated into the PC that it is impossible to ignore its impact any further."

But anyhow, back to games. How many of you readers bought something off of Valve's Steam network, or Direct2Drive? My guess (from previous threads on our forums) is quite a few of you. Despite the love of a cardboard box and manual, more and more of you are growing to love the change from buying things being an epic journey to a background process.

I can't really blame you - to be honest, it's far more convenient than buying discs. You get the right to immediately re-download it at any time, no hassle activation or CD-based copy schemes, can make backup discs if you want and your games get patched automatically. It's really quite a sweet package.

The whole world, in all its informational forms, has begun to move to digital distribution. From news to books to music, the balance is shifting. And in all of these areas, you can find people measuring the effect it has on the market. Everywhere except the most tech-savvy places: the software and games market. Does anyone else see a problem here?

Granted, you can't blame the study providers alone. I've attempted to get some figures for just what constitutes the digital sales perspective, and you know what I found? A big brick wall.

Valve doesn't discuss Steam sales. Direct2Drive, part of IGN, doesn't really respond to phone calls - nor does anyone specifically answer questions regarding this topic when you can corner them. But why hide it?

 The problem lies in their business model - they're each a small part of an otherwise large organisation. The income does not ever need to be disclosed separately, as if it were its own business. And the companies would rather keep it tight to the vest - releasing gross sales would then require releasing net profits on those specific sales, and not every company wants you to know how much dough they're raking in.

And here, we reach a conundrum - how do you account for sales figures that aren't released, even when you know they're substantial enough to impact the equation? The answer, it seems, is that we don't - and I can understand that, from a statistical approach. You can't account for data you don't have.

What bugs me, though, is the industry's pretence like it doesn't matter. And what bugs me even further is that they do have volumes of information on one form of digital distribution: piracy. That figure will be subtracted from brick-and-mortar retail market sales to come up with the 'net sales' of the PC industry.

The industry as a whole is content to tell us, "We don't know how much you bought, but we know how much you stole!" What does this tell us, as consumers? Our legal sales don't matter, but illegal downloads do.

What's even more frightening is that CEOs and Presidents of companies are "listening" to this to excuse flagging sales. Mark Rein already jumped up to cry about the figures, stating that consoles are killing the PC market. It won't be long before he and John Carmack put their heads together at some symposium or whatnot, explaining how consoles outstrip PC sales because of piracy and how the gamer is the real culprit killing the industry.

"We don't know how much you bought, but we know how much you stole!"

It's almost as if the industry secretly wants the PC to fall - and it's not that hard to understand why. The beat of ever-marching technology improvements means PC games require more work and go obsolete faster, meaning more money on engine development and less on sheer production. Nobody really buys a year-old PC game; whereas, since consoles don't change technologically, an older game can look as new and crisp as a fresh release - but with the added benefit of an established gamer base.

Unreal Engine 3 will probably live as long as the Xbox 360 - it's really the height of what the console is capable of. So all things forward can be developed on that engine, and they're good to go for another three years or so. Trust me, Microsoft isn't in a rush to release the Xbox 720 or whatever it’ll be called. Nobody aside from Nintendo is interested in making a new console until they have to- they cost too much and dilute your user base. On the flip side, the PC has already surpassed Unreal 3 - one look at Crysis makes it look like, well, last year's engine.

Look, the truth is, PC gaming does have its share of problems. The continually moving technology introduces tremendous market confusion and ever-increasing requirements. Piracy is rampant, albeit probably not to the advertised detriment of the industry. And a divided user base between different operating systems and hardware specs means some gamers demand bleeding edge while others couldn't cut through cottage cheese.

But none of these things have been a death knell. They've always existed - and for nearly as long as there have been PCs, there have been consoles. None of this has really changed anything. The continual evolution and multipurpose nature of the PC makes it always at the forefront, even if it's never at the top of the sales charts.

In fact, only one thing has changed - the industry itself. What used to be a myriad of independent developers, each working to create the next best mousetrap for mere survival and to eke out a decent living, has turned into a wasteland made up of a few giant conglomerates stomping on the users below in a struggle for who will dominate the whole market.

They snap up the little guys, put them into the machine, and spit out the post-processed Call of Duty 76 and Halo 19. Games get ported across eight (yes, eight!) different platforms in various shells, often cross-linked with other parts of the "entertainment industry." Shots will be fired, giants will fall and be assimilated to create a bigger, unified giant.

"It's almost as if the industry secretly wants the PC to fall..."

And when the final bogus study is released by the new Mega-IGN-Eurogamer-whatever conglomerate, we can see the CEO of the last media outlet standing tall in his suit, telling us to "Welcome our new benefactors. PC Gaming is dead."

But it's not PCs that will have died, and it's not consoles that will have won. Consoles are just the tool most convenient for the purpose - locked down systems that can prevent outside innovation without significant initial investment. It's gaming that will have died, and a single corporate monolith that won. The same rehashed game sold eight different ways - that will be consumer "choice."

At one point in our history, the sky did fall - bedroom developers making too many crappy, poorly thought out games brought the industry to its knees in the early 80s. This time, the opposite is true - too few developers making too few new games. However, there are a lot of poorly thought out releases...at least one thing is consistent.

And all the while, the industry can chuckle - releasing statistics to justify the move toward bigger corporate ideals, blaming piracy and technology while they buy up the next big thing before it can get released and seed another giant. There is but one goal - get bigger.

Get bigger, big enough to break the sky. Congratulations, monoliths. The most recent sales statistics say "you're winning." 

 

 

This editorial is a great read and definitely points out flaws about whats going on in the overall industry and shows why PC gaming is no where near dead.

 

Source: http://www.bit-tech.net/columns/2008/02/02/the_sky_is_falling/1



PC gaming is better than console gaming. Always.     We are Anonymous, We are Legion    Kick-ass interview   Great Flash Series Here    Anime Ratings     Make and Play Please
Amazing discussion about being wrong
Official VGChartz Folding@Home Team #109453
 
Around the Network

This article is horribly misleading. It basically says, "this study left out this and this, so PC games MUST be doing better than people say!!" Which is, of course, a fallacy.

First, the impact of downloadable games on software revene seems to always be grossly overstated by PC boosters. In 2006, the revenue from full downloadable games was a paltry 0.4% of global games revenue. (Source: http://www.developmag.com/interviews/101/Developments-next-top-models-Part-2 ) Even assuming a tremendously unbelievable growth rate in 2007 (say, 100%, with all factors remaining the same, which is highly unlikely), that still means only 0.8% of game revenue came from downloadable full games. Now, assuming that "14% of game sales" = "14% of game revenue," that puts the PC at a whole 14.8% when including that percentage.

As for casual games... well, the study doesn't seem to mention whether or not they were included, but the article writer seems to think that they weren't for some odd reason. But, let's give him the benefit of the doubt for a moment, baseless as that assumption may be. From the same article, it appears that casual PC games brought in about 3.2% of global game revenue in 2006. Assuming the same astronomical, pie-in-the-sky growth rate of 100% for '07, with all factors remaining the same, that puts casual PC games at 6.4% of revenue. Add that to our above percentage, and we get 21.2% - barely over a fifth of game revenue. And, again, that's assuming an unrealistically high growth rate and that all of the article writer's baseless assumptions are true.

And, of course, casual games don't exactly help the PC garner big-name exclusives. Why, just consider the top 10 best-selling PC games of 2007:

1. World Of Warcraft: The Burning Crusade (Vivendi) - 2.25 million
2. World Of Warcraft (Vivendi) - 914,000
3. The Sims 2: Seasons Expansion Pack (Electronic Arts) - 433,000
4. Call Of Duty 4: Modern Warfare (Activision) - 383,000
5. Command & Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars (Electronic Arts) - 343,000
6. Sim City 4 Deluxe (Electronic Arts) - 284,000
7. The Sims 2 (Electronic Arts) - 281,000
8. The Sims 2: Bon Voyage Expansion Pack (Electronic Arts) - 271,000
9. Age Of Empires III (Microsoft) - 259,000
10. The Sims 2: Pets Expansion Pack (Electronic Arts) - 236,000

Take out anything with "Warcraft" or "Sim" in the name, and you're left with CoD4 (which had much higher sales on consoles), C&C3 (which had about equal sales on the 360), and Age of Empires 3 (which was released - what, 2-3 years ago?). People also overwhelmingly bought other big-name cross-platform titles (Bioshock, Orange Box) on consoles, as opposed to PCs. In addition, the PC's most touted big-name exclusives - The Witcher, Crysis, and so on - barely made 100k in sales, if that. Even if you count digital distribution, which, according to the numbers I worked out above, accounts for maybe 3-4% of PC game sales revenue.

PC gaming is dying. Just look at '08. Aside from Starcraft 2, what else with a big name is being released? A whole lot of nothing.



"'Casual games' are something the 'Game Industry' invented to explain away the Wii success instead of actually listening or looking at what Nintendo did. There is no 'casual strategy' from Nintendo. 'Accessible strategy', yes, but ‘casual gamers’ is just the 'Game Industry''s polite way of saying what they feel: 'retarded gamers'."

 -Sean Malstrom

 

 

Garcian Smith said:

This article is horribly misleading. It basically says, "this study left out this and this, so PC games MUST be doing better than people say!!" Which is, of course, a fallacy.

First, the impact of downloadable games on software revene seems to always be grossly overstated by PC boosters. In 2006, the revenue from full downloadable games was a paltry 0.4% of global games revenue. (Source: http://www.developmag.com/interviews/101/Developments-next-top-models-Part-2 ) Even assuming a tremendously unbelievable growth rate in 2007 (say, 100%, with all factors remaining the same, which is highly unlikely), that still means only 0.8% of game revenue came from downloadable full games. Now, assuming that "14% of game sales" = "14% of game revenue," that puts the PC at a whole 14.8% when including that percentage.

As for casual games... well, the study doesn't seem to mention whether or not they were included, but the article writer seems to think that they weren't for some odd reason. But, let's give him the benefit of the doubt for a moment, baseless as that assumption may be. From the same article, it appears that casual PC games brought in about 3.2% of global game revenue in 2006. Assuming the same astronomical, pie-in-the-sky growth rate of 100% for '07, with all factors remaining the same, that puts casual PC games at 6.4% of revenue. Add that to our above percentage, and we get 21.2% - barely over a fifth of game revenue. And, again, that's assuming an unrealistically high growth rate and that all of the article writer's baseless assumptions are true.

And, of course, casual games don't exactly help the PC garner big-name exclusives. Why, just consider the top 10 best-selling PC games of 2007:

1. World Of Warcraft: The Burning Crusade (Vivendi) - 2.25 million
2. World Of Warcraft (Vivendi) - 914,000
3. The Sims 2: Seasons Expansion Pack (Electronic Arts) - 433,000
4. Call Of Duty 4: Modern Warfare (Activision) - 383,000
5. Command & Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars (Electronic Arts) - 343,000
6. Sim City 4 Deluxe (Electronic Arts) - 284,000
7. The Sims 2 (Electronic Arts) - 281,000
8. The Sims 2: Bon Voyage Expansion Pack (Electronic Arts) - 271,000
9. Age Of Empires III (Microsoft) - 259,000
10. The Sims 2: Pets Expansion Pack (Electronic Arts) - 236,000

Take out anything with "Warcraft" or "Sim" in the name, and you're left with CoD4 (which had much higher sales on consoles), C&C3 (which had about equal sales on the 360), and Age of Empires 3 (which was released - what, 2-3 years ago?). People also overwhelmingly bought other big-name cross-platform titles (Bioshock, Orange Box) on consoles, as opposed to PCs. In addition, the PC's most touted big-name exclusives - The Witcher, Crysis, and so on - barely made 100k in sales, if that. Even if you count digital distribution, which, according to the numbers I worked out above, accounts for maybe 3-4% of PC game sales revenue.

PC gaming is dying. Just look at '08. Aside from Starcraft 2, what else with a big name is being released? A whole lot of nothing.


how in the bloody hell are you coming up with numbers that are not tracked? Valve has the biggest download network in the world. The Orange Box easily sold double Halo 3. 

Face it your data is grossly BS and outdated. 

You have no idea what you are talking about as you have no idea whats being released in 2008 or the fact that 90% of all indie games like Pocket Tanks outsales games like Zack and Wink.

Learn to actually have a bloody clue what your talking about before you just act like you have any idea wtf your talking about. Becasue frankly it seems you dont know anything but the feel of your WiiMote. Even GGE can actually post a better responce then you. 



PC gaming is better than console gaming. Always.     We are Anonymous, We are Legion    Kick-ass interview   Great Flash Series Here    Anime Ratings     Make and Play Please
Amazing discussion about being wrong
Official VGChartz Folding@Home Team #109453
 

@ ssj12: Did you look at the source that I included? Or, you know, even read my post at all? I could find a source for the game sales numbers, too, if you'd like. (I yanked them from another games-related forum.)

Otherwise, do you have a source for some of those claims? Like the fact that The Orange Box PC outsold Halo 3 (a game which sold something like 4.5 million copies in 2007)? Or the fact that "90% of all indie games... outsales[sic] games like Zack and Wink[sic]?"



"'Casual games' are something the 'Game Industry' invented to explain away the Wii success instead of actually listening or looking at what Nintendo did. There is no 'casual strategy' from Nintendo. 'Accessible strategy', yes, but ‘casual gamers’ is just the 'Game Industry''s polite way of saying what they feel: 'retarded gamers'."

 -Sean Malstrom

 

 

Is this data for US or global (looks like US to me). And was the article particularly looking at US market or global PC market?

I ask because the games market as a whole has fragmented to cover different tastes and pace of change. So we have some countries (not US) where PC gaming remains huge - for example didn't I see Crysis jad reached 1M? Most of those sales weren't in US that's for sure. We have a massive swing to handhelds and portable pleasures - I mean, all current consoles sales are pretty small next to the DS and PSP. We have a move in US from PC to consoles for FPS and MP gaming. We have Europre balanced between the two, etc. etc.

As for steam - I haven't seen sources but I'd be surprised, based on comments from Value and the eagerness with which others are putting their games on the service, if it wasn't delivering pretty good sales which aren't being shared. Valve is clearly showing these comapnies something which makes putting their games on the service attractive.

I also wonder how many households have multiple devices - that's something I've never seen looked at. For example I have a PC used for gaming, a PS3, a PS2, a PSP and 2 DSs in the house. What's the impact of these kinds of changes to the market?

The one thing I do agree with is that the industry (particularly from US/Europe standpoint) has rapidly followed Hollywood in favouring safe bets, big budgets and sequels over risk and innovation, which will surely result in some crashes in the near future - no doubt with the same nasty impact when a big summer blockbuster crashes and burns because they're too many big sequels, the audience is too full from the same meal served again and again, and sooner or later something has to give resulting in big losses for the title in question.



Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...

Around the Network
Garcian Smith said:

This article is horribly misleading. It basically says, "this study left out this and this, so PC games MUST be doing better than people say!!" Which is, of course, a fallacy.

First, the impact of downloadable games on software revene seems to always be grossly overstated by PC boosters. In 2006, the revenue from full downloadable games was a paltry 0.4% of global games revenue. (Source: http://www.developmag.com/interviews/101/Developments-next-top-models-Part-2 ) Even assuming a tremendously unbelievable growth rate in 2007 (say, 100%, with all factors remaining the same, which is highly unlikely), that still means only 0.8% of game revenue came from downloadable full games. Now, assuming that "14% of game sales" = "14% of game revenue," that puts the PC at a whole 14.8% when including that percentage.

As for casual games... well, the study doesn't seem to mention whether or not they were included, but the article writer seems to think that they weren't for some odd reason. But, let's give him the benefit of the doubt for a moment, baseless as that assumption may be. From the same article, it appears that casual PC games brought in about 3.2% of global game revenue in 2006. Assuming the same astronomical, pie-in-the-sky growth rate of 100% for '07, with all factors remaining the same, that puts casual PC games at 6.4% of revenue. Add that to our above percentage, and we get 21.2% - barely over a fifth of game revenue. And, again, that's assuming an unrealistically high growth rate and that all of the article writer's baseless assumptions are true.

And, of course, casual games don't exactly help the PC garner big-name exclusives. Why, just consider the top 10 best-selling PC games of 2007:

1. World Of Warcraft: The Burning Crusade (Vivendi) - 2.25 million
2. World Of Warcraft (Vivendi) - 914,000
3. The Sims 2: Seasons Expansion Pack (Electronic Arts) - 433,000
4. Call Of Duty 4: Modern Warfare (Activision) - 383,000
5. Command & Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars (Electronic Arts) - 343,000
6. Sim City 4 Deluxe (Electronic Arts) - 284,000
7. The Sims 2 (Electronic Arts) - 281,000
8. The Sims 2: Bon Voyage Expansion Pack (Electronic Arts) - 271,000
9. Age Of Empires III (Microsoft) - 259,000
10. The Sims 2: Pets Expansion Pack (Electronic Arts) - 236,000

Take out anything with "Warcraft" or "Sim" in the name, and you're left with CoD4 (which had much higher sales on consoles), C&C3 (which had about equal sales on the 360), and Age of Empires 3 (which was released - what, 2-3 years ago?). People also overwhelmingly bought other big-name cross-platform titles (Bioshock, Orange Box) on consoles, as opposed to PCs. In addition, the PC's most touted big-name exclusives - The Witcher, Crysis, and so on - barely made 100k in sales, if that. Even if you count digital distribution, which, according to the numbers I worked out above, accounts for maybe 3-4% of PC game sales revenue.

PC gaming is dying. Just look at '08. Aside from Starcraft 2, what else with a big name is being released? A whole lot of nothing.


the hell...?

Did you even read the article? Did you comprehend how important digital distribution sales are (there are a lot, and they are constantly increasing), or casual games, not like Sims the retail game, but casual downloadable games?

It suggests you shouldn't just count the cardboard box sales in big stores...yet that's all you threw out there.

And way to cut and paste from a previous thread...it OBVIOUSLY does not apply here.

And Starcraft 2? I don't even care about that.

How about Fallout 3? Left 4 Dead? Spore? These are some of the biggest PC developments in a long time.



LEFT4DEAD411.COM
Bet with disolitude: Left4Dead will have a higher Metacritic rating than Project Origin, 3 months after the second game's release.  (hasn't been 3 months but it looks like I won :-p )

Does it really honestly matter? I can't see that it does. The article seems to want to separate handhelds from consoles, so why not separate PCs from consoles too? Or perhaps we should stop pigeonholing everything into convenient categories and accept that it doesn't really matter how you classify PC, console and handheld game sales. PCs cost a lot more than consoles, but can be upgraded and thus tend to stick around in peoples' households. They also serve as a lot more than gaming rigs. And most importantly, they're a fixture in the non-gaming side of the world market.

PC game sales are not impacted in the least by console game sales, because there's honestly not a lot of overlap between the crowds. Go ahead and ask yourself: how many of the millions of console gamers out there do you suppose are also PC gamers? While it's not easy to quantify them, internet-connected ones, to be certain, are few in number. And also, what are the odds of PC gaming ever dying out? Hint: not much. Computers would have to drop out of use entirely first, and that's about as likely as Nintendo calling it quits with video games and moving into the home improvement industry.



Sky Render - Sanity is for the weak.

Garcian Smith said:

This article is horribly misleading. It basically says, "this study left out this and this, so PC games MUST be doing better than people say!!" Which is, of course, a fallacy.

First, the impact of downloadable games on software revene seems to always be grossly overstated by PC boosters. In 2006, the revenue from full downloadable games was a paltry 0.4% of global games revenue. (Source: http://www.developmag.com/interviews/101/Developments-next-top-models-Part-2 ) Even assuming a tremendously unbelievable growth rate in 2007 (say, 100%, with all factors remaining the same, which is highly unlikely), that still means only 0.8% of game revenue came from downloadable full games. Now, assuming that "14% of game sales" = "14% of game revenue," that puts the PC at a whole 14.8% when including that percentage.

ok I'll bite this. Let's analyse and juxtapose the NPD 2007 with the "Playing for Keeps" report you mentioned. The breakdown of the report is at:

Retail - 72%
Mobile - 10%
Online item-selling and Incremental downloadable content - 7.3% (almost entirely on PC)
MMO online subscription - 6.7% (pretty much unexistant on consoles)
Casual PC games - 3.2%
Online Full-game Direct Download - 0.4%
Downloadable Console Casual games - 0.1%
(there seems to be missing 0.3%, but whatever)

in US, PC has 14% of the total of the total retail market, which accounts to 10.1% of total market (14% x 72), if the PFK report is right. If you add all related to PC:
10.1% Retail
7.3% Item-selling and DC
6.7% MMO subs.
3.2% Casual PC
0.4% Full-game Direct Download

The marketshare would then be: PC 27.7%, average console 12.4%, mobile 10%. Remove Mobile out of equation and it would be:
PC - 30.7%
Average Console - 13.7%
And that's in the US. If I had applied it to Europe or Asia, the difference would be even bigger.

I think it's a terrible report, they underestimated Content delivery services like Steam, and questioned it's validity. Funny thing, in the page 22 of the report they wrote "Valve's Steam currently has five and a half million registered users, but may have peaked". The report was released October 2007, yet:

May 23, 2007 - Steam reaches 13 million active accounts

The report failed miserably.

Garcian Smith said:

As for casual games... well, the study doesn't seem to mention whether or not they were included, but the article writer seems to think that they weren't for some odd reason. But, let's give him the benefit of the doubt for a moment, baseless as that assumption may be. From the same article, it appears that casual PC games brought in about 3.2% of global game revenue in 2006. Assuming the same astronomical, pie-in-the-sky growth rate of 100% for '07, with all factors remaining the same, that puts casual PC games at 6.4% of revenue. Add that to our above percentage, and we get 21.2% - barely over a fifth of game revenue. And, again, that's assuming an unrealistically high growth rate and that all of the article writer's baseless assumptions are true.

Have you heard of Popcap Games? They sold 10 million copies of Bejeweled, mostly on PC. I remember Gabe Newell of Valve using that as an example that PC games download sales are healthy, on an interview. There was also an NPD interview that mentioned PC casual gaming, but I can't find it.

Garcian Smith said:

And, of course, casual games don't exactly help the PC garner big-name exclusives. Why, just consider the top 10 best-selling PC games of 2007:

1. World Of Warcraft: The Burning Crusade (Vivendi) - 2.25 million
2. World Of Warcraft (Vivendi) - 914,000
3. The Sims 2: Seasons Expansion Pack (Electronic Arts) - 433,000
4. Call Of Duty 4: Modern Warfare (Activision) - 383,000
5. Command & Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars (Electronic Arts) - 343,000
6. Sim City 4 Deluxe (Electronic Arts) - 284,000
7. The Sims 2 (Electronic Arts) - 281,000
8. The Sims 2: Bon Voyage Expansion Pack (Electronic Arts) - 271,000
9. Age Of Empires III (Microsoft) - 259,000
10. The Sims 2: Pets Expansion Pack (Electronic Arts) - 236,000

Take out anything with "Warcraft" or "Sim" in the name, and you're left with CoD4 (which had much higher sales on consoles), C&C3 (which had about equal sales on the 360), and Age of Empires 3 (which was released - what, 2-3 years ago?). People also overwhelmingly bought other big-name cross-platform titles (Bioshock, Orange Box) on consoles, as opposed to PCs. In addition, the PC's most touted big-name exclusives - The Witcher, Crysis, and so on - barely made 100k in sales, if that. Even if you count digital distribution, which, according to the numbers I worked out above, accounts for maybe 3-4% of PC game sales revenue.

Again, stop basing your argument on US market, it's the weakest big PC market and console's strongest, jeeesh. US PC market is just 15% of the World's PC retail market.

Crysis sold 140k NPD (November + December) - 1 million Worldwide (over expectations)
The Witcher sold 40k NPD (first month)- 1 million Worldwide (over expectations)

See my point? By the way, NPD messed up the PC figures and they just released the real Top 10 PC games 2007, in US:

Top 10 PC Games of 2007 (Corrected)

1. World of Warcraft: The Burning Crusade – (Vivendi) – 2.25 million
2. World of Warcraft– (Vivendi) – 914K
3. The Sims 2 – (Electronic Arts) – 534K
4. The Sims 2 Seasons Expansion Pack – (Electronic Arts) – 433K
5. Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare – (Activision) – 383K
6. Command & Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars – (Electronic Arts) – 350K
7. MS Age of Empires III – (Microsoft) – 313K
8. Sim City 4 - (Electronic Arts) – 294K
9. MS Flight Simulator X - (Microsoft) - 280K
10.The Sims 2: Bon Voyage Expansion Pack – (Electronic Arts) – 272K

Garcian Smith said:

PC gaming is dying. Just look at '08. Aside from Starcraft 2, what else with a big name is being released? A whole lot of nothing.

7 Big name exclusives:
-Starcraft 2
-Empire: Total War
-Spore
-Dragon Age
-Guild Wars 2
-World of Warcraft: Wrath of Lich King
-Warhammer Online: Age of Reckoning

10 AAA Exclusives:
Starcraft 2
Empire: Total War
Spore
Demigod
Dragon Age
Guild Wars 2
World of Warcraft: Wrath of Lich King
Warhammer Online: Age of Reckoning
Sam & Max: Season Two
Storm of War: Battle of Britain

And +150 exclusives.



Great article. I just got TOB off of Steam a week or two ago.

@Shio: Excellent work.



Garcian Smith said:

This article is horribly misleading. It basically says, "this study left out this and this, so PC games MUST be doing better than people say!!" Which is, of course, a fallacy.

First, the impact of downloadable games on software revene seems to always be grossly overstated by PC boosters. In 2006, the revenue from full downloadable games was a paltry 0.4% of global games revenue. (Source: http://www.developmag.com/interviews/101/Developments-next-top-models-Part-2 ) Even assuming a tremendously unbelievable growth rate in 2007 (say, 100%, with all factors remaining the same, which is highly unlikely), that still means only 0.8% of game revenue came from downloadable full games. Now, assuming that "14% of game sales" = "14% of game revenue," that puts the PC at a whole 14.8% when including that percentage.

As for casual games... well, the study doesn't seem to mention whether or not they were included, but the article writer seems to think that they weren't for some odd reason. But, let's give him the benefit of the doubt for a moment, baseless as that assumption may be. From the same article, it appears that casual PC games brought in about 3.2% of global game revenue in 2006. Assuming the same astronomical, pie-in-the-sky growth rate of 100% for '07, with all factors remaining the same, that puts casual PC games at 6.4% of revenue. Add that to our above percentage, and we get 21.2% - barely over a fifth of game revenue. And, again, that's assuming an unrealistically high growth rate and that all of the article writer's baseless assumptions are true.

And, of course, casual games don't exactly help the PC garner big-name exclusives. Why, just consider the top 10 best-selling PC games of 2007:

1. World Of Warcraft: The Burning Crusade (Vivendi) - 2.25 million
2. World Of Warcraft (Vivendi) - 914,000
3. The Sims 2: Seasons Expansion Pack (Electronic Arts) - 433,000
4. Call Of Duty 4: Modern Warfare (Activision) - 383,000
5. Command & Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars (Electronic Arts) - 343,000
6. Sim City 4 Deluxe (Electronic Arts) - 284,000
7. The Sims 2 (Electronic Arts) - 281,000
8. The Sims 2: Bon Voyage Expansion Pack (Electronic Arts) - 271,000
9. Age Of Empires III (Microsoft) - 259,000
10. The Sims 2: Pets Expansion Pack (Electronic Arts) - 236,000

Take out anything with "Warcraft" or "Sim" in the name, and you're left with CoD4 (which had much higher sales on consoles), C&C3 (which had about equal sales on the 360), and Age of Empires 3 (which was released - what, 2-3 years ago?). People also overwhelmingly bought other big-name cross-platform titles (Bioshock, Orange Box) on consoles, as opposed to PCs. In addition, the PC's most touted big-name exclusives - The Witcher, Crysis, and so on - barely made 100k in sales, if that. Even if you count digital distribution, which, according to the numbers I worked out above, accounts for maybe 3-4% of PC game sales revenue.

PC gaming is dying. Just look at '08. Aside from Starcraft 2, what else with a big name is being released? A whole lot of nothing.


Wow, are you seriously clueless?

PC Game sales are largely downloads now, and not your 0.8% (seriously, wtf? You don't seem to understand the exponential increase of technology). 

Also those numbers you have are U.S. only, which is one of the weaker PC game markets.  over 90% of current WoW subscribers have the Burning Crusade which is obviously more than 2.25 million seeing as there are over 10 million current subscribers of the game.

And there are plenty of big name PC titles, your just such a console noob that you probably have never even looked. 



PC Gamer