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

Forums - PC - Valve's Doug Lombardi on PC Gaming

So here it is:

http://www.shacknews.com/featuredarticle.x?id=873

 Quotes:

"There's this kind of roller-coaster ride: the consoles launch, their PR agencies go out and do everything they can to try and say the PC is dying, they'll prop up the sales of the console, the console starts to get old in the tooth, the PC starts leapfrogging in terms of graphics and bigger releases. So we're almost what, mid-way through the console lifecycle now? So yeah, over the next two years the story's going to come back that the PC is bigger, things like Left 4 Dead and Spore, the id titles are going to come out and everybody's going to be like, "Wow, those console titles are looking kind of crappy."

"Shack: Do you guys ever get tired of the same old "PC Gaming Is Dying" stories?

Doug Lombardi: I mean, I think, we sort of laugh at it. Because we've been wildly successful--we're very fortunate, you know. Our games have all done really, really well, Steam has taken off and become this whole other business for us, Valve has never been in better shape--and yet everybody is talking about how in the PC world, the sky is falling. And we're like, we've been doing this for 10 years now--actually 12 years since the company started, 10 years since the first game came out--and we've never been in better shape, financially or otherwise."

 "We don't understand why that story gets traction over time. I think people have finally started to clue in to the fact--there was a story last week where people finally looked at the online subscription revenues for WoW and all the things that look like WoW, and realized, wow, there was a butt-load of cash being made here that wasn't being counted at the register, at retail, in North America, which is where all these stories come out of."

 

Shack: Does the responsibility lie somewhat with the hardware manufacturers to market their products in a reasonable way, or is it up to the developers to set sane requirements?

Doug Lombardi: Oh I think it's totally the fault of the developers. Totally the fault of the developers. I mean the graphics guys, their job to keep pushing the envelope, and as they push the envelope, move the lower-end cards down to a nice price point, so that there's always this evolution that's happening. If you're a hot rod type of guy, and you want to spend $400 on the latest thing, you want to have a smoking machine, and when Left 4 Dead comes out you want to run it at its highest resolution with killer framerates, and call your buddies over for a beer and make them all drool over your system, awesome. But if you're just a guy who wants a decent PC for less than a thousand bucks, and wants to be able to run games on it, there should be a card out there that runs games at a decent famerate and decent fluidity. Then it's on us to write for both of those guys.

 "You know, it's hard to be able to have games that scale, and to write performance on the high end, and write performance on the bottom end, but you know, winning in any industry means some hard work, and there's a certain level of hard work that developers have to take responsibility for. And when you see games that do that, where they have solid gameplay, and they scale well across machines, usually those games do well."

 --

sorry if it's been posted, couldn't find it 



the words above were backed by NUCLEAR WEAPONS!

Around the Network

Squilliam posted it on the "The real winner of the gaming generation" thread, but I think it deserves a thread of it's own.

Btw, I suggest everyone interested to read the entire interview, it's a great read, and it's not really big.



Nice interview. Where's ssj12? (for the "PC wins everything" remarks)



I wonder how many other developers can say that.
I can't think of anyone else other than Valve and Blizzard as they're probably the few companies that can profit PC main. Not to mention their back up money makers, steam/WoW.

Setting moderate requirements is good for the majority of audience and I agree but at the same ltime lets not forget its games like Crysis that evolve graphics. Otherwise we'd be stuck at 10 year old graphics.



crappy old school NES games are more entertaining than next-gen games.

I'm glad to see that someone in the biz gets it. Not every likes to upgrade their PC every month and a lot of the games look great even at lower settings. (especially since I am comparing them to ps2 graphics that I have been looking at for the past 7 years)