Ugh... Borderlands is an awesome game... but it reminds me why dedicated servers are so good.
Some of the problems with that... and it's 4 players only... I can only imagine on a much larger scale.
| Xelloss said:
And to think that consoles are inferior for gaming is to assume that everyone prefers a mouse and keyboard to a controller (true) , a more expensive peice of equiment for equivalent graphics (not relevant, PC hardware is better but underutilized due to console porting... but sometimes shines through on a good engine ( see GTA4)... or a game that had to much going on a lagged console(see Last Remnant), and a relatively small monitor instead of a TV. (erm, where did you get this from? I personally have a dual monitor setup, with one being a 32" Sony Bravia XBR and I game on it in 1080p.... and have my PS3 in a seperate HDMI. This is pretty common now.)"" |
Well, PC sales have declined for multiple reasons - during the golden age of PC gaming, piracy stole lots of sales, but it was ok, there were plenty of sales to be had. Declining sales are for many reasons (increased piracy is one - you can get a pirated games nowadays, from home, in virtually no time at all - using cracked versions in BBS days was often a hassle, and copying a game from friends didn't always work back when games required verification from manuals and such... piracy was always a problem, but not always as easy as it is today) but the fact that sales have declined for various reasons means that lost sales from piracy are more of an issue. Perhaps piracy is the same as always, but that just means that it's up, relative to sales.
My statement about consoles being the reason we have PC gaming was a general one - my reference is to is becoming a mass market business. PC games may have existed first, but they weren't a big business. Consoles brought the gaming to families and opened up a larger market.
As for calling PCs a more expensive peice of equipment - they are no doubt capable of much more thna consoles, however a $200-$300 PC is not going to deliver the gaming experience of a 360 or a PS3, and while some people have their PCs hooked into their HDTVs, it's only common among... PC gamers. A very very small % of people have that setup at home. Most people only have a large HDTV in their living room, whereas their PC is likely in their bedroom or office. And yes, you have the option, if you're a gamer, to have a nice TV in your bedroom/office - but it's something that's not economically viable for many.
My point was primarily that calling PC gaming "better", and to go so far as to say gaming in general would be better without console games is crazy. There's so much that consoles offer that PC gaming generally avoids. I myself am primarily a PC gamer - always have been, but I enjoy console games as both a change of pace, and for certain types of games. I hands-down prefer my PC over any console, but even someone as opinionated as myself wouldn't flat out say it's better.
| Jereel Hunter said: I threw out an estimate regarding sales, and granted the timing of the sales was more based on console sales as I don't generally track PC sales. However I don't believe you've actually read most of my posts, as most of my comments have been posts on piracy - not the games themselves. All I said was "chances are" the sales were primarily in the first 3 years. Yes, SC was an epic phenomenon with incredible legs - and while PC games generally have longer legs than console games, you can't say that legs anywhere near those of SC are standard. Yes, thank you, you've showed two examples, both with incredibly devoted fan bases and raved about by critics. The same could be said for some console games (i.e.) Halo:CE. Aside from which, I'm not sure how this contradicts my point at all? I believe the point I made was that PC games with long legs don't necessarily get pirated at the same rates that they sell, because pirates have no advantage of late adoption. |
You really know nothing of PC gaming, your post is so oblivious to the characteristics of PC games that I don't know where to begin.
First, the legs shown by Starcraft ARE common to PC games! If the game is great, then there's 99% probability that it will have the hundred-mile long legs of Starcraft. I showed you a recent example in Sins of a Solar Empire that is showing such legs, but there are countless examples.
If the game isn't great and just good/decent, it will still have legs of a PC game, which are LONGER than any console in existence!!
If the game is terrible, it might still have some legs, but probably not.
The thing is, you don't know crap about PC games and how their sales behave. Console games usually sell almost all copies in the first month and that's it, with few exceptions. On PC it's the other way around, since PC games keep selling for 5, 10, 15 years and more, and this is more true than ever because of Digital Distribution. Imagine now, with DD, where every PC game will never run out of shelf space.
The first month of sales of a PC game is probably less than 15% of the total lifetime sales, in most cases. This is what you need to get into your mind.
I still don't know why you even bring up piracy. Sure, PC devs would've been better without piracy, but PC games are selling better than ever, and there are more PC games being developed than ever.
| Xelloss said:
|
Although you've risen some reasonable points with the rest of your post, I'm only focusing on the part above. First, PC gaming was never bigger than consoles gaming. Why? Console gaming existed before PC gaming. PC games only stared coming around when the second generation of consoles were starting to be released. Better yet, In the second generation, consoles were already selling dozens of millions of consoles, while PC were only selling by the thousands.
Only 48 thousand PCs were sold in 1977. How many millions did consoles sell in 1977!?
| Jereel Hunter said: Well, PC sales have declined for multiple reasons - during the golden age of PC gaming, piracy stole lots of sales, but it was ok, there were plenty of sales to be had. Declining sales are for many reasons (increased piracy is one - you can get a pirated games nowadays, from home, in virtually no time at all - using cracked versions in BBS days was often a hassle, and copying a game from friends didn't always work back when games required verification from manuals and such... piracy was always a problem, but not always as easy as it is today) but the fact that sales have declined for various reasons means that lost sales from piracy are more of an issue. Perhaps piracy is the same as always, but that just means that it's up, relative to sales.
My statement about consoles being the reason we have PC gaming was a general one - my reference is to is becoming a mass market business. PC games may have existed first, but they weren't a big business. Consoles brought the gaming to families and opened up a larger market.
As for calling PCs a more expensive peice of equipment - they are no doubt capable of much more thna consoles, however a $200-$300 PC is not going to deliver the gaming experience of a 360 or a PS3, and while some people have their PCs hooked into their HDTVs, it's only common among... PC gamers. A very very small % of people have that setup at home. Most people only have a large HDTV in their living room, whereas their PC is likely in their bedroom or office. And yes, you have the option, if you're a gamer, to have a nice TV in your bedroom/office - but it's something that's not economically viable for many. My point was primarily that calling PC gaming "better", and to go so far as to say gaming in general would be better without console games is crazy. There's so much that consoles offer that PC gaming generally avoids. I myself am primarily a PC gamer - always have been, but I enjoy console games as both a change of pace, and for certain types of games. I hands-down prefer my PC over any console, but even someone as opinionated as myself wouldn't flat out say it's better. |
It's like you've been frozen for 20 years. PC GAMING NEVER DECLINED!!!! Infact, this is the best time ever for PC gamers and PC games.
And Console games existed BEFORE PC games.
And PCs are cheaper than ever, and PC games are cheaper than ever. Infact, I believe that PC gaming is cheaper than Console gaming. Just this week you could've bought:
On Steam:
$5 Stalker
$15 The Witcher
$2.50 Team Fortress 2
$24 Call of Duty 4
And a bunch of other sales
On Direct2Drive:
$5 Vampire The Masquerade Bloodlines
$20 Dead Space
$10 Ghostbusters
And a bunch of other sales
On Gamersgate:
$19 Street Fighter IV
$3.50 Gothic 2
And a bunch of other sales
On Impulse:
$24 COD4 (16,70 €)
$15 The Witcher (13,91 €)
And a bunch of other sales
This only took me a few minutes of my time.
And you can't dismiss the fact that PC has the ability to be connected on HDTVs just because not many people do it. Hell, most consoles aren't even connected to HDTVs!
| shio said: You really know nothing of PC gaming, your post is so oblivious to the characteristics of PC games that I don't know where to begin. First, the legs shown by Starcraft ARE common to PC games! If the game is great, then there's 99% probability that it will have the hundred-mile long legs of Starcraft. I showed you a recent example in Sins of a Solar Empire that is showing such legs, but there are countless examples. The thing is, you don't know crap about PC games and how their sales behave. Console games usually sell almost all copies in the first month and that's it, with few exceptions. On PC it's the other way around, since PC games keep selling for 5, 10, 15 years and more, and this is more true than ever because of Digital Distribution. Imagine now, with DD, where every PC game will never run out of shelf space. The first month of sales of a PC game is probably less than 15% of the total lifetime sales, in most cases. This is what you need to get into your mind. I still don't know why you even bring up piracy. Sure, PC devs would've been better without piracy, but PC games are selling better than ever, and there are more PC games being developed than ever.
Although you've risen some reasonable points with the rest of your post, I'm only focusing on the part above. First, PC gaming was never bigger than consoles gaming. Why? Console gaming existed before PC gaming. PC games only stared coming around when the second generation of consoles were starting to be released. Better yet, In the second generation, consoles were already selling dozens of millions of consoles, while PC were only selling by the thousands. Only 48 thousand PCs were sold in 1977. How many millions did consoles sell in 1977!?
It's like you've been frozen for 20 years. PC GAMING NEVER DECLINED!!!! Infact, this is the best time ever for PC gamers and PC games. And Console games existed BEFORE PC games. And PCs are cheaper than ever, and PC games are cheaper than ever. Infact, I believe that PC gaming is cheaper than Console gaming. Just this week you could've bought: On Direct2Drive: On Gamersgate: On Impulse: This only took me a few minutes of my time. And you can't dismiss the fact that PC has the ability to be connected on HDTVs just because not many people do it. Hell, most consoles aren't even connected to HDTVs!
|
Legs in PC games are long, but the legs shown by SC are NOT common, it's popularity and success are far from standard. And yes, DD bodes well for the future of PC sales, however it hasn't been around that long, all told.
PC gaming may not be on a visible decline from the viewpoint of PLAYERS, but the profits enjoyed by developers and publishers is down, as well as numerous developers shifting resources to consoles, developing with a console first mentality, or PC focussed developers shutting down. If you don't see that, I may not be the one who has been "frozen for 20 years."
If you look at the total market, the $ amounts may even hold up, but look at where that money is going - such a large $ of the PC market is tied up in a few MMORPGs with subbscriptions, it's easy to miss the numbers of other games falling by the wayside.
I feel like you're just looking for reasons to argue here - I'm not dismissing the PC's ability to connect to HD TVs, my only point being that most people aren't set up to do it, and need to make an additional purchase in order to have a big TV on their PC as well as in their living room. I was only saying that some people like playing on consoles because they are different, and these differences include playing on the big TV in your living room over what is, in all likeliness, a smaller TV/monitor in your bedroom/office. As for the prices of games themselves, consoles and computers have a massive variety of older titles available for bargains - second-hand games at gamestop or Arcade/PSN titles are available plenty cheap. The issue is for $300, you can have a full system and you never have to worry about specs... if you by a $300 system, it's probably not going to be so great for gaming. I'M NOT SAYING that makes consoles better, I buy a new PC(and not a $300 one) every other year to keep up with things, and PC gaming is my focus. But I think it's unfair to say that consoles have actually made gaming worse.
| Mudface said: PC gaming may not be on a visible decline from the viewpoint of PLAYERS, but the profits enjoyed by developers and publishers is down Is it? And if so, is this specifically due to a decline in PC sales and profitability, or simply reflecting the huge cost of development these days? I remember seeing a graphic in PC Gamer UK around 2003, which gave the share of PC revenue at about 30% of all gaming revenue. For 2008, Charttrack reckons it at about 29%, or 13 billion out of a total of 45 billion. Where's the decline? Publishers and developers are obviously making enough to keep on making PC games, indeed Capcom's recent PC releases are generally reckoned to be the definitive versions. Multi-platform games that aren't up to scratch and don't take advantage of the PC's strengths will fail and fail hard (e.g. COD 6 and the new Op Flash), but the likes of Zenimax and EA seem to be happy enough. There aren't as many exclusives, but there again there are very few publishers with deep enough pockets to make an exclusive for any one format these days. What's the point of aiming at 20 million PS3 owners, when you can aim at 40+ million PS3 and 360 owners and up to 200 million PC gamers? I'm meandering a lot, but I just don't see where all the 'PC gaming is dead/ dying' comes from- it's in the best condition it's ever been. |
This.
Like I said previously, consoles are more focused. A console game is garunteed to work, and work well - or at least if a reviewer / friend says it works well on their PS3.. you can be pretty assured it will work on your PS3 equally well, while the same does not hold true for PCs. This makes consoles big targets for some big houses, and some big franchises like CoD do very well on consoles, and less well on PC.
Shio, the first computer games were written in the 60's.... and existed on every model of device to some degree for pretty much all subsequent hardware. Do not forget, some early systems such as Commodore64, TRS 80, Apple etc... were all PCs. These launched mostly about same time as Atari, Commodores especially were huge in Europe (though a little later). PC in my mind is not limited to IBM/Intel compatible. I suppose it would be fair to say that console and PC gaming were popularized to the masses about the same time, but even in terms of mass market console did not pre date PC. Then there was the big crash of 83, which mostly effected the consoles, PC gaming kept going... NES released in 85..... but PC gaming was bigger for quite some time.PC gaming also kept alive the Western development market, it would be some time before western software made it back to the consoles in a meaningfull fashion.
Also, heres a very good quote from Blizzard SC2 dev :""
From another angle, what about pessimism about the PC platform generally?
DB: Whatever. PC games have been drying for, how long now? Shouldn't it be dead by now? I mean, it's been on its sickbed for ten years. Give me a break. Obviously, it's doing fine. I think that if developers make great games, people will find them, wherever they are.
We get this every couple of years from the movie industry. They're like, "Aw, nobody's going to the movies." And I always think to myself, "Yeah, but you know what? You haven't put out anything I want to see?" And then they ship, I don't know, The Dark Knight, and they're like, "Naw, we're having a great year! Who knows why!?" Well, you made that great movie so we all came. Make great movies, and we'll come.
So, if people make great games, then they'll show up. But if people don't make great games, people will wander off. But they'll always come back if there are great games. It's hard for me to say, though, being inside Blizzard. Obviously, we're a PC company, and obviously we're very comfortable with that, and we feel we've had a certain amount of success with it.
Looking at what we do, I think it's fine. I think it's a very viable platform. I think it's a very fun platform to play on. I think there are things about the PC platform that make it superior to other platforms. It's all about what kind of games people play.""
Link to full interview: http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/4174/the_design_of_starcraft_ii.php
In all honesty, we will have a most excllent test of all our assertations coming up next week when Dragon Age launches. It is a style and platform that is popular on both console and PC. Remember to account for DDL sales being at least 40% of total PC sales, and compare to console... will be a good comparison. Should be an interesting few months for the grand PC vs console arguments.
| Xelloss said: Shio, the first computer games were written in the 60's.... and existed on every model of device to some degree for pretty much all subsequent hardware. Do not forget, some early systems such as Commodore64, TRS 80, Apple etc... were all PCs. These launched mostly about same time as Atari, Commodores especially were huge in Europe (though a little later). PC in my mind is not limited to IBM/Intel compatible. I suppose it would be fair to say that console and PC gaming were popularized to the masses about the same time, but even in terms of mass market console did not pre date PC. Then there was the big crash of 83, which mostly effected the consoles, PC gaming kept going... NES released in 85..... but PC gaming was bigger for quite some time.PC gaming also kept alive the Western development market, it would be some time before western software made it back to the consoles in a meaningfull fashion. |
Read what I wrote: PC GAMING, PERSONAL COMPUTER GAMING. The first PC only came out in 1971, around the time consoles came. PC GAMING only started to exist in 1976.
Another thing is that PCs sold nowhere near consoles. In 1977 only 48k PCs were sold, while millions of consoles were being sold. In 1977 Console gaming was dozens of times bigger than PC gaming.
Before the 70's there were no PCs.
Commodore 64 was the best selling PC, and it sold 2 million. NES sold 60 millions...
Xelloss said:
This.
Like I said previously, consoles are more focused. A console game is garunteed to work, and work well - or at least if a reviewer / friend says it works well on their PS3.. you can be pretty assured it will work on your PS3 equally well, while the same does not hold true for PCs. This makes consoles big targets for some big houses, and some big franchises like CoD do very well on consoles, and less well on PC. Shio, the first computer games were written in the 60's.... and existed on every model of device to some degree for pretty much all subsequent hardware. Do not forget, some early systems such as Commodore64, TRS 80, Apple etc... were all PCs. These launched mostly about same time as Atari, Commodores especially were huge in Europe (though a little later). PC in my mind is not limited to IBM/Intel compatible. I suppose it would be fair to say that console and PC gaming were popularized to the masses about the same time, but even in terms of mass market console did not pre date PC. Then there was the big crash of 83, which mostly effected the consoles, PC gaming kept going... NES released in 85..... but PC gaming was bigger for quite some time.PC gaming also kept alive the Western development market, it would be some time before western software made it back to the consoles in a meaningfull fashion. Also, heres a very good quote from Blizzard SC2 dev :"" From another angle, what about pessimism about the PC platform generally? DB: Whatever. PC games have been drying for, how long now? Shouldn't it be dead by now? I mean, it's been on its sickbed for ten years. Give me a break. Obviously, it's doing fine. I think that if developers make great games, people will find them, wherever they are. We get this every couple of years from the movie industry. They're like, "Aw, nobody's going to the movies." And I always think to myself, "Yeah, but you know what? You haven't put out anything I want to see?" And then they ship, I don't know, The Dark Knight, and they're like, "Naw, we're having a great year! Who knows why!?" Well, you made that great movie so we all came. Make great movies, and we'll come. So, if people make great games, then they'll show up. But if people don't make great games, people will wander off. But they'll always come back if there are great games. It's hard for me to say, though, being inside Blizzard. Obviously, we're a PC company, and obviously we're very comfortable with that, and we feel we've had a certain amount of success with it. Looking at what we do, I think it's fine. I think it's a very viable platform. I think it's a very fun platform to play on. I think there are things about the PC platform that make it superior to other platforms. It's all about what kind of games people play.""
Link to full interview: http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/4174/the_design_of_starcraft_ii.php
In all honesty, we will have a most excllent test of all our assertations coming up next week when Dragon Age launches. It is a style and platform that is popular on both console and PC. Remember to account for DDL sales being at least 40% of total PC sales, and compare to console... will be a good comparison. Should be an interesting few months for the grand PC vs console arguments.
|
That's what I have been saying too!
The worthwhile andreally good games that the PC has had in the past 4-5 years I can count on the fingers on half of my hand.
Orange Box and CivIV are the only ones that I can think of off the top of my head.
Tag(thx fkusumot) - "Yet again I completely fail to see your point..."
HD vs Wii, PC vs HD: http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=93374
Why Regenerating Health is a crap game mechanic: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3986420
gamrReview's broken review scores: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4170835
vlad321 said:
That's what I have been saying too! The worthwhile andreally good games that the PC has had in the past 4-5 years I can count on the fingers on half of my hand. Orange Box and CivIV are the only ones that I can think of off the top of my head. |
I'd add in Borderlands and Mount and Blade. M&B was last 5 years right?
Man i'm loving borderlands.
I'd add in Left 4 Dead, Bioshock, Neverwinter Nights 2, The Witcher, Company of Heroes, Rome and Empire: Total War and little gems like Audiosurf, Puzzle Quest, Plants v Zombies, Peggle and The Path as well. At the moment, we have the best versions of SF 4, RE5 and Batman: AA and coming up are Dragon Age, L4D2 and the next round of Blizzard games. It's very sweet.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2025 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
