PC gaming's future

[VPeric]

This is an interesting topic, though I can't really say I agree with your conclusions. To be honest, I've been reading about PC gaming dying for more than ten years, and yet I still play everything on my PC. Yes, so the latest and greatest shooter is probably an Xbox exclusive, that great jRPG is only for PlayStation owners, and hand-waving is reserved for Wii-ers, but RPGs? Adventure games? Strategy games? It's all PC. The reason? Perhaps the audience, but there's also the mouse. Yes, the mouse is a major win for PCs - imagine playing Starcraft on a gamepad? I suppose it's possible, but probably much less fun (then again, I can't imagine anyone playing a FPS on one, yet people do). And this will not change unless consoles too get mouses - but what is then the difference between a console and a PC? In fact, consoles have become more like PCs with every single generation (internet access? patch downloading?).

Yeah, your argument wasn't really PC vs. consoles, it was more about the basic things customers should get and deserve. No insane race to the latest and prettiest water reflections, no crippling DRM, maybe less bugs and "meaningful improvements after a game's release" - sounds like that Gamer's Bill of Rights thing. And yes, Stardock really is following that model. Then there's innovation: if any platform is innovating, it's definitely the PC. Just look at IGF 2009 - even if you kill of half the games for being "too artsy", and remove the handful of console titles, you've still got lots of new concepts out there. Perhaps the only thing PC gaming lacks, as mentioned already, is a sort of "mid-budget" title - but we even had one of those recently (Drakensang), and it was received quite well. Yes, yes, perhaps it's EA and Ubisoft and Atari and whatnot who are decadent, but claiming that there's something dreadfully wrong with PC gaming is misleading.

And finally, the list. I agree, that's a lot of classics. But after 15 years, it's just the classics we remember. And looking at today, we can't know what is going to be a classic 15 years from now. Communities sometimes form around the unlikeliest of games - who'd have thought that VtM:B is getting updates even now, 5 years after release? Or why did Arcanum only get a comprehensive "fixpack/patch" a full 7-8 years after being released? So yes, such lists aren't meaningful, because you can't compare games of today to impressions of some jaded, nostalgic gamer from 15 years ago.

 

[Alrik Fassbauer]

*snip*

No insane race to the latest and prettiest water reflections, no crippling DRM, maybe less bugs and "meaningful improvements after a game's release"

*/snip*

I was browsing through a gaming magazine today, the German "Computerbild Spiele", which covers consoles & PCs alike.

The first, very much striking thing is that

- console games (especially for Wii) are much more family oriented
- this also means the handling
- much, much, much more colourful !
- many, many more creative concepts
- other game elements than combat/fighting are available !!!

The opposite side of that is the current PC gaming. (And to a bigger and bigger becoming part the xbox gaming, too, because it's the thing that's nearest to the PC.) You know that I'm biased, so take this with a grain of salt:

Current PC games are:

- not at all family oriented
- much, much more individual oriented (only applies to offline games !)
- not much family friendly in terms of handling (often relatively complex handling)
- very, very much not colourful at all
- colours are very dark and "muted"
- the same game ideas are recycled on and on and on and on and on and on ...
- almost only with fighting/combat as game solution elements available
- subjectively about 90 % war games there for the PC

This is - you know I'm biased - my personal perception of console gaming vs. PC gaming (except the xbox, which drifts more and more towards being a second PC in terms of gaming) is that the PC is the most conservative platform at all.

Companies are hiding themselves away in terms of creating something new. All of the gaming-involved companies drive the road of absolutely minimized riskks, due to

- piracy on the PC
- lesser revenue of costs (relatively guaranteed stanbility of prices for games for consoles)
- much, much, much faster life cycles, especially in terms of hardware
- fanboism (I think they are for a great deal responsible for the current fashion of muted colours, I think).

As a sidenote on these darker and rather "muted" colours in current PC games (vs. the colourfulness of the Wii) I think that the darker colours are an expression of what I see as a kind of current fashion in all kinds of arts & media:

It's the "Grey World".

I think I've collected a number of hints towards this being a kind of fashion in art and media alike.

I found it in

- role playing games
- Star Wars: The Clone wars are very much "grey" compared to the "Old Trilogy", which is rather evil vs. good
- novels (of all kind)
- movies (early Batman vs. current Batman)
- comics, while I'm at it.
- anf games, of course. One of the most striking example would be The Westerner 1 vs. The Westerner 2.

I do know that this list isn't complete at all, but - I think - if you follow this concept, you might find out that "GReyness" is a theme you'll find much more often in arts & media.

I tend to believe that this "Grey World" concept is what makes "family-unfriendly" games become rather dark & brutal. Filled with war & combat. Survival of the fittest (with the biggest hammer, of course).

This can be seen in the imho gigantic flood of WWII war games for the PC and other war-oriented games.

This is unbelievable for family-oriented platforms. A game bought by a) casual gamers and b) by a family decision or c) both will most likely not contzain that much "war-orientedness" than PC and xbox games.

They will most likely not be so dark, too. Families (as a cliché, rather) do like colourful games !

If we see the PC gaming as a mirror of individuality (just a theory which need not to be true) [if consoles seen as a mirror of "family" agfainst that], then I see thatIndividuals tend to rather see the world around us rather harsh, bitter, dark, cruel, brutal, dark and muted [colours]. The "fittest" always survives, whatever this means.

If we take tis as a kind of mirror towards social life, then it could mean that this is a sign of ... "giving up" for the mainstream current PC gamer. The rich ones always win, so why bother with a failing industry & crisis, why bother with a world in which the riches get richer and "the money goes so fast it ain't funny" [Huey Lewis & The News 1986 on the song "Simple as that"]. The average citizen must actually fight for their lives, their incomes, meanwhile the bankers and the management people get fat.

This is kind of a visual sign of a burn-out depression. Dark, grey gaming as a tool to escape reality ? To tell the gamer that he/she is at least good at something ?

Because winning a games does alwwyys give a positive feedback. And people seemingly need that, I guess.

Only, that with the PC (and, as a tendency, the xbox, too) the "tools" for "doing gaming" are rather a reflection of the current state of society: Grey, dark, no hope to grow a "good life", not colourful at all, especially in times of national crisis, recession and terror. Or all of them at the same time.

THis is what I tend to think.

 

[UK_John]

Alrik Fassbauer, excellent excellent post! You got so many things dead right about where PC gaming has gone! In fact, if you play 20 year old PC games, whether action or roleplaying, you see much more colourful games! When I think of the Kings Quest series, or Terra Nova: Task Force Centauri, a squad based first person tactical shooter, which took play exclusively outdoors in sprawling landscapes.

You cannot avoid the fact that PC gaming, in the last 5 years, has amalgamated most genres into an action-adventure type genre. It may have light roleplaying and even strategy elements, but it is mostly about action in the form of fighting.

When you consider older RPG's, for example, like Daggerfall and Morrowind, you find just as much emphasis on sneaking and diplomacy as fighting, but when you look at recent so-called RPG's, these non fighting elements disappear. I think of RPG's like Mass Effect and Jade Empire. (To be fair, Jade Empire WAS very colourful though!).

To have one mainstream genre of 'action-adventure' and to have one type of game where you win through violence, is to invite death in the marketplace. Without a wide range of genres, like we had 15 years ago, and a wide range of 'stories', PC gaming will only continue it's slow decline.

Where are the 'Oregon Trails'? Where are the 'Battlehawks 1942'? Where are the 'Carmen SanDiego's'? Where are the Monkey Islands, and Longest Journey's, the Space Quests and Railroad Tycoon's? This is why the 90's will be seen (if they aren't already!) as the peak of PC gaming, when there were 100's of releases a year covering many different genres and with many different stories to tell.....Meaning a huge market and huge sales as many different types of gamers got what they wanted.....

The PC games market is so far from those days and comparing the two shows how far down PC gaming has gone.

 

[Alrik Fassbauer]

You cannot avoid the fact that PC gaming, in the last 5 years, has amalgamated most genres into an action-adventure type genre.

I agree. At least for the PC platform.

The genre boundaries mix. Everything blurs.

To a gamer - maybe even to a casual gamer - who wants to know what a game exactly contains, this might hinder the buy decision.

What I especially miss are riddles. There are almost none there anymore, imho especially in mainstream RPGs.

 

[Squeek]

That was an outstanding post, Alrik. A little depressing, but very good!

Maybe we really have reached a turning point for PC gaming. These points seem reminiscent of the ones that were made about the end of vaudeville, silent films back when they were being usurped by talkies, and the threat of television back when radio was king.

Every point had its merits as far as I can tell. Vaudeville really had big advantages over radio, and radio over television. And silent films really did leave more to the audience's imagination (and can still be enjoyed today!).

There's still room for the PC to adapt though, IMO, still potential for new archetypes and architectures. Add to that the impact of online connectivity, and I think the future's still pretty wide open for the PC as a gaming platform.

 

[UK_John]

I wish there was a chance for change, but I think it's too late now. We hardly see PC only games now, while we see plenty of 360 and PS3 and heck PS2 only games. The style that PC gaming has is being diluted because nearly all PC games are now conversions from console. Games like Mass Effect, Jade Empire, Oblivion and Fallout 3. Compare Mass Effect and Jade Empire with Baldur's Gate or Planescape Torment, or compare Morrowind with Oblivion, or just go to You Tube and check the Oblivion documentaries and see what Radiant AI was going to be before it had to be cut to fit the 360. PC games are now 2/3 games, because 1/3 is lost in order for a game to fit in the console. Now add to that the independent games from smaller publishers that still publish on PC. Companies likes Relic, who make Dawn of War II more action and less strategy (surely an eye on a console future?!). Then you have Empire Total War, that now only allows national taxation rather than city and automates many of the options that were player controlled in Rome and Medieval II.

All you have to do is look to see that change has gone so far, it's hard to see how it's going to come back. And with the likelihood of now new consoles until 2013 at the earliest, I don't see any need at all to upgrade my 18 month old PC. If there were plenty of 'PC type' PC games that would be a good thing. But when there are so few PC titles released, it will harm hardware companies who won't be around for PC gaming to come back. We have seen a 30% decline in one year of home PC sales. NVidia have seen video card sales decline of 40% in the last year. Creative have already had lay offs.

So I am afraid it's too late, and suggest, like me, you start checking ebay for those older titles you loved and somehow lost and get them while their cheap, because as AAA PC gaming disappears, retro gaming will get more expensive!

 

[Alrik Fassbauer]

That was an outstanding post, Alrik. A little depressing, but very good!

A honest thank you.

Because I don't often receive such reactions.

At times when I'm really putting my energy into analysing things, I can be quite good, I assume (I can only tell by the reactions), but it is also quite difficult, because I'm walking on a thin line: To me: my analysis is relatively clear, because I'm an HSP, but to others this might sound as nonsense, because people just might not perceive it.

It's like listening to a very, very sensitive and fragile measuring instrument. Of course, you could always trust the bigger and not-so-sensitive one much, much better, but sometimes when the big and crude one shows something it might be too late.

It's like ... measuring an earth quake, for example. Sensitive instruments ALSO can become involved in a general distortion. Like the local bus line going along before the house where the instrument is installed in. And that's no joke: I do know an earth quake measuring station belonging to the University of Cologne whi has (or at least had when I was there) a local bus line running in front of the house ...

This difficulty can be "cleared out" or "filtered out" (as the better term for that) in part. It's up to the one analysing to do that, and the better the experience, the better the filtering.

I don't know how good I'm at it. I can only try to do my best, that's what I always say. Plus, my own analysis might be biased. That I'm against violence, for example, should be known to everyone here.

I can't really say much how I do it. It's just putting things together. Pieces of a big puzzle.
Empathy is a part of it. But not everything. I'm doing some things intuitively, too.


Back to the topic: The brand-new trailer and the logo change of Dragon Age kind of support my point of view. This game is destined not to be family friendly at all.


On the other hand I just kind of shocked everyone in a Gamestop shop yesterday (and some friends in the evening) by buying one of these very un-mature looking horse-themed PC-games (and because it has a Unicorn in it ).

"How do I shock my friends ?"
"Buy an immature game."

 

[Alrik Fassbauer]

I think I've found a way to determine how how the PC platform currently ranks for LucasArts - and all other pletforms : It's this "list [of games] by platform".

I quote from their web page:

Playstation 3
Playstation 2
Playstation Portable
XBOX 360
XBOX
Nintendo Wii
Gamecube
Nintendo DS
Gameboy Advance
PC
Playstation
Nintendo 64
MacIntosh
Dreamcast
Sega Saturn
Sega Genesis
SNES
NES
Gameboy
3DO
Other Computer

Kinda impressive, innit ?

 

[Konjad]

PC doesn't need more games. It needs better games.

 

[UK_John]

Playstation 3
Playstation 2
Playstation Portable
XBOX 360
XBOX
Nintendo Wii
Gamecube
Nintendo DS
Gameboy Advance

All above the PC. If that doesn't tell you about PC gaming at the moment AND the resurgence in retro, I don't know what does!

As to more games versus better games, if you had more games you would have better games. Because of so many console game releases, we get so many more better games. That the way it is. 1,000's of records are released so that classic hits get released. The chances of 3 games being released and all being great games is quite low, but if we had 12 games released, 3 might be bad, 5 might be average, 1 might be good and 3 might be fantastic.

So hope for more and the greats will come.....!

 

[Alrik Fassbauer]

Of course that's just LucasArts ... It is a single company, remember, but one not without influence (how much, actually ?) and reputation (which has gone down to some degree in the last few years), and a very well known name/background.

 

[UK_John]

Alrik, if they did something much more interesting and do that chart for every 5th year starting 1990, you would see PC start a lot higher and fall to where they are. That would show how PC gaming has declined. I know LucasArts is just one company, but they released many games on many formats, so they are a good example.

The No.1 way it is so easy to see that PC gaming has declined though, is the fact that no large publisher is going to release a PC only title at the moment. This means, as far as the large publisher's are concerned, PC gamers will be buying games that to some degree or another have been changed to make them suitable for the console market.

I find it interesting that we get, for example, the first RTS games on console having no base buidling and supply routes, because console gamepads couldn't handle that, and then, a couple years later, you don't see PC RTS games with base building or supply lines! Even PC only RTS's!!!

 

[zakhal]

I think I've found a way to determine how how the PC platform currently ranks for LucasArts - and all other pletforms : It's this "list [of games] by platform".

I made a thread here about lucasarts stand on pc's in 2007 when they canceled their pc titles. One snippet from it:

One more lucasarts says good bye to PC

With Jim Ward (marketing & advertising background) at the helm, LucasArts believes that consoles and handhelds are the way forward and I can't really argue with that decision based on the sales numbers I've seen. So I expect they won't release much in the way of PC games for at least the next couple of years, excepting any new SW MMORPG they may release.

http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3552&highlight=lucasarts&page=2

Now after two years things are getting only worse. Last fall I finally succumbed and bought xbox even.

 

[Alrik Fassbauer]

The thing is a little bit more complex.

It's like I recently read that people with the Borderline Syndrome are "normally" not tested regarding their IQ, and that no-one seems to have empirical data about the IQ of people suffering this syndrome at all.

The point is: How do we get data about that if it is "normally" not tested at all ?


The principially same thing here goes for the PC games vs. consoles:

If I produce no games for the PC, there will be lesser sales for the PC
If I produce more games for a console, then there'll be more sales regarding that console.

If I cater the one kind of players and reduce for the others, then there is no wonder that people feel inclined to flee from the one platform to the other.

This is a subtle way of controlling a market. Here, it is in favour of a console (and against the PC).

It's like "we don't sell this anymore, buy that over there instead." Of course, then the sales will decline for the one thing and rise for the other !

 

[txa1265]

I would actually put the PC near the top for last year, right below the DS & X360 in terms of releases.

In terms of stuff I care about ... PC remains #1 with DS #2 and PSP a distant 4th after the Mac.

 

[pibbur]

...

The No.1 way it is so easy to see that PC gaming has declined though, is the fact that no large publisher is going to release a PC only title at the moment. ...

Eh...

Starcraft 2 by Blizzard in 2009
Diablo 3 by Blizzard (tba)

Both are released fro Windows and Mac - so not entirely PC only. But no console realease.

 

[UK_John]

Eh...

Starcraft 2 by Blizzard in 2009
Diablo 3 by Blizzard (tba)

Both are released fro Windows and Mac - so not entirely PC only. But no console realease.

People always make this mistake. 'Multiformat' gaming is not 'what format does it come out on first'. Multiformat form a PC gamer's point of view, means 'what has been changed, left out or put in to allow it to be acceptable for consoles, and has this lowered the quality compared with if it was just made for a PC release ONLY!

I would say, with Starcraft, that we have already seen the console influence by the fact that you only get to play one side and will have to buy game with the other two sides in the game. This brings the total game price, compared to the original Starcraft, when all three games have been bought, to around £90 ($120). I would also say, that until we actually SEE any game on PC that will probably come out on console later, we have no real idea in what way it may have been changed to take console gaming into effect.

You have to remember the track record for PC games that were released on PC only or originally and then had the follow-up after the multiformat market came into being, is not very good at all. PC gamers complain quite a bit about Oblivion versus Morrowind, Dreamfall versus The Longest Journey, Dawn of War II versus Dawn of War, Supreme Commander 2 versus Supreme Commander 1, Deus Ex 2 versus Deus Ex and on and on.

Compare the above list with good PC multiformat games: Fallout 3 and Riddick Escape from Butcher's Bay.

The negatives of the multiformat market far outweigh the positives, from a PC gamer point of view. So I would wait and see for any PC game due at the end of the year or later, because all bets are off now, for what a PC game might end up being released as, because of it being a multiformat market now.

 

[pibbur]

People always make this mistake. 'Multiformat' gaming is not 'what format does it come out on first'. Multiformat form a PC gamer's point of view, means 'what has been changed, left out or put in to allow it to be acceptable for consoles, and has this lowered the quality compared with if it was just made for a PC release ONLY!

I would say, with Starcraft, that we have already seen the console influence by the fact that you only get to play one side and will have to buy game with the other two sides in the game. This brings the total game price, compared to the original Starcraft, when all three games have been bought, to around £90 ($120). I would also say, that until we actually SEE any game on PC that will probably come out on console later, we have no real idea in what way it may have been changed to take console gaming into effect.

You have to remember the track record for PC games that were released on PC only or originally and then had the follow-up after the multiformat market came into being, is not very good at all. PC gamers complain quite a bit about Oblivion versus Morrowind, Dreamfall versus The Longest Journey, Dawn of War II versus Dawn of War, Supreme Commander 2 versus Supreme Commander 1, Deus Ex 2 versus Deus Ex and on and on.

Compare the above list with good PC multiformat games: Fallout 3 and Riddick Escape from Butcher's Bay.

The negatives of the multiformat market far outweigh the positives, from a PC gamer point of view. So I would wait and see for any PC game due at the end of the year or later, because all bets are off now, for what a PC game might end up being released as, because of it being a multiformat market now.

I know this, and I agree with some of your points.

I based what I wrote, on information on Blizzard's website which lists the platform supported, and for Starcraft 2 it's specifically added that no console version will be released.

Of course this does not exclude that a console version might not be eventually released in the end. But based on known facts at the moment, console versions are only speculation, and a claim that "the fact that no large publisher is going to release a PC only title at the moment." is not justified.

As for Starcraft 2, based on the numbers of missions (25-30), each game is equally sized to the original game where each side had 8-10 missions (assuming that the amount of content is equal as well, we don't know that, yet). Still, I think this is a strange solution, I would have preferred all factions playable in each of the three games. But please explain to me why this is an example of console influence. I don't doubt your statements about console influence, in general, but I fail to see why this is an example of said influence.

 

[UK_John]

@1ghartveit; Good points.

My point about Starcraft is that it's well known that PC games retail for $50 while console games retail for $60+, by taking the road they have, they are following console pricing convention rather than PC gaming convention. If PC game prices are going to increase because of the console influence, is that not the multiformat effect I am talking about?!

 

[pibbur]

@1ghartveit; Good points.

My point about Starcraft is that it's well known that PC games retail for $50 while console games retail for $60+, by taking the road they have, they are following console pricing convention rather than PC gaming convention. If PC game prices are going to increase because of the console influence, is that not the multiformat effect I am talking about?!

Ahh. I see your point. Thanks.