Is the game industry trying to kill off PC gaming?

L31mr0d · 23-09-2007 05:10PM #1

Ok, i'm currently playing through stranglehold, and have had 4 or 5 BSOD's already and game freezes. I thought it was the fact i've been overclocking a lot and maybe it was some of my BIOS settings causing the problem.

But I did a quick google search and supposedly a lot of people playing this game on the PC are experiencing the same issue.

This is coming off the back of the relentlessly buggy Bioshock, which would also crash to the desktop or force a hard reset.

In fact I can't remember the last game thats been released in the last few years that hasn't needed to be patched to fix problems that should of been sorted in its beta stage.

More and more i'm beginning to think the games industry views PC gamers as their beta testers and nothing more.

On top of this, they are releasing games that are at least (and I use this liberally) about 6 months ahead of the current average top end hardware. To fully see a game as it was meant to be played on the PC you'll need to be investing in the latest hardware as its released. Some recent examples are WiC and the Call of Juarez (DX10 edition)

So you couple the expensive cost of PC gaming with the sub standard beta software, do you think the games is industry trying to push people towards console gaming to save on the headache?

Or are these companies just that bad in making games run without needing them to be patched ad nauseum.

Sidane · 23-09-2007 05:22PM

I've been a PC gamer since I was a kid playing Ultima 5 and Elite on an archaic 386. I've been very much against buying into the whole console 'revolution' over the last 5 years or so. I've always been of the belief that PC games are always superior - better graphics, more innovative, better gameplay, better controls (keyboard/mouse > console controller) etc.

However, over the last few months I've just become fed up with the never ending hardware upgrade cycle and the ever increasing number of console exclusive games. There are several games coming out that I want to play but they are XBox only (Mass Effect, Halo 3, GTA IV to name a few).

Finally, seeing my PC struggle badly to play the Bioshock demo I decided enough was enough - I bought an XBox 360 and to be honest I'm really enjoying it.

I'll still play games on the PC but it's likely to primarily be RTS style games where a keyboard & mouse is essential.

So all in all I tend to agree - the industry is very much moving towards being primarily console driven. It's a shame and a few months ago I would have been very negative about it, but now, I'm starting to change my tune...

tman · 23-09-2007 05:26PM

My experience has been the total opposite, I can't remember having any issues with a new release pc game in the past few years, certainly nothing that has made the game unplayable without a patch anyway...
Bioshock didn't crash once for me, and even the beta of TF2 has been a problem free experience after they patched it on Wednesday.

And as for constantly upgrading, it can be a pain in the ass, but you can't beat the satisfaction of running a new release with everything maxxed out...

KdjaCL · 23-09-2007 05:30PM

MOHA bioshock and quakewars all play perfectly on my system i would go the other way and say games are more compatible

kdjac

Call Me Jimmy · 23-09-2007 05:37PM

I rarely have problems with pc games, I can't remember the last time I did.

But I think that it is so much harder for developers to make games for pc because there are so many combinations of hardware - old and new - and their time is stretched enough in just making the game let alone getting it to work for every hardware combination in the world.

jesus_thats_gre · 23-09-2007 07:08PM

Software compaines seem to make more money from console sales. So it would make sense they would put more effort into the console versions of games.

cosgrove80 · 23-09-2007 07:35PM

jesus_thats_gre wrote:

Software compaines seem to make more money from console sales. So it would make sense they would put more effort into the console versions of games.

Hasn't it got to the stage now though, where a lot of the games are running on the same engine / middleware (Unreal 3 etc.) and therefore a large portion of development would be done in tandem for both the PC and console versions?

At the moment anyway it just seems like they throw on some fancy DX10 effects in the PC versions.

jesus_thats_gre · 23-09-2007 07:55PM

cosgrove80 wrote:

Hasn't it got to the stage now though, where a lot of the games are running on the same engine / middleware (Unreal 3 etc.) and therefore a large portion of development would be done in tandem for both the PC and console versions?

At the moment anyway it just seems like they throw on some fancy DX10 effects in the PC versions.

Yeah fair point alright but that is assuming that they are using a ready made solution that has been tested for scalability on various PC hardware. Alot of games are still based on in house engines and developing and testing that stuff on a closed hardware set is alot cheaper.

humanji · 23-09-2007 08:06PM

I do get the sense that a lot of PC games just aren't finished when released. I can't remember the last time I installed a game and didn't have to instantly download a patch for it. It's like they've all decided that the "it'll be done when it's done" motto isn't working and they're just deciding on release dates before they even start making the games.

Timans · 23-09-2007 08:17PM

I hope so.

Bloody geeks.

KdjaCL · 23-09-2007 09:07PM

humanji wrote:

I do get the sense that a lot of PC games just aren't finished when released. I can't remember the last time I installed a game and didn't have to instantly download a patch for it. It's like they've all decided that the "it'll be done when it's done" motto isn't working and they're just deciding on release dates before they even start making the games.

3 games i said above all work perfectly without a patch 2 are unreal and other ID.

kdjac

Creamy Goodness · 23-09-2007 09:13PM

humanji wrote:

I do get the sense that a lot of PC games just aren't finished when released. I can't remember the last time I installed a game and didn't have to instantly download a patch for it. It's like they've all decided that the "it'll be done when it's done" motto isn't working and they're just deciding on release dates before they even start making the games.

console games are getting like this as well having patches for consoles in my book screams lazy testing to me.

every console has the exact same parts in it without exception.

whereas a pc has hundreds of parts that can be manufactured by hundreds of manufacturers and be in any combination of these parts.

PC patching is more forgivable than console patching.

Mr. Presentable · 23-09-2007 09:17PM

Haven't had a problem with a PC game in years. That may be down to luck, or it may be down to the fact that I keep my PC in good health, latest drivers etc, even if not the latest gfx card etc.

Consoles are always going to be easier to design for when the setup is the same across the board for five or so years. Remember, for a game to run on PC it has to be compatible with thousands of hardware permutations, constantly evolving. In fact, it's astounding they work at all, really....

4Xcut · 23-09-2007 09:51PM

personally i think it's the fault of good broadband. this allows games companies to leave out bits and just throw out a patch and leave it for people to download. laziness in my opinion and a lack of pride in one's work.

projectmayhem · 23-09-2007 10:12PM

this isn't really developers who are mucking up the experience, it's publishers. they know the money is made in consoles, so the 3 or 4 months allocated to QA at the end of the development cycle is almost entirely dedicated to the 360, ps3 or wii, while PC might get two weeks worth of quick playthroughs where the only reported bugs are crashes.

it's absolutely true that PC games are, at this stage, an afterthought. the money isn't there anymore. the fact that PC loyalists iD and Valve (and other such companies) have gone to consoles with their latest products speaks volumes, despite being fairly vocal in the past about their lack of love for the machines.

microsoft were to be the saviours with Vista, with an actual PC gaming platform (games for windows) which would actually pump money into the developers to make PC games. instead of actually following through with the idea, Microsoft used it as an avenue to get developers/publishers to publish games on 360 exclusively without having to buy more development studios (ref: bioshock).

so basically the PC market has been thrown to the back seat by microsoft and the major publishing houses.

steviec · 23-09-2007 10:36PM

4Xcut wrote:

personally i think it's the fault of good broadband. this allows games companies to leave out bits and just throw out a patch and leave it for people to download. laziness in my opinion and a lack of pride in one's work.

That's quite insulting to developers who I can assure you are very hard working.

The problem with PC games is that developers are shooting at a moving target. It's just not possible to test with every hardware combination out there. Not to mention all the different drivers and background programs and everything else going on. It's just easier to make a solid, stable console game. If it works on the 360s in the office, it will work on user's 360s at home. You just can't be 100% sure of that with PCs.

It is of course compounded by the fact that there's less money in the PC market. PC games won't sell as well, are more likely to be pirated and aren't as profitable as their console counterparts. As such there simply won't be as many staff assigned to them for as long a period, because it's inaffordable. It doesn't mean those staff are lazy - try googling 'EA spouse' to see just how much effort some developers are forced to put in.

AntiVirus · 23-09-2007 10:42PM

KdjaCL wrote:

MOHA bioshock and quakewars all play perfectly on my system i would go the other way and say games are more compatible

kdjac

All those games work without ever crashing for me on Vista 64. The only game that I've had a lot of crashes with was Stalker.

jesus_thats_gre · 23-09-2007 10:53PM

4Xcut wrote:

personally i think it's the fault of good broadband. this allows games companies to leave out bits and just throw out a patch and leave it for people to download. laziness in my opinion and a lack of pride in one's work.

Was gonna say this myself. The fact that a large proportion of Pc gamers have broadband is a major factor in this laziness.

L31mr0d · 23-09-2007 10:56PM

KdjaCL wrote:

3 games i said above all work perfectly without a patch 2 are unreal and other ID.

kdjac

Well you only have to google "Bioshock crashing" to see i'm not alone with this. You might be lucky in that it didn't happen to you, but I know of a couple of friends personally who are experiencing the same issue on PC's ranging from laptop, DELLs to my own home built, they have all had game crashes and freezes. The only guy that was laughing was the guy playing it on his console

The last game I can remember playing through without a hitch was HL2. Since then the standard of games, imo, has been going downhill.

The first thing I do whenever I get a game is to check on the net for patchs, and without a doubt there will always be one, fixing some glitch or memory leak or any of 100 other problems. Maybe its because I play a lot of games, or play a lot of games from a lot of different developers but i've been seeing more and more technical faults in games lately. Also i'm on a lot of gaming forums and its become the norm now for complaints about games to crop up within the first week of release. I usually give a game release a couple of weeks now because of this, to wait for a plethora of patchs to get sent out, so I don't have to suffer through having my gameplay interrupted.

0ubliette · 24-09-2007 10:03AM

It certainly seems that PC gaming is being put on the back burner by developers, and lets face it the number one reason is money. PC games are just too easily pirated for the platform to be a viable market for making money. The second a game is released nowadays you can find it on the pirate bay...consoles are alot harder to pirate so are a more viable option, so at the end of the day, like back in the days of the atari st/amiga, the machines died because companies couldnt make money off them, noone bought games anymore when they could just copy them.
Ive never pirated any game, not because im a self righteous bastard, but cause at the end of the day it really does harm the industry, and i dont have a problem forking out 50 euro for a game like bioshock thats already given me hours of fun.

24-09-2007 10:25AM

I got a new Toshiba laptop a week back and playing some games is an absolute pain. HL2 is sluggish beyond belief, Bioshock keeps freezing, Tranformers has crashed to the desktop on a number of ocassions. The only game which has so far worked as well as i had hoped is World in Conflict.

Maximilian · 24-09-2007 11:16AM

I think the suggestion that the industry is trying to kill PC gaming is bordering on paranoia. Look at all the highly successful and profitable games that exist for the PC only, some of which could only work on a PC (Um... WoW anyone?). There will always be a place for PC games I think for the foreseeable future; for as long as there is demand for them. Also, as the industry goes towards download delivery, the margins will surely exceed those for console games. I wonder how much of the price for the Steam version of Half-Life 2 was profit?

Lazy ports from consoles are frustrating but its nothing new. Its not so long ago there were lazy ports from Amiga to Atari ST and vice versa.

Stephen · 24-09-2007 11:38AM

Darko: Your laptop most have some kind of rubbish integrated graphics card then, considering Half-Life 2 is a 3 year old game that ran very well on the hardware of the day when it was released.

mcgovern · 24-09-2007 11:47AM

Maximilian wrote:

I think the suggestion that the industry is trying to kill PC gaming is bordering on paranoia. Look at all the highly successful and profitable games that exist for the PC only, some of which could only work on a PC (Um... WoW anyone?). There will always be a place for PC games I think for the foreseeable future; for as long as there is demand for them. Also, as the industry goes towards download delivery, the margins will surely exceed those for console games. I wonder how much of the price for the Steam version of Half-Life 2 was profit?

Lazy ports from consoles are frustrating but its nothing new. Its not so long ago there were lazy ports from Amiga to Atari ST and vice versa.

Do you know anything about Console gaming? There is no reason WoW couldn't be played on a console and there have even been rumours that it will be released on them soon.
Downloading games online without a disk is also something that you can do on consoles. PSN already has full games available for download and Xbox Live has the capability to release more than arcade games.

24-09-2007 11:50AM

Stephen wrote:

Darko: Your laptop most have some kind of rubbish integrated graphics card then, considering Half-Life 2 is a 3 year old game that ran very well on the hardware of the day when it was released.

It's not the graphics card, it plays World in Conflict with all the video options turned up and Bioshock on high. I've heard a lot of people are having the same problem. It runs HL2, graphics set to highest, but gameplay is sluggish.

Sorted my Bioshock problem there. Wiped my harddrive, reinstalled Vistas and updated all the drivers. Did'nt freeze once during an hours of plaaying.

petes · 24-09-2007 11:53AM

Deleted User wrote:

It's not the graphics card, it plays World in Conflict with all the video options turned up and Bioshock on high. I've heard a lot of people are having the same problem. It runs HL2, graphics set to highest, but gameplay is sluggish.

Sorted my Bioshock problem there. Wiped my harddrive, reinstalled Vistas and updated all the drivers. Did'nt freeze once during an hours of plaaying.

What graphics card is in it?

nice1franko · 24-09-2007 11:54AM

The industry isn't trying to "kill off" pc gaming, it's just that the PC platform is less attractive now.

The development -> QA -> development cycle for pc games is more costly because of the multitude of hardware configurations to test on. Also, as mentioned, piracy on consoles isn't as big of a problem.

It just makes good business sense to reap the lower hanging fruit.

the_syco · 24-09-2007 12:32PM

Deleted User wrote:

I got a new Toshiba laptop a week back and playing some games is an absolute pain.

What was the graphics card? If you say integrated, you need a slap. If it's an integrated Intel, you need slaps.

=-=

Oh, and how many console games don't use a PC-game engine?

24-09-2007 12:52PM

the_syco wrote:

What was the graphics card? If you say integrated, you need a slap. If it's an integrated Intel, you need slaps.

Sweet Jesus no, it's a NVIDIA GeForce 7300.

gizmo · 24-09-2007 01:39PM

Q: Is the game industry trying to kill off PC gaming?
A: No.

Now more than ever the whole PC vs Console gaming issue is going to get more interesting. Thanks to the new generation of consoles, development costs have spiraled and smaller developers are finding it harder and harder to raise the necessary funding to complete development. Even the larger houses have admitted that it's becoming a problem. Yves Guillemot, CEO of Ubisoft, even came our recently and announced that they've started sharing art assests between studios because the time and expense required to produce them is too heavy a burden. Now, so with these kinds of costs what do publishers have to do? Release it across various platforms. You then have the above situations where PC versions are released and they seem incomplete. This is due to a number of reasons...

- QA costs being significantly higher for the PC versions than the console versions.
- Console sales being higher than PC versions
- PC games being easier to patch than console games.

The last point may piss alot of people off but if a publisher is putting pressure on a developer to get a title out the door then they will more than likely concentrate on the version which is more difficult to patch, and as such must be as close to perfect as possible, rather than one which they know they can patch up down the line.

Despite all this though the PC as a platform is as strong as ever, one needs to only look at the upcoming releases to see some top games out at the moment and coming soon. Yes the consoles have a few exclusives but then again, so do we.

Maximilian · 24-09-2007 04:14PM

mcgovern wrote:

Do you know anything about Console gaming? There is no reason WoW couldn't be played on a console and there have even been rumours that it will be released on them soon.
Downloading games online without a disk is also something that you can do on consoles. PSN already has full games available for download and Xbox Live has the capability to release more than arcade games.

No, I don't know too much about them, as consoles are for children and people who can't afford PC's. As for WoW on a console - I promise you I will purchase and eat a hat of your chooising should this ever happen.

Eg:

From http://www.pro-g.co.uk/news/15-01-2007-4497.html

A Blizzard developer has suggested massively popular MMO World of Warcraft would not translate well to the Nintendo Wii.

Speaking to Pro-G at the launch of the game's first expansion, The Burning Crusade, Blizzard game designer Jonathan LeCraft said using the Wii Remote wouldn't work with the PC hit.

No ****.

Is the game industry trying to kill off PC gaming?

Comments