Slashdot Mirror
PC Gaming On The Comeback Trail
The Chicago Tribune reports on efforts from the PC gaming sector to revive what many have considered to be a failing part of the industry. From the article: "Many [Gamespot] stores have demo kiosks for consoles such as the PlayStation 2 or Nintendo DS so gamers can try before they buy. Testing a PC game has been impossible. Not anymore. In a trial collaboration announced a few weeks ago, GameStop and Round Rock, Texas-based Dell have rolled out computer game kiosks in 25 GameStop stores. Customers can test a handful of the best PC games the same way they test-drive the latest PS2 release. The kiosks will be powered by Dell's revamped and supercharged XPS computers, coupled with 42-inch Dell high-definition plasma monitors."
Just last week, Slashdot was posting articles about the demise of PC gaming.
PC gaming is neither demising or making a comeback. It's as popular as it has ever been. More people own more computers than ever before and more people are gaming on them than ever before. There are a lot of gaming experiences you simply can't get off another instrument.
Isn't that the point of downloadable demos? So I can see what the game's like on my own PC?
If I try and play a game on a machine that far outclasses my home system, there's no way I'm going to get an accurate feel for the experience at home.
There really should be a (registration/bypass required) warning near that link.
That said, damn. 42-inch monitors. I gotta go to one of these GameStop thingies again (I went once to get my presshhiouss). I just hope they don't burn out, during an intense corridor shootout or a motion-blur-filled demonstration of the Staff of Whacking.
PC Gaming on The Comeback TrailSo we can only carry 200 pounds of buffalo on the wagon?
You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
Not if you're on a slow 'net connection, or unwilling/frightened to click on advertisements and Slashdot stories because of the Spyware Boogeyman or something to that effect.
Fast-loading minimum-requirement pages and online READMEs could do the trick, but not every corp/group tests with every compy. I'll remain on the solution-offering sidelines until further instruction by authorized personnel.
You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
The article's dumb, don't bother. The author makes it sound like trying out a PC game in the store is this neat new concept that is indicative of PC Gaming's rise. That's just stupid. The CompUSA around here has had computers running games that people can try out for years now.
Against stupidity the Gods themselves contend in vain.
If I find one of these in the shops, there will be filth all over the keyboard. And, once I've overcome the Michael Jackson like fear of attemting to touch it, I'll find that the controls are unplugged. Hooray!
Maybe game companies should consider offering downloadable demos....oh wait, nm
Unless you also have a 42" HD plasma connected to your gaming PC at home, this is in no way a realistic experience of a PC game. However, it is a much better way to *sell* you PC games, as they'll almost certainly be better, shinier and certainly bigger in every way on these demo kiosks. That said, why not just download a demo of the latest game on your own PC? Isn't that the "other" legal use of BitTorrent that everyone is always clamoring about?
There's a local PC gaming store in Pasadena called Interact that does the PC try-it-before-you-buy-it thing and it's been pretty successful for them, so I hope it works for GameStop as well.
I Am A Gaming Whore
Computer gaming was on the comback trail, but it died of dysentery right before reaching Fort Bridger.
I used to actually care about spending money to upgrade my computer to play the latest games but for some reason I just don't care anymore. I guess it's because I'm not rich, and I have other priorities to worry about...I still wish I could play F.E.A.R in 60FPS bliss though T_T
Before I start, I should say now that I think the article is basically crap. Playable machines in games stores aren't that relevant - the controllers will be broken in a week by the fat, smelly 12 year old in the sleeveless vest who stands there hitting them randomly anyway.
However, I think PC gaming has certainly been on a bit of a rollercoaster compared with console gaming over the last couple of years. In particular, I think the PC has struggled to establish itself against the curret generation of consoles in the same way that it has past generations. For me, the absolute nadir of PC gaming came in 2003, when Call of Duty was voted game of the year by pretty much every outlet that covered PC gaming. If your game of the year is a technologically obsolete and gameplay-deprived clone of a game released the previous year (Medal of Honour), you know your industry has problems. This was at a time when major titles were appearing for the consoles on a more or less weekly basis.
The PC has rallied slightly, since then. 2004 saw the PC creeping ahead of the consoles in terms of visuals for the first time, with Doom 3, Farcry and Half-Life 2 being the most impressive examples. It also finally saw some respectable big-name games for the PC. This has continued somewhat in 2005, particularly with Quake 4 and F.E.A.R, both of which look and play better than equivalent console fpses.
However, don't take this as an indication that the PC can continue to hold its own against the consoles in the longer term. The current gen consoles have virtually run their cycle now. Nintendo have all but admitted that the Gamecube is retired and the PS2 might as well be. The X-Box is still hanging on, but even there, we're about to be hit by the next generation.
However, when you compare the level of technical lead the PC has built up during this cycle and the speed with which it established it, it's pretty pathetic. Think about it. When consoles were playing Super Mario and Sonic the Hedgehog, the PC had X-Wing and Strike Commander. When the PS1 and N64 were at their height, PC gamers had Half-Life. By contrast, the PC has only just narrowly edged ahead at the end of this cycle. With the next gen about to hit, it's going to get knocked to the back of the field entirely.
Of course, the PC will never die out as a gaming platform completely. It remains the only sensible platform for widescale distribution of home-brew games. Nobody's yet managed to make an RTS interface that works on a console (although I'd argue that console fpses can be pretty sweet now). PC releases are much easier for companies who can't afford to go through the mandatory Q&A cycles for the consoles. However, if the PC doesn't get a clear technological lead over the next-gen consoles early in the cycle, it's finished as a mainstream platform.
How can this happen? I suspect there are two major steps that need to be taken. First of all, ATI and Nvidia need to get a proper strategy. They need to stop putting out a new $600 graphics card every 3 months and make solid, decently specced and non-confusing card ranges that the average consumer can use and not suffer for using. Next, they need to start insisting on their own Q&A programmes for PC games. Console games with serious bugs merit their own slashdot story. With PC games, it's expected. Until somebody forces devs to confront this situation, PC gaming is going to continue to bleed market-share in the long term.
Many [Gamespot] stores have demo kiosks for consoles such as the PlayStation 2 or Nintendo DS so gamers can try before they buy. Testing a PC game has been impossible.
Right, because nobody makes demos of their games available for free download or distribution. Shareware apparently also doesn't exist.
Uhh.... Downloable demos? Sounds like trying a game before buying to me. the XPS is a hunk of crap too AFAIK
It is not "impossible" in the context of the article. My local Radio Shack (which was since rebranded to Circut City) installed games on a computer to show that it worked.
Anyone can rig their own trial system for use in store: a PC with DeepFreeze installed immediatly takes care of the software portion - it may have a performance hit in extreme situations, but is fixed by a quick reset.
The hardware will be a bit tricky, as you can't use some random $10 keyboard and mouse - they have to be a rugged keyboard and a rugged mouse (there's a rugged joystick available, but that's optional.)
The remaining portion is the copy-protection in most games... Most computers have two IDE chains with two devices a-piece - that means you have three random games available per day, plus other things you can stuff on the computer.
Nice...but I win by way of earlier trail reference.
Or maybe not.
You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
Is that kinda like the Oregon Trail?
I call dibs on hunting!
Would you kindly mod me +1 insightful?
People can call me anachronistic if they want, but the desktop is still king in my book.
Not only can people perform all of the other usual computer-related tasks with a desktop without having to switch machines, TV really sucks for gaming, resolution wise. Also, the average PC is still usually a lot more powerful than the average console, as well. Plus if you already have a PC and use it for gaming, you don't need to spend an extra $300-$700 on an Xbox...The first generation Xbox was a glorified doorstop even when it first came out, IMHO. if you still have that money spare, you can use it on a ram, processor, or video card upgrade, which will not only improve your gaming experience, but let you do other things more effectively as well. A new GeForce 6800 video card will render graphics better than any console, as well.
There was a point to consoles back when they were 8 bit, and earlier, (mainly because back then the average PC was only as powerful as the console itself, or less so) but these days they're nothing but a expensive gimmick. The only real reason why they're viable at all now IMHO is because of the overhead normally incurred by Windows on a PC. It's possible to strip XP though, (I stop all unnecessary services and actually kill/restart explorer before/after loading a game, and can get XP down to 60 or so MB RAM this way, which leaves over 400 for the game for me) or use Linux, and with X have the game set as the window manager itself. That works great for UT at least.
Although it's true I don't have sufficient money for a console as well as a PC, if I did have it, I still wouldn't buy one. They're completely redundant.
someone could possibly come in and push Nintendo out if the Revolution ends up not doing too well.
Do you really think the GP2X handheld or J2ME on cellphones is going to push out the Nintendo DS?
Right, because nobody makes demos of their games available for free download or distribution.
I haven't seen free or $1 demo discs in EBGames or Wal-Mart stores. Not everybody has broadband because not everybody plays in online multiplayer mode.
Also, the average PC is still usually a lot more powerful than the average console, as well.
Then why do most PC games require four PCs for four players (at $800 a piece, especially if the players live in the same household or residential broadband is not affordable), while console games such as Super Smash Bros. Melee can put four players on one console with one screen?
Show me a games console which will drive four TVs from the one machine and I might concede that you have a point.
The PS3 is halfway there, with the ability to drive two TVs, each at a solid 60 Hz. Besides, if all players' characters are in an enclosed space (Super Smash Bros., Tekken, Street Fighter, Custom Robo, Bomberman, etc), what need is there for multiple televisions?
A little local software shop has about 3 or 4 computers on the floor each with a different new release title up and running on it, open for custormers to try out - they started that at least 8 years ago.
It's a nice touch, and one certianly welcome in a national chain.
I know the - go download the demo - line has been used more than a couple times in this thread, but really there are a number of games (mostly big name titles) that opt to not release a demo, or at least wait till well after the product launch to release a demo. And even then, many demos weight in at over 500 mb these days, try downloading that on dialup, even low end broadband it can take several hours (of course not a big deal since you don't tie up the phone...)
Realistically, I won't buy a game without being able to play it these days. If EBGames can provide me a way to paly Quake 4 without the $50 fee, they may earn themselves some buisness.
You're playing the wrong games.
I know several people who would take your statement in the context of parent and grandparent to mean "fighting games suck." Are you trying to start a fight?
There are plenty of splitscreen-enabled PC games, most of them just aren't the big name ones.
Got a URL of a list of major PC games that support same-screen or split-screen multiplayer, especially non-FPS non-RTS, so that I have ammo to use against console enthusiasts?
Lack of multiple controllers admittedly *is* a hardware issue, although I'm sure a pad controller card could be put together that allows for multiple control pads on a PC. It's probably already been done
And I own such a "pad controller card". It's called a USB hub. So why aren't there more commercial PC games that take advantage of multiple PC joypads plugged into a USB hub?
What's the point of a kiosk if you can just play a demo? I don't buy a PC game unless it has a demo or I "try" it first . I really wish more companies provided demos. This is for a few reasons:
-I shouldn't have to pay for a game I don't enjoy. It's hard to tell if you will enjoy a game before trying it out.
-I should be able to tell how well a game will run on my hardware. I can't do this without a demo, even on a kiosk
-Sometimes I will get addicted to a game from the demo. This happened with Unreal Tournament, Battlefield, and some others. Without the excellent demos, I never would have thought to buy the games, harming both the company and myself.
Funny, I didn't know Gamespot had any 'offline' stores.
80 CC D8 AF AE D3 AB 54 B7 2E CE 67 C7
Testing a PC game has been impossible. Not anymore.
Right, it's not like PC gamers have been able to download demos for the past 10-15 years...
Does anyone else find it annoying when announcements of something "new" feel the need to go out of their way and make ridiculous, overblown exaggerations about just how "new" they are? Not only have demos of PC games obviously been downloadable for well over a decade, but the idea of using in-store PC gaming kiosks to help sell PC games has also been done before, just not by the big names like GameStop and EB.
In fact, if anything, the situation is exactly the reverse of this news blurb's description: It is typically the CONSOLE gamers who lack the ability to freely try before they buy. Most games aren't available via in-store kiosks, and spending $8 to rent the game from blockbuster isn't exactly an inexpensive way to sample a game you're thinking about buying. In contrast, PC gamers are blessed with free downloadable demos of nearly every game in existence.
Seriously though -- this is just like a few weeks ago when the Spielberg-EA team-up was announced, and some reported it as Spielberg's first foray into videogames, completely ignoring his previous "first foray," LucasArts' "The Dig." Sorry, an artist is only entitled to ONE "debut," not several. If in doubt, check the dictionary.
And if in doubt about whether something is "new" or not, at least check Google first.
I use to work in the computer department of a large retailer. We had a couple of PCs setup with games that the public could try. We kept it up to date - often changing the game that was on there, would put a good joystick on for flight sims and a steering wheel on for racers.
Great. Another kiosk a pizza face has to tell a slightly younget pizza face to get away from...
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Anyone remember Egghead? They had games setup for you to play. I fondly remember some Heros of Might and Magic III on their rigs.