PC Games Giant Rouses From Slumber

An anonymous reader writes "The Rocky Mountain news has a piece up looking at the revival of PC gaming." From the article: "'PC gaming used to take up the entire store,' said Ken Levine, president and creative director for Irrational Games. 'Now PC gaming get's a tiny little shelf. Literally you have a fraction of the shelf space.' So which is it for the future of PC gaming? Is it a dinosaur marching toward the tar pits or a sleeping giant ready to wake and reclaim its past glory? The industry's top advocates say there are plenty of problems keeping PC gaming down - but just as much potential that portend its inevitable rebirth."

Comments

Sqrt(-1)

[American AC in Paris]

"Now PC gaming get's a tiny little shelf. Literally you have a fraction of the shelf space."

The day that PC games do not literally have a fraction of the shelf space in a store is the day the universe faces some serious, serious issues.

Re:Sqrt(-1)

[timster]

Merriam-Webster shows a better understanding of the fact that authority in linguistics is mythological. If you actually read the definition for "literally", it contains the following:

"usage Since some people take sense 2 to be the opposite of sense 1, it has been frequently criticized as a misuse. Instead, the use is pure hyperbole intended to gain emphasis, but it often appears in contexts where no additional emphasis is necessary."

Re:Sqrt(-1)

[American AC in Paris]

What, are you literally incapable of letting a joke be a joke?

*grin*

"Shelf space" is obsolete

[xxxJonBoyxxx]

"Shelf space" is obsolete - the last few computer games I bought were 100% pure electrons. (I paid online too, of course, before downloading.) The "shelf space" battle will always tilt toward the console-playing, Best-Buy-shopping, mouth-breathing masses. Show me "units sold" or "revenue per unit" and I'll pay more attention.

Re:"Shelf space" is obsolete

[Samedi1971]

And how much can you get for those electrons on Ebay?

I wouldn't buy electrons unless they're much cheaper than the boxed version. The used boxed version. There are too many overhyped and overpriced games out there. If you waste your money on a bad game wouldn't you rather have a physical copy you can resell?

Re:"Shelf space" is obsolete

[hal9000(jr)]

The "shelf space" battle will always tilt toward the console-playing, Best-Buy-shopping, mouth-breathing masses.

Not to be a dinosaur, but in the last 20 years, I have seen size of PC games shelf space cycle at least twice. The last big swell was when PC were selling like hot cakes a few years ago. I'd go into EB or even Walmart and somewhere like 75% of the shelf space was devoted to PC games. I think the problem now is that people aren't turning thier PC's as fast as they the "industry" thought they would. In addition, alot of modern games require some serious hardware like sound and viddeo cards that aren't always installed on units. So people don't buy the games because their machines won't run them. Christ, I have a pretty ripping laptop, but I can't play Quake on it.

Why they allocate they way they do

[kneppercr]

Well, off the top of my head I would say that shelf space is directly proportional to profit. Used console games generate a TON of profit so they are going to be displayed prominantly. With (comparitively) little profit coming from PC games and the non-exsistance of used PC games at stores, it just wouldn't make sense from their perspective to devote alot of valuble eye level shelf space to them. Also, you can walk into EB games and GameStop and buy a console game and the hardware you need to play it on at the same time. You walk in see the display model of the Xbox 360 say "WOW cool graphics" and buy the system and game right there. For a PC game you have to rely on the screenshots the size of your thumb on the back of the box. The companies know this and they allocate shelf space accordingly.

Really?

[mwheeler01]

When you have great games like FEAR or Civ IV or HL2 or Battlefield 2 still being produced, you can hardly say that PC games are on the way out. I don't buy the argument that if you're providing less and less shelf space for a product that the product itself is getting marginalized. If customers know it's there they'll seek it out and grab at it. I think the shrinking shelf space is a symptom of pressure to push crappy console games from EA or the fact that the used console games market is where games stores are really making their money and reselling PC games is sort of an area that most retailers would rather tread lightly in if at all.

Take a look at Walmart. Walmart deals in small margins anyway so they don't care what you buy as long as you're buying. They give just as much shelf space to PC games as they do the each of the major consoles.

Part of the Problem

[MorderVonAllem]

I think part of the problem is that whenever I go into Fry's Electronics (i used to work there), there are 100's of games on the shelf. It's hard to weed out the ones that might be interesting to you.

Also, most of the video games come in fairly large packaging with just a CD. Even the manuals are now in PDF format on the CD. Give me a break. I wanna hold it in my hand and read it.

Third. Most games only make like 50 cents to a couple bucks profit per game, when stuff like stuffed animals (fry's electronics sells them in the same area) make probably 800%-1000% profit. Not much incentive to give shelf space to a product that doesn't make you that much money in the first place.

PC - Console - PC

[prionic6]

When will people get it? There is obviusly a cyclic development. When new game consoles come out, PC gaming suffers. When the consoles are a bit outdated, PC gaming will rise again. And so on and so on.

Re:PC - Console - PC

[ultranova]

When will people get it? There is obviusly a cyclic development. When new game consoles come out, PC gaming suffers. When the consoles are a bit outdated, PC gaming will rise again. And so on and so on.

But there is also a long-term gradual slide towards the death of gaming. The slide is caused by, ironically, technological advance.

Each game must look better than the previous one, and that means more detailed 3D models. 3D models are slow and difficult to make, and the time needed goes up exponentially as the details increase. This means that each game takes longer than its predecessor to make. Of course, the producer could hire more people to work on the game; but either way, the labor needed and thus the costs to produce a game go up, up and away.

While the cost of making the game goes up, the price that the market will bear stays roughly the same. The size of the market is also quite limited. Therefore, there's a limit to how much money you can get from a game, while the price of making it grows without limit. Sooner or later the price of making a game hits the maximum possible return, and at that point, the game industry - not just PC game industry, but the whole industry - dies.

The only way out that I can see is to get a lot better tools for 3D editing. No, the current tools are not good; they are utterly horrible. The most important tool in most 3D editors is the ability to move individual vertexes or otherwise modify them. Contrast this to 2D tools: would you think it reasonable that you'd need to enter each pixels color values numerically - in hexadecimal ?-)

Until such a time that you can simply let the 3D program generate the base mesh from drawn images, or use some other similar data enrance method, the cost of making (and animating) the 3D models will remain an anchor trying to pull every game project under the waves. And of course a good 3D program would also help independent movie projects tremendously.

Fraction of the shelf in what store?

[displague]

Best Buy gives PC games an isle or two which is more than what they offer other indiviual systems. Even Target and Walmart give PC games an isle, compared to a glass case. Usually PC Games get half of the space at Electronics Boutique stores. I don't think there is any merit to the claim.

I suppose all of that would change if the PC Games would distribute in consistently smaller packages.

Re:Fraction of the shelf in what store?

[Ekarderif]

Best Buy gives PC games an isle or two which is more than what they offer other indiviual systems.

I didn't know Best Buy owned islands and built stores around them.

From TFA

[CoderBob]

He points to piracy as a chief culprit in the sales drop. He says developers need to first find ways to make people pay. "What developers and publishers need to do is come up with distribution plans and new copy protection plans," he said. "When you see a game that requires you to be online to play, people can't steal that game."

It's also a good way to get people to not play your game. It's always the "big bad pirates" who are stealing money from the game manufacturers. The industry doesn't want to admit that they're churning out a lof of junk lately, so let's jump on the bandwagon of "It's those damn pirate kids" to save face.

I haven't bought a new PC game in about a year (I've purchased a couple "older" games now that they're in the <$20 market)- and I haven't pirated any, either. I've bought console games, though. When the PC market comes out with something that's worth playing, I'll probably be first in line. Where are the X-Coms, or the RTSes that actually break new ground? Where are the adventure games with their beautiful story arcs? Hell, Deus Ex was a phenonmenal game, and I could see a variation on that (new story, but a similar engine) selling well- something that actually draws the player in. What about stuff like Dungeon Keeper? That game was a blast, it spawned a sequel- and then dropped off the face of the earth. What about Worm- before the 3D crap that made it so much more irritating to play? What about the Baldur's Gate-style RPGs? Hell, Icewind Dale was somewhere between Diablo and BG, and that game was loads of fun. It had it's own feel to it, even though the interface was almost an exact copy of BG.

It's sad that the days of off-the-wall games that sucked a gamer in seem to be gone in the PC World. Instead we get direct sequels that don't offer much more than a smoother engine or prettier graphics. We don't get the stuff that either offers an incredible story or that brings about something "new". And as the gaming market ages, that's going to keep being a problem- to keep the "veteran" gamers around, they're going to have to draw them in with something that they haven't seen before.

Irrational Games, eh?

[Anonymous Coward]

PC gaming may not be dead, but when the idiots at Irrational put Starforce on their game, they're helping to kill it.

Re:Is Piracy really the #1 problem?

[ivan256]

I think the complaints about piracy are actually developers being optimistic that there is actually somebody out there running their buggy pieces of trash.

1/2 of an EB? What?

[wuie]

The last EB I went to, they only had about 1/6th of the store dedicated to PC gaming.

Consoles losing their advantages....

[code addict]

I can only speak for my reasons for returning to PC games, but it largely has to do with consoles losing their unique advantages.

When I bought my PS1 it was WAY better than playing games on a PC, because:
1) It plugged into your TV,
2) It hardly took up any space,
3) It had no fans, ran cool, and hardly made any noise.

With the Xbox and PS2, they both have loud fans and are much bigger. I remember being very disappointed to hear that fan when I turned on my PS2 for the first time.

With the increasing popularity of Media PCs, more and more people have their PCs plugged into their TVs, or have LCD monitors that are the size of many TVs (21" for example). And since the consoles are all huge noisy machines (with the exception of Nintendo), they don't give you much over the PCs.

I know I'm probably not the average person, but my PC is connected via component and optical cables to my home theater (60" HDTV, etc.) and I have a secondary keyboard and mouse on the couch. Any game I play on the PC is automatically an HDTV game. I don't have to check the back of the box to see what resolution it is, etc. Basically it comes down to the fact that PC games actually take advantage of my system. I realize that an Xbox 360 would too, but why bother? For what it's worth, playing FEAR or Battlefield 2 on a 60" HDTV with 5.1 surround cranked sitting on the couch is an very nice experience indeed! :)

PCs cant lose

[mnmn]

There has been a recent surge in the cool factor of console gaming. However PC gaming will always be on the top. Heres why.

The cpu power per dollar is highest on wintel platforms due to the huge market. Thats part of the reason why Apple went to get Intel chips. You buy one machine and it does many other things, PVR, game machine, computer, dvd player... a given nonx86 console would be hard pressed to match what a PC can do... for the price. PCs also have the largest install base. Since no one company dominates the platform, its future is also guaranteed (I know MSFT dominates the OS market, but doesnt OWN the PC). So building games for the PC makes sense. Its really building a game for one console, and not for the PC that makes little sense. So far PCs also have the best array of available controls, from wheels and joysticks to the ubiquitous keyboard and mouse for FPS games. Make a good game for a PC... it'll sell. PCs are also more cutting edge. The best graphic cards and CPUs are available for it.

I guess the only console that can beat the PC is something thats really specialized for its game genres or one that is based on a PC (the older xbox comes to mind). Even that would be more expensive than walmart/dell/beige box PCs.

PC Games have one big problem...

[CyberLord Seven]

No one is talking about the BUGS!
From the article:
And when the newest PC hardware hits, game developers can start taking advantage of it immediately.
That's usually too fast. When I buy a console game it works. It's been tested.
Buy a PC game and fear the BUG. In the back of your mind you are going to be wondering how far you can go before the BUG bites you on your @$$. And then you wait for the patch. :(

Re:PC Games have one big problem...

[The_reformant]

In the other hand on a console if you hit a bug your completely screwed. I played morrowind on the xbox and a flaw in one of the quests resulted in a death sentence incurred for completeing one of the quests not being lifted on completion. The result meant that i couldn't safely enter about a third of the cities in the game making it pretty much a waste of time.

This was a known bug in the PC version which was patched and could be addressed in a non-patched copy using the command console but unfortunately those with the xbox version were left screwed.

Huh?

[Evangelion]

They've released another game since I bought WoW?

Consoles are better for most people

[c0d3h4x0r]

There are some major probems (for gamers and game-makers) that plague the whole concept of PC gaming:

1. It's easier for PC games to be pirated, so it's less lucrative an enterprise.

2. Unlike a console, where every unit is identical hardware, PCs have infinitely many hardware combinations. It's impossible to test for them all. It's also impossible for non-technical / non-computer people to clearly find the answer to the question, "can my computer run this game well?"

3. Unlike a console, where you just put in the game and turn on the power, on your PC you first have to troubleshoot hardware lockups and software crashes, download and install drivers, install the game, configure your game controller, configure the game's performance settings, etc...

4. Sometimes, despite your best technically-competent troubleshooting efforts (eating up valuable hours of your life), a particular game will just refuse to run on a given PC without locking up or crashing or performing way slower than it should on that hardware. No one can figure out why, and none of the involved companies seem to care about fixing it, even when the problem is being experienced by boatloads of people camped out in online support forums.

5. Consoles are much cheaper than PCs.

6. PC game controllers are notorious for sucking compared to console game controllers. In my experience the only way to get a good game controller on a PC is to go buy a console controller and a USB converter box from Lik-Sang.

7. You can't easily play games on a PC on your big-screen TV while sitting on your couch in the den. Yes, I know it's possible to get a PC to display on a TV, but you have to be pretty technically-competent to do that. And then, it's not a comfortable way to use your PC for other common tasks you'd want to use it for, such as web browsing or typing up Word docs. And who wants to have to lug their PC back and forth all the time between a computer desk and the den?

8. PC hardware tends to have a higher failure rate, in my experience, due to the variety of non-integrated components from a variety of different sources, never tested together. Consoles are completely integrated designs, engineered to be a lot more durable.

9. PCs still have delicate little connectors with lots of pins that have to be carefully inserted the right way. Consoles always have tough connectors that can only fit one way, such that constant abuse by rowdy teens or children doesnt' destroy them.

Easy question

[the computer guy nex]

XBox 360: ATI card with no equivilent on today's market and 3 3.2 ghz processors - $299.99.

Computer with best available ATI card and only a single 3.2 ghz processor - $1000+.

Computer manufacturers are not receiving a cut of every piece of software used on the system (unlike MS and the Xbox or Sony and the PS).