Slashdot Mirror


Activision Wants Consoles To Be Replaced By PCs

thsoundman writes with this excerpt from thegamersblog: "We live in a world where we have multiple platforms for gaming: PC, PS3, 360, Wii, etc. Each platform has varying amounts of power when it comes to playing games. Activision, one of the leading cross-platform publishers, wishes to move away from the 'walled gardens' set by Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo. ... [Activision CEO Bobby] Kotick’s solution is to turn to the PC, where it can set its own model for pricing — not unlike what Blizzard has done with World of Warcraft and Battle.net. Kotick stated that Activision would 'very aggressively' support the likes of HP and Dell in any attempt at making an easy 'plug-and-play' PC that would hook up directly to the TV."

28 of 344 comments (clear)

  1. Bobby Kotick again by SquarePixel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    While moving away from consoles 'walled gardens' sounds great and the summary makes it sound all nice and everything, this is Bobby Kotick were talking about. The CEO of Activision who's primary goal is to milk as much money from computer games as possible by any means necessary.

    In the article he is angry that while people pay for XBL subscriptions, Activision doesn't get any share of that. Basically he wants people to pay Activision a monthly subscription for online services, on top of the normal price for games. While it makes sense for games like MMO's where the developer needs the monthly subscription to keep up their massive server farms and keep creating new content, the usual multiplayer games don't require that. Just see Valve and TF2 or countless amount of other multiplayer games.

    Forget about "opening up consoles", making the world a better place, ending wars and famine, he just wants more money.

    1. Re:Bobby Kotick again by sznupi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      More to the point, he is surely frustrated that he can't really pursue his own 'walled gardens' on consoles; for that he needs 'open' PC.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    2. Re:Bobby Kotick again by TechnoFrood · · Score: 2, Insightful

      the usual multiplayer games don't require that. Just see Valve and TF2 or countless amount of other multiplayer games.

      Thats simple to get round, you just don't release a dedicated server for your game, and force everyone to use your matchmaking service for P2P play.

    3. Re:Bobby Kotick again by FriendlyLurker · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The CEO of Activision who's primary goal is to milk as much money from computer games as possible by any means necessary.

      In this case, the point is moot. Anyone who supports an open standard platform for gaming gets my vote, greedy or not. Walled gardens, especially when they are the dominant garden in the park, are never good for consumer choice or price in the long run. Sure Kotick can charge more on the PC than on some propriety gaming platform where he must follow orders. But he also can't exclude competition or dictate any terms to anyone else... so go to it Activision, I really hope you succeed in making a plugin and play gaming PC platform based on open standards!

    4. Re:Bobby Kotick again by ultranova · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In this case, the point is moot. Anyone who supports an open standard platform for gaming gets my vote, greedy or not. Walled gardens, especially when they are the dominant garden in the park, are never good for consumer choice or price in the long run.

      One should also remember that consoles hold back the development of games. Even something like XBox 360 has only 512 megs of memory, which severely limits how complex gameworlds it can represent; just compare with the 2 gigabytes minimum on newer PCs, and 6-8 gigs or more on high-end machines.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    5. Re:Bobby Kotick again by Eraesr · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Bobby Kotick's ultimate goal isn't an open platform. His goal is a platform that's very much closed off, but where he determines the rules instead of Microsoft. The reason he roots for the PC as a platform to do this on is because it's the only platform that is open enough for him to start up his own walled garden.

      It's bad news all-round. If every publisher started up it's own variant of XBox Live, you'd have to pay subscription fees for every publisher, maybe for every game. You'd be working yourself into serious debts if you want to sustain (multiplayer) access to a variety of games from different publishers.

    6. Re:Bobby Kotick again by bloodhawk · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And the various levels of hardware in PC land hold back development even more. Very few games can afford to shoot for the leading edge of hardware as it simply restricts their gaming audience too much. An X-box will set a gamer back $300-$500 (depending on accessories), a modern gaming machine while relatively cheap nowadays is going to cost you at least as much and is a constantly shifting target that forces gamers to upgrade regularly (I am one of them), with a console I can spend more on games with slightly less capable hardware, with a PC I spend more on hardware which reduces what I can spend on games, but get prettier games.

    7. Re:Bobby Kotick again by KDR_11k · · Score: 4, Insightful

      To be fair this whole subscription service mania is a result of revenues not growing as much as costs so sooner or later their whole operation will crash down anyway (they'll focus on delivering fewer and fewer titles that must all be huge hitters but epect failures to eliminate publishers going that route) and people who are less hostile towards the customer and blowing less money on nonsense like cutting edge graphics (of course you need decent graphics but you don't need expensive cutting edge ones) will take over. While Activision et al build bigger and bigger blockbusters countless avenues for cheaply made games are springing up everywhere. The future of gaming is not ridiculous prices, it's cutting back the superfluous costs and delivering reasonably priced games with good enough graphics and good fun (which isn't terribly expensive).

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    8. Re:Bobby Kotick again by bloodhawk · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So even with an only 2 year old graphics card you have to reduce performance, 2 years is a way to frequent upgrade. This is the whole damn problem, if you want to keep up with games in the PC world you have to upgrade or have the game operating at less than the designed intent. I can afford to keep up with that, I actually upgrade at least once a year but I have friends that can't afford to upgrade there 3,4,5 year old machines and find it almost impossible to play newer games. the 360 came out in 2005, the PS3 came out in 2006. Even games purchased in 2011 or 2012 will work the same on a 2005 model as it will on a 2012 model. get a gaming machine from 2007 or 2008 even and you will find you have to turn down the graphics on modern games.

    9. Re:Bobby Kotick again by tepples · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Bnet will be his walled garden.

      The advantage of PCs running Windows is that it has multiple walled gardens: Battle.net, Steam, etc. You can start your own if you don't like the console maker's, or you can join someone's even if the console maker thinks your business is too small.

    10. Re:Bobby Kotick again by AndersOSU · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Locked down hardware is the only advantage of consoles.

      The primary reason the PC game market is on the long slow decline is "minimum system requirements" and the upgrade treadmill that goes with it. I know that my Xbox 360 will play every Xbox game just as well as yours. I don't have to worry about frame rates or graphic cards. I plug it in, and I know I can play every game designed for the system.

    11. Re:Bobby Kotick again by jythie · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That 'reduction' also comes with a price. Higher development and testing costs. One of the advantages of producing for a known hardware set is you can put those resources into further developing the game rather then making it work across a wider range of configurations. Support for multiple resolutions alone can cause costs to balloon and gets even messier when you give the ability to switch particular types of graphics off an on. Each of those configurations needs to be tested and bugs only present in one or two types need to be fixed. Keeping behavior uniform often involves going down into the underlying engine and altering that, which requires regression testing the whole mess. It can turn a '99% done game' into months of development hell.....

  2. attempt at making an easy 'plug-and-play' PC by Chrisq · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Activision would 'very aggressively' support the likes of HP and Dell in any attempt at making an easy 'plug-and-play' PC that would hook up directly to the TV."

    So would I .... it would like a great MythTV box

  3. Re:Console vs PC Gaming Experience by daid303 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Download patches as required

    I never had to do that on my NES, SNES, Atari, Wii, Sega, gameboy, etc...
    Downloadable patches is the current evil for console games, it ruins the "plugin and play" spirit. If you cannot supply patches you will make damn sure your game works. Yes, most oldies have a few bugs, but nothing that make the game unplayable, more glitches that require special actions. (super mario 1 - level -1, zelda links awakening - screen teleport glitch, pokemon - "missin no")

    These days we have games that simply are unplayable unless you patch them, which is crazy.

  4. Don't cripple your PC games, then, Activision! by d_jedi · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Ex. Modern Warfare 2:
    "Criticism has arisen of changes made to the PC version of Modern Warfare 2 including the lack of dedicated servers, latency issues of the listen server-only IWNET, lack of console commands, lack of support for matches larger than 18 players, and inability to vote towards kicking or banning cheating players immediately"

    Remove the benefits of PC gaming, and gamers won't game on a PC..

    --
    I am the maverick of Slashdot
  5. Sort of by Moraelin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well, sort of. Actually, not really. Someone who explicitly just wants to replace Sony's walled garden with his own, doesn't exactly strike me as a sort of freedom fighters. In fact the whole situation kinda gives me the mental image of fighting Apple's walled garden by replacing it with Microsoft software.

    The fact that the PC hardware itself will be open is effectively just a way to pass that unprofitable part to someone else. PC's commoditization just drove the profit margins of PC vendors into the basement and allowed MS to stick to the part where it can rake in the taxes like a king. In the end it's one reason why MS did better than apple, back in the late 90's and early 2000's.

    Activision here wants the same thing. It wants the likes of Dell and HP to do the work of building a cheap PC that's kinda like a console, but not charge royalties for it, so he can get the money instead.

    And generally I would question the logic between giving your vote to someone just because they intend to replace another asshole. The history is full of examples where that was a bad idea. I could even Goodwin it by mentioning a certain election in '32 where some people thought they'll show the established parties and coalitions by voting for the new and vocal third party, so to speak. Yeah, that went so well. But otherwise from Lenin to Yuan Shikai to ancient greek tyrants (yeah, most of those used populism to subvert the self-serving oligarchy that passed for ancient greek democracy), we have some millennia of people who offered to save us from they tyranny of someone else by replacing it with their own.

    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    1. Re:Sort of by mcvos · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Someone who explicitly just wants to replace Sony's walled garden with his own, doesn't exactly strike me as a sort of freedom fighters.

      I don't know. Plenty of freedom fighters throughout history overthrew a brutal dictatorship just to institute their own. (Most didn't have the decency to tell you this up front, however.)

  6. In order to avoid Microsoft and Apple ... by ScaledLizard · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... they could provide their games on bootable Linux discs. No install needed, no patches possible, full control over the player's experience, with the added bonus of being able run the games in Linux. Just a dream? Also no need to update DirectX.

    1. Re:In order to avoid Microsoft and Apple ... by Shikaku · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Hell they could release something like SteamOS (name just for explanation) where it installs like Wubi and can be updated/patched from Windows but to play you have to boot into their OS.

  7. Re:Console vs PC Gaming Experience by mjwx · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Console:
    1. try to make out text that isnt aliased/sampled properly.
    2. play for 5 minutes.
    3. Level transition time, loading.
    4. play.
    5. load.
    6. play.
    7. load.
    8. change disk.
    9. load.
    10. RROD.
    11. vendor retroactively takes features.
    12. game vendor nickels and dimes you for DLC.
    13. after 13 DLC's at $5 each you finally have a full game.

    PC
    1. Set resolution to monitors native (most games do this automatically now).
    2. Play.
    3. Keep playing.
    4. Holy crap, there's more then 4 hours of content in the game and no loading screen.
    5. Enjoy quicksaving.
    6. Get free content from the distributor (thanks valve and stardock).
    7. Play the game 15 years later on your modern gaming PC.

    --
    Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  8. green eyed monster by bloodhawk · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What you have here is serious jealously of Xbox Live and soon PSN as they look to monetise it. They are seeing the huge profit MS is starting to turn on XBL (while at the same time forgetting the years of investment ie losses it took to get there) and just like a petulant child they are trying to figure out some easy way they can claim a slice of this pie (while at the same time not actually do anything to earn it).

  9. Re:Console vs PC Gaming Experience by scdeimos · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Today's games are 10000 times bigger.

    Today's games are only 10,000 times bigger because of the higher-fidelity audio and higher-resolution graphics. The games themselves are not 10,000 times more complex, otherwise they'd be unplayable by humans, so they have no excuse to be any more unstable than their older counterparts.

    Sorry, I agree with the GP... patchable console games make for shittier games because publishers are more inclined to say "she'll be right, we can patch it after release."

  10. Re:Console vs PC Gaming Experience by daid303 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Todays games are larger, yes. But today we have different tooling.
    Yes, it's not that hard to build a platform game like super mario 1. Unless you only have an assembler, 40K of ROM, 2K of RAM, a CPU at slightly less then 2Mhz and a GPU with some strict timing requirements.

  11. Re:Console vs PC Gaming Experience by stealth_finger · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Console.

    1. Open tray
    2. Close tray
    3 Play
    continue till bored.

    PC

    0. Make sure computer can actually run game, if not go out and buy more parts till it can.
    1 Open tray
    2. Close tray
    3. Install
    4. Crash
    5. Hunt for drivers.
    6. Crash
    7. Spend hours tinkering with options and settings to get a decent framerate and accecptable graphics
    8. Crash
    9. Spend hours trawling forums trying to pinpoint exact problem
    10. Recify problems, change registry settings, reinstall game, reinstall drivers
    11. Try Again
    12. Crash
    13. Repeat untill rage
    14. Finally get game working to find any online portion is filled with 99% hackers, modders and general cheats.
    15. .......Crash

    Hey this is fun.

    http://pc.mmgn.com/Lib/Images/Gallery/full/7PLLYLB8.jpg

    --
    Wanna buy a shirt?
    https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
  12. dead end by Tom · · Score: 3, Insightful

    what a piece of nonsense.

    We don't need a new computer type. We need a little bit of innovation regarding connections.

    If you have a computer in your computer room, and a flatscreen TV in your living room, why can the computer not use the TV as an output device? Wire, wireless, don't care. Why invent a new device if it does nothing you don't already have?

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  13. Re:Crysis for netbooks? by tepples · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Nobody in their right mind views a netbook as a gaming machine.

    Yet people in their right mind have seen advertising that portrays DS, PSP, and iPod Touch as gaming machines.

  14. Re:Console vs PC Gaming Experience by Buelldozer · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You've missed a large part of the OPs point! You say that QA testing spends much effort finding bugs and glitches but we both know that doesn't mean that the managers in charge are going to FIX them before the game ships!

    If they don't fix an issue before the game ships then here comes....THE PATCHES!

    Blergh.

  15. Re:Console vs PC Gaming Experience by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Just because you can doesnt mean you should.

    IMHO, Morrowind was a much more enjoyable game than Oblivion.

    The primary difference? Oblivion had physics... you could knock stuff off the table.... thats the only benefit it added.

    Meanwhile the physics resulted in ALL KINDS of problems. Players could no longer easily put things where they wanted them, sometimes the physics would screw up & stuff would go flying everywhere, stuff got lost behind a table & you couldnt get to it, the added cpu demands of the physics pushed sys reqs through the roof... etc etc etc

    all so you could accidentally knock stuff off the tables.

    Next time you're adding "A rigid body representation for the physics engine, including joint limit set ups etc." please please please take a moment & think about whether doing so actually adds anything to the gameplay.... or if you're just doing it because you can.