Yarlen

Join Date 01/2005

+365

PC Gaming Needs an Advocate

There has been a notable decline in the PC gaming industry in recent years, with flat or declining sales reported from many publishers/developers. In response, many developers have announced plans to abandon or scale back their work on the PC, instead opting for the more lucrative console market (like it or not, games are a business). As a former gaming journalist, this came as no surprise to me at the time, but what is becoming alarming is that practically nothing has been done about the problem.

As with any issue, the reasons behind it are many; almost no complex problem has a simple solution. For this article I would like to address only one primary factor - that PC gaming has no advocate. By this I mean that PC gaming's competition - consoles - each have their champion to herald the platform for development and sales. Sony has been the best at this thus far, as the PlayStation and PlayStation 2 have each dominated the market for years. However, PC gaming has had no such champion and it should - namely Microsoft.

Microsoft has a monopoly on the OS market right now and its operating systems are on over 90 percent of the world's computers. To its credit, Microsoft has made some steps to promote the PC as a viable gaming platform. About a year ago, the company started to promote the system by courting the media and creating an online advising tool to help people find the titles that might suit their interests best. The problem is that this effort as the platform's advocate has been half-hearted at best. As a starter, Microsoft has been courting the gaming press to promote the PC, but the gaming media has been sold on the PC as a platform from the start. Preaching to the choir isn't going to yield results. More to the point is that Microsoft should be leading by example. After all it's their OS we're talking about, but if you look at their Games for Windows page, you'll see that they have practically nothing upcoming: one title is a MMORPG, one is an RPG sequel, and the third is a console port. Just a few years ago Microsoft launched a number of notable games like Age of Mythology, Rise of Nations, MechWarrior 4, Freelancer and more. This huge decline in PC releases from the system's only real advocate does not instill confidence in other publishers/developers to make more product for the system.

Part of the problem must be that Microsoft has divided loyalties in that the company must also promote its Xbox as a gaming platform of choice. What the company doesn't seem to "realize" is that console games and PC games are usually quite distinct. Many of the titles that have come out on the Xbox could have easily been PC releases instead. Granted it's not all Microsoft's fault, they can't dictate to developers/publishers what to create, and many of these developers used to make PC games. However, Microsoft should draw a finer line on what it hopes to see in this regard from its partners.

So how do we turn things around? Honestly, I don't have a comprehensive answer, as I stated above, I'm only looking at one portion of the problem. My suggestion would be that Microsoft needs to push harder to promote the PC as a viable gaming platform. They need to really push their online advisor tool to consumers, advertise the value of the PC for games, and lead by example by developing more PC titles as they once used to. I don't think anyone could reasonably argue that this is beyond Microsoft's capability or resolve.

Locked Post

Advanced Search

Watch this post

Do not email me updates for this post Email me updates for this post

Successfully updated karma reason!

In the absence of a defined "thing" to test against, how can Microsoft help push the end-user experience for gaming?

Can they develop standards for how games on a PC should install and present themselves? Yes.

Can they offer a set of common tools and libraries to integrate common functionality between the PC and Xbox? Yes.

Can they suggest specs and tiers for what's needed for a specific game or generic platform level? Yes.

Can they ensure that Game XYZ is going to work on Vendor ABC's PC with a DEF video card running driver 12345? For all practical purposes, no.

The PC is saddled by onerous backward compatibility requirements. It's barely in the last year that we've seen games that require (and rightly so, imho) 2000/XP or later. On some levels, I would argue that XP-only is even the way to go for an A or AAA title. But, the albatross of earlier versions is there...

Let alone the temptation to double-dip on a "console-only" app on other platforms. Note to Microsoft: I'm not buying GTA:SA on the Xbox in June 2005. I bought it and played it on the PS2 last year.

Let's have a nice Perfect Dark and kart racing on the Xbox 360 (or whatever) as launch titles. Bundle one of them with it, you can afford it. Also include demos of everything launching with or near the console. Halo3 should be a kick-ass demo, not available at launch. You've Perfect Dark to fill in until then. Remember when consoles used to come with a game? What's $50M in launch costs?

Get people excited. The early adopters are liable to buy a ps3 (or whatever name) as well, but you'll get a half-dozen content sales from 1st-gen 360 games before that happens.

Successfully updated karma reason!

But there are hardware standards. As well as PC development standards. The problem isn't that we don't exsist. The problem is that there are simply too many. DirectX, OpenGL, SDL, and so on. Then add these to the development librraries that each hardware vendor makes.

The major problem with PC games is that they are on a PC. And the word PC gives most the the general public a stigma. "You have to be a geek." or "I don't understand those type of things." are commonly associated with the PC. No one wants to spend hundreds of dollars on something that they think they will never learn how to use. And even if they do get one, it's generally not going to run the lastest and greatest games on the market. So, then you get into the "upgrade factor." "Wait!?! Spend more money? Just so I can play the game?" And even if you mange to get them to do that. Do you really expect them to do it a year or so later?

The truth is, you'll find that most people who like to play the newest games will easily respond, "I'll just get a playstation."

Successfully updated karma reason!

I have to say I agree with Helix. PC market in my mind is heavily CRUSHED by console due to the casual gamer, theres more of them which is more money...

Successfully updated karma reason!

I just want to test the new forums!

Successfully updated karma reason!

Yarlen

Join Date 01/2005

+365

I wanted to test them too, but on a serious note, the appeal of console development is inescapable.

Successfully updated karma reason!

3D API development standards are for all intents and purposes a non-issue. It's not often that you find a polarized D3D or OGL engine anymore, both GPU manufacturers have long since adapted their graphics cards to both standards, and virtually ever PC dev studio on the planet has embraced both of those API's. It's not like the old days, where each hardware vendor had their own "flavour" of 3D, and a developer had to throw in with one or the other, leaving all other users out in the cold.

Working at an EB has taught me to examine the PC/Console debate more level-headed than I did prior to my enslavement to the corporate teat. I can see the appeal to the casual gamer, in that all effort on their behalf boils down to "plunk in cd, sit back and neurally rot". That is certainly alluring, in diametric opposition to the hours and hours of patching/compatibility headaches PC gaming has to offer.
However, as I have started telling the customers that I can tolerate speaking to at work, PC gaming is much like a high-maintenance trophy wife... SO worth it, but be prepared to put in at least as much work as you get out of it.

Your article is a good read Brian, it's nice to see you actually WRITE again, a luxury long stripped from you at your last job. I am in complete agreement, however I don't see it as a particularly hazy situation; I think it's quite easy to see what happened to Microsoft's hesitant support of PC gaming.

At one time, it looked as though Microsoft was going to make a big push for solid PC gaming support, however that push also coincided with the initial shaky confidence in the Xbox, which at the time still carried the possiblity of being a failed venture. Microsoft was essentially covering all bases in case the Xbox failed, then they could take over and dominate the PC gaming market. As we have seen, their gambit succeeded and the Xbox became a major player, so there was no longer any viable (read as: profitable) reason to continue the PC development push. Thus, all Microsoft published franchises languish (Dungeon Siege 2, anyone?) while the Xenon cooks up larger and larger ad revenue, etc.

This is no call to despair; so long as there are PC's, there will be PC gaming. You want an advocate for PC Gaming? Look to the independants, the underground. Look to Stardock and totalgaming.net, look to Reflexive Entertainment, look to GarageGames.com... The future lies in the hands of the end user.
It worked for punk music, it worked for industrial music, it worked even for metal music. It can work for PC gaming too.

-Zombosis
"A peculiar neurosis, this deep vein zombosis"

Successfully updated karma reason!