PDA

View Full Version : Could the PC Version be Delayed?



puzl
14th Oct 2008, 11:17
OK, shock-title aside, i'm noticing a disturbing trend amongst multi-format games in which the PC version is delayed after the console versions in an effort to stop piracy.

Recent games such as Mirrors Edge, Dead Space, Silent Hill 5 and many more are being delayed on the PC, probably because the publishers think all PC gamers are a bunch of pirates. Gears of War 2 is being scrapped completely because of it. While it is no doubt true that a lot of people who have the PC's capable of running todays modern games probably do have the technical knowledge to download and run pirate software, I think it is a little unfair to judge the so-called decline in sales down to piracy completely.

I remember reading an article whereby developers were complaining that the crappy integrated gpu/mobos pushed by companies like Intel were preventing the vast majority of people from buying new and system demanding video games. Consider this: pretty much everyone owns a computer in their home now and theoretically, PC software should have more sales than all of the consoles combined, but until a decent alternative to these crappy integrated gpu's is affordable to the masses, I think the mass market would rather play games on consoles rather than their computer. I actually believe piracy accounts for very little in comparison. Just look at The Sims and WoW - both games run on older technology and have sold millions.

Anyway, back on point, i'm getting really annoyed at having to wait longer for games just because publishers fear they're going to lose money by releasing them all at the same time (and risking getting it cracked with a day). I actually own both a 360 and a PS3, but there are some games i'd rather play on a PC, especially when it comes to FPS'. Deus Ex started on the PC and I really hope that Eidos respects this herrtage (and the fans) by making sure it ships on all formats at the same time!

Lazarus Ledd
14th Oct 2008, 11:27
I support.


AND


vouch that PC get's exclusive treatment!

DXeXodus
14th Oct 2008, 12:31
Shock title removed.

Agree with the point you are making though.

Quillan
14th Oct 2008, 14:01
It could be delayed for this reason. However, it doesn't really work. Did you know there's a pirated version of Fallout 3 floating around right now? It's supposedly all over the pirate sites, and it's the Xbox 360 version, not the PC version of the game. PC games were pirated more than console games because PCs with internet access had an easier time. They're going to pirate console games now, and since the consoles have internet access it's not going to be significantly more difficult. In fact, with the growing popularity of console gaming, I predict that in the future piracy will shift to console games more than PC games. It's just like the viruses targeting the most popular operating systems. Nobody wrote viruses for Netscape, but as Firefox got popular they started making worms for it.

JCD
14th Oct 2008, 16:50
Let's get the facts:

1) Piracy does exist, in vast numbers. However, there is absolutely NO chance that all these people who choose to download a pirated version of a game, would definitely buy it if piracy didn't exist. NO chance. The percentage is REALLY low imo.

2) Good games sell GOOD. See WoW/CoD4/Bioshock. They all sold excellently. Crysis on the other hand, while it sold really good (more than 1 million copies), has CryTek complaining about pirates.

Well guess what - The people who downloaded the game and didn't buy it...probably didn't like it.

I strongly support this opinion - See Sins of a Solar Empire or Stardock's Galactic Civilization II. NO COPY PROTECTION for the 2nd (amazing?!) but they still sell like crazy. PC Gamers like it when they are treated respectfully.

So, putting all these thoughts together, I really believe that a good quality game like Deus Ex 3 would sell well in the PC Platform. Providing that the game has a good marketing team backing it up, it would have the success of Bioshock or even more.

I myself, admit that I download games from torrents/etc. However, the reason why I do it is simple - I try them. If I like them (even if I have finished the game in it's pirated version), I go and buy them. If not, they are deleted. Simple as that ;)

ZylonBane
14th Oct 2008, 16:55
In cases where a game is released on both console and PC, I'm all in favor of the PC version coming out a few weeks or even months after the console version. Let the console 'ards be our paying beta testers. More polished product for us!

puzl
14th Oct 2008, 19:24
In cases where a game is released on both console and PC, I'm all in favor of the PC version coming out a few weeks or even months after the console version. Let the console 'ards be our paying beta testers. More polished product for us!

Are you serious? That is an extremely strange way of looking at things. I guess this is what happens when game developers (or rather, the publishers pressuring them) release their products early and unfinished. Didn't the original DX get another 6 months of development time? Hopefully DX3 won't be released until it is absolutely ready.

Larington
14th Oct 2008, 19:24
My opinions about Gears of War not withstanding (Stupid game for stupid people, sorry, its how I feel about it), I hardly consider it a loss when someone who doesn't understand the platform or its users decides that he doesn't want to release the game for it.

Whats comical is, they'll delay the release of a PC version, people who own multiple platforms will get the console version first, the marketing campaign will finish. Then when the PC version gets released and it doesn't sell massively well, they blame piracy - Ignoring the fact that the marketing budget for PC release wasn't comparable with that of the console release (Assuming there was at least an attempt to market it) and the fact that lots of people have already bought the game for a different system and will therefor ignore it.

For people who are supposed to think about cause and effect as designers, the ability of some developers to ignore the obvious at times is truly shocking. Then again, I can't be certain of the context yet, but this certain someone went on to make a point which, whilst more or less correct, makes me question the reason for him bringing it up... Hubris?:
http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=20609

ZylonBane
14th Oct 2008, 19:34
Are you serious? That is an extremely strange way of looking at things.
Explain why.

puzl
14th Oct 2008, 19:41
Explain why.

You'd rather wait even longer for a game that has actually been released (and as such, deemed finished even if this isn't being entirely truthful) just for the chance of some bugs being ironed out when it hits PC?

None of the previous DX games were released in an unfinished state in my opinion. I did have a few issues with video rendering for DX1, but that was mainly because of my archaic hardware rather than the game itself.

I just think it is quite a disturbing thought pattern to want to delay games post-retail just for the slim chance that they'll fix issues with the game. Bioshocks patch took absolutely ages to arrive, but it didn't stop me from playing the original retail game flawlessly from start to end.

Laokin
14th Oct 2008, 20:01
Amazing. I was just looking for a reason to post this on the dx boards to see what people thought, just couldn't find a way to make it DX related. Well, it starts with the conversation being based around games like blood, and why bodies disappear in the game. People in this other thread blamed it on technical limits.

See that thread here if you care,
http://forums.3drealms.com/vb/showthread.php?p=772077#post772077

This is what I had to say there, btw it's very relevant to the topics here.

What's the reason bodies disappear in modern games, there is no reason. Games like Unreal Tournament use no extra resources for a repeat model. 3 dead pigcops is the same as one live pigcop. Don't believe me, start mapping in unreal editor 3, read some tuts they instruct you to use as many meshes over as you can but be creative about your placement to make a fleshed out level. Not to mention you don't have to draw anything that's not on the screen, and the data for the dead body is stored in memory. It's just a variable with an x/y/z coordinator, and a snapshot of the physics numbers. 1 dead body probably wouldn't take more than 1mb of ram. Name the last game to have 500 enemies on 1 level, and you will see that it's more then technically possible. It's the lame developers that wanna rush a game out the door and not worry about programming such things that the average game doesn't need to sell right now. *Ahem* EA is the prime example of taking short cuts like this in making their games. In the end games are only a source of revenue, and you are only a consumer, and the corporations are only for greed, as long as said consumer continues to buy said unfinished products the more unfinished products you will get. The only problem with this is, Corp. America isn't very smart. As a result, they will completely abolish a genre/platform/business all together if the consumers stop buying, rather than evaluate why the consumers aren't buying. (See LucasArts on Sam 'N Max Freelance police, Full Throttle 2, and why we won't see another Monkey Island game ever.)

You see this today with pc gaming. It's not very hard to make an anti-piracy system, yet you see more and more dev's incorporating ridiculous gimmicks like DRM which actually hurt the consumer and pose no real defense to pirates while simultaneously encouraging more people to pirate, just to appease their ceo's in order to get the funding for their projects. See Spore, Will Wright himself even said EA didn't really wanna spend the money on that game, is it any question why they put DRM in there? They have resorted to driving away the demand of pc gaming so they can switch to console gaming, thinking that piracy would just disappear. In fact, console pirates are becoming much more common place. Pirates from PC, are switching to the platforms that have the games everyone wants to play. In theory, you take away pc games, force consoles on gamers, it's only logical that the ones that pirate, will start to pirate on the new platforms. Also note, piracy IS ruining pc gaming but not how you would expect -- it ruin's it by giving lazy developers a scape goat for bad sales. CliffyB made a horrible mistake choosing to alienate pc gamers, based on the fact that UT didn't sell well, and neither did GoW for pc. These games were prime targets for piracy, aswell as for low sales (even without piracy). UT 2k4 = UT3 with better graphics. Practically 0 innovations, nothing that a mod team couldn't have done in UT2k4 except the nice graphics upgrade. Gears of War showed up late to the party, so late, that the party was over when it finally got there. Everyone interested in GoW either bought a 360/gow, or played through it at a friends house, and if they liked it -- they probably would of wanted to play with their friends that already had the game. Why should it move units in a situation like this? That's just plain arrogant.

"It's actually quite time consuming and complicated to add such features -- it's just not that easy." -- Insert any dev you feel like, as they all onetime or another used this as an excuse. Last time I checked, games were costing hollywood budgets, and producing hollywood revenue. Do I have to remind you of the pay bracket you guys are in? How much you make a year? Did you think it would be easy, ya know, to make a company worth billions? No, then do it for the money. The more time you spend making a good game, the more money you make in return. The more time an architect has to work on a building, the crazier the physical structure becomes, which also results in a higher price tag. That's how the world works, so the industry as a whole 3DRealms included, needs to just shut up about this... I mean I understand this, and currently make less then 20k a year.

In all actuality, they need to make an auth server, that stores your progress the same as an MMO. When you purchase the game, you are really buying a small storage space on their servers. Just like an MMO. Their is no real reliable way to pass such a system short of cracked servers. I don't think I need to explain why this isn't even a bad thing, as cracked servers really only serve as a demo, as you probably won't even be capable of finding enough players to do high end raid's and/or pvp. This actually causes people to buy it, or they just uninstall and never play it again. (Mind you this is the same crowd that had no interest in buying it at all, thus the reason the majority pirated it.)

Bottom line, if you have a computer capable of playing all these top end games, you also have the internet. This should no longer be tolerated as an excuse, the majority is being punished because the minority doesn't have a connection. Another way to say it is, if they can't afford internet, then they probably can't really afford your game -- thus these people are not your market. IGNORE THEM for the sake of pc gaming's future.

puzl
14th Oct 2008, 20:05
My opinions about Gears of War not withstanding (Stupid game for stupid people, sorry, its how I feel about it), I hardly consider it a loss when someone who doesn't understand the platform or its users decides that he doesn't want to release the game for it.

Whats comical is, they'll delay the release of a PC version, people who own multiple platforms will get the console version first, the marketing campaign will finish. Then when the PC version gets released and it doesn't sell massively well, they blame piracy - Ignoring the fact that the marketing budget for PC release wasn't comparable with that of the console release (Assuming there was at least an attempt to market it) and the fact that lots of people have already bought the game for a different system and will therefor ignore it.

For people who are supposed to think about cause and effect as designers, the ability of some developers to ignore the obvious at times is truly shocking. Then again, I can't be certain of the context yet, but this certain someone went on to make a point which, whilst more or less correct, makes me question the reason for him bringing it up... Hubris?:
http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=20609

The sad thing is though, Epic actually DO (or rather, should!) understand the PC market since they've been involved in it for so long. Your second point hits the nail on the head and pretty much sums up the no win/no win situation we find ourselves in with most games.

On the other hand, Bioshock had fantastic marketing from day one and it was designed by a team who understand the PC market and its consumers. DRM issues aside (and this was the publishers fault, not the developers), they handled the release superbly and I believe the sales were testament to this. Oblivion was the same and because they didn't treat all PC gamers as thieves, it sold well. Even on forums like theisonews, I constantly read that gamers just want to be treated fairly and they will do the same in return. PC games are far more reasonably priced than console versions anyway and I honestly believe that the vast majority of people do like paying for games they genuinely enjoy.

I really, really hope Fallout 3 sells well and i'm sure it will. It is quite ironic that the console version leaked 3 weeks in advance and has just as many seeders/leechers on the torrent sites. Some people just don't want to pay for software, but these aren't lost sales because they never had any intention of paying in the first place. Just don't treat your genuine purchasers like criminals because of this small minority.

ZylonBane
14th Oct 2008, 20:11
You'd rather wait even longer for a game that has actually been released (and as such, deemed finished even if this isn't being entirely truthful) just for the chance of some bugs being ironed out when it hits PC?
Yes.

See, I'm not one of those gibbering, drooling, midnight-madness, day-zero, gotta-play-it-now!!! fools. I already have more games on my "to play" backlog than I can readily recount. If a developer can coast on the console sales while they polish the PC version, add stuff they didn't have time to include, and take advantage of feedback from the console players to further refine the PC gameplay, that's a win-win scenario as far as I'm concerned.

Exhibit A: The Chronicles of Ridd ick: Escape from Butcher Bay - Developer's Cut
Exhibit B: Fable: The Lost Chapters
Exhibit C: Mass Effect

So I'm in no hurry. I won't be twiddling my thumbs waiting for the PC version of game XYZ to come out, I'll be busy playing some other game for the first time.

Laokin
14th Oct 2008, 20:22
Yes.

See, I'm not one of those gibbering, drooling, midnight-madness, day-zero, gotta-play-it-now!!! fools. I already have more games on my "to play" backlog than I can readily recount. If a developer can coast on the console sales while they polish the PC version, add stuff they didn't have time to include, and take advantage of feedback from the console players to further refine the PC gameplay, that's a win-win scenario as far as I'm concerned.

Exhibit A: The Chronicles of Ridd ick: Escape from Butcher Bay - Developer's Cut
Exhibit B: Fable: The Lost Chapters
Exhibit C: Mass Effect

You would be correct, if that's how it worked, but it doesn't. See, they finish both games at the same time, and purposely hold a game off so the sales won't be affected. In this time frame, they are fixing the bugs on the consoles too. Those games get patched, and then the pc game comes out flawed like the OG console release, which requires an additional week or so to get a patch out for pc. This isn't always the case but it is the rule and we all know the rule comes with exceptions. Fable the lost chapters wasn't a delayed release, it was simultaneous. If you remember LC came out on Xbox as well as pc. Mass Effect wasn't even a month if I remember correctly, how much extra development is getting done in a month, especially when you over look the fact that they still have to print the boxes and the dvd's all the same. Do they do this in one night? A publisher is not akin to santa claus. Chronicles of Rid**** wasn't a huge amount of time either. It was about 6 months, in which case was released bugged and needed a patch in order to play on mid level equipment. Pixel Shader 2++ was bugged out of this world. So in short, just because you don't mind waiting because you have a "Que" of games to play, doesn't justify a delayed release. I play multiple games at a time, depending on the mood I'm in, ontop of the fact that there aren't really any good pc games worth playing to me, so what about people like me. (The Majority vs people like you The Minority.) You seem to want us punished, when it affects you in no way, therefor there isn't a purpose to delaying, unless it's to deliberately upset people.

puzl
14th Oct 2008, 20:29
Yes.

See, I'm not one of those gibbering, drooling, midnight-madness, day-zero, gotta-play-it-now!!! fools. I already have more games on my "to play" backlog than I can readily recount. If a developer can coast on the console sales while they polish the PC version, add stuff they didn't have time to include, and take advantage of feedback from the console players to further refine the PC gameplay, that's a win-win scenario as far as I'm concerned.

Exhibit A: The Chronicles of Ridd ick: Escape from Butcher Bay - Developer's Cut
Exhibit B: Fable: The Lost Chapters
Exhibit C: Mass Effect

So I'm in no hurry. I won't be twiddling my thumbs waiting for the PC version of game XYZ to come out, I'll be busy playing some other game for the first time.

Sorry, but you're still missing the point. If PC games are intentionally delayed after their console counterparts (to stop piracy or otherwise), they won't sell as many copies. This eventually leads to developers like Epic scrapping PC versions of their games entirely. Look at Halo 2 and Gears of War? These were released so long after they were initially released that most people just didn't care about them anymore. I'm not a big fan of either of those games, but I do see it as a disturbing trend, which is why I wrote this thread originally.

Now hardcore PC gamers like yourself may think that getting a superior product months later is a good thing, but just remember that sales literally mean everything to publishers. Bad release decisions by publishers are killing PC gaming piece by piece. The same can be applied to other media like television. If a show starts to decline in viewership, it gets cancelled completely. So while I admire your attitude, I still think that in the long run, it is detrimental to the industry as a whole for PC gamers to continue to be treated this way.

ZylonBane
14th Oct 2008, 20:34
Fable the lost chapters wasn't a delayed release, it was simultaneous. If you remember LC came out on Xbox as well as pc.
Fable came out on the XBox only. It was then enhanced into "Lost Chapters" for the PC, and the PC enhancements were backported to a re-released XBox version.


So in short, just because you don't mind waiting because you have a "Que" of games to play, doesn't justify a delayed release.
Y'know, if you're going to bother putting a word in quotes, you should at least spell it correctly.


You seem to want us punished, when it affects you in no way, therefor there isn't a purpose to delaying, unless it's to deliberately upset people.
Oh gosh golly noes! The longer a game takes to come out, the LESS FUN it will become. Somehow. Right? :scratch:


Sorry, but you're still missing the point. If PC games are intentionally delayed after their console counterparts (to stop piracy or otherwise), they won't sell as many copies. This eventually leads to developers like Epic scrapping PC versions of their games entirely. Look at Halo 2 and Gears of War? These were released so long after they were initially released that most people just didn't care about them anymore.
Sorry, no. There are basically only two reasons why a PC port would sell less due to a release delay: 1. They've stopped advertising it, or 2. Gamers already bought the console version. The former is all on the publisher's head, and the latter is irrelevant-- as long as a household buys one version or the other, the publisher is happy.

As for Halo 2 and Gears of War, those didn't sell well on the PC because, fundamentally, those are console games, not PC games. We PC gamers have a hell of a lot better FPSs to choose from. Take a look at the GameRankings stats for Halo 2. The XBox version is rated at 94.5%, but the presumably identical PC version is only 72%. It's the same story for Gears of War (94% vs 86.8%).

Larington
14th Oct 2008, 20:35
I think its really tragic that there was a time when I regarded Epic as a really daring and clever games developer that gamers kindly repaid for their efforts in kind. Since then, they've gotten absorbed by sequelitis and obsessed with big explosions (IE, GoW 2 is apparently going to be 'more badass' than before, whatever that means).

To see them fall so far, and loose touch with what made PC gamers love them so much, its really sad.

Papy
14th Oct 2008, 22:04
If the PC and console versions get out at the same time, I fear it might also be the same game. To me, either they make a true Deus Ex game for PC and then adapt it for console, or they make a console game with Deus Ex elements and then make a true Deus Ex game out of it. As the first option is only wishful thinking, I hope Deus Ex will be delayed for PC by a few months so we get a good game.

CarloGervasi
14th Oct 2008, 22:45
I wouldn't mind a small delay if they needed time to clean up the interface and remove some of the last vestiges of "console game" from it.

Freddo
14th Oct 2008, 22:59
I don't mind some extra wait.

I do want them to spend some extra time to make sure the game works with various configurations and give it a more mouse friendly userinterface.

Mr. Perfect
15th Oct 2008, 00:02
Piracy isn't just a PC only issue, so it's hard to accept delays based on that. Look at poor Fallout 3, on the day that the code goes gold, the Xbox 360 version shows up as a torrent (http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2008/10/10/fallout-3-already-pirated-for-the-xbox-360/1).


I wouldn't mind a small delay if they needed time to clean up the interface and remove some of the last vestiges of "console game" from it.

Absolutely. I think they did this for Thief 3(or was it Invisible War)? There was a small delay for the PC version, but it was because they where stripping out the dumbed-down interface that was shipped on the console versions.

CarloGervasi
15th Oct 2008, 03:43
Piracy isn't just a PC only issue, so it's hard to accept delays based on that. Look at poor Fallout 3, on the day that the code goes gold, the Xbox 360 version shows up as a torrent (http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2008/10/10/fallout-3-already-pirated-for-the-xbox-360/1).



Absolutely. I think they did this for Thief 3(or was it Invisible War)? There was a small delay for the PC version, but it was because they where stripping out the dumbed-down interface that was shipped on the console versions.

I don't think either of those games had a delay. The interfaces were both identical to the xbox versions. It damn sure wasn't Invisible War, that had one of the worst UI's of all time.

Larington
15th Oct 2008, 07:10
Hang on a second here, theres no reason (Except laziness or bad project management, neither of which is acceptable, frankly) why the developers can't just develop a different interface for both platforms at the same time.

I would hope that games developers have realised (Especially since the Nintendo Wii is there to give them a bit of a nudge) that if there are different control methods for the platforms they are developing for and they genuinely want a simultaeaneous cross platform release, they should design interfaces (Note the plural) to take advantage of the different preferred control methods for different platforms.

I'd also like to be clear on this, if I go into the key/controls configuration screen and the first thing I see is an x360 controller+, I WILL lose my f<Expletive>g nut.
There is nothing more insulting to me to have that screen shoved in my face when I'm using a computer to play a game - a computer that uses mouse and keyboard as the control method FIRST and then MAYBE an x360 controller on the few PCs where users have given up and got one for certain games (Say, racing games where keyboard/mouse admittedly doesn't quite cut it).

+ As much as anything else, it suggests the developer was too lazy to rebuild the controls screen, which gives free ammunition to the 'ports from consoles are rubbish' viewpoint.

Papy
15th Oct 2008, 20:55
Why do people focus so much on user interface? The difference between a console game and a computer game is a lot more than just a different user interface. A console game with a computer user interface, is just that : a console game with a computer user interface.

AaronJ
15th Oct 2008, 21:32
Shock title removed.

Agree with the point you are making though.

Title still contains large amount of shock and AARONBAIT.

ZylonBane
15th Oct 2008, 21:39
A console game with a computer user interface, is unplayable
Fixed that for you.

AaronJ
15th Oct 2008, 21:44
Fixed that for you.

Saucy Banter Man joins Eidos Forums to save the day!

Woosh.

Papy
15th Oct 2008, 23:45
Fixed that for you.
Can you explain why a console game with a computer user interface is "unplayable"?

CarloGervasi
16th Oct 2008, 01:56
The resolution problem is a big one - yeah, I know they're pushing "HD" a lot right now in consoles, but the fact is that the majority of your target consumers don't have the TV for it - which means a console interface needs to be designed for a 480i set. A PC interface designed for a minimum 1024x768 resolution isn't going to cut it. You've also got the issue of just how you navigate it without breaking the game. Take Deus Ex's interface for example - with all the hotkeys and my scroll wheel, it's speedy. If I had to switch focus to it every time I wanted to use it, it would be slow, cumbersome, and just not fun - which is exactly what you'd have to do if limited to a console's controller. The games need separate interfaces.

DXeXodus
16th Oct 2008, 04:05
The games need separate interfaces.

If the developers listen to one thing here let it be this.

Papy
16th Oct 2008, 06:17
The resolution problem is a big one...
You completely missed the context. I was not talking about playing a console game with a computer interface on a console, I was talking about playing a console game with a computer interface on a computer. I was talking about a port of a console game with only a new interface, without changing the gameplay at all. Changing only the interface of a console game is like dressing a trailer park girl with some Chanel clothes. She might look great, but she will still be a trailer park girl. Of course, a trailer park girl can be fun to play with, in fact she'll probably be more fun than a high society stuck up daddy's girl, you certainly won't have to spend 6 months of dry dating before the fun begins, but that's not really my kind of girl and that's why I don't hang around trailer parks.

In the case of Deus Ex 3, it seems obvious to me it will be designed as a trailer park girl like almost all console games. It will be a no commitment, no worry, no chore, let's just have immediate fun kind of game. That's not necessarily wrong, but the truth is, although Deus Ex was not a high society girl, it wasn't a trailer park girl either.

Personally, I don't want Eidos to simply give a classy dress to the trailer park girl, it won't be enough for me, I want them to also give her an education.

CarloGervasi
16th Oct 2008, 07:02
Haha, really?


Uh, guy? You weren't talking about anything. Someone edited your quote box and said "fixed". Said that "A console game with a computer user interface, is unplayable". You asked for an explanation, and I offered one. There is no "context" that could possibly change what "you said" (and again, you didn't say anything) then into what you're saying now.

Papy
16th Oct 2008, 07:35
There is no "context" that could possibly change what "you said"
The context was the meaning of "console game". Read my previous post again to get it.

CarloGervasi
16th Oct 2008, 08:11
Words mean things. Specific things. Regardless of what we want the phrase 'console game' to mean, it has a specific definition. "A game appearing and played on a video game console" is the commonly accepted defintion of the term. It isn't interchangeable with "dumbed down game", number one. Number two, you don't seem to understand that nobody was responding to anything that you actually said. You didn't put anything into any kind of context, because you did not say it. Someone edited the quote box. Just because your name was still hovering over it doesn't mean that you said it.

I really shouldn't have to explain this to people.

~Psychotic~
20th Oct 2008, 06:31
To be honest, I would find it a largely unwise idea to not release a PC version of Deus Ex 3 first and foremost, before any console versions are discussed.

The only Deus Ex game ever to be ported was Deus Ex, the first one. It was made into a PS2 game called Deus Ex: The Conspiracy. Deus Ex: Invisible War was apparently ported to Xbox (no surprise if this is true) but I've never seen a copy of it personally.

The Deus Ex fanbase, so I have seen, consists of people who mainly played the PC title. And I also come to the assumption that the PC title would have also been the most popular (seriously, the only differences with The Conspiracy was more loading intervals and more cinematic cut-scenes, which I actually liked tbh).

Consoles have also been getting attention for a large while now, several years, in fact. PC gaming is dying, regardless of what people say the evidence is there with the lack of new PC titles coming out (and not just crappy ports that are released much later then the console releases, *cough*GTA4*cough*).

The PC needs more titles in my opinion, I'm not against games being made for consoles also, in fact, I endorse and condone the fact. I just think that the PC needs some TLC at the moment and there is only a few games being released for the PC as a whole.

MrP
20th Oct 2008, 06:40
To be honest, I would find it a largely unwise idea to not release a PC version of Deus Ex 3 first and foremost, before any console versions are discussed.

The only Deus Ex game ever to be ported was Deus Ex, the first one. It was made into a PS2 game called Deus Ex: The Conspiracy. Deus Ex: Invisible War was apparently ported to Xbox (no surprise if this is true) but I've never seen a copy of it personally.

The Deus Ex fanbase, so I have seen, consists of people who mainly played the PC title. And I also come to the assumption that the PC title would have also been the most popular (seriously, the only differences with The Conspiracy was more loading intervals and more cinematic cut-scenes, which I actually liked tbh).

Consoles have also been getting attention for a large while now, several years, in fact. PC gaming is dying, regardless of what people say the evidence is there with the lack of new PC titles coming out (and not just crappy ports that are released much later then the console releases, *cough*GTA4*cough*).

The PC needs more titles in my opinion, I'm not against games being made for consoles also, in fact, I endorse and condone the fact. I just think that the PC needs some TLC at the moment and there is only a few games being released for the PC as a whole.

A lot of DX:IW's suckage was attributed to it having been written with the Xbox in mind and then being ported to PC, not the other way around.
Conversely, from what I heard, GTA IV suffered no problems from the port (unlike GTA III with its disappearing traffic).

PC gaming is suffering at the moment because of a lot of invasive DRM that many companies like EA have been incorporating into their games, meaning that many hardcore gamers (myself included) boycott their products as we, the paying customers are the only ones made to suffer, whereas the pirates enjoy unlimited installs and no DRM associated issues. :mad2:
I wouldn't go as far as to say that there are no PC titles coming out though...

Deus_Ex_Machina
20th Oct 2008, 07:19
OK, shock-title aside, i'm noticing a disturbing trend amongst multi-format games in which the PC version is delayed after the console versions in an effort to stop piracy.

Recent games such as Mirrors Edge, Dead Space, Silent Hill 5 and many more are being delayed on the PC, probably because the publishers think all PC gamers are a bunch of pirates. Gears of War 2 is being scrapped completely because of it. While it is no doubt true that a lot of people who have the PC's capable of running todays modern games probably do have the technical knowledge to download and run pirate software, I think it is a little unfair to judge the so-called decline in sales down to piracy completely.

I remember reading an article whereby developers were complaining that the crappy integrated gpu/mobos pushed by companies like Intel were preventing the vast majority of people from buying new and system demanding video games. Consider this: pretty much everyone owns a computer in their home now and theoretically, PC software should have more sales than all of the consoles combined, but until a decent alternative to these crappy integrated gpu's is affordable to the masses, I think the mass market would rather play games on consoles rather than their computer. I actually believe piracy accounts for very little in comparison. Just look at The Sims and WoW - both games run on older technology and have sold millions.

Anyway, back on point, i'm getting really annoyed at having to wait longer for games just because publishers fear they're going to lose money by releasing them all at the same time (and risking getting it cracked with a day). I actually own both a 360 and a PS3, but there are some games i'd rather play on a PC, especially when it comes to FPS'. Deus Ex started on the PC and I really hope that Eidos respects this herrtage (and the fans) by making sure it ships on all formats at the same time!

I would say that between 50% to 60% of PC gamers are pirates.

rynn taylor
20th Oct 2008, 07:24
The games need separate interfaces.


If the developers listen to one thing here let it be this.

Hopefully the developers will listen if they have not already thought about it. Mass Effect is a good example of a game that had the PC launch delayed and a PC specific interface added - kudos to Bioware & Demiurge for doing that. I just hope that the PC and any console launches are simultaneous and bug free.

~Psychotic~
20th Oct 2008, 11:14
I would say that between 50% to 60% of PC gamers are pirates.

Exactly, and even though developers think their "DRM" will protect them from piracy, in truth, it does not. Their pathetic DRM does nothing, most games are still cracked and "shipped off" before the release. It's not extremely hard to do, all you need is one person from a store that's got the shipment of games early (and any major game store will have the games before release date).

Also, with Mass Effect, I suppose it helps that BioWare have had good experience with PC titles in the past. Though I do have more faith in BioWare than most other developers for I've liked all of their games to date (and Obsidian should be stoned for their insults, what they call "sequels" to some great titles).

ZylonBane
20th Oct 2008, 17:16
I would say that between 50% to 60% of PC gamers are pirates.
Even if true, meaningless. I could just as easily say that 100% of humans are lawbreakers. Ever driven over the speed limit? Ever jaywalked? You're part of that 100%.

I believe that the gamers who can afford games, but choose to pirate them anyway, are a statistically insignificant minority. When I was a dirt-poor student, I pirated games. No sales were lost, because I couldn't have bought them anyway. Now that I have a job, I buy all my games.

puzl
20th Oct 2008, 20:26
I would say that between 50% to 60% of PC gamers are pirates.

Anyone can make up statistics. PC gamers are generally more tech savvy that console gamers, but even downloading a crack and applying it to a game requires a certain level of skill that your average consumer probably doesn't have. My uncle wanted to pirate his software actually, but had no idea how to do it. When he did learn the process involved, he couldn't be bothered with it all and just bought the game instead. He has done that ever since. I'm sure that isn't the same for everyone, but saying that more than half of the entire PC gaming userbase are pirates is just plain silly.

Skulgun
21st Oct 2008, 04:15
I believe that the gamers who can afford games, but choose to pirate them anyway, are a statistically insignificant minority. When I was a dirt-poor student, I pirated games. No sales were lost, because I couldn't have bought them anyway. Now that I have a job, I buy all my games.

Exactly. I admit I've pirated games in the past, but they've always been games I normally wouldn't have bought anyway for whatever reason. If it's a game I was looking forward too and was interested in, I always purchased it legally from the store.

Pete278
21st Oct 2008, 07:49
The majority of pirates tend to only pirate games as a demo, and then buy the good ones. For example, many of you know 4chan. On it, the video games section, /v/, tends to pirate Xbox ports to PC and not buy, but will run anyone off the website if they even -suggest- pirating Deus Ex.

Papy
21st Oct 2008, 08:53
Regardless of what we want the phrase 'console game' to mean, it has a specific definition. "A game appearing and played on a video game console" is the commonly accepted defintion of the term.
Semantics and definitions are a bit more complex than that. I know it may sound weird, but sometimes a word may have several definitions... and which definition is the correct one depends on the context. If I run pacman with mame or another emulator on a computer, does it mean pacman is not an arcade game anymore? If I put a computer with Deus Ex in an arcade, does it mean Deus Ex becomes an arcade game? Of course you can define a program by where it is run, but you can also define something by analogy. Historically, there was always a difference between console and computers. It is not a clear dichotomy, in fact we could even say console games were mostly a subset of computer games as their was always rip off of popular console games, but it is still significant. Anyone who is more than 20 years old can certainly get a feeling of whether a game is targeted at the computer computer crowd or not.

"I really shouldn't have to explain this to people". :rasp:



you don't seem to understand that nobody was responding to anything that you actually said.
So why did you said to me : "You asked for an explanation, and I offered one"?

I made a statement. ZylonBane didn't understand it and made an out of context comment. I found it amusing and posted a bait. Unfortunately, ZylonBane was intelligent enough to not take the bait... but you did. Of course as I don't know you, you may be a 14 years old kid for what I know, I didn't post the sarcastic comment I intended as I thought it would be inappropriate. So I just gave an explanation. The problem is instead of simply acknowledging your mistake, you then begun to give spurious argument to justify yourself. I'm sorry, but you are losing your credibility here. (ok, now I'm having fun with you...)

DXeXodus
21st Oct 2008, 09:00
Don't take the bait CarloGervasi. :)

phlebas
21st Oct 2008, 18:56
I wonder how the game will scale on older systems.

One of the major reasons why PC game market is suffering would be the system requirement for the new games. I usually put off buying a game when it is released to see how it performs on the average hardware, and sometimes the 'put-off' period reaches a whole year. Things have been getting better with even many of the consumer laptops getting a dedicated video card these days, but the problem is still there...

I'm certainly looking forward to the visual awesomeness that will be DX3, but I'm also hoping to be able to run it on my Thinkpad T400 (with dedicated graphics, of course. I'm not touching Intel IGP with a ten foot stick at this point). I hope the developers take it into account.

Laokin
21st Oct 2008, 19:38
I would say that between 50% to 60% of PC gamers are pirates.


I would say 30 - 40% of console gamers are pirates and growing. Look at the traffic for the Gears of War 2 leak, for the record, has been floating around on the internet for 2+ weeks already, and the game launches nov 4 almost 2 weeks from today. Also, Fallout 3 -- the only pirated version so far is 360. Dead Space was also available about a week before the 14th (xbox launch). I'd also like you to notice, it was released on pc yesterday, and still no torrents for said game.

PC pirating isn't as bad as one would believe, and EA recently released a press release that stated PC piracy doesn't really hurt their sales.

"
"Stepping aside from the whole issue of DRM, people need to recognize that every BitTorrent download doesn’t represent a successful copy of a game, let alone a lost sale," she tells Gamasutra.

In estimating losses to the industry attributable to piracy, the Entertainment Software Association has come to a similar conclusion, says Dan Hewitt, the ESA's senior director of communications.

"It’s important to remember that it’s not a one-for-one equation," Hewitt says. "Our calculation isn’t such that we say that every game that’s been stolen is a sale loss."

Because of the innate complexities, Hewitt says the ESA aims to be "conservative" in its methods of quantifying losses -- another reason for this is that often piracy attempts are only partially successful and result in sales anyway, and it's hard to parse those situations out.

Downplaying the piracy issue in this particular case, EA's Sughayer says: "We’ve talked to people that made several unsuccessful attempts to download the game and ended up with incomplete, slow, buggy or unusable code. In one case, a file identified as Spore contained a virus."

"To say that every download represents a successful copy of the game –- or that there’s been more than 500K copies downloaded -- that’s just not true."

Perhaps oddly, these comments represent an almost total role reversal from the normal dialogue on the topic from publishers and industry associations -- which usually stresses sales lost to piracy."

http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=20424
In other words 99% of working pirated versions of games, are infact only half the game. I really have no basis but my own experience on the next figure, that roughly 85% of all games released today have an MP component. Pirates cannot and will not get the full experience of the game and ones that are content with this generally wouldn't have bought your product any way.
Add another reason for piracy, is the lack of Solid demo's. When you make a game, you should finish it and sit on it for a few months.
It's part of marketing, this is how it is in every other industry in the world. Music for one, you finish albums and you patiently wait for the best window to launch the game to make back x ammount of money, plus it gives you time to properly market your product. Something pc games just don't do... ever. You see commercials for games on TV all the time, but never for pc exclusives minus Spore and WoW. The main reason to stall your release is to put out a FINAL build DEMO, that offers actual content. If your lucky enough to get a demo these days, it's usually from a beta build or a RC (release candidate) and you'll be extremely happy if the demo lasts you more then 2 and a half minutes. AKA Quantum of Solace.

So, the words that CliffyB was touting must of smacked him right out right in the face.

"Gears of War 2 will not be on pc, simply because if you have the knowledge to build a pc powerful enough to run it, you know how bit torrent works." Not exact quote but close enough.

Ironic that gears of war 2 has thousands of people playing on xbox live already and the game didn't launch. Sounds to me like piracy is piracy and good games still sell millions. The proof is right in everyone's face -- businesses are choosing to drop PC games because they req more powerful computers to run which automatically reduce sales compared to consoles. They just see the platform as a waste of time.

**** Sad really.

Larington
21st Oct 2008, 20:00
Sadly, theres no gaurauntee, even with a brilliant full game, that the demo will be done right.

The demo for Anachronox & Deus Ex 1 (Gave you enough content to truly 'get' the game, if we just had the UNATCO/Liberty Island part, folks might not have grasped quite so well what the game was about) were brilliantly done demo wise, gave me plenty to play with and left me wanting more.

Other demos, you get so far and realise that beyond the demo there isn't much more to it. If the moment to moment gameplay is rather dull (Read: Most MMOs) then your going to have a hard time getting resultant purchases from the demo because if just a limited demo is enough for you to realise combat (or regular feature x) isn't that good, a sale has been lost.

Also, limited time demo's are a bad, bad thing because players focus more on how much time is left on the demo and less on how much they are enjoying the demo (Assuming they are enjoying the demo).

But demos can be used for good things, if targetted right. You could get a big deal made about the DX3 demo made on certain sites (Where the reader-base would likely appreciate a game of its style) and you potentially have a good chance of generating positive buzz and therefor sales...

...If the demo is good.

What I think is interesting of course, is that some people make the claim they are never satisfied with restrictive demos and will pirate it to demo it, I find myself wondering if thats largely due to the developer getting the demo wrong.

Laokin
21st Oct 2008, 20:22
Sadly, theres no gaurauntee, even with a brilliant full game, that the demo will be done right.

The demo for Anachronox & Deus Ex 1 (Gave you enough content to truly 'get' the game, if we just had the UNATCO/Liberty Island part, folks might not have grasped quite so well what the game was about) were brilliantly done demo wise, gave me plenty to play with and left me wanting more.

Other demos, you get so far and realise that beyond the demo there isn't much more to it. If the moment to moment gameplay is rather dull (Read: Most MMOs) then your going to have a hard time getting resultant purchases from the demo because if just a limited demo is enough for you to realise combat (or regular feature x) isn't that good, a sale has been lost.

Also, limited time demo's are a bad, bad thing because players focus more on how much time is left on the demo and less on how much they are enjoying the demo (Assuming they are enjoying the demo).

But demos can be used for good things, if targetted right. You could get a big deal made about the DX3 demo made on certain sites (Where the reader-base would likely appreciate a game of its style) and you potentially have a good chance of generating positive buzz and therefor sales...

...If the demo is good.

What I think is interesting of course, is that some people make the claim they are never satisfied with restrictive demos and will pirate it to demo it, I find myself wondering if thats largely due to the developer getting the demo wrong.

You are right, you would lose sales.... but that's because it's not a quality project. This is also the area the industry is failing at. It's not so hard to create the art and maps for these games.... the engine takes the time. See UT3 models... people make better quality models in their spare time faster than epic, because they slack. The bottom line is that the overhead is calling the shots, not the developers in most studios. The overhead is usually a bean counter, some guy in a suit who probably never played a single game his studio has ever put out. They are the ones that make the contradicting idea's and gimmicks (features to add bullet points to the box, that really don't feel..... for lack of a better word -- right.) Which result in games like Tiberium. Thank the lord that game got cancelled, although since it's been canceled we will probably never see a renegade 2, as that's what Tiberium should have been.

It absolutley is attributed to the devs getting the demo wrong, or no demo at all. Look at FarCry 2, no demo for ANY platform.... that's a mistake. You should always have a try before buy marketing model, it's just naive to think you simply don't need one.

The other trend is, releasing the demo months and months after the game released. They do this because they realize sales aren't were they expected them to be, so they resort in making a demo so a broader scope of people can actually get the feel for the game. They have it so backwards, they spend so much money on making a game.... that most time they launch it broken/incomplete and rely on patches to fix it, no demo, no marketing, and they actually some how expect to make money off of it????

It's so simple, and 8th grader could figure it out. Then they actually start making the games shorter and shorter and shorter, and started to develop an episodic model which equals SCAM. HL2 ep 3, was supposed to be out Q4 07 and is likely to not even hit until 2010. Why would I even be interested in buying a game that I know has no conclusion.... ON PURPOSE, so they can release the rest of the game whenever they feel like it. Sin episode 2, will never see the light of day. Because they chose an episodic model and they went under... we will never get the complete story of that game. Not to mention the cuts they make from the Full Version, just so there is a reason to buy the next version(see sin emergence, it had only 3 usable weapons and a grenade, with a promise that the rest of the weapons would be released in following episodes.) Simply put -- it's not honest, and the consumer knows this. The only sure fire way to sell a game is to make the game actually good, which is why despite the fact valve went episodic, EP 3 will sell no matter what. Games like Sam n' Max actually do the episodic content justice, but it's still a rip off unless you buy the whole season in advance, or wait till it comes out on DVD. If you buy episode by episode, with download only.... No Disc, no manual, not Box art... just a file on your computer, it costs more than buying the whole season, in a box.... with the box art, a manual and BONUS's like T shirts and hats. Why would some one buy it in advance... I'm paying full price for air, until they feel it's right to give it to me. If something were to happen to the company, I get an incomplete game, and my money gets stolen. Not a wise way to treat the consumer as if we are all idiots.... it's rather insulting. Not to mention, if I payed full price for the game, mind you full price is the same as the DVD box, when the DVD box is available it should be sent to me in the mail.... considering I bought it.

I paid full price for episode 1, with the promise that the dvd would be available to the people who paid for it, only to never receive my DVD. When I inquired about it on the forums, I posted the information that stated we would get the dvd, and received a reply that they had the right to adjust the business model, and if I wanted the DVD box... I'd have to purchase it again. Mind you, the price is exactly the same that I paid in advance for the season. *Cough* bad experience.

It's just sad, that they make extra revenue from misinformed people. Shady way to do business, although I love my hyper kinetic rabbitty thing. Viva Sam & Max.

P.S.
**** CLIFFY B

Kneo24
21st Oct 2008, 22:06
The former is all on the publisher's head, and the latter is irrelevant-- as long as a household buys one version or the other, the publisher is happy.

That's not exactly true. They expect all versions to sell well. If one platform doesn't sell well, they will take that as a sign that the demand for that platform isn't there and then decide if it's worth the investment. Is the return big enough to spend the time developing that platform? Or are your assets better off being used making you money elsewhere, and faster?

Kneo24
21st Oct 2008, 22:23
So I see a lot of "PC's are so powerful blah blah blah" or whatever, as a point being used against developing on the PC. Oddly enough, current PC's being sold in stores are far more powerful than the consoles being sold, except for, of course, the discrete GPU. However a good one, one that is considerably more powerful than a GPU in the console, is pretty damn cheap. Randy Stude, the president of the PCGA recently gave a figure like of over 100 million PC's being sold that are more powerful than a console. That statement, as I pointed out, is probably not entirely true, but out of that 100 million, how many of those were capable of truly out performing a console? Even if it's 1 percent, that's 1 million PC's. Chances are the overwhelming majority of those buyers are into gaming. 1 million people is nothing to sneeze at.

So it stands to reason that the requirements issue is an uneducated answer to a problem that doesn't really exist in the first place. If you can develop for the console, you can easily develop for the PC. The console requirements can be the mid, or mid-low settings of your game. Current high-end hardware can be the high (but you should still get respectable performance with that hardware).

So the question remains, why is that currently, a formula as simple as that is so hard to follow?

Quillan
23rd Oct 2008, 13:13
It's not so much that "PCs are so powerful" that makes developing for PC hard, it's the bewildering possible combinations of hardware and software that are out there. When they're making a game for the console, they know exactly what's going to be in it, both in regards to its hardware and its operating software. With a PC, they can't even be certain which video card and which driver set is going to be in it, so they have to develop for them all. Well, they pick a limited subset and design for those, but it's still a lot of extra work.

ZylonBane
23rd Oct 2008, 14:04
So I see a lot of "PC's are so powerful blah blah blah" or whatever, as a point being used against developing on the PC.
No, you don't.

Flobulon
23rd Oct 2008, 14:42
But yeah, delay the PC version for a year for all I care, if it helps make it a better game. I'm not in a rush.

Yeah, I guess that's just more time for you to start arguments with random people on the forums.

Officer Half
26th Oct 2008, 00:54
Hmm... This is something to ponder. I'm impatient for DX3. I want it to come out, no doubt about it, as soon as possible.

But, on the other hand, I'd rather not have another Dungeon Lords. Dungeon Lords was a game with great potential, but then they decided to release it before it was finished to beat the competition. Then they said they would patch it to finish it. No, they released a 'Special Edition' which was really just a more finished copy of the game.

So, I say, make sure the game is polished, then release it, then polish it more with patches. Delay a little, maybe. But not alot.

Papy
27th Oct 2008, 07:10
Don't take the bait CarloGervasi. :)
That's like asking a rabid dog not to bite. ;)



No, it doesn't mean that.
Says who? You? Are you a philosophy major? Allow me to have some doubts about this possibility. To be honest, I find it quite ironic you are always complaining people can't read and yet you are mostly ignorant of semantics and pragmatics, which are essential to any meaningful conversation. (BTW, I strongly suggest you read a bit about what semantics and pragmatics are about before replying)



because you asked for an explanation
I didn't ask for an explanation, it was a bait. That's what I told you explicitly with my previous post. I know it may be difficult to understand, but sometimes a question is not really a question. It's like that guy who asked you if you were stupid*, it wasn't a question at all. Unfortunately, your head seems to be stuck in a dark and smelly place you have and it obviously poses a problem to your thinking abilities.

* Of course I just imagine that situation, but considering your personality and your thinking abilities, there's a good probability that question is asked to you a lot...

mr_cyberpunk
28th Oct 2008, 10:37
I don't know if this has been mentioned yet but Fallout 3 was pirated just recently on all 3 platforms its on. (PC, Xbox and apparently the PS3 version which is a first) Also even more interesting is that the PC version using SecuROM copyprotection (not the DRM version) but also in Russia uses the DRM StarForce- which is very ineffective since I've hacked into it using just a registry exploit.. EASY!

So what does this tell us:

1. Consoles aren't Immune
2. DRM sucks - just don't use it
3. PC versions shouldn't take any longer- unless the publisher is stupid enough to use DRM that screws with the QA tests
4. Publishers are lying when they delay PC versions, its just a ploy to strengthen the console market
5. That STEAM OWNS ALL! since the Steam Version of Fallout 3 is the only one that hasn't been pirated, however is so damn overpriced that I doubt anyone will buy it.