as PC gaming is my preferred platform i was a little worried about those figures, then someone pointed out that they don't include online distributed sales.
in the last year all of the games i bought were distributed online. the year before all but maybe 10% was online sales.
the market isn't decreasing, the stats just show a change in distrubution method.
I think we really need to stop using "don't include online distributed sales" arguement. I find it very hard to believe that the vast majority of people prefer to download a game, paying with their credit card as opposed to simply going to the shop to pick up the game. While I'm sure the amount of digital downloads are increasing, I seriously doubt they make up for even half of the games sold.
There is a reason why even developers keep making negative comments about PC sales.
As a person with broadband, I have to say that digital downloads are the future. "Just going down the shops", takes over an hour of my time, and will cost me £10 in petrol and £5 in parking.
A total waste of resources.
However I usually buy online through a postal service, not digital downloads. As yet the digital download systems are too anti-piracy conscious and I don't find their products reliable enough to purchase, nor their refund systems user friendly enough in case of dispute. Not to mention that a good many of them have not even attempted to pass on the reduced cost of publishing to the customer.
I have to concur that while growing and even significant, the bulk of games sold come in boxes.
Your figures for PC gaming are nothing short of stupid. World of Warcraft alone took $1.5 billion in sales for 2006.
Try places like NPD or ESA for better estimation of sales figures. If you are going to listen to industry analysts, try listening to the same ones the big money in the industry listen to also.
You will see that PC gaming sales (boxes on shelves) have pretty much trebled since 1998 and are currently $3.2 billion for last year. (Plus whatever online sales/subscriptions are to be accounted for). While this growth does not mimic the growth of the video games console, particularly the PS2, it is a very serious growth industry nevertheless. There aren't many indusrties trebling their sales every 10 years.
Feel free to post a link that backs up that WoW made 1.5 billion in sales in NA (sales, not subscribtions) in one year. Considering that Halo 3 made 125 million dollar on it's first day (in which it sold millions of copies), I find it a bit hard to believe that WoW made 1.5 billion dollar in sales in NA alone.
It did sell 969,000 units in 2006. Don't know what they cost back then but x that by 969,000 and you have a shit load of money.
LOL!! If I had a dollar for every article over the past 15 years both in print and on the net that has predicted the imminent demise of PC gaming.... Id have my own Leir jet on 24 hour standby, piloted and crewed by the worlds best porn starlets who are incidentally excellent jet pilots in their spare time... I reckon the Atari 2600 heralded the end of PC gaming rofl... and its gone all the way to PS3 and will keep going. While we keep gaming. Le' Yawn...
Taken from a few threads below:
US PC Game Software Sales
1998 - $1.8 billion
1999 - $1.9 billion
2000 - $1.78 billion (84.9 million units)
2001 - $1.75 billion (83.6 million units)
2002 - $1.4 billion (61.5 million units)
2003 - $1.2 billion (52.8 million units)
2004 - $1.1 billion (47 million units)
2005 - $953 million (38 million units)
2006 - $970 million
This of course assumes that America is the whole world now doesnt it. Believe it or not there are other places out there you know.
Another great example of Moore's Law. Give people access to that much space (developers and users alike) and they'll find uses for it that you can never imagine. "640K ought to be enough for anybody" - Bill Gates 1981
LOL!! If I had a dollar for every article over the past 15 years both in print and on the net that has predicted the imminent demise of PC gaming.... Id have my own Leir jet on 24 hour standby, piloted and crewed by the worlds best porn starlets who are incidentally excellent jet pilots in their spare time... I reckon the Atari 2600 heralded the end of PC gaming rofl... and its gone all the way to PS3 and will keep going. While we keep gaming. Le' Yawn...
Taken from a few threads below:
US PC Game Software Sales
1998 - $1.8 billion
1999 - $1.9 billion
2000 - $1.78 billion (84.9 million units)
2001 - $1.75 billion (83.6 million units)
2002 - $1.4 billion (61.5 million units)
2003 - $1.2 billion (52.8 million units)
2004 - $1.1 billion (47 million units)
2005 - $953 million (38 million units)
2006 - $970 million
This of course assumes that America is the whole world now doesnt it. Believe it or not there are other places out there you know.
As I'm European,I know very well that there is a world outside America, and as a gamer, I know that the NA market is very, very important to gaming.
Those numbers exclude MMOs subscribtions, as WoW alone has more.
PC gaming survives:
- Amiga (NOOOOOOOOO)
- Colleco
- Atari
- Nintendo
- PS1
- Xbox
- Vic 20
- C64
- Is winning vs Mac
....
PC gaming is not only surviving, it is doing better than any single competitor. Sure, the Wii, the 360 and the PS3 may be doing better in the short term. In 10 years, these consoles would all be extinct. PC gaming will still be strong.
"PC consoles" are interesting in the short term, but you can't seriously expect devs to respect that only. Some may, some won't.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
I do not believe MS wants to save PC gaming. They want to move PC games to the 360 where they have much greater control and can use that to increase profit margins.
The problem with control is that it stifles innovation. The PC has always led gaming innovation because it can become anything the developer wants it to be, a console is what it is and can only be what the console vendor made it.
I do not believe MS wants to save PC gaming. They want to move PC games to the 360 where they have much greater control and can use that to increase profit margins.
The problem with control is that it stifles innovation. The PC has always led gaming innovation because it can become anything the developer wants it to be, a console is what it is and can only be what the console vendor made it.
That's quite a big misconception. The vast majority of innovation is done on consoles, mainly because the audience of consoles is so diverse. There are still limits to what PC developers can do on a PC, mainly because PC developers know that not everyone owns a high end system. PC developers are still limited to specs just as much as console developers are.
Those numbers exclude MMOs subscribtions, as WoW alone has more.
PC gaming survives: - Amiga (NOOOOOOOOO) - Colleco - Atari - Nintendo - PS1 - Xbox - Vic 20 - C64 - Is winning vs Mac
....
PC gaming is not only surviving, it is doing better than any single competitor. Sure, the Wii, the 360 and the PS3 may be doing better in the short term. In 10 years, these consoles would all be extinct. PC gaming will still be strong.
"PC consoles" are interesting in the short term, but you can't seriously expect devs to respect that only. Some may, some won't.
You're simply adding a lot of spin here. Does your old computer of 20 years ago still run games today? No it doesn't, you have to replace it at some point, just like you replace your console at some point.
imo, the recent Wii phenomenon shows one big thing: that realistic graphics (requiring beastly machines to run) is not where it's at. Devs need to do more with the input. There could (and should) be a large number of PC input devices just plugged up to a USB port. And they should be cheap. I think there is a room for more of that than what either PC or Consoles (ps3 and xbox) are taking advantage of.
And PC games need to get off this obsession with realism. WoW looks like a cartoon and has sold millions. If the pc game devs backed off of that, then older rigs could be running lan games.
The one thing the console has over the PC is my 64'' hdtv monitor. But the thing PC has over the console is that 4 of us in this house (me and 3 sons) can play game X, each with our own monitor and controller. PC should take advantage of that imo.
Wasn't there the same topics that PC gaming was "dying" when the other consoles were released? Oh yeah, there were. Oh, look, I still see PC gaming is still here.
PC gaming dying is not something that happens overnight. Also it depends on what you consider "dying". ofcourse there will always be games software for PC, but if there will be enough software to consider it on par with consoles is up for debate.
LOL!! If I had a dollar for every article over the past 15 years both in print and on the net that has predicted the imminent demise of PC gaming.... Id have my own Leir jet on 24 hour standby, piloted and crewed by the worlds best porn starlets who are incidentally excellent jet pilots in their spare time... I reckon the Atari 2600 heralded the end of PC gaming rofl... and its gone all the way to PS3 and will keep going. While we keep gaming. Le' Yawn...
I do not believe MS wants to save PC gaming. They want to move PC games to the 360 where they have much greater control and can use that to increase profit margins.
The problem with control is that it stifles innovation. The PC has always led gaming innovation because it can become anything the developer wants it to be, a console is what it is and can only be what the console vendor made it.
That's quite a big misconception. The vast majority of innovation is done on consoles, mainly because the audience of consoles is so diverse. There are still limits to what PC developers can do on a PC, mainly because PC developers know that not everyone owns a high end system. PC developers are still limited to specs just as much as console developers are.
Name one game genre that originated on Consoles? RTS, FPS, Strategy, MMO, RPG, Flight Sim and even text based adventure games all stared out on the PC. Consoles originally couldn’t support much more then low end arcade ports, and only added the hardware required to support other game types long after they already existed on the PC.
The PC is a generalized computing device, that means it’s a computing device that can become anything you want it to be. The only limitation is your imagination and your coding ability. A console is a dedicated computing device, that is designed to be one thing and one thing only. Sony has visions of moving them up to a more generalized device, but Microsoft wants to block that because they make their money off the current king of generalized devices for the home.
I think many PC developers have learned that selling the software isn't were the money is. I mean the PC Game boxes usually get marked down to $20 within 3 months of its release. Also I think not many PC Gamers go to shops anymore because of the poor support shops have for PC games as well as the problem with employees taking keys out of boxes then trying to sell unkeyed software to people. Online shopping and digital downloads now are a bit more guraunteed then buying the box in a shop.
Online sales including subscriptions and item shops within the US did exceed 1 Billion last year by Blizzard claiming thier first Billion dollar year, and probably more in the 2~3 Billion mark when netting all the different revenues.
PC is the best platform but the problems come because of the store bought premade PC's which most potential gamers buy come with all this great hardware but then they have low end GPU's to save money. Companies like Nvidia and ATI need to make high end GPU's for cheaper so pre built machines can all be potential gaming machines. Yes making this one PC will be great for doing this but only aslong as they keep all the customization we have atm for us more advanced PC users.
Also my worried here is that all the restrictions microsoft and all these companies will put in place making it more like Xbox Live than a current PC today. See the reason I love PC's sooo much is because theres no restrictions and making it more like Xbox Live obviously just takes all that away and we know how crap xbox live is.... sure console gamers love it but they don't know what the PC can do and how much better our online service is and how much more freedom we have.
Piracy obviously effects sales because all the people I know with a PC good enough to play these games just downloads them for free. The problem is games are too expensive and people don't want to spend £35 on a brand new game but they buy games once they get to the same price as DVD's which are about £15.
Developers need to back things like Steam and make it so you need a online connection to activate and play the game. Sure it hasn't stopped 100% of piracy but it's really reduced it seeing as Valve games are really the only ones my mates do buy cause they feel that it's on Steam so they have to.
Also developers are making crap ports over to PC and treating us very badly so obviously we wont buy their games but we'll buy games of high quality like HL2 and WOW etc etc. If you're going to create a crap port like Gears of War and try and force us into using Live and being sooo badly optimized then obviously noone will buy it.
We're moving into a new age and software developers need to wake up because games sold better in the dial up age because we couldn't download games very easily or it took so long we'd rather buy them. Now we all have broadband it's soooo much easier and everyone that has a PC has the internet these days or access to the internet somewhere.
So please make online activation for games the key to breaking piracy.
I do not believe MS wants to save PC gaming. They want to move PC games to the 360 where they have much greater control and can use that to increase profit margins.
The problem with control is that it stifles innovation. The PC has always led gaming innovation because it can become anything the developer wants it to be, a console is what it is and can only be what the console vendor made it.
That's quite a big misconception. The vast majority of innovation is done on consoles, mainly because the audience of consoles is so diverse. There are still limits to what PC developers can do on a PC, mainly because PC developers know that not everyone owns a high end system. PC developers are still limited to specs just as much as console developers are.
Name one game genre that originated on Consoles? RTS, FPS, Strategy, MMO, RPG, Flight Sim and even text based adventure games all stared out on the PC. Consoles originally couldn’t support much more then low end arcade ports, and only added the hardware required to support other game types long after they already existed on the PC.
The PC is a generalized computing device, that means it’s a computing device that can become anything you want it to be. The only limitation is your imagination and your coding ability. A console is a dedicated computing device, that is designed to be one thing and one thing only. Sony has visions of moving them up to a more generalized device, but Microsoft wants to block that because they make their money off the current king of generalized devices for the home.
Genres that really started on consoles: Platform, JRPG, beat em up, Action Hack & slash (mind you, not point & click) and lots of games that really don't fit in any genre. Lots of these genres wouldn't exist without consoles. then look at more modern motivation like Eye of Judgment, Eye toy, Singstar, Guitar Hero, Rock Band, the Wii remote control scheme. Now wether it's your thing or not, it's hard to deny that they are innovative. Well a console is not a dedicated computing device that can be only one and one thing only. Xbox 360 also really isn't a one device only. Xbox 360 does support HD DVD as well, and rumors go they are currently considering a Blu Ray add - on after the HD DVD dropped. 360 also allows you to play music, watch regular DVD, download movies (and also music? Not sure, this service isn't avaible in my country). It's not a games only machine, although that is clearly where the main focus is.
Piracy obviously effects sales because all the people I know with a PC good enough to play these games just downloads them for free. The problem is games are too expensive and people don't want to spend £35 on a brand new game but they buy games once they get to the same price as DVD's which are about £15.
Meh I’ve never been convinced piracy is the problem some people claim. The problem is that corporate executive like to assume that every person who pirates a copy of software is a paying customer they are loosing, when in fact most people who use pirated software would never pay for that product.
The second thing is that in at least some cases pirated software gives people access and exposure to games that they would never have played or ever tried. Companies like id and Blizzard owe a huge part of their success to the millions of people exposed to their early games by playing pirated copies on local networks. Without pirating you would never have had critical mass of people playing, nor would new people have joined in.
Piracy obviously effects sales because all the people I know with a PC good enough to play these games just downloads them for free. The problem is games are too expensive and people don't want to spend £35 on a brand new game but they buy games once they get to the same price as DVD's which are about £15.
Meh I’ve never been convinced piracy is the problem some people claim. The problem is that corporate executive like to assume that every person who pirates a copy of software is a paying customer they are loosing, when in fact most people who use pirated software would never pay for that product.
The second thing is that in at least some cases pirated software gives people access and exposure to games that they would never have played or ever tried. Companies like id and Blizzard owe a huge part of their success to the millions of people exposed to their early games by playing pirated copies on local networks. Without pirating you would never have had critical mass of people playing, nor would new people have joined in.
I'm not blaming everything on piracy because it's only a small part of the problem but obviously it is a problem.
Genres that really started on consoles: Platform, JRPG, beat em up, Action Hack & slash (mind you, not point & click) and lots of games that really don't fit in any genre. Lots of these genres wouldn't exist without consoles. then look at more modern motivation like Eye of Judgment, Eye toy, Singstar, Guitar Hero, Rock Band, the Wii remote control scheme. Now wether it's your thing or not, it's hard to deny that they are innovative. Well a console is not a dedicated computing device that can be only one and one thing only. Xbox 360 also really isn't a one device only. Xbox 360 does support HD DVD as well, and rumors go they are currently considering a Blu Ray add - on after the HD DVD dropped. 360 also allows you to play music, watch regular DVD, download movies (and also music? Not sure, this service isn't avaible in my country). It's not a games only machine, although that is clearly where the main focus is.
JRPG started out with games like Final Fantasy I, Dragon Warrior, etc which where pretty much straightforward imitations of the PC based Ultima series. While it wasn’t really used or needed for PC gaming, the Wii remote is just a copy of the systems developed for presentation software like PowerPoint. It’s not really needed for PC gaming because it’s just an extension of a mouse, but without the same precision or responsiveness.
Movies, music, Blu-Ray/HD-DVD, etc have all been available on the PC for years, and are childsplay to add to a modern console. I seriously doubt you would see MS support such things if they didn’t need to keep up with the competition. It would be equally easy to add a web browser, or even a Keyboard to a console, but how much interest has MS shown? None, because their goal is to keep the console from machine that type of encroachment rather then adding features.
Piracy obviously effects sales because all the people I know with a PC good enough to play these games just downloads them for free. The problem is games are too expensive and people don't want to spend £35 on a brand new game but they buy games once they get to the same price as DVD's which are about £15.
Meh I’ve never been convinced piracy is the problem some people claim. The problem is that corporate executive like to assume that every person who pirates a copy of software is a paying customer they are loosing, when in fact most people who use pirated software would never pay for that product.
The second thing is that in at least some cases pirated software gives people access and exposure to games that they would never have played or ever tried. Companies like id and Blizzard owe a huge part of their success to the millions of people exposed to their early games by playing pirated copies on local networks. Without pirating you would never have had critical mass of people playing, nor would new people have joined in.
I'm not blaming everything on piracy because it's only a small part of the problem but obviously it is a problem.
The perception of piracy being a problem is a much bigger problem then piracy itself IMO.
This whole anti-piracy thing is an ever increasing problem for me and my PC gaming.
I buy games to run on my LAN. I'm not so intrested in interrnet or even single player games.
But they just get stupid.
Increasingly I am having to buy 1 copy per computer instead of 1 for my whole house.
Which means at 8 x the price, I'm simply not buying it.
Also I'm having a lot of trouble working out which anti-piracy systems will work with my systems before buying.
Piracy has certainly never been bigger, but then again, the industry has never been bigger either, and piracy has been with us since day one, and has been heralded as the death of publishing by every publisher since day one.
I think more than anything else piracy is going to change the nature of PC games to onliune play. It will drive them that way in an attempt to control the software use.
For me this is a terrible development. The customiseability of my PC system is why it's the best. I can run on 8 PC's, or I can run on 8 PC's against another team of 8 on a server I host mid way.
Or I can play on three screens or 2 or 1. I can use my flight yokes or keyboards or game controllers or trackballs. I can play on my old PC's as well as my new. Or I can do any of these and my friends online could also do any of these and still play in the same game with me.
Many times I can edit the code, rewrite the game, make my own adventures, play other peoples customising not only the hardware but the software.
(Plus it plays films and music and the radio and stores my photoes and does my emails and writes my letters and does my shopping and keeps my accounts and researches my hobbies...)
Genres that really started on consoles: Platform, JRPG, beat em up, Action Hack & slash (mind you, not point & click) and lots of games that really don't fit in any genre. Lots of these genres wouldn't exist without consoles. then look at more modern motivation like Eye of Judgment, Eye toy, Singstar, Guitar Hero, Rock Band, the Wii remote control scheme. Now wether it's your thing or not, it's hard to deny that they are innovative. Well a console is not a dedicated computing device that can be only one and one thing only. Xbox 360 also really isn't a one device only. Xbox 360 does support HD DVD as well, and rumors go they are currently considering a Blu Ray add - on after the HD DVD dropped. 360 also allows you to play music, watch regular DVD, download movies (and also music? Not sure, this service isn't avaible in my country). It's not a games only machine, although that is clearly where the main focus is.
JRPG started out with games like Final Fantasy I, Dragon Warrior, etc which where pretty much straightforward imitations of the PC based Ultima series. While it wasn’t really used or needed for PC gaming, the Wii remote is just a copy of the systems developed for presentation software like PowerPoint. It’s not really needed for PC gaming because it’s just an extension of a mouse, but without the same precision or responsiveness.
Movies, music, Blu-Ray/HD-DVD, etc have all been available on the PC for years, and are childsplay to add to a modern console. I seriously doubt you would see MS support such things if they didn’t need to keep up with the competition. It would be equally easy to add a web browser, or even a Keyboard to a console, but how much interest has MS shown? None, because their goal is to keep the console from machine that type of encroachment rather then adding features.
It's unfair to simply point at a genre, say "It started on PC, so they are the only ones that innovated", which would be unfair because the PC has been around longer then consoles. It's in the genres itself that consoles have also added a big share of innovation.
The Wii remote is also more then just a pointing device you know.
About Microsoft adding a webbrowser, I don't know how easy it is to add a web browser this late stage in the 360's lifetime, but the 360 does allow USB keyboards to work on the 360, which would probably mainly be used for online games and the build in MSN messenger feature.
It's unfair to simply point at a genre, say "It started on PC, so they are the only ones that innovated", which would be unfair because the PC has been around longer then consoles. It's in the genres itself that consoles have also added a big share of innovation.
The console was around prior to most of those innovations. My point is that those innovations could never have occurred on the console because the platform didn’t allow for it.
As a generalized platform the PC had network support available for it, so it was inevitable that someone would eventfully use that support. 3D graphics could never have happened on the console if the PC didn’t have it already because the PC had access to floating point hardware required for it while the console didn’t. Consoles added floating point hardware only after 3D graphics took off on the PC. A game like Warcraft, Civilization or master of Orion could never have been developed for the console because it’s impractical at best to play a complex strategy or RTS with just a game pad. While Final Fantasy I and Dragon Warrior were great games, they were noticeably less complex then the PC based RPG’s like Ultima or any of the D&D games at the time because of the more limited memory, and disk capabilities of the consoles in that generation.
In all these cases, it wasn’t because the console couldn’t support the required hardware there was no reason to include the hardware as part of the platform because there we no games that needed it. In turn there were no games that needed that support because you couldn’t make them due to consol hardware restrictions. It’s a classic catch 22.
On a locked down platform like a console, the console vendor has to guess what platform additions some brilliant new designer can take advantage of. If the console vendor didn’t include the support, then the game can’t happen. With the PC anyone can come along and contribute to the platform and any developer can use any part of the huge range of platform options to come up with a brilliant, innovative new game.
Originally posted by Gameloading
The Wii remote is also more then just a pointing device you know.
Not really. There is some software to recognise specific motions, but the controler itself is remarkably similar to a wireless pointer on a PC.
Apparently there is going to be an announcement this week at GDC about the creation of some PC Gaming Alliance (Nvidia, AMD, Microsoft, Intel, etc). Their one purpose is to save PC Gaming from extinction.
How do they plan on doing it? They want to standardise the PC and make it more like a console. By creating a PC that is not customizable, they can hope that PC game developers will start making games that will be run on the "pc console".
Is that really the answer to PC gaming?? Do we really need another console in the market?
It's unfair to simply point at a genre, say "It started on PC, so they are the only ones that innovated", which would be unfair because the PC has been around longer then consoles. It's in the genres itself that consoles have also added a big share of innovation.
The console was around prior to most of those innovations. My point is that those innovations could never have occurred on the console because the platform didn’t allow for it.
As a generalized platform the PC had network support available for it, so it was inevitable that someone would eventfully use that support. 3D graphics could never have happened on the console if the PC didn’t have it already because the PC had access to floating point hardware required for it while the console didn’t. Consoles added floating point hardware only after 3D graphics took off on the PC. A game like Warcraft, Civilization or master of Orion could never have been developed for the console because it’s impractical at best to play a complex strategy or RTS with just a game pad. While Final Fantasy I and Dragon Warrior were great games, they were noticeably less complex then the PC based RPG’s like Ultima or any of the D&D games at the time because of the more limited memory, and disk capabilities of the consoles in that generation.
In all these cases, it wasn’t because the console couldn’t support the required hardware there was no reason to include the hardware as part of the platform because there we no games that needed it. In turn there were no games that needed that support because you couldn’t make them due to consol hardware restrictions. It’s a classic catch 22.
On a locked down platform like a console, the console vendor has to guess what platform additions some brilliant new designer can take advantage of. If the console vendor didn’t include the support, then the game can’t happen. With the PC anyone can come along and contribute to the platform and any developer can use any part of the huge range of platform options to come up with a brilliant, innovative new game.
Originally posted by Gameloading
The Wii remote is also more then just a pointing device you know.
Not really. There is some software to recognise specific motions, but the controler itself is remarkably similar to a wireless pointer on a PC.
So what kind of things can developers use on PC that can't be done on consoles. Internet? Now avaible on consoles. Mods? Now avaible on consoles. alternative control schemes? Now avaible on consoles.
PC been ahead in terms of graphics like you pointed out, but it seems to be stuck in it's RTS - FPS -MMO genre the last couple of years, and I recall the Sims as the only game with big innovation the last couple of years. And while a game like complex RTS might be very difficult to play, Deep action games such as Ninja Gaiden would be a nightmare to play on a keyboard, so it really goes both ways.
Has PC gaming ever changed the ways we both play? Not really. We started with a keyboard and today it still is a mouse & Keyboard. Just look at how much console controller have changed over the years.
And the Wii remote is more then just point & click, you can find the full list of possibilities on google.
But to add to the thread:
Peter Molyneux doesn't like the current state of PC gaming either and call it "Tragic", he seems to agree with developers such as CliffyB and Infinity Wars, who also criticized the current state of PC gaming.
""I think it's a huge tragedy. I mean, you might as well say PC gaming is World of Warcraft and The Sims... The weird thing is everyone's got a PC, they're just not buying software for it," commented Molyneux."
Said member companies include PC hardware manufacturers Acer Inc./Gateway Inc., Dell/Alienware, Intel Corp, and AMD. AMD also owns ATI, a leading manufacturer of PC graphics cards, whose chief rival, Nvidia, is also on the PCGA board along with PC game peripheral Razer USA. Rounding out the list are game developer Epic Games and the biggest third-party publisher on the planet, Activision.
Comments
in the last year all of the games i bought were distributed online. the year before all but maybe 10% was online sales.
the market isn't decreasing, the stats just show a change in distrubution method.
I think we really need to stop using "don't include online distributed sales" arguement. I find it very hard to believe that the vast majority of people prefer to download a game, paying with their credit card as opposed to simply going to the shop to pick up the game. While I'm sure the amount of digital downloads are increasing, I seriously doubt they make up for even half of the games sold.
There is a reason why even developers keep making negative comments about PC sales.
As a person with broadband, I have to say that digital downloads are the future. "Just going down the shops", takes over an hour of my time, and will cost me £10 in petrol and £5 in parking.
A total waste of resources.
However I usually buy online through a postal service, not digital downloads. As yet the digital download systems are too anti-piracy conscious and I don't find their products reliable enough to purchase, nor their refund systems user friendly enough in case of dispute. Not to mention that a good many of them have not even attempted to pass on the reduced cost of publishing to the customer.
I have to concur that while growing and even significant, the bulk of games sold come in boxes.
Your figures for PC gaming are nothing short of stupid. World of Warcraft alone took $1.5 billion in sales for 2006.
Try places like NPD or ESA for better estimation of sales figures. If you are going to listen to industry analysts, try listening to the same ones the big money in the industry listen to also.
You will see that PC gaming sales (boxes on shelves) have pretty much trebled since 1998 and are currently $3.2 billion for last year. (Plus whatever online sales/subscriptions are to be accounted for). While this growth does not mimic the growth of the video games console, particularly the PS2, it is a very serious growth industry nevertheless. There aren't many indusrties trebling their sales every 10 years.
Feel free to post a link that backs up that WoW made 1.5 billion in sales in NA (sales, not subscribtions) in one year. Considering that Halo 3 made 125 million dollar on it's first day (in which it sold millions of copies), I find it a bit hard to believe that WoW made 1.5 billion dollar in sales in NA alone.
It did sell 969,000 units in 2006. Don't know what they cost back then but x that by 969,000 and you have a shit load of money.
US PC Game Software Sales
1998 - $1.8 billion
1999 - $1.9 billion
2000 - $1.78 billion (84.9 million units)
2001 - $1.75 billion (83.6 million units)
2002 - $1.4 billion (61.5 million units)
2003 - $1.2 billion (52.8 million units)
2004 - $1.1 billion (47 million units)
2005 - $953 million (38 million units)
2006 - $970 million
This of course assumes that America is the whole world now doesnt it. Believe it or not there are other places out there you know.
Another great example of Moore's Law. Give people access to that much space (developers and users alike) and they'll find uses for it that you can never imagine. "640K ought to be enough for anybody" - Bill Gates 1981
US PC Game Software Sales
1998 - $1.8 billion
1999 - $1.9 billion
2000 - $1.78 billion (84.9 million units)
2001 - $1.75 billion (83.6 million units)
2002 - $1.4 billion (61.5 million units)
2003 - $1.2 billion (52.8 million units)
2004 - $1.1 billion (47 million units)
2005 - $953 million (38 million units)
2006 - $970 million
This of course assumes that America is the whole world now doesnt it. Believe it or not there are other places out there you know.
As I'm European,I know very well that there is a world outside America, and as a gamer, I know that the NA market is very, very important to gaming.
Those numbers exclude MMOs subscribtions, as WoW alone has more.
PC gaming survives:
- Amiga (NOOOOOOOOO)
- Colleco
- Atari
- Nintendo
- PS1
- Xbox
- Vic 20
- C64
- Is winning vs Mac
....
PC gaming is not only surviving, it is doing better than any single competitor. Sure, the Wii, the 360 and the PS3 may be doing better in the short term. In 10 years, these consoles would all be extinct. PC gaming will still be strong.
"PC consoles" are interesting in the short term, but you can't seriously expect devs to respect that only. Some may, some won't.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
That's quite a big misconception. The vast majority of innovation is done on consoles, mainly because the audience of consoles is so diverse. There are still limits to what PC developers can do on a PC, mainly because PC developers know that not everyone owns a high end system. PC developers are still limited to specs just as much as console developers are.
You're simply adding a lot of spin here. Does your old computer of 20 years ago still run games today? No it doesn't, you have to replace it at some point, just like you replace your console at some point.
imo, the recent Wii phenomenon shows one big thing: that realistic graphics (requiring beastly machines to run) is not where it's at. Devs need to do more with the input. There could (and should) be a large number of PC input devices just plugged up to a USB port. And they should be cheap. I think there is a room for more of that than what either PC or Consoles (ps3 and xbox) are taking advantage of.
And PC games need to get off this obsession with realism. WoW looks like a cartoon and has sold millions. If the pc game devs backed off of that, then older rigs could be running lan games.
The one thing the console has over the PC is my 64'' hdtv monitor. But the thing PC has over the console is that 4 of us in this house (me and 3 sons) can play game X, each with our own monitor and controller. PC should take advantage of that imo.
Just connect your PC to your HDTV.
PC gaming dying is not something that happens overnight. Also it depends on what you consider "dying". ofcourse there will always be games software for PC, but if there will be enough software to consider it on par with consoles is up for debate.
US PC Game Software Sales
1998 - $1.8 billion
1999 - $1.9 billion
2000 - $1.78 billion (84.9 million units)
2001 - $1.75 billion (83.6 million units)
2002 - $1.4 billion (61.5 million units)
2003 - $1.2 billion (52.8 million units)
2004 - $1.1 billion (47 million units)
2005 - $953 million (38 million units)
2006 - $970 million
Bit Torrent is a bitch isnt it? lmao..
That's quite a big misconception. The vast majority of innovation is done on consoles, mainly because the audience of consoles is so diverse. There are still limits to what PC developers can do on a PC, mainly because PC developers know that not everyone owns a high end system. PC developers are still limited to specs just as much as console developers are.
I think many PC developers have learned that selling the software isn't were the money is. I mean the PC Game boxes usually get marked down to $20 within 3 months of its release. Also I think not many PC Gamers go to shops anymore because of the poor support shops have for PC games as well as the problem with employees taking keys out of boxes then trying to sell unkeyed software to people. Online shopping and digital downloads now are a bit more guraunteed then buying the box in a shop.
Online sales including subscriptions and item shops within the US did exceed 1 Billion last year by Blizzard claiming thier first Billion dollar year, and probably more in the 2~3 Billion mark when netting all the different revenues.
PC is the best platform but the problems come because of the store bought premade PC's which most potential gamers buy come with all this great hardware but then they have low end GPU's to save money. Companies like Nvidia and ATI need to make high end GPU's for cheaper so pre built machines can all be potential gaming machines. Yes making this one PC will be great for doing this but only aslong as they keep all the customization we have atm for us more advanced PC users.
Also my worried here is that all the restrictions microsoft and all these companies will put in place making it more like Xbox Live than a current PC today. See the reason I love PC's sooo much is because theres no restrictions and making it more like Xbox Live obviously just takes all that away and we know how crap xbox live is.... sure console gamers love it but they don't know what the PC can do and how much better our online service is and how much more freedom we have.
Piracy obviously effects sales because all the people I know with a PC good enough to play these games just downloads them for free. The problem is games are too expensive and people don't want to spend £35 on a brand new game but they buy games once they get to the same price as DVD's which are about £15.
Developers need to back things like Steam and make it so you need a online connection to activate and play the game. Sure it hasn't stopped 100% of piracy but it's really reduced it seeing as Valve games are really the only ones my mates do buy cause they feel that it's on Steam so they have to.
Also developers are making crap ports over to PC and treating us very badly so obviously we wont buy their games but we'll buy games of high quality like HL2 and WOW etc etc. If you're going to create a crap port like Gears of War and try and force us into using Live and being sooo badly optimized then obviously noone will buy it.
We're moving into a new age and software developers need to wake up because games sold better in the dial up age because we couldn't download games very easily or it took so long we'd rather buy them. Now we all have broadband it's soooo much easier and everyone that has a PC has the internet these days or access to the internet somewhere.
So please make online activation for games the key to breaking piracy.
That's quite a big misconception. The vast majority of innovation is done on consoles, mainly because the audience of consoles is so diverse. There are still limits to what PC developers can do on a PC, mainly because PC developers know that not everyone owns a high end system. PC developers are still limited to specs just as much as console developers are.
Genres that really started on consoles: Platform, JRPG, beat em up, Action Hack & slash (mind you, not point & click) and lots of games that really don't fit in any genre. Lots of these genres wouldn't exist without consoles. then look at more modern motivation like Eye of Judgment, Eye toy, Singstar, Guitar Hero, Rock Band, the Wii remote control scheme. Now wether it's your thing or not, it's hard to deny that they are innovative. Well a console is not a dedicated computing device that can be only one and one thing only. Xbox 360 also really isn't a one device only. Xbox 360 does support HD DVD as well, and rumors go they are currently considering a Blu Ray add - on after the HD DVD dropped. 360 also allows you to play music, watch regular DVD, download movies (and also music? Not sure, this service isn't avaible in my country). It's not a games only machine, although that is clearly where the main focus is.
I'm not blaming everything on piracy because it's only a small part of the problem but obviously it is a problem.
I'm not blaming everything on piracy because it's only a small part of the problem but obviously it is a problem.
This whole anti-piracy thing is an ever increasing problem for me and my PC gaming.
I buy games to run on my LAN. I'm not so intrested in interrnet or even single player games.
But they just get stupid.
Increasingly I am having to buy 1 copy per computer instead of 1 for my whole house.
Which means at 8 x the price, I'm simply not buying it.
Also I'm having a lot of trouble working out which anti-piracy systems will work with my systems before buying.
Piracy has certainly never been bigger, but then again, the industry has never been bigger either, and piracy has been with us since day one, and has been heralded as the death of publishing by every publisher since day one.
I think more than anything else piracy is going to change the nature of PC games to onliune play. It will drive them that way in an attempt to control the software use.
For me this is a terrible development. The customiseability of my PC system is why it's the best. I can run on 8 PC's, or I can run on 8 PC's against another team of 8 on a server I host mid way.
Or I can play on three screens or 2 or 1. I can use my flight yokes or keyboards or game controllers or trackballs. I can play on my old PC's as well as my new. Or I can do any of these and my friends online could also do any of these and still play in the same game with me.
Many times I can edit the code, rewrite the game, make my own adventures, play other peoples customising not only the hardware but the software.
(Plus it plays films and music and the radio and stores my photoes and does my emails and writes my letters and does my shopping and keeps my accounts and researches my hobbies...)
It's unfair to simply point at a genre, say "It started on PC, so they are the only ones that innovated", which would be unfair because the PC has been around longer then consoles. It's in the genres itself that consoles have also added a big share of innovation.
The Wii remote is also more then just a pointing device you know.
About Microsoft adding a webbrowser, I don't know how easy it is to add a web browser this late stage in the 360's lifetime, but the 360 does allow USB keyboards to work on the 360, which would probably mainly be used for online games and the build in MSN messenger feature.
In all these cases, it wasn’t because the console couldn’t support the required hardware there was no reason to include the hardware as part of the platform because there we no games that needed it. In turn there were no games that needed that support because you couldn’t make them due to consol hardware restrictions. It’s a classic catch 22.
On a locked down platform like a console, the console vendor has to guess what platform additions some brilliant new designer can take advantage of. If the console vendor didn’t include the support, then the game can’t happen. With the PC anyone can come along and contribute to the platform and any developer can use any part of the huge range of platform options to come up with a brilliant, innovative new game.
Not really. There is some software to recognise specific motions, but the controler itself is remarkably similar to a wireless pointer on a PC.
consoles are easy to build games for... PC's have so many different video cards and stuf to code for
In all these cases, it wasn’t because the console couldn’t support the required hardware there was no reason to include the hardware as part of the platform because there we no games that needed it. In turn there were no games that needed that support because you couldn’t make them due to consol hardware restrictions. It’s a classic catch 22.
On a locked down platform like a console, the console vendor has to guess what platform additions some brilliant new designer can take advantage of. If the console vendor didn’t include the support, then the game can’t happen. With the PC anyone can come along and contribute to the platform and any developer can use any part of the huge range of platform options to come up with a brilliant, innovative new game.
Not really. There is some software to recognise specific motions, but the controler itself is remarkably similar to a wireless pointer on a PC.
So what kind of things can developers use on PC that can't be done on consoles. Internet? Now avaible on consoles. Mods? Now avaible on consoles. alternative control schemes? Now avaible on consoles.
PC been ahead in terms of graphics like you pointed out, but it seems to be stuck in it's RTS - FPS -MMO genre the last couple of years, and I recall the Sims as the only game with big innovation the last couple of years. And while a game like complex RTS might be very difficult to play, Deep action games such as Ninja Gaiden would be a nightmare to play on a keyboard, so it really goes both ways.
Has PC gaming ever changed the ways we both play? Not really. We started with a keyboard and today it still is a mouse & Keyboard. Just look at how much console controller have changed over the years.
And the Wii remote is more then just point & click, you can find the full list of possibilities on google.
But to add to the thread:
Peter Molyneux doesn't like the current state of PC gaming either and call it "Tragic", he seems to agree with developers such as CliffyB and Infinity Wars, who also criticized the current state of PC gaming.
""I think it's a huge tragedy. I mean, you might as well say PC gaming is World of Warcraft and The Sims... The weird thing is everyone's got a PC, they're just not buying software for it," commented Molyneux."
www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php
GDC '08: PC Gaming Alliance founded
Said member companies include PC hardware manufacturers Acer Inc./Gateway Inc., Dell/Alienware, Intel Corp, and AMD. AMD also owns ATI, a leading manufacturer of PC graphics cards, whose chief rival, Nvidia, is also on the PCGA board along with PC game peripheral Razer USA. Rounding out the list are game developer Epic Games and the biggest third-party publisher on the planet, Activision.
www.gamespot.com/news/6186307.html