| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (30)

Posted: Apr 24th 2008 12:52PM Zertoss said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
"Oh absolutely. It's not just dying, it's already dead. Totally. In fact...all game developers that feel that way should quickly flee to the, um ... console market, right now..."

I laughed pretty hard at this. The folks working at Stardock and GPG are pretty awesome.

Now I HAVE to buy Demigod.
Reply

Posted: Apr 24th 2008 12:58PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
We already have Steam.
Reply

Posted: Apr 24th 2008 1:25PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
That has to be my one complaint. I love everything that Stardock is doing, but SOME of it seems to be reinventing the wheel-- we already have Steam. I'm not going to start using another service that does basically the same thing. Well I mean, I will if I have to in order to play Demigod, Sins, and stuff like that-- but I don't want to.

Stardock should just find a way to get itself aligned with Steam. Perhaps get special terms where their games won't be copy-protected, but where updates are limited to those with CD keys.
Reply

Posted: Apr 24th 2008 1:39PM Pojomofo said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
on the same token Jeff, it is good to give steam some competition so they dont just own the whole digital distribution marketplace. We can certainly agree that it will be an uphill battle for Impulse to reach steam-like popularity
Reply

Posted: Apr 24th 2008 2:06PM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
more steams is good. If steam was the only game in town they'd get complacent and soon we'd have another EA.

Plus, having competition drives these guys to invent new features, keeps costs down, and gives devs a choice of studios.

I just hope steam, impulse, greenhouse, gametap, etc.. all play well together.
Reply

Posted: Apr 24th 2008 2:59PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
You know, that's certainly a great point.

But at the same time, I think PC gaming NEEDS more unification. The sprawling, open-ended nature of it contrasts unfavorably with the simplicity of consoles for many.

Ideally, I guess, there'd be a way to unite the various servers into a single program/interface. Like an Impulse and Games for Windows Live section under Steam. And vice versa for the other services. In the name of simplicity and... of course, having less needless shit hogging up your memory =)
Reply

Posted: Apr 24th 2008 4:43PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Its called X-fire look it up!
Reply

Posted: Apr 24th 2008 9:52PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Stardock Central (what I suspect "Impulse" is or is based on) has been around as long as Steam, if not longer. People just aren't as aware of it because for a long time it was only Galactic Civilizations on there in terms of "big" games. Mostly it handled things like WindowBlinds and the rest of their products.

By swapping over to Steam they'd be giving up a lot of the independence that's letting them do what they want, plus they'd be giving wads of cash to Valve to provide a service they're going to have to keep providing anyway, as they still have to provide a download service for WindowBlinds and all their existing customers.
Reply

Posted: Apr 24th 2008 12:59PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Wow, great article joystiq. GFW had Brad on their podcast a few weeks back, it was someone from Stardock. Ot's good to see Chris is in better spirits, he was crying the PC Gaming blues back at GDC on the GFW podcast.
Reply

Posted: Apr 24th 2008 1:06PM powermatt said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
As a lifelong PC gamer (I will admit I own a 360, though), it's good to see that there are a few companies still out there that are dedicated to keeping it alive.

And amen about the copy protection system. If people like your game, they will buy it. It's as simple as that.
Reply

Posted: Apr 24th 2008 1:06PM foxhound said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
If it wasn't for THE ORANGE BOX, UTIII, the overflow of MMOs and some of those "quickie games"(like AUDIOSURF) I've downloaded on Steam; I would write off the PC scene too.

This is going to sound incredibly rude, but sadly true:
...the "masses" as a whole are too lazy and stupid to bother with the effort to play anything beyond a quick game of SOLITARE or something quick booting with a "boss button"/X-clickable shutdown.

As I've seen lately during a recent 'splurge' in video/PC gaming purchases, the following are the only people I noticed buying PC games:

A) Those looking for an expansion to a game they already have. Most likely a WoW/MMO player, SIMS player(no offense, but they're usually women. Nice looking ones at that! :d)or a RTS fan. These type probably didn't go into the PC section looking *just* for the expansion... they'll most likely buy other stuff(such as a new DVD or something)to make the visit worthwhile. They're a beloved bunch to capitalism, and usually the ones store reps aim to pester first.

B) Those who could easily sub-out an employee of the GeekSquadâ„¢ with their technical knowledge, somewhat socially inept, and generally ready to get back to the safety of their home and possibly either some twitch-FPS, MMO grinding, or brain-teasing RTS gameplay. Why didn't they reserve or buy it online? Well, I figure everyone needs a little sun & social interaction(for fuel to bitch on the blogs about later)now and then. Either way, marketing caters their ads to them first, since that's "dedicated dollars" there.

C) People led by word-of-IM, store rep(because the consumer 'fumbled' into the aisle looking for printer cartridges), word of mouth, or online game review toward buying a PC game. It's highly unlikely they saw ads for this on TV or through a regular, non-gaming magazine. Thus, they were curious to see what advances PC gaming has made since THE OREGON TRAIL and DOOM... and perhaps that DUKE NUKEM FOREVER was finally released. Who knows? They don't. If they weren't already tied down to console gameplaying, they probably just got a new PC(or upgrade)and hope to whatever superior being above they hold dear that their system can run the game - neglecting the fact and possible need to tweak the PC to play it.


Thanks to THE ORANGE BOX(the first PC game I had purchased since the original LINEAGE II software when I thought I'd try a MMO...); I'm slowly getting back into the PC scene; but I'm easily spending hundreds more a year on console-related gaming.
Reply

Posted: Apr 24th 2008 1:56PM FredFredrickson said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
PC gaming is not going to die. They've been ringing the death knell for PC gaming for years, and it's never happened. Never even came close.
Reply

Posted: Apr 24th 2008 2:00PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Where did the idea that PC gaming is dead or dying come from, anyway? Not happenin'. Not anytime soon.

It's a market that's easier to reach out to, as most people already seem to have capable PCs these days. Far more flexible for the consumer as well, in my opinion.

What's dying is gaming in general. Titles seem to be getting gimped on quality more and more every day. The Wii is a prime example of this, but the PS3 and 360 don't do so well either.

Not that I have any statistics to back this claim, but it is my belief that %15 or less of games on the market NOW are worth the $50 or $60 they're trying to sell it for.. and most of the time, those games are overlooked because the money spending majority is more interested in games comparable to E.T. for the Atari 2600.

This concludes my morning rant.
Reply

Posted: Apr 24th 2008 2:10PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Ironically, it came from Chris Taylor.
(and then from Epic and a series of prominent developers who all suddenly started talking like it was dying).

I think the real truth is that console gaming has blown up huge over the last 2-3 years. Total console game revenues have doubled every year for the last few years, and consoles have gone from being a niche product played by kids to being a mainstream media, played by all ages, that rivals hollywood.

PC gaming is probably better than it ever has been, but it hasn't seen the massive growth that console gaming has... which occasionally makes it look poorly in comparison.
Reply

Posted: Apr 24th 2008 2:18PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
In dollars and cents, yeah PC gaming is looking pretty meh, but in the overall quality of the titles offered between the PC and the consoles, it shows that the console gamer.. or in this case, the casual gamer, is letting the companies take a dump on us, the "core" gamers.

There's no doubt that the gaming industry it's booming. I just think it's booming for all the wrong reasons.

..but in terms of money, all I can say from the company's point of view is "Fap!"
Reply

Posted: Apr 24th 2008 2:32PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
I've been saying PC gaming is dying for years, it's a slow death but it's still dying. The 3 big reasons are: 1st kids grow up on consoles and so rarely migrate, 2nd piracy; Devs are switching to consoles to avoid this, 3rd the headaches of PC gaming; not having the specs or hardware incompatibility issues really is a pain.
I grew up on PC gaming but switched to because I got sick and tired of all the windows errors and hardware shit, that and a gamepad is just a more satisfying experience.
Reply

Posted: Apr 24th 2008 2:50PM Breakfastmachine said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I think one of the things really keeping PC gaming going is the mouse and keyboard. It's a better controller for RTS games, MMOs, and many believe for FPSs, myself included. If I could play all the PC games I play on my 360 without changing the experience, I probably would. I don't think PC gaming is dying, but as soon as a console manufacturer includes a mouse and keyboard with their system it will start to.
Reply

Posted: Apr 24th 2008 3:05PM Dummy00001 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
> Fundamentally, the PC game industry is broken.

Bollocks. I bet the guys forgot how to write simple and engaging games with new original ideas.

Rants. With so many open projects, no wonder they can't fix all outstanding problems in Supreme Commander and Forged Alliance. Or is it brokenness of PC gaming industry, while I sleep, is corrupting the games on my hard drive?

Fact is simple. PC gamers are hostile - because nobody listens to them. Devels on forums/channels ask gamers, write down responses - and then throw everything away. (Console gamers are "happy" - because nobody actually even asks them.) New PC games suck - because instead of trying new original ideas, companies are pumping big bucks into new shiny graphics for old ideas. On consoles choice of games is much smaller - our little brothers are happy with any bone N/Sony/MSFT would throw them. The problem on PC platform is that regardless suckage of SC/FA, its spiritual prequel Total Annihilation (now 11! yo game) runs perfectly on modern hardware. So why bother buying SC which is slow and buggy, while you can pick TA on flea market for literally nothing and have near perfect game-play on any computer?

P.S. And the bigger problem of RTS genre is that companies routinely take as beta testers some total RTS freaks who usually play games 24/7. No wonder that most RTSs released in recent years were pretty much unplayable for many months after release, while patches were routinely fixing game-play to be suitable for normal people - not freaks.
Reply

Posted: Apr 24th 2008 3:09PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Just the two of us, we can make it if we try
Just the two of us, you and I...

They sound like the really get on. Good interview.
Reply

Posted: Apr 24th 2008 3:24PM Crsh said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
I despise consoles nowadays. They're pricey, they suffer from build quality and online service reliability issues, they purposely get phased after 4-5 years to make you buy a new one (new exciting hardware is good, manufacturer forcing publishers to drop development of titles for the old console is nasty).

PCs? You can build one with just about anything, hand-pick parts you want, slap on an OS and game away. The paranoiac in me says that big honchos hate that they can't squeeze more cash out of you via PCs, not to mention new PCs can be used to play old games, another layer of control that escapes manufacturers. So consoles are the new big thing for apparently no other reason that increased revenues.

Current gen of consoles has nothing for me; X360 has severe build issues, PS3 has no game titles I'm interested in, nor does the Wii. Am I going to be forced to buy one to play a game? They can sure die trying.
Reply

Posted: Apr 24th 2008 3:26PM lakewell said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Getting tired of developers who don't know if they're porting their games for consoles. Supreme Commander, Universe at War, World in Conflict, and Command and Conquer say that you will. Just confirm it already.
Reply

Posted: Apr 24th 2008 3:35PM Lemure said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Developers leaving the PC market just gives them more business =P
Reply

Posted: Apr 24th 2008 3:36PM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
The biggest issue with PC gaming, I think, is that developers and publishers are trying to treat it like a console, when it's very different.

Trying to limit it, to fight the fact that it is an open system, will only lead to more rebellion. In short, if you're a dick about anti-piracy measures, more consumers will be dicks back and pirate it. Or just lose interest and not buy it.

Trying to come up with the most expensive to make, massively-marketed, and graphically intensive games is a dumb idea as well. That works amazing for console games-- console gamers want the prettiest game that can be pumped out, and they're more likely to buy it as a result of a huge media blitz. Us PC gamers would rather be able to run the game on our hardware at 60 FPS than have to fight with the game to get it to run. I'm not saying developers shouldn't include "ultra" graphics options. But they should be just that-- options. Games should be designed around what most people will actually be able to play it at. Ie: Focus on getting pretty with pretty good performance, and then add what other additional features can make it prettier. The trend I see is making the game pretty, and then for lower graphical settings remove features. This is a odd distinction, but means that, on the settings many people will be able to play on their hardware, a game from this generation will look and perform worse than a game from last generation.

And then of course, the myriad of little problems. Lacking basic features, such as mouse sensitivity, the ability to rebind keys, a menu/UI that looks good on the ultra-high (comparably) resolutions PC games run at.

And lastly: PC games sell for much longer than console games. They might not get the HUGE numbers that console games do the first week of release, but they can continue to sell for years. Valve understands this. When they release a game, they continue to improve upon it-- and sell it-- for ages. CS 1.6 probably still turns a profit. More devs need to capitalize on this.

Reply

Posted: Apr 24th 2008 3:58PM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Like he said, PC gaming isn't really dieing, it's just changing. Big name games with huge budgets don't really cut it as well as on consoles. I think if you want to make it on PCs, you will need just good gameplay instead of the best and tightest graphics. PC has the largest install base, but you just need to make it so that shit computers can run the game, even if not very well. PC games are changing, not dieing.

One of the things I've always found funny from console fanboys is the assertion that casual games on PC don't count, but they somehow do for consoles like the Wii.

Oh well, some console fanboys aren't exactly the brightest lightbulbs.
Reply

Posted: Apr 24th 2008 7:30PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
I found it fairly disappointing that the PC games section was recently dissolved at my local store. Although it's Fred Meyer and not a store dedicated to games (they have an entire wall for console games, however), this really sort of made me realize that buying a 360 this past christmas was probably a better decision than I thought at the time.
Reply

Posted: Apr 24th 2008 8:20PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
One of the problems with PC gaming is those damn Intel integrated chipsets. They run 2D fantastically but can't do 3D for all the electrons in the world.

From what I've seen, nVidia and ATI's new integrated chipsets are fairly decent and completely shit all over Intel graphics chipsets.

Get rid of Intel's graphics chipsets and you'll find every 3D game actually runs.
Reply

Posted: Apr 25th 2008 8:54PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Steam is a good example of success for this kind of distribution, but with SDC(Stardock Central) and now Impulse you don't have to have the program running and connected to the net the entire time your playing. It also isn't nearly as intrusive as steam is as far as grabbing games(like older valve games) and taking them over to only be run through their program.
That is just an example of some of the small differences between Steam and Stardock platforms that really makes Stardock's the preferable one for me.
Reply

Posted: Apr 29th 2008 11:29PM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
First of all, gaming in general has been going in the wrong direction for years. Developers have been too worried about amazing graphics, 3D everything, and hype to develop games that are just fun to play.

I'm sure most of you remember playing games on the Atari or later Nintendo. The graphics sucked, but the games were fun. Even Sega Genesis had some great games, they just improved the graphics. The point is if you want people to buy your games focus on quality and content first, if you have that the graphics will only enhance the experience. An eye catching game with no substance will not be played long, and the only ones buying your games will be children.

For strategy gamers the PC is still the best platform. The level of speed and control is not possible on the console without a keyboard and mouse.

As to Stardock, it is a great company that listens to it's consumer base. The developers are very interactive with their various communities. How many other companies will allow you direct constant communication with not only the devs, but the President of the company? They understand the plight of the PC gamer and they really try to give the highest quality product possible for the money.

Stardock Central is non-intrusive, non-destructive, and only needed to update and register your games. Also it can install full versions of the game if you lost your CD or bought a downloaded version. They do not place any unreasonable restrictions on how many computers you install the games you purchased on. The only restrictions are basically that you should own the computers the software is installed on, and that you are not installing/upgrading from multiple locations at the same time. You are not required to connect to the Internet to use your software. You do not have to pay any additional fees to keep using SDC. You do not even have to use SDC if you bought a hard copy of Stardock software. All SDC does is allow legitimate users to update, download, and beta test already purchased and registered software. You are rewarded for registering and not punished for purchasing.

More companies should do business like this. It would be nice if the Entertainment and Gaming industries would follow Stardocks example and stop treating all of their customers like criminals, and reward people for purchasing and registering their products. As it stands now the only people that are affected by DRM, anti-piracy ads, license restrictions, and FBI warnings are the people that are doing the right thing.
Reply

Posted: Dec 21st 2008 1:06PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'm going to keep this short.. but I agree that PC gaming has been on the decline (maybe not dying) for several years now. I personally blame EA for this, although they are not totally at fault. The problem really has to do with the shift in the economy and the globalization of the programming industry in general. There are still games coming out, and there are some good ones, but all in all the majority of them do not give the user the same enjoyment as they did 10 years ago. Games are based more on graphics than on content. Where did the Westwood, Microprose, Origin and Serria employee's all go? I think all of these companies got purchased by EA. They (the employees) were absorbed by corporate america and given the pink slip or they made all of the money they needed from the buy out and are on an island somewhere retired. All kidding aside, the industry has definitely changed towards profit margins (corporate america) opposed to user enjoyment. I've made myself heard via emails to EA a few times. It would be nice if they had the deciency to even respond, but they don't care. :) Well, i'm off to other soapboxes.
Reply

Posted: May 16th 2008 3:45PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I love these guys so much. Sins is a fantastic game, and I will pre-order Demigods just to support the team (participating in the public beta is a nice bonus). Stardock and its parters are the future of PC Gaming. So long as they don't decide to sell out to one of the majors, I expect them to be my new BioWare - a company where I just buy every one of their games without hesitation, and without needing to read any reviews.

On another note, it would be cool if they could somehow collaborate with Valve and Steam. I suppose that wouldn't make sense to give Valve a free cut of their profits, but it is nice to have one unified PC gaming distribution system, which is what Steam is quickly becoming.
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.

Featured Stories

Engadget

TUAW

Massively

WoW