In this catch 22, the ones that need to change are not the ones buying the products. What you're suggesting is like saying I should buy cars that don't work because it convinces the manufacturers to make better cars.Yes and the Catch22 wont be broken by complaining and NOT buying.
The opposite will happen - the LESS ppl buy games on PC the worse the situation will get.
Unfortunately, you have it backwards. It doesn't matter if Epic or Rockstar care. The fact that they don't is proof that they don't care about the platform, because if they did they wouldn't make the same mistakes repeatedly and would own up to the mistakes they made with those games.I know exactly why they failed, but do you think Epic or Rockstar care about that? For them its a simple cost-benefit analysis and it DIDNT work, why it didnt work is secondary and therefore its simply not worth the hassle for them to bother again.
If that is the only way, then the platform is truly doomed. I shouldn't have to buy crappy, subpar games to convince companies that it is worth putting games on my preferred platform.The ONLY way to make them consider PC again is by voting with the wallet - but currently PC gamers DONT do that (for Epic games at least)
Seems like it's easier than YOU think, though. I've known a couple games that were rejected from Steam... because they wouldn't run on any of Valve's test systems or they were trying to pulled an Apple App Store and sell a game for $9.99 that was basically showing pictures of expensive jewels. I've also helped a couple of games get on Steam. Valve has a few requirements but they aren't that stringent.Its not as easy as you would think
And its not like every game gets on steam the first place - a friend of mine who did work on an indiegame was DECLINED for Steam!
The industry doesn't think that is a success right now. Even if PC was only selling 5% of consoles (which isn't accurate, but for the sake of argument) that is still a success. That's another 5 freaking million dollars. I sure wouldn't scoff at that number, but the industry does right now.No, that would be a huge success
Currently its more like the console version makes $100m and the PC makes $5m which depending on the game might simply not be worth the hassle doing a PC version in the first place!
I've started, been involved with, and been on several indie game development teams. I know what is going on for indie studios.No it isnt, your view is very rose-tinted - i know personally a few indie teams, and its alot harsher in reality than people think it is! People ONLY hear about the successes, but they dont hear about the failures...
They have an obligation to anyone who consumes the products they make to make those products the best they can be. If they aren't willing to do that, then I have no obligation to give them any money for those products, and neither does anyone else. Epic is not a publicly traded company (dunno about Rockstar) so the only obligations that Epic has is to their own bottom line.Of course they want 0% cost and 100% profit, EVERY company wants that, its part of our market economy! Neither Epic nor Rockstar or anyone else is obliged to provide you with what you want. Complaining about it wont change anything! They are only oblidged to their shareholders and their team members!
Is it? I like lots of the 360 ports that come, and I am very forgiving of a lot of issues, but have you PLAYED Dead Space PC? I played it for about 2 hours and promptly uninstalled it because no care was given to the PC at all. Like I said in my first post, you get out of the PC what you put in. So if shoddy ports are what people are putting in, they are getting shoddy amounts of money back. That's the way an open market works.Also a direct 360 port is still better than not getting the game at all!
The signal it sends is that we don't want poorly made games. What other signal would it send? As consumers in a billion-consumer market, the only say we have is whether a company gets our money or not. Why would we just hand out money to people who show us that they don't give a crap about our money? If they did give a crap about it, they wouldn't make terrible products on our platform.If PC Gamers then complain and dont buy - what kind of signal does this send? Instead of "we want better PC versions" publishers will think to not bother with a PC version the next time!
They are targeting the same people that play FarmVille all day long. I don't know what difference that makes.They are targetting a market that wasnt in the focus of traditional publishers - casual players, same reason why the Wii kicks PS360´s ass
Your split numbers make no difference for any of those games. All of them had digital sales releases on PC and none of those sales were counted in the retail sales numbers.For CoD MW the split was 14 million on console at a price of 50$-60$ and PC 1-2 million at a price of 30$-40$
For CoD MW2 the split was even bigger and for Blops no clue
Is it a fact? The fact is you can't do a very good comparison when a game tuned tot he 360 succeeds, and then is released on PC without any effort to make it a PC game at all and it fails. I think the chances of getting lucky are the same on all platforms, as long as the quality is tuned to each platform.Yes and the risk or luck factor is currently just way higher on PC, and thats a fact. Complaining about it wont change anything.
Are you kidding me? Anyone I know that owns even just a Wii half the time is playing Starcraft 2 or FaceBook games or flash games or some crap. Nobody buys one thing and sticks with it anymore. It just doesn't happen.The majority out there owns one console and sticks with it, they dont know about freeware games or emulators. They are the ones that are responsible that CoD sells 20 million on console, they just wanna sit on a couch and play some games
So, if a company makes their first popular game on one platform they should continue making the games for that platform no matter what? That reasoning sounds quite ridiculous for me.It's not personal, but when Epic started their legacy on PC, one should expect them to continue it on PC.
Err.. quite on the contrary, all Blizzard's games are hyped. It may not require a massive PR campaign as the games they launch are sequels or expansions to the very popular titles, but be it another WoW expansion, SC2 or the upcoming Diablo 3, a lot of first day sales are generated by hype. The hype machine is noticeable with Bulletstorm, because it's a new IP, and launching new IP in the world of sequels, prequels etc is a hard task and you need to provide a huge impulse to get any interest or hype to take off. With Blizzard's games, the hype machine is ran by fans themselves, and it's pretty much self-sustaining.Not only that, but by making games that don't require a massive hype machine to sell
So, if a company makes their first popular game on one platform they should continue making the games for that platform no matter what? That reasoning sounds quite ridiculous for me.
In this catch 22, the ones that need to change are not the ones buying the products. What you're suggesting is like saying I should buy cars that don't work because it convinces the manufacturers to make better cars.
Unfortunately, you have it backwards. It doesn't matter if Epic or Rockstar care. The fact that they don't is proof that they don't care about the platform, because if they did they wouldn't make the same mistakes repeatedly and would own up to the mistakes they made with those games.
If that is the only way, then the platform is truly doomed. I shouldn't have to buy crappy, subpar games to convince companies that it is worth putting games on my preferred platform.
The industry doesn't think that is a success right now. Even if PC was only selling 5% of consoles (which isn't accurate, but for the sake of argument) that is still a success. That's another 5 freaking million dollars. I sure wouldn't scoff at that number, but the industry does right now.
The problem is that indie studios tend to do one of two things:
1) Go crazy with their idea and make an extremely niche game with no mass appeal that wouldn't sell even if it was insanely well marketed
2) Copy accurrently popular genre and not do it well.
So looking at the indie development teams to determine what developing for the PC is like right now is just an all around bad idea. They are having all of the problems small startup companies always have, and tons of them fail for lots of different reasons.
They have an obligation to anyone who consumes the products they make to make those products the best they can be. If they aren't willing to do that, then I have no obligation to give them any money for those products, and neither does anyone else. Epic is not a publicly traded company (dunno about Rockstar) so the only obligations that Epic has is to their own bottom line.
Is it? I like lots of the 360 ports that come, and I am very forgiving of a lot of issues, but have you PLAYED Dead Space PC? I played it for about 2 hours and promptly uninstalled it because no care was given to the PC at all. Like I said in my first post, you get out of the PC what you put in. So if shoddy ports are what people are putting in, they are getting shoddy amounts of money back. That's the way an open market works.
The signal it sends is that we don't want poorly made games. What other signal would it send? As consumers in a billion-consumer market, the only say we have is whether a company gets our money or not. Why would we just hand out money to people who show us that they don't give a crap about our money? If they did give a crap about it, they wouldn't make terrible products on our platform.
Your split numbers make no difference for any of those games. All of them had digital sales releases on PC and none of those sales were counted in the retail sales numbers.
Is it a fact? The fact is you can't do a very good comparison when a game tuned tot he 360 succeeds, and then is released on PC without any effort to make it a PC game at all and it fails. I think the chances of getting lucky are the same on all platforms, as long as the quality is tuned to each platform.
Maybe I'm the only one who remembers not being able to play GoW PC for a couple months because Epic set the date wrong in the exe's properties and didn't care enough to fix it until I had lost interest in the game. I won't make the mistake of thinking they care about my money again.
Yes they dont care about the plattform, but thats not a problem for THEM, its a problem for YOU, as YOU want THEIR games on YOUR plattform! You see the problem?
why is this thread so big???
Not everyone follows a game closely
Red Orchestra 2 and Section 8: Prejudice is all I need this year.Oh well it's gonna be an interesting year for FPS in the 1st quarter:
Crysis2/Brink/Bulletstorm
A PC gamer will naturally want a PC dev to continue making PC games. It is not an unreasonable request, just as a XBox fan want Xbox devs to make Xbox games, and the same for PS3. Note that my request is a lot more fair; I didn't say Epic should make only PC games, but just that they release and focus on PC as they would do for consoles, while some consolers are all about demanding more exclusives titles only for their platform of choice. And Epic isn't being compromise by focusing on PC, as the PC market is still capable of making huge revenues for devs that know how to make a good PC game. So Epic would hardly be in a position to make PC games "no matter what".So, if a company makes their first popular game on one platform they should continue making the games for that platform no matter what? That reasoning sounds quite ridiculous for me.
A PC gamer will naturally want a PC dev to continue making PC games. It is not an unreasonable request, just as a XBox fan want Xbox devs to make Xbox games, and the same for PS3. Note that my request is a lot more fair; I didn't say Epic should make only PC games, but just that they release and focus on PC as they would do for consoles, while some consolers are all about demanding more exclusives titles only for their platform of choice. And Epic isn't being compromise by focusing on PC, as the PC market is still capable of making huge revenues for devs that know how to make a good PC game. So Epic would hardly be in a position to make PC games "no matter what".
Also, I'm not sure if Mr Patcher works for Activision, thinks he works for a stock exchange company and just analyzes stocks from companies like Activision.
Im not calling him an issue for his opinion, im just saying that unless he votes with his wallet, developers and publishers wont change their opinion, especially not because a small minority of the market complains!Pointing fingers at someone and calling them an issue for their opinion on something makes their opinion look stronger then yours.
The only frustration i have is how learn-resistant PC-Gamers are, demanding that game X releases on their plattform of choice and if it does complain that its not as good as it could be and boycott buying, causing more and more damage to the plattform!You're venting a lot of frustration in the conversation. Its clear as day. You can't help a platform if you're going to make the stereotype look more true and drive people away. On top of that I believe Brizz's claim is legitimate.
Im not calling him an issue for his opinion, im just saying that unless he votes with his wallet, developers and publishers wont change their opinion, especially not because a small minority of the market complains!
is it that hard to understand?
If Epic doesnt want their games on PC, then no discussion that were doing on here will change that - only cold hard cash will!
The only frustration i have is how learn-resistant PC-Gamers are, demanding that game X releases on their plattform of choice and if it does complain that its not as good as it could be and boycott buying, causing more and more damage to the plattform!
Personally i own all the plattforms, so i get to play all the nice stuff
I already knew what you were trying to say, it's just wrong. Again, would you buy cars that were broken in the hope that the manufacturer would start making non-broken cars? If so, you're a richer man than I am (and more long suffering).Yes they dont care about the plattform, but thats not a problem for THEM, its a problem for YOU, as YOU want THEIR games on YOUR plattform! You see the problem?
Then stop ignoring the plain facts that have been presented. You CAN make money on the PC, even enough to support you.And just so you dont misunderstand me, this whole discussion is not personal - i have nothing against PC, i play on it myself regularly, but as a developer its important to see the market how it is and not like i WISH how it SHOULD be!
Even if I ignored all the terrible games on my Steam list, I would still have more than enough games to play. Regardless of that fact, the games that tend to be subpar don't HAVE to be subpar. I obviously want the game because the gameplay is fun. But it's hard to enjoy fun gameplay when everything that is supposed to be designed to help you get to playing the game is standing in your way all the time (hi UT3). Are you running out of counterpoints here or something?If they are crappy and subpar, why do you want them in the first place?
Just play all those superior PC games that are left
Or just play WoW for the rest of your life
Such as? Keep in mind that any UE3 game could be ported to PC with almost zero effort in terms of new development.Yes while it is another 5 million$ this is the exception which might only be valid for high profile releases like Batman-AA for example. But for smaller low profile games the porting might cost them more than what they will earn back.
Is that REALLY what you gleaned from what I said? Because that's not what I was saying at all.So in other words - whatever they do, they will fail?
It's risky for anyone. On any platform. It's risky for browser games, it's risky for Facebook games. It's even more risky with MMOs.So if its risky for indie teams and big pubs dont bother with it, whos left?
Browsergames? MMOs?
That doesn't mean it makes any more sense. If you can spend $500,000 on improving specific elements of your game for the PC and it practically guarantees an additional million in sales, why wouldn't you do that?They do make their poducts the best they can for the market where they earn the most money, obviously PC ISNT that market currently!
The problem with Gears PC is that there were lots of reason it wasn't popular. Lots of people did buy the game on PC and they would like to have the second game, too. The ratio of people here on this message board who would want a PC version of Gears 2 is much higher than across the entire industry.Not played, but again in the end it doesnt matter, even if it was a bad port, at least you got the game at all! I still remember the complaints from PC gamers everywhere when GoW2 didnt come out on PC. If you ppl would have bought the first one the second one would have come out too!
And if you say it was a crappy port, then why would PC Gamers want Part2 anyway?
That's exactly why I said it was a catch 22 Nobody is going to buy a poorly ported game (i.e. it won't be popular i.e. earn enough money), and publishers want their poorly ported games to sell to justify making more poorly ported games.As i explained before, this is the message that you want to send out - but what publishers recieve is: People complain anyway -> it doesnt make much money -> why bother?
And if they dont get your money, no matter WHAT reason, they dont bother!
End of story - its that simple
No.No it was total PC sales including digital
I think reputation IS a benefit. Some developers do, too. The fact of the matter is, nobody is going to buy a broken car with other, working car options from other manufacturers around just to try to convince that one manufacturer to make working cars. It wouldn't happen.A car manufacturer wouldnt optimize their cars for Luxemburg if they can sell 10 million in China Its all a matter of cost <-> benefit!
PC gamers simply aren't going to spend money when they don't see the value of the money spent. Why do you think so many games sell on PC at lower prices? Practically any game is worth $5.And the ONLY way to change that is when PC gamers spend money again!
Otherwise it will end in an endless downward spiral of less publishers bothering to release with even less PC Gamers to buy stuff to eventually killing the plattform for expensive hardcore games and only leaving cheap casual games, F2P games and MMOs as the only surviving option!
I never said he worked for them. I said he worked on stocks for companies like Activision. He would have to know as much as he could about the general environment to make any judgment for them. Either way the reason for the comment. because of that known fact on how much PC gaming makes. Its extremely enticing to branch out into more mainstream branches of the market.
I misunderstood the phrase "works... for..." then.Quote from Michale Pachter who works stocks for companies like Activision...
I already knew what you were trying to say, it's just wrong. Again, would you buy cars that were broken in the hope that the manufacturer would start making non-broken cars? If so, you're a richer man than I am (and more long suffering).
Then stop ignoring the plain facts that have been presented. You CAN make money on the PC, even enough to support you.
Even if I ignored all the terrible games on my Steam list, I would still have more than enough games to play. Regardless of that fact, the games that
tend to be subpar don't HAVE to be subpar.
I obviously want the game because the gameplay is fun. But it's hard to enjoy fun gameplay when everything that is supposed to be designed
to help you get to playing the game is standing in your way all the time (hi UT3). Are you running out of counterpoints here or something?
Such as? Keep in mind that any UE3 game could be ported to PC with almost zero effort in terms of new development.
Is that REALLY what you gleaned from what I said? Because that's not what I was saying at all.
It's risky for anyone. On any platform. It's risky for browser games, it's risky for Facebook games. It's even more risky with MMOs.
That doesn't mean it makes any more sense. If you can spend $500,000 on improving specific elements of your game for the PC and it practically guarantees an additional million in sales, why wouldn't you do that?
The problem with Gears PC is that there were lots of reason it wasn't popular. Lots of people did buy the game on PC and they would like to have the second game, too. The ratio of people here on this message board who would want a PC version of Gears 2 is much higher than across the entire industry.
That's exactly why I said it was a catch 22 Nobody is going to buy a poorly ported game (i.e. it won't be popular i.e. earn enough money), and publishers want their poorly ported games to sell to justify making more poorly ported games.
I think reputation IS a benefit. Some developers do, too. The fact of the matter is, nobody is going to buy a broken car with other, working car options from other manufacturers around just to try to convince that one manufacturer to make working cars. It wouldn't happen.
PC gamers simply aren't going to spend money when they don't see the value of the money spent. Why do you think so many games sell on PC at lower prices? Practically any game is worth $5.