How PC gamers can be heard

[crownjules]

money is in the console market now

No, there is plenty of money still left in the PC gaming market easily representing hundreds of millions in potential profits a year (if not more). There are still many who would prefer to game on their PCs. For some, it's the control that the KB + mouse offers. For others, it's the modability that the PC allows that can't be found on the console.

whether PC gamers vote with their wallets does not matter to console focused developers / publishers because any additional money gained through a PC port is good enough. only MMOs and RTSes will remain PC centric. all other genres will become more console focused.

This will be the case if, as the article says, PC gamers continue to say one thing and do another. So long as companies continue getting paid to release half-assed consolized PC ports, what reason do they have to stop? If people stop paying them off and they decide to terminate their PC development completely, it's no big loss. Other companies will be more than willing to step up and fill the void and take those profits.

 

[dguy6789]

No, there is plenty of money still left in the PC gaming market easily representing hundreds of millions in potential profits a year (if not more). There are still many who would prefer to game on their PCs. For some, it's the control that the KB + mouse offers. For others, it's the modability that the PC allows that can't be found on the console.

What you said doesn't in any way contradict what he said. Yes there is some money in the PC market, but it isn't even close to the money that is in developing for consoles. If a game has a PC and a console version, the console version sells 10 to 100 times as many copies as the PC version with few exceptions. The money is in the console market right now.

I bet that StarCraft 2 won't sell anywhere near as many copies as Halo 3 did.

 

[crownjules]

What you said doesn't in any way contradict what he said. Yes there is some money in the PC market, but it isn't even close to the money that is in developing for consoles. If a game has a PC and a console version, the console version sells 10 to 100 times as many copies as the PC version with few exceptions. The money is in the console market right now.

You don't get my point.

Yes, there is more money to be made in the console market. That doesn't mean the PC market share doesn't have the power to influence developers and publishers. But people keep rewarding them for making poor PC ports and so they will continue to happen. If the PC market would put it's foot down, they would be forced to re-evaluate their strategy. Either put more quality into their ports to resecure the PC market share or leave it entirely in favor of the console markets. The latter decision would leave a vacuum in which some companies would rise up and bring fresh IPs to the platform.

 

[Zargon]

<- still doesnt own MW2

bought borderlands though

 

[Golgatha]

Great article. Most PC gamers don't have the backbone to vote with their wallets, as evidenced by the extraordinarily successful launch of MW2 and the continued success of Intel chips.

Meh, I boycotted MW2 and still get to play it. B2G1 free sale at GameStop and there was a used PS3 copy. Won't be buying any DLC.

Still have WaW, CoD4, CoD2, and CoD + Expansion installed. IW certainly missed the boat on a sale of MW2 for PC, or any future sales from me for that matter.

 

[Golgatha]

You don't get my point.

Yes, there is more money to be made in the console market. That doesn't mean the PC market share doesn't have the power to influence developers and publishers. But people keep rewarding them for making poor PC ports and so they will continue to happen. If the PC market would put it's foot down, they would be forced to re-evaluate their strategy. Either put more quality into their ports to resecure the PC market share or leave it entirely in favor of the console markets. The latter decision would leave a vacuum in which some companies would rise up and bring fresh IPs to the platform.

IW is welcome to GTFO of the PC market.

 

[Golgatha]

What you said doesn't in any way contradict what he said. Yes there is some money in the PC market, but it isn't even close to the money that is in developing for consoles. If a game has a PC and a console version, the console version sells 10 to 100 times as many copies as the PC version with few exceptions. The money is in the console market right now.

I bet that StarCraft 2 won't sell anywhere near as many copies as Halo 3 did.

Both examples are piss poor. MW2 on PC was completely gimped and was a slap in the face of PC gamers. StarCraft 2 is doing away with LAN play, which also severely gimps the game franchise. Both of these franchises are getting rid of a component that made them wildly successful in the past and PC gamers are responding by not buying.

Simple econ really. Raise prices + reduce quality = decreased demand for your product = no return on investment. This is a lose-lose situation for gamers and publishers. Ultimately, I really do blame the publishers because they didn't support their paying customers, and instead concentrated all efforts on making the lives of non-paying harder without regard to the splash damage done to paying customers as well. There comes a point where you render your product worth so little that paying customers quit buying at MSRP or at all.

 

[GodlessAstronomer]

That's a bunch of crap. Most people on the forums here buy Intel because they are BETTER (or where better).

That's my point, mouth-breather. PC gamers are so unprincipled that they'll continue to support an evil, anti-competitive chip maker in exchange for a single-digit performance benefit.

 

[RyanPaulShaffer]

That's my point, mouth-breather. PC gamers are so unprincipled that they'll continue to support an evil, anti-competitive chip maker in exchange for a single-digit performance benefit.

LOL! Wow. So, for the same price, Intel beats AMD in performance, but us "unprincipled" consumers shouldn't choose the best value for our dollar because of some perceived "evil" that embodies Intel?

Wow...just...wow.

How about this shocker: maybe AMD should make better chips, so that they outperform Intel, and then us "unprincipled" consumers might actually buy AMD?

 

[crownjules]

LOL! Wow. So, for the same price, Intel beats AMD in performance, but us "unprincipled" consumers shouldn't choose the best value for our dollar because of some perceived "evil" that embodies Intel?

Wow...just...wow.

How about this shocker: maybe AMD should make better chips, so that they outperform Intel, and then us "unprincipled" consumers might actually buy AMD?

Perhaps you've not heard of the European Comission fining Intel $1.45 billion for antitrust practices? Or that AMD is hitting them with an antitrust suit because it is alleged they paid off Dell and other companies so they would use Intel's inferior at the time processors? Several years ago, AMD's processors were widely regarded as better performing at same value yet strangely lacking from some major pre-fab manufacturer's machines.

The latter is not proven, but many intelligent PC consumers noticed the lack of AMD chips during the time when they were the better value. The case's credibility is only strengthened by the European Comission's findings and fine on a similar issue.

 

[RyanPaulShaffer]

Perhaps you've not heard of the European Comission fining Intel $1.45 billion for antitrust practices?

The EU sues everything that moves. What else is new? They're the boy who cried wolf. I wish Microsoft and Intel would just pull out of the EU all-together and not put up with their whining any longer.

Or that AMD is hitting them with an antitrust suit because it is alleged they paid off Dell and other companies so they would use Intel's inferior at the time processors?

Alleged. AMD is grasping for straws because they are getting whupped in the processor market by superior Intel chips. Conspiracy theories are fun, right? I love how you use ALLEGATIONS as rock-solid fact.

Several years ago, AMD's processors were widely regarded as better performing at same value yet strangely lacking from some major pre-fab manufacturer's machines.

Only because the Pentium 4 was such a dog, but the Intel Core and Core 2 Duo are excellent. AMD didn't keep up the pace and fell behind. Such is business.

 

[oogabooga]

I think "Vote with your wallet" is the best advice.

Problem is :
Not buying games shows you don't like them and encourages developers to say "fuck pc gamers" and focus on the console market.

Buying games only encourages developers to keep shafting PC Gamers (no dedicated server support lol?).

All in all... I don't know what to do.

 

[GodlessAstronomer]

LOL! Wow. So, for the same price, Intel beats AMD in performance, but us "unprincipled" consumers shouldn't choose the best value for our dollar because of some perceived "evil" that embodies Intel?

Wow...just...wow.

How about this shocker: maybe AMD should make better chips, so that they outperform Intel, and then us "unprincipled" consumers might actually buy AMD?

The whole point of having principles is that sometimes you have to make compromises. The fact that PC gamers can't do that is what makes most of them weaklings who will never influence the state of the industry.

And with regards to Intel and the chip industry the compromise isn't exactly big, you're talking about single digits in performance. But you continue to support Intel and send them the message that their anti-competitive practices are A-OK with you.

 

[sourceninja]

Dragon Age is the first game I bought in a while because I support BioWare and because it didn't have DRM (Thanks EA)

Umm it has DRM. I have to break out my CD every single time I try to play it. Plus I have to log into their servers to use my DLC.

 

[crownjules]

Alleged. AMD is grasping for straws because they are getting whupped in the processor market by superior Intel chips. Conspiracy theories are fun, right? I love how you use ALLEGATIONS as rock-solid fact.

The latter is not proven, but many intelligent PC consumers noticed the lack of AMD chips during the time when they were the better value. The case's credibility is only strengthened by the European Comission's findings and fine on a similar issue.

The latter = the AMD allegations. And please, go ahead and cherry pick which world authorities you choose to accept as credible or not. I know you won't be factoring in the decision. Those that DO have a say in what happens will no doubt be informed about that trial and that Intel has already been rung up in Europe (and also Japan) on the same practices.

 

[GodlessAstronomer]

Umm it has DRM. I have to break out my CD every single time I try to play it. Plus I have to log into their servers to use my DLC.

Yeah I don't know what kind of crack he's smoking, DA definitely has DRM.

 

[dguy6789]

LOL! Wow. So, for the same price, Intel beats AMD in performance, but us "unprincipled" consumers shouldn't choose the best value for our dollar because of some perceived "evil" that embodies Intel?

Wow...just...wow.

How about this shocker: maybe AMD should make better chips, so that they outperform Intel, and then us "unprincipled" consumers might actually buy AMD?

AMD did release a better chip, in 2003, called the Athlon 64/Opteron. They had the performance crown for three years, and were also the fastest processor at every single price point for three years. Server or desktop, there was never a reason to buy an Intel processor when the Athlon 64 came out, none at all. Yet despite having an undisputed performance crown and better pricing at every performance level for three years, AMD did not make significant market share gains nor did they make much money. This is because Intel was paying PC manufacturers not to use AMD processors.

So don't go saying "maybe AMD needs to make better chips" because they did.

 

[RyanPaulShaffer]

AMD did release a better chip, in 2003, called the Athlon 64/Opteron. They had the performance crown for three years, and were also the fastest processor at every single price point for three years. Server or desktop, there was never a reason to buy an Intel processor when the Athlon 64 came out, none at all. Yet despite having an undisputed performance crown for three years, AMD did not make significant market share gains nor did they make much money. This is because Intel was paying PC manufacturers not to use AMD processors.

So don't go saying "maybe AMD needs to make better chips" because they did.

And they don't any more.

Intel is a major brand name, and has been THE processor of choice for many, many years. You think just because AMD releases one chip with single-digit performance increases that the big companies like Dell and HP are just going to cut bail with Intel and go all-in for AMD? Boy, that decision sure would look foolish nowadays!

Ever heard of marketing partnerships? Companies pay each other for the mutual benefits of supporting each others' products. The EU can go pound sand. They whine about everything and sue everybody trying to make a few bucks for themselves.

But keep up with the conspiracy theories and regarding allegations as fact. It is amusing.

I also noticed in your sig that you have an Intel Core 2 Quad...interesting. Why aren't you "fighting the man" and supporting AMD? Are you a hypocrite? Why are you running Windows 7 instead of Linux? After all, the EU sued Microsoft for anti-competitive practices as well! You seem like a pretty unprincipled consumer!

 

[GodlessAstronomer]

But keep up with the conspiracy theories and regarding allegations as fact. It is amusing.

How is this a conspiracy theory? They've been convicted and fined in multiple courts and still have more cases pending.

 

[dguy6789]

Maybe they don't anymore because they didn't make enough money from something they expected to and should have to continue development? And for what it's worth, the current gen Phenom II X4 is very competitive at the price points it is available at.

As far as I am concerned, Microsoft has not done anything wrong at any point in time with their practices. I don't for a second believe including IE or any other Microsoft program with Windows(which is what the EU and others complain about) is morally wrong or in any way unfair.

As for why I bought a Core 2 Quad, this system is over a year old. I bought it when the only competition to it was the Phenom original and AMD was not selling anything competitive with it performance wise or price wise. More importantly, none of this Intel paying companies not to use AMD during the AMD64 era news was being reported yet; I and I imagine most other people were not aware it was happening at the time of this PC being built. Nearly every PC I have ever had before this one was an AMD machine. I also recommend Phenom II processors to people who ask for advice on what to build today.

 

[photi]

actually, AMD and Intel no longer have any open lawsuits. all cases have been settled out of court. $$1.25 billion dollars to AMD ought to give its R&D a kick in the pants. the future looks good for fair competition. all evil has been expunged.

 

[GodlessAstronomer]

actually, AMD and Intel no longer have any open lawsuits. all cases have been settled out of court. $$1.25 billion dollars to AMD ought to give its R&D a kick in the pants. the future looks good for fair competition. all evil has been expunged.

Intel are still buried in law suits, just not from AMD.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

I think "Vote with your wallet" is the best advice.

Problem is :
Not buying games shows you don't like them and encourages developers to say "fuck pc gamers" and focus on the console market.

Buying games only encourages developers to keep shafting PC Gamers (no dedicated server support lol?).

All in all... I don't know what to do.

Buy games that are made for and intended for PCs from developers that favor the PC, such as Blizzard and Stardock.

 

[sourceninja]

Buy games that are made for and intended for PCs from developers that favor the PC, such as Blizzard and Stardock.

Yup, I tend to buy any game with a mac or linux version that is quality (not that cider shit). I also buy any game that has great gameplay and good developer support. I want to promote those features, those are the type of games I buy. My PC game buying in the last year looks like this.

Company of Heros
Savage 2
Pre order of Heroes of Newearth
Dragon age

That's about it.

 

[Regs]

People would of bought COD MW2 if it was a steamining pile of shit when you opened up the box because COD MW 1 was that good. That does not mean MW 3, or whatever the successor will be called, would sell that great with IWnet.