Piracy not reason consoles won

[steveOrino]

There is no perfect antipiracy mechanism.
All your really looking for as a developer/publisher is to defeat "casual pirates" if it's harder than download and run pirated copy, you eliminate the majority of that piracy.
Games sell the bulk of their units in the first month, so if you can make it difficult for people to get a working pirated copy in that window, most people who are going to buy will buy.

It's just too easy to get games for free on PC.

I still think longer term we're looking at radically different models that are more "service" oriented than product oriented. If you don't have a complete copy of the product on your HD it's far harder to "copy" it.

The reason I like models like pay to play are it's far easier to identify and reward quality over hype, and closing the loop on that makes financing the right games for the right reasons easier.

Yep.

I feel old but the idea of having a thin client on the consumer end and then having a server (in real time) stream program assets to the client was talked about on a PBS show in the late 80s. It would be the only way to avoid mass piracy. But cheap bandwidth and hardware needed to do big budget gaming software with gigabytes of assets just doesn't exist and wont exist in the near future.

I can see general apps adopt this model in the near future which would be nice imo because it would stimulate the OSS movement. People who are so used to pirating Office, photoshop, 3dsMax, etc wont be able to and will have to find alternatives... perhaps more people to contribute to those projects.

 

[function]

Internally-developed PC games can have a profit margin of up to 90 percent, while internally-developed console games can return margins of 60 to 70 percent, EA explained, while externally-developed titles necessarily generate lower margins for the publisher.

Internally-developed PC games can have a profit margin of up to 90 percent, while internally-developed console games can return margins of 60 to 70 percent, EA explained, while externally-developed titles necessarily generate lower margins for the publisher.

Internally-developed PC games can have a profit margin of up to 90 percent, while internally-developed console games can return margins of 60 to 70 percent, EA explained, while externally-developed titles necessarily generate lower margins for the publisher.

Yet EA have decided to can the PC version of Dead Space 2. Clearly we need to be careful about the kind of titles we're talking about, even within the same developer/publisher.

A 90% margin on something like a Sims expansion pack is nice for EA, but it doesn't necessarily mean the PC market is so robust for games like Crysis 2 or Rage or Modern Warfare (all primarily for console). It's not unthinkable that more games may go the way of Dead Space (although hopefully they won't).

 

[function]

why not ?

I used all my activations, as far as I can tell.

It's a good job that Valve's stuff lets you go activation crazy, otherwise I'd have burned though several copies of HL2 and Orange Box by now!

 

[Neb]

Yet EA have decided to can the PC version of Dead Space 2. Clearly we need to be careful about the kind of titles we're talking about, even within the same developer/publisher.

A 90% margin on something like a Sims expansion pack is nice for EA, but it doesn't necessarily mean the PC market is so robust for games like Crysis 2 or Rage or Modern Warfare (all primarily for console). It's not unthinkable that more games may go the way of Dead Space (although hopefully they won't).

Dunno, delayed port/wrong info or just up in question but canceled it is not (Dead Space 2).


http://twitter.com/Greenspeak/statuses/8925120492

http://kotaku.com/5469227/dead-spac...=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+kotaku/full+(Kotaku)

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/dead-space-2-pc-under-consideration

(EA) Jeff Green: Rumor fact check: There *will* be a PC version of Dead Space 2. Worry not!

EDIT: I love Google.

 

[Neb]

I used all my activations, as far as I can tell.

It's a good job that Valve's stuff lets you go activation crazy, otherwise I'd have burned though several copies of HL2 and Orange Box by now!

If you have the same hardware/OS install you should not be limited in amount of activations for that PC. As in it shouldn't be activations just verifications after first activation.

 

[function]

Dunno, delayed port/wrong info or just up in question but canceled it is not (Dead Space 2).

That's good news, I played the first on PC and it was okay (chronic mouse lag problems and wafer thin characters aside!). I know that DS1 sold poorly, so I was half expecting a cancellation anyway (and not just for the PC).

If you have the same hardware/OS install you should not be limited in amount of activations for that PC. As in it shouldn't be activations just verifications after first activation.

These have been an exciting couple of years for my OS installs. (XP <-> Vista) -> Vista reinstall -> Win 7. All on the same hardware, aside from a lovely cut price 9800 GT in late 2008 (for the princely sum of £75).*

Unfortunately I kept installing the Witcher, playing it for a couple of hours, planning to get back to it but then installing / reinstalling another OS. I can't find a deactivation tool either - I still have one install sitting around on an old hard drive, I think.

* Real men still game on DDR400!

 

[DeadlyNinja]

It's just too easy to get games for free on PC.

I still think longer term we're looking at radically different models that are more "service" oriented than product oriented. If you don't have a complete copy of the product on your HD it's far harder to "copy" it.

I read somewhere that in Pirate Land (China), companies actually release their games for free and instead charge money through other ways; like subscriptions, ads, or paying real money for in game goods.

I'm not sure that's the perfect solution, but maybe if we can evolve it more, it'll work for all kinds of genres. I'm not sure if this is really exclusive to MMORPGs there.

 

[assen]

I read somewhere that in Pirate Land (China), companies actually release their games for free and instead charge money through other ways; like subscriptions, ads, or paying real money for in game goods.

Yep, read this and weep - this is the brave new world that awaits us once we get rid of all the evil consoles, DRM schemes and expensive AAA teams:

http://www.worldsinmotion.biz/2009/10/vgs_09_game_designers_everythi.php

 

[Neb]

These have been an exciting couple of years for my OS installs. (XP <-> Vista) -> Vista reinstall -> Win 7. All on the same hardware, aside from a lovely cut price 9800 GT in late 2008 (for the princely sum of £75).*

Unfortunately I kept installing the Witcher, playing it for a couple of hours, planning to get back to it but then installing / reinstalling another OS. I can't find a deactivation tool either - I still have one install sitting around on an old hard drive, I think.

You might just be able to drop them a call or email. Dont pass on Witcher becouse it is a great game.

* Real men still game on DDR400!

*Facepalm*

 

[function]

You might just be able to drop them a call or email. Dont pass on Witcher becouse it is a great game.

I suppose I should, I just don't want to have to beg for another go with my game (plus I'm hoping to finally do a proper upgrade sometime this year!).

*Facepalm*

But seriously (and I think you'll agree!), if you pick your hardware wisely, aside from perhaps the GPU, you can get quite a few years out of your machine. Consoles can be cheaper, but the extra cost of turning you PC into a gaming PC that can last you a few years doesn't need to be much different than buying a console.

GPUs are a funny business though. My £200 7900 GTX felt archaic after 18 months, but my £75 9800 GT is still rolling along comfortably after nearly the same amount of time. Perhaps consoles are to thank for that...

 

[Silent_Buddha]

I have an idea on how to enforce online authentication for single player: Make the save function an online feature. Whenever you want to save your player profile/campaign status the program encrypts it a public key and sends it to the server. When loading a challenge is sent from the server to the client and then the game retrieves the info. Have that run on a VM so a straight IDA dump cannot find it and you might get lucky for a while.

That's one direction UBI Soft appears to be headed also with their online validation. But while I initially thought onlinie saves would be the "only" way to save, rereading it, its a bit vague. I get the feeling that they are implying online saves only, but hard to say. If that's the case, then that will make pirating it that much harder.

Regards,
SB

 

[Silent_Buddha]

I read somewhere that in Pirate Land (China), companies actually release their games for free and instead charge money through other ways; like subscriptions, ads, or paying real money for in game goods.

I'm not sure that's the perfect solution, but maybe if we can evolve it more, it'll work for all kinds of genres. I'm not sure if this is really exclusive to MMORPGs there.

Yes, if you look at MMO's coming out of Asia, there's a LOT of them that are free to play. But, you have to pay extra for things like...

1. Spell components.
2. Mounts.
3. Access to all adventure areas.
4. Bags to hold more.
5. Any gear that isn't really basic.
6. Sometimes access to higher levels.
7. Etc...

And in many of them, all those things above are time limited. So for example. You pay 5 USD for a bag that holds more items that lasts 2-4 weeks. After which you have to buy the bag again. So for the same features as you could get in say WoW, or EQ2, you end up spending about 50-100 USD a month versus 15-20 USD a month for WoW, EQ2, etc...

People who thought paid DLCs were ridiculous haven't seen anything yet. Having tried a few of the "free" to play MMO's coming out of Asia, I can tell you that a 5 USD DLC for Horse Armor seems like a really good deal compared to what's coming in the future if Asian MMO devs have their way.

BTW - I think some of the German free to play MMO devs are doing the exact same thing.

You can also look at some web based games (like Travian) as some other examples of Free to play, Pay to be anything but a doorstop. I know people that have spent 50-100 USD a month on Travian.

Regards,
SB

 

[green.pixel]

Now I dont see what is won but it is easier to release crappy games and they will still sell lots of em on consoles and not becouse of userbase size. Be it mega hype or low expectations but it sure looks that way. Though in revenues it aint so black and white.

Something like this?

Consoles are an avenue where someone can make more money with a less knowledgeable and wider audience, it's an avenue where less quality can even make more revenue.

Activision should shut the **** up if they are not happy with MW2 sales on PC. CoD series is actually *born* on PC, owns the biggest success to PC, if it weren't for PC CoDs, there wouldn't have been consoles CoDs. But no, they FUBARed and kiddified the latest releases.
I don't think that IW guys want it that way, they are forced by that [strike]cock[/strike] money-sucking fukctard Bobby Kotick.

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2009/01/activisions-bobby-kotick-brings-cash-but-not-heart.ars
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/...kotick-policy-rewards-profits-removes-fun.ars
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/...un-a-game-into-the-ground-we-dont-want-it.ars

Let's pretend Bobby Kotick is a Kentucky man, and he has a stable of winning horses. You want to keep them safe, and make sure they one run the best races and stay fresh; you have to make sure people still want them to win. That's pretty sustainable, right? You'd also want to keep a look out for new up and comers, of course. But what if he raced every animal, every day? Soon they would look tired, a little beat down. Hair would fall out. Soon, instead of beautiful animals winning you huge purses every race, you have a petting zoo where children pay a quarter to feel bad for your malnourished animals.

 

[Neb]

Something like this?

Consoles are an avenue where someone can make more money with a less knowledgeable and wider audience, it's an avenue where less quality can even make more revenue.

Seems like it. When people get games with lesser and lesser content for same price and reviewers award those games perfect scores... Scores flowing with public hype with tons of perfect scores then the developers and publishers gets the hint. The hint that it is OK to give less/simplify and charge the same and people will love it aslong as it is pre-hyped before deployement to the masses (non gamer kids). :smile:

It is becoming a 'fast food' market with to much McDonalds/BK meals instead of delicious gourmet dishes. The thing is people pay the same for both...

Activision should shut the **** up if they are not happy with MW2 sales on PC. CoD series is actually *born* on PC, owns the biggest success to PC, if it weren't for PC CoDs, there wouldn't have been consoles CoDs. But no, they FUBARed and kiddified the latest releases.
I don't think that IW guys want it that way, they are forced by that [strike]cock[/strike] money-sucking fukctard Bobby Kotick.

Actually it seems they are happy about MW2 on the PC.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/infinity-ward-defends-uk-mw2-pc-sales

Infinity Ward has denied that sales of Modern Warfare 2 on PC have been lacklustre, arguing that all the signs actually point to success.

"Yes, PC is the smallest percentage in terms of how much sold on each platform but that hardly means anything other than the PC is just the smallest market," Infinity Ward man Robert Bowling patiently informed fans on the official forum.

...The PC version of Modern Warfare 2 has actually outsold the PC version of Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare in its first week. Making it the most successful PC version.

Interesting articles btw.

 

[green.pixel]

I think that those PC gamers who bought it 'cause they were caught up by the hype train and pretty much didn't have anything to play in MP 'till BC2 or played MW and wanted to try the sequel due to it being similar but still "fresh/new". And that's how they "boycotted" MW2 .
By doing that, essentially sending them the message what you've said "that it is OK to give less/simplify and charge the same and people will love it aslong as it is pre-hyped".

As far as as BK, it's just bad management and pure corporate evil.


Consumers have the power to change the market if they want, simply by voting with their wallet. And if the majority/*average Joes* of them is buying the same rehearsed stuff, sitaution will hardly change. Endless loop.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Pffft, I could care less about multiplayer these days and I bought MW2 on PC. And while short I don't regret it as MW2 provided one of the better single player experiences I've had... Hype had nothing to do with it.

Regards,
SB

 

[Richard]

About the (crazy) talk and you'll excuse the qualifier but I get the same feeling whenever I read conspiracy theories and perpetual-motion machine claim websites:

First of all, the vast majority of "real" PC games don't use a managed environment. So your point that consoles won anything because PC games use .net/java/managed/interpreted languages is DOA.

Secondly, of the big three games on PC (Sims, WoW and all Flash-based games) one is almost always managed-code. If managed code was so bad people were fleeing to consoles, it wouldn't be in the top three.

Point the third, managed/interpreted code has been used in "real" PC games for a long time. Off the top of my head, Quake, Unreal Tournament, FarCry and BF2 (qc, US, Lua, Python, respectively). The parts of the engine that used them ran slow as hell; still didn't stop them becoming huge blockbusters and being released at the height of PC gaming.

While we're not there yet, it won't be long until malloc() and free() will be in the same situation as mov and jmp: sure they'll be faster but the performance increase vis-a-vis development time just isn't worth the trouble.

Pffft, I could care less about multiplayer these days and I bought MW2 on PC. And while short I don't regret it as MW2 provided one of the better single player experiences I've had... Hype had nothing to do with it.

Did it involve bodily fluids? Because unless it did there's no way a 5 hour game, going by the majority of accounts I've read, is worth 60 euros.

 

[assen]

Secondly, of the big three games on PC (Sims, WoW and all Flash-based games) one is almost always managed-code.

Actually, two; Sims 3 uses heavily Mono, and Flash is "managed code". WoW uses Lua in its UI, which, for a hardcore player with a hardcore UI mod installed, is a considerable part of the game. So maybe two and a half even ;-)

 

[Richard]

Actually, two; Sims 3 uses heavily Mono, and Flash is "managed code". WoW uses Lua in its UI, which, for a hardcore player with a hardcore UI mod installed, is a considerable part of the game. So maybe two and a half even ;-)

I was talking about the flash-games, didn't know Sims used Mono, thanks!

 

[green.pixel]

Pffft, I could care less about multiplayer these days and I bought MW2 on PC. And while short I don't regret it as MW2 provided one of the better single player experiences I've had... Hype had nothing to do with it.

Regards,
SB

To each its own i guess . When it comes to CoD games, I suppose you like the rollercoaster cinematic feel of a single player?