Less and less PC version of games

[Rednog]

This is the thing that bugs me about PC gaming, I see a game and I'm like oh wow this game looks amazing, I wait patiently and midway through they're like lol no PC version sorry. Game releases and I hear amazing things about it. With a heavy heart I sigh and pick it up when it is on sale and play it on my 360. Unfortunately I suck with controllers, I just can't get my hands to have the same dexterity as with a mouse and keyboard. The joysticks and buttons are just alien to me and my hands feel cramped. Because of this I suck at the games and after an hour I have to stop playing the damn thing because my hands hurt and then I don't like the game and just don't bother to buy for the console again. I know that if it had been a PC release, I probably would've loved it to death, but with my problems the game just falls to the back of my gaming library.

Example, I bought Undead Nightmare for the 360, decent amount of fun, but I just can't pull off some of the challenges no matter how hard I try. The whole light 5 undead and then kill them in dead eye mode, I throw a fire bottle, lol you missed, only got 3 or so of them. Throw another well those initially on fire are now dead. Finally get 5, but since they are all chasing me they are so clumped together I don't have the precision with the joysticks to target all their heads before the time expires or they reach me. And I fail the darn thing over and over. If I had a mouse I'd click on all their damn heads instantly and this achievement would be a joke.

And then come the crappy ports, seriously for those developers out there that actually bother to port to the PC. Seriously much love for doing that. But please for the love of all that is holy, please either 1) Allow us to customize the controls or 2) Put in a logical sense of controls. Also please realize that if you have a quicktime 1) Lower the mashing needed to be successful in an event, seriously the Reboot of Prince of Persia, you need to break your damn space bar to win against the minibosses. 2) Put the inputs of quicktimes as logical keys, Resident Evil 5, random quick times press 'v' press 'x', press 'e' & 'v'; these aren't natural, odds are players hands are in the ASWD position and won't be expecting that, or even off the keyboard completely during a cutscene.
Also, we have keyboards. I've noticed this in way too many ports, they don't give a system to chat in the darn game, seriously give a few bucks for someone to let us type. Way too many PC ported games either don't have keyboard typing support or even mic support. And this gets insanely aggravating for Co-op games. Resident Evil 5 on the PC is a nightmare, seriously checkpoints are far between, if I need to go take a wiz I pretty much have to leave the game because I have no way of telling the person on the other side of what I need to do.
Same with Bullet Storm, the multiplayer is all about doing team skill kills, lack of communication just leads to people mashing buttons like morons, you get through a few levels and then everyone quits on like level 6 because no one can coordinate the special kills for the desperately needed points.

Also, companies need to realize that when you release a PC game months and months later for the PC, don't expect stellar sales as compared to the consoles. The people who desperately wanted the game and would've chosen the PC if they could have probably picked it up for the consoles. Even then when months have passed the console version are usually half the damn price, and now you're releasing the game at the full console price on the PC? Why should I pay the full price when I can pick it up for cheaper on the console? Oh the extra price is for playing it on the PC? Then where is my discount for waiting so damn long?
And this sucks 10x for games that get spoiled by people. Seriously, it is hard enough to dodge spoilers in the first few days of a game, and when I have to wait months for a PC version to come out, the game is going to get spoiled for me one way or another.

 

[RanD00M]

L.A. Noire was supposed to be a PS3 exclusive at first so it not coming to PC is fairly understandable.
And there are just as many PC games, if not more. They just aren't advertised as much and they tend to be more indie.

 

[LordLundar]

This is very true. Piracy does seem to be scapegoated for dev failures a fair few times in the past. Also it's not the only issue, PC diversity and dev laziness also play a big part in the problem. But at the end of the day if piracy wasn't such a big issue they wouldn't be able to scapegoat it. Also, a fairly comprehensive analysis I linked to in my other posts do suggest that Crysis, among many other popular games, was still very heavily pirated.

The problem is that piracy is no where near as destructive as publishers claim it to be. As for why it's such an easy scapegoat, it's not because it's such a huge issue (that's used game sales), it's because it's illegal. Publishers institute draconian DRM to retain ownership of a copy after it's purchased and if they do that without explaining, then they're the evil corporation telling me how to use my game. But if they say they're using it to combat piracy, suddenly they're fighting the good fight.

I haven't seen a games profits killed by piracy unless it was used to combat a draconian DRM scheme, such as spore.

It's not as big of a problem as they claim (with a lack of viable demos, pirating has become the new "try before you buy", so killing that can cost sales) and it's a far stretch from being the biggest cause of low sales. PC users tend to be a more discerning bunch primarily because what's big on consoles they had similar a few years back. Novelty wore off and critical thought replaced it. Treating them like garbage is just going to cause them to walk away.

 

[Woodsey]

I feel like we see less and less PC versions of games. Red Dead Rdemption doesn't look like it's getting a PC port, Fable skipped the 2nd one for some reason, and now LA Noire is console only.

Fable 2 is terrible, and Fable 3 is coming to PC, whilst the other two are from the same company.

Because porting console games to the PC is a *****.
Remember GTA IV?
Everyone was thrilled to get it for their PC so they could mod it, but constant errors plagued the game for weeks...
And it's not all Rockstar's fault. With the different amount of computers, operating systems, and various other things out there, a large percentage of people are bound to have issues with the game, and therefore start bitching all over the place at Rockstar for "releasing a broken game". Then they have to spend time and money to make the game run on everyone's computer using any video card under any circumstances with no reward.
PC gamers are assholes. You can't please 'em, and I should know. I'm both a PC and console gamer...

The game had insanely high recommended specs considering what it was already running on (the first to list a recommended quad core if I remember correctly - and even if you met the recommended, you still probably couldn't run it). You expect a minority %age to have issues at most, not a majority. Furthermore, plenty of companies manage to port correctly.

I'm pretty sure GTA 3 was a bit of a mess on PC as well, so its not like they don't have a history.

 

[psicat]

With a smaller dedicated user base, one that's prone to piracy and can be very hard to please, many game companies probably have a why bother attitude when it comes to the PC market.

 

[veloper]

Because porting console games to the PC is a *****.
Remember GTA IV?
Everyone was thrilled to get it for their PC so they could mod it, but constant errors plagued the game for weeks...
And it's not all Rockstar's fault. With the different amount of computers, operating systems, and various other things out there, a large percentage of people are bound to have issues with the game, and therefore start bitching all over the place at Rockstar for "releasing a broken game". Then they have to spend time and money to make the game run on everyone's computer using any video card under any circumstances with no reward.
PC gamers are assholes. You can't please 'em, and I should know. I'm both a PC and console gamer...

No, this really is all their fault.

Porting from 360 to PC is easy. Differences between PCs mean less and less these days. It has never been this easy.
Almost all PC ports are better than Rockstar game ports. The only possible explantation for Rockstars shoddy ports: they don't make an effort.

 

[AndyFromMonday]

Well I can't take time out of my busy "Learn particle physics in less than 12 hours" schedule to do a full analysis. Fortunately this seems to be pretty complete http://www.tweakguides.com/Piracy_1.html

Since it's fairly long, I'd recommend skipping straight to section 5 where several game devs are sourced saying that piracy is a major issue preventing PC releases. Especially the one by Cliffy B. It also goes into detail about other reasons as to why console versions are more common than PC gaming.

What game developers think about piracy is irrelevant. I'm asking for DATA, hard DATA. Where does all that downloaded data go to? I have a hard time believing piracy is the main reason developers are moving away from PC gaming when they won't even release everything that is relevant in regards to piracy and losing profits. All we get is a rep saying the company/publisher lost money due to piracy and shows us a graph or tells us that the game has been downloaded X number of times which is irrelevant.

Also, Cliffy B. is an asshole who screwed over PC gamers and when sales bricked he blamed it all on piracy. His opinions is not only irrelevant, it's abhorent.

The move to console gaming is a logical one in the eyes of major publishers. Consoles are a closed system that you can control quite easily as opposed to the openness of the PC. Why do you think most major companies are attempting to enter the PC market by attempting to create a closed system of their own to work with? Bioware/EA, Microsoft, Valve, CD Projekt are all companies that have created a closed system or rather platform from which they attempt to sell their games. I'd say Valve is doing it right since their platform makes it possible for small indie titles to gain an audience plus their deals aren't that bad. The same applies to CD Projekt's Good Old Games though the latest entry on their Witcher franchise has made me doubt their commitment to PC gaming. On the other hand EA and Microsoft are focused entirely on screwing the customer over. The point system is there for a reason and all that fucking DLC is also there for the same reason.

Also, good luck with your thing. How about we continue this discussion after you're done?

 

[jamesworkshop]

I feel like we see less and less PC versions of games. Red Dead Rdemption doesn't look like it's getting a PC port, Fable skipped the 2nd one for some reason, and now LA Noire is console only.

Actually let's focus on LA Noire. Why do you think it's not getting a PC version? Are PC games really not that profitable anymore? Can we blame the people who pirate games for it? Does Rockstar not wanna give a cut of the profit to Steam, which looks like the best way to sell on PC nowadays? Or something else?

PS: why yes, I am considering getting a PS3 so I can play LA Noire...

I would think after people buying every Rockstar PC game so far would be glad to not have the possibility of accidentally buying one of their shoddy PC versions.

 

[Vault boy Eddie]

And some people have the nerve to blame console players while never having bought a game in their life.

I know you aren't saying -all- PC gamers are pirates, but I've bought almost all of the games I've ever played.

Even Dragon Age 2, sadly, which I wish I could un-buy.

This, I've never downloaded an illegal copy of a game, and instead of dragon age, my buying mistake was black ops, worst 60 bucks I ever spent, coulda gone on titties and beer.

 

[Katana314]

Well I can't take time out of my busy "Learn particle physics in less than 12 hours" schedule to do a full analysis. Fortunately this seems to be pretty complete http://www.tweakguides.com/Piracy_1.html

Since it's fairly long, I'd recommend skipping straight to section 5 where several game devs are sourced saying that piracy is a major issue preventing PC releases. Especially the one by Cliffy B. It also goes into detail about other reasons as to why console versions are more common than PC gaming.

What game developers think about piracy is irrelevant. I'm asking for DATA, hard DATA. Where does all that downloaded data go to? I have a hard time believing piracy is the main reason developers are moving away from PC gaming when they won't even release everything that is relevant in regards to piracy and losing profits. All we get is a rep saying the company/publisher lost money due to piracy and shows us a graph or tells us that the game has been downloaded X number of times which is irrelevant.

Also, Cliffy B. is an asshole who screwed over PC gamers and when sales bricked he blamed it all on piracy. His opinions is not only irrelevant, it's abhorent.

The move to console gaming is a logical one in the eyes of major publishers. Consoles are a closed system that you can control quite easily as opposed to the openness of the PC. Why do you think most major companies are attempting to enter the PC market by attempting to create a closed system of their own to work with? Bioware/EA, Microsoft, Valve, CD Projekt are all companies that have created a closed system or rather platform from which they attempt to sell their games. I'd say Valve is doing it right since their platform makes it possible for small indie titles to gain an audience plus their deals aren't that bad. The same applies to CD Projekt's Good Old Games though the latest entry on their Witcher franchise has made me doubt their commitment to PC gaming. On the other hand EA and Microsoft are focused entirely on screwing the customer over. The point system is there for a reason and all that fucking DLC is also there for the same reason.

Also, good luck with your thing. How about we continue this discussion after you're done?

YOU don't need data, THEY do. THEY have already decided on that data, so your opinion of whether X downloads matters is irrelevant. All that he's saying is that "Game developers decided to stop supporting PC gaming because they saw that PC gamers were pirating their product." Given quotations, that's hard to refute. I would tend to agree with them that even if you believe the (somewhat mistaken) belief that "Not all downloads are a lost sale", just assuming some mild percentage of them ARE lost sales (not a big stretch; not provable, but also not illogical) means a huge chunk of revenue lost. In such a competitive market, that really matters to them. You want proof that it matters to them? Easy; they said so.

It's like some people think there's some conspiracy about how game developers secretly want PCs to die for their own cruel motivations, and are boycotting PC development until it does. It's not like that; they will put their game anywhere it makes a profit.

Consoles may be a closed system, but they are closed off TO the company that makes them. Rockstar doesn't control the 360; Microsoft does. On the PC, any developer can create their own online store or player-stats tracking database.

If everyone stopped pirating games so incessantly, we'd see a return to PC gaming.

 

[Agayek]

I want you to provide information. If you claim that piracy is so rampant that it forces developers to actually stop developing for the PC then I want you to show piracy rates per games, the location those games were downloaded to(country) and proof that publishers are losing money over it.

Piracy rates, at all, are almost impossible to find. At best, you can find vague numbers by checking various torrents (and that will only tell you people currently uploading/downloading, not the total number who've downloaded it).

Also, I know Crytek released Crysis 2 for consoles as well as PC because of piracy.

Proof:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/83533-Crytek-Moving-to-Consoles

 

[Agayek]

The game had insanely high recommended specs considering what it was already running on (the first to list a recommended quad core if I remember correctly - and even if you met the recommended, you still probably couldn't run it). You expect a minority %age to have issues at most, not a majority. Furthermore, plenty of companies manage to port correctly.

I'm pretty sure GTA 3 was a bit of a mess on PC as well, so its not like they don't have a history.

Rockstar has never released an acceptable PC port, of any of their games. Ever.

It's a bit sad really. You barely have to alter the 360 code to get it to work properly on most PCs, yet they can't even manage that.

 

[GonzoGamer]

Why do you think it's not getting a PC version? Are PC games really not that profitable anymore? Can we blame the people who pirate games for it? Does Rockstar not wanna give a cut of the profit to Steam, which looks like the best way to sell on PC nowadays? Or something else?

PS: why yes, I am considering getting a PS3 so I can play LA Noire...

I wouldn't go that far. LA Noir looks different for sure but it doesn't look that good.
As this generation goes on the ps3 seems (and not just because of the psn fiasco) to be worth less and less. I've been playing more on the PC lately. In fact, the only reason I got Portal 2 for the ps3 was because it came with a free pc copy. The PC is just capable of a whole lot more.

Well, MS obviously makes more money off 360 gaming than PC gaming so they've been trying to bury it ever since this generation started. I don't know if they go so far as to pay publishers to ensure a port isn't made to a particular platform... oh wait... they have done that.

 

[Savagezion]

I feel like we see less and less PC versions of games. Red Dead Rdemption doesn't look like it's getting a PC port, Fable skipped the 2nd one for some reason, and now LA Noire is console only.

Actually let's focus on LA Noire. Why do you think it's not getting a PC version? Are PC games really not that profitable anymore? Can we blame the people who pirate games for it? Does Rockstar not wanna give a cut of the profit to Steam, which looks like the best way to sell on PC nowadays? Or something else?

PS: why yes, I am considering getting a PS3 so I can play LA Noire...

PC game sales are actually on the rise right now. Pirating on a console is just as easy as pirating on PCs. (Once you have jailbroke your console)

However, I will say that I bet piracy has something to do with it as well as modders. (GTA:SA - Hot Coffee and Manhunt - full frontal) PC games have given Rockstar some grief. Even when they tried to pull this hidden content out of the game, users are able to keep Rockstar from doing so. It is much easier to pull content off a console than a PC. Put both of these together and I bet that is where the answer lies.

Most console owners aren't that savvy to software/hardware manipulation. Most PC gamers are.

 

[Zantos]

Well I can't take time out of my busy "Learn particle physics in less than 12 hours" schedule to do a full analysis. Fortunately this seems to be pretty complete http://www.tweakguides.com/Piracy_1.html

Since it's fairly long, I'd recommend skipping straight to section 5 where several game devs are sourced saying that piracy is a major issue preventing PC releases. Especially the one by Cliffy B. It also goes into detail about other reasons as to why console versions are more common than PC gaming.

What game developers think about piracy is irrelevant. I'm asking for DATA, hard DATA. Where does all that downloaded data go to? I have a hard time believing piracy is the main reason developers are moving away from PC gaming when they won't even release everything that is relevant in regards to piracy and losing profits. All we get is a rep saying the company/publisher lost money due to piracy and shows us a graph or tells us that the game has been downloaded X number of times which is irrelevant.

Also, Cliffy B. is an asshole who screwed over PC gamers and when sales bricked he blamed it all on piracy. His opinions is not only irrelevant, it's abhorent.

The move to console gaming is a logical one in the eyes of major publishers. Consoles are a closed system that you can control quite easily as opposed to the openness of the PC. Why do you think most major companies are attempting to enter the PC market by attempting to create a closed system of their own to work with? Bioware/EA, Microsoft, Valve, CD Projekt are all companies that have created a closed system or rather platform from which they attempt to sell their games. I'd say Valve is doing it right since their platform makes it possible for small indie titles to gain an audience plus their deals aren't that bad. The same applies to CD Projekt's Good Old Games though the latest entry on their Witcher franchise has made me doubt their commitment to PC gaming. On the other hand EA and Microsoft are focused entirely on screwing the customer over. The point system is there for a reason and all that fucking DLC is also there for the same reason.

Also, good luck with your thing. How about we continue this discussion after you're done?

I'd be up for continued discussion after getting time for proper research. If I can still form words after 2 weeks of physics and obligatory week drunk afterwards then I'll attempt to put something together.

 

[Delusibeta]

It's interesting that PC gamers have suddenly declared Rockstar to be a PC developer. They're not: Red Dear Redemption is a sequel to a console-only game, and LA Noire was initially announced as a PS3 exclusive. Midnight Club, with the exception of 2, doesn't appear on PCs. In fact, the only franchises that Rockstar produces a PC version of is GTA, Max Payne and Manhunt.

Ultimately, I'm seeing an increase in PC versions of console games. For example, Fable 3 (since Fable 2 was made when Microsoft was in full "screw PC gamers" mode) and Dead Rising 2 are both games that have made it to the PCs.

RE: piracy. I actually do have an article [http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=17350] that concludes that for every 1000 piracy attempts blocked, you gain about one sale. Of course, there's various caveats to this (e.g. the games in question are "casual" games and not hyped, both would reduce the overall piracy rate) but most game developers and publishers when making "money we lost to piracy" statements assume 1 pirated copy = 1 lost sale, which is blatant garbage (1 download started does not equal 1 download finished).

 

[AndyFromMonday]

snip

Bullshit. Of course you need data. What publishers are doing by claiming that piracy is ruining the industry is just an excuse and an attempt at damage control. Piracy isn't the reason publishers are moving towards consoles, low sales are and the fact that most PC gamers do not put up with low quality games. Piracy usually comes to light when there are low sales and most of the time piracy has nothing to do with sales themselves. It's not entirely illogical to assume that if given the choice between buying and getting something for free a human being would choose the free option but think for a second. If a person is so careful with their money that they would resort to piracy then there's a 100% chance the moment piracy becomes unavailable most pirates would simply quit gaming. As it stands, pirates do purchase the odd games they consider are worth supporting. Most pirates resort to piracy because of an inability to purchase games regularly probably due to a lack of funds. This is why piracy is so rampart in my country and this is why piracy is extremely rampart in a lot of countries with low income.

Most of the times a pirate is either a minor or someone with not enough money to support the hobby. A pirated copy does not equal lost sales and even if a game is pirated a million times that does not mean you just lost a million customers. In fact, you lost zero customers. To say that there would have been a significant sales boost for a game if piracy did not exist is illogical. If piracy did not exist you would have gained no customers.

Minecraft is living proof that most of these excuses by major publishers are just plain bullshit. Look at it for fucks sake. It sold millions on the PC, a market widely considered by publishers "dead" due to piracy. Indie games get exposure through piracy and piracy helps propel them forward by advertising their games.

I don't think it's a conspiracy, I simply think publishers are lying. If they want anyone to believe piracy is ruining the industry, as most of them claim, then they damn better be releasing all the data they have. Otherwise, they should shut their fucking lying mouths.

The real reason most developers and publishers are switching to consoles is due to the wider market that apparently eats up every single bullshit games these assholes crap out of their assholes. Consoles are the reason games are being so dumbed down and consoles are also the reason this bullshit DLC scheme is still around. Am I saying consoles are a bad thing? No. Am I saying the way they're handled wrong? Yes.

Piracy rates, at all, are almost impossible to find. At best, you can find vague numbers by checking various torrents (and that will only tell you people currently uploading/downloading, not the total number who've downloaded it).

Also, I know Crytek released Crysis 2 for consoles as well as PC because of piracy.

Proof:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/83533-Crytek-Moving-to-Consoles

Crytek switched to consoles in an attempt to appeal to the "Call of Duty" crowd because the PC crowd wouldn't swallow the shallow, unoptimized and overall shitty FPS they released back in 2007. Piracy was also a non issue back then for Crytek because most pirates weren't able to run the game. Actually, barely any one was able to run the game. The reason Crytek switched to consoles was because the market was not only wider but that particular market didn't ask for complexity as evidenced by the fact that Call of Duty still sells in the millions. So they made an FPS to suit that crowd. They dumbed down the mechanics, they made the game linear and full of 'splosions and also added in a multiplayer mode worthy of the title "Call of Duty clone". Piracy had nothing to do with Crytek switching.

I understand why developers choose to switch to consoles. They have bills to pay and families to support and those developers realize mediocrity is frowned upon on the PC, mostly, they move to a platform that accepts it. I hold no grudge against Crytek or any other developer that choose to switch. What I hate about those developers is their smug attitude and the fact that they blame their shortcomings on piracy, every single time, instead of simply admitting the game sucked.

 

[Srdjan Tanaskovic]

I feel like we see less and less PC versions of games. Red Dead Rdemption doesn't look like it's getting a PC port, Fable skipped the 2nd one for some reason, and now LA Noire is console only.

Actually let's focus on LA Noire. Why do you think it's not getting a PC version? Are PC games really not that profitable anymore? Can we blame the people who pirate games for it? Does Rockstar not wanna give a cut of the profit to Steam, which looks like the best way to sell on PC nowadays? Or something else?

PS: why yes, I am considering getting a PS3 so I can play LA Noire...

...........................3 games?



3 games and you think that PC gets to little games?

 

[Twilight_guy]

I dunno why we don't see more PC games. Games are developed on the PC and most likely play tested on the PC. Making the decision not to make that a platform seems odd to me. Well I guess I'm not in the marketing department.