PC Gaming and Piracy: Must Read Article

Recommended Videos

CmdrGoob

New member
Oct 5, 2008
887
0
0
This is a lengthy but extremely well written and fact filled article about PC gaming and piracy, it should be a must read for any PC gamer. PC Game Piracy Examined [http://www.tweakguides.com/Piracy_1.html]. If you want to skip to the real meat, it starts about here. [http://www.tweakguides.com/Piracy_4.html]

Basically, as best as can be determined, there's as approximately as many if not more gaming capable PCs out there than current gen consoles put together, and yet cross platform games sell like utter shit on the PC compared to consoles; it's as bad as approximately a fivefold margin. So do PC exclusives compared to console exclusives. This is despite the fact that the PC version is usually cheaper, comes with more mod support, comes with M&K and console controller support, is capable of better graphics and so on and so forth. And at the same time, the PC version is more pirated than sold, and in particular is pirated ten times more frequently than the console version.

And publishers and developers are keenly aware of this sad fact, and with PC gaming in it's current state, you'd have to be mad to develop PC exlusives instead of targeting the consoles. Which means PC gamers will have to 6 month late ports of console games.

PCs have a flexible, complex and precise user interface in the mouse and keyboard, one that's uniquely different to what console controllers can do. PCs are also uniquely suited for modding. If PC exclusives die and are replaced by console ports because of the current state of the industry, then the gaming industry will have become a worse and shallower industry. There's so much potential to have different styles of games that suit consoles or PCs because of what the different hardware can do, but if it's all just consoles and console ports, then gaming has become a much poorer experience.

Personally, I'm hoping for a successful DRM scheme, because I don't want that to happen.
 

EzraPound

New member
Jan 26, 2008
1,763
0
0
CmdrGoob said:
This is a lengthy but extremely well written and fact filled article about PC gaming and piracy, it should be a must read for any PC gamer. PC Game Piracy Examined [http://www.tweakguides.com/Piracy_1.html]. If you want to skip to the real meat, it starts about here. [http://www.tweakguides.com/Piracy_4.html]

Basically, as best as can be determined, there's as approximately as many if not more gaming capable PCs out there than current gen consoles put together, and yet cross platform games sell like utter shit on the PC compared to consoles; it's as bad as approximately a fivefold margin. So do PC exclusives compared to console exclusives. This is despite the fact that the PC version is usually cheaper, comes with more mod support, comes with M&K and console controller support, is capable of better graphics and so on and so forth. And at the same time, the PC version is more pirated than sold, and in particular is pirated ten times more frequently than the console version.

And publishers and developers are keenly aware of this sad fact, and with PC gaming in it's current state, you'd have to be mad to develop PC exlusives instead of targeting the consoles. Which means PC gamers will have to 6 month late ports of console games.

PCs have a flexible, complex and precise user interface in the mouse and keyboard, one that's uniquely different to what console controllers can do. PCs are also uniquely suited for modding. If PC exclusives die and are replaced by console ports because of the current state of the industry, then the gaming industry will have become a worse and shallower industry. There's so much potential to have different styles of games that suit consoles or PCs because of what the different hardware can do, but if it's all just consoles and console ports, then gaming has become a much poorer experience.

Personally, I'm hoping for a successful DRM scheme, because I don't want that to happen.
PC games have been underselling console games in spite of there being more fit-for-gaming computers than consoles since long before widespread piracy. It's because most aren't used for gaming. Next theory please.
 

Credge

New member
Apr 12, 2008
1,042
0
0
EzraPound said:
PC games have been underselling console games in spite of there being more fit-for-gaming computers than consoles since long before widespread piracy. It's because most aren't used for gaming. Next theory please.
And this is it in a nutshell. Most fit-for-gaming PC's are used for multi tasking, video editing, flash, photoshop, and other things... INCLUDING watching T.V.

Edit: I'll go even further to say that the reason multi-platform games sell poorly on the PC is because they suck and are not made for PC. Mainly, though, they suck.
 

CmdrGoob

New member
Oct 5, 2008
887
0
0
EzraPound said:
PC games have been underselling console games in spite of there being more fit-for-gaming computers than consoles since long before widespread piracy. It's because most aren't used for gaming. Next theory please.
Lol, what?

God, some people are so resistant to the idea that piracy is hurting the PC that they'll propose the most laughable alternate theories. The article cites an estimate of of 200 million gaming PCs sold in the last three years, and sales of add-in graphics cards of about 20 million per quarter. Current gen consoles total ~80 million units sold. And games sell ~ fivefold poorer on PC.

That's a fucking shitload of gaming PCs and add-in graphics cards being sold to people who use them as doorstops or some shit.
 

SimuLord

Whom Gods Annoy
Aug 20, 2008
10,077
0
0
Credge said:
EzraPound said:
PC games have been underselling console games in spite of there being more fit-for-gaming computers than consoles since long before widespread piracy. It's because most aren't used for gaming. Next theory please.
And this is it in a nutshell. Most fit-for-gaming PC's are used for multi tasking, video editing, flash, photoshop, and other things... INCLUDING watching T.V.

Edit: I'll go even further to say that the reason multi-platform games sell poorly on the PC is because they suck and are not made for PC. Mainly, though, they suck.
I'd go a step further and say even if those cross-platform games were excellent, there exists a psychological divide between PC gamers and console gamers. Not for nothing do PC gamers use terms like "console-tarded" to describe games that are simplified or otherwise use control and gameplay elements common to console games. Compare Oblivion (which was clearly designed for the 360 first and the PC second) against Morrowind. Which game one likes better tends to reflect that person's opinion about games in general---Morrowind was deeper, more immersive, and had more PC-like gaming elements than Oblivion did (and there are plenty of folks who say "yeah, and Daggerfall was even better" for the same reasons.)
 

CmdrGoob

New member
Oct 5, 2008
887
0
0
Credge said:
EzraPound said:
PC games have been underselling console games in spite of there being more fit-for-gaming computers than consoles since long before widespread piracy. It's because most aren't used for gaming. Next theory please.
And this is it in a nutshell. Most fit-for-gaming PC's are used for multi tasking, video editing, flash, photoshop, and other things... INCLUDING watching T.V.
Gaming is a mainstream entertainment form. Video editing, flash blahblahblah are not. Do you seriously believe that so many people buy gaming PCs and add in graphics cards and then only use them for those things?

Edit: I'll go even further to say that the reason multi-platform games sell poorly on the PC is because they suck and are not made for PC. Mainly, though, they suck.
Oh, really? Take Fallout 3 as an example. Would you rather have Fallout 3 on PC or console (cheaper, GECK + mods, better graphics, better user interface)? Want to check out how PC Fallout 3 sales are going?
 

Shade Jackrabbit

New member
Aug 3, 2008
270
0
0
CmdrGoob said:
EzraPound said:
PC games have been underselling console games in spite of there being more fit-for-gaming computers than consoles since long before widespread piracy. It's because most aren't used for gaming. Next theory please.
Lol, what?

God, some people are so resistant to the idea that piracy is hurting the PC that they'll propose the most laughable alternate theories. The article cites an estimate of of 200 million gaming PCs sold in the last three years, and sales of add-in graphics cards of about 20 million per quarter. Current gen consoles total ~80 million units sold. And games sell ~ fivefold poorer on PC.

That's a fucking shitload of gaming PCs and add-in graphics cards being sold to people who use them as doorstops or some shit.
Despite what you might believe, video editing, flash, rendering, and the rest of the things Credge mentioned are indeed as or more system intensive than a lot of gaming. Whether or not it's intentional gaming PCs are all-around good PCs too.

That being said, there is indeed a piracy problem. What to do about it is simple: DRM. What a good DRM scheme is has been talked to death about countless times on these forums.

Let's not get too cocky on either side. Everyone has made valid and good points so far.

EDIT: *sigh* Didn't type fast enough apparently.
 

Anton P. Nym

New member
Sep 18, 2007
2,611
0
0
Ah, yes, let's take a thread on piracy and turn it into Platform Warz again. Joy.

-- Steve

(PS: I take offense at the term "console tards"; you could at least try to disguise your arrogance, y'know.)
 

EzraPound

New member
Jan 26, 2008
1,763
0
0
God, some people are so resistant to the idea that piracy is hurting the PC that they'll propose the most laughable alternate theories. The article cites an estimate of of 200 million gaming PCs sold in the last three years, and sales of add-in graphics cards of about 20 million per quarter. Current gen consoles total ~80 million units sold. And games sell ~ fivefold poorer on PC.
What I'm saying still stands - I remember reading an editorial in 1996 in PC Gamer pointing out similarly how PC games sales paled in relation to the sales of fit-for-gaming computers. I have a handful of friends whose parents bought fancy 3D card-equipped computer bundles for them and they never game on them - so yeah, piracy hurts PC games, but what hurts them more is an underwhelming share of the user market. This reminds me of people who said the Dreamcast "died because of piracy": or, oh wait, did it die because it it was getting outsold profusely by the PS2 at the time of the latter console's release? Because if you've got 140 million units in circulation - as the PS2, today, does - it really isn't that significant whether a portion of them are pirating.
 

SimuLord

Whom Gods Annoy
Aug 20, 2008
10,077
0
0
Anton P. Nym said:
Ah, yes, let's take a thread on piracy and turn it into Platform Warz again. Joy.

-- Steve

(PS: I take offense at the term "console tards"; you could at least try to disguise your arrogance, y'know.)
I'll disguise my arrogance as soon as Bethesda apologizes for making the PC version of Oblivion an obvious console port rather than the other way around. At least they released the Construction Kit, thereby allowing PC gamers to rescue their game for them---Oblivion's status as 2006's Game of the Year relies entirely upon its mod community to earn the honor, something 360 players didn't get to enjoy.
 

CmdrGoob

New member
Oct 5, 2008
887
0
0
Shade Jackrabbit said:
CmdrGoob said:
EzraPound said:
PC games have been underselling console games in spite of there being more fit-for-gaming computers than consoles since long before widespread piracy. It's because most aren't used for gaming. Next theory please.
Lol, what?

God, some people are so resistant to the idea that piracy is hurting the PC that they'll propose the most laughable alternate theories. The article cites an estimate of of 200 million gaming PCs sold in the last three years, and sales of add-in graphics cards of about 20 million per quarter. Current gen consoles total ~80 million units sold. And games sell ~ fivefold poorer on PC.

That's a fucking shitload of gaming PCs and add-in graphics cards being sold to people who use them as doorstops or some shit.
Despite what you might believe, video editing, flash, rendering, and the rest of the things Credge mentioned are indeed as or more system intensive than a lot of gaming. Whether or not it's intentional gaming PCs are all-around good PCs too.

That being said, there is indeed a piracy problem. What to do about it is simple: DRM. What a good DRM scheme is has been talked to death about countless times on these forums.

Let's not get too cocky on either side. Everyone has made valid and good points so far.
Yeah, they are indeed system intensive. But are they so common that most gaming PCs are being used for them rather than gaming, such that it would throw those estimates out by the fivefold discrepancy in sales? I know tons of people who play PC games, I don't know anyone who has a powerful PC solely for those things.
 

Sockerbit

New member
Jun 17, 2008
17
0
0
If you think Piracy is the only reason why PC games are doing badly, you're probably not thinking that far.

There are extremely few released for the PC, I mean there are some FPS and RTS games, that's about it. Those that do get released, you can't rent test. You have to spend 60 bucks and perhaps end up with a game that might not even be worth ten. Those games that are release usually are on the consoles too and much earlier too. PC gamers are rarely just PC gamers, they usually own at least one console which they tend to play with friends. Then there is a LOT of people that buy gaming grade PC's and don't even game on them. I mean a lot of companies tend to buy high-end computers simply so they don't have to buy new ones in a long time.
 

CmdrGoob

New member
Oct 5, 2008
887
0
0
EzraPound said:
God, some people are so resistant to the idea that piracy is hurting the PC that they'll propose the most laughable alternate theories. The article cites an estimate of of 200 million gaming PCs sold in the last three years, and sales of add-in graphics cards of about 20 million per quarter. Current gen consoles total ~80 million units sold. And games sell ~ fivefold poorer on PC.
What I'm saying still stands - I remember reading an editorial in 1996 in PC Gamer pointing out similarly how PC games sales paled in relation to the sales of fit-for-gaming computers. I have a handful of friends whose parents bought fancy 3D card-equipped computer bundles for them and they never game on them - so yeah, piracy hurts PC games, but what hurts them more is an underwhelming share of the user market. This reminds me of people who said the Dreamcast "died because of piracy": or, oh wait, did it die because it it was getting outsold profusely by the PS2 at the time of the latter console's release? Because if you've got 140 million units in circulation - as the PS2, today, does - it really isn't that significant whether a portion of them are pirating.
That's pretty anecdotal, and piracy for the PC in 1996 was still a factor.
 

SimuLord

Whom Gods Annoy
Aug 20, 2008
10,077
0
0
Eggo said:
CmdrGoob said:
Personally, I'm hoping for a successful DRM scheme, because I don't want that to happen.
It's been done. [http://store.steampowered.com/]
Indeed, [http://www.gamersgate.com/] so it has. [http://impulsedriven.com/]
 

Shade Jackrabbit

New member
Aug 3, 2008
270
0
0
CmdrGoob said:
Shade Jackrabbit said:
CmdrGoob said:
EzraPound said:
PC games have been underselling console games in spite of there being more fit-for-gaming computers than consoles since long before widespread piracy. It's because most aren't used for gaming. Next theory please.
Lol, what?

God, some people are so resistant to the idea that piracy is hurting the PC that they'll propose the most laughable alternate theories. The article cites an estimate of of 200 million gaming PCs sold in the last three years, and sales of add-in graphics cards of about 20 million per quarter. Current gen consoles total ~80 million units sold. And games sell ~ fivefold poorer on PC.

That's a fucking shitload of gaming PCs and add-in graphics cards being sold to people who use them as doorstops or some shit.
Despite what you might believe, video editing, flash, rendering, and the rest of the things Credge mentioned are indeed as or more system intensive than a lot of gaming. Whether or not it's intentional gaming PCs are all-around good PCs too.

That being said, there is indeed a piracy problem. What to do about it is simple: DRM. What a good DRM scheme is has been talked to death about countless times on these forums.

Let's not get too cocky on either side. Everyone has made valid and good points so far.
Yeah, they are indeed system intensive. But are they so common that most gaming PCs are being used for them rather than gaming, such that it would throw those estimates out by the fivefold discrepancy in sales? I know tons of people who play PC games, I don't know anyone who has a powerful PC solely for those things.
Well the question then comes down to what you mean by "play PC games". Personally I'm gonna be getting a new PC soon but I only have three games I plan to play on it. And even then only on weekends really. By some standards I would not be considered using my gaming PC for gaming.

No offense, but you are coming off a little manic. I'm just trying to make sure there's some sort of general understanding going on here between people. If you were to ask my opinion I would indeed say there is a huge piracy problem.

A better clarification between "gaming pc" and "pc fit for gaming" could help this topic, by the way.
 

EzraPound

New member
Jan 26, 2008
1,763
0
0
Okay, only a portion of any user base ever pirates, because a) most people don't know/won't bother, and b) alot of dumbtards think it's unethical (like yeah, God gives a shit if you pirate Windows Vista). Admittedly, that portion is larger on PC because the average PC gamer is presumably more knowledgeable about technology, but the point is this: the losses that occur due to piracy only become relatively staggering when you're dealing with a large user base (because more users = more pirates), in which case the console is likely self-sustaining anyway. It's like the .mp3 downloading BS: the major losses that are occuring are out of the coffers of The Beatles, Led Zeppelin, and Sony, whereas Internet awareness and access to music has generally created a media equilibrium that's hugely benefitted smaller artists, who are the only ones suffering remotely anyway (and if you quote to me the major labels' PR line about the money from larger artists being used to promote smaller ones, you're stupid: there has been no discernible positive implications for smaller artists due to the corporate oligarchy that runs the major labels).

Of course, I could go on about how trying to assign a value to a file that's endlessly reproducible actually subverts basic principles of supply and demand, how IP laws are debateable, and how the weakening of the corporate structure actually helps art forms as much or more than it hurts them, but whatever: if you're just going to buy the theft line, hook and sinker, there's probably not much I can say to assuade you anyway.
 

Shade Jackrabbit

New member
Aug 3, 2008
270
0
0
EzraPound said:
Okay, only a portion of any user base ever pirates, because a) most people don't know/won't bother, and b) alot of dumbtards think it's unethical (like yeah, God gives a shit if you pirate Windows Vista). Admittedly, that portion is larger on PC because the average PC gamer is presumably more knowledgeable about technology, but the point is this: the losses that occur due to piracy only become relatively staggering when you're dealing with a large user base (because more users = more pirates), in which case the console is likely self-sustaining anyway. It's like the .mp3 downloading BS: the major losses that are occuring are out of the coffers of The Beatles, Led Zeppelin, and Sony, whereas Internet awareness and access to music has generally created a media equilibrium that's hugely benefitted smaller artists, who are the only ones suffering remotely anyway (and if you quote to me the major labels' PR line about the money from larger artists being used to promote smaller ones, you're stupid: there has been no discernible positive implications for smaller artists due to the corporate oligarchy that runs the major labels).

Of course, I could go on about how trying to assign a value to a file that's endlessly reproducible actually subverts basis principles of supply and demand, how IP laws are debateable, and how the weakening of the corporate structure actually helps art forms as much or more than it hurts them, but whatever: if you're just going to buy the theft line, hook and sinker, there's probably not much I can say to assuade you anyway.
I think you just pwned everybody.
 

CmdrGoob

New member
Oct 5, 2008
887
0
0
Let's take Fallout 3 as an example.

Anyone here want to claim the 360 version is better? The PC version looks better, is ~$10 cheaper, has GECK plus the potential for a ton of mods. So I'm going with no on that.

There are ~23 million 360's out there. With sales of graphics cards at 20 million per quater and gaming PCs at 200 million in 3 years quoted in that article, we could say 7 out of 8 gaming capable PCs aren't used for gaming and still draw an estimate of ~25 million gaming PCs that are used for gaming.

And yet despite this, the 360 version easily outsells the PC version by approximately a 3:1 margin. While the PC version is pirated 10 times more frequently. What else explains the discrepancy in sales we see?

Now if you are a developer and you are going to chose between making a PC exclusive or a 360 exclusive or between aiming your cross platform game primarily at PCs or at consoles, even games that are better on PC (like Fallout 3) sell better on consoles, and are therefore better off being aimed at consoles. That's why we are also seeing a rash of RTS games being released on consoles. Hell, even civilization is being altered to target consoles.

At the current state of the industry it is foolish to target games at the PC, and consequently games targeted at the PC are fading away.