Observations on PC gaming (pretty much branching out to gaming as a whole)

[TheDudeWhoTriesHard]

If you guys have ADD/ADHD/or basically can't stand reading a wall of text (like I do), then its best you skip to the last paragraph which is a summary.

(Because I was a dumb f*ck, I finally finished and shortened my original post... which I accidentally deleted... so... that sucks. So yeah, here's the finished post.)

With games like the Crysis series, Witcher series, AC series, Watchdogs, Star Citizen, Evil Within, the Far Cry series, Tom Raider reboot series, so on and so forth, which have been used as a form of entertainment and as a benchmark for PC components to test their claims and capabilities, there are a ton of issues that I've read, heard, and seen such as poor optimization, constant milking through DLCs, non-Steam-like DRMs in a sense that they don't work or just there to prevent piracy and/or milk the living f*ck out of our wallets, dwindling care on gameplay mechanics (in which I can somewhat agree on) in terms of balance, functionality, and freedom, dwindling care on game polish, the list goes on and on. To some extent, I can't stand alot of gaming publishers and developers since "A company does not have a conscience" but the people running the company have it. I understand that business is business, but with that in mind, does that mean consumers are suddenly becoming more and more irrelevant when it comes to feedback, regardless if we paid them or not?

Lets look at some of the following


1.) Piracy

Well, to pirate a videogame, you do need a computer to actually share it for free or sell it at a fraction of a price, right? Also, just some observations, looking as how there are multiple operating systems right now other than Windows and OS 10.something.something, there are three major console operating systems (which are, from what I believe, updated for each console generation) for each console available on the market today. Since the coding and programming are done on a computer (pretty much regardless of OS), then natively the coding and programming data can be read, modified, and copied when put in the hands of someone who is skilled enough. Its been done for a long while and probably even console optimized (or proprietary only to console) games could still be pirated anyways in the 80s and 90s, or earlier than that. So, how can it be any more different (to someone who does these things anyways) to something that was made to play on a device that can pirate it? I mean, think about it. If you do torrent games (I don't... okay, maybe some NSFW videos, but I do not promote piracy, and neither should you guys, or even think about it. I know most, if not all of you guys don't do it.) from your torrent site of choice, why bother going for a console if/when there's a PC version of it that you can just install and play? Saves another step or two compared to doing it for your console.

And that is where DRMs have come to reduce the bleeding to a halt after maybe a few attempts to prevent piracy of their games. I like how Steam's like one of the first, if not the first, to use a DRM and actually not have as much issues as UPlay and Origin. But since those DRMs are involved and somewhat crucial to the game's multiplayer access, which also is a pain in the rear end if you have an internet speed that is as fast as a snail (I hate that I'm paying $100 USD a month for 10, yes TEN, mbps along with performance inconsistencies since fibre isn't available in our area. I WILL NOT MOVE OUT OF MY HOME JUST TO GET BETTER INTERNET CONNECTION! I'M NOT SUPPOSED TO HAVE THAT PROBLEM! Okay... back on topic) and have to download data... for a game... that you bought a physical copy of. I had to wait for 18 hours just to install Bioshock Infinite when I bought a digital copy of it and took around 2 hours of a physical copy of Modern Warfare 2. Kind of sh*tty if you ask me.

2.) DLCs

While there are times that I don't mind paying somewhat of an extra for some continuation of the game I enjoyed, I've seen some DLCs that just add map packs for multiplayer, some aesthetic changes, and maybe some DLCs that add more to the story of the game in a form of a campaign and what not. It is scarily becoming a trend and it scares me. Also, there are times that I feel rather annoyed about games like Titanfall, which feels like its just a complete portion of the game while the other contents aren't there so that it is used for other endeavors like another game or a sequel. I thought its DLCs are gonna have some added multiplayer campaigns... NOPE! Atleast, as far as I know. What about Battlefield 4? I can forgive the start of it, but really? Multiplayer packs? I really do like the game, but if its asking for more support, I am not part of that audience they are looking for if they are going to release map packs for a fee. But for some reason, alot of people pay (or have others pay for it) to have those map packs, aesthetic changes, and some added bonuses that does not contribute to the game's story progression.

3.) Cost and Optimization

Yes, a PC is cheaper in the end, and consoles are pretty much technically sold at a loss but make up for it through games and some other micro-transactions and subscription fees. If I were to guess how much a PS4 costs to make it, $600 would be my guess. For around a hundred more, a custom PC can be made to run games at higher frame rates at equal or higher resolutions, and help do homework, some office work, add some media, and  can almost replace consoles and TVs. But look at it this way, if you buy a pre-built, you are paying an extra for labour fees and ease of getting it fixed, compared to a custom built since troubleshooting is a pain in the rear-end sometimes. With a console, though cheaper and may end up costing more in the future, if it does have any malfunctions based on user error or bad QC, the most you have to do is replace the console. Not to mention since consoles, in this generation atleast, are sold at a loss, have a cheap entry price to get into gaming.

This may explain why some of the hyped games run like a crinkled ugly ass on PC almost regardless of cost, thus making the price to playability and aesthetic enjoyment ratio on PC lose out to consoles... and it annoys me ALOT. I like my games how I like my Baileys. Tastes sweet and kicks hard after a few more glasses. Now, it looks like liquor stores have stocked less baileys and added more cheap crappily made beer to the point its pretty much the only thing on display. I bought a 780 Ti because I wanna enjoy those games as they are, even if I'll end up cranking the settings down to low in the future. I did not buy it now only to find out that cranking the settings down to low in the future... is probably in a few months or a year. If this becomes a trend, I'll set my 780 Ti on fire.

4.) Exclusives

To those who say exclusives ruin the game industry, I beg to differ. Blame the guys who execute it in a rather annoying way. The next Tomb Raider game has a timed exlusive, which means if you want to be one of the first ones to play it, better have an XBox. If, back then, you wanted to play Destiny, you had to have a console. If you wanted to play Tekken... okay, not sure if they are strictly console exclusives, but if you wanted to play one, you had to get a console. Now, anyone can get an alternative, but lets say I wanted to play Tekken? Why don't I just buy the Street Fighter or Marvel vs Capcom/DC that are available for PC? At the end of the day, it isn't Tekken I'm playing. So, why do I like exclusives? It is a form of competition. Some day, someone's gonna make a MOBA on a console that actually rivals DotA 2 or LoL (or whatever the new ones are gonna be in the future), some day someone's gonna make a fighting game that plays objectively and subjectively better than Tekken, Mortal Kombat, MvC, Street Fighter, so on and so forth on the PC. Each one are forcing the other to get better or just quit the business.


So, what do I think? Well, the future of games as a form of entertainment are starting to give me fear in terms of quality control and content. I understand everyone needs money, but from how I see it, it looks like one side is winning temporarily, but both the consumer and companies are gonna get screwed in the long run.

[Geekazoid]

Hate the saying, but.....EPIC FAIL! JK

[qwertywarrior]

[Mush Brain]

-40/10

[HippY]

still more informative than the Ubisoft tech support posts

[TheDudeWhoTriesHard]

Okay, its done.

[PurplDrank]

Better than battle.net support

[Vedge]

As far as we know, current gen consoles are not sold at a loss

[DigitalHermit]

Back in the day, there used to be what we call "Expansion Packs"... These things usually cost a fraction of the base game... What these do is that they add a lot of material to the base game... Like what Brood Wars did for Starcraft and what Yuri's Revenge did for Red Alert 2...

 

These evolved into the DLC... Now, the problem with the current DLC model is that they tend to contain material that was supposed to be in the first iteration of the base game in the first place... Expansion packs were different... They were released a long time after the initial game's launch... But now, we have day zero DLCs... Heck they even pre-sell the DLCs during the pre-selling phase of the base game...

 

As for the piracy thing, there is no way to avoid it without hurting your legitimate customers in the process... Some people pirate because of access reasons (really old games that went out of distribution or abandoned games or games not distributed in certain parts of the world) and monetary reasons (not everyone can pay for a 60USD game) among others... But if you look at the indie game scene, even if the devs don't implement a DRM system, piracy is minmal (unless it's a very iconic game)...

 

Another problem I see is the way that the publishers pump out games... A yearly release is a bit stressful for developers... I'd rather have a base game every four years with a yearly expansion pack... With that we can have better day zero base games, and new content... The devs will also have the time to work on their next game...

 

The PC can be said to be the ultimate platform since you can put almost any genre of game on a PC and still have many options on how you want to control it (i.e. using a steering wheel set for an FPS)... (Ever tried an RTS on a console?)

 

On the cost and optimization thing:

Sure a PC can be very expensive, but you can get a decent system at the cost of a console... Of course there will be compromises, but consider the additional functionality of the PC... Right now, the AAA scene is to fixed on the consoles... and something needs to happen to change that...

[TheDudeWhoTriesHard]

Back in the day, there used to be what we call "Expansion Packs"... These things usually cost a fraction of the base game... What these do is that they add a lot of material to the base game... Like what Brood Wars did for Starcraft and what Yuri's Revenge did for Red Alert 2...

 

These evolved into the DLC... Now, the problem with the current DLC model is that they tend to contain material that was supposed to be in the first iteration of the base game in the first place... Expansion packs were different... They were released a long time after the initial game's launch... But now, we have day zero DLCs... Heck they even pre-sell the DLCs during the pre-selling phase of the base game...

 

As for the piracy thing, there is no way to avoid it without hurting your legitimate customers in the process... Some people pirate because of access reasons (really old games that went out of distribution or abandoned games or games not distributed in certain parts of the world) and monetary reasons (not everyone can pay for a 60USD game) among others... But if you look at the indie game scene, even if the devs don't implement a DRM system, piracy is minmal (unless it's a very iconic game)...

 

Another problem I see is the way that the publishers pump out games... A yearly release is a bit stressful for developers... I'd rather have a base game every four years with a yearly expansion pack... With that we can have better day zero base games, and new content... The devs will also have the time to work on their next game...

 

The PC can be said to be the ultimate platform since you can put almost any genre of game on a PC and still have many options on how you want to control it (i.e. using a steering wheel set for an FPS)... (Ever tried an RTS on a console?)

 

On the cost and optimization thing:

Sure a PC can be very expensive, but you can get a decent system at the cost of a console... Of course there will be compromises, but consider the additional functionality of the PC... Right now, the AAA scene is to fixed on the consoles... and something needs to happen to change that...

Piracy can't be avoided. I understand why people do it, though I still discourage it if there's a way to get it while supporting the devs if the game really worth the price tag. But hey, if some people pirate the game because they aren't even allowed to buy it, then I guess no choice.

Another issue I have is also about game quality over the years. Graphical performance is one thing, frame-rate is another, but when gameplay is equally as bad or worse... Oh my. I do not know what fuels EA, Activision, and Ubisoft to rush the devs to their breaking point (or atleast close to it) that it hurts both the developers and the publishers' reputation. I really wish CoD slowed the f*ck down in releasing games, I wish AC games came out every three years instead of nearly one year. Is the demand really that immense?

Also, I don't think there's even a MOBA for consoles.

And also, the thing is about consoles now, with how AAA games are focusing on consoles... all of the sudden, it almost (note: ALMOST) makes sense to pick a console over a PC if you wanna play Watchdogs, CoD, AC, Far Cry, and many others more, since consoles appear to evolve into something like SARS... and maybe ebola, to PCs.