Bleak Future for Videogame Customers 399
jvm writes "A recent commentary on Curmudgeon Gamer speculates on the future of the videogame market. Among the predictions: no more rentals from video stores, no used games market, no lending games to friends, less upgradeable computers, pay-as-you-play software subscriptions, and other consumer-unfriendly changes. In all, less gaming value for your hard-earned dollar."
Re:More restrictive technology = more returns (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:I think its unlikely (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Physcal media is dead, long live the bit... (Score:2, Interesting)
Also, you have a better ability to trial software before taking the plunge and buying it, something that many of my friends do with the PS2 since the majority of game seem to be rush jobs with little end result. I'm not saying that the GCN or the Xbox is any better, it's just Sony seems to encourge quanity over quality for their software library, always have.
The down side to this is you get very few quality games, but you do get a larger selection, and some fairly creative titles. Just not as creative as SEGA used to encourage.
LONG LIVE DC
Then make better games... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:At the end of the day (Score:3, Interesting)
No.
Blame it on the pirates, toughen up the DMCA and declare consumer hunting season open.
Replay Value of Older Games (Score:5, Interesting)
I suspect that the longer this trend takes to implement, the harder it will be for the game makers to pull it off. Why? An ever increasing back catalogue of existing games that don't have such restrictions
Take a look at all the consoles over the years, that's a huge library of games. Ok, sure, the graphics and features decrease dramatically as you travel further back... but does the entertainment value?
A current Xbox, modded, can happily run MAME. Making one console able to play litterally thousands of titles.
If the software makers push thing to the point where it's no longer worth it to buy, I suspect many people won't. Oh, some will, because they'll always want the latest and greatest. But many may well be content revisiting some of the existing titles.
I used to contantly upgrade my PC hardware to the newest stuff released because I actually benefited from it. These days I rarely do. My existing gear performs well enough that I see only a marginal benifit. Maybe gaming will be similar.
Blockwars [blockwars.com]: multiplayer and free.. and I'll get around to updating it some more soon. :)
Cheapskates of the World, Unite! (Score:5, Interesting)
Only one problem with this scenario: I'm not buying, and neither will a lot of other gamers. No doubt video game companies could come out with a really great sounding version of Half Life or whatever, costing $12 a month to play. But if they try to foist subscription fees on me, my money's staying in my pocket. Dollar for dollar, video games represent probably the cheapest form of entertainment ever developed. A few years back, I spent $20 on a copy of Unreal Tournament, and that is some of the best entertainment money I've ever spent. I've doubtless played that game more than a hundred hours. Same thing with NHL '94 Hockey on the Sega Genesis; I got it used for $10 or so, and I'm still playing that game today in emulation.
No doubt, the video game industry would love for all games to switch over to subscription on-demand models. The only trouble is cheapskates like me won't ever let this happen. When I buy a game, I expect it to be a one-shot expense, and I further expect to be able to play that game ten years from now. If, for the sake of argument, the next Half-Life comes out as subscription, I'll just buy UT 2004. And if UT 2004 comes out as subscription, then I'd keep playing my original UT until Quake 4 or somebody responsive to my needs comes out with a non-subscription game.
No doubt that subscriptions will capture a growing portion of the gaming market, but it's silly to think companies will forsake the model of one-time sales. There's too much demand from gamers who wouldn't have it any other way, and nobody's going to leave that much money on the table.
I can't agree (Score:2, Interesting)
What do I know? It may change and videogame companies may start doing pay for play. But try and remember that these companies want as much of your money as possible. I know I'm willing to pay more for a box and a disc that for a download link on a subscription service.
My bet is, console games will continue to be the industry focus, and the pc ports will contain whatever hacked in protection is sexy at the time. The only places we're likely to see "innovation" in pc game protection is with games like Half life 2, where pc development is the central focus.
Mexicans eat chili.
Fantastic (Score:4, Interesting)
We are seeing the groundwork already, in good GPL game engines, and the free content community already has proved their worth on proprietary engines (NWN modules and Quake 3 mods etc). All it needs now is someone to tie it all together.
DRM is the ultimate free software motivator.
(Anyone remember Total Anihilation that had a multiplayer spawn install and let you play 3 computers with each valid set of disks over the LAN/Internet?)
Not only not news, but also just plain misguided (Score:5, Interesting)
Retail sales will continue because people like to make impulse buys. If people wanted all their games delivered via the internet, meatspace gaming stores would have gone under already. Most gaming stores have noticed that people want to buy used stuff too, so they have new and used games. An excellent example is Software Etc., which purchased Funcoland, basically the USA's leader in used games/game equipment sales, and the Software Etc.s started selling used stuff. As a consequence, I go to Software Etc. again. We even bought the Myst trilogy DVD box set there, but mostly I buy the used stuff. As long as there are successful outlets which bring in gamers, however, video games will be sold in stores. That means, stores which sell used games, stores which sell game consoles, stores which sell gaming peripherals.
Next, let's talk about registration keys. The only thing these keys can really be used for is preventing people without them from playing on official online servers, or these days, from using the official master browser server. People will patch their way to playing, otherwise. But so-called piracy prevention methods have never been about preventing people from pirating games. Game developers are not idiots. Well, some of them are, of course. But any of the good games necessarily could not have been created by total morons. These people know it is impossible to stop piracy. The point of these copyright protection methods is to make it inconvenient to pirate the games, thus ensuring that the majority of people will pay for them.
As for the death of game rental, this commentary is largely applicable to PC games, not so much console games. Console games will continue to be distributed in physical form for some time to come, and it will be a long while until every home in america has the broadband internet access necessary to download games, which are only getting larger. Playstation 2 games are typically on DVD these days, even on broadband it takes a while to download a full DVD. Not only that, but I got the "official" word from Comcast that I'm only allowed to download 80-90 GB/month. (Yes, I finally got a AUP violation letter.) Just a few games and movie trailers, and you're over your limit. So, it's going to be a while before the death of physical media.
The fact is that the widespread adoption of internet use necessitated the use of registration keys and activation in all types of software to make software copyright violation less convenient, because it became so easy to get copied software, and cracks/deprotects/serials for same. As usual, the users are to blame, not the companies. It will still be possible to copy these games well into the future; it is still a truism that anything a person can put together, a person can take apart.
History repeats (Score:5, Interesting)
Did he forget the generations of copy protection before this?
The C64 copy protection battles, with the crazy disk access.
The code wheels and papers, and manuals
Companies keep trying, get some success, then it starts to fail, then they improve. This is just the copy protection arms race.
Re:One of the comments on the article's forums... (Score:2, Interesting)
This is going the opposite direction of video-on-demand, now you can play whenever you want, with subscription you have to pay for the time you spend playing... *Hrmf...*
They just don't make 'em like they used to (Score:5, Interesting)
IMHO, I think that the worst trend that has been hitting the PC gaming industry in recent years is a near-total lack of serious innovation and originality. The kinds of trends described in the article are nothing compared to this. Compared to the 1980's and early 1990's, the games of today seem to me anyway, comparatively lackluster and boring. Every major gaming company seems to be suffering from a me-too syndrome that causes the market to flood with dozens of similar games on the coattails of the last major innovation (which comes more and more seldom thanks to this phenomenon). We have hundreds of first-person shooter games and their close variants, more and more games in a genre that was saturated long ago. Real-time strategy games seem to suffer from the same problem. IMHO, the worst thing that ever happened to the gaming industry in recent years was the 3D card, which has seen more than its share of abuse at the hands of the major game companies. They seem to think that making a game 3D with impressive graphics is enough to make up for all of its shortcomings; in fact it's usually more true that abuse of the 3D engine can very quickly become a game's biggest shortcoming. Good graphics does not make up for an RPG's lack of plot and coherent storyline (cough...Ultima IX...cough), nor is it even required for many genre of games (cough...Warcraft III...cough).
DRM-ish measures in games and the other inconveniences mentioned are relatively minor compared to the mess that is a mediocre or unoriginal game.
This article [the-underdogs.org] is a better, more insightful read into what's wrong with the gaming industry today.
What, you hadn't noticed it until now? (Score:3, Interesting)
And yet, they play on those machines constantly: java/flash or small games from places like MSN, Weebl, Homestar Runner, etc., and "The Apprentice" to let them play MtG or other card games without owning the cards.
Occasionally they foray into their unfinished back stock too.
Meanwhile, the subscribe or die approach is hitting X-Box: X-Box Live is the only requirement listed for "Phantasy Star Online" until you open the package, at which point you find that a separate subscription is needed to play the online game!
Online books are a clear parallel IMO (Score:2, Interesting)
Pay to Play is a viable model for Games Software.. (Score:3, Interesting)
This works particually for MMOs and multiplayer FPSs. It might even be possible to open source the client software and have the server side code remain closed - although that would require rigourous security procedures it would allow for greater community enjoyment of community written features.
You just need to look at this from a different angle. Think of it like paying for petrol for your car.
this is absurd (Score:3, Interesting)
and even at the end of the painfully apocalyptic argument, he still hasn't managed to convince me this will be a bad thing at all.
games without physical media - wonderful! i lose the warm comfort of actually owning the shiny disc, but i gain the ability to install and play the game whenever and wherever, without worrying about lugging the media with my laptop, having to have the CD in the disc drive, losing it, etc.
no rentals? now that's absurd. of course there will be rentals. publishers aren't so dumb that they don't realize many gamers don't actually want to buy everything; that they're willing to pay a cheaper rate to try a game out for a short while. and an automatic delivery system like steam would make it easy to do just that.
indeed, steam would be much better for the independent developers than the current blockbuster-style rentals, of which the author is so fond. at a rental shop, when i rent a PS2 game the profit goes to the shop. over steam, however, the developer could arrange to rent their games, earning the profits themselves, and only paying valve for the use of their infrastructure.
then the author's attacks shift to DRM. "limited hardware upgrades" and "no sharing among friends" pop up in a frequent, if circumspect, manner. and here he's finally getting it. the new approach goes to great lengths to prevent piracy.
what bothers me, however, is that the author seems convinced that anti-piracy measures are bad. why? while i understand the motivations of the typical high-schoolers who want the ability to copy and trade as many games as they can, only the most ridiculous ones would argue that piracy is actually a positive social force for which our techologies should accommodate.
that's just patently absurd. people who make the games need to get paid. and our technologies need to prevent people from stealing the fruits of others' years of hard work.
but this the author doesn't seem to grasp.
The Future Is Now! (Score:2, Interesting)
Can't agree. (Score:2, Interesting)
I really have to disagree with the whole "pay-as-you-play" thing getting any momentum. Right now the whole MMORPG market is flooded with clones (there hasn't been a good release since UO prior 98), and it will only be a matter of time before people will get sick of playing the same game. Not only that but do you know anyone who would play(pay) for more than 3 of these? The fact that Midway is re-releasing [msn.com] its older machines should say something. They need to start making games gamers want, instead of worrying about how to take my money.
Re:Cheapskates of the World, Unite! (Score:5, Interesting)
This guy is totally on point.
Not only that, but if you think of a good idea and know how to program well, its one of the best ways to make millions of dollars.
Video games are the modern board games. Once people made millions off of homemade board games that became outrageously popular, and many people tried to emulate the success. Now a hundred years of free market evolution has filtered out only the best board games, but guess what : people are still making millions off of them, and people are still loving games made even before the depression. Even still, if you have a bright idea you can easily enter the market (Think about the very popular new-comer "Cranium")
Video games are the same way. I still play Nethack religiously on my 17" wide laptop (full key keyboard with numpad. oh yes.) with a 128 meg graphics card and half a gig of ram. Why? Because its good and its FREE. But I also BUY the latest stuff if its really top-notch. I play Warcraft III, and I'll tell ya Blizzard is raking it in without all that bullshit the article talks about (unlike the creators of nethack who do it for the love of the game).
Would I pay a small, not-for-profit server maitance fee? I might. But we live in the age of free market competition, and its damn easy for cheap knock offs to cash in. And brand loyalty is certainly not a pressing concern, for me at least.
Re:Poorly written and poorly conceived. (Score:5, Interesting)
It's like 35,000 retail to 3,000 STEAM, and STEAM is free for the taking.
Nobody I know plays the STEAM version very often because you are locked into a few maps.
Anyway, hardly anyone wants to contribute the costs of a server when the game company doesn't allow you to do anything except for an out-of-the-box configuration.
A fallacy... (Score:1, Interesting)
As with all fallacious statements, the fact that it is as such does not remove the possibility of it happening. However, it does discredit the argument of it happening as valid, and thus the argument should not be percieved as an inevitable truth.
In my opinion, the software industry would never get to the point described here. Pay to play? No user-stored content? This would be infeasable for many reasons, including:
1. User backlash/preference. From peon to power user, people prefer to have a hard copy of their software. If two companies, selling similarly featured software, were to follow two different models: one of giving hard copies and one of distributing content online or (God forbid) pay per use, the winner will always be hard copies. Even if media like CDs are no longer distributed, the customer will always want to see something; even if it's a file that they download. But what if all companies switch to that format? They wouldn't, because of the Capitalist principle of competition. If a company knows that they will recieve X more sales if they sell hard copies when their competition gives nothing to show the customers, then they will switch to hard copies. The other company, then, will have to adapt their services back to the old system or lose potential profit.
2. Publisher backlash. Without physical media, game publishers would have no business to attend to. Publishers of games traditionally are the ones that fund development. Whenever you see a game that comes in professional packaging and published by a notable firm, nine times out of ten it looks that good because the Publishers put a lot of money into development. Without that development money, most if not all game production companies would lack the immediate funds necessary to survive the 2-4 year production of games. A 2-4 year stint without profit is painful without someone to back you up. And if they cut out the Publishers, that's exactly what would happen.
There's probably other reasons too, but I'd better get back to work. =)
Popular opinion does not make a popular game (Score:3, Interesting)
I think one of the most unique game designing companies has been skunk studios [skunkstudios.com]. Why they haven't been able to score a deal with the PSX or Xbox is beyond me.
They have two unique games: Spelvin & Sveerz
The concept is common word and tone/sound match up - but the gameplay is VERY original.
The new Mario Cart on the Gamecube is a really unique spin on racing as well.
Tetrisphere for the N64 was a unique spin on Tetris.
Call Of Duty is so realistic that it too is unique.
Pearls Game is a unique PDA and Internet Flash Game.
You also fail to see that repackaing old games is actually original : MAME or Intellivision Lives for instance.
Re:Physcal media is dead, long live the bit... (Score:5, Interesting)
The large multinational conglomerates are creating the very niche OS/FS needs to flourish. We see it in the software market. For every increasingly restricted option, there is one or more viable, active OS/FS projects.
And while *content* is almost invariably locked up behind ClearChannel, RIAA/MPAA, EA, Hollywood, et. all, I think it is only a matter of time before independent content producers begin to gain a foothold. I would cite the rise of the so-called "blogospher" as evidence of this. As a reaction to the percieved bias (in the general sense of the word) in popular media, weblogs are beginning to establish themselves as legitimate news alternatives.
I think that is the power of the Internet. The physical medium is not very important any more. Because you have a broadcast tower or printing press does not guarentee you a news monopoly anymore. The instant dissemination of the Internet is breaking down (or at least challenging) the old barriers of entry. The same is true for the rest of the content industry. We all have CD burners. What need is there for a stamping plant? That's what makes the FS/OS model a viable alternative to the corporate machine. By severly lowering distribution costs, the players are forced to compete on product.
I feel it is only a matter of time before the creativity is so far encumbered by the restrictions of the corporate world that it will flow to other, more open channels. You might have to give up the polish, as we reinvent the latest shading technologies or explosion sequences, but we will always have the creativity.
If nothing else, this angle desevers consideration.
Re:Capitalism to the rescue (Score:3, Interesting)
Chances are, if things such as renting and sales of used media are going to be stopped, it's going to have to be stopped as a piracy measure. See, when you purchase something used, or rent it, the company who produced it gets practically nothing from you. Maybe the renter or the used seller has a legal right to sell it, but you have no legal right to use it.
And if you don't want to purchase a game straight out without trying it first, just find another entertainment medium. Isn't that the capitalist way?
MMORPGs: it's already here (a SW:Galaxies story) (Score:2, Interesting)
Blockbusters bring it on themselves (Score:3, Interesting)
Even in the digital age, as consumers we still need an 'online store' to distribute the downloads available. Sure we could end up with a whole load of proprietary servers, one for each games publisher, or even one per developer - however as we have seen recently in the downloadable music market, iTunes [apple.com] is winning in the market because it has the largest catalogue available. People are busy, and will always want 'one stop shops'.
Blockbusters, as the world's largest rental brand, should be ruling this market. They should have the most experience, in getting people to part with their $$$ for the right to play for a period of time - and then securing repeat business again and again. Having a load of 'bricks and mortar' stores is not what makes their business tick - it IS letting people pay less than an outright purchase, for a reduced set of rights.
If they fail to see what it is that makes their business unique, and how to innovate and apply that to the new online age, they deserve the fate that they will surely get.
One reason this is taking off... (Score:5, Interesting)
I mean, Super Mario Brothers 3 sold millions of copies at $50 each in 1988, and today Grand Theft Auto 3 and VC sold millions of copies each at $50 each.
$50 x 1,000,000 in 1988>$50 x 1,000,000 in 2004
So, not that I support this (which I don't), but the game companies haven't upped the price of games in 15 years or so, so they're just trying to make more $ in other ways. (In fact, I remember in the early-mid 90's there was a temporary trend in which games were sold for $59.99 - I remember pre-ordering Rebel Assault II for that much).
Re:Physcal media is dead, long live the bit... (Score:5, Interesting)
The crackers can still crack the hash, as much as they would like; they'll come up with keys that should work... But the trick is this:
The publisher stores in it's database all of the keys that are shipped with products. While any number of keys may actually allow the product to install, when it phones home, your key has to match a key in the database.
This technique is MUCH harder to beat than a regular key system--partially because at any point you can be assured that a REAL customer is probably using his REAL key. And that's okay. Most of the services that use this technique are online games, and some of them have a single player element that can be explored whilst offline. From my perspective, it allows you a good look at what the game is like online, so you can decide if it's worth it to buy.
And, y'know? I'm fine with keys. If you wanna play, you gotta pay.
Missing the point? (Score:3, Interesting)
EXACTLY. (Score:3, Interesting)
The ONLY way that regular games could ever stop being produced is if hardly anyone were interested in them anymore. It could happen, but if it did, very few people would be complaining about it, and they would sound like OLD CURMUDGEONS.
Re:Physcal media is dead, long live the bit... (Score:1, Interesting)
If the game just HAS to have a CD in, I'll use Alcohol 120% to make an image, and put it on hard disk.
Disk space is cheap compared to time spent swapping CDs in and out when you're in the zone.
Re:Physcal media is dead, long live the bit... (Score:5, Interesting)
1111111 = 7 7/7 = 1 valid key
7777777 = 49 49/7 = 7 valid key
6667888 = 49 49/7 = 7 valid key
1234567 = 28 28/7 = 4 valid key
4432453 = 25 25/7 = 3.571... Not a valid key
This works for the older MS products that have the 3-7 digit keys, not sure about the 5-5-5-5-5 digit keys.
Re:I think its unlikely (Score:3, Interesting)
I really can't see this being the case. People like to have libraries of things that belong to them, especially where the media they're collecting is rare.
A friend of mine collects obscure horror and b-movies. He has two walls of a room covered with videotapes, most of which I've never even heard of. Even if a cable company thought it would be profitable to host all of that content (which is incredibly unlikely), do you think he'd pay a monthly fee to access it instead?
I like to go back and play old videogames years down the road. I can't see that being a possibility with this kind of system either, since the hardware that it required wouldn't be supported, or maybe the game wouldn't hosted anymore because it wasn't profitable.
There are a lot of companies buying into the "thin media client" model right now, but I don't see it working as a replacement for buying physical media. I'm sure it will mean the end of rental stores, but that's something else entirely.
I think this is beside the point (Score:3, Interesting)
My friend recently purchased an Xbox and went on a binge on aquiring games. I thought I'd jump in with him and help him get some good ones. I spent about 2 hours on the Xbox website purveying all released and announced games. Only one piqued my interest [xboxaddict.com], and its been (wrongly) accused of racial insensativity. Every other game with some potential was part of a series and for the most part, not up to par with the original.
Even the games for PC are having the same issues. Doom 3, Half-Life 2, Counter-strike 2, Starcraft 2, GTA 5 are the only games I am looking forward to and I don't expect them to move the bar all that far. On the MMORPG front there is very little innovation even announced since Shadowbane's dismal showing. Sony's control of the MMORPG market certainly dims the future on this front.
I'm sure a few games will surprise me but I predict a dark ages period in true innovation for the next ten years or maybe even until a happy mix of movies and games can be made, which is a long way off.
Re:Physcal media is dead, long live the bit... (Score:2, Interesting)
This is a crude example of it, but it should be enough to give you a basic idea :
A 4 letter CD key. a + b + c + d Must Equal 30.
Letters A through J are 1 through 10. Letters K through T are -1 through -10. Letters U through Z are prime numbers 3, 5, 7, 11, and 13.
Once you figure this formula out any 7 year old kid who knows simple programmer can create a CD key generator. Course, this is fake and most CD keys are based on 16 characters, which includes both numbers and letters. On top of this, the formula isn't exactly posted on the company's website so how people manage to figure out the formula is beyond me. Thanks to modern computers, as long as CD keys are restricted to 36 choices (26 letters, 10 numbers) CD keys will ALWAYS be cracked.
The industry are too smart for this (Score:3, Interesting)
Consider that id eventually opened the source of both Doom and Quake, and that originally these two games were their flagship moneymakers. In doing so, in my mind id proved three things:- (a) That they'd already made more money than they could need or know what to do with, (b) That once they had established their livelihoods, that they wished to contribute to the future of first-person gaming, and (c) That although earning a living was important to them, (we all need to eat and pay the bills) finding a means of expression for their phenomonal levels of intelligence and creativity, contributing a form of entertainment to the world, and enjoying themselves in the process was the primary motivation in persuing their enterprise.
We need to remember that perhaps unlike the RIAA or MPAA, the gaming industry is populated by some of the most intelligent, lucid, and conscious human beings alive today. Active copy protection is in place for the first 2-3 years of a game, because yes, games do take time and money to make, (if you know anything about the industry, you'll know it's typically large amounts of both) and the people involved want to get something back for their efforts. After that time however (typically after a game hits "platinum" status sales wise) and it is assumed that no more income can be reasonably expected from the title, then in most cases the copy protection is removed, and in some instances the source of the game itself is opened, as we have seen. The copy protection of both the original Unreal Tournament and Half-Life was removed in later patches.
It might be true that Microsoft are planning on making their own products more closed and crippled, but in looking at this, you need to look at the history of individual companies. Fascist behaviour is par for the course in Microsoft's case in particular, but just because that's the norm for their behaviour, that doesn't mean it's that way for everybody.
I can't emphasise enough that (at least in my opinion) id and Epic represent two of the most intellectually and creatively gifted groups of human beings that I've ever heard of. The RIAA might be unreasoning, jackbooted idiots, but these two companies aren't, and that being the case they know that binding up the mod scene and doing other such things would only be shooting themselves in the foot. After all, let us not forget that Steven Polge, Epic's own AI programmer, was initially recognised due to a modification he made for the first Quake game, the Reaper Bot. The gaming industry trying to kill modding would be a case of them biting the hand that feeds them, and I believe they would be highly conscious of that fact.