PC Gaming Isn't Going Anywhere

Grimrod writes "Dave Long, one of the editors of GamerDad, has a unique look at the PC as a game platform and how it gets forgotten among the constant barrage of console gunfire in his latest Long Shot column. From the article, 'It might never be like 1998 again on the computer, the year that PC gaming was probably at its very peak, but it's far better than analysts and even armchair soothsayers would have you believe. I got caught up in the hype myself to a certain extent. I started to believe I didn't need the computer for games. Now that I'm back on the inside with current hardware, I realize again how dumb that idea was.'"

Re:PC Gaming Is The Ghetto Of The Game Dev World

[WhatAmIDoingHere]

Right, because Warhammer 40k was crap from a noname dev house. So is Empire Earth. And Age of Empires. And the Civ series. And, oh, that little game that like 4 people play.. what's it called? Oh yeah.. COUNTER STRIKE.

Battlefield 2, The Sims, Doom 3, Quake 4 (soon), Deus Ex, Starcraft, Warcraft 3, Diablo.. the list goes on and on. Crack a cover on PCGamer and there's 15 new quality games a month. You can't swing a dead cat in the gaming industry without knocking down 4 shelves of quality games for the PC.

The Future of PC Games Is and Always Has Been...

[SteevR]

...the independent developer community. Folks like Carmack, Romero, Garriot and many others developed games on the various personal computer platforms of their day on a shoestring. These individuals are the ones that, for the most part, made PC gaming great.

In terms of a lot of indie content not being "AAA" grade these days... a lot of the great indie content people seem to be chained by their balls into mod work. If these guys realized their own talent and struck out on their own with a low-cost engine like Torque, or an open source option like CrystalSpace, Nebula, or Rygax, we would see far more successful indie game companies selling their work.

Console manufacturers make money off of these guys through buyouts or licensing once they get really successful. Eventually many companies become "exclusive partners", get locked into multiple-title deals, or otherwise lose their independence from the Big Publisher model of game business. An exception of course is Id, which we all know has a positively unique management situation. Valve also is regaining some cajones in this department.

So there are always indies, and indies are what make PC gaming greatest- past, present, future.

Right

[Sv-Manowar]

He's right, as most peoples PC's are being continuously upgraded and replaced, the market for PC games continues to stay steady, whereas with consoles only being replaced every 7-8 years, they gradually loose their selling power in the couple of years before they are replaced

PC gaming might not be as strong as it once was, but it will be stable for a long time to come

Re:Huh? PC gaming has been

[MuNansen]

yes, Ion Storm were the developers that ruined DX2, but I think it's the Xbox's limitations that forced them to make the wrong decisions. First off, I don't think DX2 could ever meet the level of uniqueness DX had, since there was already DX, so they were bound for an inferior sequel right off the bat. They did make a pretty interesting story, and the graphics/physics system was ahead of its time.

BUT, Ion Storm was forced to remove the more endearing gameplay mechanics because of the knowledge it was being ported to console. For one, the Xbox's physical memory is quite paltry. There is no way that the Xbox could handle the enormous, wide-open levels of the first game unless they settled for a sub-par graphics presentation. Which of course, no one ever stands for anymore (WoW is about the only other major game than DX1 that put substance and style over power and polygons when it comes to graphics).

The other thing was that the game had to be controller-friendly. So they created a dumbed-down inventory system with none of the depth that made the first game's item manipulation fun. They also dumbed-down the character building. The first DX's character building was so in-depth and varied, and had such a strong influence on how you played the game, that it had really combined the best parts of both FPSes and RPGs. DX2, though, just had some arbitrary skills to improve that did effect the game, but not to the level of the first.

So both the limitations of the hardware, and the limitations of the audience of the consoles put very large restrictions on the development of the second Deus Ex. Yes GTA was done beautifully on all systems, but DX isn't GTA. GTA is nowhere near as complex as the first DX. A great Deus Ex sequel could only have been done for PC.