Gears of War's online cheat detection features/ expired certificate disables game

[BladeVenom]

Originally posted by: ShawnD1
Lots of retarded statements going on here. MS will never abandon PC gaming since people in this forum and several others repeatedly state over and over that PC games are the only reason they still use Windows. "I'm almost switched over to Linux except...."

What Microsoft owned game studios are still making PC games?

They recently shut down ACES Studio, which as far as I know was the last MS game studio still developing PC games. All the rest have been shut down or switched to making games for their console. As far as I can tell MS is done with making PC games.

 

[you2]

Kind of pisses me off. MS buys up a lot of good pc production studios and then shuts them down. Sort of a pattern with other things MS has done in the past...

Originally posted by: BladeVenom

Originally posted by: ShawnD1
Lots of retarded statements going on here. MS will never abandon PC gaming since people in this forum and several others repeatedly state over and over that PC games are the only reason they still use Windows. "I'm almost switched over to Linux except...."

What Microsoft owned game studios are still making PC games?

They recently shut down ACES Studio, which as far as I know was the last MS game studio still developing PC games. All the rest have been shut down or switched to making games for their console. As far as I can tell MS is done with making PC games.

 

[mindcycle]

I for one could care less if MS owned game studios are abandoning the PC market. Gives a little more room to the other great developers out there. There are some great games coming out this year for the PC. Here's a small list. http://www.1up.com/do/feature?cId=3172529

It's obvious that big companies concerned only with profit are moving to consoles, but don't worry, PC gaming isn't going anywhere.

 

[Oyeve]

Pretty much why I stopped buying new PC games. Last game I bought was the Euro version of the Witcher and UT3. And even stopped playing because of so much BS DRM on the updates for The Witcher.

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: shingletingle
No they haven't. In fact, they are designing Windows 7 with PC gaming a priority.

How so? By upgrading DirectX? If you haven't noticed, DX support is self-serving beyond any intent to directly support PC gaming, as it helps sell their OS. MS has no stake in PC gaming hardware beyond some peripherals, but DX directly differentiates their product from competitor's software products. Its kind of like owning the arena, but having no direct stake in any of the teams or competitors.

Also, DirectX is the programming API for the only gaming hardware MS does care about, the Xbox. Given the Windows-based PC will still be the development platform for XBox games using DirectX, there's always going to be incentive for MS to continue supporting DX. Which is another big reason for MS to control the spec, it allows easier support for games run on their OS.

Originally posted by: ShawnD1
Lots of retarded statements going on here. MS will never abandon PC gaming since people in this forum and several others repeatedly state over and over that PC games are the only reason they still use Windows. "I'm almost switched over to Linux except...."

Again, supporting DirectX and abandoning PC gaming are very different initiatives. Its obvious MS has abandoned their PC Gaming business and actions speak louder than words. The first shot was fired when they chose to develop the XBox instead of putting those resources into PC gaming.

Look at the Windows Release Schedule on Wiki. Compare the number of games released over the years compared to the last few. You have a single title released in 2008, Zoo Tycoon 2 compared to 6-8 average in the past. Now compare that to the 11 MS produced titles released in 2008 for the 360. Sure its Wiki and probably not 100% accurate, but you get the idea.

Notable canned franchises include: Mechwarrior, FlightSim, Age of Empires, Asheron's Call, Dungeon Siege. All of the studios involved have also been closed down, most recently ACES (FlightSim) and Ensemble (AoE) this last month. FASA Interactive, the studio behind Mechwarrior, was actually transformed into an XBox-only studio first with MechAssault, then charged to make the horrible platform shooter Shadowrun before they got canned.

MS is still making games and funding dev houses, just not for the PC. All their resources for producing video games are clearly flowing through the XBox now. It became clear MS had no interest in PC gaming with their exclusive deals and its even more obvious now that those exclusives are actually staying exclusive.

Still, I think the most obvious sign MS doesn't care about PC gaming any longer was the recent layoff of Chris Early, the head of Games for Windows Live and probably the last guy in Redmond that actually cared about the PC as a gaming platform. Shack News Interview with Chris Early. He goes through what went wrong with Windows and what they hoped to change in the future, looks like most of those ideas will never get realized now. Microsoft says otherwise, but again, actions speak louder than words and I'm not convinced.

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: mindcycle
I for one could care less if MS owned game studios are abandoning the PC market. Gives a little more room to the other great developers out there. There are some great games coming out this year for the PC. Here's a small list. http://www.1up.com/do/feature?cId=3172529

It's obvious that big companies concerned only with profit are moving to consoles, but don't worry, PC gaming isn't going anywhere.

Of course MS by itself isn't a huge issue, but similar is happening across the entire landscape of PC gaming. Some of this attrition is normal, and something even console success couldn't prevent, however, I'd be shocked if 50% of the dev studios were still in business from anyone's Top 10 game list from the last 10 years.

You can say you don't care each time a studio goes under, but the reality of it is, many of the studios that produced some of the best games on the PC are no longer in business. Even MS Game Studios, which I don't think many considered great by any means, produced at least 3 beloved franchises over the years with FlightSim, AoE, and MechWarrior (3 and 4 and MechCommander 1 and 2).

 

[mindcycle]

Originally posted by: chizow
You can say you don't care each time a studio goes under, but the reality of it is, many of the studios that produced some of the best games on the PC are no longer in business. Even MS Game Studios, which I don't think many considered great by any means, produced at least 3 beloved franchises over the years with FlightSim, AoE, and MechWarrior (3 and 4 and MechCommander 1 and 2).

Happens with any industry. If you were a PC gamer in the late 90's, you probably had a 3dfx graphics card as they were the big dogs at the time. ..but as the industry changed they couldn't keep up and went under. That doesn't mean you can't go out and buy a really good graphics card today though does it?

The naysayers can continue predicting the demise of the platform, but the numbers just aren't backing up that claim. You can look at articles like this: http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/56794 ..and claim that PC gaming is dying. But look at the amount of money that was spent on retail PC games in 08.. $701 million is still a lot of revenue, and that number doesn't account for online sales whatsoever.

Just because a couple dev houses have closed shop doesn't mean new ones won't open in their place. There is still lots of money to be made in the PC games market, and that isn't going to change anytime soon.

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: mindcycle
Happens with any industry. If you were a PC gamer in the late 90's, you probably had a 3dfx graphics card as they were the big dogs at the time. ..but as the industry changed they couldn't keep up and went under. That doesn't mean you can't go out and buy a really good graphics card today though does it?

Its not the same in every industry though, look at the reaction to firms like Bear Stearns or Lehman Bros and the panic they created. Sure companies fail and new companies rise in their ashes all the time, however, in the PC gaming industry most studios are 1 or 2 flops away from insolvency at any given time.

As for the hardware comparison, you can still get a good graphics card today, but you certainly have fewer options than you had before, which is similar to what is going to happen in the PC industry. You'll still have quality titles to choose from, you'll just have less of them.

The naysayers can continue predicting the demise of the platform, but the numbers just aren't backing up that claim. You can look at articles like this: http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/56794 ..and claim that PC gaming is dying. But look at the amount of money that was spent on retail PC games in 08.. $701 million is still a lot of revenue, and that number doesn't account for online sales whatsoever.

And iirc those 700 million figures are down from the 900 million last year, the 1.1 billion the year before etc. While some of that is going to be digital distributions and subscription revenue, we won't know for any certainty until those figures are released.

Meanwhile, there is no doubt that long-standing dev houses with proven track records for producing quality titles are either closing shop or focusing on the console going forward. These are facts that cannot be reasonably disputed. Sure you may have new dev houses step up and take their place but you can't reasonably expect better quality and you certainly can't expect the continuation of the franchises attached to the closed publishers/dev houses.

Just because a couple dev houses have closed shop doesn't mean new ones won't open in their place. There is still lots of money to be made in the PC games market, and that isn't going to change anytime soon.

And those new dev houses will be 1 flop away from closing shop as well. There's certainly money still left in the PC games market, just not as much as there used to be and certainly less than on the consoles. Not to mention much of that market is tied up and overstated with the likes of WoW and The Sims dominating sales charts.

 

[mindcycle]

Originally posted by: chizow
Meanwhile, there is no doubt that long-standing dev houses with proven track records for producing quality titles are either closing shop or focusing on the console going forward. These are facts that cannot be reasonably disputed. Sure you may have new dev houses step up and take their place but you can't reasonably expect better quality and you certainly can't expect the continuation of the franchises attached to the closed publishers/dev houses.

I have little interest in arguing such a moot point with you of all people. You can continue your naysayers quest, i'll continue looking forward to some awesome PC titles in '09 and beyond.

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: mindcycle

Originally posted by: chizow
Meanwhile, there is no doubt that long-standing dev houses with proven track records for producing quality titles are either closing shop or focusing on the console going forward. These are facts that cannot be reasonably disputed. Sure you may have new dev houses step up and take their place but you can't reasonably expect better quality and you certainly can't expect the continuation of the franchises attached to the closed publishers/dev houses.

I have little interest in arguing such a moot point with you of all people. You can continue your naysayers quest, i'll continue looking forward to some awesome PC titles in '09 and beyond.

Just not from Microsoft (or any of the other dev houses that closed their doors in 2008) :thumbsup:

 

[Maximilian]

Originally posted by: Jules

Originally posted by: Maximilian

Originally posted by: Jules

Originally posted by: chizow

Originally posted by: lupi
Was that statement really from Cliff B. (A dumbass) or our good fellow cheesewiz.

Yep, Cliffy B said it numerous times as the reason why we're not getting GoW2 on the PC. Many of the "fathers of teh PC FPS gamez" like Tim Sweeney, Mark Rein, John Carmack etc have said similar over the last few years, that they're shifting focus to the console first, PC second or not at all. Its further echoed in the actions of various PC devs and publishers that have either closed their doors entirely or shifted their development focus to the consoles in order to survive. Just look at the recent closings and layoffs from the likes of MS, ACES (Flight Sim) and Ensemble (AoE, etc), were both closed this last month, as was the head of GFWLive. MS has basically said they're done with PC gaming completely, a trend that looks to be gaining traction in the industry.

I hope not. I just built my rig.

Theres still starcraft II and diablo III and half life 2 EP3 and probably a half life 3 to look forward to.

Nice!! Anything else you can recommend?

Well heres the really great thing about starcraft II, there will be 3 of them, a terran game, zerg game, and protoss game, they couldnt fit it all into one game so theres gonna be 3 starcraft II games just like GTA III, Vice City and San Andreas kinda thing. The terran game is the one being released in 2009.

If you liked bioshock or mass effect they have sequals coming out, mass effects storyline was amazing, right up there with the stuff blizzard thinks up. Theres a supreme commander 2 in the works as well. Oh and a new company of heros expansion will be released soonish.

 

[ShawnD1]

Originally posted by: jbourne77
Now honestly, I don't know one way or the other whether MS cares about gaming in Windows (which is why I asked for links instead of baseless speculation), but the notion that they are sticking with it because of guys like you and me and the looming threat of us switching to Linux is pretty laughable.

The only thing that really sets the various operating systems apart is games. When my friend had an Apple PowerPC, it did everything that my Windows computer did except games. It used the same printer, it could use MS Office, it accessed the same internet, it crashed as often, and it even cost about the same (if you buy an OEM computer of similar quality). For normal people who use their computer for normal office type things like writing letters and balancing numbers, an Apple computer is a feasible alternative. That one thing it always seems to come down to is games. I've always stuck with Windows because it supported games. My friend with the PowerPC switched from Mac with a gaming console back to Windows simply because of the games. My brother bought a laptop this year and he picked a Dell because it could play some of his RTS games; he paid about $1300 for that computer which is more than enough to buy a Mac that would do everything but games.

Gaming really is a big deal. MS created DirectX so game developers could have a complete set of tools to use when making a game for Windows. If MS didn't give a shit about gaming, they would not have created DirectX. Commercial software like AutoCAD and Maya still use OpenGL over Direct3D because Direct3D was specifically intended for gaming.

Why does the Xbox use DirectX? It's not like programming the game would be harder if the Xbox used OpenGL for graphics, and games are made "exclusive" due to contracts, so why would MS use DirectX? It's so a developer can easily port Xbox games to the PC. MS does not make any money on PC games, so why would they care if their OS has games or not? Oh right, it's because people who buy computers care if their computer can play games or not.

Another question is why MS keeps making game deals that include the PC. Fallout 3 has exclusive content for the Xbox 360 and the PC. Bioshock was exclusive to Xbox and PC. Again, MS does not get paid for each copy of Bioshock sold. They probably don't even care if it sells on the PC. What they care about is if it's available on the PC because gaming on the PC is extremely important when it comes to preventing people from switching to other operating systems.


http://www.zdnetasia.com/news/...044164,62043879,00.htm
"Apple's operating system is gaining ground on Microsoft Windows, with second-quarter results showing the company inching close to a 10 percent market share in the United States.
[...]
Microsoft is working on a multiyear, megamillion-dollar marketing push for Windows and, as the numbers show, it can't come soon enough."

Such as Xbox-PC exclusive content for Fallout 3? Games for Windows? Bioshock on Xbox-PC? Updating DirectX graphics and sound all the time? Preparing a DirectX GPGPU alternative to OpenCL?

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: mindcycle

Originally posted by: chizow
Meanwhile, there is no doubt that long-standing dev houses with proven track records for producing quality titles are either closing shop or focusing on the console going forward. These are facts that cannot be reasonably disputed. Sure you may have new dev houses step up and take their place but you can't reasonably expect better quality and you certainly can't expect the continuation of the franchises attached to the closed publishers/dev houses.

I have little interest in arguing such a moot point with you of all people. You can continue your naysayers quest, i'll continue looking forward to some awesome PC titles in '09 and beyond.

There's a concession if I ever heard one. Chizow stated numerous points that were valid and grounded in facts and cold hard numbers. If Chizow is a naysayer, then you're an ostrich.

 

[mindcycle]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: mindcycle

Originally posted by: chizow
Meanwhile, there is no doubt that long-standing dev houses with proven track records for producing quality titles are either closing shop or focusing on the console going forward. These are facts that cannot be reasonably disputed. Sure you may have new dev houses step up and take their place but you can't reasonably expect better quality and you certainly can't expect the continuation of the franchises attached to the closed publishers/dev houses.

I have little interest in arguing such a moot point with you of all people. You can continue your naysayers quest, i'll continue looking forward to some awesome PC titles in '09 and beyond.

There's a concession if I ever heard one. Chizow stated numerous points that were valid and grounded in facts and cold hard numbers. If Chizow is a naysayer, then you're an ostrich.

Yeah, well if you want to try and convince chizow of anything other than his narrow point of view then be my guest. Just be prepared for at least 6 more pages of "valid" facts.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: mindcycle

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: mindcycle

Originally posted by: chizow
Meanwhile, there is no doubt that long-standing dev houses with proven track records for producing quality titles are either closing shop or focusing on the console going forward. These are facts that cannot be reasonably disputed. Sure you may have new dev houses step up and take their place but you can't reasonably expect better quality and you certainly can't expect the continuation of the franchises attached to the closed publishers/dev houses.

I have little interest in arguing such a moot point with you of all people. You can continue your naysayers quest, i'll continue looking forward to some awesome PC titles in '09 and beyond.

There's a concession if I ever heard one. Chizow stated numerous points that were valid and grounded in facts and cold hard numbers. If Chizow is a naysayer, then you're an ostrich.

Yeah, well if you want to try and convince chizow of anything other than his narrow point of view then be my guest. Just be prepared for at least 6 more pages of "valid" facts.

I'm not sure how you're being any more open-minded than he is. From an outsider's perspective (who's interested in being convinced one way or the other), he presents some pretty convincing evidence and reasoning to back his claims. You've offered nothing but platitudes.

Just calling it as I see it.

 

[Maximilian]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: mindcycle

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: mindcycle

Originally posted by: chizow
Meanwhile, there is no doubt that long-standing dev houses with proven track records for producing quality titles are either closing shop or focusing on the console going forward. These are facts that cannot be reasonably disputed. Sure you may have new dev houses step up and take their place but you can't reasonably expect better quality and you certainly can't expect the continuation of the franchises attached to the closed publishers/dev houses.

I have little interest in arguing such a moot point with you of all people. You can continue your naysayers quest, i'll continue looking forward to some awesome PC titles in '09 and beyond.

There's a concession if I ever heard one. Chizow stated numerous points that were valid and grounded in facts and cold hard numbers. If Chizow is a naysayer, then you're an ostrich.

Yeah, well if you want to try and convince chizow of anything other than his narrow point of view then be my guest. Just be prepared for at least 6 more pages of "valid" facts.

I'm not sure how you're being any more open-minded than he is. From an outsider's perspective (who's interested in being convinced one way or the other), he presents some pretty convincing evidence and reasoning to back his claims. You've offered nothing but platitudes.

Just calling it as I see it.

No seriously, chizow cant just agree to disagree or anything like that, everything has to be dragged off topic for many many pages before enough people disagree with him that he gives up. Im with mindcycle i wouldnt bother arguing with him either, its a waste of time, hes too stuck in his rut.

 

[Canai]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: mindcycle

Originally posted by: chizow
Meanwhile, there is no doubt that long-standing dev houses with proven track records for producing quality titles are either closing shop or focusing on the console going forward. These are facts that cannot be reasonably disputed. Sure you may have new dev houses step up and take their place but you can't reasonably expect better quality and you certainly can't expect the continuation of the franchises attached to the closed publishers/dev houses.

I have little interest in arguing such a moot point with you of all people. You can continue your naysayers quest, i'll continue looking forward to some awesome PC titles in '09 and beyond.

There's a concession if I ever heard one. Chizow stated numerous points that were valid and grounded in facts and cold hard numbers. If Chizow is a naysayer, then you're an ostrich.

Great dev houses have been closing ever since the beginning (Black Isle anyone?) - and on top of that we're in an economically unstable time. Devs have never made all that much off of their titles - most of the per unit sale goes to the middle men, mainly the publisher. Essentially what is happening is the mega publishers have set an industry standard of profits, and if those profits margins are not maintained, the game is a 'failure.'

Take Crysis for example - the game that piracy ruined. Despite selling enough copies in the first few months to qualify it as an AAA game, it didn't live up to the projected profits and was deemed a victim of piracy by EA. So instead of continuing updates and patches for Crysis, Crytek canceled patches and released the fixes in the DRM encrusted Warhead. The engine updates and tweaks should have been a patch for Crysis, and the expansion should have been the new levels and gameplay elements, but since it's difficult to employ the uber SecuROM on titles that have already been released, Crysis was abandoned which leaves people - like me - who loved Crysis' more open-ended gameplay with a broken, laggy game and no hope of ever having Warhead's improvements.

Games are no longer about gameplay, customer satisfaction, innovation, or quality. They are now about one thing: money. PC gamers are a picky, fussy, whiny bunch, who talk with their wallets, so the mega publishers started targeting the boob tube generation. You can't pawn a $40 console port POS game to PC gamers, but stick the same game in a shiny box and sell it for $60 for the PS3 or 360 and you've got instant profits since the buyers, for the most part, have little or no idea what they're getting into (aka whiny console tweens and drunken frat boys).

So you want to blame piracy? Go ahead. But you are wrong in holding piracy as the main factor, and you are wrong in pushing for more DRM. Is piracy a contributing factor? Sure, but by no means is it the only or even the main factor. Developing for the wide variety of hardware configurations is a MUCH larger factor, since it is much, much cheaper to make a game with one or two specific hardware setups in mind.

Also, ripped versions of the console games are usually online much faster than the PC variants.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: Maximilian

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: mindcycle

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: mindcycle

Originally posted by: chizow
Meanwhile, there is no doubt that long-standing dev houses with proven track records for producing quality titles are either closing shop or focusing on the console going forward. These are facts that cannot be reasonably disputed. Sure you may have new dev houses step up and take their place but you can't reasonably expect better quality and you certainly can't expect the continuation of the franchises attached to the closed publishers/dev houses.

I have little interest in arguing such a moot point with you of all people. You can continue your naysayers quest, i'll continue looking forward to some awesome PC titles in '09 and beyond.

There's a concession if I ever heard one. Chizow stated numerous points that were valid and grounded in facts and cold hard numbers. If Chizow is a naysayer, then you're an ostrich.

Yeah, well if you want to try and convince chizow of anything other than his narrow point of view then be my guest. Just be prepared for at least 6 more pages of "valid" facts.

I'm not sure how you're being any more open-minded than he is. From an outsider's perspective (who's interested in being convinced one way or the other), he presents some pretty convincing evidence and reasoning to back his claims. You've offered nothing but platitudes.

Just calling it as I see it.

No seriously, chizow cant just agree to disagree or anything like that, everything has to be dragged off topic for many many pages before enough people disagree with him that he gives up. Im with mindcycle i wouldnt bother arguing with him either, its a waste of time, hes too stuck in his rut.

What's the point of debating if you're not committed to the argument? Like I said, chizow made some very good points. Maybe he's not "worth arguing with" because it's too difficult to dispute his points.

I'm a PC gamer and want to see it succeed as a platform, but everything chizow stated is true. Just because we may not like what he's saying doesn't mean he's wrong.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: Canai

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: mindcycle

Originally posted by: chizow
Meanwhile, there is no doubt that long-standing dev houses with proven track records for producing quality titles are either closing shop or focusing on the console going forward. These are facts that cannot be reasonably disputed. Sure you may have new dev houses step up and take their place but you can't reasonably expect better quality and you certainly can't expect the continuation of the franchises attached to the closed publishers/dev houses.

I have little interest in arguing such a moot point with you of all people. You can continue your naysayers quest, i'll continue looking forward to some awesome PC titles in '09 and beyond.

There's a concession if I ever heard one. Chizow stated numerous points that were valid and grounded in facts and cold hard numbers. If Chizow is a naysayer, then you're an ostrich.

Great dev houses have been closing ever since the beginning (Black Isle anyone?) - and on top of that we're in an economically unstable time. Devs have never made all that much off of their titles - most of the per unit sale goes to the middle men, mainly the publisher. Essentially what is happening is the mega publishers have set an industry standard of profits, and if those profits margins are not maintained, the game is a 'failure.'

Take Crysis for example - the game that piracy ruined. Despite selling enough copies in the first few months to qualify it as an AAA game, it didn't live up to the projected profits and was deemed a victim of piracy by EA. So instead of continuing updates and patches for Crysis, Crytek canceled patches and released the fixes in the DRM encrusted Warhead. The engine updates and tweaks should have been a patch for Crysis, and the expansion should have been the new levels and gameplay elements, but since it's difficult to employ the uber SecuROM on titles that have already been released, Crysis was abandoned which leaves people - like me - who loved Crysis' more open-ended gameplay with a broken, laggy game and no hope of ever having Warhead's improvements.

Games are no longer about gameplay, customer satisfaction, innovation, or quality. They are now about one thing: money. PC gamers are a picky, fussy, whiny bunch, who talk with their wallets, so the mega publishers started targeting the boob tube generation. You can't pawn a $40 console port POS game to PC gamers, but stick the same game in a shiny box and sell it for $60 for the PS3 or 360 and you've got instant profits since the buyers, for the most part, have little or no idea what they're getting into (aka whiny console tweens and drunken frat boys).

So you want to blame piracy? Go ahead. But you are wrong in holding piracy as the main factor, and you are wrong in pushing for more DRM. Is piracy a contributing factor? Sure, but by no means is it the only or even the main factor. Developing for the wide variety of hardware configurations is a MUCH larger factor, since it is much, much cheaper to make a game with one or two specific hardware setups in mind.

Also, ripped versions of the console games are usually online much faster than the PC variants.

^ This rings true, as well.

 

[mindcycle]

Originally posted by: jbourne77
I'm not sure how you're being any more open-minded than he is. From an outsider's perspective (who's interested in being convinced one way or the other), he presents some pretty convincing evidence and reasoning to back his claims. You've offered nothing but platitudes.

Just calling it as I see it.

Again, i'm not interested in 6 more pages debating him. Look back through some old topics if you want to see why.

My main point was that just because MS pulled out of the PC games market, doesn't mean that PC gaming is dying. Just because profit margins have gone down for "retail" game sales, doesn't mean that either. There is still money to be made, and if the big corporations pull out of the industry it might not be such a bad thing as it leaves room for others to take their place. Maybe it will push the PC games industry towards developing some decent non-consolized games again that people actually want to buy. I don't know. All I know is that PC games aren't going to die off. Console generations have come and gone, but PC games have been there through all of that and I don't see that changing anytime soon.

 

[Maximilian]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: Maximilian

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: mindcycle

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: mindcycle

Originally posted by: chizow
Meanwhile, there is no doubt that long-standing dev houses with proven track records for producing quality titles are either closing shop or focusing on the console going forward. These are facts that cannot be reasonably disputed. Sure you may have new dev houses step up and take their place but you can't reasonably expect better quality and you certainly can't expect the continuation of the franchises attached to the closed publishers/dev houses.

I have little interest in arguing such a moot point with you of all people. You can continue your naysayers quest, i'll continue looking forward to some awesome PC titles in '09 and beyond.

There's a concession if I ever heard one. Chizow stated numerous points that were valid and grounded in facts and cold hard numbers. If Chizow is a naysayer, then you're an ostrich.

Yeah, well if you want to try and convince chizow of anything other than his narrow point of view then be my guest. Just be prepared for at least 6 more pages of "valid" facts.

I'm not sure how you're being any more open-minded than he is. From an outsider's perspective (who's interested in being convinced one way or the other), he presents some pretty convincing evidence and reasoning to back his claims. You've offered nothing but platitudes.

Just calling it as I see it.

No seriously, chizow cant just agree to disagree or anything like that, everything has to be dragged off topic for many many pages before enough people disagree with him that he gives up. Im with mindcycle i wouldnt bother arguing with him either, its a waste of time, hes too stuck in his rut.

What's the point of debating if you're not committed to the argument? Like I said, chizow made some very good points. Maybe he's not "worth arguing with" because it's too difficult to dispute his points.

I'm a PC gamer and want to see it succeed as a platform, but everything chizow stated is true. Just because we may not like what he's saying doesn't mean he's wrong.

No hes repetitive and boring.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: mindcycle
My main point was that just because MS pulled out of the PC games market, doesn't mean that PC gaming is dying.

Originally posted by: mindcycle
Just because profit margins have gone down for "retail" game sales, doesn't mean that either.

So what do those things mean? Nothing? In plain and simple terms, the PC game market is shrinking. We all know that and it's irrefutable (fewer games + smaller dollar share = shrinking), so at this point, the only real topic worthwhile debating is trying to predict how much it will shrink and when will it stop shrinking. Arguing over the rest is like arguing over whether the sky is blue.

Originally posted by: mindcycle
There is still money to be made, and if the big corporations pull out of the industry it might not be such a bad thing as it leaves room for others to take their place.

I don't disagree at all here. As long as there is a market, someone will answer the call. The real debate there about quality and quantity. There's a crap-ton of crappy games on consoles, but there's also a fair share of good ones. In the PC market, it's all relative: smaller crap-ton of games, but also much smaller selection of good games.

I'm not convinced that "big corporations" were ever keeping the "little guy" down in the first place. Unlike the OS or browser market, getting into the games market is pretty trivial if you have a good idea and the talent to make it real. The market barriers that exist in other areas of computing don't exist in the game market. If I have a good game idea and the talent/people to make it happen, it doesn't matter one iota if EA, MS, etc., are in business or not.

There's not a damn thing they can do to prevent me from writing my software and releasing it.

Originally posted by: mindcycle
All I know is that PC games aren't going to die off.

"Die off" is too strong of a phrase. Of course we'll always have PC games. The question, rather, is whether or not the selection of quality games will be at all comparable to what's available on consoles. If current trends continue, it doesn't make sense to be too optimistic.

While I very much hope you are right, there's no real logical foundation to being entrenched in such optimism right now, since we've been in a slow mudslide for 4 or 5 years and it's showing zero signs of slowing down.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: Maximilian

Originally posted by: jbourne77
I'm a PC gamer and want to see it succeed as a platform, but everything chizow stated is true. Just because we may not like what he's saying doesn't mean he's wrong.

No hes repetitive and boring.

Perhaps, but only because there's nothing else needed to be said, and no one has debunked his analysis. The nail in the coffin, in my opinion, is the fiscal analysis. You can't argue with sales figures that aren't just declining year to year, but doing so at an increasing rate. If the rate at which the PC game market is shrinking each year is accelerating, how could one possibly argue that it's in good shape and all is hunky-dory?

Detroit operated like that. For a while.

 

[you2]

The claim is that the sales data is faulty. If the data is faulty then you can argue. If it is not then you cannot.

Probably the best place to find sound data is if a publisher reported the raw revs (not profits) for the various platforms in their SEC filings. I haven't checked.

I do believe that retail sales data is likely flawed and excludes a noticeable portion of revenue from pc games.

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: Maximilian

Originally posted by: jbourne77
I'm a PC gamer and want to see it succeed as a platform, but everything chizow stated is true. Just because we may not like what he's saying doesn't mean he's wrong.

No hes repetitive and boring.

Perhaps, but only because there's nothing else needed to be said, and no one has debunked his analysis. The nail in the coffin, in my opinion, is the fiscal analysis. You can't argue with sales figures that aren't just declining year to year, but doing so at an increasing rate. If the rate at which the PC game market is shrinking each year is accelerating, how could one possibly argue that it's in good shape and all is hunky-dory?

Detroit operated like that. For a while.

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: mindcycle
Yeah, well if you want to try and convince chizow of anything other than his narrow point of view then be my guest. Just be prepared for at least 6 more pages of "valid" facts.

Rofl, by narrow point of view, you mean having to bludgeon you with 6 pages of legal code, case code, legislative testimony, and common definition to get you to understand what the majority of the population already knows to be true? That piracy is stealing and is a crime in most countries, no matter what you want to call it? By having to listen to you try and tell me I only want the "bad EA DRM that doesn't work" and not the "effective DRM everyone else uses that does actually work", despite clearly outlining what kind of DRM I wanted to see implemented?

Originally posted by: Maximilian
No seriously, chizow cant just agree to disagree or anything like that, everything has to be dragged off topic for many many pages before enough people disagree with him that he gives up. Im with mindcycle i wouldnt bother arguing with him either, its a waste of time, hes too stuck in his rut.

Of course I'm not going to agree to disagree when I clearly don't agree with your point of view that there's nothing wrong with stealing software. All of your excuses and justifications for stealing don't lend any credibility to your argument, they only further reflect poorly on you, your upbringing, and your lack of moral fiber. I'm sure you do find it repetitive and boring, perhaps your parents or a teacher did actually attempt to instill these base values upon you at some point (and failed).