Stardock interview on how to save pc gaming

ViviTheMage

Lifer
Dec 12, 2002
36,189
87
91
madgenius.com
Originally posted by: Modelworks
He makes some very good points.
Especially on the ease of playing a game on pc vs console.

I would love to see a 3rd party quality assurance lab that would test pc games before they were released.

http://www.shacknews.com/featuredarticle.x?id=994

Why...this would prolong a release even longer...they are typically 3+ years from when they are ANNOUNCED, to when they decide to start some sort of beta...(which is a form of assurance IMO)...gold stage from announcement is typically 4 years +
 

shortylickens

No Lifer
Jul 15, 2003
80,287
17,081
136
Originally posted by: ViviTheMage
Originally posted by: Modelworks
He makes some very good points.
Especially on the ease of playing a game on pc vs console.

I would love to see a 3rd party quality assurance lab that would test pc games before they were released.

http://www.shacknews.com/featuredarticle.x?id=994

Why...this would prolong a release even longer...they are typically 3+ years from when they are ANNOUNCED, to when they decide to start some sort of beta...(which is a form of assurance IMO)...gold stage from announcement is typically 4 years +
Thats another thing they need to fix. This whole "5+ years in the making, 45 million dollar" bullshit. Most of those games suck ass when they finally come out.
They need to be more focused on the gameplay itself and start using older, already established engines when they decide to make it pretty.
These fucking morons need to stop complaining they cant make a profit because they built their own engine from scratch when there's already a dozen perfectly good engines that can be had at reasonable prices.
And they dont have to spend 4 years ironing out the bugs.

Thats what I kept hoping for with Knights of the Old Republic 3. Let them take something thats been around for awhile like Unreal 2 or Source, and then they can focus their attention on gameplay instead. It worked great for KOTOR 1 & 2. The more focus they put on graphics the more time they waste and the more likely the final product will end up sucking donkey balls.

Of course, its already been stated a hundred times you cant sell gameplay on a box. Only graphics. And since companies like EA are interested in ONLY money and have no concern for customer satisfaction, that shit will never change.
 

bunnyfubbles

Lifer
Sep 3, 2001
12,248
3
0
I've been thinking about this, and I think one thing thing that hurts PC gaming has been traditionally viewed as a huge asset...and that's the ability (well, requirement rather) to install games to the hard drive. While its absolutely great for performance, I know there are many who don't want to install something they might only play for a week. PC gaming is a huge hassle compared to console gaming.
 

ViviTheMage

Lifer
Dec 12, 2002
36,189
87
91
madgenius.com
Originally posted by: shortylickens
Originally posted by: ViviTheMage
Originally posted by: Modelworks
He makes some very good points.
Especially on the ease of playing a game on pc vs console.

I would love to see a 3rd party quality assurance lab that would test pc games before they were released.

http://www.shacknews.com/featuredarticle.x?id=994

Why...this would prolong a release even longer...they are typically 3+ years from when they are ANNOUNCED, to when they decide to start some sort of beta...(which is a form of assurance IMO)...gold stage from announcement is typically 4 years +
Thats another thing they need to fix. This whole "5+ years in the making, 45 million dollar" bullshit. Most of those games suck ass when they finally come out.
They need to be more focused on the gameplay itself and start using older, already established engines when they decide to make it pretty.
These fucking morons need to stop complaining they cant make a profit because they built their own engine from scratch when there's already a dozen perfectly good engines that can be had at reasonable prices.
And they dont have to spend 4 years ironing out the bugs.

Thats what I kept hoping for with Knights of the Old Republic 3. Let them take something thats been around for awhile like Unreal 2 or Source, and then they can focus their attention on gameplay instead. It worked great for KOTOR 1 & 2. The more focus they put on graphics the more time they waste and the more likely the final product will end up sucking donkey balls.

Of course, its already been stated a hundred times you cant sell gameplay on a box. Only graphics. And since companies like EA are interested in ONLY money and have no concern for customer satisfaction, that shit will never change.

oh man, that'd be awesome if they used Source in an MMO!!!!!

But you are right, those vaporware games are never going to go anywhere if they do not get shit going.

Gameplay is huge when it comes to a lot of PC games, from the looks of Spore, you get 4-10 hours out of it...and you are done.

WoW you get hundreds of hours, and almost every level of player can paly it..hardcore, to your 2 hours a week player who just strives to hit 70.

Look at counter strike, or almost any FPS for that matter, you can play it for hours on end, or 10-20 minutes and cut it off.
 

Maximilian

Lifer
Feb 8, 2004
12,604
15
81
"Brad Wardell: Well certainly it's a publicity stunt. The idea is to get the word out there. Because at the end of the day, the only ones that are gonna really make this happen are the gamers themselves, if they start to make purchasing decisions based on those who would adhere to some kind of standard."

Agreed. Dont buy from EA because you fund the death of PC gaming! People need to stop settling for 2nd class bullshit.
 

coloumb

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
4,069
0
81
A lot of good ole plain common sense in that article which I hope the big devs/publishers take note of.




 

BladeVenom

Lifer
Jun 2, 2005
13,365
16
0
Originally posted by: ViviTheMage
Originally posted by: Modelworks
He makes some very good points.
Especially on the ease of playing a game on pc vs console.

I would love to see a 3rd party quality assurance lab that would test pc games before they were released.

http://www.shacknews.com/featuredarticle.x?id=994

Why...this would prolong a release even longer...they are typically 3+ years from when they are ANNOUNCED, to when they decide to start some sort of beta...(which is a form of assurance IMO)...gold stage from announcement is typically 4 years +

Games already take years to make, so what's another month or two to make sure they work?

Valve and Blizzard always take the extra time to make sure their games aren't buggy even if it means extra delays, and it seems to work for them. They are both financially successful and have a good reputation.
 
Oct 30, 2004
11,442
32
91

He makes points about how PC games need to leverage PC advantages. OK--so why is it that Sins of a Solar Empire doesn't leverage the PC's advantages--online multiplayer? Why isn't there custom map and mod auto-download? Why isn't the user interface (which isn't bad) better? Why doesn't the game have a built-in voice chat system?

Sins is a great game and I play it for online multiplayer all the time, but if they're really serious about leveraging a PC's advantages, online multiplayer and custom content are one of the areas that you emphasize.
 

Bateluer

Lifer
Jun 23, 2001
27,730
8
0
Originally posted by: shortylickens
Thats what I kept hoping for with Knights of the Old Republic 3. Let them take something thats been around for awhile like Unreal 2 or Source, and then they can focus their attention on gameplay instead. It worked great for KOTOR 1 & 2. The more focus they put on graphics the more time they waste and the more likely the final product will end up sucking donkey balls.

You aren't insinuating that KOTOR1/2 were based on the Unreal 2 or Source engine are you? :p

Stardock definitely has the right idea and I want to see them prosper into a major force in the industry.
 

AyashiKaibutsu

Diamond Member
Jan 24, 2004
9,306
4
81
Just about the only games I'll pay money for have atleast 3+ years of development in them. If the developer spends that amount of time polishing the game it's generally very good. The only games that take that long and are bad are the ones where it's clear the developers spent all that time fixing the bad code and design they threw together in the first 6 months (MoO3 comes to mind). Every Blizzard game I can think of that I've played for several years were all developed about that long.
 

Maximilian

Lifer
Feb 8, 2004
12,604
15
81
Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

He makes points about how PC games need to leverage PC advantages. OK--so why is it that Sins of a Solar Empire doesn't leverage the PC's advantages--online multiplayer? Why isn't there custom map and mod auto-download? Why isn't the user interface (which isn't bad) better? Why doesn't the game have a built-in voice chat system?

Sins is a great game and I play it for online multiplayer all the time, but if they're really serious about leveraging a PC's advantages, online multiplayer and custom content are one of the areas that you emphasize.

Same reason nobody plays civilization IV online :roll:
 

IEC

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Jun 10, 2004
14,600
6,084
136
Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

He makes points about how PC games need to leverage PC advantages. OK--so why is it that Sins of a Solar Empire doesn't leverage the PC's advantages--online multiplayer? Why isn't there custom map and mod auto-download? Why isn't the user interface (which isn't bad) better? Why doesn't the game have a built-in voice chat system?

Sins is a great game and I play it for online multiplayer all the time, but if they're really serious about leveraging a PC's advantages, online multiplayer and custom content are one of the areas that you emphasize.

Have you actually played Sins of a Solar Empire? The game's focus is on multiplayer!
 
Oct 30, 2004
11,442
32
91
Originally posted by: Spartan Niner
Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

He makes points about how PC games need to leverage PC advantages. OK--so why is it that Sins of a Solar Empire doesn't leverage the PC's advantages--online multiplayer? Why isn't there custom map and mod auto-download? Why isn't the user interface (which isn't bad) better? Why doesn't the game have a built-in voice chat system?

Sins is a great game and I play it for online multiplayer all the time, but if they're really serious about leveraging a PC's advantages, online multiplayer and custom content are one of the areas that you emphasize.

Have you actually played Sins of a Solar Empire? The game's focus is on multiplayer!

I play it all the time and I only play online multiplayer.

What I don't understand is why the game doesn't allow for auto-downloading of custom maps (made in Galaxy Forge, not the Map "Designer") and mods -- something you can't get (at least not without a hassle) for consoles.
 
Oct 30, 2004
11,442
32
91
Originally posted by: Maximilian
Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

He makes points about how PC games need to leverage PC advantages. OK--so why is it that Sins of a Solar Empire doesn't leverage the PC's advantages--online multiplayer? Why isn't there custom map and mod auto-download? Why isn't the user interface (which isn't bad) better? Why doesn't the game have a built-in voice chat system?

Sins is a great game and I play it for online multiplayer all the time, but if they're really serious about leveraging a PC's advantages, online multiplayer and custom content are one of the areas that you emphasize.

Same reason nobody plays civilization IV online :roll:

Online Sins games don't take as long as many people think. A 3v3 on the large random single star is normally decided within an hour-and-a-half.
 

Maximilian

Lifer
Feb 8, 2004
12,604
15
81
Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper
Originally posted by: Maximilian
Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

He makes points about how PC games need to leverage PC advantages. OK--so why is it that Sins of a Solar Empire doesn't leverage the PC's advantages--online multiplayer? Why isn't there custom map and mod auto-download? Why isn't the user interface (which isn't bad) better? Why doesn't the game have a built-in voice chat system?

Sins is a great game and I play it for online multiplayer all the time, but if they're really serious about leveraging a PC's advantages, online multiplayer and custom content are one of the areas that you emphasize.

Same reason nobody plays civilization IV online :roll:

Online Sins games don't take as long as many people think. A 3v3 on the large random single star is normally decided within an hour-and-a-half.

Yeah decided, not neccesarily won and quite a few people probably just leave when they have no chance. Its not like that for games like company of heros, you can fight bitterly and still have a chance.
 

Xavier434

Lifer
Oct 14, 2002
10,373
1
0
Threads like these make me wish we had more game devs on these boards to tell us what the real deal is.
 

s44

Diamond Member
Oct 13, 2006
9,427
16
81
Originally posted by: Modelworks
I would love to see a 3rd party quality assurance lab that would pirate pc games before they were released.
FYP
 

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
7
76
Originally posted by: s44
Originally posted by: Modelworks
I would love to see a 3rd party quality assurance lab that would pirate pc games before they were released.
FYP

Not a major issue.
There are plenty of quality assurance labs that exist without anything being tested making it off the site.
 

Markbnj

Elite Member <br>Moderator Emeritus
Moderator
Sep 16, 2005
15,682
14
81
www.markbetz.net
I think he's dead on. Really interesting read, and thanks for posting it. In terms of how hard it is to make a game work well on the PC, things are a lot better than they used to be. Windows standardized a lot of stuff that used to cause problems, and Games for Windows hauled a lot of publishers along and made it even better.

But back in the day the PC didn't have the XBOX as competition. It was great graphics and sound on the PC vs. chunky NTSC graphics and arcade-like sound on the consoles of the time. What the 360 has done is create a standard platform for _PC-like_ games. At the same time Intel sabotaged the entire graphics market in the way Wardell alludes to. Not hard to see why things have gone as they have.

Probably in the future most of the controller-friendly games will stay on the console platforms. The open question for me is whether there will still be a market for the more complicated, immersive games that the PC is good at... although you could argue that even that space is getting pretty controller-friendly. If the developers follow Wardell's lead then hopefully in five years we will still be getting big sim and strategy games for the PC, at least.
 

wanderer27

Platinum Member
Aug 6, 2005
2,173
15
81
Originally posted by: shortylickens
They need to be more focused on the gameplay itself and start using older, already established engines when they decide to make it pretty.
These fucking morons need to stop complaining they cant make a profit because they built their own engine from scratch when there's already a dozen perfectly good engines that can be had at reasonable prices.
And they dont have to spend 4 years ironing out the bugs.

You mean like . . . umm . . . . Duke Nukem Forever ? :)


Yeah, there're a lot of different Engines out today.
Just license one, or if you're big enough just buy the Company, and you're good to go.