Reasons Why Consolites Don't Care About PC Gaming

Too much circlejerking

[QUOTE="R4gn4r0k"]

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

Where do you live? We really only get semi-good BF deals because I live close to the US border in Canada (about 15 minutes away).

Desmonic

I'm from Belgium. I live about 15 minutes away from the border with the Netherlands. Don't know if they have any worthwhile sales :P

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"][QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"]Consoles are more convenient. The benefits end there. AAllxxjjnn

1. What are the cost savings from using the development set provided by Microsoft that Steam published games don't get?

2. What are the cost savings of QA testing your game on 1 piece of hardware vs having to test and debug across diverse specs and configurations?

LazySloth718

Both these would be included in development costs, which is what the Publisher deduction is for. The publisher and the developer.

3. Packaging costs $10, why aren't Steam games $40? The dev seems to pocket the savings instead of creating a lower price for the customer, as your link also mentions.

LazySloth718

Already mentioned that Valve takes around a 30%-33% cut, which is $18-$20. Lower than the cost of the retailer fee, packaging and shipping, and returning unsold inventory, which is $26.

4. Wouldn't that %7-%10 royalty just translate to %7-%10 marketing budget to create awareness of the game equal to being featured on XBL?

LazySloth718

Are you talking Steam marketing on front page? That's included.

Many PC games don't have a huge marketing budget, if any. However, marketing is included in the publisher cut, due to it being a pre-paid expense. They are making a profit, plus recouping the cost of developing and marketing the product.

5. Competition on PC : thousands of games. Competition on console, maybe 300 games. So right off the bat, the developer is against the 8-ball and has to charge more to indemnify himself against low sales and stiff competition.

LazySloth718

Where are you getting this? So, the developer has to charge more, yet the game comes out cheaper? What are you on?

Good try on this line of logic, but the methodology and line of reasoning is all wrong.

You are proving PC games *should* cost less, whereas the burden is to prove they *DO* cost less.

LazySloth718

They do. Many typically cost around $50 at launch. For reference, Steam.

New games at $50 or less:

1. Ace Combat: Assualt Horizon
2. Far Cry 3 (launched at $50)
3. X-Com (launched at $50
4. DMC (launched at $50)
5. Aliens: Colonial Marines (launching at $50)
6. Assassin's Creed 3 (launched at $50)
7. Hitman: Absolution (launched at $50)
8. Tomb Raider (launching at $50 - on sale for $45)

Sorry, bro :(

-----

Also, here.

Its also important to note that Microsoft does not get royalties off of PC game sales.Article

Right there, there is no $7-$10 fee to release a game on Windows/PC. Hence, the $50 price.

No one cares Lundy

No one cares Lundy

whiskeystrike

LazySloth asked questions. So, clearly somebody does.

I know reading's hard :(

Where are you getting this? So, the developer has to charge more, yet the game comes out cheaper? What are you on?

lundy86_4

The developer is either charging more or making less due to competition from more titles.

That PC games are in fact cheaper on average has yet to be established.

New games at $50 or less:

1. Ace Combat: Assualt Horizon
2. Far Cry 3 (launched at $50)
3. X-Com (launched at $50
4. DMC (launched at $50)
5. Aliens: Colonial Marines (launching at $50)
6. Assassin's Creed 3 (launched at $50)
7. Hitman: Absolution (launched at $50)
8. Tomb Raider (launching at $50 - on sale for $45)

 lundy86_4

You are giving examples, not proof.

Similar to saying "I got pre-order coupon of $20 for buying Far Cry 3" omg console games cheaper, $40 launch

I doubt any such proof exists.

But please, keep beating your head against a wall.

The smart thing is to just say "It is my opinion that PC games are cheaper."

You'd still be f*cking wrong, but at least the methodology would be right.

The developer is either charging more or making less due to competition from more titles.

That PC games are in fact cheaper on average has yet to be established.

LazySloth718

It truly depends, due to the fact that older games become obsolete in a buyer's market. Throughput is far less on older titles, than newer titles. This point is moot.

You are giving examples, not proof.

Similar to saying "I got pre-order coupon of $20 for buying Far Cry 3" omg console games cheaper, $40 launch

I doubt any such proof exists.

But please, keep beating your head against a wall.

The smart thing is to just say "It is my opinion that PC games are cheaper."

You'd still be f*cking wrong, but at least the methodology would be right.

LazySloth718

There is no royalty fee, thus the games are cheaper. Not all games are cheaper, as I have  specifically  said.

Furthermore, these examples are evidence, as they are releasing at a lower cost than their  console counterpart. Also, what are these examples of, exactly? Give me your interpretation.

----

Now are you going to stop ignoring the fact that there is no royalty fee, or just continue to ignore it?

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"][QUOTE="Desmonic"] Bro! Belgium! Dat beer :cool:Desmonic

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"][QUOTE="Desmonic"] Thanks bro! :cool: (also, compliment or am I being trolled? :P lol )Desmonic

(1) You are trying to tell me consolites are too lazy to a read box which takes around 15 seconds to see if the PC can play it or not.

(3) PC has some great games DCS: A10C comes to mind, which the consoles don't have, Crusader Kings II, Hearts of Iron III. The PC probably also has the best version of Risen 2. Skyrim was probably best on PC, same with Fallout NV, and The Sims 3.

The only reason I can think of that consolites don't like the PC is because the initial cost is expensive, and they may not want to build their own. There is nothing wrong with mostly console gaming, I did it for years.

Welcome to dumbfvckistan. population: TC

It truly depends, due to the fact that older games become obsolete in a buyer's market. Throughput is far less on older titles, than newer titles. This point is moot.

lundy86_4

Microsoft has a very well-oiled marketing MACHINE, each release is scheduled such that you don't get multiple games all coming out close together, and they are allotted a certain amount of visibility on XBL for a certain amount of time. This enhance sales and decrease the dog-eat-dog competition that traditionally marks PC game development.

Purely my opinion. Carry on.

There is no royalty fee and no access to a highly standardized and controlled development platform, thus the games are cheaper to release and more expensive to develop (or at least QA, test and debug.)

lundy86_4

Fixed for accuracy.

Doesn't make games any cheaper to buy.

Furthermore, these examples are evidence, as they are releasing at a lower cost than their  console counterpart. Also, what are these examples of, exactly? Give me your interpretation.

lundy86_4

These are examples of data cherry-picked to support a pre-determined conclusion, rather than a conclusion arrived from distilling data.

The main thing you're missing is data.

If XYZ game releases on Steam for $50, and on Amazon for $60

And then 9 months later the same game is on Steam for $39.95 and Amazon for $19, then "PC Games are cheaper" would be false.

"But I'd wait for a Steam sale"

Yeah? And you can also wait for a sale at Best Buy.

Distill the above paragraph, what do you have? Nothing.

Hence the claimed "factoid" of "PC Games are cheaper" falls on its face.

Now are you going to stop ignoring the fact that there is no royalty fee, or just continue to ignore it?

lundy86_4

Continue to ignore it.

If overhead correlated with retail price you'd have a point.

See

Games on PC have been around $50-$60 for a pretty long time, at least as far back as 1995 as best I can remember.

Then they took away your ability to lend it to a friend (DRM) and it was still $50-$60.

Then they took away game manuals and packaging (digital) and it was still $50-$60

Then they linked your access to the product to an online service being solvent and it was still $50-$60

Then they took out parts of the game and made it DLC and it was still $50-$60

And so their costs got less, our deliverables vanished, and the price stayed the same.

And somehow you think, just because they don't pay a royalty to Microsoft, that they're going to look into the goodness of their hearts and pass the savings onto you?

Yeah rrrrrriight.

Supply vs competition vs demand = price

That's all there is.

Microsoft has a very well-oiled marketing MACHINE, each release is scheduled such that you don't get multiple games all coming out close together, and they are allotted a certain amount of visibility on XBL for a certain amount of time. This enhance sales and decrease the dog-eat-dog competition that traditionally marks PC game development.

Purely my opinion. Carry on.

LazySloth718

You realize that Steam allots time on their main page, right? Along with having a "Coming Soon" list as well as a "New Releases" list and a "Top Sellers" list.

There is no royalty fee and no access to a highly standardized and controlled development platform, thus the games are cheaper to release and more expensive to develop (or at least QA, test and debug.)

lundy86_4

Gonna need evidence for this.

These are examples of data cherry-picked to support a pre-determined conclusion, rather than a conclusion arrived from distilling data.

The main thing you're missing is data.

LazySloth718

I picked right from the front page and upcoming releases. Hardly cherry-picked. If you want to criticize the data, feel free to prove that data wrong and find something conflicting. Burden of proof has shifted to yourself. Find something wrong with the evidence, instead of claiming inaccuracy of the selective methods... You'd need to prove the inaccuracy.

If XYZ game releases on Steam for $50, and on Amazon for $60

And then 9 months later the same game is on Steam for $39.95 and Amazon for $19, then "PC Games are cheaper" would be false.

LazySloth718

What game is this?

"But I'd wait for a Steam sale"

Yeah? And you can also wait for a sale at Best Buy.

Distill the above paragraph, what do you have? Nothing.

Hence the claimed "factoid" of "PC Games are cheaper" falls on its face.

LazySloth718

Who said to wait for a Steam sale? Hell, Steam is only an example, and not the absolute for PC game pricing. In fact, it's  your  sampling that falls short, considering you've only used Steam as an example, in this thread.

Continue to ignore it.

If overhead correlated with retail price you'd have a point.

See

Games on PC have been around $50-$60 for a pretty long time, at least as far back as 1995 as best I can remember.

Then they took away your ability to lend it to a friend (DRM) and it was still $50-$60.

Then they took away game manuals and packaging (digital) and it was still $50-$60

Then they linked your access to the product to an online service being solvent and it was still $50-$60

Then they took out parts of the game and made it DLC and it was still $50-$60

And so their costs got less, our deliverables vanished, and the price stayed the same.

And somehow you think, just because they don't pay a royalty to Microsoft, that they're going to look into the goodness of their hearts and pass the savings onto you?

Yeah rrrrrriight.

Supply vs competition vs demand = price

That's all there is.

LazySloth718

This makes no sense. You concede the games have been $50-$60 (which this whole debate was about). So, thanks. $50 is cheaper than $60, last I checked... The vast majority of retail console releases are $60 (sh*t, based on common sense, yo).

Nobody debated that they should pass the savings on to us. You are building a strawman, and it's pretty pathetic :lol:

[QUOTE="Miketheman83"]

1. System Requirements- Checking requirements for every game you purchase is annoying and cumbersome. People shouldn't have to do research every time they buy a game. Ain't nobody got time fo dat. Nothing is more annoying than having problems running a game you've been waiting to play. I dont have that problem

2. Keyboard and mouse- It really is an outdated way to control video games. PC games often map their controls to certain letters all around the keyboard. It's often very awkward and imprecise. We don't need the whole alphabet in our controller. I use a 360 controller for all of my PC games. Except Planetside 2

3. Games- PC games just don't have the big budgets as top tier console games. PC games often feel amateurish and outdated. While I love games like Left 4 Dead and The Witcher they are very unpolished games compared to console games, and that is because of small dev teams and low budgets. This one is just too stupid to answer

4. Price/Accessibility- Keeping up with the latest tech can be very pricey and time consuming. Most of us have lives outside of gaming. Spending time cooped up in our rooms building/upgrading PC's is not an appealing thought. It doesnt take days or weeks to upgrade a part

5. Comfort- Sitting on the couch with a big screen television is the way video games are meant to be played. Sitting at a computer desk with a small monitor is killing the fun in my opinion. The argument that you can connect your PC to your television and play with a controller is a poor argument because in reality you are just trying to make your PC like a console. Again , i use a 360 controller to play my PC games. Connected to a 50' sony bravia a while chillin on my couch

 

I really wish PC gamers would stop trying to "sell" the PC to us console gamers. Bottom line is that we are aware of the benefits of PC gaming, but the cons outweigh the benefits by a large margin. Console companies aren't threatened by PC gaming, consoles gamers aren't threatened by PC gaming, truth is, no one really cares about PC gaming except the elitist people that spendvall their time on forums trying to convert people who couldn't be any more disinterested.

ultraking

1. You don't have that problem because you probably understand computer hardware and memorized the parts in your PC.

2. 360 controller doesn't work for all PC games, there are games that require a mouse and keyboard to play, or because of how bad an interface design is to a game a controller just isn't going to work.

3. If its so stupid you should have an easy time writing down a counter-argument, just dismissing an argument is even stupider.

4. It doesn't if you stay up do date with current tech. Many people could have bought a PC 7 years ago and are just now looking to upgrade it, its going to take more than a week to educate oneself on current tech, and what a good deal is. Its not difficult to pick out a new console.

5. Again, hooking up a 360 controller for all games isn't an optimal solution, it makes it even worse when moved in to a living room if its your only machine, computing on the couch still isn't that great. And a lot of UI designs for PC are for close viewing.

You realize that Steam allots time on their main page, right? Along with having a "Coming Soon" list as well as a "New Releases" list and a "Top Sellers" list.

lundy86_4

Steam has more games to market.

And this is Microsoft. They can sell ice to eskimos.

Gonna need evidence for this.

lundy86_4

One hardware to debug/QA vs many hardware to debug/QA

One API vs many API.

Devkit vs "bring your own tools."

I picked right from the front page and upcoming releases. Hardly cherry-picked. If you want to criticize the data, feel free to prove that data wrong and find something conflicting. Burden of proof has shifted to yourself. Find something wrong with the evidence, instead of claiming inaccuracy of the selective methods... You'd need to prove the inaccuracy.

lundy86_4

Max Payne 3 - Steam $39.99, 360 Amazon $29.99

Ace Combat Assault Horizon - Steam $34.99 Amazon 360 $17.62

Borderlands 2 - Steam $59.99 Amazon 360 $48.98

XCOM - Steam $49.99 Amazon 360 $39.15

I can find more but I'm lazy.

[QUOTE="LazySloth718"]

If XYZ game releases on Steam for $50, and on Amazon for $60

And then 9 months later the same game is on Steam for $39.95 and Amazon for $19, then "PC Games are cheaper" would be false.

lundy86_4

What game is this?

See above

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]Hell, Steam is only an example, and not the absolute for PC game pricing. In fact, it's  your  sampling that falls short, considering you've only used Steam as an example, in this thread.LazySloth718

Did you check anywhere but Amazon for your data?

What you waiting for boy, mush.

Check ebay too, they often have brand new games for cheaper than anywhere else.

This makes no sense. You concede the games have been $50-$60 (which this whole debate was about). So, thanks. $50 is cheaper than $60, last I checked... The vast majority of retail console releases are $60 (sh*t, based on common sense, yo).

lundy86_4

Do you buy everything day 1?

I've gotten numerous console releases day 1 for $40 and less.

Learn how to shop.

Steam has more games to market.

And this is Microsoft. They can sell ice to eskimos.

LazySloth718

Not really. Older games get zero advertising allotment.

One hardware to debug/QA vs many hardware to debug/QA

One API vs many API.

Devkit vs "bring your own tools."

LazySloth718

That isn't evidence, bro.

Max Payne 3 - Steam $39.99, 360 Amazon $29.99

Ace Combat Assault Horizon - Steam $34.99 Amazon 360 $17.62

Borderlands 2 - Steam $59.99 Amazon 360 $48.98

XCOM - Steam $49.99 Amazon 360 $39.15

I can find more but I'm lazy.

LazySloth718

I chose new releases. New release prices are set by the publishers. For all we know, Steam can set older game prices based on demand.

Also, wasn't this debunked? Pretty sure it was.

See above

LazySloth718

See my response.

Did you check anywhere but Amazon for your data?

What you waiting for boy, mush.

Check ebay too, they often have brand new games for cheaper than anywhere else.

LazySloth718

Didn't need to. New release prices are dictated by the publisher. The only time you'll see a cheaper launch price, is when a sale is put forth by the publisher, a la Tomb Raider. GMG is running the same sale, with their own incentive on top.

Do you buy everything day 1?

I've gotten numerous console releases day 1 for $40 and less.

Learn how to shop.

LazySloth718

So, this whole debate hinges on how games get cheaper over time? Steam sales would like a word. So would Amazon sales, as they destroyed Steam for the Winter sales. Well done, on destroying your own argument :lol:

What titles did you get for $40? Provide evidence.

----

I noticed you ignored the part about the strawman... Glad to see you noticed your mistake.

----

The argument has whittled, and you likely won't admit defeat. Should we call it quits, or must your embarassment continue?

TC has now officially abandoned his thread and in a lousy attempt to save grave is trying to troll in other threads :lol: That must be one epic butthurt if you ask me! Well done System Warriors, you've made me proud :PDesmonic

[QUOTE="Desmonic"]TC has now officially abandoned his thread and in a lousy attempt to save grave is trying to troll in other threads :lol: That must be one epic butthurt if you ask me! Well done System Warriors, you've made me proud :PMiketheman83

Actually Im kind of starting to pity the PC fanboys in this thread. The ownage just keeps on going.Miketheman83

What ownage? Give an example.

[QUOTE="LazySloth718"]

One hardware to debug/QA vs many hardware to debug/QA

One API vs many API.

Devkit vs "bring your own tools."

lundy86_4

I think what he's saying is your QA department has to be larger and test more variations in the computer hardware, testing 360/ps3 versions is.. much simpler

[QUOTE="LazySloth718"]

Max Payne 3 - Steam $39.99, 360 Amazon $29.99

Ace Combat Assault Horizon - Steam $34.99 Amazon 360 $17.62

Borderlands 2 - Steam $59.99 Amazon 360 $48.98

XCOM - Steam $49.99 Amazon 360 $39.15

I can find more but I'm lazy.

lundy86_4

I chose new releases. New release prices are set by the publishers. For all we know, Steam can set older game prices based on demand.

Also, wasn't this debunked? Pretty sure it was.

New releases aren't set by the publishers, A store buys X number of units and sells them off, they can sell the off at pretty much any price they feel like or use the suggested retail price. I bought Mass Effect brand new for 360 on a pre-order for $39.99. PC gamers are not cheaper, but it takes less effort to find deals.

 

[QUOTE="LazySloth718"]

Did you check anywhere but Amazon for your data?

What you waiting for boy, mush.

Check ebay too, they often have brand new games for cheaper than anywhere else.

lundy86_4

Didn't need to. New release prices are dictated by the publisher. The only time you'll see a cheaper launch price, is when a sale is put forth by the publisher, a la Tomb Raider. GMG is running the same sale, with their own incentive on top.

still a bit misinformed, retailers set their own prices, normally everyone uses the msrp.

I think what he's saying is your QA department has to be larger and test more variations in the computer hardware, testing 360/ps3 versions is.. much simpler

savagetwinkie

I assumed as much. Not sure whether it is simpler.

New releases aren't set by the publishers, A store buys X number of units and sells them off, they can sell the off at pretty much any price they feel like or use the suggested retail price. I bought Mass Effect brand new for 360 on a pre-order for $39.99. PC gamers are not cheaper, but it takes less effort to find deals.

savagetwinkie

----

We seem to be bandying a lot about without evidence. 

still a bit misinformed, retailers set their own prices, normally everyone uses the msrp.

savagetwinkie

This is a lot of my word versus yours.

----

Impulse also have issues with pricing/regional pricing with publishers, due to their control of the product. They have openly discussed how they have little control in certain instances (regional pricing).

[QUOTE="Desmonic"]TC has now officially abandoned his thread and in a lousy attempt to save grave is trying to troll in other threads :lol: That must be one epic butthurt if you ask me! Well done System Warriors, you've made me proud :PMiketheman83

[QUOTE="ReadingRainbow4"]

[QUOTE="Miketheman83"] Actually Im kind of starting to pity the PC fanboys in this thread. The ownage just keeps on going.TheGuardian03

I think it's peekaboo.

Imagine seeing your mom drenched in Horse crap Rofl.

That isn't evidence, bro.

lundy86_4

As you say "common sense yo"

[QUOTE="LazySloth718"]

Max Payne 3 - Steam $39.99, 360 Amazon $29.99

Ace Combat Assault Horizon - Steam $34.99 Amazon 360 $17.62

Borderlands 2 - Steam $59.99 Amazon 360 $48.98

XCOM - Steam $49.99 Amazon 360 $39.15

I can find more but I'm lazy.

lundy86_4

I chose new releases. New release prices are set by the publishers. For all we know, Steam can set older game prices based on demand.

Wasn't this already debunked?

Can you explain how "PC Games are cheaper, fact" = only day 1, only some games, and only if you don't know how to shop?

Debunked? All I heard was "waaaah no fair, Ace Combat came out a year ago" - oh so it's not only cheaper, but also available earlier. Is that a bad thing?

Didn't need to. New release prices are dictated by the publisher.

lundy86_4

Can you explain how "PC Games are cheaper, fact" = only day 1, only some games, and only if you don't know how to shop?

So, this whole debate hinges on how games get cheaper over time? Steam sales would like a word. So would Amazon sales, as they destroyed Steam for the Winter sales. Well done, on destroying your own argument

lundy86_4

The debate hinges on the statement "PC Games are cheaper, fact"

Which you define "PC games" as : Only day 1, only some games, and only if you don't know how to shop.

I define "PC games" as : Any multiplat (for price comparison) at any given time (bought within the same day or so) purchased anywhere (excluding used)

Now average that out over say 5 years, buying a few of them day 1, waiting on others, perusing the various sales and specials to their best effect.

I think you will find the money spent to be quite identical, give or take.

Therein your argument is null and void.

I have to get some food soon.

This is still going? BWAHAHAHA.MBirdy88

I'm fighting the urge to read all these post

[QUOTE="Miketheman83"]Actually Im kind of starting to pity the PC fanboys in this thread. The ownage just keeps on going.lundy86_4

What ownage? Give an example.

As you say "common sense yo"

LazySloth718

Nope. Common sense does not apply to everything. Common sense on something that is easily presentable makes sense. On your information, not so much.

Can you explain how "PC Games are cheaper, fact" = only day 1, only some games, and only if you don't know how to shop?

Debunked? All I heard was "waaaah no fair, Ace Combat came out a year ago" - oh so it's not only cheaper, but also available earlier. Is that a bad thing?

LazySloth718

Strawman. My point is that PC games are cheaper based on the  fact  that no royalty is charged. That was the initial point, and one you have yet to disprove.

The debate hinges on the statement "PC Games are cheaper, fact"

Which you define "PC games" as : Only day 1, only some games, and only if you don't know how to shop.

I define "PC games" as : Any multiplat (for price comparison) at any given time (bought within the same day or so) purchased anywhere (excluding used)

Now average that out over say 5 years, buying a few of them day 1, waiting on others, perusing the various sales and specials to their best effect.

I think you will find the money spent to be quite identical, give or take.

Therein your argument is null and void.

I have to get some food soon.

LazySloth718

In fact, it does not. My point was not identical to the individual that you quoted originally. My point was that there were no royalties to pay, thus console games sell at $60 (for the most part) whilst PC games sell at |$50 (for the most part). Did you misconstrue my argument, somewhere?

You're assuming. We can only base this on data that is available. Furthermore, I made it clear I was referencing day one sales from the start (hence the breakdown of a $60 game).

Understand the argument, before you reply :?

I would say that any refute PC fans came up with was refuted pretty well. That LazySloth dude did most of the work for me.Miketheman83

No examples? Figured.

[QUOTE="Miketheman83"]I would say that any refute PC fans came up with was refuted pretty well. That LazySloth dude did most of the work for me.lundy86_4

No examples? Figured.

yeah, games on console are so much more established and polished

thanks for making me spit out my water

So basically consolites are idiots that live in denial :D

The issue with PC gaming is I would like the full experience undisturbed while sitting in my Sofa.StaticOnTV

yeah, games on console are so much more established and polished

thanks for making me spit out my water

Liquid_

[QUOTE="Liquid_"]

yeah, games on console are so much more established and polished

thanks for making me spit out my water

Miketheman83

RTS games play best on pc. :?

[QUOTE="StaticOnTV"]The issue with PC gaming is I would like the full experience undisturbed while sitting in my Sofa.MonsieurX

[QUOTE="Miketheman83"][QUOTE="Liquid_"]

yeah, games on console are so much more established and polished

thanks for making me spit out my water

ReadingRainbow4

RTS games play best on pc. :?

[QUOTE="ReadingRainbow4"]

[QUOTE="Miketheman83"] Thats been my experience with PC games. I cant think of any PC games with buttery smooth gameplay. The controls feel clunky to me, but most of the games Ive played on PC were RTS games.Miketheman83

RTS games play best on pc. :?

[QUOTE="Miketheman83"][QUOTE="ReadingRainbow4"]

RTS games play best on pc. :?

Liquid_

Probably doesn't have one at all