A place where I like to jot down some thoughts, analyze the video game industry, reflect upon my life, and ponder the grand mysteries of the universe. Reader beware: these entries are highly informal and are not edited.

• 8Oct 08

  More Cynical "PC" Developers...

  I've already ranted enough about this issue, so I'll just link you to the story if you aren't in the mood for a diatribe: http://www.gamespot.com/news/6198824.htm

  If you are weird enough to tolerate my rhetorical outbursts, then by all means continue.
  

  I'm honestly getting tired of all these developers ditching the PC left and right. If they can present sound financial data to back up their claims perhaps I'll be convinced that the PC isn't worth supporting, but how can they expect PC sales to even have a chance to match console sales if they don't give us PC gamers an opportunity to buy the game at launch? Cynical thinking merely exacerbates the problem rather than remedy it. By the time Ubisoft Shanghai gets their act together and releases the ill-fated PC port, PC gamers will have already moved on to bigger and better games covered by the media. TC's Endwar will have been forgotten in the dust and Ubisoft will cite the low PC sales as evidence that PC gamers are all depraved pirates. You can expect this same trend to trickle down the industry as more and more developers ditch the PC, resulting in subpar, poorly optimized PC ports with virtually no post-release support. All this will result in a vicious cycle: as more developers ditch the PC and the quality of PC games suffers, less gamers are going to buy PC games. Sales will suffer and developers will become even more cynical, resulting in even less PC support, resluting in decreased sales, etc. ad nauseum.

  I personally think that Ubisoft is just coming up with an excuse for not having a properly ported PC version of Endwar ready for the crucial Holiday season launch date. The same thing happened with Rainbow Six Vegas. Ubisoft dumped all their resources on the consoles, giving the short stick to the PC version. Ubisoft probably has a very poorly optimized, glitchy PC game which they want to get up to standards, but they don't want to admit the real situation. Thus, they come up with this convinient "PC gamers are all pirates" PR story as a veil.

  Despite the news, I'm still trying to remain optimistic. Since developers like Valve and Stardock are on the side of PC gamers and PC hardware prices are plummeting, I believe that the death throes of the PC are still, at the very least, some years away.

  P.S. Here's a related past blog post for further reading: A Gamer's Bill of Rights

  • Posted Oct 8, 2008 4:15 pm PT
  • Category:
  • 2 Comments
  • Tag
  • Print
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Digg
• 2Oct 08

  Nintendo, Convergence, and Upgrade Frenzy

  

  Is Nintendo milking the DS product line with their latest addition?

  Convergence--that seems to be one of the most recognizable buzzwords in today's tech industry. Cameras that film movies and camcorders that take pictures, printers that scan and scanners that print, PCs that play games and consoles that browse the internet. The list continues ad nauseum. Nintendo jumped on the convergence bandwagon with the Wii (which has the Opera browser built in, among other functions) and now they're seeking to turn the DS into an all-in-one wonder. With a 3 megapixel camera, an SD card, larger screens, and an ever-so-slimmer profile, can Nintendo possibly hope to reinvigorate DS fever?

  It doesn't seem likely. Sure, the new cameras are a nice addition, but most people already have 6+ MP cameras lying around or can purchase one with far better image quality than the DSi's for a reasonable price. The SD card slot is a welcome addition, but it replaces the old GBA slot which I know will be sorely missed by many. Finally, the larger screen and smaller profile are just incremental upgrades, less noteworthy than an iPod or PSP update. The only way I can see the DSi living up to the DS and DS Lite's reputation is if it's priced fairly ($130 or less) and if there are several killer-app titles that feature the camera in some way. This later scenario is highly unlikely seeing as there are already over 70 million happy DS owners. A publisher would be taking a huge risk in alienating that population by only allowing DSi users to play or take full advantage of their game. This is the primary reason why I think console upgrades are pointless. Sure, they may refine the console a little, but they can't really introduce any major new features since the console base would become fragmented.

  I'm not criticizing Nintendo for the DSi. I'm sure it'll be a great product when all is said and done and, assuming Nintendo keeps pricing the same as the DS Lite, will sell quite well. However, I can't help thinking that the DS's step towards convergence is fruitless since the new additions to the DS aren't really going to appeal to any particular demographic that the original DS hasn't already sold to. On the other hand, the DS Lite upgrade took a good product and made it smaller and more aesthetically pleasing, helping it better appeal to the masses. All future console upgrades should aim to do the same: not radically change a product, simply refine it.

  The upgrades we've been seeing the past few years, not just from Nintendo but also from Sony and Microsoft, are an indicator of the state of the gaming industry and perhaps the excessive consumerism we see from videogamers themselves. Console makers shouldn't waste their resources on incremental upgrades or try to engineer as many features into their machines as possible but rather seek to make their consoles as best suited for gaming as possible. In turn, we consumers shouldn't rush out to buy the very latest hardware iteration if it does not have any meaningful new features. Although I relish hardware upgrades just as much as anyone else (heck, I go to Anandtech and DPreview for fun), it's time for this upgrade frenzy to stop.

  • Posted Oct 2, 2008 2:55 pm PT
  • Category:
  • 1 Comment
  • Tag
  • Print
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Digg
• 12Sep 08

  A Gamer's Bill of Rights

  I have been following Spore for years now. Despite it launching last week, I have little interest in dishing out the $50 retail price to play the game. For starters, just as I anticipated, the game failed to live up the hype and ended up feeling like a bunch of mini-games strung together rather than the ambitious masterpiece that Will Wright has been lecturing on for three years. In reality though, the big turn off for me is EA's inclusion of SecuROM and DRM in the game.

  For those of you who don't know, SecuROM is a program designed to counter piracy. Unfortunately, it does so through rootkits and other questionable means that often result in a lot of PC technical problems and, ultimately, headbanging your forehead on your keyboard. EA has recently stated that SecurROM will come with all their future PC titles including the upcoming Crysis: Warhead and Red Alert 3.

  DRM is just as bad as SecuROM since it restricts you to a total of 3 installations. This means that if you choose to reinstall your OS, change some hardware in your PC, or just switch a game over to another PC, you will lose one installation credit. Use up all three and you're out of luck unless you can get EA tech support to sympathize for you and give you more credits (good luck with that). It's ultimately up to EA's discretion whether or not you're given a credit. Furthermore, DRM forces you to activate your game online initially (a problem for those without internet connections obviously). By the way, none of this is explicitly stated in the EULA. So much for consumer rights.

  The worst part about all this is that it ends up hurting the gamers that legitamately pay for the game, not the pirates for whom these systems were supposedly designed. Both Mass Effect and Spore were easily cracked and distributed on torrents within days of release (actually, a week prior to release in the case of Spore). This software does nothing to combat piracy, if anything it only encourages it since pirated copies don't come loaded with SecuROM. It's the honest customers that are hurt in the end and EA doesn't gain another single cent by using these intrusive systems. My theory is that DRM and SecuROM weren't implemented to counter piracy as EA would like us to suppose, but rather to keep their games off the resale market to maximize profits. Call me a conspiracy theorist, but I really think this is the financial reason for all this crap.

  

  To think I used to respect this guy. For shame!

  At least all is not doom and gloom in the PC gaming world. Recently, developer Stardock, which has produced such 4X wonders as the Galactic Civilization series and Sins of a Solar Empire, has posted on their website a gamer's "Bill of Rights". Their timing couldn't have been any better. Although massive corporations like EA probably won't be affected by the various boycotts we've seen against DRM or the PC Gaming Alliance (which, honestly, does more talking than anything else), it's possible that developers like Stardock can sway the bigboys, although this scenario is still very unlikely. It's quite depressing when companies like EA and even Epic Games ditch the PC in favor of consoles, but at least it's good to know we've got developers like Stardock and Valve at our backs. It's a dim hope to cling onto, but at least we have something.

  Here's a copy of the published Bill of Rights:

  --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  1. Gamers shall have the right to return games that don't work with their computers for a full refund.
  2. Gamers shall have the right to demand that games be released in a finished state.
  3. Gamers shall have the right to expect meaningful updates after a game's release.
  4. Gamers shall have the right to demand that download managers and updaters not force themselves to run or be forced to load in order to play a game.
  5. Gamers shall have the right to expect that the minimum requirements for a game will mean that the game will play adequately on that computer.
  6. Gamers shall have the right to expect that games won't install hidden drivers or other potentially harmful software without their consent.
  7. Gamers shall have the right to re-download the latest versions of the games they own at any time.
  8. Gamers shall have the right to not be treated as potential criminals by developers or publishers.
  9. Gamers shall have the right to demand that a single-player game not force them to be connected to the Internet every time they wish to play.
  10. Gamers shall have the right that games which are installed to the hard drive shall not require a CD/DVD to remain in the drive to play.

  --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  

  Happy gaming and remember to help combat SecuROM, DRM, and EA's other nasty schemes!

  • Posted Sep 12, 2008 7:16 pm PT
  • Category:
  • 9 Comments
  • Tag
  • Print
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Digg

See Previous Blog Posts