Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

No PC Ghost Recon: Future Soldier

Though plans for a PC edition of Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon: Future Soldier was previously confirmed by Ubisoft, PC Gamer has word that the next installment in the Ghost Recon series is for consoles only, and that PC gamers will get Ghost Recon Online instead, which is apparently Ubisoft's new approach to PC piracy following their almost universally despised always-on DRM. Here's word from Ghost Recon Online producer Sébastien Arnoult:

We are giving away most of the content for free because there’s no barrier to entry. To the users that are traditionally playing the game by getting it through Pirate Bay, we said, ‘Okay, go ahead guys. This is what you’re asking for. We’ve listened to you – we’re giving you this experience. It’s easy to download, there’s no DRM that will pollute your experience.’

We’re adapting the offer to the PC market. I don’t like to compare PC and Xbox boxed products because they have a model on that platform that is clearly meant to be €60’s worth of super-Hollywood content. On PC, we’re adapting our model to the demand.

“When we started Ghost Recon Online we were thinking about Ghost Recon: Future Solider; having something ported in the classical way without any deep development, because we know that 95% of our consumers will pirate the game. So we said okay, we have to change our mind.

We have to adapt, we have to embrace this instead of pushing it away. That’s the main reflection behind Ghost Recon Online and the choice we’ve made to go in this direction.

View
173 Replies. 9 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Older >

173. Re: Skyrim Versus ThreatFire Nov 29, 2011, 01:03 yonder
 
Dmitri_M wrote on Nov 26, 2011, 12:12:
This pirating to "decide whether you like it or not" is a pile of utter BS. Back when I was a teen I pirated the living shit out of every goddamn game I could get my hands on. If my parents weren't buying it, I pirated it and didn't look back.

What are you wussies shopping for, make-up? Games these days are average to shit, and once in a while great. We've all been playing long enough to know whether a game is decent from videos or aggravating reviews and user reviews. Buy it or fuck off.

I have the money to purchase games now. I have a simple delivery system like steam that delivers without needing to go to a store. I don't have the time to fuck with annoying cracks and nfo files. Don't tell me people who have the time to mess with ISO's and finding legitimate pirated copies are then somehow also putting money down and purchasing the titles.

I don't care if there is some exception at play here, that 5% of you actually do purchase after "demo'ing" the game - you're way in the minority.

It's a completely BS, and frankly idiotic, argument to make.

Just because you're a petulant little immature brat who grew up a thief doesn't mean everyone is as scummy and immature as you. Way to carry on the stereotype!
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
172. Re: No PC Ghost Recon: Future Soldier Nov 28, 2011, 14:17 ^Drag0n^
 
Teddy wrote on Nov 27, 2011, 07:59:
And as a gamer, you should know full well that what an attorney 'thinks' is completely irrelevant to the law. Ask Jack Thompson about that one. He was grandstanding and spouting the exact words his clients wanted him to, nothing more and not even close to a comment that in any way shape or form defines the law. Hell, Jack Thompson called video games 'Murder Simulators', he was an attorney at the time, I guess it must be true right?

Jack Thompson in not an US Attorney; he does not prosecute on behalf of the people as a member of the Executive branch of the Federal Government. Again, you are missing my point. What I was saying was that there is a clear message that the US Attorney's Office is sending in terms of what said office intends to prosecute, and how they view the crime. A low level US Attorney can't make statements like that without the Administration endorsing the opinion.

Look, you can call me whatever names you want, but that's not going to change the the fact that the Feds are leaning in that direction, and are trying to push legislation where it does not match that definition. And the lobbyists for the artists, publishers, and unions that represent these people are backing those that feel that way too. The law isn't absolute, it is a work-in-progress. It can, and will, change should circumstances dictate such. Were it not as such, there would have been no laws past the Bill of Rights and the Constitution as written by the founding fathers; owning slaves would still be legal, women wouldn't be voting, and Congress would still be deciding whom should be President.

Teddy wrote on Nov 27, 2011, 07:59:
The LAW says that Piracy, be it music, video or software IS NOT THEFT.

Please show me that. Seriously. I really want to see it in the CFR.

Teddy wrote on Nov 27, 2011, 07:59:
You're welcome to ignore the personal attacks, I throw them in because you've earned them. Particularly by being such a complete and utter hypocrite. You accuse me of not bothering to read everything when you conveniently skip over the parts of everyone's posts where they explain IN DETAIL that they're well aware that piracy is wrong and illegal, yet you still accuse them of trying to rationalize or justify because they don't agree with your idiotic, incorrect (and completely proven so) definition of piracy.

Now just a damn minute; show me where I'm "ignoring" anything. I've not only read the previous posts, but I've acknowledged flaws that Verno and others have pointed out in what I said, and corrected, rethought, or clarrified my position as appropriate. My belief that the Executive Branch Federal Government sees piracy as Theft of Intellectual Property, and is moving to prosecute it as such through through the injection of juricprudence via "legeslation from the bench," (be that practice right or wrong) is my opinion. Your belief that Piracy is not theft is your opinion which I happen to disagree with. I happen to think that tangible property does not have to be involved for there to have been theft, ID theft being the most notable example thereof. I am not calling anyone an idiot. I am not the one trouncing around calling other forum members retards and telling them their niece and/or her teachers is/are stupid. And, on top of all this, you have managed to ignore the forest through the trees which is: My position on how the industry should deal with piracy (regardless of whether or what type of crime it may be) is that the publishers should just quit whining, chalk it up to reality, and either deal with it by adapting their business model and making quality product that makes the risk of using pirated games completely unappealing, or just stop making PC games altogether and leave it up to people that want to invest properly in the PC platform.

God, talk about missing the point.

Now, I'm pretty sure you're the type that wants to get in one last shot at me. Feel free. As far as I'm concerned this discorse is over, and I'll waste no more time on it.

^D^

PS: For the record, I agree. Jack Thompson was nothing more than a media grabber.
 
Avatar 55075
 
"Never start a fight, but always finish it."
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
171. Re: No PC Ghost Recon: Future Soldier Nov 27, 2011, 20:09 Teddy
 
StingingVelvet wrote on Nov 27, 2011, 11:12:
Teddy wrote on Nov 27, 2011, 07:59:
The LAW says that Piracy, be it music, video or software IS NOT THEFT. They have plenty of categories of theft, from petty theft, grand theft, larceny, robbery, and note that NOT ONE OF THOSE CATEGORIES is piracy related. Not one.

You're welcome to ignore the personal attacks, I throw them in because you've earned them. Particularly by being such a complete and utter hypocrite. You accuse me of not bothering to read everything when you conveniently skip over the parts of everyone's posts where they explain IN DETAIL that they're well aware that piracy is wrong and illegal, yet you still accuse them of trying to rationalize or justify because they don't agree with your idiotic, incorrect (and completely proven so) definition of piracy.

You are 100% correct, legally it is not theft. That said, I don't begrudge people calling it that, because it's a colloquialism. "He stole my girlfriend" or "she took my idea" and other such things are good examples. Whether actual property or ownership is involved or not we often use "theft" and "took" and "stole" as slang terms.

I object to misuse of language in general, and I specifically object to the misuse of it when speaking about legal issues. People spreading misinformation about the law does a disservice to everyone.

The only reason these people want to call it theft is because theft has a more intrinsic negative emotional response since most people have had something stolen from them in their life. The argument is that it makes it easier to convince people that it's wrong if they can convince them that it's 'theft'. The problem with that is that it's an outright lie. It's fraudulent and they know it, and that is what I refuse to accept.

So rather than try to educate people on what the actual law is and why it's important, the industry simply lies and there are people out there that think it's OK. Worse, they do everything in their power to try and spread the lie.

This is the same industry that lies on it's taxes to screw people who did their jobs well out of royalties owed, remember. Yep, Forrest Gump was a huge financial failure, can't afford to pay you, sorry. Avatar? Yes we know it was the biggest selling movie of all time, just... eh... not big enough. Sorry.

Our industry is dying, you need to enact new laws to save us! What? We've set record profits every year for the last 10 years? Never mind that, JUST SAVE US!

Why anyone believes a word they say baffles the crap out of me.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
170. Re: No PC Ghost Recon: Future Soldier Nov 27, 2011, 11:12 StingingVelvet
 
Teddy wrote on Nov 27, 2011, 07:59:
The LAW says that Piracy, be it music, video or software IS NOT THEFT. They have plenty of categories of theft, from petty theft, grand theft, larceny, robbery, and note that NOT ONE OF THOSE CATEGORIES is piracy related. Not one.

You're welcome to ignore the personal attacks, I throw them in because you've earned them. Particularly by being such a complete and utter hypocrite. You accuse me of not bothering to read everything when you conveniently skip over the parts of everyone's posts where they explain IN DETAIL that they're well aware that piracy is wrong and illegal, yet you still accuse them of trying to rationalize or justify because they don't agree with your idiotic, incorrect (and completely proven so) definition of piracy.

You are 100% correct, legally it is not theft. That said, I don't begrudge people calling it that, because it's a colloquialism. "He stole my girlfriend" or "she took my idea" and other such things are good examples. Whether actual property or ownership is involved or not we often use "theft" and "took" and "stole" as slang terms.
 
Avatar 54622
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
169. Re: No PC Ghost Recon: Future Soldier Nov 27, 2011, 07:59 Teddy
 
^Drag0n^ wrote on Nov 25, 2011, 16:38:
Teddy wrote on Nov 25, 2011, 14:05:
No one is arguing whether it's illegal or immoral, so there's no justifying of anything going on, you utter fucking retard, They're arguing the fact that for some reason you (and apparently some other idiot on here) seem incapable of understanding the difference.

And perhaps you should not just read one of my posts and go off half cocked, but rather read the conversation before throwing the verbal filth around. Had you done so, you would have seen I actually acknowledged that, but pointed out my reason for posting that link was more to what the US Attorney said to the media, and the ramifications it has going forward; so if you're going to quote the article, be sure you quote the relevant part:

"'Music piracy is stealing and, unless you want to end up in a federal prison, don’t do it,' said U.S. Attorney Chuck Rosenberg in a statement trumpeting the verdict."

I've pretty much come to expect comments at that level from you, which is why I really don't care about the personal attacks you throw in as well.

QED.

^D^

And as a gamer, you should know full well that what an attorney 'thinks' is completely irrelevant to the law. Ask Jack Thompson about that one. He was grandstanding and spouting the exact words his clients wanted him to, nothing more and not even close to a comment that in any way shape or form defines the law. Hell, Jack Thompson called video games 'Murder Simulators', he was an attorney at the time, I guess it must be true right?

The LAW says that Piracy, be it music, video or software IS NOT THEFT. They have plenty of categories of theft, from petty theft, grand theft, larceny, robbery, and note that NOT ONE OF THOSE CATEGORIES is piracy related. Not one.

You're welcome to ignore the personal attacks, I throw them in because you've earned them. Particularly by being such a complete and utter hypocrite. You accuse me of not bothering to read everything when you conveniently skip over the parts of everyone's posts where they explain IN DETAIL that they're well aware that piracy is wrong and illegal, yet you still accuse them of trying to rationalize or justify because they don't agree with your idiotic, incorrect (and completely proven so) definition of piracy.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
168. removed Nov 27, 2011, 05:28 chenghan
 
* REMOVED *
This comment was deleted on Nov 27, 2011, 05:59.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
167. Re: No PC Ghost Recon: Future Soldier Nov 27, 2011, 00:59 Sepharo
 
Prez wrote on Nov 26, 2011, 18:37:
** I still refuse to be treated like a thief by Ubisoft, so after I buy games with their always-on crap, I play the superior warez version. This is the only case where piracy still applies for me.

Oh man, you just became two people. One a purchasing customer and another a stealing pirate who represents a lost sale!
 
Avatar 17249
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
166. Re: No PC Ghost Recon: Future Soldier Nov 26, 2011, 21:15 StingingVelvet
 
I don't doubt any of that. I don't doubt Jerykk when he says he buys games he likes. I just don't think either of you are in the majority in any way.  
Avatar 54622
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
165. Re: No PC Ghost Recon: Future Soldier Nov 26, 2011, 18:37 Prez
 
Has to be? Don't know about that. I have 41 years of experience in the human condition, and 34 of that as a gamer. Having pirated in the past myself (and anyone who has been a PC gamer as long as I have probably has too), I can say that your reasons for pirating games varies, often from game to game. What I can tell you is that 'piracy as a demo' is something I did often. Did I always buy every game I liked? Nah, but I did it often enough. If I still used it as such now, I definitely would pay for everything I liked and delete everything I didn't because I want to reward the developers doing it right.

The thing is, I don't pirate games anymore ** because of things like Steam sales and Humble Bundles (which is how I acquired World of Goo, incidentally). When there is virtually no financial risk, and when buying is actually more convenient than pirating, a "once-in-a-while pirate" like me can be changed into an "always-a-customer". Who's to say that it doesn't happen for millions of other pirates the same way?

** I still refuse to be treated like a thief by Ubisoft, so after I buy games with their always-on crap, I play the superior warez version. This is the only case where piracy still applies for me.
 
Avatar 17185
 
Goodbye my Monte boy. May you rest in the peace you never knew in life.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
164. Re: No PC Ghost Recon: Future Soldier Nov 26, 2011, 18:11 StingingVelvet
 
Prez wrote on Nov 26, 2011, 17:25:
Again, all your emphatic statements and passionate dissertations don't change the fact that you have no idea if what you say is even close to true. You are projecting your personal image of the modern day software pirate as if it were somehow irrefutable reality. Sorry, but because there's no way of knowing each and every pirate's habits, it's not.

You're not really wrong about not knowing 100% unless you are that person, but come on man... the number of people who actually buy the games they like after pirating them has to be infinitely small. That's not me thinking I know everyone, it's just a statement made with 30+ years of experience in the human condition.

And even if they do have some morals and plan to buy the games they really like, most of those people people would then find reasons why a game isn't that great and they should wait for a sale. "I have played Skyrim for 100 hours but the UI really sucks for PC so fuck them I'm not buying it until the game of the year edition comes out." That's just how humans are. That's why companies don't want to rely on the honor system, they want to control what you can do.
 
Avatar 54622
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
163. Re: No PC Ghost Recon: Future Soldier Nov 26, 2011, 17:25 Prez
 
Again, all your emphatic statements and passionate dissertations don't change the fact that you have no idea if what you say is even close to true. You are projecting your personal image of the modern day software pirate as if it were somehow irrefutable reality. Sorry, but because there's no way of knowing each and every pirate's habits, it's not.

I just for the life of me can't understand how someone can demand that everyone accept their personal interpretation (something shaped by their own experiences) of something, while having no more evidence than anyone else, and often less, as truth. Saying "Sorry, no. Not a chance. End of story. BLAH BLAH BLAH" doesn't really convince someone of anything, regardless of how passionately YOU believe it.

Because you can't provide real evidence (due to the simple fact that it is unobtainable), all you can do is what I'm doing - offering an opinion. Just understand I'm not making excuses for what pirates do; I'm simply explaining why I throw up in my mouth a bit when people start throwing percentages around when they are based on little or no hard evidence.

This comment was edited on Nov 26, 2011, 17:47.
 
Avatar 17185
 
Goodbye my Monte boy. May you rest in the peace you never knew in life.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
162. Re: No PC Ghost Recon: Future Soldier Nov 26, 2011, 17:09 Ventura
 
Prez wrote on Nov 26, 2011, 15:53:
It's ironic that you are saying it's an "idiotic argument to make" when you are using the smallest slice of anecdotal evidence (yourself) to extrapolate that everyone else must do things exactly the same. Unless you follow every single pirate's habits and spy on everything each one does, the only BS argument here is yours, since you are just pulling shit out of your ass. Sorry.

Christ mate, you come down in the last shower or something?

Have a look around. Get a feel for how people treat each other in this day and age. Maybe society is just different in your neck of the woods or something, but these days all I ever see are people putting themselves ahead of what would be the right thing to do. All day, every day.

There's no way on this Earth anywhere near a sizeable percentage of pirates will actually buy something that they've already downloaded. Sorry, no. Not a chance. End of story. If buying it would unlock content they don't have access to playing the pirated version, then maybe, but that's not based on some sort of moral code.

Dmitri nailed it. It's bullshit, and anyone who thinks otherwise really needs to open their eyes.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
161. Re: No PC Ghost Recon: Future Soldier Nov 26, 2011, 15:53 Prez
 
I don't care if there is some exception at play here, that 5% of you actually do purchase after "demo'ing" the game - you're way in the minority.

It's a completely BS, and frankly idiotic, argument to make.

It's ironic that you are saying it's an "idiotic argument to make" when you are using the smallest slice of anecdotal evidence (yourself) to extrapolate that everyone else must do things exactly the same. Unless you follow every single pirate's habits and spy on everything each one does, the only BS argument here is yours, since you are just pulling shit out of your ass. Sorry.
 
Avatar 17185
 
Goodbye my Monte boy. May you rest in the peace you never knew in life.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
160. Re: No PC Ghost Recon: Future Soldier Nov 26, 2011, 12:12 Dmitri_M
 
This pirating to "decide whether you like it or not" is a pile of utter BS. Back when I was a teen I pirated the living shit out of every goddamn game I could get my hands on. If my parents weren't buying it, I pirated it and didn't look back.

What are you wussies shopping for, make-up? Games these days are average to shit, and once in a while great. We've all been playing long enough to know whether a game is decent from videos or aggravating reviews and user reviews. Buy it or fuck off.

I have the money to purchase games now. I have a simple delivery system like steam that delivers without needing to go to a store. I don't have the time to fuck with annoying cracks and nfo files. Don't tell me people who have the time to mess with ISO's and finding legitimate pirated copies are then somehow also putting money down and purchasing the titles.

I don't care if there is some exception at play here, that 5% of you actually do purchase after "demo'ing" the game - you're way in the minority.

It's a completely BS, and frankly idiotic, argument to make.

This comment was edited on Nov 26, 2011, 12:20.
 
Avatar 22350
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
159. Re: No PC Ghost Recon: Future Soldier Nov 25, 2011, 22:15 Prez
 
Dev wrote on Nov 25, 2011, 20:05:
He kinda did, I linked it in my reply.
Here:
http://2dboy.com/2008/11/13/90/


I've seen it all before and it is still crap.

Why? First of all, an actual, true 90% piracy rate would imply that:

1) Not a single person who pirated the game ended up liking it and then buying it, and,
2) Every single person who pirated it liked it, completed it, but decided not to pay.

I find this to be ridiculous. Dozens of people I know who pirate games will buy one if they like it. It is certain that many of the opt-ins he is using to measure piracy rate are duplicates from people who played the "free" version then decided to reward the developer. Another significant portion of the piracy numbers were undoubtedly by people who decided the simplistic, gimmicky game was simply not worth their time, and ended up immediately forgotten. This is common practice among pirates. I bought it sight unseen, but in truth I don't think it was worth anything more than a buck at most. Had I pirated it first I never would have paid actual money for it, and would have never played past the first level. I'd hardly consider a person downloading the game, spending 5 minutes to find out it sucks as relevant to the actual numbers. You can argue that any illegal download is by definition 'piracy', but it isn't a relevant number to any meaningful discussion in my view. Nothing was lost if someone downloaded it and hated it.

Secondly, I bought the game, played it, got bored, gave it to my son, who played it, got bored, and gave it to my daughter. My daughter's girlfriend saw it and made a profile and posted her scores. Not to be outdone, their friend did the same. That's 5 different unique profiles for one legal version. According to this guy's dubious accounting, what in reality was a legal version being shared legally within a household was one legal version and 4 pirated versions. Oh Noes! That's an 80% piracy rate!!!! Rolleyes

Like I said, I ain't buying it. His numbers are useless for anything except a sympathy campaign in my opinion.

This comment was edited on Nov 25, 2011, 22:33.
 
Avatar 17185
 
Goodbye my Monte boy. May you rest in the peace you never knew in life.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
158. Re: No PC Ghost Recon: Future Soldier Nov 25, 2011, 22:05 ASeven
 
Dev wrote on Nov 25, 2011, 20:05:
ASeven wrote on Nov 25, 2011, 18:22:
Uuuh, it's exactly like 78. Publishers are pushing a lot of games per month (Just look at the past two months) and you only have to see the forums and the NPD numbers, amongst others, to see people are indeed buying less games. From the past 3 years, only about 8 or 9 months of the whole 36 showed an increase in sales, the rest was a decrease. And I mean software only, if we take hardware into account, namely consoles, the picture's more dire. The forums are also a good indication, console and PC alike, that people are getting fed up with the quality of games. Also, there's a major, vast migration going into other platforms, like mobile, and publishers are not adapting into it.
I don't know how much its like 78, but I'll point out that NPD doesn't track much digital (for instance they have no steam numbers at all), which means they are increasingly irrelevant for PC game numbers.

My wild guess is that the current state of PC gaming is something around 50% retail, 50% digital, and of the digital, valve has at least 25% of it. 25% of the entire PC gaming market is not chump change.

Yes, that is my point exactly. The PC market is growing a lot lately and it brings big bucks, however the lion's share still lies on the console market, which is mostly sold on retail. Hence why it's a serious mistake for the publishers to keep neglecting the emerging digital markets on the PC and their blunders of implementing it on all platforms. And I can't see the consoles having successful digital markets anytime soon, console gamers love retail because otherwise they wouldn't be able to buy second hand games for a fraction of the price. A digital market would kill this in an instant and I can see console gamers raising hell if this were to happen. In fact, many console gamers point the second-hand market as the biggest advantage over the PC, which has none.

Until publishers successfully implement a digital distribution on consoles the gaming industry will lose a lot of money and if they do implement said digital market who knows how console gamers will react to losing the second-hand market? They sued EA over failing a promise of giving BF1943 with pre-orders of BF3, and EA backtracked on that pretty quick. If they have that reaction over a minor thing, imagine losing the second-hand market. Hence why I keep saying that the gaming industry is pretty much doomed, because they keep repeating the mistakes of 78 and because they fail to see that if they are to survive and adapt to new market conditions they have to adopt and cherish the PC market as a vital failsafe in case things start to really get out of hand financially.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
157. Re: No PC Ghost Recon: Future Soldier Nov 25, 2011, 20:09 ^Drag0n^
 
WarpCrow wrote on Nov 25, 2011, 16:59:
You do realize that a US attorney is simply a high-ranking lawyer, right? A lawyer who, in this case, was prosecuting in a case of commercial piracy? Which is, incidentally, legally completely separate from small-scale piracy for personal, non-commercial use.

Yes. Point being remarks like the ones he delivered are an indication of how the AG views certain crimes, and what their legal position would be should they chose to attack individuals in the future.

My real point here is I don't think that one needs a judge to tell them what is right or wrong, you pretty much can figure that one out on soul searching.

I won't hide it; I am of the opinion that piracy does take something away from the people that created it, and I guess that comes from having been on both sides of that equation. Again, I believe perspectives on this get scewed when you're responsible for the welfare of individuals that make these games

That said, I also think that it's piss-poor marketing and PR to sit back and blame the PC for all of your companies woes; people have pirated, do pirate, and will continue to pirate games, music, and movies. The smarter companies will look at this, and rather than try to milk blood from a stone, will adopt their means and methods such that they not only do not alienate existing customers, but also make buying their products less of a hastle than dealing with the risks inherent in Pirate Bay and hacked copies off BT or hack sites.

IMO.

^D^
 
Avatar 55075
 
"Never start a fight, but always finish it."
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
156. Re: No PC Ghost Recon: Future Soldier Nov 25, 2011, 20:05 Dev
 
Prez wrote on Nov 25, 2011, 11:04:
It may be a point worth mentioning that the World of Goo designer never provided any hard data or either, but just expected us to take the 90% number on faith. I am just not going believe that these ridiculously high numbers have anything to do with reality just because some dude says they do.

More likely they are using grossly inflated numbers to play the sympathy card so more people may be convinced to pay for the game. Which is fine, but the numbers are still ridiculous.
He kinda did, I linked it in my reply.
Here:
http://2dboy.com/2008/11/13/90/

ASeven wrote on Nov 25, 2011, 18:22:
Uuuh, it's exactly like 78. Publishers are pushing a lot of games per month (Just look at the past two months) and you only have to see the forums and the NPD numbers, amongst others, to see people are indeed buying less games. From the past 3 years, only about 8 or 9 months of the whole 36 showed an increase in sales, the rest was a decrease. And I mean software only, if we take hardware into account, namely consoles, the picture's more dire. The forums are also a good indication, console and PC alike, that people are getting fed up with the quality of games. Also, there's a major, vast migration going into other platforms, like mobile, and publishers are not adapting into it.
I don't know how much its like 78, but I'll point out that NPD doesn't track much digital (for instance they have no steam numbers at all), which means they are increasingly irrelevant for PC game numbers.

My wild guess is that the current state of PC gaming is something around 50% retail, 50% digital, and of the digital, valve has at least 25% of it. 25% of the entire PC gaming market is not chump change.

This comment was edited on Nov 25, 2011, 20:12.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
155. Re: No PC Ghost Recon: Future Soldier Nov 25, 2011, 18:22 ASeven
 
shponglefan wrote on Nov 25, 2011, 16:39:
a) Prices are generall lower than in the past and in some cases vastly lower;

As was said, fallacy of the worst kind. Even taking into account inflation and money devaluation over time, no, games weren't that vastly lower. They were about 20-25% lower comparing consumer purchase power to then and to nowadays.

shponglefan wrote on Nov 25, 2011, 16:39:
b) Quality gaming exists in abundance; while there is a ton of crap shovelware out there, it's not at all comparable to the 1978 situation;

Uuuh, it's exactly like 78. Publishers are pushing a lot of games per month (Just look at the past two months) and you only have to see the forums and the NPD numbers, amongst others, to see people are indeed buying less games. From the past 3 years, only about 8 or 9 months of the whole 36 showed an increase in sales, the rest was a decrease. And I mean software only, if we take hardware into account, namely consoles, the picture's more dire. The forums are also a good indication, console and PC alike, that people are getting fed up with the quality of games. Also, there's a major, vast migration going into other platforms, like mobile, and publishers are not adapting into it.

So yes, exactly like the 78 situation. Too many games released, not enough quality and more importantly, we're in a recession, closing on a full-blown depression. People have and do spend money on far more important and vital things. Add to this the prices of games escalating like it hasn't happened in a long time and you can see the whole picture. People will spend their money in less games because they cannot buy all games even if they wanted, they need to buy more important goods other than luxury and with the recession people are saving more and spending less. And the publishers are blind to all that and keep on hanging to a vastly obsolete business model. And I'm not even touching on the escalating development costs of games which, again, is exactly like 78. See ET in Wikipedia as the prime example of the folly of 78.

shponglefan wrote on Nov 25, 2011, 16:39:
c) New technology continues to allow for new avenues for gaming (like cell phones;

See above. There is indeed a vast migration into mobile platforms. Problem for the publishers, the price of a mobile game is about 80% cheaper or more than a full blown game. Publishers, spending millions in game development, are still not adapting to the mobile market, plus they are very resistant to changing their business model. That is not good for the industry in the medium and long term.

shponglefan wrote on Nov 25, 2011, 16:39:
d) Digital distribution eliminates the need for manufacturing/inventory costs, thus eliminating a huge chunk of costs and associate risks.

But digital distribution is still only used in a huge scale on the PC, and the PC, apart from the indies, is not the focus of the publishers, another major mistake. As such, publishers either ignore the benefits of digital distribution or implement terrible ideas like digital copies being as expensive or even more expensive than physical copies. It does eliminate a huge chunk of distribution costs for publishers but only if the console universe also adapts to it, and even so with their culture of second hand games I doubt the console gamers will adapt to this anytime soon.

shponglefan wrote on Nov 25, 2011, 16:39:
So no, this is not the same as the lead-up to the prior crash. Not by a long shot.

I disagree. In fact I lived through 78 and I can tell you, today is very, very much like 78.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
154. Re: No PC Ghost Recon: Future Soldier Nov 25, 2011, 16:59 WarpCrow
 
And perhaps you should not just read one of my posts and go off half cocked, but rather read the conversation before throwing the verbal filth around. Had you done so, you would have seen I actually acknowledged that, but pointed out my reason for posting that link was more to what the US Attorney said to the media, and the ramifications it has going forward; so if you're going to quote the article, be sure you quote the relevant part:

You do realize that a US attorney is simply a high-ranking lawyer, right? A lawyer who, in this case, was prosecuting in a case of commercial piracy? Which is, incidentally, legally completely separate from small-scale piracy for personal, non-commercial use.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
173 Replies. 9 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Older >


footer

.. .. ..

Blue's News logo