Someone's Reading My Mind...

Tim Holman at Relic Entertainment had some interesting comments over at Edge Online today.  "I think one of the things that hurt PC gaming is PC developers.  If you make a game with such high-end requirements that only people with a $6,000 PC can play it at a decent framerate, of course your sales are going to drop."  I'm sure it was his way of responding to my post from yesterday...keep sending me secret messages Tim!

But really, what's wrong with using graphics that were cutting edge in 2005?  The rippling water looked pretty darn good back then, so why is there a constant need to push the graphics envelope?  I'm sure we all like pretty pictures, but I'd wager we really appreciate great game play even more.  What if PC Devs took half of their graphics budget and put it into game design and balance?  The water wouldn't always ripple, but that would be a price I'd be willing to pay.

Of course, I'm not trying to imply that awesome graphics always come at the cost of game play - but is the enjoyment garnered from spectacular graphics worth the cost to PC gaming as a whole?  I don't blame gamers for wanting awesome graphics, I think it's an easy metric for a game's quality.  It also makes it harder for smaller companies to compete, something that offers a competitive advantage to the big companies.  But I think it's time for gamers and devs alike to rethink their stance on graphics, because it's quite possible that the PC's viability as a game platform is at stake.

OK, I'll get off my graphics soapbox.  Two days in a row is enough for now!

Thanks to Kris at Edge Online!

Comments

[Zack]

Wow, terrible time to come to your blog.
I was wondering if you could get some information from your connections in Games for Windows Development studios if/how they hope/plan to take advantage of the multi core machines that are out there.
While huge system requirements are always annoying, there have been many PC's sold in the last few years which had at least dual core CPU's and Quad Core are even coming into the mainstream now.
I read about Supreme Commander as a cutting edge muti-core enabled game, but would love to see feedback/timeline/listing of games which make good use of multi core machines.

p.s. the small white text on black makes your blog hard to read....

[Abdul]

@Ryan: Theres nothing wrong with high end graphics, but the low end is equally important as I've been telling you over the last week or so.

@Zack: Look at what people are buying now

Netbook sales are likely going through the roof. I haven't seen the sales charts, but if those were out a few years back when I was in University, I'd be dying to have one even if it didn't play games. Even Microsoft is reconsidering it's Windows strategy by making sure Windows 7 has lower system requirements than Vista and runs on netbooks. I think its the first time in it's history that Microsoft is actively trying to downscale requirements for an OS. Netbooks usually have a 1.6 GHz single core CPU.

The trend of computers being leaps and bounds ahead of the previous generation has ended and we're starting to see lower-end machines lag behind high-end machines. When we first saw the performance that rivals the low-end CPUs of now (like the Atom), it was 5 years ago (think Barton).

That being said, most PCs sold today do have an adequate CPU for most games assuming there isn't an intense physics engine. However, across the board, from Netbooks, to Laptops, to low-to-mid range Desktops, GPUs are far below the spec that a lot of modern PC games target.

[Mike Noone]

Hello Ryan!

I understand your stance on the gfx race but you have to remember that pushing the envelope is something that we PC Gamers love and BTW take a look back when Unreal came out, not many Pc's could run it at all. nowdays alomost every crappy Pc can do it so please take a moment and think about it, the games are much more optimized now then before so thats not a problem to worry about IMO.

If devs started listening to ppl like you we all would be playing pong :D
The games would look much worse then say an xbox 360 port and 360 is total crap and old now, If it was up to me then the gfx bar should be even higher the it is.as I want advancment. tell the guys over at NwNews what you think and you shall hear a thing and two about what it's all about.

e.x nVidias 8800 series has sold more then all crappy 360 and PS3 pu together. over 100 milions or what nVidia was saying. so please read up before you speak couse the total installed base of 8800 series owners just stomp over these so called next gen consoles ;)

Otherwise then that I wish you good luck as the Pc Gaming appostle with MS and dont forget to hang out and reply at nwnews to :)

[Abdul]

Mike,

People can't justify buying a $300-$500 video card anymore nor do hardware manufacturers want to put those video cards into computers people buy. Couple that with today's economy and you've got a stagnant baseline for graphics. PC gaming can't rely on the hardcores anymore and needs to start attracting casual gamers. A high level of entry won't work anymore.

Thats not saying that developers need to ignore high-end GPUs though.

[Ryan Miller]

Hey Mike, welcome!

I'm not saying we should do away with high-end graphics, I'm saying we should lower the low end. I know there's a market for games with cutting-edge graphics, but catering to that market has negative effects on PC gaming as a whole imho.

[Mike Noone]

Hi Ryan, and thanks for the welcome :-)

Yeah I understand what you mean and if one look at it this way its okey but I mean bulding a decent gaming rig these days dont cost that extreme as it was before, you know what I mean on the Pentium days. now you can get at good dual/quad core very cheap and mem/hdd and even a good graffics card dont cost ya that much as you know. so prices have been falling drastic what once cost and arm and a leg i think and thats get more ppl inte pc gaming :-)

But i see what you mean abou lowering the end couse the more pll can play the merrier of course and that'shat I liked about what you said scalaby graffics. the devs need to do better engines and DX 11 I think will be a great start so the future looks even brighter for us fellow Pc gamers :-)

Keep up the good work Ryan and keep pushing MS in the right direction about our great hobby ;)

[dreamhunk]

If it's any thing that has hurt pc gaming it's the games dev's like epic games,crytek,the fable game dev,lucas arts Ubisoft,Id software game dev and the media. They have for years being saying pc gaming is dying or attacking pc gaming. To be honest this hole drm, pircay. Pircay is a problem but it's on all gaming plat forms. Even if pc gaming dies the pirates would end up pirating consoles. Pc gamer don't have a huge company to back them up until now. I mean with the pc gaming allaince. That article is just another attack on pc gaming. If pc gaming is hurt it's all the abuse we fans have been getting. Look at the fore unleashed for pc gamers and lucas arts. take a look the lucas arts fourms and look up force unleashed for pc. their fourms went over 3 000 posts with upset fans. You should try even googling that on you tube.

Any way pc gaming is fine it will never die. Here is a list of games coming to the pc.

http://adrianwerner.wordpress.com/

I would say that pc gaming has alot of low end games and not enough high end games. Crysis sold well over 1.6 mill very rarely does a pc game sell so well unless it was a g reallygood game. look at spore it sold over 2 mill.

I personaly think that there are some game devs and people out there that wants to destory the pc gaming.

[Mike Noone]

Wery very well said dreamhunk, I totaly agree about all you was saying and I should have put it that way from the begining.
So here a big +1 for that :)

As you say Crysis sold very good and I remember F.E.A.R sold a shitload of copies to and that was just as Crysis when it camed out, a very high end hardware driven game and that did NOT stop it from selling extremely good!

I like what Gabe / STEAM) Newell said, it's an perception problem with all the fu.. hype all these craptoyboxes got and makers say the same shi. as allways ..here what you should game on couse Pc gaming is bla bla dead and the fuc.. media is with em sheesh doutchbags I say haha!

One can only hope the MS will stay bye their world about how much they just luuves the Pc as a gaming plattform. I have read so much in the last years about how they will make Pc Gaming nr 1 as windows is their bread and butter, so will shall see. I have not seen that much for now but maybe their is hope in the end and as you say we nopw have the pc gaming alliance and I think only good can come from that!

[dreamhunk]

Sorry about my gammer and spelling I'm tired right now, any way for windows live. I have some ideas to improve it. Add a place where pc gamers could have access to mods and also have access to indie game devs.

[Ryan Miller]

Hey Mike,

Yeah, I think we're agreeing here - I'm just thinking about games for the millions of PCs already out there. In 5 or 10 years, the average PC will be plenty capable for most games, so I think this problem will go away. Lowering the low end just makes sure that we can play now.

[Mike Noone]

Hi Ryan!

As I said and what I think is that the games now is much more scalabe then before, you know Unreal or Thief for an e.x, only the best hardware could run it back then.

And now pretty much every Pc thats 3 -4 years old can run every new game that comes out, heck take a look att Crysis Warhed you know that a very weak Pc can get it playable and somewhere the basline must be, you cant expect that a Pc from 1998 a 10 year old comp can run the lastest dont ya ? ;)

As said eralier hardware these days is så frikking cheap that you can build a nice rig for next to nothing and it's better then what the toybox 360 can put out, eeh annywon said 720P and the games run at what it's like 540P and frames that is way looow :-)

My cheap old 8800GT 512Mb with q6600just stomps over the weak 360 and eat every port for breakfast, Dead Rising here at 1920*1200 with 60 FPS+ so you see it's cheap and runs all games great with much better fidelty then any console can even dream of :D

[Abdul]

Mike, walk into your local Best Buy and look at the PCs and Laptops sold there. The ones that people are going to buy usually have an Intel Accelerator or a low-end nVidia/ATI card (much less powerful than the 8800).

I know there is a disconnect between what the hardcore PC gamers see and everyone else because card like the 7800 and 8800 have been around for years now, but even the newest low-end cards from ATI/nVidia don't come close to competing with their high-end cards from a few years ago. :(

[dreamhunk]

check out this last attack by epic games

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2008/11/10/epic-second-hand-games-are-a-huge-issue/1

"According to Capps the ratio of pirated to non-pirated versions for Crysis was a staggering 20:1"

Uh... so there are over 60million people with crysis?

[Andrew]

The fact is that the quality of the graphics correlates directly to how immersive a game is. In terms of game play the racing genre has barely moved on from Pole Position but the level of immersion available from NFS, Burnout, GRID etc. is orders of magnitude better. Similarly Call Of Duty 4 was run of the mill in terms of game play but the graphics just put you right there in the action in a way nothing else in the FPS arena has been able to (there are so many highlights of that game but the scene in the TV station control room was particularly spectacular). I could make the same argument about GTA IV.

I think striving for better and better graphics is a good thing, even at the expense of game mechanics. However what I think the developers working on PC games don't do is optimize the capabilities of the existing technology in anything like the way the console developers do. It's all too easy to argue against time consuming code optimizations and just launch the game by bumping the recommended specs to reflect current cutting edge (or even future, I'm looking at you Flight Sim) hardware performance on the grounds that that will be mainstream in a couple of years.

This problem is particularly egregious when it comes to CPUs. It's easy and relatively affordable to upgrade a graphics card, especially if you stay at the $100-$130 mid-range, but a new CPU means a new machine for most people (even the DIYers will still likely need a new CPU, mobo and memory). If game designers did one thing I'd suggest that they optimize their code to minimize the CPU requirements. If they did that then I think they'd meet your requirement that the low end be lower.

[Ryan Miller]

Excellent points Andrew!

I'm not saying we should stop doing great graphics, I just think that the graphics of 2005 were pretty darn good, and I'm tired of stretching my system to the limits for the next big game just because the water is a little ripplier. My main point is scalability - there's a ton of PCs already out there, I think there should be a sizeable game catalogue for them as well.

The CPU think hits home, I remember when L4D was first announced, it wanted a 3 ghz pentium. eep.