It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Kotaku is doing a "PC Week" thing this week and one part of it is asking PC developers about the future of the platform. Crytek head Cevat Yerli. who previously made an ass of himself complaining about Crysis sales figures, responded with this article:

http://kotaku.com/5674608/the-future-of-pc-gaming-according-to-the-creator-of-crysis

Basically he says the entire future of PC gaming is "free-2-play" online games and not singleplayer content, which he says everyone switched to Xbox for. Personally I still think he's butt-hurt that Crysis didn't sell Blizzard numbers, despite there being tons of non-piracy reasons why that didn't happen.
Exactly, hard to expect a game that requires very top of the line hardware at the time of release to sell as well as a game designed to work on older hardware.
high rated
I wouldn't really put too much stock in Cry Tek's understanding of the PC market, for they have none.
They probably expected sales to increase as people got better hardware that could run the game at high settings.
Tbh, I couldn't care less about what anyone from Crytek says. Almost every PC related thing they said basically translates to, "fu PCz, we didn't sell enough copiez so you don't get another excluzive game from uz ever again".

When making a state of the art engine and a game based on that engine which only the high end machines can run, don't freaking expect to sell a lot, ffs.
Plus it had a mediocre campaign with a lack luster multilayer. Also the game looked better than average, but over time it has been shown that it took such high level hardware because of its inefficient programming. Computers today still struggle with it for this reason.
I don't see Blizzard moving their games to a free-to-play model anytime soon. Hell, I don't even see them dropping their prices sooner than before, either (which they probably should do, actually).

I also find it weird he talks of "retail" games, which seems to leave out digital distribution, a significant factor in PC gaming these days (and likely in the future).
avatar
pkt-zer0: I also find it weird he talks of "retail" games, which seems to leave out digital distribution, a significant factor in PC gaming these days (and likely in the future).
I took his use of the term "retail games" to include digital distribution. I think he was just using "retail game" as a term for a game you pay up-front for and then never pay again, in contrast to free to play games.
Blah blah blah....PC gaming is dying only facebook can save it ._.
avatar
pkt-zer0: I don't see Blizzard moving their games to a free-to-play model anytime soon. Hell, I don't even see them dropping their prices sooner than before, either (which they probably should do, actually).
Of course Blizzard understands the PC market and has a reputation for releasing quality titles. This reputation basically allows them to print cash.

Granted, the latest patch for WoW was very un-Blizzard. (aka riddled with bugs) I think having Activison calling the shots is starting to hurt them.
avatar
pkt-zer0: I also find it weird he talks of "retail" games, which seems to leave out digital distribution, a significant factor in PC gaming these days (and likely in the future).
avatar
StingingVelvet: I took his use of the term "retail games" to include digital distribution. I think he was just using "retail game" as a term for a game you pay up-front for and then never pay again, in contrast to free to play games.
Free to play can work. kingdomofloathing.com is a good example. It's completely free at no point do you ever have to pay for anything. You can donate, but if you're willing to put in the work there's nothing which you can't get by playing the game and buying it in game with currency earned in game.

It's a great model and these days donation is merely a way of getting things quickly or supporting the game.

But, I don't think that it really works for all sorts of games.
avatar
Navagon: I wouldn't really put too much stock in Cry Tek's understanding of the PC market, for they have none.
Thank you.
avatar
pkt-zer0: I also find it weird he talks of "retail" games, which seems to leave out digital distribution, a significant factor in PC gaming these days (and likely in the future).
avatar
StingingVelvet: I took his use of the term "retail games" to include digital distribution. I think he was just using "retail game" as a term for a game you pay up-front for and then never pay again, in contrast to free to play games.
If so, very confusing, and shows a lack of understanding.
Post edited October 27, 2010 by chautemoc
high rated
Here's an important secret. People are greedy, lazy and forgetful. Before anyone says how the GOG community is totally awesome, I'll say these two words: selection bias. We're here because we buy games that we can get for free.

I'll use the example Frank Trollman provides in Waiting in Line. See, in the US one has to sign papers to be an organ donor. In the Czech Republic, one has to sign papers to NOT be an organ donor. So the result is that in a country mired in Soviet-style bureaucracy it is easier for patients to get organ transplants. Because people hate the idea of filling out forms more than they are bothered by the idea of being, um, disassembled into spare parts. Inertia can be a force of good. But unless some fundamental legislative principles are changed, it will never work for voluntary donations, for obvious reasons.

So what will work? Ransom (I'll make a game if people agree to collectively donate $5000). Subscription (continuous services). Pay-to-not-suck (a.k.a. free-to-play that works).

it is important to note that pay-to-not-suck will never replace subscription. Pay-to-not-suck games incentivize players to pay more and more money by making the community internally antagonistic. This arms race does not sit well with people both poor (I don't have the money to fight Baron von Prick; this means I'll always be a crap covered farmer; suddenly, flipping burgers sounds better than playing!) and rich (gently caress that noise; I'm playing games to relax with friends, not to engage in simplistic power struggles the sole purpose of which is to swindle me out of my hard-earned money). This is what's so great about WoW: have extra money? buy a Collector's Edition, or a gold-plated stein, or a hand-painted statuette of your character, or Frostmourne. No mechanical benefits. that being said, they might introduce a pay-per-quest rate for casual players in addition to the subscription.

As for the PC vs consoles debate, until there are restrictions on what consoles can run, they will never replace the PC. I'm kinda spent now, having written a huge wall of text on the very same topic at the NaNoWriMo forums: we are gradually moving away from brands and toward user-generated content. More input, more potential for input, more free marketplaces = better. For instance, if Halo 12 sucks, you make a mod that doesn't suck, and the execs hire you to design Halo 13. This requires a gaming platform that is not "defectivebydesign" (i.e. DRM-locked). My guess is that consoles will evolve into brand PCs and their respective networks into distribution platforms competing for titles but open to all users no matter their PC make.
avatar
Starmaker: Here's an important secret. People are greedy, lazy and forgetful. Before anyone says how the GOG community is totally awesome, I'll say these two words: selection bias. We're here because we buy games that we can get for free.

I'll use the example Frank Trollman provides in Waiting in Line. See, in the US one has to sign papers to be an organ donor. In the Czech Republic, one has to sign papers to NOT be an organ donor. So the result is that in a country mired in Soviet-style bureaucracy it is easier for patients to get organ transplants. Because people hate the idea of filling out forms more than they are bothered by the idea of being, um, disassembled into spare parts. Inertia can be a force of good. But unless some fundamental legislative principles are changed, it will never work for voluntary donations, for obvious reasons.

So what will work? Ransom (I'll make a game if people agree to collectively donate $5000). Subscription (continuous services). Pay-to-not-suck (a.k.a. free-to-play that works).

it is important to note that pay-to-not-suck will never replace subscription. Pay-to-not-suck games incentivize players to pay more and more money by making the community internally antagonistic. This arms race does not sit well with people both poor (I don't have the money to fight Baron von Prick; this means I'll always be a crap covered farmer; suddenly, flipping burgers sounds better than playing!) and rich (gently caress that noise; I'm playing games to relax with friends, not to engage in simplistic power struggles the sole purpose of which is to swindle me out of my hard-earned money). This is what's so great about WoW: have extra money? buy a Collector's Edition, or a gold-plated stein, or a hand-painted statuette of your character, or Frostmourne. No mechanical benefits. that being said, they might introduce a pay-per-quest rate for casual players in addition to the subscription.

As for the PC vs consoles debate, until there are restrictions on what consoles can run, they will never replace the PC. I'm kinda spent now, having written a huge wall of text on the very same topic at the NaNoWriMo forums: we are gradually moving away from brands and toward user-generated content. More input, more potential for input, more free marketplaces = better. For instance, if Halo 12 sucks, you make a mod that doesn't suck, and the execs hire you to design Halo 13. This requires a gaming platform that is not "defectivebydesign" (i.e. DRM-locked). My guess is that consoles will evolve into brand PCs and their respective networks into distribution platforms competing for titles but open to all users no matter their PC make.
Very good post sir, +1 for you
avatar
Starmaker: Here's an important secret.
That was great. I don't totally understand the systems of it, but it was an interesting and enjoyable read!