Support NeoGAF

[jgf]

While there are many PC users out there, most of them play on toasters. So it just doesn't make sense to blow 50 millions on an exclusive title that relatively few people can play.

I can't think of a single reason - from a developers point of view - why one should go high-end PC exclusive when so much money is on the line.

 

[DocSeuss]

'cause A) multiplat is the future, and B) nobody pays for PC exclusive games to be made the way MS or Sony does. You'd need, like... Nvidia and AMD to collab on that stuff, which would be super cool, come to think of it...

Gotta move those goalposts until the proper levels of doom and gloom are achieved. (Not referring to OP specifically.)

Generally, we refer to retail games as AAA, though. F2P aren't retail, yeah?

I think, off the top of my head, Sega's the only publisher making AAA PC games, as Total War/Company of Heroes.

 

[alexandros]

I don't really understand the question. What happened to big and AAA PC only games? The same thing that happened to big and AAA console only games. Nowadays games cost so much that it makes business sense to port a game to as many platforms as possible in order to attract the biggest possible audience. The triple-A console and PC markets have amalgamated into a single multiplatform AAA market.

 

[Katana_Strikes]

It's one of the main reasons I gave up with PC gaming. The games I used to play and love don't really exist anymore or turned to shit. There's the very odd time a game comes out I want to play but it's not enough to upgrade my computer for just one game.

 

[dark10x]

and other such games.

You can't really discount the crowd funded stuff either. Some of those bigger ones get AAA level funding minus the marketing and publisher side of the budget.

All multiplayer. The types of games I don't enjoy. :-(

I want another game like Crysis - something that pushes the envelope in a well worn genre both in terms of gameplay and visuals.

 

[alexandros]

All multiplayer. The types of games I don't enjoy. :-(

I want another game like Crysis - something that pushes the envelope in a well worn genre both in terms of gameplay and visuals.

Games like this will come in the future, Star Citizen is one such example. It will take some time because for some reason most of the gaming industry, journalists included, tried to convince people some years ago that PC gaming was dying and console was the future. The damage from that toxic attitude still hasn't been fully repaired.

 

[Silent Chief]

Pirates were always there. That didn't change.

What's not there is the profits. Crowdfunding makes a lot of sense. Publishers are not willing to fund games and the devs don't have the cash. Just look at what happened to Curt Shilling's game.

 

[dejan]

This isn't a PC gaming is dying thread btw, I am a pc gamer myself but I just find the lack of exclusives or games that take advantage of a PC lacking.
...

No, you're not. You're a console gamer with a gaming pc. Big difference.

 

[texhnolyze]

No need to be butthurt over my op. You have clearly missed my point if you think that is what I was 'complaining' about.

I mean big pc games that take advantage of pc if that be hardware or k/m that are not indie, f2p, mmo and crowd funded.

It wasn't very well explained so I apologise.

You're totally ignoring f2p, indies, and mmos as if they don't matter at all. In fact, those games reap more money than any other video game market. Why would pc developers go to the heavily contested AAA market and risk their money if they can make enough profit in that already established market? Blizzard and Valve know what they're doing, just look at their newer games selection, all f2p and multi-player oriented. Devs are just companies who are profit-oriented, afterall.

Also, more muliplats are coming to PC these years compared to last generation. That's a good thing for pc gamers as they now have a more varied kinds of games to choose.

 

[Poimandres]

I want a first person shooter custom designed for PC, really pushing the envelope. The last year for those was really 2007 with STALKER and Crysis.

Actually, I think there's a decent market for PC exclusive tech pushing FPS games.

 

[Circinus]

Well, I don't think there's a industry-standardized, specific definition for AAA games (which might cause some confusion in topics like these if different people have a different interpretation of the term).

But I don't think PC has ever really had that many >$50 million AAA games exclusive games. When publishers spend that much money, they want an as big audience as possible to maximize the chances of making profit obviously.

I think some PC MMO's do still have that kind budget probably, so there you probably have some AAA exclusives.

So nothing has happened really.


Also, why do you even need AAA exclusives? Please don't take over this obsession over "EXCLUSIVES, EXCLUSIVES" like you see in many list-war topics about PS4/XB1..

"Exclusives" is something used by the console manufacturers mostly to differentiate their platform and to make it more appealing. Not something that is directly beneficial to consumers at all. Since PC is an open platform where anyone can make anyone game he wants on it, without having a party taking royalties (unless you put it on storefront/digital distribution platform like Steam), you'll only see exclusive games on PC when it makes financial sense for the publisher.

 

[Lalalandia]

Once the x360 and PS3 came out most FPS games focused on those first and foremost leaving PC gamers with little to show off the horsepower of PC beyond slightly fancier, higher res versions of fairly low tech games. The last major game that really pushed PC was Metro 2033 and the remake of that dropped a lot of the fancier effects like volumetric lights to work well on PS4/XB1.

As to why this is, my best guess is that a lot of folks took the 7th console gen as a chance to get off the ever more costly PC upgrade train and with the majority of the market on consoles why would you waste an million dollars or so in dev costs for a minority of users? Disappointing but what are you going to do, I really miss that heyday of GPU wars when new cards would be dramatically faster on games at standard res (ie 1080p) rather than improving perf at >1440p or supersampled resolutions.

 

[driver116]

PS4 + XB1 have become too easy to develop for, compared to PS3 and 360.

 

[beril]

There's no platform holders developing or moneyhatting exclusives for PC; so there's no reason not to release a game on other platforms as well.

 

[Soph]

EA and Microsoft killed their AAA PC studio's

Rip Westwood, Ensemble Studio's, Maxis, Bullfrog and many others

 

[Unai]

To be fair, there's also almost no console exclusive either, first-party notwithstanding.

 

[razgriz417]

Company of Heroes 2, anyone? Triple-A, PC only, RTS. Came out less than two years ago.

was crap in comparison to COH 1, got bored after 2 sessions :/

 

[Saintguine]

Third party exclusives are gone in general mostly, I remember when there was a shitload of PS2 third party exclusives but everything nowadays is mainly multiplats.

 

[KillerMan91]

I don't really understand the question. What happened to big and AAA PC only games? The same thing that happened to big and AAA console only games. Nowadays games cost so much that it makes business sense to port a game to as many platforms as possible in order to attract the biggest possible audience. The triple-A console and PC markets have amalgamated into a single multiplatform AAA market.

Destiny? GTAV? (well coming but two years later) FFXV? KHIII? All big first party games from Sony, MS and Nintendo? While sure most of games nowadays are multiplats there are still decent amount of console only AAA games (or they come to PC way way later). PC exclusive AAA games died pretty much with Crysis with some exceptions here and there.

 

[Unai]

Destiny? GTAV? (well coming but two years later) FFXV? KHIII? All big first party games from Sony, MS and Nintendo? While sure most of games nowadays are multiplats there are still decent amount of console only AAA games (or they come to PC way way later). PC exclusive AAA games died pretty much with Crysis with some exceptions here and there.

He was probably talking about third party games not funded by the console manufacturer.

 

[OmegaDL50]

No, you're not. You're a console gamer with a gaming pc. Big difference.

So owning a console alongside a high end PC doesn't make you a PC Gamer anymore?

Where does one draw the line exactly? This is why "Warz" are stupid.

 

[Muzicfreq]

And eventually some games will make the jump to console eventually

Smite going to Xbox One is a sign of that happening.
Also if Diablo3 went to consoles I don't see why other games like that couldn't like Dota2, LoL, ect.
I have seen so many people saying MOBAs can't work on console even though they can pretty easily since they dont require a billion buttons. really all it is is more direction and movement (Thumb sticks) usually just 4 actions which can be shoulder and triggers, other elements with the 4 face buttons.

 

[alexandros]

Destiny? GTAV? (well coming but two years later) FFXV? KHIII? All big first party games from Sony, MS and Nintendo? While sure most of games nowadays are multiplats there are still decent amount of console only AAA games (or they come to PC way way later). PC exclusive AAA games died pretty much with Crysis with some exceptions here and there.

Destiny is the exception that very clearly proves the rule. GTA is coming, FFXV might be coming also and KHIII... I have no idea what game it is. First party exclusives are funded directly by the platform holders. They were always exclusives and they will remain so. Everything else in the AAA industry is multiplatform. Destiny is the only true example of a big console game that wasn't released on PC and noone really understands why.

 

[texhnolyze]

So owning a console alongside a high end PC doesn't make you a PC Gamer anymore?

Where does one draw the line exactly? This is why "Warz" are stupid.

I am not a pc gamer myself as well, then, as I also own a PS, PS2, and PS3.
Why don't we call ourselves with just one term? Gamers. Not Nintendo, Xbox, PS, or PC gamers. But I guess that won't ever happen, sadly.

 

[Muzicfreq]

Destiny is the exception that very clearly proves the rule. GTA is coming, FFXV might be coming also and KHIII... I have no idea what game it is. First party exclusives are funded directly by the platform holders. They were always exclusives and they will remain so. Everything else in the AAA industry is multiplatform. Destiny is the only true example of a big console game that wasn't released on PC and noone really understands why.

It might later when there's more to the story than "I don't have time to explain why I don't have time to explain"

 

[KillerMan91]

Destiny is the exception that very clearly proves the rule. GTA is coming, FFXV might be coming also and KHIII... I have no idea what game it is. First party exclusives are funded directly by the platform holders. They were always exclusives and they will remain so. Everything else in the AAA industry is multiplatform. Destiny is the only true example of a big console game that wasn't released on PC and noone really understands why.

Never heard of small game called Kingdom Hearts? =P. Sure I agree that nowadays almost all games are multiplats but there are still more AAA exclusive games in console space (even without first parties). Pre Crysis both consoles and PC had pretty huge variety of big budget exclusives. Last gen that dipped heavily to console side and this gen it's more on par but not completely (Japan pretty much making the difference with those few big budget games still coming from there).

 

[alexandros]

It might later when there's more to the story than "I don't have time to explain why I don't have time to explain"

Maybe, who knows. I don't really care either way, most reviews from sites I trust painted a pretty negative picture.

 

[CryptiK]

You're totally ignoring f2p, indies, and mmos as if they don't matter at all. In fact, those games reap more money than any other video game market. Why would pc developers go to the heavily contested AAA market and risk their money if they can make enough profit in that already established market? Blizzard and Valve know what they're doing, just look at their newer games selection, all f2p and multi-player oriented. Devs are just companies who are profit-oriented, afterall.

Also, more muliplats are coming to PC these years compared to last generation. That's a good thing for pc gamers as they now have a more varied kinds of games to choose.

Indies and Free2Play games generally aren't AAA.

Lets not forget AAA is to do with the budget. We are talking 10s of millions of dollars here not 3-4 million.

AAA has nothing to do with the quality of the game.

 

[chiliboy]

cost too much to make a big exclusvie for a 3rd wheel. Playstation and xbox are the main markets. PC is an afterthought.

Yeah this is how it feels. I always get disappointed with the performance of multiplat titles on PC.. *stares at AC series*

 

[petran79]

Well said, all of these points are great, but the bolded in particular are what I believe to be the primary factors for the virtually non-existent AAA PC exclusives.

MS can still champion PC as their main platform should they ever get around to ditching a proprietary console platform.

In fact, with the advent of Windows 10 and all the ecosystem unification happening, MS will probably start releasing AAA games on the PC sometime later this gen or early next gen.

Xbox is a dead end with no growth potential in any major (or minor) market.

It is the first time since Windows 95 where Microsoft focuses that much on the video game aspect of an OS.
I guess they'll promote Windows Phone as well.

But they should have done this earlier. AAA games can be released on linux nowadays for free, without Microsoft control!
I'd never have expected Bioshock,Borderlands and Xcom to run there natively. Sign of what is about to come

 

[alexandros]

Never heard of small game called Kingdom Hearts? =P. Sure I agree that nowadays almost all games are multiplats but there are still more AAA exclusive games in console space (even without first parties). Pre Crysis both consoles and PC had pretty huge variety of big budget exclusives. Last gen that dipped heavily to console side and this gen it's more on par but not completely.

Oh, Kingdom Hearts! I had no idea what the acronym stood for. I have heard of Kingdom Hearts in name but I have no clue as to what kind of game it is. Anyway, it's pretty clear to me that third-party AAA console or PC exclusives are dead in the water. When you're spending so much money on the development of a single game, there isn't a single good reason why you should skip any console or PC aside from moneyhats. Why leave money on the table?

 

[alexandros]

Yeah this is how it feels. I always get disappointed with the performance of multiplat titles on PC.. *stares at AC series*

I don't understand why. Virtually every single Digital Foundry Face Off has declared the PC version of multiplatform games the clear winner in terms of both performance and image quality, with very few exceptions. We have tons of examples of entry-level PC hardware routinely matching or even beating console performance. What more do you want? Assassin's Creed Unity runs like shit on all platforms and even then PC performance is exactly where you'd expect compared to console. Your comment doesn't make sense to me at all.

Edit: Damn it, double post! Really sorry guys.

 

[texhnolyze]

Indies and Free2Play games generally aren't AAA.

Lets not forget AAA is to do with the budget. We are talking 10s of millions of dollars here not 3-4 million.

AAA has nothing to do with the quality of the game.

Sure, mmos aren't AAA neither, right?
SWTOR needed 150 millions and ESO is rumoured to be a 200 millions project. They aren't 10s million dollars for sure, hence they aren't AAA. Rift, Secret World, DC Universe Online, and Defiance might fit to your "10s of millions of dollars" category of AAA budget.
Yeah, I get it that gaf have 0 interest on mmos, but ignoring them and claiming PC don't have AAA budget titles are just ignorance. People have different taste, so there are different markets. Games that you guys don't have interest in don't mean that they aren't exist. It's the other way around, those people who enjoy those games probably have no interest in console-styled AAA games.

 

[kswiston]

To be fair, there's also almost no console exclusive either, first-party notwithstanding.

This.

PC doesn't have a first party development portfolio who gets big budgets to make showpiece games for the platform in an effort to get people to buy in. Subtracting first party titles, or moneyhatted titles that serve the same purpose, how many games are actually exclusive for either console these days?

 

[Opiate]

I think there are many factors at work, but a primary consideration is that AAA games are no longer held back primarily by technology, but by money. You could make a AAA looking game even on the Wii U (the Zelda gifs look pretty AAAish to me), if you have the money.

And it's very rare for companies to invest that money in a PC exclusive. There aren't even many AAA third party console exclusives at this point (is Rise of the Tomb raider exclusive, or is that also coming to PC?) When they do happen, it's generally understood to be an advertising/promotional deal worked out with the platform holder. Mommy Sony and Daddy Microsoft can and have paid companies to make exclusive games for their systems, but there is no similar entity for the PC.

With all this said, the PC is flourishing in every other capacity: MMOs, Korean games, Chinese games, f2p games, browser games. Online gambling, too. Mid range games that sell for 20-30, console ports that sell for 50-60, a bevy of smaller indie titles that sell for 5-10. All of these are flourishing. Really the only thing not doing gangbusters on PC are high end AAA exclusives.

 

[chiliboy]

I don't understand why. Virtually every single Digital Foundry Face Off has declared the PC version of multiplatform games the clear winner in terms of both performance and image quality, with very few exceptions. We have tons of examples of entry-level PC hardware routinely matching or even beating console performance. What more do you want? Assassin's Creed Unity runs like shit on all platforms and even then PC performance is exactly where you'd expect compared to console. Your comment doesn't make sense to me at all.

Edit: Damn it, double post! Really sorry guys.

Sorry to hear that it doesn't make sense to you. I have not experienced the same level of performance that digitalfoundry has with similar parts and drivers, ergo my post. I have always kept my PC builds fresh and up to date (GTX 580 -> GTX 680 -> GTX 780 for example) but I've always been disappointed with performance on some multiplat titles.

 

[Opiate]

This.

PC doesn't have a first party development portfolio who gets big budgets to make showpiece games for the platform in an effort to get people to buy in. Subtracting first party titles, or moneyhatted titles that serve the same purpose, how many games are actually exclusive for either console these days?

Is Rise of the Tomb Raider coming to PC? As of right now, we don't know that Final Fantasy is coming to PC, but given the recent support (lots of older FF content being ported to PC) it certainly seems likely.

 

[Metal Gear?!]

There are plenty of AAA PC exclusive games. They are all MMOs and F2P.

The PC got an exclusive Elder Scrolls game with a huge marketing budget. It was an MMO (which has now gone F2P).

League of Legends.

Every World of Warcraft expansion has a bigger marketing budget than most "AAA" console games these days.

Starcraft 2 might be one of the few exceptions... and it's quasi-F2P.

I'm going to be honest, I've never heard of TF2 or Dota 2 ever being referred to as AAA.

Are F2P games considered AAA?

TF2 and DOTA 2 don't utilize many traditional methods of advertising (due to being flagship games of an advertising platform itself) so it's hard to quantify their marketing spend and determine how "AAA" it is or not. But many other F2P games absolutely do have very expensive "AAA" levels of advertising.

Budgets increased to the point where one platform alone couldn't support them. The AAA exclusives that remain on PC are so because they are in markets/genres where there is nowhere else to go (without significant compromise) or they've found a very strong niche.

You see the exact same on consoles this gen. The only AAA exclusives on them are those paid for directly by the platform holder and those aren't exactly numerous (3 per year per platform-ish?). Anyone who can port to other consoles or PC does.

Bingo.

 

[UnrealEck]

• Heroes of the Storm
• Star Citizen
• Overwatch
• Everquest Next

These are the ones I can think of that aren't out yet and aren't expansions. Two of them are Blizzard games too.
Thinking about it though, I'm not sure any of the consoles have long lists of AAA exclusives either.

 

[alexandros]

Sorry to hear that it doesn't make sense to you. I have not experienced the same level of performance that digitalfoundry has with similar parts and drivers, ergo my post. I have always kept my PC builds fresh and up to date (GTX 580 -> GTX 680 -> GTX 780 for example) but I've always been disappointed with performance on some multiplat titles.

So you're getting lower performance? Any specific examples? Maybe there's something wrong, DF's performance numbers are usually on the lower end of the scale, you shouldn't be having trouble matching them.

 

[Opiate]

As another note, I'm always amused by people who behave as if paying for advertising/publishing or waving the license fees are a different phenomenon from moneyhatting.

People seem to think "moneyhatting" is literally the act of just handing thirty million dollars to EA or Take 2 or whomever. In reality, what platform holders more commonly do is pay for advertising, or wave licensing fees, or other such structural incentives. What meaningful difference is there between paying a company 30 million dollars directly -- which they promptly spend on advertising their big AAA game -- or simply paying 30 million dollars to advertise the game for them? The end result is the same.

I doubt there are many cases where Sony or Microsoft simply hand these companies a wad of cash. I bet there are lots of cases where they take on advertising costs (note all those multiplat games that have a Playstation or Xbox logo at the end anyway), or waive licensing fees, or handle distribution costs, however.

 

[Muzicfreq]

• Heroes of the Storm
• Star Citizen
• Overwatch
• Everquest Next

These are the ones I can think of that aren't out yet and aren't expansions. Two of them are Blizzard games too.
Thinking about it though, I'm not sure any of the consoles have long lists of AAA exclusives either.

Overwatch is uncertain since it is a shooter it can work on consoles pretty darn well. They did say there's no plans on it yet, so who knows.

EQ Next I thought was said to come to consoles at some point.

As another note, I'm always amused by people who behave as if paying for advertising/publishing or waving the license fees are a different phenomenon from moneyhatting.

People seem to think "moneyhatting" is literally the act of just handing thirty million dollars to EA or Take 2 or whomever. In reality, what platform holders more commonly do is pay for advertising, or wave licensing fees, or other such structural incentives. What meaningful difference is there between paying a company 30 million dollars directly -- which they promptly spend on advertising their big AAA game -- or simply paying 30 million dollars to advertise the game for them? The end result is the same.

I doubt there are many cases where Sony or Microsoft simply hand these companies a wad of cash. I bet there are lots of cases where they take on advertising costs (note all those multiplat games that say have a Playstation or Xbox logo at the end), or waive licensing fees, or handle distribution costs, however.

I thought money hatting was the hats they pass around in churches

Spoiler

I kid

 

[funkypie]

No, you're not. You're a console gamer with a gaming pc. Big difference.

what does this even mean other than some attempt to belittle me, lol.

You're totally ignoring f2p, indies, and mmos as if they don't matter at all. In fact, those games reap more money than any other video game market. Why would pc developers go to the heavily contested AAA market and risk their money if they can make enough profit in that already established market? Blizzard and Valve know what they're doing, just look at their newer games selection, all f2p and multi-player oriented. Devs are just companies who are profit-oriented, afterall.

Also, more muliplats are coming to PC these years compared to last generation. That's a good thing for pc gamers as they now have a more varied kinds of games to choose.

I really do think you are missing my point now. I never ignored f2p, indies or mmos at all.

 

[Opiate]

Overwatch is uncertain since it is a shooter it can work on consoles pretty darn well. They did say there's no plans on it yet, so who knows.

That's true, but the same is also true of games like FF XV and KH III -- if our measure is just "well it seems pretty likely."

Directed generally: I'm really interested in hearing a list of games exclusive to a console which aren't on PC.

 

[Muzicfreq]

That's true, but the same is also true of games like FF XV and KH III -- if our measure is just "well it seems pretty likely."

Directed generally: I'm really interested in hearing a list of games exclusive to a console which aren't on PC.

All I know of are First party games really. Third party Nintendo games I guess would be the only ones that really stay exclusive but I don't know how many there are.....
(Remembers Tales of Symphonia remaster)
Okay I dunno.

 

[spiderman0616]

I basically quit PC gaming back in 07. I was tired of spending money on PC hardware, only to get console ports that had no anti aliasing available and still didn't run well on PC. I think the launch and subsequent failure of Crysis as a PC exclusive signaled the end of an era.

It's really too bad--I still think PC gaming is superior to console gaming in so many ways. The problem is that it's just not really worth it anymore, especially now that really nice TVs are relatively inexpensive, and consoles are able to run games without all those jaggies everywhere.

 

[Anno]

I think it's a tough ask to develop something really expensive for just one platform outside of having incredible brand power or a 1st party subsidize it. On PC I think it's pretty much just Blizzard and Firaxis that have that brand, aside from the F2P or MMO world.

That said, it doesn't bother me at all. PC gaming is across nearly every genre is amazing right now. No reason to think it'll slow down, either. I don't personally have a reason to even consider another system.

 

[Opiate]

what does this even mean other than some attempt to belittle me, lol.



I really do think you are missing my point now. I never ignored f2p, indies or mmos at all.

His post was terrible, but I think I understand what he was basically driving at.

In the 90s, many people who wanted the very best graphics were focused on PC, because PCs have the highest technical specs at almost any given time.

However, as time has progressed, things have changed. The subsidization of games on consoles (be they explicit first party games or third party moneyhats) has provided a wealth of games that serve as graphical showpieces to attract gamers to their respective consoles. Over time, the primary limiting factor for AAA game design moved from pure technical horsepower to simple money. Yes, you can make PC games with better graphics than any console game, but do you have money to do it? Sony and Microsoft can afford to subsidize huge game development -- and even lose money on individual projects if necessary -- because their end goal is to push their platform. The PC has no analogous curator. Further, as this change occurred, a lot of old school PC gamers moved to consoles, because consoles were providing more of the whizz bang graphics and production values they desired.

When I think about "console gamers" today, I think of people who are primarily interested in AAA games with impressive production values, often to the exclusion of anything else. You may not fit this description personally, but it's a common preference, and most people who fit this description have migrated from PC to consoles either significantly or entirely.

 

[Opiate]

I'd add that another part of being AAA, to me, is the achievement of "event" status. That is, a game whose coming evokes great fanfare, lots of press coverage, and so forth. An easy example of this would be Destiny. Watch Dogs would be another.

A game like League of Legends may make far more money than either of those games, and have far more players, but when it released it was just a small title from a small team that was mostly of interest to people who already were in to the DotA mod for Warcraft 3. Its release was not an "event" in any meaningful way; the popularity of the game has grown over time, but it wasn't there at launch.

For a lot of people, this "event" status is part of the fun. They enjoy digging in to the game along with their friends. It feels like the community is playing and enjoying the game together, and this heightens the value of the game.

This preference doesn't necessarily lend itself well to big production values, but it certainly lends itself well to big advertising spend. The companies that can afford to have PR spokesmen and press releases and lots of advertising greatly increase their chance of turning their game in to an "event" that the community celebrates together.

 

[CryptiK]

Sure, mmos aren't AAA neither, right?
SWTOR needed 150 millions and ESO is rumoured to be a 200 millions project. They aren't 10s million dollars for sure, hence they aren't AAA. Rift, Secret World, DC Universe Online, and Defiance might fit to your "10s of millions of dollars" category of AAA budget.
Yeah, I get it that gaf have 0 interest on mmos, but ignoring them and claiming PC don't have AAA budget titles are just ignorance. People have different taste, so there are different markets. Games that you guys don't have interest in don't mean that they aren't exist. It's the other way around, those people who enjoy those games probably have no interest in console-styled AAA games.

You see how I didn't include MMO's in my statement? Yeah you didn't.

The fact that the few AAA games on PC we have are mostly MMO's says it all really.