Support NeoGAF

[charlequin]

As many people have mentioned, it's very true that Steam didn't "save" PC gaming -- which was still alive before Steam and would still be with us in a significant way if Steam were never born. However, it is a major link -- though not the first or only one -- in the chain of causes that led PC to be what it is today: the most vibrant, diverse, and open platform in play today, with an unprecedented depth of software, many huge opportunities for developers, and a bright future ahead of it.

That result required Microsoft -- for all the hate we throw their way -- to improve Windows XP and Vista as gaming platforms, and to drive forward some useful standardizations.

It took the GPU companies -- to get their acts together and finally improve drivers enough for normal people.

It took World of Warcraft, to get ten million people used to playing games on their computers, and in many cases to buy the machines that they could do that on.

It took Steam, to help people who aren't obsessive catalogers buy games and know that they can play them later; to push PC devs to match console featuresets; to spearhead a new, much more beneficial pricing strategy; to give small games a platform to promote themselves on while avoiding the challenges of self-fulfillment.

It took Cave Story and Braid, to kickstart a Renaissance of indie development; and Minecraft and League of Legends, to put PC gaming in an unprecedented number of hands.

It took the Humble Bundle, to make the top indie games household names and put a starter library in the hands of many brand-new PC gamers.

It took Kickstarter, to solidify PC as the place to get niche audience products.

And it took the realities of modern console development, to finally guarantee that PCs could keep up with consoles once more in terms of AAA releases.

Knock out any part of that, and PC gaming isn't as successful as it is today.

The biggest thing Steam did for PC gaming was kill the medium-/large-budget PC exclusive by transmogrifying the PC into a glorified, expensive console on which PC developers could no longer compete.

This is ridiculous, though. The biggest, most successful PC developers of the immediate pre-Steam era (y'know... Valve and Blizzard) are still producing huge, wildly successful PC exclusives today. The biggest successes in gaming period over the last five years have been PC exclusives (LoL) or titles with a clearly superior and better-selling PC version (Minecraft.) The mid-tier studios that have reinvented themselves and held on in the current marketplace (Obsidian, Double Fine, Firaxis, and so on) are doing so in large part via games that are only on the PC.

If you look at the era immediately before the Steam store's rise to prominence, the big PC exclusives are dominated by genres that collapsed under their own weight (MMOs, where nothing else could compete with WoW, and RTSes, which needed more friendly models lik tower defense or MOBA to survive), stuff that was already in trouble but has seen mini-resurgences lately (turn-based strategy titles, point-and-click adventures), and genres that started to migrate to consoles of their own accord (FPSes, open-world RPGs, I don't see any reasonable argument that draws a causal line from Steam to the reduction of games properly designed for the PC.

 

[jim-jam bongs]

Oh Charlie, the truthiness of that post was off the charts. You'll always be my octodad.

 

[DodgyGeezerFella]

I also strongly believe that, with the console focus and not chasing the high end graphics, allowing PC versions of games to run and damn near any respectable card, helped people feel comfortable in buying PC games, instead of worrying about whether their system could run a game or not. Hell you could probably still run most games today on an 8800GT to some degree.

 

[HP_Wuvcraft]

I wonder if Origin would have been invented without steam's inspiration.

The idea that Steam was a unique idea is simply wrong.

Valve just did it before everyone else, and they perfected it a full ten years before anyone else.

 

[petran79]

Apples and oranges, really. Like the bargain bin deals.

The difference was that you were limited to what your local shop had to offer. Or else you had to download the title illegally. with steam regional sale borders were eliminated. Indie games prospered due to this.

For older dos and windows games, before gog there was home of the underdogs. But steam began to offer older games too recently.

 

[Dolor]

Ah yeah, that was a long time ago.

You're welcome to hope for a Steam release but with all of Roberts' talk about World of Tanks and League of Legends and other massive games that are entirely missing from Steam, I seriously doubt it's happening.

Don't get me wrong, I'd rather have a Steam client just for easy installation and autopatching (without having to keep the Star Citizen client active). I think Roberts is convinced that his playerbase is now self-sustaining and they won't have to give up that 30% to Valve. Remember how reluctant he was to put the crowdfunding phase on Kickstarter, and that was only a 10% cut!

Well, if he goes back on what he says, that would be pretty petty, and to do so when he's already made a AAA budget for the game before it's even released at almost 100% cut would be doubly crummy. Not saying he can't do it, but I think it's telling that all these huge devs are so afraid of putting their high-selling games on Steam (EA, Blizzard, Riot, Mojang) because they assume that if they do that nearly all of their future sales will come from Steam (and will therefore lose a cut to Steam). The fact that their assumption is that (and likely true) ought to be teaching them the opposite lesson - that their customers want their game on Steam because it provides value for them. Instead, they are excluding Steam so that they get their cut.

For whatever else it is, that decision to deny their customers their first choice in where they play their game is motivated by greed alone and is particularly galling in the case of games where they are already bringing in tens of millions of dollars.

 

[Wiktor]

Well, if he goes back on what he says, that would be pretty petty, and to do so when he's already made a AAA budget for the game before it's even released at almost 100% cut would be doubly crummy. Not saying he can't do it, but I think it's telling that all these huge devs are so afraid of putting their high-selling games on Steam (EA, Blizzard, Riot, Mojang) because they assume that if they do that nearly all of their future sales will come from Steam (and will therefore lose a cut to Steam). The fact that their assumption is that (and likely true) ought to be teaching them the opposite lesson - that their customers want their game on Steam because it provides value for them. Instead, they are excluding Steam so that they get their cut.

For whatever else it is, that decision to deny their customers their first choice in where they play their game is motivated by greed alone and is particularly galling in the case of games where they are already bringing in tens of millions of dollars.

Does it even matter? The way Star Citizen is set up it will still have it's own client and online system. So even if they put it on Steam people would still whine about double logging and lack of Steamworks.

Honestly. for people who have such huge problem with open system where everybody can set up their own thing maybe PC gamingisn't the platform they should be on.

 

[akachan ningen]

You'll never settle this. Nobody can see into the alternate reality where steam never happened.

 

[quantumnerd]

Definitely helped, since the user experience for standalone executables was really inconsistent before Steam came along. That put Steam on a similar level of complexity as consoles.

 

[Shingro]

Answer: Yes. Next question!

(I mean, computers were going to always play games, so long as you can run anything on computers there will be games, but it certainly made it an economic force valuable and valued and maybe most importantly, not tied to shareholders and money-snatching. Hell, depending on how monopolization goes with companies like EA, the pressure of capable Steam releases might save ALL gaming =P)

 

[Objectively Bad Opinion]

Steam saved the pride of being a PC Gamer.

However, I have to be honest with you PC gamers.

I personally feel left out as a PC Gamer and that concern has been growing into me year by year. Particularly this year, all I hear and read about is console this and console that, portable this and portable that. I must admit this is the first time where I actually envy console owners and how promising the future looks for them in terms of titles or sequels.

you're basically saying that your confidence in a platform is wholly dependent on how much money is spent on marketing and no offense but this is a very backwards way of forming an opinion and thinking about the future. Especially since marketing as of late has tried (and succeeded in a huge way) to crowd-source hype by generating viral reactions from social networks

and it's been shown that individuals are able to come forward and generate reactions in a similar fashion, that realize small projects in big ways via crowd-sourced funding through the likes of kickstarter; proof that budgets no longer have to come from a monolithic source and games can be made that people want, not what someone decides people want

My point being that the same monoliths which fund the marketing and games you miss on PC so much, it's becoming increasingly clear, are no longer as important as they used to be. I mean, what does Sony and MS bending over backward to attract the independent developers say to you?

and anyway big name games are still being released for PC, their frequency hasn't decreased in a meaningful number (or at all?), and can only increase as the audience on PC increases (and it is increasing) and makes developing for PC more palatable to third party studios that have traditionally focused on console development

Dark Souls has become a posterchild for this movement

what I'm trying to say here I think is that your post is a big wall of wat that is pretty much completely detached from reality and presents a narrative that runs contrary to what is actually happening in real life

sorry :/

 

[charlequin]

The fact is that high quality games developed by people who were not part of the formalized industry have always existed on the PC and it really wasn't until middle budget games started deteriorating that these freeware developers became aware that their games were actually products to be sold.

Not in anything remotely like the volume they are today. It's hard to name even a single genre in the history of the medium that hasn't seen an indie title released on PC within the last year or two, and many have seen more indie releases in the last five years than they ever saw beforehand. Steam isn't remotely the sole causal factor for this, but it's a big contributor by virtue of providing a zero-effort payment and delivery platform for accepted devs.

Really?
I've been a PC-centric gamer since I was a small kid and I'm getting the exact opposite vibe, here.
I think the appeal of new consoles has never been so marginal and weak as it is right now with this new generation.

PS4/Xbone is probably the first time that someone with a brand new gaming PC can plausibly expect to skip new consoles for years and not miss out on the vast majority of major AAA titles.

 

[TheCloser]

Not in anything remotely like the volume they are today. It's hard to name even a single genre in the history of the medium that hasn't seen an indie title released on PC within the last year or two, and many have seen more indie releases in the last five years than they ever saw beforehand. Steam isn't remotely the sole causal factor for this, but it's a big contributor by virtue of providing a zero-effort payment and delivery platform for accepted devs.



PS4/Xbone is probably the first time that someone with a brand new gaming PC can plausibly expect to skip new consoles for years and not miss out on the vast majority of major AAA titles.

False. Look I like pc's as much as the next guy but this statement couldn't be more wrong. In fact, it's the opposite. This is the first generation where people with a new console can skip pc and not miss anything worth while. With the rise of indiegogo and other sites like it, devs can crowd fund their games and console manufacturers are eager to bring those games to the console. Star citizen, next car game, zero hour, day z and other games like these are going to end up on PS4. We are even sering f2p games on the ps4 as well. The variety of games coming to consoles this gen will easily surpass that of the ps2. I just built a new pc and i can honestly say that except you're a pc gamer first, there is no need for a gaming pc. Any game worthwhile on PC will end up on consoles this gen. Console exclusives on the other hand will not. Games like the order, Halo, infamous, gran turismo, quantum break etc will never come to pc. Most sports games will be absent as well. Just look at what happened this year. Fifa 14 came to pc and it was the Ps3 version instead of the ps4 version. Nba 2k14 came to pc and it was the Ps3 version as well. Pc's are more powerful but they are taking a back seat. The type of aaa games that are popular are not developed with pc at the forefront. In fact when it comes to triple a games, you can consider pc a tertiary platform.

Is pc gaming good? Yes. Is it going to be better than console gaming this gen? Nope. The advantage of pc is the openness of the platform and graphical capabilities.

Console gaming is where the money is at for aaa games. Games that push the hardware. You can already pre-order batman arkam knight on PC for 39 bucks and I'm sure that if you wait, the pre-order price will drop. On consoles, you pre-order for 59.99. more money.

I was going to get a gtx 780 but I decided to hold off till the 800 series because I couldn't justify the upgrade. Honestly, there is going to be two, maybe 3 games over the course of the generation that pushes the hardware. What is the point? Play my game at 4k and 120 fps? I don't care about that. As long as my game looks good and has good gameplay, I'm happy. It made sense last gen because I couldn't deal with the sub 1080p resolution on the ps360 but we are getting to the point where games are good enough. I mean, look at infamous. That game has good Iq and it looks good. The next big step in graphics is ray tracing and vr. These are the only 2 areas that interest me pc wise atm.

Buying a gpu to play games at 1440p is very pointless. Is it going to make the game play any better? Nope. You are still playing a console port.

 

[Wiktor]

104964509Any game worthwhile on PC will end up on consoles this gen.

If you truly believe that you're in for a world of dissapoitment. The ammount of "worthwhile" PC games that won't come to consoles will dwarf any exclusives consoles can have. Currently nobody can really afford to make console exclusives anymore unless it's funded by MS, Sony or Microsoft and those companies have limited funds and won't be able to pump out more than few worthwhile exclusives each year.

 

[TheFLYINGManga_Ka]

I don't think Steam saved it nor they kept it alive. I think PC will always be there no matter what because of PC gamers.

But I think Steam gave it mainstream appeal and kept it more relevant in the market.

 

[petran79]

. Any game worthwhile on PC will end up on consoles this gen. Console exclusives on the other hand will not. Games like the order, Halo, infamous, gran turismo, quantum break etc will never come to pc. Most sports games will be absent as well. Just look at what happened this year. Fifa 14 came to pc and it was the Ps3 version instead of the ps4 version. Nba 2k14 came to pc and it was the Ps3 version as well. Pc's are more powerful but they are taking a back seat. The type of aaa games that are popular are not developed with pc at the forefront. In fact when it comes to triple a games, you can consider pc a tertiary platform.

Is pc gaming good? Yes. Is it going to be better than console gaming this gen? Nope. The advantage of pc is the openness of the platform and graphical capabilities.

Console gaming is where the money is at for aaa games. Games that push the hardware. You can already pre-order batman arkam knight on PC for 39 bucks and I'm sure that if you wait, the pre-order price will drop. On consoles, you pre-order for 59.99. more money.

Developing costs reached such a point where developing a game to utilize PC hardware to its fullest is too expensive even for AAA games. While in the 90s if you had a Voodo card you were king and played the most advanced games.

but a lot of console exclusives are also for niche audiences, like specific low cost anime fighters and jrpgs
they have a small audience so a PC release would hardly make any difference

regarding sports games, well if you consider that Pro Evolution 13 is sold at a higher price that Pro Evolution 14, it doesnt matter that much. also on PC there are mods that can update the game with the latest rosters

My friend has the PS3 version of Pro and he used a mod to change the in-game leagues
would have been so much easier on PC.

I dont think there has ever been a gaming platform that would be able to play all games in existance, even though the PC with emulators can claim to play 99 % of video games.

you'll buy a console if you want to play specific games like Halo and GT.

but playing AAA games like The Last of Us, didnt give me the impression of playing an AAA game. Regarding controls and gameplay,I felt like I was playing a 3D platformer of the late-90s with worse controls. I couldnt believe the hype.

also those loading times, still give me the impression that you buy a console to play 1 specific game for a long period of time, instead of switching to multiple games in an instant, like on PC. hence the more expensive prices, even on the digital store.

it is a different philosophy altogether. navigating through that clunky console OS has nothing to do with playing games on Windows or Linux.

 

[-tetsuo-]

False. Look I like pc's as much as the next guy but this statement couldn't be more wrong. In fact, it's the opposite. This is the first generation where people with a new console can skip pc and not miss anything worth while. With the rise of indiegogo and other sites like it, devs can crowd fund their games and console manufacturers are eager to bring those games to the console. Star citizen, next car game, zero hour, day z and other games like these are going to end up on PS4. We are even sering f2p games on the ps4 as well. The variety of games coming to consoles this gen will easily surpass that of the ps2. I just built a new pc and i can honestly say that except you're a pc gamer first, there is no need for a gaming pc. Any game worthwhile on PC will end up on consoles this gen. Console exclusives on the other hand will not. Games like the order, Halo, infamous, gran turismo, quantum break etc will never come to pc. Most sports games will be absent as well. Just look at what happened this year. Fifa 14 came to pc and it was the Ps3 version instead of the ps4 version. Nba 2k14 came to pc and it was the Ps3 version as well. Pc's are more powerful but they are taking a back seat. The type of aaa games that are popular are not developed with pc at the forefront. In fact when it comes to triple a games, you can consider pc a tertiary platform.

Is pc gaming good? Yes. Is it going to be better than console gaming this gen? Nope. The advantage of pc is the openness of the platform and graphical capabilities.

Console gaming is where the money is at for aaa games. Games that push the hardware. You can already pre-order batman arkam knight on PC for 39 bucks and I'm sure that if you wait, the pre-order price will drop. On consoles, you pre-order for 59.99. more money.

I was going to get a gtx 780 but I decided to hold off till the 800 series because I couldn't justify the upgrade. Honestly, there is going to be two, maybe 3 games over the course of the generation that pushes the hardware. What is the point? Play my game at 4k and 120 fps? I don't care about that. As long as my game looks good and has good gameplay, I'm happy. It made sense last gen because I couldn't deal with the sub 1080p resolution on the ps360 but we are getting to the point where games are good enough. I mean, look at infamous. That game has good Iq and it looks good. The next big step in graphics is ray tracing and vr. These are the only 2 areas that interest me pc wise atm.

Buying a gpu to play games at 1440p is very pointless. Is it going to make the game play any better? Nope. You are still playing a console port.

Is ....this real?

 

[Schweinehund]

I don't think PC gaming would be dead by now without steam.

But it certainly wouldn't have been nearly as popular.