Jimquisition: Why PC Gaming Gets Away With It

[Templar_Gamer]

Kind of off topic, but does anyone know what the footage at around the 5 minute mark is from?


EDIT:
NVM, It's apparently a game called Quantum Break, carry on.

 

[Machine Man 1992]

Sorry.

The PC I was talking about was eight years old, and as unstable as a one legged milking stool.

I am not a fan of the platform is what I'm getting at.

It's cool, I certainly know PCs do often get like that. I also understand the extra work of maintaining the machine doesn't appeal to a lot of people, in fact I've only gotten back into PC gaming recently myself due to the fact that I had thought there was no way my PC would be up to snuff these days. I suppose part the point I was making originally is that since I've gotten back into it, I've found PC gaming both quite rewarding, and a lot easier to keep up with, since the ridiculous pace at which tech was advancing at a few years ago seems to have slowed down a fair amount in recent times.

Honestly? Switching to consoles was my dad's idea. He's the IT person of the household, and he thinks the universal system requirements are what makes consoles "better".

Granted that was back in the PS2 era, but still.

 

[kklawm]

Basically it's about arguing for IMPROVING the experience instead of just ragging on one thing.

And while we're on the subject, Jim's entire premise for why Steam etcetera are different is because he doesn't believe the Xbox store will be good enough, so his entire argument is basically guesswork based on a pessimistic view of the situation and frankly, I'm tired of this pessimistic bitching and moaning that all these commentators do. Is that the only message they're selling?

It's kind of pathetic.

Nothing pathetic about it. It isn't even pessimism. Its looking at the track record Microsoft has with DRM, functionality and reliability and reacting appropriately. The xbox one can't just go and release a "steam" store and go 'Hey! We made steam on consoles!' Because they have no good will and little customer loyalty. Blizzard or Nintendo could come out and do much the same and get away with a lot more because they have that loyalty by being reliable and producing to a set standard of quality. Neither has ever made an objectively bad, system or console.

Also as a previous poster beautifully stated in a few sentences:

Isn't the thing that consoles ARE drm themselves? I mean, there is all this on top, but that's the main crux of it all.

Jim didn't mention that but it's true. As for being pathetic or pessimistic I would be careful using such loaded words, lest you end up realizing you describe your own attributes along with others.

Microsoft is also starting to offer free games to Gold subscribers. They're making moves in positive directions.

And comparing Steam serves to Xbox? When xbox servers went down it killed the multiplayer, which was almost non-existent, not the access to games. Even when the Xbox One servers go down they were planning to enable offline play so to say that's a point in Steam's favour is inaccurate.


Steam is DRM. It's internet required DRM. That's all it is. In that respect it is exactly the same as the Xbox One, EXCEPT for the fact that the Xbox One would still allow for used games which is something Steam will never have. The used game block was an optional tool. So when people say "Steam is good, but Xbox One is bad" whatever it's a fucking joke. It really is.

As for offering free games, Microsoft has STARTED doing that, something that Sony has done for since its premium online service Plus was introduced in 2010. It isn't good enough. It isn't a sign of change or doing the right thing. It's just catch up.

Steam's promises are worth a million Microsoft promises. Just because either company says something doesn't mean we trust them. People don't trust Steam will offer its games if it goes out of business. And they have spent YEARS working carefully on customer relations. Microsoft does not garner confidence. Also don't make up lies, yeah the used game block was "optional" including the extra "optional" licensing fee that you would pay to transfer ownership of a game once. Microsoft would simply be putting the option into a publisher hand (and publisher are already some of the worst offenders for draconian DRM and contempt for used games, and are NOT impartial judges).

Also calling steam only DRM is ludicrous, I can only assume you've never used it. It includes:
. A persistent downloadable online library
. The ability to overlay and include any non-steam game into the steam library
. Complete social/friend functions
. MULTIPLE payment methods (not just credit card thank you Microsoft) for any purchase and gifting purchases
. No Subscription fees of any kind
. Access any account on many computers
. No in built always online requirement (like Xbox one was going to do)
. An offline mode that essentially means everyone in the world could play a singleplayer game at once if they had the account details
. Easy ways to disc install, copy/paste and download games, removing any hard wired registry settings
. User and Critic Reviews for every game
. A seperate forum for every game
. Functional steam workshop to mod games (although this feature kinda sucks)
. Removal on most games of tedious DRM like serial numbers (and a helpful popup if there are serial numbers)
. Great sales
. Works on Mac and Linux

Seriously, I'm sure there would be tons more than this. I'm not some Valve shill. I didn't even google or lookup those features. I just know them because I use it. The value of any keypoint varies on how much you may think personally they're worth but steam spent a long time to get a form of DRM to work on an essentially DRM free system over a very long period of time with competition.

Microsoft wanted a more extreme version of DRM on a closed system (which is DRM in its own way) without any features having been tested and with no competition (essentially a console monopoly). The fact they marketed it as a TV (or just any marketing they did) rubs salt into an already shitty console with worse specs than the PS3, forced peripherals and a higher price mark.

Steam is shitty DRM but it attempts to provide features in recompense and is not a monopoly, having no control over the PC market. Microsoft, just like forcing the awful Windows 8 (objectively awful since it wasn't designed for usability at all, beyond the new look: http://www.nngroup.com/articles/windows-8-disappointing-usability/) was attempting to force a shitty console into a market with fortunately enough sense to hesitate (and probably still hesitate) to purchase its console.

Considering I have never owned a Playstation and used to be exclusively an Xbox/Xbox 360 gamer, this is a shame.

 

[JetFury]

Honestly this is kinda obvious. Kids that don't understand the advantages of pcs and consoles are really watering down any digital/ future of gaming discussion. It's sad. I mean don't they at least know the pc gets a lot more sales? And better ones at that. Stop comparing consoles to pcs console kids, you'll lose. Specially since consoles are losing the advantages of consoles as they try to become pcs

 

[jmarquiso]

Snip

Snip

You know that is fine and well but that not exactly what I meant. What I meant is that a game may require a certain type of DRM and that I have no choice in the matter what kind of DRM it is.
If I want to play Skyrim I have to put up with Steam. The only other option is not playing Skyrim.

If you want to play a ?blockbuster? game you have little choice in the matter.
Yes there is choice for really old games and indie games but the very moment you tap into the big budget games it is over.

I browsed through the stores and it seems to be always the same. Rome II Total War on Greenman Gaming requires Steam as does it from Game Fly or Gamersgate. It is simply a code purchase.
I can choose where too buy my code but I can't choose a different type of DRM. For example I can't choose to use Origin instead of Steam.
The publisher/developer made that choice and I have to put up with it.
And that is what I mean when I say that I don't really have a choice on the PC and I don't see why this wouldn't work on consoles as well. Why couldn't Greenman Gaming or Game Fly (or any other of the one million code sellers) sell codes for XBox One games as well?

This is an issue of publishers choosing to have DRM. Admittedly, Steamworks is offered to publishers for free, and it's a service that's popular amongst gamers (due to other features), so publishers that don't have their own (UPlay and Origin) would probably stick to it.

But you do have an option of simply not buying Skyrim. I know that's not what you want to hear, but that's really the case. If you want DRM to go away, don't buy games with DRM. There are alternatives - Mount & Blade, for awhile.

 

[Razorback0z]

Great work Jim, amusing and spot on.

"All the inconvenience of a console with the bullshit of a PC"

Gold!

 

[oooooooooooooooooooooooooo]

Honestly? Switching to consoles was my dad's idea. He's the IT person of the household, and he thinks the universal system requirements are what makes consoles "better".

Granted that was back in the PS2 era, but still.

Yeah, my dad is the IT guy in the house too, though he's very much a PC purist. He doesn't have a problem with consoles, but I think he prefers being able to tinker and adjust things in the machines. In fact I was actually thinking of switching over onto consoles altogether when I moved out, but the fact that I can just take my machine back to my dad and he'll almost certainly get it work fantastically has meant it's actually more convenient for me to stick with PCs.

 

[Lightknight]

Consoles don't use graphics cards. They use APUs. a CPU/GPU combo that does both but is inefficient and awful at doing both.

That's why I highly doubt it can beat a 7 series. Its from AMD, a budget tablet APU, that threatens its own current graphics card line up?

Its like saying the Ouya had the potential to to be a Radeon 8 series. Tablet technology gets you tablet results. Tablets are meant to sacrifice power, and performance for less heat and power draw. Both factors mostly irrelevant to a console, which hamstrings the consoles for no reason other than manufacturers being cheap.

The PS4's GPU = 1.84 teraflops. 7850 = 1.76 teraflops. The highest end cards are in the 5 teraflops though. At least, I believe that's what the Titan puts out.

Do you have some sort of information that would make this number to measure output unreliable? A teraflop is a unit of computing speed equal to one million million floating-point operations per second. So it's a standard way to measure computing speed.

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/393991-33-7970-compare

When it comes to flops for gaming, they are sort of a joke. If you talk about flops in a gaming sense around techie sites, you usually run a high risk of getting laughed at. They recommend things like texture units, Vram, and such.

Even then, over 2 flops aren't exactly rare. There is even a card in the 6 series that does more.

tflops isn't exactly the end all be all number for graphics. From what i read, the only place it truly matters is CPU, and the PS4's CPU is kind of a joke.

So then, the forum you sent me is merely saying that we don't have that information yet. So I'm not sure how you're claiming that it can't do this or that when the only information we have is that it can and the informaiton we really need to verify that claim isn't there.

 

[Troublesome Lagomorph]

I don't really post on The Escapist, but can I just say that Steam is an absolute rip off when it comes to new games. In fact over in Ireland Gamestop can undercut Steam with a physical retail copy of a PC game by ?20 euro. I never understood the myth about Steam being this bastion of excellence and the main reason to own a PC.

Sure, it has those great sales and they are great, but if I want a game upon release I would have to wait up to a year before it becomes anyway affordable on Steam.

Honestly, with Steam. I really just don't get it. Someone enlighten me, please.

That's because Steam has rubbish currency conversion. They just have no clue how to do it.
If you're using the US Dollar, then Steam has ridiculously good prices.
OT: I can't believe this video was needed. Seriously.
With that said, my friend and I all see Steam for what it is: DRM. Still, we use it because its generally really convenient.

Except for games with 3rd party DRM like SecuRom or GFWL. Fuck that shit.

 

[BigMack70]

Don't mind Steam because I've acquired most of my games for $10 or less on there. Don't mind the DRM aspect when it means I can save so much money. Also don't mind it because unlike the xbone's original ideas, it doesn't depend on my internet connection.

Spent 3 months last year with no internet and could still play all my games 100% fine on Steam.

 

[Madkipz]

Honestly this is kinda obvious. Kids that don't understand the advantages of pcs and consoles are really watering down any digital/ future of gaming discussion. It's sad. I mean don't they at least know the pc gets a lot more sales? And better ones at that. Stop comparing consoles to pcs console kids, you'll lose. Specially since consoles are losing the advantages of consoles as they try to become pcs

The digital era will be one where consumers sell / trade digital copies of their games to one another.

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/gaming/2012/07/04/curia-digital-distribution/

It's going to be awesome for the pc!

 

[Doug]

Why PC Gaming Gets Away With It

The Xbox One no longer enforces restrictions on used games, but the debate over console DRM is not over. One lingering question is this -- why are consoles criticized, but PC gets away with it?

Watch Video

Competition is good for consumers?
*GASP*
HERESY
MONOPOLIES WILL BRING US FULLFILMENT AND ENLIGHTEN US ALL, STOP THIS CONFUSING NONSENSE ABOUT "CHOICE" AND "BENEFITTING THE CONSUMER".


Also: Jim, you wanna take part in one of the next "failcasts"?

Oh great monopolies, guide us!

Hooray for the pc master race.

People rag on steam and valve? Didn?t know that.

I?m still rather worried what would happen if valve where to ever go bankrupt, having most of my games vanish one day is a scary idea that keeps me up at night.

I have heard some people rag on Steam, and fair enough, there is some annoyances with it and I have been turning to GOG and Amazon for my gaming somewhat more these days. But thats one of the beauties of the PC - no one owns the whole thing, so no-one can enforce stupid rules over the whole system.

Note, you could argue microsoft have tried with Windows 8, but frankly thats as big a fail as the XBone's DRM policy, and there are versions of Linux that are actually -usable- these days, so Microsoft aren't able to force us all to our knees.

 

[TheBaron87]

Why do you need to say something so obvious? Because PC is still heavily stigmatized, and young gamers either A) aren't secure enough about their schoolyard "rep" to be the "hipster" PC gamer, or B) can't convince their parents to buy into it (that old PCs are for work, consoles are for play mentality) and need to put up the image that they chose console. Now, some people, young gamers included, do have access to PC gaming and legitimately PREFER console for whatever reason that's perfectly valid for them, but those are usually the rare few rational gamers that will admit that PC is actually a good platform, it's just not for them. The fanboys would rather remain ignorant, they probably feel less guilty speaking out of ignorance than out of their arse.

P.S. PSN: http://psnprofiles.com/TheBaron87
GT: https://live.xbox.com/en-US/Profile?gamertag=thebaron087

Tell me I'm a fanboy.

 

[Doug]

Why do you need to say something so obvious? Because PC is still heavily stigmatized, and young gamers either A) aren't secure enough about their schoolyard "rep" to be the "hipster" PC gamer, or B) can't convince their parents to buy into it (that old PCs are for work, consoles are for play mentality) and need to put up the image that they chose console. Now, some people, young gamers included, do have access to PC gaming and legitimately PREFER console for whatever reason that's perfectly valid for them, but those are usually the rare few rational gamers that will admit that PC is actually a good platform, it's just not for them. The fanboys would rather remain ignorant, they probably feel less guilty speaking out of ignorance than out of their arse.

P.S. PSN: http://psnprofiles.com/TheBaron87
GT: https://live.xbox.com/en-US/Profile?gamertag=thebaron087

Tell me I'm a fanboy.

I enjoyed reading your comment and find it very rational and concise; I do think there are alot of console 'kidz' who support console over PC because of insecurity and/or ignorance, as you say, but I also agree there will be some (don't know how many) who'd chose console for whatever reason if equality equipped with knowledge of both.

I do feel as well that there has been (and I think, still is) some defenders of PC gaming who harm our cause by being overly aggressive (people taking things too far on the internet? NEVER!) in there love of the platform. I personally prefer my PC for all my gaming, and only have the XBox and PS3 for exclusive games (that generally turn out not to be worth the hype they gathered); I'm sure now that I won't be getting the next-next-gen consoles - possibly a Wii or something when my son is old enough to play games like that.

 

[AuronFtw]

And a PC isn't DRM?

Er... no. No, it is not. It's the exact opposite of DRM - it's a platform with a plethora of options available. Don't like steam? Use gog. Don't like gog? Use greenman. Don't like either and feel masochistic? Use origin. Prefer physical copies shipped to you? Wait for the great holiday amazon deals.

Consoles are the *opposite* of this. A single company holds the reigns over everything you can possibly do. They decide what goes on sale and when. They ban you and remove your entire library. They ban your XBL and prevent you from connecting online ever again for updates or multiplayer gaming.

On PCs, no company has that power. Even if microsoft's nanny software detects an unauthentic version of Windows, there is software available to tell it to fuck itself. You are in control of where you buy games from. You are in control of the programs you use. You can turn advertising off with internet browser plugins, and you can customize the OS in any way imaginable.

You cannot do a fraction of that on consoles. The company OWNS the console - you are merely keeping it warm and giving it a house. Consoles are DRM - PCs are not. That's why they are, and have always been, the superior choice for a true gamer. Consoles have only been able to compete for a few short gens, when they were actually about playing video games - and now that consoles are about dicking players as much as possible and costing as much money as possible, they're falling back into the black recesses they came from. The only way companies can turn this fall around is by making consoles about video games again. Until then, RIP consoles 1995-2012.

 

[jimplunder]

The reason why PC digital distribution is way ahead of console's is because PC digital distribution doesn't have to worry about developing hardware. It's all software. Console companies have to develop their actual consoles and have to keep updating them as graphical and processing requirements increase with newer games. All digital distributors do is simply make sure they have the content available on their servers and beyond that, all of their efforts can go to improving the service. Since all of the emphasis on console gaming is the console itself, digital distribution on consoles gets left behind. As was pointed out in the video, Sony and Microsoft don't want some other digital distributor cutting in on their profits from people using their product, so they tightly control the digital market so they can keep all of the money for themselves. If there ever happens to be a console that can outlast a gaming PC or another company's console, then I'm sure the console digital distribution market will get better and there may be options for opening up the digital distribution market there. But so long as hardware and software development go hand-in-hand and while the hardware gets all of the attention, the software component will continue to stagnate.

 

[Machine Man 1992]

Now granted with the next gen looking to make consoles into shitty PC's, instead of like Jim said and a staying slightly behind the curve, this argument may have some merit, but until that time where I no longer have to carry around a sticky note with my system specs written down when I go shopping, I'm staying console.

This is really a non-issue. I've never even heard of someone getting a game that turned out to somehow be incompatible with their pc, nevermind experienced it, and I've bought hundreds of games and have a large number of friends and family who've bought as much if not more than I have. And if you mean in terms of hitting minimum specs, you'd have to be quite ridiculously out of touch in order for you to have no idea whether your hardware is recent enough to be compatible.

Oh well EXCUUUUUSE me, Mister Moneybags! But I don't have access to the vast stores of wealth you clearly have to afford all this stuff! I had to make do with my dad's hand-me-downs, a 500 Mhz rig that chugged on Internet Explorer. Hell it chugged on Half-Life 1. It was barely compatible with stuff from 2004, let alone today. We got rid of it when the whole family switched to Mac's.

> complains about being poor.

>> OWNS A MAC.

Let me guess, you have an ipod, an Iphone, and beats by Dr. Dre too?

I never said I was poor. I don't technically own the mac, my dad does.

You are jumping to conclusions and putting words in my mouth.