An interesting read
Mon Sep 17, 2007 10:21 am
Taken from FORTUNE magazine Technology section last year.
Scroll down to the bottom half of the interview where it references sega and its sports franchise.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's an interesting online Question and Answer article by AVnT (a PC / Console developer from Bethesda).
===============================================
FT: With the introduction of the Next Gen consoles, the PC market looks to be taking the back seat once again in favor of Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo's latest offerings. How do you view this 'changing of the guard' mentality?
AVnT: To be quite honest, we've accepted this mentality and know quite well that the 'changing of the guard' will occur every five or six years; or whenever the Next - Next gen consoles come out. It's part of the ever evolving process of technology and the ever changing face of the gaming industry. Yes, we've heard about the death of PC gaming every year for the last 15 -16 years now. But, with all the hype and glamour associated with any of the console launch, at the very end, is it the PC that usually comes out on top.
FT: Every year, the PC market has established itself as a premier gaming platform. Yet, it is still on the lower end of the development tier when compared to say, the 360 or the PS3. Can you eloborate?
AVnT: The mental process on how the PC is viewed needs to be clearly defined. If you do a random survey on casual gamers, most will say that the PC is for email first, internet browsing second etc. So, in order to change that mentality, you have to throw out every perception people have of the PC and revert that change. Microsoft understands this and is slowly shifting that perception by introducing their Games for Windows brand. In the next 12 - 24 months, the old adage that a PC is only for surfing the net or writing a resume will be thrown out the window. The new perception will surely reflect the PC as the most formidable and competitive gaming platform. At this point, the PC harnesses the most impressive technology.
FT: If Micrsosoft undestands this, why aren't other developers sold on the Games for Windows hype machine?
AVnT: Oh, lots of develpers are sold on the GfW hoopla, they just want to see how far Microsoft takes it. They want to see what kind of an infrastructure Microsoft builds with their latest branding, so many are just kind of taking a 'wait and see' approach. As long as the infrastructure is there, the system and processes will follow. It's like that old saying "Build it- and they will come".
FT: So, you're saying that until then, the PC market will have to make due with what they have now?
AVnT: I'm saying that the bread and butter still comes from the console market. Sure, there are some niche markets only availabale on the PC (TBS, RTS, Simulations etc.), so regardless of how much a developer loves the PC realm, that development house still needs to make a fair profit margin on the games created. So, the development house would create some third party surveys to see how beneficial, say a sports game on the PC would generate. Many times during the survey though, it would be the PC gamers themselves that would hurt the developement of certain games.
So, taking a chance on say, a sports game on the PC is like developing a true RTS for the consoles. It's a risky proposition that opens you up for some financial losses.
FT: So you're saying PC gamers hurt PC gaming?
AVnT: I'm saying that the casual PC gamers definately hurt the development of the newer games for their platform. It is these same casual gamers that clamour and whine about the lack of genre for the PC, yet refuse to upgrade to help push the technology and development further. Many so called PC gamers are still trying to game on antiquated hardware, then wondering why they can't achieve 'next gen' graphics or gameplay. This certainly hurts the hardcore PC gaming crowd who have already upgraded to the latest and greatest hardware. When you're talking about PC gaming, you're really referencing two different PC audiences: the Casual and the Hardcore.
It's interesting to note that several years ago, Sega and Visual Concepts ran a poll on a PC gaming website and asked if there would be any interested for the 2K series sports franchise(s) making their way to the PC. Obviously, over 88% of the people polled enthusiastically responded yes; but, on the second survey that was sent out, the question was asked as to whether or not these same gamers would upgrade to the newest technology for those given game(s), and only 11% of the people polled said they would. Making the possibility of bringing out the 2K franchise null and voided.
Suffice to say, the administrative brass at both VC and Sega removed that idea from their next gen agenda.
FT: So there needs to be a Unified PC Gaming Front?
AVnT: Why not? That's why the console market is so lucrative. Everyone that owns a 360 owns a static hardware platform. There's no need to mess and tinker with different versions of shaders or to create a different library path because everyone is running on the same hardware.
In order to keep the PC a viable gaming platform, a unified structure must exist. I understand this. Microsoft understands this with their GfW brand and both ATI and NVidia understand this. But it's the casual PC gamers that, for whatever reason, do not understand this. Unfortunately, there are too many casual PC gamers versus the hardcore PC gamers to make any consistent progress. It's ironic that the same platform that these casual gamers support, is the same one that they hurt.
Scroll down to the bottom half of the interview where it references sega and its sports franchise.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's an interesting online Question and Answer article by AVnT (a PC / Console developer from Bethesda).
===============================================
FT: With the introduction of the Next Gen consoles, the PC market looks to be taking the back seat once again in favor of Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo's latest offerings. How do you view this 'changing of the guard' mentality?
AVnT: To be quite honest, we've accepted this mentality and know quite well that the 'changing of the guard' will occur every five or six years; or whenever the Next - Next gen consoles come out. It's part of the ever evolving process of technology and the ever changing face of the gaming industry. Yes, we've heard about the death of PC gaming every year for the last 15 -16 years now. But, with all the hype and glamour associated with any of the console launch, at the very end, is it the PC that usually comes out on top.
FT: Every year, the PC market has established itself as a premier gaming platform. Yet, it is still on the lower end of the development tier when compared to say, the 360 or the PS3. Can you eloborate?
AVnT: The mental process on how the PC is viewed needs to be clearly defined. If you do a random survey on casual gamers, most will say that the PC is for email first, internet browsing second etc. So, in order to change that mentality, you have to throw out every perception people have of the PC and revert that change. Microsoft understands this and is slowly shifting that perception by introducing their Games for Windows brand. In the next 12 - 24 months, the old adage that a PC is only for surfing the net or writing a resume will be thrown out the window. The new perception will surely reflect the PC as the most formidable and competitive gaming platform. At this point, the PC harnesses the most impressive technology.
FT: If Micrsosoft undestands this, why aren't other developers sold on the Games for Windows hype machine?
AVnT: Oh, lots of develpers are sold on the GfW hoopla, they just want to see how far Microsoft takes it. They want to see what kind of an infrastructure Microsoft builds with their latest branding, so many are just kind of taking a 'wait and see' approach. As long as the infrastructure is there, the system and processes will follow. It's like that old saying "Build it- and they will come".
FT: So, you're saying that until then, the PC market will have to make due with what they have now?
AVnT: I'm saying that the bread and butter still comes from the console market. Sure, there are some niche markets only availabale on the PC (TBS, RTS, Simulations etc.), so regardless of how much a developer loves the PC realm, that development house still needs to make a fair profit margin on the games created. So, the development house would create some third party surveys to see how beneficial, say a sports game on the PC would generate. Many times during the survey though, it would be the PC gamers themselves that would hurt the developement of certain games.
So, taking a chance on say, a sports game on the PC is like developing a true RTS for the consoles. It's a risky proposition that opens you up for some financial losses.
FT: So you're saying PC gamers hurt PC gaming?
AVnT: I'm saying that the casual PC gamers definately hurt the development of the newer games for their platform. It is these same casual gamers that clamour and whine about the lack of genre for the PC, yet refuse to upgrade to help push the technology and development further. Many so called PC gamers are still trying to game on antiquated hardware, then wondering why they can't achieve 'next gen' graphics or gameplay. This certainly hurts the hardcore PC gaming crowd who have already upgraded to the latest and greatest hardware. When you're talking about PC gaming, you're really referencing two different PC audiences: the Casual and the Hardcore.
It's interesting to note that several years ago, Sega and Visual Concepts ran a poll on a PC gaming website and asked if there would be any interested for the 2K series sports franchise(s) making their way to the PC. Obviously, over 88% of the people polled enthusiastically responded yes; but, on the second survey that was sent out, the question was asked as to whether or not these same gamers would upgrade to the newest technology for those given game(s), and only 11% of the people polled said they would. Making the possibility of bringing out the 2K franchise null and voided.
Suffice to say, the administrative brass at both VC and Sega removed that idea from their next gen agenda.
FT: So there needs to be a Unified PC Gaming Front?
AVnT: Why not? That's why the console market is so lucrative. Everyone that owns a 360 owns a static hardware platform. There's no need to mess and tinker with different versions of shaders or to create a different library path because everyone is running on the same hardware.
In order to keep the PC a viable gaming platform, a unified structure must exist. I understand this. Microsoft understands this with their GfW brand and both ATI and NVidia understand this. But it's the casual PC gamers that, for whatever reason, do not understand this. Unfortunately, there are too many casual PC gamers versus the hardcore PC gamers to make any consistent progress. It's ironic that the same platform that these casual gamers support, is the same one that they hurt.
Mon Sep 17, 2007 10:42 am
That is why they need to make scaliable engines. Sure only 11% would upgrade just for those games, but how many people have systems that could already run the game well on max, or systems that could run it well by turning down the details slightly.
Today, it is amazingly easy to port games from the 360 to PC, not so probably when they ran that poll before. 2007 is a lot different from 2004.
Today, it is amazingly easy to port games from the 360 to PC, not so probably when they ran that poll before. 2007 is a lot different from 2004.
Mon Sep 17, 2007 10:52 am
Thanks for posting, the results of those polls are certainly interesting. I imagine those numbers would be a concern for a developer given they're already dealing with a niche market.
Mon Sep 17, 2007 10:54 am
benji wrote:That is why they need to make scaliable engines. Sure only 11% would upgrade just for those games, but how many people have systems that could already run the game well on max, or systems that could run it well by turning down the details slightly.
Today, it is amazingly easy to port games from the 360 to PC, not so probably when they ran that poll before. 2007 is a lot different from 2004.
I'm sure this is what the developer was getting at. Instead of creating a scalable engine, would it not be financial better to have an engine that works on one common denominator?
I'm not a programmer, so I have no idea what it takes to create several renditions of an engine to fit everyones hardware, but I'm assuming it takes time and effort; which equates to MONEY.
But I guess the question needs to be asked: if EA Sports and SEGA promised to release all their proprietary sports games on the PC, and all they ask is that we upgrade to a DX10 card, would you do it?
Mon Sep 17, 2007 11:09 am
Well, that is not a question for me. I will be upgrading to a DX10 card irregardless of what EA Sports and 2K (Sega is not involved in the 2K series anymore) do.
You do not write an engine to fit everyones hardware, you write an engine to meet industry standards (DirectX or OpenGL) then it is up to the hardware makers to meet them as well. With the 360 devkits, the developers basically have a checkbox to compile the game for Windows using DirectX 9 and/or 10.
You do not write an engine to fit everyones hardware, you write an engine to meet industry standards (DirectX or OpenGL) then it is up to the hardware makers to meet them as well. With the 360 devkits, the developers basically have a checkbox to compile the game for Windows using DirectX 9 and/or 10.
Mon Sep 17, 2007 12:58 pm
Instead of creating a scalable engine, would it not be financial better to have an engine that works on one common denominator?
The EAGL is similar to that, making it possible to develop a game once and have it ported to different systems(Xbox/PS2/PC).
By the way, AVnT is absolutely right. I am about half way inbetween being a hardcore gamer and a casual gamer. I have only upgraded once to top-of-the-line/near-top-of-the-line hardware. It has lasted me two years and counting. I'm still debating on whether I should upgrade so I can play BioShock without the shader hack(because I've seen it without the hack, and it's godly visuals deserved to be displayed). I will eventually have to upgrade, but I wouldn't want to get a non DX10 card right now and then have Crysis come out and have me wanting to upgrade again.
Tue Sep 18, 2007 6:45 am
This makes little sense. Because there are casual gamers on PC who play card and board and puzzle games, game developers won't develop for hardcore PC gamers who spend $1000+ every couple of years to upgrade hardware, and who own hardware now that blows away 360.
Saying that the casual PC gamers hurt the PC gamer market is ridiculous. Casual PC gamers don't play games like NBA Live, and they won't play games like NBA Live.
Saying that the casual PC gamers hurt the PC gamer market is ridiculous. Casual PC gamers don't play games like NBA Live, and they won't play games like NBA Live.
Tue Sep 18, 2007 8:44 am
I think their argument is lousy, especially today, and I think you're right in regards to casual PC gamers. But we have to remember on consoles they probably pick up plenty of casual gamers for Live. Sports fans who see the commercials and are like "I'll pick that up", something you do not really get on the PC.
As you noted casual gamers on PC play Bedazzled. Casual gamers on Xbox play Madden and Halo.
As you noted casual gamers on PC play Bedazzled. Casual gamers on Xbox play Madden and Halo.