[JemyM]

How many do you know who bought Vista? I know noone. How many do you know who stopped to play games on PC and bought an XBox? I know many.

PC was the dominating gaming platform up to just a few years ago. Now experts say PC gaming have been declining during the later years. A simple search on gaming sites such as mobygames or gamerankings show this trend. The amount of PC games released each year have dropped drastically while the console titles for enduring brands (nintendo/sony) remains close to the same.

Now, when did the PC platform begin to drop?

Reference: Mobygames
2006, Win: 497 titles, XBox 79+95 titles (2nd value = 360)
2005, Win: 602 titles, XBox 230+25 titles (2nd value = 360)
2004, Win: 763 titles, XBox 212 titles
2003, Win: 817 titles, XBox 222 titles <- Peak of the PC platform
2002, Win: 702 titles, XBox 177 titles
2001, Win: 660 titles, XBox 25 titles <- XBox released
2000, Win: 625 titles

It takes about 2-3 years to produce a modern game. If you compare this to the table above, note when XBox took over.

In the recent years I have heard people promote Linux and Macintosh with "if I want games I buy a console".

My theory is, Microsoft defeated Windows. The greatest competitor against Vista is their own console and their attention to XBox have hurted their own market even more.

Imagine if Microsoft had used their money to promote Windows as the competitor against Sony and Nintendo. Imagine if they would have invested research in gaming hardware for windows, bought "Windows Exclusives", advertised Windows as an entertainment platform with upcoming games. Imagine if XBox was a cheap hardware to connect PC to your television with just a DVD reader, plugs for a controller and wireless/lan to your PC.

Imagine if every XBox 360 exclusive game was instead a Vista exclusive game. Imagine if "XBox Vista" was sold, bundled with the hardware I mentioned above.

If that was the case, would you have bought Vista?

Point being: Microsoft defeated themselves.

[insane_cobra]

I believe the decline of PC gaming started with the release of the first PlayStation. It's not that the PC market is shrinking, the console market is growing and PlayStation quickened that by making (console) gaming "cool".

[JemyM]

According to mobygames and gamerankings the PC platform peaked around the first years of y2k.

The decay begun around 2004-2006.

[Dasilva]

''Games for Windows'' brand is just to promote Vista, they dont care about PC games anymore, they just care about their operating system & Xbox 360.

[JemyM]

Originally Posted by Dasilva

''Games for Windows'' brand is just to promote Vista, they dont care about PC games anymore, they just care about their operating system & Xbox 360.

PC games = Windows games.

I am not surprised they care for their OS, it's their product. Point is that it's due to their console product they have assisted to move the markets attention from their primary product to their greatest competition.

Games for windows is a project that should have taken place instead of XBox, and they should promote this like they currently promote XBox 360.

[Phantom]

You're wrong on many levels.

Originally Posted by JemyM

How many do you know who bought Vista? I know noone. How many do you know who stopped to play games on PC and bought an XBox? I know many.

Many of my friends have upgraded already or will upgrade in the near future. Might be because I work on a computer science university campus, but either way, some gamers DO upgrade to Vista. It depends on the people you hang out with. I don't know anyone with an X-Box. Really. (I do know many people with Wii's though).

PC was the dominating gaming platform up to just a few years ago. Now experts say PC gaming have been declining during the later years.

Not exactly correct. Experts say RETAIL sales have been declining. That does not take into account MMORPG/monthly subscription revenues, web-based games, games bought over the internet (Steam, Popcap, ...), and so on. PC gaming has shifted from standard retail sales to online distribution, cheap web-based gaming content and so on. These things aren't accounted for in retail sale figures. Look at adventure games for a perfect example: many indie or small-scale adventures are distributed (some exclusively) online, often with great success.

PC gaming is far from dead, it's only shifting focus.

Originally Posted by JemyM

PC games = Windows games.

I am not surprised they care for their OS, it's their product. Point is that it's due to their console peroduct their primary product suffers.

Games for windows is a project that should have taken place instead of XBox, and they should promote this like they currently promote XBox 360.

I agree. In the beginning, I thought this was a mistake on Microsoft part. That they had accidently made Windows a worse playing scenario than the consoles. But the more I think about, I believe they are consiously doing it because more people play games on consoles than on a PC. I know at least some people who got a console, and say they would never play games on the PC, because they prefer the console control and such... I don't know that many who say they would never play games on a console. But there must be some of those too, not sure how many though. I am one of those at least.

I am thinking. Maybe Microsoft does this because they actually want people to buy the XBOX(360) instead of a PC when they are going to play games, since the console games are in general more expensive and seem to appeal to a broader amount of customers, and since Microsoft doesn't earn anything on the hardware in a PC, but will earn on the hardware in an XBOX. I have heard some people saying that PC games are anti-social, while console games are something for a group of people to enjoy.

Anyway. If you take Microsoft Windows and remove the possibility to play games there, what do you got? At least not something that you can't get from Linux or Mac. Which could explain why they are making so many new standards now. Like: if you want to use a mac or linux, at least you can't access the files that was made in Windows. That way maybe more people will stick with Windows just because they are afraid they won't be able to use the files they depend upon if they switch to Linux or mac. I mean, considering that practically all their old standards(except DirectX perhaps, but that's coming along too... and they keep adding new standards on the new version of DirectX as well...) are supported in non-microsoft programs as well.

I am not sure. What do you people think?

[samIamsad]

Originally Posted by JemyM

Imagine if Microsoft had used their money to promote Windows as the competitor against Sony and Nintendo.

Hm, but what's the point? Besides Windows being an operating system for personal computers first and foremost... Yes, practically every commercial release for x86 machines is made for Windows, since, surprise, surprise, 9.05 out of ten x86 machines are running with Windows. I mean, there you have it:

Originally Posted by JemyM

Microsoft defeated itself.

In a few years you and me will be running Vista anyway, games or not, regardless if we think we don't need it now. Trust me on that.

The way I see it, as far as gaming is concerned, the "utter mess" that the PC platform has always been can and will never ever be on par with the ease and plug&play provided by systems designed solely with gaming in mind. Especially not now, since the lines between all the systems are more and more blurring. Yes, I'm a PC gamer. My old Amiga owns that bloody thing though. No need to be afraid, though... what's the point of that? Is it the stupid platform is or is the games that matter?

Exactly.

Originally Posted by samIamsad

In a few years you and me will be running Vista anyway, games or not, regardless if we think we don't need it now. Trust me on that.

Well, there still are people who run Windows 98 or 2000.

Originally Posted by samIamsad

No need to be afraid, though... what's the point of that? Is it the stupid platform is or is the games that matter?

Exactly.

True, even it turns out that PC games will be dead in 2015 or 2020* it's no point in worrying about it. It's not like I can do anything about that, except supporting the games and platforms I feel are worth supporting and hoping others do it too. Beside, by the time the console would take over(if it ever does) I will be at least over 30, maybe even closer to 40... by that time I am too old to play games anyway, and probably will just play the classics or just a small amount of games that I still enjoy playing. I'll probably keep on playing adventure games, if that gender doesn't die or merge with RPG games

* which I of course greatly doubt. It will probably rather be a shift in the type of games you find on a PC. Like, for example: graphics intensive games are then only on consoles, or adventure and RPG games are no longer released on consoles

[Davies]

Microsoft's marketing for Windows has historically been aimed squarely at businesses. And businesses don't want their workers playing games on their computers.

Their attitude toward home computing has been: "If people want a computer at home, they'll automatically go for what they're used to from work."

It's only recently that the home market has REALLY taken off in comparison to the business market, and the main selling points for it seem to be internet integration and home audio/video manipulation.

[RLacey]

Originally Posted by JemyM

How many do you know who bought Vista?

I'd be willing to be large amounts of money that Microsoft always shifts far more copies of operating systems with new PCs than to current PC users. As people upgrade or buy anew it will filter out into the market place, just as XP did before it.

That said, I am due to be upgrading within the next couple of weeks (though I won rather than bought my copy).

Like some others here, I'm not sure that I actually know anyone in real life that owns an Xbox. I can state quite categorically that I've never used one except one of the ones on display in shops. Regardless, though, there will always be a place for PC gaming because of its different control systems, and because anyone can go and develop a PC game without having to pay large amounts of royalties.

[Dasilva]

Wait until the PC gets the edge over the PS3 & Xbox 360, then everyone will want to make the next HL2 for PC, they woulden't make HL2 for the PS2 because they wanted the latest and greatst technology. I've been a PC gamer all my live and ust because theres something better out right now, doesnt mean PC games are dead.

[JemyM]

Originally Posted by Davies

Their attitude toward home computing has been: "If people want a computer at home, they'll automatically go for what they're used to from work."

Ironically, I note a trend in the other direction now. Several of my friends heavily promote Linux on their jobs because Linux is free and represent savings for their employer. It's not a question of small companies but large ones. Even governments start to move to Linux.

Originally Posted by marsan

I will be at least over 30, maybe even closer to 40... by that time I am too old to play games anyway

I'm closer-to-30-than-25 and I have to say the 'too old for gaming' feeling has definitely started to kick in. I imagine well before I'm 40 I won't be a gamer unless we start to see more games aimed at adults.

Originally Posted by JemyM

Ironically, I note a trend in the other direction now. Several of my friends heavily promote Linux on their jobs because Linux is free and represent savings for their employer. It's not a question of small companies but large ones. Even governments start to move to Linux.

* sees a chance to promote linux *
Also, in linux you don't have the sane problem with drivers. There are a lot of older hardware that could be quite usable still. But since it's so hard to get drivers for a newer operating system like Windows XP, there is no other choice but to throw the hardware away and get new one. But in Linux the support is already there in the kernel. No need to download extra drivers for most hardware or hunt for some legacy driver that was discontinued 10 years ago. All such factors makes it very likely that we will see more and more of Linux at different jobs. The question then is if people will switch to Linux at home as well then, or if they will stick with the operating system that came pre-installed on their new computer.

The reasons Microsoft Windows ever became as famous as it did, was because they made sure Microsoft Windows was pre-shiped on the PC when people bought it. I remember when Microsoft Windows 98 was common to be pre-shiped on the computer. Then the company that sold the computer pre-installed with Windows on all their PCs had to pay the same as those who only pre-installed it on one PC. Since there are always one person who want Windows pre-installed it was cheaper to ship it on all the PCs rather than having an alternative OS pre-installed on certain PCs. This is the reason why you rarely see the same company sell both Linux PCs(PCs that come pre-installed with Linux) and Windows PCs(PCs that come pre-installed with some flavor of Windows).

[samIamsad]

Originally Posted by marsan

The reasons Microsoft Windows ever became as famous as it did, was because they made sure Microsoft Windows was pre-shiped on the PC when people bought it.

No, no, no. You got that wrong. It became known that this mighty fine music video of this mighty fine tune shipped on the Windows disc. At least that's why *I* bought Windows Ninety-Five.

Originally Posted by RLacey

Regardless, though, there will always be a place for PC gaming

Yupp. Though input systems might not be so much of an argument in the future. Who knows how the future home gaming systems will look like? Or PC input devices, for that matter? I hope Nintendo won't "downgrade" to a keyboard from where they are now, though.

[insane_cobra]

Originally Posted by JemyM

According to mobygames and gamerankings the PC platform peaked around the first years of y2k.

The decay begun around 2004-2006.

In a number of released games, maybe, but not necessarily in sales or profits.

I stand by my assessment that PlayStation was the beginning of the decline (at least in the eyes of mainstream - like Phantom said, the PC market isn't really doing that bad). It was the first time people could get a cheap CD-ROM based console with graphical capabilities far surpassing anything available on the PC at that time (3DFX Voodoo appeared only a year, year and a half later and the cards based on it were almost as expensive as the whole PlayStation console, which by that point had quite a library of games). Couple that with Sony's aggressive marketing and you can clearly see the makings of the third console gaming revolution.

It's much more probable that Microsoft foretold the direction in which the market would be moving and decided they wanted a slice of the pie themselves (another reason is that they wanted to prevent Sony from taking over the living room). They couldn't have saved the world of PC gaming, the change would've happened even without their involvement, and I doubt the Games for Windows initiative will turn the tables either.

[Dasilva]

I think Once Xbox 360 has defeated Sony (the PS3) Then they will spread the focus to PC and not exclusively on the Xbox 360.

[aries323]

It is probably true that the decline in retail pc gaming is real. I know that in the last year alone, I have bought Dreamfall, Gothic 3, and Neverwinter Nights 2, as well as the Shivah and Morning's Wrath online. The latter two were sole digital downloads which meant that no box were shipped. I also bought the Carol Reed mysteries online as well as an old game, Morpheus.

I know that many gamers have downloaded digitally the Elder Scrolls Oblivion from Direct2Drive and many gamers (still) download games digitally from
either Steam or Gamespot.

I also think that many families want to invest in an PS2 or an Xbox or possiblly a Wii, since this means that the family can play games together. At leat the Wii has that option as well as it forces you to sort of move your body while swinging that golf club or using that sword or shooting that bow.
Families that have maybe 2-4 kids usually, I think, invest in a a PS2 or Xbox console, simply because this means that the kids can play games together or that the Dads can play with the boys in the family. And this usually makes the Moms very happy .

On the whole console vs. PC thing, I know that I am considering getting a Nintendo DS lite (not at least thanks to you guys who has opened my eyes for this platform in terms of adventure games). I'm even considering getting a PS2 slim version since they are now down to about $200 or so in my country.

The point is this:

Many PC gamers will have, I think, a console as a supplement to their PC gaming, be it an GBA, or a Nintendo DS Lite, or maybe a PS2. [If I were married with kids, I would probably have a PS2 as well, as there is PS2 in
1 out of 5 Danish homes or households].

Afaik, Oblivion, Knights of the Old Rebublic 2, and Broken Sword 4 as well
as Dreamfall all were released on consoles as well as for PC gaming.

It is possible to have good games released for consoles such as the Xbox,
the PS2, and more consoles. It is not the consoles' faults that there aren't any games out there for consoles which have depth, good stories and such things. It is mainly the publishers' and developers' faults as they think all the
console crowds want are (mindless boring) action shooters where gamers just press the A button to kill everything in sight. However, the sale of Prey, Gears of War and Lost Planet prove them wrong, though.

In a post in a thread about the same topic on rpgcodex, I mention that to me, the first Hitman was really really unplayable, because of the controls.
To me, streamlining the controls, is not 'dumbing the game down' for the consoles. It is to make the game interface more accesible to the average player, the player that don't want to be hold to *hit 14 buttons at the same time* just to get character to work. [I know I'm exageratting a lot, but I hope you get the point ].

[Davies]

Originally Posted by marsan

Beside, by the time the console would take over(if it ever does) I will be at least over 30, maybe even closer to 40... by that time I am too old to play games anyway, and probably will just play the classics or just a small amount of games that I still enjoy playing.

Originally Posted by bitwise xor

I'm closer-to-30-than-25 and I have to say the 'too old for gaming' feeling has definitely started to kick in. I imagine well before I'm 40 I won't be a gamer unless we start to see more games aimed at adults.

Aww, come on! I'm 46 in a couple of months, and hardly feeling too old to play games. The only problem I've got is lack of free time, mostly stemming from my career choice (freelance = long hours).

Look on the bright side: When you're in your 40s, you're likely to have more disposable income to spend on your toys of choice.