Shareware: The Past and Future of PC Gaming

[Rorschach]

If I had a nickle for every time I read on the internet that "PC Gaming is dead" I would have a lot of money right now. They proclaim that developers no longer want to support it when they can just sell their games on the consoles and escape from a complex Platform that requires a lot of work and is easily piratable. Pirates, pirates, pirates, you hear that word so often when a developer announces that there are no intentions of a PC Version. That because of a few Swashbucklers PC Gamers have crapped their bed and have to lie in it.

But I don't believe that is the case, I believe the reason why PC Gaming has been on a decline is because the big Developers just think that PC Gamers are one in the same as Console Gamers and thus we should be treated a like, often PC Gamers are treated worse. Right now EA is being extremely rude to the PC Market. 3 Big Budget titles: Bulletstorm, Dead Space 2, and Crysis 2 have demos on the PS3/360 but none of the PC. Dead Space 2 now costs 60 dollars on the PC which breaks the standard MSRP of 50 dollars. We're now getting games released on the Console weeks even months before the PC version gets released. And on top of that quite a few devs (ROCKSTAR GAMES) create terrible ports and never bother to fix them. So we pay just as much money now, we have to wait longer, we get lesser versions, and we don't even get the chance to Sample the game. And that's why I think so many developers fail, they don't give us a chance to try to game out, they just expect to jump in head first.

Look at all of the big hit titles that come from nowhere and you'll see they basically employ a Shareware tactics. Minecraft was made by one guy with no marketing whatsoever, all he did for promotion was give the bare bones creative mode away. If you described it to me, a game with crude graphics, with no clear objective besides building stuff by yourself I would of laughed. But then I played it and spent many countless nights perfecting my little forts and getting blown up by Creepers. It now has over a million sales.

Look at the very young non-business Smartphones. IPhone and Droid games are making a killing now. It's an amazing phenomenon because a small Finnish company called Rovio is dominating the market with a simple game called Angry Birds. The Top Sales is filled with little developers. Companies like EA, Activision, Epic Games, and ID Software make mobile games with fancy graphics but are still unable to remain constant No. 1 top sellers. I believe this phenomenon is occurring because Angry Birds and all the other small devs publish Lite Versions of their games. The top developers don't bother doing that and then they're surprised that people don't want to just buy them on the spot.

People want to be sure that they can run and enjoy the product before paying for it, and that's why Shareware was so successful. When ID Software published the landmark Doom they gave you the entire first episode for free. Nowadays we're lucky if get Demos, and Demos barely give you a taste of a game.

I honestly don't understand why developers creating Shareware or Trial versions, I think it was a win win scenario for everyone. Developers could get their games out to a far wider audience. And I think a lot of people who pirate games just wanted to try out the product but were hesitant to purchase. I think giving people a good chunk of the game without having them pay for it was a fantastic way to get your game out.

[rudel_ic]

Neither the shareware model nor demos make a significant enough difference for big titles that already came out on consoles. People have already made up their minds for the most part, so demos are like preaching to the choir. Prices may be high, but as long as the monetary result isn't hampered by prices, high prices are the correct business decision.

Sales for big titles on PC are more often than not much lower than they are on consoles, so putting more man hours into them than is absolutely necessary is a lose. Adding more infrastructure through serving demos, installing a shareware money channel and the appropriate support etc. thus doesn't make much sense from the POV of the investors.

The tipping point is really pofit maximization. Phenomenons like Minecraft notwithstanding, the expectation and experience from AAA development houses is that it is enough to provide the title as-is for PC because everything else that amounts to monetary effort reduces profit.

Shareware, preorder alpha magic and demos add man hours, that's basically the issue. In a business that is already hurting because of the insane quality baseline, adding more development time to a title is tantamount to herecy, especially if you have to report to investors.

So the little guys can get away with shareware because they build their businesses around the model from the getgo. Just as it was done with ye olde Doom. It's not realistic though if your expectations are like 750k sales without a shareware channel as it is.
Moreover, indie strategies are based upon risks big guys aren't able to take without big justifications. That's also partly why the release frequency and quality of visuals for iPhone games from big houses went up after others who could afford it had cleared the path.

The piracy argument doesn't factor in as much as you seem to think; it's mostly a footnote because people have realized by now that pirates aren't customers.

As for whether you can play the title or not, the big houses have QA departments for making sure that the system requirements on the box are accurate. If that doesn't pan out, it should be the exception.

In closing, it's less rude behavior, more what business demands. So you should aim your critique at the problems AAA titles experience that then lead to such demands, for instance the crazy budgets that make it impossible to not go for consoles first.

[Venatir]

tl;dr version
baws about few demos

they do it because they can. if you tried their shitty game first, you wouldn't have bough it

[Grayswandir]

EA has a tendency of pooping out a game, and then dropping support for it after sales go below a certain margin, they want to garner interest in something else, a year goes by, or for whatever reason. They're not exactly known for supporting their titles with updates after release (This isn't true of ALL their titles, but a majority of their releases don't get any love).

Also, Dead Space 2 on console, kicks ass.

[zoidberg rules]

EA seems to only be interested in making a lot of money quickly, for example Mass Effect 2 (Yes, I'm back to this) was designed and developed by Bioware, as has all the DLC, EA published it, then ignored it completely, the only reason they've been involved again recently is because it's just been released on PS3, and so EA can make more money out of it, also, it will give them a chance to see the ME3 engine, and see if it would be worthwhile funding it.

[chozothewise]

I used to be a paying customer for Activision EA and Ubisoft, but after receiving such shit service and being treated third rate, I exclusively boycott their games.

I used to panic and think PC gaming was at a depressing decline, and then I found indie games.

[zoidberg rules]

Man, life must suck for you, if you're personally boycotting EA, Ubisoft and Activision, it means that you can't play Mass Effect 2, AC Brotherhood or Black Ops.

I feel so sorry for you.

[chozothewise]

Man, life must suck for you, if you're personally boycotting EA, Ubisoft and Activision, it means that you can't play Mass Effect 2, AC Brotherhood or Black Ops.

I feel so sorry for you.

Save your pity, I'm actually not a fan of either of those games

[zoidberg rules]

Either?...

There was three in that list...

Also, you will like Mass Effect, or I will fire my laser.

[Renegade_Turner]

Either?...

There was three in that list...

From Dictionary.com:

"As a pronoun "either" sometimes occurs in reference to more than two ( "either of the three children" ), but "any" is more common in this construction ( "any of the three children" )."

Therefore chozothewise was right. Please do not correct people unless you're certain they are wrong. That's very annoying.

However, his apathy towards Mass Effect 2 is somewhat distressing. I begin to wonder if he's ever actually played it...I'm unsure how it can be disliked, but I'm afraid I must take his word for it.

[zoidberg rules]

Well Ren, looks like that's one thing I can relate to you on.

Also, thanks for the correction there, I just haven't heard "either" used to refer to one of three things before, so it threw me a bit.

[Renegade_Turner]

It's okay, unfamiliar grammatical syntax can distress me greatly aswell sometimes.

[zoidberg rules]

If your trying to confuse me by increasing the size and complexity of your words, it isn't working, I understood that!

If not, ummm... I didn't just make that there comment!

[Renegade_Turner]

I didn't think you'd have trouble understanding it, otherwise I wouldn't have phrased it that way. When I think I'm speaking to someone who definitely won't understand such phrasings, I simplify my English.

[Crazy Assassin]

Part of the problem, I think, is money. It's both a blessing and a curse.

Without money, developers can't afford to make the quality games everyone wants. But when they do it purely for money, then those games don't get as much attention as they deserve.


Another massive factor is the amount of work that has to be done on the graphics. People are asking for too much, and as a result everything else about the game ends up suffering. It is a proven fact that graphics will NOT make a game better automatically. Minecraft is a perfect example of this.