DescentBB

So one thing I like is having access to my physical copy of my PC games but also having access to a digital copy of games. I know many of you buy your games from Steam. But one thing why steam isn't my #1 platform to buy games is because I like buying my games and having a physical copy of the game especially when I don't have a internet connection, etc. But I also like having steam especially if I am away from home and I need to reinstall the game, I just login to steam and download it.

But one thing that frustrates me about Steam and other platforms like that is that Steam doesn't always have every game that is released. or they only have a few select older games.

One thing I wish there was out there, was a place that I can enter all my CD keys in, and have access to digital copies of the games. And not have to bounce between Steam, Windows Live, EA downloader, or other systems, like that. More of something that I guess can either built into windows or one single app I can download, and login and have access to all my games, since they would be tied to that one account, and also give me the option to trade games to other users.

I know that a service like this would be pretty expensive especially to handle all the bandwidth for a service like this.

One thing I personally think that is lacking in PC gaming is more mainstream setups. One thing I hear from all my friends who play XBOX 360 or PS3 is how its all centralized and pretty straightforward since it automatically downloads patches and updates. Which I know in some games that have that, but I think its getting to the point where we need that in PC gaming.

But who all would like this and use it? Or wants to add any suggestions or thoughts to this.

Of course XBox and PS3 are centralized and straightfoward. It's a single company in both cases, with developers releasing games for their platform to take advantage of their user base. PCs lack this characteristic.

The main problem with what you want, I would think, is that there will always be game developers cutting deals with... Steam, for instance, for release solely on their platform in exchange for certain special treatment. If you can make them all a better offer, and have a larger user base, then you have a shot. I still doubt you'll get 100% coverage, though. It's impossible to give everyone special treatment.

Another aspect, I would guess, is ease of distribution. If you make it easier and/or more cost-effective for game companies to release with you, that would get their attention, as long as you have a user-base.

Steam owns 50-70% of the PC game download market <-- (This is a link)

The main thing I would want from Steam is the ability for someone to resell a video game purchased on steam. But that is the one thing that game developers and producers will never let steam do. All the producers and developers HATE that people can play a game, and then sell it off when they are done with it when they buy a physical copy of it. They only do business with steam because steam doesn't allow resale, so it is impossible to transfer a license to someone else. The industry would like nothing more than to put gamestop and other retail stores that deal in used games out of business permanently, and they have tried several times to outlaw the sale of used video games. And they have some help from Hollywood which would like to give movies the same treatment.

Krom wrote:The main thing I would want from Steam is the ability for someone to resell a video game purchased on steam. But that is the one thing that game developers and producers will never let steam do. All the producers and developers HATE that people can play a game, and then sell it off when they are done with it when they buy a physical copy of it. They only do business with steam because steam doesn't allow resale, so it is impossible to transfer a license to someone else. The industry would like nothing more than to put gamestop and other retail stores that deal in used games out of business permanently, and they have tried several times to outlaw the sale of used video games. And they have some help from Hollywood which would like to give movies the same treatment.

The current trick is to sell part of the game, but then charge for DLC to complete the game. Dragon Age did it so I refused to buy it. Dead Space 2 did it with half the game: You need to buy the multiplayer part of the game if you bought it second hand. Some multiplayer games on consoles are even planned for the servers to be shut down on a certain date (Demon's Souls).

Developers who hate people reselling a game should try a different career to get their head knocked out of their ***. All other commodities are allowed to be resold, it should be a basic human right. If other industries were changed to run the way these developers would like then it would be illegal to work on your own car, or remodel your home.

Sergeant Thorne wrote:Of course XBox and PS3 are centralized and straightfoward. It's a single company in both cases, with developers releasing games for their platform to take advantage of their user base. PCs lack this characteristic.

The main problem with what you want, I would think, is that there will always be game developers cutting deals with... Steam, for instance, for release solely on their platform in exchange for certain special treatment. If you can make them all a better offer, and have a larger user base, then you have a shot. I still doubt you'll get 100% coverage, though. It's impossible to give everyone special treatment.

Another aspect, I would guess, is ease of distribution. If you make it easier and/or more cost-effective for game companies to release with you, that would get their attention, as long as you have a user-base.

Now I could be wrong, but isn't PC gaming essentially the same thing? I mean you take XBOX 360 who is made by Microsoft, and all the developers built for it and XBOX Live, now I could be wrong, but unless there is some kind of block on the device, couldn't a software company make there "own" version of the XBOX live marketplace and be able to have its own network setup?

I mean in very few cases, like Mac and Linux games, aren't Developers as a whole making games for windows? Which I know there are factors of different hardware that goes into that, but the platform of Windows is the main thing. Which I guess then Microsoft would need to setup a more built into setup of gaming that is integrated into the OS.

But then again that also goes back into the age old question of why people pick Windows/OSX/Linux.

Windows you get pretty mainstream setup, but your not strapped down on the hardware choices, and you get a lot of freedom on the different apps you can use. Which I know is one reason why people wouldn't want a mainstream gaming system for PC's especially if it was ran by Microsoft.

OSX you get apps that "Just Work" but you sacrifice that for more variety in your hardware choices.

Linux you get the most open endedness of them all but, due to that open endedness you can't really get a full "Standard" setup.

But to me one thing I have noticed, as I am sure you all have seen as well the Giant that was PC gaming is just getting smaller and smaller, because of XBOX 360 and PS3 which a big reason is because "they just work".

I dunno, I think I may get flamed for this but to me M$ needs to take a bigger step into PC gaming, not exacting in the department of the games but in the ensuring the games work on the OS, and more built in support for games. Because I dunno about you but I think it would be cool if I just have bought a new game, and as I am installing the game, Windows could scan to see what game it is, connect to the developers website and see if there are any patches for the game, and check feedback from other users to see if a user needs a new driver etc. I know I am sure a lot of you know people who they are really frustrated with PC gaming because when they install the game and click play its not working, and for most of us we have not problem troubleshooting it, but the average joe doesn't know or want to know how to install a new driver or anything.

You kind of already hit on this, but I want to emphasize it.

It's the hardware. When you get such a wide variety of possibly configurations, drivers, etc, it's a lot harder to get a streamlined solution. Automatic patches and upgrades don't always work, CPU x may work better with Video Card Y, etc etc. With the diversity and flexibility comes the difficulty of organizing. I think it's really that simple.

Xbox and PS3's have the same hardware, always. You release a patch, you can count on it working 99% of the time.

I own an Xbox for that very reason. My Xbox always runs the same, and always gets a good frame rate. It always does what it's supposed to do. Granted, I just bought a nice desktop to could way outperform my Xbox, but I like the streamlined solution.

Yup, the hardware does make a big difference, but the wide open nature of Windows and the ease that a program can be hacked or cracked in it is also a big factor. Developers and Producers like tightly locked down proprietary platforms for a lot of reasons. Note: Windows is also proprietary, but it is an open proprietary; anybody that wants to develop and publish a windows program can do so without needing permission from Microsoft or anyone else.

Game consoles, iPhones, iPads, portable game consoles, etc. Are all closed proprietary platforms that are more attractive to producers and developers because only people with permission from the manufacturer can run something on them. By proxy of the manufacturer the developers and producers have more control over their goods and the public has far less control.

It should also be noted that closed proprietary platforms are generally ok as long as there is sufficient competition in the marketplace. However as the number of competitors goes down, closed proprietary platforms become increasingly dangerous because they concentrate too much power and can easily become weapons for censorship and control.

As much as good hardware makes PC gaming great, it's the hassles of trying to get things either stable or working at all that may end up killing things for me. I've spent more time debugging games that either crash, won't run at all or have graphical/sound issues than playing them. It's really getting to be a turn off. I've actually got several games that won't run at all, so I'm out the cash.

Then I've run into DRM issues, also a plague for consoles, that's really the icing on the cake, SecuROM, Starforce, required constant internet connections, et al. I even bought the DVD version of a Steam game that gave me an invalid CD key error. Uh, HELLO! I own the DVD! That required going through hoops with Steam support to get the key transferred to my account and away from some twerp who probably somehow managed to steal it. And requiring an internet connection all the time has proven to be a major problem with router firewalls and AV software. Then you've got Microsoft and others running services in the background that either suck performance or cause BSOD's. I'm almost getting to old for the hassle anymore.

Xamindar wrote:The current trick is to sell part of the game, but then charge for DLC to complete the game. Dragon Age did it so I refused to buy it.

By "complete", do you mean "have all the side-quests of the game available to be played", or "finish the main story"? The latter you definitely don't have to buy DLC to do, but the former I would say it's fairly much guilty as charged for them. Though they released a bundle later on that supposedly includes the expansion and all DLC for $40, which is much more reasonable for most people.

captain_twinkie wrote:I dunno, I think I may get flamed for this but to me M$ needs to take a bigger step into PC gaming, not exacting in the department of the games but in the ensuring the games work on the OS, and more built in support for games. Because I dunno about you but I think it would be cool if I just have bought a new game, and as I am installing the game, Windows could scan to see what game it is, connect to the developers website and see if there are any patches for the game, and check feedback from other users to see if a user needs a new driver etc. I know I am sure a lot of you know people who they are really frustrated with PC gaming because when they install the game and click play its not working, and for most of us we have not problem troubleshooting it, but the average joe doesn't know or want to know how to install a new driver or anything.

Well, I know what you mean, and for the most part I agree with you. I'm just not absolutely sure it's feasible. There's a fair bit of reaching out to major hardware/driver vendors, and to some extent software vendors (hi Adobe) to make sure they don't put out rubbish that gives our platform a bad name, but with the size of the Windows ecosystem it's not really possible to work with everyone. Especially not when they're producing big and ridiculously complex applications like video games. The best chance is to find some way of "dumbing down" development so that it's not as easy to make something that crashes all the time, but ... we're a while away from that point: firstly it's a very tough problem to solve, and secondly the solution is probably ridiculously computationally inefficient.

P.S. However, if we're going to have DRM, I'd prefer it be sponsored by some central "authority" like Steam or even MS, so that producers would cease inventing copy protection mechanisms that fry or rootkit people's machines. In an ideal world, these cretins would realise that hurting your paying customers isn't actually that brilliant an idea, but we don't live in an ideal world...