Off Topic: The evolution of Video Gaming, an exposé.

By KCDodger, in X-Wing

I wrote this on Facebook after a friend and I had a discussion, that much I mention in the next paragraph or two. But I know a lot of us are gamers of many types. This is about Video Gaming, and I want your opinions on this.
___________________________________________________________________________
Foreward: This is not about Console VS. PC as a subject. This is about gaming and a hypothetical evolution/development of it.
It is my personal belief that console gaming will not survive past 2025 as anything more than a trek in nostalgia, as PCs will become more easily accessible, and polygon based gaming will plateau- if it has not already. Even now, a well textured pipeline is hard to discern from a well modeled pipeline from a certain distance, which is perfectly acceptable in most fields of gameplay.
This idea came from a discussion my buddy and I were having over Skype. From how video games are marketed, and how they should be. The 80s and 90s, with the advent of the home console, were a colorful time. We had mascots like Sonic and Mario, and kids clamored for these things, adults at the time not entirely taken with gaming, but sometimes checking it out in passing.
This period solidified the concept that games were for children, and every time you hear about gaming in the news, you always hear, "Sex, Violence, Children" in conjunction with each other.
In 2007, when Mass Effect hit news channels with its barely softcore porn scenes, Boomers and Generation X threw their hands in the air. "But the children!". What they failed to realize however is that gaming had advanced faster than they, and that not all games are marketed to children. In fact, few are honestly marketed to just young children.
The home console has been the mainstay of gaming for about twenty years. (Sorry PC, it's true.). However, with the abject failure thus far of the XBOX One, under the radar flight for the most part of the Wii U (And an early release that did in several ways, hurt it.), and the PS4 continuing the status quo, alongside polygon based gaming looking like it's near topping out, we're about to witness something interesting within this decade, I believe.
I believe personally, that the reign of the home console, will come to an end. But it will not be PC's doing, oh no. It'll be a newer device's doing. One so easy, children can use it. One so cheap in comparison, one seeing increasingly wide usage, and one that is advancing faster than every other platform on the market...
Tablets.
Tablet gaming. Accessible and simple to all- currently plagued by Free to Play games with little content in contrast to its far too plentiful paywalls, and a lot of fairly simple all but flash games, Tablet gaming does not look very significant at the moment. Lest you look closer.
Consoles, I truly believe, will not survive or make it to 2025. This console generation might -actually- be the last. On top of this, processing power is soon to become irrelevant, with video game streaming becoming a growing concept. Even home computers will not necessarily have to be very powerful if streaming is what you desire. With the advent of Google Fiber, and Fiber-Optic cables spreading in influence, The United States- arguably the largest consumer of Video Games, will have a strong infratructure for internet as early as 2025-8, while not wholesale replacing cable, but definitely a gradual spread that will increase in momentum, should Google's internet reign continue and the demand become stronger.
That is not a tirade, however. That is relevant. When tablets and PCs can stream games as powerful as star citizen, who needs consoles? Who even needs powerful PCs? Hardcore gamers like me, and many of my friends, sure. We like to own copies of our content of course. But hardcore gamers will not ever be the market again, and we have to accept this. Casual gamers have and will remain the dominant one, because they offer the most money. Or is that even true?
Games like Candy Crush, Angry Birds, and Minecraft, the latter of which only barely comparable, dominate the market. They're accessible on almost every system. But what about when Halo, Call of Duty, X-Wing, Star Citizen, and so on, are accessible on tablets thanks to streaming? What about when the internet infrastructures of Japan, The United States, The United Kingdom, and so on, can support every kind of game way play today on specialized devices, through simple, universal devices?
Something amazing happens. That's what. The line between Casual and Hardcore gamer is blurred yet remains visible. Hardcores will often own fairly powerful PCs and likely tablets alike, but casuals will also own PCs and tablets. About the only disparity will be the -type- of tools we purchase. Hardcores are less numerous, but will purchase powerful towers or the parts to build them, and perhaps even make their own tablets, as open source handheld devices are just around the corner, while casuals will purchase all-in-ones and low end tablets, because they do not need the processing power, they do not have the gaming drive, and just want a diversion, and that's perfectly fine.
But what was that about Open Source devices? For years, new smartphones have been coming out, and even more recently, there have been attempts to make the modular computer tower, a beautiful, wonderful concept that makes PCs far more easily accessible and less daunting to the average person to build. Some of these modular PCs are even fairly small, while powerful. But what's the latest and greatest open source device that is actually very likely to come to fruition?
PhoneBloks. To me, one of the most beautiful innovations in handheld device technology. Not from an aesthetic point of view, but from what it means for the market. The backing it received. The proof of concept. The mere idea that we can have a modular phone personalized specifically for our needs is utterly groundbreaking, while perfectly common sense. Now, imagine an open source tablet. The base, the screen, the processor... Imagine this technology applied to Tablets. Suddenly, you have a tablet base that can be both cheap and casual, or expensive, powerful, and hardcore.
And then, apply it to PCs. Apply it to something far larger, far more well known. Need a new processor? There's one ready for you to install, all you need to do is buy it and put it on the base. There's your new powerful Intel 812 Octocore processor right there.
So what does all of this mean?
Casual VS. Hardcore does not die, but it does dim. In time we'll be using the same platforms. In time, our infrastructure will be strong enough thanks to Google. In time, we'll be swapping out parts rather than entire units. In time, consoles will die and PCs, Tablets, will become the mainstay of gaming.
In time, gaming will change, and it won't take very long. With it, how it is marketed, will have to change. When the home console dies, so does the idea that they are simply for children soon after, when you see someone playing Crysis 5 in the subway on their Tablet, when you see markets filled with less handheld and dresser-top consoles, and more parts and devices meant to be added on. The marketing will change because the image will change- because marketing is all about what things appear to be.
And as early as 2025, gaming will be less about the children, the XBOXs and Playstations, and less about the companies pushing their individual products, competing.
And more about us. More about the game. More about what gaming is, what it means to us as people, what it means socially, interpersonally. the same devices you read books on, you watch movies on, you will soon be able to play any single game on.
And when that happens, gaming as we know it will change.
And I think it will change, one hundred percent, for the better.
___________________________________________________________________________

Hope that wasn't overbearingly lengthy. Do comment.

I want to keep my disagreement civil, but your POV is so alien from mine that I'm honestly baffled that we live in the same world and are both game nerds.

For instance: from where I'm sitting, PC gaming has been the dominant force in video gaming since... Doom 2 at the latest. But maybe even earlier than that. Don't get me wrong, TV gaming has it's place, but the sorts of games I enjoy (strategy games, mostly) simply can't be done on a console.

It's very true that the AAA gaming community mostly wrote off the PC space for a number of years, but in its absence the medium _flourished_. Unshackled from the concept of platform ownership, people began making all _kinds_ of weird little games. Once freed from the idea that we could hope to max our our graphics settings, PC gamers were freed to max our CPUs with games like Minecraft and Dwarf Fortress. Persistently online communities flourished in games like League of Legends, Defense of the Ancients (one and two) and Team Fortress Two.

Then let's talk about Massively Multiplayer Online games. World of Warcraft, Eve online, ect and so forth. Want to talk about "hardcore"? Try getting 40 of your friends together _every week_ for a raid. I honestly can't think about anything in the console space that comes close.

Again: just my perspective. If the above sounds less than civil, please feel free to mentally moderate my tone until it does sound civil. I'm spluttering in shock at how differently we perceive things than thinking you're wrong, or angry that your view is different than mine.

But from my perspective, you told me "we call it Earth because it's mostly dirt", and I know that it's mostly water.

So let me address something else: "hardcore". I'm not sure exactly what that means. The person who plays 10hrs of Call of Duty every week- is she hardcore? What about the lady who plays 20hrs of Candy Crush every week? Does setting your alarm at 3am to take a turn in Mafia Wars count as "hardcore"?

I think the word "hardcore" in this context does a lot more to confuse than to clarify. I really wish the term would go away in favor of something a little less divisive.

So those are the minor, worldview points. The major point you make is an interesting one, and I'll address it in another post.

I liked it. I hadn't considered the death of the console, but it seems likely that consoles will do what I think tablets and laptops will do. Die.

I see our phones taking over all of the above device slots. Home PC will probably live, but be called personal clouds. I've already seen the commercials. Devices like google glass and projection keyboards will remove the last of the reasons to have a tablet or laptop instead of a phone.

At some point. I think the phones will be clothing, then perhaps true wet ware. Not with computers in our heads but with interfaces, that link to some small box we carry which does everything.

The future should be fun.

@PunningPundit. I too am a PC gamer and I love what PC gaming has been, but saying PC have been the gaming machines is like claiming Apple is the personal computer company. What we have is awesome, and console scan not match us for depth of gameplay or immersion, but we are the distinct minority in dollars and quantity of people.

Still we should outlive consoles for the very reason that the next quickest cheapest easily accessible thing doesn't impact our market segment, it hits theirs.

So your prediction that "And as early as 2025, gaming will be less about the children, the XBOXs and Playstations, and less about the companies pushing their individual products, competing." seems off. By about 20, 25 years. I think gaming became mainstream, adult, and non-console oriented around the year 2000. I mean hell! We're still waiting for a console-based self-sustaining E-Sport. I don't think we're going to get there. But StarCraft 1 got there over a decade ago. Quake was there even earlier.

Today we do have companies pushing their individual products. It's _rare_ for a successful game company to have more than one game out. Think about Clash of Clans. That's... basically the only thing that company does. Riot? They've got League of Legends, and... things related to LoL. King thinks they're more than just Candy Crush, but they're wrong. Even Mojang only has Minecraft and a couple small projects.

And then there's VALVe. They seem to a) hate running Steam, b) know that Steam is necessary, and c) don't trust anyone else to do it properly. They've got more than just the one thing going on, but they're not actually happy about it. :)

What you're describing is the "games as service" concept. It's big, it's here, and it's been around for a long time. But not in console-land. If you're primarily a console gamer, I understand why it would be easy to miss the fundamental transformation of the games industry- you're only seeing the smallest, most cloistered segment of that industry. There are some interesting things going on over there (Assassin's Creed!), but there's just not much happening.

Again, to reiterate: I'm not trying to be mean, and I know I may be coming off that way. I'm just seeing things _very_ differently than you seem to be. And I'm so far inside my own worldview that I'm surprised it's even possible to see it differently. :)

I want to keep my disagreement civil, but your POV is so alien from mine that I'm honestly baffled that we live in the same world and are both game nerds.

For instance: from where I'm sitting, PC gaming has been the dominant force in video gaming since... Doom 2 at the latest. But maybe even earlier than that. Don't get me wrong, TV gaming has it's place, but the sorts of games I enjoy (strategy games, mostly) simply can't be done on a console.

It's very true that the AAA gaming community mostly wrote off the PC space for a number of years, but in its absence the medium _flourished_. Unshackled from the concept of platform ownership, people began making all _kinds_ of weird little games. Once freed from the idea that we could hope to max our our graphics settings, PC gamers were freed to max our CPUs with games like Minecraft and Dwarf Fortress. Persistently online communities flourished in games like League of Legends, Defense of the Ancients (one and two) and Team Fortress Two.

Then let's talk about Massively Multiplayer Online games. World of Warcraft, Eve online, ect and so forth. Want to talk about "hardcore"? Try getting 40 of your friends together _every week_ for a raid. I honestly can't think about anything in the console space that comes close.

Again: just my perspective. If the above sounds less than civil, please feel free to mentally moderate my tone until it does sound civil. I'm spluttering in shock at how differently we perceive things than thinking you're wrong, or angry that your view is different than mine.

But from my perspective, you told me "we call it Earth because it's mostly dirt", and I know that it's mostly water.

So let me address something else: "hardcore". I'm not sure exactly what that means. The person who plays 10hrs of Call of Duty every week- is she hardcore? What about the lady who plays 20hrs of Candy Crush every week? Does setting your alarm at 3am to take a turn in Mafia Wars count as "hardcore"?

I think the word "hardcore" in this context does a lot more to confuse than to clarify. I really wish the term would go away in favor of something a little less divisive.

So those are the minor, worldview points. The major point you make is an interesting one, and I'll address it in another post.

It's less from personal taste, my POV. It's more about marketing, and what's led the market. PC gaming for the last few years has not been the leader financially. We're just now getting out of fussing about DRM and such like Steam, which is still developing. (No tabbed browsing, really? REALLY?)

And you're absolutely right, a myriad of games cannot be done on Console. This is one of the biggest reasons console gaming will die out. But to pretend Microsoft, Nintendo, Sony, have not been utterly dominating the gaming market in the last 15 years, with stores like Electronics Boutique becoming Gamestop, and PS3, 360, Wii, and handheld titles all over their shelves, haven't been the dominant, go-to force in gaming, while PC gaming and the requisiton of our games has become almost 80% digital acquisition is somewhat foolhardy. The market has catered to consoles for a very long time- because the market caters to that which gains profit, but also demand.

The definition of a hardcore gamer is most assuredly NOT the Call of Duty, Candy Crush, or Mafia wars players. These tend to be your casuals. You however, constitute as a hardcore gamer for the most part. Playing the game for the game on your specialized machine.

You and I are in the same boat. Hardcore gamers that care less about the games that hold your hand, and more about the ones that take some modicum of skill and dedication. (Playing a good medic or spy in TF2 ain't no casual thang.).

We also agree on a distaste for the terminology. This is why I enjoy the prospect of PCs and Tablets being able to access, in the near future, the exact same kind of games. The disparity will shudder and fade in time.

I liked it. I hadn't considered the death of the console, but it seems likely that consoles will do what I think tablets and laptops will do. Die.

I see our phones taking over all of the above device slots. Home PC will probably live, but be called personal clouds. I've already seen the commercials. Devices like google glass and projection keyboards will remove the last of the reasons to have a tablet or laptop instead of a phone.

At some point. I think the phones will be clothing, then perhaps true wet ware. Not with computers in our heads but with interfaces, that link to some small box we carry which does everything.

The future should be fun.

Another interesting viewpoint, though I believe some of these things are as far away as 2030. for the most part, I'm using only what I can see and touch now as an example, which could be fairly shortsighted. What you suggest is truly more in line with something like Deus Ex, which is also a future I believe to not be far off, what with the impending technological singularity, of which this gaming shift will surely accompany.

Mass Effect did something similar to what you suggest. The Omni-Tool. A tool usable for literally everything, from flash forging a single use, super sharp blade, to playing "Alliance Corsair". It did it all, and it was a handheld computer. While big ones existed in Mass Effect, they were screenless towers, often relying on Omni-Tools for access. Which is an assured advancement in technology, but I believe we'll see the birth of that in somewhere around 2040-5. As it stands, this is speculation and nearly science fiction.

But the future will be fun, for sure. So long as we can decide unanimously that synthetics have the same rights. :P

@PunningPundit. I too am a PC gamer and I love what PC gaming has been, but saying PC have been the gaming machines is like claiming Apple is the personal computer company. What we have is awesome, and console scan not match us for depth of gameplay or immersion, but we are the distinct minority in dollars and quantity of people.

Still we should outlive consoles for the very reason that the next quickest cheapest easily accessible thing doesn't impact our market segment, it hits theirs.

Precisely.

So your prediction that "And as early as 2025, gaming will be less about the children, the XBOXs and Playstations, and less about the companies pushing their individual products, competing." seems off. By about 20, 25 years. I think gaming became mainstream, adult, and non-console oriented around the year 2000. I mean hell! We're still waiting for a console-based self-sustaining E-Sport. I don't think we're going to get there. But StarCraft 1 got there over a decade ago. Quake was there even earlier.

Today we do have companies pushing their individual products. It's _rare_ for a successful game company to have more than one game out. Think about Clash of Clans. That's... basically the only thing that company does. Riot? They've got League of Legends, and... things related to LoL. King thinks they're more than just Candy Crush, but they're wrong. Even Mojang only has Minecraft and a couple small projects.

And then there's VALVe. They seem to a) hate running Steam, b) know that Steam is necessary, and c) don't trust anyone else to do it properly. They've got more than just the one thing going on, but they're not actually happy about it. :)

What you're describing is the "games as service" concept. It's big, it's here, and it's been around for a long time. But not in console-land. If you're primarily a console gamer, I understand why it would be easy to miss the fundamental transformation of the games industry- you're only seeing the smallest, most cloistered segment of that industry. There are some interesting things going on over there (Assassin's Creed!), but there's just not much happening.

Again, to reiterate: I'm not trying to be mean, and I know I may be coming off that way. I'm just seeing things _very_ differently than you seem to be. And I'm so far inside my own worldview that I'm surprised it's even possible to see it differently. :)

You're right, in the background. But in the foreground, in the mass market, in the media, when people think games, they don't think Quake and PCs. They think CoD, Mario and so on. the things that have been wildly successful on console and have garnered the most attention and broadest appeal.

You are however 100% correct about niche companies. Mind you I do not believe it is at all a bad thing to be. One only need to look as far as, as you even mentioned, Valve, and their engine they use for everything. It's annoying, really. Convenient in some ways, but Source is not only showing its age, it's hard to sell anything on it anymore because it's the same **** engine no matter what way you cut it, used for one too many things. It's not as versatile as they believe it at all.

I do not however believe at all that Console Gaming has been the smallest industry. Because it flat out hasn't been. It's been the biggest, at least in the states. PC gaming has been taking a market back seat since the mid 2000s, and frankly, it's a crying shame. But you'll be right in about five years at least. I could only hope so, at least.

I think we are closer than you think we are. I'm on a tablet atm so forgive the lack of links, iOS and I can work togeather but we are not friends.

Anyway look up the laser keyboards, and even more the developments in human prostetics, especially eyes. We are learning how to let the brain see with electricity, and we have motor control sensors able to move mice.

The reason to get a laptop isn't processing power, not for much longer at any rate it is the battery life, full keyboard and big screen. If the keyboard becomes a set of rings, or a hat and the screen is a pair of shades, or just another part of your new natural field of vision. Then laptops are obsolete, tablets are obsolete and phones are just another radio to get us to the cell tower instead if the local blue tooth network.

Ten years ago cybernetics were where the PC was in the 70's. These days we are printing organs and reading brain impulses. I think my kids may be the last generation that views the internet as a separate thing from themselves.

All extremely valid points. I'm aware of most of them, because Transhumanism is my jam but I guess I was overestimating how long it'd take. Mind you I DO believe the singularity will come ~2030 at most. But I do believe the peripherals for gaming will be a little bit behind.

@PunningPundit. I too am a PC gamer and I love what PC gaming has been, but saying PC have been the gaming machines is like claiming Apple is the personal computer company. What we have is awesome, and console scan not match us for depth of gameplay or immersion, but we are the distinct minority in dollars and quantity of people.

Still we should outlive consoles for the very reason that the next quickest cheapest easily accessible thing doesn't impact our market segment, it hits theirs.

Naw, the NDP didn't actually count any PC digital sales until a couple years ago, and even then has _zero_ insight into Steam, Humble, GoG, etc. In other words, the best numbers available are the ones that systematically over represent console gaming.

Seriously, not even _WoW_ subs were being counted- unless those subs were bought at GameStop as a gift card. That's... that's just weird.

So I'm going with: there are far more people playing PC games and spending money on PC games than there are people doing the same in the Console space.

Great games become unique experiences, because they allow for each player to find an aspect that means a lot to them, and so they will describe their play experiences differently from others.

:)

@PunningPundit. I too am a PC gamer and I love what PC gaming has been, but saying PC have been the gaming machines is like claiming Apple is the personal computer company. What we have is awesome, and console scan not match us for depth of gameplay or immersion, but we are the distinct minority in dollars and quantity of people.

Still we should outlive consoles for the very reason that the next quickest cheapest easily accessible thing doesn't impact our market segment, it hits theirs.

Naw, the NDP didn't actually count any PC digital sales until a couple years ago, and even then has _zero_ insight into Steam, Humble, GoG, etc. In other words, the best numbers available are the ones that systematically over represent console gaming.

Seriously, not even _WoW_ subs were being counted- unless those subs were bought at GameStop as a gift card. That's... that's just weird.

So I'm going with: there are far more people playing PC games and spending money on PC games than there are people doing the same in the Console space.

If that were true, then why are almost all PC games at the biggest game retailer nationwide, digital download codes, while console stuff literally lines the walls?

Without really getting into it, I think the assumption is wrong. I'm sure console and comp gaming will fade eventually, but I think it will end up further down the road then said, and I'm not so sure tablets will take over them, if anything tablets may more kill off comps, as that is basically what they are. What the fullness of the future is, well, it may not even have been seen yet.

Edited by AngryAngel

...

Naw, the NDP didn't actually count any PC digital sales until a couple years ago, and even then has _zero_ insight into Steam, Humble, GoG, etc. In other words, the best numbers available are the ones that systematically over represent console gaming.

Seriously, not even _WoW_ subs were being counted- unless those subs were bought at GameStop as a gift card. That's... that's just weird.

So I'm going with: there are far more people playing PC games and spending money on PC games than there are people doing the same in the Console space.

Just as an exercise in curiosity I compared Steam to GameStop. Mind you steam does not release their revenue yearly, as they are privately held and have no stockholders to appease. Still these numbers are telling.

Steam in 2011 hits near 1 billion in total revenue.

http://www.afterdawn.com/news/article.cfm/2011/02/04/steam_revenue_nearly_hits_1_billion

GameStop hits 1.73 Billion in 1st quarter 2014

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/gamestop-profit-jumps-134-year-over-year-as-the-bu/1100-6421861/

Now that is not proof, but it is two of the big retailers, and the numbers difference is significant.

If you can post some data showing there is more money on PC gaming I'll be happy to eat my words, but unless you back it up with more than your perception I think I will have to politely disagree with you.

Now someone get me an inexpensive, reliable datajack. This typing is crap.

@PunningPundit. I too am a PC gamer and I love what PC gaming has been, but saying PC have been the gaming machines is like claiming Apple is the personal computer company. What we have is awesome, and console scan not match us for depth of gameplay or immersion, but we are the distinct minority in dollars and quantity of people.

Still we should outlive consoles for the very reason that the next quickest cheapest easily accessible thing doesn't impact our market segment, it hits theirs.

Naw, the NDP didn't actually count any PC digital sales until a couple years ago, and even then has _zero_ insight into Steam, Humble, GoG, etc. In other words, the best numbers available are the ones that systematically over represent console gaming.

Seriously, not even _WoW_ subs were being counted- unless those subs were bought at GameStop as a gift card. That's... that's just weird.

So I'm going with: there are far more people playing PC games and spending money on PC games than there are people doing the same in the Console space.

If that were true, then why are almost all PC games at the biggest game retailer nationwide, digital download codes, while console stuff literally lines the walls?

I want to state some of my biases up front. I'm a die-hard PC gamer. More than that: most of my friends are involved in the gaming industry in some way or another. And my wife? She's in the gaming industry. I don't _speak_ for them. Many of us have some very different opinions when it comes to this topic. Also, on the topic of biases? My doggy is the best doggy in the world.

For a good 10 or so years, AAA gaming companies basically ignored PC gaming. They were _terrified_ of piracy. It's just... They saw the 90% number and freaked out. They also believed (laughably) that console games could not be pirated. So where did they put their efforts? Console gaming.

So if you look at the big AAA games, then _yes_, the biggest part of the market is on the consoles. But if you start looking bigger, more holistic look at the game space, one that includes money spent on Free to play PC games, MMO Subs, and straight up digital downloads of games, we see a rather different picture.

Why don't we see more PC games at GameStop? The short version is that PC gamers mostly don't give a fig about GameStop anymore. They sort of abandoned us a decade ago. Now there's Steam, GoG, et al.

So for what it's worth, I asked a couple of friends if it was remotely plausible that VALVe had revenue in the same area neighborhood as Gamestop. Some very rough back of the envelope math said that this was plausible. We _know_ that GameStop had revenues of US$8 billion in 2012. And we _don't_ know how much money VALVe makes. But... some other numbers that are on the web say VALVe is at least within shouting distance of GameStop.

And then there's RIOT. And Blizzard. And others.

(I want to be clear that my friends do not have the numbers for VALVe. )

PC gaming is huge. AAA gaming is simply a small part of it.

Semi-related:

So much of the conversations I've had with friends about the stuff in this post has come down to "I can't tell you that." and "You'd love to know a whole bunch of things that I can't tell you."

Oddly enough those statements come up _way_ more often when talking to my friends in gaming than with my friends in the nuclear industry.

Lol, sounds quite a lot like some things friends of mine in the Air Force have to say. My last consol was a N64. I still have it, love that Mario game. I'd love to know there is more money in PC, it is where I gave hung my hat. A hat that will need some upgrades soonish, assuming all my fun money doesn't stay on promise to FFG.

@PunningPundit. I too am a PC gamer and I love what PC gaming has been, but saying PC have been the gaming machines is like claiming Apple is the personal computer company. What we have is awesome, and console scan not match us for depth of gameplay or immersion, but we are the distinct minority in dollars and quantity of people.

Still we should outlive consoles for the very reason that the next quickest cheapest easily accessible thing doesn't impact our market segment, it hits theirs.

Naw, the NDP didn't actually count any PC digital sales until a couple years ago, and even then has _zero_ insight into Steam, Humble, GoG, etc. In other words, the best numbers available are the ones that systematically over represent console gaming.

Seriously, not even _WoW_ subs were being counted- unless those subs were bought at GameStop as a gift card. That's... that's just weird.

So I'm going with: there are far more people playing PC games and spending money on PC games than there are people doing the same in the Console space.

If that were true, then why are almost all PC games at the biggest game retailer nationwide, digital download codes, while console stuff literally lines the walls?

Because we are the masterrace and you peasants can stay at queues while we download our games. Huehuehue. Now seriously, PC gaming industry has been moving away from physical retailers from years ago, we just buy the game or get a pre-release, and download the game, i haven't made a queue since WoW TBC release. And never ******* again.

Stelar7, you can't compare a report from 2011 to one from 2014. Steam has been growing a lot with more companies releasing their products with them, and their TF2 / LFD franchise not being the only one, now they also have CSGO and DOTA 2 aswell for hat sellers. The game most played in the world isn't any of the console games, it is league of legends. And the exposure these games thanks to streaming is one of the biggest booms in PC gaming. Console games must be sold at shops. you can buy most PC games in many places, from the game developers webstore, to steam, G2G, D2D, etc etc...

What the OP is talking about casual and hardcore, i think he means the level of interest occupying his mind when thinking about the videogames he plays. Some people just play to relax, chill, withouth much in mind. You don't need a game that makes you think for that. Other people enjoy games where there is "outside the game" thinking. You are planning upgrades, spreadsheeting stuff, and understanding the math behind the gameplay (EvE online is like the epytome of this).

This happens to games like Xwing. I know people who just move their ships mindlessly, while others are trying to improve their lists or flying outside the games too. It is just a thing of different taste, and our society reinforces the thinking that games, should be played mindlessly because games are for the immature, so we shouldn't occupy our minds on them too much.

Edited by DreadStar

Semi-related:

So much of the conversations I've had with friends about the stuff in this post has come down to "I can't tell you that." and "You'd love to know a whole bunch of things that I can't tell you."

Oddly enough those statements come up _way_ more often when talking to my friends in gaming than with my friends in the nuclear industry.

Haha. This always happens.

I try to look at things through other societal lenses. I'm also a video game music minor out of the Berklee College of Music. We were the first well-known college in the world to put together a program for this at any level. I should caveat this with the thought that I'm not actually that well-acquainted with the rest of the industry.

From my perspective:

--

First thing to note is that for the last 20 years, China has only progressed in the PC/online gaming area. Most consoles are banned in that country. Many of their native games, which you cannot get in the US, are of equal or higher quality than the TOP of our PC/MMORPG games (ex. Blizzard's WoW).

Their Starcraft, LoL pro-gaming scenes are actually more developed than ours.

Other parts of Asia are completely different stories.

Japan sees more concentration in arcade games and consoles, as these are MUCH more popular there than here. In fact, there is very little PC gaming there. (Also note that Japan has ZERO well-known Starcraft e-sports members. Taiwan has about 6 to 10, China has about the same. Singapore has maybe 3. Australia the same. Korea dominates). Sega and Nintendo are powerful forces there. And you can find a Sega or whatever arcade store at nearly every block in Japanese cities.

Taiwan's e-sports are less developed than Korea's. But notably, unlike the US, they have a TV channel solely for Starcraft, which is accessible at many points in the day.

Korea's e-sports industry is huge and booming. These are professionals paid to play DOTA, LOL, or Starcraft for upwards of $100,000 US. This figure is no exaggeration. The IEM World Championship and Blizzcon both award literally this amount. This doesn't even count the GSL and Proleague, which are arguably bigger than the other tournaments listed.

Also to note that LoL is arguable bigger than Starcraft right now, and gaining even more popularity.

Your thoughts seem to me a little too simple and too unrealistically theoretical.

I agree that we will likely see more PC/tablet based gaming in the future. However, this is because of an extent of technology. I believe we will reach a climactic point where we pass to the next stage of "computational devices". Perhaps even a world-wide computer or something, within our lifetime.

Your attempts to differentiate casual and hardcore are at best: frivolous, biased and unimportant. It seems that games of all sorts will become more commonplace in the future in many different way that it will likely become much more ubiquitous and less useful to categorize which games are casual or not. Currently, I see you simply have some want to put down some types of games over others without much of a good logical concept to your division.

Its much better to think of how games will suit a goal of a person as we go towards trying to understand their developing, larger role in the future.

Ew. "Game streaming."

Dun like et

A few, personal insights.

I've been playing video games most of my life. i.e., from the mid 80's onwards.

Started with the good ol' days of coin-op arcade cabinets and very basic handheld digital display games that run on AA's or watch batteries, not much bigger than today's mobile phones.

My first true gaming platform was a cassette-tape loading ZX Spectrum. From there I moved on directly to consoles - SEGA Megadrive, SNES (Streetfighter 2! Mario Kart!), PS1 (Tekken! WipeOut!), N64 (Goldeneye! Perfect Dark!), Gamecube (errr... Resident Evil remakes?), Xbox (first real foray online!) and Xbox 360 (boom), in that order.

The last PC game I bought was the remastered version of Baldur's Gate. Prior to that, X-Wing Alliance over ten years ago. For me at least, console gaming has always been much more efficient and much more accessible than PC gaming.

Online multiplayer for me peaked around 5 years ago, with Xbox 360 and the likes of Halo 4, Left 4 Dead, CoD4, MW2 and various other games taking up a lot of my spare time. I had a great group of friends online at that point, all using the same consoles, using the same service and playing the same games. We had a lot of fun, regularly playing games for a couple of hours every other night. That solid group of friends doesn't really exist anymore online - we're all busy doing different things. The games are still available of course, but we're not all that interested in playing them anymore. I still play single player games on 360, or occasionally jump into a multiplayer game at random if I've nothing better to do, that's about it.

XBONE & PS4 hold little to no interest for me at the moment. I haven't seen anything so far from them which has captured my interest enough to warrant a purchase. Kinect does not appeal to me. Mobile gaming holds little to no interest for me. Games like Candy Crush, Angry Birds etc just don't appeal. I don't own a tablet.

To sum up? Not sure there is a point, really, unless it's that people and their attitudes to gaming can change as much as the technology itself.

LoL is not argueable bigger than starcraft either in or outside korea, it is much bigger, as much as it pains me as a starcraft fan and player but it is what it is.

Edited by DreadStar

PC sales are down and have been heralded as the death of the desktop, but the simple fact is that PC do not need to be replaced s often as the past, the technology is not advancing the way it did in the post making out essential to keep updating on such a regular basis. The kind of games on phones and tablets are no where near s involved a other forms of gaming yet and i shudder for the say when you have to be online to play all games. Phone and tablet games are for people on the move and people at work, not as an activity for the home. The price of games does seen to have risen over the last few years and i see that online gaming doesn't hold the attention of people like it used too Although my sample might have simply aged out of this passe if their life.

I am not sure if taking all PC games online purchases is a good idea because unless you already know about it you wouldn't see the games.

@Mystic

Provide source for PC sales being down, everything i had read points to the oppossite. LoL, DOTA, CSGO and others are getting more and more traction in the gaming world, and the biggest advantadge PC gaming has always had over consoles, is that it actually forms solid online communities (too sad many of you didn't get to play star wars galaxies ^^) around their titles, while consoles do not, not to speak about genuine variety on genres.

You might think this is small, while for example the DOTA national got 1 million dollar prizepool, just raised by the fans. Imagine what their communities do. I actually gain money to make purchases by playing and following CSGO.

And about PC games online purchases. I am sorry, but most people don't know about games just by "checking" their game stores. In fact, i am pretty sure that impulse buying at stores is actually a very small minority.

Edited by DreadStar

@Mystic

Provide source for PC sales being down, everything i had read points to the oppossite. LoL, DOTA, CSGO and others are getting more and more traction in the gaming world, and the biggest advantadge PC gaming has always had over consoles, is that it actually forms solid online communities (too sad many of you didn't get to play star wars galaxies ^^) around their titles, while consoles do not, not to speak about genuine variety on genres.

You might think this is small, while for example the DOTA national got 1 million dollar prizepool, just raised by the fans. Imagine what their communities do. I actually gain money to make purchases by playing and following CSGO.

And about PC games online purchases. I am sorry, but most people don't know about games just by "checking" their game stores. In fact, i am pretty sure that impulse buying at stores is actually a very small minority.

I believe he was talking about sales of actual PCs, not PC games.