My own theory on this is that PC gamers have always been older than console gamers until fairly recently and as such, the PC gaming press has always been older as well. That dude from Kotaku whose name I can remember reamed me out for this a couple months back but I still think this theory is largely true:
The vast majority of people working in the games media today did not grow up with PC games so even when they write about them today, they are writing from the perspective of a console gamer. PC gaming has lacked the equivalent of a Super Mario Bros. type game to cultivate a young audience and bring them up along slowly with time. A great game with simple mechanics that people of all ages can enjoy.
Look at some of the biggest PC games of the last 30 years:
Unreal, Quake, Half Life
Civilization
Sims, Sim City
Ultima
Baldur's Gate
World of Warcraft
Wolfenstein
Duke Nukem
etc.
These are not games that an average 8 year can (or even want to) pick up and play. There are exceptions - I myself am one, I was playing Civilization 2 when I was 11 but that's because I had a fucking Sega Saturn in my household as my console in 1997.
People who grew up on PC gaming either grew up in the early to mid 80's when it was a huge thing, grew up in areas of the world where it was bigger (Korea, Germany, Eastern Europe) or switched over as teenagers/young adults. You see it here on NeoGaf a lot recently, people who have been lifelong console gamers just making the switch over now that they're in their mid 20's to early 30's. The demographic that grew up on PC gaming in the 90's were probably teenagers to young adults in the 90's. They are in their 40's now. Not a lot of those people are still writing about games. Why would they want to be? The gaming industry for the most part is a young man's industry.
Go look at some of the back issues of Computer Gaming World if you can. It's mostly writers in their late 20's to mid 30's. When they published their last issue in 2008, the editor, Jeff Green was in his mid 40's and had a teenage daughter. And when he left the press, he sort of said something to that affect. The gaming industry wasn't really for people like him anymore.
Ni No Kuni, GTA V, The Last of Us, Killer Instinct, Mario 3D World and then a mess of handheld games like Zelda: A Link Between Worlds, Fire Emblem Awakening and Tearaway.
There are a few PC games in that tier for me, like BioShock Infinite and Gone Home, but for the most part, console first party, console exclusives and tons of games from Japan make up a huge part of what I enjoy - which makes PC only gaming impractical and even overshadowed to some degree.
I'm fine with it not taking up a huge amount of press time in the more mainstream areas. I can go to places like PCGamesN, PC Gamer and RockPaperShotgun to get the reviews, news and other bits and bobs that I want. I feel as a PC gamer there are plenty of outlets where I can get what I want out of it.
Consoles are not all the fucking same!
Each one has different hardware, different versions of games and different infrastructure!
Lumping them in with each other is the very definition of cherry picking data!
The rest of your post has nothing to do with this topic (which is why do PC games not get a fair amount of media coverage for it's size and not why some consumers don't like PC gaming)
Sure, consoles are different from each other from a technical standpoint, but if you wanna get technical than so are PCs. Do we start counting sales differently from PCs with Nvidia and ATI graphics cards, or Intel and AMD processors? How about the 20 different manufacturers for motherboards?
I'm well aware of the differences between a Playbox and an Xstation, but my point is that they are fundamentally the same in that they are plug and play gaming machines. How many average people do you think really know the difference between a PS3 and a 360, or a PS4 and a XB1?
The same goes for mobile gaming. You have tablets and smart phones, Android and Apple, but its still mobile gaming.
PC gaming is its own way to play games. Sure you can buy a prebuilt box, plug it into your TV and slap a controller on it and kinda sorta use it like a console, but we both know there is much more to it than that.
My point is that the reason why the gaming press focuses on the console market is because that is where their target audience currently is. Its where the average consumer with the most money to spend on software currently is, at least in the West. There is plenty of coverage for larger PC releases, and a growing interest in certain mobile games, but it just doesn't make sense to me to spend a lot of time and resources covering a mid-tier niche genre indie game on PC. Especially when PC gamers tend to already be a bit more in the know about these sorts of things than your average person.
I just read the entire OP and I think I agree with everything in it. It's interesting that you point out Dragon Commander, since Swen (Vincke, Larian CEO) blogged about the difficulties in getting the media to cover a mid-sized PC game, especially US media.
Mid-sized in terms of budget obviously, not content!
I did and I agree with you. I was just coming at it from a video perspective. One of my favorite magazines to read back when I was a kid was Next Gen. They did amazing articles about PC gaming, but as time went on their focused aimed at consoles.
I feel (much like I assume you do) that PC gaming doesn't get enough love anymore. The passion writers used to have is falling away to target a larger audience.
As someone who mostly sticks with Giantbomb for games coverage, I haven't had this problem. They cover a lot fewer stuff than most websites, but they usually cover a larger variety, including PC exclusives. They just don't have the staff numbers to get articles/reviews about everything they cover so they tend to cover games in many of their video series. I do sometimes cringe when IGN editors are like "hey x game is coming to y console/handheld platform and it's totally awesome" when that game had been on PC for at least a year. It's just weird that they don't even try to play indie games on PC, which is where most of them come first. And indie games obviously don't require a dedicated GPU. Any modern laptop with Intel integrated graphics will play them without a single problem. The myth that PC gaming is janky and difficult is alive and well.
I think the real problem is that a lot of PC-only gamers don't really need coverage because they're already pretty aware of most things in that space. But that might be a massive assumption on my part. Secondly, with the exception of Valve and Blizzard, no massive company spends a ton of money on the PC market. Throughout the year, Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo (not to mention third-party publishers) spend tens of millions of dollars just on marketing their products. This creates a massive amount of hype that the PC lacks. And even though most games that show up at E3 or Gamescom or any of the PAXes will come to PC, it's not the main focus. Just this past weekend, Transistor from Supergiant Games was shown on PS4 at PAX East even though it's also coming to PC. And now a lot of people will forget that there is a PC version because their most recent exposure to that game was on PS4. So it's tiny things like that multiplied by a thousand that make it seem like consoles are more important. When in reality, the two markets (PC and console) have largely different audiences.
You are indeed making a massive assumption. I had no idea what shadow warrior was, for example, until I saw a TAY article on Kotaku about it (I believe it was by DocSeuss, actually).
Had never heard of it before then, but I really want to try it out.
The high initial cost doesn't help.
The argument could be made that it's cheaper in the long run etc etc etc, but the initial cost is way too high.
The biggest games such as League of Legends for example can run well on a machine that isn't crazy powerful. It can run pretty well on any household PC.
It's the enthusiasts with high-end rigs who are a pretty niche audience.
That's what I'm talking about though. Even many PC games that will probably run on the laptop you already own get completely ignored unless they also have a console version. So many of these people just don't want to leave the comfort zone of consoles.
My own theory on this is that PC gamers have always been older than console gamers until fairly recently and as such, the PC gaming press has always been older as well. That dude from Kotaku whose name I can remember reamed me out for this a couple months back but I still think this theory is largely true:
The vast majority of people working in the games media today did not grow up with PC games so even when they write about them today, they are writing from the perspective of a console gamer. PC gaming has lacked the equivalent of a Super Mario Bros. type game to cultivate a young audience and bring them up along slowly with time. A great game with simple mechanics that people of all ages can enjoy.
Look at some of the biggest PC games of the last 30 years:
Unreal, Quake, Half Life
Civilization
Sims, Sim City
Ultima
Baldur's Gate
World of Warcraft
Wolfenstein
Duke Nukem
etc.
These are not games that an average 8 year can (or even want to) pick up and play. There are exceptions - I myself am one, I was playing Civilization 2 when I was 11 but that's because I had a fucking Sega Saturn in my household as my console in 1997.
People who grew up on PC gaming either grew up in the early to mid 80's when it was a huge thing, grew up in areas of the world where it was bigger (Korea, Germany, Eastern Europe) or switched over as teenagers/young adults. You see it here on NeoGaf a lot recently, people who have been lifelong console gamers just making the switch over now that they're in their mid 20's to early 30's. The demographic that grew up on PC gaming in the 90's were probably teenagers to young adults in the 90's. They are in their 40's now. Not a lot of those people are still writing about games. Why would they want to be? The gaming industry for the most part is a young man's industry.
Go look at some of the back issues of Computer Gaming World if you can. It's mostly writers in their late 20's to mid 30's. When they published their last issue in 2008, the editor, Jeff Green was in his mid 40's and had a teenage daughter. And when he left the press, he sort of said something to that affect. The gaming industry wasn't really for people like him anymore.
This could be a big reason why. PC games never really started from a point of simplicity like console games did. When console games in the 80's used two buttons and a D pad, PC games were already working with a whole keyboard. It's the reason a lot of console retroists won't try PC classics (like System Shock 2 which I noted above is $5 right now on Steam) because they're just as complex as today's games but less intuitive.
You have to have a very special kind of upbringing to come up as a PC game from a young age. I have friends who did. The two biggest factors I've seen for American kids getting into PC gaming at a young age are:
1) Being the children of PC gamers. A lot of my friends had dads who had StarCraft, Command & Conquer, Fury3, or Rainbow Six installed on their home office computers and we'd play around with them a lot. My dad showing me his computer in the mid 90's is basically how I learned to use one at a young age. Come to think of it I should take advantage of chances like that whenever my brother's kids come over. I missed a perfect opportunity once when his five-year-old caught me playing Avadon once. Now the kid's playing iPad games.
2) Oddly, I'm starting to think being a military brat is a contributing factor. Maybe that's just because that's the environment I grew up in. A lot of my childhood friends had dads who had military simulation-type games on their computers like the ones mentioned above. Maybe people in the military got exposed to PCs slightly earlier than most American civilians I don't know. I wonder if somewhere there's a nine-yer-old playing ArmA III on his dad's PC right now.
Maybe I'm just trying to figure out how I got where I am now. I started to make the switch to PC around 2007, and the two deciding games for me were Crysis and Command & Conquer 3. The only reason I gave a shit about C&C3 is because the original was one of a handful of PC games I gave a shit about between all my SNES games when I was a kid.
The point is, you really have to work at it to initiate a kid into PC gaming.
I agree wholeheartedly. Most journalists are console-only gamers and you can't talk about what you don't know/care about. It kinda sucks that you have a a bunch of console gamers who view the works of these journalists and get such a narrow view of the industry. This is also why you get people with the mindset that PC games are random niche things that "I am not into/could never get into" when really it's because they are never exposed to it. It's all a vicious cycle.
Consoles are not all the fucking same!
Each one has different hardware, different versions of games and different infrastructure!
Lumping them in with each other is the very definition of cherry picking data!
The rest of your post has nothing to do with this topic (which is why do PC games not get a fair amount of media coverage for it's size and not why some consumers don't like PC gaming)
Let's just say that, for the purpose of what the OP is discussing, a gaming media decides to put more focus on PS4 news than PC; this is *still* considered, as per the OP post, something that should be included in "console news > PC news" rhetoric, the same if that gaming media focusing more on XboxOne or WiiU or whatever.
Sure, consoles are different from each other from a technical standpoint, but if you wanna get technical than so are PCs. Do we start counting sales differently from PCs with Nvidia and ATI graphics cards, or Intel and AMD processors? How about the 20 different manufacturers for motherboards?
What part of "BINARY COMPATIBLE" do you not understand?!
I can take a game I can run on my PC with an Intel CPU, ASrock motherboard and Nvidia GTX 770 graphics card and put it on my Brother's PC with an AMD CPU, Gigabyte motherboard and AMD HD7970 graphics card and it will work without any changes to it's code, you can not do that with different consoles!
I'm well aware of the differences between a Playbox and an Xstation, but my point is that they are fundamentally the same in that they are plug and play gaming machines. How many average people do you think really know the difference between a PS3 and a 360, or a PS4 and a XB1?
It does not matter if they are "fundamentally the same", they are still different platforms and thus should not be counted together so you can shit on the sales of an other platform!
But it completely bothers me that people running big gaming websites which are ostensibly about covering all games don't even play PC games, or do so rarely.
The creator of Thomas Was Alone, Mike Bithell, said he felt as though PC exclusives got a degree of 'legitimacy' when they went to consoles, but I think he's got it a bit wrong. It's not so much consumers, it's press. We're not seeing consumers go "oh, because of this news article that a game is coming to consoles, I am going to buy this game," we're seeing journalists go "oh, this game is important now that it's coming to consoles, I'll write about it," people are becoming aware of the game, and then they're going out and buying it. The issue isn't with consumers, I think, so much as it is with the gaming press.
Consider this: computer exclusive games tend to get lower press scores compared to their audience reception, unless they're known IPs (eg Diablo). After a computer-exclusive game gets released, you'll find a lot of people just completely falling in love with these games... which end up getting something in the 70s on metacritic, if they're reviewed at all. When they are reviewed, it seems that people rarely give them the attention they deserve--several major sites, for instance, completely ignored major problems with SimCity, a 'known' game IP that many of them had played earlier iterations of, presumably because they didn't spend much time with the game. On the flip side, a game like Shadow Warrior had its wonderful tragic narrative and deep gunplay ignored because it had fun with wang jokes. Obvious, but not really the meat of the games.
Games writers will talk about console, even mobile games that deserve our affections, that were unfairly ignored, but when the computer games get involved, it's like "nah, hey, let's just pretend this isn't a thing." I've seen some of these major sites dedicate a lot more time to random non-gaming stuff than computer games.
"We don't have the manpower to cover everything" seems solved by maybe spending a bit less time browsing various aggregators to repost someone's amusing Pokemon picture. Heck, it took me about two days to get through Shadow Warrior, and a couple articles to write a review
that has encouraged a surprising number of people to go buy the game, so I feel great about that
. Say you ONLY write about Shadow Warrior and Dragon Commander. That's what, maybe a week or so, assuming you're doing a ton of other real-life stuff around that? It's not like it's a whole lot of time, and it's literally just two articles in a single year.
Here's an interview on Double Fine's indie publishing program, which is PC-centric. I'll probably have one with Corsair or Razer on gaming keyboards in a month or so.
There's only a few of us at my outlet, so yeah, we can't cover everything. We do not have the scale of a Polygon or an IGN. We do realize if we write a preview of Grey Goo, you may stop at RPS, PCGamer, or PCGamesN first and never hit us. We're working on doing more video and streaming, but we won't be up to Giant Bomb snuff anytime soon. MMOs are particularly hard because of the timesink they represent, but we do them as well, despite the fact that you may just stop off at Massively, Curse, or MMO-Champion.
But we try.
If you want more PC coverage, it's best not to focus only on coverage from the major sites and instead find out who is covering what you want to read.
If Shadow Warrior and Dragon Commander are important to you, google "game title + review", see who reviewed them, and read a few of their articles. Follow them instead of defaulting to sites whose coverage doesn't work for you. That's how you make coverage better. Not by funneling into the largest sites only, but finding great writing that resonates with you, reading it on a regular basis, and sharing it online.
Sure, let's do it, but only if we can scrounge up five or six more people, and not end up like all the other terrible sites that have tried it, partly by using strong branding and design.
That is likely true on its face, although it probably has to do with how many hardcore games there are on the platform. I imagine a journalist who demonstrates extremely refined and deep knowledge of fighting games would have a good chance of getting hired at Netherrealm or something.
I think Eric Wolpaw is literally the only one to be hired directly on the strength of his writing. That definitely seems secondary to getting hired into the industry itself.
Eh, kind of. I think someone who does PC gaming is more likely to have built their computer. They're more likely to have modded a game, or even tweaked an ini. Beyond experience, it's just the way they write. Kieron Gillen's writing on the story of System Shock 2 is far beyond any writing on game stories I've read lately (not that I've read everything, of course), and now he works as a writer for Marvel. These guys, even in their journalism writing, were a cut above, because they did a tremendous job looking beyond what the average reviewer saw when they looked at a game. That's where they stand apart.
Well I see your point. I guess having this same argument every time in pretty much every thread about PC gaming has worn me down. Every time sales are brought up the thread becomes a huge case of deja vu. Opiate has mentioned the pattern a few times and now I see it as well. It always starts with a vague comment like "its because PC gaming is just a fraction of console gaming" then the arguments start and the goal posts get moved until we get to a very narrow definition of gaming where that assessment works.
The people arguing have almost exclusively argued that it's about hits. They're trying to come up with reasons why these sites wouldn't receive hits, even though, as another poster indicated, PC articles get hit even more than console articles; that's all this is, even though it's clearly not the case. It's about personal taste.
Right now, the top platform on that Kotaku poll is still the PC.
You're making the mistake of thinking an example is sole proof.
Y'know, I had a friend who went and looked at the GOTY picks from every staff member of a very large multi-platform game magazine/website. What he found was that they almost all had the exact same picks, with one or two differences. The site's coverage often reflected these tastes.
What we're seeing is self-filtering. These guys hire people with tastes similar to their own--the people themselves may be diverse, much of the time, but the games they play fall into the same narrow range, over and over again. I'd like to work on a site where someone doesn't care at all about a game, and another person is pretty aggressively all about it. Rock, Paper, Shotgun can get like this at times, and it's awesome.
People cover what they like. It's not about hits. It's about "I am interested in this, so I will write about it," because at the end of the day, someone writing cannot constantly write about things they don't enjoy. What we need to see are different hiring practices.
Nice OP. Agree, but surprised sites don't adapt. Maybe that is partly why sites like RPS are healthy, because they are a limited resource for a hungry audience? And surely a few mainstream site could attract new hits by posting relatively simple articles which other sites ignore?
But maybe it's just too easy to pad out your site with aggregated shit that doesn't take much thought?
I think they don't adapt because most of them don't care about computer games. Yes, attracting new hits is good... but I mean, look, if someone's a big Zelda fan, if Nintendo games are all they care about, they're probably going to only hire other Zelda fans. If they go write big long articles about how Zelda's the greatest, most important game ever, their articles aglow with praise for Miyamoto, their reviews shrugging off hand-holding, or even praising it for getting new people into the series... and then someone applies for a job, and their writing says "I don't think Zelda was that important," chances are, they won't get hired, because they "won't fit with the culture."
I mean, look, I don't like Red Dead Redemption. Or Mass Effect. Or Uncharted. Or, yes, Zelda. I like PC games.
If you're running a big gaming site, and RDR, ME, Uncharted, and Zelda are games your site tends to consider GOTY contenders... you're probably not going to hire someone like me, even though you should, because A) diversity of voice is important, and B) I'm a professional who won't make you feel bad for liking the games you like.
Heck, I actually like playing games my friends like, even if I don't enjoy the games, just because I like learning why other people enjoy things.
Journalists, such as Gamestop's Kevin Van Ord (and others) have pointed out that many of the most traffic gathering articles are about PC games/gaming.
Your post is pretty fantastic, though I don't think anyone should go to a site and be like "hah, your consoles suck, PC for life!" I mean, heck, I would like to buy a PS4 and an XBO. I won't use 'em much, but I'm a fiend for Forza Horizon, and Infamous was a great reason to own a PS3. I'll still play 'em, and I don't mind anyone that does.
But... yeah. Like you said, wilfull ignorance. "People don't read that," when they clearly do.
All it is: "I don't personally value PC gaming that much, so I don't want to write about it."
My own theory on this is that PC gamers have always been older than console gamers until fairly recently and as such, the PC gaming press has always been older as well. That dude from Kotaku whose name I can remember reamed me out for this a couple months back but I still think this theory is largely true:
The vast majority of people working in the games media today did not grow up with PC games so even when they write about them today, they are writing from the perspective of a console gamer. PC gaming has lacked the equivalent of a Super Mario Bros. type game to cultivate a young audience and bring them up along slowly with time. A great game with simple mechanics that people of all ages can enjoy.
I think that's part of it. PC gaming didn't really become something anyone could do until about the time the Orange Box rolled around. Building computers, messing with drivers, all that jazz? Occasionally nightmarish. It's no surprise that guys like Schafer and Cerny, in some Kotaku interviews, talked about how computer games, back in the day, were for adults. You had adults writing about games for adults, and kids growing up
But, I mean, that's not entirely the case. I know plenty of people who can--and do--write about computer games and aren't that old. Heck, I'm only 25, and I write about next to nothing else.
I think it's a case of who these people are actively hiring, as well as, again, people who are into computer games just going into development. Most of the people I feel can write about games... tend to be working pretty hard on indie/mod stuff.
I'm fine with it not taking up a huge amount of press time in the more mainstream areas. I can go to places like PCGamesN, PC Gamer and RockPaperShotgun to get the reviews, news and other bits and bobs that I want. I feel as a PC gamer there are plenty of outlets where I can get what I want out of it.
That's good for you, but part of the goal here is getting more people into computer gaming, and introducing more people to games they had no idea they might have liked. I'm trying to think about it from an altruistic perspective, rather than "doesn't effect me."
You may know Betrayer exists, but does the average person? How many more people would know about Betrayer, the best gaming experience I've had all year. So many random, not-that-great console designers are well known, but who recognizes the name Craig Hubbard? He's one of the greatest designers in existence, having created a female-led first-person comedy shooter, the greatest shooter ever made, and the best Aliens game there is (according to metacritic... also me). Betrayer's his latest game. It's brilliant.
More people should have the opportunity to know that.
That's what I'm talking about though. Even many PC games that will probably run on the laptop you already own get completely ignored unless they also have a console version. So many of these people just don't want to leave the comfort zone of consoles.
As you go on to say, consoles were easier to get into. I'm not begrudging anyone their past, I just wish they would either try to get into the platform, or at least hire people who have an interest and will write about it--and not shuffle them off into the wee hours of the morning, leaving the console news for daytime/evening in the US and Europe.
I agree wholeheartedly. Most journalists are console-only gamers and you can't talk about what you don't know/care about. It kinda sucks that you have a a bunch of console gamers who view the works of these journalists and get such a narrow view of the industry. This is also why you get people with the mindset that PC games are random niche things that "I am not into/could never get into" when really it's because they are never exposed to it. It's all a vicious cycle.
I'm here 'cause I'm hoping for broadened horizons. More talking about computers --> more people seeing the unique experiences in gaming --> gaming becomes more diverse and healthy.
Besides, I just hate misinformation, and there's no platform that has it worse than the PC, because, unlike consoles, there's no marketing department to send any kind of messaging.
Let's just say that, for the purpose of what the OP is discussing, a gaming media decides to put more focus on PS4 news than PC; this is *still* considered, as per the OP post, something that should be included in "console news > PC news" rhetoric, the same if that gaming media focusing more on XboxOne or WiiU or whatever.
I was thinking that a lot of the people I'm discussing put these things together. In their minds, it seems to be "consoles vs PC." Sure, there are minute differences. The Xbox has Kinect, the PS4 has a touch pad. Stuff like that.
At the end of the day, there's no difference in the way I consume games on my PS3 or my 360. There is a difference in the way I consume them on those platforms contrasted with my computer. It is the single biggest platform on the market, and even on large, multi-platform, AAA games, we've clearly seen that the PC represents a full third of the market.
"Computer Gaming" is a term that refers to Mac/Windows/Linux. Back in the day, it meant stuff like the Commodores as well. I didn't want to say "PC gaming" because I don't want people to think I'm trying to ignore Mac gaming, as much as I would like to think Mac gaming doesn't actually exist. Hehe.
There's only a few of us at my outlet, so yeah, we can't cover everything. We do not have the scale of a Polygon or an IGN. We do realize if we write a preview of Grey Goo, you may stop at RPS, PCGamer, or PCGamesN first and never hit us. We're working on doing more video and streaming, but we won't be up to Giant Bomb snuff anytime soon. MMOs are particularly hard because of the timesink they represent, but we do them as well, despite the fact that you may just stop off at Massively, Curse, or MMO-Champion.
I sold you short in my posting, and I'm sorry about that. Do I think you're doing the best job ever? Eeeenhnh, sorry. I think you're getting there, but I lumped you in with some offenders who are definitely worse, and I was wrong for that.
If you want more PC coverage, it's best not to focus only on coverage from the major sites and instead find out who is covering what you want to read.
If Shadow Warrior and Dragon Commander are important to you, google "game title + review", see who reviewed them, and read a few of their articles. Follow them instead of defaulting to sites whose coverage doesn't work for you. That's how you make coverage better. Not by funneling into the largest sites only, but finding great writing that resonates with you, reading it on a regular basis, and sharing it online.
I can go find the information I want by visiting sites like RPS and PCGamer. I can. That's not really what bugs me. It's that the big guys aren't doing all that much to talk about games on the PC. I'll see 'em say "hey, not enough people paid attention to..." and then talk about some console/portable game, but this doesn't happen all that much with PC games.
It's a big deal to me, because press is how these games get seen. These games are important to me, and because of that, I want people talking about them. I do what I can, but these are largely just single-draft posts written on my lunch break in community sections of a website. Shadow Warrior was a must-play game of last year, and just about no one played it, because the big boys weren't talking about it.
As I mentioned before, Bithell noted a sales spike when news hit that Thomas Was Alone was coming to PS4. This was a spike on PC. What happened was that journalists were talking about his game more than ever before (because now it's a console game so it's relevant), and it was bringing awareness to his game. Earlier tonight, a dev tweeted about publishers asking him for review code for the console edition of a game his company released earlier on PC. Ever seen anyone do that for, say, the always-delayed PC versions of an Assassin's Creed game? Nah, but you'll see that happen if it's the other way around, because consoles get that priority.
What people write sets the tone for what people are aware of. What they're aware of, they buy. Writing about PC games is, straight-up, helpful for the industry. It's where devs who've formerly lost money on consoles can rejuvenate themselves. It's where new ideas thrive, where ideas that "don't make money" make 40 million dollars. It's where the most diverse, important game experiences come from.
The responsible games journalist should prioritize them. Now, am I saying "hey, you need to talk about Planet Alcatraz, Dreamscapes, Nearwood, UFO: Aftershock, Faces of War, and all the other random titles that released today!" Nah. I'm not expecting anyone to even know what the upcoming game Xanadu is (though it's awesome and you should check it out; it's got strong Shock/Deus Ex influences) But more opinion pieces about computer games would be good. Getting awareness out there would be nice.
I want to see healthy gaming. I think an emphasis on the largest single segment of the market is important.
Anyways, Shadow Warrior, Kentucky Route Zero, and Dragon Commander were the best-written games of last year. Hardly anyone paid them any mind, and that's a huge bummer.
I get it, you're undermanned. Looking for someone, either in some sort of horribly low-paid or freelance position, to help bolster your PC content? I could fire off some stuff your way in the coming months.
Why the hell are y'all putting stuff in spoilers that aren't spoilers? I've been wondering that for some years now. Is it supposed to be dramatic or something?
I sold you short in my posting, and I'm sorry about that. Do I think you're doing the best job ever? Eeeenhnh, sorry. I think you're getting there, but I lumped you in with some offenders who are definitely worse, and I was wrong for that.
Oh no, I understand if our coverage might not completely be to your liking. We're getting better, and we will continue to strive for that aim, but we're pretty new and no one site can be everything to everyone.
I can go find the information I want by visiting sites like RPS and PCGamer. I can. That's not really what bugs me. It's that the big guys aren't doing all that much to talk about games on the PC. I'll see 'em say "hey, not enough people paid attention to..." and then talk about some console/portable game, but this doesn't happen all that much with PC games.
It's a big deal to me, because press is how these games get seen. These games are important to me, and because of that, I want people talking about them. I do what I can, but these are largely just single-draft posts written on my lunch break in community sections of a website. Shadow Warrior was a must-play game of last year, and just about no one played it, because the big boys weren't talking about it.
As I mentioned before, Bithell noted a sales spike when news hit that Thomas Was Alone was coming to PS4. This was a spike on PC. What happened was that journalists were talking about his game more than ever before (because now it's a console game so it's relevant), and it was bringing awareness to his game. Earlier tonight, a dev tweeted about publishers asking him for review code for the console edition of a game his company released earlier on PC. Ever seen anyone do that for, say, the always-delayed PC versions of an Assassin's Creed game? Nah, but you'll see that happen if it's the other way around, because consoles get that priority.
What people write sets the tone for what people are aware of. What they're aware of, they buy. Writing about PC games is, straight-up, helpful for the industry. It's where devs who've formerly lost money on consoles can rejuvenate themselves. It's where new ideas thrive, where ideas that "don't make money" make 40 million dollars. It's where the most diverse, important game experiences come from.
The responsible games journalist should prioritize them. Now, am I saying "hey, you need to talk about Planet Alcatraz, Dreamscapes, Nearwood, UFO: Aftershock, Faces of War, and all the other random titles that released today!" Nah. I'm not expecting anyone to even know what the upcoming game Xanadu is (though it's awesome and you should check it out; it's got strong Shock/Deus Ex influences) But more opinion pieces about computer games would be good. Getting awareness out there would be nice.
I want to see healthy gaming. I think an emphasis on the largest single segment of the market is important.
Anyways, Shadow Warrior, Kentucky Route Zero, and Dragon Commander were the best-written games of last year. Hardly anyone paid them any mind, and that's a huge bummer.
I get it, you're undermanned. Looking for someone, either in some sort of horribly low-paid or freelance position, to help bolster your PC content? I could fire off some stuff your way in the coming months.
Ah, I understand. You're trying to raise the mainstream visibility of some of these great PC titles. That's a great goal. I will note that sites like RPS do help in this regard, in that RPS is probably read by a number of writers from mainstream sites. Reddit and forums like NeoGAF also help a great deal; if you can get a groundswell in those places, you'll find the coverage from other sites will follow.
For example, I'm tracking down the team behind Heart Forth, Alicia because of a thread on here. I saw the thread, the game looked interesting to me, so I'm reaching out to see if we can talk.
Honestly despite the binary nature of internet denizens (you must choose between Reddit/GAF or gaming websites), I tend to not view it as an either or. Forums and Reddit have the benefit of thousands upon thousands of passionate people who crunch and sift through information far faster than any one site can. Gaming sites are just one layer beyond that, distilling it down, curating it, and using our potential access to provide more information on the topic. We publish what you folks are talking about and what you're reading. Part of that is listening to what you're asking for.
So, in short, more opinion pieces on computer games? I'll bring it up with the team and see what we can do.
If you want to freelance, the man to talk to is Jeremy Parish. ToastyFrog here, @gamespite on Twitter. He handles all the freelancers.
Why the hell are y'all putting stuff in spoilers that aren't spoilers? I've been wondering that for some years now. Is it supposed to be dramatic or something?
Oh no, I understand if our coverage might not completely be to your liking. We're getting better, and we will continue to strive for that aim, but we're pretty new and no one site can be everything to everyone.
I am insane and completely believe a site can cover all the bases. Just need all the voices.
Ah, I understand. You're trying to raise the mainstream visibility of some of these great PC titles. That's a great goal. I will note that sites like RPS do help in this regard, in that RPS is probably read by a number of writers from mainstream sites. Reddit and forums like NeoGAF also help a great deal; if you can get a groundswell in those places, you'll find the coverage from other sites will follow.
I'm aware, but I feel that shouldn't have to happen. Again, I point to the example of "eh, we already covered that game" for an indie game that hardly gets any coverage. It's super interesting, weird, and unlike any other game out there. I offered it to someone, and he turned me down. Be the groundswell, y'know? Glad you're tracking down the Heart guys, even though it's not really my kind of game.
Honestly despite the binary nature of internet denizens (you must choose between Reddit/GAF or gaming websites), I tend to not view it as an either or. Forums and Reddit have the benefit of thousands upon thousands of passionate people who crunch and sift through information far faster than any one site can. Gaming sites are just one layer beyond that, distilling it down, curating it, and using our potential access to provide more information on the topic. We publish what you folks are talking about and what you're reading. Part of that is listening to what you're asking for.
Never really understood the binary thing. My time is split pretty evenly between communities like Kotaku's, and sites like NeoGAF. I tend to keep my longform stuff to the communities, just because forums seem to tend to want shorter stuff most of the time. This is probably my most successful high-wordcount thread.
So, in short, more opinion pieces on computer games? I'll bring it up with the team and see what we can do.
If you want to freelance, the man to talk to is Jeremy Parish. ToastyFrog here, @gamespite on Twitter. He handles all the freelancers.
Opinion, talking about games, interviews, modding... I'm all over the place, man. I once spent five thousand words one week writing about Assassin's Creed III and design language, then another lamenting the death of the base-building RTS, and another explaining how many hundreds of years it would take to let all the Steam trading cards drop. I plan on things like modding guides, extensive explorations of game mechanics, and stuff like that, at least for my personal blog, in the future. My hope, one day, is to write a book on the first-person shooter, interweaving discussions with developers and practical theory on shooter design. I've got interviews with people I want to do--long-form features detailing the diaspora of Looking Glass, for instance--tons of stuff.
Don't have the resources, sadly, and living in the Midwest makes access hard, but I've always been super happy when people run articles like this or these.
I may reach out to Parish. I'm busy working on a bunch of video editing/filming projects for school (after my game design degree, I went into film and journalism), I'm desperately looking for work (it's a really bad situation; basically, my illness makes someone uncomfortable, so she's trying to make me quit/get me fired), and I'm working on a couple freelance pieces right now.
Well, it also tends to get the most innovative and agile developers, games, etc.. so... you can't have everything, now can you? Leave something for the rest of us.
It probably does not help that review or preview builds are always the console version. Giant Bomb does a good job of going back to look at the PC version of big games if they feel it is worth talking about.
Another thing is some of the more niche genes on PC have some decent learning curves attached to them. I know the guys from big sites are busy and probably do not have time to drop 20+ hours into a game to learn mechanics so they can talk about it with any level of reasonable authority, especially for a game that will probably not drive clicks or ad revenue.
It's probably due to consoles having a single company backing them with a single vision. They have marketers, advertisements and conferences that create hype machines way more effective than anybody else can. It doesn't matter if CS:GO on PC has a larger playerbase than Halo 4, Halo has more hype as decreed by Microsoft and thus journalists cover than more.
Honestly I feel PC gaming is becoming the elephant in the room, looking at the Steam sales thread for games like Civ V, XCOM and Borderlands 2, the massive growth of MOBAs, the declining Japanese console industry contrasted with the the burgeoning Chinese and Russian PC industries, the PC-oriented indie scene becoming more prominent in regards to budgets and mindshare and the relative power of modern PCs over consoles this time around which can create more affordable living room boxes and better VR, I can't help but feel in the next 2-5 years there's going to be some big changes in the industry in regards to this and mobile.
Well, it also tends to get the most innovative and agile developers, games, etc.. so... you can't have everything, now can you? Leave something for the rest of us.
It probably does not help that review or preview builds are always the console version. Giant Bomb does a good job of going back to look at the PC version of big games if they feel it is worth talking about.
Another thing is some of the more niche genes on PC have some decent learning curves attached to them. I know the guys from big sites are busy and probably do not have time to drop 20+ hours into a game to learn mechanics so they can talk about it with any level of reasonable authority, especially for a game that will probably not drive clicks or ad revenue.
Most of the games I suggested don't have these high learning curves. Each episode of Kentucky Route Zero, for instance, takes about an hour to play. Shadow Warrior's deep, but a reasonable player can delve into those systems in a single playthrough without any trouble.
And for games that do have deep mechanics, not lending themselves well to reviewing like a traditional game? Impressions threads might be nice, y'know?
It's probably due to consoles having a single company backing them with a single vision. They have marketers, advertisements and conferences that create hype machines way more effective than anybody else can. It doesn't matter if CS:GO on PC has a larger playerbase than Halo 4, Halo has more hype as decreed by Microsoft and thus journalists cover than more.
Honestly I feel PC gaming is becoming the elephant in the room, looking at the Steam sales thread for games like Civ V, XCOM and Borderlands 2, the massive growth of MOBAs, the declining Japanese console industry contrasted with the the burgeoning Chinese and Russian PC industries, the PC-oriented indie scene becoming more prominent in regards to budgets and mindshare and the relative power of modern PCs over consoles this time around which can create more affordable living room boxes and better VR, I can't help but feel in the next 2-5 years there's going to be some big changes in the industry in regards to this and mobile.
I feel like PC gaming always has been. It's always been the bleeding edge of tech. Any journalist worth their salt should be keeping up with it simply because of that. So... I'm not entirely sure things will change. Last night's Kotaku poll asking what platforms people play the most? PCs are still in the lead--almost 40% of respondents use it as their primary platform. That's almost half. And it doesn't take into account people who use it as their secondary platform. If all the users who use the PS3 as their main console use the PC as their secondary, that's over 50% of the audience with a vested interest in computer gaming.
Buuuuuuut... at the end of the day, it still feels like most major sites are saying "hey, I'm only going to write about what personally interests me, and I'm only ever going to hire people who share the same gaming tastes." So even though PC gamers make up the single biggest user share of these sites, they're not going to prioritize it.
I've seen all that data, but none of it speaks to comparable revenue between PCs and consoles. SuperData's info is great, but what you're showing doesn't break down PC vs. Console.
Why the hell are y'all putting stuff in spoilers that aren't spoilers? I've been wondering that for some years now. Is it supposed to be dramatic or something?
I've seen all that data, but none of it speaks to comparable revenue between PCs and consoles. SuperData's info is great, but what you're showing doesn't break down PC vs. Console.
And even if it's not the majority though, it's still a huge market.
You still have millions of readers and potential readers, so who cares if they aren't the simple majority? That's still a ton of readers.
DocSeuss is right. They need to higher people who are different than them. Unfortunately, that makes a lot of people uncomfortable (working with people who have different opinions and tastes), so I don't expect it. But they still ought to.
I totally agree, and that's why I do write about PC games when I can. I've tried and largely succeeded I think to write evenly about PC vs. console games. Of course my broader coverage is more focused on consoles because of the larger questions about whether the console market will grow or shrink during this generation of devices.
I've seen all that data, but none of it speaks to comparable revenue between PCs and consoles. SuperData's info is great, but what you're showing doesn't break down PC vs. Console.
I totally agree, and that's why I do write about PC games when I can. I've tried and largely succeeded I think to write evenly about PC vs. console games. Of course my broader coverage is more focused on consoles because of the larger questions about whether the console market will grow or shrink during this generation of devices.
I don't don't know that it's entirely necessary to just write about PC games for the sake of it. You do it because it deserves to be written about, and it does. It's about the reason you go into it I guess is what I'm saying.
Where do your writings get published? Can't remember if you said that earlier.
True-- there's a bias, and I agree with most of the reasons for it given in this thread. But lately it hasn't made much of a difference to me. Between RPS and Indiegam.es, there's barely a single PC release I hear anyone on GAF or /v/ or in my social circle talk about that I haven't noticed from paying attention to those two. The only under-reporting that really really annoys me is against Android, because people think that it has no games or something.
That said, I've read a lot of critical analyses of major PC games and whatnot, but most of it is coming from RPS, which I feel is in decline right now. Since I can't really depend on it forever if that's happening, what PC sites/blogs do you guys like to follow?
I agree with most of what you said, but that particular one is like asking why there's no straight white male pride parade. It's because the PC section on Twitch is basically just Twitch.
I think another reason might be that a lot of PC gaming is genres that console gamers (which include many journalists) don't give a shit about because they're uncommon-to-nonexistent on consoles. I'm not talking about MMOs and MOBAs because those are big. But mid-tier RTSs, grand strategy games (Civ being the one game getting a lot of attention), 4x games, simulators, adventure games, and western RPGs that don't have console versions.
I cover PC gaming news often and it does quite well. Remember, PC games tend to have more play value, so a lot of PC gamers just want to digest news about the game they already play (ie WoW, D3, Dota 2, etc).
I cover PC gaming news often and it does quite well. Remember, PC games tend to have more play value, so a lot of PC gamers just want to digest news about the game they already play (ie WoW, D3, Dota 2, etc).
I actually think it's really sad that "PC gaming" seems relegated to just RTS, MMO, and such. There's a ton of other games that really excel as PC games. Like, the OP has talked about Immersive Sims A LOT. And speaking of "sim" PC also has things like actual simulators, like Flight Simulator, Train Simulator,
I've pitched an article to an editor I greatly admire, and he turned an article down because "we've covered the game before." The coverage? A single article mentioning the game's Kickstarter. Much love to the guy; I think he's one of the best in the biz, and I'd pretty much kill to work for him, even at minimum wage, but in that one area, I found myself a bit disappointed.
It may not apply to this situation, or to any experience you've had freelancing, but being able to pitch a story well is as important as having a good idea. It took me some time as a freelancer to get good at pitching. And still, not everything that I thought was a good idea got picked up. Sometimes because the person I was pitching to probably knew, better than me, how much of the audience would actually be interested in the story. Sometimes because they just didn't like the idea as much as me!
"We don't have the manpower to cover everything" seems solved by maybe spending a bit less time browsing various aggregators to repost someone's amusing Pokemon picture. Heck, it took me about two days to get through Shadow Warrior, and a couple articles to write a review
that has encouraged a surprising number of people to go buy the game, so I feel great about that
I don't don't know that it's entirely necessary to just write about PC games for the sake of it. You do it because it deserves to be written about, and it does. It's about the reason you go into it I guess is what I'm saying.
The majority of PC gaming as a whole is a paradise for the middle-tier developers, which unsurprisingly gets very little coverage from the enthusiast press as well.
Man I wish Total War had a console port.
Then again an /RTS/ getting a /console port/ is a fucking stupid idea.
I find this annoying when the PC release of an indie game is totally ignored, but as soon as the game hits PS4 or Vita everyone goes apeshit. I'm glad the game eventually gets played, and it sure doesn't matter on which platform, but it's sad the media sometimes even forgets the PC version exists. Even big PC titles are completely ignored.
That said, I've read a lot of critical analyses of major PC games and whatnot, but most of it is coming from RPS, which I feel is in decline right now. Since I can't really depend on it forever if that's happening, what PC sites/blogs do you guys like to follow?
I must say I disagree about RPS, I feel like after Graham Smith joined the team they've been doing really well. But that's beside the point.
One thing that's especially important for such covarege of PC games is that you need to follow the people, not the sites. A lot of those articles are written by freelancers, so they could appear anywhere from RPS to Polygon. Go follow those writers on Twitter or check their personal blogs.
Also listen to the Crate and Crowbar podcast, with British dudes talking about PC games!
Great op. I'm also a portable/console gamer, but I see the point of what you wrote and will keep an eye for pc game articles. I may not like pc gaming much (I feel I should be working and stop playing) but I do ike reading about games in general.
I hadn't noticed how as you say there's hardly any coverage of pc stuff, whilst for consoles every teeny tiny detail gets at lest a mention. Instead of an interview about game mechanics/art/inspiration of X game, there aleays seems to be an emphasis for.simpler things like say pikachu drawn on a plane.
True-- there's a bias, and I agree with most of the reasons for it given in this thread. But lately it hasn't made much of a difference to me. Between RPS and Indiegam.es, there's barely a single PC release I hear anyone on GAF or /v/ or in my social circle talk about that I haven't noticed from paying attention to those two. The only under-reporting that really really annoys me is against Android, because people think that it has no games or something.
But it's not really about us. The point in my OP was that PC gaming is unfairly passed over by the average game site. I still think that's true. Why does this matter? Because of diversity of voice. The average person should have access to new titles on the largest single platform out there. Sure, you and I can go looking for it, but it's not about us, it's about the general audience's access to the world's largest platform, which is, strangely enough, minimal.
Someone called it an elephant in the room. Imagine that there are a bunch of blind people in a room with the elephant. You and I would seek out the people who can tell us about the elephant. But the loudest voices don't talk about it, leading the other blind people, who don't know about the elephant, into ignorance, and that's not cool.
So sure, if you go looking for it, you're going to find it. Also, I've not heard of indiegam.es. I've heard of freeindiegam.es, but they just shut down.
I think another reason might be that a lot of PC gaming is genres that console gamers (which include many journalists) don't give a shit about because they're uncommon-to-nonexistent on consoles. I'm not talking about MMOs and MOBAs because those are big. But mid-tier RTSs, grand strategy games (Civ being the one game getting a lot of attention), 4x games, simulators, adventure games, and western RPGs that don't have console versions.
Even stuff like Tropico, which does have console versions, is pretty much ignored. The series is amazing, and one of the main things I recommend everyone pick up when they're first getting into PC gaming.
I cover PC gaming news often and it does quite well. Remember, PC games tend to have more play value, so a lot of PC gamers just want to digest news about the game they already play (ie WoW, D3, Dota 2, etc).
Hm. Hadn't really thought about that, but it does make sense, because that's one of the reasons I've always been bugged by Valve and Blizzard. Their fans seem really myopic, rarely willing to branch out to new things.
Have you not read this thread? Quite a bit of its content directly disproves that the press is following the hits. If they were, they'd spend way more time focusing on PC.
It may not apply to this situation, or to any experience you've had freelancing, but being able to pitch a story well is as important as having a good idea. It took me some time as a freelancer to get good at pitching. And still, not everything that I thought was a good idea got picked up. Sometimes because the person I was pitching to probably knew, better than me, how much of the audience would actually be interested in the story. Sometimes because they just didn't like the idea as much as me!
Absolutely, I just get the impression that the PC is held to an absurdly high standard. Like if all major food blogs went "meh, it has calories" for American food, but said "it has to be the greatest, most award-winning fusion-only dish" for foreign food, y'know?
My pitch might not have been great. There are no resources on the internet of "how to write a fantastic pitch for a gaming website." But it does feel a bit weird that it seems like "anything goes" for, say, Zelda on this site ('here's some fanart,' for instance), and a profile of an indie developer and their weird game requires the world's most excellent pitch.
Oh, no, that sounds like I'm trying to blame other people for my pitch. I'm not sure how to word it better, though! I don't think my pitch was BAD, just held to a higher standard than the site's average.
This is a hell of an assumption to make about how people spend their workdays.
I did my best to track down posting habits of various games journalists, counting up the various articles and sources they used, essentially building profiles for them.
It's a research-driven statement. It could be wrong. I could have misinterpreted the data. I don't know, I'm not sitting there with the people I tracked. Butttttttt... I did actually look at what they posted and talked about in places like Twitter, so I feel I have a pretty good grasp on how they go about doing their jobs. It's not heavy, in-depth research, but just going back through a few months of posts for people to see what their habits trended towards.
I find this annoying when the PC release of an indie game is totally ignored, but as soon as the game hits PS4 or Vita everyone goes apeshit. I'm glad the game eventually gets played, and it sure doesn't matter on which platform, but it's sad the media sometimes even forgets the PC version exists. Even big PC titles are completely ignored.
Yup. When I finally get my 3D game out on the market, I'm seriously considering announcing it for next-gen platforms, just to get attention from the journalists, and eventually canceling them. Because I've been convinced that if it's PC-only, it won't get any attention from those same people.
I must say I disagree about RPS, I feel like after Graham Smith joined the team they've been doing really well. But that's beside the point.
One thing that's especially important for such covarege of PC games is that you need to follow the people, not the sites. A lot of those articles are written by freelancers, so they could appear anywhere from RPS to Polygon. Go follow those writers on Twitter or check their personal blogs.
Also listen to the Crate and Crowbar podcast, with British dudes talking about PC games!
Smith has done a good job, but I feel that people like... a certain correspondent did significant damage. After he joined the site, his holier-than-thou attitude tended to set the tone for the site, which led to a drastic shift in the tone of the comments, and RPS went from the site with the best commenters to a site I mostly just skim for headlines. Smith has helped brought it back, though. I really think the correspondent has been a toxic influence on the site, and it's frustrating to see he's getting work on another major site now. He's bad for them, but his politics are in the 'right place,' so he gets lauded.
Computer gaming shouldn't be the realm of freelancers. Every major games website should have an equal coverage of all platforms. I'm not even asking for a fair representation of all platforms--because that would result in all sites being PC-primary sites--just one where the PC gets as much coverage, in all ways (features, opinions, blips, even fanart posts if the site in question runs those). If it's just freelancers, then that means PC gaming isn't a priority for these sites--they're not willing to hire staff who have interests that differ from theirs.
It's all about getting a diverse mix of voices here.
Great op. I'm also a portable/console gamer, but I see the point of what you wrote and will keep an eye for pc game articles. I may not like pc gaming much (I feel I should be working and stop playing) but I do ike reading about games in general.
I hadn't noticed how as you say there's hardly any coverage of pc stuff, whilst for consoles every teeny tiny detail gets at lest a mention. Instead of an interview about game mechanics/art/inspiration of X game, there aleays seems to be an emphasis for.simpler things like say pikachu drawn on a plane.
When we look at PCs, we see that just about every advance in tech comes from them. Even stuff that doesn't last, like 3D or motion gaming, debuts on the PC first. So, as a gamer, if you want to know what's happening in the future, if you want to see where the trends are going, you look at the PC. Paying attention to the future is a sound journalistic practice, and something you'll find in fields like tech and film.
Things are unlikely to get better for me. At this stage, I need someone with the power to make my life better to choose to do so. I have no control over what I can do. I'm too poor and too ill to do much more than survive. I'll continue pushing myself as far as I can go every day, but I can't get better on my own.
Certainly, the sales data backs you up here. Console game sales are estimated to be nearly 4x more than PC this year. Further, PC is expected to shrink over the next three years, whereas console will grow (slightly).
More importantly, many of the top-tier games I keep my eyes on are released for both. Yes, there are certainly games released only for the PC (many MOBAs, MMOs and mid-tier stuff that's often on Steam), and in my defense I have written about them.
But because of the nature of my job, I typically focus on AAA titles, which overwhelmingly are released on both PCs and consoles.
So, perhaps your complaint is that there aren't enough people writing about mid-tier games?
Not being critical, just trying to share my thoughts and better understand yours.
This is the exact opposite of data I've seen of PC gaming over the last 5 yrs as well as projected growth into the near future. Even setting data aside, I would think even a basic familiarity with recent gaming history would give someone pause when deciding what direction game sales are going. Steam alone has pretty much reversed PC gaming fortunes the past few years and as far as I've seen, heard, and read this isn't changing anytime soon.
But it's not really about us. The point in my OP was that PC gaming is unfairly passed over by the average game site. I still think that's true. [Snip]
Have you not read this thread? Quite a bit of its content directly disproves that the press is following the hits. If they were, they'd spend way more time focusing on PC.
If it's just freelancers, then that means PC gaming isn't a priority for these sites--they're not willing to hire staff who have interests that differ from theirs.
A few big trends over the last 25-35 yrs have created a perfect storm for the current situation to develop, chief among them is that mainstream media power has gradually centralized into the hands of a very few large corporations with definite agendas, usually centering around maximizing consumer exposure to whatever product(s) will maximize profits. On the flip side, theres a generational effect at play here as well. I'm old enough to remember writing sub-routines to get PC games to work in MS-DOS. A lot of the early focus on PC gaming was due to the fact that the whole industry was still young enough that everything seemed new. Consoles have always offered ease of use but comparatively limited feature sets and locked down ecosystems as a result. Long term what is happening now from the consumer side has an air of inevitability to it, if only because I always knew growing up the only way the vast majority of gamers would ever share my love of PC gaming is if/when it became much, much easier to use. In large part that answer came in the form of Steam, which on balance has been wonderful for gaming in general. But consoles are still several orders of magnitude easier/less frustrating to use. The attention span of the average American is simply not up to dealing with PC gaming. This isnt a knock on everyone who games on consoles because sometimes its just nice to turn something on and it generally works how you expect it too. And for many, console gaming...limited though it may be...is *good enough* and the extra capabilities afforded by PC gaming arent enough to overcome perceived complications. And, partially as a result of this consumer preference, we are still dealing with a corporate media that simply doesnt have as much to gain by covering PC gaming. The long term plans that large media companies have for the internet and the resulatant struggle to keep net neutrality alive will go a long ways towards answering many questions we have about the future of all media coverage, from politics to economics to, yes, even video games. I'm not overly optimistic about this future primarily because most Americans have fallen asleep and abdicated control of this democracy to massive multinationals, while they are entertained by "bread and circuses". Ultimately, all of these issues...including the one you mention in the OP...are inter-related.
I was expecting a long rant about nothing, but actually... yeah, you raise some really good points.
And I'm glad you mentioned Shadow Warrior. I grabbed that from GOG last month and was absolutely floored by it. One of the most enjoyable shooters I've ever played, and I heard nothing about it from the press... apart from a dismissive quick look on Giantbomb.
This is the exact opposite of data I've seen of PC gaming over the last 5 yrs as well as projected growth into the near future. Even setting data aside, I would think even a basic familiarity with recent gaming history would give someone pause when deciding what direction game sales are going. Steam alone has pretty much reversed PC gaming fortunes the past few years and as far as I've seen, heard, and read this isn't changing anytime soon.
And what data are you talking about then? Several people have cited different sources in this thread against what you are saying. EA, for example of something already said in this thread, has said that they expect PC to become their biggest platform. This is EA we're talking about. They're not going to make that kind of statement without data.
I just thought the press ended up segregating themselves into mobile | console | PC.
I always figured that might have been because of the differing demographics of the audiences or the way a PC gamer looks for information vs. the average console gamer vs. the average mobile gamer.
Kotaku's poll now has 10,000+ people for PCs, while the next-highest platform is at 3,000+. Adding the four major consoles up... you end up with about 100 more than PC gamers.
One platform beats four. Kinda seems like it deserves more attention, right?
I was expecting a long rant about nothing, but actually... yeah, you raise some really good points.
And I'm glad you mentioned Shadow Warrior. I grabbed that from GOG last month and was absolutely floored by it. One of the most enjoyable shooters I've ever played, and I heard nothing about it from the press... apart from a dismissive quick look on Giantbomb.
Polygon (weirdly) said it was more fun with a controller, but gave it an average/below average score. IGN, of all places, gave it an 8.6, a mere .3 points below their score for Titanfall. I didn't like Hard Reset, but Shadow Warrior means I'll buy anything they make.
And what data are you talking about then? Several people have cited different sources in this thread against what you are saying. EA, for example of something already said in this thread, has said that they expect PC to become their biggest platform. This is EA we're talking about. They're not going to make that kind of statement without data.
Uh, he's saying the same thing you're saying.
Iansherr is the one arguing that PC gaming is declining, and Memorabilia quoted him to contradict what he said.
A few big trends over the last 25-35 yrs have created a perfect storm for the current situation to develop, chief among them is that mainstream media power has gradually centralized into the hands of a very few large corporations with definite agendas, usually centering around maximizing consumer exposure to whatever product(s) will maximize profits. On the flip side, theres a generational effect at play here as well. I'm old enough to remember writing sub-routines to get PC games to work in MS-DOS. A lot of the early focus on PC gaming was due to the fact that the whole industry was still young enough that everything seemed new. Consoles have always offered ease of use but comparatively limited feature sets and locked down ecosystems as a result. Long term what is happening now from the consumer side has an air of inevitability to it, if only because I always knew growing up the only way the vast majority of gamers would ever share my love of PC gaming is if/when it became much, much easier to use. In large part that answer came in the form of Steam, which on balance has been wonderful for gaming in general. But consoles are still several orders of magnitude easier/less frustrating to use. The attention span of the average American is simply not up to dealing with PC gaming. This isnt a knock on everyone who games on consoles because sometimes its just nice to turn something on and it generally works how you expect it too. And for many, console gaming...limited though it may be...is *good enough* and the extra capabilities afforded by PC gaming arent enough to overcome perceived complications. And, partially as a result of this consumer preference, we are still dealing with a corporate media that simply doesnt have as much to gain by covering PC gaming. The long term plans that large media companies have for the internet and the resulatant struggle to keep net neutrality alive will go a long ways towards answering many questions we have about the future of all media coverage, from politics to economics to, yes, even video games. I'm not overly optimistic about this future primarily because most Americans have fallen asleep and abdicated control of this democracy to massive multinationals, while they are entertained by "bread and circuses". Ultimately, all of these issues...including the one you mention in the OP...are inter-related.
the irony is that PC gaming became popular and easier when Microsoft enforced its monopoly practices worldwide, leading also to the demise of other competitors (eg Amiga) or the change of whole computer industries (eg Japan). Nvidia and AMD did the same thing, buying all their competitors in the hardware market.
Even when Windows OS was pirated, they didnt mind if it helped their purpose.
Prior to that, PC was just one of many computers and the most unsuitable and expensive for games.
It is exactly because Microsoft abandoned Windows gaming and focused on the Xbox, that paved the way for Steam, DD and the indie scene.
next step is to abandon Windows completely and switch to Linux and other OS that are community driven and not tied to Microsoft's interests. Certain game producers are more and more in favour of those OS.
I am afraid that this will shrink the number of PC gamers even more, but freedom has a price!
Uh, he's saying the same thing you're saying.
Iansherr is the one arguing that PC gaming is declining, and Memorabilia quoted him to contradict what he said.
Because publishers put their stake in consoles, not many really care about pc. And let's face it games journalism will bow to whatever publishers want.
