News - Government can’t wait to start punishing file-sharers

[kalniel]

Except the distinction is thus:
250million PC's for gaming, with graphics cards ranging from a geforce 4 to a 295. how many millions of them can actually play brand new AAA games at high settings?

Depends what you define as high settings, but the majority of them meet the recommended requirements of AAA games. It's hard to buy a descrete graphics card that doesn't these days, and just look at the staggering numbers of those sold each quarter.

So some random new report says

That's been the established knowlegde for many years, it's nothing new.

Consoles have stronger marketting

That's just a function of publishing budget which is itself a function of expected return - back to paying market size again.

the intrinsic nature of the networking and communication in console users compared to the fragmented userbase in pc's means word of mouth sells so many more copies

Again you seem to have the facts backwards - the PC has a much stonger base of networking and communication than consoles do - just look how many people use facebook, bebo etc. - how many of them do so on the PC vs a console?

DLC on the xbox is FAR FAR easier than on the PC

Again complete fallacy - DLC has exactly the same method on the PC as the xbox if the maker wants (we have Live as well), not to mention all the other methods we have, as well as the added bonus of far easier game modification and distribution of said mods.

Just look at the mods available for xbox games compared to PC games if you don't believe me.

If your most profitable market (and lets be honest, console manufacturers will subsidise developers to make a game just for their platform as well) is consoles, then thats where you will focus your AAA development.

That's exacty what I'm saying - consoles are the most profitable market, because of piracy, hence AAA development is heading there.

[Arthran]

Again you seem to have the facts backwards - the PC has a much stonger base of networking and communication than consoles do - just look how many people use facebook, bebo etc. - how many of them do so on the PC vs a console?

Again your confusing the issue, social networks have 0 bearing on gaming. Xbox live's networking features have a HUGE bearing on the way gaming is done.

Again complete fallacy - DLC has exactly the same method on the PC as the xbox if the maker wants (we have Live as well), not to mention all the other methods we have, as well as the added bonus of far easier game modification and distribution of said mods.

As above, yes the mod scene is better on pc's by far. But by logging into a central logon and being able to just buy some points and spend those points on any DLC or upgrades you want at will is a much simpler system than we could ever have on PC

That's exacty what I'm saying - consoles are the most profitable market, because of piracy, hence AAA development is heading there.

Again your jumping to the conclusion that the console market is stronger than the pc market because of piracy. As me and others have shown its more plainly because of the simplicity and common factors that make the console market FAR more appealing to the average Joe rather than the PC gaming market. You've given no evidence as to why its "because of piracy" where as me and others have all attempted to show many reasons why the console market is stronger

[kalniel]

Again your confusing the issue, social networks have 0 bearing on gaming. Xbox live's networking features have a HUGE bearing on the way gaming is done.

We have Live on the PC to if it's specific features you're after.. oh and 'gold' membership is free on the PC as well.

As above, yes the mod scene is better on pc's by far. But by logging into a central logon and being able to just buy some points and spend those points on any DLC or upgrades you want at will is a much simpler system than we could ever have on PC

We have exactly the same system on the PC, so it can't be simpler, except perhaps those systems where you don't have to convert cash to point first, but we have them as well.

Again your jumping to the conclusion that the console market is stronger than the pc market because of piracy. As me and others have shown its more plainly because of the simplicity and common factors that make the console market FAR more appealing to the average Joe rather than the PC gaming market.

Then why are there so many more 'average Joe/Joans's playing PC games than console games?

Let's not turn this into consoles vs PC, there are better forums for discussing that. The facts of the matter are, for whatever reasons, there are many many more people playing games on the PC than there are consoles. Despite that, however, more money is spent on console games than PC games. That's the bottom line as far as AAA companies are concerned, and hence they develop for consoles primarily as their income stream. My assertion is that less money is spent on PC games because the majority of games played are pirate copies. Your assertion is that more money is spent on consoles because those fewer players play more games (if you said buy more I'd agree, naturally). We're not going to get any further in persuading each other of the merits of our particular viewpoint. Most of the industry takes my side of view, but you would say that they would anyway, and besides, the only concrete information they have on sales as well, which doesn't clearly distinguish between the two viewpoints (even though the number of games per player would have to be extremely high for consoles compared to PCs for your view to be justified ).

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Sorry,but piracy is also present for console games too. Just go to the Far East and most countries outside Europe and the US see how many pirated games are played on consoles and this has been the case for decades.

Of all the gamers I have known most of them play on consoles and only use the PC for certain games like RTS type games,MMORPG and stuff like The SIMs. BTW,these games have sold in millions and do not require a very up to date PC to run on and it seems piracy has not affected sales of these games.

[Arthran]

We have Live on the PC to if it's specific features you're after.. oh and 'gold' membership is free on the PC as well.

We have exactly the same system on the PC, so it can't be simpler, except perhaps those systems where you don't have to convert cash to point first, but we have them as well.

Except the major difference is we log into windows, then have to go out of our way to get live gaming installed etc, i've used it and it is NOTHING compared to xbox live.

Log into an xbox and its all integrated and working out of the box, thats why it works so much better there. If they bring live gaming integrated into windows 7 then i can see things changing.

the console experience is nothing like pc gaming experience.

Then why are there so many more 'average Joe/Joans's playing PC games than console games?

The facts of the matter are, for whatever reasons, there are many many more people playing games on the PC than there are consoles.

See i've not seen figures and from experience i simply cant agree with that. Console gaming has replaced PC gaming for a great many many people.

Let's not turn this into consoles vs PC, there are better forums for discussing that. The facts of the matter are, for whatever reasons, there are many many more people playing games on the PC than there are consoles. Despite that, however, more money is spent on console games than PC games. That's the bottom line as far as AAA companies are concerned, and hence they develop for consoles primarily as their income stream. My assertion is that less money is spent on PC games because the majority of games played are pirate copies. Your assertion is that more money is spent on consoles because those fewer players play more games (if you said buy more I'd agree, naturally). We're not going to get any further in persuading each other of the merits of our particular viewpoint. Most of the industry takes my side of view, but you would say that they would anyway, and besides, the only concrete information they have on sales as well, which doesn't clearly distinguish between the two viewpoints (even though the number of games per player would have to be extremely high for consoles compared to PCs for your view to be justified ).

I may not agree with you, but yes lets not turn this into consoles vs PC.

My main sticking point to all your arguments so far has simply been:

I can see no evidence that piracy in PC gaming is effecting the market share of pc gaming or the income of said games. In fact i would argue that modern distribution like steam, d2d and mmo's means piracy is less in PC gaming than before and that there's more money in PC gaming than before.

[kalniel]

Sorry,but piracy is also present for console games too. Just go to the Far East and most countries outside Europe and the US see how many pirated games are played on consoles and this has been the case for decades.

No-one's saying it isn't present, just that it's on a completely lesser (and minor) scale in comparison to PC piracy.

Of all the gamers I have known most of them play on consoles and only use the PC for certain games like RTS type games,MMORPG and stuff like The SIMs. BTW,these games have sold in millions and do not require a very up to date PC to run on and it seems piracy has not affected sales of these games.

Millions out of a potential customer base of hundreds of millions is poor. And I'll let you into a little secret too - selling a million copies of a AAA game is barely enough to break even.

Except the major difference is we log into windows, then have to go out of our way to get live gaming installed etc, i've used it and it is NOTHING compared to xbox live.

Whatever happened to just starting up the game and clicking the log-in button? Works for me in Fallout 3, DoW2 etc. Pretty sure GFWL installed as part of the game, but could be mistaken.

the console experience is nothing like pc gaming experience.

True in many ways!

See i've not seen figures and from experience i simply cant agree with that.

Fair enough. For starters, have a gander at the JPresearch numbers for descrete graphics card sale numbers - I believe Hexus report them as do many other publications. They are independant. You can also look at Industry (gah!) figures from the likes of Intel, AMD etc. though they're not independant obviously, and under the PCGA umbrella usually.

[Arthran]

For starters, have a gander at the JPresearch numbers for descrete graphics card sale numbers - I believe Hexus report them as do many other publications.

Whilst that tells us the number of gfx cards sold, it in now way indicates number of pc gamers.

I've sold 4 graphics cards in the last month to customers who simply want multiple screens. I'm also about to buy a new graphics card at home, my 3rd in months (yey for new pc's/dead pc's/the mrs).

The problem is that opinions aside, there doesn't seem to be any solid quantifiable numbers/evidence that shows the size of each market or whether piracy is indeed effecting development. The evidence we do have is all related to hardware sales, and i can tell you that as a PC game and a console gamer, i have far more pc games than console games total, but lately i've been buying more console games than pc. I like most people just buy either what i like or what is rated as good. I avoid most AAA games because apart from being pretty, most are just more of the same crap (brown "realism" and running round shooting things... wooo!)

[dangel]

I can't help but think this thread has become a platform for the usual suspects to grind their piracy axe - all the while forgetting the real problem here: it's all going to go very horribly wrong (and for a lot of people). If this makes it into working legislation we're going to see a plethora of mis-accusations - not only that we're all sitting back and allowing an industry body to use public resources to futher their business. Couple that latter point with the fact that they're incredibly biased (and shown to be technically inept) by nature and don't need to substantiate their claims of 'piracy' against the accused and er.. we're stuffed really aren't we?

Lord knows, i'm just glad that the industry won't have to sully their hands with the legal system - how perfectly terrible it's been for them having to use their ridiculously large resources to actually proove a case in court beforehand. I can see we're all deeply relieved they've managed to pay the appropriate parties the appropriate bung to get their way.

[mmh]

As for the whole PC console debate...

i ahve to agree with Arthran... consoles are preferable for playing games because they are cheaper, the games will work at full settings out of the box and you dont have to be in a niche as far as popularity goes to play with your mates online...

Plus, i dont wanna fork out another £1500 every 3 years to keep my computer up to date to pay PC games... not when i can buy a console every 4-5 years thats going to last better (even if it breaks 3 times in the 5 year span its still cheaper than getting a high end gaming PC)...

Kalniel just seems to be spouting his opinions, and is not providing any stats/sources...

That's been the established knowlegde for many years, it's nothing new.

I'd hardly call that substancial factual data... according to who? and can this number not change over the course of these many years? sure when i first got into gaming, PC's were still relatively expensive and i was one of the only one of my friends who played CS online... infact in my year at school (300 students) i knew of only 2 people who played...

everyone i met online was either older than me or occassionally someone in the same situation as me...

last time i logged into CS:S there wa a whole variety of people playing... and xbox live, its very rare i dont meet a group of cheeky feckers who are only 12/13... as i say... statistics change over time... and i dare say the average age of consumers has dropped a fair bit over the course of "many years" - just from personal experience of course...

as for the movie and music debate...

radiohead set the precident with regards to music downloads....
let people pay what they want for music... and let them have it when they want... those that have the means to pay for it will and those that dont have the means or dont want to pay for it wont... or will put in the minimum amount they possibly can.... but it will even itself out and give the artist more access to fans...

Same with OD stuff... get it out with adverts and let us watch what we want, when we want... Theres no reason these things cant be put up on the web and hosted with adverts that cant be skipped and make revenue from them on the web... but as it stands the industries are missing out as the only way we can easily get hold of stuff is by downloading them illegally...
as has been stated... the reason people download illegally is because media is not available to us in the way we have become accustomed to it being....

click to download, watch when you want...

Hardware in our living rooms is opening up the possibility a little bit more... like Virgin on demand services, sky on demand, iplayer etc... movie manufacturers need to catch up... sure i like having a physical piece of media in my hand as much as the next guy... but it always means waiting... if i want to watch a movie, i dont want to have to order it and have it arrive sometime next week.. i want to watch the movie now... or in 10 mins... give it time to buffer... this is available on xbl, but its not all films and its still a little expensive... put some adverts at the start and end, that i'll gladly sit through and make it free to the consumer... if i like the film i'll even buy it on hard copy, especially if i liked it and its available on blu-ray. but dont sit there preaching that industries are losing revenue when they are sitting back hoping that thier sales methods of 20 years ago will still be current in the digital age...

I lost the point a little bit methinks....

The Govt should definately not be getting involved in civil matters though and if anything should be targetting people who then market the films and sell them for personal gain... not the kind of people who download a film out of convenience and watch it with thier families...

[usxhe190]

If only the government fast-track legislation to improve the UK broadband infrastructure and the "up to" crap advertising, rather than this.

[Arthran]

The Govt should definately not be getting involved in civil matters though and if anything should be targetting people who then market the films and sell them for personal gain... not the kind of people who download a film out of convenience and watch it with thier families...

thats the crux of this whole thing. Right or Wrong, industry impact or not, it IS a civil matter and the government shouldn't be involved

[kalniel]

Kalniel just seems to be spouting his opinions, and is not providing any stats/sources...


I'd hardly call that substancial factual data... according to who?

http://www.theesa.com/facts/index.asp

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8206163.stm (citing CDC)

[Arthran]

http://www.theesa.com/facts/index.asp

SO your basing opinions on Industry spouted facts rather than independent research?

[kalniel]

SO your basing opinions on Industry spouted facts rather than independent research?

I'm basing it on the CDC published research, which appears to have been neatly summarised by that particular industry body, yes. CDC are independant of the games industry.

I'm not really sure what the industry would stand to gain by biasing gamer age data however - are you so keen to disbelieve anything they say for the sake of it? Have you got some independant evidence that says something to the contrary?

[Arthran]

More naturally skeptical of Industry facts, no matter the facts or the industry. I like all my facts independently verified and its rare to get that from industry groups.

[mmh]

http://www.theesa.com/facts/index.asp

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8206163.stm (citing CDC)

fair enough... you just hadnt provided a source earlier on...

Thats as per US... the UK (according to BBC) is said to be lower at the ripe old age of 28... but i see your point