What has caused the fall in PC game sales?

[Urban Ranger]

I agree with Chris somewhat, although I feel that there are reasons to believe that he was wrong to assume that The Gamer is an Enemy. What he should have said is The Gamer does not represent the beginners but the veterans.

What's wrong with the picture is companies are spending too much money on marketing. With all that money wasted they can't afford to target different segments, although there are games out there that seem to have a different audience in mind.

I rather the game companies to take their time to come up with a few good games than waste money on media blitzs trying to convince the buyers.

[Par4]

Well we're going to have a big year this time.

The biggies
Diablo 2, over 2 million will go up to 10 million!!
The Sims, over a million
Red Alert 2,maybe

And many more!

------------------
fldmarshallpar4@icqmail.com

There is no spoon
-The Matrix
Let's kick it up a notch!!
-Emeril Lagasse
Fresh Soy makes Tofu so silky
-Ming Tsai

[Steve Clark]

As one who has played its first computer game in 1978 and regularly since 1988, I have seen all of the trends. My simplistic answer really has to do with marketing. Case in point, a few years ago I stopped subscribing to Computer Gaming World after 10 years. The reason why was that the style of games that they are marketing and to what audience they are aiming with their ads, I, like alot of aging boomers, are just not interested anymore. In order to appreciate much of the marketing, you have to go around and say stuff like, 'it rocks!', 'way kewl', 'it kicks a**', and other crap sayings like that. No, the folks who can readily buy games and be loyal (30-60 yr olds) are not the ones they care about.

You also have to remember that the 14-25 yr olds that the marketeers and game publishers target all grew up on video (console) games. You know their style - fast paced, action, reacting, no thinking, etc. That is why 3D action, 3D RPG and RTS games took off and not wargames and other TBS style games.

Plus, most of us here at Apolyton are still playing a 5 yr old game! That is the opposite of what the game publishers want to hear. For me, I would not hesitate to keep playing Civ2 as long as they keep putting out crap like many of the RTS and RPG games.

[goofydrew]

to steve clark...

i couldn't agree with you more...

shootem up games? i did that in nam... for real!

where are the brain games?

there are still no games out there that compare to civ or civ2...

cut the crap... give us a GOOD game... not just an established game with more guns and different guns... GET IT?

thanks steve... i've said it before, but it was nice to get some affirmative feedback...

the3.14rt

------------------
how can you be in two places at once
when you're not anywhere at all?
---------------------------------
We now return you to our regular programming...
a thrilling tale from yesteryear...
which is already in progress!!!

[Urban Ranger]

Some might argue that a strategy game or RPG game (good one, that is) is too hard for most gamers due to a steep learning curve. But that need not be the case. They can take a leaf from the books of their boardgame counterparts. Take Starfleet Battles for example. It is one of the most complicated game in existence. What they have are various level of rules: Basic, Advanced, Optional, and Commander's Level.

They could do the same thing with computer games. More detailed rules are more difficult, but also a higher degree of realism and more control.

[Bkeela]

I haven't read many of the above posts, but the main reason why I dont buy computer games, is because my computer is now obsolete, in respect to the latest game requirments. In only around a year and a half, games have advanced to such an extent, that I am out of the market. I refuse to continually buy a new computer every few years in order to play the latest games.
Doesn't really matter much to me, as I can live without a PC. Now I only use my PC for the Internet, or the occasional game of SMAC.

Bkeela.

[Urban Ranger]

SnowFire:

In that case, play the old games, not the new ones

[Imran Siddiqui]

Soph, play to the end of Fallout2. The ending is stunning and shocking and I think that made me turn to F2. Really makes the game.

And Sid is right. Games cost a lot to make. Flubs are BIG flubs, and I guess some companies don't want to take on challenges. Those that do (and do it well) are rewarded mostly (like Black Isle and Bioware, which the backbone of Interplay's RPG rule.

And yes, some of the gamers are too blame. One can point to the Civ3 list for evidence. Some of the suggestions would have made beginners completly turn off, and Firaxis would have lost tons, basically making them believe that doing that sort of innovation again would kill them. You need a balance.

But I must say, I am starting to tire of Diablo 2 (as I knew I would at some point). Some of these games really aren't as addictive as they used to be. Of course I hope BG2 and Arcanum and Harpoon4 buck that trend.

[My Wife Hates CIV]

I grew up on PC games. I started out with a TRS80 model III (32k ram)! I'm now 34 and in that time I've purchased hundreds of titles.
Now, many games I've only played for a couple of days. Some have been a big let down. Need for Speed, even on my super 750, is a poor job of game programming. While somthing like Driver for $15 is great. I go with a game company that makes a few good titles. If they make enough I'll buy before I see or try it. Right now I'm very pleased with GT Interactive. Microprose was the best for a time.

As far as games go, I like a hard learning curve. Sure, it takes some time but after you understand the game it's often a lot of fun. Although some flight sims are getting a little out of hand.

CIV is ok but hey, it's getting old and it's starting to show. It's got gameplay but... well, that's about it. A game like Imperium Galactica II is getting pretty near a super modern day CIV. That game is good.

Now, as far as hardware, game companys write todays games for top end machines - they just allow them to run on 233s. Games I didnt like before the super 750, are really good. Rainbow Six rocks with some real power behind it. Same goes for Mechwarrior 3.

Horsepower! That's the key. If everyone purchased a super machine the game companys would be making some cooool stuff. Than I'd buy a 1.3ghz machine.

[dr. blackclove]

I have to ask: If die-hard gamers are such a lousy target audience, then why did Civ II become one of the hottest-selling games of all time? What about Alpha Centauri?

I think the industry has done a good job of putting out games that appeal to different segments of the population. My girlfriend loves Pandora's Box, two of my female friends are completely addicted to The Sims, and I am playing Civ II and Diablo II. My retired father is playing Rollercoaster Tycoon (or was the last time I checked). The point is, to each their own. It seems like everyone I know is playing computer games right now.

The idea of labeling games as "for beginners" or "complex, deep game play" seems like a good one to me, though. Too bad no one did it.

------------------
-Blackclove
Email: blackclove.geo@yahoo.com
Web: members.xoom.com/platehead/

[mindseye]

I'm another veteran gamer (board sims in the 70's, computer games from the IBM PC onwards), and I agree with most of what' already said, so I'll throw in something different: too many games seem to have been rushed into the market before they passed basic QA! The result is games that are promising but fatally flawed. Do the lower lifetime sales really offset the initial two or three month jump on the market?

Example: Fighting Steel, a WWII naval surface warfare sim was the only game of it's type when it came out. Many aspects of it were excellent. But the user interface was flawed in ways that a 15 minute test should've shown, and it was loaded with all sorts of bugs. Menu options didn't work (they didn't have time to implement some features, but left the options in the menus!). Result: the company, DivideByZero lost it's contract to do a follow-up game (thank heavens).

I recently picked up Gangsters (Talonsoft) which I had been meaning to do for a year. Terrific game, but again, it suffers from fundamental interface flaws a ten-year old could've pointed out. For all the investment in development, some last-minute corner cutting ruined a fine product.

It's sad to see this repeated over and over.

- mindseye
(PS: has anyone tried Homeworld?)

[Steve Clark]

Even though Civ2 has a legion of die-hard strategy gamers, it was/is a mass market strategy game. The reason Civ2 became one of the best sellers is that it was "for beginners" AND offered "complex, deep gameplay", which is something rare.

One of the point that I keep making in the Civ3 forum is that you cannot implement many of the ideas people are becoming so defensive about because it would only appeal to a smaller market. You gotta keep Civ3 simple for all levels and implement specific challenges through scenarios.

I am surprised that SMAC did very well considering that scifi has no appeal to a significant segment of the market.

[Urban Ranger]

Did anybody here play Outpost? It was one of the biggest bombs in the history of computer gaming. Lots of promises, CGW ran a big preview, then dead in the water.

Steve Clark: read my post. You can definitely have different levels of rules.

[Leonidas]

mindseye: I couldn't agree with you more. This has to be the #1 plague within the gaming industry - poor quality control. So many promising titles/games - only to be rushed out the door by the suits. Of course word spreads quickly about a poor game, which results in poor sales, which the suits then use to tell us that these types of games won't sell (D'oh).

Its gotten so bad that before I buy any game, I read every review and then play the demo - before I lay down one nickel for it.

[Sophanthro]

Chris Crawford had me going until he mentioned Ultima, for this he will burn in hell. Ultima 5 was the first roleplaying game I liked. Maybe I wasn't a newbie, I played Bards Tale III first, and disliked it. What level did you have to be to teleport anyways?. Ok, Ok I guess I played Adventure Construction Set(Kit?) before that but was that for newbies? I see his point but anyone who slanders Ultima 5, 6, or 7 will feel my wrath .

He was definitely right about the quests. Police Quest anyways, I played PQ1 and liked it, PQ2 was insanely complicated, i.e who really could care less about getting a gun properly sighted.

I started out with computer games Commmodore 64, I also had an Atari 2600, this was around 87. So I wasn't on the bleeding edge of technology, hell I didn't get a nintendo till 1990, Dos games in 91. Anyways I wonder if there is any one today who starting on computer games rather then counsel, I was only half and half. With out new blood the industry will become niche, Mr. Crawford believed that it was following the advise of the hard core gamer. Yes to do this would restrict to yourself to unprofitable niche. But I can't think of any games which are overly complex these days. However, a counsel playing friend of mine said that Half-Life was to complex, he's an idiot tho . So what do I know.