Interview: PCGA president Randy Stude

With PC games worldwide dominance in the market there is no longer a need for PC gamers to worry. For example Microsoft made $7.1 Billion from their gaming division in 2007. This looks impressive until yo...

• 

  Netmind wrote at 09:18 on 20 October 2008

  Finally someone speaking out :p
  I like this guy.

• 

  john aabrams wrote at 09:38 on 20 October 2008

  Here come the messiah.

• 

  FantasyMeister wrote at 10:20 on 20 October 2008

  From a console owner perspective I found it interesting that to get a game running to his satisfaction he didn't seem to think twice about building a new PC but found that making a phone call was inconvenient. Personally I'm the other way around but then I'm slightly technophobic.
  
  I thought his release window mentality comments were... interesting. I slightly agree with them, I tended to play games on my PC for longer mainly because I invested so much time getting them up and running that I wanted to squeeze the most out of them. With console games, I just put the disc in and play without the hassle, so I do tend to go through console games a lot faster, plus there aren't that many console mmorpgs out there yet. I think he'll find dedicated fans will continue to play specific titles for years regardless of what format they're on, and having played the same titles on both systems for many years I'd take the console version any day (e.g. grinding out a few levels on FFXI is so much more relaxing on a console with your feet up).
  
  In the end, about 4 years ago, I switched to console full time for gaming just for frustration free gaming, the peace of mind that any game I buy will always work on my system and no more 'minor annoyances' like a virus scan starting up during PvP because I'd forgotten it was scheduled.
  
  For me to go back to PC gaming there would have to be a major development in terms of gaming PCs being simple to use out of the box (essentially this is what a modern day console is, just less multifunctional and less powerful).
  
  Overall I think his comments are fair, and I wish him luck in his search for anti-piracy solutions, and I'm pretty sure it's not all doom and gloom for the millions of PC gamers out there, the recent Game Developer Research 2008 report indicates that roughly 70% of western developers are still developing for PC/MAC. (73% developing for the 360 though...).

• 

  RecoN wrote at 14:09 on 20 October 2008

  Yes this guy is very interesting. <-- I guessed we gathered that :lol: But he doesn't say PC is the best, hes basically saying if consoles can do it, theres no doubt a PC is capable. And its nice to here it in a polite way rather than him stating for example "PC's are what made gaming today"
  Hes not even being biased. He's always talking about reading gamers opinions and views, which i think is great because hes listening to the audience.
  
  I really like this guy :)

• 

  RecoN wrote at 18:06 on 20 October 2008

  Just to prove that consoles are not always the best option!
  I played Pure demo on ps3 which kicks out at 720p, i have the full game on 360 which kicks out at 1080p. I bought the pc version real cheap of my mate who prefers his console format.
  
  PS3 version is sharper and not as many jaggered edges imo compared tot he 360 version. Now the 360 has a higher resolution, but fails on sharpness and quality a little....BUT!!!!!
  
  The pc version on max settings on my 40" 1080p lcd tv is far more superior to the console versions. I mean it literally knocks the crap out of them! Im shocked to be honest. No word of a lie my gf came in from work and said "I didnt notice the hdr lighting and shadows before, did you turn them off before or something?" I just smiled and shown her the pc case and she was like i thought it looked better than usual.
  
  Before any fanboys start, no im not knocking consoles, im just stating that games should be considered for all formatts. Disney got the idea and got it to work. Quality in all 3 arent that much difference. But ive been playing the console version for a few days and i really can notice the difference straight after.
  
  Ive pre ordered dead space and farcry 2 on pc. Along with SE of Fallout 3. Just to prove to other game publishers that if they put there heart and soul into it and trust gamers, they will get rewarded for the efforts.
  
  Long live PC!

• 

  CannibalBob wrote at 21:13 on 20 October 2008

  Hey I notice Randy mentions Steam quite a bit but doesn't really expand. One great thing steam does is it simplifies playing games. You don't have to install games anymore, steam does that all for you. It could use more work (in terms of finding/installing new drivers) but regardless it's a helluva lot easier than putting in a CD and installing on your own.
  
  I also want to add that I notice he mentions a lot of stats. I'm sure those stats rely heavily on Blizzard's performance. IMO that's a problem with PC gaming, which is Blizzard's monopoly. If people are already enjoying and playing a game for long periods of time (aka Warcraft 3, and WoW), what makes you think they'll readily buy a new non-Blizzard game and play that for long periods of time, instead?

• 

  StormHammer wrote at 21:57 on 20 October 2008

  I see that Randy mentions the issue around SecuROM, and I'm glad to see someone within the PCGA taking notice. I've fallen foul of SecuROM 7.xx myself - I blame it for killing a DVD drive, and it was very difficult to remove because there was no uninstaller for it with the game. This kind of activity on the part of the publishers hardly builds trust with their potential audience, and personally I have stopped buying most of the PC releases until I can discover if they use SecuROM or not. StarForce also gave me problems.
  
  I'm not fond of activation limits either, and prefer the old CD check with CD key personally. Publishers just have not fully thought it through concerning hardware failures, overclocking, reformats and OS reinstalls, and simple upgrades that means many PC gamers will reach the activation limits in a very short time and be left hanging on a tech support line to get another activation while being charged for the privilege. That doesn't build good customer relations, and just gives the impression they're trying to squeeze you for every cent possible for no good reason.
  
  After all, if it is not clear by now that DRM does nothing to prevent piracy, then people in the industry need a short, sharp shock to jolt them out of the perception that DRM is doing any good. Games like Spore, which have some of the most draconian DRM, have been pirated, so the DRM has categorically failed in that task. Which seems to indicate that DRM is only being used to try and control the activity of gamers who make legitimate game purchases, and restrict what they can do with a game. In my view, that is just wrong - and places unnecessary barriers between PC gamers and the games they want to buy and play. Barriers that console gamers never see, because they are free to play a game on consoles belonging to their friends, to rent the game and play it in it's entirety without buying it, and to sell it on without issue. Why are PC gamers being treated so differently? There is a disparity in the games market already, and DRM is just making things even worse.
  
  I've been gaming on PC for over 25 years (I'm 40+ now), and it is my platform of choice - but at this point I have simply stopped buying the majority of PC games coming to market. I've gone from buying a couple of games a month, to now looking at my second purchase for this entire year in Fallout 3 (the other one was Witcher: Enhanced). I'm sure there are many other gamers taking the same stance (from the many internet forums I've read), which means the PC game industry is losing sales - lots of sales. And that doesn't make good business sense, in my view.
  
  So I hope the PCGA will be taking some serious steps to redress the balance, and make PC gaming enjoyable once more.

• 

  matt wrote at 04:35 on 21 October 2008

  This guy does not represent pc gamers, and I am insulted to hear him claim he does.
  
  DRM must be gone in all forms before consumers will be okay with it. Why? Because there is no way to prevent piracy, piracy will occur no matter what for one specific reason: We want to own what we purchase.
  
  Therefore, the people who buy games exclusively on steam are out of luck when steam is down or their internet dies, or when steam is gone. Some day, you lose what you thought you owned. Whoops!
  
  CDs, on the other hand, you still own. CD key be damned (and proof of a stupid feature in and of itself), the main issue is all the same:
  
  publishers don't like giving people control over what they pay for. Plenty of people have shown that when a game is free, there is no piracy. Why is this hard to understand for publishers? The answer is simple: we have ignorant organizations like PCGA claiming they represent pc gamers, and they don't.

• 

  HHH wrote at 05:37 on 21 October 2008

  @matt
  
  I'm insulted by your stupid response. If games are free, why would you need to add DRM to it? Then, what's the point in pirating it when it's free and has no DRM? What are you high on?
  
  Are you protesting DRM or are you promoting piracy? Big difference on the two.
  
  I do believe that developers have the right to protect their income, but Spore DRM is over the top and just plain wrong.

• 

  DrSpock wrote at 06:54 on 21 October 2008

  I don't understand the interviewee's response to what Peter Molyneux said. He did not say there wouldn't be a PC version of Fable 2. In fact, it seems from the way he phrased it he probably wants to do a PC version but isn't 100% sure about it yet.
  
  I think the interviewee claiming that the PC is probably not the right fit for Fable II is really stupid, both for the fact that he is supposed to be an industry advocate and for the fact that many PC gamers want to see Fable II on the PC (including myself).

• 

  ThorAxe wrote at 07:24 on 21 October 2008

  With PC games worldwide dominance in the market there is no longer a need for PC gamers to worry.
  
  For example Microsoft made $7.1 Billion from their gaming division in 2007. This looks impressive until you realise that it includes hardware sales. If you just focus on software then that number is down to about $3.95 Billion and that is being generous.
  
  Compare that with PC game sales revenue of $11.3 Billion (according to dfcint.com) and you see that the PC has nearly 3x the revenue.
  
  Admittedly Microsoft had only sold about 16 million 360s to the end of 2007 so the software sales revenue will be much greater this year and the 360 enjoys a much better attach rate than the PC (about 7 times better).
  
  However, taking a very, very rough estimate, the 360 needs to reach sales of 45 million units before it is any threat to the PC’s dominance in revenue and that is assuming PC sales do not grow, which it will do given the most recent forecasts.

• 

  Matt wrote at 10:32 on 21 October 2008

  This DRM stance is just silly. He thinks "Spore DRM was a bit much .. should have given you more activations". That line of thinking is just going from stupid to slightly-less-stupid. Eventually you will run out. Or it just won't work at all. But it'll be cracked anyway.
  
  And he wants to add MORE DRM? Throughout the entire production now? Surely that will cripple the DEVELOPERS too and add to the production costs, then consumers will have to wait longer and pay more, all because of supposed piracy prevention. Then they will blame the pirates when PC gaming dies.
  
  Enough! Cut your losses and stop wasting your time and money, and mine* with this ridiculous DRM.
  
  *Okay, it's actually saving me time and money because I didn't buy Spore due to DRM and won't be buying similarly-crippled titles in future.

• 

  PSmith wrote at 10:42 on 21 October 2008

  Finally, someone who actually knows what he's talking about, talking about the 'death of PC gaming'. What a refreshing change from all the rubbish you see written about this everywhere else. Good on you Randy, and I'm glad you're head of the PCGA!

• 

  Gronath wrote at 11:33 on 21 October 2008

  @ the DRM discussion: I wonder what sort of relationship some companies are trying to establish with their costumers and potential costumers. Reasoning some points raised by gamers in the revision of his Gamers Bill of Rights, Brad Wardell he argued that, "...the person who makes the thing has the right to distribute it how they want. If I spend $5 million making a game, someone paying $50 doesn't "own" it." in response to, "DRM is just wrong in principle, you buy something, you own it and should be able to do whatever you want."
  While the latter claim was poorly phrased IMO, there's something there. As Randy Stude said, PC gamers stablish a long term relationship with titles, that means they may want to revisit their old games ten years from the time they originally bought it and if the publisher limits their relationship (through limited installs or the necessity for a certifying system that may not be up anymore after those ten years, it's a big deal. Also, whenever I pay for something, I want full control over that one thing. If I'm buying a copy of a game, it would be ridiculous for me to consider I own the IP for it, but I'd like to be able to do with that copy pretty much the same things I'd be able to with a physical property: use it whenever I feel like it, store it, lend it, sell it, give it away. Right now, companies are taking that relationship away from gamers. They should use the correct terminology then when they're "selling" their games. Instead of "Buy it!", they should phrase it "Lease it!"

• 

  matt wrote at 12:01 on 21 October 2008

  umm, yes the person who pays 50$ does own it. It is not proportionate to your $5million dollars. It's a law called "right of first sale" and means many things such as: you own what you buy and can sell it to other people if you choose.
  
  Your $5mil enabled you to choose distribution methods at the beginning only. It doesn't mean you have control over the distribution later or that you have some magic "IP". the IP is a lie gonath. There is no IP. People need to remember that the term is a complete fallacy brought around in the last 8 years. The minute an idea leaves your brain, it is no longer your own in any form. Thus if you say it, speak it, anything, people can find ways to copy your idea or sell it off, or make new things from it. Patents don't help this; they just encumber legal threats. Especially if you give things out in the form of software, it can easily be deciphered to find the actual source whether or not you want to disclose it. In fact, if it wasnt' for the DCMA, you'd see every program in the world shared openly in the US, and things would get far more creative.
  
  Executables are a windows thing. They don't actually prevent you from finding the source if you know how, even an excessively rudimentary amount of programming knowledge can get the source of any program within minutes tops. outfiles? Thanks for the game source.
  
  As far as do I support sea piracy, like Somalia? No. I support having the rights of the products being put back where they should be: in the consumer's hands, not the publishers. That is not piracy, it's called freedom. Try not to mix the terms up.
  
  Just like sharing mixtaps and software via burning CDs can't be stopped. Same thing. Even steam games are hideously easy to copy.
  
  
  Basically: there are 2 words you all need to get out of your head. 1: Piracy. 2: IP. Go look up the real explanations for what those are, and then maybe you'll start seeing where things went wrong.

• 

  zehaeva wrote at 12:01 on 21 October 2008

  @matt I think the DRM he was speaking of in production was more like actual physical barriers to keep the actual physical copies together and no leaked like say the 360 version of Fallout 3 that's been available for a while now. Lock down the production center, hire only people with clean backgrounds, get rid of any internet you have there and post guards at every exit. make sure that you can trust UPS or FedEX or whom ever. Make sure it doesn't get to stores until the night before release. Catch the leaks before they get out.
  
  It's not DRM persay, its smart business practices imo.

• 

  Adam wrote at 13:45 on 21 October 2008

  Comes across as something of a "PC apologist" to me. I work all day on a PC (software development) but it's days as my gaming platform of choice are long gone.
  
  His statement about 100 million PC sold with better capabilities than an XBox360 is dubious. Better in what way? More memory? More HD space? Better graphics card? "Better than XBox360" is a very nebulous statement. If I defined better as "The ability to put in a game and play it without the need to arse about" then 0 PC solds meet that spec.
  
  Thing is, PCs are designed as general purpose machines. Arsing about is a given. That's all well and good when I doing development work and arsing about IS work, but when it comes to gaming (Which I consider a form of relaxation) any amount of arsing about is detracting from my experience.
  
  Unsurprisingly enough, my platforms of choice for relaxtion at the moment conist of books, a few watchable TV series and, most important of all, a Nintendo DS (Amazingly useful for relaxing where you want, when you want)
  
  Anyway, that's my opinion.

• 

  SteamWontSaveY wrote at 13:45 on 21 October 2008

  Steam does NOT take away the activation limits of EA games!! Steam will allow you to reinstall Valve games unlimited times, sure. If you buy Crysis on Steam you still get 5 activations. Some people seem to be confused about that.
  
  I got rid of all my PC games, switched to Linux, and got a 360. I dont want to wonder whether the game I'm buying will let me play it in 5 years. Too much BS to worry about when I'm trying to have fun.

Name:      Register Free (Why?)

Write your comment in English here.

Verify:   Type these characters into the text box (you can register to skip this step in the future):