Consoles vs PC - Market Status and where is it going?

A decent amount, but not quite. The data here is from April, so it’s a little outdated, but it’s the quickest I have on hand. Total MMOG subscriptions are at about 16 million, and WoW holds 62.2% of that marketshare. WoW has 10-11 million subscriptions and the rest combined have about 6 million (or had, anyway). Of course, there may well be a lot of overlap, with one person holding multiple subscriptions on one or more games. (I’m about to add a WoW account next to my City of Heroes account…god help me.)

I think PC gaming isn’t nearly as bad off as it might be. Even setting aside MMOGs, which will ensure PC gaming will never die so long as they’re profitable, companies are still working out ways to make games accessible and not too invasive while still protecting their IP. Steam is wildly popular, and not just for Valve games, and other companies are working on competitive products as well.

“Keep a civil tongue in my head”? Really? OK Sir Lancelot, whatever you say.

I don’t really know anything about WoW or any other MMORPGs. What’s the subscription cost? And besides LOTRO and WAR, what are some of the big name MMORPGs left? And what do their subscription costs look like?

Because if we’re going to play the subscription game, I can throw out the 6 million+ Xbox Live Gold members (who pay $50 a year). That’s a pretty decent number.

EVE Online, City of Heroes, Final Fantasy XI, and the upcoming Champions Online is gaining some hype as well. The chart I linked to shows most of the big ones, but there’s like a hundred small MMOGs that are profitable but don’t have enough subscriptions to stand next to the big players.

Standard monthly subscription is $15/month, usually with discounts down to $10/month if you buy in bulk up to a year.

WoW beats that in revenue, but I imagine the necessary overhead and operating costs far outstrip XBL’s.

Are you counting Second Life? (How big is Second Life anyway these days?) Somewhat dubious if it counts as a “game”.

MMOGchart.com does, and apparently as of early '08 they had less than 100,000 subscriptions. City of Heroes, by comparison, reported just over 130k subscriptions in September. I think Second Life gets more press than it should because it’s a game that’s not a game and the ‘players’ have the capability to be a lot more…well, we’ll say ‘expressive’ than they’re usually allowed to be in other games.

Edit: That’s actually a strong point for PCs. It’s not just that MMOGs work better on them, but dynamic content in general finds a better home on PCs than on consoles. Consoles are making strides in this direction, but it’ll be a while before they can match the power of having a keyboard available and having the game data reside on the same machine as internet access, multimedia applications, and other such. What makes single-player static content vulnerable on the PC also allows the user to exhibit an incredible amount of self-expression, and in the age of blogs that’s not insignificant. Of course, there we’re getting outside the scope of games in specific.

Just to throw an anecdote into the pile of data, I was a long time computer AND console gamer. Hell, I had a TRS-80! I played Zork and other text-based adventures, plenty of Sierra games, I remember when 16 colors was a pretty big deal. I also had an Atari 2600, got the first Nintendo system, etc etc.

Now, however, I still have a PC, but have become almost exclusively a console gamer. Why, you ask? Because I’m not 13 (or even 33) any more, and I don’t have time to keep up with all the crap required to make sure my PC can play the games I want to play.

The last time I bought a PC game, I checked out the requirements, thought my PC met them, brought it home, shazam!, some kind of ludicrous video card or whatnot error (I can’t remember exactly, it was a couple years ago, but the damn thing wouldn’t play). Never played it. A friend of mine loaned me another game that she loved. Popped that in, the good ol’ PC cranks it up, but the health bar superimposed itself on top of the character I was supposed to be controlling. Tried to troubleshoot for an hour - no luck. Fuck it. I don’t have time or patience for that crap anymore. I’ve never had that problem with a console game - pop in the disc/cartidge/whatever - it works. Every time.

So, I like PC gaming, but until it’s as rock solid easy as console gaming, I doubt I’ll be back. (And get off my lawn!)

Well, you’re an idiot if you’re trying to make the claim that the rise of multi-platform releases hasn’t limited the depth of gameplay, control, and mechanics in recent games. Catchall context-sensitive one-button controls, automatic online matchmaking, and clumsy, linear menus have all proliferated throughout games - the best explanation is consoles. FWIW; I’m not a “fanboy” and own several consoles. You’re the one who rabidly craps all over PC gamers whenever they suggest their platform is superior in any fashion.

Look - the sad reality is that consumer culture finds a lot of appear in cheap, easy, mindless gratification. The gaming console promises a simple, gratifying gaming experience with a minimum of technical proficiency required. You put in the disk, the game starts, and as provided you aren’t playing Fable II everything runs perfectly. That’s great, widely appealing, and the numbers show that.

To some people that same list of traits feels confining and restrictive, compared to the relative freedom afforded PC gamers. With a computer, the user can define performance, cost, and peripherals at will. This tailor made experience also means that while the cutting edge of consoles moves forwards in jerky generational steps, the PC market unrolls much more smoothly. The negatives are that, generally, it’s a lot more hassle to game on a PC, that it costs (sometimes considerably) more and that frankly you’re not as spoon-fed through the entire process.

I’d say that generally the PC gaming market will continue to slowly grow at a proportionally slower rate than that of the console market. It’s not really a fair comparison, though - the demographic of people purchasing Wii Fit for their children is a lot different than those shelling out $300 for the newest video card.

Basically, I feel that the entire concept of consoles and PCs competing for the same market is a misnomer, and I’d wager that a significant proportion of PC gamers also own a console, but that the opposite isn’t so.

Fuck, I know I’d hold up well under those conditions. I was victorious when I played Halo 2 against someone using a mouse and keyboard.

The big problem in this hijack-debate is a failure to do or try the other side. Of course, the other would hop on and invariably say “oh, I can’t do this! This sucks!”, but would that be giving it a fair shake? No. My girlfriend almost did that with Left 4 Dead on my 360. Now she brags about how many zombies she kills (now that I’m in Georgia and she and my Xbox are in Michigan).
Also, I play games on a PC if I can’t play them on my 360. I hate having to get hardware upgrades. I dread seeing what it’ll take to run Total War: Empires.

Actually wasn’t a major survey of the industry done last year that showed that people who identified themselves as console gamers primarily actually spent MORE time playing PC games than console games?

I don’t think that the survey asked what KIND of games they were playing on the PC though. So while I’m sure many were thinking of WOW or other PC RGP’s and shooters, there were probably a lot who meant solitaire and minefield.

wait, you’re saying that some PC gamers are also console gamers, but that some console gamers aren’t also PC gamers? Isn’t this statement contradicting itself? If you’re a gamer of both types you’re a PC gamer who owns a console AND a console gamer who games on the PC, no? Maybe it’s just 8:30 in the morning on a saturday and I’m at work, but I think I’m confused…

That said, I used to be both. I loved console games, and I loved PC games, each respectively doing what it does best. I’d agree that in some cases (most notably Oblivion) there was a lot of dumbing down of the PC version to make it cross platform. But I still loved both systems. THen I moved to Japan and the cost of shipping a PC tower and monitor out here would have basically equaled the damn cost of the computer itself so I just took my macbook and said bollocks to that.

Also, dunno who brought it up, but there ARE cross-platform FPS games. ShadowRun being an example (I know, it sucked, was nothing like the original ShadowRun games, but it was still an FPS that allowed you to play on console vs those playing on PC) and it was tuned in such a way that, honestly, neither system-user got an advantage. I was able to lay out people playing mouse-and-keyboard style quite easily.

Plus, as I brought up, consoles are getting to the point where they allow you to play wiht mouse-and-keyboard set ups, PS3 does this already if I’m not mistaken

I tried the xbox controller vs mouse thing with a couple of console gamer friends. They played on my HTPC and I played on my main PC. I let them use the controllers and we went at it in a multi-player match in Crysis.

They both got owned. Badly. Both by myself and other gamers online. But, I understand it might have had a lto to do with them not being used to the game. That was maybe the second time they had played it.

Also, I firmly believe that people who complain about having to constantly upgrade their PC to play games are looking at things the wrong way.

Unless you haven’t upgraded in like 4 years, the most likely scenario is that you CAN play modern games on your rig. It’s just that you can’t play them with all the bells and whistles. In other words, unlike consoles, you have the OPTION of upgrading your hardware and being treated to great visuals. But you don’t have to. Just play at a lower rez and medium settings.

Oh and upgrading once every 4 years is NOT upgrading “constantly”.

I also think that the absurd prices quoted by console fans are uninformed. I always hear that from console gamers: “Why spend $5,000 on a computer to play games when I can get an xbox 360 elite for $400?”

Uhm, you do NOT have to spend $5,000 on a gaming PC. You can put together a PC that will play games at a higher resolution and with a much higher level of graphics quality and features than any console for less than $500. and if you don’t want to build it yourself, spend a hundred more to have it done for you at any number of shops.

“Oh but that’s still more than the xbox!”

Think of it this way. You’re going to use a computer. Either you have one, or you will get one, or you will upgrade to a new model at some point. You can spend $300 for a cheapo web surf and mp3 jukebox PC, or you can spend less than $200 more and be able to do the same PC things you normally do (edit pictures, family videos, watch online content, surf the web, store music, etc) only better/faster AND you have the equivalent of a console on steroids available to you. A platform where the games are cheaper, and where the number of games and the range of their game play is HUGE and spans over two decades of gaming history.

“But I like sitting on the couch in front of my TV! And I also like the controller!”

Ok, so what’s stopping you? a $5 cable will hook your PC to a TV. You can attach any xbox 360 controller to your PC too if you want.

PC is all about options and flexibility. But as it’s usually the case with things that offer more options - it tends to be more complicated. That’s the real hurdle. not the made up excuses I hear.

Do you know anyone who does? do you know anyone who even has a mouse and keyboard for their PS3?

I may have been a little vague.

What I was trying to say is that people who self-identify as “gamers” are likely to use both platforms - and in particular that most PC gamers probably own a console. Additionally, a significant slice of the console pie - specifically the Wii - are going to people that normally wouldn’t even be considered part of the market.

The PC gaming market is saturated - that of the console is beginning to find new generations of people willing to shell out. If you’re only looking at balance sheets, sure, there’s a clear winner. I was just making the statement that it may not be an entirely appropriate comparison.

Just my WAG.

And I’ll take all challengers who think their joysticks can make a showing.

ETA: Maybe I should just let Kinthalis say everything, since I find myself nodding at the screen like a dork as he read his posts.

I don’t like hardware. I don’t like drivers. I don’t even really like computers. I want to put in the game and play it, not have foreplay with a computer.

Get your leet self on a 360 with a keyboard and mouse and get some Halo 3 beatings.

Well, yes, if you have some sort of pathological fear of PC’s, then the console is probably your best bet. I’ll give you that one :slight_smile:

But don’t look down now! I think your keyboard is beeping at you, run away!

Oh noes!

Wait…it’s just a laptop…phew.

$500 on a gaming PC is a bit of an absurd quote. Last time I built a PC (maybe 2 years ago?) I spent $350 on a decent mobo and CPU, plus another $200 on a decent graphics card. None where anywhere near top of the line and that’s already over $500 and doesn’t include RAM, hard drives, sound card, speakers (not really an issue cause I played with my surround-sound headphones :smiley: ) tower case, keyboard/mouse (I like a 5 button mouse for gaming) PSU, etc etc and then dropping a few hundred on a decent monitor. (and I’ll specifically note that most people already have a TV, so the cost wouldn’t be included in console hardware)

So yea, $500 for building a decent gaming rig? not likely

So in other words you don’t know what you are talking about. You are exactly the dude I was talking about when I wrote what you are trying to refute.

Allow me to enlighten you.

This doesn’t include a monitor. But I’d say most people already have one, because most people already have a PC.

Also, hooking up your PC to an HDTV is trivial. And finally, monitors are pretty cheap now. you can get a nice 20" for ~$150.

I have been told repeatedly that there’s no way I could be a PC game player who for twenty years has refused to spend more than $500 on a desktop system. Apparently to some people you don’t count unless you spread obscene amounts of cash on components that fall in price by 90% within twelve months.

And these days I feel even less pressure to upgrade than ever. I used to spend about a hundred and fifty dollars a year keeping components current. These days the improvements are so minuscule I have trouble justifying upgrading my three year old components.

ok, you’ve just shown me a system builder website that did this a challenge, no? So basically the exception that proves the rule?