Video Gaming Outlook Looks Bleak

Discussion in 'Gaming Discussion' started by Dyre Straits, Jan 18, 2004.

  1. Dyre Straits

    Dyre Straits 10 Grandkids -2 Great-grandsons

    Joined:
    May 13, 2002
    Messages:
    19,702
    Likes Received:
    2,739
    Trophy Points:
    153
    (Front Page News Post: Source = GameTab and written by 'jvm')

    Here's the game for the day: consider the technology advances of the recent past, those announced for the near future, and whatever you think might be coming down the pipe and then extrapolate to predict what the videogame scene will be like in five years. In particular, what can you do today that you won't be able to do in a few years? I have my own ideas of where this is all headed and from where I'm sitting it looks a little grim.

    Remember when you first came home with Quake and typed in your CD key so you could play it? No? Oh, then maybe it was when you popped your shiny new Quake II CD in the drive and had to type in that long code on the back of the game's case. Wait, that's not right either. Ah, now I remember, I was thinking of Quake III Arena. Yes, that had a CD key! Something important happened there, and I bet you barely noticed at the time: a new, somewhat restrictive technology was gradually introduced by the game companies and by the time Q3A came out, it was just part of the standard experience of buying a new game.
    Over the years, this trend of adding more burdens has continued, and it will only get worse. Quake players didn't find themselves looking for a no-CD hack and Half-life players didn't need to connect to a master server to play single-player games, but DooM III and Half-life 2 owners just might have to.

    In fact, Valve's Steam, and any like services that follow its lead, are the really big step toward a new world of games. Despite the current delay, I still believe that Half-life 2 will launch and that millions of players will buy it within months of its release. At that point, Steam will be distributed to all those millions of computers, building a vast network across which Valve can begin selling software, both for itself and others. Actually, selling isn't quite the right word: they can start renting software. At first, you will be able to purchase outright and actually keep what you buy, but eventually the model will probably evolve into pay-to-play.

    This is the model the game industry is evolving toward: one which allows you to access software on the fly, download the content on demand, and pay for every use according to a schedule dicated by the game's owner.

    There will be many effects from this transition:

    *You will no longer own a physical medium that contains the games you play.
    *Parts of those games will exist on your computer at the time those parts are needed, but it is in the interest of the publisher to parcel out, say, a few levels at a time, deleting the older levels as you progress.
    *If you no longer own the physical medium, then you will no longer be able to trade the game when you're done with it. So, for example, you can't head down to your local store and get some credit from the used game to put toward buying a new game.
    *You won't be able to sell it on auction services like eBay.
    *You won't even be able to give it to a friend to try out for a while.
    *If there are no games being sold used, then you can't take advantage of the reduced price on used games, as has traditionally been the case.

    These changes will fundamentally alter the way games are viewed, and in most cases will only diminish the value of each dollar spent on gaming.

    Also, services like Steam claim to offer anti-cheating features, which when combined with the next generation of Windows security (see below), will possibly hinder the development of modifications of games. I think we may reach the point where it will become a legitimate question to ask "Could Counter-strike have been developed if Half-life had been a download-on-demand game housed within a system that prevents cheating?" Sure, there will be an SDK to allow modification this time, but it will increasingly becomes a question of how much control the game's creators are going to allow for the game player. And, when it comes down to money issues, you can be sure the creators will side with their own interests over those of the player.

    There are already examples of all of these processes right now. My understanding is that by playing Half-life through Valve's Steam, your client is only downloading parts of the game as they're needed, caching only the content you're likely to need in the near future. (This may be wrong. I'd be interested in finding a good analysis of what Steam is doing, if anyone knows of such a document.) For years we've had games which existed online only, as downloadable files, and as network connections become more prevalent and robust, you can expect those files to have a "phone home" feature to police their use (i.e. prevent piracy). And there are already games that aren't being resold by the big game retailers: neither Electronics Boutique nor GameStop/Funcoland sell used copies of games like Half-life, Warcraft III, Everquest, or Ultima Online (at least via their online storefronts). The prevalence of the unique identifiers built into these games makes reselling them a liability, since pirates have found ways to get around them. If used games become less common, what will happen to these big retailers, especially since the business of used game sales has been a burgeoning part of their revenue in the past couple of years?

    On the issue of software-as-service, there are some precedents worth mentioning. Save the Whales for the Atari 2600 was reportedly only available for download over the Gameline modem service (that eventually went on to become America Online), but was never sold in stores. Until recently, it existed only as an apocryphal piece of Atari history, since no one had actually ever owned a physical copy of the game. Now that a copy has been found, the world realizes that it probably should have stayed lost. Still a piece of history had nearly vanished because software-as-service lives only as long as the service.

    This kind of software also lives only as long as you can pay. For example, the academic world is struggling with how to deal with electronic subscriptions to journals. With a paper subscription, you get to keep those you've bought, but with electronic-only access when your subscription goes, everything goes. The same is true of software, which is good for the game company and bad for you.

    Other factors are conspiring to make the so-called Wintel PC into a closed box, a box for which user upgrades are discouraged. Already the Windows Activiation required for Windows XP uses a HWID computed from the hardware configuration in the computer at install. Changing too much hardware may require a reactivation of your Windows XP operating system, providing at least one barrier to user upgrades. The next tightening of the thumb screws will come in the form of Next-Generation Secure Computing, which will provide a locked-down environment from hardware power-on to the desktop. Once the hardware itself is involved in the security process, the ease with which users can change or upgrade hardware may again be further discouraged.

    What kind of box is that? We normally call it a game console, and Microsoft and Sony and Nintendo already sell them.

    And it is interesting to note that consoles are, themselves, headed toward the same sort of software model, selling services instead of a physical product. Each current console producer is experimenting, albeit at different levels of intensity, with online games. Microsoft's Xbox is way ahead of the pack, with copious local storage via a built-in hard drive, and a built-in ethernet adaptor. Both are used extensively for several games, offering extra levels, voice chat, and game invitations, all available only via their Xbox Live! integrated service. Perhaps most importantly, Microsoft has begun offering what they term "premium content" which is available for download, but only at a price.

    This is the next big step, selling software to console owners through an online service, that will be most closely watched by Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo as well as the big software houses like Electronic Arts. If enough people are willing to pay to download an add-on to a current game, they may also be willing to pay to download a whole game itself.

    As an example, Electronic Arts could sell a game like Madden NFL Football once in the store, and then charge an annual subscription fee to download an updated engine, an upgraded set of models, and of course the new year's roster. By charging $35 for the update and saving on distribution and media production, they'll no doubt make more money on resubscribers than on the original sale. As a bonus, they can advertise it as a price break for loyal customers, since it won't carry the heavy $50 price tag of the game on physical media. Once the model is proven to work, and it can work, the whole industry will begin to shift that direction.

    At that point, the problems listed above for PC games will begin to apply console games as well. No longer will you be able to rent the latest games from Blockbuster to try them out before deciding on whether to buy. No longer will you be able to sell used games when you're done with them. No longer will you be able to lend a game to a friend without having them pay the same kind of fees you paid to activate the game itself, if that is even possible. Moreover, by building network authentication into a game's boot sequence, a company like EA can begin to deactivate games like Madden past a certain date, in effect forcing the users to upgrade, even if they don't want to play online. Since local storage and broadband network connections are virtually guaranteed parts of the next generation of consoles, the ability to sell software as a service this way will become not only feasible, but attractive to the software companies.

    Many will say that these things can't come to pass, that the public will rebel at some point. They'll dig up the DivX debacle or other technological boondoggles from the past decade as evidence. Yet, it will only take one best-selling game, like Half-life 2, to introduce the masses to new and more restrictive technologies that will then become standard.

    And that's where were headed, like it or not. No physical media. No rentals. No used games. No sharing games among friends. Limited hardware upgrades. Pay-to-play. Unless something seriously changes the course of the industry, this is the future.
     
    Last edited: Jan 19, 2004
  2. drakesteakn

    drakesteakn boo!!!!

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2003
    Messages:
    2,041
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    48
    very interesting article.if they do start to only kinda rent a game, i would stop playing the games.
     
  3. Markius

    Markius New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Messages:
    2,350
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    i personally think Valve will sell more copies of HL2 from retail outlets than from steam.
    if something like this does happen, it will be longer than 5-10 years before it becomes mainstream.

    and remember the hacker groups like deviance, razor 1911 etc will always be there.....;)
     
  4. BWX

    BWX get out and ride

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2002
    Messages:
    19,684
    Likes Received:
    63
    Trophy Points:
    73
    If this kind of thing happens, I bet anything that someone will reverse the technology (no matter how complicated) and hack the game- even if it is nothing more than cached data for the level you are playing.

    All they are doing is making it harder to hack, and people have always proven that they are smarter than the game programmers/developers, and that there is no game on earth that hasn't been hacked.. Maybe if they made games that were actually worth buying, people would buy them.

    If they do start making un-hackable games, and overcharge for them, I won't buy them. But just to spite them, I'll download hacks if they are available. If a game comes out worth buying, I'll definitely buy it- but if it's some crappy console port I'll download it just because they should have made the game for the PC better- and scaled it down for the console, not the other way around. (Halo, DX:IW, etc...) :rolleyes:
     
  5. studbagel9

    studbagel9 Rolling the Hard Six

    Joined:
    May 26, 2003
    Messages:
    767
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I can't wait until we no longer can own any tangible piece of software, it'll all be cached. Then thanks to trust worthy computing, we won't be able to get a hacked version of a game. In fact, we won't be able to do anything with any program without paying a surcharge. Capitalism sucks sometimes.
     
  6. XSwiftX

    XSwiftX New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2002
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Add to this scenario the fact that most new games suck and you will have almost no reason to be playing games anyway.

    I have already stopped playing games simply because there is really nothing new or innovative coming out anymore. Sad since I have been an avid gameplayer since the original PONG.

    If they choose to follow this path or continue to fail to innovate with good gameplay then gaming in the future is doomed.

    Swift
     
  7. qballshalls2002

    qballshalls2002 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2003
    Messages:
    33
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    OMG....The Phantom is going directly in this direction.This is sum scary shiz-nit!!:eek:
     
  8. BWX

    BWX get out and ride

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2002
    Messages:
    19,684
    Likes Received:
    63
    Trophy Points:
    73
    Well ATI and Nvidia better come up with a way to get companies to start making better and more innovative games, or high end GFX card sales are going to be so bad that they won't have enough money to do research and make better ones which will lead to ATI and Nvida's demise.

    (did I get that all in one sentence?)

    Who needs high end cards if all game suck as bad as DX:IW? What if people refuse to put crappy steam on their PC just to pay outrageous fees to play crappy games?

    It's a downward spiral- and the big game developers are too greedy to see it coming. Hardware Manufacturers are the ones who benefit from piracy in reality, but they also benefit from the creation of great new games that allot of people have access too. The day I need to connect to a server to play a single player game is the day I find a new (main) hobby.
     
  9. BetrayerX

    BetrayerX New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2003
    Messages:
    111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Dial up users are still a BIG % of the users. Something like that would alienate them, regardless if they will pay or not for such intrusive and restrictive software.
     
  10. BWX

    BWX get out and ride

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2002
    Messages:
    19,684
    Likes Received:
    63
    Trophy Points:
    73
    Yeah, or what about when their unreliable servers are down, (which happens ALL THE TIME from what I hear), does that mean I can't play my bought and paid for single player game? What a load a crap-

    Let's see, I trust a company that's so incompetent that they can't keep the source code of their next game off the internet to have a server up so that I can play my SINGLE player game-

    I have to just quit thinking about it- it pisses me off more every time I think about it.

    Valve can go ____ _________'s .... fill in the blank. Blah-:mad:
     
  11. caqde

    caqde Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    507
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    28
    If a game company does this in the within the next five years they are really stupid. I doubt that in the next five years dial-up modem's will be extinct (who want's to wait 30+mins to play the next level?). Heck we still have the floppy to get rid of (next year PLEASE DIE). And I don't see why any company would want to put Single player maps on their server I think that this will most likely cause lot's of chaos and will end up being hell on Tech Support(I wouldn't want to be them....[pissed of dial up users]). But I still believe some game makers will still make games the way we want them. Remember game maker's are GAMERS. If they don't want that feature they won't implement it. If companies do implement it it means they are out for money, and that will destroy them in the end. There are game companies that don't implent many of these security feature's Gas Powered Game's is an example, they actually aplaud modifications to there game. So this bleak outlook will likely never happen. At least not in my lifetime. I won't let it happen.
     
  12. Markius

    Markius New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Messages:
    2,350
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    great point
     

Share This Page

visited