Lionhead cuts 50 staff, scales back project portfolio

[Supreme Cmdr]

...and so the gaming decline continues..

[DennyMala]

PC titles are going worse in sales because they're developed for consoles.

If you have to release a multi platform title, you think and project it with the smaller limits so that you don't have to make cuts later.

This has hampered the quality of PC games in these years.

More arcade and less depth.

Just my 2 cents from a veteran PC player and console hater.

[TSCavalier]

In my opinion, the reason PC games are falling by the wayside is because consoles can finally match PC performance/graphics without spending $2000 on a PC gaming rig. And, innovation is all but gone in gaming in general.

I don't think PC games are inherently more "deep" than console games. Regardless of complexity, a game has to be fun to play. And "fun to play" is subjective.

What I do think is universal is that people like variety. Racing games. FPS games. RPG games. Platformers. The market is flooded with look-alike titles with very little gameplay innovation.

I think people want new experiences not just new appearances.

[DennyMala]

You're absolutely true on all your statements.

On my point of view, I stated my reasons.

I don't like many kind of games, sport or racing are not appealing to me to say two, so for what it's regarding tactical games and simulations I need a PC with a lot of jeys and commands to "feel" the game. This is about deepth and immersion.

I don't like arcade and easy learnt games; I prefer games that will keep my brain active along with the eyes and reflexes, like building up your character in a RPG, or plan an assault in a tactical shooter (that ufortunately are bacoming alway more of a FPS than they used to be... )

Consoles and PC cater to very different audience IMHO.

[TSCavalier]

I think there will always be a market for games with a lot of complexity. The trick is finding a means to publish and market them.

The trick is to make a game deep but at the same time easily accessible. Look at chess. It's a simple game to learn, but has nearly boundless depth. Look at Magic: The Gathering, it is easy to learn to play, but once again, has many layers of compexity and strategy.

I think consoles are fine platforms for deep, complex games. A game doesn't need an alphabet soup of buttons that must be pushed, it needs deep strategy and a large, varied, enjoyable number of things that a player can "do" ... and it helps to be easy to play, but hard to master.

Even a racing game, and certainly sports games, can have deep strategy with minimal things to have to push. But, I agree with you, it's often fun to have a keyboard in front of you.

[DennyMala]

I like better games that are hard to learn that those easy to learn but difficult to master like the perfect example you did with chess.

My kind of game is the one that will really absorb you when learning gameplay and that will let you develop your strategies and techniques, giving you lot's of options.

And for that I need a lot of controls, or it will be a hell of a job to get things done.

Just think of a tactical shooter where you don't have a mouse, a keyborad to issue command to your team or men, the ability to lead easily from corners, to select a weapon od item without having to cicle every one in your inventory....it's not what I'm searching.

Optimizing controls is one thing, arcading the game is another.

[TSCavalier]

Different strokes for different folks.

UC is unique in that part of playing the game is learning how to play the game. The depth comes from the complexity. A skilled player is one that knows how to play it (knows all the controls, displays, etc.)

My guess is that most people prefer the "easy to learn" followed by the gradual revealing of depth (see chess).

Of course, there's another class of game, which is "easy to learn, get better with practice".

Racing games, fighting games, platformers. It's not that they are "deep", but they are often times hard to "master" because you have to have skilled reflexes (or muscle memory) and such to be good at them. I think most console games fall in this category.

The mass market has a short attention span, and the wider you cast the net, the less collective I.Q. also. So, as games have gathered a broader appeal, they've had to "dumb down" to more immediate and viceral payback.

That's not to say console gamers are dumb, it's just that console games are a casual entertainment outlet, not a "life" like PC games can become.

Easy to learn, easy to play. Next game, please. Lather. Rinse. Repeat.

By and large, most people don't have the time or inclination to learn a complex game like UC, or even the more complicated RPGs.

Hopefully, there will always be an opportunity for "niche" games to be made, because there will always be a (small) market. But, the industry is all about the money, and the games that cast the widest net will bring in the most money and thus will be funded more heavily, etc.

The death of the PC game is greed and sloth. People want to make and play easier games rather than harder games.

[DennyMala]

That's why I'm fearing that tendency.....I'll end up stopping to buy games and play them unfortunately.