Most of us have, or seen, or heard of live performances. More people have photos from these than any other type of media. But increasingly, gaming is a solo activity, and so to some extent live gaming is dead. Purposeful socialising and pleasure is a new concept. But that doesn’t mean that everyone is an auteur, and the quality of a large proportion of indie gaming is somewhere between the worst and best TV shows. A conversation about a game could be just as interesting as viewing a show and it can be more socially rewarding. But it’s definitely not for everyone.
The best games are as engaging as they are relaxing. You get absorbed in the game world, and when you emerge you have memories to share, and emotions to experience. Whether the source of this effect was intentional, or accidental, or somewhere in between, it means that games, in much of their design, can be therapeutic. But the realities of the gaming market often get in the way, and it’s prohibitively expensive for a lot of people to get their hands on a decent game.
PC games are superior to consoles in almost every way - from how they perform to how they look, to how they play and how they’re designed - and the difference in culture is deeply felt. The biggest knock on PC games is the piracy problem. The worst case scenario for a developer is to lose money because people have downloaded a game and installed it on their computers (assume for the sake of this example that the game in question is a legitimate game that would make money). People will do this because they can, and they won’t care about premium pricing. But a game on the market is one that has been tested. It has been priced, the bugs fixed, and the end result is much the same as a game sold in stores - with the bonus that those who have played and enjoyed the game are likely to agree to pay for it. If a game is released on Steam without any testings, then it is a gamble more than an investment, and at that point the developer has little reason to care if people pirate it. d2c66b5586