Monday, May 25, 2009
Shareware and the Golden Age of PC Games
Eurogamer has an article about the "golden age" of shareware in the early-to-mid 90's. Very worth reading:
The Shareware Age
Hat tip to Scorpia for the link, and I happen to agree with the Stingered One that they do seem to overstate the influence of shareware on the PC gaming scene. Apparently, all gaming must be console-style action gaming, and the top shareware games of the day definitely helped turn the PC into ... uh... just another console.
But the article really doesn't give enough credit to mainstream developers. About the same time Wolfenstein 3D broke ground on the first-person shooter genre, an amazing 3D action-RPG was hitting store shelves, entitled Ultima Underworld. Wing Commander, also by Origin, is blamed by many designers of ruining PC game development in a similar fashion to how Star Wars "ruined" American cinema. It issued in the era of the blockbuster. Wing Commander, incidentally, predated Doom by about three years.
This "golden age" was also the era that brought us Eye of the Beholder, Falcon 3.0, The Elder Scrolls (influenced by Ultima Underworld, I'm certain), X-Com, Lemmings, Civilization, a whole slew of killer graphic adventure games from Sierra, Legend, and LucasArts (oh, yeah, and Cyan), X-Wing, TIE Fighter, the Star Control series, Stunts, Out of This World, Prince of Persia, SimCity, System Shock, Alone in the Dark (long before the consoles lay claim to the "survivor horror" genre), Ultima VI and Ultima VII (parts I and II), Wizardry 6, Darklands, The Incredible Machine, Syndicate, Red Baron, and a whole ton more that I am no doubt missing here.
I may also note that - unless I missed it - the article missed a major low-tech hits of the shareware scene - Scorched Earth. Gameplay still trumped technology, even then.
Frankly, it was a wonderful era to be a PC gamer, and shareware was just a small (but significant) part of it. Yes, at the time, action games typically played second fiddle to an outstanding array of role-playing games, adventure games, flight simulators, strategy games, and even golf and solitaire. I kinda miss that, actually. But it was far from being in any kind of ghetto. From 1990 - 1995, the PC gaming scene was as vibrant as one could imagine, both with shareware and mainstream gaming.
In my opinion, the "revolution" wasn't about shareware, but two other things: VGA, and the end of the computer wars. While the article suggests that VGA was adopted only slowly, by 1990 it was pretty much the standard even on business computers. At this point, it was in general graphically superior to any game consoles out there, and the DOS-based PC had finally emerged from the clash of competing systems as the clear victor and standard (as "standard" as PCs ever got, which wasn't very...) around which game publishers could build a business.
This isn't to say that Doom didn't pretty much put PC gaming on the map as far as mainstream consciousness is concerned. At the time, consoles had been geared for a more juvenile crowd, and video games were still viewed (even by the console manufacturers themselves) as a pre-adolescent pastime. Doom was starkly adult in nature, with graphic (if pixelated) violence and a darker theme. It was the wake-up call that grown-ups liked games too - and the PC was the only platform that really catered to their needs.
That's changed a bit now, of course. A lot has changed. Though it seems as though the PC has led the way again on the casual gaming front. History repeats itself, I guess.
Labels: Mainstream Games, retro
- posted by The Rampant Coyote @ 9:53 AM (Permalink)
Comments:
Links to this post:
<< Home
I haven't played a large chunk of those games you mention, but they seem to me to be largely sprite-based. Certainly they predate the era of high polygon counts, which is where I think the cost of content creation began to increase exponentially.
Ah, how I do miss the early 90s and the game scene. I agree in that shareware wasn't as big as the author of that article puts it.
I need to find my 'box-o-games' and start playing some of those classics over again. I miss me some Scorched Earth!
I need to find my 'box-o-games' and start playing some of those classics over again. I miss me some Scorched Earth!
This certainly brings me back - I played most of those games.
I don't think I've seen better starfight games than X-Wing/TIE Fighter. Most of the newer stuff was just disappointing.
X-COM also had a number of awful sequels. Ufo: Afterlight was the only one I enjoyed.
I don't think I've seen better starfight games than X-Wing/TIE Fighter. Most of the newer stuff was just disappointing.
X-COM also had a number of awful sequels. Ufo: Afterlight was the only one I enjoyed.
I get such a potent hit of nostalgia just thinking about those games, most of which I played.
I can't say anything definitive regarding shareware, but I seem to remember a little renaissance period just as the Internet was coming into widespread use where I could find all these games (made with some library like Allegro, I *think*). Although there were a ton of shoot 'em ups, I also remember a lot of half-finished RPGs, wargames with clunky UI and more traditional action games with fairly detailed storylines. But once Doom became dominant, everyone wanted to make FPS and all those games seemed to have disappeared (or else I lost track of them). It's funny now that with Flash and the proliferation of game libraries so many different games are once again available.
I can't say anything definitive regarding shareware, but I seem to remember a little renaissance period just as the Internet was coming into widespread use where I could find all these games (made with some library like Allegro, I *think*). Although there were a ton of shoot 'em ups, I also remember a lot of half-finished RPGs, wargames with clunky UI and more traditional action games with fairly detailed storylines. But once Doom became dominant, everyone wanted to make FPS and all those games seemed to have disappeared (or else I lost track of them). It's funny now that with Flash and the proliferation of game libraries so many different games are once again available.
It was a good era for PC gaming... It's too bad it came to an end.
I think one reason so many good games came out of that era was that, well, the PC really blew as a gaming platform. VGA looked good, but it required a lot of skill to get decent playability out of. I have some old game design books by Andre LaMothe that describe a lot of the techniques used, and it was by no means easy. So more focus was on gameplay design than graphics design, because there were hardware limitations that were either insurmountable, or evadable by using clever hardware tricks. That would just make the games MORE unique and interesting.
I read in an article that one of the primary causes of companies like Origin being bought by EA (and eventually devoured by it) was the late adoption of CD-ROM. Apparently the cost of replication onto floppy disks was so high that they had increasing difficulty making money back on games, and small-fry companies like Origin couldn't broker decent deals with fabrication/replication companies.
That makes sense, when you think about it. I remember that computer games always cost more than console games, but the prices didn't vary much for inflation; I remember seeing Ultima's III and IV for $59.99 in the mid-80's. So over time, the amount of profit dropped. It just took one bad bout of sales (Strike Commander for Origin) to put them into financial trouble and leave them vulnerable to EA.
I think one reason so many good games came out of that era was that, well, the PC really blew as a gaming platform. VGA looked good, but it required a lot of skill to get decent playability out of. I have some old game design books by Andre LaMothe that describe a lot of the techniques used, and it was by no means easy. So more focus was on gameplay design than graphics design, because there were hardware limitations that were either insurmountable, or evadable by using clever hardware tricks. That would just make the games MORE unique and interesting.
I read in an article that one of the primary causes of companies like Origin being bought by EA (and eventually devoured by it) was the late adoption of CD-ROM. Apparently the cost of replication onto floppy disks was so high that they had increasing difficulty making money back on games, and small-fry companies like Origin couldn't broker decent deals with fabrication/replication companies.
That makes sense, when you think about it. I remember that computer games always cost more than console games, but the prices didn't vary much for inflation; I remember seeing Ultima's III and IV for $59.99 in the mid-80's. So over time, the amount of profit dropped. It just took one bad bout of sales (Strike Commander for Origin) to put them into financial trouble and leave them vulnerable to EA.
Oh, man, I know I'm in trouble when Scorpia needs to delegate the rebuttin' to you, Coyote! XD
Someone mentioned to me that if I thought PC gaming in the 80s and early 90s were a ghetto, then it was a pretty big one.
It was, wasn't it? I don't believe I said that PC gaming was limited, or that no good games came out of it; as you have already mentioned, this particular era was an incredibly prolific age. And I agree -- but not in terms of who played video games.
I don't have to go very far to look for evidence, actually; I just need to look at who's playing games today, and come to the realization that for quite a number of them wouldn't have come near the PC for gaming in the 80s and 90s.
Mind you, you've given me two other factors that caused the removal of the PC from its ghetto, or actually, one reason: standardization. When we stopped fighting over whether to use VGA, CGA, EGA, Tandy or Hercules, and when the Amiga and Atari died as a platform was the beginning of the PC games explosion.
So, I'll concede that shareware was not the only reason why PC gaming took off. But I still maintain, back then, that gaming was a ghetto, and by ghetto I mean that PC gaming was somewhat isolated from the rest of the entertainment industry.
But just because something is isolated does not mean that it is not capable of producing innovative products. It just means that not everyone was playing them.
Someone mentioned to me that if I thought PC gaming in the 80s and early 90s were a ghetto, then it was a pretty big one.
It was, wasn't it? I don't believe I said that PC gaming was limited, or that no good games came out of it; as you have already mentioned, this particular era was an incredibly prolific age. And I agree -- but not in terms of who played video games.
I don't have to go very far to look for evidence, actually; I just need to look at who's playing games today, and come to the realization that for quite a number of them wouldn't have come near the PC for gaming in the 80s and 90s.
Mind you, you've given me two other factors that caused the removal of the PC from its ghetto, or actually, one reason: standardization. When we stopped fighting over whether to use VGA, CGA, EGA, Tandy or Hercules, and when the Amiga and Atari died as a platform was the beginning of the PC games explosion.
So, I'll concede that shareware was not the only reason why PC gaming took off. But I still maintain, back then, that gaming was a ghetto, and by ghetto I mean that PC gaming was somewhat isolated from the rest of the entertainment industry.
But just because something is isolated does not mean that it is not capable of producing innovative products. It just means that not everyone was playing them.
I was constantly buying games back then. They weren't all great, but it was a good time to be a gamer. These days, it seems to be a long time between games I really want to play.
But "Doom was starkly adult in nature"? I don't see it. Maybe it depends on your definition of "adult."
But "Doom was starkly adult in nature"? I don't see it. Maybe it depends on your definition of "adult."
Thanks for taking the time to respond to the article in depth. One of my aims in writing it was to get people talking about and reappraising the older PC games (commercial or shareware).
I admit that it does seem that I'm playing down the importance of the commercial PC games scene prior to 1993. I was trying to get across the mainstream (particularly in the UK) perception of PC gaming at the time. Origin, Sierra and Lucasarts were already accelerating the PC's development as a games platform in the years before 1993, but in the UK and Europe most people played these games on the Amiga/ST (where available) or picked them up a few years later on budget.
You peg VGA as becoming a standard aroung 1990, but if you were to look at a UK multiformat computer games mag from that year, PC games would get maybe one tenth of the coverage of Amiga and ST games. The PC was in a similar kind of position to the Neo Geo - technically far in advance of other platforms, but burdened with a seriously prohibitive price tag.
Quite a lot of the games in your list came out in 1993 or later, and in some cases (Prince of Persia, Another World, Alone in the Dark) were ported *to* the PC.
Of course the shareware games of the era were just part of the wider ecosystem, but what makes them notable was that they took a different approach to Origin, EA, Sierra, etc. and were able to propogate their ideas very widely in a short time. Origin would never have come up with a game like Doom, and id would never have been able to put together a game of the scope of Ultima VII.
I admit that it does seem that I'm playing down the importance of the commercial PC games scene prior to 1993. I was trying to get across the mainstream (particularly in the UK) perception of PC gaming at the time. Origin, Sierra and Lucasarts were already accelerating the PC's development as a games platform in the years before 1993, but in the UK and Europe most people played these games on the Amiga/ST (where available) or picked them up a few years later on budget.
You peg VGA as becoming a standard aroung 1990, but if you were to look at a UK multiformat computer games mag from that year, PC games would get maybe one tenth of the coverage of Amiga and ST games. The PC was in a similar kind of position to the Neo Geo - technically far in advance of other platforms, but burdened with a seriously prohibitive price tag.
Quite a lot of the games in your list came out in 1993 or later, and in some cases (Prince of Persia, Another World, Alone in the Dark) were ported *to* the PC.
Of course the shareware games of the era were just part of the wider ecosystem, but what makes them notable was that they took a different approach to Origin, EA, Sierra, etc. and were able to propogate their ideas very widely in a short time. Origin would never have come up with a game like Doom, and id would never have been able to put together a game of the scope of Ultima VII.
I have a hard time nowadays finding games I really want to play. Back in the 80s and 90s, I found multiple games I really wanted to play every time I went to the store.
I love RPGs, but today they just seem.... stale.
I love RPGs, but today they just seem.... stale.
@T-Boy: Was the PC in a ghetto? Insofar as it was a different market than the consoles, sure. And since the PC, even then, had a smaller market share than combined sum of all consoles, I guess you could say that it was the odd man out, rather than the consoles being the ones in the ghetto. But really, things were much closer to parity back than then they are now.
@WCG - Doom vs. Super Mario Kart. :) Blood, gore, guts, violence, gibs, demons, occult references, a swastika - the game was obviously aimed at a more mature audience than either of the two dominant consoles of the era (SNES and the Sega Genesis). Granted, those of far enough on the other side of 18 might consider that content a little on the juvenile side, but contrary to opinions of folks like Wacky Jack T., the game was targeted for grown-up gamers, not young children.
@Robin - Thanks for dropping by. I understand things were pretty different in the U.S. versus Europe, so I think we may have our continental biases in the way. I included some games from later dates to coincide with your article's "end of the road" for the shareware age circa 1996.
I didn't really get into PC gaming until late 1990 (and preferred the Amiga at the time, too...), so that kinda puts my stake in the ground. But as a poor, starving college student, I was really pleased to discover shareware. :)
When I bought my first "new" computer system in 1991, VGA was already pretty much the default. The price difference between EGA and VGA was minimal. Game companies were already dropping support for EGA, IIRC, for all new games. And as much as I liked the Amiga, by that point it was pretty clear that it was dead (as well as the Atari ST --- and the Mac was for desktop publishing, not gaming).
Again - I'm sure Europe was a different story. You aren't wrong - it was expensive to keep up.
I didn't want to suggest that shareware didn't do an incredible job of shaking things up. It did. I remember a local computer company installing the demo version Wolfenstein 3D on all of their new systems to show off their capabilities. As much as I like to harp on Ultima Underworld beating Wolf3D to market by two months, it didn't have that kind of advertising potential.
But that whole era was just an amazing time for PC games, on both the shareware front and the mainstream game front. And really - there wasn't a huge difference back then between the "professional" shareware studios and the smaller independent game studios as far as size (or capabilities). And publishers were far less risk-averse back then. Maybe I'm just guilty of wearing rose-colored glasses, but it really felt like things were exploding back then.
Post a Comment
@WCG - Doom vs. Super Mario Kart. :) Blood, gore, guts, violence, gibs, demons, occult references, a swastika - the game was obviously aimed at a more mature audience than either of the two dominant consoles of the era (SNES and the Sega Genesis). Granted, those of far enough on the other side of 18 might consider that content a little on the juvenile side, but contrary to opinions of folks like Wacky Jack T., the game was targeted for grown-up gamers, not young children.
@Robin - Thanks for dropping by. I understand things were pretty different in the U.S. versus Europe, so I think we may have our continental biases in the way. I included some games from later dates to coincide with your article's "end of the road" for the shareware age circa 1996.
I didn't really get into PC gaming until late 1990 (and preferred the Amiga at the time, too...), so that kinda puts my stake in the ground. But as a poor, starving college student, I was really pleased to discover shareware. :)
When I bought my first "new" computer system in 1991, VGA was already pretty much the default. The price difference between EGA and VGA was minimal. Game companies were already dropping support for EGA, IIRC, for all new games. And as much as I liked the Amiga, by that point it was pretty clear that it was dead (as well as the Atari ST --- and the Mac was for desktop publishing, not gaming).
Again - I'm sure Europe was a different story. You aren't wrong - it was expensive to keep up.
I didn't want to suggest that shareware didn't do an incredible job of shaking things up. It did. I remember a local computer company installing the demo version Wolfenstein 3D on all of their new systems to show off their capabilities. As much as I like to harp on Ultima Underworld beating Wolf3D to market by two months, it didn't have that kind of advertising potential.
But that whole era was just an amazing time for PC games, on both the shareware front and the mainstream game front. And really - there wasn't a huge difference back then between the "professional" shareware studios and the smaller independent game studios as far as size (or capabilities). And publishers were far less risk-averse back then. Maybe I'm just guilty of wearing rose-colored glasses, but it really felt like things were exploding back then.
Links to this post:
<< Home
