Why do PC Games need to be installed anymore?

TheBluePill

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
3,773
This is baffling to me... This rant comes from an experience I had at Christmas. I bought the kids a Wii and a few games and some for their PS2. I received a couple of PC games.. After trying all of their new games over the course of the morning, the Kids wanted me to try out my new games.. I told them that It would have to wait, I didn’t have the time right now to go through all of the installs and I needed to clean up several gigs of space on my 160gb HD, as it was getting too low.. They looked at me like I was crazy..
They just got done playing 5 new games on their consoles.. why couldn’t I just fire my new games up?


Every console on the market is Plop-and-play. You Plop the disc in the drive, turn it on and you have instant satisfaction. Configuration data and saves are stored in a small file on a mem card or the consoles HD without the player seeing it. Anyone can do it.

Every PC game on the market is an exercise in patience and sometimes frustration. You plop the disc in the drive and the installer launches.. or doesn’t. the first go-around involves anywhere from 5 minutes to nearly an hour of waiting with as much as 5gb of data being transferred to your pc. Then you typically have another session of punching in a 10-20 character code. then you have to run the games configuration program and set the settings. Finally, you attempt to play the game, but if something in your system isn’t right, that just doesn’t happen without a long period of research and/or tech support.

And what does all of this Copying and install get you? 9 times out of 10 you have to have the disc in the drive anyways..


Why do we put up with all of this, a lot of consumers don’t and they now have consoles.


Why cant we insert the disc in our PC, let the program run a simple benchmark and set some basic settings in the background and make a small temp folder for all of this. Same for setting changes and user customizable data and save games.

Level loads could happen in the back ground in to a temp folder on the PC during game play, even 200mb of data could transfer in the time the title screens go by.. every console does it this way with a minimal footprint.. Bigger data that is needed for the next scene or level could slowly load to the temp folder during the current level..

There is just no reason for all of this head ache to play a game, ¾ of the games on the PC are cross platform too, those consoles don’t make you go through the same procedures. I'm not using a stack of Floppies anymore..
 
No...harddrive space is cheap and virtually unlimited unless your doing massive video encodings or something outside the ordinary.

I don't want to go hunting around for discs every time I want to play games, anooying++
The first thing I do whenever I get a game as it is; is to visit gamecopyworld and crack it asap.
 
No...harddrive space is cheap and virtually unlimited unless your doing massive video encodings or something outside the ordinary.

I don't want to go hunting around for discs every time I want to play games, anooying++
The first thing I do whenever I get a game as it is; is to visit gamecopyworld and crack it asap.

Yes, but that requires a certain level of expertise, my 7 or 9 year old wouldnt do that. Again, more overhead.
 
If you don't know, each modern computer operating system have multitasking and alot of functiuns and options. If your computer is only in idle status, it performing thousands of commands per second and in console there is only a small emulator that is used only for execute the game file. Next reason why computer games are need to be installed is that each computer is unique device, each computer have different performance, configuration, hardware from various brands and manufacturers, different drivers and operating systems. And the consoles? only one PS exists and only the one WII exists - there are no compatibility issues at all. The computer games are much more complicated programs than console games. Many of games are able to update their files from internet and they are costumable by mods, addons and extra settings and have too many aspects for load, so without installation your computer need to have over 5 gigs of RAM and DVD drive fast as Hard drive - this is impossible.
So only thing you can do is install and set each game. Or simply buy a console games not computer games.
 
If you don't know, each modern computer operating system have multitasking and alot of functiuns and options. If your computer is only in idle status, it performing thousands of commands per second and in console there is only a small emulator that is used only for execute the game file.

Actually, there is is plenty of room to multi-task file copies in the back ground on any modern computer. to state that the PC can-not copy a file from the Games Disc to the hard drive because there is already too much going on is absolutly crazy.

Next reason why computer games are need to be installed is that each computer is unique device, each computer have different performance, configuration, hardware from various brands and manufacturers, different drivers and operating systems. And the consoles? only one PS exists and only the one WII exists - there are no compatibility issues at all.


There is a large install base, but that has no bearing on the installation of files on the pc, the initial bench-mark will reveal the minimum requirements and if the program will run at all. this process takes a mere second or two for games to run, as most do now durring the install anyways. Automatically setting performance levels is also a few-second process that every title does now anyways on itial setup. These small config files can be stored in the temp folder for a title. No issues there either.


The computer games are much more complicated programs than console games. Many of games are able to update their files from internet and they are costumable by mods, addons and extra settings and have too many aspects for load, so without installation your computer need to have over 5 gigs of RAM and DVD drive fast as Hard drive - this is impossible.

Again, Not really, many games are virtually identical to their console counterparts. Downloadable content could be easily stored in the temp file, there is no need for every file of the game to reside on the HD, just like the consols. The Consoles do not have 5 Gigs of ram or Ultra fast storage devices, they are mostly Low Spec PCs or the equivalant.
.[/QUOTE]


So only thing you can do is install and set each game. Or simply buy a console games not computer games.

You didnt make an argument with any valid points to support that conclusion. Sorry man, no offense.
 
Well if installing a game is so complicated just get a console. Nobody is going to change the way computer games have been working for years just to please a minority. Besides, the performance difference from a game running from an optical drive versus a hdd (and soon SSD drives) is absurd, not to mention no "WEEEEEHH WEEHHHHH VRROOOMMMM" noises while playing it.

Besides, a installed game is moddable and has no limits on what can be done with it while a game that runs from a read only media isn't. Also it's not expected from game devs that a 7/9 year old kid knows enough about computers to install everything, and a manual is always your friend if you don't have a clue.
 
Welcome to the wonders of specialized, single-purpose vs generalized, multi-purpose devices. A lot of it has to do with hard disk access times and the increased compression of data on console versions of games.

Hard drive space is effectively infinite these days, I have around 50 some games spanning a decade installed on my PC right now ranging from Doom1 and 2 through to TF2 and COD4. Along with several emulators of older consoles with games for those. Try doing that with a modern console. Most of those are cd-cracked, so no need to juggle CDs which I still have...somewhere...maybe.
 
Well if installing a game is so complicated just get a console. Nobody is going to change the way computer games have been working for years just to please a minority. Besides, the performance difference from a game running from an optical drive versus a hdd (and soon SSD drives) is absurd, not to mention no "WEEEEEHH WEEHHHHH VRROOOMMMM" noises while playing it.

Besides, a installed game is moddable and has no limits on what can be done with it while a game that runs from a read only media isn't. Also it's not expected from game devs that a 7/9 year old kid knows enough about computers to install everything, and a manual is always your friend if you don't have a clue.


Thats the Attitude that has lead to PC gaming current state of decline. Things dont need to be this complicated for the average user and that is what has become a turn-off.

There is no technical reason that this has to be this way any longer, its a hold over from the Floppy days and days when we needed to read from the HDD due to 1 and 2x CD rom drives.. With current hardware and software, its an antiquated practice that needs to change to allow PC gaming to grow.
 
Ok man if you're not happy with PC games then don't buy them. You obviously just want to troll about PC games, good bye.
 
Microsoft's Games for Windows has something similar in mind for standardizing and doing what you have in mind. From Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tray_and_Play)

Tray and Play is a technology developed by Microsoft for the Windows Vista operating system and is a part of Games for Windows initiative. It allows users to drop a game disc into a CD or DVD drive and start playing almost immediately, while the game installs itself in the background and streams off the disc with minimal or zero caching, just like on a game console.
 
Ok man if you're not happy with PC games then don't buy them. You obviously just want to troll about PC games, good bye.

Your an ass. Trying to make a point about making PC Gaming better to get more people back in to it is not trolling nub nut. Try reading first.
 
Awesome! That is exactly what Im taking about.. I hope this takes off in a BIG Way and gets people back in to PC Gaming.

I don't think it will, because it is headed by Microsoft. Double-edged sword... it is a great idea but developers would not want to pay for the Games for Windows label, etc.

Anyone that bought Halo 2 for Vista, how well does the Tray and Play work?
 
Yes, but that requires a certain level of expertise, my 7 or 9 year old wouldnt do that. Again, more overhead.

Simply put you need to still help your kids out at that age. You cannot blame the industry because running games off the harddrive is so much better for performance and convenience issues. Just crack them so you dont have to move discs around all the time, and place shortcuts for them on the desktop. Until your kids grow older I suggest you do the installing.

As someone else said, http://www.gamecopyworld.com -> search for your game and look for "fixed exe" or "no cd/dvd" file, suited for the patch version of your game. If you dont have your game patched to the version of the available cracks, then search and apply the corresponding patch first using google. :)
 
Its mostly the differing hardware in PCs that cause the requirement for you to put the game on the HD. With consoles the game devs have complete control over what gets loaded at all times and they know exactly how much space they have to work with so they can optimize for it. Also they can check and measure how long each load will actually take within a small margin of error to make up for differing drive speeds. On the PC side, the performance from system to system will vary wildly, and performance of running the game off optical media may render the game unplayable.
 
Conventional modding would be a little more tricky if files are only stored in a temp folder. We'd obviously be looking at longer load times if it has to pull everything from the disc. Imagine loading a game like Oblivion on PC like this.. it takes long enough for a console to load it. Not to mention one of the perks of PC gaming is we don't need the stinkin disc.

If you look into the past, a lot of games used to have a lite install option where it would only install "essential" files and load the rest of the resources from the CD. This would reduce the install size and time by as much as 75% in some cases (Lord of the Realms 2 comes to mind).

I personally prefer not to use no-cd executables, as you'll likely have to get new a new exe when a patch is released. For me, YASU, Daemon Tools, and a collection of ISOs.

You're right to be asking these questions, though. I wouldn't mind it being an option.
 
Every console on the market is Plop-and-play. You Plop the disc in the drive, turn it on and you have instant satisfaction.
That might be the case, but level/area load times can be a significant hindrance to so-called 'satisfaction'. You may get to the main menu very quickly, but as you actually play through the game, you're probably spending a lot of time waiting, though it depends on the complexity of the game (and whether or not the console uses some sort of caching/pre-loading system). The advantage of not having to install the game can actually be a significant disadvantage.

A PC's hard drive may be slow in comparison to RAM, but it's also significantly faster at reading data than a DVD drive. A 10,000 RPM Raptor or a 15,000 RPM Cheetah (I still have my Cheetah...somewhere), or a pair of 7,200 RPM or 10,000 RPM drives in a RAID 0 array can make load times startlingly fast, but a lone 7,200 RPM SATA or IDE drive is still no slouch.

Every PC game on the market is an exercise in patience and sometimes frustration.
Hasn't been the case for me. Very rarely have I had any problems with installers, CD keys, even online activation. Even BioShock installed quickly and smoothly, and thankfully uninstalled even faster. Perhaps your frustrations are due to some other reason?

Fast DVD drive plus fast hard drive equals fast install. I've never waited an hour or nearly an hour while a game installed. Even the four or five disc FarCry took me, at most, 15 minutes to install. Single DVD titles are significantly faster -- typically no more than five minutes.

One thing that can take a while are driver updates, but driver updates tend to be more recommended practice than required practice and can usually be done during routine upkeep anyway. Once every two to three weeks, I check for driver updates and update as necessary.

Then you typically have another session of punching in a 10-20 character code.
A ten to twenty second exercise for anyone who can read letters and numbers (in other words, being older than four years is a prerequisite) and can find those characters on a keyboard (and has fingers in which to press those keys).

then you have to run the games configuration program and set the settings.
Also the case with some console games, though rarely as complicated. A well-designed menu system with descriptive information makes this chore a breeze, and most games detect your machine's hardware and set appropriate settings anyway, save for mouse speed, 'Always Run' and various other personal preferences.

Modern PC games are generally ready to rock right out of the box. All I typically do is set my resolution (if it doesn't set it to my native resolution by default, which is common), set graphics settings to the highest level, check out the key bindings (which is dual-purpose: I learn the controls as I scroll through them) and set mouse speed, if applicable.

Finally, you attempt to play the game, but if something in your system isn’t right, that just doesn’t happen without a long period of research and/or tech support.
I rarely have any problem. I can't recall the last game I've bought that didn't run because I didn't meet the requirements or because of some other hardware or driver-related issue. Maybe Operation Flashpoint, back in 2001, due to a sound card driver issue (I didn't have a sound card that met the DX9 spec, so I had to replace it), but there might have been a game after that. Can't really remember.

I see your point here, but it seems like the level of frustration you've had with installers is atypical. Generally, keeping a well-maintained and up-to-date machine, both in terms of hardware, drivers and software, is all you need to keep most games and installers running without issue. Tray and Play sounds good to me, sure, but does a minor waiting period prior to playing bother me? I really can't say that it does. I see it as just being part of the overall experience.
 
Fast DVD drive plus fast hard drive equals fast install. I've never waited an hour or nearly an hour while a game installed. Even the four or five disc FarCry took me, at most, 15 minutes to install. Single DVD titles are significantly faster -- typically no more than five minutes.

Have you ever installed WoW? That takes forever >.<
 
Not WoW, but I did install LOTRO, which took a good while because of the updates and not due to the installer (which took as long as any other double-DVD game to install). Naturally, MMOs are updated continuously and mandatorily, and those updates can take a hell of a long time to download, but the consoles would suffer the same fate if they had similar MMOs. That isn't a PC-centric issue.

Does the WoW DVD installer take a long time for some reason, or are you referring to the online updates?
 
The reality is that you can only load so much, so fast from a disk. Many games have compressed data on disks that need to be loaded then uncompressed, it all takes time. A console is basically limited by how much it can keep open in its ram before it has to pull from the disk. Textures have to be considerably smaller on a console.
With a HDD, raw data is right there, and it can be found and opened much faster then data on a disk.
A HDD can move data much faster then a DVD drive ever could, it can also write data on the fly.

It boils down to performance and quality, and an installed game excels at both.

Burnout Paradise demo on the HDD vs Burnout Paradise on the disk = demo loads faster = better for me

Though, many PS3 games install things on the HDD to increase performance.
 
I think the OP brings up a very legitimate point and brings about the idea of game streaming for PC.

I am a very strong supporter of game installs on HDD solely on the idea that consumer optical drives won't ever reach the speed of conventional HDDs in this decade or even the next. Playing cross platform games on PC and consoles in terms of loading times is like night and day. I mock my friends who have GH3 for 360 because of the loading times between songs, while I barely have time to read the first 2 words in the loading message. Obviously, I get shafted with the DLC but meh.

I do think that the necessity of the disc requirements post install awful and is one of the major reasons I buy my games from Steam. Considering that the install size of games are now reaching 10GB+, having some sort of drop and play system should be implemented, at least to run along side the installation process. By time the opening cinematic finishes, the game could be fully installed with no performance decrease in-game from the processes.

On the flipside, I think game streaming installs should be made for Console owners as well because considering the advancements in technology we've made over the past 10 years, we still have AAA-titles (Mass Effect, Oblivion, Lost Odyssey) with PSX load times and I think that's a shame.
 
I agree with the OP that this is something that should have changed a long time ago. There is no technical reason that PCs can&#8217;t play games directly form a CD/DVD. As for specialized hardware on each PC, that can be taken care of with a simple configuration file that is setup the first time the game is started (exactly as it&#8217;s done now). Downloadable content and mods can simply be placed in a folder on the hard drive that&#8217;s setup by the game. And slow load times can be minimized by caching upcoming levels while the player plays. All of the problems that other posters have mentioned are solvable, but devs aren&#8217;t willing to put any time into it because most people have this &#8220;I don&#8217;t care; get a console&#8221; attitude and are willing to tolerate long installs.

I think it&#8217;s all mute anyway. With the size of flash drives going up, and prices coming down I&#8217;d be willing to bet that someone will start selling software on secure flash drives (a la a dongle).
 
The OP does have a valid point. However, making PC gaming more convenient by having games run directly from CD/DVD has far more drawbacks than benefits. Devs aren't going to change it because it works and it works fairly well.

Consoles are closed platforms and developers are forced to make design their games to load quickly via optical disk. I'm not sure how difficult this is or how much they have to sacrifice to do this, but it should be fairly obvious that hard drives are much faster and are much less limiting. Load times are an issue; how many times have you read a review that complained about long load times? Running directly from CD/DVD would only make the load times worse. It makes more sense to wait 10 minutes or so to install a game once than to endure longer long load screens all the time .

Instant play from disk might be far more difficult to implement on a PC considering just how variable the hardware is. It's also mutually exclusive from online distribution. Mods would be a pain to implement; maybe even impossible to all the advanced tweakers out there. It would still be running on the same hardware so you'll have the same compatibility issues as you'll have installing to the hard drive.

Install on demand might not be such a good idea either. Do you really want software to automatically install itself if you put in the disk? I don't want that happening on the same computer that I do my taxes on...

Having to put in the CD/DVD in the drive to play is a pain. The only time it's required is for the damn copy protection. Without it, we'd never have to touch the disk aside from the initial install. That in itself would be a major convenience.
 
There is no technical reason that PCs can’t play games directly form a CD/DVD...slow load times can be minimized by caching upcoming levels while the player plays.
True, but some engines already do a form of this. Unreal Engine 3 games do a lot of background caching during gameplay to reduce load times (which fucked up Gears of War on the 360 to some extent). To add another layer of that pulling data from a DVD may upset performance, and it would again require that the DVD be in the drive during gameplay, which is something I try to avoid.

It just seems like a rob Peter to pay Paul deal to me unless it were a solid system that worked extremely well.
 
True, but some engines already do a form of this. Unreal Engine 3 games do a lot of background caching during gameplay to reduce load times (which fucked up Gears of War on the 360 to some extent). To add another layer of that pulling data from a DVD may upset performance, and it would again require that the DVD be in the drive during gameplay, which is something I try to avoid.

It just seems like a rob Peter to pay Paul deal to me unless it were a solid system that worked extremely well.


What about an In-Game Option on the setup-screen that you can check that will cache the entire game on the PC for you and put an icon on the desktop? Best of both worlds..
 
How would this be any different from installing it?

For those that want to go No-CD, it would be an option, but it isnt required to play the game. You still would have the instant playability when you put the game in the drive.. but have an option once inside the game to just go ahead and install if fully if you choose.

So instead of installing it first, you actually enter the game and tell it you want to cache the entire thing in the options. You get the full "instant on" but power users can have their cake too.
 
Thats the Attitude that has lead to PC gaming current state of decline. Things dont need to be this complicated for the average user and that is what has become a turn-off.
Ahhh yes, the same PC decline that comes up every other year or so. Yet for some strange reason, PC games keep coming out.
 
For those that want to go No-CD, it would be an option, but it isnt required to play the game. You still would have the instant playability when you put the game in the drive.. but have an option once inside the game to just go ahead and install if fully if you choose.

So instead of installing it first, you actually enter the game and tell it you want to cache the entire thing in the options. You get the full "instant on" but power users can have their cake too.

In theory this sounds great. But then the developer would be burdened with the increased cost of implementing this as well as programming for the lowest common denominator. Which means no ultra high res textures for you! Well, unless they decide to spend even more money to have multiple sets of textures; in which case they might as well release one of the versions on a console instead!

Making things more convenient is good. But how hard is it to wait a few minutes and press the next button a few times and maybe set up a few things?

Not trying to berate you or anything, but your solution seems like it would cost far too much for too little benefit.
 
For those that want to go No-CD, it would be an option, but it isnt required to play the game. You still would have the instant playability when you put the game in the drive.. but have an option once inside the game to just go ahead and install if fully if you choose.

So instead of installing it first, you actually enter the game and tell it you want to cache the entire thing in the options. You get the full "instant on" but power users can have their cake too.

I believe some more simplistic games you can do this with, (trivia games etc...) the problem is, (as has been stated,) is lagtime in loads, causing gameplay to suffer. look at the load times and lag based on background loading that happens on some of the more recent games in the console market. Based on a few reviews/quick searches games like Gears, Army of 2, MLB2k8 all suffer from shuttering; while all of this cannot be attributed to disk loading I'd be willing to bet some of it does.

I'm thinking the only way this would be a viable option is for the disks to be uncompressed BD/HD DVD's/next tech, and roms to be able to spin at least as fast as a 7200rpm drive. Until this happens its not really a viable option; I personally would rather figure out how to install something over having to deal with long loadtimes/shuttering.

If you are dead set against the installation process Steam would be the best route; after the Steam software is installed you just buy a game; it installs itself and your good to go, just click and play, no shuttering, no loading, no installing, (of the individual games.)
 
Your an ass. Trying to make a point about making PC Gaming better to get more people back in to it is not trolling nub nut. Try reading first.

Not installing PC games wouldn't make it better though.

I honestly don't understand how people can stand console load times. I recently bought a PS3 which is my first console since the Playstation and the load times are absurd. I think they should make console games installable (which probably might happen since they're becoming more like PC's anyway)
 
The reality is that you can only load so much, so fast from a disk. Many games have compressed data on disks that need to be loaded then uncompressed, it all takes time. A console is basically limited by how much it can keep open in its ram before it has to pull from the disk. Textures have to be considerably smaller on a console.
With a HDD, raw data is right there, and it can be found and opened much faster then data on a disk.
A HDD can move data much faster then a DVD drive ever could, it can also write data on the fly.

It boils down to performance and quality, and an installed game excels at both.

Burnout Paradise demo on the HDD vs Burnout Paradise on the disk = demo loads faster = better for me

Though, many PS3 games install things on the HDD to increase performance.

Truth.
 
Seems like it would be a good option. I'd probably still take the full installation route, just because I don't really mind, but others might like the idea. If it shaves off a few seconds here and there, yeah, why not?

There are good ways to handle it, I think it's just a cost/benefit thing. Some solutions would no doubt be more complex than others. And, as Fallen mentioned with Blu-ray, this could become more viable but less necessary unless BD ushers in an era of "go crazy and compress nothing", which I don't believe it will. I don't think game sizes are going to balloon when BD becomes a media standard, but will increase along the same lines as they've been doing for a while since DVD became a common format. Installation times will probably be reduced. Not drastically, but at least measurably (hopefully).
 
Why cant we insert the disc in our PC, let the program run a simple benchmark and set some basic settings in the background and make a small temp folder for all of this. Same for setting changes and user customizable data and save games.

Level loads could happen in the back ground in to a temp folder on the PC during game play, even 200mb of data could transfer in the time the title screens go by.. every console does it this way with a minimal footprint.. Bigger data that is needed for the next scene or level could slowly load to the temp folder during the current level..

There is just no reason for all of this head ache to play a game, ¾ of the games on the PC are cross platform too, those consoles don’t make you go through the same procedures. I'm not using a stack of Floppies anymore..

The fact that you have loading screens at all when installing to the hard drive should point out the fact that it really is hard to stream content in from the disk (optical or otherwise) without degrading the play experience. How much you degrade it, it is very dependent on what type of machine the game is running on. Sure you can stream in the next level from disk, decompress the assets and move seamlessly from one to the next - as long as you're running on a dual core CPU, with 50-100% more system and video ram available than what is actually required to render a level. Just don't even consider it on a single CPU and 128mb video card.

Unreal Engine 3 tries to do what you're saying, and even on high end desktops ends up with significant slow down that disrupts the flow of the game for a few seconds as the next area's resources are swapped in. Gears of War deals with that well by hiding the loads through lulls in combat or in game cut scenes; a lesser game like Turning Point: Fall of liberty drops the frame rate to 0 every time you open a door and start a fresh firefight.
WOW and similar open world games also do a lot of streaming areas in and out in the background, but they also tend to have far fewer assets that are being moved in and out of memory for each area than a graphics heavy shooter.

The simple reality is the more assets you have in game, the harder it is to hide loads from the player. Most developers prefer to shove the loading into the stat of the level and make in level itself play as consistent as possible.

Obviously none of these items preclude running from the DVD, or require the hard drive. Optical drives just tend to be about and order of magnitude slower than magnetic hard drives right now - if Blu Ray media becomes standard on PCs, or 32-48x DVD roms become common that may change, but I doubt it.
The install has, and will be a pay once to benefit forever approach.

All that said, yes I think there should be a 'minimal' install option for every game. Move the core game media and player profiles to the hard drive and load the assets from DVD, with the understanding that in game loads will be noticeably worse.
 
I think it is more of a copy protection thing. You can get a "no-cd patch" and enjoy the game without the disk in the drive. There is no need for CD really, as far as installation goes...well.

I guess reading from CD is pretty simular, however HDD"s are faster, wouldn't that mean that the loading times would be decreased at very minimum?
 
Like a few others who have replied, I personally find discs less convenient than having a bunch of games installed (and cracked) or on Steam. I think we should be moving further away from physical media (on all formats), not relying on them even more. I can imagine consoles going that way too, especially as Microsoft work to make blu-ray obsolete by moving to net-based delivery.
It's like having a PVR vs. video cassettes.
 
Awesome! That is exactly what Im taking about.. I hope this takes off in a BIG Way and gets people back in to PC Gaming.
look, nobody is forcing you to buy and install computer games, and of course game installation is a few mins problem and you don't need any extra skills, only write a key, and klicking next, next, next, wait for few minutes and than complete and if you still have a problem so you can read manual, visit creator's website and other more solutions.
So I don't understand why is this a problem. And the installation is only one, so after install you run game same as console and don't understand those stupid players who sold their computers and purchased consoles cause they don't want to install games first.

btw: maybe your kids don't have skill for installing cause you don't teached them and of course as I was at the age of 7 I installed OS, software and games fully without a problem and without learning something before install.

edit: the console gaming will never be better than PC gaming, I can't imagine how I will play FPSs and MMORPGs on console. I think that the consoles are for arcading/racing games but not a real 3D multiplayer games
 
I use to play the original Hitman off a CD. I just installed the game to my HDD then burned everything to a disc. I didn't recall any problems with load times. I haven't tried that with any recent games, but I'm sure it would work with some, depending on how they save. Install to HDD then burn to a DVD.
 
Back
Top