Slashdot Mirror
How 'Games for Windows' Will Change PC Gaming
Joystiq has a short piece up talking with Windows (GFW) Marketing Director Kevin Unangst and PR Manager Michael Wolf about the future of the 'Games for Windows' initiative. With the launch of Vista, Microsoft is making a big push to turn PC games into a 'console-like' cohesive brand. Instead of relying on the good name of individual publishers to sell titles, Redmond is requiring that all titles use similar packaging and a distinctive logo. Along with the new gamer-centric features in Vista, and the tie-in to Xbox 360 with 'Live Anywhere', this is meant to reinvigorate the PC games market for the sometimes not-so-savvy consumer. From the article: "By making gaming a priority in the Vista experience, Microsoft is molding a powerful pairing of the Games for Windows and Xbox 360 brands. To some extent, this is based on a hope that Live Anywhere will be embraced by GFW developers and publishers, pulling Xbox Live (and your Gamertag) outside of the 'Box, in turn encouraging an unrivaled virtual community. But there are simpler touches that also spark our interest. For example, start up Vista's Minesweeper, connect your 360 controller, and enjoy a subtle rumble each time you slip up. It's the melding with the familiar that will drive new and lost consumers to the Games for Windows brand."
But ultimately that would just turn PC gaming into second-rate consoles.
Personally I'd like to see the exact opposite -- PC gaming that is more appropriate for a PC. For instance windowed gaming: There are a tremendous number of games that can only play in fullscreen mode, yet I like the ability to hop between applications without a time sucking, crash-inducing schism, not to mention that I like to see all of my other windows.
"It's the melding with the familiar that will drive new and lost consumers to the Games for Windows brand."
So they have given up on all the current gamers, eh?
Besides that amazingly stupid thing to say, which I'm sure was more of a slip-of-the-tongue-while-trying-imitate-Nintendo, PC games have always been wildly different. Trying to make them somehow the same by making them all use the same box design is crazy. (Same meaning moreso than they already are, considering they are all the same shape and size, etc etc.) Requiring the logos to be the same spot, and the requirements in the same spot, etc etc will only stifle the creativity of the box designers. It will not somehow create a community for pc gamers that didn't exist before and draw in people that have been resistant to PC gaming.
Those people DO NOT CARE.
If you can build a Wiimote for PC and not get sued, THEN you can probably get some non-gamers to care. (Or another suitably wonderful and fun controller.)
"If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
Anything that brings the usability of a console with the flexibility of a PC together is a good thing in my book. An XBox Live system for the PC+XBox would be welcome too.
Honestly, I think Microsoft has the right idea except they're only 10 years too late. 10 years ago, in the wake of Window's 95, everyone wanted someone to make PC gaming a more user friendly experience that didn't require endless patches and work to play games; today if people want something that is inexpensive and easily plays games they're going to buy a console without even considering a PC.
This is yet another tactic from Microsoft to discourage the development of multi-platform titles by tying games to Windows even more.
Part of the hardcore faithful who believed in Apple long before it was cool again to do so
Of course MS wants to emphasize gaming on their OS. Many people, myself included, would never touch Windows again if it weren't for the games... But I find this stupid: "To earn the GFW brand, a title must comply with certain Microsoft-tested specifications, including ... compatibility with the Xbox 360 controller."
Another example of MS bullying game publishers to adopt its standards. Do all PC gamers have an Xbox or like its controller? Why not other PC-only gamepads that might work better? Besides, what true gamer would limit their FPS experience with a friggn' console controller?
But simplifying install (and uninstall) and system reqs makes sense. Too bad it took so damn long.
This is your wake up call. MS intends to leverage their OS monopoly to give themselves and advantage in the gaming console market. This also provides another layer of defense around their core, OS monopoly. This is bad news for all of you, Nintendo, Sony, and Apple. They're also trying to build out DirectX tools to make the PC and Xbox a one stop shop. This is their classic strategy and it works, unless the existing players form a good, open standards based partnership. You're all influential OpenGL houses. You all have a vested interest here. Sony has already moved towards making OpenGL models key to their gaming platform. Now is the time for all of you to abandon trying to build lock-in strategies in this field and start making a concerted effort to interoperate. Build a game development toolset that makes OpenGL games on Windows, PS3, Wii, and the Mac a single entity. Beat MS at their own game. Give Blizzard and Id a call. You've got one shot at this guys, and if you fail your media enterprises are going to be easy targets. Get to it!
Yah think?
One of the top reasons people cite when they reconsider moving to another platform is the unavailability of the games they like, or the reality that the games don't become available until months later. That's an advantage MS would like to preserve. Every game written for DirectX 10 / Vista rather than OpenGL / multiplatform is a step in that direction, and every effort to make OpenGL a second-class 3D API on Vista is too.
I would also like to see more "light" games that are less graphic-intense and more *gameplay* oriented.
However, the two are not going to be mixed anytime soon. Windowed games are going to be less performant, simply because you're going to be operating your desktop at a much higher resolution than you're going to be playing your game (unless you have an uber-card that can do 1900x1440 at 120fps, in which case your game window might not *fit* on your desktop).
"Times have not become more violent. They have just become more televised."
-Marilyn Manson
So MS is once again leveraging it's monopoly on the desktop to gain market share where they can't dominate without (game consoles). Wasn't there an antitrust case or something?
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
Wait--Microsoft wants me to spend $2K on a PC running Vista so I'll have a better gaming platform? Personally I have no desire to upgrade to Vista. XP works just fine plus there are no worries about DRM or Microsoft's wonky securtiy code.
Has M$ done something to prevent a USB mouse and keyboard from being plugged into the XBox360? Why isn't the future of PC gaming a console with a mouse and keyboard?
For years, we (tin hat specialists?) have been yelling that tying your games to DirectX = being swallowed by the MS behemoth. MS described DirectX as a (superior) API to existing technologies.
Now, finally, I feel vindicated. "Games for Windows" games will get all kinds of features that won't work on non-"Games for Windows" games.
Hopefully, this will be make OpenGL, OpenAL, SDL, etc. . . look even better (as they've been rapidly improving of late) in comparison to the DirectX suite of APIs.
WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
Developing a KBM for Xbox360 is a must for any solution to be a success. I have seen a few posts already here on the subject of KBM control being one of the most significant advantages to PC gaming. Being a fan of games on both platforms and knowing many games experienced with both platforms the opinion is universal. The KBM user will always have an advantage over the controllers, some exceptions might be in racing and the less evolved "questing" games. No FPS games believes that they have more precise aming or agile movement with a console controller. Try playing Lord of the Rings:Strategy with the controller, you will cry for a mouse. Even the 360 chatting features would benefit from a KBM solution. Imagine being forced to use a virtual scrolling keyboard to type any messages to game allies and friends. I would rather style my hair with a steel bristle brush while chewing on aluminum foil and playing "This little piggie" with Kris Kristofferson and his lackey wielding the 14-pound sledge hammer.
For every benefit you receive a tax is levied. - Ralph Waldo Emerson
is there anything that Microsoft could do as a business that would ever please you? Honestly?
To paraphrase the animatrix: Surrender your code and you will enjoy a new life of the mind. You have no choice.
While I think that the only way for them to prevent a repeat of past abuses is to GPL their code, most people would be happy if they would just quit trying to FUCK EVERYONE. You know, stop threatening to sue everyone, shoving formats onto media, quit the drive to "trusted computing" where everyone must pay a fine to run on "their platform" and nothing else runs on any computing device made, stupid totalitarian shit like that. I don't have anything to do with their garbage, yet still they bother me. I have to trade files with people who still suffer on their platform. Worse, I have to put up with all the silly restrictions they force onto ISPs, which do little to stop the further damage their OS does to the networks every day. If drawing up little rules about packaging for what constitutes a game on Windoze is any indication, they are going in the wrong direction. They are flexing muscles they should not have to no good purpose. It's an exercise in pure annoyance that announces the future stagnation of Windows gaming.
The funniest thing about all of this is that it's suicidal. By sticking to their own junk and the non free way, they are falling further and further behind. Had they spent the last six years porting to free software instead of building Vista, they would be much stronger today. Instead they are about to take a huge fall: Vista is going to be a washout and revenue from Office is going to dry up.
Their death will be good for the rest of the industry. There are plenty of good distributions out there, ready, willing and able to configure PCs for vendors. Their biggest roadblock is M$'s cross licensing and vendor intimidation to keep specs out of their hands. Microsoft's downfall will bring real and honest competition to an industry that's been hamstrung for decades.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
If you say "I only play on Windows because Linux has no hardware drivers and no games, it means there is no market for these.
Microsoft has destroyed the market for Linux by disallowing Microsoft OEMs from shipping other operating systems (SEE BeOS, for instance). Microsoft fucks over other people, including their customers, just to maintain dominance.
That's why I hate Microsoft. If they played fairly, I wouldn't mind their incompetence and terrible products so much. But, since that's they only way they can survive, I guess I shouldn't hold it against them.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
LOAD "SIG",8,1
The problem is not what Microsoft does, but what we, the community, do about Microsoft. Since MS has a good product, they have a right to sell it in any way they want, including word processors and games.
But what has the open source community or other companies done all these years regarding gaming? is there an open source gaming library that covers all aspects of game programming and is cross-platform and easy to use? in other words, is there a Qt for gaming? nope, there is not. As there is not a simple yet powerful operating system (Linux is powerful but not simple), a powerful Office Package without bugs (Open Office has quite a lot of them) etc.
Please don't tell me that it is the monopoly of Microsoft that determines the success of its products. It is simply the quality of the experience: Microsoft products offer the right quality for the right people (system admins many not be them though). Open source can do it; take Firefox for example: great open source success, because the product is of very high quality.
Granted it doesn't happen in every game but often enough that it's a pain. And when it does you're definitely not looking at "a few minutes" to set up the damn thing.
I tended to start at the "recommended settings" and work up from there. Usually they were good enough for the FX7600 I have (or think I have, not sure of the exact number now).
This reminds me I'll have to reinstall Windows one of these days. If only to play Company of Heroes which has been sitting on my desk for ages...
May contain traces of nut.
Made from the freshest electrons.
I hear you brother! I laugh my ass of anytime I hear from people having a "hard time" running games on their new computers, or buy Mac's as PC's are too "hard" to use...
I remember trying to game on my only 286... now that was freakin' hard.... I remember making batch files of batch files, messing withg EMS, XMS, and whatever other crazy memory BS , not to mention the CGA, EGA, VGA, stuff going on.... making boot disks for each particular game, just so it would load properly, all the while installing something on 30 floppy disks (5 1/4" bitches!)... etc..... It generalizes down to two principles:
1) I pretty much got my interetest into computer science from trying to play games on my various systems (and trying to tweak out whatever I could to play games).
2) Other people are stupid and/or lazy and/or spoiled.
If I had mod points I'd mod you up!