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."
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.
Brilliant stragety. Worked wonders for the borg.
Until that one lady captain made them emo.
Just wait till some crappy band steals your nic.
Forget Minesweeper, I want multiplayer solitaire with voice chat.
"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
"Trust us."
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
The whole games for Windows isn't introducing a whole lot. The ratings system to compare your hardware to game requirements is great, but not for me, i can read the requirements and know what my system can and can't do, but good for teh newb. I can't imagine hooking up a 360 controller to my PC as one of the features of PC gaming over consoles is the fact that a PC gets to use a mouse/kb and the console is stuck with a controller. The joy of getting a rumble cause I messed up in Minesweeper isnt' go to hit me as it's not very likely that I'm going to play minesweeper. I dunno about this, I thought the new Direct X was really the only interesting thing about gaming in the MS world.
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.
I have waited almost ten years for them to put rumble support into minesweeper! oh boy!!! I can barely contain myself.
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!
I'm predicting this will fail.
True, 2007 will not be the Year of Desktop Linux, but that's only because most people who won't buy Vista have no need to replace their old computers yet. Most of us will be moving games onto Mac or consoles, and abandoning the Windows desktop or laptop.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
"Redmond is requiring that all titles use similar packaging and a distinctive logo."
The inclusion of a distinctive logo doesn't change the need to turn the box over and read the fine print for "required" and "reccomended" hardware to play the game. Console gaming works because a Wii is a Wii is a Wii.
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.
Pc gamers may not like have to pay for live to get online play with pc games and that also means
NO MODS when playing online.
Being forced to use M$ servers for on line play would be a bad thing.
ID software games may be forced to drop mac, linux, and opengl If they want to be part of this.
Why don't they just call it, "You really should own an XBox 360. Go buy one"?
FTFA: "Computer Gaming World was also renamed as Games For Windows to help drive Microsoft's new brand."
Also, it's good to know there's another gaming rag I can safely ignore.
In summation, I really enjoy watching people I don't trust announce what they'll do to shove things I don't want down my throat.
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?
I agree. Sony is trying to lose money these days, why not take it a step further?
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
Seriously? Yes, I'm a Microsoft MVP, yes I'm a software architect who specializes in Microsoft .NET technologies, yes I'm a big Windows gamer, I also have an Xbox and an Xbox 360, I'm an Xbox Live subscriber, so yes, you can call me a fanboi.
But it amazes me to see that in the eyes of so many readers here, Microsoft can do no right. Whatever they do, you'll see the glass half-empty. Sure they tried gaming on Windows before and the MPC spec too, and it did not work. It does not mean the idea is bad, it means the implementation is. Look at pen computing: since the late 80's many companies (other than Microsoft) tried to push for pen computing and failed utterly, whereas Microsoft decided to take a crack at it and was very successful with the Tablet PC. Sometimes the approach has to change, not the idea. Ask any entrepreneur, they know.
I'm happy this is coming to Games for Windows. do not need a nice box and I can easily read specs, but I also recognize that common folks (not everyone is a geek like us guys) will find it useful, and the extra testing will only help quality. And so what if Microsoft uses their Windows dominance to help the Xbox? Look at Sony... 70% of the console market and they cannot innovate beyond a faster CPU and they have such an arrogant attitude. And if Linux is supposed to be an alternative to Windows, then it needs to have what it takes. 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. Linux still has to get a lot better for it to be used by average folks at home on their desktops. It is a great server OS, but it just does not cut it for desktops, and to beat Microsoft, you have to build something better, no destroy Redmond.
I'm open to a discussion here, but please ask yourself, is there anything that Microsoft could do as a business that would ever please you? Honestly?
If they want to pull this off, one thing they will absolutely have to do is make available for download some sort of non-geek friendly equivalent of 3DMark so that people who don't know the make and model of every component in their PC can just run a quick test and get a list of all the games they can currently run and possibly what they need in order to run LatestKillerGame 2008 or whatever, as well as hardware compatibility testing and a guided, centralized driver, BIOS, etc. upgrade system. So long as you have to know a dozen different numbers, from GPU to RAM speed to Processor family to Driver Version, as well as digging through archaic hardware manufacturer support sites and mysterious newsgroups to make sure that you don't end up with a dud even though your hardware exceeds the spec (Ubisoft / NVidia, I'm looking at you) because drivers are clashing and all involved parties are sitting on one hand and using the other to point a finger at somebody else instead of fixing it, PC gaming will simply never compare to console. Granted, I use a console maybe twice a month compared to gaming on PC nearly daily, but there's just no way in hell most of my console-gamer friends could hope to sift through the mess.
Unpleasantries.
http://www.gamesforwindows.com/games/CompanyOfHero es/gamesDetail.aspx
I haven't noticed that it supports a gamepad when I played it.
Let me reiterate: only games that support gamepads at all have to have 360 controller compatibility.
"Designed for Windows XP"
"Games for Windows."
Looks like they're really the same thing. And the summary is wrong. Redmond isn't forcing anything. If you want to have the GFW brand on your package you have to follow a set of rules, just like Designed For Windows 95. And I can still release a game for the PC that is whatever I want rules be damned. I won't get the GFW banner but MS can't stop me from releasing my game.
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
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.
The PC platform is not like the consoles in that it is not generally possible for the operating system vendor, Microsoft in this case, to exclude third parties from writing software for the platform. This has both positive and negative consequences as the experience of Microsoft has demonstrated (i.e. third parties producing poor quality software which gives Microsoft Windows a bad name while at the same time giving more software choices on Microsoft Windows). I suppose that you could invent some logo scheme like "playsforsure" or "designed for windows" or "games for windows" or whatever and not allow use of the logo if the vendor will not play by the rules (combined with a FUD advertising campaign warning consumers about "untrusted" non-logo software), but how does this in any way help the consumer? People buy games because they hear about them from a friend or read about them in a gaming magazine, not because the game has some "games for windows" logo. The only place that I can see this making any difference is when grandma is at Walmart trying to purchase a "game" for her grandson and chooses "math blasters 2007" because it is a "game for windows" and it is educational so it has to be good right? Wrong.
Microsoft reinvigorated this household out of the PC games for the Windows market with its WGA spyware crap.
Case in point (this experience is from 01, 2006. Maybe Microsoft has changed since then),
Atari ships DX9 with Roller Coaster Tycoon Gold. It won't work under Windows 98SE/2000 with the latest Nvidia card without DX9c. Atari states the can't provide the update, you need it from Microsoft. Microsoft refuses to let you download the DX9c update because its WGA spyware thinks my original Win2000/Win98 systems are stolen. I've tried it several different boxes with different (unregistered) store bought copies of Win2k and Win98SE. All failed the WGA spyware check.
Thats OK though, all our new kid games are for the PS2/Gamecube (and Wii soon). All the new purchased PC (PC means personal computer for the Microsoft folks) games are for Linux, I bought 8 games this year.
So much for Win32/DirectX being compatible accross different Microsoft platforms.
And Microsoft wonders why thier entertainment division revenue is flat. Its called treating your customers like shit.
Enjoy,
It's just the normal noises in here.
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.
I can't guarantee this, but I believe that I've purchased my last windows game already. It's consoles for me now, baybee.
Gettng a PC rigged out for games is kinda pricey, every year or two I gotta get a new video card or sit in the back of the bus, and they're still not as fun as most console games. PC games tend to be solitary. Even when you're playing with others, you're alone. (Yes, I'm discounting the lan party, due to the microscopic size of that subculture)
I'll just do without the games I can't play on a console.
Anyway, this coming from somebody who has already spent far far too much of my life and money on PC gaming.
Laugh while you can, monkey-boy!
You are completely wrong.
MS isnt forcing them to pay a logo fee. This is about simplifying hardware requirements. If you RTFA you will see that this is a system where your pc is given a ranking out of five stars that denotes what its capabilities are. That way when you go to the store you dont have to know anything about how much memory you have, what video card you have, the size of your L2 cache, etc.
This helps game developers a great deal because it means that people can buy games with confidence that they will work. A lot of folks have been turned off to pc games in the past because they got home after shelling out fifty bucks for a game and realized it wasnt playable with only 512 megs of memory or whatever.
Of course slashdotters didnt fail to put a negative spin on this with some lame conspiracy about how they are forcing their brand onto developers. And the conspiracy doesnt even make sense, those boxes ALREADY say that the game requires MS Windows.
Yup... it's time to go outside! :)
I enjoy games as much as the next guy. I steer clear of consoles because the game play is typically not what I want. That said... If MS develop something I don't enjoy, I won't use it. /shrug No sweat off my back. It's the ignorance of overreaction that they feed off of. They develop products to make money. It's not a sin, nor is it illegal. It's what people do to make a living. While most everyone seems to be complaining here, I doubt very seriously their actions will stop you from spending your money on their products in the future. They've spent countless man-hours and money to ensure that continues.
It's quite simple... They want the most money for their games and you want the most game for your money. They will continue to push the limits to get you to spend more, as you will continue to demand newer and better games.
It's the very reason that the $500 Radeon 9800 Pro that was remarkably desired just a couple years ago is now "obsolete?"... or how about the 3.4GHz P4? Because it's not Dual-Core it's not good enough any more? Now we'll need Dual-Core cpu's with parallel dual-core gpu's to run high-end uber games! OMG! hmph.. or not.
It's all marketing bs. Heck, the most fun I've had on the 360 is playing the classic games that can be downloaded through xbox live. /shrug A 25yo $5 game on a $500 console? That's so ironic, it's nauseating. Not to say I'm above it. I've got my custom home-built $1500+ pc, complete with high-end case and cooling system that has now become obsolete... so that I can pay $40+/mo for internet and a $15/mo subscription to blizzard so that I can a) play WoW and b) get the weather/traffic before I go to work?
I guess what I'm tryin' to say is... Quit crying. If you don't like it, don't use it.
-Quixxilver- "Where am I going?
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.