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."
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.
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.
"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.
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
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.
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.
Windows made my life much easier in terms of game playing. Patching games is a whole different problem and comes down to how developers handle patches. Some of them have a clue and get it right most of the time, but some of them are STILL utterly clueless. Some of them expect you to download a 500mb patch for a minor version update. Some of them expect you to pick between 8 different updates from various previous versions for a 2mb patch. Augh!