An Overview of the Games For Windows Initiative

Writing for the Escapist, author Sean Sands takes a hard look at Microsoft's Games for Windows project. The PC version of Xbox live, as well as the coherent branding they've handed out to publishers, doesn't appear to be having the kind of effect they were hoping for. Most especially, Sands points out, when players have the recently released Steam Community as an alternative: "Valve's latest community features, while they don't connect PC to console, have offered virtually every other meaningful feature in a free and functional package. Steam isn't only beating Microsoft at its own game, it's taking Microsoft's lunch money and leaving it tied to the tether-ball pole."

Comments

Hurdles

[Joe U]

It's about time Microsoft has started a "Games for Windows" push, but they have a lot to overcome.

Software stores have almost completely given up on PC games. Gamestop is a good example of this. What used to be a PC store has turned into 2 wire racks of PC games.

While Microsoft has pushed video cards into DirectX, audio fell apart. Games need both.

Microsoft hurt itself with the Xbox. It should have been simple to port games between Windows and Xbox. Microsoft should have encouraged Windows/Xbox releases, but they didn't do much.

Microsoft had a decent home brand, and abandoned it, several times. Bring back Microsoft home with a vengeance.

If they can overcome these hurdles, you'll see a comeback in PC games.

games for windows

[musikit]

i dont know how true it is but i see "games for windows" and i just assume its vista only and move onto the next game.

Re:games for windows

[orkysoft]

To me it's a warning label that it won't work with wine/Cedega...

Microsoft charges to reduce griefing

[Blakey Rat]

If there is no cost to creating a new Xbox Live account, Microsoft would have a lot more trouble getting rid of griefers and cheaters from the system. As is, if you're booted from Xbox Live, you're out $50. That's basically the reason for the charge.

Besides, the number of free downloads you get during the course of a year of Xbox Live service is worth the charge, IMO. I think I have 6 free Xbox Live Arcade games on my console, and I've owned it less than a year. If you assume each Xbox Live Arcade game is worth $10, I've come out ahead already.

Predicated on false demand

[Bieeanda]

When I buy a game, I typically check reviews and with other gamers to make sure that it's going to scratch whatever itch I've got. Proper installation, playing nice with Windows and other applications... those are things that I tend to assume are going to happen, if the game is going to survive the aggregate review process. I don't really need MS telling me that a game will work on the platform it's intended for. Go figure. Auto-detection and reconfiguration based on whether you've got a controller plugged in or not is a cute touch, but ultimately gimmicky.

I hate to trot the 'console vs. pc players' thing out, but it's there. Yes, most modern consoles can handle a keyboard and mouse, and yes, computers can handle console controllers with a modicum of issue. At the same time, using a mouse on a couch is pretty damned awkward, and keyboards tend to violate the whole compact, elegant and self-contained idea that consoles operate around too. There's merit in convergence, sure, but KB/mouse works much better on a desktop than the same combination does on a couch.

I see the Games for Windows decal and shrug. I suspect that most gamers do the same thing, assuming they haven't moved entirely to consoles. In the end, it's a pretty empty gesture... if not an outright rude one.

Did MS think of the players?

[RichPowers]

No. GFW's failure is a classic example of Redmond's hubris.

It reminds me of how Sony initially used the PS3 to push Blu-Ray adoption instead of videogames. Likewise, MS used GFW to promote Vista and DX10 instead PC games.

If GFW was about providing gamers with an enjoyable experience, there'd be a bigger focus on XP and no Live fees. Making several "flagship" GFW titles Vista-only was incredibly stupid as well.

GFW's greatest achievement is an obnoxious, totally redundant banner on new PC games. Thanks, MS, I had no clue I was purchasing a Windows game.

These other issues notwithstanding, MS also did a poor job of marketing GFW and explaining how it benefits PC gaming.

Without the baggage of promoting a new OS or some other crap, Valve can focus on what gamers care about: games!

Re:Did MS think of the players?

[Blakey Rat]

What they should focus on, IMO, is getting rid of all the bullcrap that PC games try to pull. Games for Windows games should be prohibited from:

1) Requiring Admin access to run. No I do not want to give permissions to an internet-capable app with dubious coding that goes online.
2) Requiring that games either run directly from CD, or at the very least don't install crappy fake CD drivers to impose their anti-copy code. (And in the process, either break or disable perfectly legitimate software, like virtual CD software.)
3) Requiring at least the same level of QA that goes into console games. It's acceptable for PC games to crash your computer; this should not be acceptable.

Flagship game a flop

[Yuioup]

Well... there was supposed to be this amazing game that touted Windows and XBox compatibility under the Windows Live brand. Unfortunately it didn't get good ratings.

To make things worse the project lead of the game went on air to complain about how low a review score his game got.

That game of course was Shadowrun.

What a way to launch an on-line service. Make the customers pay too much for something that should be for free ... and then bitch and moan when customers are too smart to fall for it.

Y