On Games for Windows

Games for Windows Vista how the new brand & OS will change PC gaming on Joystiq offers an updated preview of the new Games for Windows initiative, attempting, with limited success, to sort out what GFW represents besides a marketing slogan. Based on a tour of the program by Marketing Director Kevin Unangst and PR Manager Michael Wolf, they describe interoperability with Xbox 360 games via "Live Anywhere," how PCs will get numerical ratings to gauge how well they can play games, and what qualifies a game for the GFW logo. The conclusion they draw, however, is that it is difficult to draw conclusions about all this:
It's a risk. The Games for Windows strategy is on the verge of being schizophrenic. Can the cumbersome PC gaming experience really be simplified down to a console scheme? There are just too many freedoms and variations that exist in the PC universe to accurately interpret the PC as "the console that everybody already owns." It's not that simple. So is GFW a trick? Is Microsoft trying to lure back some of the consumers that were lost when Xbox was launched (an initiative that cannibalized PC gaming sales by design)?

The answer, like the Games For Windows vision, is not so clear. But there is most certainly the opportunity for Microsoft to create something very special. A cross-platform community where you and I can jump from Xbox to PC to our cell phones seamlessly. Anywhere.
View : : :
25.
 
Re: As a game developer
Dec 19, 2006, 17:25
25.
Re: As a game developer Dec 19, 2006, 17:25
Dec 19, 2006, 17:25
 
To get GFW certification you have to comply with MS's draconian specs

Oh god no! You mean they might hold you to the same standards you have to comply with when creating a console game?

The very thing that forces console games to present and interact with platform features in a consistent manner, so that a Wii game always works like a Wii game and an Xbox game always works like an Xbox game?

Do you mean to tell me that one day I might not be free to put whatever pile of shit I feel like in a box labelled "PC Version" because I'll actually have to get someone's approval?

Those bastards! Those rotten bastards! How dare they adopt a model that requires a whole new level of quality control for the games you buy.

Seriously dude, how can you think this is a bad idea? You know what kind of hoops you have to go through to get a game approved for a console? Each one has its own Giant Book of Shit You Have to Do. And while it is a sizeable pain in the ass, in the long run it makes for better (read: more reliable) games than the average PC title.

Does it still sound like a bad idea? If you said "yes" then don't ever open your damn mouth about any PC game bug you ever encounter, ever.

This comment was edited on Dec 19, 17:26.
Date
Subject
Author
1.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
4.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
2.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
3.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
18.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
20.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
23.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
24.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
 25.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
     Re: As a game developer
26.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
27.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
28.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
29.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
30.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
        couldn`t agree more
31.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
         Re: couldn`t agree more
32.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
          Re: couldn`t agree more
33.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
           Re: couldn`t agree more
34.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
            Re: couldn`t agree more
36.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
             Re: couldn`t agree more
37.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
             Re: couldn`t agree more
39.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
              Re: couldn`t agree more
48.
Dec 20, 2006Dec 20 2006
              Re: couldn`t agree more
50.
Dec 20, 2006Dec 20 2006
               Re: couldn`t agree more
51.
Dec 20, 2006Dec 20 2006
                Re: couldn`t agree more
52.
Dec 20, 2006Dec 20 2006
                Re: couldn`t agree more
53.
Dec 20, 2006Dec 20 2006
                 Re: couldn`t agree more
57.
Dec 20, 2006Dec 20 2006
56.
Dec 20, 2006Dec 20 2006
38.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
5.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
7.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
55.
Dec 20, 2006Dec 20 2006
6.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
8.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
10.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
11.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
54.
Dec 20, 2006Dec 20 2006
9.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
12.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
13.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
14.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
15.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
16.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
17.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
35.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
19.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
21.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
22.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
40.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
41.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
42.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
43.
Dec 19, 2006Dec 19 2006
44.
Dec 20, 2006Dec 20 2006
45.
Dec 20, 2006Dec 20 2006
46.
Dec 20, 2006Dec 20 2006
47.
Dec 20, 2006Dec 20 2006
49.
Dec 20, 2006Dec 20 2006