Microsoft Speaks on Improving Games for Windows Platform, PC Gaming Alliance
Unangst addressed complaints that Games for Windows Live doesn't offer enough incentive for those who pay for the service, noting that many gamers were confused that Games for Windows Live-branded titles required paid subscriptions for online play.
"Going out of the gate, we weren't as clear as we should have been that Games for Windows Live on the PC is free," Unangst told Eurogamer. "If you want to play cross-platform games, that's when you need a Gold subscription. Our challenge is to be clear on the message we're not charging for Games for Windows Live.
"People assumed we were trying to bring the Xbox model over to the PC, which we were not," Unangst added.
When asked for comment on the PC Gaming Alliance—a consortium of PC gaming developers in which Microsoft is a key figure—Unangst reaffirmed the company's support of the initiative as a means of addressing issues like piracy.
"We'll have a unified voice worldwide," he said. "We've just got to get the facts straight. I think it's easy for someone to make that judgment without knowing all those facts. That's our job to fix."
The developer noted that the company's upcoming challenge is clarifying the aim of the Games for Windows platform and adding more features for subscribers, paid or otherwise. "You can be confident we want to enable things like digital distribution, the ability to do downloadable content for games—that's a direction we're definitely headed in," Unangst noted.
-
SenorSpine
replyWhat a fucking abortion that whole thing is. Do everyone a favour MS and drop it, Steam's already got it covered for free.
-
This is my thought as well. Competition is fine and all, but I just think Microsoft can afford to muscle out anyone, so they will end up splintering the online distribution market, making things more complicated for us :(
Without Valve the "PC Gaming Alliance" is a bad joke, they're already doing many of the things the PCGA wants to accomplish. -
When EA bought the NFL license they stopped trying for quality because they had it on lock. Competition is good for the business, even if Games For Windows vs Steam is Puppy vs Train.
-
-
Bioshock is a GFW game, also available on Steam, and is also on the 360.
-
-
Sweet I guess? They're also available at Wal-Mart.
Digital distribution isn't the only thing Steam offers.
-
-
-
-
I agree competition is a good thing, except when Microsoft is involved. They have a tendency to come in and muscle people out and then stagnate. The last thing I want to see is Games for Windows built into the next OS, stealing momentum from Steam and providing nothing new.
-
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
Personally, I would rather use an improved version of Live than Steam.
-
-
If I had a 360, I would already be paying for it, and since I don't, I wouldn't pay just for the privelege of purchasing games. I would be willing to wait to purchase though.
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
-
-
-
That's the last thing I'd care about - achievement points are totally a waste of time/retarded. Tell you what, go play 10 hours of Halo 3 and I'll personally give you 1,000,000 "Wytefang Points". Enjoy! They do about the same thing for you as Xbox Live Achievement points. What's even more frightening is that I've heard the argument bandied about that "well durrrr...achievement points encourage people to play their games more" - newsflash gamers, if you need some other incentive OTHER than the game being fun, then it's time to find a better or newer game.
But I agree with the general consensus here that Steam is more compelling. :) MS needs to make GFW Live free, no matter what version. That'd be a good start.
-
-
