Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
PC Games (Games)

Live For Windows Coming in May 104

Posted by Zonk from the matchmaking-for-all-and-for-all-a-good-night dept.
Several outlets are carrying the news that Live for Windows is coming in May to a PC near you. The announcement carried confirmation of a similar pricetag for Xbox Live, as well as details on some new titles. Halo 2 will be releasing right around the launch of the service (slated to go up May 8th), and Shadowrun will follow quickly sometime in June. Gamasutra has an interview with Xbox Live general manager JJ Richards on the subject, and 1up offers a bit of commentary with the news. Though when asked about it last week Microsoft reps seemed extremely confident, it still remains to be seen whether PC gamers will pay for what they've always gotten for free.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Live For Windows Coming in May More

Live For Windows Coming in May

Comments Filter:

  • Aww :( (Score:4, Funny)

    by voice_of_all_reason ( 926702 ) on Wednesday March 14, 2007 @11:26AM (#18348853)
    I thought this said "Live without windows for a day"

    I got all excited. Maybe it was some kind of contest...

    • Re: (Score:1, Interesting)

      by __aaclcg7560 ( 824291 )
      No, it's not a contest. It's lining up to get your Borg implant. The catch is you need a valid credit card and your first born if you want the premium package.

  • Croos-platform matchmaking? (Score:4, Funny)

    by sugarman ( 33437 ) on Wednesday March 14, 2007 @11:31AM (#18348929)
    Could be cool if they allow PC v. Windows matchmaking. Watching how the console owners fare compare to their PC brethern would be quite interesting.

    • Re:Croos-platform matchmaking? (Score:4, Funny)

      by Wilson_6500 ( 896824 ) on Wednesday March 14, 2007 @11:40AM (#18349081)
      PC v. Windows matchmaking

      Your idealism is showing.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Rob T Firefly ( 844560 )
      Final Fantasy XI has had console and PC players together for years. I don't play it myself, but from what I've heard the experience is pretty much the same so long as you get a USB keyboard for your console.
      • FFXI is not an FPS.
        • Why does that matter? I did not see anything where it states that LIVE will be just for First Person Shooters.
          • Control of an FPS with mouse and keyboard is generally a bit easier and exact than using a console controller. The fear is that the PC players will have an advantage because of better controls. In FFXI, this is not an issue.
      • Logitech actually made a "netplay" controller specifically for final fantasy somethingorother on the PS2. It's got a PS2 controller with a detachable mini-size USB keyboard in the middle. I got one for $10 at Halted Specialties Corp, and I don't use the controller but the keyboard is way sexy. You could use one of those with a PS2 to Xbox controller adapter...
    • I'll assume that you meant PC vs. console. :) There are several games where friends and relatives of mine have a mixture of PC and console versions and would love to hook up together.

      I know that EA is at least considering the idea. I subscribe to several, on-line surveys. Last year I got one that was specific to EA asking me a bunch of questions regarding my feelings about connectivity between consoles and PCs -- what kinds of games would I play in such an environment, how often would I play, the oblig
      • That is because in any fast action game the pc players tend to utterly decimate the console players, refer to the Quake3 debacle between PC and the Dreamcast; mildly skilled Q3 PC players near never lost to highly skilled Q3 DC players.

        Until a mouse of some form becomes standard on Consoles, this will always remain the case, and as such the console players get frustrated and may cancel accounts or some other annoyance to the companies...
        • I thought that Xbox 360 could use a USB keyboard and mouse. Yes? No? Maybe? (No, I don't own one. Can you tell?)
          • You are correct, it can. So long as it's USB, you're away. I don't recall, but I believe the PS2 can as well.
        • Until a mouse of some form becomes standard on Consoles, this will always remain the case, and as such the console players get frustrated and may cancel accounts or some other annoyance to the companies...

          The Dreamcast had a standard keyboard and mouse, and Quake 3 supported it fully, so I'm not sure what you're getting at here.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by MeanMF ( 631837 )
      They are definitely doing cross-platform matchmaking. FASA and Microsoft announced a while back that Shadowrun [xbox.com] will have this feature.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by dabraun ( 626287 )
      I'll assume for a second you meant "console vs. windows" or "pc vs. console" - and yes, in fact, that feature was specifically demonstrated for ShadowRun at CES in January.
  • Gold accounts will cost US$ 49.95 per year, and will add to the above the facility to invite friends into your multiplayer games, unlock multiplayer achievements, find gamers of equivalent skill using Microsoft's "TrueSkill" technology, and play against people on either platform in supported games.

    So $50 a year to invite my friends to a game I'm playing, receive e-peen achievements, and play an FPS game against someone holding a controller? Sounds like a great deal...

    • Sounds like it would be way to easy to beat someone playing an FPS with a gamepad if you had a mouse and keyboard. There's just no comparison. I don't know why they don't have games on Consoles you can actually play with a keyboard at mouse (or trackball). It would give them a lot of extra sales I think.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Yvan256 ( 722131 )

        I don't know why they don't have games on Consoles you can actually play with a keyboard at mouse (or trackball).
        Especially with the new consoles having USB ports on them. That's one reason I don't play FPS games on consoles.

        Except on the Wii. With the wiimote and nunchuck, it feels more natural than a keyboard and mouse.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Sciros ( 986030 )
        If it's a game designed with the pacing and "aim adjustment" that console FPS's have, the guy with the controller is at no disadvantage. IGN found this out by using the 360 USB controller in Halo 1 and promptly owning the mouse-and-keyboard users (of comparable skill level, of course).

        UT and other mouse-and-keyboard-oriented games are designed differently because of the interface they support. If a game was meant to support both, then neither should be at any real disadvantage. Halo games I reckon would act
      • I'm fairly certain that Quake 3 and UT on the Dreamcast were playable with a mouse and keyboard.

        On that note, I find the mouse/keyboard combo very uncomfortable but nonetheless better for games that requires large directional changes and 360 degree response (like Quake 3), but I much prefer a gamepad for precision shooting (ghost recon, rainbow 6 types of games). If I precise shoot for a while with a mouse, my whole arm cramps up, similar to what happens if I'm doing pixel-editing/tweaking in photoshop for
      • Comment removed based on user account deletion

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by ivan256 ( 17499 )
        It wouldn't be as easy as you think. Practically all FPSs on consoles "help" the player aim in one way or another to make up for the fact that the accuracy, precision, and even the consistency from controller to controller are ridiculously low. If the mouse and keyboard version of the game don't have the same aids, you may actually be at a disadvantage even though the controller is provably less precise.

  • PB (Score:3, Interesting)

    by mastershake_phd ( 1050150 ) on Wednesday March 14, 2007 @11:35AM (#18349007) Homepage
    Does it have Punkbuster or something similar?

  • The really hilarious thing is cross platform play (Score:5, Insightful)

    by 2008 ( 900939 ) on Wednesday March 14, 2007 @11:40AM (#18349091) Journal
    Windows Live lets you play against Xbox 360 Live subscribers.
    However, Windows Live is Windows Vista only, so you can't play against people using Windows XP. Well done, what an impressive cross platform system!

    I know 10 or so people who I've occasionally played online with on Windows using XP/2k, and don't know a single Live subscriber. I don't have much incentive to get Windows Live, do I? YMMV, of course.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by ozphx ( 1061292 )
      I know 10 or so people who I've occasionally played online with on Windows using XP/2k, and don't know a single Live subscriber. I don't have much incentive to get Windows Live, do I? YMMV, of course.

      This may be due to the fact that you play on Windows, and that Live, as in TFA, not being released until May. YMMV, of course.

  • Cheating is why I use Consoles On-Line (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I sure hope you can choose to NOT play with PC users. The WHOLE reason I don't play on-line with my PC anymore is half the people used super bots and/or tricked out keyboard/mice. Consoles level the playing field and make it about skill again. Just my 2 cents.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by stratjakt ( 596332 )
      I dunno if you were into Halo 2, but the online experience quickly degraded into modem glitchers and snipers using a hacked mouse keyboard. Or people shutting off their madden games jsut before a loss so it wont affect their rank. On a "good day" you have a 12 year old calling you a faggot. Fuck online gaming.
      • I'm 13, douche. :(

      • Re:Cheating is why I use Consoles On-Line (Score:4, Interesting)

        by drinkypoo ( 153816 ) <drink@hyperlogos.org> on Wednesday March 14, 2007 @01:30PM (#18351121) Homepage Journal

        Or people shutting off their madden games jsut before a loss so it wont affect their rank.

        The fact that the game doesn't penalize them for this is a failure of the game, not just the gamer. Why do people keep paying for this shit?

        • What? The problem is the fault of the gamer being an asshole. Now, the game might be edited to compensate for that, by making drops losses- but that won't stop the gamer being an asshole.

          People are assholes... you can try to work around it, but the problem is that the universe keeps coming up with a better asshole.
        • It's a "benefit of the doubt" thing. Did they pull the cord specifically to avoid a loss, or did they genuinely have a network problem or power outage causing them to lose the connection? Most games, assuming the player is honest, treat the disconnect as the latter.

          It's pretty hard to create a software solution to "people are jerks" though. I prefer games giving the benefit of the doubt, but it's a huge pain for honest players sometimes.

          • It's a "benefit of the doubt" thing. Did they pull the cord specifically to avoid a loss, or did they genuinely have a network problem or power outage causing them to lose the connection? Most games, assuming the player is honest, treat the disconnect as the latter.

            But the problem is that the system is fair only to the disconnected player. What about the undisconnected player? Even if you agree that there should be no punishment for dropping near the end of a game, a concept with which I don't necessarily

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by 7Prime ( 871679 )
        That's why my "multiplayer gaming" consists of playing a single-player game, and then talking about it with friends later... this even involves REAL HUMAN CONTACT!
    • I seriously don't know what the hell are you talking about here: personally, I haven't seen a single person who uses hacks/bots/or whatever in the last, maybe, 4 years?
      Noone wants to risk getting a VAC ban, a CD-key ban, or a statwipe nowadays for a couple of extra frags, believe me.
  • so now we have to pay m$ $50 a year unlock all things in there new games. To get stuff that in the past you just need to buy the game to get.
    M$ better not do the same thing to a MMORPG game I don't thing that people will want to pay for vista + $60 for the game + $15 a month + $50 a year + pay for points to get some in game content.
  • we are supposed to pay even more for Live?

    Nuh uh.

    Too much fluff, not enough there.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by HappySqurriel ( 1010623 )
      I was wondering whether an XBox Live Account was the same as a Windows Live Account (that is buying one gives you access to the other) ...

      Personally, I think it would be cool to be able to have 1 identity on an Console and PC but I have no desire to spend $100+ to have 2 seperate identities.

  • And I thought Valve launched it two years ago.

  • Excuse for Vista (Score:2, Insightful)

    by MobyDisk ( 75490 )
    Microsoft is coming out with all kinds of excuses for force people to buy Vista. They are trying to make anything new they create artificially incompatible with XP. Xbox Live, DirectX 10, HDCP... There is no technical reason why these things can't work on XP, they just don't. It is very frustrating. Frankly, it is what makes the Mac look attractive. Apple goes out of their way to ensure compatibility. Microsoft goes out of their way to ensure INcompatibility. I wonder how long before somebody makes

    • Re:Excuse for Vista (Score:5, Insightful)

      by drinkypoo ( 153816 ) <drink@hyperlogos.org> on Wednesday March 14, 2007 @01:28PM (#18351087) Homepage Journal

      Apple goes out of their way to ensure compatibility. Microsoft goes out of their way to ensure INcompatibility.

      What?

      Apple locks their OS to their hardware. That is the antithesis of ensuring compatibility.

      I'm not trying to defend Microsoft's actions regarding Vista. Vista is crap and forcing people to go to Vista is crappier. But to hold up Apple as a paragon of compatibility is simply wrong.

      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by keytoe ( 91531 )

        You're being disingenuous with your objection. The GP poster was talking about backwards compatibility with respect to the OS, not with hardware. The point stands that it is still possible to this day to run software written in 1984 for Mac OS 6.x on a 68k processor. That's two processor architectures and a complete OS rewrite. I'd call that pretty good backwards compatibility. The only times an application requires a certain version of the OS is when it is actually using a feature that wasn't present in a

        • You're being disingenuous with your objection. The GP poster was talking about backwards compatibility with respect to the OS, not with hardware. The point stands that it is still possible to this day to run software written in 1984 for Mac OS 6.x on a 68k processor. That's two processor architectures and a complete OS rewrite. I'd call that pretty good backwards compatibility. The only times an application requires a certain version of the OS is when it is actually using a feature that wasn't present in a

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by keytoe ( 91531 )

            Wait a second. You want their new software with new enhancements to run on an older system that didn't have any of them? That isn't backwords compatibility, that would be forwards capacity for XP. MS can run programs that were written as far back as the DOS age. That's backwords compatability.

            Can programs written for MAC OSX be run from a computer running Mac 9? That's what we're talking about.

            See, this is why I don't ever post on Slashdot any more. My intent was to post a relatively off topic rebutta

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by trdrstv ( 986999 )
              God only knows why you felt the need to reply to my comment by effectively saying the same thing I did but about DOS instead of Mac OS 6.

              That was just re-iterating what backwords compatibility was in reference to the conversation. People are mixing incompatibility with backworks compatibility when they complain that software written for vista won't work on XP, yet they would certainly understand why say a PS2 disk won't work in a PS1...

              Why I posted effectively boils down I'm waiting for something to f

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by MobyDisk ( 75490 )

        Apple locks their OS to their hardware. That is the antithesis of ensuring compatibility.

        What?

        Tying the OS to the hardware has nothing to do with backward compatibility. Apple's current software runs on G4 macs, G5 macs, and Intel Macs. I know of know Apple software that has a line of code that says:

        if OS < 10.4 then MessageBox("You must have OS 10.4 or higher, even though there are no features of OS 10.4 that this application needs")

        which is exactly what Microsoft is doing with Vista.

        • Tying the OS to the hardware has nothing to do with backward compatibility. Apple's current software runs on G4 macs, G5 macs, and Intel Macs. I know of know Apple software that has a line of code that says:

          What about Xcode? Newer versions of Xcode don't just support features of newer versions of OSX, they provide compiler upgrades and bugfixes. Yet you can't run the latest Xcode on 10.3. The same is true of just about every piece of software that Apple gives away; the latest versions only run on the lates

          • Re: (Score:1)

            by MobyDisk ( 75490 )
            I can't speak for xcode. I don't know. Maybe Apple has done the same thing in that case.

            That still has nothing to do with hardware compatibility, which is a completely different topic.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Shippy ( 123643 )
      There is no technical reason why these things can't work on XP, they just don't.

      Prove it, then. How do you know it doesn't need APIs that are only available in Vista?

      Apple goes out of their way to ensure compatibility.

      I don't think I'd go that far. Try to run MacOS on non-apple hardware or take your iTunes-purchased music elsewhere.

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by Kalriath ( 849904 )
        It does need APIs only available in Vista. DirectX 10. DirectX 10 is virtually a rewrite of DirectX according to the material I've read. DirectPlay is replaced with Live, DirectSound is replaced with XACT (I think that's it), and so on. And DirectX requires the new Vista driver model, which is so insanely different from WDDM that virtually no drivers work on it at this time.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Joe The Dragon ( 967727 )
      Apple goes out of their way to ensure compatibility my a** look at how then dropped class form lintel systems and they don not want to help Sheep Shaver run os 9.2.2 as it only works up to 9.04 and that is only way to Classic on Intel Macs.
      http://gwenole.beauchesne.info/en/projects/sheepsh aver [beauchesne.info]
      http://sheepshaver.cebix.net/ [cebix.net]

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by MobyDisk ( 75490 )
        That is completely different and has nothing to do with what I'm talking about.

        Apple's inability to support a 3rd-party product on a new operating system is totally different from Microsoft releasing a first-party product and crippling it to not work on XP.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by I'm Don Giovanni ( 598558 )

      Microsoft is coming out with all kinds of excuses for force people to buy Vista. They are trying to make anything new they create artificially incompatible with XP.

      Is that why Office 2007, PowerShell, Orcas, .NET 3.0, etc all work on XP?

      The double-standards around here are tiring. Apple could've release Spotlight for OSX 10.3. There's "no technical reason" preventing that. Yet they didn't, and Spotlight was heralded as *the* reason to pay to upgrade to 10.4. Yet I heard no talk of Apple "forcing" upgrad

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by MobyDisk ( 75490 )

        Is that why Office 2007, PowerShell, Orcas, .NET 3.0, etc all work on XP?

        Because those are examples of applications that either came out before Vista, or appliccations that were not crippled. Which is why they have nothing to do with my point.

        My point is that now that Vista has come-out, Microsoft is intentionally crippling things so that they don't work on XP. This is not a double-standard. Name one example of Apple selling a product where they made it artificially not work on a previous version of the system to force people to upgrade. Splotlight is not an example of that

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by ozphx ( 1061292 )
        They make DirectX 10 specific to Vista, and are bashed for not backporting it to XP.

        Which in itself is ridiculous. DirectX 10 relies on a variety of new features in Vistas new driver model, such as GPU context switching.

        It would be a massive pain in the arse to backport it to XP. I'm not saying its technically impossible - but it's definitely not an economic decision. Its on par with making everything else in Vista free...

        Vista has some new things under the hood that won't be backported. They're the upgrade
    • I would hardly call offering more features for certain video games "forcing" people into doing anything.

      In fact, if it involves video games, there's no "forcing" involved. People choose to play video games. It's not like you need Vista to (say) order life-saving medicines or something.
  • ...that pc gamers around the world will ban together and tell Microsoft that no, we will not pay for what we used to get for free. But I have huge doubts this will happen, as a high enough precentage of MS's audience isn't even spending their own money, but spending their parent's money...Even if they only have 25% of the market pick up the service, then it will have paid for itself and set a business model for others. *sigh*

  • Xbox Live has features you don't get for free now (Score:4, Informative)

    by Blakey Rat ( 99501 ) on Wednesday March 14, 2007 @01:13PM (#18350795)
    For instance, voice across the entire system (not just in-game chat) without having to worry whether the person is using TeamSpeak, Ventrillo, or Skype.

    A single username across the entire system, meaning you can be sure the "HappyGodzilla" you play in Halo 3 is the same "HappyGodzilla" you got teamed up with in Shadowrun. This also greatly assists with getting rid of griefers and jerks.

    I'm not necessarily saying it's worth $50, but to say that Xbox Live offers nothing is disingenuous if not outright wrong.

    • For instance, voice across the entire system (not just in-game chat) without having to worry whether the person is using TeamSpeak, Ventrillo, or Skype.

      Would be more like:

      For instance, voice across the entire system (not just in-game chat) without having to worry whether the person is using TeamSpeak, Ventrillo, Skype or Live.

      Microsoft doesn't have a monopoly like on their console. They may be offering something slightly better but with such a price and already developed and estabilished alternative s

    • For instance, voice across the entire system (not just in-game chat) without having to worry whether the person is using TeamSpeak, Ventrillo, or Skype.

      Nope, but for $50 we can worry about if they are using TeamSpeak, Ventrillo, Skype or Live.
      • I can pay $50 a year and get this "no worry" situation you talk about, OR, I can download two free programs for games that don't have voice chat built in.

        And who cares if the username is consistent across games? The only way it matters is if you're trying to keep your friends together and in that case you'll know their "new" username anyway.

        While Live is novel for consoles (feature previously only heard of in PC games), WE ALREADY HAVE IT ON THE PC. The fact of the matter is that the ONLY t

    • having to worry whether the person is using TeamSpeak, Ventrillo, or Skype.


      That's actually a feature in my book.... Well not the "worrying" part. I don't worry about it.

      I just don't talk to anybody through voice chat unless we're logged into the same private server. I don't want to talk to any random squeaker who doesn't know what 'noob' means, but uses the term ever 20 seconds because they're fairly sure it's derogatory.

    • Re: (Score:1, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Xfire is free. It automatically downloads updates/patches for your games. It automatically tells you when your friends are online, what server they're on, what teamspeak server they're on. It lets you automatically join your friend's gameserver. It lets you automatically join your friend's teamspeak server. It lets you voice chat or text chat with your friends.
      I'm just saying. I will not be spending $50 to get what I already get for free. BTW, some games (Battlefield2, etc) have very good voice chat built i

  • Re: (Score:1, Redundant)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 )
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • I have been waiting for this day for many, many years. Now I can shove a virtual rocket down the throats of everyone who's ever claimed that in an FPS game, they could beat a keyboard & mouse player with a joystick. That might be worth the price of admission right there.

  • So if a game is available for both Windows and Linux and the Windows version support Windows Live would linux and windows folks still be able to play together? I don't mean Windows Live support for Linux but will they just be able to play on the same servers together?

    On another note, I wish different consoles could play together when the same game is released for them.

  • ...is to finally put to rest the raging "is a keyboard and mouse better than a gamepad" FPS flame wars.

    If Halo2 PC is compatible with the Xbox/Xbox360 version, you're going to see a lot of very pissed off Xbox/360 players getting pounded into the ground by a 15 year old with a mouse. :)
  • Oh wait, that's Windows Live OneCare [slashdot.org]. Seriously, though, if they call all their products "Live", who's going to be able to tell what's what?

Slashdot Top Deals

The best things in life go on sale sooner or later.

Close