GTA IV On PC Goes Exclusive With 'Games For Windows Live' 132
Erik J writes "Microsoft has announced that the PC version of Rockstar's Grand Theft Auto IV will exclusively use Games for Windows Live for its multiplayer mode when it hits shelves November 18th. Rockstar founder Sam Houser explained the decision: 'As we work toward the release of the PC version, Games for Windows Live affords us the opportunity to seamlessly translate the multiplayer console experience for PC gamers, the service is a natural fit for the platform and we strongly believe it will help in building a strong online community around GTA IV PC.'"
Wired is running a story suggesting that this release could save the rather unpopular Microsoft PC gaming platform.
Motherfuckers. (Score:5, Insightful)
Wired is running a story suggesting that this release could save the rather unpopular Microsoft PC gaming platform.
Motherfuckers.
Re:Motherfuckers. (Score:5, Insightful)
I agree with parent. This just forces games to be even more locked on a platform than before.
This is not about saving or helping the pc market. It's about selling windows.
Re:Motherfuckers. (Score:4, Insightful)
This is not about saving or helping the pc market. It's about selling windows.
And poorly.
GFWL was originally Vista-only. The multiplayer support also used to have a yearly fee (aside from the gimped Silver plan), while disallowing developers to have any game features they considered competitive to GFWL's (eg. voice communication and achievements).
So they release a multiplayer-only game ported from a console version (Shadowrun) using GFWL Vista-only, pay-to-play multiplayer. Surprise, surprise, it doesn't sell.
They've back-pedalled somewhat now, making GFWL free and supporting XP, but they seriously shot themselves in the foot, and will have a long way to go before they reverse the damage done to the GFWL name in the minds of gamers.
Re: (Score:2)
Man 2 supportive posts and -1 troll :(
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Is it completely free now? I was avoiding Universe At War because it has archievements that grant advantages in multiplayer mode so goldmembers could get stat boosts and such which normal players had no access to. If that's no longer pay-only I might pick the game up for a tenner from the bargain bin.
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah, it is free now. Check the forums though, there might not be anyone playing Universe At War online anymore so long after release. (Particularly given the GFWL mess).
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Why would I want some shitty in-house voice comm setup / achievements / server browser / login system?
Take a look at how well Steam works when you force people to use the "platform" services.
There is nothing worse than using some crappy server browser designed for a console without being able to do things like "click column headings to sort". Just like every damn EA driving game.
In fact I've always said that the best menu system for a game was a standard damn Windows Forms app with standard bloody common co
Re: (Score:1)
Bad example, Shadowrun was crap regardless of how they released it.
Re: (Score:2)
Ok, so two Slashdotters won't buy it because they hate Microsoft. Then again, if they already hate Microsoft, they already don't have an Xbox or a Windows computer to run it on anyway, right?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:BSOD (Score:5, Funny)
No, BSoD is a free, bundled feature of Windows.
Re: (Score:1)
Apparently you haven't seen the press releases for Windows 7.
Re: (Score:2)
No, I must have missed that. Damn. It goes a long way to explaining all the DRM stuff, though. Piracy of BSoD could be a serious problem in Redmond's view, considering how integral fatal errors are to the whole Windows experience.
It really says: (Score:4, Insightful)
The multiplayer console experience (Score:2)
"Games for Windows Live affords us the opportunity to seamlessly translate the multiplayer console experience for PC gamers"
Exactly how seamlessly? As I understand it, "the multiplayer console experience" involves inviting a couple friends over to my house and playing Smash Bros. together on my 32" Vizio monitor. Does Games for Windows certification guarantee that PC games will let me and a friend play with one PC, one monitor, and two gamepads? Or will players still have to buy a separate PC per person?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
If the game supports xinput and you have two xbox controllers plugged in then it shouldn't be a problem.
Re: (Score:2)
If the game supports xinput and you have two xbox controllers plugged in then it shouldn't be a problem.
Unless the game supports DirectInput or XInput but refuses to read more than one controller per PC.
Re: (Score:2)
The technology is in place, DirectX definitely supports it no problem, the crapshoot is whether the game developer decided to add it in.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually i'd guess its not money just effort. I dont know much about multiplayer game platforms but id guess microsoft are offering a well designed wasy to use interface to sort out all the multiplayer stuff that will be alot easier than developing thier own for scratch. Unfortunately for those of us not on windows, this is the same trick they used to get directx everywhere and few games will turn their noeses up at an easy to implement multiplayer system for xbox-live AND windows-live. The real kicker is t
Re: (Score:1)
Popular, unpopular (Score:2)
Re:Popular, unpopular (Score:4, Insightful)
That's the point. It's not Games for Windows Live that sells GTA, it's GTA that sells Games for Windows Live.
On the plus side, I'm glad I didn't wait for GTA IV to be released before buying the rest of the series on Steam.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Not being available on Steam reduces the chance that I will buy a PC game by about 90% these days. It is just so handy to have all my games in the same location, automatic patching, no need to worry about CD keys etc.
If GTA IV doesn't come on Steam I won't be buying it. That said I would take this announcement with a very large game of salt. Considering GTA IV was announced as being exclusive to pretty much every platform in existance before its release it is more likely that they have some little piddling
Games for Windows - LIVE is free as it should of b (Score:1, Informative)
Games for Windows - LIVE is free as it should of been at first and also run on XP.
If this was payed for LIVE + vista only then that would of KILLED the game.
Re: (Score:2)
where does it say that?
GFW - good GFW LIVE - bad (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
GFW Live is free. Website quote time:
Introducing Games for Windows LIVE, the free gaming service built for Windows that makes great Windows games even better. With Games for Windows LIVE, you get an online identity called a gamertag and a friends list that works across multiple games, the XBOX 360, and even the Zune music service. You can easily find and communicate with your friends online with text and voice chat. Earn achievements and Gamerscore that lets you track and compare your accomplishments.
Play multiplayer games with your friends, or play against new opponents online using our exclusive TrueSkill matchmaking system with other Windows® players or with or against XBOX 360 players (in supported games.)
All of this is possible today and at no charge.
Re: (Score:1)
GFW Live is free. Website quote time:
He already said that at the end of his comment:
I think they dropped the subscriptions recently, but it still has the stigma of being Xbox LIVE, for Windows.
Re: (Score:2)
Let's pretend that I was confirming it for him.
Re: (Score:2)
Please tell me this forces them to use some sort of standard server browser like Steam does. Nothing shits me more than some horrible fucking server browser without the standard gridview control. Yes you EA fucks, I'm looking at you.
Re: (Score:2)
I LOATHE this "all games save in the same place" stuff. When I set my system up I had a small system partition and a main partition so I could reinstall Windows without wiping everything. Now with this I have to remember to back stuff up. Not only that, developers aren't using common sense. Right now I have games:
That set up their own directory in the Documents and Settings directory.
That save their games in a directory named after the game in the My Documents directory.
That save their games in a directory
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Well, games that are writing to your user folder are doing the "correct" thing, according to Microsoft.
http://ati.amd.com/developer/SwedenTechDay/02_Preparing_Games_for_Windows_Vista.pdf [amd.com]
It's not just about sharing - it's about security practices as well. If you are not running with Administrator privileges (which normal users are *supposed* to be running at), then these user directories are the only legitimate places an application can freely write to. In Vista, writing to the program files directory will
Re: (Score:2)
Uhm, you are aware that "Documents and settings" corresponds to /home/ on Unix systems? If you are running a two-partition setup where you wish to have a separate "System partition", you are SUPPOSED to set up your home dirs on the other partition. Just configure your system to store profiles on your "D:". Or use symlinks (junctions in NTFS parlance).
How to move My Documents (Score:2)
That save their games in a directory named after the game in the My Documents directory.
Another thing that the other replies didn't point out: Google lists a bunch of guides on how to move My Documents [google.com].
Re: (Score:2)
That set up their own directory in the Documents and Settings directory.
That save their games in a directory named after the game in the My Documents directory.
That save their games in a directory names after the game in the My Games directory.
All of those are "correct" (meaning, they follow Microsoft's recommendation, and they work in XP and Vista even for users with no admin privileges.)
It's a mess. Not only that more and more games are eating up my system partition space and in most cases can't be convin
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, the entire conceit is utterly unnecessary unless the two partitions are on two separate drives, anyway. XP and Vista are perfectly capable of "repair" installs.
So I still stand by "you're doing it wrong." Or at least "you're so paranoid you're doing stuff that's a waste of time."
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
look at all the servers letting cracked copies of call of duty4 play
. don't you think this is them just trying to stop that? Ok people will still play copies offline but the online co-op play is what they are pushing.
Wait, what? (Score:4, Insightful)
Rockstar founder Sam Houser explained the decision: 'They paid us. Cash. A big green pile of the stuff. We had our own code for it, but nobody was paying us to use it. They said we have to spew some bullshit about how great it is without making it sound like it's about the money. Whatever. I can do that.'
There. Fixed that for him.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, there is precedent. [penny-arcade.com]
Path of least resistance (Score:5, Informative)
GTA IV already used XBox Live on the 360. Given that the PC port was most likely from the 360 codebase, it would have taken more effort to not use GFWL than to use it. Of course the PR spin won't mention this.
Re: (Score:2)
Yep. Microsoft did a great job with their API on the 360, and it makes using Live for a PC port a no-brainer from the development side. I just wish it was anywhere even near the level of completeness that Steam is now.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
They could open source the code but not open source the graphics. That's what Id does. That way you still have to buy the game for the graphics.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes I think I saw Id recently open sourcing Hexen 2 or something.
Id does not "open source the code" unless you are stretching "open sourcing the code when its ten bloody years old and throwaway value anyway".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
True. Id makes a significant amount of money from licensing the engine.
I think it does make more sense if you wait 5 years or so though, as with Quake 3. By that time you aren't really giving your competitors an advantage, since the engine technology would be 5 years old.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah 5ish years on a 3d engine is a more sane period than 20-year patents or 4950 year copyrights (or whatever they are up to now).
Its good to see they "care", or at least aren't so up themselves looking for "IP" to protect that they recognise the lack of value a 5 year old codebase has in that industry.
As another poster said (Score:2)
They only do this with game engines from last generation whos value has been ammortized to pretty much zero. Those engines have all been copied by other companies and don't offer Id Software a competitive edge to keep around.
GTA IV is a modern game engine that probably is still worth something all on its own. Even if they couldn't "license" the engine to other game companies (or if I was boss, simulator companies), the IP has value in that it would take a long time for the competition to "borrow" all the
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately, good 3D engines are still a valuable commodity in itself that other companies will license for real cash. Don't expect to see it until it looks dated.
Re: (Score:2)
They could put the engine under the GPL or similar? That way they gets lots of fan mods, but companies would still have to pay to use the engine for a proprietary game.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They probably had a brain, unlike you.
And they wonder why.. (Score:1)
PC gaming (is supposedly) going down hill.
I'm rather disappointed with the lack of a steam release. I really like the steam platform. Maybe in a year or so...
I've pre-ordered every GTA for PC since I played GTA2 years ago. I even purchased them again over steam (So much easier then disc hunting) This one will be a wait and see approach. If I consider the hoops unreasonable (I have no interest in running two content management platforms for games thank-you-very-much) I'll just do what I did for spore.
Re: (Score:2)
This is my corner, whore. (Score:2, Funny)
Microsoft: Exclusively beating up hookers to sell Windows since 2008.
What about Steam? (Score:2)
Does anyone know if this excludes the possibility of GTA IV being released on Steam? Can we expect a Steam release?
Re: (Score:2)
exclusive means no.
I think this is a monumental blunder on Take2's part.
It may have been a sound 'business' decision, but it is the wrong one.
Take2 has already seen a return on Steam. "Games for Windows" is a failing platform. I will certainly not be purchasing any G4W games.
Take2, I was looking forward to a Steam release.
Re: (Score:1)
Had a bad experiance with GFWL... (Score:1)
I made the mistake of buying a Games for Windows - LIVE game (Gears of War for PC). Hated it. It was just pathetic. Every time I would launch the damn game, I get nag screens saying "You can have cool features if you pay $50 and buy a Gold membership!!!". Laggy as hell. Reminded me to much of Xbox Live (Waste of money). It seemed like a dumbed down version of Xbox Live (how much dumber can it get)
My experience was so bad with GFWL that it made me vow never to buy another PC game with the "Games for Windows
or not (Score:2)
It also might reduce sales numbers for GTA4.
I know here sits a customer they just lost. I'm sick and tired of tie-ins like that where for no good reason they try to force me into signing up for some unrelated service that I otherwise had no interest in.
GFWL really bothers me (Score:1)
That all we need is a bunch of competing networks (Score:2)
Let people run their own servers. Take the middle man out. Keep it simple, stupids.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
"OMG, is the most important and crucial thing ever! Let's stop anything else we do and act like nothing else matters!".
That's why I hate hippies, not because I think Eric Cartman is cool, but because that's all you guys ever do, get obsessed with a few issues, act like it's the most important thing ever and not leave anyone alone until you made them care about it.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
Re: (Score:1, Offtopic)
In round numbers, it's a trillion dollar bailout. That's about a 50% one year increase in the federal budget.
So far...
In ten years or so, it'll probably be recompensed, maybe at a loss, maybe at a profit. Let's say it'll be at a 50% loss, so we'll get 500 billion back.
In scale, that's similar to a typical US household, earning $60,000, getting a loan for $30,000, buying a expensive car, then selling it for $15,000 ten years from now.
A typical US household can't afford to do that. A whole country of them doi
STOP POSTING OFF-TOPIC (Score:2)
There are a million forums and threads dedicated to the financial situation, go to one of those. Christ.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, Mac games are crap. They only have:
World of Warcraft: Biggest MMORPG in the world.
Spore: The most hyped game in many years.
Football Manager: The top selling game in Europe every year.
No recent releases or big games there, no siree...
Re: (Score:1)
To make matters worse Spore for mac isn't exactly native application. It uses some sort of windows environment. I believe the term for this is "ciderized".
So what if it is powered by Cider? (Score:2)
To make matters worse Spore for mac isn't exactly native application. It uses some sort of windows environment. I believe the term for this is "ciderized".
So what? Qt is a toolkit. GTK+ is a toolkit. SDL is a toolkit. Cider is a toolkit too; it just happens to resemble the Windows environment enough to get games to work. The game engine still runs natively on the Mac's Intel Core processor, not in emulation like, say, Virtual Console games from Wii Shop Channel. What feels non-native about a game that uses Cider once it starts running?
Re: (Score:2)
What feels non-native about a game that uses Cider once it starts running?
performance, well given that spore was developed for cider it will probably be OK, but despite not being an emulator wine simply cant perform as well as windows (well until it gets a kernel module anyway)
Re: (Score:2)
WOW: Don't play it.
Spore: Didn't buy it or play it.
Football Manager: Only ever heard of it 2 or 3 times.
Yep. It's got all my gaming covered!
Re: (Score:2)
don't blame the platform for dev house laziness/corruption.
Dev houses refuse to develop for anything but MS proprietary Direct X.
Never mind the fact XGL and OpenGL are just as viable, if not more so, than the oh so resource-efficient MS implementations.
There are two possible and equally likely reasons for this:
microsoft bribery
pure unmitigated laziness
Apple in particular outsells PC on many major college campuses. There is no "disparity" between the two platforms among the demographics they are trying to ta
Re:Won't see 'Games for Mac' anytime soon (Score:5, Informative)
Never mind the fact XGL and OpenGL are just as viable, if not more so, than the oh so resource-efficient MS implementations.
I sense sarcasm where there shouldn't be any. Do some research on OpenGL, specifically how it manages resources compared to DirectX, and you'll see why so many developers pick the latter. I'll also quote John Carmack:
"Actually, DX9 is really quite a good API level. Even with the D3D side of things, where I know I have a long history of people thinking I'm antagonistic against it. Microsoft has done a very, very good job of sensibly evolving it at each step - they're not worried about breaking backwards compatibility - and it's a pretty clean API. I especially like the work I'm doing on the 360, and it's probably the best graphics API as far as a sensibly designed thing that I've worked with."
Re: (Score:1)
Note: this is just my AU$0.02. Opinions stated herein are void where prohibited.
Actually, I think it's a little of both.
OpenGL is really lagging behind DirectX now. I know I was personally looking forward to OpenGL 3 bringing it back up to parity, but Khronos went and neutered that. If you want the best performance with the latest features, you pretty much have to use DirectX.
Also, DirectX provides a lot more than just graphics; it provides audio and input as well. Getting OpenGL, OpenAL and SDL all ta
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
OpenGL is really lagging behind DirectX now.
Actually, its not. OpenGL is on par with Direct3D. It the API that sucks, because the core API no longer accurately reflects modern hardware, and everything thats nice is in new 2.1 features + extensions, which are progressing into an object model similar to Longs Peak. Therefore, right now OpenGL is a mixed bag - state machine style initialization for textures, object model style initialization for pixel/vertex/framebuffer objects & shaders.
Re: (Score:1)
To the uninitiated (read: you), OpenGL didn't seem to advance much with OpenGL. But what Khronos did was clean up the API and remove the old features that are no longer needed.
So, to the inexperienced (read: you), it may seem that they just "neutered" OpenGL. But in reality, they were "cutting the fat," so to speak.
There is nothing you can do in Direct3d that is not possible, in a similar fashion, from modern OpenGL. They do the same things on the same hardware.
Re: (Score:1)
that should have been advanced much with "OpenGL 3"
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
You missed my point!
You already can do both, if you're at least a tiny bit competent.
Re: (Score:1)
And it's not as good because Linux hasn't had a multi million dollar multinational working to improve games performance and working directly with the hardware manufacturers to maximise performance.
Re: (Score:2)
I was speaking about macs
Because of Games for Xbox 360 (Score:2)
There are two possible and equally likely reasons for this:
A third:
As I understand it, Xbox 360's native graphics API is a version of DirectX similar to that included with Windows, not OpenGL. So unless an Xbox 360 licensee is planning to port its product to PS3 (which uses OpenGL ES) or Wii (which uses GX, Nintendo's variant of OpenGL), it can make a business case for targeting only DirectX.