IF there was a means of getting the sequels I'd be tempted to buy this but if it's just the first one then nah. Not going to happen.
Gears of War Ultimate Edition Suddenly Available on PC
- Thread starter Steven Bogos
- Start date
Yep, it's basically Halo 2 all over again.Zontar said:
Even worse this time since as a Windows Store Application it...
Can't use SLI
Can't use third party monitoring software (like FRAPS) or even embedded utilities that come with cards and monitors (like G-Sync)
Doesn't seem to acknowledge the existence of AMD hardware, to the point that on some devices it will ignore the installed GPU entirely and default to the onboard graphics.
Only works in windowed mode on many systems.
It's running the Gears PC version of Unreal Engine 3 with DX12 shoehorned into it in some bizarre act of eldritch coding. This is resulting in a lot of interesting visual artifacts.
So Microsoft's big push to win back PC gamers and get us onto Win 10 is basically GFWL after GFWL has spent five years hitting the gym, taking crack and boning it's cousin the Xbox.
Bravo Microsoft, bravo!
That's not going to make a load of people get Windows 10 or use the Windows store, it'll just make load of people not get Gears of War.
You know, I was upset when I heard that the PC version of Forza 6 was going to be a stripped down, free-to-play version, but if this is what Microsoft considers a complete port job and experience maybe I should just cut my losses and forget any Microsoft releases entirely. Forza was the only game that I wanted to play on Xbone and I sunk hours and hours into Gears 1. What a let down.
Yes, but Valve didn't make them exclusive. They didn't force those developers and publishers to make those games exclusive. Those publishers chose to do so.Janichsan said:
That was my point.
You can still buy brand new copies of the game on Amazon and the GFWL service is still up and running, even if the store is not.Steven Bogos said:
True they don't update it any longer but it still works as well, or as badly, as it ever did.
I have Fable III and Gears of War installed on my PC and they connect to Live without a problem.
Just thought you'd like to know so the article is not incorrect.
Locking games to specific stores doesn't help to destroy a "monopoly", it just fractures the playerbases.Lillowh said:
Or, more specifically, the fact that EA doesn't sell their games on Steam anymore hasn't made an appreciable impact on the number of people using Steam. Uplay is almost universally despised, and I don't know how good everyone else's memory is, but the last time Microsoft tried doing something like this, their proprietary DRM/storefront ended up putting massive bugs into nearly every game they sold on it.
I'd be more interested if it included the full trilogy, myself.Vigormortis said:
It also ignores that if you're getting a new PC, 10 isn't free. I mean, unless you go through the trouble of deactivating your previous Windows installation so that you can put it on your new computer and then upgrade like that. Which I suppose would be fine if you're just replacing a laptop or something, but if you're not actually ditching the PC you already have... etc.
Obviously, the only state of being is fanboy, either for or against something. There is no other option.
In a roundabout way, I think the point people who say this kind of thing are actually trying to make is what I said above, they're just missing the mark so hard that they're not even participating in the correct archery event.
Steam is the largest digital distributor on PC (and in general, maybe?), and the existence of other stores... hasn't really done much to it. Especially when the owners of those other platforms decide that they can't share their toys anymore, so if somebody wants to play with them they need to come over to their specially-prepared pram, because you're not worthy if you're spending all of your time in Steam's pram.
GOG is quite possibly the only thing close to a competitor that Steam actually has, given that Humble Bundle relies pretty extensively on Steam codes (though it has a fair few DRM-free titles itself), Origin is mostly used for EA games because their selection of third-party titles is still lacking, and as far as I'm aware all Uplay games are still available on Steam. (Is Desura still alive?)
That still doesn't make Steam a monopoly, of course, and it never really has. I think that's another term people heard a few times in their economics classes and it sounded good, and over the course of time it's been warped to mean "majority" rather than "totality".
I was about to make a joke in which I motioned to call Steam part of an oligopoly, but then I remembered that that's actually the more true statement.
The Steam monopoly idea comes from that so many people have the mentality of "if it's not on Steam then I'm not buying it." I know people like that in real life.
One of my friends loves Mass Effect 1 and 2 but refuses to play Mass Effect 3 because it is not on Steam. Steam to him is the only option.
There seems to be more and more people with this train of thought all the time.
One of my friends loves Mass Effect 1 and 2 but refuses to play Mass Effect 3 because it is not on Steam. Steam to him is the only option.
There seems to be more and more people with this train of thought all the time.
As would I. I'd even be willing to shell out $50~$60 for it.shrekfan246 said:
Not that that matters. I couldn't even play it if I wanted to, since I'm currently on an AMD build. I mean, how the hell do you fuck up a port of a game so badly that it can't even run on the very hardware it was built for in the first place?
Which becomes an even greater problem for those with OEM copies of Win7.
I keep forgetting this. Curse my search for objectivity!
I think this is what bothers me most. The inappropriate use of the term.
In a vacuum, it's not much of an issue. But with so many using the word as a blanket term for why Steam is "bad", it effectively draws attention away from the actual issues with the platform. Which, in turn, makes it harder for Valve and Steam users to properly identify and address those issues.
I know this is the internet and hyperbole is par for the course. I just wish we could collectively put aside the hyperbolic whining and get down to the nit and gritty of the problems that need solved most.
That's nothing more than someone adhering to a preference. It has literally nothing to do with a "monopoly".votemarvel said:
Hate to use yet another car analogy, but it's equivalent to seeing someone who prefers driving Ford trunks and then making the statement, "Ford has a monopoly on trucks because this guy over here only likes buying Ford trucks!"
Let's say your friend owned a Playstation and an Xbox. He prefers playing on his Playstation more than his Xbox. When Mass Effect came out only for the Xbox, would you view him as you do now if he'd said he didn't want the game unless he could get it for his Playstation?
Steam is more than just a storefront. It offers a wealth of content and community features. What's wrong with someone wanting their games on the platform that has the features they prefer?
I seem to see more people claiming this than people actually feeling that way.
Yes.Vigormortis said:
He has the platform available to play the game, he wants to play it. The only reason he wont is because he can't buy it on Steam.
I prefer to play on my PC but am happy to jump on my Xbox 360 or One if there is a title I want to play that I can't get on the PC.
Because you can run Mass Effect 3 through Steam and maintain all the features that it provides.Vigormortis said:
Perhaps we are just seeing the different posts. There are many on here when a new game is announced who instally say that they wont buy it unless it is on Steam.Vigormortis said:
Just look at Quantum Break threads. Many posts from people who wont buy it because it isn't on Steam. Though to be fair that could just be because it is on the Windows Store.
That's not Steam's fault and there isn't really anything they can (or indeed should) do about it.votemarvel said:
I mean, I've seen that mentality every now and then myself, but that has nothing to do with how Valve runs the platform. They haven't (as far as I'm aware) run out other companies that have tried doing what they do.
The stranglehold Nvidia has on PC is far more of a monopoly than Steam, actually. I have a fondness for AMD graphics cards, and you know, I was searching around for a new laptop a few weeks ago because my older laptop is on its deathbed and my gaming laptop is five years old.Vigormortis said:
You know what I found? It's practically impossible to find laptops with AMD graphics anymore. There was one Alienware-brand customizable model that offered it, and after searching through roughly seven or eight different custom PC providers, that was the only one I could find. Everything else had five million different variations of the same five Intel + Nvidia combos.
(I ended up just getting a desktop, and unfortunately settled for a slightly-weaker Nvidia card rather than the AMD one I wanted because it meant I wouldn't need to compromise the processor.)
And, surprise surprise, that's one of the only ways to even get 7 anymore. A few shops will still preinstall PCs with it, but they're few and far between from what I saw.
This is the internet. Your objectivity is wasted.
What, you haven't seen the way "censorship" has been tortured and abused over the past year and a half?
It also produces a fairly nice smokescreen so that the legitimate issues need never be truly addressed in the first place. Greenlight and Early Access are complete messes with absolutely zero oversight or recompense for developers who are either trying to scam customers or simply abandon their work? Who cares, look at all the other games on Steam, there's no possible way you could ever hope to play them all! Valve's customer service is laughable to the point of being nearly nonexistent? What, do you expect them to have hundreds of people hired to deal with their millions of customers and tens/hundreds of games that get added to the store weekly? It's not like they're made of money!!! Developers and publishers can skirt by the system on technicalities to dump shovelware and outright broken trash onto the storefront whenever they want? See both above, and also geez, what, do you think it'd be better for Steam to be the exclusive club again? Elitist!!!!
Unfortunately, people warbling off in forums like this one rarely ever actually want to solve or fix problems. Myself included.
Not really. You can get your friends list, but that's true regardless of whether you're launching them game through Steam or not. You don't get any of the other integrated features.votemarvel said:
As an example, the Steam Overlay doesn't always work with non-Steam games. Especially if, say, you launch a game through Origin. Origin's overlay overrides Steam's.
Well, I was talking more in general than this forum specifically. From my experience, most gamers will utilize whichever platform they need to in order to play the games they want to play. Most don't have the mindset "if it's not on Steam I don't want it!"
It looks like a case of a vocal minority being viewed as the majority.
microsoft "see we support pc gaming fully now along with steam.. just as long as you have our windows 10 spyware installed, dont worry we've already fixed it so you download it regardless of what you want, oh and the games will only be available to purchase from our store, and you wont have certain graphical options available, oh and there is no modding ever, and we thought it was a good idea for our latest blockbuster game to stream the cut scenes and not have them available on disk"
microsoft fucking pc gamers over since forever
someone should tell them that trying to get the most hated company award for 2016 off of EA isnt actually a good thing
microsoft fucking pc gamers over since forever
someone should tell them that trying to get the most hated company award for 2016 off of EA isnt actually a good thing
You couldn't pair the AMD GPU with your processor?shrekfan246 said:
And thankfully nVidia's stranglehold has been weakening. Especially with AMD's newest push for smaller yet more powerful GPUs. (I really want an R9 Nano build)
Now if only we could weaken DirectX's stranglehold...
Believe me, I know. I've been searching for a retail copy of Pro for a friend. Only copy I found so far was selling for over $300.
A man can dream, though...
I did, and I gave up on that one a while ago.
I picture most sounding like this:
I'm not sure what you're asking here.Vigormortis said:
I didn't want just an APU because, well, I want something powerful enough for gaming, and the only AMD CPU builds I could find that were within my price bracket used fairly old hardware (there was an issue finding AMD CPU desktops in most of the places I looked as well, to be honest). Given that I wanted a PC powerful enough to do both extensive gaming and also video editing while being future-proof enough that I wouldn't need to replace the processor until I can actually afford it, it seemed to make a bit more sense to just spring for the top-of-the-line Intel CPU.
Getting an i7 meant I couldn't afford the AMD GPU I had been looking at, though. (An R9 380x, for the record.)
Mantle is actually another reason I wanted to go AMD again. Microsoft's arbitrary limitations are, predictably, not getting any better, and I abhor the way they push their products on consumers. The remarkable thing to me is that they've done this multiple times in the past, and look how that worked for both Vista and 7. Nobody switched to either OS over its API (and, in fact, the arbitrary system lock that Microsoft put on their FLAGSHIP VISTA GAME, Halo 2, essentially broke the PC version of the game).
That sounds about right.
EDIT: Anyway, to bring this back around to the original point of the thread, I have little faith in the Windows Store not basically becoming Games For Windows Live 2.0, and that's not something I want to support because Microsoft already feels it can get away with whatever it likes. History has shown that they're pretty incapable at running this sort of thing, and even when they get it moderately right they still manage to screw things up re: their consoles. I'll be having Windows 10 on my new PC (maybe I'll actually learn some form of Linux too), but I don't see myself spending much time investigating the store at the moment.
The 8300 and 9300 line of octacore AMD processors are pretty good, though. You wouldn't necessarily have had to go with one of their APUs. But I understand what you were saying before. I was under the impression you were saying you couldn't pair an AMD GPU with an Intel CPU.shrekfan246 said:
And realistically, the top-of-the-line i7's do benchmark higher for single core performance.
(Were it me though, I would have dropped just a little more dosh so I could nab the 390. It benchmarks a lot better than the 380's.)
I'm anxious to see where Mantle goes. Same can be said for Vulkan.
It's an exciting time for graphics and engine technologies again. Finally.
The sad thing is, their push for more exclusive control via Live and the Store is being masked behind their promises of "wanting to embrace PC gaming and unite all gamers in what they love." Even sadder, people are buying into it.
Hard to trust Microsoft when they claim to be embracing the culture of PC gaming by forcing a walled garden platform on us.
In contrast to most other DD game stores? Most others don't openly disclose their inner dealings either.Janichsan said:
Let's not pretend like Valve is alone in how they maintain 'secrecy'.
As for how sure I am? Well, I'm about as sure as someone can be. As quite a lot of games that appear on Steam are also openly available on many other platforms (including other, competing DD services[footnote]And in some cases, with better versions available on those services.[/footnote]), it's hard to imagine that Valve just seemingly picks and chooses a handful of games to force exclusivity on. Especially when some aren't even that lucrative nor popular.
So what's more likely? That Valve only forces a handful of devs and publishers to release some of their games (and in many cases, only a few from their entire catalog) as exclusives for the Steam platform, or that those devs and publishers choose to make the game exclusive because Steam gives them access to certain hosting and support features that other services didn't offer at the time[footnote]See: Steamworks. Achievement integration. Community features. Etc.[/footnote].
I'm not saying the former is an impossibility, but the latter seems more likely.