Notch: Windows 8 Could Be "Very Very Bad" for Indies

[Fbuh]

I thought the idea of a PC system was to create a system in which 3rd party developers can basically create any program they want? I always assumed that that was the difference between a Mac or a PC: one is used for data crunching/programming, whereas the other is used for arts/entertainment. If tehy make them similar and restrictive, what's the point? The only good thing is that it gives the pportunity for another company to create a platform that could become a replacement programming system, thus leading to more competition berween businesses.

 

[Turing '88]

Everyone is missing part of the core to what Notch and Gabe Newell and Blizzard have been saying. The threat to them isn't simply that MS may elect to close off the OS into an Apple style App store. The threat is MS doesn't make the PC hardware. But a lot of what they are doing with Windows 8 is a direct challenge to their hardware manufacturers, plus it undercuts their bottom ,ine. There are predictions that PC makers may begin to flee the industry. The Microsoft 'Surface" Tablet has really pissed off a lot of PC makers. It is MS using it's power to directly compete with them. The same with the expected Microsoft branded phones. And if the hardware manufacturers leave the industry or abandon MS, that kills much of the tech innovation that drives Windows gaming.

Yeah, but Microsoft shouldn't just not make good products out of fear of pissing off OEMs. I can see how surface will likely cannibalise some ultrabook sales if it's successful but... so what is my response. What's out there now isn't working!

 

[cahtush]

Delta said that?

No, i just get confused by the new forum layout. The old one had the quote on the lower left, so now i accidentally click the quote for the post below.

 

[thesilentman]

So... it just occurs to me...

After reading this thread, can someone explain to me exactly WHY Windows 8 is(n't) the coming of the OS devil? Because... I'm really confused here. All I keep seeing from this is back and forth arguments about Metro (which lost me) and praising/bashing of Notch and other contemporaries listed as voicing their complaints about Windows 8.

Microsoft is taking Apple's approach by closing up. The only reason that this works for Apple as EVERYTHING is closed (besides software development). Microsoft, on the other hand, is making it's own Store. Yeah Microsoft, explain to all the PC builders how forcing a Store on different hardware is going to make sense. Especially after forcing games on there.

For us gamers, we're not interested in Microsoft in trying to win PC gamers. They're failing. See Games for Windows Live.

That is the simplest way I could say it.

 

[Denamic]

Notch should just stick to making mediocre games instead of trying to have an important presence in the industry, or just go on vacation again.

He is sticking to making his games, Mr. Reverse-fanboy.
He talks on his twitter feed and blog, then people ask him questions, which he answers, which then gets 'published' on sites such as this. It's not like he goes out to advertised press conferences to make speeches. He's in the limelight because we put him there. Why re you raging on him for that?

 

[thesilentman]

Okay, I've been hearing all this screamage (yes, I just made that word up) that Windows 8 is going to kill gaming overnight. However, what I've never heard is exactly what combination of technologies and policies cause it to inhibit game developers from creating, marketing, selling, and distributing games on the platform. I need something more than just "It's the Metro Store that does it". Exactly how will it prevent them from doing so? Exactly how will it put them at a disadvantage? Exactly what is the process by which Windows 8 will kill gaming? Is this a real phenomenon, or is it just, yet again, a bunch of knee-jerk reaction from a few individuals who have proclaimed themselves gods of the universe who can manifest unambiguous, universal truth and reality by mere divine utterance? I'm asking this as a serious question because I keep hearing people get all upset without really explaining their position on the matter. Please, enlighten me, cause I seriously want to know.

The Windows Store. Basically Money$oft is shoehorning an idea from Apple on a desktop interface. Closing desktops for selling products is an App Store waiting to happen. The reason that gamers are getting pissed as Valve is the Messiah! No seriously. Steam could be challenged as a monopoly, and Steam itself could disappear from Win8.

Everyone, move to Linux! The games are faster!

captcha-lost love

Um, this is Money$oft we're talking about here...

And that's precisely the type of answer that I said was not enough, because you aren't telling me HOW this restriction is coming about. Even with Apple's Mac App Store, I can still go out and buy and install third-party software WITHOUT having to go through the Mac App Store (even Mountain Lion allows me to do this by changing one setting in the OS system preferences). It's that going through the Mac App Store simply provides a nice convenience. Does the Windows Store explicitly say as a strictly enforced policy that ABSOLUTELY NO software can be purchased and installed on the system EXCEPT via the Windows Store? If not, then this just sounds like a select few with particular vested interests that conflict with the Windows Store trying to manipulate people's thinking and perceptions; in other words, they're trying to eliminate potential competition before it has a chance to manifest by making everyone think it's bad without any real proof. It's the same kind of smoke-and-mirrors bullshit that all companies pull, and you have to be skeptical of anything said by anyone who has a vested interest in the outcome (like when playing a competitive game and your opponents try to give you advice on what your next move should be).

People are panicking because after a while, it'll become the only way you can buy/activate software. Look at Steam. A good portion of titles today (DX: HR let's say) you can buy retail but activate on Steam. I know this because I bought Deus Ex: Human Revolution retail and activated on Steam. Win8 may do this with software in the future and let's face it, do you want a digital software distribution monopoly? So in fact, if Microsoft does this, piracy rates will skyrocket. But they can't be that dumb can they?

NOTE TO MODERATORS- I do not support piracy

 

[Epona]

It makes my point though that they don't care about what's legal or not. They have the "do it and ask forgiveness" attitude as opposed to the "ask permission first" attitude.

What point is that? That Microsoft are willing to do what they want?

I think that Microsoft want to recreate the success of the 360 with Windows. I think that's what GFWL was supposed to do but it failed so here we are with something more aggressive that doesn't have to compete with Steam on the same terms as GFWL did.

But where's the evidence for that? Microsoft themselves have said Metro is designed to help them in the tablet and phone markets, as well as simple PC users who want a streamlined and consistent experience.

I think Microsoft are fantasising about apples iPhone money much more than they are about getting a stranglehold on PC gaming. Microsoft are already a big player in gaming, I honestly don't think PC gaming is all that much to them and it's certainly nothing compared to what they will definitely lose from businesses if they dropped desktop support.

Reading problems? I mean I said what the point was and you quoted it. I have heard that Hooked on Phonics work well.

I think Microsoft got very used to the kind of control they have with the 360 and would like to extend it to Windows. You need evidence, I don't have it, it's an opinion. You've heard of those haven't you?

You seem to think that this is all about games and nothing else. Microsoft would like to license EVERY piece of software that runs on Windows. How hard is this to understand? Oh right, reading problems.

 

[Epona]

Okay, I've been hearing all this screamage (yes, I just made that word up) that Windows 8 is going to kill gaming overnight. However, what I've never heard is exactly what combination of technologies and policies cause it to inhibit game developers from creating, marketing, selling, and distributing games on the platform. I need something more than just "It's the Metro Store that does it". Exactly how will it prevent them from doing so? Exactly how will it put them at a disadvantage? Exactly what is the process by which Windows 8 will kill gaming? Is this a real phenomenon, or is it just, yet again, a bunch of knee-jerk reaction from a few individuals who have proclaimed themselves gods of the universe who can manifest unambiguous, universal truth and reality by mere divine utterance? I'm asking this as a serious question because I keep hearing people get all upset without really explaining their position on the matter. Please, enlighten me, cause I seriously want to know.

The Windows Store. Basically Money$oft is shoehorning an idea from Apple on a desktop interface. Closing desktops for selling products is an App Store waiting to happen. The reason that gamers are getting pissed as Valve is the Messiah! No seriously. Steam could be challenged as a monopoly, and Steam itself could disappear from Win8.

Everyone, move to Linux! The games are faster!

captcha-lost love

Um, this is Money$oft we're talking about here...

And that's precisely the type of answer that I said was not enough, because you aren't telling me HOW this restriction is coming about. Even with Apple's Mac App Store, I can still go out and buy and install third-party software WITHOUT having to go through the Mac App Store (even Mountain Lion allows me to do this by changing one setting in the OS system preferences). It's that going through the Mac App Store simply provides a nice convenience. Does the Windows Store explicitly say as a strictly enforced policy that ABSOLUTELY NO software can be purchased and installed on the system EXCEPT via the Windows Store? If not, then this just sounds like a select few with particular vested interests that conflict with the Windows Store trying to manipulate people's thinking and perceptions; in other words, they're trying to eliminate potential competition before it has a chance to manifest by making everyone think it's bad without any real proof. It's the same kind of smoke-and-mirrors bullshit that all companies pull, and you have to be skeptical of anything said by anyone who has a vested interest in the outcome (like when playing a competitive game and your opponents try to give you advice on what your next move should be).

People are panicking because after a while, it'll become the only way you can buy/activate software. Look at Steam. A good portion of titles today (DX: HR let's say) you can buy retail but activate on Steam. I know this because I bought Deus Ex: Human Revolution retail and activated on Steam. Win8 may do this with software in the future and let's face it, do you want a digital software distribution monopoly? So in fact, if Microsoft does this, piracy rates will skyrocket. But they can't be that dumb can they?

NOTE TO MODERATORS- I do not support piracy

Exactly.

Everyone loves Steam but give Microsoft the same kind of control and it gets scary. That is exactly what Microsoft wants, to license every piece of software that runs on their platform and it may take them 10 years to get there but I believe that is their goal.

People who think that Microsoft is actually going to run two different types of desktops for more than a couple of generations need to think things through. We're getting an old style desktop for Windows 8 to help ween us and developers over. Don't expect it on Windows 9.

Microsoft is also probably pretty confident that most people will not switch to Linux. Look at Linux, it's free and it offers many similar popular Windows programs for free and yet very few want to switch to Linux.

 

[Epona]

So... it just occurs to me...

After reading this thread, can someone explain to me exactly WHY Windows 8 is(n't) the coming of the OS devil? Because... I'm really confused here. All I keep seeing from this is back and forth arguments about Metro (which lost me) and praising/bashing of Notch and other contemporaries listed as voicing their complaints about Windows 8.

Microsoft is taking Apple's approach by closing up. The only reason that this works for Apple as EVERYTHING is closed (besides software development). Microsoft, on the other hand, is making it's own Store. Yeah Microsoft, explain to all the PC builders how forcing a Store on different hardware is going to make sense. Especially after forcing games on there.

For us gamers, we're not interested in Microsoft in trying to win PC gamers. They're failing. See Games for Windows Live.

That is the simplest way I could say it.

You know what's interesting? No one was interested in using Origin either until it had Mass Effect 3 exclusively on it. Sure, ME3 didn't sell as well as it could have on Steam but it pushed alot of unwilling people to Origin and the same thing will happen here. GFWL was a failure because Microsoft failed it, not because consumers failed it. Consumers were willing to give it a chance but it just sucked too badly. I am willing to bet Microsoft will do better this time.

They are even offering large discounts to people to upgrade to Windows 8, just so they get them in the door and exposed to the "new order of Windows".

What they are doing with the Windows Store in Windows 8 = giving their own browser preference.

I agree, I think there's a good chance they will be forced to relax the rule on no content distribution software being allowed in their store.

It makes my point though that they don't care about what's legal or not. They have the "do it and ask forgiveness" attitude as opposed to the "ask permission first" attitude.

Every company does that. Microsoft is no different.

EDIT: In fact, people, in general, tend to do that. Hell, if you have kids, THEY tend to do that all the time!

So there is no debate that Microsoft will do what it wants, legal or not? Good, now that we're past that maybe people can stop saying "Microsoft would never turn Windows into a closed OS because that would be illegal".

 

[geizr]

Okay, I've been hearing all this screamage (yes, I just made that word up) that Windows 8 is going to kill gaming overnight. However, what I've never heard is exactly what combination of technologies and policies cause it to inhibit game developers from creating, marketing, selling, and distributing games on the platform. I need something more than just "It's the Metro Store that does it". Exactly how will it prevent them from doing so? Exactly how will it put them at a disadvantage? Exactly what is the process by which Windows 8 will kill gaming? Is this a real phenomenon, or is it just, yet again, a bunch of knee-jerk reaction from a few individuals who have proclaimed themselves gods of the universe who can manifest unambiguous, universal truth and reality by mere divine utterance? I'm asking this as a serious question because I keep hearing people get all upset without really explaining their position on the matter. Please, enlighten me, cause I seriously want to know.

The Windows Store. Basically Money$oft is shoehorning an idea from Apple on a desktop interface. Closing desktops for selling products is an App Store waiting to happen. The reason that gamers are getting pissed as Valve is the Messiah! No seriously. Steam could be challenged as a monopoly, and Steam itself could disappear from Win8.

Everyone, move to Linux! The games are faster!

captcha-lost love

Um, this is Money$oft we're talking about here...

And that's precisely the type of answer that I said was not enough, because you aren't telling me HOW this restriction is coming about. Even with Apple's Mac App Store, I can still go out and buy and install third-party software WITHOUT having to go through the Mac App Store (even Mountain Lion allows me to do this by changing one setting in the OS system preferences). It's that going through the Mac App Store simply provides a nice convenience. Does the Windows Store explicitly say as a strictly enforced policy that ABSOLUTELY NO software can be purchased and installed on the system EXCEPT via the Windows Store? If not, then this just sounds like a select few with particular vested interests that conflict with the Windows Store trying to manipulate people's thinking and perceptions; in other words, they're trying to eliminate potential competition before it has a chance to manifest by making everyone think it's bad without any real proof. It's the same kind of smoke-and-mirrors bullshit that all companies pull, and you have to be skeptical of anything said by anyone who has a vested interest in the outcome (like when playing a competitive game and your opponents try to give you advice on what your next move should be).

People are panicking because after a while, it'll become the only way you can buy/activate software. Look at Steam. A good portion of titles today (DX: HR let's say) you can buy retail but activate on Steam. I know this because I bought Deus Ex: Human Revolution retail and activated on Steam. Win8 may do this with software in the future and let's face it, do you want a digital software distribution monopoly? So in fact, if Microsoft does this, piracy rates will skyrocket. But they can't be that dumb can they?

NOTE TO MODERATORS- I do not support piracy

I'm sorry, but your conclusion sounds speculative. Are you forced to activate the game on Steam, or could you play the game without such activation? As far as I know, activating a retail purchased game on Steam is more a convenience rather than a requirement, but maybe things have changed and I simply missed the change. Also, Steam is merely another application that provides a digital store-front for game distribution. It has a particular selection of games that can be purchased and installed through it. However, many of those games can be obtained and installed outside of Steam. Also, the use of Steam, as far as I know, is completely voluntary on the part of game developers, game publishers, and gamers. At no point are you locked into Steam except by your own volition of choice in games.

Until I see an explicit restriction that ABSOLUTELY NO software of ANY KIND can be purchased or installed except via the Windows Store, this entire brouhaha is just a bunch of unfounded reactions from a couple of vested interests. Speculating that it is an inevitability is just not a reasonable argument, in my opinion, because, if that is the case, there's nothing you can do to stop it anyway.


Also, I want to say something that's a bit off topic, although, it may have some indirect relevance. This is not directed specifically at you, but I notice that people seem to often assume restrictions and boundaries exist where none actually do. Any boundaries or restrictions are often artifacts of their specific case or situation, but those boundaries and restrictions don't exist in the general case. Even so, they have a tendency to confuse the rules of operation with the restrictions and boundaries and miss the more general rule set that allows a much greater latitude of possibilities. Basically, people seem to have a habit of perceiving reality to be confined to a box that doesn't really exist. This seems to occur because people make assumptions, but, then, they often fail to question the validity of those assumptions. They fail to ask the two critical questions "does that make sense?" and "is that necessarily true?". This then often leads to skewed perceptions about various situations and happenstances, because people fail to recognize that possibilities beyond their immediate experience can exist.

Sorry, I didn't mean to get off on a tangent like that. It's a little bit of boil-over from an "argument" that I was having with a friend of mine last night.

 

[Epona]

Okay, I've been hearing all this screamage (yes, I just made that word up) that Windows 8 is going to kill gaming overnight. However, what I've never heard is exactly what combination of technologies and policies cause it to inhibit game developers from creating, marketing, selling, and distributing games on the platform. I need something more than just "It's the Metro Store that does it". Exactly how will it prevent them from doing so? Exactly how will it put them at a disadvantage? Exactly what is the process by which Windows 8 will kill gaming? Is this a real phenomenon, or is it just, yet again, a bunch of knee-jerk reaction from a few individuals who have proclaimed themselves gods of the universe who can manifest unambiguous, universal truth and reality by mere divine utterance? I'm asking this as a serious question because I keep hearing people get all upset without really explaining their position on the matter. Please, enlighten me, cause I seriously want to know.

The Windows Store. Basically Money$oft is shoehorning an idea from Apple on a desktop interface. Closing desktops for selling products is an App Store waiting to happen. The reason that gamers are getting pissed as Valve is the Messiah! No seriously. Steam could be challenged as a monopoly, and Steam itself could disappear from Win8.

Everyone, move to Linux! The games are faster!

captcha-lost love

Um, this is Money$oft we're talking about here...

And that's precisely the type of answer that I said was not enough, because you aren't telling me HOW this restriction is coming about. Even with Apple's Mac App Store, I can still go out and buy and install third-party software WITHOUT having to go through the Mac App Store (even Mountain Lion allows me to do this by changing one setting in the OS system preferences). It's that going through the Mac App Store simply provides a nice convenience. Does the Windows Store explicitly say as a strictly enforced policy that ABSOLUTELY NO software can be purchased and installed on the system EXCEPT via the Windows Store? If not, then this just sounds like a select few with particular vested interests that conflict with the Windows Store trying to manipulate people's thinking and perceptions; in other words, they're trying to eliminate potential competition before it has a chance to manifest by making everyone think it's bad without any real proof. It's the same kind of smoke-and-mirrors bullshit that all companies pull, and you have to be skeptical of anything said by anyone who has a vested interest in the outcome (like when playing a competitive game and your opponents try to give you advice on what your next move should be).

People are panicking because after a while, it'll become the only way you can buy/activate software. Look at Steam. A good portion of titles today (DX: HR let's say) you can buy retail but activate on Steam. I know this because I bought Deus Ex: Human Revolution retail and activated on Steam. Win8 may do this with software in the future and let's face it, do you want a digital software distribution monopoly? So in fact, if Microsoft does this, piracy rates will skyrocket. But they can't be that dumb can they?

NOTE TO MODERATORS- I do not support piracy

I'm sorry, but your conclusion sounds speculative. Are you forced to activate the game on Steam, or could you play the game without such activation? As far as I know, activating a retail purchased game on Steam is more a convenience rather than a requirement, but maybe things have changed and I simply missed the change.

It's been going on for awhile.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_games_using_Steam_authentication

 

[Turing '88]

Reading problems? I mean I said what the point was and you quoted it. I have heard that Hooked on Phonics work well.

I think Microsoft got very used to the kind of control they have with the 360 and would like to extend it to Windows. You need evidence, I don't have it, it's an opinion. You've heard of those haven't you?

You seem to think that this is all about games and nothing else. Microsoft would like to license EVERY piece of software that runs on Windows. How hard is this to understand? Oh right, reading problems.

Nice. I meant so what Microsoft do what they want, what the fuck does that have to do with anything? If they do things deemed anti-competitive by the EU they'll me made to change them. Can't speak for USA, don't know how it works over there.

And opinions not backed up by any reasoning or evidence are suspect, that's all. You don't need actual proof, but some reasons other than 'because why wouldn't they?' would be nice...

Also you're the one talking about GFWL, if you think MS want to extend a similar thing to all software then well done for not knowing what you are talking about. That would kill backwards compatibility and break all trust between Windows and Windows developers (Microsoft make a point of trying really hard to make each Windows version support all software from the last couple of generations) thus drive away businesses. Microsoft make a lot of money from selling their software to businesses.

99%+ of Windows software can't be ported to Metro without massive, massive challenges and a huge chunk just couldn't be ported.

Understand this one point. If Microsoft do what you say, they have to scrap all software that isn't able to be written for Metro (a huge percentage) and have to basically abandon most business users

Unless they achieve an iPhone like level of profits with Metro devices there's no way they'll do that, and even then I honestly don't see why they would throw all that money away from their business users.

 

[Epona]

Reading problems? I mean I said what the point was and you quoted it. I have heard that Hooked on Phonics work well.

I think Microsoft got very used to the kind of control they have with the 360 and would like to extend it to Windows. You need evidence, I don't have it, it's an opinion. You've heard of those haven't you?

You seem to think that this is all about games and nothing else. Microsoft would like to license EVERY piece of software that runs on Windows. How hard is this to understand? Oh right, reading problems.

Nice. I meant so what Microsoft do what they want, what the fuck does that have to do with anything? If they do things deemed anti-competitive by the EU they'll me made to change them. Can't speak for USA, don't know how it works over there.

And opinions not backed up by any reasoning or evidence are suspect, that's all. You don't need actual proof, but some reasons other than 'because why wouldn't they?' would be nice...

Also you're the one talking about GFWL, if you think MS want to extend a similar thing to all software then well done for not knowing what you are talking about. That would kill backwards compatibility and break all trust between Windows and Windows developers (Microsoft make a point of trying really hard to make each Windows version support all software from the last couple of generations) thus drive away businesses. Microsoft make a lot of money from selling their software to businesses.

99%+ of Windows software can't be ported to Metro without massive, massive challenges and a huge chunk just couldn't be ported.

Understand this one point. If Microsoft do what you say, they have to scrap all software that isn't able to be written for Metro (a huge percentage) and have to basically abandon most business users

Unless they achieve an iPhone like level of profits with Metro devices there's no way they'll do that, and even then I honestly don't see why they would throw all that money away from their business users.

So you believe that licensing software is incompatible with backwards compatibility?

We're talking about software going forward, Windows 8 has BC right now, will Windows 9 or 10 have BC with Windows XP, Vista, 7 software? It's not required when you get two OS's out.

 

[Turing '88]

So you believe that licensing software is incompatible with backwards compatibility?

We're talking about software going forward, Windows 8 has BC right now, will Windows 9 or 10 have BC with Windows XP, Vista, 7 software? It's not required when you get two OS's out.

In a word, yes. Yes to licensing breaks backwards compatibility and yes windows 7 software should work on windows 9 and 10 just like XP programs work on windows 7 & 8. Microsoft are very good at backwards compatibility to say how complex an area it is. A big part of backwards comparability too is that it allows teams to continue working on old software. Yes Photoshop from XP should still work on Windows 8, but more importantly adobe can continue working on it without having to start from scratch for each windows version. The major changes you suggest would mean masses of existing software development projects get abandoned or forced to massively change.

If you force windows store only most software would suddenly and permanently become unavailable. While that will piss off normal customers, many business users would need to begin long expensive migration processes to Linux (likely a commercially supported distro) before Microsoft drops support for Windows 7/8.

The biggest problem is all this legacy software, closed stores only work when implemented from the start. Plus I stand by that in EU at least they wouldn't get away with it. It's fine saying companies break the law, well why even make products then? Why not just steal money from the public, that's much easier yes? Because even if they do break the law, there are consequences and they would be made to follow it.

Anyway I'm off, you've already made up your mind and a public speech and promise from Steve Ballmer himself wouldn't convince you at this point.

 

[Epona]

So you believe that licensing software is incompatible with backwards compatibility?

We're talking about software going forward, Windows 8 has BC right now, will Windows 9 or 10 have BC with Windows XP, Vista, 7 software? It's not required when you get two OS's out.

In a word, yes. Yes to licensing breaks backwards compatibility and yes windows 7 software should work on windows 9 and 10 just like XP programs work on windows 7 & 8. Microsoft are very good at backwards compatibility to say how complex an area it is. A big part of backwards comparability too is that it allows teams to continue working on old software. Yes Photoshop from XP should still work on Windows 8, but more importantly adobe can continue working on it without having to start from scratch for each windows version. The major changes you suggest would mean masses of existing software development projects get abandoned or forced to massively change.

If you force windows store only most software would suddenly and permanently become unavailable. While that will piss off normal customers, many business users would need to begin long expensive migration processes to Linux (likely a commercially supported distro) before Microsoft drops support for Windows 7/8.

The biggest problem is all this legacy software, closed stores only work when implemented from the start. Plus I stand by that in EU at least they wouldn't get away with it. It's fine saying companies break the law, well why even make products then? Why not just steal money from the public, that's much easier yes? Because even if they do break the law, there are consequences and they would be made to follow it.

Anyway I'm off, you've already made up your mind and a public speech and promise from Steve Ballmer himself wouldn't convince you at this point.

You know, I think it's fantastic that the EU has consumer protection laws that those of us in the US don't have but that isn't going to stop Microsoft from doing anything. Already they are breaking EU law with the Windows Store being pushed over other digital stores. You think they really care about consumer protection laws? Then why are they even attempting what they are? Maybe they hope they can find a loophole and get away with it.

I don't think you are understanding that I am talking about all software needing to be licensed after Microsoft closes the OS. Oh, you'll still be able to run old software on it up to a point but any NEW software will need a license.

So corporations can still run their XP version of Photoshop but there new Photoshop will have to be licensed like a 360 game is.

You say it's far fetched but I say that Microsoft is pretty damn bold. Last gen we thought the success of Microsoft in the game console business was far fetched too. They won't go on supporting the old desktop and the new Metro more than one or two OS's. The old desktop will be like opening a DOS shell.

 

[geizr]

Okay, I've been hearing all this screamage (yes, I just made that word up) that Windows 8 is going to kill gaming overnight. However, what I've never heard is exactly what combination of technologies and policies cause it to inhibit game developers from creating, marketing, selling, and distributing games on the platform. I need something more than just "It's the Metro Store that does it". Exactly how will it prevent them from doing so? Exactly how will it put them at a disadvantage? Exactly what is the process by which Windows 8 will kill gaming? Is this a real phenomenon, or is it just, yet again, a bunch of knee-jerk reaction from a few individuals who have proclaimed themselves gods of the universe who can manifest unambiguous, universal truth and reality by mere divine utterance? I'm asking this as a serious question because I keep hearing people get all upset without really explaining their position on the matter. Please, enlighten me, cause I seriously want to know.

The Windows Store. Basically Money$oft is shoehorning an idea from Apple on a desktop interface. Closing desktops for selling products is an App Store waiting to happen. The reason that gamers are getting pissed as Valve is the Messiah! No seriously. Steam could be challenged as a monopoly, and Steam itself could disappear from Win8.

Everyone, move to Linux! The games are faster!

captcha-lost love

Um, this is Money$oft we're talking about here...

And that's precisely the type of answer that I said was not enough, because you aren't telling me HOW this restriction is coming about. Even with Apple's Mac App Store, I can still go out and buy and install third-party software WITHOUT having to go through the Mac App Store (even Mountain Lion allows me to do this by changing one setting in the OS system preferences). It's that going through the Mac App Store simply provides a nice convenience. Does the Windows Store explicitly say as a strictly enforced policy that ABSOLUTELY NO software can be purchased and installed on the system EXCEPT via the Windows Store? If not, then this just sounds like a select few with particular vested interests that conflict with the Windows Store trying to manipulate people's thinking and perceptions; in other words, they're trying to eliminate potential competition before it has a chance to manifest by making everyone think it's bad without any real proof. It's the same kind of smoke-and-mirrors bullshit that all companies pull, and you have to be skeptical of anything said by anyone who has a vested interest in the outcome (like when playing a competitive game and your opponents try to give you advice on what your next move should be).

People are panicking because after a while, it'll become the only way you can buy/activate software. Look at Steam. A good portion of titles today (DX: HR let's say) you can buy retail but activate on Steam. I know this because I bought Deus Ex: Human Revolution retail and activated on Steam. Win8 may do this with software in the future and let's face it, do you want a digital software distribution monopoly? So in fact, if Microsoft does this, piracy rates will skyrocket. But they can't be that dumb can they?

NOTE TO MODERATORS- I do not support piracy

I'm sorry, but your conclusion sounds speculative. Are you forced to activate the game on Steam, or could you play the game without such activation? As far as I know, activating a retail purchased game on Steam is more a convenience rather than a requirement, but maybe things have changed and I simply missed the change.

It's been going on for awhile.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_games_using_Steam_authentication

Okay, let's take it one step further. For how many of those games is it the case that the Steam activation requirement was forced onto the developer as a necessity to sell and distribute the game under any circumstance as opposed to a choice by the developer to integrate the conveniences that Steam provides into the game or also provide distribution of the game through Steam, in both which cases, Steam activation is a necessity for use of the services Steam provides? Which of those games require Steam activation, yet, they are not also distributed through Steam and do not use any Steam services? How is it that Steam has compelled these games to require Steam activation through mere fact of the existence of Steam as opposed to the game developers wanting to make use of the Steam services from within the game?

The point I'm trying to convey is that the Steam activation is the result of a choice by the developer, not a compulsion from Steam itself. Any of those developers could easily have made their game such to not integrate with any features of Steam, in which case the activation would not be required. In fact, there are a number of games that can be registered into Steam for purposes of using Steam as a game library manager, but can be played just fine without activation through Steam. However, you won't necessarily get any of the conveniences in the game that Steam provides to games that are more integrated with it. If the game makes use of Steam services, then it is only natural that it require Steam activation to access those services. That is not a compulsion; that is a design choice.

We've been using Steam as an example, but we could just as easily have used Origin, GoG, or any number of other digital distribution channels. In all those cases, distribution through any given channel is not a compulsion, it is a choice by the developer. So, no, I do not agree that we have a forced situation as yet. Until I see an EXPLICIT statement from Microsoft saying that ANY AND ALL software CANNOT be purchased and installed on Windows 8 EXCEPT via the Windows Store coupled with STRICT ENFORCEMENT of that policy, it is difficult for me to believe that Windows 8 and the Windows Store spells the doom of all other channels for game distribution and, hence, the end of Windows gaming. It is the presentation of that explicit statement backed by strict enforcement that your arguments have failed to materialize. So, I remain skeptical that Windows 8 truly represents the threat some people are claiming. I especially continue to remain skeptical of those with vested interests.

 

[TomWiley]

I have no idea. Frankly, I just think it's tech-hysteria and journalistic sensationalism. The operating system hasn't bloody been released yet. It just went into RTM like yesterday. Can't we at least wait until we've tried it before we declare it the antichirst of gaming.

Are you seriously unaware that developers, especially those that licence DirectX from Microsoft, such as ... you know ... Valve or Blizzard, didn't get Windows 8 to test before us in general public?

Oh right, my bad, your cred > any mayor developer cred when it comes to statements about Win8.
(Apologies, but I just couldn't resist the opportunity. )

Wait what? Which Windows 8 are you talking about? RTM was just finished two days ago and general developers are not going to have access to it before the 15th. So the only version of Win8 these people could have tried was the release preview, or any of the earlier betas, which were accessible to everyone.

 

[Pearwood]

Hmm Valve, the owner of the biggest game store and DRM system there is and Blizzard who're one of the biggest developers both hate Windows 8. Blizzard have never touched a console, Valve we know are PC fanboys even if they have been getting better recently. The hell has Microsoft done to piss off their biggest supporters?