Windows 8 Will Be a "Real New Push Into PC Gaming"
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Sounds like they have good intentions towards the future, but even the best of intentions often never make their full impact. With the minor problems I've had with Vista over XP, I've been reluctant to attempt an update to Win7. Now the Win7 has been on the market nearly a year, they already want to start to discuss what they want to do with Win8?
I'm glad they have ambition and desire to continue to produce a product with even fundamental upgrades, but perhaps they should still consider on improving past releases in order to maintain their hold on the market as it stands today. There are quite a few people with bad memories of the brand, and releasing a new OS every couple of years instead of simply fixing the problems in previous versions doesn't sit well with me, at least. Sure, they come out with patches and updates on a regular basis, but have they even released a second (or third if I am behind) service pack for Vista? XP was a fairly solid platform that ran well, ran stable (for the most part), and was reliable. While Vista doesn't constantly screw up, there are still some glaring flaws (such as horrible compatibility with games, being a resource hog, overall system lag). I've thought about Win7, but I just can't find a reason to want to shell out $200 and format my HDD to replace something that still works (when it doesn't have the occasional hissy fit).
As a corporation, I understand MS has the same bottom line as any other company: make money. And I agree with the other arguments about exclusive Xbox titles that seem to take literally years to cross over to PC gaming (such as Halo and Fable). When you are the creator and publisher of a title that has access to both console and PC, wouldn't it make more sense to have a reasonable turn-around time for titles to come out on both platforms? I'm sure there are issues I do not understand in regards to this problem, but it is one I also have wondered about over the years.
I'm glad they have ambition and desire to continue to produce a product with even fundamental upgrades, but perhaps they should still consider on improving past releases in order to maintain their hold on the market as it stands today. There are quite a few people with bad memories of the brand, and releasing a new OS every couple of years instead of simply fixing the problems in previous versions doesn't sit well with me, at least. Sure, they come out with patches and updates on a regular basis, but have they even released a second (or third if I am behind) service pack for Vista? XP was a fairly solid platform that ran well, ran stable (for the most part), and was reliable. While Vista doesn't constantly screw up, there are still some glaring flaws (such as horrible compatibility with games, being a resource hog, overall system lag). I've thought about Win7, but I just can't find a reason to want to shell out $200 and format my HDD to replace something that still works (when it doesn't have the occasional hissy fit).
As a corporation, I understand MS has the same bottom line as any other company: make money. And I agree with the other arguments about exclusive Xbox titles that seem to take literally years to cross over to PC gaming (such as Halo and Fable). When you are the creator and publisher of a title that has access to both console and PC, wouldn't it make more sense to have a reasonable turn-around time for titles to come out on both platforms? I'm sure there are issues I do not understand in regards to this problem, but it is one I also have wondered about over the years.
Balobo said:
You can be on the bandwagon all you want, but compared to the current generation of consoles/games the PC is equal not better. You can argue all you want about graphics, but you don't see many side-by-side comparisons as you can with a competition like blu-ray and DVD.
The main perk PC gaming gets is customization by way of modding or "hacking". And sure that can be great. I myself have edited a few saved games, but for me personally it kills any and every game I can play. Just like back when I was a kid and I could easily plug in cheat codes or gameshark.
Any of my consoles (Not my WII) are just as good as my PC. And they all cost less then it did (Except my PS3).
But my argument simply proves it's all subjective and opinionated. Your fact is inFACT a lie.
The modding that people talk about for PC is not just about simple GameShark codes. The modding that people usually talk about is the act of creating your own levels, weapons, campaigns, game modes, etc. Not the simple act of cheating on a game.Sovereignty said:
Okay, any of your consoles are just as good as YOUR PC. Not mine I guess.
No, no, you don't get what I'm saying. Microsoft has cornered the PC Operating System Market. Almost everyone who owns a PC has a version of Windows on it. So if Microsoft integrated GFWL into Windows, or otherwise required it to be on your system, they would have near-saturation of the DD market simply because of how prolific their OS is. That's not fair competition, and is open to prosecution.LoganN said:
Also, if Microsoft uses Windows to make GFWL better than 3rd party DD systems in a way they can't compete with (like making downloads faster or easier, games more stable, or what have you using some kind of voodoo with the Windows source code), that is also not fair competition.
Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows ME, and NT 4.0 where all Windows 4Void(null) said:
Windows 2000, XP, Server 2003, MCE 2003/2005, XP Tablet Edition, XP 64bit Professional where all Windows 5
Windows Vista Home, Business, "Ultimate", Server 2008, where all Windows 6
Windows 7 is what it is, but it still runs on kernal version 6.
Microsoft no more wants to have a "splinternet" than Valve does. Remember, the whole controversy over Netscape happened because Marc Anderseen made a profoundly stupid statement, namely the man-decades that went into Windows, and the ideas behind it developed by the people Microsoft hired (from VMS to Xerox PARC) where all garbage.SilentHunter7 said:
In either case, there is no need for baseless speculation.
Microsoft should just hire valve to handle everything related to games on the PC.
At least steam works.
At least steam works.
Microsoft OS explained.
OS will change gaming by slowing down your processor so you must upgrade your entire pc to do anything at all.
Microsoft starts to make a new OS to use (slow down) all that wonderful CPU power when a fast enough one comes out to run the last OS at a respectable speed.
New OS slows high tech CPU down, forces upgrade.
Lather, rinse, repeat.
OS will change gaming by slowing down your processor so you must upgrade your entire pc to do anything at all.
Microsoft starts to make a new OS to use (slow down) all that wonderful CPU power when a fast enough one comes out to run the last OS at a respectable speed.
New OS slows high tech CPU down, forces upgrade.
Lather, rinse, repeat.
Honestly, all they really need to do is streamline windows even further, and improve it's security. Especially stop embedding Internet Explorer into the actual OS, it's a MASSIVE security loophole.
Outside of that, I can't complain too much, since I'm mostly a linux guy.
Outside of that, I can't complain too much, since I'm mostly a linux guy.
Digital Foundry. Plenty of side-by-side comparisons there for multiplatform games.Sovereignty said:
If the first thing that comes to mind with you when mods are mentioned is cheating, you should really check some of the amazing single player campaigns done for HL2 for instance. Minerva is a good example there. Neverwinter Nights still has servers on running awesome modules made by players.
Well, numbers aren't subjective. And 5-to-6-year-old hardware is obviously dated if we're talking pure performance here. The 360 was around the level of an average gaming PC when it was released, 6 years from then tech has obviously moved on. The Wii is intentionally a very low spec device to begin with.
Coming to a thread about PC gaming basically exclaiming "I hope it dies" is a really classy way of beginning a conversation by the way. Don't be surprised when people are wildly opposed to your idea of an all walled garden approach to gaming. That might just be the day when gaming really dies.
I got two words for Microsoft on this argument. Bull. Fucking. Shit.
All you need to know about MS's commitment to PC gaming can be summed up in their attitude toward New Vegas DLC, which was either a gigantic Eff You to PC gamers or a hissy fit at Bethesda for listening to their customers and choosing Steamworks over the awful Games for Windows Live as the digital platform of choice for the game.
And if Microsoft's track record with operating systems is anything to go by, Windows 8 will be a steaming, buggy pile of garbage and Windows 9 will be when everybody finally upgrades from Windows 7.
All you need to know about MS's commitment to PC gaming can be summed up in their attitude toward New Vegas DLC, which was either a gigantic Eff You to PC gamers or a hissy fit at Bethesda for listening to their customers and choosing Steamworks over the awful Games for Windows Live as the digital platform of choice for the game.
And if Microsoft's track record with operating systems is anything to go by, Windows 8 will be a steaming, buggy pile of garbage and Windows 9 will be when everybody finally upgrades from Windows 7.
You are forgetting about the adding in all the other versions [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Microsoft_Windows_versions], as well as the mobile versions.Nimbus said:
Opps, I swear at least once a day I respond to an old thread thinking it's still on only a couple of pages.
This is very wrong, please stop saying it. You can't just mash together the 32 and 16 bit branches like that. Same with the Server editions.QUINTIX said:
Hasn't been since 6.Johnnyallstar said:
Well there's the problem, and that's your fault. Duh. If you get parts geared toward gaming, then you can game better than with generic stuff. FACT.Sovereignty said:
After I posted, people kept making my point a ?Steam Vs. GFWL? thing when it never was, while completely missing the point.
The point is that I would rather have the whole GFWL initiative as part of the OS than as a separate client, the same way Xbox Live is integrated to the Xbox 360 platform instead of a 3rd party application; with support from the platform maker.
I?m not even talking about Steam; Steam is very good for what it is, but it cannot sub for what I want. So please stop suggesting it.
I am also not talking about what the GFWL is, but what it COULD be.
The point is that I would rather have the whole GFWL initiative as part of the OS than as a separate client, the same way Xbox Live is integrated to the Xbox 360 platform instead of a 3rd party application; with support from the platform maker.
I?m not even talking about Steam; Steam is very good for what it is, but it cannot sub for what I want. So please stop suggesting it.
I am also not talking about what the GFWL is, but what it COULD be.
How exactly are they trying? PC gaming doesn't need a new operating system it need games. They will try to sell us new OS and then continue making games for 360. They don't even make games for PC any more. Why should we listen to anything they have to say about PC gaming when their best games are on consoles?Nouw said:
