Newell: Win8 is a catastrophe; Pardo: I don't disagree.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Grall

Invisible Member
Legend
Two gaming industry heavyweights (no pun intended in reference to Newell!) have chimed in their opinions about the not yet even released Win8. (http://kotaku.com/5929569/blizzard-isnt-happy-with-windows-8-either)

Why?

Well, neither of them have said all that much outright - to my knowledge - but Newell did talk some about MS's moves towards an apparant closing of the Win ecosystem and why that would be bad. I'm sure the enforced use of the official Microsoft-owned and -run app store is an ominous threat to these entities as well.

MS has been increasingly problematic in relation to free computing for a while now. For example you can't write third-party device drivers and get them to run (without fiddling and inconveniencing the user) under 64-bit Win7 without paying an annual and fairly hefty windows tax to microsoft for a security certificate. Then there was this hubbub about secure boot and linux earlier this year, and now this.

If these two guys think this way - and I dunno about Pardo, but Newell's absolutely as smart as they come - I'm sure others in the PC biz are feeling the same way these two do.
 
Pardo and Newell are giving away their games now? When did that start?

It shouldn't be surprising that certain parties would prefer not to have MS dipping their fingers further into the gaming pie, competition sucks when you're trying to bilk a sucker from his paycheck.
 
It really depends upon just how much MS closes the ecosystem. Only a few select companies will be allowed to manufacture Tablets...will they eventually extend that to laptops? Desktops?

A W8 app store that preclude Valve, etc. unless they pay a big tax or perhaps a Steam the can't install without MS certification, etc.

It all comes down to just how far MS goes with this.
 
Pardo and Newell are giving away their games now? When did that start?
What makes you say that? Of course, they aren't. Well, except for Team Fortress 2, which is powered by hats.

Btw, I meant "free computing" as in open, not as in gratis. Perhaps confusing to the reader; my apologies.

It shouldn't be surprising that certain parties would prefer not to have MS dipping their fingers further into the gaming pie, competition sucks when you're trying to bilk a sucker from his paycheck.
It's absolutely not as simple as that. I think it's pretty obvious MS is trying to move even traditional desktop computing away from said traditional desktop, and onto the MS-moderated, controlled and taxed metro OS. The fact you have to click your way out of metro on every bootup to get to the traditional desktop - even if you never have any wish or intention to use metro for anything, ever, is just one such indicator. The removal of the start menu is another such indicator.

MS is trying to shove metro down all our collective throats wether we like it or not.
 
Aint too interested in Win8, and Gabe Newell doesnt care much about much more than his revenue either.
A already installed "App Store" on the dominant OS clearly is a pressing threat for Steam.

Let Valve do what they do, but this Newell guy should shutup until they dont leverage their own damn platform by keeping the games exclusive. MS is doin nothing else than what Valve have been doing for a decade.
 
It's a bit different if
1. it comes pre-installed on 90% of all new computers as part of the OS
2. the OS doesn't allow unregistered games

Steam isn't preinstalled and I can install any non-steam games I want. We just have to wait and see if MS makes their App Store a download - or if it's preinstalled, and if they start requiring app certifications.

Time will tell.
 
MS has been increasingly problematic in relation to free computing for a while now. For example you can't write third-party device drivers and get them to run (without fiddling and inconveniencing the user) under 64-bit Win7 without paying an annual and fairly hefty windows tax to microsoft for a security certificate. Then there was this hubbub about secure boot and linux earlier this year, and now this.

Hasn't MS 64bit OS's always been that way? It's not exactly anything new they're doing. I thought it was actually more open now and easier for consumers than 2k or 2k3 64bit was.
 
Microsoft is trying to be Apple ... and it's going to fail at it.

Seems to work to a degree on the Xbox. I think for Windows it is quite contrary, although an integrated App store and a Windows version of XBL would be welcomed by some. That said Valve, between being a developer, publisher, and "App-Store" competitor to MS/MS Game I wouldn't take their view too strongly. Valve has more to lose than anyone with a MS themed game store.
 
Its silly because with mountian lion new restricts on mac developers came out and no one is really saying anything about it.

I can understand Gabe would be upset as of course he'd want to sell games on his store and share the money with no one but he can still do that on the x86/64bit verisons of windows 8. The hardcore are going to find steam anyway , its not like they will give up on it if it doesn't exist on the windows store.
 
I'll see your haters and raise you a FUDers gonna FUD.

A future with a vastly dominant MS OS, coupled with an enforced MS-run app store is a huge threat to our digital future and freedom. NO commercial entity has thus far been shown to be able to handle such a platform in a non-discriminatory manner. This has been an increasing issue ever since closed ecosystem smartphones (and later tablets) started becoming so prevalent, and now it's starting to come to a point. Smartphones are already dominant in sales in many countries and will undoubtedly continue to squeeze out their less intellectually gifted country bumpkin cousins as time passes, while young 'uns growing up with these devices may not see it as a very big deal if they're closed. It's what they've become accustomed to.

Many people may even consider it a boon. One place to find stuff for their phone/pad/PC - convenient, one place for payment, vetted for quality, or at least security (or so one might be led to believe anyhow), what's not to like about that?

Yes, Apple has been at the forefront of all this all along, and they're certainly not saints either by any stretch. However that's off-topic and belong in a different thread. This one's about Win8, so don't threadcrap.
 
A huge portion of the market for "computers" is moving towards arm based tablets and phones. That is happening with or without Microsoft and Windows 8.

If Windows 8 did not ship with an app store, and if there was no Windows 8 RT, most of the people who will buy Windows 8 RT devices still wouldn't be lugging around Windows x86 devices that can run anything that they want. If MS shipped Windows 8 without Metro, without an app store, and made no RT version, all those x86 unlocked desktop-only systems would still probably disappear.

MS can't stop the market shifting just by taking Metro out of Windows 8. Personally, I'm just glad that at least now I'll be able to get an x86 OS that works properly with a tablet - so that's at least one extra unlocked computer that will be around because of what MS are doing with Windows 8.
 
Its silly because with mountian lion new restricts on mac developers came out and no one is really saying anything about it.

I can understand Gabe would be upset as of course he'd want to sell games on his store and share the money with no one but he can still do that on the x86/64bit verisons of windows 8. The hardcore are going to find steam anyway , its not like they will give up on it if it doesn't exist on the windows store.

Mountain Lion does NOT restrict in any way, except if you relied on 32-bit .kexts.
 
Function ... do pay a little attention to what Microsoft is doing. The Windows store is not the problem in and of itself, Metro isn't either (Microsoft store was not a problem either). Tying Metro to the Windows store is the problem.

You can not publish Metro applications independently.

Now Microsoft running Steam out of business wouldn't be so much of a problem if it wasn't known by now that Microsoft has internal power struggles with the xbox camp actively seeking to cripple PC gaming ... they simply can not be trusted with that kind of power.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You can still get desktop applications using the "legacy" GUI APIs ... but if people start using Metro you'll start getting multiplayer games with live tiles to show when friends are playing for instance, it's not entirely useless.
 
Function ... do pay a little attention to what Microsoft is doing. The Windows store is not the problem in and of itself, Metro isn't either (Microsoft store was not a problem either). Tying Metro to the Windows store is the problem.

You can not publish Metro applications independently.

Yeah I know. It's locked down. I'd prefer it if it wasn't that way.

What I'm saying is that Metro is an alternative, primarily, to iOS. If MS didn't include their locked down Metro, people would flock to iPad instead (they might still) so you still lose just as big. Metro with more freedom would be better for us, but we aren't going to be offered that choice. The choice is "locked down or locked down" instead of just "locked down". At least with Win 8 some of the tablets are full PCs.

I hope Europe will kick MS into line when/if their market share gets too big.

Now Microsoft running Steam out of business wouldn't be so much of a problem if it wasn't known by now that Microsoft has internal power struggles with the xbox camp actively seeking to cripple PC gaming ... they simply can not be trusted with that kind of power.

I don't think MS have tried to cripple PC gaming, so much as failed to support it. If they were trying to cripple PC gaming then it was a feeble and half hearted effort.

You can still get desktop applications using the "legacy" GUI APIs ... but if people start using Metro you'll start getting multiplayer games with live tiles to show when friends are playing for instance, it's not entirely useless.

What makes you call the desktop a "legacy" GUI? The truth is that's is clumsy and unnecessary for many users, but for the people that need a more powerful interface it's not going to be replaced by jabbing huge icons with your finger.
 
I don't think MS have tried to cripple PC gaming
I did not say "they" did ... but Microsoft as a whole has to be dragged into supporting PC gaming kicking and screaming, Valve was probably the company pulling the hardest in that respect. If they have to drag themselves nothing will get done.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top