Relaxed Muscle
Member
I'm not sure, all these limitations are conscious choices MS took, not some glaring mistakes that they didn't thought about it.
That's clearly the vision they have of the store.
Greenberg: Quantum Break is not coming to Steam
- Thread starter chadskin
- Start date
I'm not sure, all these limitations are conscious choices MS took, not some glaring mistakes that they didn't thought about it.
That's clearly the vision they have of the store.
iNvid02
Member
yup, i suggested changing the thread title yesterday to better reflect what the real problem is here regarding the unviersal apps, but it wouldnt solve the underlying issue here which is that people just drop in after looking at the title, skim the OP and then start typing out a response.
Might purchase the Xbox digital version of this and try it on PC.
At least if the PC version is bust i can still enjoy it.
Considering Steam's restrictive region locks, that would be reason to want it on Windows Store rather than Steam.
Why, why can't people just read the thread?
No, that's not the issue here. The issue is how locked down the game will be due to how non-user friendly the windows store platform is on PC. Users can't access the install folders, make adjustments/tweaks, etc.
There is the February event, i made a post about waiting to see what they announce before getting all pissy. Gfwl burned alot of people i assume, so any trust from Microsoft in changing their ways is out, for some. We'll see or things will remain the same.
Boombox On
Member
yup, i suggested changing the thread title yesterday to better reflect what the real problem is here regarding the unviersal apps, but it wouldnt solve the underlying issue here which is that people just drop in after looking at the title, skim the OP and then start typing out a response.
Yea. Still, I feel like this discussion needs its own thread
Yeah, likely but you never know.
We need an interview that asks the right questions. Game journalists, over to you. Not basic stuff. Will you support mods, stuff discussed in this thread etc. like Steam does and if not, why not. Clear the air. Don't let them away with, we love Steam and respect what their doing. Follow up.
Fbh
Member
If them being able to use their game to promote their store is the push they need to bring it to PC then so be it.
I don't particularly like Gamestop and I never buy there. But if they made a deal with Sega to localize Yakuza Ishin and bring it to the west as a Gamestop exclusive then I would be there day one.
I understand people saying they don't want to just accept things like these. But as I see it, it's all a give and take scenario. Companies have their agendas and reasonings and so do the consumers. For me at least, having to buy this over the Windows store is a compromise I'm willing to accept.
Then again I havent read the whole thread so I'm not sure of there is something seriously wrong with the MS store that I should know about
Did I state that people can't voice their opinions? No. I did say that giving feedback where something is definitely going to be seen is better than just doing it at a place that MS employees come in and out. MS always asks for feedback since W10 and put it at the place where they itemize their priorities.
I just wondered if people are actually giving this feedback where it would actually be seen than just on a forum and hope it makes it up the grapevine.
The feedback isn't to replace the UWA version with a win32 one, but to at least offer it at all. I mean, I don't think Octagon/DeadEndThrills' massive screengrabs of ROTR PC were done using the UWA version because it would have been impossible. Is it truly wrong for people to suggest that they ought to at least have the option of a regular install versus a sandboxed one? I mean Square could make both work evidenced by ROTR, so why not offer customers an option?
I don't know why I keep reading this thread. So much shitposting and people completely ignoring the issues a lot of us have with only releasing the games via their own locked down store that has no benefits at all to the consumers compared to a game released on Steam/Origin/Uplay etc.
Or well, the single benefit is that the game gets released on PC at all. But if it's in this form, I don't feel very compelled to give them any money even though I really want to because Remedy makes really cool games.
Heck, I'm 90% sure Phil said that Steam wasn't their competitor and that they embrace everything Valve has done for PC gaming (or something along those lines). Way to show your support then, not even giving people the option to buy your game on the very platform you praised a year ago.
Like usual with MS and PC gaming, it's all talk but they never follow through in a way that isn't crappy for the consumer.
Or well, the single benefit is that the game gets released on PC at all. But if it's in this form, I don't feel very compelled to give them any money even though I really want to because Remedy makes really cool games.
Heck, I'm 90% sure Phil said that Steam wasn't their competitor and that they embrace everything Valve has done for PC gaming (or something along those lines). Way to show your support then, not even giving people the option to buy your game on the very platform you praised a year ago.
Like usual with MS and PC gaming, it's all talk but they never follow through in a way that isn't crappy for the consumer.
Pheace
Member
So many people wasting comments on the guy's obvious trollbait.
GHG
Member
If it's such a big security risk then why does every other place I use to purchase my PC games allow me to use them?
Why do Microsoft always have to behave like they have some classified CIA documents embedded within their games and platforms?
Can you not just be grateful the game is being released on the PC? Who gives a shit if it's via a locked down store - at least you can play it...
Steam is irrelevant to the core problem. Had they offered the ability to purchase a win32/ 'normal' version of the game on the Windows 10 store, it'd be fine.
Why would they offer w32 app if they are working on UWA for the future of their app ecosystem? That doesn't make sense. They have to do certain things within the ecosystem they are trying to create. Square isn't MS, they have no benefit from not releasing a w32 app. MS is building something more than that.
Because a win32 version has value in the functionality that exists that comes with more open accessibility. I haven't denied there being benefits to software sandboxed as a UWA, but there are advantages that come with it being a win32 application. Like I said, I don't begrudge the existence of QB being offered as an 'app', but functionality is lost when gamers don't get to install a win32 copy. People are now voicing their displeasure because they took advantage of that functionality and that value is lost.
edit: I'm not suggesting they sell a win32 copy on Steam or another marketplace, but why not a WIn32 copy on the Windows 10 store, they're still purchasing a license for the software on the Windows 10 store that's maintained as the ecosystem evolves, but they get to choose how they want to install it.
This one is hilarious, because it reveals first that you havent read the thread, and second that you are completely ignorant of how the place where people got ultra cheap Rise of the Tomb Raider was on the Win10 buying on the ukranian Store for 9$ lol
Stop with the "we should be grateful" shit.
People give a shit that its a via locked down store because it literally affects them in a major way on its playability.
I understand the reasoning from a business perspective, and competition is good, but I can't help noticing how the store on my main computer crashes on launch, which really doesn't help me separating it from GFWL.
Long thread is long. Wondering what happens if the game is broken on launch? Are the windows store versions much different than Steam/GOG/Origin? Could the kind hearted modding scene fix what developer won't without interference?
Long thread is long. Wondering what happens if the game is broken on launch? Are the windows store versions much different than Steam/GOG/Origin? Could the kind hearted modding scene fix what developer won't without interference?
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
You have zero access to the install folder files. You can't mod or fix shit son. Hell, you are playing in a non full screen wrapper.
Think of it similar to a game on a mobile phone.
Wowfunhappy
Member
This is where talk of security risks, well, pisses me off for lack of a better word. Realize that none of this is aimed at you specifically Zedox.
If I buy a computer, it is my computer to infect with a virus if I so wish. My computer ought to warn me that installing a virus is a bad idea, but if I tell my computer to back off and let me install a virus, then it should let me. And that extends down to DLL injection. I want to be able to modify crap on my computer.
Microsoft has made it so freaking difficult to do things like install unsigned drivers in newer versions of windows. First, you have to reboot the computer into startup settings and disable "driver signature enforcement" (good luck doing this if you're using a Bluetooth keyboard; it won't work). Then you can install the driver (after answering yes to a bunch of security prompts) BUT it will stop functioning after you reboot your computer, unless you ALSO run a series of terminal commands that will have the side effect of permanently enabling a "test mode" watermark on your desktop.
All of that so I could use my Wii Remote to play Towerfall Ascension. They really couldn't have just had one security prompt?
I don't know what "service" I will want going forward. If stuff like this is made impossible from the get-go, how am I ever supposed to find out? Would the concept of video game mods even exist in the first place had UWA app security been a "standard"? I don't think so.
I can understand, say, an enterprise telling its employees that they need to keep company-provided laptops secure. But that isn't what's happening here.
Mass_Pincup
Banned
People have standards, we don't have to be grateful for anything, Microsoft isn't doing it from the bottom of their heart because they want us so much to play this game. They want people in their ecosystem, they want to have complete control of want you can or can't do. They're just using games as a way to entices their proprietary platform.
stan423321
Member
Yes it is. It means your "security" is not considered a feature by me. Suppose I force all my customers of cloud storage to put in authentication codes when they log in on the new device, which are physically mailed the day one logs in on it. I'll receive complaints about that, because complainers don't find this security measure worth it. This is absolutely valid feedback, since this sort of "security" is nuts if you're not working for military or something.
DLL injection requires administrator rights for programs which protect folder containing their files (referred to as "application bundle" in some context, the explanation being - if you can maliciously change the DLL you can maliciously change the whole program as well), and besides one can protect the program against it in a few more ways if that's considered a good idea for some reason. Anything more is not security for user, it's just enforcing of the "only envisioned usage" by the software developer/publisher.
Why would I be grateful for a game that arbitrarily breaks functionality that adds value to other games on the same platform?
There is no modding (unless developer specifically allows it), so nope.
Yeah, PC gamers are used to more open platform, unlike consoles that always has been closed. Current generation isn't locked to single store, but I suspect that's what MS & Sony would like to do in future. This is basically bringing console's restrictions to PC.
They don't "allow" it, the OS does. There is nothing they can do about it. Even MS can't change this now due to a lot of backward comparability issues (if it's even technically feasible that is).
The windows store works hand in hand with new OS features which include a new executable format. When using the new format the OS is able to block dll injection. (AFAIK it's not even tied to the store. Meaning you could buy software using the new format elsewhere and it will have to abide by the new format's restrictions)
Wowfunhappy
Member
And they can't let us turn off that feature because...
This thread was a good read. I had no idea the windows store was so restrictive.
Wait, so Killer Instinct isn't going to have any of this? Thats a fucking bummer.
Because it will beat the purpose of having this new format in the first place.
Well, not really, no. The nature of the universality of Windows applications isn't lost when allowing users to enable dll injections.
Thanks. Only time I ever went near it was when I got credit with a netbook and bought Hitman Go. Worked perfectly, but it wasn't enough to make me trust a full on big budget game. Lack of community support is a massive blow in this day and age.
holygeesus
Banned
People can make a stand and say 'nope, not buying' but I can't see the numbers influencing MS's business model, as this is pretty sure to sell shit-loads of copies isn't it? Even if they artificially inflate the numbers, by including the free codes given to Xbox One buyers or similar, they are going to proclaim it a massive success and not budge from how they intend to proceed with future releases. Seeing as this wasn't even coming to the PC until quite recently, I'd be shocked if it is allowed on any other store front for years to come, if ever.
They could use .Net, android/java VMs if all they wanted is universality. It would have come with the benefit of having a ton of apps and software already available.
Preventing people from changing the code is an important part of this new format.
To be fair you could argue that they aren't directly competing with Steam as a result of this approach actually. The Windows Store and how apps are handled basically means that MS aren't releasing a PC game in the typical sense, but rather offering an Xbox game, just freed from the Xbox console itself. Valve continues with their current approach, whilst MS offers something additional. As of yet, there haven't really been any subtractive elements to this. It's not as if Rise of the Tomb Raider was witheld from a Steam release. The only games so far that are Windows Store exclusives are those that would otherwise be Xbox One exclusives without it.
Supporting Steam doesn't have to mean releasing everything they make onto it, any more than it means they would have to port Halo 5 day and date to the platform. They haven't done anything that restricts you from using Steam in the fashion that you always have, and they haven't yet caused any games that would be Steam-bound to end up exclusively on the Windows Store. All that's happened so far is that games that the previous clause would be "you can only play it if you buy an Xbox" have become "you can play it on PC if you want... but your PC's gonna act like it's playing it on an Xbox". Which in and of itself doesn't strike me as a bad thing.
I understand where people like Durante are coming from in regards to the things that aren't possible... as even though I care little today, I used to be almost exclusively a PC player and am aware what kind of difference it would have been if for example Quake III Arena could have never had OSP/CPMA and was stuck with the inbuilt functionality of the base game. If the PC gaming landscape became that universally, then yea, we'd have a rather big problem... but unlike Durante, I don't really see that as any real possibility whatsoever... they are so many different things that would be required from so many different players to make such a reality possible. Gamers would have to let it happen (I think this thread kinda shows that Steam's not about to lose its default store status), publishers would have to let it happen (including those like EA, that are already adverse to Steam's restrictions), competing platforms would have to let it happen (I'm pretty sure Apple/Google would be giddy at the though of MS discarding its legacy advantage, because god only knows they have a headstart with this storefront stuff), etc. It just doesn't seem like a realistic fear at all to me. At most I can only really see it being a case of some games that people may have wanted to buy if they were on Steam (or if UWP apps functioned more like Steam) will effectively remain the Xbox One exclusives they were prior to all this. Those that mind less can now just pretend there's an Xbox One built into their PC, negating the need to own the console itself in order to play the games, whilst also making use of the more powerful hardware to allow it to run better.
And it's completely and totally unnecessary and counter intuitive to the goal of bringing together users of multiple microsoft devices.
Wowfunhappy
Member
Why? So there's a powershell command that turns the feature off (after a series of scary red warning messages). 90%+ of Windows users are now protected from evil malicious code injection. The remaining 10% clearly knows what they're doing and doesn't need said protection.
This is exactly how Apple's System Integrity Protection works. You can disable it with csrutil disable, but most users will leave it on.
Not yet.
It's not bad platform for mobile games, Hitman Go & Lara Croft Go both work well as there's no need for extra features.
These aren't true universal apps, as in they support only desktop Windows. (And tablets that run full desktop windows). Thought, it's not like those devices would've power to run it.
Mass_Pincup
Banned
The amount of copies sold on PC isn't the first priority of MS, they just want people to come in the Windows Store, so having AAA games adding value to the store is what they want. Even if Quantum Break sales 10 copies on PC I'm fairly sure it isn't going to come out anywhere else.
That's what I was getting at. I should have been more clear.
Because UWA is really awful for gaming.
Valve even encourage people on modding.
How/why?
My best guess would be because they want to give the promise of code integrity to the devs, and not just to the end users.
I was talikng about the technincal side of this. Look at GHG's question.
It's taking away features that add value to Windows as a platform on the PC. Not to mention it hasn't been established as being necessary for bringing Microsoft platforms together in the first place- I'm not even talking about the Windows Store application but the policies regarding the locked down files.
stan423321
Member
It's hard to be absolutely sure. Blocking modding means that no one will spam customer service due to malfunctioning mod as well as slightly harder barrier to entering cheating, and reducing interactions between programs means that if Microsoft will remotely PT something, it won't break anything else (and no one spamming customer service due to badly interacting program). These are positives on their side that come to mind.
However I can't rule out they do that simply because that's how iOS works and iOS sells so everything should be like iOS so it will sell too. Well, from my limited experience iOS doesn't even seem to expose anything on filesystem by default, but that would absolutely screw up desktop as is, so they couldn't do this.
7 doesn't even have DX12, it was never going there regardless.