Support NeoGAF

[Trup1aya]

Funny you talk about facts vs assumptions when all I see is the defenders of UWP saying "wait for this, wait for that, but in the meantime please don't say bad things about Microsoft and UWP".

So in your mind who is talking about the facts here and who is assuming?

I could go back and quote things. But I'm on mobile and at work and don't feel like it.

But you don't have to go far to see comments about how UWP is will to lock devs and users into the Windows store, how it is a threat to open Distribution, or how the QB rendering solution is because Remedy, due to UWP had to use the Xbox solution, or how KI's framerate bug is due to UWP.


There are specific issues that are due to the limitations of UWP (SLI, Vsync, modding, overlays etc). Only modding is one that is inherently problematic. There's no technical reason the others wont be fixed in OS updates.

There are other issues that are due to developer decisions or oversight during the porting process. Those should be obvious, but folks attribute that to UWP. The Quit button. The QB rendering solution on PC. The framerate issue in KI.

Then there are other issues, that are probably due to piss poor management. Like releasing these graphics intensive games prior to the OS being able to support many of the features gamers expect.

I really don't see much sentiment that suggests UWP is great in every way. But in a discussion about the shortcoming of these PC releases, it's important to discuss facts, rather that make blanket statements that aren't factually accurate.

 

[RealityCheque]

I agree it is a win for Microoft, but I don't agree it's a loss for the open platform. Steam and all the other platforms are still going to exist in parallel, so it changes nothing about the openness of the Windows platform. It simply adds another ecosystem which is Xbox Live, which will be somewhat closer

But again. The whole point of my post is that the material benefit is only felt by a tiny subsection of users (those who have a PC, Xbox and Windows phone). The "it works everywhere" is just a weak reason for its existence. Again, the only real benefit is to Microsoft. Because given the mostly poor state of these AAA games there's not much here for actual PC gamers.

 

[aeolist]

And I already told that there are no advantages, concerning the advanced features. It's about Microsoft trying to establish another ecosystem on PC. There was no advantage of Origin either. It's about competition.

origin didn't try to take away fundamental PC features

i don't buy games there because i hate EA as a company but it's not anywhere near the same thing

 

[Akronis]

You're faster than my edit. First game was World Cup 98, Gothic soon followed. ^^

Second: None other than soon being able to play Xbox exclusives on PC.

Pray tell, how does UWP allow us to have those magical XBONE exclusives?

We've had exclusives in the past without UWA (albeit with shitty GFWL).

 

[riflen]

When Microsoft are releasing Forza 6 on Windows 10 without any wheel support, you really have to question whether UWP is worth anything at all to those people who choose to play their games on a PC.
Even in 1996, the Windows 95 DirectX 2 release of The Need for Speed had wheel support. EA even included the DOS and Win95 builds on the CD. Imagine Microsoft giving users the option to download the Win32 or UWP build of Quantum Break.

Turn 10 promise wheel support some time after release, but as a customer, why would I choose to spend my cash on this software? There are so many other choices that don't involve me giving my tacit support to a very bad idea by Microsoft to try and make their mobile platforms less of a failure.
Add this to all the other junk we're seeing with UWP games and it's just painfully obvious that computer games on Windows are just along for the UWP ride and in no way is this platform designed with the needs of complex games in mind. These releases are a very obvious attempt to get the platform rolling and it's a shame for the developers that UWP is just not ready and is causing their work to look worse than it otherwise might.

 

[RexNovis]

Enlighten me.

People have been trying to do so for pages at this point. Nothing I say is going to magically make you understand if the hundreds of ousts before me haven't. It is evident from your absurd number of posts in this thread that not only do you not have any idea what you're talking about but you have desire or intention of listening to a single solitary word that anyone says to explain things to you. So now that this has been established and we know you are contributing absolutely nothing to this thread besides frustration and befuddlement it's time for you to move on.

 

[Crackbone]

And I already told that there are no advantages, concerning the advanced features. It's about Microsoft trying to establish another ecosystem on PC. There was no advantage of Origin either. It's about competition.

I certainly won't blame them for trying to expand Xbox Live beyond the console market space.

The only similarity between Origin and UWP is the store. It takes only a nanosecond to understand that one has fundamental changes to executables and the ability to modify and inject them and the other is just a store.

You can find positives in your use case but for the majority of PC gamers this entire proposition is a big fat loser. Furthermore, the games that are being released are shotty at best and completely shitty at worst when it comes to performance.

 

[Dinjoralo]

The only reason third parties would get with UWP is MS moneyhats and/or locking OS/graphics features to UWP apps. Microsoft is definitely not above either strategy.

How much money would you need to hat to convince someone to put a game on a platform that would net far less sales? Steam's HW/SW survey shows that the number of people still running windows 7 and 8.1 is greater than the number of people on windows 10. Not to mention hat they'd be limiting themselves to a store many people have shown they don't want to use, or are outright boycotting against. Making a game Windows 10 store exclusive cuts the potential audience in half at best. You'd have to be an idiot to go along with this.

 

[bltn]

And I already told that there are no advantages, concerning the advanced features. It's about Microsoft trying to establish another ecosystem on PC. There was no advantage of Origin either. It's about competition.

I certainly won't blame them for trying to expand Xbox Live beyond the console market space.

Win32 games can be sold on Steam and Origin simultaneously. UWP games can only be sold in Microsoft's store. So much for competition, eh?

 

[Zaph]

I'm surprised by how quickly MS let the mask slip on UWA. Thought they'd at least have a short honeymoon period to garner good press.

If I had to guess, the state of the XONE forced their hand and they had to roll-out this integrated masterplan earlier than planned in order to save face.

 

[epmode]

How much money would you need to hat to convince someone to put a game on a platform that would net far less sales? Steam's HW/SW survey shows that the number of people still running windows 7 and 8.1 is greater than the number of people on windows 10. Not to mention hat they'd be limiting themselves to a store many people have shown they don't want to use, or are outright boycotting against. Making a game Windows 10 store exclusive cuts the potential audience in half at best. You'd have to be an idiot to go along with this.

Yeah, it would have to be a LOT of money. Which is why I think MS is going to lock DirectX features behind UWP in the future. They've already restricted new new Xbox One controller features to UWP (impulse triggers) so there's precedent.

Win32 games can be sold on Steam and Origin simultaneously. UWP games can only be sold in Microsoft's store. So much for competition, eh?

That's technically not true. At least, MS claims it isn't. Of course, the other stores would have to re-engineer themselves to support UWP downloads but I think it's technically possible.

 

[Saul]

Again, the only real benefit is to Microsoft. Because given the mostly poor state of these AAA games there's not much here for actual PC gamers.

I'm quite sure that the state of future UWP games will be just fine, once the platform is established.

I do agree that being a closed platform is a valid point of criticism tho, and it's not a progress for PC gamers. It's just one that doesn't concern me personally, as I'm not really interested in modding anyway. It's a progress for console gamers, but not for PC gamers.

origin didn't try to take away fundamental PC features

It doesn't take away fundamental PC features, it basically brings Xbox to PC, as an addition. The openness of the PC will always be a given, just not for the UWAs. But nothing holds you back from installint Steam on a Windows device. ^^

Pray tell, how does UWP allow us to have those magical XBONE exclusives?

Forza wasn't ever on PC. Gears not either as far as I remember.

Also Recore is going to be on PC, which is one of my most wanted because it's coming from the makers of Metroid Prime. ^^

 

[Metfanant]

I do not think this is that, at all.
Especially under DX12.

Spoiler

also there is no game I can think of that has evidenced such a problem this entire gen

but have any previous games gone to such length with crazy reconstruction techniques, and then been ported to the PC?...Its a central piece of the rendering tech for QB is it not?...

The "port" to PC would need to be completely changed to work in a more conventional sense no?

 

[nynt9]

Yeah, it would have to be a LOT of money. Which is why I think MS is going to lock DirectX features behind UWP in the future. They've already restricted new new Xbox One controller features to UWP (impulse triggers) so there's precedent.



That's technically not true. At least, MS claims it isn't. Of coruse, the other stores would have to re-engineer themselves to support UWP downloads but I think it's technically possible.

Which is a stark contrast with the steam controller, you can use it on any game in any way you want.

 

[Grief.exe]

What advantages does UWP grant the end-user over Win32?

Win32 games can be sold on Steam and Origin simultaneously. UWP games can only be sold in Microsoft's store. So much for competition, eh?

Atthr latest developer conference Microsoft did say UWP could be distributed through any store.

 

[Trup1aya]

When Microsoft are releasing Forza 6 on Windows 10 without any wheel support, you really have to question whether UWP is worth anything at all to those people who choose to play their games on a PC.
Even in 1996, the Windows 95 DirectX 2 release of The Need for Speed had wheel support. EA even included the DOS and Win95 builds on the CD. Imagine Microsoft giving users the option to download the Win32 or UWP build of Quantum Break.

Turn 10 promise wheel support some time after release, but as a customer, why would I choose to spend my cash on this software? There are so many other choices that don't involve me giving my tacit support to a very bad idea by Microsoft to try and make their mobile platforms less of a failure.
Add this to all the other junk we're seeing with UWP games and it's just painfully obvious that computer games on Windows are just along for the UWP ride and in no way is this platform designed with the needs of complex games in mind. These releases are a very obvious attempt to get the platform rolling and it's a shame for the developers that UWP is just not ready and is causing their work to look worse than it otherwise might.

Who says they are releasing Forza 6 w/o wheel support?

Unless I'm mistaken, Forza Apex is releasing w/o wheel support (due to current UWP limitations). But you wouldn't be spending your cash on this software anyway... Because it's free.

What advantages does UWP grant the end-user over Win32?

For most applications and smaller games, the end user would notice no difference between UWP and Win32, other than an extra layer of security and perhaps the ability to use that same app across devices. It could also mean apps that wouldn't have been released on this users device of choice will now make it.

For larger games, UWP in its current state is disadvantageous for the end-user.

 

[robotrock]

Is this really double buffered? I thought UWP being borderless windowed would give triple buffer

 

[justsomeguy]

Microsoft have been caught astroturfing before, so when a bunch of new, or previously inactive, members suddenly show up extolling the virtues of a new MS initiative, it looks rather suspicious.

If you think someone's astroturfing, PM a mod (Bish has a great banhammer) and let them deal with it.

 

[Dinjoralo]

Yeah, it would have to be a LOT of money. Which is why I think MS is going to lock DirectX features behind UWP in the future. They've already restricted new new Xbox One controller features to UWP (impulse triggers) so there's precedent.

They tried to do this with DX10 on Windows Vista. Almost no games used DX10. I'm sure developers could ignore a UWP exclusive DX13, especially since DX12 is available for everyone and seems to be working fine.

 

[YoshiMax]

but have any previous games gone to such length with crazy reconstruction techniques, and then been ported to the PC?...Its a central piece of the rendering tech for QB is it not?...

The "port" to PC would need to be completely changed to work in a more conventional sense no?

Why let that get in the way of entitlement? The game wasn't even coming to PC a few months ago now they're scum for not going back to the drawing board and entirely rewriting it for PC where the revenue gain will be slight at best.

 

[Felix Lighter]

It's crazy. With so much they needed to prove to gain any trust from PC gamers again, on top of all of the UWP restrictions, they shit out garbage ports at the same time so they make sure that even those who don't care about the UWP restrictions get kicked in the nuts as well. Right out of the gate, MS brutally kneecapped their new PC gaming initiative almost every way that they could.

 

[Saul]

People have been trying to do so for pages at this point. Nothing I say is going to magically make you understand if the hundreds of ousts before me haven't. It is evident from your absurd number of posts in this thread that not only do you not have any idea what you're talking about but you have desire or intention of listening to a single solitary word that anyone says to explain things to you. So now that this has been established and we know you are contributing absolutely nothing to this thread besides frustration and befuddlement it's time for you to move on.

I'm not responding to that kind of arrogand jabbering.

The only similarity between Origin and UWP is the store. It takes only a nanosecond to understand that one has fundamental changes to executables and the ability to modify and inject them and the other is just a store.

Yes I know that.

Win32 games can be sold on Steam and Origin simultaneously. UWP games can only be sold in Microsoft's store. So much for competition, eh?

As far as I understand it, UWP will serve as a development platform to also easily convert your games to the Win32 format. They don't want you to forcibly release the game on their store, they want you to use their development platform (which of course they hope will help making the developers release the game ALSO on their store).

Who says they are releasing Forza 6 w/o wheel support?

Unless I'm mistaken, Forza Apex is releasing w/o wheel support (due to current UWP limitations). But you wouldn't be spending your cash on this software anyway... Because it's free.

And they already confirmed wheel support will be coming later this year.

 

[GHG]

I could go back and quote things. But I'm on mobile and at work and don't feel like it.

But you don't have to go far to see comments about how UWP is will to lock devs and users into the Windows store, how it is a threat to open Distribution, or how the QB rendering solution is because Remedy, due to UWP had to use the Xbox solution, or how KI's framerate bug is due to UWP.


There are specific issues that are due to the limitations of UWP (SLI, Vsync, modding, overlays etc). Only modding is one that is inherently problematic. There's no technical reason the others wont be fixed in OS updates.

There are other issues that are due to developer decisions or oversight during the porting process. Those should be obvious, but folks attribute that to UWP. The Quit button. The QB rendering solution on PC. The framerate issue in KI.

Then there are other issues, that are probably due to piss poor management. Like releasing these graphics intensive games prior to the OS being able to support many of the features gamers expect.

I really don't see much sentiment that suggests UWP is great in every way. But in a discussion about the shortcoming of these PC releases, it's important to discuss facts, rather that make blanket statements that aren't factually accurate.

The bolded is exactly what I'm getting at. Thanks for proving my point.

PS, remedy have already said themselves that certain issues are down to UWP. Nevermind the fact that the situation wouldn't be so severe if the game wasn't UWP since there are tools that exist which can fix things like the frame pacing issue.

Who says they are releasing Forza 6 w/o wheel support?

Unless I'm mistaken, Forza Apex is releasing w/o wheel support (due to current UWP limitations). But you wouldn't be spending your cash on this software anyway... Because it's free.
.

Oh thank heavens. That makes it all ok then.

Spoiler

There are quite a few other f2p racing games on the platform with wheel and peripheral support already.

 

[inner-G]

Yeesh, I'm not touching these UWP games with a 10 foot pole.

 

[JaggedSac]

When Microsoft are releasing Forza 6 on Windows 10 without any wheel support, you really have to question whether UWP is worth anything at all to those people who choose to play their games on a PC.
Even in 1996, the Windows 95 DirectX 2 release of The Need for Speed had wheel support. EA even included the DOS and Win95 builds on the CD. Imagine Microsoft giving users the option to download the Win32 or UWP build of Quantum Break.

Turn 10 promise wheel support some time after release, but as a customer, why would I choose to spend my cash on this software? There are so many other choices that don't involve me giving my tacit support to a very bad idea by Microsoft to try and make their mobile platforms less of a failure.
Add this to all the other junk we're seeing with UWP games and it's just painfully obvious that computer games on Windows are just along for the UWP ride and in no way is this platform designed with the needs of complex games in mind. These releases are a very obvious attempt to get the platform rolling and it's a shame for the developers that UWP is just not ready and is causing their work to look worse than it otherwise might.

Xbox One fighting sticks aren't compatible yet with KI. Which is another huge head scratcher, lol.

 

[potatohead]

This reminds me of when DirectInput was the standard and switched to Xinput.... which supported fewer controllers and fewer axes :/

Good thing we have tools to inject into Xinput now though.

 

[Jude]

I have to admit I didn't.
I really thought they would be exceedingly careful with and dedicated to making their first few flagship titles for the platform perfect.
(Or at least as perfect as they can be within the UWP constraints)

The first text you see when launch the game is "please dont turn off your console"... they didnt even try it.

 

[Metfanant]

Why let that get in the way of entitlement? The game wasn't even coming to PC a few months ago now they're scum for not going back to the drawing board and entirely rewriting it for PC where the revenue gain will be slight at best.

i think youre missing my point. my concern was simply that this could become a recurring issue when dealing with exceedingly complicated tricks used to harness every little nuance of the console hardware..especially on exclusive games...

obviously games designed to be multiplatform from the get go will be easier to work with...

 

[Dinjoralo]

What advantages does UWP grant the end-user over Win32?

Based on my time with Killer Instinct, minor conveniences and novelties at best. In fullscreen, you can move your mouse to the top of the screen to show the window bar, or the bottom to show the task bar. Achievements pop up as windows notifications. Stuff boots up instantly. That's about it, aside from the trigger vibration on XB1 controllers that I haven't used since I don't have one.

 

[Grief.exe]

This reminds me of when DirectInput was the standard and switched to Xinput.... which supported fewer controllers and fewer axes :/

Good thing we have tools to inject into Xinput now though.

I didn't know that xinput was inferior, but I'm thankful it standardized the industry and brought more controller compatible games.

The only thing Microsoft has done for PC gaming in the last 10 years was largely by accident.

 

[potatohead]

Why let that get in the way of entitlement? The game wasn't even coming to PC a few months ago now they're scum for not going back to the drawing board and entirely rewriting it for PC where the revenue gain will be slight at best.

It's entitled to have any interest in a decent product on the platform of your choice?

That's entitlement?

Wat.jpg

I didn't know that xinput was inferior, but I'm thankful it standardized the industry and brought more controller compatible games.

The only thing Microsoft has done for PC gaming in the last 10 years was largely by accident.

It did bring a good standard, but only after so much input by others does it let people use the controller of their choice.

Double-edged sword, but I agree that it helped standardize control systems.

In Halo 2 for example only Xinput is supported (that works properly at least).

Whereas in Halo 1 on PC which uses DirectInput you could literally plug in any controller detected by Windows and use that to play the game, and completely configure the controls however you want.

Even Star Wars Rogue Squadron on PC, using DirectInput, still works to this day on modern platforms, with completely configurable controls, with any controller pad. That's how awesome DirectInput is.

 

[Reizo Ryuu]

When I first heard about it being pre-purchase from xbox store and you'll get the w10 version for free.
But Then I saw it was 70 euros on the xbox store...and even worse also 70 euros on the windows store.

In the end I just bought it at retail for xb1 for 50, and while it's definitely a step down graphically from my normal pc gaming, still having a blast. I hope they fix all these issues for the pc version though.

 

[Trup1aya]

The bolded is exactly what I'm getting at. Thanks for proving my point.

PS, remedy have already said themselves that certain issues are down to UWP. Nevermind the fact that the situation wouldn't be so severe if the game wasn't UWP since there are tools that exist which can fix things like the frame pacing issue.



Oh thank heavens. That makes it all ok then.

Spoiler

There are quite a few other f2p racing games on the platform with wheel and peripheral support already.

What point did you prove? MS has explicitly stated that quite a few of these technical issues will be addressed in an upcoming update.

Now you can ASSUME they are lying. But the announcements were made directly to developers...

Regarding Forza, There you go mischaracterizing comments again... When did I say it was ok to not have peripheral support?

The person I was talking to said he didn't want to spend money on a product that didn't have it. I let him know that said product isn't being offered for money...

Again, with the peripherals, we have a UWP limitation, that is scheduled to be addressed in an update. so again, it's not an inherent flaw with the principle of UWP.

In short: not ok, but unlike modding, will be fixed.


It seems like you are cool with selective reasoning... You'll assume Remedy is right about the quit button (even though we know they are wrong, simply by looking at all the other UWP games). We know which issues are UWP related, and even Remedy suggests that MS will be removing those limitations in the future. But you'll gloss over that right?

 

[RealityCheque]

And even if the technical issues are largely solved in the future, what about the prices?

It's €70 in my country. For a PC game!

Is this a precedent that MS is trying to set? Because if they are going for console level pricing then this thing is completely DOA.

Xbox/PS4 usually go with €70 for first party and big third party, then €60 for anything under that bar. This is a crazy price for PC games and very few will be inclined to pay that when they are used to getting day 1 AAAs for far less. No third party dev is going to be encouraged to publish on the windows 10 store by this crazy strategy.

 

[potatohead]

Here's a good thread on DirectInput from GAF itself, saved me from doing any searching: https://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1125249

The XInput API also as of 2010 has limits that DirectInput does not:

XInput supports only "next generation" controllers. This limits it basically to controllers for the Xbox 360 that also have Windows drivers. Legacy Windows controllers, joysticks and generalized force-feedback devices are not supported.

XInput supports a maximum of four controllers at a time. This is an Xbox limit, carried over to Windows. Although as of 2010 few PC games require more than four controllers at once, DirectInput itself has no such limitation.

XInput does not support keyboards, mice, or mouse-type devices. While this mirrors Microsoft's recommendation not to use DirectInput with these devices,programmers can use DirectInput with these devices.

XInput supports maximum of 4 axes, 10 buttons, 2 triggers and 8-direction digital pad per controller, compared to DirectInput's support for 8 axes, 128 buttons, and full-range POV. (The number of axes, buttons and triggers XInput supports corresponds directly to the Xbox 360 controller.)

Just for FYI for anyone who was interested in that.

 

[gypsygib]

I don't think over priced is a valid argument. It's standard for new games, at least in Canada. Comparing the price to the Indian store for one game isn't a fair comparison. You can't expect every game to be heavily discounted on release.

All the other issues a legit, don't have much hope for MS being a serious player in the PC games market. Everything they release is well below the standard set buy other publishers and negates all the advantages of PC.

 

[JaggedSac]

What advantages does UWP grant the end-user over Win32?

For games? Zilch. Although it does eradicate the Myth 2 uninstall scenario from ever happening, lol.

But it does provide a bit of peace of mind when downloading things from the net. And I am not even referring to the big things, which usually have their own large distribution infrastructure, but the small things that someone might want. You don't have to go to some small website and worry about whether this thing you want to download is legit and checking around the web to ensure it is. You can have peace of mind that it won't shit your registry to pieces, it wont leave crap during uninstall, it wont install in weird areas, etc. That certainly seems to have benefit from point of view for both devs and consumers since smaller devs of smaller software might be able to get a wider audience from that. And that is even without them bothering to through the Windows Store. And that is not even touching on the sandboxed nature of the runtime itself in that you can be sure they wont be messing with other processes on your computer in harmful ways. And that last bit is the part that really affect pc games. Although, I foresee Win32 software to be able to penetrate that sandbox.

 

[riflen]

Who says they are releasing Forza 6 w/o wheel support?

Unless I'm mistaken, Forza Apex is releasing w/o wheel support (due to current UWP limitations). But you wouldn't be spending your cash on this software anyway... Because it's free.

Sorry, Forza 6: Apex then. It's free, yes, so my point about paying for that title is moot, but the gist of my post is, "why would you buy a UWP PC game at this point?". Seems from your post that we're in agreement at the moment, where any reasonably complex PC games are concerned.

 

[prag16]

What's your rig like?

I have an i7-4790, 16GB ram, and a GTX 970. So I'm hoping for a good experience.

You do not notice any frame pacing issues? Like at all?

stock 2550k/970. Not really noticing any frame pacing issues outside of an infrequent hitch here or there.

I don't have a tool to prove it, but I'm pretty sure I'm damn close to 60fps almost at all times. I'm not trying to go balls out ultra though. I'm running a mixture of medium and high settings at 1680x1050.

Actually, my BIGGEST complaint so far doesn't have anything to do with any of this. It's the fact that instead of letterboxing the 16:9 TV show, it is stretching it to fill my 16x10 monitor. Another silly oversight I guess..

 

[LordRaptor]

Game is £50 in the UK, I don't even like spending £30 on a PC game lol.

The extra slap in the face is that buying it on Xbox One through the Xbox One digital store - the worst possible option on price available in the UK - the game is only £45.
So UK PC Gamers get to pay £5 more because fuck you thats why.

As far as I understand it, UWP will serve as a development platform to also easily convert your games to the Win32 format. They don't want you to forcibly release the game on their store, they want you to use their development platform (which of course they hope will help making the developers release the game ALSO on their store).

No, MS are making no moves whatsoever to make UWA -> Win32 conversion a thing. All of their efforts are concentrated on the other way round.

Win32 is a popular self sustaining platform that developers want to release on.
UWA is basically for a Phone that nobody wants. Its pretty obvious why they want to make it easy for people to covert their popular software so that it works on an unpopular phone.
Because then they can stand on a stage and brag about how healthy their ecosystem is with lots of developer support. Even though their marketshare of aforesaid phone are falling into the range of statistical error.

 

[Saul]

all the advantages of PC.

More powerful hardware than on console, check
Mouse & keyboarde optimized software, check

Those are the two most important things for me concerning PC gaming. ^^

 

[wazoo]

I see lots of benefits for non gaming software to be UWP for all these reasons, provided I can install them from outside Winstore.

As for games, I have already a format that is secure and does not mess with my system, it is called Steam.

 

[Barack Lesnar]

After reading all 12 pages I see conflicting info. Several people have made posts saying the game runs well on ultra but they all have monster setups. Most of them are playing it on 1080p which is fine to me as I only have a 23" 1080p monitor. A technical feast like this with all those crazy post fx was never going to run well at 4k with ultra settings. I don't think poorly optimized is that valid.

The only legit major technical issues I'm reading are the reconstruction rendering and frame pacing. The latter can probably be fixed. Whatever this reconstruction is it sounds too hardcoded into the engine to fix. It would probably take a lot of resources and time. It's not a toggle dark souls type of fix.

Then of course the overseas price which is all on MS and pretty awful.

 

[JaggedSac]

No, MS are making no moves whatsoever to make UWA -> Win32 conversion a thing. All of their efforts are concentrated on the other way round.

Win32 is a popular self sustaining platform that developers want to release on.
UWA is basically for a Phone that nobody wants. Its pretty obvious why they want to make it easy for people to covert their popular software so that it works on an unpopular phone.
Because then they can stand on a stage and brag about how healthy their ecosystem is with lots of developer support. Even though their marketshare of aforesaid phone are falling into the range of statistical error.

Nah, MS cares little for phones at this point. Hell they mentioned it maybe once during the entire build keynote, lol. Meyerson even said they weren't focusing on phones this year. New hardware likely won't arrive until sometime in 2017 and at which point it will likely be running x86. So I believe you are a bit misguided in your assumptions there.

 

[LordRaptor]

I don't think over priced is a valid argument.

PC games traditionally do not pay any royalties to a platform holder, nor are required to pay certification fees for release or patching. Modern PC games are also entirely digital, so a publisher has zero infrastructure or logisitics costs to cover as part of the sticker price.

Therefore putting a digital only release out on PC at the same cost as a console physical disk is being visibly greedy.
Putting a PC digital only release out at more than a console retail cost (as Ms have done in the UK with QB) is just taking the piss.

e:

Nah, MS cares little for phones at this point. Hell they mentioned it maybe once during the entire build keynote, lol. Meyerson even said they weren't focusing on phones this year. New hardware likely won't arrive until sometime in 2017 and at which point it will likely be running x86. So I believe you are a bit misguided in your assumptions there.

Possibly, but the moves MS make make me stay pretty sure that they are internally still trying to make Windows Phone their future, rather than doubling down on making Windows Desktop its own thing with its own reasons for people to use it.

 

[aeolist]

More powerful hardware than on console, check
Mouse & keyboarde optimized software, check

Those are the two most important things for me concerning PC gaming. ^^

what that boils down to is choice. choice in GPU, CPU, RAM, controller, etc.

choice (mostly in software but in some cases hardware as well) is exactly what microsoft is limiting or outright removing with UWP.

 

[JaggedSac]

e:


Possibly, but the moves MS make make me stay pretty sure that they are internally still trying to make Windows Phone their future, rather than doubling down on making Windows Desktop its own thing with its own reasons for people to use it.

Their future is building a platform where the hardware does not matter. Only display and feature sets differentiating them.

 

[Trup1aya]

The vast majority of applications will never be able to be "coded once" for such a wildly different platforms as smartphones, tablets (with keyboards!), laptops (with touchscreens!) and desktops. Hence why I consider the whole UWP idea built on a false premise.

MS is looking at how Apple do stuff and try to mimic and improve it but they don't really understand why that stuff is done this way in Apple's ecosystem and as a result of this lack of understanding they are making it worse instead of improving it.

The gory truth here is that MS has lost its own identity and is trying to chase some other company success instead of embracing the better parts of their own ecosystem - and while they're doing this another company has successfully sidetracked them and has built a platform which is in all essence and purpose what a Windows for smartphones should've been years ago (I'm talking about Android obviously).

Instead of building this attractive mobile platform separately from Windows and integrating them together later (as Apple did) they try to force themselves into the market by turning their PC platform into something it's not and something it doesn't want to be. This is a false way of getting there for them and it won't bring them anything but issues as they are trying to sell something to PC crowd which nobody here wants to buy in the first place.

So yeah I can see this whole UWP initiative dead in a couple of years just like it was with countless MS initiatives of the previous dozen of years where they essentially failed to provide a product which market wanted and provided something which they wanted instead thinking that it will be successful just because of their grasp and influence on PC market. It wasn't though and it won't be now.

There are plenty of apps that would be candidates for coding once, and hitting multiple platforms device, if not all win10. and developers don't have to aim to hit all, they can target specific ones, or just one of they want. Different input methods is probably the least complex obstacle to handle in this regards.

Banking apps, social networking apps, mobile games, smaller indie games, streaming services, messaging apps, etc.

Even larger more intensive that probably wouldn't target all devices, like music production or graphic design programs, would probably switch to the new standard w/o loss in performance...

Really, the only types of applications whose users that generally need deep system access are antivirus and video games.

Beyond having their own store, I don't see how MS is channeling Apple. Developers will still be able to distributed these apps through any means they deem neccisary... Just like they do with Win32. They won't have to touch the Win10 store at all.

 

[texhnolyze]

After reading all 12 pages I see conflicting info. Several people have made posts saying the game runs well on ultra but they all have monster setups. Most of them are playing it on 1080p which is fine to me as I only have a 23" 1080p monitor. A technical feast like this with all those crazy post fx was never going to run well at 4k with ultra settings. I don't think poorly optimized is that valid.

The only legit major technical issues I'm reading are the reconstruction rendering and frame pacing. The latter can probably be fixed. Whatever this reconstruction is it sounds too hardcoded into the engine to fix. It would probably take a lot of resources and time. It's not a toggle dark souls type of fix.

Then of course the overseas price which is all on MS and pretty awful.

That's the problem, monster PCs shouldn't run any game at 1080p. Not locked at 60fps on top of that.

 

[JaggedSac]

There are plenty of apps that would be candidates for coding once, and hitting multiple platforms device, if not all win10. and developers don't have to aim to hit all, they can target specific ones, or just one of they want. Different input methods is probably the least complex obstacle to handle in this regards.

Banking apps, social networking apps, mobile games, smaller indie games, streaming services, messaging apps, etc.

Even larger more intensive that probably wouldn't target all devices, like music production or graphic design programs, would probably switch to the new standard w/o loss in performance...

Really, the only types of applications whose users that generally need deep system access are antivirus and video games.

And software development tools. Which, unless massive changes happen to UWP, will be using Win32.