Should Microsoft be given a third chance with PC Gaming ?

Dont need to give them a chance tbh, idk why anyone would give any corparation a chance. Wait. Look at what is happening, what happens in the future. If they continue with good support, listening and more options while continually trying then i have no problems. But their stuff is pretty bad atm, i hope quantum break is better. At a minimum i would like g sync support, no forced vsync, full screen and a better store layout.
 
They wish PC is a close system now.
If they truly care about PC gaming, just release games on all store front, you know, for the real gamer.
Obviously, they only care about windows 10 store.
 
Ludens said:
No. Just because actually it's impossible to download from GFWL the games I BOUGHT with REAL money on GFW store.
I tried to ask help to the support (a Steam key for Fable 3, in example), I got nothing.
I tried to ask some kind of refund, I got nothing.
I gave them money and I have nothing.
Luckily some games got a Steamwork passage to I have them on Steam, now, but I'm plenty of games and dlcs I can't use. Why this time should be different?
Click to expand...

This is disgraceful.
 
Modest Mauser said:
I
Even Steam was awful when it first released way back in the day. If MS irons out the kinks in the new storefront, of which there are many, I'm willing to give it a shot.
Click to expand...

Microsoft isn't competing against Steam from 2003, they are competing with Steam in 2016. If you want to launch a digital distribution platform today you need to complete with what's available today not what was available more then a decade ago.

Microsoft lost my trust years ago with everything that happened with GfWL, I will not be buying any PC games from them. Digital Distribution is all about trust and I just don't trust them.
 
This annoys me: GFWL Gold was only for cross-play with 360 which was supported on what, 2 games? PC-only multiplayer was never behind a paywall.

That said, Durante nailed it by saying that pc gaming is used as just another 'strategic objective, and it shows.'

The ONE thing this new move by MS is good for is bringing a certification process to PC Games and Windows overall. All the gnashing of teeth at bad or otherwise compromised ports is exactly because without a cert process, devs & publishers do whatever the heck they want and public opinion is notoriously bad at policing these transgressions - If it sells, who cares?

Imagine if Valve did any curation of Steam... Jim Sterling would be out of a job... so that's a wash I guess.
 
For that they need to actually try. All they're doing right now is rushing out games to release on PC for that "One ecosystem" strategy, not because they want a piece of the PC market, or because they're doing this because Phil Spencer just now discovered that there's some PC player and they need to have a chance to play their games, but because they have to make the Windows Store look attractive.

They don't take into account basic fonction PC gamers are expecting which is kind of sad now since MS has been developing PC games for decades now, they're actually regressing as time goes on.

Kukawaki said:
This annoys me: GFWL Gold was only for cross-play with 360 which was supported on what, 2 games? PC-only multiplayer was never behind a paywall.

That said, Durante nailed it by saying that pc gaming is used as just another 'strategic objective, and it shows.'

The ONE thing this new move by MS is good for is bringing a certification process to PC Games and with the store overall, a certification process to Windows. All the gnashing of teeth at bad or otherwise compromised ports is exactly because without a cert process, devs & publishers do whatever the heck they want and public opinion is notoriously bad at policeing these transgressions - If it sells, who cares?

Imagine if Valve did any curation of Steam... Jim Sterling would be out of a job... so that's a wash I guess.
Click to expand...

But it seems like Gears is a mess on AMD cards, a Microsoft game no less so, your argument fails apart when they're not even trying.
 
WadeitOut said:
Lol the hyperbole. I can't take it seriously.
Click to expand...

Were you just not around for the Games for Windows Live nonsense, and all the non-Microsoft games tied to that garbage software?

Kukawaki said:
The ONE thing this new move by MS is good for is bringing a certification process to PC Games and Windows overall. All the gnashing of teeth at bad or otherwise compromised ports is exactly because without a cert process, devs & publishers do whatever the heck they want and public opinion is notoriously bad at policing these transgressions - If it sells, who cares?
Click to expand...

I don't think a certification process is a positive. On the PC all it does is delay needed patches from getting to customers. We saw this, again, back during the GFWL days, where Steam games would get updates as needed and GFWL games would often be waiting for the patches to pass cert.
 
Mass_Pincup said:
But it seems like Gears is a mess on AMD cards, a Microsoft game no less so your argument fails apart when they're not even trying.
Click to expand...

Hahaha! *facepalm*

I don't have a good counterpoint aside from that Cert doesn't mean it runs on everything... but this is really damning. Wow. Jeez MS...
 
Htown said:
Were you just not around for the Games for Windows Live nonsense, and all the non-Microsoft games tied to that garbage software?



I don't think a certification process is a positive. On the PC all it does is delay needed patches from getting to customers. We saw this, again, back during the GFWL days, where Steam games would get updates as needed and GFWL games would often be waiting for the patches to pass cert.
Click to expand...

That just depends on how well it's managed... and MS has proven time and time again that they can't do it well (see above)

I'm out.
 
Seems to me this is an effort to get everyone to use windows 10 including gamers. The platform is not good enough compared to the competition so they need to change fast as we all know they can if they need to. Just dont buy the games.
 
Mindlog said:
Don't really think it matters. I just want games.
And top tier peripherals.
G7W2Gkh.jpg
Click to expand...

The closure of these PC focused series (and peripherals) and the studios that created them in order to focus more on the successful Xbox360 should be Indicator at least historically MS is perfectly fine with cutting their losses in gaming markets.
 
Why would I give them a third chance? That's just Stockholm Syndrome. MS is pretty much dead to me at this point.
 
Timedog said:
No steam, no buy.
Click to expand...

This. I see no point in using additional platforms to collect my games. MS should just distribute their games on Steam and all is good. Steam works perfectly fine as a platform and is better than ever before. Also all my friends use Steam...
 
Uh. Hate to be a smartass, but I'm pretty sure MS just blew their third chance. Not sure how they did it but they found a way. All they had to do was release some games on the PC. They did much more and managed to ruin a good thing.

Do the folks at MS even play pc games? I mean, did even 1 of em stop and critically think about what kind of reactions the PC Gaming community would have to their product? Might there be lessons to be learned from Games for Windows Live that may help steer the company away from disasters like that in the future? I would hope so man.

Anyways, after GFWL, the Marketplace, and now this whole Windows App Store incident, I don't think I should be quick to forget the kind of good-will that MS has shown the pc gaming community.
 
Looking at their track record, their current "efforts" and my other, way better options ... a resounding: NO
 
You know there would be a very simple and easy way for Microsoft to get back some of the goodwill lost from PC gamers.

Release their back catalogue onto Steam and GOG. Seriously, they have such a good library of games on PC from back in the day and that would be a huge first step.

  • Freelancer
  • Starlancer
  • Mechwarrior 3 and beyond
  • I believe they own the rights to Mechcommander as well
  • The Close Combat series
  • Flight Simulator series - at least the most recent non-F2P version
  • Viva Pinata
  • Halo 1 and 2.

It's kind of shameful that games like the Age of Empires series had to be licensed out to another company before they saw a release onto digital platforms.
 
A nice gesture would be for MS to patch out GFWL in their own titles so that they, you know, actually work again, and provide access to the titles purchased on the GFWL store to people who can't access them currently.

It really seems like the very least they could do.
For all the shit PC gamers might give Warner Bros, Warner Bros at the very least paid to remove GFWL and ensured customers could access the DLC that they may have purchased through GFWL.

Right now MS are hovering at G2A levels of sketchiness and take-the-money-and-run trustability
 
Microsoft doesn't have to be "given" chances. The opportunity for more than lip service has always been there for the taking. It is up to Microsoft to back up their words with money.
 
Just check the issues with windows store applications and now the problems with the just released Gears of War Ultimate.

Even if they were doing all this to simplify the process to people that come from console gaming they are achieving the opposite. Its like they learned nothing from GFWL.
 
Third chance? You sure are being charitable.

Microsoft chases markets, not fans. If PC gamers temporarily benefit from their latest endeavor, I see no problem with that. Their last endeavor gave us 1 1/2 exceptional console generations. I don't see the problem of enjoying a decade of PC support while it lasts.
 
Jesus said, and I quote, "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her."

I feel that answers the question.
 
PastorOfMuppets said:
You know there would be a very simple and easy way for Microsoft to get back some of the goodwill lost from PC gamers.

Release their back catalogue onto Steam and GOG. Seriously, they have such a good library of games on PC from back in the day and that would be a huge first step.

  • Freelancer
  • Starlancer
  • Mechwarrior 3 and beyond
  • I believe they own the rights to Mechcommander as well
  • The Close Combat series
  • Flight Simulator series - at least the most recent non-F2P version
  • Viva Pinata
  • Halo 1 and 2.

It's kind of shameful that games like the Age of Empires series had to be licensed out to another company before they saw a release onto digital platforms.
Click to expand...

I bought free lancer but somehow lost the disk :( Gone forever.
 
Im looking at it from a practical standpoint. If the ports of Xbox one exclusives are good, and if the Window Store is easy to use and is non intrusive then I would say they have a success. A success in the sense that Steam is still my primary go to place, but will occasionally go to Origin for EA exclusive games.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

PC games should have a 'console graphics' preset
Opinion  2
78
815
Guilty_AI replied
[Tom's Hardware] Microsoft Gaming Copilot hits Windows in public beta — in-game AI overlay goes live for PC players
News  2
64
579
BennyBlanco replied
Tom Warren: "[Call of Duty hacks] should be a giant wake-up call for Microsoft. Games in the Microsoft Store are older versions or missing features"
2
63
942
Giallo Corsa replied
Big Gaming week for PC Gaming
7
182
Kacho replied
PCWorld: Microsoft should be terrified of SteamOS.
2 3 4 5
233
14K
kentkouh replied
Top Bottom