"Games for Windows" just a short term Vista-push program?

So, I was thinking about it these days and by the current state of "Games for Windows" program, I really must agree with Lombardi, GfW really could be just a short-term marketing crap in order to push Vista sales.

Why? Well, just because of the lack of any aggressive "Games for Windows" marketing program. Microsoft doesn't seem eager enough to construct Games for Windows shape like it does with the Xbox brand. Since Microsoft has spread itself longer than the sheet is, they obviously can not give GfW a priority ahead of their glorious Xbox brand, right?

But on the other hand, obvious mistakes are shaping up pretty well.

Halo 2 had marketing attention like all other "GfW" games alltogether. But why in the world would PC gamers want Halo 2, a two years old Xbox port in the first place? Where's the logic? Beacause of multiplayer? Why would a PC gamer wanna play a two years old console game multiplayer?

Maybe because of Games for Windows Live? Sure, it seems kinda interesting, but you'll have to pay for it. Why the hell would I wanna pay to play multiplayer on a PC platform?

What do you thing about the current state of Games for Windows program?

It's Microsoft's feeble attempt to assert control over a decentralised market it's supposed to control. From what I've heard, it actually creates benefits for developers who adhere to it, contrasted with say, the 360, where developers have guidelines imposed by MS.

In the end, the state of PC gaming software doesn't stand to need much changed IMO. It's competitive, innovative and has functioned perfectly well in the past without this sort of interference. I suppose an argument could be made if games were increasingly diversifying in terms of hardware requirements, but they really aren't. In fact, software incompatibility is something which has improven a great deal recently in my opinion.  

yes it is but its a good business plan.i mean isnt the ps3 a blue ray push?and that move turned out pretty good.

Games for windows is a gimmick like Blu-ray or the Wiimote.

It is Crysis, with MS going so far as to say that Crysis will be Vista's Halo.dgsag

Um... isn't Halo 2 Vista's Halo?

Contrary to popular belief, Halo 2 is not the MAIN game behind the GFW propgram. It is Crysis, with MS going so far as to say that Crysis will be Vista's Halo.dgsag

Games for windows is a gimmick like Blu-ray or the Wiimote.

JoeWii60

blue ray=not a gimmick,outselling hd dvd 2 to 1.probably will become mainstream when hdtv's are mainstream.

Contrary to popular belief, Halo 2 is not the MAIN game behind the GFW propgram. It is Crysis, with MS going so far as to say that Crysis will be Vista's Halo.dgsag

cant really see how that works considering that its the SP AND the MP that made halo so popular.....so crysis better have a long and intertesting SP to keep people buying the game

Games for windows is a gimmick like Blu-ray or the Wiimote.

JoeWii60

GfW really could be just a short-term marketing crap in order to push Vista sales.IgGy621985

I believe Microsoft is just dipping their toe in, so to speak.

They really haven't inversted much into this yet at all.  I still haven't seen anything in retail game areas that they have promised.  I don't see anything advertised on TV (though I watch little TV, so maybe that is why).

It is probably something to help push Vista.  Also, with reference to dipping the toe in the waters, they would probably like to see how much people embrace the idea of Live Anywhere.

I hope the retail branding proceeds, but I hope Live Anywhere flops miserably.  The last thing I want to see happen to PC gaming is it become fully under Microsofts control with respect to online playing.

Yes it is, Hermits are forced to buy Vista in order to play the best PC gaming can offer. Me, I'll just continue using Windows XP, the best OS ever made, my games run fine on it, no need to upgrade.Kayrod29

[QUOTE="Kayrod29"]Yes it is, Hermits are forced to buy Vista in order to play the best PC gaming can offer. Me, I'll just continue using Windows XP, the best OS ever made, my games run fine on it, no need to upgrade.smokeydabear076

[QUOTE="smokeydabear076"][QUOTE="Kayrod29"]Yes it is, Hermits are forced to buy Vista in order to play the best PC gaming can offer. Me, I'll just continue using Windows XP, the best OS ever made, my games run fine on it, no need to upgrade.Kayrod29

    Games for Windows has been around since 2005. It is just now becoming more popular with the launch of Vista, so therefore, by date alone you would see that it is not just because of Vista.

    MS is trying to make PC gaming simpler by making sure that people know quickly and easily what will and what won't play on their PC, since many people don't know the difference between Vista, XP, or Mac OS, let alone what RAM is. 

[QUOTE="smokeydabear076"][QUOTE="Kayrod29"]Yes it is, Hermits are forced to buy Vista in order to play the best PC gaming can offer. Me, I'll just continue using Windows XP, the best OS ever made, my games run fine on it, no need to upgrade.Kayrod29

    Its not a bad OS, and its requirements are high enough to where the memory it uses isn't drastic, but since I am not a hardcore PC gamer, I have no reason to upgrade, nor do I want to. I will stick with XP. 

[QUOTE="dgsag"]Contrary to popular belief, Halo 2 is not the MAIN game behind the GFW propgram. It is Crysis, with MS going so far as to say that Crysis will be Vista's Halo.hyperboy152000

cant really see how that works considering that its the SP AND the MP that made halo so popular.....so crysis better have a long and intertesting SP to keep people buying the game

You do know that GfW games can be played on XP right? They aren't Vista exclusive.....trix5817

[QUOTE="smokeydabear076"][QUOTE="Kayrod29"]Yes it is, Hermits are forced to buy Vista in order to play the best PC gaming can offer. Me, I'll just continue using Windows XP, the best OS ever made, my games run fine on it, no need to upgrade.Kayrod29

When Windows 95 launched people were appalled at how terrible it ran at 4mb of memory, which was fine for Windows 3.1.

When Windows 98 launched it ran pretty poorly at under 16mb, 32mb was Ideal.

Windows XP? My God.... 128mb chug city. 256mb was ideal, which later raised to 512mb as service packs released.

Windows Vista at 512mb ugh... but in Vista's case if you have a good, 1gb+ USB flash drive you can get MUCH better performance with only 512. I'd say 1gb is the bare minimum and 2gb or more is ideal.

Each of these OS seemed to have ludicrously high requirements when they launched but it wasn't long at all before the technology caught up and competent PC with good OS performance were on the market. And like has been said at the early launch of any recent Windows: if your current system is running fine and performing well don't bother to upgrade yet, if at all, until you have new hardware or more memory.