bit-gamer.net

Microsoft: "PC gaming is very important to us"

Microsoft: "PC gaming is very important to us"

Microsoft may not have mentioned PC gaming at E3 2010, but it still claims a renewed focus on the platform.

Microsoft may not have made practically any mention of the PC platform at E3 2010 last week, preferring to focus on Kinect and the Xbox 360 Slim instead, but it is still claiming a revived interest in Windows-based gaming.

According to internal mail discovered by Kotaku, Microsoft's PRs are being fed answers to questions about whether the recently announced PC version of Fable 3 indicates a slight change of direction for the company.

"In terms of revenue, Windows is far and away the largest gaming platform in the world," says Microsoft's official response. "It's an incredibly important part of Microsoft's business. From core games like Fable III to casual, social and Facebook titles, more gaming happens on Windows than anywhere else."

"Windows 7 is a world-class gaming platform, and you can bet Microsoft has a vested interest in using it as a platform for amazing first party content. Fable III on Windows as well as Xbox 360 this holiday is a great first step, and we'll have more news for you later this summer."

Whether the PR plans indicate a genuine change of direction for Microsoft or just some PR spiel waits to be seen, especially since Microsoft's latest efforts on the PC, such as Games For Windows Live, have been poorly received by gamers, developers and journalists alike.

Let us know your thoughts in the forums.

65 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply
samkiller42 23rd June 2010, 11:55 Quote
We can only hope the Game studios see it in the same way, which i doubt unfortunately. They can charge more for Console games than they can for PC, so they don't make as much money, shame.

Sam
Flibblebot 23rd June 2010, 12:21 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by samkiller42
...They can charge more for Console games...
Not necessarily true. Console games cost more because the console hardware manufacturers (Sony, Microsoft & Nintendo) charge a license fee per game which is why they cost more. Because the extra cost goes to the console manufacturers, the developers don't necessarily make more per game although I imagine that they probably sell more copies of console-based games compared to PC-based games.

I'm interested that MS seem to include Flash games in the list - does this mean they're going to try to get people developing games in Silverlight instead? I'd be interested to see what proportion of games are "real" (i.e. non-Flash, non-casual) games?
[USRF]Obiwan 23rd June 2010, 12:24 Quote
I believe it got to do with age. The generation (25 - 35) has grown up with pc's. The 'now' generation is growing up with consoles. My generation (35-45) is gown up with consoles (atari 2600 etc) and later in early 20's, with pc's.

I must say that I do not spend much time on games the last couple of years compared to when I was 20 to 30.

And maybe the quality of the games has something to do with it to. 10 years back the quality of pc games where much much better then any console. Now the console is just as pretty as a pc game.
Jezcentral 23rd June 2010, 12:24 Quote
The gaming community will take a lot more convincing then a "leaked" PR piece.

Mind you, it will be a small step in the right direction if GFW Fable 3 gets a simultaneous release with the Xbox version. I'll believe that when I see it, though.
Coldon 23rd June 2010, 12:24 Quote
Console games cost the same as PC games, its just that publishers need to pay an addition console tax to the console manufacturers, this is what accounts for the price difference between the platforms.

This is a good thing, as it stands almost all middleware game engines support at the least PC and XBOX 360 with some of the bigger engine like UE3, Gamebryo and CryEngine support the PS3 as well as other platforms. Cross platform development is becoming easy (tho the artists job isnt ;) )
l3v1ck 23rd June 2010, 12:25 Quote
MS will show more intrest in PC gaming a year or two befor the next generation Xbox comes out. As the Xbox is basically a PC, they'll want to ensure there's plenty of good stuff to port for launch. Assuming the hardware will be a similar spec to PC's at teh time of launch. At the moment they have no real need for PC games as they're often too higher a spec to fully port.
Gunsmith 23rd June 2010, 12:27 Quote
"bollocks"
mi1ez 23rd June 2010, 12:27 Quote
PC gaming had better be important to you! If it wasn't for gaming I'd be a linux user.
NikoBellic 23rd June 2010, 12:27 Quote
I think that MS is only looking at PC Gaming again now because Valve is trying to make Mac a popular gaming platform, and that may have an impact on MS, so MS I would imagine are going to be trying to encourage devs to use DX and try to encourage most developers to make Windows exclusives still... I just heard the other day that one of Ubisoft PC games is going to be available on Mac too (Driver: San Fransico)
Kúsař 23rd June 2010, 12:30 Quote
Fable 3 is a "core PC game"? But it's on par with Sims 3!

So the rumours are true...PC gaming is dead...
PQuiff 23rd June 2010, 12:34 Quote
Who do they think is buying this? If they believe this they would fix the pile of crap this games for windows live. They just want it both ways. It will be a long time before i believe MS value there PC gamers.

They started of well with windows seven then just let it slide.
cgthomas 23rd June 2010, 12:38 Quote
YES FABLE IS BACK TO PC, WOOHOOOO
Anfield 23rd June 2010, 12:39 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by PQuiff
Who do they think is buying this? If they believe this they would fix the pile of crap this games for windows live.

fix GFWL? I think that pile of s**t is beyond repair, they should just stop it all together.
johnnyboy700 23rd June 2010, 12:42 Quote
Oh dear, its just like a football manager with a run of dodgy results getting the vote of confidence and full backing of the board, then they sack him two weeks later.

Damn, just when it looks like the runaway horse that is GPU performance increase every three months looks like its about to slow down, we find that games hit a peak graphical quality with (of all things) Crysis. Time to hit my back catalogue of games I haven't played yet.
steveo_mcg 23rd June 2010, 12:42 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by mi1ez
PC gaming had better be important to you! If it wasn't for gaming I'd be a linux user.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NikoBellic
I think that MS is only looking at PC Gaming again now because Valve is trying to make Mac a popular gaming platform, and that may have an impact on MS, so MS I would imagine are going to be trying to encourage devs to use DX and try to encourage most developers to make Windows exclusives still... I just heard the other day that one of Ubisoft PC games is going to be available on Mac too (Driver: San Fransico)

These are fair points. MS depends on the ubiquity of their software you use in the office so you use it at home and vice a versa.
l3v1ck 23rd June 2010, 12:46 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by mi1ez
PC gaming had better be important to you! If it wasn't for gaming I'd be a linux user.
I'll say + 1/2 rather than plus 1.
Driver availability keeps me with Windows too.
battles_atlas 23rd June 2010, 12:51 Quote
Microsoft's clearly confused attitude towards PC gaming is probably a result of the accountants at the company struggling to to put a figure on how much PC gaming actually makes for Microsoft. And to be fair, its probably not that much in direct terms - if we're talking sales of operating systems, then those sales that can be primarily attributed to games playing is probably pretty tiny. I mean I'd have a PC regardless of whether I used it for games.

The benefits for microsoft are, it seems to me, to esoteric to be capturable on the all-important company balance sheets. They make no money from Direct X as far as I know, but the knowledge generated allowed them to develop the xbox and bring shiny featues like Aero to their core products. They probably sell as decent amount of gaming pheriphals, but compared to their software business the numbers are likely small.

The revenue that PC gaming does generate goes largely to producers and devs, and hardware manufacters. It keeps the PC market in good shape, but the benefits to microsoft are indirect eg gaming might drive a lot of improvement in CPUs, which allows MS to incorporate new features in their software to justify a new (profitable) release, but this role isn't going to be captured by the balance sheets.

Basically the key weakness of PC gaming is summed up by microsofts attitude towards it - no company has the financial dominance of the platform that would encourage them to promote it properly and enforce standards to make it more customer friendly, except perhaps nvidia and ati, but they're too busy squabbling between themselves.

On the plus side, this weakness is also PC gaming's greatest strength - freedom, to mod, to make indie games, to custom build etc. The danger is the younger generations never get a chance to appreciate these benefits because no company has a strong enough interest in telling them.

PS none of this lets MS off the hook for the utterly woeful GFWL. There is a case where they can make money directly through licensing, and yet the system is so hopeless and unpopular that producers are switching to Steam in their droves. GFWL has simply been a case of bad business.
Jack_Pepsi 23rd June 2010, 13:18 Quote
Alan Wake who?
Pete J 23rd June 2010, 13:27 Quote
Oh good! So by saying this, I take it Microsoft will release the following games on PC:

Halo 3
Gears of War 2
Gears of War 3

I can't wait! :(
Shagbag 23rd June 2010, 13:39 Quote
Damn right it's important to them. PC gaming on Windows is what props up their whole house-of-cards business model. As others have already said, if it wasn't for Windows' monopoly on PC gaming, the Windows client OS would not have anywhere near the desktop market share it currently enjoys. And if you don't believe me, take a look at the server market and ask yourself why MS have failed to achieve the same market dominance.

PC gaming is the only reason people choose Windows. Full Stop.
The alternative OSes are as good, if not better, at doing anything else and they're a damn sight cheaper.
NikoBellic 23rd June 2010, 13:46 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shagbag

PC gaming is the only reason people choose Windows. Full Stop.
The alternative OSes are as good, if not better, at doing anything else and they're a damn sight cheaper.

My nan didn't choose W7 for gaming, she chose it because I reccomended it.

I chose windows for gaming, then people who know me usually choose windows for reccomendation from myself
battles_atlas 23rd June 2010, 14:07 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shagbag
Damn right it's important to them. PC gaming on Windows is what props up their whole house-of-cards business model. As others have already said, if it wasn't for Windows' monopoly on PC gaming, the Windows client OS would not have anywhere near the desktop market share it currently enjoys. And if you don't believe me, take a look at the server market and ask yourself why MS have failed to achieve the same market dominance.

I don't see this at all. The vast majority of operating systems are sold either for personal use to people who want word processing and internet browsing, and who's interest in games doesn't stretch beyond The Sims at most, or to companys, who have no interest in games beyond making sure they stay off their machines. Truth is games are not a massive direct driver of Windows sales. They're definitely part of the picture, but I bet the sales are a poor third behind the two markets above.
devdevil85 23rd June 2010, 14:29 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by mi1ez
PC gaming had better be important to you! If it wasn't for gaming I'd be a linux user.
I'd be the same way. Linux runs more efficiently than Windows, we all know that, but like others have said driver support in Linux isn't the same as Windows. C'mon ATi/nVidia! Linux driver support for you newest cards please and I might have a reason to try Wine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack_Pepsi
Alan Wake who?
Exactly!!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgthomas
YES FABLE IS BACK TO PC, WOOHOOOO
Haven't played Fable II because I played the original on PC and wouldn't play it any other way, so I'm definitely pumped for this announcement.
[PUNK] crompers 23rd June 2010, 14:42 Quote
Fable = meh tbh, i'd rather buy the expansion for dragons age and start a new character in that.

fable is just not rpg enough for me, too casual not enough stats =]
gavomatic57 23rd June 2010, 14:55 Quote
We're heading for a point where Microsoft are no longer important to PC gaming - when Steam arrives on Linux as has been announced, the barriers to linux gaming fall away, such as the complicated installs and having to download separate installers. Not only that, but it'll potentially open the floodgates for other developers who can use OpenGL and OpenAL by default and have it work on almost all platforms besides the RROD 360.

If you can save yourself up to £200 on Vista SP3, download a free OS from the internet without any activation issues and get new features every 6 months for free and still play your Steam games on an OS that has a much lower footprint and currently doesn't need antivirus software, what are you going to do? I'll be spending OS money on games, personally.

Lets not forget, Apple are also selling nearly 3 million macs every quarter - that's a lot of potential Windows-free gamers.
Jezcentral 23rd June 2010, 15:09 Quote
@gavomatic57
Agreed. With Valve making Source OpenGL etc compatible, and Rage also doing this, there seems to be a movement towards game engines that are platform agnostic. If this happens, Microsoft will be forced to work harder to keep Windows as the de facto standard (tautology?). Hopefully they won't wait until that happens to start putting more effort into PC gaming.
uz1_l0v3r 23rd June 2010, 15:26 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by [USRF
Obiwan]I believe it got to do with age. The generation (25 - 35) has grown up with pc's. The 'now' generation is growing up with consoles. My generation (35-45) is gown up with consoles (atari 2600 etc) and later in early 20's, with pc's.

I must say that I do not spend much time on games the last couple of years compared to when I was 20 to 30.

And maybe the quality of the games has something to do with it to. 10 years back the quality of pc games where much much better then any console. Now the console is just as pretty as a pc game.

I grew up with consoles, apart from my spectrum +2. I had a sega master system, then a SNES, then a playstation. I didn't discover pc gaming until I was in my mid twenties.
Jack_Pepsi 23rd June 2010, 15:35 Quote
Last console I had was a SNES and then I went straight on to a PC - unfortunately, gaming on it wasn't something I could do, but the ability of being able to play games on a PC fuel my passion and now I'm a console-free, PC gaming hardware enthusiast (that's my official title).

I don't think I'll ever own another console - if PC gaming does die, then that part of me will die as well. However, I don't see PC gaming dying at all tbh, they'll always be someone out that there that shares my passion but obviously with more creative drive and flare.
fatty beef 23rd June 2010, 15:50 Quote
to bad when you buy a bargin OEM pc it doesnt deliver all of the gaming power one would hope for or expect

that doesnt really help the situation
binary101 23rd June 2010, 15:56 Quote
Well done Microsoft, say you love the PC every year at E3 and do NOTHING to support it, they said PC gaming was important two years ago, they said it last year while firing their own developers like ACES Game Studio, RIP MS Flight Simulator I'll miss you. They said it this year and they'll say it every year, while promoting Xbox 360 and do nothing for the PC.

Why would Microsoft do anything just for the PC when they got 3rd Party developers making and showing off PC games for them, and why would 3rd parties go out of their way to show PC games when
binary101 23rd June 2010, 15:59 Quote
^ the console market is so strong and more value when MS, Sony and Nintendo is paying huge amounts to make games for their consoles. Chicken and egg thing anyone?
mastorofpuppetz 23rd June 2010, 16:55 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgthomas
YES FABLE IS BACK TO PC, WOOHOOOO

Considering how garbage 2 was, not sure what to WOOHOO about. Talk about simplistic tripe.
mastorofpuppetz 23rd June 2010, 16:56 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by uz1_l0v3r
Quote:
Originally Posted by [USRF
Obiwan]I believe it got to do with age. The generation (25 - 35) has grown up with pc's. The 'now' generation is growing up with consoles. My generation (35-45) is gown up with consoles (atari 2600 etc) and later in early 20's, with pc's.

I must say that I do not spend much time on games the last couple of years compared to when I was 20 to 30.

And maybe the quality of the games has something to do with it to. 10 years back the quality of pc games where much much better then any console. Now the console is just as pretty as a pc game.

I grew up with consoles, apart from my spectrum +2. I had a sega master system, then a SNES, then a playstation. I didn't discover pc gaming until I was in my mid twenties.

Same, grew up with consoles, got into PC, never looked back.
leveller 23rd June 2010, 18:00 Quote
What this guy says:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jezcentral
@gavomatic57
Agreed. With Valve making Source OpenGL etc compatible, and Rage also doing this, there seems to be a movement towards game engines that are platform agnostic. If this happens, Microsoft will be forced to work harder to keep Windows as the de facto standard (tautology?). Hopefully they won't wait until that happens to start putting more effort into PC gaming.
Phil Rhodes 23rd June 2010, 18:38 Quote
If all they're going to keep giving us is hopelessly obvious X-box ports, then I'm really not interested.
kornedbeefy 23rd June 2010, 19:15 Quote
"I work at MS (not in the games group though). there have been a lot of job openings in the games group, especially the PC area. I think MS is trying to re-invigorate their PC gaming activities."

I ran across that qoute at another forum back in May. It seemed legit enough.

Microsoft needs PC gaming. PC gaming is where next gen games/hardware originate. Without PC gaming they wouldn't have anywhere to steal ideas/devs from for their next XBOX.
cheeriokilla 23rd June 2010, 19:21 Quote
Age of Empires 4, and get ensemble back together, 'nough said
l3v1ck 23rd June 2010, 19:47 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by battles_atlas
PS none of this lets MS off the hook for the utterly woeful GFWL. There is a case where they can make money directly through licensing, and yet the system is so hopeless and unpopular that producers are switching to Steam in their droves. GFWL has simply been a case of bad business.
Really?
That goodness for that.
Just as long as we don't need several different systems running in the background.
frontline 23rd June 2010, 20:00 Quote
Microsoft: "PC gaming is very important to us" - hmm, i remember 'hellbender' and thinking that Microsoft should leave games development to people who know what they are doing....
delriogw 23rd June 2010, 20:08 Quote
i think in general a lot of us would have grown up with consoles, for me we had a megadrive and then i had a playstation and a ps2, i started pc gaming in my early 20's (i always played some games on pc before this, but it was my dads pc, and my own console was obviously preferable), i think that unless you had parents who were buy anything for you, most of us weren't in a position to have a gaming pc (and maintain it) until we were earning ourselves, consoles work for younger players.

the issue now is that the kids are those with the mass spending money, either their own or their parents, because of broadband they have a much higher presence online (i could never go online with my ps2 despite having internet at home - it just wasn't practical), and they have parents and grandparents buying them games as it's quick easy and they know it'll work on the machine they have.

i'm not sure much has changed demographically, just spending power.

microsoft, interestingly, have caused a slight shift away from pc gaming, by pushing the xbox and releasing exclusives for it, and releasing games on it before pc etc. they make it clear they expect windows to sell itself and are only interested in getting people on their console, but with steam becoming multiplatform, and the potential (all be it distant) of cloud gaming (meaning less upgrades - and therefore less reason to buy new windows), they have suddenly realised they may have backed themselves into a bit of a corner and are hoping they can get their way out of it.

as someone above has said though, i'm certain this pc friendliness will only last until they bring out their next generation of console.
FeRaL 23rd June 2010, 20:42 Quote
Those of you who say gaming isn't important to the PC market are somewhat right… For those of you who don't remember back when the first Windows versions came out. When the PC was mainly a business machine and not really a home machine, one of the big selling points to the home consumer was this game changing application called Solitaire.

Believe it or not, it was a big selling point to the home consumer to show that not only could you do things like, word processing, spread sheeting, etc… but you could also use this "thing" for entertainment.

It would seem that now that MS has it’s market share in both business and home markets, the need for their software to be entertaining has diminished with their development of the Xbox. Well, like others have said, If my PC can't really be used for gaming much, why use Windows, I will just buy a cheap $400 PC and run Linux and free productivity software on it and save the other $1000 and buy something other than a Xbox just to spite them as I am not much into consoles but would like to game a bit if that is all that is really going to be out there for gaming…
GravitySmacked 23rd June 2010, 21:21 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by mi1ez
PC gaming had better be important to you! If it wasn't for gaming I'd be a linux user.

Yep and so would I.
whamio 23rd June 2010, 21:53 Quote
talk is cheap..MS

where's the beef?
or

better yet where's Halo 3
Sloth 23rd June 2010, 22:01 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by mi1ez
PC gaming had better be important to you! If it wasn't for gaming I'd be a linux user.
Same.

Of course, seeing the results of Portal being ported to Mac I'm not entirely sure that's true. Didn't look quite as good on OpenGL, though that may have to do with not being initially designed for it. And drivers like was mentioned previously. But in a hypothetical showdown based purely on two games which work exactly the same on both systems and no other factors involved? Linux all the way if I had the chance.
robots 23rd June 2010, 22:09 Quote
Your call is important to us.
Gunsmith 24th June 2010, 00:29 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by whamio

better yet where's Halo 3

you are actually joking right?
Star*Dagger 24th June 2010, 01:05 Quote
PC Games are the only reason to buy their crappy Operating Systems.

Consoles are not real gaming.
cgthomas 24th June 2010, 02:07 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by mastorofpuppetz
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgthomas
YES FABLE IS BACK TO PC, WOOHOOOO

Considering how garbage 2 was, not sure what to WOOHOO about. Talk about simplistic tripe.

I'm easily satisfied, mind you, I'm only 5 (in my head that is)
knuck 24th June 2010, 02:17 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Star*Dagger
PC Games are the only reason to buy their crappy Operating Systems.

Consoles are not real gaming.


Thank you
Nature 24th June 2010, 02:47 Quote
"crabapples"
general22 24th June 2010, 11:35 Quote
For the silly people who think gaming props up windows then you really need to have another look at the computer market and see what a small percentage of that consists of gaming grade hardware.

Linux will be as suitable for gaming as it is suitable for every other computing task i.e. not very for the majority of people. Don't get me wrong Linux is great but it will never be mainstream with the current attitude of the community.

Also I hear kinect will be compatible with PC, perhaps a good media centre control method?
gavomatic57 24th June 2010, 14:31 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by general22
For the silly people who think gaming props up windows then you really need to have another look at the computer market and see what a small percentage of that consists of gaming grade hardware.

Linux will be as suitable for gaming as it is suitable for every other computing task i.e. not very for the majority of people. Don't get me wrong Linux is great but it will never be mainstream with the current attitude of the community.

Also I hear kinect will be compatible with PC, perhaps a good media centre control method?

I wouldn't be to sure. A large proportion of Windows users are in the workplace. The public sector, thanks to an EU mandate is forced to look at open source operating systems. Red hat have been largely unaffected by this recession and there appears to be a general push for open standards in everything. I'm not saying it is going to happen overnight, but given the speed that linux is progressing at, I don't think widespread acceptance is particularly far fetched.

Lets be honest, among the younger generation, Microsoft have taken uncool to almost biblical levels. Whilst the older generation may stick with Windows, the youngsters are far more open minded.

The attitude of the community will change as the demographic shifts from developers to consumers, so I wouldn't worry too much about that.
gavomatic57 24th June 2010, 14:35 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sloth
Same.

Of course, seeing the results of Portal being ported to Mac I'm not entirely sure that's true. Didn't look quite as good on OpenGL, though that may have to do with not being initially designed for it. And drivers like was mentioned previously. But in a hypothetical showdown based purely on two games which work exactly the same on both systems and no other factors involved? Linux all the way if I had the chance.

Look at the Unigine benchmarks - they look the same whether you use OpenGL or DX10. The newest version of OpenGL can handle tesselation and other features included in DX11, so there is no reason why OpenGL can't hold its own.
Coldon 24th June 2010, 15:08 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by gavomatic57
Look at the Unigine benchmarks - they look the same whether you use OpenGL or DX10. The newest version of OpenGL can handle tesselation and other features included in DX11, so there is no reason why OpenGL can't hold its own.

have you ever worked in openGL and that abortion of an extension system? Khronos have just tacked on feature after feature over the year without stopping to think that it might not be the smartest thing to just keep adding and adding.

openGL in its current state is bloated and monolithic, while yes it can do pretty much everything DX10/11 (still behind in several aspects) its a pain in the ass to develop in. The only thing it has going for it is its ES variant. (that and legacy CAD applications)

Hopefully more developers will hop onto the DX11 bandwagon now since DX11 can now run on dx9/10/11 gen hardware by making use of the new devcaps system, there is no need for 3 renderers anymore.

DX10/11 is a nice lightweight API that stripped out a lot of the legacy FF systems, while openGL is still dragging all those old features along. As a developer, there is no way in hell I would choose openGL as my graphics API.
Xir 24th June 2010, 15:29 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by battles_atlas
I mean I'd have a PC regardless of whether I used it for games.

yes, but not necessarily a windows based one :D
Krayzie_B.o.n.e. 24th June 2010, 18:13 Quote
Microsoft better turn their entire attention to PC gaming because if it wasn't for PC gaming I would own a MAC. Microsoft failed by having the PC play second fiddle to the 360 (quick money grab I understand) but now that Valve is opening the door for Macs to be considered a serious gaming platform a lot of Pc owners will switch to Apple OS only machines because Microsoft seriously lacks innovation
Krayzie_B.o.n.e. 24th June 2010, 18:17 Quote
I think Bit-Tech should have a survey question that reads....

If all Pc games were available on Apple computers just like they are on the PC as well as your favorite Nvidia or ATi Gpu which system would you buy... A Mac running OSx or a PC running windows 7?
knuck 24th June 2010, 18:42 Quote
I know I'd still own a PC, but that's my own preference.
NikoBellic 24th June 2010, 19:09 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghys
I know I'd still own a PC, but that's my own preference.

+1.

I'm not gonna lie, I still would stick with W7 over Linux or OSX,

I think that Windows 7 feels finished, I tried OSX and in some areas it felt a little "clunky"... With Linux it lacked that simplicity that you get with Windows (and of course the support is very poor with linux)

and Since OSX is starting to become a little more popular I notice that I have started to come across alot more tech news stories about OSX having big security holes (pretty much everywhere), and obviously it won't be long until we find the same problem with linux if that starts to attract a big crowd...


Just my opinion though...
Sloth 24th June 2010, 20:17 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krayzie_B.o.n.e.
I think Bit-Tech should have a survey question that reads....

If all Pc games were available on Apple computers just like they are on the PC as well as your favorite Nvidia or ATi Gpu which system would you buy... A Mac running OSx or a PC running windows 7?
Just slapping on my favorite GPU won't exactly make a gaming beast out of a Mac, so your question is a little misleading. There would be little/no overclocking potential with their motherboards, and you're not fitting high end hardware into a Mac Mini or and iMac, so at that point it really doesn't even matter if it's Apple branded hardware since it isn't going to be slim and pretty. So you're really just asking if people, gamers specifically, like OSX or Win7.

Though in that two-way question, I'd still take Win7. If I'm going to pay for either one I may as well get the one I'm most used to. Linux is great because it's free and I'm still decently comfortable using it.
Ficky Pucker 24th June 2010, 21:49 Quote
i don't believe them, unless they make freelancer 2

GravitySmacked 24th June 2010, 23:32 Quote
Well said, sir, well said!
DiegoAAC 25th June 2010, 04:46 Quote
and where is the half-assed port of fable 2?
Saivert 26th June 2010, 02:56 Quote
Linux has still a long way to go. There are just about only Red hat and Novell that are the big players with money to spend on development, sure Sun and IBM does things too but that is enterprise based stuff and not stuff that will help a home user.
Linux is still targeted to developers and enterprise. As a home operating system it is far from there yet.
Also because there is too much freedom they can't settle on the stuff that just works well. Some distros seem to be doing a good job currently (Fedora and Ubuntu) but that is just on the surface.
You can say what you want but if I can't get things done the same way I do on Windows I'm just not interested in using Linux.

But this is besides the point because Microsoft is just going back and forth as they see fit with this. They have no obligation to support the PC platform for gaming at all. They do it if they can earn money on it and they will drop support if it makes more sense to push the console.
This is business after all. Not charity for PC gamers. Not even Valve does this which is clear after they spent time and money on developing a Mac version of Steam and have ported all their games. They need to run a business too and need to get more customers to earn more money rather than please PC gamers forever.
Krayzie_B.o.n.e. 26th June 2010, 23:40 Quote
I really think that if Apple starts pumping out high end 3D games on MAC PRO's which already has software that allows you to OVERCLOCK the CPu then I really do believe Apple and OSX will cause many gamers to switch to Apple.

Seeing how all Mac Pro's come in only a few models this makes it a whole lot easier for developers to make games that really push the hardware with great optimization without worrying about the 1 million configurations of the PC.

Apple would represent console base gaming but with PC power and the games would all look like Crysis or better. So if Microsoft wants to continue it's ungodly Windows 7 sales numbers they should turn their attention to PC gaming in a more leadership role because PC gamers and cheap PCs running Windows are the key to Microsoft's future profitability.
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums