say what you will about MS and their business software etc but their games division just rocks.

A few things I would like to be implemented

1) Central place to manage my save games. Not spread accross my hard drives like it currently is. A nice GUI to manage saves in a central location would be nice.

2) Proper resolution support. It's a joke when games like BF2 ship a year ago and don't even support standard 17" and 19" LCD resolutions of 1280x1024. Before you say it, no using a command line or edit a .con file isn't sufficient. All games should support proper 4:3, 5:4, 16:9 and 16:10 resolutions out of the box and from the games GUI. No stretched HUD's would be nice also.

3) Good Matchmaking. Gamespy has been a pain to use for years and the reliance of 3rd party browsers like ASE, QTracker, GS3D shouldn't be needed. Steam is a prime example of a built in server browser done right. It's fast, efficient and has the proper filters and isn't broken to all shit like the original BF2 and other Gamespy ones. You should be able to load up a game and be able to play without the requirement of a 3rd party program or waiting for it to update it's games and filters settings.

4) Auto patching ability. Obviously the ability to disable this would be nice but having the Vista's Game Explorer (or whatever it's called) auto download and auto install patches would be a great addition. It be cool if it would be transparant running in the backround of Windows but if it was like WoW where it would update when loading the game (or like CoH beta) that would be great as well). It's silly that in 2006 gamers (remember not everyone is like us reading shacknews.com 15x a day) have to read webpages and download .zip files to install updates. To grow the market it needs to be easier for people who have jobs, family and games aren't their hobby like it is for many of us. That way avg joe bob could just load the game and play it without hunting for updates he didn't know existed.

5) Better description of required hardware. I think it's a bad sign when experienced gamers who play games as their hobby such as many shackers have to ask everytime a new PC game or demo is released you get a couple dozne posts "How would it play on x CPU with y GPU and z Ram?" If we as hardcore gamers have to ask how does someone who plays maybe a couple hrs a night and doesn't follow anandtech.com know if his desktop or laptop would be able to run the game. This isn't something that's easily fixed and I could write paragraphs on this issue alone but i'll just leave it at that :) This would be a good start though http://www.shacknews.com/ja.zz?id=12652433

Those are some things I would like to see done in Vista. I fully support the use of standard voice comm down the road as long as it has a global setting to disable voice for people not in your friends list (ala 360). Voice chat is great and people who participated in BF shackbattles or various Live shackbattles know what i'm talking about. All the good stuff like player feedback,achievements and standard game boxes are also welcome additions.

my .02

I think the biggest thing holding them back from being a true brand is varying systems and requirements.

Anyone with a PS2 can walk into a store, and know that every game in the PS2 section with the PS2 logo works on their PS2.

Don't get your Console in my PC! This kind of 'movement' is the one thing that could actually kill off PC Gaming.

http://www.shacknews.com/ja.zz?id=12684208

In reply to #40:

A few things I would like to be implemented

1) Central place to manage my save games. Not spread accross my hard drives like it currently is. A nice GUI to manage saves in a central location would be nice.

That is what the Vista Games Explorer is.

2) Proper resolution support. It's a joke when games like BF2 ship a year ago and don't even support standard 17" and 19" LCD resolutions of 1280x1024. Before you say it, no using a command line or edit a .con file isn't sufficient. All games should support proper 4:3, 5:4, 16:9 and 16:10 resolutions out of the box and from the games GUI. No stretched HUD's would be nice also.

That's exactly what the "Essential" mentioned in the article is requesting games do.

3) Good Matchmaking. Gamespy has been a pain to use for years and the reliance of 3rd party browsers like ASE, QTracker, GS3D shouldn't be needed. Steam is a prime example of a built in server browser done right. It's fast, efficient and has the proper filters and isn't broken to all shit like the original BF2 and other Gamespy ones. You should be able to load up a game and be able to play without the requirement of a 3rd party program or waiting for it to update it's games and filters settings.

That's what the "Showcase" mentioned in the article about Live Anywhere requires.

4) Auto patching ability. Obviously the ability to disable this would be nice but having the Vista's Game Explorer (or whatever it's called) auto download and auto install patches would be a great addition. It be cool if it would be transparant running in the backround of Windows but if it was like WoW where it would update when loading the game (or like CoH beta) that would be great as well). It's silly that in 2006 gamers (remember not everyone is like us reading shacknews.com 15x a day) have to read webpages and download .zip files to install updates. To grow the market it needs to be easier for people who have jobs, family and games aren't their hobby like it is for many of us. That way avg joe bob could just load the game and play it without hunting for updates he didn't know existed.

Yep, this was cut from the Games Explorer, but hopefully will make it back in shortly after Vista ships.

5) Better description of required hardware. I think it's a bad sign when experienced gamers who play games as their hobby such as many shackers have to ask everytime a new PC game or demo is released you get a couple dozne posts "How would it play on x CPU with y GPU and z Ram?" If we as hardcore gamers have to ask how does someone who plays maybe a couple hrs a night and doesn't follow anandtech.com know if his desktop or laptop would be able to run the game. This isn't something that's easily fixed and I could write paragraphs on this issue alone but i'll just leave it at that :) This would be a good start though

Yep, that's exactly what the Game Advisor and Games Explorer (mentioned in the article) do.

-- None of this is being required by Microsoft. They are simply "rewarding" games that implement these things, in order to help address common frustrations.

For the "Essentials," think of it as: "Don't do the silly things that make PC gaming frustrating at times, and we'll let the customer know that you've taken the time to 'not screw up'."

For the "Showcases," think of it as "Do something cool that other games on other platforms aren't doing, and we'll tell lots of gamers how cool your game is."

-- Many of you are misreading the article regarding installation: the recommendation is to look for ways to streamline and simplify the installation process, and one of those ways is to allow for an optional, yet possibly default, option to install only the bits necessary to launch the first level to the hard drive, while you drizzle the rest of the bits to the harddrive in the background. Again, this is not required, just a potential option that if done in a compelling way, might be worth mentioning. The recommendation is also there to always include an advanced option for users who want to copy the whole game to their hard-drive. The guy who mentioned Triton and Steam as examples has the right idea.

-- Microsoft is definitely not requiring controllers for Windows games. The recommendation is that if the game already supports controllers / gamepads, to also support the Xbox 360 controller. The reason why is that they are trying to address the inconsistencies with controllers / gamepads / joysticks on Windows, but setting forth some standards that allow game developers to make games on Windows that work as reliably as they do on the Xbox 360.

-- Regarding the D3D9 vs D3D10 screenshots: the author of the article was a bit irresponsible posting them without any comments: the comments made during the presentation were that these were screenshots from a simple coding sample in the DirectX SDK that showed how a similar scene was drawn using 451 Draw calls on D3D9, and in only 6 Draw calls on D3D10.

-- Regarding "the biggest problem in PC gaming is all the various hardware and software": yep, and it's also its biggest strength. What Microsoft is trying to do with this program is say to game developers: "Hey, here are some best practices that will help you avoid the negative aspects of crashes, incompatibilities, inconsistencies and inefficiencies of targeting all that stuff. Follow them, and we'll advertise the fact that your game is likely to be less buggy, incompatible, etc." The other purpose behind these things is that some things are changing in Vista that should benefit games, and ensuring game developers are aware of them, and working with the OS instead of fighting with it, is a good thing.

-- Microsoft is not withholding support or blocking game developers from making games for Windows with this concept, they're simply rewarding the folks that help fix the things that are broken and those that show off the things that are best about the Windows platform.

MS isn't looking to "consolize" the Windows platform, except in that one way the console beats the PC: "it just works." Windows exists mainly because of its open-ness: it's a platform where anyone can do whatever they like and make money from it. Asking folks to do things smarter / cooler isn't the same thing restricting them from the platform. As a previous poster said, MS is all about inclusivity on the Windows platform, not exclusivity: their livelihood depends on it.

Posted here (instead of as a reply) for more visibility

Microsoft has to keep PC gaming alive. And specifically, on Windows.

Without games, people leave Windows. PhotoShop is on the Mac. Hosting of web and databases can be done by Linux. Grandma needs email and web browsing on *something* and she's fine.

Lots of people would leave Windows or at least try but they can't take their games with them. So they stay on Windows. And why not, gaming on Windows is bliss.

But publishers and developers want to leave the PC for consoles. Main reason is piracy. And Microsoft is contributing to the problem by actually making one of the consoles in question

So they're doing this - to keep PC gaming on Windows viable. Becuase without it they're toast. And since Activision won't pay to make EA's shelf space look better, Microsoft is paying for them both. They're the only ones with the incentive and money to do it.

The only thing "devious" about it is keeping games on Windows. But hey, one of the games in the freaking picture is Quake 4 which is also on Linux (and Mac?). So it's not like they're being exclusionist dicks or anything.

Games for Windows is a GOOD thing guys. It will keep us from having to go to consoles for id's next title and convince the average person that a high-end PC is a good investment.

Plus we'll get to smoke those 360-controller using pansies :)

http://www.schnapple.com/2006_04_16_archive.html#114406699995548032

Someone else told me this, but I agree. I think the 360 will be the last or second to last gaming console. Think about it: MS is pushing pc games that will play right from the drive, Xinput, XNA (works on both 360 and PC), game advisor, etc etc, the list goes on. They know that the 360 is a big money loser, but they had to win over a chunk of the market. So I think next round, we will se an official microsoft Xbox certification, and MS will get out of the hardware business. You will see, for instance, the Compaq Xbox HTPC or whatever... and then it will just be a PC or an HTPC that can play a certain level of games reliably, with 360 controllers and all that jazz.

It all fits when you put together their various initiatives, and the fact that they lose so much money on making consoles. They are still a software company at heart, and thats where the money is.

On the surface this seems like a good idea, but after reading about the criteria required to get MS's blessing and pimping, I think this is a terrible idea, mainly because I think only id and Valve (and friends) will resist any of it. It seems like they're trying to 'consolize' PC games, and not in a good way.

Not installing the game to the hard drive, and instead streaming it from the CD/DVD? How the fuck is this a good idea? I remember those days, and have no desire to go back to that. Load times are long enough as it is...

And this in no way addresses the biggest hurdle to PC gaming to begin with: the huge variety of hardware and software configurations that inhibit performance and compatibility.

Sure, there's some good stuff in there. The 1 central place to launch your games is okay I guess. I thought that was what the Start menu was for, but whatever. And I definately can say the media center interface idea is a good one. And the integrating Windows Error Reporting to go straight to the developer is a great idea too.

A lot of the ideas are great as optional things, but to force developers into it seems like a bad thing for the entire platform.

Nice to see the death of PC gaming possibly delayed or post-poned.

how bout making Vista enter "un-bloat mode" to run games so you can get away with lower hardware requirements.

But of course, since it seems everyone but nintendo is throwing as much power as they can at game consoles, MS wont do much different with windows and instead will spend time marketing instead of optimizing

For the love of god:
1. Show file extensions by default
2. Get rid of auto-run

Half the people in the world have no fucking idea what's going on on their computer because of these two features. Hidden file extensions alone is single handedly responsible for 90% of the social engineering viruses we've seen.

If you have auto-run, something nasty is invariable going to run itself when you didn't want it to (see sony's root kit).

Bottom line: If you try to make things easier, people will just get dumber. It's better to just show them what's really happening and have the system behave consistantly.

Anyone remeber the last PC standard?
I can't remeber the name, but all of the developers got together and put a min. hardware spec.. it was printed on the outside of the box with a gold seal.. I remember I had to get a new sound blaster to get my machine up to spec.. I think it came out around 1992 or so.

This is great and all, but what are they doing to address the impossibility of finding any game over a year or two old at retail (save for massive hits like Blizzard games)?

So often I've wanted a two or three-year-old game and have had to buy online, or search several stores. And these aren't unknown titles.

I'll bet if you wanted a two-year-old title for PC it'd be hard to find it at the majority of gaming stores.

Another thing:

Part of me almost prays for a PC crash. Why? Independent games and digital distribution.

This initiative is great, and I support most of it. But the greatest value of the PC is the ability to develop games for next to nothing, thanks to mods and cheap engines, and also to be able to distribute games that may not get retail attention (like Darwinia or Rag Doll Kung Fu).

So a good weeding out of PC games is fine with me. Honestly, the industry could return to its mid-nineties state of lower budget, smaller team games and I wouldn't care. Graphics be damned.

"another Essential is using Direct3D as the default game renderer."
hehe considering their mock-up display case includes at least 2 OpenGL only titles...

Those D3D 9 vs. D3D 10 screenshots are bullshi'ite.

PCs Forevah! Seriously this is awesome, and hopefully it's the shot in the arm that PC gaming needs. I know a lot of my friends who are casual gamers have expressed interest in PCs when I tell them about how far ahead and innovative PC games can be, so some kind of a display like this should really catch attention.

Wow, this is some pretty high goals Microsoft is setting for themselves. I really hope they pull it off; if anyone can I suppose it'll be them. I have faith they can implement this, whether developers will pick up on it will remain to be seen.

"It will include features such as the TruSkill matching system used in Xbox Live, built in voice chat for all compatible titles, an all-inclusive cross-platform Gamertag, support for microtransactions and other paid content, Xbox 360-like Achievements, and so on."

Gee, thanks.

I hope this works out, PC gaming needs it.

of course microsoft is gonna try to take care of microsoft first, but still, its not all evil microsoft here.. IMHO i see some of this as a nice effort to try and help the retail pc reality as it is this day... wether or not that feeling was intential who knows, we can all come to our own on that.. but i think if developers dont mind jumpin thru some of those, for lack of a better word, crazy, hoops then I think this could have nice results... ah well, plus the helping of indie's is a nice touch even if its got it's own microsoft twists to it.. what do u all think?

I'm still skeptical.