DailyTech - Games for Windows - Live Launching on May 8

Submit News

Software Games for Windows - Live Launching on May 8
Marcus Yam (Blog) - March 14, 2007 10:05 AM

37 comment(s) - last by isaacmacdonald.. on Mar 15 at 7:49 PM

Microsoft online gaming service for PC will carry Xbox 360 pricing

Word of Microsoft's plans for Live for Windows, a service for PC that mirrors Xbox Live, leaked earlier this month. Today, Microsoft confirms those reports by announcing the launch date and pricing for what is now officially called "Games for Windows - Live."

The service will debut on May 8, 2007, with the launch of the Windows Vista version of the Halo 2. Then, launching in June, Shadowrun will for the first time connect Windows gamers with Xbox 360 players in cross-platform matches using a single service. UNO, releasing later in 2007, will also support cross-platform play between Windows and Xbox 360.

"Five years ago, we began building a service that now defines the bar for online gameplay," said Peter Moore, corporate vice president of the Interactive Entertainment Business in the Entertainment and Devices Division at Microsoft. "The benefits of expanding Xbox Live to Games for Windows titles is twofold: We're bringing together two communities that share a passion for playing online games, and we're enhancing the online experience for PC gamers who have long desired seamless game and voice connectivity -- it's a win for everyone."

While Games for Windows - Live brings a new level of online service to PC gamers, it also carries with it a fee for something that many PC fans are accustomed to getting for free. The Microsoft service will be identical to that of Xbox Live, with Silver accounts for free and more useful Gold memberships requiring at least $49.95 a year. Existing subscribers with Xbox Live automatically receive the functionality of Games for Windows - Live at no additional cost by using the same gamertag.

Comments

Threshold

Username
Password
remember me

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

yeah...

By Quiksel on 3/14/2007 10:15:34 AM , Rating: 2

quote:
it's a win for everyone.

yeah, i bet it's a win for everyone on a PC . Those FPS games are gonna be hard to balance controller vs. KB/mouse. How do they think it's gonna be fair? Honestly, it sounds like the 360's at a major disadvantage.

I'm sure this tech will make it great for those non-FPS games, but the slaughter that awaits 360 players that do enjoy the FPS style is coming soon!

RE: yeah...

By TheShniz on 3/14/2007 10:23:08 AM , Rating: 2

Yeah, the slaughter is a sure thing, it's happened before and will happen now yet again... gives PC FPS'ers a nice warm fuzzy feeling to quickly shut the mouths of console fan boys :)

Parent

RE: yeah...

By OrSin on 3/14/2007 12:21:15 PM , Rating: 2

You think FPS is bad let them try to play RTS.
And no comments on PC player having to pay to play in line?
Let me be the first to say it. I hate it. Dont want o pay for something that is al erady free just o play some one onther platform. I own both a 360 and PC and I dont care to play for online play.

Parent

RE: yeah...

By robertgu on 3/14/2007 1:16:48 PM , Rating: 2

For me the approx $4 a month is well worth it. That's only a cheese burger a month for Christ sakes.

I've used many different online multiplayer services for all kinds of PC games and used collaboration services like Teamspeak and Ventrillo. I hate having to create new accounts and install more junk on my computer every time I want to play new games that are using a different multiplayer service.

Having only one account to maintain, one that works with all games (at least the new ones programmed for it) is a Godsend for me. I've used the Xbox Live service and it's by far the best multiplayer service I've ever used. All the services it contains, I have to install separately on my PC (multiplayer networking service and collaboration services like VOIP, friends networking, and video conferencing). While XBL is one tightly integrated package with one common interface across all games.

And if history is a guidance, the network performance will be FAR FAR superior to the avg PC networking service I’ve used in the past. Many of the PC networking services are hit and miss, some are good, most where spotty and laggy.

Least lets it’s not forget that having to host a Teamspeak or Ventrillo server costs more than a subscription on this new M$ PC gaming service.

So for ME I’m more than happy to pay the approx $4 a month for a service that’s integrated with all the collaboration services I want, with only one program to install, one interface to deal with, and which will likely be far superior to the avg. PC networking service in reliability and performance.

Parent

RE: yeah...

By timmiser on 3/14/2007 5:57:12 PM , Rating: 2

Depends on how you look at it. Would you pay money for the chance to kick those chubby snot nosed console college boys into the next dimension with your mouse/key combo unit?

Parent

RE: yeah...

By Griswold on 3/14/2007 10:23:13 AM , Rating: 2

"Cheat0r! He's using a keyboard and mouse!! 0mfg!!11"

I'm sure they will dumb down the controls enough in upcoming games to level the playfield - you know, more aimbot-esque features for the consoleros in order to compensate for the disadvantage.

Parent

RE: yeah...

By tuteja1986 on 3/14/2007 10:28:40 AM , Rating: 3

Maybe this will help bring back some Fighting games back to PC. I would love to see dead or alive , Virtual Fighter 5 and others on PC.

Parent

RE: yeah...

By TheShniz on 3/14/2007 10:31:09 AM , Rating: 2

Auto-aim hasn't helped consolers in the past... if anything they only increased their disadvantage to veteran PC FPS'ers. Unless console weapons start spraying more bullets, I can't see any kind of useful 'balancing' taking place.

Parent

RE: yeah...

By Alpha4 on 3/15/2007 3:28:05 AM , Rating: 2

This post made me laugh out loud! So true...

Quake III for dreamcast is a prime, prime example which I'm surprised nobody mentioned. However, it is for reasons other than the interface, because the dreamcast did have mouse & keyboard support. Such a great console :*(

PC users were able to compete against dreamcast users via Patch 1.16n, and despite the greatness of the dreamcast it still acceded to PC Quake III Players because PC gamers with l33t rigs enjoyed the following advantages:

* up to 1600x1200 resolution from 640x480 (best at the time)
* 125fps from 30fps
* More advanced configurations and scripts including Field of View adjustments, custom lighting & forced models.
* Networking tweaks

Hell, I can see dual displays eventually playing a big part in favour of PC gamers. That is, after all, one of the features Vista is pushing, is it not?

Parent

RE: yeah...

By Thorburn on 3/14/2007 10:40:34 AM , Rating: 2

I'm sure games that offer PC gamers a clear advantage will offer 360 players the option to exclude PC players.

Parent

RE: yeah...

By Kefner on 3/14/2007 10:44:32 AM , Rating: 2

I think the controller vs KB/Mouse think is blown way out of proportion. I play both ways, and don't personally feel one is more advantageous than the other. It all comes down to individual skill, not what input device you are using.

Parent

RE: yeah...

By StriderGT on 3/14/07, Rating: -1

RE: yeah...

By bpurkapi on 3/14/2007 5:29:46 PM , Rating: 2

correct! Also I can guess that Microsoft might just allow a mouse and keyboard to be used on the 360, it does have those usb ports after all. It would generate some easy cash if it were Microsoft brand keyboards and mice. More peripherals means more money for Redmond!

Parent

RE: yeah...

By dpope on 3/14/2007 11:10:25 AM , Rating: 3

We have the option to use keyboard and mouse when playing FPS on XBOX 360.

Same goes for PC players as the XBOX 360 wireless controller works on PC's.

Personally, I think game play will be reduced to lowest common denominator which is probably the XBOX 360 and Live.

Parent

RE: yeah...

By isaacmacdonald on 3/15/2007 7:49:09 PM , Rating: 2

quote:
We have the option to use keyboard and mouse when playing FPS on XBOX 360.

Huh? I plugged my keyboard and mouse into my 360 before and it did approximately nothing. What option are you talking about?

Parent

RE: yeah...

By ATWindsor on 3/14/2007 12:04:15 PM , Rating: 2

They tried with shadow run or whatever its called, all they had to do was make the kontroller setup for mouse/keyboard unconfigurable, and mess up the aim on fast turns on the PC-version, and give the consol-version autoaim.

Goes to show that a mouse-keyborad-combo is a pretty big advantage..

Parent

RE: yeah...

By Fenixgoon on 3/14/2007 5:37:07 PM , Rating: 2

if im not mistaken, shadowrun mouse controls were nerfed so PC players didn't gain too big an advantage or something.

Parent

*nix Gaming

By phatboye on 3/14/2007 11:19:42 AM , Rating: 2

Not that I am bashing MS'es attempt at Live, I believe that Live will really hurt the *nix gaming community. As if it wasn't bad enough. This may even deter prospective devs from ever considering creating games for *nix OSes.

RE: *nix Gaming

By Spivonious on 3/14/2007 11:25:40 AM , Rating: 2

Devs don't create games for *nix OSes because *nix OSes are used by like 2% of computer gamers. Not because Microsoft made an online service.

Parent

RE: *nix Gaming

By Visual on 3/14/2007 12:33:10 PM , Rating: 2

to be honest, i have absolutely no clue what the "games for windows" title is all about.

but if i have to guesstimate - standardization of installation, configuration and operation of the various games - from obvious aspects like user interface to important but more unnoticeable ones like directory structure and api usage.

i'm just as clueless about the "live" designation, but again i can come up with a wild guess - it should be adding standardization in the area of networking, maybe on deeper levels like the specific protocols used or at least on a more general level for private server announcing and discovering, friend lists, messaging and status monitoring, perhaps voice chat in-game...

if anything, a bunch of things done the same way in every game should make it easier for emulation projects like wine or cedega to support newer games, not harder.

and i'm sure the same protocol can be adapted for use in even native *nix games, despite it being called "live for windows" or whatever. it is just a name after all. if it is open and well-documented (as it should be to get windows devs to use it) then all platforms can benefit from it.

Parent

Name..

By Visk on 3/14/2007 11:11:53 AM , Rating: 3

Terrible name...
"Games for Windows - Live"

They should have come up with something short and concise that doesn't sound as retarded.

RE: Name..

By Scrogneugneu on 3/14/2007 7:03:31 PM , Rating: 2

It sounds obvious how it was created. Somebody, somewhere, chose "Games for Windows". It's pretty clear and self-explanatory. Everyone was happy.

That is, until the marketing department got into it. "Wait, every product we get out is branded Live." There you go then, "Games for Windows - Live".

Kinda reminds me of the old /etc/bus story ( http://www.netlazy.com/node/4131 )

Parent

Double Dipping?

By BMFPitt on 3/14/2007 10:35:29 AM , Rating: 2

So will you have to buy games for both PC and the 360? I'd love to play some Uno while reading DT, but not if I have to pay for it twice...

RE: Double Dipping?

By Aikouka on 3/14/2007 11:29:12 AM , Rating: 2

Well, this is essentially similar to saying that you shouldn't have to pay for the PS2 version of Samurai Warriors 2, because you own the XBOX 360 version. There are slight differences, but they're still separate platforms.

Although, I do agree that it'd be nice if we didn't have to pay for the Live Arcade games again if you want to play them on the PC. Or maybe just a small "port charge" for them making them available on the PC (I don't know if they use XNA for all of the LA games, but theoretically, XNA porting between the XBOX 360 and the PC (with the proper libraries) isn't difficult nor horribly time consuming, which was the point of XNA).

Parent

The evolution of the console.

By Koder on 3/14/2007 10:41:26 AM , Rating: 2

You could go into battle unprepared, or you could level the playing field with a keyboard and mouse adapter for your 360.

Has anyone had any success with one of these devices?

http://news.teamxbox.com/xbox/12316/Connect-a-Mous...

RE: The evolution of the console.

By Aikouka on 3/14/2007 11:32:36 AM , Rating: 2

If I remember what I've read correctly, these devices are really hit-or-miss as they usually work decently, but there's a couple issues with the one released for the XBOX 360 that I remember.

1) You need a wired controller to connect the XBOX 360 to the device. I don't know if a wireless adapter for the PC Works like this, but I doubt it. I could test this by attaching my wireless adapter to my XBOX 360 and seeing what happens (almost creating a multi-tap like environment).

2) They're a bit flaky. I don't remember the exact issues with them, but they weren't perfect. Some mice didn't work correctly (I believe the Logitech G5 was listed as not functioning correctly)

Parent

Controller vs Keyboard

By misbfa1 on 3/14/2007 11:53:38 PM , Rating: 2

I wouldn't so sure about owning people just cause you have a keyboard and they have a mouse. I had been telling my brothers for years that the only reason that I sucked at Halo 2 is because of the damn controller (I am damn good in other PC FPS games). So here I am at CES 2007, I am at the Microsoft booth where they are demoing Halo 2 for PC. Eight machines each with the option of a 360 controller or a m/k. I look around and everyone was using the controller, and I thought "This is it time to prove the inferiority of the controller". So I jump in the game, after about about 15 rounds of getting completely owned by the guys using the keyboard, I shut up about the whole thing. I will say this however, the controlling did feel very odd in comparison to other PC FPS games that I have played and once I acclimated, it may have been a different story.

RE: Controller vs Keyboard

By misbfa1 on 3/14/2007 11:55:02 PM , Rating: 2

I meant to say, getting owned by the guys using the CONTROLLER.

Parent

So...

By yacoub on 3/14/2007 3:25:37 PM , Rating: 3

How long before games stop offering multiplayer hosting/matching outside of this new service, such that playing multiplayer games on the computer becomes a charge pay-per-month service like for consoles? This is, after all, where they want it to go. It must frustrate them to no end that all these people are playing games on 'their Internets' and they aren't being charged for it. ^^

Good and bad... but mostly good, I think.

By therealnickdanger on 3/14/2007 10:42:42 AM , Rating: 2

I think a company like MS needs to step up and provide this service for the PC. Sure, we've got TeamSpeak, XFire, Steam, and God-knows-what-else, but PC gaming needs some conformity and simplicity in order to compete in the future. I'm disappointed that Live for PCs costs as much as Live for Xbox though, since it really doesn't offer the same experience.

I'd like to know more details about older PC games. Do games have to be made for Live PC in order to be recognized by the service or can Live PC show me as "playing UT2K4" to my Friends? Can my Friends join my game of HaloPC via Live PC as they can in XFire?

I'm excited for this, but I just don't think there are enough Vista gamers yet to make it worthwhile. Fortunately, as a XBL member, I don't have to pay for it, so I'll get it for certain. Can't wait for the test drive!

Great response to Sony

By BPB on 3/14/2007 11:32:05 AM , Rating: 2

In my opinion this is a great thing, something many of us expected now that Vista is here. MS really is serious about Windows gaming. Sony only just now is getting something going that competes with Xbox Live, this makes it that much harder for them to compete vs MS. I'm personally looking forward to this, though I suspect that many game studios are not too happy. I like it because it'll make it easier for people to meet and greet. I wonder if you'll be able to go into Window - Live and look for friends BEFORE you decide what to play. Hopefully you won't have to be in a game to then get into Windows - Live.

Regarding console v PC play, there are other items to consider: the quality of the PC system and resolution. If a PC player has a weak system that may give the console player a leg up, a great PC system would give the PC a leg up. Also, if the PC player is using a much higher resolution he may see more giving him yet another advantage. I myself play at 1920x1200 when possible. I don't think any Xbox games can currently do that. Certainly not original Xbox games, eventually some Xbox 360 games will come close, but by then you'll have PC gamers playing at even higher resolutions.

controller issue

By casket on 3/14/2007 11:37:54 AM , Rating: 2

You can always buy a "360 controller for windows"...
or the $15 wireless dongle to use your 360 controller on a pc.

More Games, Less Corporate Branding

By eugen02 on 3/14/2007 2:27:13 PM , Rating: 2

There are a dozen voice chat services already... Plus, it's a private Microsoft-only network that only works with other Microsoft Live paid subscribers?

This adds no new features. Seamless game connectivity? What BS. My Internet "game connectivity" is fine, thanks.

And what games does this support? Shadowrun, an old port, and freaking Uno?!?

You have to be a serious Microsoft devotee to buy this.

How about companies focus on making better games and less on corporate branding and PR and a new Microsoft centric logo?

Private Servers

By SmokeRngs on 3/14/2007 4:01:54 PM , Rating: 2

I didn't see it stated in the article anywhere. Will the PC version of the games have online play support only through the Live Service or will it allow for private servers like most current online multiplayer games?

As long as they keep the ability for private servers in each and every game for PC users, I don't see a downside to this. The PC users would still have their "free" online play and if they want to play against Xbox360 users, they can do that by paying for a gold account.

The biggest loss if private servers aren't allowed would be mods and different preferences for server setups. I'm accustomed to having my server setup the way I want it (for the most part since it's also a clan server). I can also connect to hundreds of other servers with different mods and configurations to keep play interesting.

I have no clue how clans and such are done for the 360, but I would bet it's much more difficult if even possible at all to do compared to the PC. I never intended to join a clan or anything like that, but once I did I found it to be lots of fun. It has kept my interest in an old game far longer than I had ever expected my interest to last.

As a PC gamer, I expect a certain amount of flexibility and customization with online multiplayer games. If I were to lose that, I'm not sure I would enjoy a game nearly as much. I understand that my thoughts are geared more towards FPS type games and other types of games would not be affected as much or at all.

uhmm

By vitul on 3/14/2007 5:09:56 PM , Rating: 2

this is stupid for anyone who doesnt already own a xbox360. And if you own a xbox360 you obviously bought it to play the games on that and not a pc.

there is free programs such as gamespy, all-seeing eye, xfire, etc where you can play the game with who you want when you want and not waste 50 bux a year.

All i really see is PC users getting a few free 2 month gold card's for the live service and destroying people in FPS games to get a good laugh then once the 2months are up go back to the free programs where you actually know your ping and play without lag.

This is maybe the worst idea i have ever heard for pc users.

title of article should be different

By wetwareinterface on 3/14/2007 6:27:16 PM , Rating: 2

this article should have been titled

"Microsoft set to release Gamespy Arcade 8 years late"

so i'm not so impressed with windows live gaming for online multiplayer support. kudos and whatnot interest me not in the least while i'm shooting at someone in battlefield games or counter strike. why will it matter to me in newer games? guess it won't.

the only feature here worth the release at all is the cross platform gaming ability but on only 2 or 3 titles it doesn't make it worthwhile or even really a feature.

halo 2 is gonna be a suck as well. it was a nice game but requiring vista and direct x 9 or 10 to play a game that ran fine on a 700 mhz p3 with a fancy geforce 2 is a bit stupid. not to mention already done that, been there, played as sarge, and as covenant and beat the game etc...

what did they do? upgrade the graphics? add levels and maps? nope. they ported it and made it to run on higher end hardware for the same glowing walls and object effects. a few extra multiplayer maps and you have halo2 for p.c. not really worth getting jazzed over.

the last bit of live that might be okay is the arcade portion but we already have popcap games and steam and yahoo games etc... all are non-pay up front to see content only if you grab content do you pay. live requires you to have a sub just to see arcade stuff. pay twice for the same games you can get online for free on a p.c.? i see this failing until microsoft makes the service free. especially since sony announced its online component is free the 360 version will probably be free soon too with ad support for revenue. and the p.c. version will fail first and be free sooner.