Topic: By your powers combined, I am GAMING ALLIANCE!

[Pugnate]

http://kotaku.com/355751/microsoft-nvidia--intel-to-form-pc-gaming-alliance

And the name they came up with was "Gaming Alliance"?? What the hell sort of a stupid name is that? What are we, three years old?

I also have to say, that while this should be good news, I am weary. As one of the people in the comments section said, let's hope this doesn't turn PC gaming into what is basically console gaming.

I'd rather see this sorta thing involve Valve, than Microsoft.

[Ghandi]

It is just a rumor at this point, according to the article.

[Quemaqua]

I was going to say that nothing there really seems to indicate that they're actually going to call themselves that, it just says they're going to potentially announce an alliance of some sort.  "Alliance" is in quotations and isn't capitalized.  But the other link I followed from there seems to indicate that they might actually use the name.  Hard to say if that's accurate information, but you're right, that's a fucking stupid name if they do use that.

Also, Valve has done more to take away the freedom of PC gamers than any other company.  You can go on about PCs getting consolized, and no offense meant to you personally, but if you took a look at the shit you're supporting you'd realize that you're actually pretty much the kind of user creating the problem.  Increasing restriction in the extreme in exchange for a little bit of convenience is what you've really signed up for, and if that isn't the biggest attempt to turn PCs into consoles, I don't know what is.  But hey, if you want even more mass market BS aimed at profitability for a corporation rather than any even remotely fucking tangible advantage for the end user, and other people making all your choices for you, by all means, continue to support them.

Sorry, I know this sounds bitter and mean-spirited, but I find your logic in this area completely unfathomable.

[Pugnate]

but if you took a look at the shit you're supporting you'd realize that you're actually pretty much the kind of user creating the problem

Wow that's pretty extreme, don't you think? Based on my comment that I'd rather have Valve (a PC games developer team) involved than Microsoft (Pure bastards)

To start, I see your point. Of course I do, I've been there hating STEAM. But PC gaming is in a downward spiral, and it is question of identifying the lesser of two evils.

You realize that Microsoft have been talking about doing some sort of unified motherboards with the 360s for a while now? They've been planning on installing hardware chips and the like -- who knows what the fuck that would do. I'll find you some links, but they can't do this without the support of the big hardware guys.

Why do you think they are forming an alliance with only hardware manufacturers? Honestly, wouldn't you rather put up with something anal that goes on at the software end? Doesn't it worry you that they basically grabbed all these hardware guys, with the goal of cleaning up PC gaming? Again, you've got Intel, AMD, ATI and Nvidia, all joining forces with Microsoft.

Do you like HDCP? Obviously not, but neither of us really cares much about HDDVD/BluRay. What if these companies decide that they are going to place chips in video cards, processors, motherboards and the like to "combat piracy"? Next thing you know, you are physically unable to create a backup copy of a game you bought, or aren't able to install daemon tools/cracks to forgo the goddamn disc protection. I mean right now if you have a legit Bluray movie, and a drive, you can't watch it without a HDCP licensed monitor. Imagine if that works into gaming somehow.

At least you can turn STEAM off when you are done with a Valve game. I'd rather put up with STEAM, than the crap that is GFW.

Valve has done more to take away the freedom of PC gamers than any other company

STEAM was a horrible piece of software when it launched. I didn't like it at all, even though the rest of the net seemed to fall in love with it. But these past few months I've been using it extensively, and it is better. In the past, I had issues with having to login to play or having to go through mandatory updates, but that seems to have improved. I can play offline without issue now, and optional updating works OK now.

And the whole update unification thing helps tremendously. I've never had any issue with CS:S or TF2 partially because STEAM is so polished now, and everyone is playing the same version of the software. And you know, I like being able to update my game without doing insane hunts for patches. But now I appreciate updating only when I want to.

Increasing restriction in the extreme in exchange for a little bit of convenience is what you've really signed up for

Fact is you don't play muliplayer. That's why your opinion on that aspect of gaming isn't valid. Don't take this the wrong way, as I am obviously not speaking of your opinion on STEAM as a whole. But that particular benefit of STEAM you will never see, which you will admit, right? People love STEAM because of the community it gives them, and the almost seamless multiplayer gaming it allows. I know you aren't into that at all.

It is like people complaining about COD4's value, without being interested in its multiplayer, or giving its singleplayer campaign a chance. Same with Xbox Live. Yea Microsoft suck etc, but why bitch about it, if you don't play multiplayer? (By it I mean Xbox Live)

Aside from seamless patching, I like being able to switch games on the fly, without digging up the game DVD, or hunting online for a crack for a game I legitimately bought.

And STEAM's support has helped a lot of companies. The most recent success seems to be of S.T.A.L.K.E.R., which was a huge flop at retail. Yet it apparently sold a million copies on STEAM.

It has come to the point where the prequel to S.T.A.L.K.E.R. will come to STEAM first.

But hey, if you want even more mass market BS aimed at profitability for a corporation rather than any even remotely fucking tangible advantage for the end user, and other people making all your choices for you, by all means, continue to support them.

It is fine to complain about losing some freedom to STEAM, but then what other option do you have? You either let PC gaming die its slow death, or you let these large money making corporations take over, or you put up with an online system that seems to be actually fighting piracy, and helping a lot of otherwise failing developers. It isn't that Valve isn't a money hungry company, I just find them at this stage easier to trust than Microsoft.

I realize all this could change, but again, when it comes to this "Alliance", I'd rather see those involved have something to do with games development. Valve are a hardcore bunch of PC games developers, and that shows when you compare STEAM to GFW.


Here read this:

http://www.yougamers.com/news/17520_pc_games_sales_-_has_it_really_been_that_bad/

And this:

http://pc.ign.com/articles/842/842883p1.html

So yes, PC Gaming is in trouble. The success of these alternatives like STEAM is a symptom of that problem.

This might depress you:

http://www.joystiq.com/2008/02/07/steam-hits-15-million-users/

That sort of thing does worry me because who knows when Valve will let that power get to their head. Once they have an entire monopoly on the online system, they are pretty much free to do as they please.

And it is inevitable.

The moment STEAM has a monopoly on the online distribution service, they will start fucking around.

[Quemaqua]

They already do, pretty much (the other services are hemorrhaging business like crazy from what I can tell), and they've already abused their power on a number of occasions, some of which you talked about yourself here.  They've pretty much been doing as they please from the start.

And no, I'm not saying I like Microsoft, nor saying that I want them anywhere near PC gaming (the GFW thing has more or less been a stick up my ass since it was announced), and yes, the thought of them pairing with manufacturers scares the shit out of me.  But do I want to replace them with Valve?  Fuck no.  I want both of them gone.

Next, you act like I've never played multiplayer or something.  I've played multiplayer games for years, and I've played multiplayer games on Steam.  But honestly, when the fuck did anyone ever have trouble figuring out what version of a game a server was running?  When did anyone ever have some irreparable problem that Steam has somehow rendered obsolete?  When did it ever take you more than 10 seconds to find a patch to download?  It takes me a matter of minutes to find patches for games from 13 years ago.  Steam is trying to solve all my problems, except it fails to realize that I didn't have any to begin with.

I'm not trying to turn the tide of conversation this way again since obviously this thread isn't about Steam, I'm just saying... why can't we all get behind keeping PC gaming moving forward instead of taking giant steps backward that do nothing but benefit people living in giant houses and driving Ferraris paid for with your money?  This shit needs to stop.  I'm sick of it.  Whether it be Microsoft or Intel or Valve or anybody else matters very little to me.

[idolminds]

I had some (non-Steam) thoughts on this. Not so much this "alliance", but what exactly are the problems with PC gaming that keeps people away and what can be done to fix them.

I think MS making the 360 controller the "default" setup is a wonderful step forward. I hated playing old games on gamepads because you'd never know which button did what. The in-game tutorials would say stuff like "Press Button 1 to do this"...which button is Button 1? It may or may not be labeled on the pad. If it is, it might not be labeled correctly (It might be Button 2...or the A button). Now with the 360 pad support its simple, the in-game stuff can show you the button and it will be the correct one, and it can have a default config set up because the dev knows what the pad has in terms of buttons. So, cool.

The big sticking point for PC is system requirements. It can get confusing for the average person. Hell, even now I look at the specs on a box and don't know if I can run it. You've all seen my idea for defining minimum spec, which would be an excellent start. However, I thought up an alternate solution.

Define a Standard spec PC. Like consoles, this defined spec will be relevant for 5 years. This is not to say that devs can't make games that require higher specs, but it would do them well to use the Standard spec as a minimum requirement.

So as an example, Gen1 spec PC is a dual core CPU of a certain speed with 2GB of RAM and a 8800GT or equivalent GPU. This then becomes a baseline spec PC that both devs and consumers can use. Devs can use it as baseline spec. Like I said, make games that require more to run at their highest, but if you can turn settings down and make the game playable (playable being my 1024x768 @ 30FPS standard), then you can say on the box "Gen1 compliant" or "Runs on Gen1 PCs".

Consumers can then go out and buy Gen1 PCs, and look at game boxes and if Gen1 is supported then they can safely buy the game and know they can play it. Similar to console games where you just buy a game and it's guaranteed to work. Eventually Gen1 becomes the minimum spec, and then Gen2 PCs are defined and used the same way. This can be every 3-5 years. Use numbers like Gen1, Gen2, etc to keep things clear. Gen2 is faster than Gen1. A Gen2 PC will run all Gen1 games as well as all Gen2 games, but not Gen3 games.

Good idea? I dunno. I'm sure people would bitch, but theres nothing stopping the "hardcores" from still building their uber-PCs and cranking the graphics of every game. But having some easy to use basic system for everyone else I think would be very helpful. And that is something only a group of hardware manufacturers could come up with.

[Jedi]

I see you point and I agree selecting a game based on specs could be tricky for the average user and using such a simple grade system would help. But PCs being the way they are implementing a meaningful grading system could be darn right tricky. Unless the user runs a simple little app (which would have to use established and industry accepted standards for grading) that grades their system and gives them a number before they leave their house to buy a game this would simplify matters a great deal. (this would also allow for upgrades etc) And I'm aware that MS/Vista has such a system in place so I'd imagine this is where it's going in termsof this alliance.

On this point I don’t see a problem with making things easier for the average user, beyond that I’m not willing to comment on this like STEAM and any other forms of control that this alliance might bring about.

[sirean_syan]

The standard spec PC wouldn't be a bad idea. For the "average" user, I wouldn't be surprised to see companies like Dell having it as a selling point that given PC would conform to the standard. They already have supposed gamer lines, so they could then make a lower end model that's always got that tag.

[Cobra951]

A reference standard is fine, as long as it isn't bolted down and locked with some DRM scheme for everything you try to use.  Any scenario which includes forced DRM at the hardware or OS level I oppose outright, even if it means that the big commercial PC games become history.  There are more important uses for PCs which need to remain free from the IP police.

[MysterD]

X360 GamePad For X360 and Windows

I had some (non-Steam) thoughts on this. Not so much this "alliance", but what exactly are the problems with PC gaming that keeps people away and what can be done to fix them.

I think MS making the 360 controller the "default" setup is a wonderful step forward. I hated playing old games on gamepads because you'd never know which button did what. The in-game tutorials would say stuff like "Press Button 1 to do this"...which button is Button 1? It may or may not be labeled on the pad. If it is, it might not be labeled correctly (It might be Button 2...or the A button). Now with the 360 pad support its simple, the in-game stuff can show you the button and it will be the correct one, and it can have a default config set up because the dev knows what the pad has in terms of buttons. So, cool.

I also have NO PROBLEM w/ X360 gamepads being supported for PC games -- especially if a X360 gamepad gets a PC Port. It just seems logical that a X360 game ported to the PC game would support the X360 gamepad on the PC version of the game.

Though, I do have a problem w/ games that don't support the KB/mouse to the extent they should, instead forcing me to use the X360 gamepad b/c they decided to be lazy when porting the controls to the KB/mouse -- i.e. Res Evil 4 would've probably been fine w/ KB/mouse if it supported the mouse and especially MOUSELOOK.

X360 pad is the best gamepad my PC has ever seen. Best move Microsoft ever made w/ gamepads. PERIOD.

Vid Cards

The big sticking point for PC is system requirements. It can get confusing for the average person. Hell, even now I look at the specs on a box and don't know if I can run it. You've all seen my idea for defining minimum spec, which would be an excellent start. However, I thought up an alternate solution.

Define a Standard spec PC. Like consoles, this defined spec will be relevant for 5 years. This is not to say that devs can't make games that require higher specs, but it would do them well to use the Standard spec as a minimum requirement.

So as an example, Gen1 spec PC is a dual core CPU of a certain speed with 2GB of RAM and a 8800GT or equivalent GPU. This then becomes a baseline spec PC that both devs and consumers can use. Devs can use it as baseline spec. Like I said, make games that require more to run at their highest, but if you can turn settings down and make the game playable (playable being my 1024x768 @ 30FPS standard), then you can say on the box "Gen1 compliant" or "Runs on Gen1 PCs".

Consumers can then go out and buy Gen1 PCs, and look at game boxes and if Gen1 is supported then they can safely buy the game and know they can play it. Similar to console games where you just buy a game and it's guaranteed to work. Eventually Gen1 becomes the minimum spec, and then Gen2 PCs are defined and used the same way. This can be every 3-5 years. Use numbers like Gen1, Gen2, etc to keep things clear. Gen2 is faster than Gen1. A Gen2 PC will run all Gen1 games as well as all Gen2 games, but not Gen3 games.

Good idea? I dunno. I'm sure people would bitch, but theres nothing stopping the "hardcores" from still building their uber-PCs and cranking the graphics of every game. But having some easy to use basic system for everyone else I think would be very helpful. And that is something only a group of hardware manufacturers could come up with.

I think what is also a big problem are computer store companies (Best Buy, Circuit City, etc) pushing out PC's w/ Intel-integrated vid-card and crappy-ass budget vid cards inside of them. This is a major problem, I think -- namely b/c you do have the occasional casual gamer who knows zero about PC's, but they will buy game-X b/c it's on the PC only and they just have to play this one....and then, they wind up screwed b/c they can't run the game b/c their vid card ain't up to snuff.

Every time I go to one of those stores, I look at their PC's and just scratch my head. On a damn good majority of them, if I was to buy a PC from one of those stores, I would leave the PC alone except one thing: I'd be swapping out the vid card the day I buy the damn PC. So, I think there should be a new standard for vid cards.

It doesn't help that when NVidia pumps out a GF 7300, it way runs worse than the 6800. To casual person X, w/out knowing jack about vid cards, they'd probably look it say, "Hmmmm....GF 7300 sounds better than a GF 6800." Logically, you'd think -- oh, the 7300 would trump the 6800, just by the number.  But, the truth is -- GF 7300 is a low-end card in the 7000 series, so you're better off buying a high-end 6800, mid-range 7600 or high-end 7800 for better performance; all which will trump the 7300.

Also, low-end budget vid cards need to go. That's right. I said it. Looking at most of the new games -- games like Witcher, Bioshock, R6 Vegas -- they all want a GF 6600 for a minimum vid card; they want a mid-range card from a series, at the least. Crysis wants a high-end 6000 series card as a min, the 6800. GH3 calls for a 7600 as a minimum -- a mid-range series 7000 series card. Stranglehold PC calls for a 7800, which is a high-end 7000 series model. So, I think it's time for NVidia to get rid of the budget series numbers, such as the GF 5200's, GF 6200's, 7300's, etc etc -- especially since it seems like more so than ever, I'm seeing mid-range cards in a series being a minimum supported vid card on these game boxes. Namely, seems like cards ending in 600 to 800 are being supported more than anything by game developers (i.e. GF 6600, 6800, 7600, 7800, 8600, 8800), nowadays.

Also, the vid card naming sucks. First a GF 8800, then a 8800 GT, 8800 GTS, 8800 GTX, 8800 GTPugX, 8800 GTXXX crap -- guys, this got to go. Who came up w/ this crap? Stop making so many suped-up versions of cards and then making it worse by attaching silly letters on the end. Why can't you just go on and call the beefed-up a bit 8800 a GF 8810? Or 8815? Or 8820? Sheesh....
 

Min Requirements
Idol, I always liked your idea of the box telling you "Minimum Requirements" AND TELLING you right on the box what your res' should be, Overall settings should be (Low, Medium, High, etc) right on the box. And I like the idea that "Reccommend Specs" should do the same, as well. It is crappy when you get a game and your PC is a good deal over the specs, only to find out that you feel like you're running the game on the "minimum spec" system b/c it runs like shit and you're saying to yourself -- "Why the hell didn't they put the res' and whatnot for what "mimimum specs" is on the box?"

STEAM

Next, you act like I've never played multiplayer or something.  I've played multiplayer games for years, and I've played multiplayer games on Steam.  But honestly, when the fuck did anyone ever have trouble figuring out what version of a game a server was running?  When did anyone ever have some irreparable problem that Steam has somehow rendered obsolete?  When did it ever take you more than 10 seconds to find a patch to download?  It takes me a matter of minutes to find patches for games from 13 years ago.  Steam is trying to solve all my problems, except it fails to realize that I didn't have any to begin with.

I don't mind STEAM wanting to update my game for me.

It's just it doesn't warn me and ask me before it's about to do it if I want to do it. And, worst of all -- to run game X from STEAM, you must have your game updated or else...And for a MP game, that does matter -- b/c you all should be running the same stuff so y'all can play together the correct right. But for a SP game, who cares what version of the game I'm playing??? You're playing ALONE, but w/ other gamers -- that patch shouldn't be FORCED down my throat.

Oh, and what sucks about Valve's patch system is you can't keep your game disc and then download a small patch to back stuff up. Nope, so you can't just back-up say a patch. You want to do that, you got to back-up the ENTIRE game!!!

I like that I don't need the disc to play STEAM games, but let's cut the crap here. SP games I decide to buy out the retail box, I just feel I shouldn't EVER need to activate them over STEAM. PERIOD -- should be no need of the Net for a game that doesn't require me to interact w/ other gamers at all.

And I do like the whole Valve STEAM Community thing built into STEAM -- I think that's really the only thing I have liked that Valve done w/ STEAM, in the last God knows how many years!
 
Gaming Alliance

And the name they came up with was "Gaming Alliance"?? What the hell sort of a stupid name is that? What are we, three years old? Tongue

I also have to say, that while this should be good news, I am weary. As one of the people in the comments section said, let's hope this doesn't turn PC gaming into what is basically console gaming.

I'd rather see this sorta thing involve Valve, than Microsoft.

Valve?!?!? They don't make a OS!

If you're going w/ gaming companies on this alliance, I think Id and Blizzard would be a better choice than Valve -- just b/c they actually have removed "copy protection" from their games and b/c both of those companies support their games years beyond their release. To me, that sounds like they care about their game enough to after a while, to keep making official patches years after a game's out AND then just decide eventually "We made enuff money on this game; goodbye copy protection!" Especially if they want their game to live on forever, even when they're gone and even when we're gone -- so, the mod community can mess w/ the game and support it themselves." I mean, hell -- look at Id who make their games open-source, eventually -- ridiculous years later, gamers running those old Doom games on Windows XP PC's now!

I'm sure everyone owns a copy of Half-Life 1 by now -- whether they bought it alone OR in one of those HL Anthology packs Valve sold. I'm sure many own a copy of HL2 by now, too -- whether they bought it from the HL2 Retail Box, STEAM, or from The Orange Box (retail). If Valve really cared, it'd probably be time to make at least HL1 and HL2 to be able to run completely independent from STEAM and its copy protection, if you ask me.

Piracy

It is fine to complain about losing some freedom to STEAM, but then what other option do you have? You either let PC gaming die its slow death, or you let these large money making corporations take over, or you put up with an online system that seems to be actually fighting piracy, and helping a lot of otherwise failing developers. It isn't that Valve isn't a money hungry company, I just find them at this stage easier to trust than Microsoft.

Piracy is always a nasty issue to game developers. And games that use nasty protections -- like the newest Securom version and Starforce -- just won't help themselves get sales out the gate either, I think. Not unless they remove the protection checks, of course.

It's crazy Crysis sold so little, 86k in its first month. I'm sure steep requirements didn't help -- but, I wonder how much more Crysis would've sold, if it wasn't pirated at all. I'm guessing like most games, it had to at least be pirated somewhat.

Best option really is to have no need for copy protection around a game and to just make the game free-to-all -- that way, nobody's a pirate. And I think one way to eliminate piracy is -- well, Battlefield: Heroes might have an interesting answer -- just make the game FREE for everyone to download, but litter the game w/ advertisements in the Battlefield: Heroes Community aspect of the game. Like on web pages and chat rooms, for the community -- as the latest GFW mentions. I hope it doesn't go beyond that to where there's a ridiculous amounts on there w/ the ads and all. We'll just have to see how it turns out.

Oh, and if you want extra content, extra items, quicker leveling boosts, etc -- go pay for it.
Though, you might create a problem of having pirates try to steal the extra content and extra items that you are supposed to pay for, huh?

I dunno, but BF: Heroes could be an interesting poster child for killing "game piracy."

[Pugnate]

Que I'll respond to your post soon, but I just wanted to say that I knew this thread would give D an orgasm of gargantuan proportions. I was just waiting for it. Glad I have an umbrella.

[Quemaqua]

Yeah, I can't say I read any of that, heh.

[Ghandi]

This is a little off topic but is this thread title a reference to Captain Planet?

[Pugnate]

Yes... yes it is.

And I will get around to reading D's post as well.

[Xessive]

X360 pad is the best gamepad my PC has ever seen. Best move Microsoft ever made w/ gamepads. PERIOD.

I'm thinking about getting a new gamepad for my PC (since I gave my Logitech DualAction, which looks just like a PS2 gamepad, to my brother).

I really like the X360 gamepad's feel and layout (plus most of the new game's direct support), so would you recommend the Logitech ChillStream for PC?

[Jedi]

Que I'll respond to your post soon, but I just wanted to say that I knew this thread would give D an orgasm of gargantuan proportions. I was just waiting for it. Glad I have an umbrella.

/sings
Umbrealla.. ella, ella, a, a, a.

So couldn't help it. 

[Cobra951]

I'm thinking about getting a new gamepad for my PC (since I gave my Logitech DualAction, which looks just like a PS2 gamepad, to my brother).

I really like the X360 gamepad's feel and layout (plus most of the new game's direct support), so would you recommend the Logitech ChillStream for PC?

Oh, a shameless clone of the 360 pad.  Ha!  I love it.

Why don't you just get the real deal?  The wired 360 controller ($40) plugs into USB and works just fine on PCs.  I have my older one plugged into my PC right now.  The stick center reading changed with age and abuse, and the 360 can't compensate.  The PC can.

Edit: Here is one packaged for Windows.  If I remember correctly, it includes a driver disc, but don't quote me.

[MysterD]

Oh, a shameless clone of the 360 pad.  Ha!  I love it.

Why don't you just get the real deal?  The wired 360 controller ($40) plugs into USB and works just fine on PCs.  I have my older one plugged into my PC right now.  The stick center reading changed with age and abuse, and the 360 can't compensate.  The PC can.

Edit: Here is one packaged for Windows.  If I remember correctly, it includes a driver disc, but don't quote me.

Hell, you probably won't really NEED the driver disc. I never needed it. As soon as I plugged in my 360 Windows GamePad, Microsoft XP recognized it.

Also, Gogamer has in the past sold the X360 USB GamePad (S Controller) that works on the PC before a few times for like $20 or so. I did get one when Gogamer had that sale -- yup, they work no problem.

Oh, and if someone does need the X360/PC Controller Driver, I'm pretty sure it's on Microsoft's website somewhere over here.

[Pugnate]

Oh, a shameless clone of the 360 pad.  Ha!  I love it.

Why don't you just get the real deal?  The wired 360 controller ($40) plugs into USB and works just fine on PCs.  I have my older one plugged into my PC right now.  The stick center reading changed with age and abuse, and the 360 can't compensate.  The PC can.

Edit: Here is one packaged for Windows.  If I remember correctly, it includes a driver disc, but don't quote me.

I think the problem could be finding one in this part of the world. I am not sure about the UAE, but for some bloody reason they only have Saitek and Logtiech here.

[idolminds]

If you can get a regular 360 controller for cheaper, go for it. As D said, you dont need the disc...just download the driver from MS. They controllers themselves are exactly the same.

[Xessive]

If the regular 360 controller is cheaper I'd go for it but out here they're about 10 Dhs ($3 USD) apart. The one thing that makes me lean more toward the Logitech is its colour. I don't know why, I just don't like the white controller.

My main concern now is compatibility. I've heard that the 360 controller (as well as the Logitech ChillStream) have some recognition issues with older games and/or games without the "Games For Windows" logo; is that true?

[Pugnate]

If I had the option, then I'd definitely opt for the 360 controller. It has gotten so much praise from PC critics, one feels like it is a necessity of life... like toilet paper.

[Quemaqua]

I'm actually not all that fond of it.  I don't really see what the buzz is about.  Sure, it's a solid controller, but so are a lot of the other options that predate it.  I've never quite seen the excitement.  It's really just another controller... the real nice thing is if you have a 360 and a PC you've automatically got a solution for both, which is pretty sweet.  But yeah, I'd still rather have a PS2 controller.

[gpw11]

Buy a $5 adapter and you can use your PS2 controller.

I think the thing with the 360 pad is that it's universally supported and has a quality design and construction.  I've had problems with a lot of well designed and constructed pads just because support wasn't there.

[scottws]

There's a PC wireless adapter for the wireless 360 controller as well.  Just FYI.

[MysterD]

If the regular 360 controller is cheaper I'd go for it but out here they're about 10 Dhs ($3 USD) apart. The one thing that makes me lean more toward the Logitech is its colour. I don't know why, I just don't like the white controller.

My main concern now is compatibility. I've heard that the 360 controller (as well as the Logitech ChillStream) have some recognition issues with older games and/or games without the "Games For Windows" logo; is that true?

Ain't there some other unsupported drivers some modder made that you can use instead of the MS ones to play OLDER PC games w/ the 360 Pad???

[Pugnate]

The wireless adapter apparently works for all 360 peripherals... though who cares about the rest I guess.

[scottws]

What other wireless peripherals are there?

[gpw11]

guitar?

[Pugnate]

I think there is some webcam and headhpones and stuff.

[idolminds]

Is real.

GDC08: First message from group that boasts support from Epic, Activision and Microsoft touts strong PC games category

The previously rumoured PC Gaming Alliance official revealed its intentions during a press conference at the Game Developers Conference today, promising to provide a united front for a platform it said is mistakenly being often described as dying.

Headed by Intel's Randy Stude as president and founding board member, the PC Gaming Alliance is an Amercan non-profit organisation whose mission is "to drive worldwide growth of PC gaming". Membership incldues key computer hardware and software companies from around the world.

Activision, Epic and Microsoft are founding members representing PC game developers, joining hardware companies AMD, Nvidia and Intel. PC OEM firms Dell, Acer, Alienware and Gateway round out the number of founding members.



The group has three primary focuses: industry leadership, platform leadership and consumer experience.

"We believe we can have a united front and have some impact," said Stude on the plan to redress the perception  "in some markets that PC gaming is dying" despite the fact they are all competitors and will remain as such.

The organisation won't be touting an expensive brand or logo to slap on game boxes and present to consumers in marketing (although Stude added that in time the group will flesh out its plans for relaying its strategy to games players), instead at first looking to maintain an industry-facing presence that champions the PC as a games platform.

Said Stude: "One of our main major objectives is to provide one voice on PC gaming market. There's no one source that says 'hey this is where the PC market is going'. Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft are always calling their market share - we're going to call our market through this group."

He offered up stats on the US and worldwide PC games market, saying the former (not including casual games) in 2007 generated $2.76bn revenue, a year-on-year rise of 12 per cent, accounted for 30 per cent of gaming revenues in the territory, and was set to make $9.6bn - a rise of 16 per cent - in 2008. For the global games market the figures were $8.3bn in 2007, up 14 per cent, with 2008 revenues set to be $9.6bn, up for 16 per cent.

There are 263 million onlne PC gamers worldwide, added Stude, saying it was proof that the PC gaming market's death has been greatly exaggerated.

The PCGA will also look to help developers and publishers acknowledge and look to contain the "large challenges" impacting PC gameplay and business such as piracy, phishing and cheating.

The next step for the PCGA, said Stude, was for the founder members to relay their enthusiasm for the platform to developers and publishers, ensure them that there is a market for games, and explain what system specs to aim for.

"We want to make sure that we are sharing with a developer base what consumers are putting into their PCs and notebooks," said Stude, saying that a united group can help focus the attentions of their contemporaries.

"What we intend to do is look at what's out there and tell developers what consumers have and understand what audiences exist," added Microsoft's Games for Windows boss and board member Kevin Unagast. Working together, he said, means "we can get better results faster."

The organisation isn't currently planning to offer technology to developers - although president Stude didn't rule it out - saying it was the intention instead to inform and guide the industry.

Unagast added: "The role of the PCGA is providing guidance to developers when they are making a game, explain how they can achieve consistency."

Commented Richy Corphus, AMD's developer relations boss and treasurer of the Alliance: "If we make the experience better it makes it easier for PC developers to support gaming."

[Pugnate]

CAPTAIN GAMING ALLIANCE HE'S A HERO.... HES GONA TAKE NANASOMETHINGNANASOMETHINGNANAN DOWN TO ZERO!

MICROSOFT! INTEL! AMD! NVIDIA! EPIC! BLIZZARD!

BY YOUR POWERS COMBINED.... I AM GAMING ALLIANCE!

[gpw11]

Ain't there some other unsupported drivers some modder made that you can use instead of the MS ones to play OLDER PC games w/ the 360 Pad???

XBCD is the name of the driver/program. It's pretty good and supports full customization of the buttons, analog axis, and deadzones.  I use it with an adapter dongle for my Type-S Xbox controller and haven't had any problems.  Newer games generally recognize it through the drivers as a 360 pad and automatically set it up, and older ones work fine.  The best part is that a lot of old dual analog gamepads didn't have any kind of standard for what the right analog stick actually controlled (pov hat, sliders, different axis) so in some games it could be totally whacked or not work at all.  You can totally fix that through the xbcd program and save the profile, which is kind of a lifesaver.  Oh, and the rumble works great in emulation software, which is very hit or miss with most pads.

As for gaming alliance, that's cool and all, but for some reason I can't help but think they're all sitting around trying to think up new ways to fleece me.

[Quemaqua]

Probably.  But it sounds better to me now than it did originally.

[MysterD]

PCGA plans to tackle piracy and DRM issues.

PC Gaming Alliance: "We are the guardians of PC gaming"

By Ben Kuchera | Published: November 10, 2008 - 07:50PM CT

At the 2008 Game Developers Conference, we attended a press conference where the PC Gaming Alliance made itself known to the world. Members include Intel, AMD, Epic, and Dell, among others, so power is not an issue—but there seemed to be no clear idea of what the PCGA would actually do. Recently, Ars spoke to PCGA President Randy Stude about some of these concerns, as well as the issues of piracy, DRM, and how to turn piracy into profits.
Related Stories

Stude is an outspoken man, with strong opinions about how to make PC gaming better, and one of the major goals of the PCGA will be to give PC gamers a voice. "PC gamers have known for a long time that there are lots of them out there, you get on a server for a brand new beta of Call of Duty World at War and you get on there at 6 o'clock at night and you see thousands and thousands of people playing on hundreds of servers," he told Ars. "The notion that PC game is dead immediately gets bumped if you're a player... What the PCGA is attempting to do with its research is to quantify the market, to say 'We know you're out there, and we're going to add you up and make certain that everyone recognizes that you count.'"

Stude also says the PCGA wants to help gamers choose the right hardware. "With the amount of money that people are spending on their new PC, the PC [they're buying] should have graphics capabilities, and CPU and memory capabilities, powerful enough to play the games they want to play." The PCGA wants to make the suggested gaming requirements clearer, and it wants to communicate "in harmony" what it thinks the best gaming experience is on the PC, and to show OEM how to make these things clear to consumers. Announcements about this goal are expected in the coming months.

Piracy is a hot-button issue right now, but is it really more prevalent than it has always been? Stude thinks that question misses the point. "I don't think it's getting worse, as much as it's getting easier." He points to Napster as making musical piracy ridiculously easy; now games are just as easy to pirate, as a few clicks and a fast connection gets you whatever game you want. "As broadband has gotten more prolific the issue has been exacerbated," Stude said. He also points out this isn't a unique problem: movies, music, and console games all are feeling the effects of piracy.

Where there's piracy, however, there is also potential for profit. "The largest market for PC gaming happens to be the emerging market places in the Far East. Over half a billion in software revenue was generated in China, Korea, and Taiwan. All the top markets for piracy are also the top markets for revenue," he told Ars. "Those who are going to invest in those markets will have to acknowledge that the traditional disc-based media might not be able to survive in those environments."

It's also a matter of education. "The PCGA will take up the challenge of piracy, not to assume the responsibility that the ESA has taken on... rather the PCGA would like to address the methodology that publishers might be able to take to solve, or to do a better job trying to solve, the piracy challenge for their substantial investments in content."

The PCGA won't give a standard approach to publishers, saying it is much more likely it will release a series of recommendations to publishers, and track piracy on an annual basis to see if the problem is growing or shrinking. The PCGA is also working on methods for members to track how effective their antipiracy measures are once a game has been released. While the ESA's job is enforcement, the PCGA seems more willing to adapt to the challenge of piracy and to create games that can't simply be copied. This would include things like MMO titles or free-to-play games with microtransactions, as are popular in many parts of the world. Stude also points to systems like Steam that reduce the effects of piracy on even AAA games such as Half-Life 2 and Left 4 Dead.

The piracy issue tends to lead to discussions on DRM, and I bring up the controversy over Spore. "I think gamers wanted to make their voices known; it was the equivalent of the Boston tea party." He tells a story about not being able to play a game he bought for his son because the activation code didn't work, and he couldn't call customer support because they were closed for the holidays. "Everyone has a story like that," he says.

Activation limits aren't the best way to keep games safe or gamers happy, and he believes EA got the message about what people are willing to tolerate. "[PC Gamers] don't buy one machine, stick it in the corner, hook it up to the TV, and play it forever. We play on multitudes of machines, and we want the same rights an Xbox 360 purchaser has, to move the game to whatever machine we want to play on."

The PCGA has a clear mandate. "We are the guardians of the PC as a platform for gaming. We need to make sure there is an environment where publishers are not afraid to invest tens of millions of dollars in developing great gaming experiences," Stude says, and while it doesn't seem like the average gamer will often know what goes into the work the PCGA does, many of the group's ideas are compelling.

Giving PC gamers a voice and proving their value as a market, while trying to maintain a balance between publishers keeping their content safe and gamers being able to play the way they want to... these are the biggest challenges in PC gaming right now. We wish the PCGA luck in trying to fight the good fight.

[Pugnate]

I think about the only thing these guys do is make one statement a year. They've been apparently around for the past four years, (only formally announcing themselves last year) and in all that time have done nothing

I just don't see how so many huge profit seeking and shareholder-pleasing companies -- some competing with each other -- can work together to do something constructive -- aside from obvious statements.

In my opinion, the only company that can do anything to secure the future of hardcore PC gaming, is Microsoft... and by anything I mean at the very least continue to give us the rights we had become accustomed to from Windows 98 to Windows XP, and at best enhance the platform to offer some sensible and unified guidelines to publishers, and thus create an environment where there is simplicity and less confusion, especially for the less experienced gamers.

With Visa there was obviously an attempt at doing that, but it all seemingly fell apart before it started. There was a half-assed PC experience index, that was just never adopted by publishers properly. There was the GFW branding, that didn't stand for the quality it was supposed to, and saw extremely buggy titles released waving its flag. There actually was a vast improvement in driver implementation, especially in Windows Update, though it was less because of gaming, and more because of the OS in general. Then there was DX10, which was just a lot of marketing bullshit

It became apparent that a lot of the improvements for gamers in Vista were half-hearted, and only used as a tool to create hype amongst gamers, with as minimum an investment from MS as possible. The investment in these "features" was just enough to show something in the trade shows.

Unfortunately, MS just don't have the business motivation to make actual improvements in their OSs, for gamers. Firstly, they are focused primarily on the Xbox console, and secondly, they have absolutely no threat for the gamer's dollar from competing operating systems on the PC (Mac or Linux). Basically they have no motivation to enhance the PC gaming platform because it won't increase their profit margin. At best they will take part in marketing BS tactics like DX10. Even now, Windows 7 is supposed to launch with DX11, which in actuality is more like DX10.2 -- seriously... it is just a few updates on DX10, and was originally planned to have been released as such, until the MS marketing bullshit machine saw another opportunity. I actually read about this on Anandtech...

In the end, PC gaming has done very well without MS's help till the last few years... but with all this negativity, we need them to actually do something...

[MysterD]

Capcom's getting serious about PC gaming, of late.

They've joined the PC Gaming Alliance. (PCGA).

[MysterD]

PC Gaming Alliance has put forth Their Very Own 2008 Report for PC Gaming.
Click this link for the PDF file Report!

The PCGA Presents: The PC Gaming Industry in 2008

Gaming software (retail, digital distribution, online subscription, advertising and other business models) generated $10.7 Billion which according to most industry studies would make PC game software responsible for nearly one third of every dollar generated in the gaming software industry.