Firstly the Peter Zetterberg quote, I am aware it is two years old however from what I have seen in the past two years MS's policy certainly hasn't changed unless I missed a massive influx of support for the PC platform whilst I was sleeping. So whilst the quote is two years old I think it is still relevant today, I certainly haven't seen anything from MGS that suggests they are no longer practicing what they were preaching 2 years ago. As for it only covering Europe, yes he was talking about European territories. The fact the PC dominates in Europe and around the world means MS tries to avoid squaring it's xbox up against such stiff competition, that was the point Peter was making.

Not that doing so is going to convince me to start taking this personally and boycott Alan Wake if they release it for PC, just like I'll never be able to convince you that game developers have no obligation whatsoever to treat you or me, or anyone else, as if we actually matter in the big scheme of things. We don't. :P Bowing out of this discussion now. :)ChiliDragon

This is the thing you are saying I am "taking this personally" now my language might sound like that I am not taking this personally. I am "boycotting" Alan Wake on the PC because I do not believe in paying full price for 6/12 month old games. I never said that developers have an obligation to me whatsoever, but if a developer WANTS my money then they have to damn well make me WANT to give them my money. Now delaying games and refusing to release games till they are nearly a year old on the PC is not exactly making me want to give them my money.

At the end of the day if you want to pay full whack for old games then that is up to you, I would argue that you aren't helping the PC by supporting developers that carry out this practice though. However on the same side you would argue me not buying these games is "harming" the PC platform. Now if MS and Remedy are going to act like a "business" then I will act like a "consumer" they are not giving me the product I want, when I want it and at a price I want to pay so therefore as a consumer I will not pay for or consume their product. You call it a "boycott" I call it "good consumer practice".

If that is the case then why are they even bothering to release Fable 3 for the PC?Philhellene

What you mean the now "delayed on the PC" Fable 3 ? That is probably more down to Peter Molyneux he has always been a fan of PC gaming and you will probably find he has pushed for Fable 3 on the PC. I don't think it is any coincidence that Fable 3 on the PC has been "delayed" it will probably come out 6 - 12 months later when no one will really care and those that are going to convert will have converted then.

It's more to do with piracy I think, and console games usually do cost $10 more.

the_mitch28

It has nothing to do with piracy, Microsoft are on record as stating they will hold games OFF the PC because they want people to buy the Xbox version. They have discovered that if they release the PC and Xbox version together then some territories neglect the xbox version and buy the PC version. By delaying the PC version they literally "force" consumers to buy the xbox version. This is what Peter Zetterberg from Microsoft Game Studios had to say on the subject :-

On a global scale the Windows Vista business is as important as our Xbox 360 business. But in Germany for example, we want more gamers to buy our Xbox 360. If we launch a game that is on 360 and PC simultaneously, we basically shoot ourselves in the foot by allowing the German market to choose to play the PC version � because they are more likely to buy that than spend their money on the Xbox 360. On a global scale the PC is very relevant to us. And I would say that 90 per cent of the games that are pitched to us are on console. We're strongly perceived as a console publisher because we're the first-party publisher even though the Windows operating system is equally important to us. If we launched a Halo game on PC and 360 in Germany simultaneously, 80 per cent of sales would be on the PC. So we need to pick and choose our formats.Peter Zetterberg

http://www.ggmania.com/?smsid=25553

That is the reason for the delay, it was always on the cards there was just no way on this planet MS would allow Fable 3 to release simultaneously on the PC and Xbox 360.

I wouldn't say this is "evidence" that there will be a port of Halo : Reach and I would be very dubious about whether MS would allow a game with such important implications for their xbox 360 appearing on the PC. I would have thought it was pretty obvious by now what Microsoft want you to do, hell they have told us enough times via their actions and comments. They want you to buy a PC for the internet and buy an xbox 360 for gaming. That hasn't changed and bringing Halo : Reach to the PC would be hampering that goal of theirs.

Or we might see development for it cut back even further since nothing ever sells for it. Personally, I try not to actively push things in that direction, if I can avoid it.ChiliDragon

As I said it depends on how you view things, it could be equally argued people supporting developers that release games later on the PC are just encouraging developers to do that. If you are comfortable getting all your PC games 6 months to a year after the console crowd then fair enough. I personally am not happy to encourage that situation I reward developers that actually seem to want my money and a developer releasing a version later on the PC doesn't say "we want your money" to me.

Somehow I doubt that let's give "a massive big finger to PC gamers" was on the list of reasons for why the game was removed/delayed for the PC platform. :P It's nothing personal; it's just business. If it's not cost effective to sell to PC, they're not going to do it. It has nothing to do with contempt, it has to do with the fact we were enough to merit the cost of giving us the game. It's an unemotional numbers game, that's all.ChiliDragon

Nope it is a middle finger to PC gamers the fact that it is "business" doesn't change the fact that both Remedy and MS basically said "your money isn't good enough". Well that's fine by me but I don't see why my money should now be good enough 6 months later ? This whole decision by Microsoft has nothing to do with good "business" and everything to do with propping their xbox up. They know if you give consumers a choice between the PC version or the xbox version then most will choose the PC version in some territories. After all they said exactly that :-

If we launched a Halo game on PC and 360 in Germany simultaneously, 80 per cent of sales would be on the PC. So we need to pick and choose our formats.Peter Zetterberg

http://www.ggmania.com/?smsid=25553

At the end of the day you obviously feel it is worth paying full price for a 6 month/1 year old game. I don't, if a company wants my money then they should treat me accordingly after all I am putting food on their table all they are providing me with is a few hours "distraction".

Exactly. Boycotts backfire... I'll get it for PC if it comes out reasonably soon.ChiliDragon

Well it could be equally argued that buying games that get released 6 months to a year later is "encouraging" this practice. If developers/publishers see PC gamers happy to buy versions of their game for full price nearly a year later then that is what they will carry on doing. However if we can show them that by holding the PC version back for nearly a year they will suffer worse financially than releasing it along with the console version then we just might actually get the PC platform being treated appropriately again.

Either way when MS and Remedy cancelled the PC version of Alan Wake it was a massive big finger to PC gamers and call me picky but I don't give my money to people that treat me with utter contempt.

Nooooo! Mafia 2 on PC is supposed to be an incredible experience. It will have some serious PhysX going. They've surely put in the time to make it work well on PC. Plus, any exclusive content will likely make its way to other platforms, and if not, we'll have alternate content.giant11

Mafia 2 with physx's enabled is a joke requirements wise. I have an Nvidia GTX260 and I won't be able to use the Physx included in this game. You need a minimum of a Quadcore Processor + GTX470 + 9800GTX just to access the physx's rubbish. To max out the physx's rubbish you need an i7 + GTX470 + GTX285

So along with ridiculous spec requirements, ridiculous "exclusive content to one system only", ridiculous pre-order rubbish and only 10 hours of gaming it is one game I won't touch till it is in the "fiver or less" bin.

If you are ignoring Ubi games because of the DRM... DON'T! The last few games I played, namely Assassin's Creed 2 and Splinter Cell Conviction have been amaazing, and the DRM didn't really interfere.Resistance_Kid

The online DRM that Ubisoft uses is so grotesque that I refuse to be a party to it. Whilst Ubisoft continues to use this 100% on line DRM I will continue to not give them my money. It dismays me that people are quite happy to accept this DRM just to play a game but that is for each individual to decide. Me personally anything Ubisoft gets ignored now, as far as I am concerned Ubisoft is now a console developer.

Pretty much anything by Ubisoft, not bothering with starcraft 2 (don't see why I should pay a console game price for a PC game). I am not bothering with Mafia 2 due to the ridiculous "exclusive PS3 content" rubbish. So right now there isn't much for me to look forward too gaming wise :P ah well less money for them and more money for me I guess.

There's no need for "exclusives" when even multiplats play completely different than console versions, (Dragon Age 9.5 PC version >>> Dragon Age 8.5 Console).nintendog66

I was trying to find a way to say exactly what nintendog66 said but he said it much better than me. When you think about it what seperates the consoles ? whether you play on console A or console B you are still going to get pretty much the same experience. That is why certain console companies pour millions into securing exclusives (or buying developers) it is the only way they can differentiate their machine from their competitors. The PC does not need to "differentiate" itself from the consoles, the platform brings a unique way of playing games that no console can offer.

If you are looking for exclusives then you really should stay away from the PC, there is no big time backer willing to throw millions at a developer just to ensure a game is exclusive to the PC platform even the console giants are finding it difficult to secure "exclusive games" now and have moved on to pathetic "exclusive DLC". However the PC does have one "exclusive" thing going for it, you can only play games in the unique PC way by owning a PC :D