Gears of War Ultimate Edition Suddenly Available on PC

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

Gears of War Ultimate Edition Suddenly Available on PC

Gears of War Ultimate Logo Large

After months of silence, Gears of War Ultimate Edition is now available for purchase exclusively for Windows 10 via the Windows Store.

Microsoft wasn't kidding about its push to unify Xbox One and PC gaming: after months of silence, it has finally announced a release date for the PC version of Gears of War Ultimate Edition. Right now! That's right, you can now buy the game on the Windows store (and only on the Windows store).

The game will set you back $29.99 and is only available for Windows 10. This means that if you have any version of Windows below 10, or are using any other kind of app store (like Steam), you can't play the game.

The PC release comes a full six months after the original Xbox One release, but Microsoft promises some extra goodies for PC gamers. First and foremost: the game is much, much prettier on PC. Microsoft says that the Xbox One version of the game is only equivilant to "medium" settings on the PC, and support for 4K displays and unlocked refresh rates means those with PCs beefier than Marcus Fenix's pecs can get some glorious visuals.

PC gamers will also get the Deluxe Weapon Skin Pack and 11 bonus multiplayer character skins.

Originally, Gears of War was released on the PC exclusively via the Games for Windows LIVE service. When the service closed down in 2013, there was no legitimate way for gamers to buy, or play the game on PC.

As a PSA: we warn you that various reports are floating around the internet suggesting that the game runs poorly on AMD cards. Purchase at your own risk!

Source: Microsoft

Permalink

So it finally comes to PC, and Microsoft is so unaware of the state of PC gaming that they think it will move the modern iteration of the failed Games for Windows Live.

Congratulations, they won't be getting my money.

Oh neat I kinda wouldn't mind... Oh, windows store, I don't feel like ever turning that on despite using 10.

Well, that's a worrying precedent.

I mean, it's a HD rerelease of a decade old game that was the worst in its series anyway so I couldn't give a crispy fried shit.

But I wonder if Microsoft has the pull to make other games Windows 10 and totally-not-GFWL exclusive.

Windows 10? Windows store exclusive? Well, that was a one-two punch to the nads of any desire to buy this.

Zhukov:
Well, that's a worrying precedent.

I mean, it's a HD rerelease of a decade old game that was the worst in its series anyway so I couldn't give a crispy fried shit.

But I wonder if Microsoft has the pull to make other games Windows 10 and totally-not-GFWL exclusive.

Microsoft is going to be pulling this shit for all the titles they publish, so stuff like Gears of War, Killer Instinct, Quantum Break and whatever other Xbone exclusives they decide to port over. I don't think any other publishers are going to make their games exclusive to the Windows Store, though we might see some publishers offer it on the Windows Store along side Steam and other stores like Squeenix is doing with Rise of the Tomb Raider.

In any case, lots of people aren't happy with games on the Windows Store right now due to restrictions placed on them, eg. forced Vsync locked to 60FPS regardless of monitor refresh rate, forced borderless window mode, meaning no SLI or Crossfire support, and the game files are all locked down removing the possibility of modding. As it stands, there is no reason to buy anything on the Windows store unless it is exclusive to that platform and you want to play it really badly despite all the current limitations of that platform.

What I want to know is if it looks pretty enough to justify the file size. According to PCGamingWiki, it's 60 GB, a little under six times the original 12 GB file size. If anyone played it, was it enough of a visual leap to justify the large space requirements?

Edit: Also, OP misspelled equivalent, just wanted to point that out.

Microsoft isn't doing themselves any favors by trying to push a broken piece of software onto its customers.

I work at a computer repair shop, and I frequently get computers that crashed while they were upgrading to Windows 10. If that happens, it fucks the entire hard drive; it has to be wiped and re-imaged in order to make it usable again. On top of that, it's not uncommon for a Windows Update to get corrupted on installation and make the entire OS practically unusable.

I wouldn't mind playing GoW for the nostalgia factor, but if doing so requires me to use a useless piece of software, I'll pass.

Oh thank god, It is contained by that windows 10. Good to see Microsoft doing ethical practices against their profits.

(by mistake)

Well hey, that sounds pretty coo- wait, nope, nevermind. Not a chance in hell am I going to "upgrade" to 10 for this.

Lol, the amount of hate on this for nothing other than a free os upgrade and a new distribution platform is just plain alarming. I get it, steam is handy, I loved steam for the longest time, but it's NOT GOOD FOR THE ECOSYSTEM. Oh no it requires Windows 10? It's free just like steam was when they forced it for half life. People seem to forget steam was kinda a steaming pile of garbage when it launched, too. This whole mentality of avoiding a free operating system upgrade and with it the integrated support for Xbox live and entirely new suite of Direct3D stuff because it's not on steam, is worrying due to the state of monopoly that people seem to be supporting here. Valve did and do the same things people complain about now, just has a veil of console-level "fanboyism" around it.

Also worrying but far less scary is the lack of ANY marketing for this. Like...really? Out of nowhere?

That's cool I guess.

I'm pretty sure if they hadn't restricted it to only Windows 10, people would be labeling this as the final nail on the supposed coffin of the Xbone.

Everyone is glossing over this ...really interesting bit of news here that a console game is now on PC and like Quantom Break likely is a Cross Buy thing. So you buy it on Xbox and you can play it on PC without buying a new version- yet it's upgraded. Console, to PC, anyone else not seeing this weird Berlin Wall style thing happening?

Yes, windows=MS but never has windows=xbox or games that go cross that kinda boundaries.

Irritatingly most of the windows 10 comments I hear are from people who've never used it, just 'heard from a guy that it's shit'. WIN10 saved my ass a lot of work when I had to replace half my computer and instead of having to reinstall my OS and all my work software it just identified everything and worked.

I can't be the only one concerned about the fact that it reportedly runs poorly on AMD cards meanwhile that's the same brand of GPU that their console uses, am I? I'm really hoping this isn't some precedent that's being set, poorly ported games that require windows 10.

ah, i title i always had some interest and its not even that expensive......oh, win 10 only and not even available on steam? sorry, i buy nothing over win store and my gaming rig has only win 7. but just alone for getting it over win store is a no-buy for me.
MS, you never learn, do you? you could sell so much much more if you make it available for previous win verisons and purchasable over steam.

I might take a look at it, if someones mod it so the crappy brown/grey filter is gone.

Forty bucks for an HD remake of a decade-old Xbox360 game that runs poorly on the very brand of GPU the original console version ran on? AND it's only available for Win10? (even though it seemingly makes use of none of Win10's DX features)

Mmm, no thanks. While I might've been interested, if only for nostalgia's sake, there's too much sketchy nonsense attached to this. Seems I'm better off just booting up the old game on my 360.

Now I'll admit, if the price goes down to $20~$30 and they fix the issues, I may be interested again. Until then...

:/

Lillowh:
Lol, the amount of hate on this for nothing other than a free os upgrade and a new distribution platform is just plain alarming. I get it, steam is handy, I loved steam for the longest time, but it's NOT GOOD FOR THE ECOSYSTEM. Oh no it requires Windows 10? It's free just like steam was when they forced it for half life. People seem to forget steam was kinda a steaming pile of garbage when it launched, too. This whole mentality of avoiding a free operating system upgrade and with it the integrated support for Xbox live and entirely new suite of Direct3D stuff because it's not on steam, is worrying due to the state of monopoly that people seem to be supporting here. Valve did and do the same things people complain about now, just has a veil of console-level "fanboyism" around it.

Also worrying but far less scary is the lack of ANY marketing for this. Like...really? Out of nowhere?

Couple questions, if I may...

- Other than their own games (of which also released on numerous consoles), what games have Valve made exclusive to Steam?

- Windows 10 being "free" somehow negates all criticism against it? And why should we be more forgiving just because it includes "Live support"?

- What if someone, like myself, has actually used Windows 10 and the Windows Store and has decided both are atrocious and unnecessary? Am I just a "fanboy" for not liking them?

- Steam was most assuredly a "steaming pile of garbage" when it launched...back in 2003. It's been thirteen years since then. Thirteen years of lessons learned and technological advancement. So, what excuse does Microsoft (and others like EA) have for launching their own services in such abysmal states, given the breadth of experience to draw from on how to do it properly?

- Given the existence of services like Origin, Uplay, GOG Galaxy, Desura, Humble Bundle, etc, and the definition of "monopoly" being this, how can anyone still argue Steam has a monopoly?

- Why conflate using a specific digital distribution platform with changing to a different OS?

There are a LOT of things to criticize Valve and Steam over. Why all this nonsense?

Vigormortis:
- Other than their own games (of which also released on numerous consoles), what games have Valve made exclusive to Steam?

While I generally won't disagree with you, I have to point out that there are actually quite a lot non-Valve games exclusive to Steam on PC: all Call of Duty titles from MW2 on, almost every 2K title from the last couple of years (Bioshock Infinite, Borderlands, Civilization, XCOM, NBA, etc.), the Dark Souls games, all recent SEGA games (amongst others Total War, Alien: Isolation), all recent Squeenix games (Hitman since Absolution, Tomb Raider 2013, Deus Ex since HR)... the list goes on an on.

You might be able to purchase the Steam key in other stores (e.g. the Humble Store), but you'll have to use Steam nonetheless.

Janichsan:

Vigormortis:
- Other than their own games (of which also released on numerous consoles), what games have Valve made exclusive to Steam?

While I generally won't disagree with you, I have to point out that there are actually quite a lot non-Valve games exclusive to Steam on PC: all Call of Duty titles from MW2 on, almost every 2K title from the last couple of years (Bioshock Infinite, Borderlands, Civilization, XCOM, NBA, etc.), the Dark Souls games, all recent SEGA games (amongst others Total War, Alien: Isolation), all recent Squeenix games (Hitman since Absolution, Tomb Raider 2013, Deus Ex since HR)... the list goes on an on.

You might be able to purchase the Steam key in other stores (e.g. the Humble Store), but you'll have to use Steam nonetheless.

There is no exclusivity deal with any of the games as far as I know, it's just the publisher/developer that simply hasn't bothered to make those games available via other systems. Plus Steam is just a store where as Windows is a platform, tying games to Windows Store means no Mac or Linux versions.

So0o0o0o0 rebuy a game i got on my pc like 10 years ago, only yo be screwed outta Gears 2 and 3 just as i was with Halo 2 and 3 etc. No deal.

IF there was a means of getting the sequels I'd be tempted to buy this but if it's just the first one then nah. Not going to happen.

Zontar:
So it finally comes to PC, and Microsoft is so unaware of the state of PC gaming that they think it will move the modern iteration of the failed Games for Windows Live.

Congratulations, they won't be getting my money.

Yep, it's basically Halo 2 all over again.
Even worse this time since as a Windows Store Application it...

Can't use SLI
Can't use third party monitoring software (like FRAPS) or even embedded utilities that come with cards and monitors (like G-Sync)
Doesn't seem to acknowledge the existence of AMD hardware, to the point that on some devices it will ignore the installed GPU entirely and default to the onboard graphics.
Only works in windowed mode on many systems.
It's running the Gears PC version of Unreal Engine 3 with DX12 shoehorned into it in some bizarre act of eldritch coding. This is resulting in a lot of interesting visual artifacts.

So Microsoft's big push to win back PC gamers and get us onto Win 10 is basically GFWL after GFWL has spent five years hitting the gym, taking crack and boning it's cousin the Xbox.

Bravo Microsoft, bravo!

That's not going to make a load of people get Windows 10 or use the Windows store, it'll just make load of people not get Gears of War.

Despite meeting the requirements (win10 64bit 1511), exceeding the hardware requirements (AMD R9390, 16gb ram, 6-Core 3.5ghz Processor), Windows Store says its not compatible with my device.

You know, I was upset when I heard that the PC version of Forza 6 was going to be a stripped down, free-to-play version, but if this is what Microsoft considers a complete port job and experience maybe I should just cut my losses and forget any Microsoft releases entirely. Forza was the only game that I wanted to play on Xbone and I sunk hours and hours into Gears 1. What a let down.

Janichsan:

Vigormortis:
- Other than their own games (of which also released on numerous consoles), what games have Valve made exclusive to Steam?

While I generally won't disagree with you, I have to point out that there are actually quite a lot non-Valve games exclusive to Steam on PC: all Call of Duty titles from MW2 on, almost every 2K title from the last couple of years (Bioshock Infinite, Borderlands, Civilization, XCOM, NBA, etc.), the Dark Souls games, all recent SEGA games (amongst others Total War, Alien: Isolation), all recent Squeenix games (Hitman since Absolution, Tomb Raider 2013, Deus Ex since HR)... the list goes on an on.

You might be able to purchase the Steam key in other stores (e.g. the Humble Store), but you'll have to use Steam nonetheless.

Yes, but Valve didn't make them exclusive. They didn't force those developers and publishers to make those games exclusive. Those publishers chose to do so.

That was my point.

Steven Bogos:
Originally, Gears of War was released on the PC exclusively via the Games for Windows LIVE service. When the service closed down in 2013, there was no legitimate way for gamers to buy, or play the game on PC.

You can still buy brand new copies of the game on Amazon and the GFWL service is still up and running, even if the store is not.

True they don't update it any longer but it still works as well, or as badly, as it ever did.

I have Fable III and Gears of War installed on my PC and they connect to Live without a problem.

Just thought you'd like to know so the article is not incorrect.

Lillowh:
Lol, the amount of hate on this for nothing other than a free os upgrade and a new distribution platform is just plain alarming. I get it, steam is handy, I loved steam for the longest time, but it's NOT GOOD FOR THE ECOSYSTEM. Oh no it requires Windows 10? It's free just like steam was when they forced it for half life. People seem to forget steam was kinda a steaming pile of garbage when it launched, too. This whole mentality of avoiding a free operating system upgrade and with it the integrated support for Xbox live and entirely new suite of Direct3D stuff because it's not on steam, is worrying due to the state of monopoly that people seem to be supporting here. Valve did and do the same things people complain about now, just has a veil of console-level "fanboyism" around it.

Also worrying but far less scary is the lack of ANY marketing for this. Like...really? Out of nowhere?

Locking games to specific stores doesn't help to destroy a "monopoly", it just fractures the playerbases.

Or, more specifically, the fact that EA doesn't sell their games on Steam anymore hasn't made an appreciable impact on the number of people using Steam. Uplay is almost universally despised, and I don't know how good everyone else's memory is, but the last time Microsoft tried doing something like this, their proprietary DRM/storefront ended up putting massive bugs into nearly every game they sold on it.

Vigormortis:

Now I'll admit, if the price goes down to $20~$30 and they fix the issues, I may be interested again. Until then...

I'd be more interested if it included the full trilogy, myself.

- Windows 10 being "free" somehow negates all criticism against it? And why should we be more forgiving just because it includes "Live support"?

It also ignores that if you're getting a new PC, 10 isn't free. I mean, unless you go through the trouble of deactivating your previous Windows installation so that you can put it on your new computer and then upgrade like that. Which I suppose would be fine if you're just replacing a laptop or something, but if you're not actually ditching the PC you already have... etc.

- What if someone, like myself, has actually used Windows 10 and the Windows Store and has decided both are atrocious and unnecessary? Am I just a "fanboy" for not liking them?

Obviously, the only state of being is fanboy, either for or against something. There is no other option.

- Given the existence of services like Origin, Uplay, GOG Galaxy, Desura, Humble Bundle, etc, and the definition of "monopoly" being this, how can anyone still argue Steam has a monopoly?

In a roundabout way, I think the point people who say this kind of thing are actually trying to make is what I said above, they're just missing the mark so hard that they're not even participating in the correct archery event.

Steam is the largest digital distributor on PC (and in general, maybe?), and the existence of other stores... hasn't really done much to it. Especially when the owners of those other platforms decide that they can't share their toys anymore, so if somebody wants to play with them they need to come over to their specially-prepared pram, because you're not worthy if you're spending all of your time in Steam's pram.

GOG is quite possibly the only thing close to a competitor that Steam actually has, given that Humble Bundle relies pretty extensively on Steam codes (though it has a fair few DRM-free titles itself), Origin is mostly used for EA games because their selection of third-party titles is still lacking, and as far as I'm aware all Uplay games are still available on Steam. (Is Desura still alive?)

That still doesn't make Steam a monopoly, of course, and it never really has. I think that's another term people heard a few times in their economics classes and it sounded good, and over the course of time it's been warped to mean "majority" rather than "totality".

I was about to make a joke in which I motioned to call Steam part of an oligopoly, but then I remembered that that's actually the more true statement.

The Steam monopoly idea comes from that so many people have the mentality of "if it's not on Steam then I'm not buying it." I know people like that in real life.

One of my friends loves Mass Effect 1 and 2 but refuses to play Mass Effect 3 because it is not on Steam. Steam to him is the only option.

There seems to be more and more people with this train of thought all the time.

shrekfan246:

I'd be more interested if it included the full trilogy, myself.

As would I. I'd even be willing to shell out $50~$60 for it.

Not that that matters. I couldn't even play it if I wanted to, since I'm currently on an AMD build. I mean, how the hell do you fuck up a port of a game so badly that it can't even run on the very hardware it was built for in the first place?

It also ignores that if you're getting a new PC, 10 isn't free. I mean, unless you go through the trouble of deactivating your previous Windows installation so that you can put it on your new computer and then upgrade like that. Which I suppose would be fine if you're just replacing a laptop or something, but if you're not actually ditching the PC you already have... etc.

Which becomes an even greater problem for those with OEM copies of Win7.

Obviously, the only state of being is fanboy, either for or against something. There is no other option.

I keep forgetting this. Curse my search for objectivity!

In a roundabout way, I think the point people who say this kind of thing are actually trying to make is what I said above, they're just missing the mark so hard that they're not even participating in the correct archery event.

Steam is the largest digital distributor on PC (and in general, maybe?), and the existence of other stores... hasn't really done much to it. Especially when the owners of those other platforms decide that they can't share their toys anymore, so if somebody wants to play with them they need to come over to their specially-prepared pram, because you're not worthy if you're spending all of your time in Steam's pram.

GOG is quite possibly the only thing close to a competitor that Steam actually has, given that Humble Bundle relies pretty extensively on Steam codes (though it has a fair few DRM-free titles itself), Origin is mostly used for EA games because their selection of third-party titles is still lacking, and as far as I'm aware all Uplay games are still available on Steam. (Is Desura still alive?)

That still doesn't make Steam a monopoly, of course, and it never really has. I think that's another term people heard a few times in their economics classes and it sounded good, and over the course of time it's been warped to mean "majority" rather than "totality".

I was about to make a joke in which I motioned to call Steam part of an oligopoly, but then I remembered that that's actually the more true statement.

I think this is what bothers me most. The inappropriate use of the term.

In a vacuum, it's not much of an issue. But with so many using the word as a blanket term for why Steam is "bad", it effectively draws attention away from the actual issues with the platform. Which, in turn, makes it harder for Valve and Steam users to properly identify and address those issues.

I know this is the internet and hyperbole is par for the course. I just wish we could collectively put aside the hyperbolic whining and get down to the nit and gritty of the problems that need solved most.

votemarvel:
The Steam monopoly idea comes from that so many people have the mentality of "if it's not on Steam then I'm not buying it." I know people like that in real life.

That's nothing more than someone adhering to a preference. It has literally nothing to do with a "monopoly".

Hate to use yet another car analogy, but it's equivalent to seeing someone who prefers driving Ford trunks and then making the statement, "Ford has a monopoly on trucks because this guy over here only likes buying Ford trucks!"

One of my friends loves Mass Effect 1 and 2 but refuses to play Mass Effect 3 because it is not on Steam. Steam to him is the only option.

Let's say your friend owned a Playstation and an Xbox. He prefers playing on his Playstation more than his Xbox. When Mass Effect came out only for the Xbox, would you view him as you do now if he'd said he didn't want the game unless he could get it for his Playstation?

Steam is more than just a storefront. It offers a wealth of content and community features. What's wrong with someone wanting their games on the platform that has the features they prefer?

There seems to be more and more people with this train of thought all the time.

I seem to see more people claiming this than people actually feeling that way.

Vigormortis:

One of my friends loves Mass Effect 1 and 2 but refuses to play Mass Effect 3 because it is not on Steam. Steam to him is the only option.

Let's say your friend owned a Playstation and an Xbox. He prefers playing on his Playstation more than his Xbox. When Mass Effect came out only for the Xbox, would you view him as you do now if he'd said he didn't want the game unless he could get it for his Playstation?

Yes.

He has the platform available to play the game, he wants to play it. The only reason he wont is because he can't buy it on Steam.

I prefer to play on my PC but am happy to jump on my Xbox 360 or One if there is a title I want to play that I can't get on the PC.

Vigormortis:
Steam is more than just a storefront. It offers a wealth of content and community features. What's wrong with someone wanting their games on the platform that has the features they prefer?

Because you can run Mass Effect 3 through Steam and maintain all the features that it provides.

Vigormortis:

There seems to be more and more people with this train of thought all the time.

I seem to see more people claiming this than people actually feeling that way.

Perhaps we are just seeing the different posts. There are many on here when a new game is announced who instally say that they wont buy it unless it is on Steam.

Just look at Quantum Break threads. Many posts from people who wont buy it because it isn't on Steam. Though to be fair that could just be because it is on the Windows Store.

votemarvel:
The Steam monopoly idea comes from that so many people have the mentality of "if it's not on Steam then I'm not buying it." I know people like that in real life.

One of my friends loves Mass Effect 1 and 2 but refuses to play Mass Effect 3 because it is not on Steam. Steam to him is the only option.

There seems to be more and more people with this train of thought all the time.

That's not Steam's fault and there isn't really anything they can (or indeed should) do about it.

I mean, I've seen that mentality every now and then myself, but that has nothing to do with how Valve runs the platform. They haven't (as far as I'm aware) run out other companies that have tried doing what they do.

Vigormortis:

Not that that matters. I couldn't even play it if I wanted to, since I'm currently on an AMD build. I mean, how the hell do you fuck up a port of a game so badly that it can't even run on the very hardware it was built for in the first place?

The stranglehold Nvidia has on PC is far more of a monopoly than Steam, actually. I have a fondness for AMD graphics cards, and you know, I was searching around for a new laptop a few weeks ago because my older laptop is on its deathbed and my gaming laptop is five years old.

You know what I found? It's practically impossible to find laptops with AMD graphics anymore. There was one Alienware-brand customizable model that offered it, and after searching through roughly seven or eight different custom PC providers, that was the only one I could find. Everything else had five million different variations of the same five Intel + Nvidia combos.

(I ended up just getting a desktop, and unfortunately settled for a slightly-weaker Nvidia card rather than the AMD one I wanted because it meant I wouldn't need to compromise the processor.)

Which becomes an even greater problem for those with OEM copies of Win7.

And, surprise surprise, that's one of the only ways to even get 7 anymore. A few shops will still preinstall PCs with it, but they're few and far between from what I saw.

I keep forgetting this. Curse my search for objectivity!

This is the internet. Your objectivity is wasted.

I think this is what bothers me most. The inappropriate use of the term.

What, you haven't seen the way "censorship" has been tortured and abused over the past year and a half?

In a vacuum, it's not much of an issue. But with so many using the word as a blanket term for why Steam is "bad", it effectively draws attention away from the actual issues with the platform. Which, in turn, makes it harder for Valve and Steam users to properly identify and address those issues.

It also produces a fairly nice smokescreen so that the legitimate issues need never be truly addressed in the first place. Greenlight and Early Access are complete messes with absolutely zero oversight or recompense for developers who are either trying to scam customers or simply abandon their work? Who cares, look at all the other games on Steam, there's no possible way you could ever hope to play them all! Valve's customer service is laughable to the point of being nearly nonexistent? What, do you expect them to have hundreds of people hired to deal with their millions of customers and tens/hundreds of games that get added to the store weekly? It's not like they're made of money!!! Developers and publishers can skirt by the system on technicalities to dump shovelware and outright broken trash onto the storefront whenever they want? See both above, and also geez, what, do you think it'd be better for Steam to be the exclusive club again? Elitist!!!!

I know this is the internet and hyperbole is par for the course. I just wish we could collectively put aside the hyperbolic whining and get down to the nit and gritty of the problems that need solved most.

Unfortunately, people warbling off in forums like this one rarely ever actually want to solve or fix problems. Myself included.

votemarvel:
Because you can run Mass Effect 3 through Steam and maintain all the features that it provides.

Not really. You can get your friends list, but that's true regardless of whether you're launching them game through Steam or not. You don't get any of the other integrated features.

As an example, the Steam Overlay doesn't always work with non-Steam games. Especially if, say, you launch a game through Origin. Origin's overlay overrides Steam's.

Perhaps we are just seeing the different posts. There are many on here when a new game is announced who instally say that they wont buy it unless it is on Steam.

Just look at Quantum Break threads. Many posts from people who wont buy it because it isn't on Steam. Though to be fair that could just be because it is on the Windows Store.

Well, I was talking more in general than this forum specifically. From my experience, most gamers will utilize whichever platform they need to in order to play the games they want to play. Most don't have the mindset "if it's not on Steam I don't want it!"

It looks like a case of a vocal minority being viewed as the majority.

microsoft "see we support pc gaming fully now along with steam.. just as long as you have our windows 10 spyware installed, dont worry we've already fixed it so you download it regardless of what you want, oh and the games will only be available to purchase from our store, and you wont have certain graphical options available, oh and there is no modding ever, and we thought it was a good idea for our latest blockbuster game to stream the cut scenes and not have them available on disk"

microsoft fucking pc gamers over since forever

someone should tell them that trying to get the most hated company award for 2016 off of EA isnt actually a good thing

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Posting on this forum is disabled.