Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
This is how big money corrupt people and turn them upside down.
Just a few example of his hipocriciti and self contradiction:
https://twitter.com/timsweeneyepic/status/1079818156410060800
Windows “♥♥♥♥ You The Microsoft Store Is The Only Store” Edition was cancelled though?
22:14 - 31 дек. 2018 г.
https://mspoweruser.com/epics-tim-sweeney-still-hating-windows-store/
He expressed the somewhat paranoid assertion that Microsoft’s Windows Store moves was like boiling a frog, and will eventually end with a closed ecosystem.
“Microsoft has been taking a series of steps for a while now to close down the Windows ecosystem,” Sweeney said at GamesBeat Summit. “They can’t do it all at once, because there would be an industry uproar. But one little step at a time, they’re trying to take it all over. UWP is another step in that direction.”
“The GPU revolution started there, well before Microsoft adopted it. If that had relied on Microsoft initiative and Microsoft had actively blocked external drivers and apps supporting these things they didn’t approve of, it never would have happened,” Sweeney said. “Open platforms encourage innovation, and when you have a closed platform and a monopoly on commerce, it stifles it.”
“Windows is the platform of choice for gamers. It’s the only choice for enterprise. If we want to have an open platform, we have to fight to keep Windows open. Linux is not a realistic fallback plan.”
“With Windows, Microsoft has given itself the ability to force patch updates without your authorization. It will just update itself and you can’t do anything about it. They can change the rules of the game at any time. They call it “sideloading” now, because other stores aren’t official, and they’ve launched the operating system with that disabled. They forced a patch to enable it. They say a lot about openness, but they want us to play this game by porting all our apps to this new platform and they’re not telling us what the rules are. They reserve the right to change the rules. I don’t think they’re going to change them in our favor. That’s my fear.”]
----
Now just replace MS with EPIC and Windows with Epic Store, and your self-contradiction-meter will explode!
Oh, this one even more golden... TIM said that MS is going to break the precious Steam... and now steam doing the same but the other way around:
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/07/now-tim-sweeney-thinks-that-microsoft-will-use-windows-10-to-break-steam/
Tim Sweeney claims that Microsoft will remove Win32, destroy Steam
Tim Sweeney says that Microsoft is already trying to make Steam stop working.
Tim Sweeney doesn't like Windows 10 or Microsoft's Universal Windows Platform, the common development platform that allows developers to create software that can run on Windows on PCs, phones, tablets, HoloLens, and the Xbox. In March he published an op-ed in The Guardian saying that UWP "can, should, must, and will die" because, he claimed, Microsoft could use UWP to create a walled garden, with UWP games not available through competing stores such as Steam. Still apparently concerned with the health of the PC gaming industry, Sweeney is now claiming, through an interview with the print-only Edge magazine, that Microsoft will use Windows updates to kill Steam.
Sweeney's complaints about UWP were technically off-base. His issues are based on the assumption that all UWP apps had to be individually vetted by Microsoft and could only be delivered by the Windows Store. This was somewhat true in Windows 8—apps built using the WinRT platform (the predecessor branding to UWP) could not be trivially sideloaded, as the ability was officially restricted to enterprise users only. But it's not true in Windows 10. Sideloading is enabled by default in Windows 10, and any third-party store could download and install UWP-based games in much the same way as they already do for software that uses the Win32 API.
Sweeney's Steam concerns are once again driven by UWP:
There are two programming interfaces for Windows, and every app has to choose one of them. Every Steam app—every PC game for the past few decades—has used Win32. It's been both responsible for the vibrant software market we have now, but also for malware. Any program can be a virus. Universal Windows Platform is seen as an antidote to that. It's sandboxed—much more locked down.
The risk here is that, if Microsoft convinces everybody to use UWP, then they phase out Win32 apps. If they can succeed in doing that then it's a small leap to forcing all apps and games to be distributed through the Windows Store. Once we reach that point, the PC has become a closed platform. It won't be that one day they flip a switch that will break your Steam library—what they're trying to do is a series of sneaky maneuvers. They make it more and more inconvenient to use the old apps, and, simultaneously, they try to become the only source for the new ones.
As before, it's worth remembering that UWPs are not tied to the Windows Store. Anyone can produce a UWP that installs and runs on Windows without having to use the Windows Store at all. Even if Microsoft were to remove Win32 somehow, this would not be equivalent to forcing the use of the Windows Store.
On the one hand, it's certainly possible to imagine a future world in which at least some PC users need never use anything other than UWPs. For a PC primarily used for mail, Web browsing, and a little light gaming, UWPs can handle this job. This is not a problem in itself. Some people today don't need anything more capable than an iPad, so of course there will be a certain audience for whom UWPs apps (with or without sideloading) are sufficient to handle their computing needs.
But, on the other hand, this is neglecting to consider some important details. For example, UWP is built on Win32. It is a fairly large subset of Win32, and it runs in a sandboxed environment, but there's no clear path for Microsoft to completely strip Win32 from Windows without also removing UWP. Similarly, core applications currently depend on Win32: this includes things like Windows' own Explorer shell, as well as critical applications such as the full Office suite. This makes ditching Win32 even more untenable; Microsoft would have to get all of its own software off Win32 first, and that's not going to happen for many years.
On the gripping hand is a vast array of Win32 software that isn't going away any time soon. This includes major applications such as Adobe Photoshop and all manner of custom, line-of-business applications. This enormous legacy of software is a key part of Windows' value proposition: 64-bit Windows today will run almost any 32-bit Windows application (going back to Windows NT 3.1 in 1993). 32-bit Windows today will run almost any 16- or 32-bit Windows application and a substantial number of DOS applications dating back further still. The big reason that Windows is what it is, and Microsoft hasn't gotten rid of weird quirks such as drive letters, is precisely so that these applications continue to work. They're not discardable relics; they're why Windows is used on more than a billion computers.
Microsoft has even been down this road before. Windows RT, the version of Windows 8 and 8.1 for ARM processors, included a near-complete Win32 API, but it locked that API away; only applications developed and digitally signed by Microsoft could use it. Third-party applications all had to use WinRT, making the systems running Windows RT functionally equivalent to "Windows but without Win32." They bombed, hard. Windows without Win32 means Windows without Win32 applications, and the market for Windows without Win32 applications is very limited indeed.
Sweeney appears to be betting that Microsoft will make the same costly mistake again. While a richer UWP ecosystem will certainly make ditching Win32 more palatable, especially for those with simple needs, the notion that Microsoft will willingly break compatibility with a million or more extant Win32 applications is ridiculous. Indeed, the company is, if anything, working in the opposite direction: Project Centennial makes it possible for developers to use the Windows Store to sell and service their existing Win32 applications without having to rewrite them to use UWP.
Xbox chief Phil Spencer even recognizes how core this backwards compatibility is to gaming. Back when rumors of an updated Xbox first started circulating, Spencer said that any hypothetical upgrade or replacement would "effectively feel a little bit more like we see on PC, where I can still go back and run my old Doom and Quake games that I used to play years ago, but I can still see the best 4K games come out and my library is always with me." This compatibility is a virtue, and the still-mysterious next generation Xbox system Project Scorpio will boast full compatibility with the Xbox One and Xbox One S.
More extraordinarily, Sweeney believes that Microsoft will somehow sabotage Steam to drive gamers away:
Slowly, over the next five years, they will force-patch Windows 10 to make Steam progressively worse and more broken. They'll never completely break it, but [Microsoft] will continue to break it until, in five years, people are so fed up that Steam is buggy that the Windows Store seems like an ideal alternative. That's exactly what they did to their previous competitors in other areas. Now they're doing it to Steam. It’s only just starting to become visible. Microsoft might not be competent enough to succeed with their plan, but they're certainly trying.
If this were Wikipedia, both the "that's exactly what they did" and "they're certainly trying" claims would be adorned "citation needed." Evidence of Microsoft doing such a thing is decidedly thin on the ground. Perhaps Sweeney is thinking back to beta versions of Windows 3.1, which issued warnings when used in conjunction with DR-DOS, Digital Research's competitor to Microsoft's MS-DOS.
It's true that Steam is somewhat reckless as a Win32 application. Steam plays fast and loose with file permissions so that a Steam client can update itself, download games, and download patches without requiring Administrator rights. One could perhaps imagine Microsoft doing something, eventually, to crack down on this behavior. If so, Valve would have to change Steam accordingly. But breaking Steam in some kind of incremental patch-by-patch way to drive users away is a non-starter for much the same reason that ditching Win32 is a non-starter. Steam is a Win32 application, and Win32 applications represent a major part of the Windows value proposition. Microsoft can no more start breaking Win32 apps in weird, secretive ways than it can scrap Win32 entirely. If Win32 stops working properly, Windows stops working properly.
Sweeney's fixation with Windows 10 and gaming in particular is peculiar. Gaming is an important part of the Windows platform, but it's a small factor when compared to the hold the company has on the corporate desktop market. The very idea that Microsoft would jeopardize Windows in business situations by breaking Win32 just to kill off Steam is extraordinary.
-----
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/mar/04/microsoft-monopolise-pc-games-development-epic-games-gears-of-war
Microsoft wants to monopolise games development on PC. We must fight it:
Microsoft is looking to dominate the games industry ecosystem with its aggressive new UWP initiative. Developers must oppose this, or else cede control of their titles
Gears of War developer tells games industry: we must fight Microsoft
Tim Sweeney
Fri 4 Mar 2016 10.00 GMT Last modified on Tue 12 Dec 2017 11.53 GMT
The Gears of War cover
The Gears of War series has been a key exclusive for Microsoft and its Xbox consoles, but developer Epic Games is now unhappy with the publisher’s business plans. Photograph: Microsoft/Epic Games
With its new Universal Windows Platform (UWP) initiative, Microsoft has built a closed platform-within-a-platform into Windows 10, as the first apparent step towards locking down the consumer PC ecosystem and monopolising app distribution and commerce.
In my view, this is the most aggressive move Microsoft has ever made. While the company has been convicted of violating antitrust law in the past, its wrongful actions were limited to fights with specific competitors and contracts with certain PC manufacturers.
This isn’t like that. Here, Microsoft is moving against the entire PC industry – including consumers (and gamers in particular), software developers such as Epic Games, publishers like EA and Activision, and distributors like Valve and Good Old Games.
Microsoft has launched new PC Windows features exclusively in UWP, and is effectively telling developers you can use these Windows features only if you submit to the control of our locked-down UWP ecosystem. They’re curtailing users’ freedom to install full-featured PC software, and subverting the rights of developers and publishers to maintain a direct relationship with their customers.
Windows Store and UWP
I’m not questioning the idea of a Windows Store. I believe Microsoft has every right to operate a PC app store, and to curate it how they choose. This contrasts with the position the government took in its anti-trust prosecution, that Microsoft’s free bundling of Internet Explorer with Windows was anti-competitive.
My view is that bundling is a valuable practice that benefits users, and my criticism is limited to Microsoft structuring its operating system to advantage its own store while unfairly disadvantaging competing app stores, as well as developers and publishers who distribute games directly to their customers.
Gears of War: Ultimate Edition
Gears of War: Ultimate Edition. Photograph: Microsoft
The specific problem here is that Microsoft’s shiny new “Universal Windows Platform” is locked down, and by default it’s impossible to download UWP apps from the websites of publishers and developers, to install them, update them, and conduct commerce in them outside of the Windows Store.
It’s true that if you dig far enough into Microsoft’s settings-burying UI, you can find a way to install these apps by enabling “side-loading”. But in turning this off by default, Microsoft is unfairly disadvantaging the competition. Bigger-picture, this is a feature Microsoft can revoke at any time using Windows 10’s forced-update process.
The Solution
If UWP is to gain the support of major PC game and application developers, it must be as open a platform as today’s predominant win32 API, which is used by all major PC games and applications. To the PC ecosystem, opening UWP means the following:
That any PC Windows user can download and install a UWP application from the web, just as we can do now with win32 applications. No new hassle, no insidious warnings about venturing outside of Microsoft’s walled garden, and no change to Windows’ default settings required.
That any company can operate a store for PC Windows games and apps in UWP format – as Valve, Good Old Games, Epic Games, EA, and Ubi Soft do today with the win32 format, and that Windows will not impede or obstruct these apps stores, relegating them to second-class citizenship.
That users, developers, and publishers will always be free to engage in direct commerce with each other, without Microsoft forcing everyone into its formative in-app commerce monopoly and taking a 30% cut.
This true openness requires that Microsoft not follow Google’s clever but conniving lead with the Android platform, which is technically open, but practically closed. In particular, Android makes it possible to install third-party applications outside of the Google Play store, which is required for Google to comply with the Linux kernel’s GNU General Public License. However, Google makes it comically difficult for users to do so, by defaulting the option to off, burying it, and obfuscating it. This is not merely a technical issue: it has the market impact of Google Play Store dominating over competing stores, despite not being very good.
Does Microsoft think independent PC developers and publishers, who cherish their freedom, are going to sign up for this
Microsoft has certainly followed this lead in technically exposing, but practically burying, options that let users escape from its force-bundled services. If you’ve tried to change your Windows 10 search engine, web browser, or movie player, or to turn off their invasive new lock-screen ads, Windows search bar Bing spam, and invasive “analytics”, you know what I’m talking about. It’s a deliberately anti-customer experience: the options are there, but good luck finding them.
The ultimate danger here is that Microsoft continually improves UWP while neglecting and even degrading win32, over time making it harder for developers and publishers to escape from Microsoft’s new UWP commerce monopoly. Ultimately, the open win32 Windows experience could be relegated to Enterprise and Developer editions of Windows.
An Open PC Ecosystem is a Vibrant One
Valve’s Steam distribution service is booming with over 100m users, and publishers like Adobe, Autodesk, Blizzard, Riot Games and EA are operating highly successful businesses selling their games and content directly to consumers.
Microsoft’s situation, however, is an embarrassment. Seven months after the launch of Windows Store alongside Windows 10, the place remains devoid of the top third-party games and signature applications that define the PC experience. Where’s Photoshop? Grand Theft Auto V? Fifa 2016? There are some PC ports of what were great mobile games, and some weirder things, such as the Windows 10 port of the Android port of the PC version of Grand Theft Auto from 2004.
But the good PC stuff isn’t there, with the exception of Microsoft’s own software products. Does Microsoft really think that independent PC developers and publishers, who cherish their freedom and their direct customer relationships, are going to sign up for this current UWP fiasco?
A boy plays Minecraft, developed by Swedish company Mojang.
Minecraft is developed by Swedish company Mojang. Will future games be developed now that Microsoft is closing its borders? Photograph: Alamy
In my view, if Microsoft does not commit to opening PC UWP up in the manner described here, then PC UWP can, should, must and will, die as a result of industry backlash. Gamers, developers, publishers simply cannot trust the PC UWP “platform” so long as Microsoft gives evasive, ambiguous and sneaky answers to questions about UWP’s future, as if it’s a PR issue. This isn’t a PR issue, it’s an existential issue for Microsoft, a first-class determinant of Microsoft’s future role in the world.
Why We Fight
As the founder of a major Windows game developer and technology supplier, this is an op-ed I hoped I would never feel compelled to write. But Epic has prided itself on providing software directly to customers ever since I started mailing floppy disks in 1991. We wouldn’t let Microsoft close down the PC platform overnight without a fight, and therefore we won’t sit silently by while Microsoft embarks on a series of sneaky manoeuvres aimed at achieving this over a period of several years.
This day has been approaching for over 18 months, and I need to give credit to Microsoft folks, especially Phil Spencer, for always being willing to listen to Epic’s concerns with UWP’s paradigm, and to proposed solutions. Because they listened very patiently, I hoped and believed that Microsoft would do the right thing, but here we are. Microsoft’s consumer launch and PR around UWP are in full swing, and this side of the story must be told.
Microsoft’s intentions must be judged by Microsoft’s actions, not Microsoft’s words. Their actions speak plainly enough: they are working to turn today’s open PC ecosystem into a closed, Microsoft-controlled distribution and commerce monopoly, over time, in a series of steps of which we’re seeing the very first. Unless Microsoft changes course, all of the independent companies comprising the PC ecosystem have a decision to make: to oppose this, or cede control of their existing customer relationships and commerce to Microsoft’s exclusive control.
Tim Sweeney is the co-founder of US-based developer, Epic Games, creator of the Gears of War series of Xbox and PC titles, which has sold over 20m units worldwide.
----
Where is this Tim now? Drawn in a pool full of fortnite cash? Man has no principles, no standing ground, and changes his opinion given enough of money, it a shame!
In all honesty i dont even ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ know what Bulletstorm was
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulletstorm
"Upon release, the game received positive reviews from critics who praised the game's voice acting, characters, graphics, action, soundtrack, humor and storyline, but has amassed a great deal of controversy following its release. Bulletstorm was a commercial failure for both Epic Games and Electronic Arts. A remastered version, Bulletstorm: Full Clip Edition published by Gearbox Software, was released on April 7, 2017 for Xbox One, PlayStation 4 and Steam. "
"Sales
Bulletstorm was the seventh selling title in February 2011 with over 285.6K copies sold. The game sold just under one million copies.
As of July 25, 2011, Epic Games declared that they had failed to turn a profit on the game. However, Sebastian Wojciechowski, the CEO of People Can Fly following their split from Epic, considered that the game sold well, and it was never going to be considered as successful or profitable as Epic's Gears of War series at the time. While the final sales numbers were disappointing to both EA and Epic Games, the game has garnered a cult following in the years after its release. The HD rerelease of the game was considered far more successful in terms of sales.
A sequel was planned but was later cancelled. "
This roughly translates to the following
EA: It didn't sell 20 million copies so it was a commercial failure. We shall disband another studio after this loss.
Epic: Those darn pirates again
People can fly: Yeah idk what's wrong with you people but we earned money. Go seek professional help. I'm going to leave you to your weird ways.
People can fly are responsible for, or had contributions towards: Painkiller franchise, Gears of war franchise, Bulletstorm, Fortnite: Save the World (the good one no one's ever seen or heard of) and the cancelled Come Midnight, which didn't go through due to THQ ceasing to exist.
Compared to painkiller from same studio it was not that fun to play. Story also was not that interesting, and whole kill with a style system kind felt weird and while it sorta tried to mimic painkiller in terms of creative killing devices, it was not as fun as painkiller, where this stylish killing was natural. Graphics also was not the best at times, shadows was prebaked and textures was low for PC standarts, controls was quite clunky for FPS, probably becuse they was more suitable for TPS Gears of War. And in general game just felt like poor mans gears of war with 1st person camera that totally did not suit this game and with less serious story that sort of tried to be fun, but all the fund swearing of characters.
It was not bad, but was not a masterpiece, it would say it was 6 of 10 in general or 7 of 10 at best moments. It did not sell well on PC not because of piracy, but becase PC standards was set too high, we had Crysis after all from 2007 that was 4 years old yet was superior in every aspect (you can kill with style too and with a lot vertical and horisontal freedom), even old good Duke Nukem 3D and Quake provided way more freedom and interactivity than this game. Oh dont forget it was packed with GFWL that did not work well for many people.
On console it was not such a big problem because console standards was low and because there LIVE worked well which is why it sold better on consoles.
EPIC assumptions that game was not such a big hit on PC because of piracy was plain stupid denyal that it was not such a good game for PC FPS standards.
EPIC showed many time general lack of analytics capability and ability of forward thinking, and they showed it again with store. I wonder what would be their excuse for poor sales of Metro there - piracy again? They cant distinguish reason from results.
"PC gamers didn't purchase games from our Store. They are pirates"
They will be as clueless as ever, throwing the blame around as it already started to happen.
Actually BulletStorm was a pretty good game and contrary to Tim "Mob Boss" Sweeney, I bought it and played it because it was on Steam when I could have just as easily pirated it