Games for Windows Live…A Good Idea?

Being a long time console gamer that has only dabbled in PC gaming, finally having a gaming ready computer has opened my eyes to what is available for my pointing and clicking pleasure. From what I have found, doing the ridiculously anal research that I usually do on a topic, currently, the most reliable and what is fast becoming the de facto standard for PC gaming is Steam. This digital distribution channel built by Valve (the Half Life guys) is easy to use, reasonably priced and a publisher’s dream. One can clearly see that digital distribution is where the PC game market is going, especially with more and more store shelves being dedicated to console games and fake plastic instruments. However, this has not stopped Microsoft from trying to steal some PC Gaming market-share of there own, at retail.

Games for Windows is a line of PC games marketed by Microsoft and built to make it exceedingly easy to play games on your PC. Now, Games for Windows isn’t a new program, by any means. Microsoft has been building it since its 2005 launch. Many high profile PC games have been released using this platform, including: Bioshock, Age of Empire III (expansions), Crysis, Gears of War, Halo 2, Civilization IV, and Devil May Cry 4.  However, it’s obvious that the platform is not getting massive amounts of support, with barely over 100 titles available to date. This is understandable since PC gaming has been on the decline for years. One thing that Microsoft has gotten right, is Games for Windows – Live.  Live has many functions, but one of the most exciting ones is the ability to integrate players’ Xbox Live accounts into their PC games.  Live allows players to login to their Gamertag and use many of its functions when PC gaming. At first glance this may seem like an obvious move by Microsoft, but with further examination it becomes very obvious that this functionality is brilliant if not genius.

I have worked long and hard to get my Xbox Live Gamerscore as high as possible and as soon as I found out that I can add to that score using my PC and Game for Windows – Live I jumped right on the bandwagon. I actually bought a Game for Windows – Live copy of Viva Piñata (a game I had already decided to shy away from on the Xbox 360). I know that I am not alone when it comes to being an achievement monger and to many gamers the idea of earning achievements in Halo 2 is almost mouthwatering. The question is, has Microsoft been supporting this function like they really should? Since its inception, only 17 games have supported the Games for Windows – Live feature. That’s 17 out of about 103 games. That’s a terrible attach rate. Sure, the main titles like Halo or Gears are going to get the Live treatment, but smaller non-Microsoft exclusive titles such as Lego Batman from Warner Interactive, Tomb Raider: Underworld from Eidos, and Call of Duty: World at War from Activision, are completely lacking the Live experience. All three of them were required to have it on the Xbox 360. This behavior can be expected from developers, since adding the Live experience undoubtedly adds precious if not significant development time to a game on a platform that at best is 3rd or 4th place in the market. What the lack of Live is not doing is building Games for Windows as a viable market competitor. Until you can buy a 3rd party game for all three platforms (PS3, Xbox 360 and PC) and receive a similar if not identical experience, whichever platform lacks the smallest and most seemingly insignificant detail is going suffer from that omission.

Take the PS3 as an example. The 360 launched with Live and achievements intact on 100% of its titles in 2005. The Playstation 3 had nearly a calendar year to integrate similar features in order to compete. A Live-esq system was built called PSN (Playstation Network), but the console lacked an achievement system. Of course, in 2005 there was no way to know that the achievements on 360 would become as popular as they have, but Sony should have been prepared to counter Microsoft’s idea immediately (especially with a console sporting a $500 price tag). They were not. Trophies weren’t implemented until over a year and a half after launch, during which the PS3 had major trouble trying to build a market share. Also, since developers weren’t required to include Trophies the attach rate was weak. Starting in January of 2009 Sony made Trophy support mandatory for PS3 games, this finally brings their user experience on par with that of Microsoft…finally.

To say that the PS3’s struggle is caused solely by the lack of an achievement system is both ignorant and haphazard. All I’m saying is that absolutely nothing good came out of Sony neglecting the achievement whores. Many gamers that owned both systems would buy the 360 version of multiplatform games to build their Gamerscore, leaving their PS3 to collect dust until the next big exclusive title was released. The same can be said about Games for Windows – Live. With the PC gamer market as fragile as it is, if Microsoft wants to make Games for Windows a truly profitable venture that is on par or better than it competitors, they need to not give gamers reasons not to buy their games. Making achievements and Live compatibility mandatory in Games for Windows titles is a must for the platform to thrive. I am really wondering why they haven’t done it yet. Are they scared that developers will drop the Games for Windows flag and just go with a generic PC release (because of the development costs), or do they just not care if the service fails. The Live initiative has been ported over to the Zune and the experience is wonderful, its usage is underwhelming, but that’s probably due to the Zune’s tiny market-share. However, the Zune as media player is a completely different post…I’ll get to that later.

In the mean time, I will be playing my Games for Windows – Live copy of Viva Piñata and hoping something decent is released for the platform in 2009. That way I, achievement whore Liugeaux, can build my seemingly meaningless Gamerscore.