Support NeoGAF

[wapplew]

The smart money would be to pay Activision to add cross-play, or don't bother courting the game at all. Surely someone at MS would have foreseen the hamstringing that would occur.

It shouldn't be "cross" play in the first place. It's fucking PC, running same OS!
There nothing to cross if MS themselves don't make it a separate platform within their platform.

 

[Corleth the Fey]

Okay I was seriously wrong...all I can ask is why? Why bother if no crossplay? Why was this not announced before....why bother at all?

EDIT: Well i guess its time

Good job on owning it. You're alright, son.

 

[Ricky_R]

Hahah that confirmation must've felt good, eh benny?

 

[Barakov]

I guess they're only going to need one server, then?

 

[IgotElbows]

I don't know if anyone has mentioned it, but COD on PC/Steam by itself is also not even at the best numbers. The peak alone today for BLOPS 3 was 8,355...

And with COD IW not even getting the beta, that might lead to less sales because of people nervous it might be a bad port.

 

[MUnited83]

So now you know the specifics of the contract work that microsoft asked for?

Yes, I do.


Nowhere on the contract it says "Activision is obligated to provide cross-play solution between PC platforms on the UWP port of IW".
If it did, it would have cross play to begin with!

 

[Maztorre]

I still think thats quite an assumption at this point (we have effect not cause)

Feels slightly like a dry run at uwp porting (similar to halo 5 forge and forza free version)

But activision wants to get paid

Edit: Also zero news around this at all until the day before it launches?

How many dry runs before it becomes obvious that UWP is a deeply flawed implementation that is causing fragmentation where none should exist?

Activision do not have to develop for the UWA platform. If they are going to develop for that platform then of course they should spend the money to do so. Are you saying that it's fine for companies to not invest on versions of their games on unpopular platforms?

He's saying that the UWA version of the game is "working as intended", given that UWA and Microsoft's Win10 store have intentionally silo'd themselves away from the rest of the PC platform. The result is this omnishambles, where they won't allow crossplay with Xbox owners because they don't want KB/M players among them, and allowing crossplay with Win32 players has been turned into an additional expense because of Microsoft's walling off of their app platform. For example, even if crossplay was implemented, Activision's Steam customers would be screwed over for patch deployment because they would be held up by MS certification.

Activision shouldn't have bothered at all, and I think may simply have been fulfilling a contractual obligation to support the Win10 platform, because the entire premise of UWP/Win32 crossplay is fundamentally flawed and causes a compromised experience for users on all sides.

 

[March of the Crabs]

This is genuinely the dumbest thing I have ever seen and I've seen Paul Blart and watched Trump talk.

 

[GRaider81]

Yeah, this is a good point. But activision even porting to the platform is them knowingly fracturing their PC user base. The fact that they even created this port says that that's something they're fine with doing.

They probably safely assumed around 5-10 people would buy it on UWP so weighing it up against the cash was likely easy for them.

 

[Chobel]

Huh? No. We JUST said earlier that we don't know the details of cost for any of it. Without knowing what it cost Microsoft OR activision to do this, how can we conclude anything?

We don't know how much it would cost Acti to port this so we can't know whether sales would have justified it because in its current state, no one will buy it. But a proper port? I don't see why some less hardcore PC players wouldn't have bought a proper port. Obviously not huge numbers, but enough to justify a proper port? We can't possibly know and that's the issue with too many assumptions.

Why are we talking about "proper port"? That doesn't exist. We should talk about what we have here: a version that no one will buy and Activision wasted money on it (Porting to UWP, QA testing...etc).

Again, what Activision has to gain from what we have here?

EDIT: Also if Activision is interested on expanding their sales as you assume, why isn't CoD on all PC digital stores (Origin, GoG...etc)?

 

[jelly]

UWP, player free, hacker free.

 

[GhostTrick]

Wow, Microsoft bringing the good competition once again !
Seriously though, why can't they learn their lesson ?

 

[ScientificPizza]

Yes, I do

No, you don't

He's saying that the UWA version of the game is "working as intended", given that UWA and Microsoft's Win10 store have intentionally silo'd themselves away from the rest of the PC platform. The result is this omnishambles, where they won't allow crossplay with Xbox owners because they don't want KB/M players among them, and allowing crossplay with Win32 players has been turned into an additional expense because of Microsoft's walling off of their app platform. For example, even if crossplay was implemented, Activision's Steam customers would be screwed over for patch deployment because they would be held up by MS certification.

Activision shouldn't have bothered at all, and I think may simply have been fulfilling a contractual obligation to support the Win10 platform, because the entire premise of UWP/Win32 crossplay is fundamentally flawed and causes a compromised experience for users on all sides.

Yeah, I understand what he's saying. I didn't say anything to the contrary

 

[yatesl]

But guys, guys

Them xbox live achievements tho

 

[LordBaztion]

Everything I have seen suggests to me that X1 owners do not want to play competitive FPSes against PC owners.

The fact MS have run a negative whispering campaign against the PC as a gaming platform as being a hive of cheats and piracy and everyone using a controller being a 'level playing field' for so long is just the cherry on top of the delicious ironing

I agree that playing competitively againt PC would damage the platform but Gears' solution of limiting interactions to pve/private seems to has been posively received. Probably Activision didn't care enough to add the game more options. That's why I don't think MS paid to them to make a port. I think they made the X1 version based on UWA and porting it to W10 PC was cheap enough for them to try.

 

[Trup1aya]

Exactly. They have no incentive to invest on unpopular platforms. Tomb Raiders sales were 2% of the total on WIn10. And that's probably gone down with steam sales since then. There is 0 incentive for Activision to put out a UWA WIN10 version without incentive from Microsoft. So they put out what Microsoft paid them for.

That's a smart assumption. But for publishers it isn't unwise to try to bolster the success of multiple store fronts. a healthy competition between storefronts would give publishers an avenue to leverage for better terms.

I'm not saying this is why COD is in the Win10 store, but their are potentially long term benefits to Activision for A store other the steam to succeed.

 

[MUnited83]

No, you don't

So they wrote on the contract that it would have crossplay but now it doesn't? MS should sue then.

 

[Chobel]

I'm don't think that's the case. The game is already runing on XBL and adding crossplay with xbox would give both versions more legs. Population is problem in CoD on PC, adding the xbox player pool would be very beneficial to both Activision and MS. Probably the crossplay patch is coming afterwards.

Wait, PC + Console in PVP game? That's not gonna happen. Not even MS themselves are doing that in Gears 4.

 

[michaelius]

I feel bad for people who buy this on windows store without knowing this.

 

[Gamezone]

But guys, guys

Them xbox live achievements tho

I like Steam achievements on PC.

 

[Chobel]

That's a smart assumption. But for publishers it isn't unwise to try to bolster the success of multiple store fronts. a healthy competition between storefronts would give publishers an avenue to leverage for better terms.

I'm not saying this is why COD is in the Win10 store, but their are potentially long term benefits to Activision for A store other the steam to succeed.

That's exactly the reason CoD games are on Origin, GoG and... Oh wait.

 

[GhostTrick]

That's a smart assumption. But for publishers it isn't unwise to try to bolster the success of multiple store fronts. a healthy competition between storefronts would give publishers an avenue to leverage for better terms.

I'm not saying this is why COD is in the Win10 store, but their are potentially long term benefits to Activision for A store other the steam to succeed.

Which benefits ? Rework/Retool their games when the store is closed ?

 

[KHlover]

UWP confirmed to be the version with the least amount of hackers.

Spoiler

0, which in unrelented news is also the amount of active players a week after launch

 

[Gren]

UWP, player free, hacker free.

This thread has been great.

Theoretical deals aside, this omission is on Acti/whoever did the port, but it still invites negative connotations to the Windows Store, moreso because it's library is so comparitively sparse.

 

[ScientificPizza]

So they wrote on the contract that it would have crossplay but now it doesn't? MS should sue then.

oh wow you really DO know the specifics of the contract

you can make your assumptions without framing them in fact

you don't know the specifics of the contract, but i'm sure there are things you can safely assume

 

[jelly]

That's a smart assumption. But for publishers it isn't unwise to try to bolster the success of multiple store fronts. a healthy competition between storefronts would give publishers an avenue to leverage for better terms.

I'm not saying this is why COD is in the Win10 store, but their are potentially long term benefits to Activision for A store other the steam to succeed.

Like what, first on Steam, platform exclusive items, less than the industry standard 30% cut?

The fact the Windows Store has gone nowhere, I presume Microsoft wants nothing less than 30% like everybody else.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

Why...how...

I'd love to be a fly on the wall in the meeting where this version was begged for by MS.

This is like getting a tinder app exclusive for Windows phone users.

 

[Trup1aya]

It shouldn't be "cross" play in the first place. It's fucking PC, running same OS!
There nothing to cross if MS themselves don't make it a separate platform within their platform.

Well there are serveral different networking solutions on PC, so some sort of cross-networking capability is always going to be a must a dev is going to use more that one.

UWP, which is inherently compatible with any networking solution, is not the subject at hand. The issue is that UWP apps sold in the Win10 store must use Xbox live.

 

[mcrommert]

Well there are serveral different networking solutions on PC, so some sort of cross-networking capability is always going to be a must a dev is going to use more that one.

UWP, which is inherently compatible with any networking solution, is not the subject at hand. The issue is that UWP apps sold in the Win10 store must use Xbox live.

Which they don't

 

[Darth Smurf X]

And confirmed:

https://support.activision.com/arti...re-Remastered-for-Windows-10-on-Windows-Store

HAhahahahahahahahahahahahhaaa... I can't stop laughing at this. #3 and 4 are pure comic gold. Thank you so much for posting this today. You made my day.

 

[Trup1aya]

Like what, first on Steam, platform exclusive items, less than the industry standard 30% cut?

The fact the Windows Store has gone nowhere, I presume Microsoft wants nothing less than 30% like everybody else.

I said leverage for publishers.

In a fictional universe where Steam wasn't so domoniant, Activision could give exclusive perks to a storefront in exchange for better rates on a particular game.

 

[MUnited83]

oh wow you really DO know the specifics of the contract

you can make your assumptions without framing them in fact

you don't know the specifics of the contract, but i'm sure there are things you can safely assume

Well, it's a fact that crossplay isn't mentioned in the contract.

If it was Acti would be getting sued right now for breaching of contract.

 

[goldsoundz]

I rolled my eyes when I saw this thread earlier, wondering why anyone would believe such an idiotic rumor. Now all I can do is laugh at how fucked Microsoft's "return" to PC gaming has been. This is one of the most absurd events I've ever seen in this industry. Fuck Microsoft.

 

[Maztorre]

That's a smart assumption. But for publishers it isn't unwise to try to bolster the success of multiple store fronts. a healthy competition between storefronts would give publishers an avenue to leverage for better terms.

I'm not saying this is why COD is in the Win10 store, but their are potentially long term benefits to Activision for A store other the steam to succeed.

If that was the case they would be on Origin and would be bringing at least their back catalog to GOG too (EDIT: Or, you know, building their own storefront with their battle.net team!). They're on Steam because it it the healthiest environment for AAA $60 shooters on PC. In any case, Activision have no reason to throw their weight behind a platform that, by design, will arbitrarily cut them off from Windows 7/8 customers who have been playing PC COD for years. Literally the only reason they could be there is either for a payout or some kind of contractual obligation.

Microsoft are not providing "healthy competition" on this platform, they are distorting it and causing confusion to end users by introducing another PC SKU for any title that supports both UWP and Win32. These SKUs have different OS requirements and now can't even offer a guarantee of either playing with other Xbox users on console, or other PC platform users.

 

[HarryDemeanor]

What the fuck is Activision thinking here?

Pretty scummy of them to release something this half-assed.

 

[LordRaptor]

In a fictional universe where Steam wasn't so domoniant, Activision could give exclusive perks to a storefront in exchange for better rates on a particular game.

PC games can have retailer exclusive preorder bonuses on games redeemable on steam in this universe.

 

[AcceptableGhost]

But guys, guys

Them xbox live achievements tho

On windows 10 the achievements are literally just a standard windows notification, lame. At least steam achievements pop up kind of looks cool when you are playing in Big Picture.

 

[Gamezone]

Like Windows Store errors and horrible DRM wasn't enough. Is Phil Spencer really behind any of these decisions?

 

[Mechanized]

This... turned out to be real? I thought they couldn't be this stupid.
CoD is far from dead on PC, even though many people on Gaf think it is, but it is way smaller than console, to divide the community is straight up stupid. There's no other word for it.

 

[Lucifon]

I rolled my eyes when I saw this thread earlier, wondering why anyone would believe such an idiotic rumor. Now all I can do is laugh at how fucked Microsoft's "return" to PC gaming has been. This is one of the most absurd events I've ever seen in this industry. Fuck Microsoft.

A lot of MS hate in this thread but is there any indication that this is MS which has caused this as opposed to Activision? Because it sure looks like an Activision screw up to me.

 

[pitchfork]

A lot of MS hate in this thread but is there any indication that this is MS which has caused this as opposed to Activision? Because it sure looks like an Activision screw up to me.

Just saw this posted on Windows Central

Update: A source familiar to the matter recently informed us that the decision to segregate Windows 10 Store and Win32 PC platform players is entirely on Activision. There is nothing about the UWP toolset that prevents cross-play functionality, as seen with CD Projekt RED's upcoming GWENT card game. We can only hope that Activision will reverse its frankly odd decision.

Who Knows though mate

Madness!

 

[PhilipDoesMatter]

The series has died.

 

[Shpeshal Nick]

A lot of MS hate in this thread but is there any indication that this is MS which has caused this as opposed to Activision? Because it sure looks like an Activision screw up to me.

Just saw this posted on Windows Central


Who Knows though mate

Madness!

Well I first assumed this was an Activision call. But as I said to Chobel, without knowing the cost and trouble involved in implementing it, we shouldn't assume either way really.

I think everyone knows UWP is capable of cross platform and I'm fairly sure everyone knows this was Activisions choice. The arguments are centering around why.

 

[MUnited83]

A lot of MS hate in this thread but is there any indication that this is MS which has caused this as opposed to Activision? Because it sure looks like an Activision screw up to me.

MS shoulda have paid more and contracted the game with cross play. MS is shit at doing deals though.

 

[Cipherr]

Where are the super soldiers that were trying to talk up the W10 store here on GAF like it was going to be some new beginning or some shit?

Jesus Christ.

 

[LordRaptor]

Just saw this posted on Windows Central

Wow, throw third parties under the bus for being 'lazy' with the "no technical reason this doesn't happen, just a bunch of financial and time related ones" spin.

Its truly a wonder third parties aren't chopping their own dicks off to jump on the UWA bandwagon!

 

[guybrushfreeman]

Just saw this posted on Windows Central



Who Knows though mate

Madness!

It's almost certainly because they can't push patches through the Windows store as fast as Steam. They would have to start trying to delay Steam patches until the windows store version is approved and try to time them together which is basically impossible because Windows store patches still have arbitrary certification times making them unpredictable for the user and publisher.

In the end it's because of inherent limitations of the Windows 10 store. It's just a patching rather than networking problem.

This is hilarious though. It's hard to imagine how anyone thinks this is a good idea.

 

[Trup1aya]

If that was the case they would be on Origin and would be bringing at least their back catalog to GOG too (EDIT: Or, you know, building their own storefront with their battle.net team!). They're on Steam because it it the healthiest environment for AAA $60 shooters on PC. In any case, Activision have no reason to throw their weight behind a platform that, by design, will arbitrarily cut them off from Windows 7/8 customers who have been playing PC COD for years. Literally the only reason they could be there is either for a payout or some kind of contractual obligation.

Microsoft are not providing "healthy competition" on this platform, they are distorting it and causing confusion to end users by introducing another PC SKU for any title that supports both UWP and Win32. These SKUs have different OS requirements and now can't even offer a guarantee of either playing with other Xbox users on console, or other PC platform users.

I'm aware the competition isn't healthy... currently.

I said publishers would benefit from having multiple successful storefronts. Not even talking about MS specifically. Not even commenting on why they are on Steam. Of course they are on steam

 

[CoffeeJanitor]

I feel like this will kill any momentum for UWP from a consumer perspective.

 

[dr_rus]

It's getting better one step at a time.
First big third party mega hit franchise available at Windows store, that's crazy improvement. It will be steam greatest competitor in no time.
Next up, RDR2 Windows store exclusive.

Yes, I'm expecting Valve going out of business in about a year and Apple will succumb and switch from iTunes to WinStore on iPhones.