Support NeoGAF

[Sky87]

I think the fact that Nordic Games had to step in to help make it happen means the most credit we can give MS on this one is not actively trying to stop it even after their own political maneuvering meant it was sent to die in the first place.

It's also entirely unrelated to the issues raised by Tim Sweeney which should be obvious to anyone capable of stepping outside of a console wars trench defend the hive against the heretic Sweeney mindset.

I feel your first paragraph needs some clarifying. Why did Nordic Games have to step in to make anything happen? What do you base that on?

Not really unrelated either, since actually releasing their games on Steam would be the opposite of making it worse and more unappealing.

 

[Papacheeks]

Can someone please translate this?

He's saying look at it with Sweeney's perspective as a engine developer who works with software especially Microsoft's.

 

[Mass_Pincup]

I feel your first paragraph needs some clarifying. Why did Nordic Games have to step in to make anything happen? What do you base that on?

Not really unrelated either, since actually releasing their games on Steam would be the opposite of making it worse and more unappealing.

Nordic Games is handling the PC's retail version.

 

[CosmicQueso]

He's saying look at it with Sweeney's perspective as a engine developer who works with software especially Microsoft's.

Implication being that while the commercial team may be playing nice with Steam and getting QB on it, the dev/engine side isn't (or may not)?

Not sure how the console wars/hive mind/heretic language helps get that point across. Unfortunate.

 

[Squire]

Is "gymnastics" supposed to be a rebuttal of some kind?
What did I say that is demonstrably wrong?

MS announced this port and on the actual Xbox news page no less. To say "Well Nordic probably pushed for it, MS just didn't stop it" is a little silly when MS is promoting it. It would be telling if they were acting completely aloof about it, but they're not. They're saying straight up: Yo, you can get this on another platform, that we don't own, for cheaper, and with updates applied so it's actually a better product, too.

It's OK to give credit where it's due. This is more than "not getting in the way".

 

[Pathfinder]

Is "gymnastics" supposed to be a rebuttal of some kind?
What did I say that is demonstrably wrong?

First, how do you know Nordic stepped in to save the day and make it happen? We don't know the scope of their involvement with the project yet, their name is just attached to it. For all we know, they're just handling the retail packaging and distribution.

Second, it's ENTIRELY related to the issues Tim Sweeney brought up. Why would Microsoft go against their suspected grand master plan to put Steam out of business and kill Win32 by putting a high profile release on Steam in Win32 format?

 

[Bizzquik]

I think the fact that Nordic Games had to step in to help make it happen means the most credit we can give MS on this one is not actively trying to stop it even after their own political maneuvering meant it was sent to die in the first place.

It's also entirely unrelated to the issues raised by Tim Sweeney which should be obvious to anyone capable of stepping outside of a console wars trench defend the hive against the heretic Sweeney mindset.

The gymnastics in this response are worthy of the Olympics.

Is "gymnastics" supposed to be a rebuttal of some kind?
What did I say that is demonstrably wrong?

LoL, that's a great reply, Pathfinder.

LordRaptor, it sounded like you were going out of your way to avoid saying something even remotely positive about Microsoft. That's the 'gymnastics' line: a lot of words and phrasing to imply that Microsoft is still an evil overlord that was simply forced into doing a good deed....because they couldn't possibly have just listened to the will of the consumer.

 

[Sky87]

Nordic Games is handling the PC's retail version.

Wouldn't Microsoft be the ones to pick them for the job then?

 

[LordRaptor]

Can someone please translate this?

This topic was bumped because console warriors have decided Tim Sweeney is dissing their team.
The things he are saying are - entirely - unrelated to MS releasing games on Windows.
Like, MS putting their entire gaming catalogue in Steam tomorrow doesn't actually affect a single word he has said.

So the point of bumping this topic because QB is getting a PC release is...?
Oh, console wars. Defend the hive. Attack the heretic.

I feel your first paragraph needs some clarifying. Why did Nordic Games have to step in to make anything happen? What do you base that on?

Nordic Games have been explicitly stated as being responsible for help making this happen. My supposition why they had to get involved - MS aren't actually blocking it, but they're not doing anything to facilitate it, and NG are helping Remedy with the port costs - makes logical sense.

e:

First, how do you know Nordic stepped in to save the day and make it happen? We don't know the scope of their involvement with the project yet, their name is just attached to it. For all we know, they're just handling the retail packaging and distribution.

Second, it's ENTIRELY related to the issues Tim Sweeney brought up. Why would Microsoft go against their suspected grand master plan to put Steam out of business and kill Win32 by putting a high profile release on Steam in Win32 format?

Because... what, MS don't have logisitics chains in place to print and distribute boxed products?

It's entirely unrelated to the concerns raised in the OP.

 

[Mass_Pincup]

Wouldn't Microsoft be the ones to pick them for the job then?

Yes but the implication is that they would't do it themselves.

 

[CosmicQueso]

So the point of bumping this topic because QB is getting a PC release is...?

Not how I read it, but maybe I'm just wrong.

Just looks like, at minimum, there's no concerted, coordinated, overt effort at undermining Steam from MS.

Perhaps there still is, but placing QB on Steam is, at the least, showing that a business relationship still exists, and that MS is still looking at making some money there.

This move certainly doesn't support Tim's claims.

 

[Pathfinder]

This topic was bumped because console warriors have decided Tim Sweeney is dissing their team.

So the point of bumping this topic because QB is getting a PC release is...?
Oh, console wars. Defend the hive. Attack the heretic.

I know this might be hard for you to understand, but there are some of us who think Tim Sweeney is fear-mongering. Has nothing to do with console wars.

 

[LordRaptor]

Just looks like, at minimum, there's no concerted, coordinated, overt effort at undermining Steam from MS.

It is a complicated nuanced argument; it is worth reading what he is actually saying.

He is not claiming that MS are attempting to "stop Steam" as an end goal.
Steam is the example given of actions that might be taken to get to their end goal - a closed platform.

e:

I know this might be hard for you to understand, but there are some of us who think Tim Sweeney is fear-mongering.

I am well aware of that, which is why I attempt to make people understand the actual issues at hand, because I care about them.

 

[Trup1aya]

This topic was bumped because console warriors have decided Tim Sweeney is dissing their team.
The things he are saying are - entirely - unrelated to MS releasing games on Windows.
Like, MS putting their entire gaming catalogue in Steam tomorrow doesn't actually affect a single word he has said.

So the point of bumping this topic because QB is getting a PC release is...?
Oh, console wars. Defend the hive. Attack the heretic.



Nordic Games have been explicitly stated as being responsible for help making this happen. My supposition why they had to get involved - MS aren't actually blocking it, but they're not doing anything to facilitate it, and NG are helping Remedy with the port costs - makes logical sense.

e:


Because... what, MS don't have logisitics chains in place to print and distribute boxed products?

It's entirely unrelated to the concerns raised in the OP.

Why do you keep resorting to this inaccurate cop-out of an argument.

People on both sides of the fence regarding what they believe MS' intentions are believe that Sweeney's allegations aren't based on knowledge of an actually plot (which Sweeney admits), and take issue with the FUD nature of his approach.

The idea that this is completely unrelated to discussion of Tim's allegations is bullshit. He alledges that MS wants to destroy Steam. MS puts their IP on the service. None of this happens in a vacuum.

 

[SmartWaffles]

Just like Ori and the Blind Forest, Nordic only makes and distributes the retail version which also will be quite limited. MS is still selling the game on Steam and it makes no sense to sabotage a platform that they do business on.

 

[LordRaptor]

Why do you keep resorting to this inaccurate cop-out of an argument.

Because a substantial number of people in these topics want to reframe the issue into an "us versus them" when it is not.

The criticism of MS's actions in the PC gaming space aren't from people who want to see Xbox fail, or anything like that. It is from people who are also MS customers.

The idea that this is completely unrelated to discussion of Tim's allegations is bullshit. He alledges that MS wants to destroy Steam. MS puts their IP on the service. None of this happens in a vacuum.

Again; despite the title of the topic, his comments are not about Steam.
Steam is the illustration used, not the end goal target.

 

[Pathfinder]

Again; despite the title of the topic, his comments are not about Steam.
Steam is the illustration used, not the end goal target.

I quote, from Tim Sweeney himself:

Slowly, over the next 5 years, they will force-patch Windows 10 to make Steam progressively worse and more broken. They'll never completely break it, but will continue to break it until, in five years, people are so fed up that Steam is buggy that the Windows Store seem 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 are certainly trying.

Three specific mentions of "Steam" right there, yet you claim his comments are not about Steam and its not the end goal target for Microsoft.

Come on, man. I've seen you make some very good arguments here on the board, but this is not one of them.

 

[LordRaptor]

Three specific mentions of "Steam" right there, yet you claim his comments are not about Steam and its not the end goal target for Microsoft.

You're missing the - essential - piece of context, which is the question that was asked that that is a response to:

Given that Steam is so widespread and popular, how could Microsoft truly win that battle, in terms of games at least?

He didn't just up and start talking about Steam apropos of nothing; that is his response to a direct question specifically regarding Steam.

e:
Honestly, the points he is trying to make are nuanced.
I know that "Tim Sweeney Says MS are trying to kill Steam!" makes a headline, but it's not the crux of his argument,

e2:
I mean, his concerns aren't even actually about gaming. It's big picture stuff.

 

[deadscreensky]

Now they're doing it to Steam. It's only just starting to become visible.

How is this remotely some purely theoretical possibility, rather than an actual accusation of current behavior?

 

[Mass_Pincup]

I quote, from Tim Sweeney himself:



Three specific mentions of "Steam" right there, yet you claim his comments are not about Steam and its not the end goal target for Microsoft.

Come on, man. I've seen you make some very good arguments here on the board, but this is not one of them.

What you quoted doesn't go against what LordRaptor said, actually the very first question on OP's post related to MS shifting Windows into a closed platform, that's where Sweeney used Steam as an relatable exemple for the readership of Edge and where the journalist pushed for him to develop his thoughts regarding the Steam situation.

You should know that since that's what your quoted, it's clear as day. Out of the 3 questions there, Sweeney talked about Steam to provide an exemple and to respond to a question.

 

[Pathfinder]

You should know that since that's what your quoted, it's clear as day. Out of the 3 questions there, Sweeney talked about Steam to provide an exemple and to respond to a question.

He didn't just up and start talking about Steam apropos of nothing; that is his response to a direct question specifically regarding Steam.

Okay, let's go with the possibility that he may have just been using "Steam" as an example of a general threat to Microsoft's supposed endgame of turning Windows into a closed platform.

It still makes no sense then that they would be fully behind releasing their brand new IP on a platform that they're secretly wanting to hinder in order to make theirs look better. Let alone using Win32, which apparently they're also wanting to make obsolete.

It's a direct contradiction is all I'm saying, and I would be very very interested to hear a response from Tim regarding it.

 

[LordRaptor]

How is this remotely some purely theoretical possibility, rather than an actual accusation of current behavior?

I know it is a long topic, but the only unattributed baseless claim he makes is that MS are doing this intentionally and maliciously as a power play.
- MS clearly would love to have the PC as a closed platform they are in sole control of, I don't think anyone would deny that.
- Win32 has been termed as "legacy desktop" since Windows 8, a term which has specific meaning.
- UWA has features available exclusively to it that Win32 does not
- Recent patches have broken certain Win32 features

These are things that have happened.
Whether they are deliberate attempts to shut down the PC as an open platform, or whether it is even possible to do so are what is contended.

It still makes no sense then that they would be fully behind releasing their brand new IP on a platform that they're secretly wanting to hinder in order to make theirs look better. Let alone using Win32, which apparently they're also wanting to make obsolete.

It's a direct contradiction is all I'm saying, and I would be very very interested to hear a response from Tim regarding it.

I mean, you would have to ask him that yourself.

Having said that, if there are sinister plans afoot to patch out 'legacy desktop support' into a Pro only feature in 2 years time, why wouldn't you sell all those games as Win32s now then get the double dippers for the UWAs in 2 years time?

e:
I mean, Sony basically did that offering deep discount sales on PS3 titles knowing full well they'd be unplayable on PS4 - if you're rendering a swathe of titles unusable soon anyway, why not take those free revenues now?

 

[Shiggy]

Seeing Quantum Break on Steam as evidence that Sweeney is wrong is like seeing Putin visiting Greece as evidence for the end of tensions between Russia and the West. Quantum Break is a minor project that failed hard on the Win 10 Store. Remedy must have pushed hard for a Steam release as bonuses were most likely tied to sales.

 

[JaggedSac]

It is certainly a valid point of view even when broadening the discussion from Steam to the overall Windows environment. MS still releases massive pieces of software on the Win32 platform. VS, SSMS, the entire Office suite, etc. Kneecapping Win32 is kneecapping themselves at this point and for the foreseeable future.

 

[CosmicQueso]

Seeing Quantum Break on Steam as evidence that Sweeney is wrong is like seeing Putin visiting Greece as evidence for the end of tensions between Russia and the West. Quantum Break is a minor project that failed hard on the Win 10 Store. Remedy must have pushed hard for a Steam release as bonuses were most likely tied to sales.

Okay. So what would be evidence of Sweeney being wrong? Because it appears like nothing can actually disprove the claims outside of time, and how much time must pass before the claims are refuted? 5 years? 10 years?

 

[krang]

Seeing Quantum Break on Steam as evidence that Sweeney is wrong is like seeing Putin visiting Greece as evidence for the end of tensions between Russia and the West. Quantum Break is a minor project that failed hard on the Win 10 Store. Remedy must have pushed hard for a Steam release as bonuses were most likely tied to sales.

Dafuq kinda analogy is that??

 

[Shiggy]

Okay. So what would be evidence of Sweeney being wrong? Because it appears like nothing can actually disprove the claims outside of time, and how much time must pass before the claims are refuted? 5 years? 10 years?

Weren't there quite a few actions this week which pointed more towards Sweeney being right than not being right? Quite obviously, Microsoft would much prefer if everything went through the Win 10 Store.

There are a number of ways to easily disprove Sweeney's claims. One being the release of the entire lineup on Steam.

Dafuq kinda analogy is that??

One that is fitting.

 

[CosmicQueso]

Weren't there quite a few actions this week which pointed more towards Sweeney being right than not being right? Quite obviously, Microsoft would much prefer if everything went through the Win 10 Store.

Well of course they'd prefer customers use the closed garden. Who wouldn't?

But that's not the point.

But I'm confused, small pieces of evidence come out that support his theories... those are okay to assume. But small pieces of evidence that refute his claims, those are not okay to accept?

There are a number of ways to easily disprove Sweeney's claims. One being the release of the entire lineup on Steam.

So the whole slate coming to Steam disproves the claims, but the latest AAA game comes to Steam and doesn't mean anything?

 

[LordRaptor]

Okay. So what would be evidence of Sweeney being wrong? Because it appears like nothing can actually disprove the claims outside of time, and how much time must pass before the claims are refuted? 5 years? 10 years?

It's impossible to prove a negative, but MS aren't operating from a position of trust or a spotless track record, so scepticism of their behaviours is more warranted than not.

Personally, as I said before in this topic, if they want to replace Win32 with a more managed & controlled format, putting the control and stewardship of development of that format in the hands of an independent group of stakeholders would be a lot more trustworthy than creating a format that by default MS are the sole authority over, with vague promises as to opening it up to others at some point in the future.

Or to put it another way, you're more likely to get studios aboard a DVD consortium to improve the medium, than you are to get them to sign up to The Disney Format just because of the inherent conflicts of interest involved.

 

[CosmicQueso]

It's impossible to prove a negative, but MS aren't operating from a position of trust or a spotless track record, so scepticism of their behaviours is more warranted than not.

True, healthy skepticism is always a good thing. Just still seems like a case of people will believe what they want to believe, and not necessarily from a position of being a fan of one console or company over another.

 

[Mass_Pincup]

So the whole slate coming to Steam disproves the claims, but the latest AAA game comes to Steam and doesn't mean anything?

Releasing you whole lineup means that you don't have any reason not to release it on a competitor's storefront, not releasing your whole lineup and just some exceptions means you have a reason not to.

 

[Shiggy]

Well of course they'd prefer customers use the closed garden. Who wouldn't?

But that's not the point.

But I'm confused, small pieces of evidence come out that support his theories... those are okay to assume. But small pieces of evidence that refute his claims, those are not okay to accept?

When the aggregated amount of evidence is still pointing towards a stronger focus on a closed ecosystem? Yes, this is a small piece of evidence refuting his claim, but in the greater picture this small 3rd party collaboration (which was a commercial flop) doesn't really matter. Let me know when the next GoW or Halo are launching on Steam.

So the whole slate coming to Steam disproves the claims, but the latest AAA game comes to Steam and doesn't mean anything?

Problem is that Quantum Break is not their latest AAA game. It was a commercial flop. It's like putting Sunset Overdrive on Steam. Or Ori (which happened).

 

[LordRaptor]

I'll just reiterate my feeling that what storefront MS put their games on isn't particularly compelling evidence as to their intentions either way.

As a gamer I'd obviously prefer all titles to be on Steam because Steam is 'best in class' as a digital storefront period, not even just in the gaming sphere.

 

[Durante]

Must be the first step right.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1260888

I was about to comment on this, but then I remembered that Stumpokapow already covered everything I'd say in that other thread.

Setting aside that you don't wonder that at all--you're just angry that Sweeney said something bad about Microsoft and trying to score a cheap point--Sweeney's premise doesn't exclude this at all. This is a relatively low impact project relative to the scale of Windows as a whole, Sweeney's argument leaves open tension between interests within Microsoft (like the famous org chart diagram suggests), and if you're planning on using Microsoft's every move to fit or disprove Sweeney's theory then you also have to grapple that last week the Windows 10 anniversary update broke a bunch of gaming stuff, disabled group policies for users to give them less control over key elements of the OS, and focused near-entirely on improvements to UWP versus Win32, so all told the week would still in aggregate "prove" his theory if you really want to keep score.

 

[Pathfinder]

I was about to comment on this, but then I remembered that Stumpokapow already covered everything I'd say in that other thread.

And hopefully you also read my response.

It doesn't matter that its Microsoft. This is about someone in an established position using their influence to introduce a theory without any real proof to back it up other than saying bad things have happened before so therefore bad things will happen again.

 

[Trup1aya]

Because a substantial number of people in these topics want to reframe the issue into an "us versus them" when it is not.

The criticism of MS's actions in the PC gaming space aren't from people who want to see Xbox fail, or anything like that. It is from people who are also MS customers.



Again; despite the title of the topic, his comments are not about Steam.
Steam is the illustration used, not the end goal target.

What does Xbox have to do with anything? Tim Sweeney said that Microsoft wanted to kill steam in 5 years. Those were his words. Why do you assume that the people who recognize that he made these claims (and many other claims) without hard evidence have some affinity to Xbox. This thread is filled with people who are PC gamers, many skeptical of MS, but still also don't appreciate FUD.

I'll just reiterate my feeling that what storefront MS put their games on isn't particularly compelling evidence as to their intentions either way.

As a gamer I'd obviously prefer all titles to be on Steam because Steam is 'best in class' as a digital storefront period, not even just in the gaming sphere.

Ok. Will you also acknowledge that Sweeney has presented no evidence what so ever to support his assertions and even admits that he has none.

 

[LordRaptor]

What does Xbox have to do with anything?

The people in these and other topics who rush to defend MSs actions and give them the benefit of the doubt are Xbox gamers.
You are an Xbox gamer.

Nobody who is not an Xbox gamer has that level of trust with MS, because there is no "PC Gaming" division at MS.
There is a "PC Gaming at Xbox" division.
Moves aren't ever made with the sole benefit of PC gamers, they are always made through the lens of benefitting Xbox first, and PC gaming second, if at all.

Nobody questions the fact that the Xbox division looks out for the interests of Xbox.
Your personal goodwill and trust entirely stems from how as an Xbox gamer you are treated by the Xbox division.

You are basically speaking from a position of privilege and telling people who do not share that privilege to shut up because things are pretty good for people in privilege.

 

[Trup1aya]

The people in these and other topics who rush to defend MSs actions and give them the benefit of the doubt are Xbox gamers.
You are an Xbox gamer.

Nobody who is not an Xbox gamer has that level of trust with MS, because there is no "PC Gaming" division at MS.
There is a "PC Gaming at Xbox" division.
Moves aren't ever made with the sole benefit of PC gamers, they are always made through the lens of benefitting Xbox first, and PC gaming second, if at all.

Nobody questions the fact that the Xbox division looks out for the interests of Xbox.
Your personal goodwill and trust entirely stems from how as an Xbox gamer you are treated by the Xbox division.

You are basically speaking from a position of privilege and telling people who do not share that privilege to shut up because things are pretty good for people in privilege.

The thing is, you aren't even accurate in describing my situation. What "level of trust" are you talking about?

Yes, I play Xbox, but not because I trust MS. It's because the console has the games I want to play. But I'm still skeptical of MS' actions in the PC space... My ownership of the console and my distrust for MS (and mega corps in general) aren't mutually exclusive. You are irrationally using my choice of console hardware to label myself and others as folks who blindly trust MS' intentions in the PC space. There is no connection there whatsoever. Your logic here makes about as much sense as saying a Mexican Judge can't fairly adjudicate a Trump case.

I'm actually skeptical of MS in the PC space, just like any rational person would be. However, My skeptism doesn't prevent me from recognizing when someone doesn't have any evidence to support the allegations they are making. (Especially when he admits he doesn't have any evidence). It's called being objective. You should try it.

Also, my participation in this thread doesn't negate the fact that there are plenty of PC gamers in this thread and elsewhere who also would like Sweeney to back up what he is saying with facts.

Also, when have I ever told anyone to shut up about anything? I asked for people to provide proof instead of speculation based on past transgressions, and presenting that as proof. Requesting evidence is not "defending". since when is demanding proof objectionable?

 

[BriareosGAF]

It's not an accurate depiction of how decisions get made, either. It's a very complicated situation with various business units, and even over time those change and merge and split. I think I've seen three reorgs of the various DX, Xbox, etc., groups at MSFT in the last several years of visiting them at Building D.

 

[BleedOrange]

TBH Tim's comments seem like something a forum warrior would post just so that they could quote themselves in 5 years and say "SEE, I TOLD YOU SO!!" just on the off chance that something actually happens.

 

[LordRaptor]

there are plenty of PC gamers in this thread and elsewhere who also would like Sweeney to back up what he is saying with facts.

The only thing he is saying that isn't backed up by facts is that MSs actions are deliberately malicious.

I don't see the point in getting worked up on debating the point if they are evil or stupid. Neither motivation portrays them in a particularly strong light.

 

[Banjo-Kazooie]

I think the fact that Nordic Games had to step in to help make it happen means the most credit we can give MS on this one is not actively trying to stop it even after their own political maneuvering meant it was sent to die in the first place.

It's also entirely unrelated to the issues raised by Tim Sweeney which should be obvious to anyone capable of stepping outside of a console wars trench defend the hive against the heretic Sweeney mindset.

Nordic has been handling physical versions of their other games like Ori and State of Decay. Stop with he BS excuses lol. MS is the publisher of the digital version. They own the IP. THEY decide where it goes. Not Remedy, and certainly not Nordic.

 

[Blizzard]

I was about to comment on this, but then I remembered that Stumpokapow already covered everything I'd say in that other thread.

On that note, the latest Steam beta mentions specifically working around a controller bug that was introduced in the Windows update.

 

[timberger]

And hopefully you also read my response.

It doesn't matter that its Microsoft. This is about someone in an established position using their influence to introduce a theory without any real proof to back it up other than saying bad things have happened before so therefore bad things will happen again.

You seem to harass other members for saying anything bad about MS all the time as far as I can tell, so I think that moderator has you pegged, son.

 

[Trup1aya]

The only thing he is saying that isn't backed up by facts is that MSs actions are deliberately malicious.

I don't see the point in getting worked up on debating the point if they are evil or stupid. Neither motivation portrays them in a particularly strong light.

False.

What proof has he provided that MS will break Steam in 5 years? What proof has he provided that MS intends to monopolize PC gaming?

The answers: None. None.

Sweeney has repeatedly made statements that suggests he knows exactly what MS' intentions are and exactly what they will do with their OS in the years to come. his statements thus far have largely been proven to be inaccurate at worst or premature and without evidence at best. Whether or not his allegations describe malicious intent is neither here nor there. THE QUESTION is can Sweeney prove that what he SAYS are MS' plans are ACTUALLY MS' plans. By his own admission he cannot.

I'm not interested in portraying anyone in any sort of light. Im not interested in debating whether or not MS is Evil or Stupid or Trustworthy. I'm interested in facts over speculation, and thus far Sweeney has only provided speculation.

PS you still fail to explain what anyone's console of choice has to do with any of this.

 

[LordRaptor]

Nordic has been handling physical versions of their other games like Ori and State of Decay. Stop with he BS excuses lol.

And there is no question in your mind as to why MS as publisher have chosen not to bother with, well, fairly normal publisher duties of pressing and shipping retail copies for those games? Why would Nordic need to get involved at all?
Do MS not have any infrastructure or logistics channels to print game disks and ship them to retailers? Who handles all of that for their retail Xbox One games then?

 

[Pathfinder]

You seem to harass other members for saying anything bad about MS all the time as far as I can tell, so I think that moderator has you pegged, son.

Thanks for your input?

 

[JaggedSac]

And there is no question in your mind as to why MS as publisher have chosen not to bother with, well, fairly normal publisher duties of pressing and shipping retail copies for those games? Why would Nordic need to get involved at all?
Do MS not have any infrastructure or logistics channels to print game disks and ship them to retailers? Who handles all of that for their retail Xbox One games then?

Time and resources. MS needs a person(s) to handle the deals with a box manufacturer, disc printer, etc. If MS doesn't have anyone available to handle this additional task, would make the decision to just let someone else handle those duties, and a company they have worked with for this sort of task in the past. Same reason anyone might contract any other company to do anything.

 

[LordRaptor]

Time and resources. MS needs a person(s) to handle the deals with a box manufacturer, disc printer, etc. If MS doesn't have anyone available to handle this additional task, would make the decision to just let someone else handle those duties, and a company they have worked with for this sort of task in the past. Same reason anyone might contract any other company to do anything.

No, I know that.
It undermines the assumption that PC gaming is just a important to MS as Xbox gaming is though, no?

 

[Trup1aya]

And there is no question in your mind as to why MS as publisher have chosen not to bother with, well, fairly normal publisher duties of pressing and shipping retail copies for those games? Why would Nordic need to get involved at all?
Do MS not have any infrastructure or logistics channels to print game disks and ship them to retailers? Who handles all of that for their retail Xbox One games then?

No, I know that.
It undermines the assumption that PC gaming is just a important to MS as Xbox gaming is though, no?

What does this have to do with ANYTHING?

At this point, thanks to Digital. Many publishers on PC don't bother with box retail at all. Why is it a surprise that MS would hand off the logistics on the SKU that will inevitably have the smallest impact on the market?

You are suffering from a very serious case of confirmation bias.

"MS isn't pressing the retail version themselves = PC gaming isn't important to them" what kind of logic is this? Especially since they are actually arranging to release a retail version when many others in this space would skip it all together.