Jump to content



Photo

Serious Sam 3 Developer Has Serious Issues with Windows 8


  • Please log in to reply
30 replies to this topic

#16 articuno1au

articuno1au

    Neowinian Senior

  • 4,487 posts
  • Joined: 20-March 11
  • Location: Brisbane, Australia

Posted 07 November 2012 - 08:42

What HawkMan said.

There's nothing wrong with 8.

Most of the people speaking out against the Windows Store are doing so on the basis of dooms day prophecies of Microsoft only allowing metro apps and nothing else.

I personally don't see that happening any time soon, and I think the people speaking out about it miss the damn point.

Either way, try it.


#17 Ryoken

Ryoken

    The Other Other White Meat

  • 2,466 posts
  • Joined: 10-September 09
  • Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
  • OS: Windows 7 x64, MacOS
  • Phone: iPhone 4S, Nexus 7, iPad Mini

Posted 07 November 2012 - 12:58

Then don't code metro apps? Microsoft isn't standing behind you with a gun and saying you better code metro apps for Windows 8 or else.

You can still use win32 just like you could with Windows 7, and face it almost all PC games are going to remain win32.

Now if MS completely ditched Win32 and only allowed Metro apps to run on Windows 8 (not talking about RT here), then yes that's a completely different matter. But they haven't done that, and most probably won't for the foreseeable future.

---

What's funny is all these developers that you hear speaking out against the MS store (Valve, Blizzard etc) are ones that won't ever make a metro app (regardless of the store restrictions) since it doesn't really apply to them and doesn't give them the flexibility / performance that they need.

Actually you can't just use Win32 apps..

You can in the x86/64 version, sure.. But they are now gimped, you can't appeal to the whole market, and you can't integrate it into the OS the same way.. not PG, no tiles for you.. now the user HAS to deal with both metro and the desktop, with vastly different experiences in both, all because MS decided your app doesn't meat their criteria..

Also, with RT, now those x86/64 apps just can't be used, your only option is Metro, but you can't release Metro cause only MS can.

If you can't see why companies are annoyed by this, then you are wearing blinders.

#18 -Razorfold

-Razorfold

    Neowinian Senior

  • 9,772 posts
  • Joined: 16-March 06
  • OS: Windows 8
  • Phone: Nokia Lumia 900 / Oneplus One

Posted 07 November 2012 - 22:15

Actually you can't just use Win32 apps..

You can in the x86/64 version, sure.. But they are now gimped, you can't appeal to the whole market, and you can't integrate it into the OS the same way.. not PG, no tiles for you.. now the user HAS to deal with both metro and the desktop, with vastly different experiences in both, all because MS decided your app doesn't meat their criteria..

You can still pin tiles of Win32 apps, they just won't be live tiles. You can still appeal to the whole market because Windows 8 =/= RT.

All the Win32 APIs that exist in Windows 7 exist in Windows 8, so yes you can integrate into the OS in the same way. The start screen =/= the OS.

And the user doesn't have to deal with both metro and desktop. The only time I ever see metro is the start menu, everything else I do using the desktop. Some people may prefer using metro apps for mail, news etc and for those people the option is available. Others (like me) prefer using regular good ole apps, and nothing has changed in that.

If you can't see why companies are annoyed by this, then you are wearing blinders.


The companies that are annoyed by this are game publishers who WON'T ever release a metro app regardless of an MS store existing or not. Metro doesn't have the flexibility or the performance that Win32 does so Blizzard/Valve etc aren't going to ever use it to code their games. So the metro app installation restrictions don't even apply to them.

#19 Javik

Javik

    Beware the tyrrany of those that wield power

  • 5,955 posts
  • Joined: 21-May 12

Posted 07 November 2012 - 22:21

What HawkMan said.

There's nothing wrong with 8.

Most of the people speaking out against the Windows Store are doing so on the basis of dooms day prophecies of Microsoft only allowing metro apps and nothing else.

I personally don't see that happening any time soon, and I think the people speaking out about it miss the damn point.

Either way, try it.


I personally take no issue with the store at all, in fact having competition in those markets is beneficial to all, it's the removal of glass and the start screen that I hate.

#20 TheExperiment

TheExperiment

    Reality Bomb

  • 5,276 posts
  • Joined: 11-October 03
  • Location: Everywhere
  • OS: 8.1 x64

Posted 07 November 2012 - 22:22

The companies that are annoyed by this are game publishers who WON'T ever release a metro app regardless of an MS store existing or not. Metro doesn't have the flexibility or the performance that Win32 does so Blizzard/Valve etc aren't going to ever use it to code their games. So the metro app installation restrictions don't even apply to them.

It actually has the same performance. WinRT uses all DX11 interfaces. You can get the same out of Win32 using Directwrite/Direct2D/D3D11. Claiming it doesn't have the performance that Win32 does is ridiculous.

It also has more features such as the return of a hardware audio path and enhanced programming languages.

#21 Lord Method Man

Lord Method Man

    Banned

  • 3,758 posts
  • Joined: 18-September 12

Posted 07 November 2012 - 22:26

Windows has been an Open system since it first launched, allowing anyone who wanted too to write apps for it, and have it work and install and run the same as if it was done by MS themselves.

Now you don't have that.. sure you can install desktop apps, but Metro, it's go through MS or gtfo.


Desktop Windows has been Open since it first launched and remains to this day open in Windows 8.

Metro Windows is a whole new system that, like iOS, has never been Open.

Microsoft has taken NOTHING away. The comparisons to iOS to show the idiocy of these whining developers are 100% spot-on.

#22 Stoffel

Stoffel

    Being on the ocean is cooler then being in front of a Computer

  • 1,977 posts
  • Joined: 16-August 11
  • Location: Utila, Honduras
  • OS: Windows 8.1 Update 1
  • Phone: WP 8.1 Update

Posted 07 November 2012 - 22:51

Looks like another no story.

Question: I know developers can put their desktop apps in the store, it will link to the website of the developer, but you still get the exposure. Do they have to pay for this or is that free? Does MS then take 30% of the profits?

I feel that if MS doesn't take the 30% for win32 apps in the store then all these Game studios are full of crap. All they have to do is go through a certification process, making sure your app stores data in the right places and uninstalls properly, which makes sense to me. After that they get all the extra exposure. And even if they don't want to use the store, MS still allows you to install any kind off win32 app you want.

WinRT is a different thing, it's a new platform that from the start is closed. MS has good reasons for doing this They want to make sure that when you use a device running WinRT you have a similar experience like people on the iPad. Always snappy, the apps can't ruin the OS, no viruses,...

So if the Game studios want to develop for this new platform they'll just have to play by the rules, just like they do on iOS.
If they don't , well they can still develop for the Desktop and collect all the money

I just see more choices and more chances for revenue, what's so bad about it?

#23 George P

George P

    Neowinian Senior

  • 18,981 posts
  • Joined: 04-February 07
  • Location: Greece
  • OS: Windows 8.1 Pro 64bit
  • Phone: HTC Windows Phone 8X

Posted 08 November 2012 - 09:00

Looks like another no story.

Question: I know developers can put their desktop apps in the store, it will link to the website of the developer, but you still get the exposure. Do they have to pay for this or is that free? Does MS then take 30% of the profits?

I feel that if MS doesn't take the 30% for win32 apps in the store then all these Game studios are full of crap. All they have to do is go through a certification process, making sure your app stores data in the right places and uninstalls properly, which makes sense to me. After that they get all the extra exposure. And even if they don't want to use the store, MS still allows you to install any kind off win32 app you want.

WinRT is a different thing, it's a new platform that from the start is closed. MS has good reasons for doing this They want to make sure that when you use a device running WinRT you have a similar experience like people on the iPad. Always snappy, the apps can't ruin the OS, no viruses,...

So if the Game studios want to develop for this new platform they'll just have to play by the rules, just like they do on iOS.
If they don't , well they can still develop for the Desktop and collect all the money

I just see more choices and more chances for revenue, what's so bad about it?


I don't know if it costs to list your desktop app like it does to put up your metro app but for desktop apps MS takes 0% of any sales. This was made clear the first time they talked about the windows store in general half a year ago or longer.

#24 HawkMan

HawkMan

    Neowinian Senior

  • 21,697 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 04
  • Location: Norway
  • Phone: Noka Lumia 1020

Posted 08 November 2012 - 09:44

Desktop apps are free to have listed since they're only linked to the download site.

HOWEVER. there's a few requirements
- it cannot require UAC elevation to run (ie it needs to be coded decently, and not by retards)
- it needs to pass a few security checks for code and memory faults (again, good coding practices and not crap coded)
- it needs to pass checks for buffer overflow attacks (again, needs to be decently coded, notice a pattern?)

and some other small things, it all goes towards a well coded app that doesn't mess with things it shouldn't and not having obvious security flaws int he code. You know how a certain self improtant hack of a coder whop made a for smoe reason popular game called Minecraft refused to have his game lsited despite it being free, offerign him more exposure and he would be given free support in fixing any flaws in his game. Well one of the coders who would have helped him decided to check it out anyway, and it would have taken between 15 minutes to an hour to get his code up top standard and be more secure and not require UAC and such.

So yeah, only modern apps will give a 30/20% cut to MS.

#25 Stoffel

Stoffel

    Being on the ocean is cooler then being in front of a Computer

  • 1,977 posts
  • Joined: 16-August 11
  • Location: Utila, Honduras
  • OS: Windows 8.1 Update 1
  • Phone: WP 8.1 Update

Posted 08 November 2012 - 15:59

I don't know if it costs to list your desktop app like it does to put up your metro app but for desktop apps MS takes 0% of any sales. This was made clear the first time they talked about the windows store in general half a year ago or longer.


That's what I thought, but I wasn't sure.
So my point stays the same, what are the Game Studios talking about? This is a no issue

Desktop apps are free to have listed since they're only linked to the download site.

HOWEVER. there's a few requirements
- it cannot require UAC elevation to run (ie it needs to be coded decently, and not by retards)
- it needs to pass a few security checks for code and memory faults (again, good coding practices and not crap coded)
- it needs to pass checks for buffer overflow attacks (again, needs to be decently coded, notice a pattern?)

and some other small things, it all goes towards a well coded app that doesn't mess with things it shouldn't and not having obvious security flaws int he code. You know how a certain self improtant hack of a coder whop made a for smoe reason popular game called Minecraft refused to have his game lsited despite it being free, offerign him more exposure and he would be given free support in fixing any flaws in his game. Well one of the coders who would have helped him decided to check it out anyway, and it would have taken between 15 minutes to an hour to get his code up top standard and be more secure and not require UAC and such.

So yeah, only modern apps will give a 30/20% cut to MS.


That's what I also understood the certification process was.
Seems very reasonable to me

#26 George P

George P

    Neowinian Senior

  • 18,981 posts
  • Joined: 04-February 07
  • Location: Greece
  • OS: Windows 8.1 Pro 64bit
  • Phone: HTC Windows Phone 8X

Posted 08 November 2012 - 16:21

That's what I thought, but I wasn't sure.
So my point stays the same, what are the Game Studios talking about? This is a no issue



That's what I also understood the certification process was.
Seems very reasonable to me


I'll take it another step further and say that MS allows in-app purchasing, they've made a point of it in Win8 and WP8 apps now a number of times. Free apps In the MS store don't pay anything to MS though you do have that yearly fee to put them up if they're metro apps. That said, it shouldn't be hard to write a metro front end client that connects to your own "store" and then sell your desktop apps, as far as Windows 8 goes, Windows RT is a different story. Basically, EA, Valve, Amazon, and whoever else has their own store can write a metro client and just have it download desktop games like before or w/e. The OS and MS don't care. And since the clients would be free MS doesn't even get a cut other than the original fee which could be $45 for a individual or $99 for a business which, for the above mentioned companies, is pocket change.

From what I've seen there's already a kindle app in the store, and though I have a kindle device I haven't tried the app since I'd rather read on e-ink and not my LCD but I'm pretty sure it lets you buy books etc through it.

#27 +MikeChipshop

MikeChipshop

    Miniman

  • 6,963 posts
  • Joined: 02-October 06
  • Location: Scotland
  • OS: Windows 8, iOS, Android, WP8
  • Phone: HTC 8X / Nexus 5

Posted 08 November 2012 - 16:34

Another developer looking for some free publicity by whining on and on? Check.
I think i can probably live without any of this developers stuff any way.

- it cannot require UAC elevation to run (ie it needs to be coded decently, and not by retards)
- it needs to pass a few security checks for code and memory faults (again, good coding practices and not crap coded)
- it needs to pass checks for buffer overflow attacks (again, needs to be decently coded, notice a pattern?)


I see a pattern and i like the pattern :D

#28 Eric

Eric

    Neowinian Senior

  • 12,864 posts
  • Joined: 02-August 06
  • Location: Greenville, SC

Posted 08 November 2012 - 16:38

I don't understand. Do they want to make a Metro version of SS3? If so, then I'm pretty sure the company can afford the $99 yearly registration fee. If they don't want to make it a Metro game then absolutely nothing has changed. The game just won't work on ARM tablets.

#29 TheExperiment

TheExperiment

    Reality Bomb

  • 5,276 posts
  • Joined: 11-October 03
  • Location: Everywhere
  • OS: 8.1 x64

Posted 08 November 2012 - 18:44

I don't understand. Do they want to make a Metro version of SS3? If so, then I'm pretty sure the company can afford the $99 yearly registration fee. If they don't want to make it a Metro game then absolutely nothing has changed. The game just won't work on ARM tablets.

But don't you know MS is evil and only ever thinks of themselves and will get worse no matter what we say or do because they don't listen to anybody and C# is dead just like it has been every couple years since 2004 and....

#30 ViperAFK

ViperAFK

    Neowinian Senior

  • 10,846 posts
  • Joined: 07-March 06
  • Location: Vermont

Posted 11 November 2012 - 23:44

Microsoft has taken NOTHING away. The comparisons to iOS to show the idiocy of these whining developers are 100% spot-on.


This logic flawed. Yes they have "taken nothing away", but they are clearly hedging their bets on metro for the future. Do you think win32 will be around forever? MS is moving down a very slippery slope.

MS is now only concentrating on their new "modern UI", and any apps that aren't in the MS controlled store have to be run on the "legacy desktop". The legacy desktop will probably become more and more neglected by MS. And what happens if they decide to drop the legacy in the future?