Dude, it's Microsoft, only reason they made the damn program was so they can upload even more viruses to their bloody OS (windows xp, vista, 7 etc.) i have both a mac and a windows and i gotta say, mac gives you way more freedom. Anything Microsoft related is sure to give you bad news, lets hope the age of tyranny will end soon :foodndrink:

Please don't bring that pish-posh trash in here.

If TES V did have GFWL, I'd bet it'd be like Fallout 3 had it. You could use it if you wanted, but you didn't have to. Now, if it was a requirement then I'd probably end up buying the console version instead.

You'd be surprised, but lets not turn this into a fan boy war...

I hate GFWL with all my heart, but I don't mind it as long as it can be disabled like in Fallout 3 and there will be additional means of buying the DLC/expansions. But I'll really appreciate it if Beth doesn't use it! :brokencomputer:

Mac only gives more freedom because it can't do half the things Windows based computers can.


But honestly, do any of you think Bethesda cares about linux or mac users? Do you think that Beth actually cares enough about 1% of their POSSIBLE (I am assuming Mac users are any type of RPG gamer) sales? PC gamers are already a minority, why would you go for macs/linux (a EVEN SMALLER minority).

No. Beth will stick with Windows because it has the largest user-base.

I like the IDEA of GFWL, it is a good one, it's a Xbox Live of PC games. However I do think it needs ALOT more work. (best possible Mod compatibility etc.) So to answer the OP, as I did before, no it wouldn't affect me buying a TES game.

Except that's REALLY not something to aspire to.

GFWL came with FO3, iirc it installed without my permission but I may not have been paying attention, I've done my best to ignore it and it has not caused me any problems. My tolerance of GFWL does not extend to using it for the purchase of additional content. I cannot comment on the problems that came with the Oblivion add-ons, I didn't like the game, and while I did enjoy FO3 the whole exclusivity deal felt somewhat dirty, manipulative, political. The Interplay logo once proclaimed 'By Gamers For Gamers', I'm of the opinion GFWL, indeed the whole 'Games for Windows' initiative, would be well served by the phrase 'By Marketing For Shareholders'. I'll do what is necessary to play the game but I'll not actively sponsor an initiative that is being used to to limit choice and competition under the guise of promoting the end user experience.

Paranoid? Maybe. But pause for a moment and look at the 360. Microsoft control the console, the method of software distribution, the content, there is a check list of features to which all Games for Windows must adhere, they even make their own games. This is much to be expected for a consumer product. The world of the PC is, was, should be, somewhat different. It is interesting to note that much of Microsoft's early success was due to ensuring none exclusive rights for products they developed with the funding of other companies, how times have changed. These days I can launch my MS browser on my MS operating system to access the 'net via my MS search engine and download MS games or approved content or news from MSNBC. The operative word here is 'can', while such broad control over any media is potentially unhealthy it does not become a problem until such time as there is no other choice. My argument here is GFWL is an early attempt at removing choice, forcing PC gaming to conform to the console consumer device model.

On can argue the likes of Steam enjoy a similar position. It is true they provide the mechanisms for distribution and make their own games, if Morrowind is anything to go by they also go out of their way to ensure comparability with 3rd party mods from which they derive no direct profit. They do not impose content restrictions on games from other publishers neither do they partake in petty PS3 wars or promote an operating system a browser a search engine etc. If they did I'd argue against them too.

I have no idea what deals Microsoft cuts with developers but as I look at the console based hud and the low resolution textures I ask myself if they are truly justified by the costs of additional testing and qualification paths or if they exist purely to ensure the the console is not eclipsed. Just one more item on the Microsoft check list?

GFW and GFWL, the saviours of PC gaming or an attempt to marginalise SONY and force PC games into the Microsoft way? It makes good business sense. So, while I'm willing to make some compromise for the sake of my hobby I keep an eye on how things develop. One thing's for certain, I'll be damned before I hand control of my PC and my gaming pleasure over to a company with a proven tendency for megalomania.

You sir (or madam, can't be too sure on the 'net) deserve a cookie :cookie: , you have phrased so many things people wanted to say eloquently, that doesn't mean i'll stop trash-talking microsoft though

To me, PC gaming is about getting away from all this "everything must be integrated" rubbish. I want my games to be individual, I don't want them to have parental control options, I don't want Bethesda wasting time making a one click install option, and I don't want them to waste time integrating it into Games Explorer so that I can appreciate the box art every time I want to play the darn game.