# Gabe Newell Calls Windows 8 A Catastrophe



## habicore_5150 (Jul 27, 2012)

Why Newell deems Windows 8 a catastrophe - Features - Hooked Gamers

Apparently, the man in charge of Valve has a bit of a problem with the new Windows 8 OS

Gonna be pulling a couple of quotes from the article [its linked up top so you guys can check it out for yourselves]



Hooked Gamers said:


> The new Windows Marketplace will, in theory, compete with Steam. Contrary to Games for Windows Live, the Marketplace is a decent digital storefront that works more like the digital store on your phone than your average web shop.





Hooked Gamers said:


> There is no doubt in my mind that Newell is secure in the knowledge that Steam is a competent platform with a huge following and strong industry support. If allowed to compete freely and fairly, Steam will be the driving power in the PC gaming industry for years to come.
> 
> But what if that is taken away? What if Microsoft closes the shutters on its Windows OS and makes it impossible for Steam to compete?
> 
> That is exactly what appears to be at stake here: Windows 8 makes it illegal to purchase and download software through any other storefront than Marketplace  unless  it has been licensed by Microsoft. In other words, Steams very existence on your PC will be deemed illegal by Microsoft. The same looks to be true for pretty much every other piece of software  gaming or otherwise  on your Windows 8 PC as well.



In short, If there's a single downloadable item that hasn't been licensed by Microsoft (includes Steam, and say a couple of video editing programs like Sony Vegas, to name a few), it would be considered illegal if you install said program on Windows 8

So any of you Steam gamers on here that are looking forward to Windows 8, please walk away from it

Any thoughts on this whole situation?


----------



## guitarister7321 (Jul 27, 2012)

I totally agree with Gabe. I'll be sticking with Windows 7. I'm not at all excited for Windows 8, never was. Looks like shit, IMHO.


----------



## st2012 (Jul 27, 2012)

As incredibly lame as GfWL was, this takes stupidity to an entirely new level if this is the case. I wasn't particularly interested in Windows 8 to begin with and this would absolutely kill it for me. My guess would be that if they stick with this plan, enough users (including myself) will stick with their current OS and MS will back off this garbage once Windows 9 rolls out. I've never used any OS other than Windows personally but if this is the way it's going to be then I'll have no issue at all dropping it.


----------



## Mexi (Jul 27, 2012)

Windows 8 feels like complete garbage. the interface is not in the least be intuitive unless you're running it on a phone/tablet. I'll hold onto my Windows 7, thanks. I should just start running Linux, now that Steam is on it.


----------



## pink freud (Jul 27, 2012)

Since Half-Life 1 (1998) Microsoft has released six Windows operating systems, while he has only managed one full game and two episodes of Half Life.

Give me HL3 and stop bitching about Windows!


----------



## Mexi (Jul 27, 2012)

pink freud said:


> Since Half-Life 1 (1998) Microsoft has released six Windows operating systems, while he has only managed one full game and two episodes of Half Life.
> 
> Give me HL3 and stop bitching about Windows!



Valve has been more concerned with the Steam platform and digital-distribution of games than actually creating truly original stories these days, which is really unfortunate (Portal being the exception). There's even a Steam group that is dedicated to more info on the Half-Life series
Steam Community :: Group :: A Call for Communication (Half-Life)

My guess is that they're waiting around for next-gen consoles to announce a new engine (source 2 maybe?) to compete with Unreal Engine 4 and to really have the tech there to create a truly amazing sequel, which I'd expect in 2-3 years.

but lets not make this a HL3 thread and lets keep bitching about how bad windows 8 is


----------



## Marv Attaxx (Jul 28, 2012)

I stopped taking him seriously when he started bashing the PS3.
Your ports were horrible, not the freakin' system.


----------



## Jinogalpa (Jul 28, 2012)

pink freud said:


> Since Half-Life 1 (1998) Microsoft has released six Windows operating systems, while he has only managed one full game and two episodes of Half Life.
> 
> Give me HL3 and stop bitching about Windows!



better one kick ass Half Life 2 than six crappy Windows


----------



## flint757 (Jul 29, 2012)

Something smells fishy to me. I sincerely doubt that this is how windows 8 will run. I know that the beta does not run this way and apparently all they are doing is adding x-box live capability on the PC. Steam, for new games, isn't cheap anyhow. Microsoft's appeal has always been it's open platform so i doubt this (as it is only a rumor anyhow). Just like the buying used games thing awhile back, never gonna happen.

I'll eat my words if it does however.


----------



## Severance (Jul 29, 2012)

So they want to release a OS that supports only 3rd party products officially liscenced by microsoft... I forsee great financial gain for Apple in the years to come.


----------



## flint757 (Jul 29, 2012)

Supposedly this information is quite inaccurate. He is just butt hurt because another marketplace will be introduced that directly competes with his. Apparently metro applications are the only ones affected, you can still install 3rd party applications without the consent of Microsoft. Truth be told he should build an application that fits in the mold of their structure. Everyone is building things for the mobile market these days and microsoft has no choice, but to keep up or be left behind.

If you look it up the only thing that comes up about something in the vein of what he is talking about are the articles about him talking about it. He has an agenda...


----------



## Asrial (Jul 30, 2012)

It does seem quite inaccurate, but if worst case scenario really unfolds, we're in for one hell of a ride!
I think his agenda might be the fear that he gets excluded from the Windows users, while the users either have to go Linux (so they have to port over the code) or stick with a possibly flawed marketplace (where he loses revenue). He loses either case.

Also, it's no joke saying every other OS from Microsoft is utter garbage. Vista, anyone?


----------



## tacotiklah (Jul 30, 2012)

Asrial said:


> It does seem quite inaccurate, but if worst case scenario really unfolds, we're in for one hell of a ride!
> I think his agenda might be the fear that he gets excluded from the Windows users, while the users either have to go Linux (so they have to port over the code) or stick with a possibly flawed marketplace (where he loses revenue). He loses either case.
> 
> Also, it's no joke saying every other OS from Microsoft is utter garbage. Vista, anyone?



Oh agreed. Vista was a joke and finally we got a decent OS in the form of windows 7. So I'm more than expecting 8 to be a complete flop. I think if they stopped trying to release them so often and used that time for better QC and testing, they'd be able to shake this weird thing where only every other release is worth installing. 

And trust and believe that if there is any credence to what this guy is say, I will never buy a computer with windows 8 on it.


----------



## flint757 (Jul 30, 2012)

Worst case scenario won't even be that bad because there would be a backlash and user complaints (bad publicity). If it did happen I guarantee they'd quickly revert. I still remember when steam used to be the bad guy...

It seems like Microsoft uses every other release like a beta test.


----------



## troyguitar (Jul 30, 2012)

I don't like Windows 8 but that is because it's designed for tablets and phones. I'm not using a tablet or a phone, I'm using a desktop PC.


----------



## Xaios (Jul 30, 2012)

ghstofperdition said:


> Oh agreed. Vista was a joke and finally we got a decent OS in the form of windows 7. So I'm more than expecting 8 to be a complete flop. I think if they stopped trying to release them so often and used that time for better QC and testing, they'd be able to shake this weird thing where only every other release is worth installing.



Interestingly enough though, it was Vista, the OS with the long and protracted development cycle, that bombed when it came out in early 2007. Then, less than 3 years later, we get Windows 7, which was released to rave reviews.

Also, Microsoft doesn't new operating systems nearly as often as they used to, not since XP. To illustrate:

- Windows 98: May 1998
- Windows 2000: February 2000
- Windows Me: September 2000
- Windows XP: October 2001

That's 4 major releases in under 4 years. We can be glad we don't have to contend with that kind of upgrade cycle anymore!


----------



## The Reverend (Jul 30, 2012)

If there is any credence to what Newell said, I will not be buying anything with Windows 8 on it, nor will I be upgrading. Like Flint, I couldn't find anything that really lined up with what Newell is claiming, and strangely enough, I'm not a big PC gamer anyway, but corporate bullying is wrong in all forms. I'm not going to let Microsoft dictate what I can and can't do with my computer. It's not like Steam is illegal or something, cutting it of from Windows 8 would be the most shameful sort of ploy.


----------



## leandroab (Jul 30, 2012)

I figured Windows 8 was an OS made specifically for tablets and phones... 

I also figured it would be a fiasco. Even for the target "audience"...

I couldn't see myself using that OS on a PC. Even with a touchscreen. Sounds silly.


----------



## pink freud (Jul 30, 2012)

Everybody knows that every other Windows is complete garbage.

98 - good
ME - horrible
XP -good
Vista - horrible
7 - good


----------



## leandroab (Jul 30, 2012)

pink freud said:


> Everybody knows that every other Windows is complete garbage.
> 
> 98 - good
> ME - horrible
> ...



Exactly... ahahhaha


----------



## Xaios (Jul 30, 2012)

pink freud said:


> Everybody knows that every other Windows is complete garbage.
> 
> 98 - good
> ME - horrible
> ...



You forgot 2000, which was extremely solid. XP was also a revelation when it came out, if you remember those days.

But yeah, otherwise it does suffer the Star Trek rule.


----------



## troyguitar (Jul 30, 2012)

95, 2000, NT were all fairly solid. The only real bad ones IMO were Me and Vista, and Vista eventually got to be decent but by that time 7 was already out and better


----------



## flint757 (Jul 30, 2012)

For ME and Vista they just rushed the release. Literally the only problem (outside of the problems that caused ).


----------



## tacotiklah (Jul 30, 2012)

troyguitar said:


> 95, 2000, NT were all fairly solid. The only real bad ones IMO were Me and Vista, and Vista eventually got to be decent but by that time 7 was already out and better



95 was good. 98 was originally atrocious, but by the 2nd edition it was a great OS. I never like to switch to new versions of windows right away anyways because there are ALWAYS new bugs that have to be ironed out to begin with. It just makes sense to wait a bit anyways. Plus a lot of programs will need to have new drivers and shit to be written to support the new OS and that takes time anyhow. Makes no sense to just jump into a new OS if you can't use half of your stuff anyhow.


----------



## Bekanor (Jul 31, 2012)

I'm sure it'll be fine as a tablet OS but I really wouldn't expect it to become status quo for desktops even though that's their goal. I don't think I need to mention the various factors that make a unifying, cross-platform OS a bad idea, and those will come to light very quickly once it launches and I daresay they'll feel the ME/Vista backlash once again. 

Also the launch build of 98 was anus, then they released 98SE and THAT was the good one.


----------



## Prydogga (Jul 31, 2012)

Marv Attaxx said:


> I stopped taking him seriously when he started bashing the PS3.
> Your ports were horrible, not the freakin' system.



The ports were horrible because the PS3 is reportedly much harder to work with than other consoles. There's not a week that goes by were I don't hear devs complaining about porting to PS3.


----------



## MF_Kitten (Jul 31, 2012)

Marv Attaxx said:


> I stopped taking him seriously when he started bashing the PS3.
> Your ports were horrible, not the freakin' system.



He was right about the PS3. It's a huge pain in the ass to develop for, and takes ages to learn. I read a game developer's story about how it took them like a month to get to the point where they could render a triangle on the screen.

Unfortunately for him, it was also the one console that had the openness that Valve needs, and that would let them do Steam on a console.


----------



## Marv Attaxx (Jul 31, 2012)

^ It may be a pain in the ass but other developers had the same problems and managed to produce awesome games. The valve games sucked on the ps3 and so he started bitching. Funny that he now says stuff like this:
"If you look at the customers that I feel we've done the worst job taking care of, it's the people who bought [The Orange Box ] on the PS3 and that's a source of frustration. Those are people I have trouble saying anything other than, 'yeah, I'm sorry, you have a legitimate beef with us.'" 

bottom line: gabe newell likes bitching. I love most valve games but I don't like the way he treats technologies that aren't even available yet


----------



## leandroab (Jul 31, 2012)

Just a funny fact: the laptop I was using (Vista) just died. ahahaha


----------



## axxessdenied (Aug 4, 2012)

Marv Attaxx said:


> ^ It may be a pain in the ass but other developers had the same problems and managed to produce awesome games. The valve games sucked on the ps3 and so he started bitching. Funny that he now says stuff like this:
> "If you look at the customers that I feel we've done the worst job taking care of, it's the people who bought [The Orange Box ] on the PS3 and that's a source of frustration. Those are people I have trouble saying anything other than, 'yeah, I'm sorry, you have a legitimate beef with us.'"
> 
> bottom line: gabe newell likes bitching. I love most valve games but I don't like the way he treats technologies that aren't even available yet



Sony just likes making all their stuff propriety. Look at all different media formats they tried pushing on us over the years, they finally won with Blu-ray! Same thing with the tools you have to use to develop games for the PS3. It also means that it takes a while for developers to figure out how to optimize their code for the PS3 to unleash its full potential.

It's much easier to develop something for PC / MAC/ 360.

Also, I'm not sure how I feel about Windows 8 as an operating system. I don't think I will be making the switch right away like when Windows 7 came out. I definitely want to get my hands on a Microsoft Surface Pro, though!


----------



## flint757 (Aug 4, 2012)

Easier or not the point is he is a whiny bitch. 

Now he is bitching about PC, mind you something he can't even guarantee at this point either it is pure speculation (poor speculation at that). I agree with Marv, many do just fine on PS3 format whether it is harder or not...360 would be alright in my book if the hardware was better, the PS3 online is fine, the only problem are the people on it.  however IMO that should be free unlike xbox.


----------



## dvon21 (Aug 5, 2012)

pink freud said:


> Since Half-Life 1 (1998) Microsoft has released six Windows operating systems, while he has only managed one full game and two episodes of Half Life.
> 
> Give me HL3 and stop bitching about Windows!



By that logic, we should all hail Call of Duty as the God of gaming. By the same token a series like Super Smash Bros. is just a pion.


----------



## The Atomic Ass (Aug 9, 2012)

I predict, that if Microsoft does not slacken the chain slightly, Steam shall RUN to Linux, as will many other developers, and the gaming community will slowly shift.

'Tis a glorious day.


----------



## flint757 (Aug 9, 2012)

The problem is people won't follow (well not the average PC gamer). Some would switch, sure, but many will just continue with Windows or switch to console if I were to guess. As an example I wouldn't (not that being the only reason at least). I like Linux and use it, but jumping ship for a company that only offers good deals twice a year (overpriced most of it) isn't worth the hassle.


----------



## Bekanor (Aug 9, 2012)

If there's one thing gamers never do, it's vote with their wallets/feet. 

A perfect example of this is the Diablo 3 always-on DRM thing. Everyone bitches about it, but everyone still bought the game.

For a more general example, a quick glance at modern gaming sees the behaviour of people pre-ordering in droves knowing full well that pretty much every AAA title is glitchy for at least the first 2 patches.

No, I can't see people making the switch to Linux even if Steam does go that way.


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Aug 9, 2012)

I'm going to go ahead and assume the average Steam user will never use anything but the OS his or her (his, amirite?) computer came with. If for some stupid reason Steam doesn't work on future versions of Windows, Steam will just see a significant drop in new customers, not a mass exodus to a new OS that it _will_ work on.


----------



## flint757 (Aug 9, 2012)

Especially considering there are viable alternatives.


----------



## The Atomic Ass (Aug 10, 2012)

Xaios said:


> Interestingly enough though, it was Vista, the OS with the long and protracted development cycle, that bombed when it came out in early 2007. Then, less than 3 years later, we get Windows 7, which was released to rave reviews.
> 
> Also, Microsoft doesn't new operating systems nearly as often as they used to, not since XP. To illustrate:
> 
> ...


Most of the major Linux distributions release twice as fast, and provide a better product (generally). 

Also, I wouldn't count that as 4 releases in 4 years, because those are 3 different product lines. Post 3.0, Windows was split into home (95) and networked (NT) versions. 98 and Me fall under the home banner, while 2000 was an upgrade to NT. XP was the convergance. So really, in my eyes, they have not altered their release schedule much, if at all.


----------



## Korbain (Aug 10, 2012)

i appreciate gabe, but sometime he has a little too much to say. windows 8 isn't even released yet, and i read/hear a lot of the things he was complaining about can be disabled/aren't even as much of a hassle as he is making out?

Either way, windows 7 is more than fine for me, so i won't be looking at buying windows 8 for sometime lol 

instead of whinging about windows 8 release half life 3 already


----------



## Mexi (Aug 10, 2012)

Korbain said:


> i appreciate gabe, but sometime he has a little too much to say. windows 8 isn't even released yet, and i read/hear a lot of the things he was complaining about can be disabled/aren't even as much of a hassle as he is making out?
> 
> Either way, windows 7 is more than fine for me, so i won't be looking at buying windows 8 for sometime lol
> 
> *instead of whinging about windows 8 release half life 3 already*



saw this sometime back

Report: Source 2 references buried in Source Filmmaker code | Joystiq

hopefully it is indicative of work being done with a new engine (as the code seems to hint at next-gen) which would mean a flagship title for it, and it will probably be HL3, but we're still looking at 2 years I think.


----------



## Lagtastic (Aug 12, 2012)

Its a money thing guys, plain and simple. Microsoft wants a bigger cut. Can you blame them? Not really, it's business. However, you can place them blame squarely on Microsoft for what this may do to PC gaming.


From Microsoft's point of view:

After you buy the Windows OS, Microsoft makes no profit at all from you playing video games unless you buy them off the terrible Microsoft Live Store, which is inferior to Steam in almost every way. Why would they want you playing games on PC? Microsoft wants you playing those games on XBox, where they make a cut from the games themselves and your XBox Live monthly membership. 

Microsoft sees all the profits Apple makes from the AppStore. Apple has IOS development locked down in the sense that you have to sell the app through the AppStore, thus making Apple 30% of all sales from apps. The MS Store is being totally integrated into the OS, and is being designed from the ground up to; 
1: Tie you to Windows because you don't want to lose your apps. 
2: Make a cut of every little 99cent app you buy.



Here are some scary requirements of the new Microsoft Store in Windows 8:
-All free and purchaseable apps must be purchased through the Windows Store. The "official" reason is so Microsoft can scan everything for malware. There is no official word if high end games will receive a pass on this. If not, this basically means you log into Win8, and they have your credit card info basically right away, and anything you purchase for the OS goes directly through them.
-All third party apps must start in 2 seconds (hindrance to high end games)
-All third party apps must take up no more than 2/3 of the screen so the Metro interface stays available (hindrance to high end gaming)




Everyone who is so interested in these kinds of issues should check out TB's Youtube channel. He does a daily mailbox on issues exactly like this and other gaming related news. He did a mailbox on this exact topic last week. Also a weekly podcast where they discuss this sort of thing.

TotalBiscuit, The Cynical Brit - YouTube


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Aug 12, 2012)

With how fast technology moves these day, I wouldn't be surprised if there was a cheap/free hack to get non-Windows 8 approved games up and going in a matter of minutes. 

Just look how quickly XDA or IDT comes out with ways to get around Android and iOS.


----------



## Xaios (Aug 14, 2012)

So, in a hilarious tease, Half-Life 3 appeared on a list of games that were to be shown off at Gamescom. Then the organizers of the event went on record to say "no, that was a mistake."

My bet is that it won't actually get shown, but it's presence on the list was far from being a mistake. It was put there intentially just so Valve could screw with us as they've proven they're quite capable of doing. Those evil, evil people.


----------



## Ryan-ZenGtr- (Aug 14, 2012)

Ah, predictions that OS providers will iron clad the fences surrounding their monopolies... 

Haven't M$ been there before and received multi-million dollar *slaps on the wrist*?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Browser_wars

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft

Is This Microsoft vs. Netscape All Over Again? -- Redmondmag.com


Dual booting to a Linux partition might become more common place, who knows?

Win 8 with it's new, hip styling has no interest to me. Afterall, Win 7 gave access to quad core, +1TB HDD and more than 3.4 GB of ram, along with x64bit processing. I can't see future hardware requirements being exceeded by consumer software (advanced cad/3d design/experimental and scientific research such as folding excepted).

Only the next Pro Tools release has such demanding hardware expenses. 

One thing that really annoys me is LUA: Least User Access (privilege). I just installed a version of Win 7 Home and after being used to Pro, it's so frustrating to have to work around all the default settings of "Oh nooes, a retard might damagify the computertron!!! ZOMG!!!!"

I was reading an article recently singing the praises of locking down the PC to protect it from the user in a management article the other day. *shakes fist*

Here are some examples;
Using a Least-Privileged User Account
http://cups.cs.cmu.edu/soups/2010/proceedings/a1_motiee.pdf
Implementing Principle of Least Privilege


Most of the problems Vista condemned users to solving were from M$' paranoid user access rights concept. 
Speaking of which, I just opened up an old laptop. "Would you like to install Vista Service Pack 1?"... Infinite reboot loop, due to a poorly implemented .XML file that fails to delete itself. 

After all, any experienced computer user knows that behind all the pretty colours and flashing lights, the monotone light of DOS can be seen, blinking faintly in the darkness.


----------



## Azathoth43 (Sep 1, 2012)

Do people _still_ think Linux is a viable OS?


----------



## flint757 (Sep 1, 2012)

In short yes. For the average consumer I'd say no.


----------



## The Atomic Ass (Sep 3, 2012)

Azathoth43 said:


> Do people _still_ think Windows is a viable OS?


Fix'd that for ya'.


----------



## flint757 (Sep 3, 2012)

I believe 90% of computer users.


----------



## The Atomic Ass (Sep 3, 2012)

flint757 said:


> I believe 90% of computer users.


90% of computer users don't know what an OS *is*. They use what came with the computer, and are unaware that there are options. So in reality, you're saying you believe the statistics of pre-installs.


----------



## flint757 (Sep 4, 2012)

The Atomic Ass said:


> 90% of computer users don't know what an OS *is*. They use what came with the computer, and are unaware that there are options. So in reality, you're saying you believe the statistics of pre-installs.



True, however, a lot of people do know and had choices. These statistics probably aren't right anymore, but if 90% use Windows, 2% Linux and 8% Apple (I'm sure it has shifted) even if you excluded 60% of users there are still more knowledgeable Windows users as a percentage of PC owners. I work on apple and windows computers as a side job and I 100% prefer windows, I doubt I'm the only person. I'm sure some would prefer Linux and yes obviously some prefer Mac, but to assume (because you clearly don't like it) that it isn't valid was a poor argument. The amount of people using it only further proves my point as it wouldn't be pre-packaged if it wasn't the standard, that and Windows (thanks to open source nature) has economy of scale to make the hardware overall cheaper.

If all else aside the majority of software is written for windows, so it by default is viable (even if it were shitty, IMO as a whole it is not).


----------

