[UPDATED] The Windows 10 store version of Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare will not work with the Steam version

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

Welp then. Sucks for the microshit store. 

 

 

[jagdtigger]

One more nail in the UWP's coffin... Seriously, its around since the release of win8 but its still mostly ignored by users. Its like a brain dead kept alive by machines, sooner or later they have to pull the plug. And the sooner they do it is the better.

[Master Disaster]

3 hours ago, Misanthrope said:

The Windows 10 store version of Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare will not work with the Steam version

 

So I can't say I didn't saw this coming eventually: Microsoft is basically segregating PC gaming even more. They're not only making Windows Store exclusive games (though some have found their way to other stores afterwards) But now a 3rd party Windows Store game is intentionally crippled:

 

 

I hold the controversial opinion that people should still not update to Windows 10 (even though us Windows 7 are 8 users are the minority at this point) and it's precisely because I know that whenever Microsoft "gets it right" with an OS this is immediately exploit it to their advantage and this Games For Windows Live levels of stupidity is basically Microsoft 101 for you: Embrace, Extend, Extinguish. They're only "interested" in PC gaming all over again basically to try and fuck with Valve.

 

Which would be fine if they tried to do so on a more legitimate level but instead they're turning a free and open platform into and even worst walled garden not unlike xbox live. Yes I'm sure many will claim this is technical and not intentional but I still think that if they wanted they could have addressed any potential technical limitations before they started pushing so hard for their store.

 

Source: https://www.overclock3d.net/news/software/the_windows_10_store_version_of_call_of_duty_infinite_warfare_will_not_work_with_the_steam_version/1

Proof?

 

I mean how'd you know it wasn't IW or Activision that mandated this? I see nothing to prove Microsoft are responsible for this at all.

 

Given that Microsoft just released Quantum Break onto Steam I find it hard to believe they're trying to fuck with them and given Microsoft are pushing Sony for XB and PS cross play I find it hard to believe they want a walled garden.

[AlTech]

3 hours ago, GoodBytes said:

Sounds to me like an Activision decision. Probably because the game has cross play feature, and Activition is to lazy to allow a proper implementation of the multi-player system.

 

XBox One users can't play with Steam users... So I am thinking they focused on implementing cross play between PC and XBox One with the cross buy program, but didn't care about those outside... probably because Activision thinks that you are pirate and should not be able to play with non-pirate, even thought you bought your copy... who knows what crap they are thinking. But thinking genuine users are criminal, is nothing knew for many big publishers.

 

So, I can absolutely destroy those noob Console Peasants? Yay!

[shermantanker]

Quote

This design choice will split the game's multiplayer communities on PC and will undoubtedly lead to issues for PC gamers, especially given the Windows 10 Store's lack of popularity amongst PC gamers. It is likely that players from the Windows 10 Store will have difficulty finding online matches before long due to the Windows 10 store's lack of widespread adoption by gamers, effectively killing the game's online community before it has a chance to develop. 

Right now it is unknown why the multiplayer communities for both versions of the game are split on PC, or if Activision has any plans to unify them in the future.

 

By the wording in the article it sounds like activation made the choice.

[Master Disaster]

1 hour ago, AluminiumTech said:

So, I can absolutely destroy those noob Console Peasants? Yay!

I seriously doubt it will ever happen outside of games which PC players tend to use a pad (or hotas/wheel) over M&KB already, things like racing sims, sports sim, flight sims, space sims etc. Don't expect to be pwning console players in COD, BF or even Gears of War any time soon.

 

Microsoft did the research a while back when GFWL was still pretty new and they were looking at XB360 PC Xplay for a game called Shadowrun, they even talked about it to the press. Then they did the testing and discovered that PC players would pretty much always win in a fair fight against a console player. Needless to say Shardowrun launched without Xplay.

 

http://www.pcworld.com/article/203559/answered_did_microsoft_kill_cross_platform_play.html

 

 

[Bouzoo]

4 hours ago, Jovidah said:

...why...on...earth? This stuff just annoys the crap out of me. Let's face it guys... Valve started this whole digital distribution thing, and they nailed it. I'm geting sick and tired of all these competitors trying to come up with their own shitty alternative and walling it off (Origin...Ubi...now MS). As a customer I don't want all the clutter of having 5 different game platforms. You missed the boat guys...now suck it up. 

I don't understand why the hell they'd do this though. Might as well put a shotgun to your own foot and pull the trigger. What's the point in seggregating different pc players?

More different clients is a necessity that we need, otherwise it gives too much power to Valve (like GOG is a reseller, they even gave their super popular games to Steam to resell them). They would be able to raise prices as they see fit, give demands to publishers as they see fit, force DRM that is horrible bad players, etc. Clients with exclusives are up to the individual to decide. On the other hand, separation is something that shouldn't exist from the start. 

[Misanthrope]

2 hours ago, Master Disaster said:

Proof?

No proof my opinion is speculative (Check my exchanges with Goodbytes I admit as much)

[Jovidah]

57 minutes ago, Bouzoo said:

More different clients is a necessity that we need, otherwise it gives too much power to Valve (like GOG is a reseller, they even gave their super popular games to Steam to resell them). They would be able to raise prices as they see fit, give demands to publishers as they see fit, force DRM that is horrible bad players, etc. Clients with exclusives are up to the individual to decide. On the other hand, separation is something that shouldn't exist from the start. 

The issue is however that all those things you are talking about is exactly what other publishers did in their shitty propriertary platforms. None of the other clients came anywhere close to being either 'better', 'more convenient' or 'more open' than Steam. Can anyone here honestly say that they are enthusiastic about Origin or that Uplay thing? They are just like herpes; you simply want to play and then you're stuck with that crap.

[Bouzoo]

10 minutes ago, Jovidah said:

The issue is however that all those things you are talking about is exactly what other publishers did in their shitty propriertary platforms. None of the other clients came anywhere close to being either 'better', 'more convenient' or 'more open' than Steam. Can anyone here honestly say that they are enthusiastic about Origin or that Uplay thing? They are just like herpes; you simply want to play and then you're stuck with that crap.

I have said it many times, I actually prefer Origin to Steam, it's a personal preference, but many things are pushing me apart from it. I have never had a single issue with to be honest, nor I had with Steam for that matter. Uplay I have because... I can and there are free games nowadays there. The only reason. And I think that GOG is by far the best platforms, and I'm just waiting for them to have more games. 

 

EDIT: As I said, I never had a single issue with Steam or Origin, but one thing that Steam lacks is better customer support. I know many people here had issues and few of my rl friends had as well. That is something that Origin has by far better. 2nd hand experience so to say. The only issues I had with customer support were with my carrier, I had even great experience with Square Enix (multiple times), 2K, and Paypal/Ebay.

[Arri]

One of the pitfalls of PC gaming.

[suicidalfranco]

41 minutes ago, Bouzoo said:

That is something that Origin has by far better

i think Luke would disagree on that

 

[sof006]

So its not Microsofts fault but the fault of Activision... Well done Activision you earn a gold star.

[Bouzoo]

26 minutes ago, suicidalfranco said:

i think Luke would disagree on that

There are always anomalies, and he is in the extreme section. I was thinking about him when I wrote but decided to post even though I knew someone would point that out.

[Zodiark1593]

While the Microsoft store isn't an ideal platform (I prefer Steam and GoG), they are a step above Origin and uPlay in my opinion. 

 

Given Activision's resources, not including cross platform play between the Steam and Windows versions is probably an intentional move, potentially even political if they're not fond of Microsoft or the store. 

[dragosudeki]

3 hours ago, Misanthrope said:

No proof my opinion is speculative (Check my exchanges with Goodbytes I admit as much)

Well, that update leans more toward Microsoft too. The fact that there already is an example of cross play between UWP and Steam (Rocket's League) was already enough to show that Microsoft is likely doing nothing about it. Also, Activision is more favoured towards PS4 (PS4 is only platform available for early release) as well, so it wouldn't make sense for them to have another deal with Microsoft.

 

Surprised you doubted Microsoft more than Activision though, seeing as to how Activision has a much more greedy model. This segregation could just be a result of making sure people will have to buy two seperate products to access the different platforms.

[Misanthrope]

11 minutes ago, dragosudeki said:

Surprised you doubted Microsoft more than Activision though, seeing as to how Activision has a much more greedy model. This segregation could just be a result of making sure people will have to buy two seperate products to access the different platforms.

I don't find it surprising: Even if it's Activision's stupidity the one company that would have anything to gain at all from the segregation is Microsoft, as we've seen with the titles that are or begun as Windows Store Exclusives.

 

But for now I'll speculate more: We know Valve offers Steamworks but developed it for their inhouse titles mostly but do we know if Microsoft gives incentives for devs to use certain Windows Store features incluying the match making and online parts?

 

Microsoft could state publicly "We allow cross platform" but then carefully, under a thick NDA I'm sure, tell devs "If you want, you can use our ready-to-go API and netcode and save a bunch of time, we'll even give you some cash incentives whaddayasay"?

[Curufinwe_wins]

Rofl. all game developers fault. shocker there.

[Castdeath97]

If they scewed up this, I won't be surprised if we get another god awful port.

[niofalpha]

10 hours ago, GoodBytes said:

Sounds to me like an Activision decision. Probably because the game has cross play feature, and Activition is to lazy to allow a proper implementation of the multi-player system.

 

XBox One users can't play with Steam users by default due to drastically different APIs (which is normal, there is no standards)... So I am thinking they focused on implementing cross play between PC and XBox One with the cross buy program (so that means that they get to use Microsoft XBox servers with its APIs), but didn't care about those outside... probably because Activision thinks that you are pirate and should not be able to play with non-pirate, even thought you bought your copy... or maybe they they just wanted to save some money, who knows what crap they are thinking. Thinking genuine users are criminal, is nothing knew for many big publishers. But regardless of this point, because maybe it has nothing to do... they are at least trying to maximize profits by not investing more time/money in developing cross play. All they need to do to sale their game is to check all boxes. They have. So they can call it a day. Their games won't sale any less if they are anti-consumers by screwing them over with having Steam and XBox on separate servers... if anything, they probably hope that they'll sale 2 copies for some people. XBox one users and PC, as before. So why spend the money in adding cross-multi-platform-play? Heck in a business sense, I think everyone here would do the same, and ignore the "greater good" (remember, that you have no competition, and you are already big and successful, and you are selling a product that sales like free hot cakes)

 

But OP wants to use his pitchfork.

[Misanthrope]

3 minutes ago, niofalpha said:

But OP wants to use his pitchfork.

OP already amended the OP so settle down.

[Notional]

Quote

Little bro bought CoD: IW through the Microsoft Store. He's one of the two people online looking for a match.

 

Brutal.

[Humbug]

I don't think Microsoft would encourage the segregation tbh.

steam has a massive community and always sells more copies. So giving their windows store buyers access to that multiplayer community would be a good thing for windows store. Otherwise the multiplayer scene for windows store buyers will be pathetic and that will further discourage gamers from buying via them. the multiplayer obviously can work across stores, EA had no problem letting origin players play with steam players. Of course this means that the game dev has to come up with a match making method which bridges both worlds. They can't just rely on the solutions from Microsoft and steamworks.

[Misanthrope]

7 minutes ago, Humbug said:

I don't think Microsoft would encourage the segregation tbh.

Re: DX12 is a windows 10 exclusive . Just because it doesn't appears to be the case here doesn't means there's no precedent.  

[GoodBytes]

Based on Angry Joe, it looks  like the user based online on Steam is very low... almost none... and they still use crap online system on PC.