TIGSource Forums

I was wondering how Windows Store compares now to desktop Linux and Mac.

Aside of the expected M$ advocating with its own games like Gears of War, Quantum Break, MinedByM$Craft, etc.

Other AAA games also appeared: Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare, Resident Evil 7: Biohazard, Ryze of the Tomb Raider, Dead Rising 4, and maybe others.

New indie games are: Batman, The Walking Dead, Guardians of the Galaxy, The Wolf Among Us (by Tell Tale), Cities: Sky Lines, ReCore, Ori and the Blind Forest, Broken Age, The Turin Test, Teslargrad, and maybe others.

Damn, even EVERPSACE which was made with UE4. And UE4 is NOT supporting UWP last time I checked a year ago. Is also on the Windows Store!

I'm really getting a strong itch, not to port to Linux/Mac. But use the Windows Store as a second platform instead. I tried to find market share statistics, to see how many even buy on the store. But I couldn't find anything good really.

A reason why I'm thinking of going for exclusive M$ support for my games, is Apple's failure to support OpenGL 4.6/Vulkan. Apple got stuck on 4.1. And frankly, Metal will just kill off OpenGL. Because of Metal, there is not going to be Vulkan support either.

Linux is such a small market, which if not already oversaturated, will get over stuffed soon!? I'm still working on my fist game. So I have no clue. But, I have to wonder whether cross platform, is worth the money with my own engine.

By the way, people seem to game a lot on the Windows Store: https://developer.microsoft.com/en-us/store/windows-app-data-trends

I hope I can contribute:

Windows gives away tons of giveaways to Windows Store developers. At one point they were giving $200 for every app made. People were making $2000 just rereleasing their app over and over. My friends and I even got a free tablet 3 years ago in college for a small game we finished and published after a game jam.

Microsoft was pretty desperate to get people to make more games for the Windows Store. Now, more and more developers are really moving over there though so things are changing.

The ad revenue for Universal Windows Apps isn't that much (Fraction of a fraction of a cent per view) and the ePubCenter interface isn't as friendly for claiming your earnings.

Don't kill yourself trying to publish what you have to Windows Store. Unless your game engine is already suited for porting a game to Windows Store,or uses IE9/Edge compatible HTML5 (Porting HTML5 games is VERY EASY to Windows Store!!!!  :)), it probably isn't worth the time, but again you may feel differently.

Well, the whole reason why I decided to use OpenTK, and not DX instead, wasn't for the reasons other devs may have chosen it. E.g. cross platform. I'm some kind of technology nut. I chose OpenTK because it isn't object oriented. That's one of the reasons why I program my game/engine in F#, too, and not C/C++ or C#. However, OpenGL/OpenAL is executed badly. Then Apple seems to kill off OpenGL anyways, and not even wanting to support Vulkan. Linux is dropping a lot again with its market share on Steam. I still may have used a high-level Vulkan framework. But there is none just yet. Nvidia's is experimental still.  I don't feel like entering this eternal war between platforms anymore. But rather just choose my side instead.

I was wondering if the lack of extra money from Mac/Linux releases, could be compensated with Windows Store/Xbox releases. OpenGL ain't consistent over Linux, and Mac. This also may require more work just to port. But DX should be without much porting problems for Windows Store/Xbox. There may be less extra money, but there should also be less extra work.

My engine is currently in Pre-Alpha 1. So, there is still an opportunity to use DX instead of OpenTK.  :)

I used to develop an engine in OpenTK (OpenGL graphics, but Fmod Audio) but it used very old drawing functions with immediate mode and drawing quads.. I switched to HTML5 because of the cross platform support, though I should say that the performance of Canvas2D based rendering doesn't compare to that of the more modern OpenGL drawing operations. I hear WebGL is a viable alternative for HTML5 developers.

Personally I love the drawing operations available in even the lowest minimal versions of browsers that support HTML5, such as https://www.w3schools.com/tags/canvas_getimagedata.asp

You can literally modify pixel data directly and easily in HTML5, almost like compiling a program with GLSL and writing a shader! I know you can probably do the same in OpenGL's lowest versions without GLSL or shaders but it feels hacky. This lets you do some really cool effects in HTML5. Also, with WebGL or Phoria.js you can also perform 3D rendering.

Personally I don't know what makes F# better than C# for game development, but if you say there's a benefit I believe you. I don't see much of a difference since both run on the Microsoft .NET CLR. It all depends on the programmer.

HTML5 is the master race ^_^

There are plenty of advantages in F# over C#. Both C++, and C# do have the Billion Dollar Mistake a.k.a. nullable types. F# doesn't have any nulls. So, no need to write code to handle nulls, nor any need to debug them during run-time. In general, OOP is over engineering. Inheritance sucks. Encapsulation sucks. That's why C likes still to appear these days, instead of being completely replaced by C++.

F# works with math like expression, instead of clunky statements. So shorter and more direct code, not just because of code noise reduction. Everything is immutable(except arrays) by default. This makes the code thread-safe, and easier to reason about. I think F# is ideal for the new generation of 4+ core CPUs like AMD Ryzen. And close to metal APIs DX12/Vulkan.

However, the immutables take up more memory, and can stress the GC. So there is this one single disadvantage, that when not handle correctly, can cause performance issues. Since .Net 4.6, programmers can now configure, and control the GC. The GC can be blocked for as long there is free RAM. Or can be cleared ahead entirely during any in-game transitions. So there is further room for performance optimization on .Net's side. Beside the obvious solution to use mutables, instead of immutable values. Arrays in F# are mutable, instead of immutable by default, already.

I don't know how .Net 4.6 compares to .Net Core. But this may be another thing to worry about when trying to port to Linux/Mac. I rather focus more on engine feature implementation, and actual game development, instead of messing around with porting. XBox/Store isn't supporting Vulkan either. You get this eternal platform war here again. Though, I think Xbox/Store = Linux, but minus the extra porting efforts. But of course I'm only guessing here.

I don't think it's a good idea to be supporting the Windows 10 store. It just gives Microsoft more power in the future to pull the kind of bullshit that's so common on mobile nowadays. If everyone is using the Windows 10 store, Microsoft will be able to prevent you from installing software from "Unknown sources" by default for "security reasons", and eventually they'll hide that option to enable unknown sources in some obscure menu or the registry. With that, every single software distributor/store will need to throw more money into their marketing communications in order to educate consumers on how to enable "unknown sources". Plus, Microsoft will have 100% control over what appears on the front page of their store, so good luck with that race to the bottom and/or bidding war and an indie dev who actually cares about what they're making.


I don't wear my tin foil hat often, but when I do, it's usually because of tech giants. :blink:


And besides, even if porting to Mac/Linux doesn't make much financial sense, having a portable game is useful if you ever want to sell on consoles, which is a bigger market for gaming than Windows (especially the Switch, which I hear is starving for content)

You haven't mentioned a single actual reason why Windows 10 Store, is inferior to Mac's store, or Steam itself. In case you haven't that noticed devs' complains, Steam sucks, too, with it's front page.


Windows 10 Store also starves for content. Seems Xbox may lack a bit, too, compared to PlayStation. And not every game genre can run on a Switch, or on a console to  begin with. It's either the processing power(not much of a case these days). Or the controls that makes porting pointless.

The single actual reason is that: Android, iOS, Xbox, PlayStation... the market and the platform are tightly coupled and in control of a single company. Windows and Steam not yet. And there are people who want to preserve this, as it's subjectively or objectively worse to have too much control in a single company's hands.

Windows already tries to push its store  in front of everyone. They replaced the "select which program to open this file with" with a next-to-useless "find app in store" dialog. And they bring this up again after a while even with fixed file associations. I'd love to see Linux take off on Desktop, unfortunately it's so incredibly far behind and suffers alot from spare time code injections. Not to diss spare-time work, I did a lot myself, but to maintain an established and widely used system means a lot of boring maintenance work. And it turned out that such work doesn't appeal to spare time workers.

Steam is also controlled by one company. And GreenLight will be gone soon, according to Valve. And what ever the hell "control" supposed to mean here.

That said. M$ requires income from Windows. Windows as a product, so a sold copy, is history. Now, Windows is a service. And it comes with the store. This will provide free security, and even feature updates. Maybe one day, Windows 10 also could come for free itself. But that's only going to work with a profitable store.

My only concern with the Windows Store, is its low feature level:

• No whish-list.
• No mod/plugin support.
• Not GSync/Freesync compatible.
• No forum.
• Not FPS meter, or capture software compatible.

It also likes to break down for simple stuff. If M$ could fix these problems. Then I would ditch Steam for my own private use already.

One could say that the OS's store is "natural" for an OS, at some point in its evolution. While Steam, Origin, UPlay, Bethesda.net, GOG, etc. They are not. At least not in the later evolution period.

Windows Store also offers aside of games, other apps types. And movies, music, and books. I would ditch iTunes, too, for private use, if M$ had more original English voiced movies. But compared to Android, the Windows Store still seem to have more, though. Last time I checked, I found zero movies with original audio.

Your ignorance is showing. It's a bad move to encourage monopolies. History has taught that often enough by now.

Side note: It is a very intelligent idea money-wise to plan every game you make with very versatile controls in mind. Start out with mobile in mind and move from there.

It always bothers me to see people willfully ignoring history. When has a monopolized platform ever worked out for consumers and indie developers? Even Android, which promised to be a free and open platform, is now nearly impossible to find without Google in it. The promise of being able to choose which store you get your software from is bullshit if one store comes preinstalled and preferred by the underlying operating system (third party stores need to prompt the user to install or update an app, but Google Play can do it quietly in the background), and other stores are blocked unless you know how to search for the option to unblock them.


I think the reason people get excited about stores like these is because they're focused on the short term profits right in front of them. If you know that Microsoft can block third party stores in the future, and force people to get their software from the Windows store, then you know that having your game on there early is going to be profitable.

But what about 10 years down the line when hundreds of thousands of candy crush and flappy bird clones are flooding the store, and that passion project you worked so hard on is no longer appealing to the ranking algorithm, or you can't afford to bid for a spot on the front page because Zynga and King have bought them all up for Flappy Rescue Kingdom Saga III (that's not even mentioning the bundle of games like these that come pre-installed with Windows 10)? You can't really go to another store because those other stores are no longer competitive. Look at the Amazon appstore on Android. Amazon had to manufacture their own devices for the store to have a chance. That actually might be a reason why Valve is trying so hard to support Linux; they're preparing for what they see as a legitimate threat to their business.


Sure, Steam is owned by Valve (which isn't even a public company), but who cares? Valve doesn't own Windows. They can't prevent consumers from going to another store. Steam is not the only software distributor on Windows, and that's a good thing. That's why PC gaming in particular has been so great for indie developers in particular. Proprietary platforms are why consoles have always been so damn hard for the little guys to break into.


And about portability, controls are a part of that. Making your game portable doesn't just mean writing the software so it builds on different platforms, it means writing it so it can be played on different platforms. That's why the game is portable, not the engine. Of course, not every game is a good candidate for this, but then again, we weren't talking about any specific game here. Nowadays it's usually a good idea to approach game design with portability in mind because there are a lot of consumers and a lot of platforms.

I am unsure you you can ever have real numbers from either store front, but I'd go for whatever I can support at the moment, andthen, if sales/time allowed, I'd move on to other fronts.

I'd say (not for sure) that the windows store is a bit easier to get into, so I'd go for that. Steam is at the moment so saturated that getting decent exposure should be a problem on it's own.

:handthumbsupR:

Steam is a monopoly. In case nobody noticed that. And Steam sucks, too. Even UPlay got now a better GUI than Steam. Steam search sucks. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to fix such things. Yet Valve still failed. So, don't complain about M$, and pretend that Valve may be a white knight here. If I sold my game on Windows Store, and Xbox, instead of Steam. It could make Valve to get up off its ass, and fix Steam in order not to lose devs. And M$ is motivated to make their Store as appealing as possible. In such a scenario, the devs, and customers can win.

Also. I don't think that M$ could prevent other launchers from being used in the first place. Because Apple couldn't stop Steam either.

Steam is much less dangerous than microsoft, as it only controls your discoverability and accessibility, but it doesn't (and I can't stress this enough) limit your TECHNOLOGY.

Whatever Microsoft does will be next big thing for couple years, then it will be in limbo for five or so more years, and then it will be abandoned. Start in early 80s and just count onwards. Yeah, I heard .NET and XNA were big, weren't they? DirectDraw too. Visual Basic rocked. And who needs extended DOS memory anyway.
C# is still around in gamedev just because of Unity. Microsoft has nothing to do with it.

In the meantime, you can still develop your software with OpenGL 1.3 and C if you wish so. AND you can publish it on Steam.

Now imagine how the world of web development and server maintenance would've looked if they'd swallowed Microsoft's lies like game developers did.  :coffee:

tl;dr: Valve does't give a f*ck what technology you use, as long as you sell through them. Microsoft just wants to sell you their technology, over and over.

Not all games in the Microsoft store are made using Microsoft technologies.

Were? In case you haven't noticed. .Net is cross platform now. And it was M$ who created C# in the first place. And they still update it. Its now on version 7. C#/F# and .Net are so good, that Xamarin did their own open source implementation called Mono for it.

A tech push can be annoying, but no, I'm still not a fan of old crap like OpenGL 1.3 either. Technology should be pushed forward at times. Yes, DX12 is another "DX10" just to push Windows 10 instead of Window Vista this time. But regarding Valve not carrying what tech we use. Yeah. But also they don't care a lot about Steam either. I'm not willing to give a Silicon Justice Warrior like GabeN even more money, so that he can get even more weight. I need M$ to get off its ass to make Windows Store succeed, because I want Windows 10 to have a future!

Bottom lines still is, that the days when Windows was sold as retail, is over. Yes, it still sells on the shelve today. But it's fading into an as-service model already. In two or three years, Windows 10 may be for free! Provided of course, that the Windows Store makes enough money.

In case nobody noticed it here, because everybody is using Linux. Windows 10 ain't pure 10. It's a stitched hybrid of 10 AND 7. There is still a lot to do left. Like unify the user interface, and ditch the 7 elements.

Managed DirectX (directx .net implementation) is gone and nobody ever used it. It was superseded by XNA. Which is also gone. Whatever is in use now will be gone when XBOX One goes away and new xbox will sell you new technology.

And "regular" Net is not cross-platform. Net core is, which conveniently omits the whole windows forms gui thing, because with that being cross platform, Microsoft would start losing Windows sales.
Microsoft's C# is used almost nowhere in gamedev industry, except in editor GUIs and such. Probably 90% of C# in circulation is coming from Unity's mono integration, which is based on .NET 2.0 from ten years ago.

Free windows won't happen. Ever. It will be replaced by Windows 11. Not because Windows Store being success or not, but because most MS customers don't give a sh!t about Windows store. Government agencies, companies, institutions, etc. It's where their profit is.
And Windows store will be gone in five years just like Xbox Live, Windows Mobile, Zune, blahblah. And then they will start selling another, "better" store technology, that's locked to Win 11 ofcourse. The whole store thing is just throwing sh!t at the wall and seeing if it sticks, ten years after Apple, Valve and Google did it. But their bread and butter is and will always be - selling licenses and technologies to business and xboxes to the people.

Can you imagine MS abandoning billions of certain extortion money from license sales in favor of selling games on app store?
And even then, where would people play those store games? On their desktops? How much does Mac App store make in sales and how much does Steam on Mac make? Would you abandon your Steam library that's the same since day one in favor of Microsoft newest flame that will be abandoned in a few years? There is your answer. Almost nobody uses their PCs anymore for entertainment, and when they do, they use Steam.

And iOS and Android app stores are completely irrelevant here, since, well, Microsoft utterly failed in mobile hardware sales and development. (hi Nokia!)


You'll see all of that in Windows 11 (or Windows NT 10.1 or whatever). But you'll have to buy it first.


In the meantime, C++ is growing faster than ever with each new standard, AMD is opensourcing GPU technology left and right, someone somewhere (I'm betting on certain fat bastard's minions) is reverse engineering DirectX, and CPU and GPU cores are multiplying like bunnies.

The cold war between MS and Valve started few years ago, it's just no one has incentive to heat it up just yet as both are locked in a M.A.D. situation. We'll se what comes first - successful MS app store or successful port of DirectX 9/10 to SteamOS. Both seem impossible at the moment.