×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Alan Wake Reconfirmed As PC/360 Exclusive

Zonk posted more than 7 years ago | from the heck-of-a-tornado dept.

XBox (Games) 47

Alan Wake (the game with the really great tornado from last year's E3) has been reconfirmed as an exclusive title for Microsoft platforms. Via Wired's Game|Life blog, the news comes from the awesomely named Helsingin Sanomat website. Remedy (makers of the Max Payne titles) had this game slated as a 360/PC exclusive back in their E3 2006 trailers, but news of Microsoft's new 'mentoring' role for the company appears to have renewed interest in the game. It's unclear why Microsoft isn't following their general pattern of purchasing the company outright, but the 30-employee strong company is staying independent. Microsoft's resources still back the company, though: "Microsoft has huge machinery for games production. If a team of 80 voice actors are needed from the States, they can provide it. Their test laboratory is also fantastic."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

47 comments

Any doubt? (1)

frenchy64 (965930) | more than 7 years ago | (#17918612)

Was there really any doubt about the 360/PC exclusive?

Re:Any doubt? (1)

theonephillyd123 (946015) | more than 7 years ago | (#17918868)

Given the close ties the company has to Microsoft as mentioned in the article, I don't think there was ever really any doubt. Can't really blame them though. If I was a small finnish game developer, I'd produce a couple exclusive titles in return for support from Microsoft.

Um, Ok...??? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17918626)

A PC developer is crapping out an Xbox version of their game.

In other news, sky will be blue, again!, today.

oh yea (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17918642)

wohoo! im the first to post! now im going to get moded down 100 points for being stupid, and no one will ever see this post!

Re:oh yea (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17919068)

Except that your post is not first. But you're still stupid.
Like all morons like you spamming /.
Period.

If it ever appears.... (1)

Arricc (75463) | more than 7 years ago | (#17918882)

If it wasn't for the videos and the apparent "Demo" I'd call vapourware.

I've been waiting for this game for more than a year now, given it was supposed to be a 360 launch title as I understand it.

Very Important Clarification (4, Insightful)

WidescreenFreak (830043) | more than 7 years ago | (#17919232)

No, this is NOT a PC/360 exclusive title. This is a VISTA/360 exclusive title.

From TFA (emphasis mine): Alan Wake will require either the Windows Vista operating system or Microsoft's Xbox 360 gaming console as its platform.

Go f**k yourselves, Remedy! I'm not switching to Vista just to play one of your damned games! You want me to play your game? I expect a copy of Vista to come with it, and we all know that that's NOT going to happen. Otherwise, I'll be sticking with XP and going back to your gaming pinnacles, Max Payne and Max Payne 2!

Re:Very Important Clarification (2, Interesting)

Andreaskem (999089) | more than 7 years ago | (#17919330)

I think this is because it uses DirectX10 for its graphics engine. Since DX10 will only be available for Vista, it will naturally require Vista to run.

Every serious gamer will have to switch to Vista sooner or later. At least for gamers, it might not be a bad move after all (new driver model, better support for multicore CPUs and memory > 4GB, ...)

Re:Very Important Clarification (2, Insightful)

Aladrin (926209) | more than 7 years ago | (#17919542)

It saddens me, but I suspect this will cause me to lose my serious gamer badge. Im getting old enough to lose it anyhow, but I expected to have a choice in the matter.

I dont want Vista. I liked Dos. I liked Win3.1. I liked Win98/Me. I like XP. I dont want all the extra crap in Vista. Until someone finds a way to slim it down and have a barebones Vista, with no DRM and no unnecessary cruft, I dont want it.

What I really want is for games to run on Kubuntu. With the exception of games, it does everything I want. (Yes, I know about Wine. I dont like to have to fiddle with every game. I want them to just work.)

Re:Very Important Clarification (1)

GFree (853379) | more than 7 years ago | (#17927728)

What I really want is for games to run on Kubuntu.
That's what I want too (or more specifically, games for all Linux distros).

Problem though, is that what I and others want is different to what we will get. In other words, holding out for more game on Linux will probably result in disappointment, at least in terms of what the PC/consoles have available. I know that X3: Reunion is in the process of being ported to Linux, which is nice, but if you're OK with some smaller/older games, I'd say give it up and move entirely to Linux knowing this fact. It will avoid disappointment and irrational hope.

Vista is actually not that bad though, and the DRM isn't as invading as the FUD would lead you to believe (shit, I use Steam every day so I'm aware of working with DRM). Having said that, forcing someone to use Vista for a game this soon after Vista's release is fucked up.

Re:Very Important Clarification (1)

Raenex (947668) | more than 7 years ago | (#17931258)

And I want people to use apostrophes. Will you start doing that? Will Microsoft change Vista to your liking? Will games start working seamlessly in Linux?

Re:Very Important Clarification (1)

Aladrin (926209) | more than 7 years ago | (#17932722)

Oddly enough, I DO use apostrophes. Ive been working on a greasemonkey script to use TinyMCE on Slashdot... Apparently its got a few issues still. (Yes, I put an apostophe there.)

Re:Very Important Clarification (1)

Raenex (947668) | more than 7 years ago | (#17953560)

Ah, interesting. Sorry to nag, but I'd say that you shouldn't use it until apostrophes work.

Re:Very Important Clarification (1)

Jaysyn (203771) | more than 7 years ago | (#17919566)

You sound like a shill, but I'll bite.

If *no one* buys games that only run on Vista this won't be a problem. Also, there are so many 100's of good games that run fine on "older" operating systems that I haven't gotten around to playing yet, I don't see any reason to switch to the crap MS trying to push on me.

Re:Very Important Clarification (1)

hr.wien (986516) | more than 7 years ago | (#17919782)

If it uses DX10 exclusively, people will need a DX10 card as well. At present, that is only the 8000 series from Nvidia. Somehow I doubt Remedy is that stupid. It's extremely likely the game also has a DX9(ex?) fallback, so porting it to XP would be trivial.

If it wasn't for all that money in their back pockets weighing them down that is.

Re:Very Important Clarification (1)

Nasarius (593729) | more than 7 years ago | (#17920224)

Somehow I doubt Remedy is that stupid.
Given that they're being backed by Microsoft, I wouldn't count on it. Microsoft has their hands in enough good game developers to force the adoption of Direct3D 10, even if it will hurt them commercially. Fuck 'em. I certainly won't be buying any game that requires Vista and obsoletes all but the newest video cards.

Re:Very Important Clarification (1)

iNetRunner (613289) | more than 7 years ago | (#17929864)

DX10 does run on non DX10 cards you know..

Though, like you, I don't fancy the Vista requirement one bit. Oh-well, have to get the 360 version instead.

Re:Very Important Clarification (1)

hr.wien (986516) | more than 7 years ago | (#17932564)

Actually, no. It won't run on DX9 generation cards. With the removal of cap bits, cards now actually have to support everything the API requires to be called DX10 compatible. Older cards just don't have the required functionality. (Shader model 4, scheduling support etc.)

Re:Very Important Clarification (1)

iNetRunner (613289) | more than 7 years ago | (#17941848)

Well, I suppose that is possible, but I still would like to see some confirmation from Microsoft. (I haven't read too many reviews about the new tech.) New SM 4 of course wouldn't be compatible, but universal stages of the DX10 might be synthesized the with older DX9 pipes.. Ati's DX10 chip will not support as universal stages as Nvidia, but it still is DX10 compatible, right? Anyway.. Well, sometimes you just have to through the old baggage away and stop supporting the old.

Re:Very Important Clarification (3, Funny)

hal2814 (725639) | more than 7 years ago | (#17919804)

Yeah, go double f yourselves, Remedy! I'm not going to go out there and buy a whole $400 console just to play one of your games! You want me to play your game? I expect an XBox 360 to come with it, and we all know that that's NOT going to happen.

Oh wait a minute, that sounds a bit silly, doesn't it? Just as silly as expecting any other system requirement to come with a game.

NO, an OS upgrade != Console upgrade!!! (3, Insightful)

WidescreenFreak (830043) | more than 7 years ago | (#17920538)

I was waiting for someone to state that exact response. Thank you for not making me wait too long. No, it absolutely does not sound silly. Your attempt to equate the two is what sounds silly, or actually closer to ignorant.

As people like you always tend to forget, upgrading a PC vs. a console it a totally different experience. When you upgrade a console, it's with the expectation of newer and better games. The console is expected to be engineered with a narrow scope and hardware platform with one specific function -- to play games, although admittedly many are marching towards becoming media centers. The hardware is a specific chipset; the coding is for a specific set of circuitry. You can have a reasonable expectation that everything will work just fine and if something goes wrong, you lose your ability to play games.

With Remedy's expectations that you must upgrade to Vista, there are a ton of other issues that might be affected. We're already getting reports of hardware and software incompatibilities across the board. If you have iTunes, don't go to Vista - the blue screen will follow. I've been reading that old games run slower on Vista than on XP. I've not heard good things about NVidia's drivers for Vista. There are lots of reports of application incompatibility.

So, upgrading to Vista just because Remedy doesn't want to use DX9 will likely have more ramifications than just the cost of upgrading to a new operating system. In this case, if something goes wrong you could lose a lot more than just your ability to play games, not the least of which is who-know-how-many hours possibly rebuilding your PC, loss of data, inability to use software that you've been using for years, and lots of other headaches that have been reported for just about every new Windows version since 3.1 -> 95.

In fairness, some have reported no problems at all with Vista, and I say "Good for them". And, yes, yes, we know all about backups or using a test PC instead, blah, blah, blah. We're geeks. We know all about that. Some ignoramus parent who buys Vista (A) because it's programmed into them by Microsoft marketing, (B) because they want to have the newest status symbol, or (C) because their kid is screaming to play Crysis or Alan Wake isn't going to take the same precaution and therefore risks encountering a lot of upgrade problems. "Gee, dad. Did you back up all of your data before you tried to upgrade?" "No." "How far back does your data go?" "Since XP was released." You don't run into that with a console upgrade because your old console is still there!

Upgrading to Vista just to play one game has far more risks involved for things that have nothing to do with that game than buying a new console just to play one game. Forcing customers to a whole new operating system is a much more arrogant statement on the company than forcing them to buy a new console.

Re:NO, an OS upgrade != Console upgrade!!! (1)

hal2814 (725639) | more than 7 years ago | (#17920646)

"You want me to play your game? I expect a copy of Vista to come with it"

You made the two equivalent, not me. If a copy of Vista came with the game then it would be a-OK from your stated position. In your agrument, you completely ignore the risks involved in upgrading the OS and then try to blast my argument for not taking that into account. For someone who was "waiting for someone to state that exact response" you sure didn't set up well for it.

Re:NO, an OS upgrade != Console upgrade!!! (1)

WidescreenFreak (830043) | more than 7 years ago | (#17920728)

Apparently, the phrase "sarcasm" is lost on you.

Re:NO, an OS upgrade != Console upgrade!!! (1)

hal2814 (725639) | more than 7 years ago | (#17920876)

You obviously condoned an issue you claim to later expect to take someone to task on. Sorry, but you'll have to do better than cry sarcasm to have a coherent argument. It's not my fauly you didn't think things through. Better luck next time.

Re:NO, an OS upgrade != Console upgrade!!! (2)

Nasarius (593729) | more than 7 years ago | (#17920940)

Wow, you're an idiot. Go read the fucking post again:

Go f**k yourselves, Remedy! I'm not switching to Vista just to play one of your damned games! You want me to play your game? I expect a copy of Vista to come with it, and we all know that that's NOT going to happen.
That was a rant, not an "argument". You made a piss-poor analogy and got called on it.

MOD PARENT UP, MOD GP TROLL PLEASE! (2, Insightful)

Were-Rabbit (959205) | more than 7 years ago | (#17921206)

This is exactly the argument that I'm sick of getting into with die-hard console fans with respect to upgrading. Most of us at least know that when upgrading to a new Micosoft operating system to install it on a test box, install it on our main box after all of our pertinent data is backed up, or install it on a box where we don't really care if the data is lost. The average Joe who doesn't know nearly as much about computers as we do and whose kids want to play any DX10-only game is NOT going to take any kinds of precaution and will just throw himself into the trusting arms of Microsoft's developers. If anything happens, there are going to be a lot of curse words thrown around and possibly some memories lost that otherwise might not have been lost. I know, I know, a bitched Vista upgrade doesn't mean that data will be suddenly lost, but I know a lot of people who equate "Windows problem" with "must format the hard drive".

With a console, you don't have a choice -- you MUST buy a new box, so the old one is still around to fall back on. Most people who upgrade to Vista aren't going to have that luxury. A console "upgrade" cannot possibly be compared to a Vista "upgrade" unless people are forced to buy a new PC in order to run Vista, which would be disastrous for Microsoft. Anyone who intentionally tries to make the two the same thing clearly doesn't know what he's talking about or is just looking for an argument.

Re:NO, an OS upgrade != Console upgrade!!! (1)

MrNemesis (587188) | more than 7 years ago | (#17932912)

...and if someone can point out why XP is utterly incapable of running DX10 when Vista is, or why Company of Heroes refuses to install on Windows 2000 but runs just fine on XP.

Hint: the answer to both questions is firstly a) Payola and b) greedy fucking monopolist bastards.

Wake's DirectX 10.1 support (1)

G3ckoG33k (647276) | more than 7 years ago | (#17919268)

I wonder how many of all these announced games, including alan wake, which will end up using DirectX 10.1.

Possibly they are more than anyone cares to admit, today only few days after Vista's launch into the land of no DirectX 10.0 games in sight...

Re:Wake's DirectX 10.1 support (1)

PingSpike (947548) | more than 7 years ago | (#17920178)

Does vista even have directX 10 yet? (and by directX, I mean direct3d) Last time I checked it was still waiting for that component to arrive and was presently functioning with DX9. I could be wrong though, I don't really have any interest in vista.

Re:Wake's DirectX 10.1 support (1)

aikouka (932902) | more than 7 years ago | (#17920468)

To my knowledge, Vista includes DirectX 10. However, you're probably thinking of the fact that Vista's Aero interface was coded in DirectX 9EX. DirectX 9EX is essentially DirectX 9 ported to work with Vista's new graphic driver model.

Avesomely named website? (1)

usv (829497) | more than 7 years ago | (#17919282)

What does the summary mean by saying "the awesomely named Helsingin Sanomat website"? Is it perhaps the typo "Helsingen Sanomat" in the actual article? Something else? I really don't know what's so awesome about it. "Sanomat" is just a word meaning newspaper in finnish. Just like in "The New York Times" or "The Sydney Morning Herald". City name and newspaper suffix. Nothing else.

Re:Avesomely named website? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17919352)

Could it be a "hell singing" misinterpretation? ;)

Re:Avesomely named website? (1)

Floritard (1058660) | more than 7 years ago | (#17920460)

i know. i was trying to pronounce it in weird ways to see if it would produce a phonetically similar trick phrase or something but no luck. now how did your finger miss "w" for "v"? those keys are not very close.

Re:Avesomely named website? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17920816)

> now how did your finger miss "w" for "v"? those keys are not very close.

They are right next to each other if you are using the dvorak layout.

Re:Avesomely named website? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17921078)

Finnish pronounciations of awesome and avesome are identical so maybe it's not a type but a Finnish-English mistranslation?

Re:Avesomely named website? (1)

usv (829497) | more than 7 years ago | (#17926260)

Hmm, don't really know how the "w" and "v" got changed, damn. Maybe I was too eager to write under the influence of high doses of caffeine, or maybe the suggested phonetic similiarity of the two characters in finnish caused this. Can't really tell.

DX10? Not likely. (1)

Jartan (219704) | more than 7 years ago | (#17919512)

If it's really going to require DX10 then it's not going to be due out for a long long time. ATI just very recently released DX10 cards and Nvidia hasn't had them out very long either. All of them are extremely expensive and it'll take a great deal of time for DX10 to build the market mass to support any kind of reasonably succesful game limited to DX10 only.

Re:DX10? Not likely. (1)

Frumply (999178) | more than 7 years ago | (#17921798)

I don't see a problem, as they're releasing it on a console as well. Besides, isn't the whole point of the game being DX10 only to increase the Vista user base? Considering how reluctant people seem to be to adopt Vista, this seems like a fairly wise decision.

Re:DX10? Not likely. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17935632)

"I don't see a problem, as they're releasing it on a console as well."

Well, the problem is that they won't sell enough copies on Vista to justify the costs of porting. However, it's pretty clear that MS is funding them so they're fine.

What is a problem (for me) is that I won't get to play - I've already got a decent PC so I don't really want a 360, and I'm not going to pay for Vista since upgrade versions of windows are a rip off. I'm still using 2000, they probably won't even allow direct upgrades. I'm not exactly upset, there are enough games for me on my PC and on the consoles I do have already (DS, Wii, PS2 - the consoles that offer lots of stuff that doesn't really have an equivalent on PC), but I would still have liked the choice to play "vista-exclusives" Alan Wake, Shadowrun, and even Halo 2 (I'm a PC FPS fan but have to admit the vehicles rock).

I also have to wonder if MS is breaking some anticompetition laws.

Re:DX10? Not likely. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17924480)

people seem to confuse DX10 requirement with the requirement for a DirectX 10 card. You can still use your old card with DirectX 10, you just won't get some of the additional graphical benefits and features of DirectX 10. The game requires the DirectX 10 subsystem in windows NOT A DIRECTX 10 card, that subsystem is only in Vista and hence Vista only. This does not "require" you to get a new card to use it.

Re:DX10? Not likely. (2, Informative)

MonsterSound (940269) | more than 7 years ago | (#17925336)

ATI has not released DX10 cards. Nvidia released the 8800 series in November 06 (without DX10 drivers).

Fantastic? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17919530)

"Microsoft has huge machinery for games production. If a team of 80 voice actors are needed from the States, they can provide it. Their test laboratory is also fantastic."

What?! If they are so fantastic, where is the DX10 patch for Flight Simulator X?

Re:Fantastic? (1)

cluke (30394) | more than 7 years ago | (#17921422)

Their test lab IS fantastic, but unfortunately the developers close all their defect tickets with "WORKING AS EXPECTED".

Voice actors? Meh. (1)

JFMulder (59706) | more than 7 years ago | (#17919812)

Microsoft has huge machinery for games production. If a team of 80 voice actors are needed from the States, they can provide it. Their test laboratory is also fantastic.
If those voice actors are the same as Microsoft must have hired for the english version of 99 Nights, a game made by Q Entertainment but mostly funded by Microsoft and published exclusively for the 360, then I'll suddenly become a lot less interested in Alan Wake. As for testing...

Oh *PC*/360 (1)

John Zebedee (659358) | more than 7 years ago | (#17921632)

Showing my age, I saw the title and flashed on a port to the really *big* iron. Consoles, eh? You kids don't even know you're alive! Games should be printed out in EBCDIC after showing in green screen. And get off my damn lawn!
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...