Thread 11818421

So there's this zoomer where I work that said to me that a few decades ago when PC games would only release on a Windows OS that Microsoft used to charge them like 95% because the game developers literally couldn't release anywhere else. He said one of his professors told him this. Can any oldfags confirm if this is true or not?

I know that Sony, Nintendo, etc. will charge you a percentage of your sales on their console, but 95%? I feel like that number is made up and there is no way developers would pay that since they would make almost no money. Someone tell me if he is right or not because I feel like he is a bullshitting bitch.

>>11818421 (OP)
it's false. most distribution was direct on disk and microsoft did not control it at all. only the consoles and later on steam, xbox etc controlled their platforms

There is simply no way MS could monitor the sheer volume of software releases on their OS, plus there were games coming out that had multiple versions included (Windows/Mac/Linux).

>>11818421 (OP)
He's a retard and he confused Microsoft with Nintendo. You're a retard and he trolled you. He's a retard and someone trolled him and he spread that information to you. I'm a retard and you're trolling me. It's one of those 4.

>>11818421 (OP)
Try explaining these to him

>>11818421 (OP)
>So there's this zoomer where I work that said to me that a few decades ago when PC games would only release on a Windows OS that Microsoft used to charge them like 95% because the game developers literally couldn't release anywhere else.
100% bullshit.

You could release a game for Windows and keep 100% of the profits. Developers didn't have to pay Microsoft anything unless they used part of Microsoft's graphics APIs that needed a license for commercial use. Which is one of the major reasons OpenGL exists.

So your zoomer friend is completely wrong.

>>11818442
I'm now retarded for reading this whole post

>>11818421 (OP)
The kid or his professor is bullshitting, anyone could publish basically anything on a home computer, the only thing stopping you is logistics and then things which would just be illegal to publish in general.
You can see this in how all the popular home computers in the 90s and 80s had oceans and oceans of indie and small publisher software and games.

There's even things mostly or completely lost to time, just because they had such poor success in the market and then nobody saved anything of it. The vast majority of all such lost content is not missed by anyone either (because it remains obscure), which is how society and the creative process goes.

>>11818438
Yeah, it would be logistically impossible to keep a tight control on such open systems with such widespread reach. Someone will just make something running on your hardware and OS, and you can't really do anything about it or demand anything from them, you're not even going to be aware of the majority of products and projects.
Consoles can do that because they're restricted systems with control, which don't really allow for any development on the user end at all, rather a game developer will have a special development kit lent to them for work.

There were really shitty porn games for Commodore 64 computers and early DOS, not because that's what Commodore or Microsoft really wanted, or really that it's what many people wanted at all, but because you could just do it, and someone did.

>>11818421 (OP)
MS didn't gather any money from people releasing software on Windows back in those days. MS contented itself with selling their development tools. Your zoomer friend is wrong.

>>11818421 (OP)
That would kill the software industry and microsoft's monopoly so no that isn't true. Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers Developers etc.

>>11818442
>he's a retard
>you're a retard
>i'm a retard
not mutually exclusive

>>11818442
>>11818585
>>11818676
I could be retarded too. What if all of us are retards?

>>11818679
Are there any other retards that I don't know about!?

>>11818712
I think Doom 3 is underappreciated.

Royalty rates on average:
>Nintendo platforms: 33-35%
>Sega platforms: 20-33%
>PSX: 7,5%
>Computers: 0%

The thing is it just wasn't possible. "Windows" is not a platform, because a platform is the sum of its parts. Almost each computer is a different platform made of different parts. If Microsoft could ask for royalties why not IBM or 3DFX or the sound card manufacturers etc ? No, it's only possible if the company actually owns the (entire) platform.

>>11818712
Yes. I'm the also a retarded

>>11818421 (OP)
It's not even slightly true. You were outwitted by a child.

>>11818712
bussing

>>11818491
There was a descent 3?

>>11818935
Yes and it's called Forsaken.

>>11818421 (OP)
Kids love to exaggerate and make shit up that makes what they're saying sound more impactful.
Never trust anyone under the age of 25 using words like "death threat" or "racist" or "literally"

>>11818421 (OP)
Windows was and still is an open platform. Microsoft has no way of controlling what software is released for it, and as such have no way of taxing developers/publishers.
The guy is probably parroting something he didn't listen to properly, like a real life game of Telephone.

>>11818421 (OP)
>So there's this zoomer
take his hand gently and kiss
then fuck his tight zoomzoomhole

>>11818421 (OP)
Yeah that... didn't happen

M$ paid people to release on their platforms. DOOM on Win95 was them paying Id.

>>11818712
10/10

>>11818965
>tfw no retarded zoomergf who reminds you she was born after the Xbox 360 as she reverse mating presses you

The only thing I could imagine publishers paying Microsoft for is the use of the Microsoft or Windows logo in marketing materials.

>>11818421 (OP)
You can just ask if you don't know something, it's okay. You don't need to invent some character in order to deflect from your own ignorance.

>>11818421 (OP)
Assuming you are older than him and hence not a zoombini, why would you believe him in the first place? You would have been old enough to have lived in that era and know his claims were BS.

>>11819756
hey now zoombinis was cool

>>11818421 (OP)
i'm pretty sure something he told you (or his professor told him) got lost in translation so i'm just going to assume that he meant to say something along the lines of digital distribution and say no.

your buddy could also be confusing windows with steam which takes a 75% cut on games and started that whole trend of every triple A publisher having their own launcher/steam equivalent like origin, Uplay, GOG and the epic games store.

>>11818421 (OP)
>So there's this zoomer where I work that said to me that a few decades ago when PC games would only release on a Windows OS that Microsoft used to charge them like 95% because the game developers literally couldn't release anywhere else.

That is the dumbest fucking retard-shit I think I've ever read on /vr/. Windows didn't even have a platform royalty fee, now, or even in the 90's when it came out. The only truth in this quote is that Microsoft had a monopoly on PC releases, but that's mostly due to the fact that PC's were more modular and Windows was the primary OS. MAC's either lacked entirely, or used really low quality shitty GPU's, and had a smaller market share than PC's.

Windows itself was not a proprietary closed environment, it was essentially just a program that you bought. They only licensed their OS to PC Manufacturers and then selling tools alongside, not by restricting third party access to it.

His professor is a seething macfag, I'm sure said professor saw the conspiracy in some macfag alt newsgroup or some shit.

>>11820132
Also, what is his professor even a professor of? For all I know, he's probably some gay ass english or communications prof. I've once had my architectural cad professor make the claim that "A jpeg loses quality every time it's opened".

>>11818421 (OP)
Old fucking game developer here, 100% bullshit. Sometimes it was the other way around.

>>11820005
Anybody over the age of 30 and posting on /vr/ should know the answer to this, which means that OP is the zoomer in question, or just taking the piss. Either way, fake and gay.