backtop

Software Gaming in Windows Vista
Brandon Hill (Blog) - October 2, 2006 9:24 AM
Print E-mail del.icio.us 65 comment(s) - last by SniperWulf.. on Oct 3 at 11:48 AM

"Games for Windows" branding -- Image courtesy Paul Thurrott
Microsoft takes a new approach to PC gaming with Vista

For all the talk about the security features of Windows Vista and the controversy surrounding its inclusion of a number of utilities and file formats that have some up in arms, there's one aspect of Vista that hasn't gotten much attention -- gaming. Microsoft looks to take a new approach to gaming with Windows Vista and is using the operating system as a launch pad for its new "gaming centric" focus.

With Vista, Microsoft is putting a lot of emphasis on DirectX 10 technology which will offload all rendering to the graphics card as well as most computational functions. DirectX 10 will be a Vista-only proposition making Vista the only choice for a number of hot titles launching in the coming months and Crytek proclaims that DirectX 10 is the only way to go to see Crysis in the way it was intended by the developers.

Microsoft is also bridging the gap between the XBOX 360 and PC gaming with the XBOX 360 Wireless Gaming Receiver. The USB peripheral plugs into your PC and allows you to use all of the 360's wireless peripherals including the upcoming Wireless Racing Wheel and Wireless Headset.

Also of note is new branding for games designed for Windows Vista. Microsoft is looking to give PC games more visibility in the retail space by creating "Games for Windows" branding and marketing. Epic’s Mark Rein already expressed his thoughts on the poor showing of current PC games in the retail space back in July. The branding will give game packaging a more uniform appearance akin to what we see with PS2, Gamecube, XBOX and XBOX 360 games. Microsoft also wants to see PC game kiosks of the same breadth and scale that consoles currently have in retail outlets. Paul Thurrott goes into detail on how the new “Games for Windows” branding will be implemented:

In fact, these Games for Windows titles will be packaged just like Xbox 360 games: Instead of a white bar at the top with a green Xbox 360 logo, you'll see a white bar at the top with a blue Windows Vista logo. Bravo. Getting the logo isn't a walk in the park, but the end result is that consumers can expect a much simpler and more console-like experience when installing these titles. While Microsoft has yet to release the full list of requirements, I was told about a few of them this week: The game must support an "Easy Install" option that installs the title on your PC in the fewest possible steps and mouse clicks. It must install an icon and associated information into the Windows Vista Games Explorer. It must be compatible with the Xbox 360 common controller. And it must install and run properly on x64 versions of Windows Vista (though the game itself can be 32-bit).

It seems as though Microsoft is on the right track with specific PC games branding, universal PC support for XBOX 360 controllers and Live Anywhere support that plugs in with XBOX Live allowing users from both services interact with each other. The state of PC gaming appears to be in flux right now, so hopefully this new initiative will restore some order.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Hmm
By ixelion on 10/2/2006 9:51:24 AM , Rating: 2
This leads me to believe that MS wants vista only games due to technical limitations of XP and not the fact that they simply want to promote Vista at all costs at the XP user's expense. Is this true?




RE: Hmm
By tuteja1986 on 10/2/2006 10:01:33 AM , Rating: 1
Nah , they are trying to make Windows into Platform ... like have unified Game cases , an Official Games for Window Magazine (which will done by people behind CWG magazine) . They will games for windows kiosk which look really cool. Microsoft is just investing cash on PC gaming which they have sort of neglected for a long time. Also they will have Windows live anywhere service which seem to look really cool and has potential to beat X-fire by a lot. Also they will bring in Achievement points for Games for Windows.


RE: Hmm
By kextyn on 10/2/2006 10:08:09 AM , Rating: 2
Don't forget that they're trying to promote Vista as much as possible to get people to switch.


RE: Hmm
By mlittl3 on 10/2/2006 10:14:48 AM , Rating: 1
And for all you people who are about to reply (flame) to this comment, I think the reader's comment meant switch (or upgrade) from Windows XP/2000/98SE to Windows Vista and not a switch from Mac OS X.


RE: Hmm
By kextyn on 10/2/2006 10:18:16 AM , Rating: 1
Sorry, I should have said upgrade rather then switch. I wasn't thinking about Apple at all.


RE: Hmm
By encryptkeeper on 10/2/2006 10:41:16 AM , Rating: 3
Look at all of the projects Microsoft has gotten into in the last 5 years. The Xbox, Zune, they're making their own version of MySpace, plus lots of other stuff. If anyone out there thinks Bill Gates doesn't want to rule the friggin' world, they need a SERIOUS dose of reality.


RE: Hmm
By peldor on 10/2/2006 11:03:11 AM , Rating: 5
If 80's music taught us anything it's that Everbody Wants to Rule the World.


RE: Hmm
By Tsuwamono on 10/2/06, Rating: -1
RE: Hmm
By GhandiInstinct on 10/2/2006 11:26:30 AM , Rating: 2
"This just in, Microsoft says XBOX games can now run on Vista, rendering 360 useless for now...more to come."


RE: Hmm
By creathir on 10/2/2006 12:23:10 PM , Rating: 3
Google is just as bad...
They come out with every product under the sun and people worship them... Microsoft continues the same approach, and they are reprimanded for it...

Double standard if ya ask me...

- Creathir


RE: Hmm
By mindless1 on 10/3/2006 3:37:39 AM , Rating: 2
Hardly just as bad, most of us are using their core product without having to pay a cent, we CHOOSE to do so in a competitive market.


RE: Hmm
By OddTSi on 10/2/2006 4:07:25 PM , Rating: 2
MSN Spaces (now renamed Live Spaces or something like that) was around WELL before MySpace and in fact has more users/members than MySpace, hell it's the biggest such site around. So I don't see how Microsoft is making their own version of MySpace.


RE: Hmm
By therealnickdanger on 10/3/2006 9:11:30 AM , Rating: 2
Isn't that funny how that works? LOL People give Microsoft far too little credit.


RE: Hmm
By KCjoker on 10/2/2006 5:05:25 PM , Rating: 3
You mean a company wants to grow? Wow what a shocker that is. It's sort of like how Coca Cola company started making Dr Pepper, Sprite, etc...just as Chevy started GMC, Saturn, etc...get over your stupid MS hating.


RE: Hmm
By GoodRevrnd on 10/2/2006 9:04:33 PM , Rating: 2
Dr Pepper is still its own company/brand. Coca Cola just has a distribution contract.


RE: Hmm
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 10/2/2006 10:03:51 AM , Rating: 5
It's a double edged sword... On one hand, DX10 only functions with the new driver model and kernel changes that are in Vista. On the other hand Microsoft wants Vista to become a more unified platform, much the way consoles are. They want the "one stop shop" feel, where you can pop a game in and press one or two buttons and play. While it is possible to make the necessary changes to XP, for Microsoft it wouldn't be worth it. XP has been out over 5 years, going on 6 by the time we see Vista on shelves, so this is a good move by them. The conspiracy wacko's will tell you Vista sucks and Microsoft is just pushing everyone on it, but the reality is that XP is an aging system and certain changes require a new OS to implement. Seriously can you imagine them trying to push out a SP3 to users to update the driver model and kernel in XP? Then listen to everyone cry how they thought they could use this new game but didn't realize they needed to have certain updates......... Yea F*** that, a new OS, starts everything from the ground up. Just slap on a VISTA sticker on the top and make it REQUIRED, then suddenly, now Microsoft can guarantee any game with the Vista sticker will work on a Vista system. Sounds like a winning strategy.


RE: Hmm
By kextyn on 10/2/2006 10:10:57 AM , Rating: 1
I don't think it will be possible for them to guarantee every game with a Vista sticker will work on a Vista system. It would be more like saying the game will work on certain levels of Vista. And will the requirements for these different levels of Vista change over the years as the technology gets better or will even the value systems 3 years from now qualify for the highest level of Vista which then nullifies the whole system and you're back to checking system requirements.


RE: Hmm
By NullSubroutine on 10/2/2006 6:52:08 PM , Rating: 1
Actually if you think about it, with the 3d requirements to run Vista (on new computers) its quite possible that any game branded "Vista Ready" would be able to run on it. True it wouldnt be 20902x34124 resolution or anything, but its still would be possible.


RE: Hmm
By EclipsedAurora on 10/2/2006 10:46:37 AM , Rating: 2
Instead, I think it's a way that for M$ to earn $. In long term, u must upgrade your OS in order to play games in PC.


RE: Hmm
By sbrown23 on 10/2/2006 11:41:10 AM , Rating: 5
OK, this is asinine. As if consoles don't demand that you upgrade to the latest one to play the latest games? When PS3-specific titles ship, are you going to rant and rave a bout how $ONY is screwing PS2 ownerz and making everyone buy PS3? Or was that just a standard anti-Microsoft rant?


RE: Hmm
By FITCamaro on 10/2/2006 11:55:38 AM , Rating: 2
No. Like all games in the past, the games will also support older versions of DX. Its the same way with every previous new iteration of DX. You have to upgrade to get the new features. The only difference here is that the new version of DX only runs on Vista. But the games will still play on XP in DX9.

Take for example Crisis. Do you really thing they're developing two versions of the game? No. They're developing it with DX10 support. But it will be fully playable in DX9. There won't be two versions of the game on the shelf. Just in XP it won't install any of the files for DX10 content or features (or maybe it will and they'll sit there unused.


Xbox common controller???
By Araemo on 10/2/2006 9:59:45 AM , Rating: 3
I can't believe the game has to be compatible with the xbox controller to get the Vista logo.

Lots of games will realistically be unplayable on the common controller. I dont' want my games dumbed down to that level just to get a marketting edge. For most games, the controller will be fine, but I also don't play most games...




RE: Xbox common controller???
By tuteja1986 on 10/2/2006 10:03:11 AM , Rating: 2
dude some game suck on Mouse and Keyboard like Racing , Fighting or Platformer like Price of Persia ect... So having controller support is good.


RE: Xbox common controller???
By tuteja1986 on 10/2/2006 10:07:05 AM , Rating: 3
Also forget to say , it only takes few hr to implement XBOX 360 controls , Developers aren't going to waste time with fine tuning it to death and they will never ever drop Mouse and Keyboard support.


RE: Xbox common controller???
By PrinceGaz on 10/2/2006 5:07:51 PM , Rating: 1
...and some games suck on a controller like FPS, RTS and RPG. I don't want those games dumbed down such that they are also playable with a controller just to get the Vista logo.

Even if the default option is still to use keyboard and mouse, it seems likely that games for Vista will have to be fully playable with the controller to get the official logo, which is sure to mean compromises to the gameplay.


By theprodigalrebel on 10/3/2006 1:03:09 AM , Rating: 2
For heaven's sake, a game isn't going to 'not work' if it doesn't have X360 Controller support. It just means it won't have that 'Games for Windows' sticker! Microsoft isn't going to destroy game publishers who didn't include X360 Controller support, if that's what you are worried about.

Eg. Take the FIFA football games. Players using the keyboard 'can not' use the Off the Ball control - it only works with a controller. But the game itself works - only you have a slight disadvantage.


RE: Xbox common controller???
By kextyn on 10/2/2006 10:06:38 AM , Rating: 2
I was just going to post the same thing untill I refreshed. I don't think it should have to be compatible with a specific controller. Microsoft is just trying to get too much out of this. While it's nice to know that the game will be compatible with your controller, how many people own an XBox 360 controller? I sure as hell don't and don't plan on buying one anytime soon. Mouse and keyboard for me.

The other thing that worries me is if they put PC games in cases like console games and inevitably behind glass just like console games how can you check the system requirements without asking someone to come open it for you? Sure it may not be a problem for the first year or so when pretty much any Vista computer can play the game. But look a couple years down the line when we have new processors and video cards and games don't work very well on the old stuff.

I don't know whether I like this idea or hate it. Sure the boxes that games come in are getting kinda old and take up a lot of space, but do we really want PC gaming to be like console gaming?


RE: Xbox common controller???
By wien on 10/2/2006 10:17:26 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
The other thing that worries me is if they put PC games in cases like console games and inevitably behind glass just like console games how can you check the system requirements without asking someone to come open it for you? Sure it may not be a problem for the first year or so when pretty much any Vista computer can play the game. But look a couple years down the line when we have new processors and video cards and games don't work very well on the old stuff.
This is why Vista has that performance rating thingy. Publishers print performance requirements on the box, and Average Joe checks that against his own computer's rating.


RE: Xbox common controller???
By kextyn on 10/2/2006 10:20:00 AM , Rating: 2
Yea, I figured that. But like I said in another post what will happen 3 years from now when value systems meet the current requirement for a high end Vista machine. Normally the requirements for versions of Windows do not change over the years. So will they have to change the performance rating on Vista every year or what?


RE: Xbox common controller???
By killerroach on 10/2/2006 11:10:39 AM , Rating: 2
Microsoft has already said that the Performance Rating numbers will keep climbing upward with future hardware, that we will see systems that score a 6.0 or higher in the not-too-distant future (kinda creeps me out, my rig only scored a 3.9). The real trick is going to be whether or not they'll be able to properly incorporate the seemingly exponential growth of GPU power in with the more linear growth of CPU horsepower. After all, the Performance Rating is basically whatever your lowest subscore is.

Say you have a CPU that scores, say, around a 4 (like my poor Athlon 64 3000+ does), and you throw a G80-based card in there. Unless a game is extraordinarily physics-intensive (like Oblivion), it should handle games that would recommend far more than a 4.0 for system specs with ease. What happens then?


RE: Xbox common controller???
By Chernobyl68 on 10/2/2006 11:37:38 AM , Rating: 2
same here...not really concerned about this though because almost every game I play uses mouse and keyboard just fine. The last console I owned was an Atari 2600. PC games are fine with me.


RE: Xbox common controller???
By Assimilator87 on 10/2/2006 12:25:59 PM , Rating: 2
Why did retarded a$$ Microsoft release the wireless dongle for PC now? If they had at least mentioned something about it a long time ago then I wouldn't have bought the wired controller, which I like very much by the way.


RE: Xbox common controller???
By Crusader on 10/2/2006 1:12:31 PM , Rating: 2
I'm buying the wireless xbox controller because it works on the 360 as well. Talk about a value.

And besides, some games arent even setup for direct input controllers, at least being compatible with the 360 controller means that we get controller setup.

I use a dual analog pad for BF2 vehicles, and there are many examples where you need the variability of control that an analog joystick provides.

Keyboard offers you WASD, usually in two variants of speed (simply walk and run). This isnt the best control, sometimes even for shooters.


RE: Xbox common controller???
By AxemanFU on 10/2/2006 3:38:06 PM , Rating: 2
I'd be MUCH more worried about them starting to charge the same prices for console games and PC games. Right now, consoles are sold at a loss and then supported by overpriced games. PC hardware and OS is sold for a moderate profit, and the games are also sold for a moderate profit, and typically cost $5-20 less on the PC. If you have a single cross platform game, the PC gamers will be subsidizing the console players' console costs by paying more for the games. THIS is going to be a real problem soon, I think.


RE: Xbox common controller???
By willow01 on 10/2/2006 8:43:30 PM , Rating: 2
Also considering getting the certification is going to cost as well. I'm not sure all of this is a good thing, I don't really find installing a game all that difficult, support for a standard controller is nice (for games that need it), putting all my games in one place is nice, but I'm a little worried about how smaller developers, indie's, etc. are going to go when their box doesn't have the logo because they just don't want to fork out the extra dough for compliance testing, etc.


High cost of entry
By AxemanFU on 10/2/2006 10:14:35 AM , Rating: 1
So, to use the new DX10 games in DX10, we have to get Vista AND a decent DX10 capable card. Those that are still using high end AGP will have to do a complete system upgrade. It's going to be hard for a lot of users to take that all on at once, especially given the escalating price of mid to high range vid cards and the much higher per unit cost of the USABLE and WORTHWHILE versions of Vista. You're talking $400-$1000, depending on what you buy, to upgrade to DX10 gaming. That's pretty ouch.

Hopefully all the DX10 games remain fully DX9 backwards compatible, because the upgrade cycle this time is going to be a bit slower than before. Probably most early adopters will be the Dell/HP/Sony types that get the Vista with their new PC, and only have to upgrade the sucktactular default video card to a DX10 card. I'm assuming most of these folks would have been planning a full upgrade anyways when they buy.




RE: High cost of entry
By kextyn on 10/2/2006 10:16:27 AM , Rating: 2
Does the article say anything about DX10 cards? I read through everything on the page and didn't see anything about it. As far as I know you will still be able to run a DX9 card with DX10, the same way you can use a DX8 card with DX9.


RE: High cost of entry
By mlittl3 on 10/2/2006 10:21:51 AM , Rating: 2
In order to be DX10 compatible, hardware implementations must be made in the GPU. Of course you will be able to install and play DX9 games on vista with your agp graphics card. You will NOT be able to play DX10 only games or game settings that implement DX10 graphics (such as setting texture quality to very high which really means use shader model x.0). This is how it has always been. When DX9 came out, you could only play those games that still had an implementation of DX8 with your DX8 graphics card. DX9 only games would not work.

I think everyone is getting a little out of perspective due to the long upgrade cycle this time around to the next version of windows. DX9 has been out for a long time. Everyone has enjoyed being able to use up to 5 year old technology with all newly released games. It is time for an upgrade people. We are not being shafted here. It is time to let in new technology and say goodbye to old technology.


RE: High cost of entry
By goku on 10/2/06, Rating: -1
RE: High cost of entry
By johnsonx on 10/2/2006 11:33:38 AM , Rating: 2
It might be nice to explain what's wrong with the post rather than just saying 'Clueless'. The post looks more or less correct to me. Though I might argue with some of the wording, I don't see how that makes the whole post 'Clueless'.


RE: High cost of entry
By Pirks on 10/2/2006 1:02:29 PM , Rating: 1
goku was obviously smoking something, just ignore his mumble


RE: High cost of entry
By mlittl3 on 10/2/2006 2:00:50 PM , Rating: 2
I apologize if my wording wasn't 100% correct. But in essence, we have had 6 lovely years with Windows XP and I really like the operating system. Now its time for the next big thing and its going to require some upgrading which I think is a good thing.


RE: High cost of entry
By AxemanFU on 10/2/2006 3:33:55 PM , Rating: 2
I agree, we've crusied a long time happily on Dx9. It's just that before, the hardware and software implementations of a shift in DirectX weren't timed to conincide with the relase of an entirely new OS as well. I'm sure 95% of what comes out will be backwards compatible as usual, but it's going to be costly to move to a full Dx10 compatible system. My point was that I don't think the average gaming consumer is ready for that steep cost of entry into Dx10. Sure, most people will upgrade OS first, then probably hardware later, but it's going to be costly in total.


Crysis is DX9 as well!?
By probedb on 10/2/2006 10:41:30 AM , Rating: 2
I didn't think Crysis was DX10 only?




RE: Crysis is DX9 as well!?
By othercents on 10/2/2006 11:02:31 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Crytek proclaims that DirectX 10 is the only way to go to see Crysis in the way it was intended by the developers.


I think it is both, but DX10 will probably look better.

Other


RE: Crysis is DX9 as well!?
By Griswold on 10/2/2006 11:03:20 AM , Rating: 2
It comes with support for both out of the box but crytek always said that D3D10 is needed to make your jaw hit the floor.


RE: Crysis is DX9 as well!?
By Chernobyl68 on 10/2/2006 11:41:55 AM , Rating: 2
I don't think most game developers will want to discard a great deal of the market by making a title "DX10 ONLY", most of them will have a way for it to be backwards compatible otherwise they won't make as much money on the initial release.


RE: Crysis is DX9 as well!?
By Assimilator87 on 10/2/2006 12:23:44 PM , Rating: 2
What's scary is that all those mouth dropping video's of Crysis that we've seen are all in DX9 since there is no DX10 hardware yet. I can't wait to see what the real deal will look like.


XNA - Game Design Platform
By othercents on 10/2/2006 11:12:40 AM , Rating: 3
Remember when Microsoft released XNA to everyone to develop with?

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=4009

XNA is supposed to be the future of game development. The development studios won't need to buy game engines or build their own engines since they could just use the MS one. Probably even a one time charge and then they can develop multiple games. This tool will also allow you to develop a single game for both 360 and Vista platforms.

Doing this is very powerful since this would allow Microsoft to steal the gaming market on both ends. For those die hard PC fans you get all the 360 console games on your computer and for those console fans you get all the MS PC games on your console. The only thing you don't get are the Wii and PS3 games.

Allowing game manufacturers to use one tool to develop for two platforms is a major deal. XNA is going to give problems too Sony and Nintendo over the long run. For the short term you shouldn't see any changes.

Other




RE: XNA - Game Design Platform
By Pirks on 10/2/2006 1:09:24 PM , Rating: 2
nah, renderware can do more than XNA and works for PS3 and Wii as well, so I won't say XNA will change much... in the short run. dunno about longtime trends, I'd say it's a major plus, but with renderware out there I kind of a bit sceptic about XNA


RE: XNA - Game Design Platform
By Dactyl on 10/2/2006 2:18:14 PM , Rating: 2
It also allows amateurs to attempt to make games. There's a lot of creative energy there that MS can tap for no cost. People in that community will choose the 360 over the PS3 in a heartbeat (as if they needed a reason). If the amateurs put out interesting content, that could encourage 360 sales.

What I'd really like to see is the ability for amateurs to make add-ons to existing games. New levels, etc., that could be designed on the PC, tested at home on their console, and then distributed over the internet to other users.

A level is much easier to create than an entire game, such that at least a few talented amateurs are likely to do a good job creating new content. I realize this might cut into new game sales, but if it keeps people on the 360 and away from the PS3/Wii, it might still be worth it to MSFT.


Short-Term Hype!
By Hydrofirex on 10/2/06, Rating: 0
RE: Short-Term Hype!
By Xenoterranos on 10/2/2006 12:09:12 PM , Rating: 2
No one here would be complaining or arguing against DX10 if it where native to XP. It seems that most of you are just disappointed that you'll need to upgrade your OS in order to stay on top of gaming. While I can understand that it sucks, it is kind of neccessary every, oh, say 6 years. For the longest time, we've been seeing cpu and gpu performance increases that our software could barely take advantage of. I'm glad that MS has come up with a new way to stress that hardware and push the technology even further.


RE: Short-Term Hype!
By Teletran1 on 10/2/2006 12:33:07 PM , Rating: 3
You could have written that when DX?....9 came out. Every time MS releases a new Direct X people who just bought a new Videocard come on these boards and say the same thing. Everyone who frequents this site knows that DX10 is just around the corner. They should also know that DX10 cards are just around the corner as well. To complain now is just stupid. Why bitch at microsoft because you cant wait a couple of months to buy a new videocard if you care so much?


64-bit
By bubbl07 on 10/2/2006 10:00:51 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
And it must install and run properly on x64 versions of Windows Vista (though the game itself can be 32-bit).
This is probably the best news from this. Perhaps now we can run a 64-bit Windows without having to worry if games will run properly, if at all. Microsoft still needs to get its WoW64 emulation working better, but at least this is a step in the right direction.




RE: 64-bit
By 05SilverGT on 10/2/2006 11:11:38 AM , Rating: 2
That is awesome because it's about time we move to 64-bit. My A64 3000+ has been waiting for a 64-bit Windows OS for two years. Yeah, I could have went with the 64-bit version of XP but the support hasn't been there. Plus with Vista in the picture I didn't want to waist the money.


It's about time
By PitbulI on 10/2/2006 11:23:51 AM , Rating: 3
I'm happy that Microsoft is once again taking Windows games seriously.

I remember when I would spend hours playing Monster Truck Madness 1/2(I wish they'd come out with another one), Hellbender and Motocross Madness 1/2. Even Midtown Madness was good until MS made it a XBox exclusive title and that marked the end of MS gaming for Windows until now. The Flight Sim games were not really games though. Links is gone as well.

Hopefully Microsoft is planning on making their own games as well.




Gaming on Vista
By beepandbop on 10/2/2006 12:16:35 PM , Rating: 2
I have read and understood that the plug and play of consoles, in which you stick a game into the dvd drive and the game immdiately loads/plays with no installing is also another hall mark of Vista. Quite something if you ask me. This will give an edge to the PC. More so of an edge anyway. I mean, what do consoles have that PCs don't?
If anything, Vista will turn your PC into a cosnole that can be upgraded, easily managed, and lots of good things.
However, I have also read that certain games do not run, or don't even install well on Vista. So there will be a lot of patching me thinks and a "Vista SP2" before all of our loved games can be played.
I still like the idea, but I'm not in the mood for shoving out 400$ for these improvements til a year later.




RE: Gaming on Vista
By Pirks on 10/2/2006 1:16:11 PM , Rating: 1
actually nobody (except risk/thrill lovers and Dell/Sony buying types) will get Vista immediately, since SP1 is coming out in a year and it's going to bring _unified_ server/desktop kernel, which is a major deal for me, on a same scale that XP SP2 was. when SP1 is out and Vista kernel is them finally done (not a specific desktop version like now) then I'm out for a major upgrade. 64-bit is going to be at least non problematic then, kernel is done, DX10 is out and reasonably mature and inexpensive, Crysis is out - everytihng is ripe and ready. SP1 will come out at the right time, THEN it'll be time to do a major system upgrade, and I'll get a 64-bit CPU at last woohoo!

p.s. just listen to the latest paul thurrott podcast - there's all this stuff about Vista kernel and when and why MS is unifying it next fall.


dx10 is all vista has!
By Lazarus Dark on 10/2/2006 2:01:18 PM , Rating: 2
Seriously, MS has taken out all the features that looked interesting and I haven't heard whats really different about vista other than fancy ui and dx10. So yeah makes sense they'd push "vista certified game" as dx10 is one of the only reasons to migrate. winxp does everything I need and I consider myself a power user. If I want something else, fedora core 5 is free.




Sure a lot of fine words!
By Clauzii on 10/2/2006 4:02:02 PM , Rating: 2
But will games automatically get better?

I see this as purely marketing from Microsoft.




chaos
By Armorize on 10/2/2006 4:49:50 PM , Rating: 2
I see chaos in the future for gamers and developers, if they try to force this os down gamers throats that dx10 is the only way, ya its sweet and all but denying other gamers and forcing them into the deathgrip to buy more shit to play 50 dollar games... but hey im no marketing genious.




Interesting...
By lemonadesoda on 10/2/2006 5:42:49 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
With Vista, Microsoft is putting a lot of emphasis on DirectX 10 technology which will offload all rendering to the graphics card as well as most computational functions.
If that is true, then DirectX isn't doing anything at all other than sending the instructions to the GPU to process.

If the OS isn't doing anything other than forwarding instructions to the GPU, then this would be easy to implement by a 3rd party.

And if a 3rd party could implement this easily... since there is nothing much to process, only forwarding of instructions... then it should be just as easy to implement it on XP, even 2000, even Linux.

All that is needed is the DRIVERS to work in the corresponding platform.

It seems that Microsoft has become the "IEEE standards" setter for DirectX but isn't actually doing any coding.

Interesting.




widescreen
By SniperWulf on 10/3/2006 11:48:01 AM , Rating: 2
I would love for MS to include native widescreen support on their list of "its gotta do's"




Old news
By Spivonious on 10/2/06, Rating: -1
"Well, we didn't have anyone in line that got shot waiting for our system." -- Nintendo of America Vice President Perrin Kaplan











botimage
Copyright 2010 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki