backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 128 comment(s) - last by bes.. on Jun 5 at 5:49 PM
Master Chief spills hot coffee on self; needs extra time to recover

For those of you who have been waiting for the PC version of Halo 2, looks like you will have to wait a little longer – that is, if you’re able to tear yourself away from the Xbox 360 Halo 3 beta. Microsoft has once again pushed back the release date for the Windows Vista edition of Halo 2 to May 31.

Halo 2 Vista was originally set for release on May 8, but Microsoft decided to push it back in order to make some important improvements to the install experience and to touch upon other technical issues. 

"Halo 2 for Windows Vista did not release to retailers on May 22, as previously announced, and will now ship from manufacturers on May 31," a Microsoft representative said. "Shadowrun will be the first game to debut the highly anticipated Games for Windows Live system on May 29. We apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused our customers."

Interestingly enough, reports are now surfacing that nudity is the cause for Halo 2 PC release. In an email statement received by Next-Generation, Microsoft said, “It has come to our attention that an unfortunate, obscure content error which includes partial nudity was included in our initial production of “Halo 2” for Windows Vista. As such, we have updated the initial game packaging at retailers with a label, so customers are aware before purchasing the game. Additionally, we’ve developed an online update which can be downloaded from www.halo2.com to remove the content. At Microsoft we take the Entertainment Software Ratings Board (ESRB) guidelines very seriously and hold ourselves to high standards, with our customers always in mind.”

While Microsoft is officially calling it a delay, some stores have already received shipments and are selling copies. Stores such as Circuit City and other retail chain websites list the PC shooter as currently shipping and available for in-store pickup.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
XP
By kyleb2112 on 5/25/2007 4:26:49 AM , Rating: 3
Damn, I was hoping they'd got a clue and decided to include XP.
So...ignoring half your customers is cool, but god forbid we see a boob amidst the carnage.




RE: XP
By Noya on 5/25/2007 4:47:01 AM , Rating: 4
quote:
So...ignoring half your customers is cool


Half? I didn't realize 50% of gamers have switched over to Vista yet?

Wasn't the Halo series always for console lovers anyway?


RE: XP
By BladeVenom on 5/25/2007 1:17:11 PM , Rating: 3
Last month reports were that Vista was only on about 3% of computers.


RE: XP
By tgc2100 on 5/25/2007 3:39:29 PM , Rating: 2
fix for DX10 on XP, in case no one knows yet. I've posted it already, but it's way further down. So just in case no one reads all the posts to get there, here ya go.

http://alkyproject.blogspot.com/

You can also pre order Halo2 from them, and it comes with the fix for XP


RE: XP
By hannibal da mekanikabull on 5/29/2007 8:03:22 PM , Rating: 2
"Last month reports were that Vista was only on about 3% of computers."

So in just a few short months, the new (and mostly unnecesary) OS from MS is already more used than the entire MAC platform? LOL


RE: XP
By kyleb2112 on 5/26/07, Rating: 0
RE: XP
By Munkles on 5/25/07, Rating: -1
RE: XP
By rdeegvainl on 5/25/07, Rating: -1
RE: XP
By Aikouka on 5/25/2007 9:13:34 AM , Rating: 5
1. You're talking about games here. What would run Halo 2 at a decent framerate would run Vista fine. Also, consumers will always be idiots and install an OS or a piece of software on a machine that is really too slow to run it. I remember working IT and seeing a laptop come in... I think it was an old Pentium sub-100Mhz laptop that they installed Windows XP on. They said their laptop had problems... well, I think the problem is pretty obvious. Trying to run Windows XP on a laptop that retailed with Windows 95 isn't exactly the best combination.

2. I don't know where people get the idea that Vista makes tons of games incompatible. I haven't had a single game not run or fail during a point because of something in Vista. Also, the drivers are fairly solid, albeit some will say they're still a tiny bit slower. But if I really care about 85 fps vs 80 fps... well, that's a bit too nit picky for me.

3. Exclusives sell. If that's the case, why should their be any PS3 exclusives when it has the lowest adoption rate of all the next-gen consoles (not to say it's 0%, but it's still the lowest :P). Exclusives sell.


RE: XP
By rdeegvainl on 5/25/07, Rating: -1
RE: XP
By Munkles on 5/25/2007 10:16:44 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
1 we are talking about a game made for xbox hardware, that is also many years old. would the xbox run vista fine, no it would be wasted by vista's requirements. halo 2 will not need the amount of power that vista needs, any decent,( i use the term liberally here) would be able to run halo2 except for it being vista exclusive.


Yes Halo 2 was originally developed for the Xbox, but performance issues abounded! Also were not talking about running the game at 480p, were talking about (at least in my case) 1600x1200, which takes sizeable hardware adjustments. Bungie also stated that they had to change, dump or massively alter the game from what they originally wanted because the xbox simply wasnt powerful enough. With the current release that DX10 systems will have prettier fx here and there its all the more reason to say its going to be prettier than the original.

quote:
2.I do, I have vista and it has many more problems than my xp machines running the same games. and also I do care about 5 fps diffenence, especially on newer games that take so much more to fun, that can make or break the setting you want to run at.


Thats funny, ive been running Vista for almsot two years now including the various beta's Ive been through and NEVER had it crash on me, lock up or otherwise just say f-no im not doing that. Even with rough drivers.

quote:
3. i don't agree with exclusives, so there shouldn't be the any ps3 exclusives. also things sell better when they are compatible with more things. And a better comparison would be saying you have games that are exclusive to different versions of the ps3. being the 20 or 60 gig and what not. I miss the days when you could play atari and colecovision games on either console


You may not agree with exclusives but they exist and they work. Without exclusives, or at least the promise of exclusives the ps3 would have no footing to stand on. Nor wood the 360. People would simply migrate to the cheapest alternative... not the BEST option for their situation.


RE: XP
By rdeegvainl on 5/25/2007 10:30:23 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
Yes Halo 2 was originally developed for the Xbox, but performance issues abounded! Also were not talking about running the game at 480p, were talking about (at least in my case) 1600x1200, which takes sizeable hardware adjustments. Bungie also stated that they had to change, dump or massively alter the game from what they originally wanted because the xbox simply wasnt powerful enough. With the current release that DX10 systems will have prettier fx here and there its all the more reason to say its going to be prettier than the original.

halo 2 vista is not dx 10, so any dx 10 statement about that making it better is only applicable to those with dx10 cards. most won't get them until they either have enough dx10 games to make it worth it, or the cards lower in price a whole lot. Still wouldn't stop it from running on xp being as it is predominately a dx9 game. and still halo 2 ran on the xbox a system massively outdated years ago.(even if it had problems) even with upgrades to the game it doesn't require vista to make it work.
quote:
Thats funny, ive been running Vista for almsot two years now including the various beta's Ive been through and NEVER had it crash on me, lock up or otherwise just say f-no im not doing that. Even with rough drivers

Great that vista hasn't ever crashed for you, don't know how that is classified as funny, but you are not the only person in the world. and others do have problems with vista. just because i haven't ever gotten a computer virus doesn't mean that it isn't a problem.
quote:
You may not agree with exclusives but they exist and they work. Without exclusives, or at least the promise of exclusives the ps3 would have no footing to stand on. Nor wood the 360. People would simply migrate to the cheapest alternative... not the BEST option for their situation.

and once again the operating system vista wouldn't be the best choice for halo2. it would also still not be on the ps3 or wii. so it would retain alot of it's exclusivity.


RE: XP
By Munkles on 5/25/2007 10:47:12 AM , Rating: 5
rdee,

You make a lot of good points, but MS has to make the line of demarkation somewhere. If not with one of their flagship titles then where? Im not saying make it Vista only based off of better performance of DX10 necessity. Im saying make it Vista only because at the very least "gamers" need to get with the times. I HAVE a DX 10 card, and now just about anyone can for $200+ which isnt unreasonable.

I know Vista isnt prefect but a LARGE part of the issues people have with it are directly related to immature drivers not to the structure, functionality, or layout of the OS. So what ive been trying to say, is that since Hardware manufacturers and vendors have been LAZY in getting good drivers to market a couple really good, high-selling vista only games is whats needed. Since games utilize just about every component of a system, the manufacturers will have to make better drivers is they want people to take them seriously compared to their competition. Make sense?

For your final point, exclusivity vs ps3/wii has nothing to do with it at this point IMHO, its more about giving people one more reason to adopt Vista, and by proxy forcing better drivers out of Nvidia/ATI/Crativelabs.... etc.


RE: XP
By rdeegvainl on 5/25/2007 10:55:51 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
its more about giving people one more reason to adopt Vista

I agree with that completely. I also think that microsoft shouldn't be the one to make the line of debarkation. If halo 2 wouldn't run on xp because it needed directx10 i would have no problem with that. i think that is what they should have done if it was about gamers getting with the times. but it isn't it is about selling as many copies of vista as possible. not for vista's selling points, that being dx10, but to make as much money as possible.


RE: XP
By Aikouka on 5/25/2007 2:02:39 PM , Rating: 2
In regard to your comment on requiring DirectX 10. If Halo 2 did require DirectX 10, wouldn't the comments then simply shift to the other argument that gamers have... that DirectX 10 shouldn't be exclusive to Vista? I won't get into that argument as I'm quite sure there are some vibrant opinions on it, but what I'm trying to get at is that regardless of the current limitation, any limitation will cause people to complain.

To jump back a couple comments up. I'm not too sure what problems you're having with Vista, but in both of my home-built machines, I haven't seen a single issue. Personally, I usually attribute stability issues to how cheap the computer is. You buy the stereotypical $300 eMachines PC... well, they had to cut corners somewhere. I think the only bad issue I ever had was also present in Windows XP and was a bad issue with nVidia's G80 drivers. Certainly made it fun in WoW whenever I entered an Arakkoa village and both monitor's video feed sudden dropped and I was greeted with a nice black screen and an unresponsive computer.

I certainly do understand why you don't get Microsoft's Vista-only decision for Halo 2 as there is no clearcut physical limitation-based reason. Personally I think Halo 2 is a poor choice for trying to push Vista (I bet they'd have much better success if it was Gears of War for the PC), so I'm wondering if they're simply trying to strengthen Vista's Gaming section. Since Vista has the whole games window where it provides a launcher for any installed game and even more features of it's a "Game for Windows" game. Since it's published by Microsoft, they can control where it goes, unlike a game published by EA.


RE: XP
By NotAok on 5/25/2007 8:43:24 AM , Rating: 5
your comparison sucks, a 5 year old computer is nothing like a 5 year old operating system. XP is fine, no reason to upgrade.


RE: XP
By Omega215D on 5/25/2007 9:51:57 PM , Rating: 2
The point of Vista and DirectX 10 being tied to it, according to the MS developer interviewed in MaximumPC, is to break away from legacy coding.


RE: XP
By EODetroit on 5/25/07, Rating: -1
RE: XP
By psypher on 5/25/2007 10:22:50 AM , Rating: 4
ok, so if you are looking at just benchmarks, vista is not better. However, i have vista on my laptop and XP on my desktop and i'll tell you what, i prefer my laptop hands down over my desktop nowadays... vista is just a more friendly environment to work in. speed isn't an issue. I have pretty decent hardware in my laptop. I use it mainly for work, which means i use Access and SQL a lot. I even love the new version of office as well...

when it comes down to it, vista is the future. it is way easier to use, especially for people that aren't great with computers. Example: I bought my mother a copy of vista and upgraded her computer. I now recieve about a quarter as many phone calls asking for help to fix her machine. And most of her calls nowadays are just asking me to teach her how to scan something again (she'll never figure it out...)

Thank you microsoft for reducing the number of tech support related phone calls i recieve from my mother!


RE: XP
By goku on 5/26/2007 5:30:07 PM , Rating: 2
maybe because cause she knows it's hopeless to ask you for help with vista, probably because she's heard from her friends that any issues you have with vista are due to vista itself.

I.e program compatibility or just plain slowness. I used vista on a brand new laptop and I can tell you, it isn't quick by any means, the only reason I'd use vista is because support will eventually dry up for older OSs which IMO is a shame since a lot of them still could offer a decent experience.

Windows 2000 is by no means dated but unfortunately people won't support it anymore because it's simply easier to work for the latest platform. It'd be nice if they'd just allow the install of programs onto 2000 and just not offer support in the first place..


RE: XP
By TomZ on 5/26/2007 8:55:28 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Windows 2000 is by no means dated...

That's funny - I would say that Windows 2000 is absolutely dated. LOL.

Seriously though, Windows 2000 is complete garbage compared to XP and especially Vista. Running Windows 2000 today is kind of like driving a 1983 Ford Escort. Just because the damn thing still runs doesn't mean that it should be on the road.


RE: XP
By mr toasty on 5/27/2007 8:59:46 PM , Rating: 2
I run Windows 2000

How the hell is 2000 garbage? I've used XP, and in my opinion it's like windows 2000 with a cartoony, i-know-whats-good-for-you-even-if-you-don't-like-it -i'm-going-to-do-it-anyways interface.

The only programs I've ever had a problem with are ones from Microsoft anyways. No support for IE7, Live Messenger or Movie Maker. I know it's not that it would be a problem to implement, I get the feeling that they're going out of their way to support only XP and above. Why else would Firefox 2.0 still work (and support for Windows 98 is supposedly there for 3)


RE: XP
By Milliamp on 5/28/2007 6:21:09 PM , Rating: 2
Amen


RE: XP
By psypher on 5/27/2007 9:04:39 PM , Rating: 2
you sir must have bought a very slow laptop... My mother has a P4-d 3.2 i believe with a gig of ram... not exactly a speed demon... at least not by today's standards with cheap C2D's and 2gig kits of ddr2 for under $100.

the reason she almost never has a tech question is because for things like email, web browsing and word (the things that 97% of all non-gamers, non-techies use their computers for) vista just works, and it works well, fast and is VERY intuitive.

As far as us tech geeks, i routinely use my machine with vista x64 for large database work and critical projects constantly. I have way more issues doing my work with my XP box. Vista just works. And to tell you the truth, even though vista is a decently expensive upgrade (not really), my company was more than happy with my purchase since my downtime has been reduced since i have started using vista. and when you bill more than the cost of the software in an hour, it is a no brainer purchase.


RE: XP
By hannibal da mekanikabull on 5/29/2007 8:09:19 PM , Rating: 2
running both right now, dual boot. I guess I am a half a moron?

putz


RE: XP
By OxBow on 5/25/2007 9:30:39 AM , Rating: 3
Actually, I do use computers that are five years old. I finally retired one that was 10 years old last month, It was still running Win95 just fine. Heck, I still have a couple old DOS programs that I pull out once in a while.

Seriously, for what most people do on their computer, most of the machines sold these days are way overkill. Surf the web, check e-mail, write a letter, layout a spreadsheet, that's about it. I enjoy new technology, but just because something new has come out doesn't mean I'm going to go screaming out the door to buy it and take it home.

I haven't seen anything in Vista that makes me want to migrate, and a lot of things that make me think it would be best to hold off or just ignore it. The system requirements are outrageous for an OS and just serve to sell more new hardware. Next time I buy a computer, I'm seriously going to look at Linux or osX.


RE: XP
By Munkles on 5/25/07, Rating: 0
RE: XP
By rdeegvainl on 5/25/07, Rating: -1
RE: XP
By Munkles on 5/25/2007 10:23:49 AM , Rating: 2
I NEVER made the claim that it would preform better in Vista rdeegvainl! You should re read my posts if you think I did! Im simply saying the adoption of Vista is necessary. Even if only to get end users better protection, a more stable enviroment to work in and to get hardware vendors to work on their drivers.

I understand that its difficult too learn how to program for a totally new api, but thats no excuse devs have had WAY too long with Vista to not have sufficient drivers out.

I think its interesting that the only argument AGAINST Vista thus far is performance related which is EASILY fixed with good drivers. Noone wants to shell out for a new OS, that I understand and noone wants to learn something new but baselessly attacking an OS.... is childish.


RE: XP
By rdeegvainl on 5/25/2007 10:40:31 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
Im simply saying the adoption of Vista is necessary.


Why is it necessary for halo 2? that is what it is all about. stop sounding like a microsoft rep trying to sell their newest and most expensive OS and stop skirting the issue at hand. It isn't about programing, or about the whole vista experience. not about a more stable enviroment. The whole driver issue isn't the matter either. i have no doubt that halo2 at least will run well in vista.
It isn't about anything other than microsoft deciding that they are only making it for VISTA.
Can you tell me what halo2 NEEDS that vista HAS and XP does not have?
Cause there is only one thing that fits that description. Microsofts approval.


RE: XP
By EODetroit on 5/25/2007 11:07:49 AM , Rating: 1
rdeegvainl, do you work for Microsoft, or do you work for a company with Microsoft as a client?

Microsoft FIRED its rep to CDW because CDW didn't sell enough copies of Vista despite the fact that it was totally out of his control. If MS would do what, who knows what else they'd try to sell more copies... like telling people to post this crap on Dailytech.

quote:
Im simply saying the adoption of Vista is necessary.

Why? So Bill can pay his property taxes? The truth is Vista is entirely UN-necessary right now, especially for gamers. Halo 2, which its own game developer freely admits is a big piece of crap, changes nothing.

Obviously Vista is the un-avoidable future of Windows, and all games starting development now are keeping Vista in mind. But those games won't be around for years, only a fool would upgrade now instead of then, because there's no real benefit for the current and soon upcoming crops of games, and it always makes sense to wait until you need a new Windows OS before you actually "upgrade" to it.


RE: XP
By EODetroit on 5/25/2007 11:10:07 AM , Rating: 2
Post should be directed at Munkles, not rdeegvainl, no edit and didn't catch it in preview :-/. Sorry about that.


RE: XP
By rdeegvainl on 5/25/2007 11:14:27 AM , Rating: 2
ahh i understand now. disregard the below post i made.


RE: XP
By rdeegvainl on 5/25/2007 11:13:45 AM , Rating: 2
no i do not work for microsoft. I think that examples of behavior like you outlined are wrong.
I am not advertising vista or microsoft. I don't know where you got that idea from. If it was the quote you selected, that was what i was arguing against. I was replying to someone who said that.


RE: XP
By EODetroit on 5/25/2007 11:14:20 AM , Rating: 1
I can thought of another argument against Vista in two seconds flat:

Vista costs money, while my current OS is already paid for, and works better.

Here's another:

Reinstalling an OS is a pain even when it goes smoothly, and since there's no benefit to using Vista, its a better use of my time to NOT upgrade.


RE: XP
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 5/25/2007 1:33:26 PM , Rating: 2
Installing a new OS, isn't that big of a deal. Especially for anyone who posts here. I just copied everything to my RAID, and nuked my Boot drive (Raptor). Loaded Vista and was on my way in 25 minutes. The Vista install and setup took me a grand total of 20 Minutes, with 5 minutes of configuration.


RE: XP
By EODetroit on 5/25/2007 1:43:13 PM , Rating: 1
How long did it take you to reinstall all your apps and utilities after Vista was technically "installed"?

Unset overclock back to default
Latest Drivers for everything
Winzip
Winrar
Antivirus
Gimp
Acrobat reader
ffdshow
Firefox
All your real apps, games, etc
Re-overclock

That's a full day's work, if not two days. 20 minutes my ass.


RE: XP
By glennpratt on 5/25/2007 2:29:57 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
Unset overclock back to default

Why? If your overclock isn't stable, why are you using it?

quote:
Latest Drivers for everything

For alot of people there are two things, motherboard chipset driver and video driver, hell with my computer I can get them in one download.

quote:
Winzip
Winrar

7zip covers everything these do, better and open source. Takes less then 1 minute to download and install.

quote:
Antivirus

AVG Free - 10 minutes tops

quote:
Gimp
Gimp, inkscape, paint.net, just load up all those downloads for the latest versions at once, 10-20 minutes.

quote:
Acrobat reader

Foxit for me, 1 minute.

quote:
ffdshow

Again, tiny program, 1 minute install.

quote:
Firefox

5mb, 1 minute easy.

quote:
All your real apps, games, etc

Install as you need. Do you install all your games and then go play them? What a waste of time.

quote:
Re-overclock

Again, why?


RE: XP
By cinder on 5/25/2007 3:06:59 PM , Rating: 1
Took me about 40 minutes to get EVERYTHING reinstalled on my Vista machine. I did have the XP partition though so it made lots of stuff easy to copy.


RE: XP
By solgae1784 on 5/25/2007 10:36:05 AM , Rating: 2
Your info is somewhat outdated there. Vista drivers has now gotten quite mature enough that there's barely any performance difference between XP in terms of DirectX gaming. The only time where Vista somewhat falters is on OpenGL since Microsoft dropped native support on it, so basically ATI/NVidia had to start from scratch.

Having said that, since Halo 2 is actually a DX9 game with no DX10 features used, the only thing that makes it a Vista-exclusive is a tray-and-play feature, which allows you to play the game while it is being installed on the background. I think someone will hack away to make it run on XP sooner or later. But don't get your hopes up.

Xbox only has to run games in contrast to PC, and that's where the supposedly 'old' specs on xbox shine on it compared to regular PC components. Also, the max resolution it can run is 640x480, whereas the PC can go as high as 1900x1200, with higher details. And let's not forget the fact that Xbox version of halo 2 have texture loading problems, so the cutscenes look butt ugly.....and of course, having a slower dvd drive makes it worse.


RE: XP
By solgae1784 on 5/25/2007 10:40:18 AM , Rating: 2
Also, I have a feeling that Game for Windows Live would only work well with vista, so even if someone makes it to run on XP, you won't be able to play online since it requires at least a silver live account in order for you to play.


RE: XP
By rdeegvainl on 5/25/2007 10:46:13 AM , Rating: 2
If my information is outdated about, considering i'm using vista myself, then the problem IS vista. most likely it's resource hungry nature.


RE: XP
By ChronoReverse on 5/25/2007 1:24:02 PM , Rating: 2
That is incorrect. Vista has the same support for OGL as XP does (actually the "native" support is slightly better even). However, it is, just as in XP, up to the manufacturers to actually write a driver.

ATi's OGL driver is actually coming along fairly well now. Not sure about the Nvidia situation.


RE: XP
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 5/25/2007 10:36:30 AM , Rating: 2
No problem with any of my games on Vista. Heck, even Starcraft works on it natively, without even running it as administrator.

That said, my Vista machine (Ultimate 64-bit) will take your XP machine to the cleaners. Because Vista can better utilize my newer hardware. (4GB Ram now) Although with the price of RAM dropping so quickly, I might increase that. But, in case anyone here hasn't noticed, but if you have Vista, and you have greater than 2GB of ram, and you own a copy of Command & Conquer 3, go check how much RAM it eats while playing. I checked mine, 2.4GB. Of RAM, just for that 1 game. Games are becoming more resource hungry, and machines will need to be upgraded. Not like RAM isnt dirt cheap anyways.

Go check out newegg. A quick look at their front page lists DDR-800 2x1GB Sticks for 80.99.

Insane pricing.


RE: XP
By rdeegvainl on 5/25/2007 10:51:26 AM , Rating: 3
Your system would take my xp system to the cleaners, that i do not doubt. But I cannot afford your system either.
I still play C&C 3 with no problems.


RE: XP
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 5/25/2007 1:21:42 PM , Rating: 2
True enough. I can play CNC3 on my laptop. Which only boasts Vista-32, an X1300 Mobility card, and 2GB of 667 Ram. Can't crank the graphics settings but its playable if scaled down.

I just bought a 37" Westinghouse LCD Panel
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...

Gonna hook mu desktop up to it tonight to see if I can play CNC3 on it...... /drool


RE: XP
By nah on 5/25/2007 1:37:29 PM , Rating: 3
there is peformance degradation with vista---I ran the built in benchmark with winrar3.7 b5 and found out that performance degrades from 536 KB/s to 371 KB/s from XP SP2 to Vista Ultimate (with Aero)--this is my 3rd computer--a P4 3 Ghz with 2 GB of dual DDR2 533 RAM,a Radeon X800XT. Also some minor issues exist--in Vista things like copying large files from DVD to HDD take more time, when you remove a removable drive the window does not automatically close like XP, you have to manually close it---minor annoyances that sometimes grate

the perf issues are lesser in my Core2D with 2 GB of DDR2 800 and GF 7900, but they are still there--

By the way, even a 3 year game like Doom 3 gobbles up nearly a gig of RAM--load it and see


RE: XP
By EODetroit on 5/25/2007 1:44:54 PM , Rating: 2
Try playing Enemy Territories. Its a free download... go ahead... try it.


RE: XP
By knar on 5/25/2007 12:14:06 PM , Rating: 2
for people who are saying the Halo2 was designed to run on the original xbox...remember that running a game at 480i or 480p is not the same as running it at 1600*1200 or even 1024*768....running at 480i/p is like gaming at 640*480....yes alot of video cards today can do that...running a game on a higher res require more porcessing power...and aobut the vista has lower performance.....its not a playable vs unplayable difference in almost all cases...its a few frames....but when you running at 100FPS do you really notice the difference?? also, im assuming that they didnt just port the game over. im assuming they did improve texture quality as well as shading. Also keep in mind that console OS are designed with one thing in mind GAMING! a windows OS (xp or vista) is a multi-perpouse platform so it has more overhead which is why games run the same on computer with higher specs than a console. Back to the vista exclusive issue... Vista alone is a great OS...instability in vista occurs when people install software that is not vista compatable. Drivers are another issue although they are getting better. IMO vista is a better OS than XP...and think back to when XP first came out...it had problems as well but people finally upgradedbut XP was not without its share of problems


RE: XP
By TedStriker on 5/25/2007 10:43:59 AM , Rating: 3
My PC is around 5yrs old and I'm a gamer. Play just about every FPS and RTS out there. I don't get insane frame rates, but so long as I get 20 - 30 it's enjoyable. I 've been succesful in online league play too.

no reason for me to buy all new hardware and upgrade to a new OS when what I have now works perfectly fine.

MS making Halo 2, and probably other upcoming games, Vista only just seems like a desperation move to try and get more people to upgrade since XP works fine and there's little else to sway consumers. They need to try using better games to entice people though. Played Halo 1 on my PC and wasn't impressed with it. the first few levels were great, but the rest of the game was just a wash and repeat of the same content, felt more like a chore to finish it.


RE: XP
By NotAok on 5/25/2007 10:45:37 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Its for the GAMER

how so? If I'd switch to Vista right now I can guarantee it would take a hit on my games. It makes no sense to me to switch to an operating system that offers very little benefits over XP and yet requires more resources to run.
quote:
get the most out of their cutting edge hardware.

And cutting edge hardware isn't even necessary for gamers. My machine is under $1,000 and just recently I completed STALKER with my settings on high at 1680 x 1050 and now I'm playing Two Worlds on high settings too. Cutting Edge hardware is for those who want insane benchmarking scores and bragging rights, about it. A mid-range system will do just fine.

quote:
and someone who expects to run Halo 2 with all the bells and whistles had better have both a rig, and OS that are capable of that.


The rig i understand, but the operating system? Come on man, now you're just talking crap. Halo 2 would've run better on XP had they made it for it. MS clearly did it to push vista sales, no other reason.


RE: XP
By Munkles on 5/25/2007 11:00:35 AM , Rating: 2
You perfectly illustrate my point. The benefit we SHOULD be getting from Vista is GREATLY reduced because there is nothing to take advantage of it, because of people like you who refuse to upgrade, and because you refust to upgrade devs are slower to program content which REQUIRES the better hardware.

People can piss n moan all they want about how XP gets better performance, but thats only true because of immature drivers and is usually just an excuse to let people remain delusional that their 9800 pro doesn need an upgrade.


RE: XP
By rdeegvainl on 5/25/2007 11:10:00 AM , Rating: 2
Unfortunately, halo2 doesn't take advantage of vista's finer points. There is nothing that Vista has and XP doesn't that halo2 NEEDS. If they made the whole game in dx10 then i would agree, but such is not the case. And it isn't the consumers responsibility to upgrade. it is the dev's job to make content that takes advantage of the upgrades (not just making it exclusive to the upgrade) to give the consumer a reason to upgrade.


RE: XP
By NotAok on 5/25/2007 2:48:12 PM , Rating: 2
You have it backwards my friend. I should not have to purchase high end hardware in order to push developers to make more demanding games. Developers should be making high end stuff that makes me want to upgrade. If my system that costs me under $1000 to build can run anything on the market then why would I go and spend $3,000 just to have top of the line?? Seems pretty dumb to me.


RE: XP
By TomZ on 5/26/2007 8:58:26 PM , Rating: 2
It's called "the chicken and the egg" - there is a mutual dependency between people investing in higher-end machines and software publishers investing in higher-end content. Seems pretty simple to me.


RE: XP
By Belard on 5/25/2007 6:04:04 PM , Rating: 2
Even Vista doesn't use 4GB of ram properly unless you buy/install the 64bit version. And when it comes to games, Vista still plays them ALL slower than XP... and Vista64bit is even SLOWER than Vista32bit.

These benchmarks are with Dual and quad core CPUs - so your statement about "wasted on XP" is not 100% true.

Point is: Vista offers NO actual benifits over XP. DX10 COULD work on XP, if M$ wanted to do so. M$ has NO problems making DX9 work on Windows98, which is vastly more different from XP, when compared to XP<>Vista.

Dx10 for future games and "locking out" current customers is marketing. Its screwing their customers. Halo2's graphics is still not AWSOME... doesn't surpass the abilities of DX9. There are games that are better looking and more advanced than Halo/Halo2... that run just fine with DX9/XP.

- Vista is NOT the most solid OS either, or secure. Its kinda ugly compared to XP, but oooooh - its transparent!

- Much of vista's problems is the heavy DRM, checking 10+ times per second to make sure the OS, CPU, mobo, video card and their drivers are "legit", etc.

Microsoft should be sued for not supporting XP with DX10, as they did with DX9 for Win98 & Win2000.

Find game developers and GPU manufactures that can state "DX10 can't run on WinXP because of the limitations of WinXP" - I don't think that is going to happen. In a world were we can run emulations of PS1/PS2 - Arcade games and even Virtual computers (Mac on PC, visaversa) DirectX can be made to run on XP just fine, or worse.... far better than Vista. That makes sense... DX9 is faster on WinXP... There would be even LESS people adapting to Vista if DX10 was a big jump faster on XP.

Perhaps if Microsoft had skills as the worlds largest OS marker to actually make Vista run faster and better than XP - then these issues would not exist.


RE: XP
By TomZ on 5/26/2007 8:38:31 PM , Rating: 1
I think it's funny that you complain about the performance of Vista, but the go on to suggest that DX10 could be supported in XP using software emulation. Hilarious.

Microsoft pretty clearly stated that DX10 wasn't going to be available because of its dependencies on WDDM and the subsequently high development and support costs. And besides, why should Microsoft continue to put more features into XP? They are better off getting paid for their development, i.e., by adding features to Vista that add value for that, so they can get paid for that work. People like you want everything for free. That's really the core issue.


RE: XP
By wallijonn on 5/29/2007 11:38:25 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
someone who expects to run Halo 2 with all the bells and whistles had better have both a rig, and OS that are capable of that.


That is the crux of the matter: that one needs a whole new system to play ONE new game.

It may play out this way: developers won't write DX10 only games because there isn't a large enough DX10 base, there wouldn't be enough profit since they need to sell at least half a million copies to make a decent profit. Which will slow down the complete adoption of DX10.

I get the feeling that MS is betting on people not buying a whole new system and instead they will buy an XBox 360 instead. Which will mean less games on the PC because, again, developers will code for the system with the largest installed user base.


RE: XP
By Volrath06660 on 5/25/2007 10:33:26 PM , Rating: 2
You do not like to get scr^@&(! over by hardware........yet you are considering Apple?! You can build a system from Newegg and Tigerdirect more powerful than any Mac sent out from their factories for a fraction of the cost.....I speced a PowerPC two months ago at $4000+ (of which they were charging $1100 for 2 gigs of DDR2 667 mind you) and then built a system with just hardware parts from Newegg that owned it for less than half the cost. And for an OS, you are PAYING to get a SKIN over Unix, which is a FREE OS!!!!!

I laugh at Apple users who think they are avoiding getting owned by a big name brand........


RE: XP
By GotDiesel on 5/25/2007 2:28:58 PM , Rating: 3
I've been using a 64bit OS for the last 3 years and very pleased with it.. it's just not windoze.. LOL


RE: XP
By TomZ on 5/26/2007 9:00:23 PM , Rating: 1
So how many of the games that are being discussed here are you able to run on your alternative OS? LOL.


RE: XP
By random123 on 5/28/2007 4:58:15 AM , Rating: 2
Er haven't had a game not work so far, only problem with 64 bit XP is some products don't have drivers, and 16 bit apps wont run and thats the only problems I've had so far. Also shouldn't XP/vista 32 bit address up to 4 gig memory anyway and 64 bit if you have more?


RE: XP
By TomZ on 5/29/2007 12:26:32 PM , Rating: 1
The OP said that he/she wasn't running Windows.


RE: XP
By CrimsonFrost on 5/25/2007 2:48:12 PM , Rating: 2
Amen brotha! I approve this statement :)


RE: XP
By Fubar0606 on 5/25/2007 1:49:28 PM , Rating: 2
I agree, but the whole Idea is that HALO Microsoft's "baby" is supposed to premier on PC to boost sales to there bastard Child, windows Vista hahaha I love making windows sound like a slut. "It was a late night and Bill gates hadn't seen a women in months. his CD drive looked so tempting..." man I sound like a newb, but last day of school man!


RE: XP
By tgc2100 on 5/25/2007 3:36:09 PM , Rating: 2
I should probably get around to reading all of the posts, but it's already pages and pages. Just in case someone hasn't posted it yet there is a fix for Halo 2 and other DX10 games for XP.

http://alkyproject.blogspot.com/

you can even preorder Halo2 from them and it comes with the fix for XP


RE: XP
By tuteja1986 on 5/25/2007 10:56:44 PM , Rating: 2
Wait this game was on sale like in JB Hifi in Australia/sydney/townhall.


RE: XP
By OblivionMage on 5/29/2007 9:52:40 PM , Rating: 2
Ok, they made it only for Vista to support thier new operating system. I would be thousands that any major corporation would do that. I am not really sure why people are so angry?


Wait, what?
By KaiserCSS on 5/25/2007 3:51:07 AM , Rating: 4
Hold up a sec... since when did Halo 2 sport nudity? I mean, perhaps Cortana might be a bit iffy, but what in the world did they add for H2 Vista?

For the sake of laughs, I must know who or what appears nude, and who the hell decided to throw that in the game.




RE: Wait, what?
By Christopher1 on 5/25/2007 4:00:43 AM , Rating: 2
That's a good question. From what I have seen, there is no nudity in Halo 2, of course I have only played it sparingly at a local Best Buy.

Where is this nudity? And why, in a game that purports to take place on alien planets with troops, would there be any nudity?


RE: Wait, what?
By TedStriker on 5/25/2007 1:11:27 PM , Rating: 3
None of the aliens are wearing any clothes....


RE: Wait, what?
By Bruce 1337 on 5/25/2007 7:04:58 AM , Rating: 5
It's probably just a rumor Microsoft is using to drum up some sales.

I can just imaging hundreds of teenagers running out to buy Halo 2 and then immediately searching the web for the Hot Plasma mod.


RE: Wait, what?
By hannibal da mekanikabull on 5/29/2007 4:00:28 PM , Rating: 2
yup, prolly true


RE: Wait, what?
By Archmaille on 5/25/2007 7:15:17 AM , Rating: 2
I'd have to assume that it is probably a glitch from the sounds of things. Something to where at the right angle, or at the right place on a certain map some of the units armor can be seen through... not like someone purposely designed it that way but it probably just shows the unit model without its armor/clothing.


RE: Wait, what?
By MonkeyPaw on 5/25/2007 7:47:06 AM , Rating: 2
I think it is Cortana. Really, it's the only possibility, unless the Flood's clothes were just a bit too tattered.


RE: Wait, what?
By killerroach on 5/25/2007 8:29:20 AM , Rating: 4
Since when does it matter? Partial nudity can appear in a T-rated game, last I knew. Since Halo 2 is obviously not a Teen-rated game, but rather a Mature one, I don't see what the big deal is, unless there is some sort of sex thing (which some people might get bent out of shape over). Sounds more like either a publicity stunt, Microsoft running scared, or their port wasn't completely ready and they jumped at the most convenient excuse, one or the other.

That being said, I think I'll stick with HL2, FEAR, and Far Cry... all better shooters that will probably all run better on my system, even in Vista (and even considering Halo 2 PC isn't sporting much in terms of enhanced visuals).


RE: Wait, what?
By Goty on 5/25/2007 10:30:02 AM , Rating: 3
It's definitely ready. Shipments had already gone out to certain retailers and some are even selling copies now. If it wasn't ready, a measly 8-9 day delay wouldn't be enough to fix it.


RE: Wait, what?
By cheburashka on 5/25/2007 4:08:47 PM , Rating: 2
Here is the nudity in question. I guess since MS doesn't approve I must qualify this with NSFW and 18+ warnings or whatever. It's just a dudes ass in a special type of error message you will probably never see.
http://img293.imageshack.us/img293/5082/untitleddf...


RE: Wait, what?
By jajig on 5/26/2007 1:58:35 AM , Rating: 2
There's no pint in upgrading to vista and buying the game now!


RE: Wait, what?
By TomZ on 5/26/2007 9:03:57 PM , Rating: 1
Geez, I sure wish I hadn't clicked on that link...what was I thinking - please don't post links to pictures of male nudity on this site! LOL.


Uh....
By IceTron on 5/25/07, Rating: 0
RE: Uh....
By Mojo the Monkey on 5/25/2007 4:16:59 AM , Rating: 2
while i agree with the general sentiment about us being too sensitive with natural body images amidst a backdrop of wanton violence and destruction...

...isnt the "combine" from Half-Life? Did you mean the flood?


RE: Uh....
By oDii on 5/25/2007 5:35:38 AM , Rating: 3
Subconsciously, he knows Half-Life 2 is a better game...


RE: Uh....
By Archmaille on 5/25/2007 7:12:35 AM , Rating: 2
Dang straight! HL2 is the only FPS game that I can stand to play, and it's actually quite addicting.


RE: Uh....
By jtesoro on 5/25/2007 9:17:17 AM , Rating: 2
And HL2 Episode One dropped in price to $9.99 in Steam. I practically swore off the execution of the site before (slow, etc.), but I'm pretty sure I'll bite after I reinstall HL2 soon.


RE: Uh....
By GotDiesel on 5/25/2007 2:35:37 PM , Rating: 2
America was doomed a LONG time ago buddy... didn't need a game to realise that did you ???


Why buy Halo 2 for Vista in the first place.
By BZDTemp on 5/25/2007 7:09:19 AM , Rating: 3
Most likely it will be cheaper to get a 2nd hand XBOX with a bunch of games one of which could likely be Halo 2.




RE: Why buy Halo 2 for Vista in the first place.
By Archmaille on 5/25/2007 7:18:42 AM , Rating: 1
That would require buying an Xbox, sure I spend about $1,500 a year in upgrades to my computer, but it gets more done than just gaming.


RE: Why buy Halo 2 for Vista in the first place.
By NotAok on 5/25/2007 8:44:43 AM , Rating: 2
$1,500 in upgrades a year?! how is that even possible. I could build a new high-end gaming rig every year with that amount of money, upgrades alone shouldn't come close to that


By adam92682 on 5/25/2007 11:39:23 AM , Rating: 2
Just 2 8800 ultra's alone would be more than $1500


By Goty on 5/25/2007 7:37:20 AM , Rating: 2
There's also the fact that Halo2 runs like crap on the XBOX. (Texture loading problems being the biggest issue)

Also, a lot of people would rather play the game with a mouse and keyboard rather than with a controller.


doomed
By zam786 on 5/25/07, Rating: 0
RE: doomed
By oTAL (blog) on 5/25/2007 4:54:10 AM , Rating: 4
quote:
by the way microsoft are slowing down xp with the latest windows updates so consumers are forced to upgradeto vista.


Yeah! I noticed that yesterday after the aliens came for my weekly anal probe.
*adjusts tin foil hat*


RE: doomed
By Trogdor on 5/25/2007 9:14:51 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
by the way microsoft are slowing down xp with the latest windows updates so consumers are forced to upgrade to vista.
quote:


Ahahahahaha.......bwahahahahah..... Oh come on now, if you wanna bash Vista, go nuts, it seems to be the popular thing to do, but MS forcibly slowing down XP? You reached really deep into someone's ass for that one!


RE: doomed
By HrilL on 5/25/2007 10:19:11 AM , Rating: 1
I don't know where you get your info... I have vista, win2k3 server, and windows xp pro machines and they all seem to get updates at the same time. Xp and 2k3 have almost the same updates. They won't stop supporting xp for a long time now. I believe 2000 is still getting updated... and support for 98 ended on July 11, 2006. So M$ will be supporting Xp for at least 3 more years...


...
By Nik00117 on 5/25/2007 9:21:16 AM , Rating: 2
Just because there may of been a glimpse of nudity...

Your delaying it...




RE: ...
By Icehawk on 5/25/2007 11:44:19 AM , Rating: 2
Why switch to Vista at this point other than for the exclusives?

When Vista is more mature in another 6mos-1yr then I will be more inclined to jump. Still looking at the memory footprint and overall performance nothing, other than exclusives, is making me want to switch from XP.


RE: ...
By Sazar on 5/25/2007 1:02:44 PM , Rating: 2
They are talking about having to redo packaging and I guess adjust the rating on the retail channel.

Personally, I am more than likely going to buy the download version from the locker, if its available :)

Been happy with every single digital download I have purchased EXCEPT for Far Cry with the 1.4 patch already applied. One of the worst patches in gaming existence :(

Re: Discussion about Vista v/s XP, it is the perogative of the designer to do as they please. You can choose to buy or not buy as you see fit. No one is forcing you to purchase or play Halo 2 OR Vista.

And fwiw, Vista is the best OS I have used in ages. I dual boot Vista Ultimate and ubunut 7.04.

Cheers :)


Why does partial nudity matter?
By giantpandaman2 on 5/25/2007 11:07:37 AM , Rating: 2
Since Halo 2 is a rated M game?

Doesn't make jack sense.




By noirsoft on 5/25/2007 12:08:59 PM , Rating: 2
It matters because of the content descriptors on the box. an M rated game because of violence has a different ratings box than an M for nudity. So, when the content was discovered, a new box legally had to be printed. It's definitely a bit of legal butt-covering to stave off any potential lawsuits because of "misleading packaging" -- but it is necessary.


By Omega215D on 5/25/2007 9:57:33 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, Jack Thompson never makes any sense.


Jubblies
By Chrysolithos on 5/25/2007 9:21:35 AM , Rating: 5
VG cats predicted this long ago.

http://www.vgcats.com/comics/?strip_id=158




The neverending vista whine
By SavagePotato on 5/25/2007 3:24:54 PM , Rating: 2
I don't get why this constant whine about Vista is still going everywhere you look. It is here, it isn't going anywhere.

You do not have to upgrade if you don't want to. Noone is twisting your arm in any way. Halo 2? a half assed console port of an old game? who gives a flying leap anyway? I think it's sillier that they are releasing this game AT ALL for pc as opposed to including XP.

If you have a computer thats 5 years old or even 2 years old for that matter, why would you want to upgrade to this OS? You are not going to play any directx 10 games on anything but a pretty hefty machine when they DO come out anyway. There are none yet.

So have a coke and a smile and well you know the rest. I am using Vista, drivers were rank for the first two months and I was a VERY early adopter, because I am a technophile and want to try everything new. If i keep a mobo processor ram combo for more than a year it's a rare occasion cause I love to try new technology.

If that ain't you, then what are you worried about, keep using your xp system, when it burns out and needs replacing, or if you decide you want vista, do the smart thing if you don't know what the heck your doing. Buy a system PRELOADED with vista, if it's more than 2 years old it's always a good time to buy a new system anyway.

It isn't like were in the age of 3000 dollar systems anymore.(unless your silly enough to buy a dell or a mac or something) We sell alot of machines at work and we don't even bring in anything thats over 1200 bucks. The majority of systems we sell are in the $599-899 range. If you can't scrounge that up every 2 or three years, I don't know what to tell you.




RE: The neverending vista whine
By mcsnet on 5/25/2007 3:29:24 PM , Rating: 2
I do not receive, why this looks at the constant gejank regarding the aspect you goes still everywhere. He is not goes here, everywhere he. They may not promote, if you do not want to deform your weapon at Noone anyhow. Halo 2? _ consolehaven half assed an old play? who give-nth - in a kind or on another to fly jumped? I think more dwazer am that they solve this play WITH THEM for the PC by opposition, XP to be contained. If it a computer thats 5 years old or even 2 years old those the question why this at OS, which became you to promote to want? They will not possibly play something from directx 10 plays up, but hefty free machine, if they come in a kind or from another. there is still nothing. A coke and a mouse have so much and well to know you the remainder. I use was the splendid drivers for the two first months, and again I was one to assume MUCH early -, because the aspect is I technophile, and everything to try wants. If I ramscombo for more than year keep more mobobewerker, it is a cause of the opportunity I rare love to try the new technology. They, which are you him, their xpsysteem keep using at this time, how this made ain ' t anxious, if he and it burn replaced required, or if you you decide the aspect, make the smart thing wants as you none that weet tail their action. The purchase is a system of with the aspect the VOORGELADEN, if more than 2 old years it is always it a good time is to buy in a kind or from another a new system. He is not as was enough in the age of 3000 dollar systems anymore.(unless your humans for dell, or MAC or something) sales alot the machines to the work to buy, and we do not possibly even bring ourselves somewhat in thats 1200 of bucks. Who are we in the fan $599-899 sell the majority of the systems. If it scrounge in top for 2 or the three years me not what does not weet over you can to tell.


This is normal for Microsoft...
By vze4z7nx on 5/25/2007 3:50:43 PM , Rating: 2
Microsoft is so busy thinking about getting the most money possible from a product that they forgot to test it before they started selling it.

I hope some little kid gets to see that nude so that his parents can sue Microsoft.




By MrPieGuy on 5/26/2007 4:00:56 PM , Rating: 2
Okay first off Microsoft is a corporation, it would be rather dumb of them to not make money. Secondly, clearly they did test this product otherwise they wouldn't of found the problem. Thirdly, some little kid wont be seeing it because they are removing it, hence the delay. Get your head out of your ass and try to realize that Microsoft isn't some evil corporation.


Get with the times....
By Pandamonium on 5/25/07, Rating: 0
RE: Get with the times....
By Kragoth on 5/25/2007 10:35:40 PM , Rating: 2
Just to clarify on what you said as I think you missed a very important point in that the MAJORITY of M$ customers are still using Windows XP. M$ have a lot more to worry about then forcing people to a new Operating System. I AM a software engineer and we CANNOT just move to another OS. There are weeks and weeks of System Testing that have to go on before we can make a move. PLUS you have to ensure that you have the budget to allow such a move. PLUS you need to train your staff in the use of the new OS. PLUS you have to ensure that ALL your tools are compatible with the new OS. YOU forget that the MAJORITY of businesses are still using legacy systems that cannot be easily migrated to a new OS. These are M$ customers who will quickly decide to never buy another M$ product if they do not get support for their system as a LOT of small businesses cannot afford to upgrade to Vista.

Now, onto gamers. IF M$ were worried about how much money they were going to make from Halo 2 they would have made it compatible with XP PERIOD. M$ know better then anyone else that MOST gamers use XP not Vista. WHY? Because the facts are out there. XP is a better gaming platform then Vista currently.
You are going to say: WAIT! XP can't support more then 3.8GB of RAM so Vista is better - WRONG! There are 64bit versions of XP and better yet XP doesn't need more then 2GB of RAM to run extremely well.
Or you might say DX10 is only for Vista so Vista is better! DX10 Could run on XP as well, and probly would run better only that M$ in their great wisdom decided that the only way to make sales from Vista is to make DX10 exclusive. Which is problably right. If DX10 was XP compatible then no one in the gaming community would bother with Vista. Why would I want a resource hungry OS for gaming? ... The answer is I wouldn't. M$ knew this and said OK, we can't make a great OS so we will force the issue by making DX10 exclusive to Vista. Smart move for sales, but stupid move for popularity amongst gamers.

Why? Well, who wants to pay $500 or more for an OS? Not me! I'd rather put that to a better graphics card to increase my gaming performance. Not make my computer slower with a new OS that isn't as good as the one I already run.

And don't try and tell me that Vista is just as fast as XP. EVERY review done so far has basically pointed out that Vista is still not as fast as XP. OK This could be a driver issue. But the fact of the matter is that I would have to do some serious upgrades to my machine to get the same performance from Vista as I do now with XP. And that is a well known FACT. XP can run quite nicely with 1GB of RAM and produce pretty good framerates in most games even current ones so long as you have a relatively decent graphics card. Vista on the other hand struggles to maintain the same sort of performance with 2GB of RAM and a dual core processor. Go Figure.

Solution? M$ need to back to programming 101 and cut out all the bloated copy protection and DRM and all that sort of rubbish that can be circumvented with by any half decent coder and focus on a fast reliable OS. Fast and accurate integration with the hardware and reduced overheads. That is what is needed in an OS.

If M$ want people to buy their product they need to do 2 things.

1. Make it affordable. It is SOOOO overpriced that for a lot of people the only way to get Vista is to get a pirated copy, and that is a fact.

2. Show people a real hardcore reason to move to Vista, not exclusive 5 year old games. (OK it's not that old but you get my drift). But performance increase on current hardware, not having to upgrade to run it on a machine that runs XP very well.

OK, end of rant. but seriously if you want to make comments about software at least have some experience in writing it. M$ are well below the standards of coding software and they know it and as consumers we should be forcing them to do better not just going oooooh a new shiney OS lets get it. NOOOOOB


RE: Get with the times....
By TomZ on 5/26/07, Rating: 0
RE: Get with the times....
By OblivionMage on 5/31/2007 3:48:42 PM , Rating: 2
Who keeps marking these posts down...


Because seeing...
By scrapsma54 on 5/29/2007 10:22:01 AM , Rating: 2
unattractive alien nipples is wrong and depressing to make people panic. (refernce to Elderscrolls 4 oblivion)
Seriously, if you are going to rate a game m because of nipples, at least make the nipples a little more attractive.




RE: Because seeing...
By OblivionMage on 5/29/2007 9:50:45 PM , Rating: 2
Err, I am pretty sure that wasn't the partial nudity, Gamespot has a link to it, and its really not bad at all.


Just press Alt-F4...
By squeezee on 5/25/2007 4:38:31 AM , Rating: 3
Perhaps they found a command which lets Master Chief whip it out.




Why the Fuss?
By Xerstead on 5/25/2007 2:11:21 PM , Rating: 2
I still don't get it. Why is there such a fuss over a bit of digitised flesh? The parents complaining are the same people who allow their kids to play games with Warfare, Murder, Prostitution (GTA) etc..
All of which I regard as more moraly questionable.




I love it!!
By socokid on 5/25/2007 2:37:10 PM , Rating: 2
"Interestingly enough, reports are now surfacing that nudity is the cause for Halo 2 PC release."

Nice proofreading. According to this article, the entire reason Halo 2 for PC was released was due the nudity... excellent...




I actually already Have Halo 2 PC
By cinder on 5/25/2007 3:02:33 PM , Rating: 2
I am an employee at Circuit City, and we received Halo 2 PC on May 6th and put it out on the 8th. Apparently CCity was not notified about the delay. We sold it. I even bought myself a copy. Its actually pretty awesome. You even get a dashboard like the xbox360 to connect with friends..but either way Im not trying to advertise the game..just saying if you go to CCity its probably on the shelf. Look on our website it states the release date was 5/8 haha :D




Halo 2 obscenity
By MaLaoshi on 5/25/2007 7:39:47 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
It has come to our attention that an unfortunate, obscure content error which includes partial nudity was included in our initial production of “Halo 2” for Windows Vista.


Stop the press! Cortana is all nekkid! Jack T's gonna
fry us over this!




Hm...
By monitorjbl on 5/25/2007 11:29:32 PM , Rating: 2
I wonder if you can see Cortana's nipple....




There is no nudity in the game!
By Alexvrb on 5/26/2007 2:05:53 PM , Rating: 2
I'm really floored I haven't seen more sites (or even commenters) posting a correction to this story. They got this hot little "news" tidbit and ran with it, without waiting for information or asking questions. Typical internet news. Can't accuse Jack Thompson of jumping the gun and getting his info wrong if you can't get your own crap straight.

http://biz.gamedaily.com/industry/news/?id=16294

The "nudity" in question was slipped into a particular error in the Map Editor (probably in the final development stages! too late to catch it). Again, the Map Editor, and only in a certain Error Message. Some coder must have put a picture of his or someone else's backside and put it in there. The GAME contains no such content. They only had to alter the rating info to cover their legal backside because the disc did techically come with nudity on it. 99.9% of users would never have even known it existed if they silently patched it, but this was the better route than covering it up to get burned later.




By Toebot on 5/26/2007 11:21:30 PM , Rating: 2
How about: "Halo 2 Vista Canceled Due to Lack of Interest".




Two reasons
By Treckin on 5/27/2007 12:46:48 AM , Rating: 2
Halo 1 was co released on Xbox and PC, while Halo multiplayer was first available on the PC (xbox live was still in the works).
There are two main reasons Microsoft is releasing H2 for Vista only
1. XP is not compatible with many functions of Windows Live!
2. This one has some duality to it: Halo has a very loyal fan base, so many people will upgrade to Windows Vista in order to play it. Conversely, many non-Halo fans with with or without vista will purchase the game.

IMO, if Microsoft was trying to get the best of both worlds, they would simply offer a free copy of H2 Vista with every purchase of Ultimate Edition or Premium. This would make for both more people purchasing Vista, as well as more people paying the monthly fees for Windows Live
(also, the increased system requirements for Vista would ensure a wide array of people being able to play)




hmmm
By Iroh on 5/29/2007 11:36:59 AM , Rating: 2
I don't know if anyone else already mentioned this, but maybe it is a sales tactic to draw attention to the game by stating there was "hot coffee" in Halo 2.

I don't know how "hot coffee" in GTA affected it's popularity or sales though.

/discuss




Typical MICROSUCKS
By cornfedone on 5/25/07, Rating: -1
RE: Typical MICROSUCKS
By blckgrffn on 5/25/2007 9:11:09 AM , Rating: 2
*dripping sarcasm* Yep, this is the only obvious conclusion.

Really, what does this port have to do with MS OS dev team? Nothing.


RE: Typical MICROSUCKS
By codeThug on 5/25/2007 11:53:19 AM , Rating: 2
Watch it!!!

L Ron Ballmer and the Microtologists are watching this thread. Your life could be in danger.


RE: Typical MICROSUCKS
By Treckin on 5/27/2007 4:56:09 AM , Rating: 2
rofl!!!! That is the funniest thing I have heard all year, bar none. Thank you for bringing some light back into my evening. I was being overwhelmed by idiocy there for a while, I was about to go cry then slit my wrists..
Really though, that was hilarious. Ill remember that for a long time... ; - )


RE: Typical MICROSUCKS
By OblivionMage on 5/29/2007 9:48:54 PM , Rating: 2
Are you one of those crazy people from "Psychologist Weekly" or something? This has got to be the tenth post I have read from you RANTING about your apparent "Microsucks".

Ok about the delay, I really doubt that was actual Microsofts fault, it was Bungie's, who are owned by Microsoft, yes, but still have thier own staff.

The partial nudity was meant to be a joke, it was a .ASS error (actually pretty funny) and they 'forgot' to take it out of the final producy.

Now quite honestly what is wrong with Microsoft's Operating Systems? I don't have much time so I won't say much, but addressing reliability, I have not had any problems with thier Operating systems, with some Third Party programs that are often associated with Microsoft, but not with Windows itself. If every bored teenager tried to exploit Apple's Operating systems, there would be some serious holes. And they are constantly releasing vulnerability fixes, much more then Microsoft. Much of Apple computers vulnerability has gone unnoticed due to lack of interest to try to exploit 4.5% of the marketshare. Again bugs are almost always due to third party software leaving crap in the registry, etc...

Cheers,


RE: Typical MICROSUCKS
By bes on 6/5/2007 5:49:41 PM , Rating: 2
I got Vista Home Premium for free when I bought WinXP Media Center Edition,then I paid $17 for the upgrade to 64bit.
I also ordered Halo2,should be here tomorrow..
There is a few points that I didnt see anyone metion or if it was it was ignored:
Halo2 is being made to support DX10 and DX9.0L,Vista has both installed,also Windows LIVE! features are supposidly Vista only due to the fact that they want to keep it compatable with the XBOX360 users.
And people that think there is a performance drop in Vista its only for the 32bit Version...after I upgraded to the 64bit version my comp was going waaay faster.
Also I have a Radeon HD2900XT 512meg graphics card,they just updated their drivers and then my comp even went faster.
My Specs:
Athlon64 X2 2.6ghz 1meg cache socket AM2
ASUS M2N-E Motherboard with Windows Live! compatability
5gigs DDR2 800 ram
Radeon HD2900XT 512meg graphics pci express
HD Soundmax DTS soundcard
22" HD Widescreen monitor
So far compared to Windows XP fps wise:
Tomb Raider Legend With Next gen content and max settings on everything 1280x1024 32bit
There was a 30% speed increase compared to XP
Several other games..same deal
Half-Life 2 max settings 1280x1024 same deal
the benchmark showed a 50% increase in speed compared to WinXP.
Even Explorer loads websites tons faster than my XP
I use Vista for just about everything now,I have XP as a dual boot option.
I disagree with Microsoft that Halo2 should be Vista only instead of both Xp and Vista,but thats how it works..


"Game reviewers fought each other to write the most glowing coverage possible for the powerhouse Sony, MS systems. Reviewers flipped coins to see who would review the Nintendo Wii. The losers got stuck with the job." -- Andy Marken









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