So only for Vista , heh i knowed it was coming this way

Fuck MS

who cares no improvement (only high resolution and aa) in graphics and vista only. igo buy xbox and play there

its using Dx9... so someone might be able to hack it to work on XP :P

Why bother Bro it will be on console and let MS cook in there Vista. If this supports DX9 there is no reason an XP version isn't available. Some palms are being greased me thinks HUH ??

i played it on console,... i wanna play it how a fps is supposed to be played now :P

You right - I've played it already - years ago. God only knows why MS feel an old FPS is going to sell their new OS - esp. when the PC market is overloaded with superior examples of the genre.

Halo 2 has ALWAYS been meant to be a Vista-only title. Where have you guys been all this time?

And, if you think there are no improvements, you're totally misinformed. This is one title that my son and daughter-in-law are really, really excited about.

Yes I know Dyre but this is just the beginning everything coming out will be DX10 and Vista soon

Only MicroShaft titles, everyone else will maintain XP support if they want to make money.

I hope so

or you can dl vista

Exactly Bro and hence my comment ...

Some palms are being greased me thinks HUH ??

The rich get richer and a thief never trusts a thief

Microsoft are just a bunch of assholez

I agreed, the DX9/XP won't die that fast, I believe theres a good couple of years left, as RingWraith stated "everyone else will maintain XP support if they want to make money."

Has anyone been able to get Oblivion to play on Windows 95 with an 8 MB AIW ATI card?


EDIT: Here's my point. I'm not even using VISTA yet, although I could be using it if I so desired. I've made the choice to wait until at least the release of SP1....whenever that happens.

BUT, as we all know, games have been the big push for PC Technology for years now. AND, to get the most in our games, we're going to have to bite the bullet and upgrade sooner or later. I don't see a big reason for anyone "who can afford to do so" to make games that are only backward compatible with the last two OS versions. At some point, it loses all appeal.

So, if the big boys can put out games that promise to look better, perform better, and give gamers more of what they REALLY want, then who am I to stand in the way? Five, six, seven years from now, we'll look back and realize it was all a matter of progression.

Do we really want to go three steps forward, one step back all the time?

i would agree with you... if it wasn't for the fact that Vista is 10 steps back when compared to XP, in terms of functionality and ease of use.

I agree with you to a point - the cut needn't be as immediate as DX10 being Vista only, after the switch from 9x to NT games still worked on both platforms - I was still using 98SE not that long ago - and to a point avoided 2k - I made the switch as I recall because Doom 3 wouldn't run out of the box on 98 - although a 'patch' was soon made. I think the reason for DX10 being Vista only is driven by MS' desire to sell Vista - i.e. make much more money, than any tech. issues.

As was XP compared to 98SE...which I used religiously until just about three years ago.

Each OS has taken some time to 'get it right'. That's why I'm telling people they have "upgraded" to Vista TOO SOON. People need to wait until at least SP1 is released.

Then you're reading the wrong editorials.

DirectX 10 is completely and differently coded. It will NOT work natively on XP. Period!! Only by using some 'wrapper' can it be made to work and then the performance hit will be so huge it won't be worth it. Believe me, I've read the pros AND cons.

I still say, though, that people using VISTA now is too soon! It needs to mature and MS will need to release SP1 before it becomes attractive to me. I've used some of the later RCs and it does show some promise. But, drivers support is atrocious still.

Let me see if I can pull up an article recently published in PC Format magazine...a UK magazine I like....

just becoz XP won't be able to use Dx10 doesn't mean games need to only support vista

nearly all the software devs no how to incorporoate shader paths and this is evident in Crysis as it can work on both Vista and XP under both Dx10 and Dx9 code paths

So, why not make all PS3 games play on XBOX360 and vice versa? and all PS3/XBOX360 games play nice on Gamecube? and all XBOX360 games play on XP/2K/Vista/98SE/95/and 3.1?

My point is, the developers can make it play on whatever they want and have the time and investment to spend on it. As a consumer, I can choose to NOT buy their game and whatever system it plays on.

I just don't follow the logic behind all the 'MS is so BAD' because they are making games for Vista-only. They aren't the only ones who have made games that aren't backward compatible....or able to be played on previous Windows. BloodRayne II comes to mind. It was XP only and wouldn't play on ME or 98. (I think it was that game, anyway. But, there are even others and MS had nothing to do with it.)

Some of my own favorite developers are putting out a game for this summer that's -- so far -- only slated for XBOX 360. And, I'm quite upset with them for selling out the PC gamers because it was we who put them on the map.

Now, here's another view: If I want to play XBOX 360 games only, I HAVE to buy an XBOX 360, right? AND, the games cost more than most PC games, right? AND, most XBOX 360 kits start at $399 USA dollars, right?

So, I can get VISTA for half that money and play Vista-only games and STILL play XP games, too. AND, with Cross Platform in VISTA, I can ALSO play XBOX 360 games just like the XBOX Live players.

But, all of these costs ONLY AFFECT the people who actually are honest enough to purchase them. Maybe the problem is that people don't want to have to shell out money if they can just 'download' it and enjoy the fruits of others' labor.

And, I'm writing in my sleep now as it's WAY past my bedtime.

Or maybe I don't believe the MS propaganda?

I'm sure if the will was there the migration to DX10 could be made much more smoothly

comparing 9x to NT is a bad comparison though as the 9x core didn't have the efficient memory management that the NT core has, new games only work on 2k/XP for this reason, as they require the memory management..

the memory management between XP and Vista though, is no different, they are both on the NT core and both have access to the full system memory without having to pass it through a GDI type layer.

writing a game in Dx9 but only have it work on Vista, is BAD FORM.

especially since people are actualling returning thier copies of vista to the store since its utter crap.

Totally agree, if MS didn't want to force people in adopting Vista then games would be DX 10 and 9 compatibile, i'm sure Halo 2 could easily run on DX9!