Vista-only DX10 a mistake

[Dhruin]

...according to Valve's Gabe Newell in an interview for heise online.de (http://www.heise.de/english/newsticker/news/94869):
According to an online survey by Valve Software (http://www.valvesoftware.com/), only one in fifty players who access download service Steam has a DirectX 10-compatible graphics card and Windows Vista installed. In an interview with heise online, Gabe Newell, president of Valve Software, said that Microsoft made a terrible mistake releasing DirectX 10 for Vista only and excluding Windows XP. He said this decision affected the whole industry as so far only a very small percentage of players can use DirectX 10.
More information. (http://www.rpgwatch.com/show/newsbit?newsbit=6172)

[Brother None]

What, that's news to this guy?

Yeah, duh, it's a mistake

[Unregistered]

I'll tell you what else is a mistake. Episodic content.

[woges]

Well what it means is they spent some time implementing some dx10 into Source and they wanted to sell that to more people. Seriously, even the developers are moaning now.

[Lucky Day]

What, that's news to this guy?

Yeah, duh, it's a mistake

Well the editor of PC World was only willing to come out against Vista because he was no longer the editor.

Now a major distributer feels secure enough to weigh in. I think this is very significant.

It's ok for some fly by night website to be critical but when you are in sales for a living publicly criticizing your vendors doesn't make a lot of sense. He's actually taking a risk.

It took Dell just to get us OEM copies of XP again until December, and they did it behind the scenes.

[txa1265]

It took Dell just to get us OEM copies of XP again until December, and they did it behind the scenes.
And I'm sure they paid for it with Linux installs ...

But I also think this is significant - taking official stances against Microsoft isn't something that serious people in executive positions do lightly.

[KasperFauerby]

From a technical point of view I think one has to seperate the DX10 API from the "DX10" features of current graphics hardware.

The DX10 API contains some serious changes from DX9 - some of these are "logical" changes to how the API is structured, which could also have been done on XP, but they also introduced a new and improved graphics driver model that relies on new (very technical) features that *are* indeed Vista-only. It would simply be impossible, due to limitations in the XP core, to introduce those changes in XP drivers.

Now, regarding the "DX10" hardware features (I put DX10 in quotation marks because while the features are named after a certain API they are in fact "just" changes to the hardware) - those features could *in theory* also be exposed in a new version of DX9 if Microsoft wanted to. The problem is just that some of these new hardware features are so significant that it would require a lot of work to fit them into DX9. I guess that's why Microsoft decided to only add them to their completely new API on Vista where they could take advantage of the new driver model as well from the start.

[woges]

Well thats not true according to this artical:
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=40913

I don't believe there is even 1 dx10 only game yet so what do you expect?

Whats more steam is not totally correct on numbers as I have 2 machines one XP and one Vista and I can send either or neither to Gabe for his surveys. I'm pretty sure that I'am not the only gamer with both OS's. A simple partician and dual boot machine can do the same thing.

Edit:

"He would like to see controllers like the Wiimote or the Guitar Hero guitar." Oh please ^^.

[txa1265]

I don't believe there is even 1 dx10 only game yet so what do you expect?
There are *TWO* - Halo 2 (http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages2/932095.asp)and Shadowrun (http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages2/933049.asp?q=shadowrun).

Of course, those aren't *really* DX10 games ... they are MS shovelware ...

[elikal]

Usually I dont chime into MS bashing, but in this case... I think it was a huge mistake. It made a split in the community and MS will catch a LOT of anger from people trying to force them to go to Vista and buy the necessary expensive computers. I am not sure if they will stick to this decision, but I will boycott Vista as long until no games work with DX9 anymore. This kind of policy can greatly backfire, and I hope their arrogance will get them what they deserve.

On a rational note, I didnt see any reason to make a new OS. Why should I change from XP, which now works just fine (as good as any Windows can run) to change to a new system, which makes nothing really better and only takes away MUCH more system ressources, so essentially its only a way to slow down my computer. It it were faster than XP on the same machine! But MS has a history of burderning its OS with LEGIONS of DLLs, EXEs and whatnot. Sometimes it makes me miss the old DOS or even WIndows 3.11 times, when I KNEW what was for what. They really should start to make their OS more slim, taking LESS ressources for the same abilities. Now THAT would be a REAL progress!

[doctor_kaz]

If Bioshock is any indication, you're not missing out on much by not having DX10 yet. I have been playing it on DX10, and then I played it with DX9 and I couldn't tell the difference at all. Of course, that could be because DX10 has just been added on after the fact. I am hoping that Crysis will be that one game that shows it off.

[woges]

Well if you want better PC support don't go putting and designing your AAA titles for consoles then. MS and Gabe's stance on this is about money. Just as bollox as each other sorry.

[Thaurin]

I'll tell you what else is a mistake. Episodic content.

Sam & Max: Season One.

[aries100]

Vista, for me, is a way for MS to break into the business and government worlds of backing up data. As I understand it, major corporations use UNIX technology to this. And Vista simply 'borrows' a bit from this UNIX technology.

Microsoft needs to make two divisions: one for regular users, gamers, etc. and one for business people. And MS needs to understand that regular users need an OS that will play their games (all of them, or 90% of them) withouit having to do all sort of things, first, like Turning OFF UAC and a bunch of other things...

[txa1265]

Sam & Max: Season One.

F T W

<filler>

[Lucky Day]

Here's the previous discussion on this in regards to PC Magazine's editor

http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2473

[Stanza]

Microsoft needs to make two divisions: one for regular users, gamers, etc. and one for business people. And MS needs to understand that regular users need an OS that will play their games (all of them, or 90% of them) withouit having to do all sort of things, first, like Turning OFF UAC and a bunch of other things...

That's pretty much the way it's been for a long time. You had 9x and Me *spit* for Joe Average, and NT for business/professional. Things changed with XP, which strongly derives from NT, and it's used for both home and business. Personally, I think XP's the best version of windows so far, even if there are things I completely despise about it -- but I'm still able to disable what I don't like (sometimes wielding the equivalent of a butcher's knife and sledgehammer to accomplish it, gutting the parts I don't like and disabling AutoUpdate to prevent it from "repairing" itself).

With Vista, they're again trying to make one size fit all, only this time it's like they're resurrected the sambling corpse of Me, spit-shined it with some DX10 polish, and pushed it out to everyone. And the parts that people don't like are so ingrained in the OS that removing them are not an option.

For the foreseeable future, the only version of windows available for knowledgeable users is XP Embedded, but that's not available to either Joe Average or power users like me. You need to be an OEM vendor to get it, and I doubt you'd be able to get most games to run on it.

I'm going to stick with XP as long as I can, since there really isn't an alternative. Macs don't exactly have a wide range of software unless you're doing multimedia work (or don't mind waitinga few years for PC->Mac ports), and Linux is not user friendly (with an install base that tends towards the rabid end of unfriendliness).

[Alrik Fassbauer]

From a technical point of view I think one has to seperate the DX10 API from the "DX10" features of current graphics hardware.

Nice to technicians to know this, but the average gamer only hears "Directx 10" and knows he can't run the game. Period.

And this is what sales affects. I believe.

and no, this was no mistake, is was planned by microsoft to have exactly this effect : forcing gamers to hasta la vista.


Sam & Max: Season One.

Comes out finally boxed.

I'm not too happy about episodic content, but I regard this is a niche for smaller companies to stay alive.


and Linux is not user friendly (with an install base that tends towards the rabid end of unfriendliness).

It *has* become better with Ubuntu, the "puppy linux", as one arrogant poster in a thread in a far different forum stated.

I'm using Ubuntu myself.

[txa1265]

Comes out finally boxed.

About which I duly gushed here (http://www.gamerdad.com/detail.cfm?itemID=3810) ... I got the benefit of the individual games and then the ability to replay the whole season.

[Alrik Fassbauer]

I read your review before, thanks. :)

It's being released here in Germany as well - fully translated - and I'm looking forward to it. :)

[doctor_kaz]

Episodic content is simply a method for developers and/or pubishers to milk more money out of consumers by taking their product and dividing it into smaller parts, and then charging more per hour of gameplay than they would if the entire game were a $40 or $50 package. If you can take a 12 hour game and divide it up into four parts and sell each part for $20, you make $80 on the game, versus selling it for $40 or $50 as a whole. The sooner this shitty business model dies, the better off we'll all be.

[txa1265]

The sooner this shitty business model dies, the better off we'll all be.
Have you actually *played* Sam & Max, because with regards to them you're talkin' out your butt. You could buy the whole season for $35 in advance, or $9 each with discounts for then converting to a full season ... and now the boxed version is just $30.

When applied to the (canned) SiN Episode and Half-Life 2 Episodes ... I agree. That isn't episodic content but spoon-fed greed.

[doctor_kaz]

Have you actually *played* Sam & Max, because with regards to them you're talkin' out your butt. You could buy the whole season for $35 in advance, or $9 each with discounts for then converting to a full season ... and now the boxed version is just $30

I thought that Gametap subscribers got those episodes for free (?)

It seems to me with episodes you lose some economies of scale. Especially when there are boxed versions that sell for $20 or less. Television has episodes because it's relatively easy to produce one hour of content per week (not every few months), and because people's attention spans usually won't facilitate a TV show that lasts longer than an hour. Video games are different. The episodic format simply doesn't fit.

[woges]

Well a bit OT but is that new Sam & Max as good as the original game?

[Lucky Day]

Sam and Max thread here (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1856).