Vista Question

[Burroughs]

Does Windows Vista provide any benefits to a game like Alan Wake?

I would understand the forced upgrade if there were some reason. For some games, you have to buy a new graphics card or a better CPU or a DVD drive, and while that is sometimes annoying, it makes sense.

But a new OS?!? In 2007? What benefit can a new general purpose OS like Vista provide for games over XP? Games just need access to graphics libraries, storage, networking, sound, and control. That's it. It's not like it's going to use the new desktop GUI stuff or integration with the new Microsoft Office or IE 7 or some new device driver model.

[Morry]

Refer to Paul Thurrott's excellent website on all things Vista related.

This article in particular: http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/winvista_games.asp

Simply put, in order to achieve the best visuals and performance capable, Remedy is relying on Directx10 to achieve their design goals. Directx10 requires Windows Vista to operate.

[Kaylel]

And the reason it is required is because the way Vista handles drivers is completely different than previous OSes. You can't get DX10 on XP. The fact is, PC gamers will be forced to upgrade if they want to continue to game on the PC. One of the reasons why I've given up on PC gaming. An upgrade with consoles is much cheaper and doesn't happen more than once every few years.

[noah]

And the reason it is required is because the way Vista handles drivers is completely different than previous OSes. You can't get DX10 on XP. The fact is, PC gamers will be forced to upgrade if they want to continue to game on the PC. One of the reasons why I've given up on PC gaming. An upgrade with consoles is much cheaper and doesn't happen more than once every few years.

The XBOX and the 360 were both released within the lifespan of Windows XP.

It's quite possible to buy a cheap, mid-high range packaged PC for around the price of a console that is comparably (if not more) powerful. It's even cheaper if you build one yourself.

No one is claiming that the absolute top of the line is necessary...heck at least there's an option with the PC platform to go higher.

[Dark River]

Before I was a little aphrehensive to upgrade to Vista just to play Wake, but if the advantage of having new DirectX10 drivers increase performance alone by 20% than I think its pretty much worth it.

An upgrade with consoles is much cheaper and doesn't happen more than once every few years.

That's what I wonder though in say 20 years time. Will the technology behind Graphics and Systems become so fast that a console becomes old technology within a few months to a top of the range PC. Possibly not since the lifespan of the PS2/Xbox lasted a few more years than the PS1/Nintendo. 7 years to 5. It just makes me wonder..

[Kaylel]

It's quite possible to buy a cheap, mid-high range packaged PC for around the price of a console that is comparably (if not more) powerful. It's even cheaper if you build one yourself.

It is impossible to purchase a computer as powerful as the 360 for less than twice the price of the 360. The video card alone would cost as much as the 360.

[Dukefrukem]

And the reason it is required is because the way Vista handles drivers is completely different than previous OSes. You can't get DX10 on XP. The fact is, PC gamers will be forced to upgrade if they want to continue to game on the PC. One of the reasons why I've given up on PC gaming. An upgrade with consoles is much cheaper and doesn't happen more than once every few years.

Well then you will get most games 12 months after they are released on PC...hope you like waiting.

[dejay]

Obviously it's a personal choice, but I don't see myself paying for a beefier computer that can handle the Vista bloat and also paying for a Vista OS upgrade yet. XP will be relevent for at least another two years so in that time I'll stick with my 360 to play games and XP to handle my other computing diversions.

As it is, the gaming performance of Vista RC1 is underwhelming compared to that of XP. While it's a little unfair to compare a mature OS to a pre-release one, it gives me absolutely no incentive to get Vista apon release because I'm very happy with XP and the last thing I want is a more sluggish GUI and for my Half Life 2 game to stutter even worse than it already does. I, like many others I'm sure, will wait at least until Vista SP1 comes along.

[slapnutz]

Something i read from Vista pimps in the Industry is that a game DESIGNED for dx10 will run FASTER than in dx9 mode on the SAME PC.

Needless to say, i cant wait for independent sites to try to benchmark this when Vista v1.0 is out.

[Morry]

Something i read from Vista pimps in the Industry is that a game DESIGNED for dx10 will run FASTER than in dx9 mode on the SAME PC.

Needless to say, i cant wait for independent sites to try to benchmark this when Vista v1.0 is out.
It probably just depends on the game really. DX10 games would certainly run more synchronised than the previous generation, seeing as DX10 is directly linked up with Vista and all sorts of processing calculations.

[hesido]

I have this feeling making Alan Wake DX10 only was not something Remedy really wanted. Of course the publisher, unfortunately, is now MS. They are trying to make Vista more appealing by publishing / pushing Vista only games (e.g. The next Halo PC will be Vista only). This is a very cheap marketing trick.

Till we see the hardware, do not expect a 20% increase in performance. And even if that is the case, a 20% increase, in the world of PC with all the different configurations, can provide no justifiable reason for a "DX10 only" decision. A slow directX 10 capable video card with a slow CPU should perform far worse than a fast DX9 card with a fast CPU.

Vista with Aero is supposed to be priced around $200:
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=124

You'd be much better off with a gaming console. This way you don't get caught in an upgrade frenzy, and games will get *better* as years go by as developers get hold of the console, not get *worse* as even admitted here on this forum because of "lazy" PC coders. (It is mentioned that the Xbox version forced them to optimize their code to a great extent). The top-affordable PC today will start to show its age in games after a year or so. requiring you reduce detail in games.

I personally will boycott Vista as long as I can. Smart developers should make their games XP compatible, if they want their games to sell.

Alternatively, MS could sell a DX10 game-only OS for real cheap, and let me do my daily routine with Linux or XP. I read this idea on a forum, and I think it is a good idea for the consumer. But it won't happen, erm, as it is a good idea for the consumer.

[Kaylel]

Well then you will get most games 12 months after they are released on PC...hope you like waiting.

Odd, since most of the games on the 360 aren't even on the PC. I think you have that backwards my friend.

[Fusion]

Hello, I'm new here and kind of computer illiterate. For one thing, what is Windows Vista? Does it cost money?
I know I am bringing back a sort of dead thread, but I was just wondering this.

[Morry]

Windows Vista is the next edition of Windows, due for release early next year.

[Fusion]

Will you be able to upgrade XP to it?

[Morry]

Yes, there will be the usual upgrade package. You can read more about Vista at Paul Thurrott's site, he's been covering Vista for a long time now.
http://www.winsupersite.com/

[bobytt]

I have one question about Alan Wake. I am going to buy Vista Ultimate x64bit version , Are your game going to support x64 Vista? And another question, I already preorder QX6700 (quad core CPU from INTEL) is there any advantage from 4 cores in Alan Wake? I mean is it multithread game?

[RTsa]

Yes to all your questions, bobytt.

[bobytt]

thanks a lot.

[BelgianBull]

@RTsa where do you found the info about 64 Bit supporting?

[Morry]

It's a very good guess. Alan Wake will be exclusive to Vista, so you can assume that will include all versions of the operating system.

[BelgianBull]

Yes but 32bit applications can work with 64bit Vista, it's backward compatible... But that doesn't mean that Alan Wake is 64bit.

[duncan36]

Several thoughts come to mind:

1. Theres nothing you can do on Vista with a game you cant do on XP.
2. Microsoft is purposefully using this game as a carrot to force you to upgrade to Vista.

Kind of cheesy of the game designers to sell out like this for a little extra cash IMO. I'll probably avoid the game, I dont like being blackmailed.

[Morry]

Several thoughts come to mind:

1. Theres nothing you can do on Vista with a game you cant do on XP.
2. Microsoft is purposefully using this game as a carrot to force you to upgrade to Vista.

Kind of cheesy of the game designers to sell out like this for a little extra cash IMO. I'll probably avoid the game, I dont like being blackmailed.
1. DirectX10 can only be run on Vista and Alan Wake will be using several features of this to improve graphical quality and performance.
2. If you were Microsoft, you would too.

[Maddieman]

Welcome to the forums duncan36. :)

I share your scepticism, but I'm sure other factors also influenced their decision besides just the money -- creative freedom, control over ip, shared knowledge, resources, and technology. Not to mention other factors like the people they're working with: - how enthusiastic and passionate they are about the game.

Unfortunately, exclusive titles have always been a dark side of gaming, and yes, it's no secret that publishers use them to gain leverage in market share -- especially during or around launches. That's just the nature of any competitive industry. Call it blackmail if you want, but nearly every good/service company uses some kind of marketing or branding strategy to attract customers away from the competition. As you rightly point out, you as the customer, still have the power to choose.

However, all that aside, when Alan Wake is finally finished, hopefully it will speak for itself. At that point, we'll be in a MUCH better position to decide if justifies the purchase of a new console/OS.