Halo 2 PC/ Only on Vista

[gonaads]

Isn't Win 95 16 bit?

 

[Terrahertz]

Terrahertz, your rant doesn't make sense to me. You are an IT staffer of some sort and you mention progression is what keeps IT going (very true).

On the other hand, you are balking at Microsoft for only releasing Halo 2 for Vista (and not XP). Wouldn't that be progression?

Im sorry but how many of us users have XP? How many will have vista on release? Lets rememebr most early adopters will not equal the market share of XP for a while. Also Vista will have its early launch bugs and such. So why are you forcing me to buy a game just to play on a specific OS? What happened to all your Halo fans on XP? Progression is Vista. Not alienating your consumers and fans. That to my knowledge is not progression.

 

[madmatt]

By drawing a line in the sand.

And they've drawn the line time and time again, but yet we have the same arguement every time.

No IE6 SP2 or IE7 for Windows 2000.
No WMP10 for Windows 2000.
No DX10 or Halo 2 for Windows XP.

And we'll see about WMP11 being available for XP.

 

[Steevo]

All I have to say, is out of the office-corperate world, here had better be more than Halo 2 as a reason.

 

[Aprox]

Wow this thread grew fast... heh.

I think the real point behind the people "complaining" is more the principle of what Microsoft is doing. Technical details such as DX10 aside, and we can safely assume this about more than just one game title... it just seems like Microsoft is trying to blackmail (a tad harsh I know ) users into upgrading right away. Naturally people will fall into line with Vista as it becomes more mainstream and cost effective at the business level. So I take this as an artificial accelerator for Microsoft's sales.

Now, I could not care less about Halo 2, but being a college student I Cannot afford a 400$ operating system. I know some of you might cough at this and say "oh well, get over it" you obviously arn't poor.

Lastly, whats to stop MS from bring DX10 to XP? That way nobody would get pushed out in the cold in the game department.

 

[gonaads]

Well, to be fair, that's a slightly different situation. In the case of the Xbox and the 360, there's a big difference in the hardware specs. Most of the games built for the 360 wouldn't even run, or would look like utter garbage on the Xbox, even if all the software and APIs necessary were magically ported to the original Xbox, simply because the hardware wouldn't be able to keep up.

But again, the role of software and APIs is as important to the functioning of a game as the hardware is. You could have the finest wood on the planet, but you wouldn't be able to build a ship without the glue.

Ahhhhaaaa, hardware. Yeah yeah I know that it has to do mainly with DirectX and OpenGL APIs and such. Just frustrating that once ya get comfortable with yer OS and ya have it tweaked just the way you want it and all is stable within the OS universe ya gotta go and throw a new OS on top and wait 'n see what goes tits up. And then ya start from scratch all over again and go through the same ritual of tweaking and getting everything just so. And then the next "new and improved" OS comes out. And then...

Rant rant... blah blah.

 

[NetRyder]

Isn't Win 95 16 bit?

It could run 32-bit apps, if that's what you're asking.

 

[madmatt]

Im sorry but how many of us users have XP? How many will have vista on release? Lets rememebr most early adopters will not equal the market share of XP for a while. Also Vista will have its early launch bugs and such. So why are you forcing me to buy a game just to play on a specific OS? What happened to all your Halo fans on XP? Progression is Vista. Not alienating your consumers and fans. That to my knowledge is not progression.

I don't know the numbers. I can only speak for myself. I was in line at midnight when XP came out. But that's just me.

And last I knew, the original Halo isn't even available for PC/XP. Are you balking at Microsoft for that? Now they decide to release the new Halo for PC and you're mad because it's not going to be available for a five year old OS. And by the time Vista comes out Halo 2 will be a year old and it will be time for Halo 3.

 

[Terrahertz]

Im sorry but your talking about PC apps that are part of the OS. Just so we all know win 98 all the way to Xp is still supported. June is the deadline for Win98 but guess what PEOPLE still use them. Its not like we get a grant each 5cycles to buy a new OS and pray everything works on day one. Halo 2 is a game that will not reach the mass audience until sometime because of this move. Whats wrong with running it on XP and vista? Have the Dx9 and Dx10 hooks in software. This is not about progression in the usual tech sense. This is Microsoft forcing you to buy an OS because they know the mass love of Halo. Its that simple. Im not hating against vista. I will get it eventually. But why force me?

Nvidia and Ati should release a new card and tell all of us only the games coming out now will run on them. So fork over the $600 and shutup. Thats exactly what were getting here.

edit: Have to go pick up the lady . chat later fellas.

 

[NetRyder]

Ahhhhaaaa, hardware. Yeah yeah I know that it has to do mainly with DirectX and OpenGL APIs and such. Just frustrating that once ya get comfortable with yer OS and ya have it tweaked just the way you want it and all is stable within the OS universe ya gotta go and throw a new OS on top and wait 'n see what goes tits up. And then ya start from scratch all over again and go through the same ritual of tweaking and getting everything just so. And then the next "new and improved" OS comes out. And then...

Rant rant... blah blah.

So basically what you're saying is, you got the point I was trying to make but just feel like complaining nonetheless.
Rant, rant for the sake of it, rant...blah blah.

 

[gonaads]

I don't know the numbers. I can only speak for myself. I was in line at midnight when XP came out. But that's just me.

And last I knew, the original Halo isn't even available for PC/XP. Are you balking at Microsoft for that? Now they decide to release the new Halo for PC and you're mad because it's not going to be available for a five year old OS. And by the time Vista comes out Halo 2 will be a year old and it will be time for Halo 3.

Errrrr, I have the original Halo, for PC. I played it through I still play it every once in a while. I played Halo2 also, on XBox of course.

 

[madmatt]

I was mistaken, I thought the original Halo was only available for XBOX. Sorry.

Windows 98 might be supported but they haven't released any new functionality or Microsoft applications for that matter (Office, etc.) since prior to 2002 (Office XP/2002 and 2003 are only supported on 2000 and XP).

 

[Electronic Punk]

ok, a slight exaggeration

 

[gonaads]

O.K. so Halo 2 will only run on Vista especially since it will need DX 10 But it has been said that DX 10 is not going to be backwards compatible unless DX 10 has DX 9 shipped with it. And DX 10 will not run on XP. So all the games that you are playing now such as Battlefield 2, Far Cry, ect. would not run on DX 10 if DX 9 isn't included with DX 10. And so would not runn on Vista. Unless DX 9 is included or emulated. Yes/No?

 

[NetRyder]

Im sorry but your talking about PC apps that are part of the OS. Just so we all know win 98 all the way to Xp is still supported. June is the deadline for Win98 but guess what PEOPLE still use them. Its not like we get a grant each 5cycles to buy a new OS and pray everything works on day one. Halo 2 is a game that will not reach the mass audience until sometime because of this move. Whats wrong with running it on XP and vista? Have the Dx9 and Dx10 hooks in software. This is not about progression in the usual tech sense. This is Microsoft forcing you to buy an OS because they know the mass love of Halo. Its that simple. Im not hating against vista. I will get it eventually. But why force me?

Could they develop Halo 2 for the PC so that it runs on XP and Vista? Sure. But that would mean two things - they can't take advantage of DX10 capabilities, and it would require additional time, money and manpower to go through the QA process separately for two different systems. People think Microsoft has an infinite amount of resources, but that's simply not true. Spending time and money on old stuff means less time and money for new stuff, which translates to product ship delays, features getting cut and all the stuff that nobody wants either. So take your pick.

Nvidia and Ati should release a new card and tell all of us only the games coming out now will run on them. So fork over the $600 and shutup. Thats exactly what were getting here.

You have that analogy completely backwards, actually. What you describe is akin to Microsoft releasing a brand new OS which will only run the latest games and none of your old ones, which is obviously not what's happening here.

 

[NetRyder]

O.K. so Halo 2 will only run on Vista especially since it will need DX 10 But it has been said that DX 10 is not going to be backwards compatible unless DX 10 has DX 9 shipped with it. And DX 10 will not run on XP. So all the games that you are playing now such as Battlefield 2, Far Cry, ect. would not run on DX 10 if DX 9 isn't included with DX 10. And so would not runn on Vista. Unless DX 9 is included or emulated. Yes/No?

No. DirectX 10 is, as of this time, supposed to be a Vista-only. However, it includes a compatibility layer that allows DX9-based apps to run on it. That part wasn't included in the December CTP release, but it's coming. So DX9 games should have no problems running with the DX10 runtimes installed.

 

[gonaads]

Could they develop Halo 2 for the PC so that it runs on XP and Vista? Sure. But that would mean two things - they can't take advantage of DX10 capabilities...

No. DirectX 10 is, as of this time, supposed to be a Vista-only. However, it includes a compatibility layer that allows DX9-based apps to run on it. That part wasn't included in the December CTP release, but it's coming. So DX9 games should have no problems running with the DX10 runtimes installed.

O.K. fine, but what's to keep them from doing DX 10 for XP? It won't sell, that's what. Vista will sell. As was said, Vista will run 32 and 64 bit. But DX 10 has been written specifically for the Vista OS. To have DX 10 for XP is not profitable.

Why would you go out and buy a new OS if the OS you are running now is doing well and has DX 10 to run all the newest games. Remember that XP was turned 64 bit not that long ago. Granted that XP itself is five years old but XP64 is not. And 64 bit games are still fairly new-ish. Not to mention all the drivers that are still getting 64 bit-ed Yes Vista is still a ways away and by then all the 64 bit driver issues should be, I repeat, should be resolved. I understand that Microsoft has to make a profit. It's just that it would be nice to run it on an XP machine with DX 10, that's all.

 

[ElementalDragon]

x64 was, and still basically is, a consumer test-bed just to see how well x64 OS's run. i say this because you can't even pick it up on store shelves. it isn't a marketed OS like XP is and like Vista will be.

As for the Halo 2 PC/Microsoft/Progression deal...... i say that Halo 2 only on Vista IS progress. why? look at cross-platform console games..... or console to PC ports..... something always comes out crap in the end. take Halo PC for instance. it ran like utter crap until the GF 6800 series was released basically. the FX 5xxx series was struggling to run it nicely half the time. What sense does it make to port ANOTHER Halo..... running on both x64 and x86 tech..... plus for both DX9 and DX10? that's a lot to cover in a relatively short time frame. i don't think Bungie wants another flop like the first Halo for PC was.

As for Vista....... wasn't there rumors going around that when Vista comes out, they will be released in much cheaper priced versions than what we've seen in the past with new OS releases (like XP Pro when it came out.... what was it? like $400?)

As for Terrahertz......... what business do you know (game related) that DOESN'T make you upgrade to play the latest and greatest games? i can tell you 3 big ones. can you guess? Sony, Nintendo, and MICROSOFT! do Console's ring a bell? Halo came out on Xbox. then Halo 2 came out for Xbox, but runs like crap on half the systems. you know what just about half the sheepish population said when they were buying their Xbox 360's? "I can't WAIT to play Halo 3 on this!". you're complaining about MS making people upgrade to play a game that's already a year old, but on their computer....... when people are already upgrading their consoles.... so they can play a game that hasn't even been ANOUNCED as being anywhere near having a possible release date yet? take a look around...... this type of stuff is everywhere..... but you don't really notice it until someone points it out. and look at the 360 so far! it's not even that much better than today's PC's yet..... because the game developers didn't get their developers consoles till like a month before the console came out. hence the crappy ports.

 

[NetRyder]

O.K. fine, but what's to keep them from doing DX 10 for XP? It won't sell, that's what. Vista will sell. As was said, Vista will run 32 and 64 bit. But DX 10 has been written specifically for the Vista OS. To have DX 10 for XP is not profitable.

What's keeping them from doing DX10 for XP?

Ok, think about this. Microsoft has already back-ported Avalon, Indigo and the entire WinFX framework to XP. When WinFS goes RTM, that will be made available on XP. IE 7 now has a corresponding XP build. There's an XP version of the Sidebar coming. WMP11 might possibly have an XP version too. All of these were originally slated to be Vista-exclusives.

So my question to you is, at what point does something classify as a new OS? If Microsoft went ahead and back-ported everything to XP, guess what? XP just became Vista! Only difference is, you'd get it for free. If you want free operating systems, move to Linux please.* Things don't work that way in Windows and Macintosh land. Microsoft and Apple are for-profit corporations with responsibilities towards their shareholders. I hope each one of you was aware of that fact when you consciously decided to buy your very first copy of Windows. If not, here, I'm telling you now.


* No Halo 2 for you anyway then. ;p

 

[gonaads]

If Microsoft went ahead and back-ported everything to XP, guess what? XP just became Vista! Only difference is, you'd get it for free...

Things don't work that way in Windows and the Macintosh land. Microsoft and Apple are corporations with responsibilities towards their shareholders....

I hope each one of you was aware of that fact when you consciously decided to buy your very first copy of Windows. If not, here, I'm telling you now.

I want free Windows damn it. I have bought Microsoft OSs since DOS back in '82 '83. I would like something for being frickin loyal

I know all that crap,

and I don't need anyone to tell me.


But after a while ya just get fed up, that's all.

I could give a shiit how MicroSquish or Rotten Apple screws anyone out of their money.

My statements are basically, "why not". Even though I know why not.

Just wishin out loud. Not all of us can go to a developer's show and get free XP64 and kick ass vid cards and CPUs and all dem goodies.

*runs*