Slashdot Mirror


Halo 2 PC Vista Only, With Exclusive Content

Via 1up and Kotaku, news from the most recent Bungie weekly update. Work on Halo 2 PC is continuing apace, but players looking forward to the game should know a few things. The game looks to be Vista only and, despite the promise of the 'Live Anywhere' concept, will not be interconnected in the way that the Shadowrun game will be. The Bungie update clarifies on these announcements. From the article: "Will I need a DirectX 10 graphics card to run Halo 2 on PC? No. Although you will require Windows Vista to play Halo 2 on a PC, you won't necessarily need to upgrade your graphics card to do it. Halo 2, like some other Vista titles, will work just fine on a wide range of graphics cards, including DX9 cards. We will provide far more detailed minimum hardware requirements closer to the game's completion."

156 comments

  1. Thanks, Microsoft! by PSXer · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Is there any reason for such a requirement other than forcing people who want to play Halo 2 on PC to get Vista? Might as well require people to get Office while you're at it!

    Oh dear, I just gave them an idea.

    1. Re:Thanks, Microsoft! by hibiki_r · · Score: 1

      Believe it or not, there is a reason. Halo 2's multiplayer will work through the spiffy, magical Live-anywhere contraption that MS announced at E3. Since it comes only with Vista, Halo 2 multiplayer would only work in Vista. Since the single player campaign is short and pretty uninspired, releasing the game for an OS where they won't support multiplayer doesn't seem like a good idea.

    2. Re:Thanks, Microsoft! by PSXer · · Score: 1
      Ah, but is Live Anywhere really that much better than the way PC gamers have been playing multiplayer for years? Does it have to be a requirement?

      Granted, if the market was split between LA and regular servers, LA might not work that well because so few would be using it, but it seems like a solution in search of a problem.

      Wait, will LA have a yearly fee like regular Live? If so, it's all starting to make sense.

    3. Re:Thanks, Microsoft! by NetNifty · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      At a guess it probably uses DirectX 10, which will only be available for Vista.

      Don't know why DirectX 10 is only available in Vista though, given that DirectX 9.0c is available from every MS OS from Windows 98 to XP...

    4. Re:Thanks, Microsoft! by samkass · · Score: 1

      Wow... not only did you apparently not read the article, you didn't even read the SUMMARY of the article before posting.

      --
      E pluribus unum
    5. Re:Thanks, Microsoft! by Neeex · · Score: 1

      AFAIK the game will use DirectX 10, but Bungie are saying it won't require a DirectX 10-level graphics card. There's a difference. If you have a graphics card that supports DirectX 9 features, you'll be OK.

      --
      All those who believe in telekinesis, raise my hand.
    6. Re:Thanks, Microsoft! by e03179 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Isn't Halo 2 for PC being exclusive for Vista kind of like Halo 3 being exclusive to the XBOX 360? One isn't going to run on XP. The other isn't going to run on the first-gen XBOX.

      --
      -516
    7. Re:Thanks, Microsoft! by damiam · · Score: 1

      Halo 2 is written for DirectX 10. If the graphics card doesn't support a DirectX 10 feature, it can be emulated in software, but you still have to have the software (DirectX 10), which is only available on Vista.

      --
      It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
    8. Re:Thanks, Microsoft! by Rix · · Score: 1

      No, there's no technical reason for Halo 2 (or any other game in anyone's pipeline) to require Vista.

    9. Re:Thanks, Microsoft! by i.of.the.storm · · Score: 1

      DX10 requires the new driver framework, WDDM or w/e. That's why, unlike the previous versions, it's only available on Vista.

      --
      All your base are belong to Wii.
    10. Re:Thanks, Microsoft! by blitzsieg · · Score: 1

      Nah, because buying a 360 is buying a whole separate platform. Upgrading to Vista is an upgrade (I think...) to your whole computer that will probably make it run slower.

      Speaking of, that is why I run win 2k, lol. Gotta love having 23 processes running on your system.

    11. Re:Thanks, Microsoft! by Mac+Degger · · Score: 1

      The interesting thing of course is that DirectX10 is only really an update to it's graphics library. DX10 should therefore be more accurately called Direct3D10.

      --
      -- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
    12. Re:Thanks, Microsoft! by Mac+Degger · · Score: 1

      True, but the question was more allong the lines of 'why is DX10 not being ported for XP?', to which the answer is of course 'no good reason except as a measure to sucker you into buying a skin for XP, namely Vista', as there is no technical limitation in writing DX10 for XP.

      --
      -- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
    13. Re:Thanks, Microsoft! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, Office 2003 will already require WinXP+SP2 (nice suicide, Microsoft!). Be grateful it is (apparently) going to come out before Vista, otherwise who knows what OS it might have required...

    14. Re:Thanks, Microsoft! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No Technical reason for DX10 to not come out on Linux... Evil MS!

    15. Re:Thanks, Microsoft! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, damn peddling skins. That's why I still use Red Hat 2!

    16. Re:Thanks, Microsoft! by toolie · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Instead of +5 insightful, this should really be moderated as -1 whining.

      --
      -- toolie
    17. Re:Thanks, Microsoft! by AnyoneEB · · Score: 1

      Don't worry, it will, just not from MS.

      --
      Centralization breaks the internet.
  2. One word: by mrchaotica · · Score: 0

    Fuck.

    --

    "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    1. Re:One word: by RonnyJ · · Score: 1

      Another word... dupe! ;)

    2. Re:One word: by e03179 · · Score: 1

      You didn't RTFA. This is NEW info...

      --
      -516
  3. Exclusive Content? by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 4, Funny

    Up yours, xbox owners!

    ... wait, Vista will cost me more money than an Xbox. :( Bah.

    1. Re:Exclusive Content? by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 3, Informative

      The Exclusive Content may be BSOD's

  4. Oh man! by MrShaggy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Funny I thought that this was the beginning of Web 2.0, and the end of forced upgrades.

    Guess I was reading the wrong news?

    So, does that mean that Duke Nukem Forever will also be vista only?

    --
    I have mod points and I am not afraid to use them.
    1. Re:Oh man! by Donniedarkness · · Score: 3, Funny

      No, I believe that DNF is slated to be released on Windows Apology, Microsoft's next OS after Vista.

      --
      Earn a % of cash back from Newegg, Tiger Direct, Walmart.com, and more: http://www.mrrebates.com?refid=458505
    2. Re:Oh man! by ZakuSage · · Score: 1

      Idiot, of course DNF is going to be an exclusive for the Phantom. Sheesh, and I thought everyone knew that by now.

    3. Re:Oh man! by ichigo+2.0 · · Score: 4, Funny

      So, does that mean that Duke Nukem Forever will also be vista only?

      Nope, by the time DNF comes out Microsoft will have dropped support for legacy OS's like Vista!

    4. Re:Oh man! by jZnat · · Score: 1

      Actually, judging by the somewhat recent news of DNF nearing completion and Vista being delayed once again, I'd think it'll be the other way around.

      --
      'Yes, firefox is indeed greater than women. Can women block pops up for you? No. Can Firefox show you naked women? Yes.'
    5. Re:Oh man! by helfom · · Score: 1

      haven't you heard?! Duke Nukem Forever will be a launch title for Vista!
      (ha! delays and all....... eh, nevermind...)

  5. Emulator by MaliciousSmurf · · Score: 1

    So... When is the Vista emulator coming out?

    1. Re:Emulator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most likely it'll be easier to just pirate Vista. Do you remember the new Live features demoed on E3? The problem will not be a version check at start up, but that they use all those features.

    2. Re:Emulator by rootofevil · · Score: 1



      Mac OS X has been out for several years

      --
      turn up the jukebox and tell me a lie
  6. Two words: by mobby_6kl · · Score: 1

    Fuck 'em!

    It took them forever to get H1 to PC, so by the time H2 arrives, Vista would already be the only OS to support such ancient hardware.

    1. Re:Two words: by Arker · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You know folks, if people will quit BUYING this kind of schlock they'll eventually quit making it.

      --
      =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
      Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
    2. Re:Two words: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Easy solution.. dont buy their crap, download it, play it, throw it away and use the rest of the evening for something better.

    3. Re:Two words: by Arker · · Score: 1

      Why would I waste my bandwidth downloading it?

      --
      =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
      Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
    4. Re:Two words: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To stop people pirating good quality software. By using all the available bandwidth to download this kinda crap, people will *have* to buy the good software?

      ok, i couldnt think of a real reason either.

  7. Fanboys by blackraven14250 · · Score: 1

    Surefire way to get the Halo fanboys to get Vista that much faster.

    1. Re:Fanboys by MrShaggy · · Score: 3, Funny

      Kind of when Doom 3 came out and veryone rished out to get the best video card. Doom3: 70$ nVIDia top-of-the-line-card 400$; The look on everyones face when they realised that the game is played in the dark? PRICELESS!!

      --
      I have mod points and I am not afraid to use them.
    2. Re:Fanboys by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      .. the 5 halo fanboys who are willing to drop hundreds on a new OS but weren't willing to pay $200 for an xbox?

    3. Re:Fanboys by blackraven14250 · · Score: 1

      They could always pirate Vista too. That's actually more like the fanboys, but oh well.

    4. Re:Fanboys by Parham · · Score: 1

      wouldn't it top things off if the parents that were forced to buy the top-end video cards also used their Mastercards... LOL

  8. Wait a second... by Donniedarkness · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Weren't we JOKING about them making Halo 3 Vista-only to boost sales? Now they're gonna do this with freaking Halo 2? I don't even like the Halo series, but I see no reason that it wouldn't be able to run on XP, other than the fact that M$ wants to improve sales of Vista. Dammit, Microsoft must be reading Slashdot... Stop giving them ideas, guys!

    --
    Earn a % of cash back from Newegg, Tiger Direct, Walmart.com, and more: http://www.mrrebates.com?refid=458505
    1. Re:Wait a second... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    2. Re:Wait a second... by purple_cobra · · Score: 0

      So I need to buy an entirely new OS to play a distinctly average FPS? I think not. Vista will need to offer a more compelling reason than this to make me part with my money, I'm afraid.

    3. Re:Wait a second... by cgenman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Weren't we JOKING about them making Halo 3 Vista-only to boost sales? Now they're gonna do this with freaking Halo 2?

      Halo is Microsoft's new mythical moneymaker. When their games division needs a boost to help their rather terrible margins, or they need to push a new system, they'll lean on Bungee to release whatever it is they have and call it the next Halo.

      It's kind of sad, really. Halo is a great series and Bungee is a great developer, but they're almost commodotizing Halo. Not finishing 2? It's like the Legacy of Kain... an amazing game that really hurt the series because they released it unfinished. At least Halo 2's multiplayer was solid.

      MS is going to find that you can't milk a series too much before it simply goes dry. If you don't earn each and every sale, you can coast for one or two iterations but then it all goes away.

    4. Re:Wait a second... by pxuongl · · Score: 1

      Halo is Microsoft's new mythical moneymaker.

      and strangely enough (or as history repeats itself), halo's made by a company that started publishing games for the mac.

    5. Re:Wait a second... by JFMulder · · Score: 3, Interesting

      MS is going to find that you can't milk a series too much before it simply goes dry

      Depends... have you ever heard of a game called Street Fighter 2? Or 3?

    6. Re:Wait a second... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      It's kind of sad, really. Halo is a great series and Bungee is a great developer, but they're almost commodotizing Halo. Not finishing 2? It's like the Legacy of Kain... an amazing game that really hurt the series because they released it unfinished. At least Halo 2's multiplayer was solid.

      Hell, the first Halo wasn't finished either. The most boring repetitive single player campaign I've ever played. It's like they were told to add 15 more hours to it a week before it launched.

    7. Re:Wait a second... by Solra+Bizna · · Score: 1

      Ignore the Library level and it's quite solid, IMO.

      -:sigma.SB (reformed Halo modder)

      --
      WARN
      THERE IS ANOTHER SYSTEM
    8. Re:Wait a second... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shut up, you fucking liar!

    9. Re:Wait a second... by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Yes but that's Capcom. hey milk anything. Meanwhile they have lots of divisions dedicated to inventing new game series to milk.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    10. Re:Wait a second... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Spoken like someone that doesn't really play the series. The various incarnations of SF2 are quite different, and just barely superficially similar. I could go into the differences, but a quick google would refute your entire statement. That, and you can't teach the ignorant.

    11. Re:Wait a second... by JFMulder · · Score: 1

      Well, I have to admit that I haven't played the third serie. But I did play every incarnation or almost of SF2 and between SF2, SF2 Championship, nothing change except the addition of 4 more characters. Then, the added the Turbo sufix which I think introduced the speed change option, then super street fight, which introduced more characters and some more special moves. I stopped after that. I think the alpha games were pretty different, but I never played them. But we are speaking here 4 different version of the same game where the only changes were basically more characters and a speed option. That's pretty much milking it. Unless I played the games so long ago that I don't remember other changes.

    12. Re:Wait a second... by PhoenixOne · · Score: 1
      "Weren't we JOKING about them making Halo 3 Vista-only to boost sales?"

      I never joked about that, I figured that was their plan when they started buying up the popular game development houses. Unless something major happens, expect all their content to be Vista-Only by 2007.

      PC game developers outside of Microsoft will probably continue writing non-Vista games for a little while yet. But Microsoft is already encouraging us to "make the switch" to Vista-Only. And I have to agree that Vista-Only features like DX10 and "Live Anywhere" are damn tempting from a developer's point of view...

      --
      Spell cheek you've failed me four the last thyme!
  9. And who cares? by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Halo did do something very nice that every FPS game should copy. Give grenades their own controls so you can throw them with your main weapon equipped. Brilliant.

    Everything else about the game was a distinct case of Meh on the PC. It just didn't compete with PC born titles. Part of it may have been due to its age (the x-box conversion took ages) and part was that it never delivered on its original promises.

    I just never got the idea that Halo PC had a big impact.

    As for coupling it to vista. Well that is just taking the piss. A 2.5 year old game + time until vista launches having such a minimum requirement can't be anything but fake.At least pull such a stunt with a more recent game, say the upcoming Halo 3.

    MS really could set it self up for a gigantic fall with vista. Have they forgotten Windows ME? Or are they remembering ME and are this time determined to ensure people can't just skip an upgrade?

    The game companies making their game Vista only must really be certain of MS success. Not only are they tying their game to an OS that keeps getting delayed but one that might not be picked up. Remember Vista is launching at a bad time. Gamers will have the PS3 and Wii competing for their dollars. Can you afford to buy the consoles AND a new PC?

    Why is bungie still called bungie? Shouldn't they just be called MS game division?

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    1. Re:And who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      "Halo did do something very nice that every FPS game should copy. Give grenades their own controls so you can throw them with your main weapon equipped. Brilliant."

      I'd like to note that the uberpopular Quake one mod "Team Fortress" did this originally.

    2. Re:And who cares? by ClamIAm · · Score: 1
      Halo did do something very nice that every FPS game should copy. Give grenades their own controls so you can throw them with your main weapon equipped. Brilliant.

      *THWAK* Don't forget they did the same thing with melee strikes. The dedicated grenade/melee buttons really add some complexity to the game. They also make watching a good Halo player a lot of fun; it's like watching some sort of deathmatch symphony. It also makes casual FPSers (ahem, like me) horrible at multiplayer.

    3. Re:And who cares? by tpemble · · Score: 1
      Or are they remembering ME and are this time determined to ensure people can't just skip an upgrade?
      Wrong! Microsoft never remembers the customer.
    4. Re:And who cares? by ceoyoyo · · Score: 5, Funny

      Why is bungie still called bungie? Shouldn't they just be called MS game division?

      Because when they wander too far afield they get snapped back by a big semi-elastic cable tied around their ankles?

    5. Re:And who cares? by demon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why is bungie still called bungie? Shouldn't they just be called MS game division?

      Because Microsoft still wants people to believe that Bungie still has a shred of independence. I'd say that this pretty well proves that they do not - if they did, this (the fantasy that a port of a now several years old repetitive sequel to a repetitive shooter targeted for an as-yet-unreleased OS being just the thing to push people to buy the OS and new hardware to boot) would have been laughed right out of the board room. Microsoft just needs to end the facade.

      --

      Sam: "That was needlessly cryptic."
      Max: "I'd be peeing my pants if I wore any!"
    6. Re:And who cares? by Trogre · · Score: 1

      Oh, if I had mod points...

      That's the funniest thing I've seen all day. And possibly true in a way.

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    7. Re:And who cares? by Espectr0 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Vista will be the biggest OS release they have done so far.
      Almost everything has changed. The problem is that most of these things are under the hood, so the casual user (even uninformed slashdotters) think Vista is just Aero.

      Fact is:
      -New directx, will mean prettier games (and faster too, they said it is faster than dx9)
      -New networking stack
      -Sandboxed IE7
      -Better firewall and now spyware tool.
      -IIS 7
      -New included games

      I myself will get it, even if it is only to play the newest games. That said, halo 2 is not one of them. I only hope drm isn't that bad.

    8. Re:And who cares? by mrchaotica · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I only hope drm isn't that bad.
      This negates all the improvements you just listed, and more.

      Not to mention that they shouldn't be bothering with DirectX at all, but instead should be implementing a standard like OpenGL, etc., shouldn't have broken IE in the first place, and shouldn't need an anti-spyware tool since it's only because of the fundamental flaws in the OS that spyware exists anyway!
      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    9. Re:And who cares? by Adriax · · Score: 1

      Tribes had the seperate grenade controls from the beginning, without having a mod.
      It also had the limited weapons carrying feature, though it was limited by your armor class, not just 2.

      Duke3d had a kick feature, a weapon available at all times at the push of a button, even when you were unarmed and kicking anyway. Made for some amusing play sessions, people running around doublekicking stuff.

      Vehicles had been done many times over in other games.

      Really, there's nothing inovative about the halo series. What made it a decent game was a good storyline and the specific combination of features.

      --
      I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it!
    10. Re:And who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Halo did do something very nice that every FPS game should copy. Give grenades their own controls so you can throw them with your main weapon equipped. Brilliant.

      System Shock did it first.

      Come to that, you could do it in Quake, too. (Not by default; you had to add a couple of lines to your configuration file to bind a key to the function, and most people used rockets rather than grenades.)

    11. Re:And who cares? by TCM · · Score: 1

      Halo did do something very nice that every FPS game should copy. Give grenades their own controls so you can throw them with your main weapon equipped. Brilliant.

      You mean like Team Fortress Classic (Multiplayer Half-Life 1 mod) did years ago?

      --
      Of course it runs NetBSD. BTC: 1NT7QvbetmANwaMzhpVL6
    12. Re:And who cares? by e03179 · · Score: 0, Troll

      Hmm. The both of you don't know the difference between Bungie and bungee. Looks like the joke is on you.

      --
      -516
    13. Re:And who cares? by Terminal+Saint · · Score: 1

      "Halo did do something very nice that every FPS game should copy. Give grenades their own controls so you can throw them with your main weapon equipped. Brilliant."

      Fast action FPS games, yes, every FPS no. Throwing a grenade is a moderately complex two-handed action. Im all for fast paced arcady shooters like Halo and TFC having their own grenade key, but in a realism shooter like Americas Army or Red Orchestra requiring you to switch to grenades is perfectly reasonable.

      --
      It's sad when choosing an installation directory on your own qualifies you as an "advanced user."
    14. Re:And who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's a reason it was called Team Fortress Classic. The original Team Fortress for Quake had that feature.

    15. Re:And who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree, apart from on two tiny points. First being that the Halo vehicles, whilst hardly original, were probably the first fun-to-drive vehicles in an FPS.
      And, of course, the major innovation with Halo was the marketing.

    16. Re:And who cares? by ildon · · Score: 1

      It's called "Team Fortress CLASSIC" for a reason. TF was for Quake first. If you're going to try and point out the origin of something, at least get it right.

    17. Re:And who cares? by TCM · · Score: 1

      Since TFC was before Halo, that's sufficient to claim "prior art". I never said TFC was the first to have this.

      --
      Of course it runs NetBSD. BTC: 1NT7QvbetmANwaMzhpVL6
    18. Re:And who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OMGG wht a newb he dont know about original TF!! i just have to point it out so i can put myself above him

    19. Re:And who cares? by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      Really, there's nothing inovative about the halo series. What made it a decent game was a good storyline and the specific combination of features.

      The story sucked ass too. Masterchief! Good grief how puerile.

      Well at least the controls are good, oh wait they aren't.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    20. Re:And who cares? by Jace+of+Fuse! · · Score: 1

      While I agree they should focus on implimenting OpenGL more tightly, there's no reason to stop "bothering" with DirectX. Like it or not it's a very mature API and it provides a lot of things beyond what simply expanding on their support for OpenGL would provide.

      Without something even remotely as good as DirectX that increasingly popular "other" operating system doesn't stand a chance of having nearly as much game developer support as Windows.

      That isn't to say something opened that parallels the features of DirectX couldn't be developed, but I don't see it happening anytime soon.

      --

      "Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"

      Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
    21. Re:And who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Probably going to be modded down as a troll, but...

      Alternatives does exist. Besides Direct3D and DirectInput, which realisticly speaking are the ONLY pieces of DirectX that actually work well (the rest being just too much bother to be worth it), DirectX sucks ass. And yes, IAAGD (I Am A Game Developer).

    22. Re:And who cares? by Swordsmanus · · Score: 1
      "Halo did do something very nice that every FPS game should copy. Give grenades their own controls so you can throw them with your main weapon equipped. Brilliant."

      Forgive me if I misinterpreted this part of your comment, but the Team Fortress Classic mod for Half-Life had that feature. I wouldn't be suprised if Team Fortress for Quake had that, too. It's a good feature, yes, but it's nothing new. For that matter Halo brought little if anything new to the FPS genre.

    23. Re:And who cares? by Mac+Degger · · Score: 1

      "Vista will be the biggest OS release they have done so far. Almost everything has changed."

      Well, that was /before/ they had to make such drastic cuts in order to release Vista late. Like dropping WinFS and all the other mayor features.

      Now all that has changed is CP's skin and the fact that you get even more amazing whining popups...but this time it's the OS and not some rogue website!

      --
      -- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
    24. Re:And who cares? by mlk · · Score: 1

      (and faster too, they said it is faster than dx9)

      I think the "faster" comes from having a newer graphics card. :P

      --
      Wow, I should not post when knackered.
    25. Re:And who cares? by AlexMax2742 · · Score: 1
      I just never got the idea that Halo PC had a big impact.

      Halo PC never had a huge impact because of two reasons. First, Gearbox did the port. It was terrible and had astronimic system requirements, and was not mod-friendly at all. With the Halo 2 PC port in Bungie's hands, I have a great deal more faith that Halo 2 PC will be much much better. However, the other factor is how late it came out.

      Reguardless, although it didn't have much of an impact, it still had one. There are still people playing Halo PC online, both the demo, full game and more mod-friendly Custom Edition, despite such crippling deficiancies. So, the question then begs, why do they continue to play it? Perhaps you're not giving it enough credit, or never really paid that much attention to it. It deserves another look, especially the multiplayer.

      --
      I'm the guy with the unpopular opinion
    26. Re:And who cares? by prisoner-of-enigma · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      This negates all the improvements you just listed, and more.

      That is your opinion only. There are plenty of people out there who find nothing wrong with the DRM at all because (gasp!) it allows them to do whatever they want to do with it (i.e. make backups, etc.) Just because it prevents you from ripping the latest movie and giving it to all your friends free of charge doesn't mean some people don't find it the least be intrusive...or even less intrusive than the current DeCSS since it offers no legal way to copy it at all.

      Not to mention that they shouldn't be bothering with DirectX at all, but instead should be implementing a standard like OpenGL, etc.,

      OpenGL? Oh, you mean that graphics standard run by the woefully-lethargic standards body that took years to move from one point release to the next? The standard that came to have almost as many proprietary extensions as it did standard ones? OpenGL was a great thing, and it could've remained a great thing. The problem is, it didn't keep pace with graphics card development and gamer interests, largely due to its glacial roots in professional OpenGL cards. I should know because I have had many such cards over the years. The point here is that Microsoft put DirectX in place and pushed it farther and faster than OpenGL could. The initial DirectX was a disaster and it really didn't come into its own until about DirectX7. Today, DirectX9 is the "standard" whether you like it or not. If you doubt that, just see how many modern 3D-accelerated games you can run without it. QED.

      shouldn't have broken IE in the first place

      Other than failing a variety of tests that also make Firefox puke (ie ACID test), please explain how IE is "broken" in a way that matters to the average user. Every website on the planet that entertains customers QA's their site on IE first and all other browsers second -- if at all. You stand a much higher chance of getting a non-functional or poorly formatted web page using Firefox or Opera than with using IE. Oh, sure, IE implements things in a non-standard way, but that doesn't matter to the end user! They just care that their pages look right and don't care one whit what coding gymnastics you went through to get it that way. You can get all high 'n mighty about standard-this and standard-that, but it doesn't matter one hill of beans. If the vast majority of people use something, it's generally a de-facto standard. I know that offends your puritanicalism, but it's true.

      and shouldn't need an anti-spyware tool since it's only because of the fundamental flaws in the OS that spyware exists anyway!

      So are you implying it's impossible to construct a spyware tool for another OS like, say, OS X or Linux? If so, would you be willing to bet a year's salary on that? Don't be so foolish. Your narrow-mindedness is blinding you to reality. Take a step back and remember that this is software, not a religion. Microsoft is a competitor, not the Nazi party. Quit taking this stuff so personally and your judgement won't be so badly marred by your emotions.

      --
      In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us. - Fyodor Dostoyevsky
    27. Re:And who cares? by mrchaotica · · Score: 1
      There are plenty of people out there who find nothing wrong with the DRM at all because (gasp!) it allows them to do whatever they want to do with it (i.e. make backups, etc.)
      And plenty of people are stupid and shortsighted. What's your point?

      We've already seen how DRM puts you at the mercy of the publisher, when Apple changed the rules about iTMS music after the fact. This will only continue, and will only become more restrictive over time.
      If you doubt that, just see how many modern 3D-accelerated games you can run without [DirectX]. QED.
      Well, let's see:
      • World of Warcraft
      • Warcraft 3
      • Quake 4
      • Doom 3
      • Halo
      • Age of Mythology
      • America's Army
      • Black & White
      • Call of Duty 2
      • Darwinia
      • Dungeon Siege
      • Ghost Recon
      • Return to Castle Wolfenstein (and Enemy Territory)
      • The Sims 2
      • Second Life
      • Red Faction
      • Star Wars Jedi Knight 2
      • Star Wars KOTOR
      • Splinter Cell
      • UT 2004
      ...and bunches of others that I haven't bothered to list.

      Of course, none of these games require Windows at all, either. Odd coincidence, eh?
      please explain how IE is "broken" in a way that matters to the average user.
      IE allows the average user to be subjected to unwanted advertisements. IE allows spyware and adware to take over the average user's computer. IE allows the average user's computer to get viruses. IE puts the average user at extreme risk of identity theft.

      The issue of page rendering doesn't even enter into it (not to mention that by now the number of websites that don't work in Firefox are negligable).
      So are you implying it's impossible to construct a spyware tool for another OS like, say, OS X or Linux?
      Not impossible, but much harder because there are fewer ways to get it installed without the user's knowledge.
      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    28. Re:And who cares? by prisoner-of-enigma · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      And plenty of people are stupid and shortsighted. What's your point?

      My point is that you're being insular, arrogant, stupid, and shortsighted yourself. Everyone is not like you. DRM is not necessarily a bad thing all the time. True, it's far worse than totally unfettered access to digital content, but the media companies are not going to release content in an uncontrolled fashion. Of course, we have the wonderful pirate culture to blame for that, since they've shown themselves to be oh so responsible when it comes to observing the rights of intellectual property holders. But I digress. The point here is that DRM which allows at least limited copying is far, far better than things like DeCSS which allow no legal copying whatsoever. You can argue otherwise 'til you're blue in the face, but that doesn't change the fact that you're wrong. If anything, you're just pouting because you can't violate copyrights anymore. ...and bunches of others that I haven't bothered to list.

      Perhaps you missed the part about "modern 3-D accelerated games" in my requirements. Many in your list have a bit of age on them. Try harder next time.

      E allows the average user to be subjected to unwanted advertisements.

      Perhaps you're unaware of the existence of an integrated pop-up blocker in IE? Or the fact that ad-removal options do exist for IE? Besides, this is no more a "broken" feature than Firefox's lack of support for ActiveX Controls. You're grasping at straws here.

      IE allows spyware and adware to take over the average user's computer.

      And Firefox on Linux is immune to this...how? A number of exploits have surfaced for FF on Linux. Several of them allowed arbitrary code execution. Are you going to be stupid enough to suggest that all the bugs in FF are gone now? That there will never be another exploit? Or, going further, that FF is somehow immune to social engineering practices that trick users into downloading malicious content? You're making a huge fool of yourself here and not even remotely presenting a challenge to me in this argument.

      IE allows the average user's computer to get viruses. IE puts the average user at extreme risk of identity theft.

      Blah blah blah. You keep spouting the same old tired lines. I will remind you that FF, Opera, Safari, and every other browser known to man either currently has or recently had numerous exploits available that would allow such as this. If you want to be stupid enough to claim that this will never happen again, go ahead. It will simply reinforce the idea that you're so blinded by anti-MS hatred that you're unable to make a rational decision in this matter. And even if you could somehow magically make FF/Opera/Linux/OSX/whatever immune to code exploits, all of these are still vulnerable to socially engineering an ususpecting, ignorant user into doing all manner of nefarious things to their own machine. Even non-root users can do a lot of damage, especially to themselves (deletion of user home directory would hurt, now, wouldn't it? And that can't be stopped by simply restricting root access because the user has rw privs to his/her home dir). Gosh, you didn't think about that, did you? Now that I mention it, you didn't think much at all about this whole concept, did you? You just reacted emotionally, like a good /. myrmidon.

      ot to mention that by now the number of websites that don't work in Firefox are negligable.

      Oh really? You don't surf much, do you? I use FF every day (I'm using it right now). I come across at least one or two every day that don't render properly in FF but look fine in IE. Sure, FF is trying to do things the "web standard" way and IE is doing things the "Microsoft" way, but my original point stands unmolested: none of this matters to the end user. If it renders properly in IE, it doesn't matter if the site had to be coded in object-oriented FORTRAN. The user doesn

      --
      In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us. - Fyodor Dostoyevsky
    29. Re:And who cares? by mrchaotica · · Score: 1
      Perhaps you missed the part about "modern 3-D accelerated games" in my requirements. Many in your list have a bit of age on them. Try harder next time.
      WTF?! Stuff like WoW and Quake 4 are some of the newest games out there! What more do you want?
      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    30. Re:And who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wow is almost 2 years old. Thats a lifetime in the technoverse

    31. Re:And who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Other than failing a variety of tests that also make Firefox puke (ie ACID test), please explain how IE is "broken" in a way that matters to the average user.


      OK, here's one: their cookie implementation via Javascript has been broken since before IE6 in 2001. How is it broken? The RFC for cookies states that the minimum is 20 cookies of 4KB size each. IE, however, chooses to only respect the first 4KB in both reading and writing, effectively limiting you to only 4KB (there's a knowledge base article on this). Opera 8 suffers from the same problem but Gecko based browsers are fine (FF 1.0, MZ 1.6, NS 8.0).

      Why is this hassle to users? The workarounds suck. You notice them because they run from being shut out from another browser to posting and reloading every single time you want to save state.

      1. ASP's response.cookie() function works to varying degrees but you have to post/request to read/write and it corners you into IIS on the backend. It also screws up F5 refreshes and pops up dialogs because it has to resubmit. I shudder to think what that does to an older browser that doesn't quite recognize what the server's spitting out.

      2. You get shoved into IE from your regular browser because the developer isn't as benevolent as I am (my code is cross compatible everywhere, even if it does force slow submits and requests for everything on IE while Gecko-based browsers fly by on just Java), exposing yourself to holes from within Windows or forcing a reboot out of an alternative OS.

      If they'd just fix this TINY little bug (my guess is it gets ignored again in IE7), it wouldn't be such a pain in the ass for users OR developers. Defacto standard or not, it's broken and you're irresponsible bragging about it.
    32. Re:And who cares? by prisoner-of-enigma · · Score: 1

      OK, here's one: their cookie implementation via Javascript has been broken since before IE6 in 2001.

      (sigh) It would seem you failed to grasp the important part of the requirement. Here, let my try to help you a bit: "Other than failing a variety of tests that also make Firefox puke (ie ACID test), please explain how IE is "broken" in a way that matters to the average user." You've given me a dissertation on why it's difficult for web developers, but in the same breath you indicate there are workarounds. Sure, they're a pain for you. So what? I don't say that to be trite, but the end user doesn't give one damn how many nights you've lost sleep over some non-RFC-compliant thing Microsoft did. If there's a workaround that doesn't involve the user doing anything, I've got news for you: the user doesn't care! And ultimately it's the user's experience -- not your coding experience -- that matters. Sorry to break it to you like that, but it's true.

      And while we're on the subject of RFC's, let's remember something: an RFC is a guideline, not a rule. Anyone is free to do anything they want, however they want, using whatever tools, languages, or widgets that they want. If it works and people like it, it doesn't matter whether it's RFC compliant or not. If it gets enough market share, it becomes a standard whether you like it or not, RFC be damned. You ignore this reality at your peril.

      Defacto standard or not, it's broken and you're irresponsible bragging about it.

      I'm not bragging about it, I'm just dragging you kicking and screaming into reality. The only standards that matter are those standards that are accepted into widespread usage. History is littered with the corpses of standards that never got adopted because either a better standard emerged or a proprietary one did a better job...and in the latter case, many proprietary standards eventually became public domain standards or "generic" versions of them were reverse-engineered into the public domain. I abhor non-standard stuff as much as you do, but I'm not so stupid that I don't recognize the value of a de facto standard.

      --
      In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us. - Fyodor Dostoyevsky
    33. Re:And who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just ignore the MS employee. He's been spouting garbage for a long time. Let him troll someone else.

    34. Re:And who cares? by prisoner-of-enigma · · Score: 1

      Just ignore the AC. He's been spouting BS for a long time. Let him try to fool someone else.

      And, for the record, I don't work at Microsoft.

      --
      In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us. - Fyodor Dostoyevsky
  10. Wonderful! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The game looks to be Vista only..."

    Great, looks like I now have two things to download via bittorrent instead of just one.

  11. Never ceases to amaze me... by gweihir · · Score: 1

    ...that these practices are not criminal according to US law. Seems to me this is corporate greed at ist best.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    1. Re:Never ceases to amaze me... by NoTheory · · Score: 1

      You know, i'm not a fan of microsoft at all. I used to be a bungie adherent back in the Marathon days, but i don't care for them since they were bought out. But on this count i'll defend them. This may be a business decision, but this could be just as likely an engineering decision. So seriously, people need to lay off. There's barely a potential for unethical behavior, but seriously, this is their gear, their software, why the hell can't the decide what they release it for? What's next? Would you have them re-write all their game titles for the gamecube and the PS3 too?

      (that said, as much as i enjoyed halo 1 and 2, i don't have any sort of X-box, and have no intention of getting one, even for a halo game.)

      --
      There are lives at stake here!
    2. Re:Never ceases to amaze me... by chriso11 · · Score: 1

      their software, why the hell can't the decide what they release it for?

      Well, this may surprise you, but the majority of new PC games can play on XP, and 2K; even 98 is commonly supported. Heck, even ME (for the 7 gamers that play on ME).

      So, while it may be only slightly easier to develop Vista only, the difference to support all of the other Win OSs is not that much more significant (I'm not a game developer, so I could be off base on this...).

      Of course, with Battlefield 2 and CS, who really needs Halo on their PC anyway?

      --
      No, I don't trust in god. He'll have to pay up front, like everybody else.
    3. Re:Never ceases to amaze me... by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Well, I have to admit that I assume this is not for technical reasons, judging from past MS behaviour. It would be extremely hard to prove either way. And once the decision has been made to abuse the monopoly (once again), the game couls actually be designed in a way that it really needs Vista as basis.

      Well, I guess if Halo2 is the only reason to update to Vista, then MS is doomed in the long run anuways, because their business-model is dead.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    4. Re:Never ceases to amaze me... by pedantic+bore · · Score: 1
      Hard to say where it begins and ends.

      I have an old mac that would have been tossed in the dumpster a long time ago except that it is the only hardware I have that can correctly run some games my daughters love. Should I be angry that I'm forced to use a particular platform in order to run software that I want? Should I sue the game manufacturer for never getting around to porting it to some other platform?

      In any case, if you want to get huffy about Microsoft lock-in, there are plenty of cases that don't involve games but instead are real time-and-money wasting problems... (Why isn't Entourage the same as Outlook?)

      --
      Am I part of the core demographic for Swedish Fish?
    5. Re:Never ceases to amaze me... by jZnat · · Score: 1

      Halo 2 might be using DirectX 10 for technical reasons, but Microsoft's inability to release DirectX 10 for its other operating systems that actually exist in an arguably usable form is purely not technical.

      --
      'Yes, firefox is indeed greater than women. Can women block pops up for you? No. Can Firefox show you naked women? Yes.'
    6. Re:Never ceases to amaze me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, we should write a law that says you can't market your own products alongside your other products that help you make a profit or drive sales. That should be downright criminal.

      Seriously though, how could you possibly write a law to prevent this from happening? Crybaby. Either play Halo 2 on an Xbox or upgrade to Vista when it comes out. Either way, unless you YOURSELF are breaking the law, you're going to have to give Bill G his filthy lucre in order to play Halo 2.

    7. Re:Never ceases to amaze me... by Parham · · Score: 1

      The big difference between what you stated and what Microsoft is doing is that Microsoft is pushing one product with another within their own company. The Mac games your daughter loves so much, were they created by Apple? It's one thing if a group of developers outside the company independently chose to create Vista-only games, but this is a completely different story.

      My thinking for this article goes like this: Why would I pay for a newer operating system just to play a (single) game? I can just as simply save that money and buy a 360 altogether. I know Vista in the longrun will cause me a lot more headache (and therefore more money) than the 360 ever can. Also, a lot of other people I know seem to be very comfortable with their current XP operating system.

    8. Re:Never ceases to amaze me... by Emetophobe · · Score: 1

      The thing that pisses me off is DirectX 10. Vista will use DirectX 10, and they aren't going to let Windows XP users using DirectX 9 be able to upgrade to DirectX 10 (because they want to force people to upgrade to Vista). I'm guessing when Vista comes out alot of games will be written for it, and you will have to have a "DirectX 10 compatible" video card. As a gamer, I'm more than a little bit worried about the day Vista comes out. My only hope is that game developers will continue to support Windows XP for atleast a few more years.

    9. Re:Never ceases to amaze me... by Mac+Degger · · Score: 1

      "but this could be just as likely an engineering decision. So seriously, people need to lay off."

      Except it's not an engineering decision. Halo 1 ran on the xbox and got ported, Halo 2 runs on the xbox. Plus you have me telling you that it's not an engineering decision. The pc has all the hardware/software to play Halo 2....it's a bundling decions by MS to get more people to buy into Vista. So seriously, mopre people need to give MS shit for such an obvious tactic.

      --
      -- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
    10. Re:Never ceases to amaze me... by pedantic+bore · · Score: 1
      I don't think that it's completely different. Imagine if it was some other company (take your favorite non-microsoft game, for example) who told you that their next game required Vista. Would your feelings be any different?

      Imagine that you're a strategist working for microsoft. Your choices:

      1. Write the game for XP. Ignore Vista features that XP doesn't support. Hope that Vista is sufficiently backward-compatible so that it runs well on Vista.
      2. Write the game for XP (like above) and then port it to Vista.
      3. Just write it once for Vista and don't look back.

      I don't know whether you'd pick #1 or #2. Either way, now try to rationalize your choice to your boss...

      --
      Am I part of the core demographic for Swedish Fish?
    11. Re:Never ceases to amaze me... by bmajik · · Score: 1

      How do you know?

      Suppose, for instance, that there is a new display driver model in Vista, and that DX10 works only on this new model. Perhaps DX10 and the new model were developed together, since in Vista so much of the UI is using the GPU at all times.

      XP would lack this driver model, making DX10 not run on XP.

      If the above scenario were true, it would tend to suggest a technical reason, don't you agree?

      Do you know for a fact that what I've described isn't true?

      --
      My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
    12. Re:Never ceases to amaze me... by prisoner-of-enigma · · Score: 1

      ...that these practices are not criminal according to US law. Seems to me this is corporate greed at ist best.

      It's called "freedom," a word you aren't apparently familiar with. In this country, people are free to not buy Windows Vista, Halo PC, or whatever if they don't want to, thus voting with their dollars. Microsoft can only be as greedy as the market will allow it. If the market decides Microsoft's products are no longer worth the money Microsoft is demanding, Microsoft will lose customers. It's that simple. Such a pity that you think goverment is somehow required to solve all your piddling little problems.

      --
      In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us. - Fyodor Dostoyevsky
  12. Not too interested in Halo2 by gweihir · · Score: 0

    I playd Halo and for a while it was good. But then it became repetitive and boring. The same room-design over and over again. Like they neded 10 additional hours of play-time and just repliacted a 10 minute segment of the game to get it. Needless to say I did not finish it.

    I doubt Halo2 will be worth an upgrade to Vista. I also doubt an upd=grade to Vista will be a godd idea before end of 2008 or so.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  13. Oh well... by Rendo · · Score: 0

    Guess I won't be able to play Halo 2 on PC. ;) Not wasting my money on a glorified XP just to play ONE game. Maybe Cedega will get around Vista. ;)

  14. XP Patch? by Paul+Slocum · · Score: 1

    I'm curious what they'll do to insure it only runs on Vista. I wonder if some good hackers could patch it to run on XP?

    1. Re:XP Patch? by miscz · · Score: 1

      I'm not wondering if somebody will hack it to run on XP. I'm just certain that somebody will.

    2. Re:XP Patch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll bet twenty bucks it'll be available for XP before it's available retail, especially if runs on DirectX 9 like I've heard...

    3. Re:XP Patch? by Fittysix · · Score: 2, Interesting

      As a matter of curiosity, I took the sol.exe from a vista beta machine, and tried to run it on XP. I expected it wouldn't run due to some missing dependancies or something, but to my surprise it said that the EXE was not a valid win32 executable. It appears they've already implimented whatever the method is, and although I didn't investigate the matter any further I'm guessing by the error that this is a fairly complex matter, possibly beyond the ability of a simple patch/crack.

      --
      *.sig
    4. Re:XP Patch? by Perseid · · Score: 1

      As I understand Vista is going to be 64-bit, so all of it's executables will have to be 64-bit code. And Windows XP won't run 64-bit code. This is all pure guessing on my part, but that would explain that error. And it would also make any Vista programs hard to XP-patch.

      Dammit.

    5. Re:XP Patch? by Paul+Slocum · · Score: 1

      Just because it doesn't run doesn't mean it's hard to patch. It could be as simple as a header modification.

    6. Re:XP Patch? by Spacejock · · Score: 1

      I'm curious what they'll do to insure it only runs on Vista.

      My guess? They'll make DX 10 Vista only. If not 10, then 11. They did this with DX 7 or 8 (can't remember which), and it no longer installed on Win98. DX is tied in much closer with the OS and drivers than any game would be.

      I'm happy with my nice stable XP and fave games (never thought I'd say that) and I'd never upgrade an OS for a single game.

  15. I'm more interested... by Bieeanda · · Score: 3, Interesting
    In when non-MS games will start to require DX10. I really don't care for Halo, so I'm not concerned about it being a Vista-only title. The real fun will be when DX10 comes out, and developers will have to start worrying about whether to risk alienating customers by using it exclusively, or forego any improvements it brings in order to stick with the widely accepted (and not Vista-exclusive) DX9. This isn't like DVD-only games, where the push came at the cost of drives that had already dropped to the price of an average game, or the performance gains brought by laying out a few hundred for a new video card-- it's paying several hundred bucks for a new OS (while XP is still very much supported) and pretty much having to flatten and reinstall in order to play a blasted game in the first place.

    And while I'm here, Halo 2 and Shadowrun? Christ almighty. Halo PC was one of the most atrocious ports that I've had the misfortune of dealing with, and Shadowrun is shaping up to be an ugly, me-too squad-based FPS. Some great incentives there, guys. Really.

    1. Re:I'm more interested... by Mistshadow2k4 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Would you trade a market of 95% of all Windows-users for even 50%? And how long do you think it'll take before Vista hits 50%? We (nerds) know that Vista isn't really that much of an improvement over XP now and the average user doesn't, but they will as soon as people they know get it -- and are likely disappointed unless they're upgrading from 98.

      Let's rehash Vista for a moment:
      1. Aero: You can make XP look just like Aero right now for free; just go look at softpedia.com or download.com.
      2. The sidebar (is that even still on Vista?): desktop sidebar works even on Win 2k. And then's there the Google Desktop.
      3. Better security: You'd be better off sticking with Win 2k or XP and getting the free version of Win Patrol. More security and it uses less than 5 mb of Ram to run in the background -- how much memory is Vista going to require again?
      4. DirectX 10: It'll be almost useless for a long time. No game company is going to trade the market of almost all Windows-users for the Vista-users market exclusively. I predict that when games get more advanced they will either use OpenGL or even program what the game needs into the game itself (which likely won't be a permanent upgrade to your system).

      Those are its pluses! Consider the biggest negative of all: 8 different versions, each costing more than the last. Is everyone going to rush out and buy a copy of Vista when the version they can afford has less features than the copy of XP they already have? Most who do so would by mistake.... and they won't be very quiet about how they feel they got screwed either. Personally, I think the 8 versions thing is what is going to be the biggest detriment to selling it. MS is trying to force everyone to pay through the nose for Windows and a great many simply will not. MS has forgotten that their target market is cheap; if they weren't a lot more of them would be using Macs (and I'm no Apple fangirl by any means, so don't take it that way).

      Pirate Vista? A lot of them won't even bother with that when they find out from folks who have it that it's not really that much of an improvement over XP (from a user's standpoint) and requires powerful, expensive hardware -- which a lot of people simply don't have even now. You can't download hardware over p2p so Vista will be useless to many, who aren't going to upgrade without a compelling reason to do so. And what complelling reason will there be? MS's own games? That's not good enough for most, not so long as there are a lot of games that still support XP. No, I think Microsoft's only real hope lies with companies like Dell, who will sell pre-built computers with Vista. And guess how happy those people are going to be when they find out that they have to pay do much exta for features? To summarize, I think word of mouth alone will do a lot to prevent Vista's widespread adoption -- it will cost too much to have anything beyond the basics, most hardware can't even utilize it and hardware that can won't be all that common for another couple of years. For all that inconvenience Vista Premium should have a boatload of great features, but it's apparently not going to. Even with all that aside it would be very foolish for a game company to go Vista-only because the Vista market share is going to be too small. And if Vista bombs they certainly won't. Even if it is suceesful, its market share is still going to be low enough compared to previous versions of Windows that marketing games to it exclusively just wouldn't be profitable enough, especially since OpenGL can be used instead.

      Come to think of it, maybe Vista will do more to push OpenGL than anything else. Bonus! Go MS! :-D

      --
      I dream of a better world... one in which chickens can cross roads without their motives being questioned.
    2. Re:I'm more interested... by Kazzahdrane · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Of course, all Microsoft need to do is convince Blizzard to make the second WoW expansion Vista-only and they'll instantly get huge numbers of people upgrading to the new OS :P

    3. Re:I'm more interested... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Come to think of it, maybe Vista will do more to push OpenGL than anything else.

      wishful thinking.i agree that halo wont be the hottest game there is and is not a reason enough to upgare to vista.but most joe sixpacks buy their pcs from companies like dell.what have you got ? ,we have VISTA the latest in eye candy,wow,id buy it,end of story.we might now use it,dosent necessarily mean they wont.they will eventually.if theydidnt,then the software insdustry would be a very different model than today.it simply wouldnt be like this at all to begin with.

    4. Re:I'm more interested... by tgd · · Score: 1

      Not to get into an argument, but there are "nerds" who think they know what Vista brings to the table, and "nerds" actively doing development against it.

      The former believes Vista brings nothing signficant to the table. The latter, who is making huge changes to their apps to support it knows exactly what has changed, and the big stuff isn't in your list.

    5. Re:I'm more interested... by Tim+C · · Score: 1

      I predict that when games get more advanced they will either use OpenGL

      OpenGL is arguably a replacement for the functionality of Direct3D (although I've not used it, so I can't tell how close the feature equivalence is), but D3D is a relatively small part of DX. You can't just use OGL instead of DX.

      or even program what the game needs into the game itself (which likely won't be a permanent upgrade to your system).

      Now why in the world would you do that? You're saying that rather than rely on third-party libraries and concentrate on getting the engine right, it would be *better* to write not only the engine, but also the entire HAL?

      OGL and DX exist precisely because software houses have neither the time nor the expertise to create their own. What you suggest would massively increase the complexity and therefore time and cost of any game; it simply isn't practical. And to what end? What would they gain over simply using an existing set of libraries?

      To answer another point, the vast majority of PC users do not upgrade their OS. They simply use whatever comes with their PC. If they're in the market for a new PC, they'll choose the one with the latest version of Windows, because

      1) no-one likes to think that they're using old, out-dated stuff
      2) the advertising will tell them to
      3) they'll quickly have no choice, as no manufacturer likes to be slling old, out-dated stuff (see point 1)

      People like you and me, we upgrade, but we're in a tiny minority.

    6. Re:I'm more interested... by jmauro · · Score: 1

      But probably not a huge number paying to upgrade to Vista.

    7. Re:I'm more interested... by NetRAVEN5000 · · Score: 1

      Large numbers meaning who? You and "Leeroy Jenkins"?

      All kidding aside. . . that still won't do it. People won't pay more for a game they already own.

    8. Re:I'm more interested... by Quince+alPillan · · Score: 1
      The latter, who is making huge changes to their apps to support it knows exactly what has changed, and the big stuff isn't in your list.

      Mind letting us poor plebs know what "big stuff" there is? The only reason I've seen so far to wipe my XP install is DX10, but since DX9 is only run in emulation, and all of my games run slow, DX10 doesn't sound very nice until I'm forced to upgrade.

  16. Shooting themselves in the foot by Null+Nihils · · Score: 1

    MS is actually kind of shooting themselves in the foot with XBox. Not only have they burned up an insane amount of money on the two XBoxes, but they are helping to encourage people to divide their time away from Windows gaming to console gaming. There have been many, many game consoles in the past, made by numerous companies. There is still a fair amount of competition in the console market. But, there has only been one OS that is popular for PC gaming, MS Windows.

    I can't see this "Vista only" requirement pushing anyone but a super-hardcore Halo fan off the fence.

  17. Re:Interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, I don't know about you, but I got HOURS of entertainment out of sharing the goatse experience with friends and relatives (even grandma got a good laugh at her best friend's expense!). But I played Halo for about five minutes plus setup time before I realized it was severly overhyped. But Goatse is legendary and deserves it. I'm 100% serious.

  18. As someone who just bought a DX9 card... by bogie · · Score: 0, Troll

    Let me say, who gives a crap? Halo for the PC basically sucked and was never popular among FPS fans.

    This whole DX10 being Vista only is BS. They are royally screwing over XP users and especially anyone who has bought a new GPU recently. Developers can't be happy with MS for pulling a stunt like this. Must be nice to always have that monopoly to fall back on when you need to force unwanted changes down people's throats.

    --
    If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
    1. Re:As someone who just bought a DX9 card... by ClamIAm · · Score: 1
      This whole DX10 being Vista only is BS.

      Welcome to the Microsoft World (TM, pat. pend). They've been doing this crap for years, but mostly in the business market with Windows/Office. Why do you think there's so much news about governments and businesses trying to get out of the lock (see Massachusetts, Ernie Ball, etc)?

      The thing is, I don't understand why they're going after gamers like this. Most PC gamers are as pro-MS as you get, and have no doubt bought several PCs, Windows tax included. The only theory I can really entertain seriously is that they see a tough future in the OS market (tweakers moving to Linux and the other free Unixes, etc), and are trying to lock it down as best they can.

    2. Re:As someone who just bought a DX9 card... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not a lot different than how Mac users got screwed when MS bought Bungie. Welcome to the club!

  19. Economics by mattbee · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Price of your next Vista upgrade: £100-200 ?

    Price of second-hand XBox + Halo 2 at Game: £60

    I think they made a mistake and meant to say Halo 3 :-) There are lots more exciting game prospects than Halo 2 on the PC and only Microsoft can afford to tie their games to it -- sounds like it's a exercise for the new API & tech demo for developers rather than an enticing prospect for gamers.

    If you've not got one yet, old XBoxes are a steal at the moment! Also Gamecubes are only £30, and you won't waste your investment on any games either ... this awkward twilight for "current gen" games consoles will make life very cheap for a few months!

    --
    Matthew @ Bytemark Hosting
  20. vista only, meh by Mike_ya · · Score: 1

    The game wont make me upgrade. By the time I do move to Vista Halo 4 will be coming out. Probably wont play that game either.

  21. Microsoft Admits: Vista Isn't Worth It by ewhac · · Score: 3, Insightful
    You'd think that, with the enormous amount of prior art out there, and the amount of time and money Microsoft has had to design and develop Vista, that it would completely and utterly kick ass, from boot logo to shutdown. I mean, there are so many ideas out there, and Microsoft has had so much time to play with all of them and select the best ones, that Vista has no business being anything less that digitally optimized sex.

    Well, Microsoft just admitted that Vista sucks.

    Because, you see, if Vista was as good as it's supposed to be, it would stand on its own and sell itself. It would be so clearly better than XP or MacOS or even Linux that there would be no question that Vista is The Thing to Have For Your New PC.

    But no. Microsoft is telling us that Vista is so appallingly bad that not only can't it stand on its own, it needs to lean on an exclusive binding with Halo 2 to be able to support itself in the marketplace.

    There is no rational basis for tying Halo 2 to Vista other than the fact that Vista sucks. Halo 2 does not use DirectX 10 functionality, so Vista is not required. Further, by tying Halo 2 to Vista, Halo 2 sales will be depressed since, rounded to the nearest million, there are zero copies of Vista out there. Therefore, tying Halo 2 to Vista is being done not to drive Halo 2, but to drive Vista. And Vista wouldn't need driving... Unless Vista sucks.

    QED.

    Schwab

  22. I'm just wondering... by wilgibson · · Score: 1

    ...when the PC world actually gave two shits about Halo?

    I'm still playing Call of Duty!

  23. Re:Microsoft Admits: Vista Isn't Worth It by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your points contradict each other.

    The PC port of Halo2 is using Vista functionality not present on XP. These would be the "Vista has no business being anything less than digital sex" type of features.

    But this is slashdot. Everyone here thinks that operating systems don't change/add APIs over time and that every program ever written can run on any platform with a simple recompile.

    Idiots.

  24. Re:Microsoft Admits: Vista Isn't Worth It by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
    if Vista was as good as it's supposed to be, it would stand on its own and sell itself. It would be so clearly better than XP or MacOS or even Linux...

    Microsoft is telling us that Vista is so appallingly bad that not only can't it stand on its own, it needs to lean on an exclusive binding with Halo 2 to be able to support itself in the marketplace.

    There is no rational basis for tying Halo 2 to Vista other than the fact that Vista sucks.

    Mac OS X 10.2 was released on 24 August 2002, ten months after Windows XP was released.

    System requirements for some Apple non-pro software...

    • Final Cut Express HD: OS X 10.4
    • iLife '06: OS X 10.3; 10.4 recommended
    • iWork '06: OS X 10.3
    • Quicktime 7 Pro: OS X 10.3

    Are there good reasons for these system requirements?

  25. Mod parent up. by Corngood · · Score: 1

    This isn't really an Apple vs. Microsoft issue, but still interesting.

  26. Windows subsystem in 10.5? by tepples · · Score: 1

    I've read that future versions of Mac OS X for Intel architecture may include a Windows application compatibility subsystem. Will this be compatible with Windows Vista exclusive apps?

  27. This is bullshit by SpacePunk · · Score: 0

    Fuck Bungie, and fuck Microsoft.

    The Bungie CEO and Bill Gates can jack each other off all they want. I'm not upgrading, they can both kiss my ass.

    1. Re:This is bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love you. :) You're a real hero, you know?

  28. Re:Interesting by wibwib · · Score: 1

    The big win for Halo/2 on the XBox was the split screen coop. Me and a mate played right through both, and they were awesome. I've been playing FPSes since W3D, but the console coop experience is probably the best gaming I've had (BF1942 stole 6 months of my life though :)

    --
    "Everything louder than everything else"
  29. Interesting note by Perseid · · Score: 2

    As of the last article I read, Microsoft Flight Simulator X is not going to be DirectX 10 and will indeed NOT require Vista. It will instead have optional enhancements that will make it better on the new OS.

    This proves that supporting both OSes is possible and that Microsoft isn't doing it on Halo 2 because they simply don't want to.

  30. Re:Interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you've never player golden eye?

  31. Who cares about Halo (PC)? by code-e255 · · Score: 1

    Who cares about this? PC FPS games like Half-Life, Counter-Strike, Quake, Battlefield, Doom, FEAR... you name it, they're all much better than Halo. Besides, by the time Vista's out, we'll have Enemy Territory: Quake Wars, which will make Battlefield and Halo totally obsolete.

    I can understand that Halo's popular on the XBox by people who don't know what they're missing out on on the PC, but why the hell would any PC gamer give half a s*** about Halo 2 on the PC, especially after how terribly unoptimised the Halo 1 port was?

    1. Re:Who cares about Halo (PC)? by Fortyseven · · Score: 1

      I think it's not so much the game itself, but more about the motivation behind the move. It could be "Super Robo-Snooker Babe League 2007" for all it matters -- it's a SKU that MS thinks it's gonna move big time, and they're putting in an artificial limitation in the product to force it's fans into upgrading. That's the real issue.

      (Also, can I say 'snooker' again? Thank you.)

  32. hahaha hah by typidemon · · Score: 1

    fuck you microsoft, and fuck your little dog@!

  33. Another future game scratched off... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My list. First it was HL2 because of Steam, my slow network connection, and the whole hassle of DRM on a game I paid for. Next up, Halo 2. Vista only? Why? Is there some legitimate technical reason? Let me guess -- probably some new DRM scheme only enabled by Vista. I can't think of any other reason why it wouldn't be able to work on XP.

    There soon won't be a big-name game on the market that is of interest.

  34. Re:Interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Serious Sam split screen co-op on PC is soooo much better.

    Anecdotal evidence, but:

    Me+friend playing Halo co-op - bored after 4 hour session, I think the identical corridors did it.

    Halo 2 - 6 hours, playing as an Elite sucked.

    Serious Sam on PC - stayed up way past dawn (I think 8 or 9 hours), completed it all in one go.

    Plus, on a PC, you can actually see what's happening on the screen - half resolution on a TV is hard to use.

  35. Halo 2 exclusive to Vista? by suv4x4 · · Score: 1

    Microsoft is desperate...

  36. The Truth is by TheSkepticalOptimist · · Score: 1

    Despite all the naysayers, most of you will run out and pirate a copy of Vista just to play Halo 2. I mean, you bought the Xbox and Xbox360 simply to play Halo, at least you will be able to pirate a copy of Vista to play it as well.

    --
    I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
  37. For a few days or so... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There will be a hack to disable this a few days after the release. Don't get all whiny about it.

  38. And no word on OS X by DurendalMac · · Score: 1

    Bungie still hasn't said whether or not they'll port Halo 2 to OS X. If they don't, then they have really, truly sold out and lost whatever shred of decency they may have had left. Bungie got started doing games on the Mac, then moved into the Windows world. Gnop, Operation: Desert Storm, Minotaur, Pathways into Darkness, Marathon, Maraton 2, Marathon Infinity...all exclusively Mac, except for Marathon 2, which was later ported. Now they're not even throwing a bone to the very people that put them where they are now. Fucking despicable greedy sellout bastards.

  39. Xbox - PC by Phantasmo · · Score: 1

    Remember when the Xbox was first announced and the "big thing" was that it would be super-simple to port games from Xbox -> PC and vice-versa?
    I can see why they would delay the release of this game for business reasons, but they're blaming it on technical difficulties. What's going on in Redmond?

    --

    The US Army: promoting democracy through unquestioned obedience
  40. Vista Halo 2 Exclusive content revealed by Psykechan · · Score: 2, Funny

    Microsoft has promised fans of the Halo series that the exclusive content for Halo 2 on Windows Vista will be an ending.

    We have this quote from the Microsoft's game division formerly known as Bungie: "With the new technologies available to us in Windows Vista we can bring gamers the actual ending to the game that we envisioned instead of simply fading to credits in the middle of the story."

    It was also revealed that players will need a monitor and video card with HDCP technology to actually view this new ending. "We believe that gamers will demand this new technology from manufacturers, probably in some sort of online petition."

  41. look at the bright side by rabbot · · Score: 2, Interesting

    At least they are trying this crap with Halo 2 and not a good PC FPS. Let's hope it doesn't work out too well for them so they don't do it with something us PC fans actually care about.