So some random guy on the net was wrong about whether a crappy "game" supported Linux and this is why people don't take the Linux community seriously? I can't take YOU seriously for making such a stupid generalization.
I honestly don't think people on Slashdot are all that interested in it. I think they astroturf this site. Most people check out Second Life...find it fairly boring and poorly implemented and walk away. People are too busy playing World of Warcraft to care to post articles about WoW. In Second Life, there is real money involved so it makes sense that they try to sucker more people in to it. I think that is why I don't like it. It reeks of the real world. I play games to escape the real world...not enter another one that is run off of greed.
I don't really think the Final Fantasy series needs buzz. Particularly buzz on Second Life. I don't think SE wants to see Cloud fighting off the flying penii.
I sure hope they are learning things but that they aren't thinking about following that model. Nintendo really lucked out that their controller was a big hit. It was a huge risk and it is paying off...good for them. But I also like what the Xbox360 and PS3 are doing. I like that they are trying to put cutting edge technology in to their boxes. It allows for a lot of graphical and AI improvements. Really, anyone can make a motion sensing controller now that it is known that people enjoy that sort of thing. But Nintendo is stuck with their inferior hardware they have for the rest of this generation. If all 3 consoles do the same thing next generation and just marginally improve the hardware...it would be disappointing.
In other words, what Nintendo did was great but I really don't want 3 different Nintendos.
Would you be saying the same thing if this was made by Sony or MS? If Apple does something wrong then they should be called out for it. Just because it is currently trendy doesn't mean it can't have faults.
Not that I am anti-gun...but come on...what a horrible argument. Cars have been a huge advancement in society allowing us to travel large distances in a short amount of time. By design, a car is created to do this...not to kill people. They don't put spikes on the bumper and hub caps so that you can more effective kill or maim someone when you hit them. The goal of the vehicle is to get you from point A to point B safely.
Guns are designed to kill or wound. Sometimes we need to kill or wound for what would be considered "good" reasons. But really, killing or causing harm is not something that I think of as a good thing.
Some people call for banning of guns...some people call for everyone to carry guns. Quite frankly, I can understand both positions and I find each extreme equally nuts. The system we have right now isn't that bad. My personal opinion is that we could probably do away with a lot of the loopholes that make getting guns so easy for people who shouldn't have them. But the NRA and other gun nuts are too afraid of rational laws. I'm sorry, but making it more difficult to legally get a gun when you are confirmed to be insane shouldn't be something that people are against. Can they get a gun illegally? Sure, but that doesn't mean we should remove all gun laws.
Haha, classic! You call the guy a twerp for pushing his "gun control agenda" and then try to push your legal concealed carry agenda. A horrible thing happened...can't you guys just give it a rest?
Hmm, the people who run Slashdot need to be more careful. The site encourages people to become more cynical. Bunch of cynical people start noticing that they are making us cynical purposely. Cyncial people become cynical about the site and start reading Fox News.
While I don't really care that Steve Jobs saved your kittens, etc...I do find it amazing that you have such a low slashdot id and don't have excellent karma. Do you troll Slashdot like you just trolled poor Steve?;)
This article summary disgusts me. If you think eBay is responsible (even in part) for the school shooting then you should wake up. There was nothing wrong with what they did. The implication is an insult to the rational people who read this site.
CS games are already slow enough. I would hate to see how bad they were with some kid hiding out because he doesn't want to lose a buck. I bet you would learn all the lame camping spots fairly quickly though. Plus, CS isn't 100% hack free.
$200 the break even point? That doesn't even make sense. It depends on how many people are playing the game. The lifetime membership was limited time only and I am sure it was just to get some quick cash to make up their production cost. They now have a pay scale on par with every other MMO out there.
They are going to run the game as long as it is profitable to do so. They won't "finish" the story line. Or if they do, they will leave it open for people to complete and then add on new content that extends the universe.
Quite frankly, this is just another MMORPG. It will have its own little twists but it is still the same thing with a different wrapper.
Just like the Titanic was a new type of movie - a destiny locked movie. You know how it was going to end. This made it totally unique! (hopefully obvious sarcasm)
No, sorry, it is just an MMORPG like any other. It has classes, quest, XP, and loot. But instead of having a free universe where they can make up whatever they want, they are now constrained to Tolkein's world. But are they really? I am sure they can write their own lore if they have/want/need to. There aren't going to be a million one rings that people cast in to lava and then see "Game Over" flash on their screen.
Not really. In the previous Warcrafts the Orcs are insane with bloodlust from an external force (forgive me for not remembering the exact lore). The Orc that you play in WoW have broken free of that and are pretty nice (though a bit primitive). They rescued the trolls and the tauren from being whiped out from other agressors. Tauren are probably the nicest race in the game as they just really care about nature. Humans, on the other hand, burn with racism and are unable to see how the Orcs have broken free from their past. They are greedy opportunists that are a blend of both good and evil. Undead are flat out evil, I'll give you that...but it is more complex than good vs evil. This is true in the real world as well. Everything isn't black and white but varying shades of grey.
What they are talking about is the primary reason the Gamecube did so poorly. Nintendo titles sell better than third party titles...for obvious reasons (quality, fun, etc.). Particularly for a system like the Wii that appeals to more causal gamers...they are going to sell less games per system per year (nothing wrong with this, just casual gamers are going to buy less than hardcore gamers by definition). Most of the games that will be bought will be first party Nintendo games leaving sales for third parties be somewhat poor.
So what is different this time around? Well, developers have short memories too apparently. They see the Wii selling like hotcakes and they want in on the action. Of course, they most likely won't sell as many games as they would like to since Nintendo's titles will soak up most of the casual sales (and the few quality third party titles). Thus people will stop developing for the Wii and third party developers will go where they can sell more titles. Of course, the people who have Wii's won't care because they are still getting what they want...first party titles. This time around the casuals plus the Wii's price point might be enough for people to ignore the lack of games allowing Nintendo to win number of consoles sold this time around.
In a way, this sucks for PART of the industry. The model that Nintendo invented (improve the console through improving hardware and offering a reinvention of the typical controller) may not be seen as viable any more. XBox and PS survive off of game sales in the early years since they take losses on the consoles. The advantage to the consumer is that you get expensive hardware cheap and developers can create cutting edge graphics and develop better AI on these top of the line boxes. The downside for them is that it is is more costly to develop for these systems compared to the Wii which is basically just an elite Gamecube with an innovative controller. They feel the need to develp cutting edge graphics for the PS3/XBox while with the Wii they can get away with putting a lot less effort in to that because the games just don't have to look that good.
Now, while it is more expensive to develop for the 360 and PS3...I don't think they are "sacrificing" fun. The people who work on the mechanics of a game are separate than the art team. Slashdotters have this stupid idea that you can't have good graphics and good game play. Are there games out there that have "ooh, shiny" graphics but play like crap? Of course...but there are games that look like crap that have that as well.
Personally, I like to have top of the line hardware. The Wii is a fantastic product...I just hope MS and Sony don't do the same thing the next generation (i.e. offer up something that is an iteration of the PS3 and 360 rather than pushing the limits). I know anything that says the Wii isn't a gift from God on here is taken with offense. I am not trying to say the Wii is bad...I am just saying that I hope everyone doesn't go down that road. There is room for all 3 console makers and I hope they all do well. Competition is good for everyone.
Hmm, how do I explain this (some Wiilots would rather insult me than use their brains). We all know that demand can increase for something when it is hard to get, right? Well, with e-bayers buying up 1000s of units every chance they can get, that artificially limits the number of consoles available to people who would go in to a store to buy it. So the Wii is harder to get than it would be if the ebayers didn't exist. Obviously, demand has to be high enough that the ebayers are able to pick up everything that isn't sold and actually get suckers to buy them. I am not saying that there isn't a high demand...just that some of it is artificial due to Nintendo's inability to produce enough units and the thousands of units out there not being played because people want to sell them for profit.
I'd estimate that the number of Wii's purchased for resale is probably much higher than the low thousands (and I am talking about the US alone). There are many people with multiple Wiis fore sale and many sites other than ebay with them listed (like Craigslist). It is probably closer to ten thousand.
Their sales strategy is working in spades. At least one analyst thinks that Wii demand won't be met until 2009.
And that analyst should be fired. I think it is much more likely that the Wii will be able to catch up to demand in 3 to 4 months. Right now there are 1000s of Wii consoles up on Ebay. So I feel some of the demand is a bit artificial due to people trying to make a quick buck.
What I find interesting is that the PS2 is outselling the Wii (of course, we don't know if the Wii would outsell the PS2 if it could increase its supply enough..it probably would). I mean, it makes sense because it has the largest library and still has great games coming out for it...but still...I don't remember this happening in the previous previous generation.
I guess I don't understand your complaint. If you create a world that is compelling enough, then it is easy to have many different, uniquie, deep stories in that universe. The benefit is, after the first one, you now have a frame of reference to draw upon. Use Star Wars as an easy example. Can you think of a story for the Star Wars universe? What elements will it have? Light sabres, lasers, space ships, the Force, the Rebels, and the Empire. Can there not be many compelling stories in the same universe that let you see how different people view the galaxy?
As far as the engine goes...that has nothing to do with the universe. Again, using Star Wars, you could almost say it used a different engine for episodes 1, 2, and 3 vs 4, 5, and 6. Even though they were vastly different in special effects, directing, etc. they were all distinctly Star Wars.
Square knows what it is doing better than any other game company I have seen. I wouldn't worry about it until they actually put out something universally bad (girls like X-2 I think:P)
Of course it can overstep its bounds. Just like the US can overstep its bounds (see Iraq war). Yeah, Slashdot is anti-MS...that should say something to you when they are siding with MS against the EU. Americans (or Slashdotians) have no beef with the EU. But when we see something that logically is unfair, we are able to drop our bias against MS (well, somewhat) and say something is going too far. You should be able to look at your own political system and see its flaws.
I am tired of the anti-American garbage that gets modded up on this site. Americans feel so bad about how our administration is screwing up the world that we mod this stuff up out of self-hate. Quite frankly, we aren't backing a US-American company. We are voicing our opinions against the EU's heavy handedness. Yeah, we all know the dark side of MS. Does that mean the EU should act improperly as well. Your post is really telling, though. This is more the EU trying to spit in the eye of the US while it is popular to do so. The small child standing up to the bully. Quite frankly, MS != US to us. It is just a giant corporation that has a lot of anti-competitive practices. If Slashdot of all places is siding with MS, then there are probably some good reasons.
Um, how is that logical? So you create a cookie recipe and distribute it freely on the Internet and give all the cookies you make away for free. I have a cookie recipe but I keep it a secret and sell my cookies for a profit. Despite the fact that your cookies are free, more people want my cookies and are willing to pay for it. So you are saying the only fair thing to do is make it so that my cookies are free and that everyone should have my recipe.
Ok, so not a perfect analogy because we are talking about interoperability and I can't fit that in with cookies...but it is basically what you are saying. Having and using open standards is a big advantage to the consumer and to free software. But Microsoft is a business and what you are saying it should do is basically give up its recipes so that people can use its competitor. What business in its right mind would do this? Really, I understand both sides of this. But forcing MS to give its specs is a bad business move for them and I understand why they do what they do. Basically, they built themselves up to be dominant and now Free Software wants to interoperate with them so that they can gain more marketshare. How does that benefit MS?
I fail to see how this is a real problem. DX10 games aren't something you need to worry about right now. So get a machine, stick XP on it, and get your cheaper video card. If a game comes out in the next few years that you just have to have, get a DX10 card. But if you are building a decent system, a few extra hundered dollars shouldn't be a big deal to get a DX10 card (I should know, I just built my own system with a DX10 card).
PC gamers won't care about Games for Windows until something awesome comes out and that is they only way to get access to it. Steam wouldn't work either if it didn't have some quality games.
Your premise that MS has dominance over the PC game makert is false. Thus the rest of your reasoning is flawed. I don't see how you can think what they are doing is not legal. They are finding a model that makes money for everyone involved. Other companies and independants will still exist...so if you don't like what MS is doing, don't buy it. Nothing is going to change.
There are only 2 options that make sense from a business perspective. Make the game run in both DX9 and DX10. Or go with DX9 because that is the lagest install base. Going with DX10 only would be a huge mistake and it would cost you a lot of money. For example, World of Warcraft isn't the most graphically amazing MMO out there by a long shot. But because it can run on older hardware, they have many more subscribers. If they made World of Starcraft DX10 only, it would die a horrible death. There will always be ids and other game companies that push the graphical edge...but right now it doesn't make sense from a business perspective. Most gamers know that XP runs games better. Until Vista can beat XP, no one in there right mind is going to touch it.
Slashdot Mirror
So some random guy on the net was wrong about whether a crappy "game" supported Linux and this is why people don't take the Linux community seriously? I can't take YOU seriously for making such a stupid generalization.
I honestly don't think people on Slashdot are all that interested in it. I think they astroturf this site. Most people check out Second Life...find it fairly boring and poorly implemented and walk away. People are too busy playing World of Warcraft to care to post articles about WoW. In Second Life, there is real money involved so it makes sense that they try to sucker more people in to it. I think that is why I don't like it. It reeks of the real world. I play games to escape the real world...not enter another one that is run off of greed.
I don't really think the Final Fantasy series needs buzz. Particularly buzz on Second Life. I don't think SE wants to see Cloud fighting off the flying penii.
I sure hope they are learning things but that they aren't thinking about following that model. Nintendo really lucked out that their controller was a big hit. It was a huge risk and it is paying off...good for them. But I also like what the Xbox360 and PS3 are doing. I like that they are trying to put cutting edge technology in to their boxes. It allows for a lot of graphical and AI improvements. Really, anyone can make a motion sensing controller now that it is known that people enjoy that sort of thing. But Nintendo is stuck with their inferior hardware they have for the rest of this generation. If all 3 consoles do the same thing next generation and just marginally improve the hardware...it would be disappointing.
In other words, what Nintendo did was great but I really don't want 3 different Nintendos.
Giuliani said that he believes it is a woman's right to choose abortion (in case you didn't see the debate).
Funny that you use the word "sanctity"...because if you believe in the "sanctity of innocent human life" then you need to have God.
Would you be saying the same thing if this was made by Sony or MS? If Apple does something wrong then they should be called out for it. Just because it is currently trendy doesn't mean it can't have faults.
Not that I am anti-gun...but come on...what a horrible argument. Cars have been a huge advancement in society allowing us to travel large distances in a short amount of time. By design, a car is created to do this...not to kill people. They don't put spikes on the bumper and hub caps so that you can more effective kill or maim someone when you hit them. The goal of the vehicle is to get you from point A to point B safely.
Guns are designed to kill or wound. Sometimes we need to kill or wound for what would be considered "good" reasons. But really, killing or causing harm is not something that I think of as a good thing.
Some people call for banning of guns...some people call for everyone to carry guns. Quite frankly, I can understand both positions and I find each extreme equally nuts. The system we have right now isn't that bad. My personal opinion is that we could probably do away with a lot of the loopholes that make getting guns so easy for people who shouldn't have them. But the NRA and other gun nuts are too afraid of rational laws. I'm sorry, but making it more difficult to legally get a gun when you are confirmed to be insane shouldn't be something that people are against. Can they get a gun illegally? Sure, but that doesn't mean we should remove all gun laws.
Haha, classic! You call the guy a twerp for pushing his "gun control agenda" and then try to push your legal concealed carry agenda. A horrible thing happened...can't you guys just give it a rest?
Hmm, the people who run Slashdot need to be more careful. The site encourages people to become more cynical. Bunch of cynical people start noticing that they are making us cynical purposely. Cyncial people become cynical about the site and start reading Fox News.
It is a dangerous road. Think of the children.
While I don't really care that Steve Jobs saved your kittens, etc...I do find it amazing that you have such a low slashdot id and don't have excellent karma. Do you troll Slashdot like you just trolled poor Steve? ;)
This article summary disgusts me. If you think eBay is responsible (even in part) for the school shooting then you should wake up. There was nothing wrong with what they did. The implication is an insult to the rational people who read this site.
CS games are already slow enough. I would hate to see how bad they were with some kid hiding out because he doesn't want to lose a buck. I bet you would learn all the lame camping spots fairly quickly though. Plus, CS isn't 100% hack free.
$200 the break even point? That doesn't even make sense. It depends on how many people are playing the game. The lifetime membership was limited time only and I am sure it was just to get some quick cash to make up their production cost. They now have a pay scale on par with every other MMO out there.
They are going to run the game as long as it is profitable to do so. They won't "finish" the story line. Or if they do, they will leave it open for people to complete and then add on new content that extends the universe.
Quite frankly, this is just another MMORPG. It will have its own little twists but it is still the same thing with a different wrapper.
Just like the Titanic was a new type of movie - a destiny locked movie. You know how it was going to end. This made it totally unique! (hopefully obvious sarcasm)
No, sorry, it is just an MMORPG like any other. It has classes, quest, XP, and loot. But instead of having a free universe where they can make up whatever they want, they are now constrained to Tolkein's world. But are they really? I am sure they can write their own lore if they have/want/need to. There aren't going to be a million one rings that people cast in to lava and then see "Game Over" flash on their screen.
Not really. In the previous Warcrafts the Orcs are insane with bloodlust from an external force (forgive me for not remembering the exact lore). The Orc that you play in WoW have broken free of that and are pretty nice (though a bit primitive). They rescued the trolls and the tauren from being whiped out from other agressors. Tauren are probably the nicest race in the game as they just really care about nature. Humans, on the other hand, burn with racism and are unable to see how the Orcs have broken free from their past. They are greedy opportunists that are a blend of both good and evil. Undead are flat out evil, I'll give you that...but it is more complex than good vs evil. This is true in the real world as well. Everything isn't black and white but varying shades of grey.
What they are talking about is the primary reason the Gamecube did so poorly. Nintendo titles sell better than third party titles...for obvious reasons (quality, fun, etc.). Particularly for a system like the Wii that appeals to more causal gamers...they are going to sell less games per system per year (nothing wrong with this, just casual gamers are going to buy less than hardcore gamers by definition). Most of the games that will be bought will be first party Nintendo games leaving sales for third parties be somewhat poor.
So what is different this time around? Well, developers have short memories too apparently. They see the Wii selling like hotcakes and they want in on the action. Of course, they most likely won't sell as many games as they would like to since Nintendo's titles will soak up most of the casual sales (and the few quality third party titles). Thus people will stop developing for the Wii and third party developers will go where they can sell more titles. Of course, the people who have Wii's won't care because they are still getting what they want...first party titles. This time around the casuals plus the Wii's price point might be enough for people to ignore the lack of games allowing Nintendo to win number of consoles sold this time around.
In a way, this sucks for PART of the industry. The model that Nintendo invented (improve the console through improving hardware and offering a reinvention of the typical controller) may not be seen as viable any more. XBox and PS survive off of game sales in the early years since they take losses on the consoles. The advantage to the consumer is that you get expensive hardware cheap and developers can create cutting edge graphics and develop better AI on these top of the line boxes. The downside for them is that it is is more costly to develop for these systems compared to the Wii which is basically just an elite Gamecube with an innovative controller. They feel the need to develp cutting edge graphics for the PS3/XBox while with the Wii they can get away with putting a lot less effort in to that because the games just don't have to look that good.
Now, while it is more expensive to develop for the 360 and PS3...I don't think they are "sacrificing" fun. The people who work on the mechanics of a game are separate than the art team. Slashdotters have this stupid idea that you can't have good graphics and good game play. Are there games out there that have "ooh, shiny" graphics but play like crap? Of course...but there are games that look like crap that have that as well.
Personally, I like to have top of the line hardware. The Wii is a fantastic product...I just hope MS and Sony don't do the same thing the next generation (i.e. offer up something that is an iteration of the PS3 and 360 rather than pushing the limits). I know anything that says the Wii isn't a gift from God on here is taken with offense. I am not trying to say the Wii is bad...I am just saying that I hope everyone doesn't go down that road. There is room for all 3 console makers and I hope they all do well. Competition is good for everyone.
Hmm, how do I explain this (some Wiilots would rather insult me than use their brains). We all know that demand can increase for something when it is hard to get, right? Well, with e-bayers buying up 1000s of units every chance they can get, that artificially limits the number of consoles available to people who would go in to a store to buy it. So the Wii is harder to get than it would be if the ebayers didn't exist. Obviously, demand has to be high enough that the ebayers are able to pick up everything that isn't sold and actually get suckers to buy them. I am not saying that there isn't a high demand...just that some of it is artificial due to Nintendo's inability to produce enough units and the thousands of units out there not being played because people want to sell them for profit.
I'd estimate that the number of Wii's purchased for resale is probably much higher than the low thousands (and I am talking about the US alone). There are many people with multiple Wiis fore sale and many sites other than ebay with them listed (like Craigslist). It is probably closer to ten thousand.
Their sales strategy is working in spades. At least one analyst thinks that Wii demand won't be met until 2009.
And that analyst should be fired. I think it is much more likely that the Wii will be able to catch up to demand in 3 to 4 months. Right now there are 1000s of Wii consoles up on Ebay. So I feel some of the demand is a bit artificial due to people trying to make a quick buck.
What I find interesting is that the PS2 is outselling the Wii (of course, we don't know if the Wii would outsell the PS2 if it could increase its supply enough..it probably would). I mean, it makes sense because it has the largest library and still has great games coming out for it...but still...I don't remember this happening in the previous previous generation.
I don't know...I cared a lot for the bunny girl :)
I guess I don't understand your complaint. If you create a world that is compelling enough, then it is easy to have many different, uniquie, deep stories in that universe. The benefit is, after the first one, you now have a frame of reference to draw upon. Use Star Wars as an easy example. Can you think of a story for the Star Wars universe? What elements will it have? Light sabres, lasers, space ships, the Force, the Rebels, and the Empire. Can there not be many compelling stories in the same universe that let you see how different people view the galaxy?
:P)
As far as the engine goes...that has nothing to do with the universe. Again, using Star Wars, you could almost say it used a different engine for episodes 1, 2, and 3 vs 4, 5, and 6. Even though they were vastly different in special effects, directing, etc. they were all distinctly Star Wars.
Square knows what it is doing better than any other game company I have seen. I wouldn't worry about it until they actually put out something universally bad (girls like X-2 I think
Of course it can overstep its bounds. Just like the US can overstep its bounds (see Iraq war). Yeah, Slashdot is anti-MS...that should say something to you when they are siding with MS against the EU. Americans (or Slashdotians) have no beef with the EU. But when we see something that logically is unfair, we are able to drop our bias against MS (well, somewhat) and say something is going too far. You should be able to look at your own political system and see its flaws.
I am tired of the anti-American garbage that gets modded up on this site. Americans feel so bad about how our administration is screwing up the world that we mod this stuff up out of self-hate. Quite frankly, we aren't backing a US-American company. We are voicing our opinions against the EU's heavy handedness. Yeah, we all know the dark side of MS. Does that mean the EU should act improperly as well. Your post is really telling, though. This is more the EU trying to spit in the eye of the US while it is popular to do so. The small child standing up to the bully. Quite frankly, MS != US to us. It is just a giant corporation that has a lot of anti-competitive practices. If Slashdot of all places is siding with MS, then there are probably some good reasons.
Um, how is that logical? So you create a cookie recipe and distribute it freely on the Internet and give all the cookies you make away for free. I have a cookie recipe but I keep it a secret and sell my cookies for a profit. Despite the fact that your cookies are free, more people want my cookies and are willing to pay for it. So you are saying the only fair thing to do is make it so that my cookies are free and that everyone should have my recipe.
Ok, so not a perfect analogy because we are talking about interoperability and I can't fit that in with cookies...but it is basically what you are saying. Having and using open standards is a big advantage to the consumer and to free software. But Microsoft is a business and what you are saying it should do is basically give up its recipes so that people can use its competitor. What business in its right mind would do this? Really, I understand both sides of this. But forcing MS to give its specs is a bad business move for them and I understand why they do what they do. Basically, they built themselves up to be dominant and now Free Software wants to interoperate with them so that they can gain more marketshare. How does that benefit MS?
I fail to see how this is a real problem. DX10 games aren't something you need to worry about right now. So get a machine, stick XP on it, and get your cheaper video card. If a game comes out in the next few years that you just have to have, get a DX10 card. But if you are building a decent system, a few extra hundered dollars shouldn't be a big deal to get a DX10 card (I should know, I just built my own system with a DX10 card).
PC gamers won't care about Games for Windows until something awesome comes out and that is they only way to get access to it. Steam wouldn't work either if it didn't have some quality games.
Your premise that MS has dominance over the PC game makert is false. Thus the rest of your reasoning is flawed. I don't see how you can think what they are doing is not legal. They are finding a model that makes money for everyone involved. Other companies and independants will still exist...so if you don't like what MS is doing, don't buy it. Nothing is going to change.
There are only 2 options that make sense from a business perspective. Make the game run in both DX9 and DX10. Or go with DX9 because that is the lagest install base. Going with DX10 only would be a huge mistake and it would cost you a lot of money. For example, World of Warcraft isn't the most graphically amazing MMO out there by a long shot. But because it can run on older hardware, they have many more subscribers. If they made World of Starcraft DX10 only, it would die a horrible death. There will always be ids and other game companies that push the graphical edge...but right now it doesn't make sense from a business perspective. Most gamers know that XP runs games better. Until Vista can beat XP, no one in there right mind is going to touch it.