Vista and games are a joke!


J

Jack Mc Kenna

I thought I was doing well with my Vista Ultimate 64 bit install until I
installed Temple of Elemental Evil as a test, to see if there would be any
problems. I set it up in compatibily mode for XP SP_2 and it seemed to work
very well. Then I fought my first battle, and with the first sword strike
the game crashed. Returning to the desktop everything was mixed up with
Icons spread all over the screen, the windows sidebar had moved from the
left side of the screen to the right side and was locked there. I had to
re-boot to re-arrange the desktop. OK I thought, I will wait until a Windows
Vista specific game was released. This morning I downloaded Lost Planet,
for Windows Vista 64 and tried to run it. Ha Ha Fat Chance, crashed as soon
as I ran the .exe file. I guess vista is not yet ready for games. I am
happy that I was smart enough to set up a dual boot system with XP Pro. I
have still not found a reason to actually use Vista.
 
Ad

Advertisements

G

Guest

the vista compatability isses are known to most games, so the question remains:
why post a flaming of vista when the issues are already known?
post an acutal problem (not one you can get around) or jsut dont post).
 
P

Paul Smith

Jack Mc Kenna said:
I thought I was doing well with my Vista Ultimate 64 bit install until I
installed Temple of Elemental Evil as a test, to see if there would be any
problems. I set it up in compatibily mode for XP SP_2 and it seemed to
work very well. Then I fought my first battle, and with the first sword
strike the game crashed. Returning to the desktop everything was mixed up
with Icons spread all over the screen, the windows sidebar had moved from
the left side of the screen to the right side and was locked there. I had
to re-boot to re-arrange the desktop. OK I thought, I will wait until a
Windows Vista specific game was released. This morning I downloaded Lost
Planet, for Windows Vista 64 and tried to run it. Ha Ha Fat Chance,
crashed as soon as I ran the .exe file. I guess vista is not yet ready for
games. I am happy that I was smart enough to set up a dual boot system
with XP Pro. I have still not found a reason to actually use Vista.

Do you want support or do you just want to rant and/or troll?

--
Paul Smith,
Yeovil, UK.
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User.
http://www.dasmirnov.net/blog/
http://www.windowsresource.net/

*Remove nospam. to reply by e-mail*
 
?

=?iso-8859-1?B?qWFybA==?=

Jack Mc Kenna said:
I thought I was doing well with my Vista Ultimate 64 bit install until I
installed Temple of Elemental Evil as a test, to see if there would be any
problems. I set it up in compatibily mode for XP SP_2 and it seemed to
work very well. Then I fought my first battle, and with the first sword
strike the game crashed. Returning to the desktop everything was mixed up
with Icons spread all over the screen, the windows sidebar had moved from
the left side of the screen to the right side and was locked there. I had
to re-boot to re-arrange the desktop. OK I thought, I will wait until a
Windows Vista specific game was released. This morning I downloaded Lost
Planet, for Windows Vista 64 and tried to run it. Ha Ha Fat Chance,
crashed as soon as I ran the .exe file. I guess vista is not yet ready for
games. I am happy that I was smart enough to set up a dual boot system
with XP Pro. I have still not found a reason to actually use Vista.


i'd recommend you to www.vistareadygames.com for help but people would only
jump down my throat like they did to their admin a few weeks ago
 
A

Andy

Jack Mc Kenna said:
I thought I was doing well with my Vista Ultimate 64 bit install until I
installed Temple of Elemental Evil as a test, to see if there would be any
problems. I set it up in compatibily mode for XP SP_2 and it seemed to
work very well. Then I fought my first battle, and with the first sword
strike the game crashed. Returning to the desktop everything was mixed up
with Icons spread all over the screen, the windows sidebar had moved from
the left side of the screen to the right side and was locked there. I had
to re-boot to re-arrange the desktop. OK I thought, I will wait until a
Windows Vista specific game was released. This morning I downloaded Lost
Planet, for Windows Vista 64 and tried to run it. Ha Ha Fat Chance,
crashed as soon as I ran the .exe file. I guess vista is not yet ready for
games. I am happy that I was smart enough to set up a dual boot system
with XP Pro. I have still not found a reason to actually use Vista.

Ran Lost Planet demo with no issue here, I haven't loaded up Temple of
Elemental Evil yet, but I ran Baulders Gate 2 the other day. Similar
program, but not quite.

No, Vista is not ready for games, you have to work at it to get them to
work. If you want to play games like TOEE, without issue, get Windows XP
(make sure you're updated), as for Lost Planet, not sure what to suggest
other than call Capcom and get support assistance, or just throw away your
computer. (you can drop it in the dumpster outside my house if you want)
 
A

Andy

©arl said:
i'd recommend you to www.vistareadygames.com for help but people would
only jump down my throat like they did to their admin a few weeks ago
--

We won't do that "Carl with a Copyright Symbol", we'll just point and
snicker. You could ALSO go to Capcom since they made the game.
Steampowered.com has forums for support if you're running the game in Steam.

And I agree with Paul, sounds like Jack is just here to rant/troll.

-A.
 
Ad

Advertisements

?

=?iso-8859-1?B?qWFybA==?=

No, Vista is not ready for games, you have to work at it to get them to
work. If you want to play games like TOEE, without issue, get Windows XP
(make sure you're updated), as for Lost Planet, not sure what to suggest
other than call Capcom and get support assistance, or just throw away your
computer. (you can drop it in the dumpster outside my house if you want)

I have to disagree slightly
i run 32bit ultimate and it runs games as sweet as you like
I am even thinking of upgrading to 64bit as a fair few good reports are been
placed on review sites ... still think i'll wait til SP1 before I jump
though
"just in case"
--


©arl

Get Yor Vista Right - www.vistareadygames.com
Have a ball at www.gamezone.me.uk
 
J

Jupiter Jones [MVP]

Have you asked the game manufacturers if the game is compatible with
Windows Vista?
Are there updates for the game? And are they installed?
Do you have the latest Vista drivers, particularly video?

"I have still not found a reason to actually use Vista."
Not everyone does and those that don't normally stay with what they
have.
 
P

phypps

Lost Planet runs just fine on Vista x64.
DirectX10 (or 9 if you wish), 1920x1200 with everything turned up high so it
gives my system a good hammering and its still solid as a rock.
Ditto for Oblivion and Half Life 2 (off and online) with no problems.
Vista runs games fine for most people, while some (which still amounts to a
lot of people) have problems.
Considering the variability of computer systems, and the messed up state of
many operating system installations (and alterations, upgrades, and
tinkering) its not surprising that there are some problems.
And of course the people with problems are the vocal majority when it comes
to posting so it just makes the problem look far worse than it is.

If you give a proper description of the problems you are facing, together
with as much relevant information as possible (instead of the usual "Vista
is Crap") you may actually get several replies that could be of real help
and point you in the right direction.

Phypps
 
?

=?iso-8859-1?B?qWFybA==?=

If you give a proper description of the problems you are facing, together
with as much relevant information as possible (instead of the usual "Vista
is Crap") you may actually get several replies that could be of real help
and point you in the right direction.

Phypps

good point that man
--


©arl

Get Yor Vista Right - www.vistareadygames.com
Have a ball at www.gamezone.me.uk
 
A

Andy

©arl said:
I have to disagree slightly
i run 32bit ultimate and it runs games as sweet as you like
I am even thinking of upgrading to 64bit as a fair few good reports are
been placed on review sites ... still think i'll wait til SP1 before I
jump though
"just in case"

Sure, that's a fair statement, has any game given you any problems? I've
only had like 3...

System Shock 2 (Horrid experience, but working)
Oblivion (Random crashes, took forever to resolve, still stutters when
moving about)
EverQuest 1 (Video issues)

1 new, 2 old, and given Microsoft has put in all this effort to support
games for windows you'd think they'd have better backwards support (I'd love
it if they put in DOS game support natively). Vista works, but I wouldn't
say it's a better gaming platform than a updated Windows XP.

I won't even get into the whole 64-bit thing, but it's not really an option
for me since I got a freebie copy of Ultimate OEM/32, and I'm still not
ready to put down more money on Vista when I have 3 licensed copies of XP at
my disposal.

I still haven't gotten over the whole pricing thing. If Microsoft really
wanted to win over more Vista peeps, change the OS pricing in line with what
Apple does, 1 price, 1 OS. I digress, I'm not a huge Apple fan, but I'm more
excited about Leopard than I am about Vista, and I don't even own an Apple.

-A.
 
Ad

Advertisements

P

Paul Smith

I still haven't gotten over the whole pricing thing. If Microsoft really
wanted to win over more Vista peeps, change the OS pricing in line with
what Apple does, 1 price, 1 OS. I digress, I'm not a huge Apple fan, but
I'm more excited about Leopard than I am about Vista, and I don't even own
an Apple.

I tackled Vista's price back in February
http://www.dasmirnov.net/blog/2007/02/20/cnet_s_five_reasons_not_to_buy_windows_v
Vista is cheaper than 2000, or XP were even after a couple of years after
their launch.

I would of liked to see fewer product SKUs, Home Basic being canned for
example.

Apple try to release a new OS every 18 months, and you can hardly call each
release a ground-breaking update, they just add in some features they've
borrowed from everybody else and rush to get it out the door. You would of
spent more money upgrading to each Mac OS X release than you would of spent
on Windows Vista Ultimate.

PS, good luck running your games on a Mac OS. :) You'd soon see what lack
of compatibility is like.

--
Paul Smith,
Yeovil, UK.
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User.
http://www.dasmirnov.net/blog/
http://www.windowsresource.net/

*Remove nospam. to reply by e-mail*
 
D

Dan Huber

For what it's worth, I'm rockin' out with my Geforce 8600GTS in Home Premium
x64 with Red Orchestra, HL2: E1, NFS:U2, Railroads!, and have tried demos of
NFS:MW, Lost Planet in both DX9 and DX10 (bit much for my hardware but looks
sweet - I believe Vista updates and better video drivers will turn this
around using my same hardware), BF2 and BF2142, COD2, and the new WiC in
both DX9 and DX10.

I have to admit that gaming in Vista takes more to tackle and get it to work
right than it did in XP, but anyone with any moderate experience in gaming
at the bleeding edge is familiar with tweaks, patches, driver updates/hacks,
overclocking, instability, etc. and all that comes along with being on the
frontlines of the latest stuff is familiar with that and learns to overcome
it. That, and I can't entirely blame MS for instabilities caused primarily
by video cards in most cases with the more recent gaming titles pushing the
hardware, especially with lackluster drivers from Nvidia as of late with all
the new GF 8 cards available - I'd say we really didn't have a polished
experience in XP for some decent gaming until around 2004/2005.

At present, this is almost as good as it gets when it comes to PC gaming in
today's world when using XP. Vista will supercede it within the next couple
years with continued developments, OpenAL and DirectX enhancements,
continued driver updates from manufacturers, and developers working out the
kinks in their games. I've had crashes in HL2 and NFS:U2 along with
Railroads! often enough in Vista, but I wouldn't say that they were many
times over what happened in XP. Most often I'm just ramming my way through
the game and I can see the hardware starting to choke just a bit and then my
game's gone - no biggie.

Dan
 
A

Andy

Paul Smith said:
I tackled Vista's price back in February
http://www.dasmirnov.net/blog/2007/02/20/cnet_s_five_reasons_not_to_buy_windows_v
Vista is cheaper than 2000, or XP were even after a couple of years after
their launch.

I would of liked to see fewer product SKUs, Home Basic being canned for
example.

Apple try to release a new OS every 18 months, and you can hardly call
each release a ground-breaking update, they just add in some features
they've borrowed from everybody else and rush to get it out the door. You
would of spent more money upgrading to each Mac OS X release than you
would of spent on Windows Vista Ultimate.

PS, good luck running your games on a Mac OS. :) You'd soon see what
lack of compatibility is like.

Yes, Vista is cheaper, but $400 for a single license with the added benefit
of domain registration, bitlocker, poker, and dreamscene(tm)? I mean, ouch.
Don't give me the System Builder arguement, it doesn't make sense to buy an
OS and not be able to use it if you upgrade your system.

My parents have one of those old dome iMacs, they upgraded from 10.1 to
10.4, I thought it was a huge upgrade for them. I mean it's not like Apple
is forcing you to upgrade every OSX version that comes out. Most Mac users
don't even know there are different versions of OSX until they run into
programs that require 10.2 or something (what happened with my parents
computer).

I don't know, Apples updates may not be ground breaking, but neither are
Microsofts. I can't imagine that most of the Vista features couldn't be
implemented into Xp or even 2k.

Also, I own 4 PCs, I think I have gaming covered, I think the Macs are just
more sexy, although my newest PC has an Antec P182SE case, which is pretty
awesome, but notebook wise those Macbook Pros are hard to resist their
sirens call. (Some of the new Gateway and HP notebooks are pretty neat
though)

I ran bootcamp on a MBP, WoW works, and so does Source Engine games, what
more do you need?
 
J

Jupiter Jones [MVP]

"I would of liked to see fewer product SKUs..."
Part of me agrees with that but a larger part disagrees.
The 4 versions of windows Vista give people more control of the
features they get and the price paid.
Most do not want Home Basic but there those that appreciate the
cheaper price lacking the features they do not need.
Also if Home Basic was removed, some of the critics would pounce on
Microsoft for removing a less expensive option.

I like options and if the customer uses similar purchasing methodology
as they do with other products, money can be saved by purchasing what
is needed.
 
A

Andy

Jupiter Jones said:
"I would of liked to see fewer product SKUs..."
Part of me agrees with that but a larger part disagrees.
The 4 versions of windows Vista give people more control of the features
they get and the price paid.
Most do not want Home Basic but there those that appreciate the cheaper
price lacking the features they do not need.
Also if Home Basic was removed, some of the critics would pounce on
Microsoft for removing a less expensive option.

I like options and if the customer uses similar purchasing methodology as
they do with other products, money can be saved by purchasing what is
needed.

Maybe if they just priced the OS at $149, or HELL make it free with a full
copy of Office 2007 or something?

Everything under Windows Ultimate I just see as cripleware, You can't afford
it you don't get all the benefits.

OSX, $149. Uncrippled, except, well it's a Mac OS.

$399 is still $399 I don't care how often you have to spend that much, $399
has been and always will be > $149.

That was a terrible arguement, and I apologize.

-A.
 
Ad

Advertisements

C

Chuck Walbourn [MSFT]

What exactly are you missing in Home Premium that you feel you must have as
a gamer?

The problem Windows has always had over the years is the distinction between
the needs of businesses vs the needs of consumers. Windows XP tried to make
this distinction with Home vs. Pro, but some people felt Home was
'crippleware'. The only fundamental difference was that Home supported Fast
User Switching and Pro had domain join (which disabled FUS). That was pretty
much it.

Windows Vista seems to me to have a more logical division, with SKUs focused
on consumers, SKUs focused on business, and "one SKU to rule them all" for
users interested in blending the features together. Other than some default
changes (inbox games are disabled by default on corporate SKUs), the key
differences are basically the following:

- Media Center is only in the consumer SKUs. You can get it as an add-on for
Home Basic, it comes with Premium.

- Parental Controls / Family Safety is only in the consumer SKUs

- Domain join and remote desktop access are in the corporate SKUs.

- Ultimate has it Media Center, Parental Controls / Family Safety (disabled
by default when you join a domain), Domain Join, and Remote Desktop access.

Home Basic is really for low-end computer upgrades that want the security
features of Windows Vista, but don't have the GPU or battery life to drive
the new UI experience. Home Premium is really the 99% case for home users.
Not many people have domain servers configured at home, although some power
users really like Remote Desktop access and have to move to Ultimate to get
it.

Business is for run-of-the-mill businesses looking to run Windows on some
machines. Enterprise is the 'volume' product for large businesses that comes
with some tools for IT departments managing large numbers of machines.

It seems pretty easy to figure out which SKU makes sense for you from there.

The only caveat here is that while all versions of Windows Vista can be
installed either as x86 or x64 (the same PID works for either), only the
Ultimate retail package comes with the x64 media. Otherwise, you have to
order it from the www.windowsvista.com alternate media site or have it come
from your OEM with a new machine.

All editions of Windows Vista have basically the same capabilities
(excluding Starter Edition), technologies, and base-line operations.
 
A

Andy [Ex-MSFT]

Chuck Walbourn said:
What exactly are you missing in Home Premium that you feel you must have
as a gamer?

Texas Hold'Em FTW! (Show of hands, who saw that coming?)
Windows Vista seems to me to have a more logical division, with SKUs
focused on consumers, SKUs focused on business, and "one SKU to rule them
all" for users interested in blending the features together. Other than
some default changes (inbox games are disabled by default on corporate
SKUs), the key differences are basically the following:
- Media Center is only in the consumer SKUs. You can get it as an add-on
for Home Basic, it comes with Premium.
- Parental Controls / Family Safety is only in the consumer SKUs
- Domain join and remote desktop access are in the corporate SKUs.
- Ultimate has it Media Center, Parental Controls / Family Safety
(disabled by default when you join a domain), Domain Join, and Remote
Desktop access.

Excellent points, however as a user of both a Vista "Business" and a
"Consumer" version of Vista, when at home I sometimes wish I could bitlocker
my finances, then when I'm at the office I'd like to be able to implement a
restricted access schedule based on time of day, similar to "parental
controls", but because of the version of Windows I have (and the fact that
our business is small and won't be installing a longhorn server anytime
soon), I don't have some of those options. I mean I know the options are
there, but I just can't use them and I have to go find a third party option.
(Or pay more money, also not an option)

If I have an ultimate box that doesn't mean I'm going to connect to a
domain, but it's nice to know I could if the situation were to arrise. If
you put Ultimate on a home computer and someone buys it who doesn't know
what a domain is, will it effect their experience? I mean do you think the
average consumer can tell the difference between Ultimate and Premium if
they don't have a handout or any visual cues?

Yeah, Vista does have clearer definitions between the different SKUs, but it
just seems like such a hassle when you could just release a Sku, price it at
a level everyone can afford and let them choose what they want to use and
what they don't want too. I see $399 and I think, damn for $239 what the
hell am I missing that it's worth an extra $160, and I have to settle for
the $239 price, or break the bank for $399 only to find out that $160
doesn't buy you that much.
Business is for run-of-the-mill businesses looking to run Windows on some
machines. Enterprise is the 'volume' product for large businesses that
comes with some tools for IT departments managing large numbers of
machines.

We have Business boxes, its too bad we can't use the enterprise tools to
determine if they'd benefit us. Suggestions? I'm kind of the IT guy here and
I'd love to keep our virus scanners and ad-aware up to date automatically
when you connect to our 2k server.
It seems pretty easy to figure out which SKU makes sense for you from
there.

Or, like I said, you could just give me one box and then I don't have to
guess what I need and what I don't need because I'll have it all.
All editions of Windows Vista have basically the same capabilities
(excluding Starter Edition), technologies, and base-line operations.

Just hope a situation doesn't come up down the line where you need something
you don't have.

As a gamer, I love you guys, but yer killing me here, your OS is $399 unless
you get the Bill Gates Signature Edition, then it's $449. What does that
come with again? I saw a bunch of them at a store near my pad.

-A.
 
C

Chuck Walbourn [MSFT]

Or, like I said, you could just give me one box and then I don't have to
guess what I need and what I don't need because I'll have it all.

Either we charge everyone too much for features they never need, or we give
away things for free that are worth paying for. There's no way to make
everyone happy here. The Windows Anytime Upgrade means that if you are
running Home Premium and you decide that you really need Remote Desktop &
Domain join features, you can upgrade to Ultimate in place:
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/pr...orupgrade/windowsanytimeupgrade/overview.mspx

Just hope a situation doesn't come up down the line where you need
something you don't have.

Software developers generally make applications that run on the largest
number of machines and operating systems as possible. The same is true here,
so there's not likely to be a product that requires a specific version of
Windows Vista unless it's tied specifically to domains, remote desktop
features, or IT enterprise tools. Certainly this isn't going to be an issue
for games.
 
Ad

Advertisements

A

Andy [Ex-MSFT]

Chuck Walbourn said:
Either we charge everyone too much for features they never need, or we
give away things for free that are worth paying for. There's no way to
make everyone happy here. The Windows Anytime Upgrade means that if you
are running Home Premium and you decide that you really need Remote
Desktop & Domain join features, you can upgrade to Ultimate in place:
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/pr...orupgrade/windowsanytimeupgrade/overview.mspx

Yes, there is a way to make everyone happy... don't cripple your software. I
may "really need" remote desktop and Domain join, but $160? I can buy a copy
of Tiger or Leopard for that much, and everything that comes with it, comes
with it.

I mean, with the way Microsoft did this "instant upgrade" why didn't you
guys put Office in with the Vista anytimeupgrade? or visa-versa, why not
make 1 Vista then box stuff you wanted to charge extra for in seperate
packaging? (Windows Remote Desktop for Vista, Windows Advanced Networking
for Vista, etc.)

Perception I think is what i'm getting at here. Why not package a $239 Vista
and give everything OS centric in package, then pack the Ultimate stuff as
software, and not as an OS?

Don't get me wrong, still got much love of the Vista, but... just some
nagging stuff.
Software developers generally make applications that run on the largest
number of machines and operating systems as possible. The same is true
here, so there's not likely to be a product that requires a specific
version of Windows Vista unless it's tied specifically to domains, remote
desktop features, or IT enterprise tools. Certainly this isn't going to be
an issue for games.

Mainstream applications, sure. Some of the best programs I've ever used come
from the Apple camp, past and present. Indy development thrills the crud out
of me, and I'll gladly shotgun massive amounts of cash to support the little
guy that takes risks and makes labors of love. i'm babbling.

Unfortunatly not many games on Apple platforms (historically), and while EA
is saying they plan to support Apple concurrently with PC, I still don't
think this will catapolt them into mainstream gaming, which made me wonder
why MS decided to not allow Mac users to run Vista virtually. Seems like a
weird movement. I'd guess supporting virtualization wasn't cost effective or
something.

Sorry I'm being such a mule about this Chuck, but MS just has this aura of
trying to squeeze every last drop of happyness out of PC users where Apple
is trying to breathe new life into it. I heard something on a gaming blog
about Microsoft releasing Vista 2010 down the road and calling this Vista,
Microsoft ME 2. Squeezing...

-A.
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top