Microsoft to force users to upgrade to Vista for Halo 2
Posted by Tom Warren on 09 February 2006 - 17:16 · 170 comments & 33580 views
If you're a Halo 2 fan then brace yourself...
Microsoft has the sheer audacity to expect PC gamers to upgrade to Windows Vista in order to be able to play Halo 2 for PC.
The shocking revelation comes from none other than the BBC who haven't quoted anyone from Microsoft regarding this. It will make it very expensive for the average PC user to play Halo 2.
Vista is currently in beta stage and is expected to be released between mid and late October, 2006.
If it's true that Microsoft will force users to upgrade, what else is the company likely to do in order to force their latest version of Windows onto consumer PCs?
View: BBC News
About the Author
Full name: Tom Warren
Forum name: creamhackered
Contact: via forum PM
Submissions: Normal · Headline
Full name: Tom Warren
Forum name: creamhackered
Contact: via forum PM
Submissions: Normal · Headline
Slashdot It!
Submit to reddit
Submit to blinklist
Bookmark on del.icio.us
Add to furl
Share on Facebook
Add to Windows Live
Add to Google- Advertisement
-
-
(19 replies)
#1 Posted by shirike on 09 Feb 2006 - 17:19
- This news item is a joke. What happened to impartial news items based on facts? This seems to be the terrificly biased reproduction of an unconfirmed report.
However, let's give you the benefit of the doubt and reply as if it's true:
So what? There are many instances of consumers needing to upgrade to get new or better functionality - why does gaming suddenly become sacrosanct? It's not like games designers themselves don't have a hand in forcing users to upgrade their machines to play the game. -
#1.1 Posted by scsgoal31 on 09 Feb 2006 - 17:22
- I was thinking the same thing...so much anger! haha
Let's wait until MS actually states this.....the article even says "the BBC who haven't quoted anyone from Microsoft regarding this."
And if they do state it....I'm sure there's a reason in terms of performance they're looking to get out of the game. -
#1.2 Posted by creamhackered on 09 Feb 2006 - 17:23
- So you think it's correct business practice to force an upgrade of an operating system down to consumers who may just be happy with their Windows XP systems?
-
#1.3 Posted by scsgoal31 on 09 Feb 2006 - 17:25
- Buying the game is an option...I don't understand how that translates into a forced upgrade?
And yes, I do believe that this is just a gimmick to get more money...but guess what? They're allowed to..it's their game, and their OS. If they honestly didn't think people would indeed upgrade to Vista, they wouldn't require it. Bottom line is they know people will do it. -
#1.4 Posted by creamhackered on 09 Feb 2006 - 17:28
- Buying a game is an option but installing it is not. Windows XP is due to be supported for years yet so there should be no reason that Microsoft needs to create applications or games specifically for Vista in order to force users to upgrade. It's not necessary and very unfair for consumers.
-
#1.5 Posted by mikeyj on 09 Feb 2006 - 17:33
- I have to agree, this news seem very bias in details and lack all the reason why. I would read this news article with reservations.
-
#1.6 Posted by minnow_trap on 09 Feb 2006 - 17:33
- "Buying the game is a option.... I don't understand how that translates into a forced upgrade?" quote by scsgoal21
No offense, but that is a pretty lame statement. Of course it is a option to buy a game, but let's say I want to goto "Best Buy" (Which I don't but...), and I buy the game. The nagging salesperson on the other end is gonna say, well if you want the game dude, your gonna have to upgrade your operating system and possibly your PC.
You don't see that? Geez.....
No need to elaborate on this one. -
#1.7 Posted by creamhackered on 09 Feb 2006 - 17:36
- I'm waiting on confirmation from Microsoft at the moment regarding the BBC's story.
Glad someone sees sense here (minnow_trap). -
#1.8 Posted by gunky on 09 Feb 2006 - 17:43
- but guess what? They're allowed to..it's their game
and the game is monopoly. using halo 2 to sell vista is reprehensible. -
#1.9 Posted by Octol on 09 Feb 2006 - 17:49
- Obviously, people who already own the game can play it on Windows XP. If a new version of the game is only supported on Vista, so what?
Bitching about this is tantamount to complaining about companies that make PCI Express video cards because they will only work in systems with PCIe motherboards.
If I'm stupid enough to go out and buy a product that isn't supported by the hardware or software that I already have, should I blame the company that makes it?
Maybe I should complain to the Ford Motor Company because it doesn't provide engine cranks with every car that it sells. Or, more appropriately, because it doesn't make all its CD decks backwards compatible with Model T electical systems.
Gimme a break! -
#1.10 Posted by Beastage on 09 Feb 2006 - 17:54
- I'm 100% with Octol on this
if you read his comment then all arguements are null and void
if MS wants to make Halo 2 Vista only its their choice and their choice alone! -
#1.11 Posted by Skyfrog on 09 Feb 2006 - 18:27
- "Obviously, people who already own the game can play it on Windows XP. If a new version of the game is only supported on Vista, so what?"
What on earth are you talking about. How can anyone own a game that doesn't exist? There is no PC version of Halo 2 yet. Anyway this news is made up garbage, where is the source? Microsoft made an announcement but only the BBC knows about it? Please...
"Bitching about this is tantamount to complaining about companies that make PCI Express video cards because they will only work in systems with PCIe motherboards."
That's a dumb comparison. PCI Express video cards won't work without PCI Express motherboards because it's physically impossible. There is NO reason at all that Halo 2 wouldn't be able to work on XP however.
"if MS wants to make Halo 2 Vista only its their choice and their choice alone!"
It might be their choice but it would be a terribly stupid one, and Microsoft isn't stupid. Again this news is BS.
Edit: Well someone found the press release, it's true. I guess Microsoft really is stupid.
Last edited by Skyfrog on 09 Feb 2006 - 18:32 -
#1.12 Posted by Mr_Mo on 09 Feb 2006 - 18:48
- PCI Express video cards won't work without PCI Express motherboards because it's physically impossible. There is NO reason at all that Halo 2 wouldn't be able to work on XP however.
PCI-eX graphics card works on AGP system, look at 7800GS. The reason nVidia won't make a 7800GT/GTX is because they want to force people to switch over to PCI-eX.
Besides if there is no reason halo won't work on WinXP then you should be able to execute it. So there is something that requires Vista, else one could just modify the exe and the dll files to be compatible with WinXP. -
#1.13 Posted by orichimaru on 09 Feb 2006 - 21:18
- I think you will find the 7800GS, just like the 6600GT is a PCI express only card with an extra chip to allow it to function on an AGP bus.
-
#1.14 Posted by Skyfrog on 09 Feb 2006 - 22:16
- I meant it's physically impossible to plug a PCI Express card into an AGP slot. Hence the use of the word physical.
-
#1.15 Posted by DaCypher on 10 Feb 2006 - 00:27
- Why is no one complaining that Halo 3 will only be available for Xbox 360?
I am certainly no MS apologist, but this just smart business (though, I don't agree with it). -
#1.16 Posted by mayamaniac on 10 Feb 2006 - 02:52
- I don't see the big deal. I mean Win98 and Win2000 are still supported too right? I'm sure there are plenty of games that requires XP to play. And this isn't news, OS exclusive titles have been made for decades, and even more so on the consoles.
And lastly, we are talking about HALO 2 here, not exactly a fresh new game, so who cares. -
#1.17 Posted by mr_da3m0n on 12 Feb 2006 - 23:28
- The part everyone is missing is that I do not see *anything* in Halo 2 that would *require* vista. Except maybe the fact that they want you to upgrade to it. There really is no reason it couldn't run on WinXP.
So it is purerly a pseudo limitation, to make people buy vista. -
#1.18 Posted by scyphe on 13 Feb 2006 - 09:38
- To all the people that says it's biased and bull****, visit: http://www.bungie.net/News/TopStory.aspx?s...o2vistaannounce
Straight from the horses mouth.
-
#2 Posted by xMorpheousx416 on 09 Feb 2006 - 17:20
- I thought the Halo series for PC wasn't going to go beyond the first one?
Doesn't matter, the only difference is what you see in regards to resolutions. The game doesn't change, and since it was so easy to finish on the XBox, I see no reason what-so-ever to buy the game again.
-
#3 Posted by Trade Wind on 09 Feb 2006 - 17:20
- rock on. I'll be enjoying Halo 2 on my DX10 Vista machine
-
#4 Posted by ArtOf_War on 09 Feb 2006 - 17:24
- Yay new, halo for the PC, the first one was just too awesome without a sucky controller
-
(1 reply)
#5 Posted by denzilla on 09 Feb 2006 - 17:29
- WTF! When was Halo 2 announced for PC!?
-
#6 Posted by Gabureiru on 09 Feb 2006 - 17:29
- Even if it was true, MS isn't "forcing" any one to do anything, this is just a sensationalist pseudo news that bashes and trashes MS again. People who have the money will upgrade to vista no matter if it has Halo 2 involved or not. If they want a good experience playing Halo 2, just buy an XBox......
-
(2 replies)
#7 Posted by Sn4k36 on 09 Feb 2006 - 17:33
- I through that microsoft cancel Halo 2 for the PC and they are waiting for Halo 3 to be released either the end of this year or Q1 next year... geez what retarded morons at microsoft.
-
#7.1 Posted by Beastage on 09 Feb 2006 - 17:56
- Cause obviously you have to be a retarded moron to be the worlds biggest software company......
-
#7.2 Posted by chimera963 on 09 Feb 2006 - 20:16
- Yep...looks like it
-
(1 reply)
#8 Posted by Rob on 09 Feb 2006 - 17:33
- I agree that this story, as I read it at 1730, is written in a totally different style to the rest of Neowin's news; it just comes across as a sensationalist rant by a newsposter who's not having a good day. I agree, if it is true it's not great business practice but Neowin's reporting before has rarely been this emotionally fuelled.
On-topic though, I cannot help wondering that, if this is true, there must be some more to it: as in, Microsoft embracing some of the new graphics technologies only present in Vista to enhance the experience which would warrant the game being Vista-only. I really don't think they'd make it Vista-only without a good, necessary reason such as genuine incompatibilities with previous versions of Windows. The question there is whether those incompatibilities are unavoidable.
Last edited by Rob on 09 Feb 2006 - 17:42 -
#8.1 Posted by fubarshibby on 10 Feb 2006 - 01:44
- Ummm.... hello? This is more of a comment on the actual news story that BBC has posted. If you actually clicked on the BBC News link, you would have seen that.
-
#9 Posted by AngelicRaver on 09 Feb 2006 - 17:35
- Hopfully it wont run as laggy as Halo 1 did on XP x.X..
-
(5 replies)
#10 Posted by Toastyone on 09 Feb 2006 - 17:38
- Is this any different from Microsoft saying you need to have an Xbox 360 to play Halo 3.....besides Halo is much better on the xbox :p
-
#10.1 Posted by King Raa on 09 Feb 2006 - 17:45
- Surely it is, I can understand games now not working on windows 95, but when 98 came out the games being released still worked on 95 - it wasn't like "98s in, no new games will work on 95". If that makes sense.
-
#10.2 Posted by Fantmx on 09 Feb 2006 - 19:14
- This is exactly what I was thinking. And no it isn't different. Xbox 1 is still supported, so you thing every 360 game should work on the original Xbox?
-
#10.3 Posted by threedaysdwn on 09 Feb 2006 - 21:17
- Aren't there plenty of games that require XP today? Or at least Windows 2000?
Remember.. Windows 95, 98, and ME were all part of the Windows 4.x generation.
2000/XP/2003 are 5.x
Vista is the first 6.x release. It should be expected developers will have to give up compatability if they want to use certain new functions of Vista. -
#10.4 Posted by Angel Blue01 on 09 Feb 2006 - 21:47
- 10.3: No they were part of a totally different line of operating systems. Now we use NT 5.x. Vista is NT 6.x why shouldn't it work?
-
(1 reply)
#11 Posted by TC17 on 09 Feb 2006 - 17:39
- Funny how there are so many Microsoft fanboys on Neowin.
This article makes total sense if its true. Its just ludicrous for Microsoft to expect people to buy Vista just to play Halo. As if somehow the new operating system has some magical power to increase your graphical speed or something. Just a bunch of BS from Microsoft. -
#11.1 Posted by Pdj79 on 09 Feb 2006 - 23:32
- "Its just ludicrous for Microsoft to expect people to buy Vista just to play Halo."
And its also ludicrous for Microsoft to expect people to buy Xbox360 just to play Halo 3.
In all seriousness, if this were to actually happen, there's probably a really good reason for it. Perhaps its because DirectX10 will only be available for Vista? Perhaps the game will require an OS that supports HDCP to offer a level of encryption to prevent piracy? Whatever the reason, its not illogical for a company to demand their flagship product be the required platform for which to run a program. It was just as unfair to people who had purchased a PC with WinME on it when XP came out and games were made that only supported XP/2k. They had to shell out the extra cash for the upgrade not long after they bought it to keep up with technology. Regardless of how flawed or ancient the 9x-based Windows were, its the same thing then as it would be now, and obviously no one is raising a stink about that.
-
(2 replies)
#12 Posted by MightyJordan on 09 Feb 2006 - 17:44
- I thought Halo 2 wasn't going to be released on the PC. On the box for Halo 2 on the Xbox is says "Only on Xbox". However, that was on the Halo box aswell but they released it for the PC. I'm just a bit angry because they're gonna include new features for the PC version. In Halo 1 for the PC they included online play, a flamethrower, and a fuel rod cannon (in Halo 2 aswell). Who knows what they're gonna add on for this version.
-
#12.1 Posted by DarkSim905 on 09 Feb 2006 - 18:00
- Even if it says X-BOx Only, doesn't automatically make a port to PC void. microsoft also owns a good chunk of the PC Market (I guess you can argue that now ...) but I think they are starting to listen to gamers more and more. WIthout PCs, there wouldn't be gaming (also debatable) and almost anything, gets ported over.
-
#13 Posted by hotdog963al on 09 Feb 2006 - 17:44
- Well Sod that!
No Vista, No Halo 2.
Waste of MONEY.
-
(6 replies)
#14 Posted by XanDaMan on 09 Feb 2006 - 17:48
- Sony are going to make people upgrade to PS3 for GT5.
Sony has the sheer audacity...
...
...you see where i'm going? -
#14.1 Posted by creamhackered on 09 Feb 2006 - 17:53
- Yeah but consoles is a different thing. They have strict hardware requirements and people upgrade because replacing the hardware isn't a viable option. That's totally understandable.
I'm sure 90% of the hardware out there at the moment could run Halo 2 on PC. Unless Microsoft is developing some secret new way of rendering that isn't included in current copies of Vista then Halo 2 could definitely run on Windows XP and even on Windows 2000. -
#14.3 Posted by HawkMan on 09 Feb 2006 - 18:14
- I could say there's no difference between the PS2-PS3 and the XP to Vista argument as well.
Vista is a next generation OS, it comes with DX10 wich is not DX9 compatible, it dcomes with some other gaming technolgies wich while they dont' directly affect compatibility, they do make gamign faster.
Now Microsoft could do 3 things here
1: spend lots of money makign a DX9 and DX10 version, expanding the dev time, and costs of the gamein order to support both.
2: Make it only for DX9, makign it compatible with XP, but not takign advantage of the much Faster DX10, and in addition slightly reducing the speed because of the DX9 emulation in DX10.
3: Make it a NExt gen sellign title for Vista, runnign on DX10 , showcasing the power and speed of DX10 and the other technolgies built into Vista for increasing speed and memory available to games.
Of course they'll go for #3. There's no section in the human rights, or any constitution that says everyon has the right to play Halo2, Halo has allways been a showcase title for MS latest technology, this won't be any different. Microsoft are the ones who loose sales from the old XP users, not them.
this is just a bitter newspost from a whiny newsposter(oh look at the objectivity of the newspost....:rolleyes, I could even go as far as calling the entire newspost a flamebait and Trolling post, in fact I will. -
#14.4 Posted by cheesegoduk on 09 Feb 2006 - 18:34
- erm that would imply that they won't release DX10 for Windows XP which would pretty much kill XP gaming stone dead. I highly doubt they are willing to upset that many customers.
-
#14.5 Posted by Julius Caro on 09 Feb 2006 - 21:46
- I would totally understand this move if Halo 2 used features not present in previous versions of windows prior to vista. If that doesnt happen I'm sure there will be patches or something.
These will either help vista sales or hurt halo.
I think both products are good enough to sell by themselves... -
#14.6 Posted by minnow_trap on 09 Feb 2006 - 22:11
- Yeah but consoles is a different thing. They have strict hardware requirements and people upgrade because replacing the hardware isn't a viable option. That's totally understandable.
I'm sure 90% of the hardware out there at the moment could run Halo 2 on PC. Unless Microsoft is developing some secret new way of rendering that isn't included in current copies of Vista then Halo 2 could definitely run on Windows XP and even on Windows 2000. "quoted by creamhackered"
I totally agree with you creamhackered. Since other individuals brought hardware into this discussion, this seems to more of a run software to upgrade to a "certain" software issue. (So essentially, nothing but a software issue.) Hardware is irrevalant to a "certain" extent in this matter.
If this story is true, and in the long run, you will see more Microsoft gaming titles sitting on the shelves at your local store. (Then maybe they can start firing some marketing executives.)
Again, don't need to elaborate on this subject.
Last edited by minnow_trap on 09 Feb 2006 - 23:25
-
#15 Posted by kirk26 on 09 Feb 2006 - 17:54
- Sounds fair. Why still use a 5 or 6 year old OS for a new game. Your choice.
-
(1 reply)
#16 Posted by toadeater on 09 Feb 2006 - 17:57
- LOL. Good going MS. Show those fanboys who's boss!
I guess there's nothing illegal about this. Even though there are no actual Vista-dependent features in the game that couldn't be duplicated in XP. They must really be desperate to find a killer app for Vista. IMHO, Halo 2 isn't it. I could live without it -- and Vista. At least until a Vista SP1.
Oh well. MS (M$) shows it's true colors again; a company that cannot profit honestly because its products are crap.
-
(7 replies)
#17 Posted by ProphetManX on 09 Feb 2006 - 17:58
- Funny stuff... whining about having to upgrade your OS...
We all know very well that by the time Halo 2 comes out for PC, it will require the beefiest video card in SLI/Crossfire config for it to look great (and we all want it to look great dont' we?). so you're prolly going to have to spend $400.00 for a new videocard anyways, but of course people have been doing that for YEARS due to new games coming out.
now that microsoft is gonna have you upgrade your OS you're gonna cry like babies? c'mon, most of you will get a *cracked copy of Vista the week after it's released anyways, so what's the problem?
*not that i support piracy
now i don't agree with forcing anyone to upgrade their system, but you have to realize that this marketing tactic has been going on forever, just now it's in a new product. And really, if you put it on XP with an old videocard, how crappy would the game run? do you really think you'd play it with that poor of video quality? -
#17.1 Posted by DarkSim905 on 09 Feb 2006 - 18:03
- Your comment makes me happy I'm a console gamer. Not to say that I'm saying money, I'm sure I operate at a loss as a console gamer; but the fact you don't have to deal with being "forced" an upgrade to a game, is one less problem at the end of the day.
-
#17.2 Posted by Chicane-UK on 09 Feb 2006 - 18:09
- I get my copies of Windows for free legitimately because of the licensing agreement with Microsoft and the place I work - it has been like this for years as well. But it must mean something when I even feel aggrieved and I don't even have to PAY for my copy!
I can only imagine how much this must frustrate the people who actually have to cough up.
Once I have some pennies i'm actually going to move away from FREE Microsoft software and paid Apple hardware and software simply because I can't bear the business practices of Microsoft any more. The more I read, the more disgust I feel. -
#17.3 Posted by Beastage on 09 Feb 2006 - 18:17
- Chicane I didn't understand, you moving from free MS to Apple ? or both all the same time?
cause you know they are companies? and companies supposed to make cash? cash that alot of it goes to workers like you?
How much a copy of windows costs? 200usd? for 5-7 years? thats alot of money?? people pay that much for gas in a month.... -
#17.4 Posted by Chicane-UK on 09 Feb 2006 - 19:35
- Its fairly simple mate.
I don't care if i'm getting the product for free or not - I still have my own opinions on what I feel are right and wrong. Now before you start ringing the fanboy alarm, no company is immune.. if Apple did something that I felt was wrong, or if I felt the Linux people did something wrong, i'd stop using products from either of those circles.
But at the minute Microsoft is just getting to me. Vista is, whichever way you look at it, far from the product it was promised to be.. so yet another 'stopgap' OS and the next version of Windows will REALLY be the technology flagship.
Couple this with the early EOL of XP Home (thus forcing people into Vista upgrades if they want support), Microsoft having the audacity to charge people for antivirus / antispyware products (because of the flawed nature of their OS), 'Vista exclusives' like Halo 2 (please explain the technological reasons why Halo 2 couldn't run on XP provided Microsoft and the hardware vendors released suitable drivers & DirectX versions), and Microsofts continuing claims about the innovative features in Vista shamelessly lifted from OSX - it just leaves me feeling generally unsatisfied with Microsofts business practices and its ethics.
And really, lastly, with regards to Apple - I just like OSX - its reignited an interest in IT inside me which I thought had died for good.. but it turns out it was simply down to Windows being more of the same and never that interesting. Apple hardware, Apple software.. I just think they're doing things well and doing things right now (well, except the Intel chips of course!!
) and they've got my interest. I just need to scrape together the cash for a half decent Mac.. and thats the problem! Too damn expensive! 
-
#17.5 Posted by Fantmx on 09 Feb 2006 - 21:04
- Actually even if you have MSDN, it still is not legal for you to install a copy of Microsoft software on your home PC. It is a per seat license, so unless your company paid for you to have two seats I doubt it is actually legit.
-
#17.6 Posted by Chicane-UK on 09 Feb 2006 - 21:16
- I work for an academic institution - I don't know it works but I just know its legal for staff to install Windows and Office on their home PC's.
-
#17.7 Posted by Pdj79 on 09 Feb 2006 - 23:43
- #17.4
"Microsoft having the audacity to charge people for antivirus / antispyware products (because of the flawed nature of their OS)"
Anti-spyware is and will remain free to home users. An enterprise edition will cost. As for antivirus not being free, lets not forget that MS has fought too many anti-trust lawsuits in the past 10 years in regards to this very matter. If they release an antivirus program free of charge, McAfee and Norton will be the first to file antitrust lawsuits NOT because the product is free but because Microsoft released it and the courts hate Microsoft, so its a win/win.
-
#18 Posted by tony-inpo on 09 Feb 2006 - 17:59
- Typical Microsoft
-
(1 reply)
#19 Posted by lostspyder on 09 Feb 2006 - 18:00
- I had to upgrade from win 3.1 for workgroups to play the original halo!!!!!!!
And NOW I have to upgrade AGAIN?!?!?!?!?!
THis is complete BS, just M$ trying to leech off of US!!!1!!!!!one!!!!11111oneone11!!
-
#20 Posted by Ficman on 09 Feb 2006 - 18:01
- I had no plans to play it anyway... I'm good...
-
(3 replies)
#21 Posted by ahhell on 09 Feb 2006 - 18:02
- MS has never announced they would even RELEASE Halo 2 for the PC.
This story is bull****...pure and simple.
Halo for the PC wasn't made by Microsoft anyway and neither would this game.
This story should be removed from the front page as it is NOT news. -
#21.1 Posted by creamhackered on 09 Feb 2006 - 18:03
- I think the BBC know what news is.
-
#21.2 Posted by Beastage on 09 Feb 2006 - 18:15
- Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't there some scandal a few months ago that force the resignation of some executives becasue the broadcasted something that they knew was a complete lie?
-
#21.3 Posted by WindowsNT on 09 Feb 2006 - 18:32
- I agree with fellow UKer Creamhackerd here.
The BBC knows what news is unlike other organisations like FOX News who spout utter crap 24/7 and even had the gaul to bash the BBC and take things out of context which landed then in trouble with Ofcom since they broadcast to the UK as well.
I recall FOX bashed the UK people and Ofcom as well, so I think the BBC know how to be impartial and broadcast fact !
-
#22 Posted by Chicane-UK on 09 Feb 2006 - 18:07
- Yet more persuasion to get me the hell away from Vista and onto another platform. Microsoft just make it too easy! I just don't know how their marketing drones can spout this crap and actually try and sell it as a POSITIVE thing.
What possible features could be in Halo 2 which would require an upgrade to a seperate OS, that couldn't be made available as a seperate download for XP. Someone please enlighten me.
-
#23 Posted by Skyfrog on 09 Feb 2006 - 18:21
- This is idiotic, but it will be running on XP within a week. Doom 3 wasn't supposed to work on Windows 98 but that didn't take long to get around.
Last edited by Skyfrog on 09 Feb 2006 - 18:32
-
(2 replies)
#24 Posted by max-pain on 09 Feb 2006 - 18:27
- Official Press Release:
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/press/2006/0206-halo2vista.htm
-
(2 replies)
#25 Posted by DG55 on 09 Feb 2006 - 18:34
- They're not forcing people to upgrade, dont be stupid.
If they were trying to force people to upgrade to vista, why are they shipping many enhancements from Vista back to XP? -
#25.1 Posted by Skyfrog on 09 Feb 2006 - 18:39
- Then what reason do they have for making it Vista only?
-
#26 Posted by daveoc64 on 09 Feb 2006 - 18:40
- I don't personally care how MS chooses to make their games. If they think Halo 2 will benefit from the new gaming features in Windows Vista, so be it.
-
#27 Posted by ahhell on 09 Feb 2006 - 18:40
- Thanks for the link max-pain
Well that is really lame! What is Microsoft/Bungie thinking??
Whom in his/her right mind would buy Vista just to play this game??? It was a poor game on the Xbox and it will be poor on Vista.
-
#28 Posted by jimbo11883 on 09 Feb 2006 - 18:44
- Doesn't bother me... I'll be using Vista anyways...
-
#29 Posted by jadkins555 on 09 Feb 2006 - 18:45
- I actually think it is smart business. And I agree with the poster above -- I am looking forward to Vista and will be purchasing that anyway.
-
(2 replies)
#30 Posted by SamNeeds on 09 Feb 2006 - 18:48
- Smart business? Crude business more like.
Bad move if you ask me. I think its stupid to ask people to upgrade their OS to play a game. -
#30.1 Posted by jb23fan on 09 Feb 2006 - 18:52
- So would you be upset that you can't play battlefield 2 or a similar product on windows 3.1?
-
#31 Posted by jb23fan on 09 Feb 2006 - 18:51
- Although some of you say its no different than a console...it really isnt.
Vista supports a lot of new technologies that are going to make gaming better.
We all know that Bungie is very picky about the quality of their products.
I wonder if Flight Simulator X will also be Vista only...
I hope it is. Optimize for the future is the way to go
-
#32 Posted by Carlson-online on 09 Feb 2006 - 19:02
- i think this news maybe being taken out of context.
perhaps what it is meant to say is that although it will run on XP and Vista, only Vista will be supported when it comes to tech support etc etc.
-
(1 reply)
#33 Posted by markjensen on 09 Feb 2006 - 19:09
- Oh, I hate to bring up Linux when it had not yet been mentioned (and flamed! in a Windows thread, but here goes:
I don't see any problem with this at all! If the system requirements for Halo2 genuinely require features only in Vista, then that is just the way it is. I certainly am not whining that I had to upgrade from the older 2.2 Linux kernel to 2.4, just to use the newer and improved iptables firewall. I don't whine that "ipchains worked in 2.2, why isn't iptables made to work on the older kernel?". Granted not quite the same analogy, as the Open Source stuff is free, but the basic point of newer apps have different needs (and some may only be supplied in a newer overall system/OS) is valid.
Of course, if it turns out that Halo2 would run on XP, but they put in a special "OS Check" to disable it except on Vista... Now, that would be a different matter. -
#33.1 Posted by NeoTech on 09 Feb 2006 - 19:46
- Agreed.
If it has to run on Vista to have certain features then it's fine by me to release it Vista only.But, if they are just forcing people to upgrade to Vista when it would work perfectly fine on Windows XP then I can see what everyone is complaining about.
-
#34 Posted by marlow714 on 09 Feb 2006 - 19:15
- Most others OS users have to upgrade ALL of their software to run a new generation OS + doesn't support running the old software without a "classic" mode! LOL!
-
(5 replies)
#35 Posted by dl0711 on 09 Feb 2006 - 19:41
- Well its 100% Official strate from the Creators [bungie] site http://www.bungie.net/News/TopStory.aspx?s...ounce&p=6136047
Halo What on the Whatnow?
Halo 2, on Windows Vista. Halo 2, you may remember, is a "shoot them up" featuring the adventures of Master Chief and his wacky sidekick, Cortana. Well, Halo 2 you know about, but Vista, what the heck is that?
Windows Vista is the next generation Microsoft operating system that will by turns, be sweet, awesome, radical, and potentially translucent (in places). It will also add layers of new functionality, speed, media processing and so on. I have heard a rumor, in fact, that it will replicate a lot of the functionality of them new-fangled Media Center PCs so that you can stream HD and whatnot to your Xbox 360. If that's true, that would also be nice.
The game WILL be for Windows Vista, as in, not for Windows XP, so you have a while to get used to that and complain to me about what a jerk I am to Windows 3.1 users.
But back to Halo 2. We're working with another team at MS to make this not only happen, but happen in a super-sweet radical fashion. To that end, we're going to be helping with a lot of aspects, but don't worry, we are not doing the actual coding work – we're too busy with ONP (Our Next Project). In fact, a lot of you spotted the job postings at Bungie.net asking for, "programmers who are awesome at programming Halo 2 Xbox to work on a PC," and other subtle clues.
Using your Sherlock Holmes-ian powers of deduction, you probably figured it out. Anyway, there will be significant differences between the PC and the Xbox version. The PC for example, invariably runs at resolutions that aren't 480i. So there's that. The specs and features have been targeted, but not carved in stone, and things will change, so we're NOT going to announce anything more specific than you find here today.
One HUGE difference between Xbox and PC versions is the absence of Xbox Live. Now, much as a subset of you likes to bitch and moan about Live matchmaking, most of you agree it's a very nice way to find games in a hurry. But don't worry, we'll have a cool system for that, no doubt.
There will also be some kind of map-customization ability. Does that mean you can build your own maps from scratch, pixel by pixel, importing your own textures, scripts and detailed shaders? Or does it mean one empty room and a crate? Well, we'll have more news on that later this year, but it will be cool, we guarantee that.
There's loads of questions the Bungie faithful will ask, like, "Will there be a Mac version?" We can't answer that yet. It's not out of the question, but it's not definitely happening either. We promise to keep you posted, and in the interim, you can read the PR-ified version of the press release and FAQ below.
GENERAL
Q: Why has it taken so long to port Halo 2 to Windows Vista?
A: Bungie Studios and Microsoft are committed to delivering and creating the highest quality experience of Halo 2 on the Windows Vista platform. As such, the development of Halo 2 for Windows Vista coincides with the development of the Windows Vista platform itself in order to ensure the title's uncompromised quality.
Q: Why are you releasing Halo 2 for Windows Vista only?
A: As Bungie Studios and Microsoft are dedicated to delivering a top quality translation of Halo 2 for the PC, their efforts require the use of the best available technological platform for Windows games. Windows