Recommended Posts

If third party companies choose to ignore this advice, like they chose to ignore the information Microsoft gave out about Windows XP SP2, should Microsoft get blamed? I certainly don't think so!

I agree with you, but not fully. Sometimes -not always- developers faced with situations where the only to run such thing is by having Admin rights, MS created that limitation and the only way to do it is by having admin rights !!

They should just keep the circular back button at the top, and have 'NEXT' in the bottom right. People can choose to cancel by pressing the 'X' button in the top right. If cancel's not an option, it will be a grey close button.

Why? That makes no sense. They should have it as it has been. Their new method (as well as your proposal) is counter-intuitive and is going to **** off a lot of people.

Some of you just really don't get it:

- UAC is not to protect from you, it is to protect you.

- it is not "Hey, you! Are really wanna do this?" it is "Hey, this will happen. Do you want it to happen?"

- the whole UAC reason: the whole OS is built on messages flying around (a click was at x,y; the "c" key was pressed etc.) programs work as they react to these messages: even orientated system. Every app is able to send any message and the system is not capable to make difference between you clicked the "Format D:" or another application/virus/spyware "clicked" that button in the background, invisible - it is possible to write this application under 10 minutes. That's why it goes to a secure desktop (the annoying black flash) where a remote clicking is not possible and asks if you, the user, the living thing wanted this to happen. There are even spywares, when you click on the "No, i don't want to install millionxxxpasswords.exe" and the mouseclick goes to the "Yes, sure, give it to me."

This whole thing started very long ago - like when the first WinZip cracks actually were little programs inside the main program, and they found the "yes" button and sent a mouse click to it making the nag actually to fast to notice. Now too many applications (remote, accesibility, OSD, bundled apps like SetPoint) use this system to change it drastically. Microsoft tries to tweak it (make a Google search on "Help, SendKeys not working under Vista"), but wihout much luck.

EDIT: If you use a "root" or a real-admin login in Windows when there is no UAC, you will never know if another application did something behind your back.

Edited by Symphony

If you're confronted with 'constant popup's on Windows Vista when running third party applications,t hen the issue is with the third party applications, and the vendor not writing their applications to take into account permissions and user limitations.

Run Nero under a restricted account on Windows XP - you *can* write to a cd under a resitrcitved account, but due to Nero being written so poorly, it has to have root/administrator access when doing so.

So before the 'slam feast' continues, lets remember, 90% of Windows problems you see are related to crappy third party vendors not getting their **** together; Windows Vista has been in beta form publically for over a year, there has been NOTHING stopping vendors from getting their applications ready; the information regarding UAC has been around for over 2 years.

If third party companies choose to ignore this advice, like they chose to ignore the information Microsoft gave out about Windows XP SP2, should Microsoft get blamed? I certainly don't think so!

In my honest opinion, MS is to blame for the application programming model in XP. They started it when they threw their own logic out of the Window with XP. If anyone remembers the Windows 2000 days they had a more unix like system where on default you had a "User" account with limited rights. In order to get a "Power User" or "Administrator" level account you had to manually create one or edit the current one, it wasn't admin by default. Like Linux MS didn't recommend you create and use the admin account by default, but you had the option, as you should. With XP they threw all of that logic out of the Window and made you admin by default, a decision i always thought was retarded, even in 2001. Now they come to us developers and complain that we don't write code to use a "less privileged account" and the question is simply "Why should we when everyone is admin by default?" I thought MS was going to change this with Vista as the main was of resurrecting the idea of writing for the least privileged account. I thought UAC would work much like its equivalence I've used in Linux so many times... Nope... UAC was so annoying to me that i uninstalled the Pre-RC1 MS allowed me to download the day after i installed it. I went back to my XP and SUSE Linux Ent. Desktop 10 installations.

They need to just make the default account in Vista a "user" level account. Not some Admin account with annoying popups. If they are serious about protecting your computer why aren't they just demoting the user and asking them to truly elevate when needed? UAC is shaping up to be more hassle than its worth and going to set security back even more I'm sure. As was mentioned previously in this topic, normal users will hit OK, next, enter passwords, etc. to get the program they want running. They won't care or know how to determine or care about whether the program will hose their machine or not. They simply want their smiley pack or whatever other incentive the spyware/virus is using to lure them in.

Not to mention the whole screen blanking thing is just stupid.... Every few clicks your whole workflow is disrupted and you can't do anything else until you respond to UAC. Maybe it is just me, but i don't actually do one thing at a time on my computer! I actually do multiple tasks at once...

I'm probably in the minority, but i won't be upgrading to Vista until I'm really forced. I'll stick with XP and Linux until I'm literally dragged kicking and screaming to install Vista on any machine i own or administer.

In my honest opinion, MS is to blame for the application programming model in XP. They started it when they threw their own logic out of the Window with XP. If anyone remembers the Windows 2000 days they had a more unix like system where on default you had a "User" account with limited rights. In order to get a "Power User" or "Administrator" level account you had to manually create one or edit the current one, it wasn't admin by default. Like Linux MS didn't recommend you create and use the admin account by default, but you had the option, as you should. With XP they threw all of that logic out of the Window and made you admin by default, a decision i always thought was retarded, even in 2001. Now they come to us developers and complain that we don't write code to use a "less privileged account" and the question is simply "Why should we when everyone is admin by default?" I thought MS was going to change this with Vista as the main was of resurrecting the idea of writing for the least privileged account. I thought UAC would work much like its equivalence I've used in Linux so many times... Nope... UAC was so annoying to me that i uninstalled the Pre-RC1 MS allowed me to download the day after i installed it. I went back to my XP and SUSE Linux Ent. Desktop 10 installations.

They need to just make the default account in Vista a "user" level account. Not some Admin account with annoying popups. If they are serious about protecting your computer why aren't they just demoting the user and asking them to truly elevate when needed? UAC is shaping up to be more hassle than its worth and going to set security back even more I'm sure. As was mentioned previously in this topic, normal users will hit OK, next, enter passwords, etc. to get the program they want running. They won't care or know how to determine or care about whether the program will hose their machine or not. They simply want their smiley pack or whatever other incentive the spyware/virus is using to lure them in.

Not to mention the whole screen blanking thing is just stupid.... Every few clicks your whole workflow is disrupted and you can't do anything else until you respond to UAC. Maybe it is just me, but i don't actually do one thing at a time on my computer! I actually do multiple tasks at once...

I'm probably in the minority, but i won't be upgrading to Vista until I'm really forced. I'll stick with XP and Linux until I'm literally dragged kicking and screaming to install Vista on any machine i own or administer.

Quoted For Truth.

I'll still be switching to Vista, though. But I'll do as I've always done on my systems... Run as Standard User and let UAC elevate me when I need it to and disable UAC for Administrator Users - the way I thought UAC should've been done from the start.

I agree with a lot of the UI points.

The problem is, where can MS go with this? I mean, they need a complete overhaul of the UI - and I don't mean that as a technical statement - as Vista is a rethink i that respect.

I mean, thinking back, the "desktop" paradigm was flawed as soon as it was rolled out. You DON'T have a waste bin on your desktop, and it only got worse by adding the startbar, etc. I am not flaming these UI elements, they certainly help the usage - but the paradigm of the desktop is just messy and no longer even relevant. These additions made a PC easier to use - but NOT easier to learn.

I think we have become a little like cattle. Instead of the interface being designed around the user, the user adapts to the interface. MS helped a lot with task panes and such (UI adapting to the task) but not enough.

I am not saying there is anything better, as I don't know - if I did I would be rich. But the current "Desktop, with a startbar and a sidebar and buttons, and a wastebasket" is NOT intuitive.

In all honesty there are more features that suck in Vista then usual. But the best thing is that most annoyances can be turned off. (Y)

I think that Vista represents a pretty poor effort Interface and Design wise. There are improvements in stability and performance over XP but those, alone, are not enough to make Vista a "must have" purchase.

Paul Thurrott made a lot of sense in what he published. I hope that Microsoft takes this to heart and does something about the screwiness in Windows %whatever%.

I couldn't agree more with Paul's article. Microsoft said they listen to their users/testers? ... *looks around*

As a retiring Beta Tester I can say with a lot of certainty - Microsoft do listen to their beta testers. But then they do their own thing anyway, because as usual - Microsoft knows what's better, for us.

In my honest opinion, MS is to blame for the application programming model in XP. They started it when they threw their own logic out of the Window with XP. If anyone remembers the Windows 2000 days they had a more unix like system where on default you had a "User" account with limited rights. In order to get a "Power User" or "Administrator" level account you had to manually create one or edit the current one, it wasn't admin by default. Like Linux MS didn't recommend you create and use the admin account by default, but you had the option, as you should. With XP they threw all of that logic out of the Window and made you admin by default, a decision i always thought was retarded, even in 2001. Now they come to us developers and complain that we don't write code to use a "less privileged account" and the question is simply "Why should we when everyone is admin by default?" I thought MS was going to change this with Vista as the main was of resurrecting the idea of writing for the least privileged account. I thought UAC would work much like its equivalence I've used in Linux so many times... Nope... UAC was so annoying to me that i uninstalled the Pre-RC1 MS allowed me to download the day after i installed it. I went back to my XP and SUSE Linux Ent. Desktop 10 installations.

I guess M$ think users should be admin by default. Especially, for some losers who don't to use computer. If they want to do something need admin right. They almost don't even know how to create an admin account or log in as admin.

I guess M$ think users should be admin by default. Especially, for some losers who don't to use computer. If they want to do something need admin right. They almost don't even know how to create an admin account or log in as admin.

Of course being admin by default makes everything easier as it all "just works", but if they are attempting to "fix" that problem with UAC than i think they should start right there, with the accounts. They are attempting to build a bridge in Vista, a retarted one in its current implemenation, where they give you an Admin account by default and then prevent you from doing admin tasks without bothersome notices. They should start whole business by putting users in user accounts by default and then asking them for elevation, if needed.

I just think they are going about it in a really stupid fashion really. It will only cause confusion for developers, users, and administrators alike.

Main fustration i've had with Windows post Windows 2000... MS seems to think were all so stupid that we need them to hold our hands the whole way. Ah well... Like i said i'm not hoping on the Vista bandwagon anytime soon. I've used the Betas and Pre-RC and i'm simply not impressed. Why couldn't MS just keep the "Business" and "Consumer" line seperate? Then i wouldn't have to deal with this garbage :p;)

Your quote here shows a great example of a blinded fanboy.

Linux and has it's own pros anc cons and so vista, I use both and both are cans or worms.

I would strongly disagree with you regarding UAC is better than linux security. I suggest you go and read about linux security and compare it with UAC.

:no: :no: :no:

I suggest you go and read about Vista and UAC security and compare it with linux. Linux permissions are very old, very limited, linux's SUDO is not granular like UAC. UAC is more powerful than linux sudo, and this is the reason someone could think UAC is annoying. And Linux doesn't have the Vista's secure desktop to prevent spoofing of the UI or the mouse by the application requesting elevation

Edited by franzon

Stop the Fanboys, lets all get back down to earth and think with your brains.

UAC is NOT usefull for everybody. It's a nice feature that can have a place with Home edition, because lets get real, users are stupids. They are the one clicking on just about everything that comes in their e-mails, download junks and cry out loud that Windows is unstable and not secure.

But for professional, IT, advanced users.... UAC is a pain in the ass. It's realy not like Linux (Sudo) or OSX. Wake up and get real. Why a pop-up because I want to delete a file? Why UAC gets in my way because i'm browsing (reading/writing) another partition or HD inside my PC? Those are MY files. Since when Linux or OSX stopped you from deleting your personal file? (not OS file).

UAC is a good feature implemented the wrong way. It's not the "best" Vista feature at all.

UAC just makes the "point and click" crowd worse off. These are the types of people who click away without ever reading or paying attention to the dialogs and later wonder what has happened to their pc.

That's my point... For people that blindly lick OK at whatever pop-up in their face, UAC wont help at all.

It's just one more click.....

Fist of all I should say I laughed like I never have reading Paul Thurrott's review on Vista. Especially the "need to be brought out and shot" part.

On a serious note, I totally agree with the many issues highlighted in the article. UAC for example is a big time over do. UAC needs to pop up when things very serious such as making changes in windows core files, auto start apps, installing low level drivers and such happen. Not for things like opening device manager. Good God that really annoyed me and was abviously the first one I looked to disable.

The vista design team needs to stop confusing browser with explorer. Keep interfaces separate. If you want to combine them, maintain consistency. Finally for God's sake stop messing with stuff thats working fine in XP !!

On a sidenote I don't think there is anything wrong in bundling apps along with OS as long as other apps can work equally well. Heck MS did bundle a firewall but anybody with knowledge about outbound security will not use it. In the end if its not quality product people will not use it no matter if it was bundled or not. And this subscription based I want to rip you off every year garbage is so not gonna fly. People refuse "pay once and get free updates" model. Do they really think yearly subscription is gonna work ?

In all honesty I'm going to disable UAP simply because I know what I'm doing. I've never had a virus or spyware and I don't intend on getting them anytime soon. For the people that know what they're doing, this is going to be a big pain (although it's good you can turn it off).

The UI issue is completely different. I don't think it would be that hard for them to go in and see what needs to be changed to make it consistent. Really. Especially the 'back' button issue.

Paul set it straight, Vista is the most Frankestien OS i have ever used. It's all over the place and I am glad he admitted it. If he would have just wrote the "5 things I love about vista" I would have called him a fanboy. Im glad he pointed out alot of its faults to the public. Hopefully MS will change there minds and delay vista as it's very sloppy. I turn on UAC and all hell breaks loose. I cant save priter profiles, programs dont load, to copy six 64k-128k files is a task that take 5 to 10x longer than in XP. I mean what gives? Thats complete crap. I new vista would turn out like this, why, because its really XP strip downed with new clothing added to it by the worlds worst fashion designers. From day one you could tell it was XP and they were trying to add stuff and take stuff away. They should have started from ground up and anyone who says they did, doesnt know what ground up means. We wouldnt have legacy icons that disappered only 2 builds ago, the same calculator, paint, notepad,wordpad, same right click look on the desktop. This OS has tons of old XP elements scattered through out. Some things havent changed since Windows 98. Nice try MS. I have been running Longhorn since it looked like XP with a plex theme. I also ran/tested windows 2000 and windows XP when they were in beta stages. I think MS has failed if they choose to put out a build similar to 5600.

Paul Thurrott is ignorant, I don't like his thoughts.

UAC is the best Vista feature, I love the UAC. UAC is not annoying. UAC allows you to run as Standard user with the possibility to make the administrative tasks when you want. UAC also protects you from trojans want to start administrative tasks without your knowledge and so UAC will prompt you and save your life!

If you think UAC annoying you, this means:

. you're doing a lot of unnecessary administrative tasks

. you're using a lot of incompatibility programs

. you don't understand the UAC and runas capabilities in Vista i.e. you're simple ignorant like Paul Thurrott

Paul Thurrott is wondering why the beta2 was bad and why Microsoft didn't release immediately a good build like the RC1, and so Paul is ignorant because he doesn't understand what a beta program means!

So you're insulting inteligent beings? You must be desperately needing love from Microsoft.

Do you spend your life to delete files every day and at every hour? No, so you have just only to click on the UAC prompt in order to allow the action, and this doesn't happen often because you don't delete files at every hour of the day! So I don't think this is annoying.

And do you understand what happens when a program try to delete these files without your knowledge if you hadn't the UAC? You'll lose the files and you'll cry just like when you're using windows xp as administrator

Uh, the prompt literally pops up every 15 seconds. I dont think anyone could afford to waste that much time with crap like that.

I also understand that a program WILL NOT delete files without my knowledge because there ARE NO programs that is capable of doing so on my computer. And what happened to data backup?

:no: :no:

You wrong!!! UAC is especially suitable for power users, because with the UAC the power users will have the true full control of own computer. Without the UAC, the power users can't have the full control. Having the full control means you always know what happens and UAC help you for this purpose

UAC is useless for two groups of people: the plain ignorant idiots, and the power users.

If I leave UAC enabled I have to click extra times to do what I want, but if I disable it, I could do whatever I want. I already have full control, UAC just puts more obstacles in between.

:no: :no: :no:

No antivirus/antispyware is able to detect when an administrative task have to run i.e. executed by a program, so you don't have the full control of your computer without UAC. So antivirus and antispyware are not enough

Firewall/Antivirus/Antispyware wont let malware that run administrative tasks onto your computer in the first place. You keep saying I dont have full control of my computer. I do. Shut up. Prevention is better than cure.l

:no: :no:

You are a standard user and when you run an admin task UAC will prompt you in order to elevate. This happens on Mac and linux every day, so where's the problem? Why you bother?

No, I'm an admin.

Some of you just really don't get it:

- UAC is not to protect from you, it is to protect you.

- it is not "Hey, you! Are really wanna do this?" it is "Hey, this will happen. Do you want it to happen?"

- the whole UAC reason: the whole OS is built on messages flying around (a click was at x,y; the "c" key was pressed etc.) programs work as they react to these messages: even orientated system. Every app is able to send any message and the system is not capable to make difference between you clicked the "Format D:" or another application/virus/spyware "clicked" that button in the background, invisible - it is possible to write this application under 10 minutes. That's why it goes to a secure desktop (the annoying black flash) where a remote clicking is not possible and asks if you, the user, the living thing wanted this to happen. There are even spywares, when you click on the "No, i don't want to install millionxxxpasswords.exe" and the mouseclick goes to the "Yes, sure, give it to me."

This whole thing started very long ago - like when the first WinZip cracks actually were little programs inside the main program, and they found the "yes" button and sent a mouse click to it making the nag actually to fast to notice. Now too many applications (remote, accesibility, OSD, bundled apps like SetPoint) use this system to change it drastically. Microsoft tries to tweak it (make a Google search on "Help, SendKeys not working under Vista"), but wihout much luck.

EDIT: If you use a "root" or a real-admin login in Windows when there is no UAC, you will never know if another application did something behind your back.

As above, why let malware onto your system in the first place?

another thing about UAC is why dont they just add a "always run the program without asking me" button? why the hell do i need to be asked eveytime i run photoshop? shouldnt we just be able to click a button to confirm it once and never be asked again?

forget photoshop for a moment; since it's a 3rd party software. But as an Admin, I use "Computer Management" a lot, so every time I run it a stupid UAC window comes up.... WTF??? and as you said there is no "always run this program" button.... which really annoys me. In Mac OS X if you use sodo, it will ask you the first time, but if you don't logoff or reboot, during that opend session sodo will work like a charm, but in the case of UAC no matter how many times you run the damn application in the same session; it will keep poping up annoying messages.... :argh:

forget photoshop for a moment; since it's a 3rd party software. But as an Admin, I use "Computer Management" a lot, so every time I run it a stupid UAC window comes up.... WTF??? and as you said there is no "always run this program" button.... which really annoys me. In Mac OS X if you use sodo, it will ask you the first time, but if you don't logoff or reboot, during that opend session sodo will work like a charm, but in the case of UAC no matter how many times you run the damn application in the same session; it will keep poping up annoying messages.... :argh:

Yes ... because they want to protect you. Protect you so much that you get fed up with it and not use it ever again.

Hah. Anyways, this is exactly why I will disable UAP. I do a lot of administration work and there's no way I'm going to be clicking "OMG DO YOU WANT TO OPEN THIS MAYBE MALICIOUS PROGRAM???!?!" everytime.

another thing about UAC is why dont they just add a "always run the program without asking me" button? why the hell do i need to be asked eveytime i run photoshop? shouldnt we just be able to click a button to confirm it once and never be asked again?

Photoshop is bad programmed if it requires UAC interaction

You can to configure a program with right click on the icon and set the automatic runas setting for it.

Edited by franzon

Firstly, learn some grammar. Secondly, you're saying that Photoshop, the number 1 program used by professional graphic designers, photographers, web designers, and the like, is poorly programmed? Wow, you really are a fanboy.

Once again, you're not convincing anybody here.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • 007 First Light review: Satisfying spy adventure that James Bond needed by Pulasthi Ariyasinghe I have fond memories of classic James Bond games from the Electronic Arts era. Using high-tech gadgets, sneaking into parties, and dispatching bad guys were wildly exciting activities for my younger self. In recent years, Bond games have entirely disappeared, alongside the super spy genre. Fast forward to 2020, imagine my surprise when IO Interactive announced it had secured the Bond IP to make a game. Considering the studio’s Hitman history, this project is one I keenly kept an eye on. Six years later, 007 First Light is finally here, and after spending time inside this globe-trotting adventure, I can safely say that my excitement for this developer’s take on this universe was not unfounded. IO has taken lessons it has learned from Hitman and combined them with what I would expect from a directed cinematic experience like James Bond. I have refrained from mentioning major plot points to save you from story spoilers in this review. This is an original story that doesn’t tie into any movies, so there isn’t an expectation of knowing the backstory or the decades of movies either. Bond, James Bond When 007 First Light begins, Bond is just Bond. There isn’t a spy angle, fancy gadgets, or even a secret mission. The introductory mission is framed to show how James Bond handled himself and how he does not care about the odds when it comes to saving lives. It’s a gorgeous level as well, showing off an island scattered with cliffs in the middle of a storm. Looking back, this is probably the best-looking level in the game, with IO showing off all its abilities with its custom engine, Glacier. But my favorite ended up being the follow-up to this level. Once the United Kingdom's foreign intelligence agency, MI6, recruits our daring youngster into its super-spy “00” program, training begins. However, instead of treading through the same tutorial missions where the game teaches you to run and jump and drive, IO opted for a montage, and it’s amazing. The scenes cut between Bond practicing and improving his marksmanship, parkour, hand-to-hand combat, and driving as weeks go by in his training. What impressed me here was the lack of any loading screens or stutters as scenes instantly switched to different locations entirely, as if I was watching a movie. This creativity is a trend I noticed in most levels, where there is some sort of gameplay or choreography mechanic being introduced to keep things interesting. Soon, the rest of the cast is introduced, bringing other agents that our favorite secret agent will be working with, the scientists and engineers that build MI6’s spy gadgets, as well as higher-ranking officers that either appreciate or (at best) tolerate Bond’s rebellious attitude. It’s a tight cast, all with incredibly good voice acting and personalities that quickly grew on me. The casting for Bond himself is also an excellent one. From showing his iconic soft spot for women to the condescending smiles that get a rise out of enemies, I had no issues getting immersed into this universe as this new face of James Bond. The missions take place in a wide range of locations as MI6 sends Bond to tackle dangers that are growing everywhere from the UK to Africa. These aren’t unrelated adventures where MI6 is sending secret agents, which is an angle I would love to see in another game, but a part of a bigger conspiracy affecting the entire world. Some of the twists and turns were all too predictable, and the character that Lenny Kravitz played made me cringe a little too much. But all in all, I enjoyed the campaign’s storyline that sets the stage for this new agent joining the illustrious “00” program. Plenty of Possibilities The third-person style of IO Interactive fits this role quite well. Bond is presented as a master at hand-to-hand combat as well as firearms, while also having a knack for being stealthy when required. Most sections of missions have a lot of freedom. This means I could beat up every goon and security guard on the way to an objective, slip past them without sounding a single alarm, or do a mix of both. My sessions usually end up with the third option because I tend to be impatient about waiting for a patrol to move. Drawing from its Hitman genes, the developer almost always gives multiple routes for going through missions. Levels can be massive, sometimes sporting hundreds of NPCs going their own ways and having conversations. If my objective is to break into a security room on the third floor, I could look around for roof access, eavesdrop on conversations to find out where someone lost a key, create a distraction and pickpocket a guard for a keycard, sneak in through the vents, or simply kick down the offending door. I enjoyed the variety on offer, especially because the same solutions didn’t usually show up in different missions. Before heading out into a secret MI6 escapade, the gadget specialist of the branch walks Bond through the organization's latest and greatest achievements. This can be cool little devices like a laser built into the watch, a phone that fires poison darts, or a camera that emits a powerful shockwave. The choice of what can be taken into the mission is up to the player. I could usually find fresh routes or get out of tough situations with a punch or two, so I never had the feeling of missing out by not choosing the right equipment. It’s still a fun practice. Choosing the armaments before a mission enhanced the super spy feeling quite a bit. As I mentioned, stealth comes in as a very viable option for most of the missions, letting Bond sneak past foes or knock them out silently. While it is satisfying to clear entire areas of goons and walk away without any alarms, the way of accomplishing this could have been done better. Bond can lure enemies, sneak up and knock them out, or use a gadget to disorient them before dealing a nasty blow. Bodies cannot be moved or hidden afterward either. It’s a very simple system, which I wish were more exciting to pull off. Perhaps more stealth-orientated gadgets, distraction options, or multi-takedowns could have helped here, I think. Getting caught while attempting to be in stealth does not mean a game over. Other than getting into a fist fight, an interesting twist of 007 First Light is the bluffing option. While an enemy is confused as to what you are doing in a restricted location, Bond has the option to improvise and persuade them that you are exactly where you’re supposed to be. These are fun little dynamic interactions with unique dialog depending on the mission and location, giving a few extra moments for Bond to go past suspicious guards smoothly. It’s the first time I’ve witnessed this system in a game, and I hope to see more. License to Kill Bond isn’t just dealing with security guards or civilians. From time to time, entire gangs of gun-toting mercenaries show up in levels looking to take down our protagonist. It is then that License to Kill mode is activated for Bond, letting him use firearms with no restrictions. I was surprised by just how tight gunplay is in 007 First Light. The weapons feel powerful and satisfying to fire, with single bullets capable of taking down an enemy with a headshot. Ammo is scarce, and enemies don’t drop weapons with full magazines most of the time. This forces a hectic kind of gameplay where I am always advancing towards enemies to take their weapons after they are downed. Things like shooting legs to immobilize, aiming at the hands to make their weapon go flying, blowing up nearby fire extinguishers for cover, and using gadgets to halt a goon in their tracks while I reload, make up enjoyable levels. I had to hold back my disappointment when the enemy count in these action sequences dropped to zero and I had to go non-lethal again. Speaking of action sequences, First Light isn’t just offering sandbox levels to complete at the player’s own leisure either. Each level comes with specific linear and directed scenes to move the story forward and put Bond in tight situations. These usually end up with high-octane chases or driving sections, offering the chance to witness chaining explosions, hails of gunfire, and scripted parkour scenes that remind me of Mission Impossible movies more than Bond. Elements like seeing James Bond jump out of a plane without a parachute or drive through buildings in London inside a trash truck were fantastic and always left me at a high point when finishing a mission. The classic James Bond theme is sprinkled in here too, which only happens a handful of times in the game, but at just the right moments. Visuals and Performance Compared to Unreal Engine 5 games we are seeing nowadays, 007 First Light isn’t flexing a huge amount of realism when it comes to graphics. The models, textures, and effects all feel a little dated, with the starting mission that I mentioned being the most visually striking. However, the complete lack of stutters, the hundreds of NPCs that can be on screen without a single hitch, massive sandbox levels, and smooth transitions between them all play a part in making this an immensely immersive and complex experience. The in-engine cutscenes are gorgeous as well, offering an upgraded visual style and model detail over the gameplay sections. Animations are one aspect that jumps out at me about any new game, and First Light has nailed what a third-person action game should feel like. Walking, sneaking, and running all have a heaviness to them that I appreciate. Whenever Bond moves past a wall or a ledge, his arms reach out to lightly hold those structures until he moves away. NPCs actually react to my character and move out of the way. Even during melee combat or takedown animations, the fists impacting a body or a head hitting a wall all have that same weight. Even the more frivolous animations, like catching a gun in midair or chucking an empty one at a goon (yes, you can do that), are satisfying to pull off. Of course, the in-engine cutscene animations are remarkably well done too, with facial animations and the upgraded model details improving my engagement with the characters. I have an AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT 16GB paired with an eight-core Ryzen 7 3700X and 32GB of RAM, with the game running at 1440p resolution. Deciding to completely max out all the graphics options gave me a range of frame rates between 60 and 100 depending on the scene and level. While I did try to enable AMD FSR, which bumped up the frame rates by a good 20% at Quality mode, IO Interactive’s implementation of the technology wasn’t that great. Every corner and edge in levels began shimmering, and I was also seeing smearing issues in fast-moving sections. The title seemingly uses the older generation FSR 3.1 and not the machine learning-assisted FSR 4, leading to these artifacts. Unfortunately, there isn't a way to manually upgrade this right now either. I opted to turn off the upscaling and play the game in native 1440p to avoid problems. I would say the FPS range I was getting was an acceptable one for a single-player action game for my setup. I do wish there were an FOV slider option in the settings. While the camera is far enough back for my tastes in most situations in this third-person adventure, at times the perspective is far too close. When trying to look around quickly and spot targets, I realized I was getting a slight headache at times due to the use of an almost over-the-shoulder close-up camera. Conclusion Being James Bond in 007 First Light is a treat. Traveling around the world chasing conspiracies, using high-tech gadgets disguised as everyday accessories, and improvising on the spot to fool foes all give a fantastic feeling of being a super spy. For an origin story, IO Interactive has done a great job at introducing the character and his motives for doing what he does. The satisfying combat animation and fantastic voice acting are definitely high points, with the License to Kill moments being my favorite. Not being able to move bodies and the simplistic stealth of mechanics does hurt its presentation a little. The NPC logic and intelligence is easy to manipulate and trick, repeating the same actions over and over again if I keep making distractions. The lack of an FOV slider was also a pain (quite literally) at times, and the FSR implementation is quite poor. These are things I hope the studio will improve upon with updates. Even with its faults, IO Interactive and James Bond are a match made in heaven. The studio knows how to make a main character that oozes charm and competency while also leaning heavily into its Hitman experience to make gigantic levels with what looks like hundreds of NPCs roaming around. Being an origin story, IO’s Bond has a way to go before he becomes the highly effective agent we see in the movie world. I am hoping the studio will continue this series alongside its Hitman ventures going forward, just so we get to experience the journey for longer. 007 First Light is available on PC (Steam, Epic Games Store, and Xbox PC), Xbox Series X|S, and PlayStation 5 for $69.99. This review was conducted on the PC version of the game provided by IO Interactive.
    • [Price Drop] PDF Expert for Mac v3 is still half off by Steven Parker Today's highlighted deal comes via our Apps + Software section of the Neowin Deals store, where for only a limited time you can save 42% on PDF Expert One-Time Purchase. PDFs remain the best way to transmit documents, but editing them isn't possible with standard Mac software. PDF Expert changes that, allowing you to edit PDF text, images, links, and outlines quickly and easily. Typo in a contract? Easy fix. Need to rework a complete section of a document? No problem. PDF Expert provides a series of essential functions that will transform the way you work with documents on your Mac. It recognizes text and OCR, makes edits, and fills out forms. And with the “Enhance” feature powered by AI, it will fix distortions, remove shadows and improve contrast so that even difficult-to-read documents look great. EDIT Change the text. Easily fix typos, update numbers, or add entire paragraphs Insert images. Update logos in a contract or add a new graph to a report Add links. Enrich your PDFs by linking to other pages or external websites ANNOTATE Highlight the important. Make the most valuable content stand out at a glance Comment on PDFs. Add text to PDFs, insert pop-up notes & write your thoughts in the margins Add stamps. Review documents with our set of stamps or create custom stamps for any workflow ORGANIZE Merge PDFs. Combine multiple files into one PDF document Manage pages. Add, delete, rearrange, or rotate PDF pages with ease Split PDFs. Extract pages from PDFs & save them as separate files CONVERT Convert to PDF. Turn JPG, PNG, Word, PPT, and Excel to PDF PDF to Word. Convert PDFs into editable Word documents PDF to image. Turn PDFs into JPG or PNG images PDF to Excel. Convert PDFs into Excel spreadsheets PDF to PPT. Save PDFs as PowerPoint presentations PDF to text. Convert PDFs into editable TXT files FILL OUT Fill out PDF forms. Easily fill out PDF forms by just clicking on them Sign documents. Add your signature to a PDF in a few clicks. Let customers sign documents with handy one-time signatures Redact PDFs. Blackout or erase confidential information from your documents RECOGNIZE TEXT OCR text in PDF. Recognize the text, so you can search, highlight & copy it Enhance scans. Fix distortions, remove shadows & improve contrast Crop & split pages. Split double-page scans into separate pages & remove undesired margins Good to know: Length of access: Lifetime Redemption deadline: redeem your code within 30 days of purchase Access options: Mac Max number of device(s): Unlimited usage on personal macOS devices Version: PDF Expert 3 for Mac (macOS) Updates: Get continuous support and bug fixes. Additional new features may come at an extra cost. PDF Expert One-Time Purchase normally costs $139.99, but you can pick it up for just $69.97 for a limited time, that represents a saving of $70 (50% off). For a full description, specs, and license info, click the link below. Deal Price One time cost now only $69.97 (was $139.99) Although priced in U.S. dollars, this deal is available for digital purchase worldwide. Support queries If you have queries or need support for any of the Neowin Deals, please use the contact form here. Neowin Deals are managed and sold by StackCommerce who represent Neowin on an affiliate basis. We post these because we earn commission on each sale so as not to rely solely on advertising, which many of our readers block. It all helps toward paying staff reporters, servers and hosting costs. Other ways to support Neowin Whitelist Neowin by not blocking our ads Create a free member account to see fewer ads Make a donation to support our day to day running costs Subscribe to Neowin - for $14 a year, or $28 a year for an ad-free experience Disclosure: Neowin benefits from revenue of each sale made through our branded deals site powered by StackCommerce.
    • Indeed - drives me mad - usually because Refresh is hidden in the full menu.
    • Firefox has had rounded corners for many years. I take it you're not a fan of modern browsers?
    • The problem is in the fundamentals of how businesses are allowed to operate and the change should happen in the basics and certain consumer friendly and moral practices should be enforced by law. This would fix so many things, not just this ages old default browser issue which is a tiny drop in the backut that includes a flood of privacy and other issues.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Collaborator
      conkir earned a badge
      Collaborator
    • Rising Star
      olavinto went up a rank
      Rising Star
    • One Month Later
      lamborghiniv10 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      lamborghiniv10 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Reacting Well
      X-No-file earned a badge
      Reacting Well
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      504
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      271
    3. 3
      Skyfrog
      75
    4. 4
      +Edouard
      75
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!