Windows Vista Free Games !

[Phanto]

Well Gamespot have a preview of some of the oldies but goodies and even some new Windows Vista games that will come with the operating system you can read it Here (http://www.gamespot.com/features/6154558/index.html)

The expensive games usually get all the attention at GameSpot, but we wanted to take a look at the Windows Vista games that will be responsible for countless hours of wasted productivity through the end of the decade. Windows Vista's updated DirectX 10 API promises to give us better-looking and better-playing games by allowing game developers to get more performance out of the PC system, but Vista isn't only going to help improve those $50 games. Microsoft will update Windows's collection of casual games, which includes old standbys such as Minesweeper, FreeCell, and Solitaire, and Vista will also introduce completely new games including Chess Titans, Mahjong Titans, and Purble Place, which are designed to appeal to a large, global audience.Well this will be good news for my uncle since he every 2 years buy the newest computer available at Gateway or Dell (mostly Gateway) to just play the games that comes with windows.

[torrefaction]

How awesome would it be if Microsoft released some full scale games with Windows. An RTS, an FPS, and an adventure game to draw people into gaming :)

Answer:
So Awesome.

[DeathtollWRX]

Why don't they pack in Halo2? Actually.. that gets me to thinking. Why does Halo 2 need Vista? will it be that much better then the old xbox version? Or is it just a scheme?

[The Continental]

Why support your platform in a way that may promote growth in the industry when you can just include some new "secretary-ware" and append "Titans" to the name.

[Wasson_]

Bring back SkiFree!

[Mr. Lake]

Why does Halo 2 need Vista? will it be that much better then the old xbox version? Or is it just a scheme?

It is a "half scheme". The reason being that Halo 2 ran on a DirectX7-ish system on the Xbox, which in turn had specific hardware that the software was meant to exclusively run on. Porting the game to PC requires that you take into account the system deficiencies that crop up when you have mis-matched hardware and a bloated operating system taking up those resources to run background components.

DirectX 10 is meant mostly to compensate for that lost performance. It's a sham that MS refuses to make a DX10 derivitivie to run on XP...they purposely built Vista's foundation on DX9/10 to push consumers' need to upgrade.

[Heretic Machine]

I liked Vista's packaged games... some of them are pretty fun. The Chess game and Mahjong in particular.

[torrefaction]

Hahaha. It'd be crazy if they just don't intend on selling Halo 2 on the PC. Maybe that's the scheme, and why it'll only run on Vista.

I make no claims as to the validity of my previous statement, but I promise to rant "I told you so" if said statement comes true.

[torrefaction]

It is a "half scheme". The reason being that Halo 2 ran on a DirectX7-ish system on the Xbox, which in turn had specific hardware that the software was meant to exclusively run on. Porting the game to PC requires that you take into account the system deficiencies that crop up when you have mis-matched hardware and a bloated operating system taking up those resources to run background components.

DirectX 10 is meant mostly to compensate for that lost performance. It's a sham that MS refuses to make a DX10 derivitivie to run on XP...they purposely built Vista's foundation on DX9/10 to push consumers' need to upgrade.

No. Wrong. This is a horrible way to think about it. Microsoft has always been about legacy code...that's what happened to Vista. In the words of their developer, the pig would no longer fly.

Microsoft has redesigned their display driver model. They've designed the graphics driver have more efficient access to the hardware. This is a good thing for gamers, and a good thing for technology. They simply can't economically port the device driver model back to Windows XP. It doesn't make business sense. And customers shouldn't expect that much effort for free.

It's the same thing with Security. They changed an awful lot of how they do things at Microsoft. They have code gatekeepers that put developers in a "jail" if they submit too many bugs.

I can't believe I'm defending Microsoft. I quit.

[MoJoBehaumat]

Speaking of PC games....
Time to play a little Quake

[MrMeatshake]

Bring back SkiFree!

go skifree! go! :)

[Grimgrock]

I think they ought to focus on fixing bugs and security holes that will be in the OS on Day 1. Games are nice but an OS that isn't ripe with security issues is better.

[shnastybiznastic]

It's commendable that MS is throwing away all the old legacy code, but it's also a software engineer's nightmare.

[Roc Ingersol]

ya know, with all the DRM and bullshit stuffed into Vista - they ought to at least use Live Anywhere to give us our damn XBL Arcade games on the desktop.

[torrefaction]

I think they ought to focus on fixing bugs and security holes that will be in the OS on Day 1. Games are nice but an OS that isn't ripe with security issues is better.

They did. The focus they've had on quality in Vista is hardcore. They've redesigned a LOT of things in the system. Part of their focus on games is about security. Games have always needed to run as administrator, and Vista is doing a lot of things to change that. It's the reason a lot of home users are always logged in as Administrator.

[Manzy]

Where is Gorillas dot Motherfucking Bas and Ski Free

[TalkingOctopus]

The new version of mine sweeper rocks! You can still download Skifree. Read the Skifree story and download it here, from The Most Officialest SkiFree Home Page! http://ski.ihoc.net/

[Grimgrock]

They did. The focus they've had on quality in Vista is hardcore. They've redesigned a LOT of things in the system. Part of their focus on games is about security. Games have always needed to run as administrator, and Vista is doing a lot of things to change that. It's the reason a lot of home users are always logged in as Administrator.

Time will tell. They will have to pay me to upgrade though. Their track record does not speak for itself. Me, I will stick with OSX where true security has always been present. My days of PC gaming are coming to a close. WoW is OSX ready and that's all I play these days.

[torrefaction]

Time will tell. They will have to pay me to upgrade though. Their track record does not speak for itself. Me, I will stick with OSX where true security has always been present. My days of PC gaming are coming to a close. WoW is OSX ready and that's all I play these days.

Everytime someone says this, it amuses me. First of all, there's no such thing as security. Security is a process, not a product. The only way to attain security is through defense in depth, and I guarantee you don't have that. Mac OS X just isn't the target of every black hat in the world. They are too small of a target for them to be concerned about.

That's not to say that nothing happens ;)
http://www.viruslist.com/en/analysis?pubid=191968025
http://daringfireball.net/2004/05/ounce_of_prevention

I'm not knocking OSX, it's a well thought out system. However, right now many in the security find the current virus and security commercials annoying (and hilarious). They give the impression that these things aren't going to happen to a Mac, while the truth is up until recently they just haven't been "deliberate targets"

None of this is defending Microsoft, their track record is abysmal. But from everything I've read, and from our MS liasons here at my work, things seem to be coming along nicely.

[A Lusty Alien]

Heh... I remember when Mom got her first Windows 95 PC. She's still using it BTW, 120 MHz Pentium, 96 MB RAM, 850 MB Hardrive, Office 97. (If you don't change the software you use, you never have to upgrade.) She was complaing about her shoulder hurting after the first day she got it, then realized it was because she had been playing Solitaire on it for about 8 hours straight.

[Magnanimous Gnome]

Hahaha. It'd be crazy if they just don't intend on selling Halo 2 on the PC. Maybe that's the scheme, and why it'll only run on Vista.

I make no claims as to the validity of my previous statement, but I promise to rant "I told you so" if said statement comes true.


No PC gamers will care though. I'm not trying to troll, just being honest. Most PC gamers won't give a shit if Halo 2 comes to PC or not.

I'm also going to be switching to OSX next year. Vista just doesn't impress me, and I have had enough bad experiences with MS to not want to stick with them any longer. There are definitely some killer PC games coming down the pipe that I'd love to play (Spore, Gothic 3), but it's just not worth sticking with Windows.

[Phanto]

Why don't they pack in Halo2? Actually.. that gets me to thinking. Why does Halo 2 need Vista? will it be that much better then the old xbox version? Or is it just a scheme?

The real question would be... Halo 2 will be better than the original crappy port of Halo for the PC?

Maybe they think that Halo 2 for Windows Vista will be a "system seller". In my opinion I don't think thats about to happend..thats depends on the kind of effort and promo they do with Halo 2 for PC.
In the end I think that game its for the console not the PC.

[Mr. Lake]

Microsoft has redesigned their display driver model. They've designed the graphics driver have more efficient access to the hardware. This is a good thing for gamers, and a good thing for technology. They simply can't economically port the device driver model back to Windows XP. It doesn't make business sense. And customers shouldn't expect that much effort for free.

Dude, chill. I'm talking about the Halo 2 sham, not the DX10 sham...well sort of. The issue is with Halo 2's renderer (shaders and the like which is based on DX8) and the excuse Microsoft is giving about it's incompatibility on XP (which USES DX8). Its a bogus claim. It needs Vista and DX10 to run about as much as humans need pure sugar and preservatives. THAT is the sham. Halo 2 ran on a trimmed-OS with hardware specific drivers on the equivalent of a GeForce 4 and a Pentium 3 733MHz CPU with 64MBs of RAM. The minimum requirements for Windows XP (except for memory) are far lower than this, and the bloated specs for Vista go way beyond these, especially with respect to memory requirements.

Halo 2 was (like EVERY GAME) first built and debugged on a PC, not directly on the console. So it figures that the game could easily run on XP since that was the prevelant OS for developing Microsoft games on at the time. It doesn't make sense to go out of their way to re-write the Halo 2 renderer to exclusively use DX10 for a number of reasons (such as the potential market you are missing by not shipping on the XP platform, or the cost in tools and man-hours in development), unless they need some sort of powerhouse title that will help bolster sales of Vista. That's exactly what this is...a sham.

Yes, DX10 is very good and games will run much better with it. In fact, they'll need to because Vista's resource footprint is HUGE, and more than likely will suck up the spread in performance.

[miah]

I think the Mahjong game packaged with Vista is the only thing I've really enjoyed about it since I installed RC2.

[torrefaction]

Yes, DX10 is very good and games will run much better with it. In fact, they'll need to because Vista's resource footprint is HUGE, and more than likely will suck up the spread in performance.

As far as Halo 2, you're preaching to the choir. The only VALID reason I would accept as far as this goes is if they were being sneaky, and are porting Halo 2 to the Halo 3 engine for the PC. That'd be the only solid technical reason to do this.

As far as my argument, I was purely referring to you saying they are using DX10 as a way to push upgrades. They did it so they didn't have to support the legacy driver model, and as an aside, yes...people will need to upgrade. As far as performance, that argument only goes so far. Yes, Vista's memory footprint is huge. But a lot of people said the same thing about XP. In 2 years, we're all going to be very happy they made the decision to finally drop some legacy bullshit.

[torrefaction]

No PC gamers will care though. I'm not trying to troll, just being honest. Most PC gamers won't give a shit if Halo 2 comes to PC or not.

I'm also going to be switching to OSX next year. Vista just doesn't impress me, and I have had enough bad experiences with MS to not want to stick with them any longer. There are definitely some killer PC games coming down the pipe that I'd love to play (Spore, Gothic 3), but it's just not worth sticking with Windows.

My point was in regards to people who AREN'T PC gamers. If they packaged in, they have the chance to draw in people who haven't given games a chance in a while.

[Johan]

PC Mag's John Dvorak has an interesting take on Windows Vista here (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,205498,00.html)

Thought it might be interesting; though not focused on games on Vista, it is enlightening as far as opinion from a respected techie journalist.

[torrefaction]

PC Mag's John Dvorak has an interesting take on Windows Vista here (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,205498,00.html)

Thought it might be interesting; though not focused on games on Vista, it is enlightening as far as opinion from a respected techie journalist.

Dvorak is crazy as often as he's dead on. In this case, I'd say he's crazy.

If you really want to know want went down with Vista, read this article. I feel like it's the most transparent MS has ever been about their Windows codebase.

http://net127.com/2005/09/24/battling-google-microsoft-changes-how-it-builds-software/