Former Microsoft engineer, Alex St John, has voiced concerns about the upcoming Windows Vista’s implications for small games developers. He claims that the increased security on the operating system will make things difficult for downloading games.
"There are some problems with Vista that are actually very frustrating," said St. John, who helped create DirectX for Microsoft and now runs independent publisher WildTangent. Specifically he refers to security settings which Microsoft has taken pains to tighten up.
For example, when a user downloads a game Vista warns it may be harmful. Then when they try to install the game up comes a second warning. Following that, if the user proceeds, the administrator’s code is required. St. John is quick to point out the problems with this:
He also voices concerns about the fact that Vista does not ship with Flash, which many online and casual games developers use. He goes on to mention the fact that parental controls make it difficult to find games outside Games Explorer, Vista’s games management system which is similar to My Pictures. He further gripes that the system emphasizes retail titles over downloadable games.
Rich Wickham, director of Windows gaming, has his own take on these concerns, stating: "From a games perspective, there might be some small hurdles to take advantage of all those security features, but the benefit is enormous." The benefits he refers to are those produced by DirectX 10, which allows higher graphical capability. Microsoft is also claiming that the installation of games will be smoother than ever.
Bill Gates was also quick to big up Vista in his CES Keynote earlier this month. Vista launches on January 31st.
SPOnG had a quick word with Team17’s Studio Director, Martyn Brown, about Vista. He was more optimistic than St John:
Speaking on potential problems St. John mentions Brown added:
Will you be upgrading to Windows Vista? Do you see any benefits from it? Let SPOnG know in the Forum.
Source: Reuters
"There are some problems with Vista that are actually very frustrating," said St. John, who helped create DirectX for Microsoft and now runs independent publisher WildTangent. Specifically he refers to security settings which Microsoft has taken pains to tighten up.
For example, when a user downloads a game Vista warns it may be harmful. Then when they try to install the game up comes a second warning. Following that, if the user proceeds, the administrator’s code is required. St. John is quick to point out the problems with this:
"I am pretty darn sure it will significantly reduce the number of people who are downloading games or the number of games people download and buy. Vista does cast a wet blanket that does have some weight over that innovation. It doesn't crush it, it just hurts."
He also voices concerns about the fact that Vista does not ship with Flash, which many online and casual games developers use. He goes on to mention the fact that parental controls make it difficult to find games outside Games Explorer, Vista’s games management system which is similar to My Pictures. He further gripes that the system emphasizes retail titles over downloadable games.
Rich Wickham, director of Windows gaming, has his own take on these concerns, stating: "From a games perspective, there might be some small hurdles to take advantage of all those security features, but the benefit is enormous." The benefits he refers to are those produced by DirectX 10, which allows higher graphical capability. Microsoft is also claiming that the installation of games will be smoother than ever.
Bill Gates was also quick to big up Vista in his CES Keynote earlier this month. Vista launches on January 31st.
SPOnG had a quick word with Team17’s Studio Director, Martyn Brown, about Vista. He was more optimistic than St John:
"With the amount of effort Microsoft are investing into Windows Vista and the games area, including Live for Windows, it's a platform we'll be keeping our eyes on and certainly preparing titles for. I think it's generally accepted that PC gaming needs a shot in the arm, so to speak and Vista/Live for Windows could be that shot.”
Speaking on potential problems St. John mentions Brown added:
Well, since we've not go that far I wouldn't really know about that stuff. I'm sure they'll sort that out - it'll be just teething problems as far as I can see. That's hardly gamer-friendly, where Live certainly is.
Will you be upgrading to Windows Vista? Do you see any benefits from it? Let SPOnG know in the Forum.
Source: Reuters
Companies:
Microsoft
Read More Like This
Comments
king skins 26 Jan 2007 12:00
1/4
I have Vista on my laptop and have been using it for the last couple of weeks. I've been doing some compatibility test of software to make sure it all works with Vista.
I can see where St. John is coming from and you do have a lot more confirmation screens before the system will let anything run. Setting the thing up is quite annoying as you have to continually confirm the changes you are making.
MS are in a bit of a bind here as they are damned is they do and damned it they don't. They make the system more secure and it makes harder for legitimate software. But if they didn't then everyone would be complaining about the how unsecure the system is and how easy it is for malicious software to get installed.
Edge did a good article on PC gaming this month. It was quite interesting and brought up some interesting issues.
One of the benefits to gaming from Vista is the Windows Experience measure that scores you PC on on a scale of 0 to 5.9 with the over all rating being the lowest rated part within your PC. Game makers will be able to state that you need a 3.4 system with a 4.3 rated graphics card for this game to run rather that a lot of system spec's that people don't understand.
I would agree with St John that most of the work MS have done have been targeted towards retail and no online/downloadable games. You could say that is a mistake and they should be putting more effort into helping this sector as it will become the backbone (if it isn't already) of the PC gaming sector.
I can see where St. John is coming from and you do have a lot more confirmation screens before the system will let anything run. Setting the thing up is quite annoying as you have to continually confirm the changes you are making.
MS are in a bit of a bind here as they are damned is they do and damned it they don't. They make the system more secure and it makes harder for legitimate software. But if they didn't then everyone would be complaining about the how unsecure the system is and how easy it is for malicious software to get installed.
Edge did a good article on PC gaming this month. It was quite interesting and brought up some interesting issues.
One of the benefits to gaming from Vista is the Windows Experience measure that scores you PC on on a scale of 0 to 5.9 with the over all rating being the lowest rated part within your PC. Game makers will be able to state that you need a 3.4 system with a 4.3 rated graphics card for this game to run rather that a lot of system spec's that people don't understand.
I would agree with St John that most of the work MS have done have been targeted towards retail and no online/downloadable games. You could say that is a mistake and they should be putting more effort into helping this sector as it will become the backbone (if it isn't already) of the PC gaming sector.
OptimusP 26 Jan 2007 14:00
2/4
I think i'll be waiting untill they get SP1 out at the end of the year before switching over so all the kinks get a bit ironed out and maybe get some performance boost.
That's a nice question too, how much does that OS ask anyway? And can you turn off all the useless "graphical" stuff...make it look like Win2000? (which i still use as my primary gaming OS). And don't give me the official minimum specs, i know those and those are actually the specs to run XP reasonable well...so how bloatware-y is Vista is the real question...
That's a nice question too, how much does that OS ask anyway? And can you turn off all the useless "graphical" stuff...make it look like Win2000? (which i still use as my primary gaming OS). And don't give me the official minimum specs, i know those and those are actually the specs to run XP reasonable well...so how bloatware-y is Vista is the real question...
more comments below our sponsor's message
king skins 26 Jan 2007 14:09
3/4
OptimusP wrote:
That's a nice question too, how much does that OS ask anyway? And can you turn off all the useless "graphical" stuff...make it look like Win2000? (which i still use as my primary gaming OS). And don't give me the official minimum specs, i know those and those are actually the specs to run XP reasonable well...so how bloatware-y is Vista is the real question...
With the system started and only IIS and SQL Server 2005 running it uses 600-750MB. Including all the Aero graphics and the install is about 8GB.
You can turn Aero off although I have not tried to reset it back to the boring grey, I quite like the new look.
I have upgraded my home PC to Vista Ultimate for the Media Centre things (I'm turning it into to a Media Server). I'll post again when I get back home (If I remember) and tell you how much that is taking up as it's not running any un needed services and its not running aero as the GPU is not good enough.
I would recommend a good upto date GPU with at least 2GB of RAM but preferably more.
ian cripps 4 Jul 2007 19:25
4/4
give vista a chance!i've just bought a new vista premium pc and i'm mightily impressed(my last pc was an ex-I.T. relic!).surely in time all gaming problems with vista will be resolved and don't forget that problems are what spurs us to be creative,without problems and challenges there would be no growth in pc development or indeed in ANY area of life.vista is just like any new system,it has it's admirers and it has it's doubters and critics.those who rant on about xp,windows 2000 etc being so wonderful seem to forget that those systems ALSO had their share of gaming problems when they first started,that is sadly the nature of pc gaming.the evolution of the pc never stops and obstacles/problems are an entirely natural part of the process.life on planet earth is patently imperfect but solutions are always found.i just don't believe that 'small' game developers will simply be consigned to history through lack of support from big organisations like microsoft,because microsoft knows that there is much ORIGINALITY AND INNOVATIVE IDEAS coming from smaller game companies who have the incentive and freedom to be individually creative.remember that many a brilliant game has come from people simply programming at home or in small groups.microsoft simply cannot afford to let such people go under simply because the new ideas of smaller companies are the life-blood of future gaming.people don't want more of the same old thing re-hashed over and over but they want originality and freshness of ideas.the wise will understand.