News Bethesda: 'PC development is a headache'

It does an excellent job of running a graphics beauty like Witcher 2.

Actually XP (or parts of it) is 18 years old (Windows NT, on which XP, Vista and Win7 are based was released in 1993). On the other hand, XP (or parts of it) is also 5 days old (at time of posting, looking at the most recent security update), like Win7. So to talk about an OS being "x years old" shows a lack of understanding of what an OS is. In comparison, Linux/Unix dates back to the 1960s and that age (or as others would consider it, maturity) hasn't caused it problems.

Here's a test for you - try opening Event Viewer on a Win7 system and an XP system and scrolling through the items. Notice how XP's event viewer can zip through an event list at lightning speed while Win7's puffs and pants to the point that you can see the individual lines being drawn. Now that's due to Event Viewer using .NET Framework in Vista/7, but is a clear example of "one step forward, two steps back".

Another example - look at the number of background processes Win7 has compared to WinXP. Even on a system stripped to the bare essentials you'll have a good few extra (such as dwm and a couple of instances of conhost) and more background services running (165 services listed for Win7 compared to 103 services listed for XP).

Then we have the use of file and registry redirection in Win7/Vista - that adds "clunkiness" whatever its justification.

XP isn't perfect - it has a number of dumb design issues (teletubby theming, control panel categories, "new" Start Menu) but these can be pruned back to (better) Win2000 settings. Win7 on the other hand makes some of those dumb designs compulsory (the Start Menu notably).

So saying WinXP is "clunkier" than Vista/7 is just demonstrating ignorance of Windows' internal working.

There are several reasons but rather than repeat them all here, I'll point you to this post instead.

You'd not researched this too well have you? What graphics card does Virtual PC emulate? An S3 Trio with 4MB RAM and no 3D acceleration? (i.e. incapable of DirectX at all, let alone DX9). What sort of jerk would try running Crysis on that?

Not quite because the provisions aren't as enforceable - Microsoft can't magically disable everyone's XP disks (though Windows Activation allows them to come close). If you have an OEM copy (that requires no activation on a matching system) then you're OK. It is however one major reason why I prefer Win2K over XP (and spent some time trying to get Win2K installed initially - sadly even SP4 couldn't recognise PCI-E graphics cards).

However just because Microsoft chose to screw over their customers doesn't justify other companies following in their tracks.

My suggestion is to look further afield for companies that don't treat you like a criminal or digital serf. If companies like Valve, EA, Ubisoft, etc get away with more onerous DRM mechanisms, they will seek to increase their control over users rather than lessen it.

That's clearly your decision to make, and as long as it is a considered one looking at the downsides, there's little to criticise. It is the uninformed adulation that many seem to give Steam and its ilk that concerns me more.

 

I have no desire to get the game, but I can see why people would be annoyed, if I were at home, it would take literally days to download it if you couldn't install from disk.

And XP Cheesecake, only reason I've 'upgraded' to W7 is because I kept getting old to get an SSD, and I don't want tit dying so want TRIM support (which apparently XP doesn't have)

 

Maybe too late (and OT) but I wouldn't worry too much over TRIM (or lack of) in XP - the background garbage collection in current SSDs should suffice for normal usage. I've been using SSDs on XP for the last 2 years and not seen significant performance loss. You'll also not have TRIM support in Vista/7 if you go for an SSD RAID setup currently.

The one thing you may need to do with WinXP on SSD is setting the partition alignment properly (see this OCZ forum thread for details) and, if installing XP, it may not be able to format a partition on SSD - in that case, install to a hard disk partition and then copy it across.

I've found partition alignment makes a big difference with Crucial C300s but very little with Samsungs so YMMV.

 

Piracy is a problem on any platform, I'd go so far as to say that Piracy is a bigger problem on console than it is on PC. Simply because piracy on consoles is far easier than it is on PC.... Many people have 2 360's of PS3's one hacked the other is official for online gaming. Of course there is piracy on PC, but its down to the fact that over time, games developers have shot themselves in the foot...

A decade ago a map pack DLC was free, the majority of the DLC content as well came from the modding community, this made PC games massive and the primary platform, because you could do cool stuff for them. Now they are really restricted and the only extra content you can get for PC comes at a £10 cost for a pack of three maps normally 2 carbon copies from previous titles in the franchise and one new map.. That is not value for money *cough*CoD*cough*.

In conclusion, is all well and good Mr Hines, crying that PC development is difficult and full of pirating, but as they say, you make you bed you sleep in it.

As for the line on Driver issues, the solution to that one is seriously simple, distribute the correct display and audio drivers with the title... Problem solved...

 

95 is better than XP, the design has more squares and it only runs 15 services.

 

Thanks for the links to ShowMeTheGames, GamersFront and IndieRoyale I didn't know about them. GOG and HumbleBundle are great locations for DRM free games and I would urge everyone to use and support these companies.

I do use Steam myself, more out of need rather than desire. If a steamworks game is available for < £5 and my connection is not playing up, has not reached the monthly limit and its not available DRM free from anywhere else then I will buy it. But out of principle I do not buy them full price as I disagree with the DRM.

My main gripe with publishers is that they make games steamworks only, so then I have no choice as to what I want and from where. This is not the case with all publishers just the vast majority don't seam believe in customer choice.

How long before Skyrim is made available DRM free on GOG?

P.S. For anyone who wants a steam free copy of SOTS2 this may be of use: The-Non-Steam-Version-Request

 

Glad to hear you found them useful.

Sadly we could be in for some wait given that no Bethesda games are currently offered (not even Morrowind).

GOG do have a Wanted page so it may help to register interest there.

Hmmm...that seems to have attracted some high-level support! Thanks for the link...

 

The fact that skyrim PC is a headache shows. The game is designed first and foremost for consoles. I think they should forget the PC and focus on what they're most skilled at... making console games. Clearly they find it difficult creating games on a more complex/capable platform.

 

FEATHERS! **** OFF!