Vista. Who told you to buy Vista?

I am not a MS guy, but for all you people that are b****ing that your PC / Games / Apps are not working now that YOU installed Vista, you have no right to b****.

Same thing with the PS3 and the WII. On the release date and in the first few month, THINGS SUCK! Lack of Patches, Games, Applications or support.

YOU all insist on having the latest and greatest without testing a BETA first or thinking ahead.

No one put a gun to your heads and made you buy Vista, YOU choose to upgrade without anyone's input.

Bottom line: It's better to wait out the first year of a Product (Software, Game Consoles, Cars, Etc...) until it has some of the bugs worked out and a much larger library or working Apps.

Homepage: http://mysite.verizon.net/slinkys_delsol

PS. And who cares about "WildTangent" it's called SPYWARE! When my Elder Scrolls and Guild Wars do not work, then I will be pissed!

Bottom Line: Does your software say it works with Vista on the box? Is it an availible choice in its requirements? No? Then be happy when stuff does work.

...You didn't read the article did you.

..no, no don't bother to answer...that wasn't a question.

Vista blows.

the "blows" designation belongs to the PS3

I was thinking that Vista and the PS3 had equal share on the "blows" designation

Says "DaveBJ."

It is up in the air right now. Sony is claiming dibs since the PS3 was released first, and MS is claiming prior art since they have been releasing operating systems longer than Sony has been releasing consoles. The initial court hearing is next week. Given the legal powerhouses both of these companies wield, it is likely the case won't actually go to court until 2107...and they'll probably just settle out of court in 2110.

wasnt wild tangent responsible for spyware back in the day? gosh, i feel so bad for them not getting with the program before the launch. i bet they had some really serious games out there too... like world of tetris, and checkers

Wish WT dead all you want, their spyware crap sucks. But remember that WT is just a publisher, don't lose sight of the indie developers who get screwed by this. And make no mistake, they WILL get screwed. Every lazy, idiotic parent will think this is a bulletproof way of keeping GTA out of their kids hands without them having to lift a finger and will be sure to turn it on.

Hee hee hee...as long as Flash games/media runs in my computer with Vista I'll be fine hee hee hee

"RealArcade, Yahoo Games, AOL Games"

Excellent!

WildTangent is complaining because it breaks their spyware. Anyone who knows even a little bit about computer security knows to remove any and all WildTangent garbage.

Gratz on not reading the article.

well, parental controls are for BLOCKING bad games right? rather than some bad games leaking through, I guess it's better to have some good games unaccessible

Yes, lets just destroy choice and remove parental responsibility. I can see it now, "It's not OUR fault little jimmy was exposed to GTA, were just the parents! It's Microsoft's fault for letting him play that game!"

I can just keep adding these things to the list of reasons why it's a good idea to WAIT and not upgrade to Vista until absolutely necessary. DX10 games will be the reason, no doubt. :P

It's better to boycott any developer that dare to make DX10 only software... Vista sucks too much

Yes, lets finally put our collective foot down and make a statement to these uppity software developers that think we want more powerful computers and better software. Let it be known this day that we should stop allowing things to be upgraded an updated so that no one can feel left out from things their computers cannot run.

/sarcasm

Holy cow Alex St. John is one of these guys who writes games on line and they become adware or blocked by adware protection software/broken by adware protection software. He is always complaining about that. Geeze.

So how does Vista know what's a game and what's not. I know Star Wars Galaxies didn't show up there when I installed it. You got to run it as an administrator though or else it won't update itself, but I'm sure SOE is right on top of that.

As far as AOL, WT, and Yahoo goes can't they submit the game for ESRB rating even though they weren't the developer. It's in there interest that these games work. When a user goes to Yahoo and such and such game won't work it's Yahoo that hears about it and possibly loses a customer not the indie game developer.

I for one applaud Microsoft for putting these parental controls into Vista even though I don't have kids.

"As far as AOL, WT, and Yahoo goes can't they submit the game for ESRB rating even though they weren't the developer. It's in there interest that these games work."

a) not as easy as it sounds
b) margins are so tight on these titles that its likely not cost effective

"When a user goes to Yahoo and such and such game won't work it's Yahoo that hears about it and possibly loses a customer not the indie game developer."

Again, this is not ONLY browser based games but ANY game. They only talk about the browser games since thats what places like Yahoo and AOL are offering as casual games. So yes, the indie developers could lose out on a sale because of this...assuming the parents have parental controls turned on.

"I for one applaud Microsoft for putting these parental controls into Vista even though I don't have kids."

I prefer to parent my kids myself, not let Microsoft do it for me.

"I prefer to parent my kids myself, not let Microsoft do it for me. ".. The parental controls werent created for you in that case. As Microsoft have made abundantly clear, parental controls are OFF by default. If you should so choose, parent your kids on your own, but if you want Microsoft to assist you by blocking unrated content, whats the issue?? Hats off to Microsoft for their effort. Its a giant leap in the right direction.

So you watch what your kids are doing on the computer every second? I wouldn't totally trust it, but it sends a message to the kids that they shouldn't be doing something.

Thank you for pointing out what I and others have already stated multiple times already as if we didn't know. The point is, it is NOT the fault of the game devs that this problem exists. Instead Microsoft has created a giant roadblock for indie game developers while at the same time providing no real value. It IS however, a very effective way of killing the indie game development market as parents refuse to accept responsibility for their child's upbringing and rely on MS and the family computer to monitor their behavior.

"So you watch what your kids are doing on the computer every second?"

Of course not, I TEACH them, I pay attention to them and above all, I trust them. If they break that trust they lose privileges. It's called parenting.

"but it sends a message to the kids that they shouldn't be doing something."

Great...I can't think of a surer way to get a kid to do something than to deny them without reason or explanation. Good job, you just provoked the child's curiosity and ensured they will find away around your "safe guards"

Yes, let's pander to the folks who don't want to involve themselves in such nastieness as the raising of their own children.

Let's make laws that limit the rights of adults and responsible children. Let's spend a king's ransom of our Taxes to support this trend towards a Nanny Country.

No.

Not while I live here.

Hillary and all of her "victims" can rot.

Spoken like a true victim of responsibility.

Since when is being involved in a child's life and responsible for their behavior something we need to be saved from?

I think you and Arakiel are overreacting a little, since this is not a government control, but a tool provided by a software company. This really is no different than bundling some net nanny software that a parent could buy separately. Except, like all of MS' initial forays, it probably pales in comparison to a full 3rd party product, and they'll probably get sued over it for anti-competitiveness soon.
The question is, are the game companies going to sue on the basis of it being some underhanded plot to get a tighter grip on the computer games industry, or are the security companies offering parenting tools going to sue for the obvious reasons? And if they both decide to sue, which one will be first?

Disclaimer: I in no way believe reliance on such tools are a passable form of parenting, but could be a helpful tool to a good parent. A surgeon will work better with a sharper scalpel, but the sharpest scalpel can't perform surgery on its own.

I think you and Arakiel are overreacting a little, since this is not a government control, but a tool provided by a software company.

Sorry. Not willing to give up my responsibilities to *anyone*. Government, Corporation...nada.

My fears may be irrational, sure. I'm willing to admit that. But lately it seems that *any* tool that promises to allow parents to shrug off even a small portion of their responsibility only seems to enable that lack of responsibility to mushroom into total and complete dependence.

That, and I'll use every opportunity I can to expose Hillary and Co.

I despise her. Did I mention that? :p

Sorry. Not willing to give up my responsibilities to *anyone*. Government, Corporation...nada.
I completely understand the sentiment; but, I would look at it more as getting tools to help you fulfill your responsibilities. I am sure parents that cannot be around all the time (due to fulfilling other responsibilities such as earning money to feed their children), would appreciate some help. Of course, you would wonder where such a poor family got the computer running Vista; but that is not really the point.

If you want to clean that floor with a rag, go right ahead. I'm just pointing out a mop that would make things a little easier for you.

Now, if it were the government deciding it could tell me what was appropriate, and requiring me to follow that dogma, then I would have a serious problem with it.

By "online games" what he really means is games which are played in IE via an ActiveX control. Vista and IE7 makes browser security stricter now to protect us from ActiveX malware. Regular online games such as World of Warcraft, EverQuest, Vanguard etc. run just fine on Vista. And future online games which will be developed using DirectX 10 will run exclusively on Vista.

Years ago Alex used to work on the initial DirectX team at Microsoft. I don't know if he was ousted of left on his own accord, but ever since he left he mad-mouths Microsoft every chance he gets. And yes, WildTangent sucks!

"And yes, WildTangent sucks!"

Sucks resources you mean, right? :D

WildTangent should be uninstalled anyway. They have claimed recently that their spyware days are over, but their privacy policy and the fact that their process seems to 'check' the internet every now and then for no reason tell me otherwise.

If you ask me this is probably the best thing that could have happened. Put that in yer book, HP!

By the way--why is this Microsoft's problem? They have been able to test Wildtangent on Vista since November, and the betas have been around for about a year before that! 3rd party software is written to run off of Windows, not the other way around. Stop your data mining, WildTangent, and perhaps Microsoft's security software will let you through!

"3rd party software is written to run off of Windows, not the other way around".. Here here!

Err, this doesn't really have to do with WT's spyware like "engine". It has to do with the dev's not having an ESRB rating (due to expense) and Microsoft putting in "safeguards" that prevent those games from running. Everyone on this thread seems to forget that WT is separate from the dev's. It's the dev's that will really get screwed by this over time, all because they don't have huge budgets to pay the ESRB.

Here's a little more info on WildTangent, for those interested. Alex St. John did predict this would happen in a column he wrote for CPU magazine.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WildTangent

http://support.wildgames.com/wt_nsp.html

I wonder if anyone has looked to see if Yahoo Games and AOL Games have tracking code installed as a "feature". Lets face it Yahoo and AOL do a lot of data gathering.

HP, let it be known: The #1 reason I still will not buy your PC is because you partner with these guys (WildTangent). Yeah I can uninstall the junk, but the point is it STILL benefits them when I buy your product, so I refuse to.

Break off and I might change--even I'm becoming a little less impressed with dell lately.

Alex StJohn is a hack who does nothing but whine non-stop about Microsoft. He has never gotten over the fact that they fired his a** and has never had anything good to say. He whined constantly about XP and is continuing that tradition with Vista. Go away Alex, your games suck anyways!

Agreed. I have no love for Vista at this stage, but whenever I see the name Alex St. John on the web, it's always about him whining about something MS related. Back when I used to subscribe to CPU magazine, his column was a monthly "must skip" for me.

I'm playing an online game right now that so far does not work on Vista. They are working on making it work for Vista. It is in no way a responsibility MS/Vista to ensure a game works on the new OS or not.

Lazy game devs. I am all for being patient until a game works flawlessly with Vista. Blocking WildTangent routines is more than welcome.

Here's another good one posted on neowin's web site:

Quote:

"Vista 'Family Discount' Bites Back

In the past, early adopters of new Windows versions have had some small hurdles to overcome. Such hurdles may be software incompatibility, or lack of driver support. These sorts of things are almost expected with each new Windows launch. But what would you do if you bought Windows Vista and your product key didn’t work? What if Microsoft had no solution and was unwilling to issue you a new key?

Many (if not all) users who took advantage of Microsoft’s Vista Family Discount have been issued invalid installation keys and cannot install Windows Vista Home Premium. Microsoft confirms that the keys are indeed valid, but not for Windows Vista. The CSR I spoke with was unable to tell what the key was for, but it did appear to be a valid key, for something.

Microsoft says, “This is a known issue and has been escalated to the program manager.” When asked what could be done I was told, “I can take your name and number and call you back when there is a solution. If that is not acceptable, I can cancel your order and issue you a refund.” I was also told, “There is no expected time period for a fix at this time.”

If Microsoft does not have this issue fixed very soon, they are going to have a lot of unhappy customers. In the past Microsoft has just issued new keys when this happened. Why is Microsoft being so tight gripped about handing out new keys? If I purchased a valid key, what is it for? How long is this going to take to fix? So many questions, so little answers."

Not that I'm always on topic or something...

...but your post is off topic a little.

Simple: WildTangeant was not certified as 'Vista Ready', and was not updated specifically to run on Vista, so why should anyone expect it to work? If it isn't tested, assume it does not work--if it ends up working, consider yourself luckey and move on.

My kids play mostly Flash-based games on NeoPets, Nick and CartoonNetwork. Almost every single one of them runs noticably slower and "sticks" frequently on Vista Ultimate, but runs flawlessly on XP/SP2 and on Linux (Ubuntu/Suse/Fedora) - I've actually had them sit at a test machine and tried that out for curiosity.

Might be a display driver problem, the ones shipped with Windows are commonly pretty bad. Check the web site for your video card and download the latest Vista drivers.

http://ati.amd.com for ATI cards
http://www.nvidia.com for NVIDIA

Done that. It's an Intel onboard chipset (Dell)

Heh...the 950's about the only one that's going to Run Vista with Aero enabled even remotely well.

Disable onboard video and buy a dedicated card, for even a low end $50 - $100 Card from either NVidia or ATI (AMD) will server you a lot better than Intel's onboard junk.

I'm not using Aero, and it rubs me wrong that I would think of buying a new video card to play a Flash game within a browser. I'm hoping there's a Flash update that resolves it first. That's a long shot I know.

WildTangent should be filtered anyhow. Two thumbs up to Vista.

"the security features of Vista are also causing several games to break"

Good, it's about time!

All these games developers are finally going to have to write software properly.

It is absolutely ludicrous that you have to have an Administrators account in order for a game to work properly.

100% agreed!

Was READING the article too much to ask?

The games aren't ESRB rated
ESRB rating takes a great deal of money
Indi game developers get screwed if parental controls are on because of the lack of ESRB

It has NOTHING to do with admin accounts, if you had bothered to READ the article you would know that.

1.) I understand your point. Really, I do.

2.) They specifically mentioned AOL, Yahoo, and WildTangent, all of whom are far from indie devs and should be *more* than able to get ESRB certification.

3.) Indie devs are very likely able to be far more versatile in the tech they use and therefore are not necessarily locked into ActiveX controls, allowing them to be able to bypass this "feature".

4.) Indie devs tend to deal with folks who can search them out, and thus tend to know a bit more about computing. It would likely be a *lot* easier to require the use of a less restrictive browser.

Again, I see your point, but I think the effects this will have on indie developers is a bit less harsh a picture than you've painted.

Actually that is not correct.
AOL, Yahoo and WildTangent are publishers. They themselves are not the developers. Their job is marketing and distribution, the rest is up to the developer. A good developer might be able to convince the publisher to fork over cash for an ESRB but most indies don't have that kind of clout.

EX: WildTangent's FATE, (a great little game, ruined by WildTangent spyware but thats a different story) was written by a third party using WildTangent's "engine", a *requirement* to getting their stuff published by WT.

There also seems to be the misconception here that this only effects browser games and that just is not so. Fate is a perfect example of that. Fate is not a browser game. More then that however, this problem is NOT limited to browser games. It's ANY game that does not have an ESRB rating. Indi games != browser game. Although I have not heard anything specific, I imagine most of the indi developers at places like GarageGames are getting boned by this problem as well since an ESRB is costly and time consuming to get.

...

I was under the impression that the ESRB was enforced through IE7's engine. Am I mistaken?

Under this assumption (and you seem to know a bit more about this than I, so I could be way off), the only games affected by this would be those tied in some way shape or form to IE7 tech.

If this is the case, I believe my point stands.

If, however, I am wrong about how these games work, it simply goes back to my original belief that ESRB is something that should *never* be enforced by anyone or anything *other* than parents/care-givers.

When the OS, industry, or government start to feel they can decide for us what our children can and cannot do, we lose. End of story.

As it stands, however, this is moot. According to the article, parental controls are *not* the default setting. Sure, it's there and I would advise any parent to take responsibility into their own hands and *not* the ESRB / OS, etc, at least their not *forcing* us to use it.

"I was under the impression that the ESRB was enforced through IE7's engine. Am I mistaken?"

I have not seen anything tying the ESRB check with IE7 tech. I am however, open to correction.

As to your other points I agree completely, parents are ultimately responsible for the content their kids take in and should be getting off their a** to do some parenting instead of leaving it to the computer. My b****ing here is with some peoples assertions that this is somehow the fault of "lazy devs" or bad programming. That just plain stupid. Granted, it would have been wise to test their products under Vista prior to release but not everyone (especially indies) have the time/resources to do so. And even if they did, what can they do about it? The only thing that I know of is to live with it as a support problem or they need to fork over a ton of cash to get the ESRB rating.

Edit: From a Gamasutra article:

"any game that registers with Game Explorer becomes “subject” to Vista parental controls which will proceed to block the game from running and offer to delete the link to the game if you try to run it from anywhere on the system other than within the Game Explorer."

http://www.gamasutra.com...s_index.php?story=12314

also:

http://biz.gamedaily.com...ustry/feature/?id=14952

which talks about much the same thing.

Well, again, at least it's not on by default.

Hopefully a patch will allow these games to be run, but perhaps with an "information bar" stating the game is currently unrated.

I get pissed off when people start taking the responsibility away from the parents.

The ratings are fine, but they need to stop implementing tech and laws to enforce them. It is not the place of such things to make such judgments.

Just a thought. Couldn't getting a rating kinda be considered part of marketing and distribution? Even if it couldn't, saying all a publisher is responsible for is those two things is completely inaccurate. Many publishers also serve as a second layer of QA; it all really depends on the contract between the developer and the publisher.

It could, but the publisher will just push the cost back onto the developer. Unless the developer has clout, which indie developers do not have.

"Even if it couldn't, saying all a publisher is responsible for is those two things is completely inaccurate."

It's not completely inaccurate, it's the way the industry works. Publishers are not a "second layer of QA", they publish the games, that is all.

Except most game development cycles I have observed, the publisher is the company financing the game, ie paying the publisher. Developers must meet milestones agreed upon in the contract to actually get paid by the publisher. I have never heard of any publisher "pushing the cost" of something onto a developer, unless perhaps you mean it cutting into what they pay the developer. Publishers do not just publish games, they approve or disapprove the final product. To say publishers do nothing other than publish is blatantly false, as I know several people who test games from various developers being published by THQ. The testers work for THQ, not the developer.

"To say publishers do nothing other than publish is blatantly false, as I know several people who test games from various developers being published by THQ. The testers work for THQ, not the developer."

It's not "blatantly false" (interesting choice if words) your just not thinking correctly. THQ is not an indie developer nor is it a publisher of indie games. In MY experience, from actually working in the industry, Indie publishers do NOT cover development costs. This article and my comments are about INDIE developers, stop and think for a minute before running out to try and flame someone.

No intention to flame here. However, in all your previous statements, you never qualified that you were talking about "indie" publishers, and never had any qualifiers such as "most". At this point we need to determine what exactly makes a publisher or developer "indie" by your definition. For example, is Gas Powered Games an indie developer? They have developed titles for MS and THQ. If that makes them an "indie" developer, then does that not make MS and THQ "publishers of indie games". Some people would really take issue with AOL or Yahoo being called "indie" anything.

Sorry if I am being nitpicky (blame it on too much formal logic in college); but qualifiers such as "most" and "all", and even "in my experience" really do affect the meanings of statements.

You are picking more then a few nits here. The article references indie developers, and my posts are riddled with conditional statements that I'm talking about indie developers so I don't see how you can claim I wasn't "qualifying" who I was talking about. You might as well ask me to "qualify" that I'm speaking in English.

Gas Powered Games is certainly NOT an Indie developer. They are a corporate business with budgets and formal employees. Indie game developers are, traditionally, one man shows or at best, a few friends / associates. Certainly not a large business with a budget and investors. As such the multi-thousand dollar cost of an ESRB are a huge expense to these sorts of developers. And anything that shrinks these already small margins is vastly detrimental to what little profit they already make.

WildTangent sucks! Useless crap.

WildTangent? Good for Vista if it doesn't allow this festering crap to be installed.