Microsoft need pc gaming to be dead

Microsoft need pc gaming to be dead.With vista they release the new API called DX10 and they sad DX 10 push the boundaries of visual quality in gaming,much more simple to program and effiency is mush higher in rendering pipeline.When it was release all of they sad were bullcrap,its the worst API (DX10)in the history of visual-computing.The perfect example is crysis,it runs very smoothly 1680x1050 high settings (DX9),but what about 1680x1050 very high (DX 10),so theres nothing worng done by cry-tec its just that dame new API DX10 (this is also apply to stalker).Somebody could say thats past with widows 7 and DX 11 thing could turn around, regardless of ATI/AMD's hype about DX11 i can guarantee DX 11 is not much far form DX 10.

MS is the biggest son of a bitch who holding the development of pc gaming.Why MS brought a new platform(xbox) to gaming when they already got huge platform (pc or windows) ,closing development studios loyal to pc games(Ensemble) and delaying pc version of games (Alen wake,bionic commnado,red faction,sprint cell conviction).They do this every thing to increase their junk box(xbox) sales and ruin pc as a game platform.Support pc as a gaming platform MS get nothing only the window sales but on consoles they get big chunks form hardware sales and psycho box(xbox) subscription.

I like to hear your thought guys

http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/53403

You're bringing together two or three pieces of information and drawing conclusions that ignore other pertinent facts. Yes, Crysis does run slower in Very High settings than in High - but show me any game that doesn't run slower when you up the graphics level! What you need to do is compare a game where you can have the same graphic settings, just one in DX9 and one in DX10. HEnthusiast did that with Far Cry 2 and found that DX10 actually ran quicker than DX9 - http://www.hardocp.com/article.htm [...] VzaWFzdA==

There have also only been a dozen or so games that support DX10 so it's difficult to make sweeping statements about whether any problems are in DX10 itself, or the game's coding. If every game showed DX10 to be slower then maybe, but the benchmarks I've seen have been split so the DX level doesn't seem to have a direct influence on speed - some are quicker, some slower. One thing I have noticed is that some graphics are definitely more effective in DX10 (particle effects certainly) so if DX10 improves the graphics while not slowing down the system then I'd say that's an improvement over DX9.

The main problem with DX10 has been nothing to do with Microsoft, it's been with PC users. Game developers want to sell the most amount of games possible, and where so many people have kept to XP rather than change to Vista, the developers have to make sure their games are compatible with XP - hence they code in DX9, not DX10. I don't see any evidence of Microsoft trying to hold back games development and I would say their continued improvement of both the core OS and DX implies they actually want it to continue and flourish.

Personal opinion is that games development is being held back at the moment only because people won't move off XP and still expect to be able to play the latest games. I hope W7 manages to get these people onto a newer OS and then we can start to see games taking advantage of DX10 and DX11 and really reminding the consoles which are the ultimate gaming systems.

How could MS develop a good DX version if they want when their CEO is nut case

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IwP [...] r_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvs [...] re=related

I'll second that you have no clue what you are talking about. Even assuming "their CEO is a nut case", what does sanity have to do with making a good product? You don't have to look too long or far to find many examples of nut cases who were very good at what they do.