GameTap does not run on Vista :(

Stevecrox · **Posted:** Wed Nov 01, 2006 9:56 pm

It is encouraging I have to say its been interesting to follow, Avermedia released a x64 beta driver for XP x64 they got it driver signed and it works perfect in Vista 64. Same token Creative Labs XP x64 drivers are refused on Vista 64, it looks like their only starting to get it right for the RC2 copy and even then there are a lot of bugs.

I have to say I'm looking forward to Vista 64 forcing companies to make GOOD drivers there have been so many awful ones.

Anouther handy Vista thing is the "Run as Administrator" its one of those tools which is great at flushing out badly written programs (games shouldn't need Admin rights to run.)

Its for those reasons I think Gametap should already be developing a Vista compatible version. There shouldn't be any problems running it on either the x64 OS's or on Vista unless they have some really dodgy coding.

Sophia · **Joined:** Wed May 17, 2006 11:30 pm **Posts:** 1116

Release date of Vista is 30 January 2007 (see http://apcmag.com/node/4258)

So in my humble opinion GameTap would do well to hurry the release of a supported version of their software.......

Jahuti · **Posted:** Thu Nov 02, 2006 5:59 pm

Fact is, the *only* operating system that GameTap seems to currently support is XP 32 bit.. There are a lot of people out there running Win2000, which is, at its base, just XP without all the eye candy, etc.

I disagree with GameTap's insistence on actively preventing people from using Vista and Win2000, rather than simply stating that they don't support them and allow them to install nonetheless. Cutting off chunks of your fan-base in that manner is not good business.

Marten · **Posted:** Thu Nov 02, 2006 6:51 pm

GameTap does run on Windows 2000. I know this for certain. I have a friend who's been running GameTap on W2K. It is Uru Live that presently doesn't run on W2K, and according to all public accounts, this is likely due to a problem with the installer for PhysX which we've all heard Uru Live is using. Some people have managed to get the latest PhysX onto Win2K, but they had to do so by installing it on XP, then repackaging. But of course for obvious reasons, nobody has said in public whether that method solved the problem for those in beta.

Though I do admit, some of the content within GameTap doesn't run on anything other than XP. Myst and Riven require XP, because GameTap is using the versions updated specifically for XP. I don't believe that is entirely GameTap's fault.

From the perspective of educated gamers who are often willing to go to great lengths to get software to run in environments for which it wasn't written, it is disappointing when an interface simply shuts out "unsupported" platforms completely. But I'm certain there are a lot of very determined people that GameTap could attract, who would call their technical support for help with running games on unsupported platforms if they would start at all. By blocking GameTap completely from running Myst and Riven on Win2K, GameTap sends an emphatic message of "No! When we say it is unsupported, we really mean it!"

Let me explain what I mean by determined people...

Over on the D'ni Guild forums, I have tried to help people who want to install two copies of Uru side-by-side on the same computer - one for "Until Uru" and one for "Uru: Complete Chronicles." For someone with just a small amount of technical knowledge, this is not difficult, but I have encountered people who don't understand the Start menu, and only launch programs from shortcuts on their desktop. If the shortcut isn't there, or has changed, those people are totally lost. These are the type of people who don't know how to program the clock on their VCR. But once they've decided they want 2 copies of Uru on their computer, they don't seem to care how ignorant they are, they want to do it and by gum, they're going to do it (and then complain because they really don't know what they're doing). Combine those people + GameTap, and I think you'll start to see why GameTap has tried to make things idiot-proof. Now, I'm not calling anyone an idiot... I'm just saying that if some of these people were as unfamiliar with guns as they are computers, and were equally determined to use a gun, they'd shoot themselves because they wouldn't know which end is the "business" end. No question about it.

I also wanted to mention, however, that it is a bit misleading to say that GameTap "only" supports XP 32-bit. Over at UruObsession, another person said something very similar....

Quote:

Seems a bit silly to only support ONE version of the OS-- the very last one. ... Usually at least the latest two versions of a platform are supported as much as possible.

I felt obligated to say then, and I feel obligated to say here again:

Quote:

The two latest versions of the platform ARE supported as much as possible. Those versions are:

Windows XP SP1
and
Windows XP SP2

Microsoft used to release "new" versions of their OS every 2 to 3 years. In the days of Windows 95, Windows 98, and Windows ME, you had to pay for an OS upgrade frequently to stay with the latest and "greatest" OS. Back then, it was common for programs to run on the last two or three releases of Windows because of the rapid turnover. But I wouldn't use the word "usually" today, because it implies things haven't changed, when clearly, things have changed.

Windows XP first came out five years ago. Microsoft has slowed down their paid releases and is offering more service packs for free. This OS has lasted twice as long on the market than prior OS releases, so it's really not big surprise that support is narrowing down to just variations of Windows XP, when you consider all of the facts.

I am sympathetic to people who are in a position of financial hardship over this matter. I'm in talks with some other people right now about how we can organize an effort to help such people out. But I'm far, far less sympathetic towards those who lash out towards Cyan, as if they're somehow entitled support for a 6.5 year old OS that was never intended by Microsoft to be a gaming platform.

darkstar · **Posted:** Thu Nov 02, 2006 7:10 pm

The full versions of Microsoft Vista are currently being offered for pre-order on Amazon UK. They are qouting a release date of 2nd February, I know Amazon release dates are questionable sometimes but in my experiance they usually qoute the manufacturers one in the first instance and then push it out in 3 months increments if it misses its release dates and further information is not available from the supplier.

Given that MS have are offering a 'Express Upgrade to Vista' service which expires in March next year. I think we can safely assume that Vistas release date to the consumer market will be end January start of February at the earliest and March at the latest.

Having said that Gametap must be into beta testing a Vista client. As I'm sure they will not want to miss the new potential players getting there new machines at christmas who in all likelyhood will be upgrading within the month.

All the major manufacturers are offering this at a sub $50 prices for XP Home machines and in some cases for free.

Given that the release date for business is qouted as 30th November i think it is safe to assume that the current release candidate will be the one released. So technically there is no reason not to consider it as the version that will be released. Gametap should stop preventing there client installing on Vista and just go with a disclaimer that any install undertaken prior to the official release is at the installers risk.

Stevecrox · **Posted:** Thu Nov 02, 2006 11:02 pm

The thing that really really gets me is that unless Gametap are making a real hash of their code (using hundreds of DLL's) or are lazy (making it need admin rights to run) or lastly are too WinXP locked in (installer and registry devices being extremly specific (a problem with old Me to XP games) then Gametap shouldn't even notice Window XP x64, or Windows Vista. Admitedly XP x64 and Vista 64 have closed kernals which won't allow programs access (a very good thing) but then thats only going to occur if Gametap are trying to put their own driver or something stupid like that.

Has anyone repackaged the gametap installer and tried it again?

Sophia · **Joined:** Wed May 17, 2006 11:30 pm **Posts:** 1116

This is their official reply:

Quote:

Dear GameTap Customer,

Currently, we do not support the Windows Vista operating system at this time. We do not have an estimated time when it will be supported with our product. We are very sorry for any inconvenience this may cause.

Thank you,
GameTap Associate

Disappointing

Does not look like they are planning to release a supported (or even non-supported but working) version before the release of Vista...... :cry:

lego_addict · **Posted:** Sun Nov 05, 2006 2:30 am

I'm glad my mom convinced (read: told) me not to install Vista. I would have walked right into it.

Alahmnat · **Posted:** Sun Nov 05, 2006 7:22 am

It's not exactly uncommon practice for companies to delay support for a new OS. The software needs to go through an extensive QA process using the final RTM version of the code, which is obviously only available after the completion of the beta/RC process. The added problem with GameTap is that they not only have their client to QA, but they also have over 700 games to ensure compatibility for or prevent from functioning (something I doubt they'll want to do too often). That'll undoubtedly take some time.

Joey Zoonishii · **Joined:** Wed May 10, 2006 11:27 pm **Posts:** 963

...don't mean to derail the topic or go too far off on a tangent, but...

...I read somewhere (yes, a brilliant source of information, I know) that the different distributions of Windows Vista will all contain both the 32-bit and 64-bit versions...

edit: ...I read it at the bottom of this article

http://www.windows-vista-update.com/Windows_Vista_64_bit.html

...anyone have any idea if that's true or not? To be honest, it'd make life a lot easier if they did...

...I've just noticed, that picking around the Vista site again recently, they don't list anything about the 64-bit version anymore... They've just got... Home, Business, and... "Ulitimate" or something... ...no real mention of x64, and I think there used to be one in the list...

~Joey Scoomberlinks

Ja'de · **Posted:** Sun Nov 05, 2006 8:39 pm

Hi Joey, I just went and checked and the beta rc1 client comes in 32 or 64 bit versions so I don't think they are combining them.
As for installing gametap, the installer does not recognize the admin user so does not allow the install even if you use the compatability app.

J'on · **Posted:** Fri Nov 10, 2006 12:57 am

Ja'de wrote:

As for installing gametap, the installer does not recognize the admin user so does not allow the install even if you use the compatability app.

I wonder what would happen if you installed Gametap under Windows XP and then upgraded to Vista.

Nalates · **Posted:** Sat Nov 11, 2006 7:44 pm

[quote="Stevecrox"]The thing that really really gets me is that unless Gametap are making a real hash of their code (using hundreds of DLL's) or are lazy (making it need admin rights to run) or lastly are too WinXP locked in (installer and registry devices being extremly specific (a problem with old Me to XP games) then Gametap shouldn't even notice Window XP x64, or Windows Vista. Admitedly XP x64 and Vista 64 have closed kernals which won't allow programs access (a very good thing) but then thats only going to occur if Gametap are trying to put their own driver or something stupid like that.[quote]
I am amazed they have gotten so many Win9x games to run on XP. THe challenge GT has is not making their stuff run on Vista. It is getting all those games to run on Vista.

GameTap does not run on Vista :(

Who is online