It is currently Mon Nov 23, 2020 10:39 pm

All times are UTC




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 37 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 30, 2006 7:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 4:34 pm
Posts: 347
Location: Northern California
So to run Uru Live on Game Tap we *must* be running WinXP?

Guess that will lock me out. I have Win2000 and I sure can't afford to "upgrade".

:(

_________________
Image Hippie in a Pimp Hat
Join the Forces of the Rebellion
Feel the power of the Light Side


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 30, 2006 8:25 pm 
Offline
Obduction Backer

Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 10:27 pm
Posts: 452
Location: stuck inside of Mobile... .
Very nice and thorough explanation ImagaeMaker. *thumbsup* Thanks.

:D


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 30, 2006 8:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 7:28 pm
Posts: 184
Well, that's all well and good for the *original* Myst (Though DOSBox, the exact kind of virtual machine you describe, runs quite happily on my Win2000 machine--I should try it with Myst sometime, since I had gotten it originally to play Bethesda's Arena: The Elder Scrolls), but to be honest does *nothing* to explain my original question about why the processor requirements for Uru, a game that was written for the current versions of Windows in the first place, doubled.

And that's a good question, Jahuti, and one that should probably be added to mine--as it stands now, only the first two Myst games (Myst and Riven) require XP, Myst III: Exile runs my 2k machine without comment, while Uru:ABM doesn't have an OS requirement, but does complain about the CPU. Who *knows* what kind of requirements will be slapped on Live when GameTap starts offering it in the library? If GameTap is going to refuse to *allow* me to run the game that's currently running quite happily (albeit I do need to get a better video card for the water effects. ;-) ) on my machine, I'd like to know in advance.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 30, 2006 9:20 pm 
Offline
Obduction Backer

Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 12:55 pm
Posts: 9852
Location: Luton, UK
I don't think Jahuti need worry. NT 4, 2000 and XP all share a common core. Windows 9x share a different one. One clue - NTFS vs FAT32.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 30, 2006 9:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 4:34 pm
Posts: 347
Location: Northern California
Yeah, I know, Rusty. The concern is with the virtualization services.

_________________
Image Hippie in a Pimp Hat
Join the Forces of the Rebellion
Feel the power of the Light Side


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 30, 2006 9:38 pm 
Offline
Obduction Backer

Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 12:55 pm
Posts: 9852
Location: Luton, UK
You've lost me there, Jahuti. Whatever, I hope you're able to play.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 30, 2006 11:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 7:28 pm
Posts: 184
Hmmm. That does make me wonder--are they planning to run Uru straight, or within a virtual machine emulating Windows? I could see the reasoning for it -- it'd still be playable 2 or 3 Windows versions down the line, as they'd not have to change the game itself, just the virtual machine it runs in, *and* they'd be able to bring in Mac and Linux users, again without having to change the original game code, just the VM code.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2006 3:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2006 11:16 pm
Posts: 1342
Location: D'ni Zoological Society
I'll put this disclaimer in first - I haven't the foggiest clue how all this tech stuff works. I just want to throw in a reminder that they have repeatedly said that installing Gametap is not necessary to run Uru Live, so concerns about emulation engines probably aren't worth worrying about. From all appearances it will be a stand alone application, ie, downloadable by the international community.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2006 3:37 pm 
Offline
Obduction Backer

Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 12:55 pm
Posts: 9852
Location: Luton, UK
Rils, GameTap is not necessary to run URU Live if you're not in the US and can't get it.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2006 3:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2006 11:16 pm
Posts: 1342
Location: D'ni Zoological Society
That's correct, for non-US folks. In which case it's a moot point anyways, cuz yer obviously not going to be running it through the GT emulation system.

I'd hafta go find the exact quote, but it gave the impression that UL would also be available for non GT suscribers in the US. Something like "You can sign up to play UL for $9.95 a month, but it is also included in your GT subscription so why not just sign up for that?"

I'll see if I can find the article...

~Rils

sorry, not to divert the thread, back to yer regularly scheduled tech talk... :wink:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2006 6:33 pm 
Offline
Obduction Backer

Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 10:21 pm
Posts: 123
**Technical Discussion Warning**

We've been discussing the assumption that certain games are running on a virtual machine in order to run on WinXP/Win2k through GameTap. This seems like a reasonable assumption.

I do not think that GameTap will do this for Live, as that would needlessly inflate system requirements and make it harder for Cyan to develop Uru Live to be the best it can be technically. I see no reason for it.

What I could see happening, though, is the GameTap-delivered Uru Live client being encrypted like all other GameTap games. I.E., one wouldn't be able to see and access the filesystem (C:\Program Files\Uru Live\) and all files within.

There would be benefits to this for Cyan/GameTap: It would make it exceedingly difficult to "hack" the game and make potentially dangerous modifications. If they went this route, they could even encrypt the international/standalone client in the same manner, just without the GameTap front-end.

There are also negative consequences of this: It would make it exceeding difficult for honest hackers/moders to creat positive content and modifications to the game. It would also impede technical support when end-users cannot see and modify files.

What I think Cyan and GameTap will do is this: There will only be one Uru Live Client. You could download it through GameTap or though the Internet. Neither version will be encrypted/obfuscated, although they may reside in different directories. Either version will be able to log in with either a GameTap username or an international login.

_________________
Image
KI# 49748


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 12:55 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 11:10 pm
Posts: 52
Jahuti, I haven't looked that closely at GameTap's requirements. If they don't include Win2k for a particular game, however, it may well be that something about the virtualizer, emulator, or internal game operation requires something Win2k doesn't have. After all, WinXP isn't identical to Win2k, and from my understanding much/most of the difference is in the entertainment end -- game controller support, an API for high performance video, and a few other things that might well make some things GameTap asks for not work in Win2k.

I don't think GameTap in general requires XP; as I recall, it runs on Win2k, and Server 2k3 as well as XP Home and Pro (haven't tried it on my 98SE box, but I suspect it won't work there) and Media Center. By now, it probably runs on Vista RC1. Generally, Win2k and later include the virtualization support you need, but may lack hardware support (such as the high performance video API) needed for certain game software. At a minimum, I wouldn't expect a game that came out after 2000 and didn't run on Win2k to work on Win2k from GameTap, especially if it *did* work under XP.

_________________
These ruins have been ruined for more than two centuries -- who cares if the camera I use to photograph them is fifty years old?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 2:26 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 7:28 pm
Posts: 184
Again, ImageMaker, that's all well and good, but a) I'm running GameTap, Uru: Complete Chronicles, Until Uru, and Uru Live Beta all on my Win2k machine, and b) the issue is a pair of games that came out well *before* 2k that they're requiring XP to run.

GameTap itself runs fine on Win2k. The question that needs to be answered is whether GT will allow Uru Live to run on it once it does go 'live', or are they going to inflate the system requirements (which is a decision on their end) so that the GT client won't let you play it unless you have XP.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 9:09 am 
Offline
Obduction Backer

Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 12:55 pm
Posts: 9852
Location: Luton, UK
I've found what I was looking for, Rils, and it's explicit. GameTap, US, UL.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 3:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2006 11:16 pm
Posts: 1342
Location: D'ni Zoological Society
:shock:

Well, err, yeah, seems pretty clear... :oops: Musta missed that. Thanks for digging that up!

So yes, as I've been saying all along, a subscription to GT is required to play UL in the States...

:wink:

~Rils


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 37 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: