No, you don't. Don't buy the game. It is very simple. Buy a different game instead.
The manufacturer of the game sitting on the shelves will react, you can count on this. :agree:
Microsoft isn't going to support directx 10 for XP, which sucks. This is the problem. If they offered
directx 10 for windows xp, I wouldn't switch. Or better yet, if Microsoft got rid of all the DRM and other nonsense
for Vista, I would want to switch.
If you see a game you want to buy, but which requires Vista: Write the manufacturer, that they lost a sale.
It's not that the games won't work in XP. It's that they won't look as good, because XP doesn't support directX 10.
I don't like what Microsoft is doing anymore than you do. But the industry isn't giving hardcore PC gamers any alternative if they want better graphics.
If you want the better graphics, there's no choice. Most developers will be producing games that will work for both directx 9 and 10. But the visual improvements are only going to be available for directx 10 with directx 10 supported video cards.
These are directx 10 screenshots (seriously, take a look at the
pics for Flight Simulator X and Alan Wake):
http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=1010840&postcount=1
Why would I want to play inferior directx 9 versions of these games?
No console is going to touch what directx 10 graphics can do for awhile
either.
This is from the Senior Editor of PC Gaming Magazine, which is probably the most
influential PC Gaming magazine in North America:
from
http://pcgamer.com/
1/24/07 - More praise for DX10
By Logan Decker, Senior Editor
If you're among the stoic and curmudgeonly crowd that's still not impressed with some of the DirectX 10 screenshots that have been making the rounds on the internet, well, then to hell with you. But I'll concede this: DirectX 10 has to be seen in action to be really appreciated.
Take motion blur, for instance, an effect facilitated by DX10 that's admittedly tough to work up a boner over. After enjoying a hands-on session with a level from Crysis, I'm convinced.
Slight motion blur is applied whenever you're in motion (including when you throw an object or get whacked in the head), and increases in intensity the faster you move (and can obscure almost everything when you're running at top speed in your "Nano Muscle" suit).
It doesn't sound like much because motion blur is intrinsic to our natural vision; we don't notice it because we're so used to it. Crysis mimics this natural blur to spectacular effect, and when I recently played Far Cry and Prey while benchmarking today, I noticed that movement inside these games appeared less realistic, flat, and, paradoxically, static, now that I've come to expect a game to show me images that more closely resemble how I see the real world.
I spent $5000 getting my eyes fixed with Lasik surgery. $600 for a DirectX 10 video card and $50 for Crysis to shoot down a helicopter and watch it streak to the ground before detonating into a ball of flames, smoke, and shrapnel? Sounds like a good deal to me."
James, it's just a bad situation right now for PC Gamers who hate DRM. None of us want Vista. We want the improved graphics that are offered by Directx 10.