Patch does not install in Vista.

The new Heroes games produced by Ubisoft. Please specify which game you are referring to in your post.
Yeznick
Leprechaun
Leprechaun
Posts: 7
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: Slovenia
Contact:

Patch does not install in Vista.

Unread postby Yeznick » 19 Feb 2007, 21:20

Has anyone managed to apply any patch version in Vista? My patch to version 1.1 installed in c:\Windows instead in c:\Program Files\ etc..

I know that windows vista is not supported yet, but I want to know if anyone has solved the problem.
By the way, running version 1.0 in Vista works like a charm and I didn't notice any slowdowns due to Vista, so this is good, and patching is bad :D .

Yeznick

User avatar
Sikon
Hunter
Hunter
Posts: 542
Joined: 22 Dec 2005
Location: Russia

Unread postby Sikon » 20 Feb 2007, 06:48

What was the point of installing Vista in the first place?

Yeznick
Leprechaun
Leprechaun
Posts: 7
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: Slovenia
Contact:

Unread postby Yeznick » 20 Feb 2007, 15:57

Well, for testing puropses, to see what works and what doesn't work.

nevermindspy
Pixie
Pixie
Posts: 145
Joined: 04 Sep 2006

Unread postby nevermindspy » 20 Feb 2007, 19:31

Not notice any slowdown cuz of vista? vista takes up ALOTTTTT more MB of ram maybe you have like 3gb or something if u didn't notice a diffrence,Personally i have 1.25GB RAM and i noticed a MASSIVE diffrence but i think i didn't try to update my version but i don't remmeber about the version i just remmeber no problems in running game (besides slowness)

User avatar
Ya5MieL
Marksman
Marksman
Posts: 428
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: Kutjevo, Croatia

Unread postby Ya5MieL » 01 Mar 2007, 17:11

So far my experience with Vista tells me this:
(all includes running Aero and Dreamscene constantly)

512 MB Ram works nice with Vista for office tools
1 Gig is necessary if you are doing some work other than office tools on your computer.
2 Gig recommended for gaming, video editing or some other RAM hungry work.

Everything above that is a bonus imho.


And to that guy promoting "badvista" site --> only real competition for Vista OS to any decent developer is WinXP , not any free OS for sure.

User avatar
Akul
Round Table Hero
Round Table Hero
Posts: 1544
Joined: 06 Jan 2006

Unread postby Akul » 02 Mar 2007, 09:01

Sikon wrote:What was the point of installing Vista in the first place?
One of dumbest things I have EVER heard.

I have Vista installed on a computer with 1GB RAM and a terrible graphics card... and it works perfectly, and not to forget to mention, smoothly. Those who speak against Vista either: 1) hate Windows 2) hate Microsoft 3) are Linux worshipers 4) (most common) all 3.

However, to OP: I hope that you still have XP installed for things that still aren't supported by Vista.
I am back and ready to... ready to... post things.

nevermindspy
Pixie
Pixie
Posts: 145
Joined: 04 Sep 2006

Unread postby nevermindspy » 02 Mar 2007, 10:27

Sauron wrote:
Sikon wrote:What was the point of installing Vista in the first place?
One of dumbest things I have EVER heard.

I have Vista installed on a computer with 1GB RAM and a terrible graphics card... and it works perfectly, and not to forget to mention, smoothly. Those who speak against Vista either: 1) hate Windows 2) hate Microsoft 3) are Linux worshipers 4) (most common) all 3.

However, to OP: I hope that you still have XP installed for things that still aren't supported by Vista.
This is BIG BIG bolony please don't talk shit about things you HAVE NO CLUE ABOUT

"works perfectly" sure the game works perfectly for me with all setups i've tried homm5 in about any windows there is ( including vista,xp,special edition of xp ,windows2003 server)
I've compared performance against EACH OTHER not against what I THINK is a resonable perfomence and the diffrence between performance is soooooooo BIG you have no idea how fast homm5 can really run on something diffrent.

Besides you really don't need to understand that much about computers
Games run faster with more RAM = the memory is faster then HD
VISTA uses more RAM then ANY OTHER WINDOWS
=GAME RUNS SLOWER
VERY VERY SIMPLE.

User avatar
Campaigner
Vampire
Vampire
Posts: 917
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: Campaigner

Unread postby Campaigner » 02 Mar 2007, 16:27

It was the same thing (in a smaller scale though) when people upgraded from Win98 to WinXP. WinXP requires more RAM but is better. And the themes shut down when you start a game.

User avatar
Pol
Admin
Admin
Posts: 10057
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Location: IN SOMNIS VERITAS
Contact:

Unread postby Pol » 02 Mar 2007, 22:05

Ya5MieL wrote: 2 Gig recommended for gaming, video editing or some other RAM hungry work.
I have 512MB and Win2k and from what I remember just "uncompromising" browsing of internet with firefox can eat over 2Gigs.

So for real work + Vista + nitty gritty look= 8Gigs look like optimal. Furthermore Vista are still not complete product - they strip out lots of features which originally planned (new file system for example). And these are crucial - without them here is no reason to advance. Aero means nothing.
"We made it!"
The Archives | Collection of H3&WoG files | Older albeit still useful | CH Downloads
PC Specs: A10-7850K, FM2A88X+K, 16GB-1600, SSD-MLC-G3, 1TB-HDD-G3, MAYA44, SP10 500W Be Quiet

val-gaav
Peasant
Peasant
Posts: 85
Joined: 06 Jan 2006

Unread postby val-gaav » 03 Mar 2007, 03:01

Ya5MieL wrote:So far my experience with Vista tells me this:
And to that guy promoting "badvista" site --> only real competition for Vista OS to any decent developer is WinXP , not any free OS for sure.
Sure ..... You can make windows games and aps under GNU/linux you know that ? You do not need windows to make aps run under windows ....

Ever heard of idsoftware ? .... I guess they are not decent developers for you ?

User avatar
Ya5MieL
Marksman
Marksman
Posts: 428
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: Kutjevo, Croatia

Unread postby Ya5MieL » 03 Mar 2007, 16:47

And how much of their profit do they get for making linux version?.. 1%? 0.1%, 0.01%?

ID is PC games developer, be happy that they are good souls that ported the game for linux :P. Without production for windows, there would be no id company at all.

Don't get me wrong, Win is not very good OS, but unfortunately its all we got, and all we will have for quite some time. (hope that changes someday)

User avatar
Sikon
Hunter
Hunter
Posts: 542
Joined: 22 Dec 2005
Location: Russia

Unread postby Sikon » 05 Mar 2007, 10:14

that ported the game for linux
If they used cross-platform APIs like SDL and OpenGL instead of Microsoft's proprietary DirectX, there would be no need to port anything. Releasing a Linux version would require no effort at all.
only real competition for Vista OS to any decent developer is WinXP , not any free OS for sure.
Prove it. I have posted the link to a site that outlines what's wrong with Vista. Now, it's your turn: what's wrong with free operating systems?
1) hate Windows 2) hate Microsoft
There are damn good reasons to disagree with Microsoft's marketing policies, especially when they deliberately cripple their software allegedly for the users' own good.
3) are Linux worshipers
This is so juvenile, I'm not even bothering to comment.
Those who speak against Vista either
5) Concerned that their computers are rapidly becoming someone else's property - and that "someone else" is bent on restricting users' freedomes even further.
WinXP requires more RAM but is better.
This is true. Windows XP uses the NT architecture, which is more modern, stable and secure than that of Windows 98 (where security and stability are nonexistent).

Therefore, users had a real reason to convert to XP: the system worked better.

This is not the case with Vista. Many old Windows applications don't work in Vista at all, and there are no real architecture improvements. WPS was cut, the development of WinFS was ceased, and two major improvements originally planned as Vista-only - namely, IE7 and .NET 3.0 - were eventually backported to XP, leaving even fewer reasons to upgrade.

Most of the improvements that remain are limited to the "eye-candy" category. But even here, Vista falls flat: its 3D desktop effects are more limited than those of Mac OS X or Beryl.

So, we have a system that isn't much better than XP, which supports fewer Windows applications, consumes more system resources, is ridden with technologies that restrict users' freedom, and has a new license agreement that basically authorizes Microsoft to do whatever they want with your PC. If that is the case, why upgrade at all?

User avatar
Akul
Round Table Hero
Round Table Hero
Posts: 1544
Joined: 06 Jan 2006

Unread postby Akul » 05 Mar 2007, 11:08

what's wrong with free operating systems?
Problem with Linux and other open-source Os is the fact that most of users are not programers and are unable to tweak the system for their own wishes.
Linux is good if you know programming, but an totally un-wise choice if you are a normal user. And a normal user will gladly give money for something that has hand-holding then for something that doesn't.
This is so juvenile, I'm not even bothering to comment.
You act as if this was intended for you.
5) Concerned that their computers are rapidly becoming someone else's property - and that "someone else" is bent on restricting users' freedomes even further.
For normal users, that is for better. For professional, there is Linux and Mac OS.
This is not the case with Vista. Many old Windows applications don't work in Vista at all, and there are no real architecture improvements. WPS was cut, the development of WinFS was ceased, and two major improvements originally planned as Vista-only - namely, IE7 and .NET 3.0 - were eventually backported to XP, leaving even fewer reasons to upgrade.
Most of old Windows applications will work with it after a year or so. Until then, it Vista is used for testing purposes.


About system absorbing:
I am testing Vista on a not to strong PC with next-gen games. Guess what: they work perfectly.
If you really have problems, you can either:
1. buy more RAM
2. turn off Aero
3. sycrifice some of your USB-flash memory to speed it up


Also, we have gone off-topic here.
I am back and ready to... ready to... post things.

User avatar
Pol
Admin
Admin
Posts: 10057
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Location: IN SOMNIS VERITAS
Contact:

Unread postby Pol » 05 Mar 2007, 12:03

Sauron wrote:Linux is good if you know programming, but an totally un-wise choice if you are a normal user.
Sauron wrote:For normal users, that is for better. For professional, there is Linux and Mac OS.
No. No at all.

We probably differ in definition of normal user. Linux is easier to mod or even to control which is true for normal people as well. - You don't need to be programmer for using it - but it's a different gravy.

May seems so on first sight but that is deceptive feel. For no one is better to loosing its privacy. Security at first place - you cannot rely on fact that Microsoft cannot intelligently (mis)use its database when it has it against individuals - because misusing is is also to put knowldege gathered in this way in business manner. Which is doing.
Sauron wrote: Most of old Windows...
Of course. And yes, we should get back on topic :D
"We made it!"
The Archives | Collection of H3&WoG files | Older albeit still useful | CH Downloads
PC Specs: A10-7850K, FM2A88X+K, 16GB-1600, SSD-MLC-G3, 1TB-HDD-G3, MAYA44, SP10 500W Be Quiet

val-gaav
Peasant
Peasant
Posts: 85
Joined: 06 Jan 2006

Unread postby val-gaav » 05 Mar 2007, 12:11

Sauron wrote:
what's wrong with free operating systems?
Problem with Linux and other open-source Os is the fact that most of users are not programers and are unable to tweak the system for their own wishes.
Linux is good if you know programming, but an totally un-wise choice if you are a normal user. And a normal user will gladly give money for something that has hand-holding then for something that doesn't.

.
This just so not true ...

There are many distros that are good for newbies and where you can do everything by clicking and through wizards etc... .... Suse , Mandriva, or Kubuntu just to name a few ...

BTW My girlfriend runs GNU/Linux Kubuntu and she is not a programer ... Actually she does not know much about computers.... but the point is that she likes it more then windows .... She is happy that she has an office suite that she can browse web and watch movies listen to music just like in windows ..... but then again she is not forced anymore to do viruses scans and DOES NOT ASK ME for help when windows gets damaged just because Linux runs over half year at her home and nothing went wrong ....
Ya5MieL wrote:And how much of their profit do they get for making linux version?.. 1%? 0.1%, 0.01%?

ID is PC games developer, be happy that they are good souls that ported the game for linux :P. Without production for windows, there would be no id company at all.

)
How much profit well they did not port the game .... id makes games by using OpenGL api so by definition they are cross platform. It's not big efford to realese a binary for linux.... they just realese the windows version and then after a month you can download for free a patch from their website for mac or linux ..... It's hard too tell how many people of those who bought the windows version did so for the sake of linux gaming ....

As for the profit .... well I actually would buy a linux version of HoMM5 ... or a windows version if there was a free linux binary .... and I did not boy this game yet BTW and refuse to do so if they will not support my OS of choice ....

User avatar
Ya5MieL
Marksman
Marksman
Posts: 428
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: Kutjevo, Croatia

Unread postby Ya5MieL » 05 Mar 2007, 14:04

I think they can live without your money (or money of all ppl that have linux), on the other hand they can't survive if windows users stop buying the game.

This thread is getting out of hand.. it seems we are all happy with OS that we curentlly have (be it Win, MacOS, Linux or something else), so no point in arguing at all. If you are happy with something, dont change it.

To conclude the thread question, Heroes will surely work on Vista (albeit slower than on XP), and patches installed normaly for me (including no-cd ones)

User avatar
Sikon
Hunter
Hunter
Posts: 542
Joined: 22 Dec 2005
Location: Russia

Unread postby Sikon » 05 Mar 2007, 18:44

I think they can live without your money (or money of all ppl that have linux), on the other hand they can't survive if windows users stop buying the game.
Why will Windows users stop buying the game if they switch from DirectX to OpenGL? I don't get the logic here.

User avatar
Ya5MieL
Marksman
Marksman
Posts: 428
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: Kutjevo, Croatia

Unread postby Ya5MieL » 05 Mar 2007, 19:33

This is my last post in here..

I really don't remember when i was saying anything about DirectX vs OpenGL. It was about Win Vista perspective in gaming area which is still miles ahead of any free OS.
Games are created for profit, profit is in the Windows. Hypotethical situations "wouldnt it be better if they used OpenGL" are irrelevant since the FACT is that they DON'T use it in a considerable percentage and thats all that matter.

Keep your OS, and play 1/10 or less of the games that are available.

Losing the ability to play 90% games for ability to say that i use Better OS is simply not a good trade.

I'm out of this pointless debate.


Return to “Heroes V-VI”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 56 guests