That's not right, dx9 is sufficient:

I think this feature will be a plus for the whole audience who's targeting at the budget market.

We're normally following the masses in such decisions. When the majority of commercial games become GfW compliant, we'll do that too.

Good to hear, rather have the features in place first

JCL: For clarification, is it possible for a developer like us to make our own changes that will bring a 3dgs game into compliance? Or is it simply an impossibility to get G4W certification on a game developed with 3dgs? For example, is there a hard barrier a developer can't overcome themselves such as corruption caused when adding the required manifests to 3dgs-generated exe and dll files?

I'm looking for clarification because there's a big difference between 3dgs not being G4W certified itself vs. any game developed with 3dgs being impossible to achieve certification no matter what a developer does. Thanks for clearing this question up.

I am not in depth familiar with the G4W requirements, but you should be able to get compliance for your game yourself. It's not as easy as when Gamestudio were already prepared for that. For instance you need to implement XBOX controllers and have to do that through a DLL.

If you run into any problems that can't be solved on your side, please contact the support or ask me.

JCL: There is one question I have. Regarding exe and dll manifests, please see section 2.1 in the G4W specs: http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb173456.aspx

How can we make sure the exe that 3dgs generates includes an embedded manifest that meets this requirements?

Everything else looks like something we can control ourselves, so any guidance on how we can meet the 2.1 requirement would be very helpful.

The default EXE does not contain a manifest, but you can easily compile an EXE with a manifest. You'll find the EXE source code in the engine SDK.

If you have a problem with the manifest, post again - I'll then generate and upload an EXE that meets the requirement.

G4W is not mainstream better to keep doing the other stuff first.

I would not add G4W support until lots of people upgrade to DirectX10 (Vista) you are better off adding support for Valve Steamworks with 15 million users

SW

I think that cannot be compared. G4W is a widely accepted standard and has for sure a lot of marketing advantages. That has nothing do to with DX10 or any other technical stuff. It's a kind of insurance for users, that a certain game will for sure run on their systems. And if the possible users trust in the compatibility of our games this can only be good for selling them.