Bioshock not working. DX11?

[crimson]

Windows 7 comes standard with DirectX 11. What is unclear is whether or not DX11 is backwards compatible. Also whether W7 has DX9 or DX10 preinstalled.

For people that installed certain games that ran fine on W7, it is possible that those games installed DX9. However, on a clean install of W7, everything remains unclear.

Did you not see this post?

While Windows 7 is fully compatible with games and hardware that use older versions of DirectX, the new DirectX 11 features are available with a DirectX 11 compatible graphics card and games designed to take advantage of this new technology.​

Link: Microsoft DirectX​

Also, if you read the brief description here Download details: DirectX End-User Runtime and look at system requirements you will see that DX9 is part of Windows 7​

Hint...

DirectX End-User Runtime Web Installer Brief Description

August 2009
The Microsoft DirectX® End-User Runtime provides updates to 9.0c and previous versions of DirectX — the core Windows® technology that drives high-speed multimedia and games on the PC.

Key operative word in the above statement is "update" to 9.0c

More info...

System Requirements

• Supported Operating Systems: Windows 2000; Windows 2000 Advanced Server; Windows 2000 Professional Edition ; Windows 2000 Server; Windows 2000 Service Pack 2; Windows 2000 Service Pack 3; Windows 2000 Service Pack 4; Windows 7;

Note Windows 7

A little reading would help clear things up

Yes. I saw that post. I forgot to mention that I couldn't find what you were talking about on that page. It doesn't say whether or not DX9 is installed on W7. Furthermore, that download doesn't update anything. It's the web installer for DX9 latest version DX 9.27.17349.

Installer download: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...FamilyID=04ac064b-00d1-474e-b7b1-442d8712d553

Web installer: Download details: DirectX End-User Runtime

Neither of those are updaters for DX9. Both of those are the latest MS updates to DX9 (latest updated versions of DX9). Thus, if you install that, what you are doing is installing the latest version of DX9.

The statement " Microsoft DirectX® End-User Runtime provides updates to 9.0c" is not very good. What it is saying is that this installer includes 9.0c updates meaning it is the updated version of DX 9.0c.

It doesn't mean DX9 is preinstalled in W7. Unless you know for sure that DX9 is preinstalled in W7, you're possibly missinforming people that it is. We do not know if DX9 was there prior to your game installations which install DX9. I tried to run a game that I installed by bypassing the DX9 installation. Which leads me to the conclusion that:
1. DX9 is probably not preinstalled in W7. Only DX11.
2. DX11 isn't backards compatible.

Also, the DX9 that installs with Bioshock isn't even the latest version. It's a 2007 version of DX9. DX11 isn't even backwards compatible with that. I don't know why.

 

[mushroomboy]

Win7 comes with DX9 on it but it's not up to date. Why? Because when they started the 7000 builds I'm guessing DX9 wasn't what it is now... When they do new builds of windows it doesn't mean they incorporate new DX9 it means they incorporate new windows accessories/programs and you update DX9 yourself. That's why most games come with a certain version of DX9, because if a person doesn't have this amazing internet they can play the game because the version of DX it needs comes with it.

And to clarify DX10 IS NOT BACKWARDS COMPAT WITH DX9!!!!!!!!!!!! They are so different, what they utilize is compeletly different. As well as DX11 won't work with 10 or 9. That's why DX has versions and the hardware you get says what it supports. Because they have to A) have the physical hardware/firmware built for it and B) they have to have the program/game run specific DX functions.

So yes windows 7 yas DX9/10/11 but they aren't up to date. It's just they don't updated DX9 on Win7 every time it comes out with an update, you would have to create a new install disc every time, that may not seem like much work but it's a lot cheaper to just let the consumer do the updates.

 

[crimson]

Bioshock comes with a 2007 version of DX9. Bioshock didn't run on W7 without the need to install this or any version of DX9. That is why I've concluded that DX9 doesn't come on W7.

And that DX11 isn't backwards compatible. It says on Wikipedia that DirectX 11 will have compatibility modes for 9, 10, and 10.1. Not sure what this is or how it works.

 

[mushroomboy]

Compatibility API's are the same way 32bit programs run on 64bit OS's. Really you still have all the libraries and files, it just converts the calls over to the newer format. 8, 9, and 10 all come on Win 7, it's just no updates the base DX. I guess the other reason they do that is space, make a bare minimum, for those who don't need it installed.

 

[crimson]

What do updates have to do with it? If W7 came with DX9, Bioshock should work.

 

[mushroomboy]

What do updates have to do with it? If W7 came with DX9, Bioshock should work.

They have everything to do with it, they ship a stripped down version of DX9. If you don't like how or why they do it then you should probably ask MS. I have a fresh install of Win7 on my computer now and the files that come with it are d2d1.dll d3d8thk.dll d3d9.dll d3d10.dll d3d10_1.dll d3d10_1core.dll d3d10core.dll d3d10level9.dll d3d10warp.dll d3d11.dll All those files are DX files in sys32, but since you don't have the added files such as d3d9_41.dll ect you don't have the full library which means it's a stripped DX9, which means they ship it with a stripped DX9. Why? Maybe they just had it in for testing and didn't bother to intagrate the full DX9. Maybe they had space issues and didn't put everything in because of that? They could have possible compiled the OS with a size projection and got it smaller than they anticipated. Who knows, but it's stripped down so you need the updates for DX9.

 

[crimson]

What do updates have to do with it? If W7 came with DX9, Bioshock should work.

They have everything to do with it, they ship a stripped down version of DX9. If you don't like how or why they do it then you should probably ask MS. I have a fresh install of Win7 on my computer now and the files that come with it are d2d1.dll d3d8thk.dll d3d9.dll d3d10.dll d3d10_1.dll d3d10_1core.dll d3d10core.dll d3d10level9.dll d3d10warp.dll d3d11.dll All those files are DX files in sys32, but since you don't have the added files such as d3d9_41.dll ect you don't have the full library which means it's a stripped DX9, which means they ship it with a stripped DX9. Why? Maybe they just had it in for testing and didn't bother to intagrate the full DX9. Maybe they had space issues and didn't put everything in because of that? They could have possible compiled the OS with a size projection and got it smaller than they anticipated. Who knows, but it's stripped down so you need the updates for DX9.

Yes. But what relevance does this have to the updated version of DX9? So either they don't have DX9 installed or they have a stripped down version of DX9 installed. Either way, DX9 old version or updated version doesn't seem to be installed. In fact, it's unclear what is installed. What does DX11 look like. Are you saying those files that you mentioned aren't part of DX11? What are you basing all this information on? IOW where did you find out DirectX9 is in W7 or where did you find out a stripped version of it is installed?

 

[mushroomboy]

What do updates have to do with it? If W7 came with DX9, Bioshock should work.

They have everything to do with it, they ship a stripped down version of DX9. If you don't like how or why they do it then you should probably ask MS. I have a fresh install of Win7 on my computer now and the files that come with it are d2d1.dll d3d8thk.dll d3d9.dll d3d10.dll d3d10_1.dll d3d10_1core.dll d3d10core.dll d3d10level9.dll d3d10warp.dll d3d11.dll All those files are DX files in sys32, but since you don't have the added files such as d3d9_41.dll ect you don't have the full library which means it's a stripped DX9, which means they ship it with a stripped DX9. Why? Maybe they just had it in for testing and didn't bother to intagrate the full DX9. Maybe they had space issues and didn't put everything in because of that? They could have possible compiled the OS with a size projection and got it smaller than they anticipated. Who knows, but it's stripped down so you need the updates for DX9.

Yes. But what relevance does this have to the updated version of DX9? So either they don't have DX9 installed or they have a stripped down version of DX9 installed. Either way, DX9 old version or updated version doesn't seem to be installed. In fact, it's unclear what is installed. What does DX11 look like. Are you saying those files that you mentioned aren't part of DX11? What are you basing all this information on? IOW where did you find out DirectX9 is in W7 or where did you find out a stripped version of it is installed?

Well I've been dealing with libraries and dependencies probably a lot more than you, I run linux and that has a much more interlaced setup with libraries. When I say stripped you can also say core libraries, enough for compatability and to run the bare requirements for DX9.

http://www.sevenforums.com/music-pictures-video/24897-directx-problem.html#post269625

There is another thread with the issues, if you knew how the OS runs and the different levels of security you'd understand where to look for the different files. Every file has it's place in the Windows dir, if you have dealt with modifying windows (or any OS based off a kernel with run levels) you would know the different file setups and what they actually do for the OS. So in short I know because I program, that's why I know. It's not unclear, it's very clear... I said it's stripped down, meaning it will run DX9 but the BARE REQUIREMENTS. Go get a compiler and make a program to do all the base DX9 calls and build it then run it.... it runs!!! There is a huge difference between the DX9 that first came out and the DX9 that runs COD4. When I mean differences I mean the functions calls. See DX9 is really just a library of functions for video, if it's not updated and a program calls functionX you get epic failure. That happens when you run the core DX9 instead of the updated. Now if you run a program that was built when DX9 first came out it might call functionA instead of functionX. FunctionX is newer and looks better, but is only in new games as it is only in the new updated DX9.

I know this sounds mean, but people should stop assuming something isn't their just because you get the error "blah blah won't work".

 

[chiefboo]

hey guys. i'm trying to get bioshock working as well. I"ve tried to download the installer from the link provided in this thread but i keep getting an error message upon installation that says:

An Internal System Error Occured
Please refer to DXError.log and DirectX.log in your windows folder to determine problem.

Please help.. i really want to be bioshock! i even drove 40 minutes to pick up a copy!

also... bioshock said it was updating directX components during installation... why wouldn't it work then?

When i load bioshock.exe it says "Bioshock.exe has stopped working..." and something along the lines of Windows will search for a resoluation and never get back to you or help you in your time of relatlve crisis.

 

[mushroomboy]

we need a post of your bioshock log. and this is really unrelated to windows not having DX9 so much as the DX9 doesn't work. So you should start a new thread with your directx.log printed out

 

[crimson]

They have everything to do with it, they ship a stripped down version of DX9. If you don't like how or why they do it then you should probably ask MS. I have a fresh install of Win7 on my computer now and the files that come with it are d2d1.dll d3d8thk.dll d3d9.dll d3d10.dll d3d10_1.dll d3d10_1core.dll d3d10core.dll d3d10level9.dll d3d10warp.dll d3d11.dll All those files are DX files in sys32, but since you don't have the added files such as d3d9_41.dll ect you don't have the full library which means it's a stripped DX9, which means they ship it with a stripped DX9. Why? Maybe they just had it in for testing and didn't bother to intagrate the full DX9. Maybe they had space issues and didn't put everything in because of that? They could have possible compiled the OS with a size projection and got it smaller than they anticipated. Who knows, but it's stripped down so you need the updates for DX9.

Yes. But what relevance does this have to the updated version of DX9? So either they don't have DX9 installed or they have a stripped down version of DX9 installed. Either way, DX9 old version or updated version doesn't seem to be installed. In fact, it's unclear what is installed. What does DX11 look like. Are you saying those files that you mentioned aren't part of DX11? What are you basing all this information on? IOW where did you find out DirectX9 is in W7 or where did you find out a stripped version of it is installed?

Well I've been dealing with libraries and dependencies probably a lot more than you, I run linux and that has a much more interlaced setup with libraries. When I say stripped you can also say core libraries, enough for compatability and to run the bare requirements for DX9.

http://www.sevenforums.com/music-pictures-video/24897-directx-problem.html#post269625

There is another thread with the issues, if you knew how the OS runs and the different levels of security you'd understand where to look for the different files. Every file has it's place in the Windows dir, if you have dealt with modifying windows (or any OS based off a kernel with run levels) you would know the different file setups and what they actually do for the OS. So in short I know because I program, that's why I know. It's not unclear, it's very clear... I said it's stripped down, meaning it will run DX9 but the BARE REQUIREMENTS. Go get a compiler and make a program to do all the base DX9 calls and build it then run it.... it runs!!! There is a huge difference between the DX9 that first came out and the DX9 that runs COD4. When I mean differences I mean the functions calls. See DX9 is really just a library of functions for video, if it's not updated and a program calls functionX you get epic failure. That happens when you run the core DX9 instead of the updated. Now if you run a program that was built when DX9 first came out it might call functionA instead of functionX. FunctionX is newer and looks better, but is only in new games as it is only in the new updated DX9.

I know this sounds mean, but people should stop assuming something isn't their just because you get the error "blah blah won't work".

My original conclusion was that DX9c was not installed and that DX11 wasn't backwards compatible. As it turns out, the other post stated that core versions of DX9, DX10, and DX10.1 are installed. This is probably then the case. But still waiting on a response on how they came to this conclusion. What the basis they used to determine this. Perhaps MS specifically stated the core files are installed or perhaps there is some solid way of telling.

 

[mushroomboy]

Because when your developing a new operating system your worries aren't going to be putting on every DX9 runtime. Really all you want is the core DX files just to see if everything works with it, and then ship it out. If you already have a package for the new runtime libraries then why add it? it's like making a game expansion. Why would you make a cd that installs the game and the expansion when you already have 1000x copies out? Just make an expansion CD and ship that out, if you want to do a bundle that comes later your current concern is the expansion. Win7 is really just a re-done Vista, in fact it's where Vista should have been. So why would they worry about all the extra run time libraries when they have an OS deadline. If you've ever worked on a project like that you have A) your boss yelling at you, B) your employees yelling at you to get your part done, and B) customers yelling at everyone because they want it NOW. So making sure every runtime library is in the DVD is the least of your concern. You really just want to make sure it works.

Now you say that's inconvenient for the customer right? Well next thin you have is the new DX9d that comes out, well you'll have people bitching as to why the new Win7 CDs aren't shipped with it. Why? Because then they'd have to recall every disc, throw them away, and then make 1000x new discs just to make you happy. It's called corporate **** and saving money. You have a DX9c package out, don't make a new one just use the old one.

[edit] Why don't the new Bioshock CDs come with the latest up to date DX9c files? So if I get a new Bioshock CD and install DX9c and a new game that comes out requires the august update, shouldn't the latest bioshock CD have that august update? NO! It's called business and marketing. You can't expect everything to come in one neat package, that costs more money and then that makes the product price go up.

 

[crimson]

Because when your developing a new operating system your worries aren't going to be putting on every DX9 runtime. Really all you want is the core DX files just to see if everything works with it, and then ship it out. If you already have a package for the new runtime libraries then why add it? it's like making a game expansion. Why would you make a cd that installs the game and the expansion when you already have 1000x copies out? Just make an expansion CD and ship that out, if you want to do a bundle that comes later your current concern is the expansion. Win7 is really just a re-done Vista, in fact it's where Vista should have been. So why would they worry about all the extra run time libraries when they have an OS deadline. If you've ever worked on a project like that you have A) your boss yelling at you, B) your employees yelling at you to get your part done, and B) customers yelling at everyone because they want it NOW. So making sure every runtime library is in the DVD is the least of your concern. You really just want to make sure it works.

Now you say that's inconvenient for the customer right? Well next thin you have is the new DX9d that comes out, well you'll have people bitching as to why the new Win7 CDs aren't shipped with it. Why? Because then they'd have to recall every disc, throw them away, and then make 1000x new discs just to make you happy. It's called corporate **** and saving money. You have a DX9c package out, don't make a new one just use the old one.

[edit] Why don't the new Bioshock CDs come with the latest up to date DX9c files? So if I get a new Bioshock CD and install DX9c and a new game that comes out requires the august update, shouldn't the latest bioshock CD have that august update? NO! It's called business and marketing. You can't expect everything to come in one neat package, that costs more money and then that makes the product price go up.

This has nothing to do with anything I'm talking about. Nor is this correct. It's possible that either the DX9c installed is DX9c as it was when it was released. Or whatever DX9c was when Vista was released is different.

Windows 7 cannot be compared to an update of Bioshock such as the Bioshock patch. It can be compared to a sequel of a game. Sims, Sims 2, Sims 3, etc. If I wanted to make a sequel to a game that is runs on the same DX as the first game, that is fine. If I want to make a sequel than runs on the latest DX, that's fine too. If I want to make the sequel run on the same engine or not, that is also fine. Either way, a sequel isn't a patch. Whatever reason MS had for only installing core files of 9c, 10, 10.1, it has nothing to do with what you're talking about.

Either way, it still doesn't solve the question of whether or not it has been verified that they are installed. It is probably most likely that they are, but there still must be verification. Just the same way I stated earlier that, even though I didn't know whether or not DX9 was installed, my conclusion was that it most likely wasn't. With additional information from the other thread, it is most likely that the core files are installed. However, there is still no verification.

Back on the topic of why MS would only install the core files. Vista released with DX10 original version (core files). Prior to DX11, I don't even know if there are any other releases other than DX10 and DX10.1. So it can be said that 10 is installed in W7 as it was when Vista released.

As for 9.0c, it is likely that by the time Vista released, there had already been at least one update to 9.0c. A) It may be that when Vista released, it included whatever version of 9.0c was out at the time. B) Or it could be that Vista included core files of 9.0c. C) Or it may be that Vista didn't include any 9.0c at all. Out of the 3, I would speculate that the core files for 9.0c were installed in Vista.

If that is the case, then Vista shipped with original core version of 10 as well as original core of 9.0c. And the same is shipped with W7 with 10.1 added in the same way 11 has been added. This is my conclusion. Still no verification.

So core for 10 and 10.1 make sense if they were never were any updates to them. As for why W7 was released with core for 9.0c instead of the latest updated version, who knows? Perhaps they did this on Vista as well. Who knows? What I do know is that it's not because W7 is some type of patch in the way you explained above.

 

[deeaa]

I can't even try Bioshock, as when I've installed it off the *original* DVD it simply refuses to accept the serial in the package.

That's the second time I've bought a game and it won't work at all claiming I have a pirated copy, wrong serial or something.

The last time I just found a cracked exe and used that to play the damned game but this time I won't do it, I'll just never buy their games again.

 

[mushroomboy]

They do it because of marketing!!! if you really read the thread you'd understand it's CHEAPER to release a core version and make the customer upgrade. CHEAPER CHEAPER CHEAEPER!!!!

[edit] They don't really give a RATS about DX9c, it's old, the new focus is DX10/11. So why spend the money on something that they want to phase out. My whole point on all of this is what!? CHEAPER!!!