[rjbarker]

The apprehension over Vista has been the major cause of the slow adoption along with game developers lagging behind on the uptake. The original Crysis was heralded for its DirectX10 support, and the gamers who used it were treated to improved visuals and immersion. However, Crysis Warhead has arguably taken a step back in terms of quality, offering almost no visual improvements when using the supposedly advanced technology. Is this apparent lack of change a limitation of the game's engine, negligence on behalf of the developers, or does DirectX10 just not offer the quality boost that we once thought?

I'd say from every article I have ever read about DX10, that it was the fact it showed no improvements visually....got that?....none nada, zero...was the reason, people didn't adopt it. Oh yeah....and then there's the substantial performance hit by switching over to Vista and DX10.
Warheads "taken a step back"???????????? How could that possibly be? From What?
Ummm....hate to break it to you, but there never was a quality boost under DX10, so how is it possible to question whether it's negligence or a limitation of the games engine?
You must have missed all those reviews that were specifically searching for improvements w/ DX10 and couldn't find them.

I agree totally, althoguh the "mouse overs" do show some difference, when I have to put on my extra-strength reading glasses and "study" the mouse-over scenes very carefully to see the difference..?...whats the point..negligable.

Anyways I am playing crysis warhead with playable frame rate at 1920 x 1200 Enthusiast with 8 x AA.

Really..curious..what do you consider "playable Framerates"?...