But again, DX support, unfortunately, is not very stable yet... And DX 9 support remains unofficial, so we can say that there's no DX 9 support in Parallels.

I failed to find 'Destruction' in the net. I assume this game is pretty old - I remember playing it a couple of years ago... It must require a version of DX not higher than 8.0, I think. Hence, theoretically it should work fine in Parallels - theoretically:)

Yeah, that's pretty much what I had heard for DX9 as well. The thing is that there is some overlap between functionality in 8 and 9, so a game that says it needs DX9 probably uses a majority of DX8 functions, right? So, theoretically, if the game you are playing doesn't use much DX9 it just might work.

But what I will say: With a MacBook C2D, which doesn't have dedicated graphics card, is going to have a hard time running any "semi supported" DX9 games. First off, Parallels is running in OSX, which is hogging a bunch of RAM. Second, though Parallels isn't really an emulator, it does consume a lot of resources, so there's more RAM being eaten up. Plus, you have no dedicated vRAM, so there's more RAM out the window... And the list goes on.

At least if the game is run in windows you can get ride of a couple of layers of RAM eaters. And if you want to run Windows games from the last few years, you really ought to do it in BootCamp. Especially if you want to do it on a MacBook.

But, and I reiterate, if you don't care to run games from the last 3 years or so, then go look at games built for the Mac. They work much better in OSX than any Windows game will in parallels.

Yes, this overlap must be present. This is the reason I'm sure.
Agreed. Moreover, there are few good games that are older.
RAM issue can be fixed a bit by allocating little RAM to MacOs and lots to Windows. But it only brings inconvenience.
I like it when developers make a double-supported version of their game.
Football Manager 2008, for example, works fine on Macs - natively.