Hedging bets. Basically they want people to have more than two, and they're hoping that there isn't too much address space allocated to hardware.
You're not getting it. 4GB is not the recommended amount of RAM, it's the minimum requirement. if you have 3GB of RAM, download and install the game.. then try to open it: You're not going to be able to play. You will be sent to some G error code page telling you that you don't have enough memory to play this game. Plenty of posts in forums about this when it was first launched from beta.
Is that how it works now though? Most listings are generally "what you have installed," not what is addressed.
Someone is going to have to take some RAM out and try it. I can't, as even 1 DIMM is 4GB in my system. So someone else would have to test it with less than 4GB installed. As well, as far as Windows goes: What you have addressed is what you have installed. Windows won't recognize that extra RAM, and if Windows doesn't the game shouldn't be able to either as it's run ON Windows.
I've got old systems that have only 2GB.. though I'm not sure if they meet the minimums on CPU/GPU anyway. I'll see if I can't play with it.
Alright I'm curious to see the outcome: Because either the allegations that this was designed to be compatible with 32-bit Windows is false, or SOE seriously needs to lay a few people off lol.
I have a Windows 7 32-bit laptop and 2GB ram that can run PS2 just fine, although I lag like crap in huge fights.
I've always been under the impression that 4 GB is the most you can have for 32-bit Windows. Someone show me otherwise. 4 GB minus some reserved by the system leaves about 3.25 GB for applications.
People with 32-bit OSs, honestly, really don't have the hardware to run this game well at all. The people who get 32-bit OSs are those generic brand desktops from the computer store with 4G or less of system RAM. 4GB is rare in a gamers system, out of of all the friends I polled in Steam, almost all of them have at least 8GB of RAM, a few had 16GB, and even less had 32GB RAM. Only one had a 32-bit OS, and his PC isn't good enough to even play a game like Counter-Strike GO. As for the above, yes, 4GB is the maximum you can have for a 32-bit Windows. This also counts GPU RAM, and other chips with memory in your system. If I installed a 32-bit Windows on my system, my 16GB available system memory would be reduce to 800MB, unbearable. PS2 needs a lot of memory, it also needs a lot of graphics card power and processing power. People with 32-bit aren't computer literate enough to understand this; their systems are not designed for gaming at all, simply low level business work; they will never run PS2 well. When we take into consideration Steam stats, we have to realize that a lot of these accounts are children trying to play Free 2 Play games, and barely being able to do so on their 32-bit PCs, or casual gamers who play the occasional low end indie game. This is AAA level of quality, so it doesn't make sense to support 32-bit this late in the game. As for DX11, if you are sitting around making claims that DX9 'looks good enough' then you are, very much, a dumb***; you should learn the purpose of graphics libraries. If a game is programmed in DX11, DX11 uses a significantly different, incompatible method of rendering graphics on the screen compared to DX9. Modern hardware is designed around DX11's method of rendering, not the other way around. Graphics libraries make it possible to put more graphics on the screen for less resources, utilizing new features in new hardware. There are no DX9 GPUs that are fast enough to play this game, therefore it does not make sense that this game isn't using DX11. DX11 would allow the user to have: A: 100% support for SLI/Crossfire (DX9 doesnt do well in crossfire/SLI, AA also has issues). B: Higher FPS due to better resource optimization of modern graphic library standards. C: Improve the quality of graphics and open more features to play around with in optimizing graphical quality. Similarly, the latest standard of OpenGL is the same, except it also works on Linux/Mac.
That's a nice long rant about 32-bit users being illiterate (considering my other gaming computer is running 32-bit OS), but it ignores the issue that mostly everyone else is also ignoring. A 64-bit client will not improve this game's source code. --------------- And to elaborate, they scan switch out all the libraries to let it compile for 64-bit... But you still have the same unstreamlined source code.
The amount of ram which windows can access is irrelevant to PS2. In 32-bit windows, by default, each application can only access up to 2GB of ram. bcdedit can increase the amount of ram which an application can access to approximately 3GB but this not an ideal solution. The ideal solution is to use a 64-bit OS. Games are being held back because developers continue to cater to people with old computers: 32-bit and dx9. I think PS2 should be even bigger, with a larger and more complex world and even more players, but that can't happen if the developers continue to design games to run on 32-bit operating system with dx9 graphics cards.
PS2 is supposedly LAA. With that it can address up to 4GB, but that limit of 4GB is usually absorbed by memory allocated to other hardware.
I did a test on one of my machines at work. I couldn't use one of my older ones, but I simply just popped out a few DIMMs to get to 2GB. The game launched and it seemed okay, despite a performance hitch.
they shoud just do a hardware survey of the current playerbase and see whats what, if 95% of the playerbase is running dx11 hardware and 64bit they should start tailoring the game towards a transition to that, which they are anyway in a few years the game should be 64bit and dx11 , i would put money on it that almost ever player here is on a dx10 spec card or higher
dx11 is not only better looking pictures its Multithreaded Rendering and DirectCompute if you dont know what it is Code: http://blogs.amd.com/play/2009/09/09/directx-11-%E2%80%93-what-to-expect/
I would like to see some sort of count. Processors have been 64bit for many years now. Maybe 6 at least. Anyone still on a pure 32bit cpu really has an old computer. I would even be shocked if their computer has PCI-E slots. Not many AGP cards. No gaming PCI vcards out there anymore, not high enough to run most PC games these days. Sad when it's the tiny percent of people holding back the rest of the world from moving on to better things.
Funny you mention that. I've got a total of 8, now 9 if you count a rasp pi, machines in here and only one is capable of 64bit. Half of these are still more/less modern machines. There are many more people that still have only 32bit capability than you think.
