That doesn't make sense, there has been plenty of games over the years that run in DX10/11 on PC but still have released on consoles.
Would give the option for more people to play the game. I'm sure there's plenty of people out there still running 32 bit OS, lots of archaic programs need 32-bit to run, our company had to cancel a new laptop rollout because we had the developer tell us at the last minute "uh, we did testing and our app doesnt work on 64-bit OS and there's no plans to change that"
i google searched to see what/if there was any status on a 64bit client. saw this thread, and felt it needed some illumination as there are some misconceptions. i notice in my playing something that was fairly common on another similar game i used to play, ww2ol. once the memory grew to a certain point (not talking memory leaks those are they're own issue) instability occurred. periods of extremely low FPS, etc. last night i was falling victim to the 5+ second periods of 1fps. It felt to me like the game engine was frantically trying to free up memory. which made me think of a 64bit client, google search, and find this thread. this was happening most frequently in areas where all three factions were present. this means all faction specific weapons, models, vehicles, etc all have to be accounted for and would logically cause the highest memory usage. i don't recall this occurring in situations where only one side was fighting. it probably does, i just haven't noticed it.
I'm more upset this game wasn't coded natively using DX11. That was a screw up is ever one if they truly plan to run this game until 2025. DX9 does have the ability to look amazing. Take Crysis for example. But doesn't run nearly as well as native DX11 - BF3. When you start adding DX10/11 features on top of DX9, it's a usually a performance disaster. I don't know a single game that brought in a DX10 or DX11 patch that didn't tank the performance. And PS2 doesn't have room to tank the performance by throwing in a DX11 tessellation patch right now. I think they made things much more complicated on themselves for the future, if they want the game to age well. Or maybe not? Only those who built the engine know.
well, hopefully they will switch to openGL 4.x. reason for that is the steam console will run a stripped down linux kernel and require openGL. presumably 4.x since the spec has been out awhile and whatever hardware they're going to use iwll likely support it anyway. opengl opens up mac clients too so all 8 of the mac gamers out there can be happy about that.
I hate to play devils advocate even though i agree and support that the devs should be putting more time into making the game run better than making it pretty or fixing non critical problems, because people will quit if they cannot have high enough fps which is the current problem atm. i keep upgrading my gaming computer to keep up with the increased specs of ps2 and the game has only been live for about 2 months! i started on a 32 bit os with 64 bit hardware with specs all at least the minimum to run ps2. since then i've changed my os to 64 bit and that was a big improvement to run ps2 for some reason and it wasn't bc my os had any problems. i went from 32 bit vista to 64 bit 7 both times i stripped down the os as much as i could to run the game meaning disabling advanced graphical stuff in your "advanced" visual options and upping the priority of the service which both help immensely, as well as taking away unneccesary programs unneeded for ps2, which is why you make a "gaming" computer if you have multiple computers. (for the non computer professionals vista and 7 run off of the same kernel so the oses are almost identical in capabilities and operating speed) just feb 1st they disallowed 800x600 screen size, which in itself might make me quit. people are complaining about low fps and it was a major difference in that i was running the game fine, getting playable lag even in the heaviest of firefights, but now i can't even go into an area with tons of players even after minimizing everything including the new clip plane. this is why you are reading my booktext instead of me zerging in game sorry! without going on and on, i hate to say it that even though the game was made a long time ago and requires a really fast computer, why not just let the game be runnable with piss poor graphics for those people who play more for the social factor than the game itself? i haven't played an mmo yet that i would play bc the game is good. i play mostly for the interaction bc i work from home, and i know i'm not the only one who uses a computer as a social crutch when in person you are ugly or look scary (like me) and most people judge a book by its cover in person. at least let the people eat cake king developers. after all i'm fighting a neverending war as a grunt for a fake faction on a make believe world. i know i could find something better to do with my time, but i don't want to and it's a shame how they won't make an allowance for me and my computer where if i don't feel like upgrading again, i might just play another fps (o no!)
In the marketing world they have a quote, 80% of profits come from 20% of your customers. For game companies, the 10-20% that they would loose wouldn't be the dedicated gamers who go out and get the best possible computer according to their budget. They would be loosing the people who bought it more or less on a whim. "Oh, that looks so cool, i think i'll get it" vs. the guys who will camp out outside of a store for 5 days just to be the first to get a new game in a series. These game companies only care about that market. I don't mean to be rude, just giving facts. We covered this exact topic in my Marketing class last semester.
http://www.ntcore.com/4gb_patch.php Would using this on the games, .exe file count as an injection and get a user banned if it were used? I used this recently on a couple older games such as Rome Total War and what not. Maybe someone here has already given this thing a whirl on Planetside 2? For those that are wondering, it is a 4gb patch application that changes something within the .exe to make the game able to utilize 4gb of ram. I am not 100% aware of the full details, a friend recommended it to me when I was modding New Vegas and I thought of it when reading the thread title.
I would argue that over 65% of the market is just about as a "majority" as it can get. Source: http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey (See the operating system piece)
Can you even run this game with a processor that isn't 64bit? I don't imagine running this game at more than 5 fps with a CPU old enough to be 32bit (like a pentium 4)
The original Crysis had a 64bit version way back when, and Source has had a 64bit version for years. The main reason that we do not see more games in 64bit is because of dual development/console ports. Most games released for PC are first developed on the consoles which are 32bit so that's what we get once the game gets ported/developed for the PC. The new generation of consoles are running on 64bit architecture so could run 64bit software, however, whether they will will of course depend on their OS.
More computers run 32-bit Windows XP than any other OS, today. That may be changing, but as long as the most prevalent OS is 32-bit and you need to get your game on as many boxes as possible, you stick devs in 32-bit land. This is the biggest driver, imo. You can run 32-bit software using a 64-bit OS, but not the other way around.
And 90% of all computers in the world never get to have a single game installed - stop skewing statistics with irrelevant data.
Whoa, you upset there, turbo? You gonna be ok? Developing software for a targeted audience takes into account the hardware and software those folks use. The topic was about ideas on why PS2 was 32 bit and not 64, and that statement, regardless how much it seems to have bothered you, is true. Developing 64 bit software when trying to get as many dollars from folks on 32 bit systems is something to consider. Oh, and you'd like us to believe that 10% of the computers IN THE WORLD have no games installed, at the same time. Sure, lol. Thanks for the laugh. As one correction, Win7 is tops, but close behind is WinXP. I took the title a bit to literal. http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Windows-8-Windows-XP-Market-Share-Windows-98-Zombie,21341.html
A hell of a lot of people still use Windows XP (because it is so easy to steal). This has only recently started to change, however Microsoft really screwed up with Windows 8 so a lot of people are unwilling to upgrade now. There is basically no difference between 64bit and 32bit code, one only has to use standardized vars and set the complier for which version to create. There is no extra work to make a new client. It's DirectX 11 that is a rewrite.
