Page 3 of 3 First First 123

Thread: XP compatibility only is wrong

XP compatibility only is wrong

  1. #51
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    10
    There are numerous reasons for moving to the next platform of a technology. Sometimes convenience, sometimes new features or performance, sometimes to keep up with hardware technology.

    XP has been out, in one incarnation or another, for the better part of eight and a half years now (yes, you read that right - 8.5 years old). It was released in October of 2001. That is a huge time to remain on the market, despite multiple large service packs.

    While I too recognize the fact that Vista wasn't all it was cracked up to be, there had to be a point at which developers say: "enough is enough, we're missing out on new technologies and possibilities, and the old programming interfaces are holding us back". More evidence of this: DirectX 9.0 was released in 2002, not long after the debut of Windows XP. Back then, they could only have dreamed of the current GPU capabilities and what games would be attempting to do.

    I too love XP - up until Windows 7, it was the clear winner for best MS operating system ever. That reign is over now, and it is time to move on from the old technologies. Despite having it's flaws, Vista does work, and Windows 7 holds the new position of most preferred O/S on a new machine. And it can handle the new programming for high-powered GPUs and rendering that games need.

    Don't complain that Just Cause 2 won't run on XP. If anything, complain that DX10/11 were never made to run with XP, though it does seem a bit silly to be developing new graphic layers for an O/S that is approaching 9 years in age. Just Cause was built to be run on DX10/11 and what comes after.. and that limits what Operating Systems it will run on, and what graphics cards support it.

    I personally believe the developers made the right decision with this - move forward and embrace/utilize the new technologies, make your engine do everything it is capable of doing with today's hardware. Make your game shine graphically, since the premise for it is largely eye-candy to begin with.

    I've tested JC2 on hardware which is 2.5 to 3 years old, and it runs like a champ, even at medium widescreen resolutions, on Windows 7. That tells me they did something right, and the game looks fantastic as well.

    Moral of the story: it had to happen - you can't keep throwing resources at aging technologies and hope to win in a very competitive market.

  2. #52
    Originally Posted by BLaZiNgSPEED
    I just figured out a mistake in amazons website about Just cause 2.
    http://www.amazon.co.uk/Just-Cause-2...7231057&sr=8-5
    Platform: Windows Vista / XP
    This is a serious mistake and it is simply both misleading & misguiding towards the XP users.

    Not anymore. LOL. You must have scared them into changing it.

    Platform: Windows Vista / 7

  3. #53
    For the XP proponents I hope you are still holding onto 10lbs cell phones, green screen PDAs, CRT TVs and PS1 - because that is the decade you love and belong in.

    For those of us who LIKE technology, we don't have a problem.

  4. #54
    Originally Posted by Prokofiev
    For the XP proponents I hope you are still holding onto 10lbs cell phones, green screen PDAs, CRT TVs and PS1 - because that is the decade you love and belong in.

    For those of us who LIKE technology, we don't have a problem.
    Especially with Newegg.com. If you can't afford a PC on that site, you need to stop playing JC2 and go back to work.

  5. #55
    It had to happen once. We can't live in the past anymore. Xp is old and obsolete. I don't care how many people are using it, if I were a developer I would have made the same choice.
    LOST

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    11
    For every couple of people who sit here and complain about XP not being supported with your half baked ideas and ridiculous notions about lost profit, there are at least 100 of us who are happy about this and laud their move. Technology needs to keep moving forward. Keeping on supporting an 8 year old OS is nothing short of stupid. Also, computers with four gigs of RAM are becomming more common, and XP can't address more then 3.5 (unless you're using 64Bit OS...but who seriously actually kept that around, the driver support was terrible) Gigs.

    Sorry about the rambling, but tech has got to move on. Are you one of them people like * about the lack of PS1 games coming out?

  7. #57
    Originally Posted by Dradien
    For every couple of people who sit here and complain about XP not being supported with your half baked ideas and ridiculous notions about lost profit, there are at least 100 of us who are happy about this and laud their move. Technology needs to keep moving forward. Keeping on supporting an 8 year old OS is nothing short of stupid. Also, computers with four gigs of RAM are becomming more common, and XP can't address more then 3.5 (unless you're using 64Bit OS...but who seriously actually kept that around, the driver support was terrible) Gigs.

    Sorry about the rambling, but tech has got to move on. Are you one of them people like * about the lack of PS1 games coming out?
    half baked ideas...lol 4GB more common!!!!! 4GB standard!!!!! XP was great until last October....7 Rules. If you cannot run it, upgrade. If you can't afford an upgrade right now, accept your reality and upgrade when you can. The future is now and it is cheap as dirt at Newegg. AMD 955/965, AM3 Mobo, 4gb 1333...screamin' and cheap as a thai hooker.

  8. #58
    Originally Posted by Jaga
    Don't complain that Just Cause 2 won't run on XP. If anything, complain that DX10/11 were never made to run with XP, though it does seem a bit silly to be developing new graphic layers for an O/S that is approaching 9 years in age. Just Cause was built to be run on DX10/11 and what comes after.. and that limits what Operating Systems it will run on, and what graphics cards support it.
    This is the part that confused me, JC2 is a port from console, last time I checked console's do not have DirectX 10.

  9. #59
    Yet another one of these threads, hasn't this been done to death yet?
    Are people STILL completely misreading the statistics and somehow assuming every single xp machine is capable of running JC2? To argue that those stats mean they've alienated 50% of the market is a major misunderstanding of statistics.
    Well guess what, they aren't. Those statistics cover every pc with steam, including my mother's and my sister's, who only have steam so they can play Bejewelled and Peggle, somehow they aren't too phased that they can't get JC2 on their computers.

    And no, consoles don't use directx10, but they don't technically use directx 9 either. Xbox has something -similar- to DX9.0c.

    This game uses a brand new engine that was built on DX10 software, it's not designed for people with ancient pc's, it's designed to run on the latest and greatest.
    If you don't have the latest and greatest, sucks to be you.
    If you do, congrats, you can play the latest and greatest games.
    JC2 isn't the first game to be DX10 only (that prize goes to Stormrise), and it certainly won't be the last.
    If you want to hang on to xp, you are free to do so, hell you are even free to complain about it like an old woman saying back in her day roller shoes had four wheels instead of two. But you are going to miss out on a lot of games, and you'll find that as time passes you have less and less people agreeing with you.
    That's the thing about technology, it advances.

  10. #60
    Originally Posted by RunningBare
    This is the part that confused me, JC2 is a port from console, last time I checked console's do not have DirectX 10.
    Confusement seems to be your speciality. It was not ported to PC.

  11. #61
    Originally Posted by MrExplosive
    Confusement seems to be your speciality. It was not ported to PC.
    Actually, I think you are the confused one. Consoles are not computers. 360 has DX9, 10, and 11 features all packed into it. I'm not sure about PS3.

    And I think JC2 was ported, then optimized. That's more than I can say for GTA IV. Oh well, who cares. GTA IV was rubbish.
    Trust. Duty. Love. Hate. Fear. Lust. Leo.

  12. #62
    Originally Posted by Helegad
    Actually, I think you are the confused one. Consoles are not computers. 360 has DX9, 10, and 11 features all packed into it. I'm not sure about PS3.

    And I think JC2 was ported, then optimized. That's more than I can say for GTA IV. Oh well, who cares. GTA IV was rubbish.
    I think you will find XBox still only has DirectX 9, I've not been able to find anything to confirm Directx 10 or higher.

  13. #63
    Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it possible to just dual-boot Windows XP and Windows Vista/Windows 7? A friend of mine did that last year, and all seems to be okay.

  14. #64
    As much as it makes me shudder to support M$ in any fashion, really guys, upgrade to Windows 7, it works and is a very stable operating system, I cannot believe they may have actually got this one right.

  15. #65
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    11
    I'm not a Microsoft guy by any means. I have Ubuntu on my Desktop, running M0n0wall on my spare PC (linux based soft router), and had DD-WRT on my router along with linux on my PS3.

    That being said, make the jump to Win7. You'll never be happier. I love it.

    Also, comparing the consoles programming APIs to the PCs APIs is kind of comparing Apples to Oranges.

  16. #66
    Originally Posted by Ban Strife
    Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it possible to just dual-boot Windows XP and Windows Vista/Windows 7? A friend of mine did that last year, and all seems to be okay.

    That is all this comes down to. Go to the Battlefield Bad Company 2 forums. You need a monster machine just to run the game at a low framerate and it really does not look much better than JC2. All that is needed is a reasonable PC with Windows 7. The only issue is an OS upgrade. As many people have stated here, this game runs on a PC that is 2-3 years old.

  17. #67
    Hey look a pointless thread, not like the game will be reconfigured to run on XP

    Failed thread

  18. #68
    Originally Posted by Arrowslinger
    Hey look a pointless thread, not like the game will be reconfigured to run on XP

    Failed thread

    Nice English. FAIL

  19. #69
    Originally Posted by RunningBare
    I think you will find XBox still only has DirectX 9, I've not been able to find anything to confirm Directx 10 or higher.
    It does not have DX-anything. It has a combination of DX9, 10, and 11.
    Trust. Duty. Love. Hate. Fear. Lust. Leo.

  20. #70
    Reading on this subject all I got to say is this: Vista support should go out before XP!

    So many people are saying that XP have been out for 9 years, but the reason is because Vista sucked so much, cutting the performance of something like 20% from your hardware. MS even had to make XP 64-bit, not even based on the 32-bit version but the Windows Server, because Vista wasn't used by any serious person. Now the only reason people are even using Windows 7 is because it doesn't cut performance as much as Vista, though the actual benchmarks say something like 1-2% better and worse than XP on different areas.

    It's by far no reason to "move on", this is how it should be done: You make an OS that's good enough for people to move on, when enough have done so you cut support. You shouldn't cut support in order to make people move on. Being a programmer this really stinks of MS, I remember programming in OpenGL some years ago and I had to do some strange things because MS simply blocked their only competitor to Direct3D above version OpenGL 1.0. It's really not cricket you know.

    All in all it's a really sad state of affairs, since it's obvious they can't push enough out of DirectX 10-11 to make people migrate. Crysis even had a mod where you changed two lines of code to make the DirectX 10-settings available in XP. In conclusion, the "step" shouldn't be like this, it should be a high-risk project to make a game so incredible good-looking (i.e. much better looking than Crysis) so people really get an incentive to upgrade. Of course it'll sell horrible, but maybe MS can pay them because it'll be a project that'll boost their Windows 7 sales, like you're imagining they're doing for JC2

    They're really not giving anyone any reason to upgrade to Windows 7 other than if you're buying a computer now with a new OS you pick 7 because it's just as good as XP but newer. End rant

  21. #71
    Originally Posted by Helegad
    Consoles are not computers.

  22. #72
    Originally Posted by Brown_Jenkins
    Crysis even had a mod where you changed two lines of code to make the DirectX 10-settings available in XP.
    Not really. Crysis disabled certain effects when you ran it on XP (which they claimed was done to "improve performance on those systems"). With INI tweaking some of these effects could be enabled (since they were DirectX 9 to begin with), but others could not (since they were DirectX 10 only effects). You never got the "DirectX 10 effects on XP" ... but you did get pretty close with manual tweaking.

    Btw, I do think Windows 7 is a step up from XP. And I still think Vista was a big mistake from Microsoft (which they corrected with the 'tweaked Vista' called Windows 7).

  23. #73
    [QUOTE=Brown_Jenkins;1361777]Reading on this subject all I got to say is this: Vista support should go out before XP!/QUOTE]

    -_-

    IT's not a lack of support for a specific windows, it's a lack of support for the old direct x.
    Vista supports the new, so does 7, which is why they will continue on.

    Basically the crux of the matter isn't games not supporting windows (though really, as I say, directx), it's windows (directxs) not supporting games

Page 3 of 3 First First 123