Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

No XP Battlefield 3?

A tweet from Johan Andersson from this past summer offers a revelation not noted here at the time, as the tweet seems to confirm rumors from 2007 that the Frostbite 2.0 engine that will power the upcoming Battlefield 3 will not support Windows XP, saying: "Frostbite 2 is primarily developed for DX11. XP & DX9 is _not_ supported, 64-bit OS is recommended. Lots of time to upgrade if you haven't!" The thread about this on the Electronic Arts Forums also has comments noting this was revealed already, and there are slides in DICE's SIGGRAPH 2010 presentation indicating Frostbite 2.0 will only support DirectX 10 and DirectX 11. Thanks James via BF3Blog.

View
122 Replies. 7 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ] Older >

122. Re: No XP Battlefield 3? Jan 4, 2011, 17:36 Zardoz5
 
Dev wrote on Jan 4, 2011, 05:08:
Tried openAL and/or alchemy? Vista/7 did away with the directsound and went an entirely different way. Oddly enough the model MS went to instead is closer to the xbox, thus helping ports of games.

As a result, unless using something like openAL, there's sound problems with many older games, and surround doesn't work, etc. Alchemy is creative's driver to translate those directsound calls into openAL.

No I haven't tried them yet, but I'll look into them. Thanks for the info! It would be nice not having to boot up in XP just to play a few of the classics every now and then. After using Shista and 7 for close to 4 years I find XP hasn't aged that well.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
121. Re: No XP Battlefield 3? Jan 4, 2011, 13:47 Verno
 
SpectralMeat wrote on Jan 4, 2011, 10:40:
JohnnyRotten wrote on Jan 4, 2011, 09:32:
On the plus side, a 2TB disk is around $100 these days, so disk space shouldn't be the pivotal point in a build out these days.

That is true however if you are thinking about getting an SSD for your OS then install size very much matters.

Get an SSD 64GB or over. The prices on them have come down enough to the point that people shouldn't really be buying a 32GB SSD anyway. I picked up one for a friend for $179, 120GB JMicron controller based drive. It's not as fast as the latest Sandforce drives but it's still ludicrous compared to mechanical drives.
 
Avatar 51617
 
Playing: Divinity Original Sin, Infamous Second Son, Madden
Watching: Spartan, Possible Worlds, The Changeling
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
120. Re: No XP Battlefield 3? Jan 4, 2011, 10:40 SpectralMeat
 
JohnnyRotten wrote on Jan 4, 2011, 09:32:
On the plus side, a 2TB disk is around $100 these days, so disk space shouldn't be the pivotal point in a build out these days.

That is true however if you are thinking about getting an SSD for your OS then install size very much matters.
 
Avatar 14225
 
Steam: SpectralMeat
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
119. Re: No XP Battlefield 3? Jan 4, 2011, 09:32 JohnnyRotten
 
Dev wrote on Jan 3, 2011, 09:58:
Here, go nuts:
http://www.jam-software.com/freeware/index.shtml
Its a program called TreeSize that shows you gigabytes taken up by each folder (look at the screenshot to the right) in a nice graphical list format.

Sweetness! A program I like because it lays the disk or folder usage out in a nice pie chart is: http://sourceforge.net/projects/treepie/

Dev wrote on Jan 3, 2011, 09:58:
You'll notice that the win 7 WINDOWS folder alone is going to be like 20 gigs or more, and thats not the only part of a windows install.

You can probably get a virgin install down to 5GB, but a working install is going to grow quickly. Plan for at LEAST 20GB of space for the operating system, more if you do anything that requires big installer caches or updated help files from M/S (Visual Studio, MSSMS, etc). You simply can't move or delete some things without causing downrange issues. Trying to change the sysvol size on the fly is tricky.

On the plus side, a 2TB disk is around $100 these days, so disk space shouldn't be the pivotal point in a build out these days.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
118. Re: No XP Battlefield 3? Jan 4, 2011, 05:08 Dev
 
Zardoz5 wrote on Jan 4, 2011, 02:10:
noman wrote on Jan 3, 2011, 02:53:
Zardoz5 wrote on Jan 2, 2011, 19:38:
No it doesn't. For kicks I installed 1942 in Windows 7's XP VM and the game wouldn't even start.

Yes, but 1942 works fine in Windows7 any way.

For you perhaps, but for me it doesn't.

The audio in BF Vietnam and 1942 is screwed up for me in Win 7 Pro x64. I'm missing the music (noooo) and some sounds in Vietnam and the audio is screwy in 1942. I tried both my onboard sound card and a Creative POS and have had no luck either way. It must be the mix of my hardware and DICE's audio drivers.

Tried openAL and/or alchemy? Vista/7 did away with the directsound and went an entirely different way. Oddly enough the model MS went to instead is closer to the xbox, thus helping ports of games.

As a result, unless using something like openAL, there's sound problems with many older games, and surround doesn't work, etc. Alchemy is creative's driver to translate those directsound calls into openAL.

This comment was edited on Jan 4, 2011, 06:32.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
117. Re: No XP Battlefield 3? Jan 4, 2011, 02:10 Zardoz5
 
noman wrote on Jan 3, 2011, 02:53:
Zardoz5 wrote on Jan 2, 2011, 19:38:
No it doesn't. For kicks I installed 1942 in Windows 7's XP VM and the game wouldn't even start.

Yes, but 1942 works fine in Windows7 any way.

For you perhaps, but for me it doesn't.

The audio in BF Vietnam and 1942 is screwed up for me in Win 7 Pro x64. I'm missing the music (noooo) and some sounds in Vietnam and the audio is screwy in 1942. I tried both my onboard sound card and a Creative POS and have had no luck either way. It must be the mix of my hardware and DICE's audio drivers.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
116. Re: No XP Battlefield 3? Jan 3, 2011, 21:01 Jerykk
 
remember those photo realistic screen shots of ground scenery? of what was supposed to be DX10/11 version of microsoft flight sim? whatever happened to that project?

MS recently announced a new flight sim, though they haven't shown or revealed anything about it. They just said it would be more casual, which seems to be the direction they're taking with their PC games now.

I was actually pretty surprised that MS would release any PC exclusives these days, casual or not. Unfortunately, it doesn't really amount to much when the Xbox division is constantly undermining the PC division by paying for Xbox-exclusive games and DLC. It also doesn't help when they call games like ME2, Splinter Cell: Conviction and L4D2 "Xbox Exclusives." Nor does it help when they bribe publishers to only show the Xbox logo at the end of TV spots for multiplatform games.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
115. Re: No XP Battlefield 3? Jan 3, 2011, 19:14 zirik
 
Jerykk wrote on Jan 3, 2011, 15:07:
If MS really cared about DX10 and 11, they would pay some prominent developer to make a high-profile, DX10/11 PC exclusive.

i dont think MS really cared about pushing DX10/11 over what the consoles were capable of which is DX9.5. remember those photo realistic screen shots of ground scenery? of what was supposed to be DX10/11 version of microsoft flight sim? whatever happened to that project?
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
114. Re: No XP Battlefield 3? Jan 3, 2011, 18:33 Kosumo
 
I agree Dev, but I wonder if they wish they had the smart phone market instead (like Apple and i-things)

The Xbox360 will make money due to the long cycle, the xbox was just to get in against the PS/2 which was in my opioin the best commercal console yet (in part to GTA 3, VC, SA - which MS the paid rockstar for some of the GTA exclusive stuff)
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
113. Re: No XP Battlefield 3? Jan 3, 2011, 18:04 Dev
 
Kosumo wrote on Jan 3, 2011, 14:50:
I don't think MS made much money out of the Xbox360 Red Ring of Death.
I believe the writedown was about $3 billion for that.

Interestingly, if you examine the financials, on xbox 1 they LOST $4 billion all told during its lifetime. Thats after you add in all the sales from licensing, and software, and halo, and anything else they made money on relating to the xbox 1. The problem was they were eating so much of the cost of the console, and the disasters like the global power supply replacements, that it just out numbered any profit they brought in. However, they just counted it as the price of entering the console market. After all, MS makes almost that much in pure cash profit every few months. Its when xbox 360 came out they finally started making money in the console market. I don't recall when it became profitable but even when you throw in the writedown for the RROD, they are still making money.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
112. Re: No XP Battlefield 3? Jan 3, 2011, 15:07 Jerykk
 
If MS really cared about DX10 and 11, they would pay some prominent developer to make a high-profile, DX10/11 PC exclusive. They did pay Take-Two $50 million just for timed GTA4 DLC exclusivity, after all. I wonder how much they pay Activision for the timed CoD DLC exclusivity. I wouldn't be surprised if it were more than $50 million.  
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
111. Re: No XP Battlefield 3? Jan 3, 2011, 14:50 Kosumo
 
I don't think MS made much money out of the Xbox360 Red Ring of Death.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
110. Re: No XP Battlefield 3? Jan 3, 2011, 14:39 SpectralMeat
 
xXBatmanXx wrote on Jan 3, 2011, 14:30:
So they make so many diff flavors of OS for Windows, why not make a streamlined Gaming OS? The market is big enough, why couldn't they drop that Windows uses 60% of your RAM and load even when idle and push that towards the GPU/CPU for gaming?

.....

Because there isn't all that much money in PC gaming for Microsoft. They make far more money off the console gamers with a lot less effort. Every single Xbox game carries a $10 royalty fee that goes directly to Microsoft's pocket, not to mention the Live Gold subscription fee and all the money they make on the stupid DLC on consoles.

Maybe there is a lot of PC gamers out there but the money Microsoft makes on PC gamers is far less than on console gamers.
 
Avatar 14225
 
Steam: SpectralMeat
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
109. Re: No XP Battlefield 3? Jan 3, 2011, 14:36 Dev
 
xXBatmanXx wrote on Jan 3, 2011, 14:30:
So they make so many diff flavors of OS for Windows, why not make a streamlined Gaming OS? The market is big enough, why couldn't they drop that Windows uses 60% of your RAM and load even when idle and push that towards the GPU/CPU for gaming?

.....
Good point, I'd pay for a gaming OS. And the way they are doing the windows disks nowadays, all versions of windows are on the single DVD.
I dislike giving MS money (although I also very much prefer to stay legit on windows stuff), so I always look for a deal on windows (such as the family pack). But I'd pay a good chunk for a special gaming edition that has bloat (RAM usage, hdd space, and CPU cycle usage) reduced.
I think for gamers a $150 price point would be reasonable.

Hey MS, instead of blithering on about dedicating yourself to PC gamers and not actually doing anything, get up off your butt and do something like this. It wouldn't take all that much work, and best of all from your viewpoint, you can soak windows users for more money. Make them buy yet another edition of windows, and you could do this even before windows 8 comes out.
SpectralMeat wrote on Jan 3, 2011, 14:22:
Sure you get a turbo boost in performance for your OS but my games will still have to sit on the mechanical HD anyways.
You just have to use a different install strategy. Say you can get windows down to 30 gigs, that leaves 60 gigs on the SSD for games. Figure 6 games that are 10 gigs each (or 4 games at 15 gigs). You install the ones where the load times matter most, such as in the current multiplayer games you play most. Then as you go on to playing other games you either uninstall or move the previous games to another drive. You can use junction points to move everything and let windows (and steam!) still think the game is installed in its current location if you dont want to bother with a uninstall/reinstall.

Yes its extra work, but to stay reasonably priced with SSD (I consider $100ish to be reasonable) and keep the speed yet keep most used games, it requires some effort. The alternatives would be to avoid SSD (miss out on the speed) or buy giant SSD drives that are very high priced (I've seen a 480 gig one for like $1500).

This comment was edited on Jan 3, 2011, 14:45.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
108. Re: No XP Battlefield 3? Jan 3, 2011, 14:30 xXBatmanXx
 
So they make so many diff flavors of OS for Windows, why not make a streamlined Gaming OS? The market is big enough, why couldn't they drop that Windows uses 60% of your RAM and load even when idle and push that towards the GPU/CPU for gaming?

.....
 
Avatar 10714
 
In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. / Few men have virtue enough to withstand the highest bidder.
Playing: New dad
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
107. Re: No XP Battlefield 3? Jan 3, 2011, 14:22 SpectralMeat
 
Dev wrote on Jan 3, 2011, 14:10:
SpectralMeat wrote on Jan 3, 2011, 13:27:
I'll wait until the SSD's get a little cheaper and bigger, for now I am okay with my SATA3 mechanical HD.
Decent mechanicals get around 100ish megabyte/sec average sustained transfer rates. A decent SSD is 200+ megabytes/sec sustained transfers.
There was a 90 gb SSD on sale recently for $120 AR, it had 275 megabytes/sec sustained transfers
http://slickdeals.net/permadeal/42783
Enough for windows (even without de-bloating it) and a few games, and a decent price too IMHO.

Its getting to where a decent SSD is about the same $ per gig as a 10k RPM SATA raptor was in the previous generation.

I know and understand the differences in between the mechanical HD versus the SSD but for me personally they are still way too expensive. Sure you get a turbo boost in performance for your OS but my games will still have to sit on the mechanical HD anyways.
 
Avatar 14225
 
Steam: SpectralMeat
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
106. Re: No XP Battlefield 3? Jan 3, 2011, 14:10 Dev
 
SpectralMeat wrote on Jan 3, 2011, 13:27:
I'll wait until the SSD's get a little cheaper and bigger, for now I am okay with my SATA3 mechanical HD.
Decent mechanicals get around 100ish megabyte/sec average sustained transfer rates (latest raptor is around 150). A decent SSD is 200+ megabytes/sec sustained transfers.
There was a 90 gb SSD on sale recently for $120 AR, it had 275 megabytes/sec sustained transfers
http://slickdeals.net/permadeal/42783
Enough for windows (even without de-bloating it) and a few games, and a decent price too IMHO.

Its getting to where a decent SSD is about the same $ per gig as a 10k RPM SATA raptor was in the previous generation.

This comment was edited on Jan 3, 2011, 14:30.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
105. Re: No XP Battlefield 3? Jan 3, 2011, 13:27 SpectralMeat
 
I think 5Gb is a bit of a stretch without screwing up Win7 like you said but to get Win7 under 10Gb is easily achievable imo. If you have even a 40Gb SSD you should be okay.

I'll wait until the SSD's get a little cheaper and bigger, for now I am okay with my SATA3 mechanical HD.
 
Avatar 14225
 
Steam: SpectralMeat
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
104. Re: No XP Battlefield 3? Jan 3, 2011, 13:21 Dev
 
SpectralMeat wrote on Jan 3, 2011, 11:07:
Dev wrote on Jan 3, 2011, 09:58:
I'll paypal you money if you can get my windows folder to 5 gigs without screwing it up. No joke, its taking up a huge chunk of my expensive SSD, the win 7 folder is about 20 gigs,

Dev

Try this guide to slim down your Win 7 folder(s)
I've used that guide to considerable cut down on HD space as well as speed up my W7. I got rid of my page file for example and from my 4Gb memory I hardly ever use more than 75% while I am playing games and run some other apps in the background. When I am not playing any games the free memory is over 50%.
Anyways check out the guide and see if it helps you cut down on the Win7 folder size.
Thanks! I've done some of it in the past, and I see a few decent suggestions in the guide that I haven't tried. I don't think it will take me down to 5 gigs from 20 (only including the windows folder, not including the swap file, its in the root of the drive), but it should help some.

And that offer to paypal that Theo guy was genuine if he can get hte windows folder down to 5 gigs without screwing up my OS install. However, I'm thinking it involves things like using vlite and having a special install (which is out for me because I'm not interested in installing again), and killing folders like the install folder which can negatively impact the OS install, and probably killing parts of the winsxs folder which can also negatively impact the OS install.

This comment was edited on Jan 3, 2011, 13:42.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
103. Re: No XP Battlefield 3? Jan 3, 2011, 13:20 Dunkirk
 
Verno wrote on Jan 3, 2011, 12:50:
Yes, certainly typing text into Google when you run into a minor compatibility problem is a huge hassle that could easily influence getting rid of your operating system. I can totally see how running Linux and Windows XP are much easier things by comparison Artist That mole hill, it's a mountain!

Now you're getting it! I have an XP install disk that's slipstreamed with SP3 and my motherboard's RAID driver. Going back was really easy!

Horses for courses: I don't value learning to fiddle with compatibility mode.

And you're saying that it takes a lot of work to run XP or Linux, but you're hacking 7 to fit on your ridiculously-cheap hard drive space? Glass houses, buddy.

This comment was edited on Jan 3, 2011, 13:30.
 
Acts 17:28 - "For in Him we live, and move, and have our being."
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
122 Replies. 7 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ] Older >


footer

.. .. ..

Blue's News logo