Thread: Battlefield Not recession proof....

jeez people really? This is silliness. Win7 forced upon the masses "Oh noes!!!!"

Seriously. It is 2011 now. XP has been the de facto standard for an entire decade. It's time to move on. Enterprises are finally beginning to make massive changes in their own standard platforms/images. Those are generally the lasts segments of the computer industry/market to shift or adapt to new technology. If the large enterprises can do it without dieing so can you and almost everyone else who owns a computer.

You play BF2, probably on high settings given your comments in the pasta about other games and high settings , possibly play/ed Red Orchestra2 and apparently play Monday Night Combat. All of those games (run at the high settings) would require a certain level of hardware. That hardware would allow you to run Win7.

Just saying.

Originally Posted by flame

I game on vista and have only 1 issue and that is that I cant play bf2

Why can't you play BF2 on Vista? I have two Vista machines in the house. One 64-bit and one 32-bit. Both can run BF2/2142.

I have vista, I have very few problems. Biggest problem is I cant play any of my old games(age of empires/age of mythology) but I can fine on my dads Win7

Originally Posted by cornfuse

When BF2 was released, did it support 95, 98, or even ME? I think it was only XP.

This isn't exactly a shocker, and if it means they are making the game better by cutting out XP support, then I'm all for it.

Yeah, I totally failed to make my point.

There's no way BF2 supported those old Win versions. I wasn't suggesting it did.

Of course BF3 won't run on XP. I don't even think it's an issue of "cutting out XP support". A new BF title will need cutting edge graphics, and sound, and that means the lastest DirectX, and that means no XP. It will need an OS with better support for multi-core processing than XP has, and it will most likely benefit from more RAM than XP can conveniently support.

I was saying that the PC gaming industry has, for years, been able to coast along with confidence that people were going to be upgrading their hardware and their Windows version anyway. The same computer most people needed for everything else also ran the latest games. If you wanted to run the latest games on the highest settings, you splurged a little.

But that's changing. Many people still use Windows, but most of them don't need anything better than XP. Someone in this thread said that BF3 was the ONLY reason for them to get Win7. There was a time when you needed a faster processor to run the newest web browser. That's no longer true. Beyond that, more home computers are using something that isn't Windows at all. Also, more and more people are gaming on consoles, and communicating on hand-helds.

You're telling me that Win7 isn't that expensive. I'm saying that more and more people hear "Windows 7" and think "Meh."

I think there's more friction to upgrading than there used to be. Before, you bought new hardware and WindowsNewest because you were going to need it for lots of things. Now, lots of people are faced with buying new hardware and Windows7 only so they can play a game. I'm not saying that it's a bad deal. I'm saying that the situation is different. Also, that I don't know how that will affect BF3 adoption.

Cheers,


AetheLove

Originally Posted by DancingCorpse

Originally Posted by QuickLightning

You can legally get Win7 for dirt cheap if you take the time to look around. I got mine (Windows 7 Ultimate Signature Edition) for free even.

Yup, lots of work places get discounts for their employees on Win7, and if you're a Student...well, I don't know if there are any right now...

Exactly. I actually got Vista 64 Ultimate a few years ago for free. Win7 64 Ultimate I bought through my employer (ultimately UT) for about $40. It can be had for dirt cheap. Just have to look.

Originally Posted by AetheLove

I was saying that the PC gaming industry has, for years, been able to coast along with confidence that people were going to be upgrading their hardware and their Windows version anyway. The same computer most people needed for everything else also ran the latest games. If you wanted to run the latest games on the highest settings, you splurged a little.
This I agree with

...more home computers are using something that isn't Windows at all....
This I hesitate on. If you're saying that more home computers are using something other than Windows in total then that is not correct. If you're saying that more home computers are using something other than Windows than previously then I can see that. However, if people are playing games on their PCs (and not simple puzzle-ish or PopCap stuff) then they are still likely using some flavor of Windows. That is a fairly straight forward fact. Publishing houses (and subsequently developing houses) don't want to develop on small platforms. This is why there are far more games on console than there are on PCs. And additionally far more games on PCs than there are on Macs, than there are on Linux etc... Those are small(er) platforms.