Dice says in 2013 Frostbite 2 games will require 64bit OS

[Grooveriding]

https://twitter.com/#!/repi/status/204501258273427456

We'll have Frostbite-powered games in 2013 that will _require_ a 64-bit OS. If you are on 32-bit, great opportunity to upgrade to Windows 8

Thought this was interesting, although I assume at this point most of us already are on one, the windows 8 is a laugh though, I am sticking to Win 7.

 

[biostud]

Then we just need DX11 requirements.

 

[BrightCandle]

Consoles may be limited to less than a GB but PC games really can utilise 8GB or more. Some games even crash due to the 4GB limit (Civilisation) others are severely crippled by it (SimCity and Arma 2). Honestly its time to move on seeing as how the majority of the market has it now.

 

[TheSlamma]

Maybe they will use that ram to not have delayed hit markers in BF so you don't die when you are 10 steps around a corner already

 

[Dankk]

Good. After all, what PC gamer doesn't have at least 4GB of memory nowadays?

 

[Texashiker]

Good. After all, what PC gamer doesn't have at least 4GB of memory nowadays?

That is a good question. For the answer I turn to the steam hardware survey.

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey

Memory

Less than 512 MB - 0.07%
512 Mb to 999 MB - 0.70%
1 GB - 3.57%
2 GB - 13.73%
3 GB - 19.61%
4 GB - 22.21%
5 GB - 1.28%
6 GB - 6.96%
7 GB - 1.19%
8 GB - 21.80%
9 GB - 0.11%
10 GB - 0.25%
11 GB - 0.04%
12 GB and higher - 8.45%


operating system

Windows 7 (32bit) - 14.18%
Windows XP 32 bit - 9.66%

Between windows 7 (32 bit) and windows xp, that is a combined 20.84% of steam users.

 

[Buxaroo]

As it should. There is ZERO excuse to be running a 32 bit OS. Period. If you have a CPU that was made in the last 8 years, you aint got an excuse.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

I wonder if this is because the new consoles seem to have 8GB, maybe finally consoles will actually help us PC Master Race guys.

 

[Lonyo]

That is a good question. For the answer I turn to the steam hardware survey.

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey

Memory

Less than 512 MB - 0.07%
512 Mb to 999 MB - 0.70%
1 GB - 3.57%
2 GB - 13.73%
3 GB - 19.61%
4 GB - 22.21%
5 GB - 1.28%
6 GB - 6.96%
7 GB - 1.19%
8 GB - 21.80%
9 GB - 0.11%
10 GB - 0.25%
11 GB - 0.04%
12 GB and higher - 8.45%


operating system

Windows 7 (32bit) - 14.18%
Windows XP 32 bit - 9.66%

Between windows 7 (32 bit) and windows xp, that is a combined 20.84% of steam users.

XP users are irrelevant for high end gaming.
If you're still on a 12 year old OS and running hardware capable of playing games made on a brand new engine, you're doing something wrong.

Just because Steam users have X doesn't mean the relevant customer base does. XP users aren't relevant to Frostbite 2 engine games. Much like Playstation 2 users aren't relevant when it comes to PS3 games (since that's only 1 year older than XP).

"Don't make a PS3 game, think of the tens of millions of PS2 users who won't be able to play it".

64-bit Win7 + Win 8 + Win Vista makes up over 66% of the Steam market. XP users can throw their computers away.

 

[gorcorps]

Then we just need DX11 requirements.

BF3 already didn't work on xp because it had no dx9 mode.

 

[DominionSeraph]

As it should. There is ZERO excuse to be running a 32 bit OS. Period. If you have a CPU that was made in the last 8 years, you aint got an excuse.

You seem to have things backwards. There is still no reason to be running a 64 bit OS.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

^^and the harm of running a 64 bit OS is....

 

[Texashiker]

64-bit Win7 + Win 8 + Win Vista makes up over 66% of the Steam market. XP users can throw their computers away.

My daughter and my son both have xp on their computers.

If something works, why change?

 

[pcslookout]

Windows Vista and 7 are the future.

Windows XP will soon be outdated just like Windows 2000.

 

[Texashiker]

Windows Vista and 7 are the future.

Vista is the future????

I do not know what to think of that comment. Does microsoft even sale vista anymore?

 

[Lonyo]

My daughter and my son both have xp on their computers.

If something works, why change?

If it works for what they do, that's fine. They probably won't be playing the latest and greatest games that require high end hardware anyway.
Same as a PS2 works for playing PS2 games.

As long as people don't complain when their OS which is more than a decade old doesn't play the newest games, that's fine.

The only people who might complain are those who got shafted by OEMs who skimped out and went with 32-bit versions of NT6 based OS's.

 

[ImpulsE69]

Wait...the latest and greatest console ports currently require 8 cores, 64bit dx11, and 32gb of ram?? Did NOT know that....yes, that's right XP still runs so many of the new games coming out. OMG You can't play BF3??? ;p The truth is, as of right now there is very little incentive for the "AVERAGE" read AVERAGE user to care about 64bit or 8gb of ram. That's right, this means, probably not YOU. These games only require this stuff because of lazy coding. Would I recommend someone go to Windows 7? Sure...but honestly, I do practically as much on XP as 7. You are missing out on very little.

Some of you really need to get over your high horse. wow.

I would imagine the whole thing they are saying here is, we're lazy and this is what you'll need, even though the ports we'll be making the games from won't actually benefit from it.

 

[dguy6789]

You seem to have things backwards. There is still no reason to be running a 64 bit OS.

You're crazy. Just web browsing and having messenger and chat programs open with music playing with the number of tabs I have open uses like 3.5GB of RAM.

 

[Texashiker]

Wait...the latest and greatest console ports currently require 8 cores, 64bit dx11, and 32gb of ram?? Did NOT know that....yes, that's right XP still runs so many of the new games coming out. OMG You can't play BF3??? ;p The truth is, as of right now there is very little incentive for the "AVERAGE" read AVERAGE user to care about 64bit or 8gb of ram. That's right, this means, probably not YOU. These games only require this stuff because of lazy coding. Would I recommend someone go to Windows 7? Sure...but honestly, I do practically as much on XP as 7. You are missing out on very little.

Thank you, my thoughts exactly.

I upgraded to windows 7 64 bit only for the windows movie maker live, and extra memory support. And that is because I do video blogging on youtube.

You're crazy. Just web browsing and having messenger and chat programs open with music playing with the number of tabs I have open uses like 3.5GB of RAM.

That is because of lousy code.

There is no reason for a web browser to need 300+ megs of memory to display a 100kb web page.


As for gaming, with so much competition from consoles and casual games, by requiring 64 bit OS the developers are isolating customers.

My daughter plays more causal games on facebook then she plays on her steam account.

 

[badb0y]

Thank you, my thoughts exactly.

I upgraded to windows 7 64 bit only for the windows movie maker live, and extra memory support. And that is because I do video blogging on youtube.




That is because of lousy code.

There is no reason for a web browser to need 300+ megs of memory to display a 100kb web page.


As for gaming, with so much competition from consoles and casual games, by requiring 64 bit OS the developers are isolating customers.

My daughter plays more causal games on facebook then she plays on her steam account.

Obviously DICE isn't targeting your daughter when they make a game...

 

[Lonyo]

You seem to have things backwards. There is still no reason to be running a 64 bit OS.

Except 32-bit Windows OS is limited to less than 4GB RAM, due to the way address space is mapped.

Sure, if you want developers to have to limit what they can do, then there's no reason to run a 64-bit OS. But if you want to make life easier for developers, and give them more chance to push systems, then you want a system that can be pushed.

There's no reason to run a 32-bit system because there's practically zero drawback to 64-bit these days. If you are getting new, or bought new within the last 4 years, really you should have got a 64-bit system.

There's also another reason: forward compatibility.
Why go 32-bit now, when we are approaching 64-bit being much more useful? You're just hindering yourself, which is stupid when there's basically no reason not to go 64-bit.

Most sensible people nowadays will be going 64-bit. Frostbite 2 is for higher end hardware, recent hardware, which should, reasonably, all be 64-bit, assuming it was supposed to last a while.

Hell, there have already been games with memory issues due to 32-bit programs, specifically the default Windows 32-bit implementation with 2GB per process RAM limit.

(All the above within a gaming context, obviously)

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Agreed BF3 has a reasonably hardcore audience, its safe to assume anyone running a 7 year old XP machine is not that person, neither is the one who plays Facebook games. People who buy Battlefield have been asking for bigger maps, better detail, more destruction and more vehicles. To me the smart way to accomplish this is make the game for 64 bit OS's only just for the extra addressable memory alone.

 

[Stringjam]

The only lazy coding was from Microsoft for being so behind in the first place.

The Linux kernel was available on 64-bit architecture in 2001...before you could even get 64-bit hardware.

That was over a decade ago......why is this still even an issue?

 

[TakeNoPrisoners]

DICE makes high end games, they do not support people running a C2D with 1GB of RAM.

 

[NikolaeVarius]

Now if only they would release a game worth playing for more than 2 months..