BattleField 3 will not support XP

Kenai · 4 Jan 2011 at 18:53

dirtydog said:
Hang on, I thought people here said they wrote BC2 for all three platforms, and then at the last minute were told to include DX9 support. Suggesting it doesn't involve a huge amount of extra work.

It probably doesn't involve a huge amount extra to go back and add it in but I was under the impression that typically a game would be developed using XNA and because this effectively develops the code for the 360 and PC at the same time, it isn't capable (or won't let you) of giving you non DX9 code for PC.

As such, i'm assuming they must be avoiding using this, which means they'll be having to write a PC game and a 360 game rather than just doing both in XNA.

Whether it's easy to go back and add DX9 compatibility after the event, i'm not sure.

I think what excites people is that it essentially means they are developing native PC code and so things should be optimised a bit better than whatever your typical XNA output manages.

opethdisciple · 4 Jan 2011 at 18:54

Iv been saying it for a while now, and no one has belived me, but what DICE and EA are doing is firther turning the screw on Activision and the COD franchise.

The COD franchise took a huge nose dive when MW2 game out. Then you'v got the complete travesty that is BO. So what DICE are doing is saying right whilst the old dog is down, lets kick it so we take advantage of the current situation.

By saying things like 'we will support BC2 long after its release' (which they did and for free with map packs) and saying we will give you dedicated servers and now saying that we will not make a dogs dinner (console port) out of BF3, they are delivering or at least making the right sounds that the PC market (and the COD players) want to hear.

I wasa big COD fan, still am, but MW2 was horrendous, that I moved on to BC2 and Vietnam and skipped BO.

Dice and EA became the top dog in this arean about 6 months ago..... they just further reinforcing their position, because COD and Activision have been so dominant for so long.

Hopefull BF3 wont disapoint.

dirtydog · 4 Jan 2011 at 18:57

opethdisciple said:
Iv been saying it for a while now, and no one has belived me, but what DICE and EA are doing is firther turning the screw on Activision and the COD franchise.

The COD franchise took a huge nose dive when MW2 game out. Then you'v got the complete travesty that is BO. So what DICE are doing is saying right whilst the old dog is down, lets kick it so we take advantage of the current situation.

By saying things like 'we will support BC2 long after its release' (which they did and for free with map packs) and saying we will give you dedicated servers and now saying that we will not make a dogs dinner (console port) out of BF3, they are delivering or at least making the right sounds that the PC market (and the COD players) want to hear.

I wasa big COD fan, still am, but MW2 was horrendous, that I moved on to BC2 and Vietnam and skipped BO.

Dice and EA became the top dog in this arean about 6 months ago..... they just further reinforcing their position, because COD and Activision have been so dominant for so long.

Hopefull BF3 wont disapoint.

Haha, this made me laugh actually

Kick Activision while it's DOWN? Did you miss that MW2 and Black Ops made billions? You might have thought MW2 was rubbish but sales figures say otherwise. Activision aren't down. And Battlefield 3 will not be a direct competitor to CoD, it doesn't appeal to me and I daresay it doesn't have half the wide spectrum appeal and accessibility that CoD does.

~>Dg<~ · 4 Jan 2011 at 18:59

opethdisciple said:
Iv been saying it for a while now, and no one has belived me, but what DICE and EA are doing is firther turning the screw on Activision and the COD franchise.

The COD franchise took a huge nose dive when MW2 game out. Then you'v got the complete travesty that is BO. So what DICE are doing is saying right whilst the old dog is down, lets kick it so we take advantage of the current situation.

By saying things like 'we will support BC2 long after its release' (which they did and for free with map packs) and saying we will give you dedicated servers and now saying that we will not make a dogs dinner (console port) out of BF3, they are delivering or at least making the right sounds that the PC market (and the COD players) want to hear.

I wasa big COD fan, still am, but MW2 was horrendous, that I moved on to BC2 and Vietnam and skipped BO.

Dice and EA became the top dog in this arean about 6 months ago..... they just further reinforcing their position, because COD and Activision have been so dominant for so long.

Hopefull BF3 wont disapoint.

no the gameplay for you personally is better for ea. cod sells ten times more and always will . so cod is top dog at end of day. the game isnt great now but as bad as it is its the biggest fps.

hope bf3 is better but i have higher hopes for red orchestra 2. the more i see of this the more i know it isnt just rehashed garbage like bf or cod series.

opethdisciple · 4 Jan 2011 at 19:01

dirtydog said:
Haha, this made me laugh actually

Kick Activision while it's DOWN? Did you miss that MW2 and Black Ops made billions? You might have thought MW2 was rubbish but sales figures say otherwise. Activision aren't down. And Battlefield 3 will not be a direct competitor to CoD, it doesn't appeal to me and I daresay it doesn't have half the wide spectrum appeal and accessibility that CoD does.

I knew someone would say that. Of course they sold millions and that MW2 and BO have been some of the biggest selling games of all time.

But that doesnt make them good does it? 95% of people that bought the game would have bought it before playing it!

Garbage. COD4 was GOLD dust a timeless classic. MW2 broke everything good in COD4 and BO is just a rehash of MW2.

But BFBC2 and Vietnam have moved in to the void left by this mess.

This will be further reinforced with BF3. I mean come on, BO still uses the engine written for MW2 and MW2 was only a little sharper visually then COD4.

BFBc2 and BF3 are Dx11 etc.... basically they hold all the cards, and COD franchise better delever next time around or they are lookinga ta year on year 3yr decline.

Forget sales! Sales dont make a game good! It is some indication, but the only reason why MW2 was so huge, was ecuase people thought they where buying the successor to COD4, which they werent. With BO, well possibly people thought maybe the'v fixed the travesty that was MW2 so they bought BO.

Technically terrible games, which are simply indefensible!

BL was released without being beta tested it seemed, by all the bugs....

dirtydog · 4 Jan 2011 at 19:05

How good you or I think they are is irrelevant, they have sold record numbers and the next one is guaranteed to sell well too, regardless of if it is another rehash. It is just a much bigger franchise than BF is.

opethdisciple · 4 Jan 2011 at 19:08

dirtydog said:
How good you or I think they are is irrelevant, they have sold record numbers and the next one is guaranteed to sell well too, regardless of if it is another rehash. It is just a much bigger franchise than BF is.

I agree with you, and agree that BF is the underdog to the COD franchise. Which is why im saying whilst the dog is down, DICE and EA are trying to take their chance and move in to the space vacated by Activision by the mistakes made with MW2 and BO.

Im not saying they will become the top dog, but they will win back some market share.... which is a loss to Activision.

dirtydog · 4 Jan 2011 at 19:13

opethdisciple said:
I agree with you, and agree that BF is the underdog to the COD franchise. Which is why im saying whilst the dog is down, DICE and EA are trying to take their chance and move in to the space vacated by Activision by the mistakes made with MW2 and BO.

Im not saying they will become the top dog, but they will win back some market share.... which is a loss to Activision.

Fair enough, but then they are making an epic fail mistake by limiting the platforms it will run on. Whether you think it is stupid or not that people are running Windows XP today or even in a year, the fact is lots of people still are so from a business perspective, when you are looking to gain market share, dropping support for an OS with 25% of the gaming market (40% of the total PC market IIRC) is arguably foolish.

Kenai · 4 Jan 2011 at 19:19

25% now don't forget, which dropped from 35% in the space of about 5 months, so give it 12 more months and it's clearly only going to be smaller.

30% of Steam users currently have 2GB of RAM or less, which just goes to show how many people on Steam are not likely particularly hardcore gamers, even though they have Steam installed.

I really don't think not supporting XP will be as big a problem to them as you do.

overclick · 4 Jan 2011 at 20:29

Sounds good they are making the right noises at least as allways best wait closer to the time.

Personally I prefer the gameplay style in MW2 and Bops. Saddly black Ops is poorly ported/tested and doesn't play right on my system as per sig. Out of all the games I own it is only black ops and fallout NV (until i applied a fix) that has caused me problems.

Tefal · 4 Jan 2011 at 20:35

opethdisciple said:
The COD franchise took a huge nose dive when MW2 game out. Then you'v got the complete travesty that is BO.

Technically while gameplay took a nose dive profits when though the roof with mw2 and only got better with BO.

Tefal · 4 Jan 2011 at 20:37

dirtydog said:
Fair enough, but then they are making an epic fail mistake by limiting the platforms it will run on. Whether you think it is stupid or not that people are running Windows XP today or even in a year, the fact is lots of people still are so from a business perspective, when you are looking to gain market share, dropping support for an OS with 25% of the gaming market (40% of the total PC market IIRC) is arguably foolish.

Not when you see it's still steadily dropping.

but what you're missing dog is the x64 market share bigger games like bf3/4/5 etc are going to need x64 to run well, and xp x64 holds less than 1 % of of the market share.

overclick · 4 Jan 2011 at 20:49

running 7 x64 here, previous was xp and skipped vista as i heard it was a dog. Does 7 x64 have other benefits other than an ability to use more ram?

dirtydog · 4 Jan 2011 at 21:01

Tefal said:
bf3/4/5 etc are going to need x64 to run well

Why's that then

BF3 needs x64 'to run well' - link to this info?

ace-rimmer · 4 Jan 2011 at 21:05

novalogic games and big maps for the win

Kenai · 4 Jan 2011 at 22:23

dirtydog said:
Why's that then

BF3 needs x64 'to run well' - link to this info?

Well if it has as many players as rumour suggests it might, coupled with a slightly more advanced version of Frostbite and larger maps - it could well find itself struggling against the RAM limitations encountered on a 32 bit machine.

There isn't going to be anything to link to (as you well know) because there is still likely a year of development to be done yet.

L33 · 5 Jan 2011 at 01:11

I don't want to come across rude but you seem a little misinformed...

opethdisciple said:
I knew someone would say that. Of course they sold millions and that MW2 and BO have been some of the biggest selling games of all time.

They are just about the biggest selling entertainment releases of all time: movies/cinema, music, games. COD:BO broke all records for first day/weekend/week/month sales etc.

opethdisciple said:
But that doesnt make them good does it? 95% of people that bought the game would have bought it before playing it!

Kind of a moot point really, most people will buy most of their games without playing them first.

opethdisciple said:
Garbage. COD4 was GOLD dust a timeless classic. MW2 broke everything good in COD4 and BO is just a rehash of MW2.

I'm not a massive COD fan but this seems a bit of a sweeping statement. Of all those I know that own MW2/BO, a far greater percentage of them love them/are addicted to them rather than disliking them.

opethdisciple said:
But BFBC2 and Vietnam have moved in to the void left by this mess.
This will be further reinforced with BF3. I mean come on, BO still uses the engine written for MW2 and MW2 was only a little sharper visually then COD4.

BO is actually based on the WAW engine (which in turn was a modified COD4 engine). MW2 was a seperate 'branch' of the COD4 engine.

opethdisciple said:
BFBc2 and BF3 are Dx11 etc.... basically they hold all the cards, and COD franchise better delever next time around or they are lookinga ta year on year 3yr decline.

Most people on here are enthusiasts and will know what DX11 is. The vast majority will not have a clue and probably won't even be able to tell much of a difference.

opethdisciple said:
BL was released without being beta tested it seemed, by all the bugs....

BFBC2 wasn't exactly released bug-free either (see http://forums.electronicarts.co.uk/...es-bugs-compilation-thread-sticky-please.html.

silversurfer · 5 Jan 2011 at 01:51

alexhull24 said:
Welcome to 2011! 10 years after XP was released and we're still talking about this.

I still use xp sometimes, vista was crap.

64 bit is bigger news, that means 4gb likely needed and probably means not really a console game

Tefal · 5 Jan 2011 at 01:56

L33 said:
BO is actually based on the WAW engine (which in turn was a modified COD4 engine). MW2 was a seperate 'branch' of the COD4 engine.

aren't they all modified versions of the cod 2 engine though?

Tefal · 5 Jan 2011 at 01:59

dirtydog said:
Why's that then

Ram limits and the fact it's a waste to have so many x64 processors running 32 bit apps.

BF3 needs x64 'to run well' - link to this info?

I meant more the later ones for "need" but yes they recommend x64 for bf3

Frostbite 2 is primarily developed for DX11. XP & DX9 is _not_ supported, 64-bit OS is recommended. Lots of time to upgrade if you havent!

link is in the op.