Battlefield 3 no XP support

Console won't be a patch on the PC version, a drop of 40 players! 720p at 30fps max. Lower textures, effects, shadows, lighting, I know where I will be playing BF3 and it's not on the couch.
 
Last edited:
Rack said:
Really? It kind of seems like they're both exactly the same game with the PC able to turn on a few extra lighting effects and potentially run at a higher resolution.
Click to expand...

/facepalm. You can't be a troll, nobody can be this simple.

Just actually do some reading into the technical limitations and differences between the pc and console versions before posting again. For the sake of sanity.
 
orderoftheflame said:
/facepalm. You can't be a troll, nobody can be this simple.

Just actually do some reading into the technical limitations and differences between the pc and console versions before posting again. For the sake of sanity.
Click to expand...

If you want to be nit-picky you can throw in slightly smaller maps and fewer players in multi. But on the side by side video comparisons all you get is "if you pause the video here you can see the muzzle flash reflects on the wall a bit"

That's gotta be worth £100 right there doesn't it?
 
XP is rubbish compared to Win 7.

When I was using Vista, I had to dual boot with XP all the time because of how terrible Vista was. XP was only given more longevity due to Vista being as bad as it was.

Since I installed Win 7, I've never needed XP again. I wouldnt want to go back to XP due to how much better Win 7 is.

Rack said:
If you want to be nit-picky you can throw in slightly smaller maps and fewer players in multi. But on the side by side video comparisons all you get is "if you pause the video here you can see the muzzle flash reflects on the wall a bit"

That's gotta be worth £100 right there doesn't it?
Click to expand...

Yes it is. DX 11 also handles everything that DX9 and 10 can do far more efficiently with significantly more FPS.

DX9 is long obsolete and cant handle the same graphics engines that DX11 can. If you think an ATI 5850 isnt worth the money, then buy a console and stop playing PC games.
 
Last edited:
bhavv said:
DX9 is long obsolete and cant handle the same graphics engines that DX11 can. If you think an ATI 5850 isnt worth the money, then buy a console and stop playing PC games.
Click to expand...

No, just better, more efficient ones. Can't have that! It's also depressing that you seem to think mods and strategy games are of no value, if you don't want to buy a new graphics card with every game then you shouldn't be into pc gaming.
 
Strategy games are my favorite genre. Battleforge is purely lush in DX11 with the improved FPS it has over DX10 mode.

Also the latest graphics can still run 'mods and strategy games'.

Rack said:
if you don't want to buy a new graphics card with every game then you shouldn't be into pc gaming.
Click to expand...

Trolololololol.

How old is a 5850 now?

You shouldnt be into PC gaming if you want modern games to run on a 10 year old OS and hardware. Even consoles progress faster than you seem to do.

But seriously, I demand that they make all the latest video games compatible with my Mega Drive, we all know its possible, they just dont do so to force us to buy new hardware.
 
Last edited:
bhavv said:
Strategy games are my favorite genre. Battleforge is purely lush in DX11 with the improved FPS it has over DX10 mode.

Also the latest graphics can still run 'mods and strategy games'.

Trolololololol.

How old is a 5850 now?

You shouldnt be into PC gaming if you want modern games to run on a 10 year old OS and hardware. Even consoles progress faster than you seem to do.

But seriously, I demand that they make all the latest video games compatible with my Mega Drive, we all know its possible, they just dont do so to force us to buy new hardware.
Click to expand...

Would you stop with the damn sophistry, you know as well as I do the age of XP is irrelevant. Plasma and LCD tech has been around since the 80s, would you really be welcoming if new films only supported OLED sets?

My system is newer and substantially more powerful than the 360, I don't think it's unreasonable that it should continue to be able to run ports acceptably (irrespective of the direction of porting).

The 5850 is a couple of years old as I remember, but as it's both more powerful and older than the 6850 I imagine it was a pretty murderous price. Even if not 2 years from latest thing to redundant is a bit rich for my blood.
 
If the age of the OS is irrelevant then why arent you still using Windows 3.1?

Rack said:
My system is newer and substantially more powerful than the 360, I don't think it's unreasonable that it should continue to be able to run ports acceptably (irrespective of the direction of porting).
Click to expand...

I dont think its unreasonable to get Windows 7 either. Whats wrong with doing so?
 
I don't know why you're adamant that hardware is obsolete so quickly. My current build is from 2006 (£700), and I spent £130 on a new graphics card in '08. I can't be the only person who feels hardware is lasting longer now than it used to, since its not like I've ever bought top end hardware :/
 
Rack said:
Lots of rubbish
Click to expand...

I suggest you analyse the Steam Survey again as all your information is wrong.

There's far fewer PC gamers that don't have DirectX 10 compatible card than you think.

If those that are still on XP don't want to upgrade, their problem. They're probably less than 10% anyway. :p ;)
 
Rack said:
Which is why the PC version of Mirrors Edge needed an 8800. That argument shouldn't be allowed to run forever though, otherwise you'd need a GT 590 just to run Final Fight.
Click to expand...

You do realise there's a smaller gap between the release of the 8800GT and Mirrors Edge and the 5850 and BF3 right? As the GT was around the same price as a 5850 was when it was released. It now costs half that for a 5850, so what exactly is your point.
 
Tombo said:
You do realise there's a smaller gap between the release of the 8800GT and Mirrors Edge and the 5850 and BF3 right? As the GT was around the same price as a 5850 was when it was released. It now costs half that for a 5850, so what exactly is your point.
Click to expand...

That Mirrors Edge, Oblivion and Battlefield 3 will all run on the same hardware on consoles, yet need 3 separate upgrades to run on PC.

bhavv said:
More sophistry...

I dont think its unreasonable to get Windows 7 either. Whats wrong with doing so?
Click to expand...

Because it's £70 on an OS I'd only be using for a year or so. If MS had anything approaching a reasonable pricing strategy for OS I wouldn't have a problem, but £70 a year and all I get is the right to play a couple of games is a bit much.
 
Going by your XP usage, you'd probably be using Windows 7 for 20 years.

It's not £70 a year, new OS's come out around every 3 years, and you don't have to upgrade, but older OS's may hinder performance, and may not support modern software and hardware.
 
£70 a year? Where the hell did you get that from? Why would windows 7 only last you a year when xp has lasted you 10? Or have you only just upgraded to xp in the last couple of years and this is your reasoning that windows 7 will only last a year?

I suggest you just get BF3 on console. It's very clear that you just don't 'get the drift'. Countless people have tried to explain, yet you still talk the same pointless argument.
 
Last edited:
i upgraded to XP late, it was about the time when the Pentium 4 with HT was popular (the LGA775 not the older SKT478) not sure how long i have had XP can anyone work it out? :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom