Battlefield 3 Relieving Windows XP From Duty

[tautologico]

So while this is a gamble for DICE to potentially alienate a good quarter of its potential market, it is probably a calculated one: There's a good chance that the hardcore gamers who would play a game like Battlefield 3 are the ones that have already upgraded to an OS like Vista or Windows 7.

I question the intelligence of anyone running Vista over 7, currently. If your PC can run Vista, it can run 7 better. Plain and simple.

You dare question my intelligence? I am quite offended! Duel, at dawn. Pick your weapons.

(Vista runs quite well for me and reinstalling means a lot of stuff to do because my game machine is also a work machine. Also, I don't want to spend buying 7 for this machine that I'll probably replace sometime this year. Vista runs fine, really.)

 

[nagi]

If not, well, it'll also be coming out on Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3. Better than nothing, right?

Actually that would be worse then nothing because being on consoles is a dragging down the quality of the whole game.

QFT unfortunately.

I'm also happy to see DX9 go, as I've switched to win7 on most of my machines already. And since even a 2+ year old VGA is DX10 capable (eg: ATi 4800), it should only be an OS-change, not a full new machine for most.

 

[tautologico]

Why are PC gamers so attached to XP again?

Mainly because Vista didn't work very well, glitchy, memory heavy and generally rubbish, so gamers stuck to XP like old chewing gum to a boot. Although 7 has poven much better.

This is more about perception than reality. Vista is not as bad as people say it is. And I'm not just saying that from a single experience. I have installed and used Vista on lots of machines. Yes, Windows 7 is lighter, but that's about it. If you have more than 1Gb of RAM and know how to configure it, Vista runs basically as well as 7, even using similar amounts of RAM.

 

[Wolfenbarg]

Why are PC gamers so attached to XP again?

I'm surprised this OS wasn't phased out of PC gaming years ago...

Because Vista was a buggy memory hog. If it had been up to the level of polish that Windows 7 is, then you would have seen a lot more gamers upgrade by now. Since it wasn't, it'll be a little bit more time for everyone upgrade. Upgrading operating systems isn't too cheap, so it takes time to make an investment like that.

Also because of backwards compatibility. It's easy to play old games on XP, as even games from last generation like Kotor are a massive hassle to get running on Vista and Windows 7. If you're buying a new machine, then this isn't too much of a problem. If you're upgrading, then you have a trade-off decision to make.

 

[TerranReaper]

I know some people will be pissed at this matter, but I find the decision to be understandable. Continuing to support XP will drag down whatever innovations in the engine they hope to do. In any case, I hope Battlefield 3 will be great and I really need to upgrade from the piece of crap known as Vista.

 

[TheHecatomb]

About time, really. WindowsXP has had a great run, but it's outdated. It really is.

 

[Lazy Kitty]

Well, I guess I won't be playing Battlefield 3 then...
Not that I was planning to...

 

[Danny Ocean]

So while this is a gamble for DICE to potentially alienate a good quarter of its potential market, it is probably a calculated one: There's a good chance that the hardcore gamers who would play a game like Battlefield 3 are the ones that have already upgraded to an OS like Vista or Windows 7.

I question the intelligence of anyone running Vista over 7, currently.

S'cuse me? Don't be getting all up on mah intellect, dawg.

Ever occurred that the slight speed loss just isn't enough of an issue for us to fork out an extra however-many-pounds for one that's slightly better but, broadly speaking, functionally the same?

 

[Rad Party God]

Upgrading for just one game that I'm really doubtful that my PC, as it is right now, may or may not run, no thanks.

But until I upgrade my PC, then I'll fully embrace Win7 x64 (I still have my copy laying around somewhere).

 

[Slycne]

It was bound to happen at some point and invariably some game would have to herald it, though I doubt that Battlefield 3 will be the one to get me to switch even if I have been meaning to upgrade from Xp to Windows 7 on my desktop for some time.

 

[tautologico]

7 Still runs better, by a very far margin. And, really, no offense meant here, but reinstalling your OS is a mere fraction of the effort that it used to. This isn't the 90's where installing Windows 3.11 would take 5 or 6 hours. Windows 7 installs in under 30-45 minutes for me. Hell, so did Vista for that matter. I do understand the work machine though, been there myself, however, it's really not as big of a time consumer as it once was.

Seriously, the difference is not that big. I have installed and configured machines with both Vista and 7. As I said in another reply above, a well-configured Vista is, at most, only (very) slightly more resource intensive than a Windows 7. The gain I would have going to 7 would not be worth the money for a Win7 copy and, more importantly, my time. This machine runs 3 OSs and Windows installers don't care for bootloaders, among other things.

 

[HentMas]

Why are PC gamers so attached to XP again?

I'm surprised this OS wasn't phased out of PC gaming years ago...

because A LOT of people dont want to cough up some bucks to Microsoft to upgrade

those are the same that can be found saying "Micro$oft is trying to rip us out of our pants!!!"

and probably have "Ubuntu" or other linux based OS in a partition somewhere.

 

[Petromir]

7 Still runs better, by a very far margin. And, really, no offense meant here, but reinstalling your OS is a mere fraction of the effort that it used to. This isn't the 90's where installing Windows 3.11 would take 5 or 6 hours. Windows 7 installs in under 30-45 minutes for me. Hell, so did Vista for that matter. I do understand the work machine though, been there myself, however, it's really not as big of a time consumer as it once was.

Seriously, the difference is not that big. I have installed and configured machines with both Vista and 7. As I said in another reply above, a well-configured Vista is, at most, only (very) slightly more resource intensive than a Windows 7. The gain I would have going to 7 would not be worth the money for a Win7 copy and, more importantly, my time. This machine runs 3 OSs and Windows installers don't care for bootloaders, among other things.

Windows 7 is almost indistiguisble from an up to date Windows Vista install. The bigest shift between them is the name, and that appeared to be the main point in windows 7 release, it wasnt the upgrades, which could easially have been rolled out for Vista, it was to get away from the Vista name.

Launch vista was a bloated beast, most of the upgrading from launch Vista to launch win 7 was released in updates and service packs. Yeh theres still a difference, but unless your near the base requirments your not really going to get much difference in them.

 

[Danny Ocean]

Performance-wise, Windows 7 blows the doors off of Vista, all other details are secondary and inconsequential to me.

Excuse me for being so amazingly stupid that I continue to use Vista at the moment.

I guess that either makes you narrow-minded or naive. I don't really think I should need to greatly elaborate why, as doing so would simply be reciting to you aspects of human nature that you should really already know about.

Perhaps you don't care about other factors, but then I'd have to ask why you've not made or commissioned your own custom Operating System which is the peak of efficiency for all the tasks you need. After all, you don't care about time, the cost, previous investments, lack of knowledge, human reluctance to change, the lack of much practical difference between the two, any other things that other people might find more important, and so on.

Calling yourself an idiot for not using it would be fine, but directly insulting everyone who doesn't use it for not sharing your computational priorities is incredibly arrogant.

In fact broadly tarring everyone who isn't using 7 as an idiot is starting to seem, to me, quite hypocritical of you.

 

[Burck]

Staying with XP while Vista was the newest Microsoft OS was understandable since XP was much more reliable and didn't eat up memory, but Windows 7 runs much better.

Remember how Mac's commercials that speculated Windows 7 wouldn't work out any better than Vista?

Well, that ad campaign disappeared after Mac realized people actually liked Windows 7.

 

[Vrach]

Why are PC gamers so attached to XP again?

I'm surprised this OS wasn't phased out of PC gaming years ago...

Because Vista sucked so much arse, most sensible people stuck with XP and grew fond of it. It's pretty stable too and shelling out 90+ bucks for an OS upgrade which, while nice, is not really necessary at this point is probably something most people aren't yet ready for (not to mention 90$ being the basic version of 7, if you want something like Ultimate, it's around 200), especially knowing prices will drop with time.

Also because there's nothing really wrong with the system. For all around usage, aside from 7 (which only came out recently, so I'm not seeing what the "years ago" you're on about), it was the best OS around.