View Single Post
Old 10-21-2009, 06:33 PM   #149
JesusIsGonnaOwnSatan
ANTA BAKAAA?!
 
JesusIsGonnaOwnSatan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Over the bridge from Australia
Posts: 1,213
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurgan
Yeah, but high memory usage and space doesn't necessarily translate to "spectacular."
more space = more room for [higher quality] textures, etc.

Quote:
It better
make good use of all that, is all I can say! Is this the type of game that will sit on our hard
drives and be played now and then (even after it is beaten) or is it going straight to the recycle
bin after 10 hours? It's hard to justify those kinds of upgrades when only a handful of decent
games require them (unless you're going to spend a lot of time on them).
good point. but personally i intend to get an ultra gaming rig as soon as i am able to, regardless of USE. its been an aspiration of mine since i was 8.

Quote:
Yeah, but nobody ever liked winME, especially for games. I bypassed it entirely based
on all the negative feedback from friends and people online. 2000pro was the first Windows
OS that officially didn't suck for the most part. It's still supported by most games, but a
few games are XP (and up) only... soon it will be Vista only, then Windows7 only. Why?
(other than profit) Since it takes more memory to run those OSes, I don't see the point,
unless I'm "forced" to use them for certain games.
My opinion: i think it's the roll of technology. if no one moved past an old OS, there would be no incentive to create new ones. If new ones aren't created, then there won't be a any new features, capabilities, etc. If that didn't happen, technology in general wouldn't be able to move past a certain point. since Windows owns such a huge percent of the OS market, it affects more people than any other OS (maybe even software) on earth. With new versions of windows, new capabilities are introduced, and with it, people are given the power to accomplish new things. if windows didn't move past windows 3 for example, the whole world wouldn't be able to do things we take for granted with XP today.

the abandoning of support for older OS's is just what pushes things along, and game support is simply a part of that.

basically, since OSes (windows) are the single most affecting bit of software for humans, if they didn't advance, we wouldn't advance. (technologically)

Quote:
It's one thing if they want to say "not supported" but it really works and it's just a CYA
thing, but locked out, entirely? Why should they? That's just greed.
"CYA"?

Quote:
Anyway, not to continue being a curmudgeon, but if new mid-range PC's are coming
pre-loaded with 2+ gigs of ram, that's cool. If not, how do they expect people to be able
to play this, especially with the economy being what it is?
I think it's more the graphics card and the CPU rather than the RAM. Most new PCs nowadays do actually come with 2+ gb of RAM.

Quote:
I suspect though that it's due to console
porting issues that these specs are so inflated, more than anything.
I think so too, but i'm hoping we're wrong.

Quote:
Looks I'll be out of town when the pc version comes out.
me too, but either way i think i'll only buy USE once i have access to a decent enough computer to run it. (or i might break down and force the poor laptop to play it... )



mfw I read the Revan novel

it is not a cry of joy.

Last edited by JesusIsGonnaOwnSatan; 10-21-2009 at 06:43 PM.
JesusIsGonnaOwnSatan is offline   you may: quote & reply,