Jump to content



Photo

Need For Speed: Rivals x64 - Impressions/Thoughts?

windows x64 x32 dice

  • Please log in to reply
77 replies to this topic

#31 TheExperiment

TheExperiment

    Reality Bomb

  • Tech Issues Solved: 1
  • Joined: 11-October 03
  • Location: Everywhere
  • OS: 8.1 x64

Posted 21 November 2013 - 03:32

Do you really think that even most PC gamers want to spend time feeding into the "arms race" mentality that drives hardware upgrades, and especially those driven entirely by gaming?

So say I only buy a new PC as often as new consoles come out, but I like playing games from 3-5 years ago when I do.  (This isn't true in my case, but I know people who it is.)  Should the game be the exact same as it was when it came out, not because of my system but because of an arbitrary limitation?  Even in your scenario, having better performance through being framerate locked doesn't make any sense.




#32 OP PGHammer

PGHammer

    Neowinian Senior

  • Tech Issues Solved: 1
  • Joined: 31-August 03
  • Location: Accokeek, MD
  • OS: Windows 8 Pro with Media Center x64

Posted 21 November 2013 - 03:34

Every time they did it that I recall they ended up patching it out...so as I said before, here's hoping.  Even if not, I'd certainly hope the Mantle renderer isn't locked.

The reason it got patched out on PC is because of that "arms race" mentality that is STILL prevalent at the high end of PC gaming.  It's not a big part - however, the squeaking does get rather loud.

 

Quite honestly, I could care less, and not because I hate PC gaming - I simply have things that I'd rather be doing with my time (and my money) as opposed to competing to see who has the biggest e-peen.



#33 OP PGHammer

PGHammer

    Neowinian Senior

  • Tech Issues Solved: 1
  • Joined: 31-August 03
  • Location: Accokeek, MD
  • OS: Windows 8 Pro with Media Center x64

Posted 21 November 2013 - 03:50

So say I only buy a new PC as often as new consoles come out, but I like playing games from 3-5 years ago when I do.  (This isn't true in my case, but I know people who it is.)  Should the game be the exact same as it was when it came out, not because of my system but because of an arbitrary limitation?  Even in your scenario, having better performance through being framerate locked doesn't make any sense.

How is it arbitrary?  Because there is actually a ceiling? All upgrades - for any PC - reach a point of diminishing returns; what a performance ceiling does is bring sanity to your PC hardware budget.  (Basically, it's the same thinking behind military treaties, or even console hardware standards/APIs - or PC APIs, for that matter.)

 

By setting a reasonable ceiling - and enforcing it with caps - performance at the floor can then be worked on.  (All too often, game performance on PCs at the minimum, or even recommended, level suffered horribly because game developers concentrated so hard on satisfying the high end.  Satisfying the low end, and the midrange, is not supposed to be a crime, even when it does mean that the high end can't push a game as hard as it wants to.  Satisfactory performance grows the market, which means more games get sold, which means increased earnings, for both developers AND publishers.  Think of frame-rate caps as treaty enforcement.)



#34 vcfan

vcfan

    Straight Ballin'

  • Tech Issues Solved: 3
  • Joined: 12-June 11

Posted 21 November 2013 - 03:51

lol @ the game running at twice the speed with the frame unlocking

 

I will play this game though.



#35 The_Decryptor

The_Decryptor

    STEAL THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE

  • Tech Issues Solved: 5
  • Joined: 28-September 02
  • Location: Sol System
  • OS: iSymbian 9.2 SP24.8 Mars Bar

Posted 21 November 2013 - 04:26

How is it arbitrary?  Because there is actually a ceiling? All upgrades - for any PC - reach a point of diminishing returns; what a performance ceiling does is bring sanity to your PC hardware budget.  (Basically, it's the same thinking behind military treaties, or even console hardware standards/APIs - or PC APIs, for that matter.)
 
By setting a reasonable ceiling - and enforcing it with caps - performance at the floor can then be worked on.  (All too often, game performance on PCs at the minimum, or even recommended, level suffered horribly because game developers concentrated so hard on satisfying the high end.  Satisfying the low end, and the midrange, is not supposed to be a crime, even when it does mean that the high end can't push a game as hard as it wants to.  Satisfactory performance grows the market, which means more games get sold, which means increased earnings, for both developers AND publishers.  Think of frame-rate caps as treaty enforcement.)


I have no idea why you keep treating the frame rate cap as a performance thing, it's not. It's 100% down to being a bad port and the game being programmed badly, they literally can't raise the frame rate without the game breaking. Run the game on a super computer 30 years from now and it'd still run at 30fps.

#36 U2K

U2K

    Neowinian

  • Joined: 29-October 13
  • Location: North, Hollywood CA | Dundalk, MD
  • OS: Windows 7 64bit
  • Phone: N/A

Posted 21 November 2013 - 10:44

 The last great nfs game was nfs 2002. Anything after that is rated 4/10 in my book and nothing like the older games. Rivlas isn't any different from need for speed 2010 or most wanted or the other one lol. They need to back to the roots and also release road rash. EA is a terrible company lol



#37 riahc3

riahc3

    Neowin's most indecisive member

  • Tech Issues Solved: 11
  • Joined: 09-April 03
  • Location: Spain
  • OS: Windows 7
  • Phone: HTC Desire Z

Posted 21 November 2013 - 10:59

Hello,

As it should be.  There shouldn't even be a 32 bit edition.

As long as Microsoft release 32 bit operating systems, there always should be a 32 bit edition THEN a 64 bit edition.

I played Battlefield 4 on 32 bits and it was great :)
 
 

I don't hate the x64 edition whatever - in fact, that is the only executable I am playing (as is the case with Battlefield 4).

I was referring to hating the 32 bit edition.
 

I started this thread for the exact same reason I started the Battlefield x64 thread - the reality that the x64 game has very much come of age.

Like I mentioned, until Microsoft releases a 64 bit only operating system for consumers, the 64 bit only software age will never kick off as large as it should.  

You went way overboard with your reply but I dont care much about 10000fps. I just want a fun game, not the best graphics in the world :)
 

a 32-bit process is limited to 2GB of memory

And everyday you learn something new :)

I thought it was around 3GB

#38 TheExperiment

TheExperiment

    Reality Bomb

  • Tech Issues Solved: 1
  • Joined: 11-October 03
  • Location: Everywhere
  • OS: 8.1 x64

Posted 21 November 2013 - 17:15

As long as Microsoft release 32 bit operating systems, there always should be a 32 bit edition THEN a 64 bit edition.

That 32 bit exe is only catering to 9% of their playerbase, a number that will keep shrinking.  While I personally don't think it's worth their time now, they'll decide it isn't worth their time soon enough.



#39 The_Decryptor

The_Decryptor

    STEAL THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE

  • Tech Issues Solved: 5
  • Joined: 28-September 02
  • Location: Sol System
  • OS: iSymbian 9.2 SP24.8 Mars Bar

Posted 22 November 2013 - 00:04

...
And everyday you learn something new :)

I thought it was around 3GB


Windows itself limits apps to 2GB (total) on 32bit Windows (it takes the rest for the kernel and the hardware takes some), that 2GB limit for 32bit apps remains on 64bit Windows unless the developer sets the right flag on the executable (Then it will get the full 4GB)

I have no idea why a game like BF4 even comes in a 32bit variant, it needs more than 2GB of RAM to run properly, and it's not like it'd even run right on hardware old enough to be 32bit only (And there's no good reason for running 32bit Windows on 64bit hardware)

#40 U2K

U2K

    Neowinian

  • Joined: 29-October 13
  • Location: North, Hollywood CA | Dundalk, MD
  • OS: Windows 7 64bit
  • Phone: N/A

Posted 22 November 2013 - 11:19

Well its a good thing i have all the older versions, jewel cases, etc. I'm abotu to play NFS porshe unleased in about an hour. Even this game is better than all the newer ones.



#41 OP PGHammer

PGHammer

    Neowinian Senior

  • Tech Issues Solved: 1
  • Joined: 31-August 03
  • Location: Accokeek, MD
  • OS: Windows 8 Pro with Media Center x64

Posted 22 November 2013 - 15:48

Windows itself limits apps to 2GB (total) on 32bit Windows (it takes the rest for the kernel and the hardware takes some), that 2GB limit for 32bit apps remains on 64bit Windows unless the developer sets the right flag on the executable (Then it will get the full 4GB)

I have no idea why a game like BF4 even comes in a 32bit variant, it needs more than 2GB of RAM to run properly, and it's not like it'd even run right on hardware old enough to be 32bit only (And there's no good reason for running 32bit Windows on 64bit hardware)

Two words - older hardware.

 

Never mind that the percentage of such hardware among gamers is officially in miniscule territory.  (Only with XP, which is where the division between x32 and x64 began, has x32 continued to outnumber x64.  Vista, unlike XP, had x64 versions of most SKUs - including those most in demand - at launch.  Further, Vista's launch window included the breakout of x64 and quad-core onto the CPU scene.)  

 

Also, how many folks with x64 operating systems still insist on running x32 applications, games, etc - even when an x64 version that does everything they need is available?  (No, I'm not referring to Web browsers, but productivity applications and suites, and specifically Microsoft Office 2010 and later, and I am NOT referring to those locked in add-in/plug-in jail.  Remember - like Windows, if you are licensed for an SKU of a version of Office, it is NOT bitness-specific; if there is an x64 version of your SKU available, you can crossgrade with the same license.)

 

This week, I actually got dragged into a HARDWARE upgrade due to my x64 transition.

 

I wound up replacing my (PCI bus) X-Fi XtremeGamer due to a known flaw that specifically involved the x64 support at 4 GB of RAM or higher.  It's hardware-related (not software), therefore, the only real fix is replacing the hardware.

 

Planning for future upgrades, I realized that I WOULD be breaching that 4 GB barrier - hence, even though I had no issues with the card in question now, there WOULD be issues later.

 

Basically, I had to stop stalling.



#42 OP PGHammer

PGHammer

    Neowinian Senior

  • Tech Issues Solved: 1
  • Joined: 31-August 03
  • Location: Accokeek, MD
  • OS: Windows 8 Pro with Media Center x64

Posted 22 November 2013 - 17:13

I have no idea why you keep treating the frame rate cap as a performance thing, it's not. It's 100% down to being a bad port and the game being programmed badly, they literally can't raise the frame rate without the game breaking. Run the game on a super computer 30 years from now and it'd still run at 30fps.

 

That is the nature of software - whether we're talking games or productivity applications or even operating systems.

 

ALL software has some sort of performance cap - even Excel (spreadsheet software) has a limit as to how fast it can calculate - and it's not a hardware limit, either.

 

You don't like limits - fine.  I don't have a problem with that opinion per se.

 

What I have been saying is that there are disadvantages to concentrating all the development efforts on maximizing performance on the high end.  (Every game developer has said the same thing - even PC-focussed game developers.)

 

Concentrating on the high end means that the middle and low end will inevitably suffer for it.

 

That nasty realization led DIRECTLY to consoles, and developers catering to that need because there was no need for a software cap - all consoles are alike by design; basically a HARDWARE cap.

 

Meanwhile, with a new generation of the consoles (easily the most PC-like consoles ever) there is also pressure on the PC gaming market to grow - and during a still-poor economy.

 

You can't grow while starving the low-end and midrange of gaming quality - which most admit the concentration on the high end (whether the game is a console port or not) definitely does.

 

Those minimum (and even recommended) requirements to play a game (and especially a AAA game) have to be realistic - and until the implementation of caps, they have NOT been.

 

Look at the minimum and recommended requirements for the original Starcraft (Anthology - which encompasses the original game and the Brood War expansion) - how well would you say it hit the targets of its day?

 

How playable is Anthology today - on modern hardware - in YOUR opinion?  (It's far from facetious - I happen to own Anthology, and, quite bluntly, it looks meh and quite flat compared merely to Sins of a Solar Empire, let alone either Wings of Liberty or Heart of the Swarm - and I have hardware closest to the floor of the latter two, while it was not even a consideration in Anthology's heyday.) 



#43 OP PGHammer

PGHammer

    Neowinian Senior

  • Tech Issues Solved: 1
  • Joined: 31-August 03
  • Location: Accokeek, MD
  • OS: Windows 8 Pro with Media Center x64

Posted 22 November 2013 - 17:25

Well its a good thing i have all the older versions, jewel cases, etc. I'm abotu to play NFS porshe unleased in about an hour. Even this game is better than all the newer ones.

And why is that, pray tell?

 

Is it because you have hardware closer to the high-end of that game's design?  (That actually makes sense as a reason - especially if you purchased the game prior to even so much as one major hardware revision.)

 

Porsche Unleashed and High Stakes are NOT in the same category as Rivals (or Hot Pursuit, which preceded it in the same category), as neither includes either playing as, or avoiding, the police - both are straight racing games.

 

Therefore, preference of that category of game also is a sensible reason.  (I avoided purchasing either BECAUSE I tend to prefer the Hot Pursuit model - both playing as a racer avoiding the cops, and playing as a cop, busting racers - as opposed to a straight arcade racing game - I have a low opinion of SHIFT, SHIFT 2, and the GRID series as well, and not JUST due to their "simminess" - almost Flight Simulator on the ground.)

 

If you really think that neither is capped  at the high end, you're likely going to be in for a rather rude shock.



#44 TheExperiment

TheExperiment

    Reality Bomb

  • Tech Issues Solved: 1
  • Joined: 11-October 03
  • Location: Everywhere
  • OS: 8.1 x64

Posted 22 November 2013 - 17:32

And why is that, pray tell?

The same reason Ultima is better than these new fangled RPGs :rolleyes:

 

(Yes, I know people like that.)



#45 Athernar

Athernar

    ?

  • Joined: 15-December 04

Posted 22 November 2013 - 17:56

That is the nature of software - whether we're talking games or productivity applications or even operating systems.

 

ALL software has some sort of performance cap - even Excel (spreadsheet software) has a limit as to how fast it can calculate - and it's not a hardware limit, either.

 

Totally wrong. Software will execute as fast as the hardware it's running on will permit, proof of this is easily observable when running older games that do not artificially limit or otherwise time lock the game simulation, resulting in games running unusably fast. The solution? CPU limiting.

 

The_Decryptor is 100% right here, the limit in NFS is purely the result of shoddy programming practices.