Will This Run on 64-bit OSs?

[Veldor]

Great post Zen especially your mention of virtualization. Which prompts me to state I think given the huge explosion of virtualization technologies (EMC buying VMware, Citrix buying XenSource, Yahoo buying Greenborders, Microsoft trying to invent better virtualization products etc.) that it actually may be more likely that even a home user will be needing to run a game in a virtual machine before they will need to run it on a 64-bit operating system!!!

Greenborders was an excellent example of how virtualization technology can help the home user (It virtualizes IE/Internet access so each time you close your window essentially the VM is closed and all viruses, trojans, cookies, etc all go away as well). It may not be too long off before its commonplace for each app/game to launch in some kind of its own virtual machine/mini-os/etc.

Yet I wouldn't have a chance at convincing Matrix to start supporting me running their games in virtual machines today (Though its quite possible many would actually work).

I think its better if they focus just on adding better Vista support for the time being.

[Erik Rutins]

Actually, we're currently moving all our pre-release testing to a few systems that support virtualization, to make it easier to ensure "clean" environments for installation and compatibility testing. Virtualization has some major benefits for us on the testing and production side and we may go with server virtualization in the near future as well to consolidate some of those systems. What I'd really like to do... ah, but I digress. Back to EIA! [8D]

[sabre100]

Erik no fair we dont have EIA yet so I think you should wait to play it like the rest of us until next week [:D]

[ravinhood]

I think they should wait until Dec 14th to release it when the physical edtion is ready as well. Also ZEN bravo on your excellent post and rebuttal to the technogeek.

[hammersinger]

Let me point a coupla' things out:
1. AMD is launching/has launched a tri-core model of the phenom on the spider platform. See this discussion: http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/ ... -core-8000
Apparenly the quad cores will have 9000-series numeration and the tricores will have 8000-series enumeration. These are part of a total package involving a cpu+mobo chipsets+plug-in GPUs. They believe that this integrated package will outperform Intel offerings. We will see if that is true. they are saying that gaming in particular will benefit from this integrated approach. This gives a market for CPUs consisting of one, two, three or four on a chip. All of them are 64-bit. Intel also makes lots of very powerful multicores.

The 32-bit machines still in existence are an endangered species and will fail in a few more years. Few of those machines, particulary the mass-market types, seem to last beyond five to seven years. The cheapo power supplies eventually drop some stray voltage onto the mobo and burn it out. (I have had this happen repeatedly with both home equipment and at the hospital with supposedly commercial-grade equipment.) There are fewer and fewer replacement parts as the days pass. The price of entry-level 64-bit is dropping daily. I doubt that anyone whose system is much below my modest specs could be considered to be running a computer at all. There are probably hand-held devices like PDAs and some cell phones which have more processing power and memory in them. Yet this is the market that Matrix is marketing to and many of you are defending like it was the last ditch on Borodino.

2. I described my system not to praise it. It is not a high-spec system at all. It is cheap and made with a lot of recycled parts. If you want to see a modern high-spec gamer try here: http://www.voodoopc.com/system/quotekit ... =61#imgmed
That is a high-end Voodoo rig at about $9700 comes with a water cooled video card and no monitor, sound board or speakers. I would not be happy buying something like the Voodoo to play 32-bit emulator games.

3. I ran my dissertation statistics and word processing on a Kaypro II which had a six-inch monochrome screen no graphics and no games. I had to write my own statistics programs but was able to run Word Perfect or something for the word processing. Good thing. The final result was several hundred pages and barely manageable with that technology. Two years later I bought a shiney new 16-bit computer with a real monitor. That thing played games!

Now: If you are old enough you can remember this era in computer gaming. The color interface was primitive but it worked. We soon had bunches of games from companies who are all defunct now. Lots of graphics adapters were developed. Intel stabilized the market with the ISA interface and things took off. Intel began to put out 32-bit processers, the 80386. I think the first 32-bit CPU that I got was a Pentium I. At that point we had increasing quality graphics and increasing processor resources although it was a while before RAM prices really dropped. Texas Instruments had done a study during the late 1970's which came to the conclusion that in the digital electronics market everyone always buys up. Nobody ever buys less processing power to replace more processing power even if they do not need increased power for the intended function of the device. This seems to be true. 32-bit conquered the (PC) gaming world and relentless developments in graphics, sound, storage and interface devices drove along. Why? Because we all wanted better and more functional stuff to play better/more graphics-heavy games. I doubt that anyone who is reading this would replace their 32-bit system with a 16-bit system and suffer the resultant loss of speed, graphics, memory etc.

The potential gaming experience improvement going from 32-bit to 64-bit will be much more dramatic than what we got going from 16-bit to 32-bit. At some point there will be "no comparison" and when software is available to take advantage of the universally-available 64-bit marketplace the market will move and not look back. That will be the end of non-adapting companies like Matrix just like the las move was the end for non-adapting 16-bit game companies. I have been watching several European firms and I think that the "64-bit killer app games" (in this market nich) will come from there.

4. I bought, downloaded, installed and have played enough of Starshatter from Matrix to believe that it runs on 64-bit Win XL. That was nice. It seems to me that discovering specifications like this would be a function of Customer Support or Product Support or System Recommendations or something. Caveat Matrix.

5. Regarding Vista: This review: http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/ ... erformance
shows that Vista with SP1 only executes at about half the speed of XP. Vista is garbage for many reasons and will be seen as "Millenium 2.0" soon. That only leaves XL and a few Linux distros in the 64-bit game.

6. The GPU future of gaming is not my idea. I gave a referenced modern quote from Alex Saint John. Saint John is a major player in the gaming world and a recognized authority on game programming. Read the book about him and his rebellion at Microsoft, for instance. I tend to believe him. Other people have other opinions with no data or footnotes to back them up. Thats so nice.

7. We will see if virtualization does anything in the game world. Meanwhile it sound like this game EIA, will not be on my buy list. That is too bad.
best,
hammersinger

[pzgndr]

In response to that, I can only say that if we began to design for requirements such as those you have, we would eliminate most of our market. You might be surprised how many wargamers are way back on the hardware upgrade curve. Frankly, we get quite a bit more in the way of complaints when a game has higher minimum specs than we do when it doesn't exploit the latest and greatest hardware or software.

I agree with the Matrix position. hammersinger, despite his technical savvy, fails to distinguish between the computer gaming world and the computer wargaming world. There is a significant difference. A wargame like EiA does not need high end hardware and software, and many grognards are slow to upgrade their systems.

When I go to World Boardgaming Championship in August each year, it's amazing to find some players who do not even own a home computer. There's a market of grognards out there, and Matrix is doing what it can to attract them to computer wargames. Pushing expensive high end systems would not attract these players, and the techno-geeks playing high-speed eye-candy games are not interested in wargames like EiA anyway.

[Murat]

1. Sorry Erik, et. al. @ Matrix cuz I know you hate these type of commments that follow.
 
2. Hammer, you could not last in an EIA game if you cannot even admit your errors.
 
3. 2 years, 10 posts, 5 here talking out your ass about things that you have heard from others instead of doing your own research work.
 
4. If you are going to talk about AMD or anyone else's products, quote them, not commentators. Check the AMD site, their have moved on to quad, no tri. Phenom 9000 series is being marketed.
 
5. I quoted my sources after you mistated some facts. As for the future of gaming, just pick up the Wall Street Journal, check in Forbes, or even just go to your local store and see for yourself what they all say the future of gaming is and you will see it is NOT PC, it IS console.
 
6. Mr. St. John is considered by many to be insanely evil in that he developed IN GAME advertising.  His programs are tagged as spyware and adware. Bookwise if you mean Renegades of the Empire it is not only about him. Yes his development of DirectX is nice, but it was his job and if not him, Gates could have had another of his brain trust develop something with a different title for the same purpose.  He makes nice mind candy games (beer and pretzels if you like that term better) but his main funding comes from advertising, mostly of the spam nature. You are welcome to him as a hero if you like, I personally hope he slides under a gas truck and tastes his own blood (modifications of his programs are used for such nice purposes as spam emailing in MMORPGs).

[zenmaster]

Hammersinger,

You again are very lost.
You are running an OS that few people are using, need, or Want.
It is for a very Niche market and that Nice is not the Home User or gaming market.

Now to address some of your almost points...........

1) You do undertand that AMD's "Spider" system is all about "Marketing"?
They are going from Dual to Quad Cores to make use of the more multi-threaded apps.
(The 3-Core Processors are quads with a single defective core.)
The GPUs will simple PCI-E2 slots just like that exist today.
However, you will find these are being used for Intense Graphical Work, not standard computations.

32-Bit CPUs have little to do with either Operating Systems or the software running on them.

The truth is, 64-bit software and Operating systems are slower and less efficient than 32-bit Software and Operating Systems for use that does not require the 64-bit code.
And in general, Home/Office use does not really need 64-bit software and it's overhead.
For some heavy duty programs such as SQL Databases and the like which need loads of memory, they make sense.
For most Desktop products, it clearly is not.

2) And your point is what?

3) And again your point of a personal resume is what? You do understand that such statements are one of the basic fallacies in logical arguments. You don't say "I'm correct because I have credentials". Rather you should say, I'm correct because of these facts. I could give my resume, but that would not prove I am correct.

However, If you are going to talk about the past, present, and future of gaming we can do that.
Companies make money by making and selling products that are desired by the current market place.

Intel Created the 64-Bit Alpha CPU years ago.
Microsoft made a 64-Bit Version of Windows years ago for that CPU.
Nobody bought the CPU or OS.
IBM made OS/2 as a 32-bit OS far before Windows, but nobody bought it.
Vista 64 is currently available and most CPUs being shipped are 64-bit, however Vista-32 is what is being shipped!

Software companies like Matrix are not going to try and force market change. Rather, They are going to meet the demands of the one that exists.

4) The most common question when buying any software is the system requirements. If you can't find them, ask. Most likely, you knew that it was not officially supported but rather you hoped it was since many software programs run on an Operating Systems on which they have not been certified.

5) The Link is also garbage. I could find tests that show Vista Outpeforming XP.
However, in your case I would ditch XP-64 as soon as possible and grab yourself a nice 64-bit Linux Distro such as Suse.
Since Microsoft will be dropping support for XP in the not too distant future and you dislike Vista, Linux is the only way to go.
There is a good chance you will be able to get your games running under WINE.

6) Believe who you like, but fact that both Intel and AMD are moving from Single to Duel to Quad with 8-Core CPUs from Intel within a year clearly demonstrate that the big players are focusing on increased CPU loads. Intel has shown many demos about how Physics is being off-loaded onto the additonal cores. In fact, there was only a single significant company working on GPU based physics computation.
This company has been purchased by Intel and basically terminating all movement in this area for the next few years. Now, what happens in future decades really is of little concern for Matrix and EIA.

7) That is really your lose and not that of Matrix. As both a software developer with customers across dozens of countries and all continents except Antartica, I grasp the concept of the support and development costs for all different supported platforms and languages. The $50 that Matrix could have gotten from you and perhaps two-three other sales is likely not going to come close to the cost they would have incurred for those potential sales.

[Veldor]

Hammer, with all due respect, I don't think your defending your stance all that well.

Let says, for giggles, every single wargamer in creation goes out and buys a new 64-bit PC like the one(s) your talking about tommorrow.

Thing is, 99% of them are probably going to load 32-Bit XP or 32-Bit Vista on them (Or the system will simply come with a 32bit OS).

Better yet its gonna work just great for them and they will likely have far less issues than the 1% who do load a 64-bit OS. So how is your argument even relevant?

That fact isn't gonna change even half as fast as the Vista Adoption rate, and even THAT is slow (As you point out with your own hatred of it).

If even you are the first to trash a new OS why on earth would you think the greater majority of us are so apt to soon abadon what we run now in favor of this miracle 64-bit version?

In a perfect world Matrix would certify every single game for 64-bit OS's. They'd also make a Linux and a Mac Version. And of course an XBOX 360 and a PS3 version. Let's not forget a Wii version that leverages the numchucks, and of course the Nintendo DS version for on the road EIA play.

No again, much as I'd probably like to agree with you, I think its already enough to ask a game company of Matrix's size to try to juggle both XP and VISTA support alone.

I'm torn though. Do I buy EIA now or hold out for the Windows 7 Version (Formerly codenamed Windows Vienna)? Oddly enough even though it isn't out until 2010 there are still peeps like me soon to be running the early alphas and I demand support! The world should be ready for a hypervisor OS today and that means MATRIX!

BTW, to all the 64bit junkies out there YES WINDOWS 7 WILL BE IN BOTH A 32BIT AND A 64BIT FLAVOR AND THAT IS IN THE YEAR 2010. Only the Server version will be exclusively 64bit.

[timewalker03]

Best Thread Ever!

[hammersinger]

Terminal Comments:
1. You folks can whine all you want. When the shift comes, whether it is to consoles or 64-bit-hood, fossile emulator games like Matrix and others market will be undesirable. Matrix and similar companies are not able to pro-act the market. The shift is inevitable as a consequence of market forces. Personally I think that consoles are the future of all gaming including the turn-based sort that I like. I also think that the Sony line will eventually win out as it has massive unused capacity even though it is too expensive for the games that are available for it etc. I also think Sony is a really satanic corporation. Ditto Microsoft.
2. I mostly started this because I think that Matarix should specify just what their software will run on so that people like me can make a reasonable purchase decision. Matrix, see Eric Rutins' comments about "Caveat Emptor," wants to play wargames against its customer base. That is suicide. I just did potential Matrix customers a service by buying and testing Starshatter on my little, rediculously low-spec 64-bit system and it seems to work. I do not see why they cannot test their software on different systems/configs and just report the results on the game site with other systems requirement data.
3. Lotta people talk about emulation. Emulation is better than no solution at all. I looked at VMware a while back on advice of a consultant. It seemed simpler to me to just run another system doing its regular job than replace it with an emulated verson on a more powerful system. Systems are cheap particularly when they are running low-demand office tasks. I put single-task boxes on KVM switches when I have to and they work just fine. I have never really seen the need for emulators except to run these antique games from Matrix and similar vendors. Actually I could run most of my office correspondence on my old Kaypro II. It typed letters, compiled multi-chapter documents and did simple spreadsheets just fine. The salient reason to buy more spiffy hardware is to play games. Now I need to find some games. OK then.
Been fun, see you later
Hammersinger

[Erik Rutins]

Hammersinger,

ORIGINAL: hammersinger
2. I mostly started this because I think that Matarix should specify just what their software will run on so that people like me can make a reasonable purchase decision. Matrix, see Eric Rutins' comments about "Caveat Emptor," wants to play wargames against its customer base. That is suicide. I just did potential Matrix customers a service by buying and testing Starshatter on my little, rediculously low-spec 64-bit system and it seems to work. I do not see why they cannot test their software on different systems/configs and just report the results on the game site with other systems requirement data.

I'm not sure I understand this. We do list what our software runs on. We list the compatible operating systems, based on our testing. If we can't test an operating system, we won't list it. I think everyone pretty much understands that if their OS is not on the game's supported OS list, then they're taking a big risk buying the game and hoping it will work. Hence the "caveat emptor".

Regards,

- Erik

[sabre100]

Lotta people talk about emulation. Emulation is better than no solution at all. I looked at VMware a while back on advice of a consultant. It seemed simpler to me to just run another system doing its regular job than replace it with an emulated verson on a more powerful system. Systems are cheap particularly when they are running low-demand office tasks. I put single-task boxes on KVM switches when I have to and they work just fine. I have never really seen the need for emulators except to run these antique games from Matrix and similar vendors. Actually I could run most of my office correspondence on my old Kaypro II. It typed letters, compiled

 
 
You miss the point on VMWare and other virtualization products, yes you may be able to buy a cheaper hardware then one super server that can run so many virtual machines.  The main benefits that companies in the Enterprise world are going to VMWare are:
 
1.  Power Cosumption - Power is very expensive and this will help save costs as well as reduce data center foot print.  Data Center Realte Space is very expensive and in fact many data center providers are running out of space and power.  VMWare solves that problem.  Instead of 200 physical servers taking up power and rack space you now have 20 beefy servers taking up the space and running 180 Virtual Servers on them for example.  Cost in the long run will be MUCH cheaper not just for hardware but for data center and power costs.  If VMWare and virtualization is so useless why is it growing so rapidly among many companies including the fortune 500.
 
2. Ability to deploy servers much quicker and easier
 
3. No hardware support is needed on virtual machines you save money there by not paying hardware support costs on 200 servers instead you pay for the 20 beefy servers
 
4. Disaster recovery you can easily deploy virtual servers and their DR counterparts
 
And many more reasons for it that would take just to long to explain,  I would suggest you study and learn VMWare as it is growing rapidly in the computer world if you ever wanted to get an IT job.
 
 
 

[zenmaster]

1) Who here is whining except you?  I suspect most of us find your confused ramblings more than entertaining.
2) I believe you were told quite directly what was and was not supported.
3) Clearly you have very little experience outside very small offices.  And even then nothing very advanced.  See the 4 comments above.
    (And In general, Strategy Games do not need very advanced hardware - It's the kiddie shoot'em up games that require that.  Wrong WebSite)
 
Of course the list could go on for miles.........
 
5) Extremely safe softare upgrades - If the upgrade does not go well, you are back to where you started in a click of a button.
6) Instantaneous Hardware Upgrades for 24x7x365 operations.  I can migrate a new server from an old box to a new box w/o a single second of down time.  Even streaming media will not see a hiccup as the server is moved from one box to another.
7) Even hear a Vendor say they can't dupe your issue?  Well you could mail in your hardware or just FTP it.  Today I had one customer FTP me his Windows 2003 Server having issues specific to certain Chineese Characters.  It would have taken forever to get the physical shipment.  I received it in a matter of hours instead.
 
 
 

[Veldor]

MMMM I feel much VMware love here.... Lets not forget though the DRS option where a server can transparently move on its own with no interruption to a server with more CPU and memory available. Sort of like an automated version of whats mentioned above.

And the upcoming Storage VMotion that lets you transfer the location of an Entire Server while its running (So move the entire contents from drive to drive or even SAN to SAN tranparently while users still access the server). New Experemental support also out soon that even monitors and recovers failed Windows VMs using the High Availability component that currently protects only the VMware servers themselves. And how about the 3i Hypervisor that can even run off a USB Key?

Like others I could go on and on.

Companies litterally mail us blank checks to implement VMware. Its one of the few IT advancements in history where the ROI works even on one or two aspects alone even if you devalue or discount the other benefits altogether. It basically sells itself.