[QUOTE=Sirias;22014563]Also to all thoses saying bawwww its 9years olds, How old is the source engine??[/QUOTE]
3 years old. Considering the massive upgrade in 2007.
And it still looks worse than most games out in the market today.
[QUOTE=The Vman;22016591]3 years old. Considering the massive upgrade in 2007.
And it still looks worse than most games out in the market today.[/QUOTE]
So? It ain't no slouch either.
[QUOTE=The Vman;22016591]3 years old. Considering the massive upgrade in 2007.
And it still looks worse than most games out in the market today.[/QUOTE]
Maybe on a top-of-the-line computer, but Valve realistically targets the average gaming computer. The Source engine looks good even on bad computers. Who cares if it isn't Crysis? It looks good enough to maintain immersion. That's the only thing that matters.
It's going to be a necessity, I'd get it over and done with now. It's really painful when you've been using XP all your life, but eventually you get used to it. Besides, it's incredibly backwards compatible so there isn't many problems related to that.
It's not painful at all. It's still Windows. Holy shit.
The interface sucks and everything has been moved around.
[QUOTE=The_Fly56556;22016913]The interface sucks and everything has been moved around.[/QUOTE]
OH MY GOD, CHANGE!
Suck it up.
I wish Microsoft could just disable all windows XP copies, wouldn't that be fun :D
[QUOTE=chunkymonkey;22016939]OH MY GOD, CHANGE!
Suck it up.[/QUOTE]
I did. I gave you a bad reading.
[QUOTE=The_Fly56556;22016955]I did. I gave you a bad reading.[/QUOTE]
Oh man, knowing you gave me a bad reading rating had crippled my life forever.
:rolleyes:
"Yo windows XP are the shit, they work and are the most awesome and stable and customizable and al;gkjsahksahls"
New Windows surface
"Ahh Wondows xP suck so much dick its terrible and broken and bugged and blalbkaghkadgh"
I don't see how new Windows made the old ones become worse.
I am not using either of them, but the sudden hate is confusing me.
I would get it if it went like "Windows XP were good, but Windows 7 are better..."
[QUOTE=Foda;22013304]why buy windows XP? why not just stick with win2000? seriously, you are using 9 year old software.[/QUOTE]
9 year old software for a 9 year old user.
[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;22017242]"Yo windows XP are the shit, they work and are the most awesome and stable and customizable and al;gkjsahksahls"
New Windows surface
"Ahh Wondows xP suck so much dick its terrible and broken and bugged and blalbkaghkadgh"
I don't see how new Windows made the old ones become worse.
I am not using either of them, but the sudden hate is confusing me.
I would get it if it went like "Windows XP were good, but Windows 7 are better..."[/QUOTE]
XP doesn't suck, 7 is just better tho.
You're bitching about an interface change between Luna and Aero? Try switching between Aero, Luna, Aqua, WindowMaker and KDE. Plus Ctrl-Alt-Tabbing to a command prompt every so often. I do that, and the only thing that really throws me off is trying to remember whether to use "ls" or "dir", which mainly comes down to "did I install Cygwin?".
Computer interfaces are pretty similar nowadays. Switching from one GUI to another is easy. The buttons are all in the same spot (save OS X, but they're just flipped), the buttons all do the same things, and they all use the same icon scheme. I have more problems switching switching between games that use ctrl to crouch and ones that use c to crouch.
If your only complaint is the aesthetics, not only are you the one person who likes the Luna theme, there are (as others have pointed out) numerous skins you can use to make any os look like XP.
So now, your only two arguments are not having enough money, or not having the processing power to run Aero. I can't solve the first one for you, but if you can't run 7, you won't be able to run JC2 anyways, rendering this discussion pointless.
Quod erat demonstrandum, motherfucker.
Edited main op, I know it sounds like I'm just trying to avoid more dumb ratings (A lot of people do that on FP), but it's not. Who cares about ratings in total... Ratings are only meant to portray the quality of the specific post.
[editline]07:01PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=gman003-main;22017413]1: You're bitching about an interface change between Luna and Aero? Try switching between Aero, Luna, Aqua, WindowMaker and KDE. Plus Ctrl-Alt-Tabbing to a command prompt every so often. I do that, and the only thing that really throws me off is trying to remember whether to use "ls" or "dir", which mainly comes down to "did I install Cygwin?".
2: Computer interfaces are pretty similar nowadays. Switching from one GUI to another is easy. The buttons are all in the same spot (save OS X, but they're just flipped), the buttons all do the same things, and they all use the same icon scheme. I have more problems switching switching between games that use ctrl to crouch and ones that use c to crouch.
3: If your only complaint is the aesthetics, not only are you the one person who likes the Luna theme, there are (as others have pointed out) numerous skins you can use to make any os look like XP.
4: So now, your only two arguments are not having enough money, or not having the processing power to run Aero. I can't solve the first one for you, but if you can't run 7, you won't be able to run JC2 anyways, rendering this discussion pointless.
Quod erat demonstrandum, motherfucker.[/QUOTE]
1: Yeah after looking at my post again, it does look rather bitchy... I guess I was a bit worked up after finding out I downloaded 6gb (not to mention the money) and not being able to play it. Oh and the money for the OS.
2: It's not that I find it hard to switch interface, I just don't like the layout As I said in my OP edit, though, XP is pretty ugly too, it's more about the layout than the colors and effects. And the big icons :P (I know you can change that, but that makes it look weird too.
3: I don't want it to look like XP and I have found a way (well my friend has) to make the the layout better, so now it actually looks pretty good.
4: I have a pretty good comp (not trying to brag or anything), so that's not why :)
[quote]
1: Yeah after looking at my post again, it does look rather bitchy... [b]I guess I was a bit worked up after finding out I downloaded 6gb (not to mention the money) and not being able to play it.[/b] Oh and the money for the OS.
[/quote]
They have that big warning that says only DX10 compatible for a reason, you know.
Anyways, the upgrade is absolutely worth it in the long run. In the future, Microsoft is just going to completely phase XP out of the things they develop, and people who don't upgrade are going to be completely fucked. May as well stay (somewhat) ahead of the curve.
[QUOTE=Father Funk;22024366]They have that big warning that says only DX10 compatible for a reason, you know.
Anyways, the upgrade is absolutely worth it in the long run. In the future, Microsoft is just going to completely phase XP out of the things they develop, and people who don't upgrade are going to be completely fucked. May as well stay (somewhat) ahead of the curve.[/QUOTE]
I had previously installed a DX10 Xp patch which allowed me to paly another game, I just assumed it would work for this too. Turns out it was half fake... It was directx10, but it was carved up and fitted together, just making it "work" for that one game, which they suggested as a test on their website :P
Yeah, Too bad a lot of classics are likely to be lost though :( I'm already unable to play Worms World Party on my comp... That's a hardware problem though.
Jesus, I didn't realize every Windows 7 user has a bloodthirsty, sadistic hatred for everyone who hasn't bought it yet.
[editline]11:28AM[/editline]
Apparently you're a retard if you're wary of the new operating system having problems like Vista did.
I don't get it, why are people so attached to XP? Yes it was good but like many others said, it's NINE years old. You can't expect them to keep supporting it. It isn't hard to upgrade and nor does it cost all that much. Just do it or don't, your choice. Microsoft recently had to ditch the old Xbox's Live, why? Because otherwise they can't improve on the 360's Live.
Same story here, they improve things, you can't expect them to think of older things all the time.
[QUOTE=Loofiloo;22024501]Jesus, I didn't realize every Windows 7 user has a bloodthirsty, sadistic hatred for everyone who hasn't bought it yet.
[editline]11:28AM[/editline]
Apparently you're a retard if you're wary of the new operating system having problems like Vista did.[/QUOTE]
I felt the same way against some posts, when reading through the thread :P
Windows 7 does have it's bugs... I guess some people are just scared of wasting money on another OS which turns out to be just as buggy.(as Vista was at release.) "W00t, Windows 7 is totally going to make up for the mistake that is Vista! IT IS! I WONT HEAR YOUR LIES! *cry*" ;P
[QUOTE=Banned?;22017346]XP doesn't suck, 7 is just better tho.[/QUOTE]
Exactly, saying that XP still works is just dumb. Windows 95 is also working, people who say that can use 95 too right?
[editline]05:33PM[/editline]
Doh, broke my automerge.
[QUOTE=Loofiloo;22024501]Jesus, I didn't realize every Windows 7 user has a bloodthirsty, sadistic hatred for everyone who hasn't bought it yet.
[editline]11:28AM[/editline]
Apparently you're a retard if you're wary of the new operating system having problems like Vista did.[/QUOTE]
I haven't bought 7 yet. My laptop came with Vista, which actually works pretty well. 7 just doesn't offer enough of an improvement to justify buying it.
BTW, Microsoft has already killed support for XP SP2. SP3 won't be too far behind.
[QUOTE=CommanderPT;22024584]Exactly, saying that XP still works is just dumb. Windows 95 is also working, people who say that can use 95 too right?[/QUOTE]
:colbert: I disagree.
So far this is the only new game windows XP can't play and I have yet to find hardware windows XP 64-bit can't handle.
I can name several games and maybe hardware that wouldn't work on 95...
I like the look of Windows 7. I have vista. I have a question: Do you get higher FPS at all on 7? I get a decent fps in most of my games on max (70 on tf2 max, 300 on halo, 40 on crysis) and I was wondering if you get a slight FPS boost?
There is no real reason not to upgrade to Windows 7, yes it is a 'tiny' bit slower compared to XP but anyone with a half decent computer should have no problem.
The point is your going to have to upgrade eventually or you will be left behind, you can't expect people to waste their time writing crappy hacks so you can play the latest game on your old operating system.
[QUOTE=geogzm;22025123]I like the look of Windows 7. I have vista. I have a question: Do you get higher FPS at all on 7? I get a decent fps in most of my games on max (70 on tf2 max, 300 on halo, 40 on crysis) and I was wondering if you get a slight FPS boost?[/QUOTE]
You probably won't gain much in the way of frame rate but personally I find Windows 7 to be much more stable and responsive.
[QUOTE=Chryseus;22025223]The point is your going to have to upgrade eventually or you will be left behind[/QUOTE]
If somebody had said this about Vista, they'd be looking pretty silly right now.
[QUOTE=windwakr;22025320]It's around 5GB larger for a basic install, plus you have to download many GB in updates. It hogs more memory, has many stupid features(who the fuck wants superfetch?) and is just all around bloated. The interface is dumbed down for all the stupid people that use the OS. You can't even delete a fucking folder half the time without a "You don't have permission to do this", even if you are a fucking admin(and that's after disabling UAC).
I've used Vista/7 for a while on another computer, I would never want either of those pieces of shit on mine.[/QUOTE]
... You don't actually know what superfetch does, do you?
I disabled UAC and I never get "you don't have permission" things.
[QUOTE=windwakr;22025320]It's around 5GB larger for a basic install, plus you have to download many GB in updates. It hogs more memory, has many stupid features(who the fuck wants superfetch?) and is just all around bloated. The interface is dumbed down for all the stupid people that use the OS. You can't even delete a fucking folder half the time without a "You don't have permission to do this", even if you are a fucking admin(and that's after disabling UAC).
I've used Vista/7 for a while on another computer, I would never want either of those pieces of shit on mine.[/QUOTE]
Disk space is cheap. You can get a terabyte for $70. 5 gigs isn't a big deal for gaming computers.
Superfetch is arguably one of the better features. It means that you don't have to wait as long after booting up for your apps to launch. It means everything's still ready to go after leaving your computer running overnight. On my computer, it preloads Steam, Firefox, OpenOffice and Media Player. I rather like having them instantly usable.
Why are you running as Admin anyways? Security 101: never run as admin or root unless you absolutely need to. Maybe you think you're smart enough to never get a virus, but nobody's bulletproof. And yes, I practice what I preach.
Vista was shit at first with horrible driver support and all. Few service packs and peripheral manufacturer -written drivers later it got actually decent. And now Microsoft throws a new skin, couple of superficial features to this decent OS and so everyone goes "omg win7 is teh best thing evar"
Since Vista already paved the way, Windows 7 is actually decent and pretty usable. It's still nothing more than I minor update to Vista. So, I do understand people who still prefer "9 years old OS".
And I have used all three of them, I have Windows 7 on my 2 desktops and 7 and XP on my laptops.
[QUOTE=windwakr;22025320]It's around 5GB larger for a basic install, plus you have to download many GB in updates. It hogs more memory, has many stupid features(who the fuck wants superfetch?) and is just all around bloated. The interface is dumbed down for all the stupid people that use the OS. You can't even delete a fucking folder half the time without a "You don't have permission to do this", even if you are a fucking admin(and that's after disabling UAC).
I've used Vista/7 for a while on another computer, I would never want either of those pieces of shit on mine.[/QUOTE]
1. Who cares if it is an extra 5GB ? unless you have a tiny ass hard drive
2. Many GB in updates ? I've hardly had to download any updates in Windows 7 and you can get along just fine without them.
3. If your comparing it to say Windows XP then yes it does use about 50-150MB extra memory, but then again memory is cheap as shit.
4. I don't know if superfetch is any use, it don't seem to cause any problems.
5. The interface is mostly the same as XP, although I do dislike the start menu.
6. I'm sure someone else in this thread pointed out UAC can be turned off.
Your arguments against vista / 7 are very poor, please try again later.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
