I'm not going to build a 32bit so y'all can stop wasting time talking about it.
Never insisted you do so. Merely stated my surprise at it absence. Like I stated it is of no consequence to me either way. So the point is doubly mute.
BTW I don't think anybody has thanked you for the effort in doing this, so thankyou.
I'd hardly call them slams, but to be fair, they were provoked.
Condescending tones and negative presumptions can still be a slam.
That is basically a troll. Your expressing surprise, or presumably disappointment by even making this statement. As the most logical development path was the one taken, you are trolling anyone who understands this concept to defend it, by questioning it to begin with.
Hardly a troll to be surprised that there was no 32bit, something that is pretty well standard procedure. Perhaps you should read
a definition on what it is to 'troll'... notice that it needs to be a deliberate attempt to do those things also. Your perception is your problem. Had the response been something like "yes. 64bit only." My response would would have been along the lines of "K. Kinda limiting your potential users a tad though."
Nor was it the most logical 'development path' and the fact that that apparently isn't understood is obviously the problem. Dual compiling isn't difficult, google it. It may have been TWD only option and that is fine. It may be the general preferance here, still fine. But neither make it the most logical.
No other reply in this thread even matters, for this is the heart of the hijack.
The thread was hijacked by ambershee. My comment was about the content of the first post. My response to ambershee was about the generalized miscategorization that was generally directed at me.
To play the BF4 demo required a quad core processor. Every other demo, alpha, or beta I've ever played also had more stringent requirements of both hardware and software.
Hardware requirements are there for performance reasons and are down to what the game actually needs to play. The 64bit vs 32bit question is hardly that. The game will play just as well in 32bit as it will in 64bit. Making the later a question of preference and not necessity.
To even make that reply shows that you are either new to this process, or a troll.
I am neither 'new' nor a troll. That however looks like a troll.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
So this leads back to the original question: How many PC gamers are there? I’ve seen estimates under a ~100 million, to highs of over ~300 million. Personally I lean more toward the high end of the spectrum. If I had to put a stake in the ground I’d say that there are at least ~100-150m enthusiast (high-end) and mainstream gamers, and potentially another ~100-200m more casual gamers. It can also fluctuate a little up and down based on AAA game availability.
~https://software.intel.com/en-us/blogs/2009/03/03/just-how-many-pc-gamers-are-there
According to a pcgamer article steam has around 75million active accounts.
Ignoring the small portion of that that are people with multiple accounts.That would be 75% of the lowest figure or 21% of the top end.
~http://www.pcgamer.com/2014/01/15/steam-grew-15-in-three-months-to-75-million-users/
This was an interesting graphic considering how big gaming is in some of those smaller pie chunks.
According to this 78.9% of homes had a PC
~https://www.census.gov/hhes/computer/files/2012/Computer_Use_Infographic_FINAL.pdf
If that # hasn't risen Given the population here
~http://www.census.gov/popclock/
Then roughly 250m
American homes have computers.
Windows captures more than 91 percent of the desktop OS market (Macs collectively have 6.94 percent and Linux systems, 1.17 percent), but Windows 7 is used on 44.73 percent of systems and XP has 38.73 percent of the market. At 3.17 percent of the market, Windows 8 is the fourth most popular OS, still behind Vista (which retains 4.99 percent) but ahead of Mac OSX 10.8 Mountain Lion (2.65 percent).
~http://www.pcworld.com/article/2032...ins-market-share-traction-analysis-shows.html
http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/
http://blogs.windows.com/windows/b/...08/64-bit-momentum-surges-with-windows-7.aspx
If you dig into the data it paints a pretty clear picture that 32bit is still a very viable market both in the general area of PCs and more specifically too topic, gaming. It may be on the decline but that decline is just starting really. It took 64bit 10 years to start to get the upper hand but 32bit is far from dead with the exception of the enthusiast market. (I am willing to assert that without research as it seems terribly obvious). Furthermore it shows that given the portion of the PC gaming market steam holds it is a poor indicator of the market as a whole.
Getting even closer to topic has it occurred to anybody that in the marketplace, the unreal engines mobile and console support, the popularity of the engine plus the UDK, and the publicity stunt of making a AAA title open dev and completely free. While simultaneously offering the ability for people to sell there own stuff on the market place... That epic is perhaps positioning themselves to challenge steam in the future? Steam itself started out only selling Valve titles. Purely conjecture true but if my guess is even close to right it seems to me the way this will work is something like:
1. You will need to make an account on the epic market place(free).
2. You purchase UT4 (or whatever they wind up calling it) to your account(free)
3. Add mod tools(free)
4. Do you want to sell your stuff? Add a UDN account.($ for Epic and maybe +$ for you)
5. Do you want to buy stuff? ($ for epic and dollars for somebody else)
I would be surprised if there wasn't integration with google and apple pay systems as well as credit/debit card and/or paypal options.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Irrelevant side-note: While looking up those pages I found that Mozilla recently caved and will finally make a 64bit FF.