Skyrim exe. : V

» Sun Jul 31, 2011 8:22 am

I was curious as to why TES is not making a 64 exe. and would like to explore some of the aspects if possible concerning 64 bit verses 32 bit. I run windows 7 64 bit and have hardware that is designed to work well with a 64 bit OS.

1. Is it something that is to complicated and possibly buggy?

2. What performance benefit would be gained if any over a 32 bit exe?

3. Is this thread just a waste of time and I need to just S T F U.? Hehehehe. ^^

» Sat Jul 30, 2011 8:22 pm

Your gonna get alot of 3's thank fully you didnt make it a poll

its being made for 360 and ported to PC, a concept I find hilarious but its nothing new.

by words of Beth/Todd whomever the gains are "neglible", just like how todd in this case said theres no difference between a loading screen when entering cities, and a seamless transistion into open cities.

Ill let you contemplate your thoughts on such statements.

» Sun Jul 31, 2011 4:31 am

well the main reason i see them not going with a 64bit exe is so people like me can play it. i run 32bit and a 64bit would not run on my system

EDIT:

never mind on this statement i did not realize that the majority of 64bit applications out there come with the 32bit version as well... please stop flaming me for my ignorance :flamed:

» Sun Jul 31, 2011 5:18 am

just like how todd in this case said theres no difference between a loading screen when entering cities, and a seamless transistion into open cities.

Yeah, I get your drift on that statement for sure! Todd is crazy if he thinks that! How ever I do understand the reasons for making zones.

» Sat Jul 30, 2011 11:49 pm

Your gonna get alot of 3's thank fully you didnt make it a poll

its being made for 360 and ported to PC, a concept I find hilarious but its nothing new.

by words of Beth/Todd whomever the gains are "neglible", just like how todd in this case said theres no difference between a loading screen when entering cities, and a seamless transistion into open cities.

Ill let you contemplate your thoughts on such statements.

Blatant lies. Everything we've seen on Skyrim has been shown on xbox 360 for two reasons.

1) Todd Howard has PUBLICLY stated that he finds it easier to show it off on a 360

2) 360 is the industry minimum. It is the lowest console, and the bog standard for Skyrim. If you show off Skyrim on PC, a lot of 360 and PS3 users (of which make up 90% of the TES market) are going to be VERY ****ed off when they see the Skyrim Todd Howard was showing off is nothing like the version they got.

Sorry if this post seemed hostile. I get a little annoyed when people state clear falsehoods easily rectified by watching interviews

» Sat Jul 30, 2011 10:13 pm

There was a Game back in 2006 called Tomb Raider Legend and before you Install the Game, it asked you to be Installed with Lower Specifications for Low End Systems or High Specifications with High End Systems and it workd Great for me.

So why not have Skyrim in Two Versions, 32bit Low End Installation and 64bit High End Installation.

» Sun Jul 31, 2011 3:51 am

well the main reason i see them not going with a 64bit exe is so people like me can play it. i run 32bit and a 64bit would not run on my system

No, not asking for strictly just a 64 bit only game but simply a 64 bit exe added along with the 32 bit exe.

» Sun Jul 31, 2011 5:24 am

360 is the industry minimum. It is the lowest console, and the bog standard for Skyrim. If you show off Skyrim on PC, a lot of 360 and PS3 users (of which make up 90% of the TES market) are going to be VERY ****ed off when they see the Skyrim Todd Howard was showing off is nothing like the version they got.

I still remember the storm in a teacup that brewed when console gamers found how far ahead PC graphics were for Battlefield 3. :celebration:

» Sat Jul 30, 2011 7:29 pm

Blatant lies. Everything we've seen on Skyrim has been shown on xbox 360 for two reasons.

1) Todd Howard has PUBLICLY stated that he finds it easier to show it off on a 360

2) 360 is the industry minimum. It is the lowest console, and the bog standard for Skyrim. If you show off Skyrim on PC, a lot of 360 and PS3 users (of which make up 90% of the TES market) are going to be VERY ****ed off when they see the Skyrim Todd Howard was showing off is nothing like the version they got.

Sorry if this post seemed hostile. I get a little annoyed when people state clear falsehoods easily rectified by watching interviews

Oh, I could not agree with you more on that statement!

» Sat Jul 30, 2011 6:01 pm

Blatant lies. Everything we've seen on Skyrim has been shown on xbox 360 for two reasons.

1) Todd Howard has PUBLICLY stated that he finds it easier to show it off on a 360

2) 360 is the industry minimum. It is the lowest console, and the bog standard for Skyrim. If you show off Skyrim on PC, a lot of 360 and PS3 users (of which make up 90% of the TES market) are going to be VERY ****ed off when they see the Skyrim Todd Howard was showing off is nothing like the version they got.

Sorry if this post seemed hostile. I get a little annoyed when people state clear falsehoods easily rectified by watching interviews

what does this have to do with me saying its being Made for 360? nothing I said was lies....thats what he stated >_>

» Sun Jul 31, 2011 12:04 am

What exactly does "64 bit" gain you, beyond the ability to address more memory? More processing power? Because if the gains aren't really needed (which, if the AI & physics run on consoles, it probably isn't - most people's dual & quad core chips are way faster even at 32bit), then there's probably little economic reason for them to allocate programmer time to making a second exe. Just a guess, though. :shrug:

» Sun Jul 31, 2011 5:38 am

What exactly does "64 bit" gain you, beyond the ability to address more memory? More processing power? Because if the gains aren't really needed (which, if the AI & physics run on consoles, it probably isn't - most people's dual & quad core chips are way faster even at 32bit), then there's probably little economic reason for them to allocate programmer time to making a second exe. Just a guess, though. :shrug:

........ Im not sure about program time...but I make alot of my Game exe's address More than 2 gb which is the limit for 32, yes it makes the game faster you can have 8 gbs on a 64 bit system and skyrim will only use less then 2 of them.

» Sun Jul 31, 2011 3:14 am

No, not asking for strictly just a 64 bit only game but simply a 64 bit exe added along with the 32 bit exe.

ah, so upon instillation your given a choice of which exe you want? i could go with that

» Sun Jul 31, 2011 4:28 am

well the main reason i see them not going with a 64bit exe is so people like me can play it. i run 32bit and a 64bit would not run on my system

That's not really a relevant reason.

Nearly every software application (and certainly every game) that has a 64-bit executable also comes with a 32-bit executable.

» Sat Jul 30, 2011 5:48 pm

I still remember the storm in a teacup that brewed when console gamers found how far ahead PC graphics were for Battlefield 3. :celebration:

Yeah, well that is the stupidity of people that think they can run a game like that on an outdated system and get sweet graphics. I hate consoles. And because they are the majority of the market game developers are limited as to what they can do with them. And I feel in some way it slows down the advancement of ground breaking, awe inspiring games because of consoles. Just my 2 cents and this is getting somewhat off topic too.

» Sat Jul 30, 2011 7:44 pm

........ Im not sure about program time...but I make alot of my Game exe's address More than 2 gb which is the limit for 32, yes it makes the game faster you can have 8 gbs on a 64 bit system and skyrim will only use less then 2 of them.

Is that something you could easily explain how to do? I'm new to pc gaming, and I'm trying to get the most out of my computer.

» Sat Jul 30, 2011 7:33 pm

What exactly does "64 bit" gain you, beyond the ability to address more memory? More processing power? Because if the gains aren't really needed (which, if the AI & physics run on consoles, it probably isn't - most people's dual & quad core chips are way faster even at 32bit), then there's probably little economic reason for them to allocate programmer time to making a second exe. Just a guess, though. :shrug:

Yeah, those are my questions exactly. If some tech savy person could answer this that would be great.

» Sat Jul 30, 2011 11:21 pm

Well, 64bit applications require that they be compiled with different compilers and small things change that require code changes. It would certainly be nice to have 64bit support, as it would help with chunk streaming in the open world, but it's not an entirely big deal.

Basically, the more memory available the more data can be cached in memory and won't have to be saved / reloaded.

» Sat Jul 30, 2011 8:14 pm

Is that something you could easily explain how to do? I'm new to pc gaming, and I'm trying to get the most out of my computer.

I use CFF explorer if you run around with Obivion or Morrowind for PC one should hear about it, infact MGE doesnt work unless you make the MW.exe address more than 2gbs. 5 clicks and BAM more than 2gbs the game will run on, purrs like a kitten if you have the Ram.

» Sat Jul 30, 2011 9:01 pm

a lot of 360 and PS3 users (of which make up 90% of the TES market)

You’ve got a wild imagination there, boy.

» Sat Jul 30, 2011 9:16 pm

There was a Game back in 2006 called Tomb Raider Legend and before you Install the Game, it asked you to be Installed with Lower Specifications for Low End Systems or High Specifications with High End Systems and it workd Great for me.

So why not have Skyrim in Two Versions, 32bit Low End Installation and 64bit High End Installation.

its not that easy

» Sun Jul 31, 2011 7:06 am

Yeah, well that is the stupidity of people that think they can run a game like that on an outdated system and get sweet graphics. I hate consoles. And because they are the majority of the market game developers are limited as to what they can do with them. And I feel in some way it slows down the advancement of ground breaking, awe inspiring games because of consoles. Just my 2 cents and this is getting somewhat off topic too.

Consoles may slow down the advancement of ground breaking games, but without them there would be way less money available for the development of said games.

» Sun Jul 31, 2011 7:25 am

Consoles may slow down the advancement of ground breaking games, but without them there would be way less money available for the development of said games.

lol, I suppose that is another way of looking at it. But instead of having a console just get a PC instead. :wink_smile:

» Sun Jul 31, 2011 3:04 am

360 and PS3 users (of which make up 90% of the TES market)

Can you prove that by linking to a source, son? :spotted owl:

» Sun Jul 31, 2011 6:22 am

Can you prove that by linking to a source, son? :spotted owl:

http://www.game.co.uk/News/Fallout-3-decimates-Oblivion-sales/~cA_10207/?pagetype=content

83% console majority for Fallout 3.

Woah. I didn't expect that.