Poll: 32 Bit vs 64 Bit SOW, the next generation engines

[RebBugler]

Please Note: This is my own personal poll, so please don't associate it in any way with influencing the direction of SOW. IOW, this is not officially authorized or sanctioned through the SOW team.

I've recently moved from 32 Bit XP to 64 Bit Win 7 and I can state soundly that the 64 Bit system is far superior in playing the SOW engine. Of course, the main gain here is the amount of RAM now available to crank play up but also I'm completely comfortable with Win 7.

The present SOW engine is limited to around 1.8 RAM allotment, but still runs better on machines with more than 2GBs installed. On a 64 Bit only engine I'm assuming this allotment would be doubled, with obvious advantages of play, size of battles, FPS, etc.

This poll is directed toward SOW's next generation engines, the present games available would not be affected.
Bottom line question: Should SOW move to 64 Bit only with future engines, or stay backward compatible with 32 Bit?

[montecristo1981]

Steam posted their annual usuer survey today

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/

[con20or]

64 Bit RB - faster and better games can always provide functionality for users with lower performance machines, just at reduced settings..

I think the current game is beautiful - dont want any better graphics, just more sprites and longer visibility!

I cant wait for the day I have 2000 visibility distance and see whole regiments coming at me from miles away B)

[Hancock the Superb]

If SOW wants to attract high-paying customers, it needs to be the latest in graphics, programming, etc. That means 64 bit system, 3D sprites, revamped code to try to run the engine faster, etc. The cutting edge is always behind by the time you produce, and people pay for graphics (unfortunately for this game now).

In my opinion, for SOW to expand, it needs to take a leap into the unknown and produce some magnificent graphics and code that set the standard. Alternatively, this niche market will always exist, and that market will demand increased modability and maps over game design and visual improvements.

[born2see]

Hancock the Superb wrote:

If SOW wants to attract high-paying customers, it needs to be the latest in graphics, programming, etc. That means 64 bit system, 3D sprites, revamped code to try to run the engine faster, etc.

That would be nice, of course. But you realize that the AI is controlling 100K troops for some large battles and the horsepower required to display those troops in 3D is pretty steep. Why do you think the Total War folks don't do that?

B

[Hancock the Superb]

Hancock the Superb wrote:

If SOW wants to attract high-paying customers, it needs to be the latest in graphics, programming, etc. That means 64 bit system, 3D sprites, revamped code to try to run the engine faster, etc.

That would be nice, of course. But you realize that the AI is controlling 100K troops for some large battles and the horsepower required to display those troops in 3D is pretty steep. Why do you think the Total War folks don't do that?

B

Computers have increased in capacity as of late makes it feasible for one. The second is a good coder can find shortcuts that reduce the overall length of code necessary to run the game, thereby improving the performance. Of course, this is more of a dream list than reality, with Norb the only major coder for the game.

[RebBugler]

Besides the 64 Bit advantages of introducing more sprites, especially for more SR1 play possibilities, I'd push for the tiling to be at least halved in size to improve pathing and troop movements in general. This has been discussed in team meetings and 64 Bit designs could make this possible. Although nice eye candy, 3D modeling would be low on my wish list.

More things on my 64 Bit wish list would be obstacle climbing sprites, flag bearers, complete artillery loading cycles including limbering, unlimbering cycles and realistic dismounted cavalry sequences showing the historically accurate tethering of horses.

[KG_Soldier]

Besides the 64 Bit advantages of introducing more sprites, especially for more SR1 play possibilities, I'd push for the tiling to be at least halved in size to improve pathing and troop movements in general. This has been discussed in team meetings and 64 Bit designs could make this possible. Although nice eye candy, 3D modeling would be low on my wish list.

More things on my 64 Bit wish list would be obstacle climbing sprites, flag bearers, complete artillery loading cycles including limbering, unlimbering cycles and realistic dismounted cavalry sequences showing the historically accurate tethering of horses.

Better pathing would be so nice! :cheer:

[Davinci]

The present SOW engine is limited to around 1.8 RAM allotment, but still runs better on machines with more than 2GBs installed. On a 64 Bit only engine I'm assuming this allotment would be doubled, with obvious advantages of play, size of battles, FPS, etc.

The 1.8 was slightly increased in a later patch after someone several years ago told Norb about a Windows fix, but I understand your point.

Can someone with a 64-bit Computer run one of the highest demanding maps, along with as many different sprites as possible and post a screen-shot like the one that I have below.

The attachment Memory.jpg is no longer available

I would like to see just how much memory the game is using on a 64-bit Computer. Thanks!

EDIT Post - to vote and say to stick with keeping the game running on 32-bit Systems, you must reach out to all available customers. This is a very small market!

davinci

[Garnier]

Davinci, this is the relevant screenshot, which shows how much SOW itself is using.


On your screenshot davinci, you see how it says 2/3 of your memory is used, but then 2GB out of 7GB page file is used. That means your computer has run out of memory and is using the extremely slow hard drive as extra memory, making it drastically slower. If you have enough ram, no page file is used so it's much faster.



It's compiled for a 32 bit machine so it won't use more memory on a 64 bit machine.

This stuff we're talking about isn't very relevant. The performance gains from compiling the engine for 64 bit machine, in multiplayer, would either mean people with 32-bit machines can't play anymore (huge performance boost, but fewer players) or that it only helps those with 64-bit machines (no performance boost).

The performance bottleneck in MP is the few players with 32-bit machines, so improving 64-bit performance wouldn't help us.