4 ms·
The software has already been produced. Games are a kind of art and "outdated systems" are needed to play them. Nobody would say that we shouldn't produce the i
by std_throwaway 7y ago
The software has already been produced. Games are a kind of art and "outdated systems" are needed to play them. Nobody would say that we shouldn't produce the instruments needed to play classical music since there has been plenty of time to do so in the past and when somebody wants to listen to it they should use digital recordings instead.
- doubleunplussed 7y agoIt sounds like things are on track. In this blog post, canonical is talking about containerising 32-bit support so that the 'ultimate fate' of the 32 bit libs is a situation in which these games can still be played. I'll be totally satisfied if you can run a 32 bit application in some equivalent of DOSbox. It's going to happen eventually, and I think people will accept it so long as a practical alternative is in place.
- olliej 7y agoWindows, Linux, and Mac have supported 64bit software for more than a decade. Mac has been 64bit hardware only for more than a decade iirc, the last version of macOS that could boot on a non-64 bit system must also be more than a decade old at this point. These companies that were still making 32bit only software 5 years ago were making the choice to both leave performance on the table and cause update problems going forward. The fact that their were still AAA games coming out 32bit only is insane and the compatibility problem lie squarely on their shoulders. All this continued walkback accomplishes is cause devs to continue to ship brand new, already outdated software because they know if they make enough noise they’ll get what they want in the future.