Jump to content

64-bit apocalypse

  • Please log in to reply
24 replies to this topic

#21 Cougar



  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1418 posts
  • Steam Name:FuzzyPuffin

Posted 17 October 2017 - 05:14 PM

View PostDirtyHarry50, on 01 August 2017 - 06:46 PM, said:

I understood what you said, including the apocalypse title, to be about impending loss of access. You did say you were considering prioritizing games that may become inaccessible. That was what I was initially responding to although I admittedly wandered into related territory when I wrote about costs, money wasted, etc. all of which was based on my own personal experience and not meant to be critical of you or anybody else. I do feel that all of that was relevant though. You had mentioned an indie game for example that I would find difficult to believe you want to play again and again for years to come when you have yet to ever play it, until confronted with the possibility of not being able to. Suddenly, Incredipede appears on the radar for that reason and my whole point was that reason probably doesn't hold up too well against other games you've preferred to play instead ever since buying it. Otherwise, like I said, you wouldn't care about it becoming obsolete. You would have played it a long time ago. Clearly it was less important than other games. I maintain it still is considering the evidence I see. So why play it now? Is it subjectively better than everything else you have access to right now, so much so that you really want to drop everything and play this game today? How did that come to be? That was my point.

I said I wouldn't *solely* play a game based on its impending doom. My backlog has become so large that I have so many games that I still have the same amount of interest in playing that I haven't gotten around to yet. The fact that I bought them years ago is beside the point. Part of the problem is that I tend to prioritize one-sitting games or really long RPGs, so the rest (even if I have the same level of interest in them) tends to languish.

I'm changing my buying habits, which helps. Now, I only buy games that I know I want to play right away for whatever reason, or they're in a Humble. I'm buying a lot less.

#22 mattw



  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 849 posts

Posted 24 January 2018 - 04:26 PM

Starting to see some rumours that following the iOS transition this might be coming sooner than I perhaps expected:


I think I'm right in saying there is no 3D support for the guest OS when virtualising old versions of MacOS on a Mac. If so, without booting from another drive with an older MacOS that has 32-bit support this could be a problem for all but the most recent Mac game ports.

I know from experience I tend to find rebooting too much trouble. It even seems like WINE might not be possible on a 64-bit only Mac as well so it really might be a case of HAVING to use Windows (virtualised or otherwise) because so many titles will likely never be made 64-bit and looking at the vast list in System Report it isn't just old games but ones that are still quite recent and active.
Mac Pro 09 (now a 5.1, 2 x 3.06GHz Xeon X5675, 24GB, RX580 8GB, 480SSD, 16TB HD, MacOS 10.13.1

#23 Janichsan


    Jugger Bugger

  • Forum Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8149 posts
  • Steam Name:Janichsan
  • Location:over there

Posted 25 January 2018 - 10:12 AM

Apple's statement that High Sierra would be the last version of macOS to support 32-bit apps "without compromises" hasn't changed, which means that 10.14 will still be supporting older apps in a way.

"We do what we must, because we can."
"Gaming on a Mac is like women on the internet." — "Highly common and totally awesome?"

#24 Camper-Hunter



  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 375 posts
  • Steam Name:Rorqual
  • Steam ID:Rorqual
  • Location:Paris, France

Posted 25 January 2018 - 02:39 PM

Without knowing which compromises they mean, we can't judge if they're acceptable or not. Knowing Apple, I'd assume the worst (backward compatibility isn't their forte) until they clarify.

#25 macdude22


    Like, totally awesome.

  • Forum Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2081 posts
  • Steam Name:Rakden
  • Location:Iowa
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 25 January 2018 - 03:28 PM

View PostCamper-Hunter, on 25 January 2018 - 02:39 PM, said:

Without knowing which compromises they mean, we can't judge if they're acceptable or not. Knowing Apple, I'd assume the worst (backward compatibility isn't their forte) until they clarify.

Ya, without compromises could be "run 32 bit apps in a VM"
IMG Discord Server | http://raptr.com/rakden | http://www.trueachie....com/Rakden.htm
Enterprise (MacPro 3,1): 8 Xeon Cores @ 2.8 GHz || 14 GB RAM || Radeon 4870 || 480GB Crucial M500 + 2TB WD Black (Fusion Drive) || 144hz Asus Mon
Defiant (MacBookPro 9,1): Core i7 @ 2.3ghz || 8GB RAM || nVidia GT 650M 512MB || 512GB Toshiba SSD