Am I the only one that finds "harken back to the days of 8-bit and 16-bit videogame consoles" combined with "games created with it need 512MB to run well" amusing?

Quote

Biff wrote:
Am I the only one that finds "harken back to the days of 8-bit and 16-bit videogame consoles" combined with "games created with it need 512MB to run well" amusing?

If by "amusing" you mean "freak'n awsome!" then yes, yes I do.

This program looks like a lot of fun.

Well I'm just pretty certain my TurboGrafx 16 didn't have 512MB of system memory and 32MB of VRAM.

Quote

Biff wrote:
Well I'm just pretty certain my TurboGrafx 16 didn't have 512MB of system memory and 32MB of VRAM.

Right, that just proves how much cooler these games will be



Or horribly inefficient. One of those. I'm hoping for "cooler."

Quote

Small White Car wrote:
Right, that just proves how much cooler these games will be



Or horribly inefficient. One of those. I'm hoping for "cooler."

If it were really "cooler", then there'd be a way to tone down the "coolness" for older hardware. Think horribly inefficient, as just about all software is these days (sometimes I feel like our computers would be faster if the hardware had stopped advancing 5 years ago...)

Quote

Mikuro wrote:
(sometimes I feel like our computers would be faster if the hardware had stopped advancing 5 years ago...)

My G3-800 iBook would beg to differ.

Quote

Biff wrote:

Quote

Mikuro wrote:
(sometimes I feel like our computers would be faster if the hardware had stopped advancing 5 years ago...)

My G3-800 iBook would beg to differ.

But my point is that if the fastest thing out there were an 800MHz G3, then programmers would right much, much, MUCH more efficient software. But since it's not, companies are all too willing to design programs for machines 2-4x faster, and then simply extend a friendly middle finger to anyone with a 2+ year old machine. Technological advancement breeds bloatware like this (and the entire Aqua UI).

Which is not to say this is a bad product, mind you. Anything that makes the creation of games easy is a Good Thing™ in my book. I do hope, however, that either A) they optimize the heck out of future versions and bring down those system requirements, or B) many of their users will use it as a stepping-stone to greater things. Honestly, I expect both to happen to a degree.

I mean, my brand-new Mac mini doesn't even meet those requirements. Talk about bloatware!

Quote

Mikuro wrote:

Quote

Biff wrote:

Quote

Mikuro wrote:
(sometimes I feel like our computers would be faster if the hardware had stopped advancing 5 years ago...)

My G3-800 iBook would beg to differ.

But my point is that if the fastest thing out there were an 800MHz G3, then programmers would right much, much, MUCH more efficient software. But since it's not, companies are all too willing to design programs for machines 2-4x faster, and then simply extend a friendly middle finger to anyone with a 2+ year old machine. Technological advancement breeds bloatware like this (and the entire Aqua UI).

Which is not to say this is a bad product, mind you. Anything that makes the creation of games easy is a Good Thing™ in my book. I do hope, however, that either A) they optimize the heck out of future versions and bring down those system requirements, or B) many of their users will use it as a stepping-stone to greater things. Honestly, I expect both to happen to a degree.

I mean, my brand-new Mac mini doesn't even meet those requirements. Talk about bloatware!

And yet my 5 year old Powermac G4 does. Ever heard of buying more RAM? Considering the minimum for OS X to run is 256 mb, calling a program that requires 256 mb of memory (yes, 256, after you subtract the 256 for the OS itself) bloatware is just silly. It's the Mac OS itself that's the bloatware (If there was a way to throw the old Platinum interface on OS X, I'd have that sucker down to 128 mb of ram).