We require 64-bit binaries

FordGT90Concept wrote:

TanyaRubirose wrote:
http://www.twitlonger.com/show/lci4q4
http://www.twitlonger.com/show/lci46h

Did you not read it? He basically said he's at the bottom of the totem pole for a new computer so he's grateful for the upgrade--exactly what I said.

Did you read the part where he says he also uses development tools? Not to mention he's mentioned before on his Twitter about doing such things as fixing coding-implementation problems with houseboats.

TanyaRubirose wrote:
Even more so if you read his entire twitter and realize he's one of the people actually making the world and items in it;

"World and items" are data (content), not binaries. They can be developed on any computer that the tools are compatible with, even ARM. It's the output that is universally the same.

http://www.gnardone.com/

He's in charge of feature development as well... you know, things such as Simport and all of that which are advertised as part of the game, which often require development tools to create.

TanyaRubirose wrote:
If Sims 4 is going to be 64-bit, then why is SimCity still 32-bit, and why is EA not making a change to 64-bit games right now?

Why are you asking me? Ask EA.

I'm asking you because you are the one with little doubt. Since you seem to know so much about what EA is going to do, I would like you to outright prove it. Because, in order for you to lack that doubt, you either have to be relying on pure faith, or you have to have some inside knowledge on how EA operates. And if you're relying on pure faith, it means you have absolutely no evidence to support what you're saying.

TanyaRubirose wrote:
Why are most video game companies not producing 64-bit games for computers right now?

Because most games on PC are ports from consoles that have <1 GiB of RAM. There was simply no incentive to make it 64-bit when it runs fine in 32-bit.

TanyaRubirose wrote:
So, if 64-bit games are coming, why are we not seeing more of them right now?

Because most developers don't see their game as needing 64-bit support. They can accomplish their design goals without it. The Sims 3 is breaking that mold due the sheer amount of content the game can load.

Sims 3 isn't breaking a mold. There have been games with a lot more content they can load released since it was; it's just unique in that players can alter that content. And to be honest, Sims 2 was also known for massive amounts of content, due to the CC creators. So, not even anything new for the series.

And, have you noticed outright that you pretty much just provided a pretty good argument against going 64-bit by pointing out both a lack of incentive and a perception of not needing 64-bit support? What makes you think they've changed their minds after Sims 3? Sims 3 isn't even the first game to nearly max 32-bit processors towards the end of its run; it's just another entry in a very long list.