[Dev] PS2 and the new expansion

[Gilraen]

I like how everyone early in the thread was calling this a troll thread in spite of the original post's very valid concerns. I, too, would like a real response to this oversight. I play on the P2 verson (on a 1st gen PS3) as well and don't want to have to get the PC version just to play one expansion.

[Zerich]

I like how everyone early in the thread was calling this a troll thread in spite of the original post's very valid concerns. I, too, would like a real response to this oversight. I play on the P2 verson (on a 1st gen PS3) as well and don't want to have to get the PC version just to play one expansion.

if you can't afford a shitty computer or laptop (or even have one) then you might have more important things to do than worry about PS2 support. that's what they're trying to convey.

[JouriStarz]

I am sure they will allow PS2 players to buy the codes online and download the content like the add-ons. There is no other reason for them to have been adding the new zones in the game except maybe for test server purposes. In all honesty though only a handful of people in the US still use the ps2 so you can't expect them to manufacture actual discs if they aren't gonna be sold.

[RAIST]

The problem is that the PS2 is simply extremely dated hardware, using extremely dated software/firmware. Eventually it simply becomes too much trouble with the legacy code to be worth supporting it anymore compared to the more efficient way of supporting it on newer platforms. If they are to keep this game alive and well for the future, they may very well one day have to scrap some of that problematic code and do some recompiling to keep it stable on the newer platforms. We've already begun to see problem with Win7 and video card driver support issues. There are some older i486 based games (written in the Win3.x and Win95 era) that throw up on themselves when you try to run them on today's systems. The same can potentially happen with the legacy coding/emulation going on with FFXI---eventually, it just isn't worth it to try to support that older code in newer environments, and some of it simply has to go.

Many companies don't want to incure the added expense of continuing to support platforms no longer viable in the marketplace. Sure, you may manage to still run the older version on the newer hardware/OS, or still have an older machine it runs fine on--but if you have problems, they won't help you fix them under their support agreements. Typically, they would rather spend the resources to put out updated versions geared for the more mainstream environments--often with some bonus features to encourage consumers to purchase the newer versions. We saw a lot of this happen fairly recently with older games (Re-releases of PC series games like Myst and Hasbro classics like Monopoly, older PS2 games getting HD revamps on the PS3, etc.) We may very well be reaching that point where attrition needs to take place and everyone sluffs off the 12 year old software/hardware and moves to some more updated code/machines. This 5th expansion could very well be just that, an opportunity for SE to get people to move away from PS2 environments onto more robust platforms so they can continue to advance development of the franchise. Vanadiel still has what, 4 or 5 other continents on it's map we have yet to explore?

[Laraul]

The problem is that the PS2 is simply extremely dated hardware, using extremely dated software/firmware. Eventually it simply becomes too much trouble with the legacy code to be worth supporting it anymore compared to the more efficient way of supporting it on newer platforms. If they are to keep this game alive and well for the future, they may very well one day have to scrap some of that problematic code and do some recompiling to keep it stable on the newer platforms. We've already begun to see problem with Win7 and video card driver support issues. There are some older i486 based games (written in the Win3.x and Win95 era) that throw up on themselves when you try to run them on today's systems. The same can potentially happen with the legacy coding/emulation going on with FFXI---eventually, it just isn't worth it to try to support that older code in newer environments, and some of it simply has to go.

But today's PCs are completely compatible with Windows 3.1 and earlier. Intel CPUs now support 64bit and have twice the number of registers but completely backward compatible with any PC that conforms to IBM's original specs for it's PS/2 line. And the PS2 CPU is quite a bit more sophisticated than Intel's processors.

[RAIST]

But today's PCs are completely compatible with Windows 3.1 and earlier. Intel CPUs now support 64bit and have twice the number of registers but completely backward compatible with any PC that conforms to IBM's original specs for it's PS/2 line. And the PS2 CPU is quite a bit more sophisticated than Intel's processors.

Selective reading?

Knowing of this pending obsolescence for the PS2, the sooner they can start preparing a migration path off the dated platform and into a Windows centered environment, the better. Remember, PS2 is 12 years old...hard to find a high percentage of home users still running ME/W2K, and the XB360 is a Microsoft product and does incorporate some Windows components into it's development and such. It would greatly benefit them for future survival of the franchise to take steps as soon as possible to encourage users to migrate away from the PS2 so that when it does finally slope off the radar, they can have a smooth transition.

The older OS's from the 80's/90's are no longer mainstream for some specific reasons.....PS2 suffers in the same way. You can't find win 3.x drivers for newer hardware. Aside from maybe recovery and a short list of various maintenance utilities, you'd be hard pressed to find practical use software or games that boot into a DOS environment and use VESA graphics (think the last game I had that did that was Wing Commander, Heart of the Tiger or something like that). There are simply other platforms that superceed the PS2 much in the same way newer OS's superceded Win3.x and Win9x.

[lowkey]

But today's PCs are completely compatible with Windows 3.1 and earlier. Intel CPUs now support 64bit and have twice the number of registers but completely backward compatible with any PC that conforms to IBM's original specs for it's PS/2 line. And the PS2 CPU is quite a bit more sophisticated than Intel's processors.

Windows 7 64 does not natively support 16 bit programs. Most new PCs come with the 64 bit version to make use of 4gb+ RAM If you want to run Win 3.1, or DOS programs, on a 64 bit machine, then you need an emulator to do so. Even getting older 32 bit programs running properly can be tricky.

[Laraul]

Windows 7 64 does not natively support 16 bit programs. Most new PCs come with the 64 bit version to make use of 4gb+ RAM If you want to run Win 3.1, or DOS programs, on a 64 bit machine, then you need an emulator to do so. Even getting older 32 bit programs running properly can be tricky.

Windows 7 includes a copy of Virtual PC which will run any version of Windows. That's all you need.

[RAIST]

Windows 7 includes a copy of Virtual PC which will run any version of Windows. That's all you need.

Then you are kind of doing what FFXI does....you are emulating another operating environment inside a virtual machine. In other words, (as lowkey pointed out) you are not running it natively.

Also, you may have to actually download that copy of Virtual PC (does not always come installed), and....depending on your system, it may not have hardware supported virtualization, which can open another can of worms. Sounds even a bit more like what goes on with FFXI, eh?

[Mirage]

Windows 7 64 does not natively support 16 bit programs. Most new PCs come with the 64 bit version to make use of 4gb+ RAM If you want to run Win 3.1, or DOS programs, on a 64 bit machine, then you need an emulator to do so. Even getting older 32 bit programs running properly can be tricky.

32bit programs run natively on x64-windows though, so older 32-bit programs are incompatible with win7 because it's win7, not because of 32/64 bit differences. As a side note, however: Some 32bit games use 16bit installers, such as need for speed 2 and 3 (i wanted to play you and I hate you :((((( )

Anyway, talking about hardware, all x64 CPUs actually have the sufficient instructions and modes needed to natively run 16 bit programs. That's why running a 16-bit program inside a 32bit Windows Virtual machine on a x64bit windows isn't *really* emulation, but virtualization.

The difference might not be obvious, but there is a distinction between the two. Emulation generally involves "translating" instructions from one system to instructions that the current system's CPU understands. In the case of 16-bit on 64bit via virtualization, I am pretty sure the CPU executes the 16 bit program's instructions without them being translated to other instructions.

Likewise, WINE on Linux in order to run Windows applications isn't emulation in the same sense as (for example) zsnes, because these Linux systems run hardware that is more or less 100% compatible with the hardware Windows systems run on. That's why WINE usually sees far less performance loss compared to emulations of entire hardware systems.

Although, if someone who is actually really hardcore at virtualization comes in here and tells me I'm wrong now, I won't feel insulted.