| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (30)

Posted: Mar 16th 2012 5:18PM blix2006 said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
o wtffffffff my windows 98 runs skyrim flawless why are you singling us out boooo boycott arena net DO NOT BUY GW2!!!!!BOOOOOOOOOOOO

Posted: Mar 16th 2012 5:30PM Keladry said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@blix2006 Geez...really?

/sarcasm
Reply

Posted: Mar 16th 2012 6:18PM avaloner said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@blix2006 Windows 3.1 is where its at. Chicks love that early nighties lack of functionality!
Reply

Posted: Mar 18th 2012 1:39PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@avaloner
Nighties? Freudian slip?
Reply

Posted: Mar 16th 2012 5:35PM Fabius Bile said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
win95 shouldnt be considered old. it should be considered ancient. a museum piece.

Posted: Mar 16th 2012 5:45PM SnarlingWolf said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Hell at this point I'd think companies would be looking into phasing out xp within a year or two.

Who out there is really running win 95/98? Even more sad would be someone running Windows ME, that poor person would of been duped into both buying that OS and actually using it all this time.... sad thought

Posted: Mar 16th 2012 6:00PM Lenn said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
But will they still support MS-DOS?

Posted: Mar 16th 2012 6:14PM Foobar1923 said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
I remember hearing stories from my grand-parents about this elusive win95. It must be really really old and they said it was awesome back then.

Ok, I'm not that young, but it sounded kinda funny in my head.

Posted: Mar 16th 2012 6:24PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I almost soiled myself when I saw the title! But no worries, they're still supporting XP. Whew!

Posted: Mar 16th 2012 6:26PM Eamil said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
You mean I can't play Guild Wars on my Amiga anymore?!

Posted: Mar 16th 2012 7:24PM SupahGamuh said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
@Eamil No, but you'll still be able to play Shadow of The Beast.

Man, I miss the good ol' Amiga.
Reply

Posted: Mar 16th 2012 6:34PM Traptz said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Honestly imo...if you're a PC gamer and you're running anything but Windows 7 you're not doing it right...

Windows XP - GREAT OS, but lacks DX 10/11
Windows Vista - Terrible OS(IMO)
Windows 7 - Pure heaven

Posted: Mar 16th 2012 9:27PM nhat said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Traptz
Eh just get > 2gigs of ram for vista and it runs as good as 7. Actually there isn't a lot of differences between 7 and vista. MS just tweaked the UI to seem like its faster and that's about it.
Reply

Posted: Mar 16th 2012 6:45PM Mr Blunt said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I still run vista. Its meh but not as bad as ppl say.
I remember the good ol' days of 3.1, playing Tomb Raider with 16mb of ram
/cheer

Posted: Mar 16th 2012 6:54PM cdheer said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Mr Blunt Agreed about Vista. It amazes me how many people think Vista is the worst thing EVAH but then rave about Win7. They're not much different, other than some cosmetic crap.

But really, all of you are lame if you're not running CP/M on an S100 BUS system. Guild Wars supports that, right?
Reply

Posted: Mar 16th 2012 7:23PM Adeptus Enginus said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@cdheer

Vista is VERY different from W7, but it's all due to technical background stuff. Vista was very unoptimized at release; there's a reason many, MANY gamers didn't upgrade when it first came out: because they literally couldn't afford to. Vista was a memory hog that ate a womping 2gb of ram to run ITSELF, and given back then 3-4gb of ram was the norm, most rigs with Vista ran too slow to game efficiently. I remember the significant difference i saw when I added 2 gigs of ram onto my old machine that ran Vista. Night and friggin' day.

While modern vista has been patched to hell and a number of it's problems ironed out, 7 is still a vastly superior OS in every single technical way possible. From VAC efficiency to simple optimization, 7 is just better. Modern Vista works, but if you can honestly sit there and say that they "aren't much different", than you've clearly never seen a proper machine running 7.

On topic, I find it interesting that GW2 is being optimized for XP, yet they're dropping the majority of the platforms GW1 was optimized for. Guess they just want to shorten their potential workload.
Reply

Posted: Mar 16th 2012 7:37PM Gaugamela said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
@cdheer

Windows Vista ate resources like crazy. That was its biggest problem.
Obviously it wasn't no Windows Me.
Reply

Posted: Mar 17th 2012 4:09AM Oskiee said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
@Mr Blunt

Ill have you know that the majority of systems ive looked at in the past 2 years that were running frustratingly slow were vista machines.

The solution? Windows XP or Windows 7 every time.
Reply

Posted: Mar 18th 2012 1:43PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Mr Blunt
i still run Vista on my desktop and have never had a problem with it. Most of the issues I have seen personally from people have to do with software support for software makers that didn't bother to patch older software to be compatible and hardware makers who didn't write drivers (or do proper drivers).

Since I run the latest software and my hardware was all designed for it, it's been very nice.

Of course to, a lot of the complaints had to do with all the security popups that everyone asked for to begin with when Microsoft wasn't as security conscious. Talk about no way to win.
Reply

Posted: Mar 16th 2012 8:18PM Sorithal said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Honestly, who actually uses Win98 or lower for gaming now o.o

I honestly don't even see why someone wouldn't at least have XP.

Featured Stories

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW