ok i myself have a pc, i do not plan on switching to mac or linux, not my fortey, not discriminating but they have limited gaming possibility, ok well i have a pc with vista, i cant play jack shit on it, only guildwars,the old sims, umm and thats it....i used to play a bunch of free mmo's but cant thanks to vista, can any one give me a hand and tell me what i should do or if there is any way to go back to xp?
pc games and there issues
- Thread starter darkgryffon
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Buy it and install it.darkgryffon said:
Other than that, I'm not really sure what you're talking about. I think you're saying that Vista isn't great for games, but I'm not entirely sure. If that's the case, go back to XP. There are more games for it, and it's better overall. Although Vista is definitely improving now, I'd still recommend XP over it.
Also, the thread title should read "their issues".
Yeah I'm not sure what you're referring to either, I can play all of my old games on vista, just as easily (if not more so) than I could on XP. The x86 folder is just for just that. I'm going to guess you not being able to play your games is the result of user error.darkgryffon said:
It's not very stable. Plus, it takes up a lot of memory to run, which takes away from gaming. If you have the service pack installed, it's not as bad as it was. It all depends on the video card too. I could hardly play Portal when I had Vista.Zac_Dai said:
I don't understand why you have an issue... Do you mean that because you have Vista, it takes up too much of your computer's resources and you can't play games?
Or am I missing the point?
Title should read "their" issues.
Or am I missing the point?
Title should read "their" issues.
Vista is much more stable these days than it was in beta, which is when most people formed their opinions of it.paypuh said:
These days, vista is actually a very stable platform which, although it does have a need for more memory to run in general, there is very little performance difference between it and XP using the same hardware (assuming the hardware has the minimum amount of memory)
No offense but I hate it when people tell me this, I've had Vista on this machine for 2 years and only had a BSOD once due to the initial crap Nvidia drivers.paypuh said:
If anything its been more stable then my previous XP machine, which I had to reinstall every couple of months, yet I'm still on the same Vista install since day one and it still runs butterly smooth.
As for it hogging memory its a myth read this:
Many Vista users are horrified to see that shortly after booting up Vista, no matter how much system RAM they have, Vista seems to gobble up most of it straight away. They instantly assume that Vista's eye candy or some other "bloated" new feature must be very memory-intensive. What's actually happening is that the SuperFetch feature - covered under the 'Constant Hard Drive Activity' annoyance further above - starts filling any free memory with portions of your most commonly used programs right after Vista boots up. By using otherwise idle RAM as a data cache in this way, Vista greatly improves your application startup times and responsiveness. As the saying goes, "Free RAM is wasted RAM". The concern of course is that by taking up all this RAM, Vista will somehow slow down your system or "hog" the RAM should other programs require it. In practice this is a myth - the moment SuperFetch detects that your system requires the RAM for other purposes, it frees it up instantly.
I don't mind if people wish to stick XP but hate people bad mouthing Vista when my experience with it has been the total opposite.