The minimum requirements say Vista. why? it runs fine on XP

[paganize]

I'm just wondering... if you have hardware that is even close to recent, especially RAM and video, KSP runs just fine on Windows XPSP3. The operating system that 18.9% of computers use, with only Windows 7 being more popular.
It runs better than it would run on the same hardware with win7 or vista. I did try it out on WinXP64...no. It *will* run on windows 2000 advanced server fairly well though, if you know what you are doing.
So, please, kill that 'Vista' minimum requirement?

[SievertChaser]

Uh, the devs cannot be held responsible for other people 'knowing what they're doing", and there is a complaint thread that suggests Squad drop all support for all 32-bit Windows systems.

[Dr Jebus]

XP is old, very old now. The devs do not test on it, so cannot guarentee it will work with it, so state vista as the minimum. The majority of companies are dropping XP support as Microsoft itself has done.

If you can get it to work with XP, that's great, but the devs should not be wasting time ensuring their game works on obsolete OSs.

[Corvus]

That only means they're not doing any specific support for that OS, doesn't mean that it won't work at all.

[paganize]

Originally posted by Jebus:

XP is old, very old now. The devs do not test on it, so cannot guarentee it will work with it, so state vista as the minimum. The majority of companies are dropping XP support as Microsoft itself has done.

If you can get it to work with XP, that's great, but the devs should not be wasting time ensuring their game works on obsolete OSs.

On the one hand, I'd say in a way you are right; providing support for obsolete windows98se would be insane. However, NOT alienating the users of what is *currently* the 2nd most-used desktop operating system in the world, behind Windows 7 but ahead of all other versions of windows & OSX, seems like a very obvious thing to do.

I'm also not suggesting that they develop the game on a 32-bit WindowsXP platform; however, until such time as it no longer runs on XP, stated minimum requirements should be such that the 18.9% of users who are still using XP will know they can run the game if their hardware is up to speed.

I couldn't craft a paragraph if my life depended on it tonight, hopefully the context gets through.

[Gralzeim]

If they change the minimum requirements to add XP, and a patch at a later date screws things up for XP, then that would be a problem.

By not claiming support for an obsolete operating system that they do not have the time or resources to test on (in addition to current operating systems), they're avoiding the potential issue of a patch screwing up something on XP and having people say "but you said it runs on XP".

They're not saying it runs on XP, so they don't have to worry about it not working on XP at a later date. To make sure it -did- continue to work, they'd have to have testing systems with XP on them, and that's a hassle in of itself (security risk, extra precautions needed as a result, if they decide to add DirectX 11 support/features at some point this would also cause difficulties, and so on).

Consider it a bonus if it works on XP, but you really shouldn't be expecting new games or games in development (like KSP) to support it any longer.

[RossDBrown]

18.9% of PC "users" may be running Windows XP, but that does not mean that 18.9% of PC "gamers" are.

I would imagine a significant number of that 18.9% to be internet surfers and word doc writers. Maybe even business PCs or laptops.

Of the people using PCs for gaming I would expect XP users to significantly less, given that the OS is not really supported these days.

[Yawzheek]

Originally posted by paganize:

Originally posted by Jebus:

XP is old, very old now. The devs do not test on it, so cannot guarentee it will work with it, so state vista as the minimum. The majority of companies are dropping XP support as Microsoft itself has done.

If you can get it to work with XP, that's great, but the devs should not be wasting time ensuring their game works on obsolete OSs.

On the one hand, I'd say in a way you are right; providing support for obsolete windows98se would be insane. However, NOT alienating the users of what is *currently* the 2nd most-used desktop operating system in the world, behind Windows 7 but ahead of all other versions of windows & OSX, seems like a very obvious thing to do.

You know, you keep citing the 18.9% of users that use XP while neglecting the obvious question: of those 18.9%, how many of them partake in modern gaming?

There is part of your answer as to why XP is not listed.

The other reason is that, aside from and largely because of it being dated and obsolete: if they list it as a supported OS, they're under an obligation to waste time ensuring it WILL run on said obsolete OS.

If you can get it to run on XP? Great. Wonderful. Fantastic. But just because you can make it work doesn't obligate them to support it. I can get Doom to run on a TI-NSpire calculator, but id Software isn't going to list it as a supported OS.

[sal_vager]

Squad can only realistically offer support on platforms that the Unity game engine officially supports.

But I wonder if anyones tried KSP on Windows 2000?

[SievertChaser]

Originally posted by paganize:

It *will* run on windows 2000 advanced server fairly well though, if you know what you are doing.

[shoopy]

Even though minimum requirements and minimum supported specs are actually different things, and it is technically wrong to say that Vista is a minimum requirement, people and even developers confuse these two things so much that there's really nothing you can do about it.

[Red]

There would be a bigger backlash if they put XP/2000 as the minimum due to all the people who don't know what they're are doing.
You can't expect people to be good at IT just becuase they game on a computer.

[paganize]

Originally posted by Ewok:

18.9% of PC "users" may be running Windows XP, but that does not mean that 18.9% of PC "gamers" are.

I would imagine a significant number of that 18.9% to be internet surfers and word doc writers. Maybe even business PCs or laptops.

Of the people using PCs for gaming I would expect XP users to significantly less, given that the OS is not really supported these days.

It looks like I was pretty wrong on that aspect. The last time I looked at steam usage stats back in October, something like 18% of steam users were using XP; it's now down to 3.8%. A lot less than I was expecting.

[paganize]

Originally posted by dennis.danilov:

Originally posted by paganize:

It *will* run on windows 2000 advanced server fairly well though, if you know what you are doing.

It was seriously a pain.

[ezwip]

Windows abandoned XP, nuff said, geesh.

[Maverick]

Originally posted by paganize:

It looks like I was pretty wrong on that aspect. The last time I looked at steam usage stats back in October, something like 18% of steam users were using XP; it's now down to 3.8%. A lot less than I was expecting.

Ahhh.... That's the 3.8% turning up to high end games forums complaining game X doesn't work on a print server.

But tbh, why even start a thread saying it "runs on XP"? You trying to be Santa Claus to the 3.8%?

Pandoras Box much.....

(Besides, OS generally == hardware specs so an "XP machine" is likely to fail..... badly).