WARNING: Continued from Desktop Tuesday: The Engineer - #90 by Dwalus
Wrong; Dwarf Fortress runs on 64-bit bit systems, but isn’t 64-bit itself and doesn;t support 64-bit CPUs itself. That is why it can’t use more than 4 GiB of RAM (32-bit addresses can’t access more than 2**32 bytes).
[quote=“Dwalus, post:90, topic:23517”]but that’s not even remotely an issue because RAM isn’t the important part, but the processor speed.
[/quote]
Wrong. Often with software design there’s a trade-off between memory consumption and CPU usage. Do you use one algorithm or another? Do you cache data (and how much)? Can you afford pre-computed lookup tables? If you’re designing for modern computers with more RAM you make different choices; and when your main bottleneck is CPU time you choose to use more RAM and less CPU.
Wrong. Being created a decade ago just makes it recent (or “recent-ish”), not modern. Using software design practices from 50 years ago makes it “retro” at best even if it was created today.
[quote=“Dwalus, post:90, topic:23517”]and even now it won’t run on most of the computers that existed when it was first released.
[/quote]
Wrong. It will still run on a computer that was “relatively high end” in the late 1990s (from 5 years before the game’s first release). The only thing that has changed is how far you can go (population size, etc) before the game reaches “too laggy to play”.
Wrong. You’re confusing “modern” with “recent”. Something’s age has very little to do with how modern it is. If I used hand tools to create a kerosene lantern it would be new lantern using old technology and wouldn’t be modern (and would be even less modern than a 20 year old electric torch, despite being 20 years newer).
Now tell me; are you going to persist in disagreeing with me at every single opportunity, and continue being consistently wrong every time you do?