Neverwinter Nights, Quake 3 are 2 big games that come to mind for Linux. There are others, just can't think of any, but generally, not really a gaming platform.
You shouldn't ask yourself which os is best for gaming...you should ask yourself which os is best for what you do. Any non-windows os (not sure about mac though) can be tricked with other programs to play windows games
It's quite obvious that he likes gaming, elseways he would not have posed the question in the manner he did.
Whilst other operating systems can dupe a program into thinking it's in the Windows environment thanks to emulation, this method is neither very quick nor the best.
Win2k is always a good one since you don't have to call MS every time you upgrade a few parts on your PC. XP is fine once you've dealt with upgrading all of it. 40 something updates is annoying to download, even on 2mbit cable. XP Home is annoying. It feels cheap to me, sorta like those plastic cases from Dell or HP or something (at least Alienware has their CASES right!)
Bottom line? Try to "borrow" 2k and see if you like it. Be careful though. I "found" an old copy I had borrowed and it would give me drive errors during installation. Had I made a disk to format the drive to NTFS prior to installing, I'd be talking to you on 2k right now, but bleh, I'm tired of formatting every week so I just put Home on and let it be. Saving for a Longhorn copy.. heh.
Best graphics quality? OS independent. It's regulated by the graphics driver.
gotta agree with simguy, though i tend to use xp because of compatability with my other programs. I've had better luck with stability wiht xp over 2000, but thats a case by case issue
Thrax had this to say It's quite obvious that he likes gaming, elseways he would not have posed the question in the manner he did.
Whilst other operating systems can dupe a program into thinking it's in the Windows environment thanks to emulation, this method is neither very quick nor the best.
I agree. And also, I don't see why someone would want to take a harder route to playing a game from when there is an obvious easy route. Figuring that games are made for fun.
I would use either XP or 2000, if I were built for gaming only.
Bud had this to say what do you guys think is the best operating system for playing games for frames and getting best graphics?
Also, I've noticed that memory can be a very big determining factor on how your systems performance is with games. Just don't forget about it, hardware is as important as software. You can't have a good gaming computer without hardware, and vice versa.
I am a Windows 2000 Pro guy... XP is ok too. I just wish that more programs were made for Linux or something else other than Microsoft.
0
BlackHawkBible music connoisseurThere's no place like 127.0.0.1Icrontian
edited December 2003
I personally don't think it matters (2k and XP). Just use whatever you're using now. I'm a XP kindda guy. Windows XP + automated installation + AutoPatcher XP = win . Tweak it and you're all set.
Same, doesn't really seem to matter. What I have found is that if you pick the OS most of your friends use, it makes LANing slightly easier, but it really doesn't matter if you know whats up. I use 2K Pro just because I got a free copy from school I can use on all my comps.
Although, up until recently, an argument could have been made for W98. EVERYTHING worked w. Win98, it was the standard consumer level OS for almost 5 years. However, MS has officially (or will soon) discontinued support of W98, so expect that it will slowly become non supported by game makers.
Thrax had this to say Win2k is objectively quicker than XP when it comes to games.
Prior to Win2k SP3, this was not the case.
I find that to be extreamly so hard to beleive...
XP is right from the 2K/Nt kernel, with directX 9 I just can't bring my self to beleive that.
Especialy since 2K was origionaly built for business use...
Sorry, I know that I'm in the minority but I don't see it...
I guess that there could be some drivers that are older thus more optimised for 2K but that's really not the fault of the OS...
I hardly think that you will notice the difference in a couple of FPS when either one is more than capable of producing FPS faster than the system would use during game play anyway...
2k is faster for games as long as you have sp3 or 4 installed. It runs smooth and fast. Doesnt load things in the background on boot up and is stable asa motha!
i've never noticed a difference between 2k and xp, if ther is a difference, it'll only be noticeable in benchmarks and I think you'd only notice it then cause it's in your head that 2k scored 25 extra points in 3dmark2k1.
I can OC higher when I use 2k which in turn = Higher benchmark scores!
0
Straight_ManGeeky, in my own wayNaples, FLIcrontian
edited December 2003
Well, gaming is a special case, and can be related to DriectX and drivers, BOTH.
The nice thing about XP in Pro, is that it can run things in a compatibility mode for 2000. Best results are games made natively for your O\S, adn Linux is likely to see soem ports in the next 2-3 years as modre and more graphics high-end are developed. For now, Windows, period, for gaming. OSX Panther as recently updated is another potential comer, but most of the games are deved for Windows right now so that wins hands down until there is a base of games for other O\Ss and ports to them that are in reality 80-90% rewrites from scratch, like the games Enverex mentioned.
Comments
Best compatability? WinXP.
Best graphics quality? OS independent. It's regulated by the graphics driver.
Same with Apple..I think. Not sure though.
EX
Whilst other operating systems can dupe a program into thinking it's in the Windows environment thanks to emulation, this method is neither very quick nor the best.
Win2k is always a good one since you don't have to call MS every time you upgrade a few parts on your PC. XP is fine once you've dealt with upgrading all of it. 40 something updates is annoying to download, even on 2mbit cable. XP Home is annoying. It feels cheap to me, sorta like those plastic cases from Dell or HP or something (at least Alienware has their CASES right!)
Bottom line? Try to "borrow" 2k and see if you like it. Be careful though. I "found" an old copy I had borrowed and it would give me drive errors during installation. Had I made a disk to format the drive to NTFS prior to installing, I'd be talking to you on 2k right now, but bleh, I'm tired of formatting every week so I just put Home on and let it be. Saving for a Longhorn copy.. heh.
gotta agree with simguy, though i tend to use xp because of compatability with my other programs. I've had better luck with stability wiht xp over 2000, but thats a case by case issue
I agree. And also, I don't see why someone would want to take a harder route to playing a game from when there is an obvious easy route. Figuring that games are made for fun.
I would use either XP or 2000, if I were built for gaming only.
Prior to Win2k SP3, this was not the case.
I find that to be extreamly so hard to beleive...
XP is right from the 2K/Nt kernel, with directX 9 I just can't bring my self to beleive that.
Especialy since 2K was origionaly built for business use...
Sorry, I know that I'm in the minority but I don't see it...
I guess that there could be some drivers that are older thus more optimised for 2K but that's really not the fault of the OS...
I hardly think that you will notice the difference in a couple of FPS when either one is more than capable of producing FPS faster than the system would use during game play anyway...
I would go XP.
"g"
The nice thing about XP in Pro, is that it can run things in a compatibility mode for 2000. Best results are games made natively for your O\S, adn Linux is likely to see soem ports in the next 2-3 years as modre and more graphics high-end are developed. For now, Windows, period, for gaming. OSX Panther as recently updated is another potential comer, but most of the games are deved for Windows right now so that wins hands down until there is a base of games for other O\Ss and ports to them that are in reality 80-90% rewrites from scratch, like the games Enverex mentioned.
John.