UO Second Age

does anyone use x64 to play here? i cant seem to get it to work.. iv tried everything

installed in x86 programs files, as well as c:\

when i try to patch with patch5.0.8.3.exe sometimes it wont install, i have to reboot, try again, and some times it works, tested this by uninstalling/installing a bunch of times

if i get the patch to work, i run razor, set up the config for the shard, and when UO loads(in full screen, cuz its the first time) it crashes.

and thats as far as i got..


btw, i can play fine on my laptop running windows7 32bit.
id like to play on my desktop as well, which is running x64

I use XP 64bit and have no problems playing. I remember when I installed I too had trouble with the patcher and the fullscreen issue.

I think i ended up using the auto-updater and patching the old fashioned way, although this isn't completely necessary.

If you have gotten to the part where the client tried to load, i think you are very close. I found this solution a while ago

http://www.onlinegamecommands.com/ultim ... tweaks.htm

FullScreen - Can be set to "on" or "off" to select whether to start by default in full screen mode.

ShowIntro Anim=no - If having lockup or crash's in the intro movie you can add this line to skip the beginning Intro

Make sure you are installing it under C:\Program Files x86 vs the default. I have seen several people on the forums where this worked for them.


This is a little off topic, but I feel the need to put this out there. I don't understand why people are insisting on using x64bit versions of windows.

If you don't have more than 4GB of RAM you are wasting your time. There is a very minimal gain from running a 64bit OS. 90% of your applications and games are still 32bit code so your not gaining anything there. There are hundreds of benchmark comparisons on the web that show a minuscule difference in performance, and actually a decrease in performance on some aspects of the benchmarking. The differences are humanly impossible to detect with the naked eye. I have performed my own benchmarks also with the same results. If you find benchmarks where 64bit was considerably faster, that is because the benchmarking software used was most likely written for 64bit OS, and you won't get an accurate comparison to 32bit since 64bit apps will always run faster on a 64bit OS. Which brings me back to my earlier comment on software, there is very little software that exists for 64bit OS unless you are running Windows Server and Server based applications.

Here is an example, notice that some items are just a little faster and some items are just a little slower than 32bit. Google your own, enlighten yourself.

http://64-bit-computers.com/windows-vis ... hmark.html


The only benefit I see in 64bit is in Server operating systems. For example at my job we are moving towards Windows Server 2008 64bit because our servers have over 16GB of RAM (yes, 32bit server can address up to 16GB versus xp's limit of 4GB) Also the applications our developers come up with are written for 64bit processing, which does give a humanly noticeable difference in performance.

Is there any particular reason for you guys running 64bit other than "it's cool"? It seems to me that it just causes more greif than anything. Yes I have tried 64bit, and I am no amateur by any means.

My point is, if you don't meet the criteria, stick with 32bit, life would be easier for you. Some people report not having any problems at all with 64bit, well more power to you, you guys are most likely power users or more advanced users and know how to handle issues, but you are still not gaining much in performance.

leterrien wrote:I use XP 64bit and have no problems playing. I remember when I installed I too had trouble with the patcher and the fullscreen issue.

I think i ended up using the auto-updater and patching the old fashioned way, although this isn't completely necessary.

If you have gotten to the part where the client tried to load, i think you are very close. I found this solution a while ago

http://www.onlinegamecommands.com/ultim ... tweaks.htm

FullScreen - Can be set to "on" or "off" to select whether to start by default in full screen mode.

ShowIntro Anim=no - If having lockup or crash's in the intro movie you can add this line to skip the beginning Intro

tried messing with those.. and a few more.. but still crashing when the game loads.
thx for the link tho

orionsune wrote:Make sure you are installing it under C:\Program Files x86 vs the default. I have seen several people on the forums where this worked for them.


This is a little off topic, but I feel the need to put this out there. I don't understand why people are insisting on using x64bit versions of windows.

If you don't have more than 4GB of RAM you are wasting your time. There is a very minimal gain from running a 64bit OS. 90% of your applications and games are still 32bit code so your not gaining anything there. There are hundreds of benchmark comparisons on the web that show a minuscule difference in performance, and actually a decrease in performance on some aspects of the benchmarking. The differences are humanly impossible to detect with the naked eye. I have performed my own benchmarks also with the same results. If you find benchmarks where 64bit was considerably faster, that is because the benchmarking software used was most likely written for 64bit OS, and you won't get an accurate comparison to 32bit since 64bit apps will always run faster on a 64bit OS. Which brings me back to my earlier comment on software, there is very little software that exists for 64bit OS unless you are running Windows Server and Server based applications.

Here is an example, notice that some items are just a little faster and some items are just a little slower than 32bit. Google your own, enlighten yourself.

http://64-bit-computers.com/windows-vis ... hmark.html


The only benefit I see in 64bit is in Server operating systems. For example at my job we are moving towards Windows Server 2008 64bit because our servers have over 16GB of RAM (yes, 32bit server can address up to 16GB versus xp's limit of 4GB) Also the applications our developers come up with are written for 64bit processing, which does give a humanly noticeable difference in performance.

Is there any particular reason for you guys running 64bit other than "it's cool"? It seems to me that it just causes more greif than anything. Yes I have tried 64bit, and I am no amateur by any means.

My point is, if you don't meet the criteria, stick with 32bit, life would be easier for you. Some people report not having any problems at all with 64bit, well more power to you, you guys are most likely power users or more advanced users and know how to handle issues, but you are still not gaining much in performance.

i used x64 for video/music production and editing. plus i have 6gb of ram.. + a 1gb video card

fearmee wrote: i used x64 for video/music production and editing. plus i have 6gb of ram.. + a 1gb video card

Get a Mac for video/music... no just kidding...

Still that doesn't sound like too much of an improvement, your likely to benchmark at the same as a 32bit... except for maybe the video card, of which I have a 1gb video card (64bit) too when I did my benchmarking, didn't see much of a difference. Are your video/audio applications written for 64bit?

Still sounds like more of a headache for a few extra fps and clock cycles...

I'm swearing off Windows altogether except a virtual XP to use Netflix with... :/

Anyway, try moving the patch executable to the folder in which you installed UO and running it from there.