I’m a little out of date. Then it’s impossible packaging and shipping a game for a x86 machines now???. OH My Good.
About the mobile: I could send a picture of My Half-***** (I like this feature: "*"! It’s automatic!!!) Samsung Very cheap and thin. I like this unit, has a Stitch cover. It is a quadcore with 1.7GHz per core. It is not a big deal. But, it maybe can running Infinity Blade more or less with a little lag! But some mobiles using Nvidia Tegra can be much better than an old card, as the old generation GeForce 9800 GT GDDR3 for Desktop PCs, which was already considered almoust high-end in UDK era. and was able to runnig without any lagging, games like Gear of Wars 1 in an old dual core x86 pentium 4. Maybe they do not want more 32bits, because there will be a great revlution, perhaps a GDDR6, perhaps 128 bits or more.
eh? I don’t really get what you are trying to say .
I’m not talking about old operating systems, or old grpahics, or old processors…
“New” 32bit systems are just as relevant as “New” 64bit systems in today’s PC market. Even your mobile phone is likely using 32bit simply because it is efficient with the RAM usage.
This thread is a feature request for a 32bit “version” of the Unreal Engine 4 Editor.
Or something like a Mobile Development Mode of the Editor, that disables non-mobile memory expensive features. This could also be done in 32bit, especially if even Unity5+ and Cryengine can still work in 32bit.
With 32bit Editor, half (if not all) Epic’s examples and assets won’t load due to memory constraints. And there will be people who will be complaining.
Thinking as a developer, why would I want to get myself into this kind of situation where there are very little to no benefits in having 32bit Editor. Epic isn’t charity, but business. Resources are better spent somewhere else instead of trying to make sure 32bit editor works in the same capacity as 64bit editor.
I am pretty sure making Mobile Development Mode isn’t just a few lines of code but perhaps fundamental rewrite of many subsystems.
I am surprised Epic hasn’t chimed in, but it seems like 26 posts down there is nothing more to add.
If there was enough call for a 32 bit system I am sure Epic would make it happen because they must respond to market pressures. In this case, I can’t imagine it meeting that threshold.
When working on any game project or an engine it takes a lot of work, you should never expect anything less.
Many games fail to improve properly after even beta phase because some of its own community dulls down suggested features with this sentiment. It just makes developers think “Well if no one else wants anything other than our own vanilla, we will just sell them that”.
Some early adopters do this during the development cycle to maintain a low expectant atmosphere, to get the game released faster so that they can just play. Then they realize it could have been done better; and it disappoints…
I understand where you’re coming from Peter_M but there are plenty of reasons why this won’t happen.
The biggest reason is that such a version would be dramatically crippled - most engine demos or samples wouldn’t even work in a 32bit environment, especially on Windows. Your average 32b Windows laptop supports 3.2 ~3.5GB of actual memory, depending on the internal layout, so UE4 would typically have access to only 2GB after Windows as taken its toll. And you need to think about other stuff as well : the launcher would also need to be made available in two versions, the QA and tests would need to be done twice, marketplace assets would need to be checked twice, etc.
UDK still exists for those who can’t have 64bit support, btw. No need to slow UE4 development down.
But what’s the big advantage in using a supposed UE4 adressed for 32-bits machines? Why? Just because Unity has its 32-bit version? Probably has, but almost no one uses!
For Unreal Editor 4 one of the requirements is a machine with almoust 16 GB of Ram for best experience. In UDK was 8GB! x-86 machines has a physical 4GB barrier, can not run more than 4GB of Memory Ram. Do you can ask them to turn something like physical address extension mode in a possible Unreal Editor 4 with 32-bits and use 8GB or more in your machine with 32bits processor.
, I have a 64bit PC with 16GB of ram. The UE4 hardly touches it because I’m currently prototyping a mobile app. The engine is just using 1.2GB right now. So if done in 32bit the project will actually only use about 600-700MB of RAM, which is low enough for a 32bit system to easily handle, and suitable for mobile development.
Gwenn, 3.5GB is enough to work with for basic projects. It is very common in the industry to have 32bit and 64bit versions and QA should be testing more thoroughly than just twice.
I stand to be corrected but I doubt the inclusion of 32bit would slow UE4 development down at all.
I think for the most part, there’s just not enough people that need the feature, I’m sure part of the reason for the lack of 32-Bit support is to encourage people to use 64-Bit
Peter_M
I would also like a 32-bit version. But I think the question is not performance drop (But it could be), but some limitation in the Unreal Editor 4 framework, I think that including a 32-bit version would make all more complex. I think it is an attempt to simplify and unify better the things.
But I think that 32-bit shipping folder is a bit empty!!! Fail!!! I also think there should be an executable for the editor in that folder. Since first time I compiled the Git Engine 4.
I think they should make a 32-bit version, maybe in their country they are well economically, and they have nothing 32 bits, but in Latin American countries we are bad, and we have from 32-bit cell phones to 32-bit desktop computers, I think a smaller version is better, I do not want to play a game, I just want a 2d game programmed in Unreal for its ease of use, I am impressed that Epic does nothing, knowing that they have millions and spend them on many things for developers, could spend it on a 32-bit version to open to the other half of the world.