Why is there a copy protection system in the graphics, and is it crippling the game?

And my point is you don't know that. I can think of lots of things it could be, as well as providing debug support in beta. Your statement is flawed. There are plenty of reasons to run things outside your main process. At least one has already been stated.

You don't know that it shouldn't be there.

This has nothing to do with the topic at hand. A memory leak is a bug, for starters. If the process is LAA then sure on a 64-bit OS a single LAA 32-bit process can run up to 4GB address space (or usually a bit less by the time fragmentation gets involved) before running out and thus crashing out with an invalid page fault. My point remains that if you want to map a large quantity of data on a 32-bit OS, including support for 1 or 2 GB VRAM cards, you need two processes. WOW64 doesn't handle VRAM at all, DirectX does. In order to address VRAM you must map it into address space. Whilst Windows 7 & DX11 are much better at this, the target minimum market for TOR remains XP & DX9. Your actual VRAM usage is reported separately to Private Bytes & Working Set. There is nothing that requires all of the VRAM to be mapped in one go as a single 1GB chunk.

Again, address space usage is only indirectly linked to physical RAM usage. Memory leaks are bugs, they are not indicators of correct or expected behaviour.

So from all of this info that I've provided, the question now begs to be asked: do ppl with 64 bit systems, RAM over 4GB up to 12 or 16 and hard drives with platter speeds of 7600 rpms or higher with over 1TB of storage still experiencing these type of freaky lag issues? If so, then there is still something else at work here that BW is NOT sharing with us.

So from all of this info that I've provided, the question now begs to be asked: do ppl with 64 bit systems, RAM over 4GB up to 12 or 16 and hard drives with platter speeds of 7600 rpms or higher with over 1TB of storage still experiencing these type of freaky lag issues?

And if I understand you correctly, on a hypothetical 32 bit system with say, a 1GB vidcard and 2.75 GB of available memory (allowing some room for the other MIMO junk), that in order for swtor to be able to address 2GB of the system memory AND the full 1GB of VRAM, it needs two processes, because it's only given 2GB address space, including the VRAM?

I think the game should just give us the option to choose how many Player-Controlled Characters are being displayed on our screens...for instance...

0 PC characters displayed (except for your own, of course))

Party Members Only Displayed

All PC Characters displayed.

Also. let us alter the Field-of-view parameters from "Close" to "Far".

That is feasible yes. We don't actually know why the process is there; it could as easily be a workaround for a threading issue so that TOR can use multiple cores because there's an issue with a given multithreading approach that one might normally use.

I guess what I'm trying to say is: There are lots of reasons in programming why this might be done. Just because a lot of older stuff didn't used to do this doesn't mean that today people are finding ways to push the bounds because lots of recalcitrant people haven't upgraded to 64-bit (much to my irritation).

The definition and proof requirement of False Advertising is:



As such, this issue clearly falls into this category. I would not have purchased this game, spending over 120 dollars for the Collectors Edition, had it been advertised correctly as a low resolution game.
The game was misrepresented by screenshots, video play (check out any of the videos posted on youtube under the "Directors commentary") and beta experiences as a product that they had no intent to deliver upon at launch.

Simply put:



I don't really care if some of you feel that it "isn't a big deal". We were marketed and sold a product with no capability from the vendor to deliver that product. We got a beat-up pick up truck instead of the fancy sports car that we test drove. This is a MAJOR issue. Accepting problems like this only set a precedent for future games to do the same, because we're willing to accept unfinished products that do not make good on their claims. How quickly would you take a product back to the grocery store if it advertised the product as steak, but you found out it was hot dog meat? Sure, you can eat it, and might even be able to convince yourself its nearly the same thing, but dollars to donuts you'd take it back for your 10 dollars - why wouldn't you do the same for your 50 dollar investment?
Don't let this get swept under the rug.

Rather than sit here and complain about it, it's simple enough to file a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission. I have already done so. It takes a few minutes to file the complaint online;

https://www.ftccomplaintassistant.go...d.aspx?Lang=en

Don't take answers like this. You as a consumer are entitled to get the product you purchased.

They need to support systems other than Windows. The 32 bit world has been around a lot longer than 64 bit has and is more pervasive and "stable."