Jump attack input (skullsplitter) not working?

[Mechanist]

As for why allow these things to be disabled, troubleshooting.

Yep. I found a couple reports in the meantime; some people had problems with modern games when the "GX" option was (needlessly) turned on. Go figure...

So, since you had XP compatibility in mind, you must have settled for an older graphics card for the new PC among other things as well? NVIDIA dropped XP support in 2016, AMD even earlier. AMD doesn't even bother to support 8.1 anymore, just 7 and 10.

That's strange, because the facts seem to speak the opposite.
AMD supported XP all the way up to Radeon R7 260x (which is what I have), and IIRC also one model further - which I was unable to physically find and buy, in any case.
But OTOH, Intel seemed very eager to abandon ship shortly after M$ ended XP support...

My new hardware (all XP-supported, unless where noted):

• AMD FX-8370 8-core (didn't want the FX-9*** because of known problems caused by insane TDP; also crazy price at the time),
• 990FX chipset,
• 32GB RAM (max that the chipset will allow, and can't nominally go faster than 1600 with >16GB either),
• 2x Radeon R7 260x, linked (but CrossFire isn't supported on XP for such "new" cards; only the "main" card works),
• 2x 512GB Samsung 850 Pro SSD (the newer 860 isn't supported by the older, XP version of Magician),
• 1x 512GB Samsung 960 Pro NVMe SSD (there are no NVMe drivers for XP; it isn't even detected as a storage volume! W7 and above only!),
• Asus Xonar DGX 5.1 soundcard,
• Aquacomputer Poweradjust 2 smart fan controller (older versions of the software work just fine in XP),
• Corsair AXi 1200 PSU (USB data link works fine in 7, but very broken - almost nonfunctional - in XP due to poor software support),
• Logitech F710 wireless gamepad (DirectInput mode works out-of-the-box in XP; XInput requires modified M$ Xbox controller drivers),
• (a bunch of other irrelevant things omitted for clarity)

Note that most of this had been purchased around the beginning of 2017, but ended up sitting on the shelf for a year due to various unrelated complications.
So not exactly too recent, but should easily carry me through the next 6-8 years, as the previous hardware did before it.

[UCyborg]

Radeon R7 260x was released in October 2013, so it's already more than 4 years old now. And it's better to have one powerful card which is guaranteed to be able to be utilized universally across all games rather than relying on things like SLI and Crossfire that most developers don't even take into account when developing their games. Also never understood the fascination people have with Windows XP. In the age of Vista without service packs, understandable, but today? Sure MS made some questionable decisions, but the newest OS will always have the most APIs for application developers to play with.

[Mechanist]

Eh, I don't care much for very modern/recent games, anyway.

Both because of the modern developers' attitude problem (PC ports of console games? Singleplayer-as-an-afterthought? No save-anywhere functionality, on a friggin PC no less, thus needlessly wasting my precious time reloading from some arbitrary checkpoint??? F you, game devs... ), and also because I have a massive backlog of existing, older titles to explore.
By the time I'm done with those, a few more years will have passed, and the cycle begins anew...

Generally, I just don't play "new" games - they never work well on what I consider to be "current" hardware.
I just wait a few years, until they aren't at all new anymore, and at that point the "now-current" hardware can run them fairly smoothly.

Also, I resent change, on general principles - unless I'm instigating it in the first place, or when the change in question is unequivocally positive.
If it works (quite well, no less), why "fix" it?

For example, I still use Winamp 2.7 (released in 2000). It has one job only. Does it well. Don't need, nor want, any more than that.

Adobe Acrobat... why does the newest version weigh to the tune of hundreds of MB's, when it's supposed to do the same exact thing as the old version, which is only a couple of MB in size?
Said older version also still opens 99% of PDF's, no problem.

On my old computer, I had 3 vastly different versions of Firefox installed at the same time:

• 1 very, very old (and blindingly fast) - surprisingly, >50% of the pages I normally visit still worked just fine on it, as recently as a few weeks ago.
• 1 relatively recent version, albeit noticeably slower, which covered >90% of the rest.
• And 1 even more recent release, which obnoxiously took >30s to start up - and I only used it for the most recalcitrant sites, which just stubbornly refused to work in anything older than that.

At work, we have a whole mishmash of OS'es, ranging from XP (Embedded), all the way to W10.
W7 I consider just barely tolerable; and a necessary evil, given that increasingly little new software will stomach XP at all.
W8 & W10... I resent that rubbish. M$ should burn in hell for all eternity because of these atrocities.

My computer at work has W10... ugh . Can't do much about it, though; it isn't my call to make.
ClassicShell helps a bit, even though it's merely a case of polishing dung at this point.
The only reason I can stomach that garbage in the first place, is because I only ever use 4 programs on it: SolidWorks (3D CAD), PC-CAM, Calculator and Notepad. The former 2 mercifully provide their own, OS-independent interface; and the latter 2 are inconsequential anyhow.

Also, this policy of mine extends to hardware as well, and not merely computer hardware.

I could've kept using that old computer for 2-3 more years at this rate, no problem.
Just replace that old XP x86 with XP x64 (since x86 was getting increasingly limiting...), change the increasingly noisy old fans, and maybe slap a cheap SSD and another 4GB RAM on it for good measure.

But in the meantime, I caught wind that the XP ship was starting to sink, and wanted to be on top of the tallest mast, for when that finally does happen.
Especially since attempting to upgrade the old hardware would mean a fair amount of effort anyway: might as well build a new, much better system, and set that up instead...