http://www.farcry.ubi.com/index.php
Yeah, that was a good idea wanting them to release it when it wasnt ready.
Yeah, that was a good idea wanting them to release it when it wasnt ready.
Farcry 1.2 patch recalled
- Thread starter Ackmed
- Start date
this is really reprehensible/unforgiveable. they were so anxious to make nvidia happy, they compromised their integrity.
(i say that because they leaked it to every site on the planet touting the PS3.0 benefits).
(i say that because they leaked it to every site on the planet touting the PS3.0 benefits).
More likely Ubisoft was pushing for a release.
It isnt that they want to make Nvidia happy - they want to make their engine look like the most advanced engine because theyre eager to license it.. If they wanted to make Nvidia happy they wouldnt be adding 3dc in the next patch. Either way though continue bashing if it pleases you.
What a fiasco. Looks like nvidia specific optimisations aren't nearly as easy to implement in code as first claimed. I still don't understand why nvidia user optimisations had to break the ATI code?
It works for me. 
That is why I said put out a beta patch....and "install at own risk" LOFL If they would have put out a beta patch weeks ago they could have received information from a wide range of users on bugs. What so damn ironic though Ackmed, if you had been in the Far Cry forum since July 4th, they had stated many, many,many, times that the Far Cry 1.2 patch would not be released until EVERY bug was worked out. They were totally against any premature release of the patch. So everyone waited for "perfect" release of the patch. What a fnnn joke. They released a bugged out "offical patch". I do not know where you get off and say it was released early. Where do you get your info.?
Do you ever check out anything before you state anything? I think not! They are more interested in selling the engine then fixing the game. Their sales for Far Cry have already peaked. Plus putting out a beta patch would have kept the mud offtheir faces. Putting it out so called offical really made them look stupid.
That is why I said put out a beta patch....and "install at own risk" LOFL If they would have put out a beta patch weeks ago they could have received information from a wide range of users on bugs. What so damn ironic though Ackmed, if you had been in the Far Cry forum since July 4th, they had stated many, many,many, times that the Far Cry 1.2 patch would not be released until EVERY bug was worked out. They were totally against any premature release of the patch. So everyone waited for "perfect" release of the patch. What a fnnn joke. They released a bugged out "offical patch". I do not know where you get off and say it was released early. Where do you get your info.?Do you ever check out anything before you state anything? I think not! They are more interested in selling the engine then fixing the game. Their sales for Far Cry have already peaked. Plus putting out a beta patch would have kept the mud offtheir faces.
Putting it out so called offical really made them look stupid.I never said put out a offical buggy patch. I said put out a beta patch. There is a difference between beta and offical, you might want to research that too)
)You guys should have checked out the Far Cry forum for the last 3 weeks and read what the mods where giving out for info. Totally misinformed everyone in there.
Ackmed you should tell everyone that you are pulling your quotes out of a forum that was clearly stated "beta", before waiting for kudos on your "foresight". LOFL
http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.cfm?catid=31&threadid=1351889
You in a way are taking yourself out of context and at the same time discrediting me. Beta and offical two completely different issues!
I would never say put out an "offical patch" that is not ready.
http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.cfm?catid=31&threadid=1351889
You in a way are taking yourself out of context and at the same time discrediting me. Beta and offical two completely different issues!
I would never say put out an "offical patch" that is not ready.
Putting out a beta patch would have done the same thing, borked installs, crashes to desktop, etc. But whatever makes you feel better.
Yeah whatever,,,but don't take me out of context and act like I said: "put out an OFFICAL patch that is buggy". I love how you act like you had foresight when we were discussing beta. LOfl
Schadenfroh
Elite Member
- Mar 8, 2003
- 38,416
- 4
- 0
- Aug 22, 2001
- 32,039
- 32,524
- 146
Looks like problems with Cryteks internal patch testing. There are problems with NV cards as well, but I guess thats overlooked now? Just as the many FX problems with the 1.1 patch are forgotten now? A patch that gave the FX cards a nice boost in performance, but also introduced many graphical issues.
413xram, I didnt once quote you in this thread, from the other thread. The only time I quoted you in this thread, was from your post in this thread. Nothing was out of context. Im done replying to you, all you seem to want to do is troll after me and try and start an argument. Good day.
and you did take yourself out of context......you are the one that refered to an earlier thread. trying to take credit for a discussion on a beta issue. i'm through replying to your trolling, misinformed, and taking things out of context crap. Later dude...have a good day. you better stay out of the sun you may turn to stone.......)
)TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 404
-
Facebook
Twitter