ut 2004 is still to this day my favorite game of all time. nothing matches its fast gameplay and online fun. mechwarrior 3 comes pretty close though
ut 2004 is still to this day my favorite game of all time. nothing matches its fast gameplay and online fun. mechwarrior 3 comes pretty close though
reallyscrued
Platinum Member
- Jul 28, 2004
- 2,618
- 5
- 81
I read an article somewhere some time ago that the UT 2007 engine will be playable on a 9600 XT on 800x600 on everything minimum.
Haven't u guys watched any tech demos for UE3? The whole point of the engine is that it looks great at the same time as running very very efficiently. IMO it will run better than engines like BF2 and F.E.A.R.
Some of you are far too passive... "oh who cares if they write the engine like crap, I'll just lower my settings or upgrade my hardware."
kylebisme
Diamond Member
- Mar 25, 2000
- 9,396
- 0
- 0
Some of use have been lowering our settings or upgrading our hardware for new games since the original Doom came out, and we know that if we didn't have to lower our settings or upgrade our hardware we'd all still be playing games like the original Doom. I'm sorry if you think you can just build a system and stomp your foot to make developers stop taking advantage of all the newer and faster hardware that comes out all the time, but that simply isn't how the PC gaming world has ever worked and stomping your feet and accusing people of being passive isn't going to change that.
- Oct 30, 2004
- 11,442
- 32
- 91
Based on my impressions of what I have read about it, I'm under the impression that Epic would prefer to have the game release in the year before the game's year number. It's a marketing problem for them. When the game is on the shelves it looks outdated if it's late in the game's name year or the year after that year even though the game might still be very worthwhile.
So, if they release it in mid-2006 it will have more marketability if they call it 2007 and not 2006.
reallyscrued
Platinum Member
- Jul 28, 2004
- 2,618
- 5
- 81
That is no where near any of our arguments. FEAR is nice, but if you can't do it half right, don't do it at all. Please stop talking about programming experience, look around the net, it's not just me. When it's almost a world wide outcry, something ain't right. But fine, since you assume that we are all too much of crybabbies that can't sit out this generation of video cards, let's make a bet. You gonna stay on Anand for next 6-8 months? If you still here, I propose that UT2007, while looking even more impressive, will run at higher framerates on the same exact machine as the retail version of FEAR. You in?
Ah, if only the game was coded as well as kkreiger. I heard on the unreal website that the game should run fine on a 6600gt or better.
Why? If it was coded like that it would likely take a few hundred gigs on your HD and have the worst loading times imaginable
kylebisme
Diamond Member
- Mar 25, 2000
- 9,396
- 0
- 0
Look around some old Usenet disscussions on the orginal Quake and you will find the same crap. Here is one gem I just dug up:
[Q I wouldn't declare the 486 "dead" just because ID can't code a game
that will run on anything but a Pentium. That's ID's fault. The 486
isn't dead, it'l be aroud for quite a while... it won't however, be
_mainstream_. [/quote]
link
And there is plenty of more to see if you dig around. Duke3D is a good term to search for in that group, you'll find lots of people going on about how Duke3D is so great and runs so much better calling for Id's collective head on a platter. Granted, anyone who had even a hint of understanding about the internal workings of Quake knew damn well that John Carmack knew what he was doing back then, and even if you don't know anything about the code it should still be rather obvious to you now.
I have been around here over five years and I don't plan on going anywhere, but what kind of a bet is that? Lots of machines won't even run either game at their highest settings and even with the ones that will, the framerates are going to be completly dependent on the demos you benchmark in each game. You might as well bet that the next South Park is going to be Funnier than the next Family Guy; bets on generlasations just don't work.
But it is funny you bring up UT2007 as I recall when UT2004 came out and I had comparably faster system for the time than I do now yet still had to turn the options down in UT2004 to low just to keep the game above 30fps. here is a quote from me back then:
Link to thread.
Not that I didn't bitch that they can't code, I turned my settings down and accepted the fact that Epic valued their big environments and intense action over keeping the performance up even on the most powerful systems of the time. But even then there were people who were willing to service good framerate to run with some of the pretty stuff on, and now we have computers that are well fast enough to do both at once. I hope you are right in your belief that the next UT will generally run better than FEAR, but I'm not counting on it by any means.
Look, I didn't mean for this turn into an argument. My point was that you can't judge current hardware performance on just one game because you never know if poor performance is because of the developer and not because the hardware. If I see a video of Unreal 2007 and it's engine running quite well on a 7800gtx, then yes I'm going to wonder why performance suffers when Fear is being played at high settings not on just my system but on others as well and it really isn't doing anything revolutionary
kylebisme
Diamond Member
- Mar 25, 2000
- 9,396
- 0
- 0
The game isn't revolutionary by any means, it is evolutionary; and wondering why it takes such a powerful system to run it with everything cranked is fine. My trouble is with people stating the demo is unoptimised when they have little to no understanding of the internal workings of the program and no factual grounds to base their claims on.
Sorry superfly27, but i think that the 754 pin AMD motherboards don't support PCIexpress, only the 939 pin motherboards. Is there some sort of conversion available to allow it?
Monster, it's possible, but would destroy the programming team that worked to such a financial disaster. They'd patch it to work on 2.0 cards, and we'll all get it for $20.
IMHO, I think it will take at least 4 of the current top-of-the-line vidcards running in SLi/Crossfire....wheeheeeeeeeee!!!!!!!! not to mention a Athlon 64 XP X2^2 10000....
Agreed. Since when did you have to write a better program to criticize someone else's? Ever heard of movie critics? Doesn't matter if you code x86 asm second nature or not, you have a leg to stand on considering maybe Doom 3 or HL2 produce better images in your opinion. There's no reason why anyone here wouldn't say FEAR's performance is thus subpar. If you had only decent game developers arguing, this forum might have maybe 100 people at max.
Besides, I have plenty of an idea how games work. Obviously, me nor you nor he nor 99.999999983% of the world is Carmack. Doom 3 set a bar, and FEAR lowered it, that's what people are arguing. I wouldn't call that evolutionary. Thing is you are taking relative terms as absolute ones.
Interesting enough, I hate people who say Microsoft doesn't know how to code OSs. However a game has nothing inherent that makes it slow, unlike OSs which are inherently prone to viruses because there are much needed programs that serve a good function but use the some of the same low-level functions as the viruses. Not to mention an install base of maybe a billion is harder to cope with versus 10 million(?).
Don't take it personally, but this stuff is one of my many pet peeves. Just making a point. :beer:
LOL. Sad, but true. It was fast enough for me to enjoy it, for, maybe an hour.
6800gt, most likely. it's coming out 2007... do you realize that in that time, the graphics engine is going to be so demanding that the 6800ultra will act like a 9700pro nowadays!
reallyscrued
Platinum Member
- Jul 28, 2004
- 2,618
- 5
- 81
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter