Want to play F.E.A.R.?

[xtknight]

I would bet $10 noone's going to buy this game and be able to play it...or they'll have a lot of returns. The overwhelming population doesn't have 6800SLI+...or maybe hell froze over...

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Your premise is flawed. Your Title and Topic Summary are FALSE:

Topic Title: Want to play F.E.A.R.?
Topic Summary: Looks like you need 6800SLI+

You cannot play FEAR and may never be able to play it . . . you cannout use beta benchmarks form an unreleased game to make ANY point.

IF it does get released, you most certainly will NOT need 6800+ SLI.

i don't think i can make it any clearer . . . but then your true purpose of this thread was revealed in several of your posts.
:roll:

I've edited both the post and the subject line.

However, many have played the F.E.A.R. beta. On July 14th anyone who preorders can play the F.E.A.R. beta for two weeks- so you CAN play F.E.A.R..

You are right that you won't "need" a 6800+SLI or 7800GTX; however, you will to run at settings we all take for granted these days if the performance on these benches holds true. You could say you don't "need" a 6800 or X800XL+ to play Doom3 to- but who plays at 10X7 anymore?



[/quote]

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: xtknight
I would bet $10 noone's going to buy this game and be able to play it...or they'll have a lot of returns. The overwhelming population doesn't have 6800SLI+...or maybe hell froze over...

Most people don't have 6800s either, but SC:CT only runs at full IQ on a nV4X> card?

IIRC it was this way with Quake 1 and Quake2 as well- you could "play" on lots of cards. The only cards you could play well on were the Voodoo 1 and Voodoo2, respectively. (can't remember when TNT1 launched relative to Q2)

 

[archcommus]

The bottom line is, by the time it's released, you'll be surprised how modest of a system plays it well.

 

[DidlySquat]

bottom line is that old giezers like the OP, with their thick reading glasses sliding down their sweaty noses, who will be playing on their ultra expensive video cards running the game at ultra high resolutions, will STILL get fragged to bits by real online gamers (most likely half their age) running the game on sub $300 video cards. Having high end hardware doesn't make you into a good gamer.

 

[StrangerGuy]

Originally posted by: Rollo

but who plays at 10X7 anymore?

You need a reality check. This is like saying, "who uses Windows XP anymore?"

 

[xtknight]

Originally posted by: DidlySquat
bottom line is that old giezers like the OP, with their thick reading glasses sliding down their sweaty noses, who will be playing on their ultra expensive video cards running the game at ultra high resolutions, will STILL get fragged to bits by real online gamers (most likely half their age) running the game on sub $300 video cards. Having high end hardware doesn't make you into a good gamer.

lol...

I don't think fatal1ty had a top-of-the-line video card and he kicked everyones ass and even got his own motherboard line. bet he's richer now than people who used to have high-end cards...

i'll whip out my voodoo3 2000 and beat everyone else at quake3... and i'd bet you your crapped underwear too...

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Rollo

Originally posted by: apoppin

Your premise is flawed. Your Title and Topic Summary are FALSE:

Topic Title: Want to play F.E.A.R.?
Topic Summary: Looks like you need 6800SLI+

You cannot play FEAR and may never be able to play it . . . you cannout use beta benchmarks form an unreleased game to make ANY point.

IF it does get released, you most certainly will NOT need 6800+ SLI.

i don't think i can make it any clearer . . . but then your true purpose of this thread was revealed in several of your posts.
:roll:

I've edited both the post and the subject line.

However, many have played the F.E.A.R. beta. On July 14th anyone who preorders can play the F.E.A.R. beta for two weeks- so you CAN play F.E.A.R..

You are right that you won't "need" a 6800+SLI or 7800GTX; however, you will to run at settings we all take for granted these days if the performance on these benches holds true. You could say you don't "need" a 6800 or X800XL+ to play Doom3 to- but who plays at 10X7 anymore?

[/quote]

thank-you for the edit . . .

. . . and lets wait and see what the actual game plays like before jumping to any conclusions about possible needs for future performance from a beta, please.

Clearly, each succeeding game tries to raise the gfx bar a bit further while still maintaining playability for the LCD. The first Unreal3 game - with a 6600 as the recommended 'min' for 'playability' - should be here this year.

. . . oh and i'd say the majority of gamers still play at 10x7.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Originally posted by: StrangerGuy

Originally posted by: Rollo

but who plays at 10X7 anymore?

You need a reality check. This is like saying, "who uses Windows XP anymore?"

NONONONONONONO NO NO NO NO NO no no no no no no no no no no no no.

Rollo is obviously representative of your common every day gammer. Anything other than a 7800 SLI settup is pure rubbish and can't play games to satisfaction because there will always be the 7800 SLI you could have had instead of your reasonable 6600GT.

Oh wait, Rollo pimped that card too, albeit in SLI. However the X800XL performs as well if not better than such a setup yet is rubbish in Rollo's opinon.

Oh wait, I forgot. ATI produces the X800XL, not nVidia.

Good thing I caught my mistake.


Rollos reasoning summed up since his days of pimping the 5800U: If it is impractical it is a winner, the more absurdly so the better.

 

[speedstream5621]

Look at the minimum vs. maximum FPS...there is something seriously wrong with this game.

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: archcommus
The bottom line is, by the time it's released, you'll be surprised how modest of a system plays it well.

What is your position in the game's development staff that you can tell us this?

Why should we believe you?

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: DidlySquat
Having high end hardware doesn't make you into a good gamer.

True. It just gives you the ability to play games that look better than yours.

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: xtknight

Originally posted by: DidlySquat
bottom line is that old giezers like the OP, with their thick reading glasses sliding down their sweaty noses, who will be playing on their ultra expensive video cards running the game at ultra high resolutions, will STILL get fragged to bits by real online gamers (most likely half their age) running the game on sub $300 video cards. Having high end hardware doesn't make you into a good gamer.

lol...

I don't think fatal1ty had a top-of-the-line video card and he kicked everyones ass and even got his own motherboard line. bet he's richer now than people who used to have high-end cards...

i'll whip out my voodoo3 2000 and beat everyone else at quake3... and i'd bet you your crapped underwear too...

As interesting as this all is, the thread isn't titled "Is fatal1ty a good gamer"? or "Is fatal1ty now rich?" :roll:

The thread is about not being able to play a much anticipated shooter at decent settings on last gen single cards?

So while fatal1ty is cashing his hardware endorsement checks, if this game is mostly done (likely) people with one last gen card will be playing it at lower res, and with less AA/AF than they're used to.

That's what this thread is about. (helping you get on topic, or would you like to talk about how Thresh used to win at Quake now?)

 

[Regs]

OMG THE GAME LOOKS LIKE CRAP

THIS GAME ROXORS WITH HYPE

 

[imported_g33k]

Originally posted by: Regs
OMG THE GAME LOOKS LIKE CRAP

THIS GAME ROXORS WITH HYPE

meh, the screeenshots don't look that great. I think I'll wait to sample a demo before I buy.

 

[xtknight]

Originally posted by: Rollo

Originally posted by: xtknight

Originally posted by: DidlySquat
bottom line is that old giezers like the OP, with their thick reading glasses sliding down their sweaty noses, who will be playing on their ultra expensive video cards running the game at ultra high resolutions, will STILL get fragged to bits by real online gamers (most likely half their age) running the game on sub $300 video cards. Having high end hardware doesn't make you into a good gamer.

lol...

I don't think fatal1ty had a top-of-the-line video card and he kicked everyones ass and even got his own motherboard line. bet he's richer now than people who used to have high-end cards...

i'll whip out my voodoo3 2000 and beat everyone else at quake3... and i'd bet you your crapped underwear too...

As interesting as this all is, the thread isn't titled "Is fatal1ty a good gamer"? or "Is fatal1ty now rich?" :roll:

The thread is about not being able to play a much anticipated shooter at decent settings on last gen single cards?

So while fatal1ty is cashing his hardware endorsement checks, if this game is mostly done (likely) people with one last gen card will be playing it at lower res, and with less AA/AF than they're used to.

That's what this thread is about. (helping you get on topic, or would you like to talk about how Thresh used to win at Quake now?)

Oh well it was fun while it lasted. It did serve as a nice bump.

Originally posted by: Regs
OMG THE GAME LOOKS LIKE CRAP

THIS GAME ROXORS WITH HYPE

isn't the second screenshot of STALKER?

 

[302efi]

Originally posted by: DidlySquat
bottom line is that old giezers like the OP, with their thick reading glasses sliding down their sweaty noses, who will be playing on their ultra expensive video cards running the game at ultra high resolutions, will STILL get fragged to bits by real online gamers (most likely half their age) running the game on sub $300 video cards. Having high end hardware doesn't make you into a good gamer.

Well said :thumbsup:

When I sit down to do some serious online gaming, even though I have a 6800 Ultra Extreme (AGP), all the settings go down, V-sync off, and at 10X7...

With Rollo's 7800GTX setup, it sure must look nice when hes waiting to respawn every 30 secs :laugh:

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: 302efi

Originally posted by: DidlySquat
bottom line is that old giezers like the OP, with their thick reading glasses sliding down their sweaty noses, who will be playing on their ultra expensive video cards running the game at ultra high resolutions, will STILL get fragged to bits by real online gamers (most likely half their age) running the game on sub $300 video cards. Having high end hardware doesn't make you into a good gamer.

Well said :thumbsup:

When I sit down to do some serious online gaming, even though I have a 6800 Ultra Extreme (AGP), all the settings go down, V-sync off, and at 10X7...

With Rollo's 7800GTX setup, it sure must look nice when hes waiting to respawn every 30 secs :laugh:

Another totally off topic and meaningless 302EFI post, you seem to have trouble understanding the concept.

If you were sharper, you'd realize that I can play at settings that look better than yours at speeds comparable to your 10X7? Look into it, maybe your Dad can help?

 

[BenSkywalker]

This is a GITG title, one that I recall being touted as a good reason to own a R3x0 over a NV3x(along with Stalker). I also recall seeing the beta benches for HL2 being posted and the ATi crowd fall all over themselves talking about how everyone was an idiot who didn't have a R3x0 part to play the game. What exactly is any different in what Rollo is doing right now in this thread? One element is that these benches clearly show that FEAR is obviously not a very good reason to own a R3x0 part(or R420 for that matter)- another is countering all the talk about 'noone needs a $600 graphics card' and 'all games are CPU limited with any decent board today anyway'.

You want something to counter Rollo's touting of the 7800GTX then tell ATi to ship the R520 or at least get Crossfire out the door. Other then that, this was a highly hyped game bandied about in these forums for quite some time, the benches are out, and the only setup that runs it relatively decently at higher settings is the one that Rollo has.

 

[302efi]

Originally posted by: Rollo

Originally posted by: 302efi

Originally posted by: DidlySquat
bottom line is that old giezers like the OP, with their thick reading glasses sliding down their sweaty noses, who will be playing on their ultra expensive video cards running the game at ultra high resolutions, will STILL get fragged to bits by real online gamers (most likely half their age) running the game on sub $300 video cards. Having high end hardware doesn't make you into a good gamer.

Well said :thumbsup:

When I sit down to do some serious online gaming, even though I have a 6800 Ultra Extreme (AGP), all the settings go down, V-sync off, and at 10X7...

With Rollo's 7800GTX setup, it sure must look nice when hes waiting to respawn every 30 secs :laugh:

Another totally off topic and meaningless 302EFI post, you seem to have trouble understanding the concept.

If you were sharper, you'd realize that I can play at settings that look better than yours at speeds comparable to your 10X7? Look into it, maybe your Dad can help?

LOL...As usual you missed the point

Ponder this: How does it feel when your running a game at 1600x1200 4x/8x Vs. someone with an old 5500 playing at 800x600 and getting your ass fragged ?

To a real gamer, eye candy doesnt mean sh!t. Maybe in a single player mode, the high res is good. Ask any CS:S, FarCry, BF2 or whatever, when your in the middle of fragging the sh!t out someone it don't mean a damn thing.

...but as a side note, it seems that your more of a hardware enthusiast then being a hardcore gamer, so maybe high res and eye candy looks good to an old person

 

[jim1976]

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker
This is a GITG title, one that I recall being touted as a good reason to own a R3x0 over a NV3x(along with Stalker). I also recall seeing the beta benches for HL2 being posted and the ATi crowd fall all over themselves talking about how everyone was an idiot who didn't have a R3x0 part to play the game. What exactly is any different in what Rollo is doing right now in this thread? One element is that these benches clearly show that FEAR is obviously not a very good reason to own a R3x0 part(or R420 for that matter)- another is countering all the talk about 'noone needs a $600 graphics card' and 'all games are CPU limited with any decent board today anyway'.

You want something to counter Rollo's touting of the 7800GTX then tell ATi to ship the R520 or at least get Crossfire out the door. Other then that, this was a highly hyped game bandied about in these forums for quite some time, the benches are out, and the only setup that runs it relatively decently at higher settings is the one that Rollo has.

Nothing is wrong with Rollo's logic Ben. But you and I know that Rollo has selective memory and opinion favoring Nvidia...

 

[jim1976]

edit triple post

 

[jim1976]

edit triple post

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: 302efi
LOL...As usual you missed the point

Your "points" aren't too hard to pick up on, you just don't make much sense.

Ponder this: How does it feel when your running a game at 1600x1200 4x/8x Vs. someone with an old 5500 playing at 800x600 and getting your ass fragged ?

Ponder this:I run Doom3 at that setting at 83fps average, I run HL2 at that setting at 90-100fps average. If I'm getting beat by the guy at 8X6, it's because he made a better play than me, not because I'm slowing down. The difference is now his Nintendo like picture vs. my eye candy.
You also assume apparently assume I'm a bad player because I'm middle aged. :roll:
Also, if I'm a bad player and going to be beaten by these retro gamers, why wouldn't I want to do it at eye candy settings? :roll:

To a real gamer, eye candy doesnt mean sh!t.

Oh. So only online twitch gamers are "real" gamers- I'm sure the millions of single player gamers of the world will be happy you've insulted them with your obtuse, narrow minded perspective.
While I too used to hold online fps above all, recently Doom3, Riddick, Unreal2, Far Cry have changed my opinion- not to mention it gets old mashing buttons furiously and it can be enjoyable to let yourself get immersed in a story line and play a game. Ask anyone who likes HL2.

Maybe in a single player mode, the high res is good. Ask any CS:S, FarCry, BF2 or whatever, when your in the middle of fragging the sh!t out someone it don't mean a damn thing.

LOL the problem is, at the ending of the day "fragging the sh1t" out of someone doesn't earn you any money, get you any women, and they all respawn anyway and probably enjoy playing as much as you. If they have a 7800 and are playing BF2, they're enjoying the game much more than you because they're running it much better than you.

...but as a side note, it seems that your more of a hardware enthusiast then being a hardcore gamer, so maybe high res and eye candy looks good to an old person

High res and eye candy look good to any gamer who's not "slow"......oops, did I just infer something about your intellect?

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: jim1976

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker
This is a GITG title, one that I recall being touted as a good reason to own a R3x0 over a NV3x(along with Stalker). I also recall seeing the beta benches for HL2 being posted and the ATi crowd fall all over themselves talking about how everyone was an idiot who didn't have a R3x0 part to play the game. What exactly is any different in what Rollo is doing right now in this thread? One element is that these benches clearly show that FEAR is obviously not a very good reason to own a R3x0 part(or R420 for that matter)- another is countering all the talk about 'noone needs a $600 graphics card' and 'all games are CPU limited with any decent board today anyway'.

You want something to counter Rollo's touting of the 7800GTX then tell ATi to ship the R520 or at least get Crossfire out the door. Other then that, this was a highly hyped game bandied about in these forums for quite some time, the benches are out, and the only setup that runs it relatively decently at higher settings is the one that Rollo has.

Nothing is wrong with Rollo's logic Ben. But you and I know that Rollo has selective memory and opinion favoring Nvidia...

Yep. It can truly be said I favor the nV40 line over the X800 line, like most ATers who responded to the recent poll here, most who responded to the Steam survey, and the Mercury Research market share surveys.

Pretty radical of me, next I'll be posting "AMD makes better gaming processors". :shocked: