• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

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

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Monolith is STUPID if they think such game will be sold for anyone other than those who only have a 7800 or 2X 7800!

They are insane with such requirement!.

I think they need to send their developpers to TeamNinja to learn couple lines of programming. Damn it, Ninja Gaiden Rocks on lonely XBOX!


 
I liked the trailer. DL the trailer before you judge the graphics, screenshots are not always accurate.

I played the multiplayer beta on my 3.0E P4 with my 9600xt. Im actually pay for the lineless servers on Fileplanet and i signed up for my beta serial though them.
I had to turn the settings pretty low but not all the way at the bottom, the resolution was something like 800*600 I believe. A few times I got a little choppy(fraps score was 40s mostly) and ofcourse the lighting was suck. well that was my actual expierence playing it.

if you have a better system than me then maybe now you have some idea how it may perform for you. personally i think it will be perfectly enjoyable on my P4 with a 6800gt once i save enough. the single player is what i look forward too.
 
wtf is going on...ok...Doom 3...which can run just fine on a 9800 pro and high...and FEAR which runs like crap on even a 7800...yet they both look almost identical.

now developers rely on super video cards to cover for their incompetent programming...learn something new every day...

2 of my gamer friends have a geforce fx5200 of some sort, and the other has a geforce 4. i wouldn't be surprised if that represented the public as a whole. all of my friends have no problem playing half life 2 at comfortable settings, and it still looks amazing. the developers need to take a lesson from this. maybe this game was written in visual basic .NET....ahhhh the horror! :evil:

to answer that article: "What happens when you turn on soft shadows?" S**t hits the fan.
 
In Doom3 the lack of stuff that you could actually see on the screen helped performance I bet.
the game screens dont look that much worse without the soft shadows.
soft shadows are tough on GPUs.
what if they had made the game and never added soft shadows, and it ran great.....
what if you just turned off the soft shadows?
 
Originally posted by: Beiruty
Monolith is STUPID if they think such game will be sold for anyone other than those who only have a 7800 or 2X 7800!

They are insane with such requirement!.

I think they need to send their developpers to TeamNinja to learn couple lines of programming. Damn it, Ninja Gaiden Rocks on lonely XBOX!
Click to expand...

I second that. I used to be in QA for a company tha tpublished Monolith titles using some of hte older Lithtech engines. Monolith engines are historically horrendously inefficient. The screen shots and #'s that're being put up by even the 7800 shows me nothing's changed. Hopefully the release will be cleaned up quiet and I'm sure it will since my own experience with their titles specifically shows a big jump in performance a few builds before relase. That's not saying much though as the title was still underperforming relative to games that were it's visual competitors at the time. In a nutshell, I woudln't use this game as a barometer for anything.
 
Originally posted by: xtknight
wtf is going on...ok...Doom 3...which can run just fine on a 9800 pro and high...and FEAR which runs like crap on even a 7800...yet they both look almost identical.

now developers rely on super video cards to cover for their incompetent programming...learn something new every day...

2 of my gamer friends have a geforce fx5200 of some sort, and the other has a geforce 4. i wouldn't be surprised if that represented the public as a whole. all of my friends have no problem playing half life 2 at comfortable settings, and it still looks amazing. the developers need to take a lesson from this. maybe this game was written in visual basic .NET....ahhhh the horror! :evil:

to answer that article: "What happens when you turn on soft shadows?" S**t hits the fan.
Click to expand...


Don't worry about it. It's Monolith. Consider them the anti-Id when it comes to vpu efficency in their games.
 
yeah i was afraid of this too, i looked at the tests yesterday and i kept sayin oh no...i know its beta, but the performance doesnt look too impressive (40 odd fps on a 6800GT @ 12x9 with no AA!) doesnt really sound good. are the new cards coming to a point where they simply cant paly every game with AA and AF now?

hopefully final release will be faster....but it looks like im gonna have to overclock somemore if i wanna play how i like it

wish i didnt have a TFT now...being limited to 12x10 kinda sucks
 
Originally posted by: JackBurton
I'm all cool with SLI, but $1200 to play this game is WAY too much. This is just a small step in gaming graphics but a HUGE step in price to play. If I need $1200 just for the graphics cards to play a game, it better look like the Final Fantasy movie! :|

I'm going to take my little 6800GT and have some fun now playing some old school UT. 🙂
Click to expand...

they dont make them like they used too! the good old days

UT was just ace i still prefer it too the new ones
 
Let me get this straight:
Click to expand...
Let me get this straight: 1024x768, 0xAF & 0xAA is now acceptable on a $1200 GPU setup?

Keep telling yourself that BFG.
Click to expand...
Given your past efforts at benchmarking you are in no position to debunk my results.

Really? I didn't know anyone had any idea when the R520 would see the light of day, do tell! Link?
Click to expand...
Really? I had no idea it had been canceled. Do tell! Link?

But you won't be running it at all?
Click to expand...
Depends.

But you won't be running it at all?
Click to expand...
And you will? At what? 1024x768, 0xAF and 0xAA while proudly proclaiming how superior your $1200 setup is for giving you soft shadows?

I happened on the review, was surprised that it's not playable on ATI at all.
Click to expand...
But it's not really playable on nVidia either. The point of this thread should have really been how poorly the game runs in general but of course (t)Rollo couldn't miss the opportunity to proclaim "OMG Soft Shadows!"
 
Originally posted by: hans030390
First off, I'd like to see benchmarks with no AA/AF...I don't use those anyways just because I'm not that picky. Second, there will most likely be a good amount of programming before it is released, so we can expect some better framerate and then maybe some patches to clear it up even more.

Oh, and believe me, there are many many many more people that went out to buy SC:CT for PC than all of us on these forums...and they know nothing about hardware, so that's how the game sold. Shader models would mean nothing to those people.
Click to expand...


look at the very first pages of the test .... they are there here
 
Originally posted by: PerfeK
I bet some people will still say that there is no game that can push the 6800GT.
Click to expand...


bare faced lie lol.....6800GT has been pushed for a while, mine certainly doesnt provide good enough speed in FC @ 12x10 4xaa 8xaf at all, ive had to tone down AA in many games, riddick pushed it alot too, im finding BF2 even pushes it
 
Originally posted by: xtknight
wtf is going on...ok...Doom 3...which can run just fine on a 9800 pro and high...and FEAR which runs like crap on even a 7800...yet they both look almost identical.

now developers rely on super video cards to cover for their incompetent programming...learn something new every day...

2 of my gamer friends have a geforce fx5200 of some sort, and the other has a geforce 4. i wouldn't be surprised if that represented the public as a whole. all of my friends have no problem playing half life 2 at comfortable settings, and it still looks amazing. the developers need to take a lesson from this. maybe this game was written in visual basic .NET....ahhhh the horror! :evil:

to answer that article: "What happens when you turn on soft shadows?" S**t hits the fan.
Click to expand...

seriously valve and others like team ninja, should do "programming tuition" on the side for abit of pocket money. HL2 looks better than this and that runs rather nicely on my old Gf3 rig

 
The graphics of FEAR beta looks like sh!t. Seriously. Just take a look at this and judge it for yourself. You thought you expected a FPS in 2005 that features better graphics than the original UT, but no.

And now, a 7800GTX pulling 55FPS in a very high resolution of 1024x768 (4xAA) in a game that looks like crap? Granted, it's in beta, but still, it's hilarious...
 
Originally posted by: Ackmed
You should really stop trolling Rollo. This is pure flaimbait.
Click to expand...

It's actually pure irony.

F.E.A.R. is a Get In The Game (ATI funded) game that can't even be played on ATI hardware.

Think about it?
 
Originally posted by: BFG10K
I happened on the review, was surprised that it's not playable on ATI at all.
Click to expand...
But it's not really playable on nVidia either. The point of this thread should have really been how poorly the game runs in general but of course (t)Rollo couldn't miss the opportunity to proclaim "OMG Soft Shadows!"
Click to expand...


We're reduced to calling each other names now BFG?

I don't know where you get "it's not really playable on nVidia either"-
Most people would call having the choice between 60fps at 12X9 4X8X and 45fps at 16X12 4X8X "playable"?
If you don't there must be a LOT of games you don't consider "playable" on your X800XL BFG!
Far Cry
58fps and 42fps at those settings, I guess you don't play Far Cry, BFG?
IL2
57/40- no IL2 for you either, eh?
Doom3
No Doom 3 for BFG either- only 43/31fps.
Riddick
Ouch 24 and 18fps- that's not even CLOSE.
Splinter Cell
D'oh. 38/28 for the "high end" X800XL at those settings.

Like I said if 60 at 12X9 4x8X and 45 at 16X12 4X8X isn't "playable" to you BFG, you must be playing some Donkey Kong these days with your X800XL?
🙂
 
They aren't going to sell many copies if the only setups that can run the game are 6800gt sli, 6800u sli, 7800 and 7800 sli. Can't look at the benches here, are there others that are capable?
 
Originally posted by: johnnqq
still trying to justify spending $1200 for 50% better graphics than a $300 card?
Click to expand...

I it was 50% improvment i would say fine ill gop buy a 7800 BUT ITS NOT 50% improvment u fuyckers got suckered, Shoulda waited a few weeks
 
I got a feeling ATI plans to launch r520 right around this games release.

Anyways, if the benchmarks are true and the game is not heavily optimized before release, this game is doomed. I know that even if I wanted to, I could never afford 6800GTSLI or get even close to owning ONE 7800GTX, so I wont be buying the game if I cant run it on my x800xl
 
Gee what a surprise, a DX9 game comes out and the R300 is as worthless as the NV30\35.

Like I have been saying, DX9 was irrelevant on that generation of cards.
 
You know what's cool? ATi being late on this generation means that the 8800 from nVidia will be competing with the r520, and the 7800 will be competing with the x800 series. How does it feel to be a generation behind, bitches? On your knees!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top