Again, dunno exactly what your source of information is, but even if it was the case, so what? I'll be sticking with my nanosuit, while you trundle through tunnels with a crowbar, have fun.
crysis and ut3 tanking?
- Thread starter Gerard
- Start date
Again, dunno exactly what your source of information is, but even if it was the case, so what? I'll be sticking with my nanosuit, while you trundle through tunnels with a crowbar, have fun.
Indeed:
Even at max settings, the 6200 does 42fps.
I believe the Geforce5 cards run in DX8 mode by default for HL2 because their DX9 performance is so weak
I think I heard that somewhere. I bet the Geforce4 is better than those figures as well.What progress though? UT3 is basically UT99 rehashed with better graphics (if you have the hardware). The gameplay is utterly dumbed down from UT2004.
Are you being deliberately obtuse or are you just a bit slow?
We'll make it simpler.
3 YEARS AGO.
Half Life 2 is released. The top end card of the time was the 6800GT. This ran it to the max, balls to the wall, mentalist style, with plenty of frames per second to throw around.
However, I only had a GeForce 4 Ti4200 at the time, a card two generations old, somewhat into the realms of being obselete. I could run HL2 at a decent resolution (1280x1024), most settings on high, albeit with no pretty DX9 effects and maintain a decent (40fps+) framerate.
FAST FORWARD 3 YEARS TO THE PRESENT DAY
Crysis/UT3 are released. The top end card now is the 8800GTX. Hell you can have two if you want. These will run UT3 and Crysis pretty damn well, turn the settings up, everythings nice.
However, I only have an X800XL, a card two generations old, somewhat into the realms of being obselete. I can't run Crysis/UT3 without it looking either like a dog has thrown up on my monitor or it being slower than a collections of screenshots being run in a slideshow.
Do you see what i'm getting at now?
Yeah no progress on that front
I never mentioned UT engine. However, Cryengine2 is a massive step forward in terms of technology and what you can do with hardware and what you can render in realtime, this is backed up by just how many awards it has won.HL2 is basically HL1 with better graphics. The reason UT3 has dumbed down gameplay is probably because of PS3.
Are you being deliberately obtuse or are you just a bit slow?
We'll make it simpler.
3 YEARS AGO.
Half Life 2 is released. The top end card of the time was the 6800GT. This ran it to the max, balls to the wall, mentalist style, with plenty of frames per second to throw around.
However, I only had a GeForce 4 Ti4200 at the time, a card two generations old, somewhat into the realms of being obselete. I could run HL2 at a decent resolution (1280x1024), most settings on high, albeit with no pretty DX9 effects and maintain a decent (40fps+) framerate.
FAST FORWARD 3 YEARS TO THE PRESENT DAY
Crysis/UT3 are released. The top end card now is the 8800GTX. Hell you can have two if you want. These will run UT3 and Crysis pretty damn well, turn the settings up, everythings nice.
However, I only have an X800XL, a card two generations old, somewhat into the realms of being obselete. I can't run Crysis/UT3 without it looking either like a dog has thrown up on my monitor or it being slower than a collections of screenshots being run in a slideshow.
Do you see what i'm getting at now?
Maybe because with the introduction of mutliple cores aswell as faster graphics cards there are more things going on at one time regardless of "setting" level than there were in half life 2? It's not a straight line on a graph mate.
You're still missing the point.
Half Life 2 could scale. It would play and look half decent on stuff that was pretty much obselete and barely worth selling on eBay.
Crysis just doesn't. Unless you have the cutting edge, it either looks crap or runs crap.
I can't look at an engine and say it's any good, when it can't even decently scale itself to hardware that is anything other than cutting edge.
Half Life 2 could scale. It would play and look half decent on stuff that was pretty much obselete and barely worth selling on eBay.
Crysis just doesn't. Unless you have the cutting edge, it either looks crap or runs crap.
I can't look at an engine and say it's any good, when it can't even decently scale itself to hardware that is anything other than cutting edge.
HL2 progresses the 'Half Life' story. It also adds new gameplay elements which were not present in HL1, such as the new 3D physics where you interact with objects and greater interaction / team work with other in-game characters.
UT3 is UT1 with better graphics, period.
You're missing the point, it's a leap you have to make. There are many of these in the history of progress as i'm sure you're well aware of. This is the jump, take it.
No denying that, the entire UT series is like ADHD on a disc.
Unless you have anything less than an 8600GT it would seem, whereby it reverts to looking like a 7 year old game.
I highly doubt it's as bad as you say but once again it comes down to more things going on at once.
What point? That it's somehow a good thing that nowadays games don't scale at all and you need to lay out £1500 to play them properly?
Great. I'm well up for that, where do I sign up?
It is no exaggeration to say, the original UT looks better than that screenshot I posted earlier from a 7600GS.
It really is.
http://i6.tinypic.com/6t1ceh0.jpg
That's running on a 7600GS.
That is not acceptable really is it? That looks like games made pre-half life 2.
Half Life 2 looked better on a 9800Pro, than UT3 does with a 7600GS.
It's beyond belief.
From what I hear, that sort of spec would just about hack medium at a playable framerate.
And all you're doing is proving my point. I'd need to buy a new PC to even have a chance of playing.
How is that better than before, when you could choose to buy the top notch stuff and it look awesome, but it would still play fine on older slower machines?
And all you're doing is proving my point. I'd need to buy a new PC to even have a chance of playing.
How is that better than before, when you could choose to buy the top notch stuff and it look awesome, but it would still play fine on older slower machines?
'3D physics' and 'character interaction' have nothing to do with gfx cards.
..so upgrade, or play it on low settings, Or are we all supposed to keep playing games using 3 year old engines until you decide to upgrade? The situation is no different to when Farcry was first released. Its a demanding game, get over it.
That spec would comfortably run Crysis at a solid 30fps on mostly high settings (which is perfectly playable in this game) At 1680x1020.
My brothers rig, an AMD X2 4400, 2 gig ram, and an old style 8800gts runs Crysis dead smooth on high settings at 1280x1024.
On the above spec you could happily drop the budget by having a cheaper case, 2 gig ram and probably the 520W corsair.
The whole £1500 to run the game thing is a complete load of rubbish, unless however you plan on playing in native res on a 1920x1200 + screen.
My brothers rig, an AMD X2 4400, 2 gig ram, and an old style 8800gts runs Crysis dead smooth on high settings at 1280x1024.
On the above spec you could happily drop the budget by having a cheaper case, 2 gig ram and probably the 520W corsair.
The whole £1500 to run the game thing is a complete load of rubbish, unless however you plan on playing in native res on a 1920x1200 + screen.