k should i buy Command and Conquer 3: Tiberiam Wars ( i think i spelt tiberiem wrong) or Empire earth 3 or World in Conflict. I really cannot decide. ThanksRTS troubles
Command and Conquare 3 is the only RTS that been released out of the 3 you said. I never was a fan of command and conquare so I would go for Empire Earth 3 (release at the end of the year). RTS troubles
Just get C%26C 3 now if you can%26#39;t wait to play something.
buy all 3 of them
Get C%26C3
C%26C 3
Buy CnC 3 first, and buy the one that comes out first then get the last one.
If they were all out id go with World in conflict
C%26C3
k i know empire earth 3 and world in conflict arnt out but thanks to ur responses i'm gonna get C%26C3
Thursday, April 15, 2010
Titan Quest quick spec question before i buy.
Hi
I exceed the minimum but not the recommended..I have an Athlon2800+ cpu(2ghz) and a Nvidia 6200.. the demo runs ok if not perfectly smooth..I was thinking of buying the download version....Just wondering if it will be wqorth it with the specs i have? also 1.28gb of ram
thanks in advance..Can%26#39;t really afford to upgrade right now. Titan Quest quick spec question before i buy.
It will run pretty much the same as the demo.Titan Quest quick spec question before i buy.
I have a p4 2.56ghz 1gig ram on 6600gt 128 and that game had alot of lag on medium and for some reason snow textures were messed up. It was playable...Now I got a new 22'' monitor with much higher resolution and game is barely playable now, will play again when get my new computer.
sounds like i shouls hold up i guess....:roll:
[QUOTE=''Sleepyz''] I have a p4 2.56ghz 1gig ram on 6600gt 128 and that game had alot of lag on medium and for some reason snow textures were messed up. It was playable...Now I got a new 22'' monitor with much higher resolution and game is barely playable now, will play again when get my new computer.[/QUOTE]Theres definitely something wrong with your system. I ran it with an FX5500 (all low) with some lag, with a 6600TD on medium with no problems and now with my x1650 on high with no problems.
[QUOTE=''Whermacht02''][QUOTE=''Sleepyz''] I have a p4 2.56ghz 1gig ram on 6600gt 128 and that game had alot of lag on medium and for some reason snow textures were messed up. It was playable...Now I got a new 22'' monitor with much higher resolution and game is barely playable now, will play again when get my new computer.[/QUOTE]Theres definitely something wrong with your system. I ran it with an FX5500 (all low) with some lag, with a 6600TD on medium with no problems and now with my x1650 on high with no problems.[/QUOTE]
My GF's comp is an A64 3500+ with 1 gig of ram and a 9800 pro, and she runs it fine on medium settings @ 1024x768. I'm guessing the resolution is just overpowering the video card, yeah.
I exceed the minimum but not the recommended..I have an Athlon2800+ cpu(2ghz) and a Nvidia 6200.. the demo runs ok if not perfectly smooth..I was thinking of buying the download version....Just wondering if it will be wqorth it with the specs i have? also 1.28gb of ram
thanks in advance..Can%26#39;t really afford to upgrade right now. Titan Quest quick spec question before i buy.
It will run pretty much the same as the demo.Titan Quest quick spec question before i buy.
I have a p4 2.56ghz 1gig ram on 6600gt 128 and that game had alot of lag on medium and for some reason snow textures were messed up. It was playable...Now I got a new 22'' monitor with much higher resolution and game is barely playable now, will play again when get my new computer.
sounds like i shouls hold up i guess....:roll:
[QUOTE=''Sleepyz''] I have a p4 2.56ghz 1gig ram on 6600gt 128 and that game had alot of lag on medium and for some reason snow textures were messed up. It was playable...Now I got a new 22'' monitor with much higher resolution and game is barely playable now, will play again when get my new computer.[/QUOTE]Theres definitely something wrong with your system. I ran it with an FX5500 (all low) with some lag, with a 6600TD on medium with no problems and now with my x1650 on high with no problems.
[QUOTE=''Whermacht02''][QUOTE=''Sleepyz''] I have a p4 2.56ghz 1gig ram on 6600gt 128 and that game had alot of lag on medium and for some reason snow textures were messed up. It was playable...Now I got a new 22'' monitor with much higher resolution and game is barely playable now, will play again when get my new computer.[/QUOTE]Theres definitely something wrong with your system. I ran it with an FX5500 (all low) with some lag, with a 6600TD on medium with no problems and now with my x1650 on high with no problems.[/QUOTE]
My GF's comp is an A64 3500+ with 1 gig of ram and a 9800 pro, and she runs it fine on medium settings @ 1024x768. I'm guessing the resolution is just overpowering the video card, yeah.
Pirates game
Hello all member any body now a good pirets game and plz the type is stratigy game not action Pirates game
Sid Meier%26#39;s Pirates! is a fantastic game. Check its gamespace out on Gamespot. It blends a little bit of everything together - strategy, trading, adventure, and a few other mini-games. Well worth a look.Pirates game
Sid Meier%26#39;s Pirates! is good, but its about half strategy half action. I think its a game anyone can really enjoy. But if you are looking for something a bit deeper and more complex, theres Port Royale 2, and if you want something thats more focused on trading, building, and strategy (with the ability to be a pirate) theres Patrician 3.
Sid Meier%26#39;s Pirates! is a fantastic game. Check its gamespace out on Gamespot. It blends a little bit of everything together - strategy, trading, adventure, and a few other mini-games. Well worth a look.Pirates game
Sid Meier%26#39;s Pirates! is good, but its about half strategy half action. I think its a game anyone can really enjoy. But if you are looking for something a bit deeper and more complex, theres Port Royale 2, and if you want something thats more focused on trading, building, and strategy (with the ability to be a pirate) theres Patrician 3.
C&C worldbuilder prob
I installed WB on my computer (vista) and it froze up the computer every time I tried to open it. Then I installed it on another computer (XP) and it did the exact same thing. Fixes?C%26amp;C worldbuilder prob
not one other person has had this problem?
not one other person has had this problem?
Playing cell factor without phyx card!
Ok the demo is finaly here!Here are some instructions on how to play the game even if you do not have a physx card. If you dont have the game then you can download it here.http://hdvg.net/index.php?option=com_docman%26task=doc_details%26gid=129%26Itemid=26http://www.fileplanet.com/176835/170000/fileinfo/CellFactor:-Revolution-Client-%5BFree-Game%5Dhttp://uk.gamespot.com/pc/action/cellfactor/download.html?sid=6170252%26tag=topslot;title;5%26om_act=convert%26om_clk=topslot Credits to Iced_Eagle from hl2world forum for a work around.
http://ageia.com/physx_in_action/cellfactor.html
PPU is required to really play the game, but I found a workaround...
Here%26#39;s the workaround that I posted about in HL2.net... Enjoy!
I can%26#39;t really find a way to disable the debugging stuff, but o well, at least you get to play around with the physics...
Basically all you do is load up Reality Builder, and launch the game from there...
Now you can do what I did which was go through and on each visible entitiy change the IsHidden bool variable in the ''Visibility'' category to false... The one thing I can%26#39;t figure out is the AI Path node and how to hide that.
Also, since it isn%26#39;t really running a ''game'', the flag, and vehicles won%26#39;t work... Cloth also doesn%26#39;t appear (most likely because you truly need the PPU for that)
So to do this just go Start -> All Programs -> Artificial Studios -> CellFactor -> CellFactor Editor
From there go File -> LIMBO_FuelingStation
Give it a min or two to load, then once the level has finished loading you need to position yourself over an area of land... Hold Right-Click and move yourself (using WASD) over a nice area where you want to spawn in... Hit F5 and give it about 2 minutes or so (it should appear like nothing is happening... Just give it time!)
Once you are in, you should get a warning about a Cloth Script, just hit OK.
Woot woot, now you are in-game!!! Run around shoot stuff, and play with those physics!
Quote: WSAD, Arrow Keys: Move forward %26 backwards, strafe left %26 right
Mouse movement: Turn
Left Mouse Button: Shoot Assault Rifle (Primary Weapon) / Swing Flag Pole (CTF mode)
Right Mouse Button: Shoot Impact Grenade (Secondary Weapon)
Mouse Wheel Button: Jump, Fly Up (when Psi-Overcharged)
Mouse Wheel Up: Extend Psi-Pull distance when holding an object, Zoom in (Sniper Mode)
Mouse Wheel Down: Contract Psi-Pull distance when holding an object, Zoom out (Sniper Mode)
Left Shift: Run
Z: Enter/Exit Sniper Mode
R: Reload/Drop Flag
C: Crouch, Fly Down (when Psi-Overcharged)
E: Activate, Enter vehicle
V: Throw Gravity Grenade
F: Throw Proximity Mine
Q: Toggle View (First Person or Third Person)
T: Regular Chat
Y: Team Chat
K: Self Kill (costs points!)
Spacebar: Psi-Push (Allows to push objects around in world)
Left Control: Psi-Pull (Allows to pick up objects in world)
Spacebar + Control (Press %26 Hold Together): Psi-Charge (Allows to push off ground when released) o get ammo: Shoot the square indestructible metal boxes a few times, and ammo will pop-out
To get the Psi-Overcharge, there is a rectangular box that I think has the radiation symbol on it... Shoot that a few times and a blue-thing will pop up, just run over that and you are in Psi-Overchage!
Enjoy...
BTW, you really don%26#39;t get the full experience playing this way... It%26#39;s just a workaround so you can mess around... It%26#39;s not really a ''game'' in this state, but more like a sandbox..
If you want vehicles in-game you need to do the following...
Go into the Editor, and the top there is a drop-down Box (this is the Actors List)... Simply click on either CFHelicopter or CFTruck and click Insert.... Then use the gizmo%26#39;s to put them where you want them (In the top of the toolbar there is a downward arrow, this is the Land-Down button, so you can put the vehicles right on the ground so they don%26#39;t clip through and get stuck) Playing cell factor without phyx card!
a year ago when all this physics card crap and games using it came out i thought it looked really cool now it just looks boring as hell.....Playing cell factor without phyx card!
I have no idea what the fook I%26#39;m doing in Reality Builder. This takes too much effort. I%26#39;m just gonna go buy a card.
[QUOTE=''hacknslash12'']I have no idea what the fook I%26#39;m doing in Reality Builder. This takes too much effort. I%26#39;m just gonna go buy a card.[/QUOTE]Yes, that%26#39;s what I did. The card is actually not that expensive, plus I am all set for Unreal Tournament 3. And I am a huge GRAW fan so this card pays for itself in awesomeness.
I enjoy this game immensly. Best free download ever. Great music, great graphics, nice multiplayer. Only downside is in 1 level (#3), there are a little many objects, like broken roads and grates to try and run over. The cheesy Quake voices too I am not fond of, but ''PhysX Kill'' sounds sweet :D.
Anyways, great game, glad I have my PhysX card.
I understand that UT3 will support the physics cards, but will you actually need the card to play the game? If so, then I guess I won%26#39;t be getting UT3. I aint spending $200+ (game and card to play game) to play one game. I will be running a 8800GTS 640MB.
no you wont need it to play. just like you dont need it to play Cell Factor and any other game that uses Ageia...Rainbow 6 Vegas, GRAW, Infernal, Splinter Cell 4, Vanguard and City of Heroes/villains
cell factor controls are insanely complex, like madness, to many keys to bind and remember, i aint even gonna bother
[QUOTE=''Arch_Demonz'']cell factor controls are insanely complex, like madness, to many keys to bind and remember, i aint even gonna bother[/QUOTE] meh, just have to know your class. I have been playing the game for a year now, so Im quite intune with them. But like all games, takes a bit to get to know.
So this allows you to play the locked levels like reactor?
Crytek said the cards a bunch of crap and they wont be suppoting it for Crysis. Cell factor doesn%26#39;t even need it apart from the fact it isn%26#39;t optimized for use without it
[QUOTE=''Terrorantula'']Crytek said the cards a bunch of crap and they wont be suppoting it for Crysis. Cell factor doesn%26#39;t even need it apart from the fact it isn%26#39;t optimized for use without it[/QUOTE] I bet you they pupposely didn%26#39;t optmize it and probably didn%26#39;t put in any support for multithreading so that everyone who doesn%26#39;t have the card will think if they get a PPU their framrates will increase drastically. FUnny thing is there will barely be any difference.(Well at least for the non-physx required levels)
hmm.. I just found a physx card for $138 on google.. I think the price is comign down to reality on these
Ofcourse you are gonna have lots of physX in the game wit no PhysX card. But you dont get cloth tearing, bullet ricochets, sound waves, more dismatiling. This just goes to show you, how good physX is. theres so much going on.
Also, Terrorantula, please get me a link for what you say Crysis saying that. I acutally thought they never looked into Ageia, because Havok had gotten there first, then brought out GPU physics.
physx has some big probs. actually slows down your PC if you have a fast PC. Not to mention there are only about 4 PC games that use it. What is the point of what is essentially a math co-processor with mutli core chips and fast GPU%26#39;s. They obviously can%26#39;t keep up with AMD/AMD/INTEL and NVIDIA, should get out of the game.
l
[QUOTE=''ElvisNixon'']physx has some big probs. actually slows down your PC if you have a fast PC. Not to mention there are only about 4 PC games that use it. What is the point of what is essentially a math co-processor with mutli core chips and fast GPU%26#39;s. They obviously can%26#39;t keep up with AMD/AMD/INTEL and NVIDIA, should get out of the game.
l
[/QUOTE] youre reading old info. PhsyX does not slow your PC downthat was only when GRAW first came out and it was fixed. The purpose of a PPU is to give more physics to the game and letting the CPU be used to its fullest. They haev nothing to do with ATI, nvdia, Intel or AMD.
Personally heres what I%26#39;d like AGEIA to end up doign with thier PhysiX processor and future games:I%26#39;d like the whole push for ''PhysiX on multicore and GPU%26#39;s'' to happen, and have Ageia develop thier PhysiX technology for that. This theoretically should be good for everyone, as it will allow everyone to play those coveted ''PhysiX'' games.However, for those of use who are still on single cores or cant afford a really expensive GPU with ''PhysiX'' on it, have the PhysiX cards avalalbe for purhcase for a reasonablly cheap price (less than $150 or so). This way, the push to Multi-core and better GPU%26#39;s are there, but we can still purchase easy-to-instal ''piggy-back'' CPU%26#39;s (aka the PhysiX card) that could do the PhysiX (mabey even act as a kind of CPU core in itself!)Wouldnt that be grand? That way everyone wins, including me (so I dont have to buy a Dual Core in order to experience the best out of physics in games in the future).
[QUOTE=''KorJax'']Personally heres what I%26#39;d like AGEIA to end up doign with thier PhysiX processor and future games:I%26#39;d like the whole push for ''PhysiX on multicore and GPU%26#39;s'' to happen, and have Ageia develop thier PhysiX technology for that. This theoretically should be good for everyone, as it will allow everyone to play those coveted ''PhysiX'' games.However, for those of use who are still on single cores or cant afford a really expensive GPU with ''PhysiX'' on it, have the PhysiX cards avalalbe for purhcase for a reasonablly cheap price (less than $150 or so). This way, the push to Multi-core and better GPU%26#39;s are there, but we can still purchase easy-to-instal ''piggy-back'' CPU%26#39;s (aka the PhysiX card) that could do the PhysiX (mabey even act as a kind of CPU core in itself!)Wouldnt that be grand? That way everyone wins, including me (so I dont have to buy a Dual Core in order to experience the best out of physics in games in the future).[/QUOTE]There%26#39;s no reason for Intel or AMD to share profits with Physix or whatever.. PhysiX will only be profitable if they start making their own CPUs or do something interesting.. The way it stands, Intel could simply add another core, or keep the two cores already had- they basically do exactly the same thing the physix cards do.. The only difference is that the game is made in such a way to optimize something other than the CPU to handle physics calculations.. The way it is now, you could make a game optimized in such a way that it used one core for normal CPU stuff, and the other for physics, if you really wanted to, but it doesn%26#39;t work as well. Basically, PhysiX, the way it stands right now, is just basically adding another middle-man in the processer game for no reason, and you, and we, get to pay for basically the name, when AMD or Intel can make their own stuff better for cheaper. The game is what determines what it uses which processor core or PhysiX card for what.. It%26#39;s just a gimmick, now..
[QUOTE=''KorJax''] ... have the PhysiX cards avalalbe for purhcase for a reasonablly cheap price (less than $150 or so). [/QUOTE]The PhysX cards (not PhysiX) are already priced below $150, so go get one already :)
[QUOTE=''t0adphr0g''][QUOTE=''KorJax''] ... have the PhysiX cards avalalbe for purhcase for a reasonablly cheap price (less than $150 or so). [/QUOTE]The PhysX cards (not PhysiX) are already priced below $150, so go get one already :)[/QUOTE] Or you could just get another GPU(I think it%26#39;s only available to the geforce 8 series) and put it in SLI mode, so that the second GPU focuses on the physics.dermatologist acne
http://ageia.com/physx_in_action/cellfactor.html
PPU is required to really play the game, but I found a workaround...
Here%26#39;s the workaround that I posted about in HL2.net... Enjoy!
I can%26#39;t really find a way to disable the debugging stuff, but o well, at least you get to play around with the physics...
Basically all you do is load up Reality Builder, and launch the game from there...
Now you can do what I did which was go through and on each visible entitiy change the IsHidden bool variable in the ''Visibility'' category to false... The one thing I can%26#39;t figure out is the AI Path node and how to hide that.
Also, since it isn%26#39;t really running a ''game'', the flag, and vehicles won%26#39;t work... Cloth also doesn%26#39;t appear (most likely because you truly need the PPU for that)
So to do this just go Start -> All Programs -> Artificial Studios -> CellFactor -> CellFactor Editor
From there go File -> LIMBO_FuelingStation
Give it a min or two to load, then once the level has finished loading you need to position yourself over an area of land... Hold Right-Click and move yourself (using WASD) over a nice area where you want to spawn in... Hit F5 and give it about 2 minutes or so (it should appear like nothing is happening... Just give it time!)
Once you are in, you should get a warning about a Cloth Script, just hit OK.
Woot woot, now you are in-game!!! Run around shoot stuff, and play with those physics!
Quote: WSAD, Arrow Keys: Move forward %26 backwards, strafe left %26 right
Mouse movement: Turn
Left Mouse Button: Shoot Assault Rifle (Primary Weapon) / Swing Flag Pole (CTF mode)
Right Mouse Button: Shoot Impact Grenade (Secondary Weapon)
Mouse Wheel Button: Jump, Fly Up (when Psi-Overcharged)
Mouse Wheel Up: Extend Psi-Pull distance when holding an object, Zoom in (Sniper Mode)
Mouse Wheel Down: Contract Psi-Pull distance when holding an object, Zoom out (Sniper Mode)
Left Shift: Run
Z: Enter/Exit Sniper Mode
R: Reload/Drop Flag
C: Crouch, Fly Down (when Psi-Overcharged)
E: Activate, Enter vehicle
V: Throw Gravity Grenade
F: Throw Proximity Mine
Q: Toggle View (First Person or Third Person)
T: Regular Chat
Y: Team Chat
K: Self Kill (costs points!)
Spacebar: Psi-Push (Allows to push objects around in world)
Left Control: Psi-Pull (Allows to pick up objects in world)
Spacebar + Control (Press %26 Hold Together): Psi-Charge (Allows to push off ground when released) o get ammo: Shoot the square indestructible metal boxes a few times, and ammo will pop-out
To get the Psi-Overcharge, there is a rectangular box that I think has the radiation symbol on it... Shoot that a few times and a blue-thing will pop up, just run over that and you are in Psi-Overchage!
Enjoy...
BTW, you really don%26#39;t get the full experience playing this way... It%26#39;s just a workaround so you can mess around... It%26#39;s not really a ''game'' in this state, but more like a sandbox..
If you want vehicles in-game you need to do the following...
Go into the Editor, and the top there is a drop-down Box (this is the Actors List)... Simply click on either CFHelicopter or CFTruck and click Insert.... Then use the gizmo%26#39;s to put them where you want them (In the top of the toolbar there is a downward arrow, this is the Land-Down button, so you can put the vehicles right on the ground so they don%26#39;t clip through and get stuck) Playing cell factor without phyx card!
a year ago when all this physics card crap and games using it came out i thought it looked really cool now it just looks boring as hell.....Playing cell factor without phyx card!
I have no idea what the fook I%26#39;m doing in Reality Builder. This takes too much effort. I%26#39;m just gonna go buy a card.
[QUOTE=''hacknslash12'']I have no idea what the fook I%26#39;m doing in Reality Builder. This takes too much effort. I%26#39;m just gonna go buy a card.[/QUOTE]Yes, that%26#39;s what I did. The card is actually not that expensive, plus I am all set for Unreal Tournament 3. And I am a huge GRAW fan so this card pays for itself in awesomeness.
I enjoy this game immensly. Best free download ever. Great music, great graphics, nice multiplayer. Only downside is in 1 level (#3), there are a little many objects, like broken roads and grates to try and run over. The cheesy Quake voices too I am not fond of, but ''PhysX Kill'' sounds sweet :D.
Anyways, great game, glad I have my PhysX card.
I understand that UT3 will support the physics cards, but will you actually need the card to play the game? If so, then I guess I won%26#39;t be getting UT3. I aint spending $200+ (game and card to play game) to play one game. I will be running a 8800GTS 640MB.
no you wont need it to play. just like you dont need it to play Cell Factor and any other game that uses Ageia...Rainbow 6 Vegas, GRAW, Infernal, Splinter Cell 4, Vanguard and City of Heroes/villains
cell factor controls are insanely complex, like madness, to many keys to bind and remember, i aint even gonna bother
[QUOTE=''Arch_Demonz'']cell factor controls are insanely complex, like madness, to many keys to bind and remember, i aint even gonna bother[/QUOTE] meh, just have to know your class. I have been playing the game for a year now, so Im quite intune with them. But like all games, takes a bit to get to know.
So this allows you to play the locked levels like reactor?
Crytek said the cards a bunch of crap and they wont be suppoting it for Crysis. Cell factor doesn%26#39;t even need it apart from the fact it isn%26#39;t optimized for use without it
[QUOTE=''Terrorantula'']Crytek said the cards a bunch of crap and they wont be suppoting it for Crysis. Cell factor doesn%26#39;t even need it apart from the fact it isn%26#39;t optimized for use without it[/QUOTE] I bet you they pupposely didn%26#39;t optmize it and probably didn%26#39;t put in any support for multithreading so that everyone who doesn%26#39;t have the card will think if they get a PPU their framrates will increase drastically. FUnny thing is there will barely be any difference.(Well at least for the non-physx required levels)
hmm.. I just found a physx card for $138 on google.. I think the price is comign down to reality on these
Ofcourse you are gonna have lots of physX in the game wit no PhysX card. But you dont get cloth tearing, bullet ricochets, sound waves, more dismatiling. This just goes to show you, how good physX is. theres so much going on.
Also, Terrorantula, please get me a link for what you say Crysis saying that. I acutally thought they never looked into Ageia, because Havok had gotten there first, then brought out GPU physics.
physx has some big probs. actually slows down your PC if you have a fast PC. Not to mention there are only about 4 PC games that use it. What is the point of what is essentially a math co-processor with mutli core chips and fast GPU%26#39;s. They obviously can%26#39;t keep up with AMD/AMD/INTEL and NVIDIA, should get out of the game.
l
[QUOTE=''ElvisNixon'']physx has some big probs. actually slows down your PC if you have a fast PC. Not to mention there are only about 4 PC games that use it. What is the point of what is essentially a math co-processor with mutli core chips and fast GPU%26#39;s. They obviously can%26#39;t keep up with AMD/AMD/INTEL and NVIDIA, should get out of the game.
l
[/QUOTE] youre reading old info. PhsyX does not slow your PC downthat was only when GRAW first came out and it was fixed. The purpose of a PPU is to give more physics to the game and letting the CPU be used to its fullest. They haev nothing to do with ATI, nvdia, Intel or AMD.
Personally heres what I%26#39;d like AGEIA to end up doign with thier PhysiX processor and future games:I%26#39;d like the whole push for ''PhysiX on multicore and GPU%26#39;s'' to happen, and have Ageia develop thier PhysiX technology for that. This theoretically should be good for everyone, as it will allow everyone to play those coveted ''PhysiX'' games.However, for those of use who are still on single cores or cant afford a really expensive GPU with ''PhysiX'' on it, have the PhysiX cards avalalbe for purhcase for a reasonablly cheap price (less than $150 or so). This way, the push to Multi-core and better GPU%26#39;s are there, but we can still purchase easy-to-instal ''piggy-back'' CPU%26#39;s (aka the PhysiX card) that could do the PhysiX (mabey even act as a kind of CPU core in itself!)Wouldnt that be grand? That way everyone wins, including me (so I dont have to buy a Dual Core in order to experience the best out of physics in games in the future).
[QUOTE=''KorJax'']Personally heres what I%26#39;d like AGEIA to end up doign with thier PhysiX processor and future games:I%26#39;d like the whole push for ''PhysiX on multicore and GPU%26#39;s'' to happen, and have Ageia develop thier PhysiX technology for that. This theoretically should be good for everyone, as it will allow everyone to play those coveted ''PhysiX'' games.However, for those of use who are still on single cores or cant afford a really expensive GPU with ''PhysiX'' on it, have the PhysiX cards avalalbe for purhcase for a reasonablly cheap price (less than $150 or so). This way, the push to Multi-core and better GPU%26#39;s are there, but we can still purchase easy-to-instal ''piggy-back'' CPU%26#39;s (aka the PhysiX card) that could do the PhysiX (mabey even act as a kind of CPU core in itself!)Wouldnt that be grand? That way everyone wins, including me (so I dont have to buy a Dual Core in order to experience the best out of physics in games in the future).[/QUOTE]There%26#39;s no reason for Intel or AMD to share profits with Physix or whatever.. PhysiX will only be profitable if they start making their own CPUs or do something interesting.. The way it stands, Intel could simply add another core, or keep the two cores already had- they basically do exactly the same thing the physix cards do.. The only difference is that the game is made in such a way to optimize something other than the CPU to handle physics calculations.. The way it is now, you could make a game optimized in such a way that it used one core for normal CPU stuff, and the other for physics, if you really wanted to, but it doesn%26#39;t work as well. Basically, PhysiX, the way it stands right now, is just basically adding another middle-man in the processer game for no reason, and you, and we, get to pay for basically the name, when AMD or Intel can make their own stuff better for cheaper. The game is what determines what it uses which processor core or PhysiX card for what.. It%26#39;s just a gimmick, now..
[QUOTE=''KorJax''] ... have the PhysiX cards avalalbe for purhcase for a reasonablly cheap price (less than $150 or so). [/QUOTE]The PhysX cards (not PhysiX) are already priced below $150, so go get one already :)
[QUOTE=''t0adphr0g''][QUOTE=''KorJax''] ... have the PhysiX cards avalalbe for purhcase for a reasonablly cheap price (less than $150 or so). [/QUOTE]The PhysX cards (not PhysiX) are already priced below $150, so go get one already :)[/QUOTE] Or you could just get another GPU(I think it%26#39;s only available to the geforce 8 series) and put it in SLI mode, so that the second GPU focuses on the physics.
world of warcraft . vs . lord of the rings online
whch game would you say is better because im going to buy wichever one is best is world of warcraft better or worse than lord of the rings online shadows of angmar .......... thankyouworld of warcraft . vs . lord of the rings online
World of Warcraft, but I warn you, its more work than it is a game.world of warcraft . vs . lord of the rings online
LOTR because its actually fun to play not a task.
The sensible thing to do would be to wait for a free trial to come along (WoW has one on atm) and play both...choosing teh one you prefer. It doesn%26#39;t matter what people here say is better it%26#39;s up to you :)But...for what it%26#39;s worth...my prefernce is LOTR:Online. The license is not really an issue to me and the game has bundles of atmosphere :) Ade.
I would go with LOTRO since it%26#39;s still very early and to soon to say if Turbine has screwed it up. LOTRO has time to grow and improve, and its first major update is coming in a month. However, I must warn you LOTRO currently lacks the mindless fun factor that WOW has, and so the game can really only be played in stints as it gets boring. It%26#39;s not something I would say you can marathon, at least not yet in my experience with it.As for WOW, it%26#39;s glory days are behind it. Blizz ruined everything that was great about the game with the expansion.
I have been playing World of Warcraft for more then a year and I love it. I am in a very big guild. I do want to try LOTR Online but am waiting for free 14 days. I will make my vote then.
WoW
Lotr is full price right now and these games tend to be buggy when new (Never played so guessing on that :) )Wow is 20 bucks and you get a free month and it%26#39;s a proven game. If the cartoony graphics don%26#39;t turn you off then its still the best out there.
I havent tried either but based on what you guys are saying I think Il go and try WoW
LotRO without a question. It has an actual story to it (imagine that) and, unlike many newer MMORPG%26#39;s, it is pretty much bug free. Turbine did a really nice job with the game. So far the community seems a lot better than WoW%26#39;s but, then, I can%26#39;t imagine any game community being worse than WoW%26#39;s. WoW is seriously overrated.
lotro
I can%26#39;t stand fantasy games (or movies or books). The idea of paying to play one online boggles my mind!
wow gets boring fast IMO I played the preview for lorto. The impression it gave me was bad, because there were so many players it made questing hard, and take 5x as long. Plus i was playing on low graphic settings. I%26#39;d go with Vanguard if you can run it. It has the most features by far
[QUOTE=''Sleepyz'']Lotr is full price right now and these games tend to be buggy when new (Never played so guessing on that :) )Wow is 20 bucks and you get a free month and it%26#39;s a proven game. If the cartoony graphics don%26#39;t turn you off then its still the best out there.[/QUOTE]That is the one great thing Turbine did with LOTRO it had one if not the best MMO launches ever. No Major bugs and runs very smooth.
After playing WoW for 2 1/2 years and LotR for all of 3 days. I%26#39;ll say that WoW is the better game, but that doesn%26#39;t mean it%26#39;s the one to buy or play. I think that the gameplay is more flushed out and the stability on it is really good. There is a deep lore in WoW now that might be missed if you do grind out to 70 without paying attention to it, and the lore in LotR is great obviously but I%26#39;m concerned that it might get limiting to the games development as you only have the 2 books to base the game on.My initial opinion of LotR is that it is a quality game and I%26#39;m having fun with it. I%26#39;d rate WoW the better game, but I%26#39;m not planning on playing that in the near future as it has just grown sooooooo stale.One other note: I played AC back in the day and one of the great things was that Trubine always did a monthly update where they added new content, and they had some live events that changed the world. In my time in WoW nothing in the world has actually changed. Sure they added instances and stuff, but the barren is the barrens and has never changed. To me the world just isn%26#39;t dynamic and I%26#39;m hoping to see that out of LotR based on my history with Trubine.WoW is a 9/10 all timeLotR is an 8/10 right now and that could go up.
[QUOTE=''Icky27''] After playing WoW for 2 1/2 years and LotR for all of 3 days. I%26#39;ll say that WoW is the better game, but that doesn%26#39;t mean it%26#39;s the one to buy or play. I think that the gameplay is more flushed out and the stability on it is really good. There is a deep lore in WoW now that might be missed if you do grind out to 70 without paying attention to it, and the lore in LotR is great obviously but I%26#39;m concerned that it might get limiting to the games development as you only have the 2 books to base the game on.My initial opinion of LotR is that it is a quality game and I%26#39;m having fun with it. I%26#39;d rate WoW the better game, but I%26#39;m not planning on playing that in the near future as it has just grown sooooooo stale.One other note: I played AC back in the day and one of the great things was that Trubine always did a monthly update where they added new content, and they had some live events that changed the world. In my time in WoW nothing in the world has actually changed. Sure they added instances and stuff, but the barren is the barrens and has never changed. To me the world just isn%26#39;t dynamic and I%26#39;m hoping to see that out of LotR based on my history with Trubine.WoW is a 9/10 all timeLotR is an 8/10 right now and that could go up.[/QUOTE] Dead on with the content updating. The change of seasons and stuff was great. I remember the good ol%26#39; days of land rushes when they released housing. Hopefully Turbine continues that trend. The game has huge potential, just needs some work. WoW IS the more polished as far as content, but they%26#39;ve also had how many years to develop it? I haven%26#39;t bought LOTRO yet, still waiting to see how it develops.
LOTRO because you don%26#39;t need to dedicate your life to it.
[QUOTE=''Icky27'']the lore in LotR is great obviously but I%26#39;m concerned that it might get limiting to the games development as you only have the 2 books to base the game on.
WoW is a 9/10 all timeLotR is an 8/10 right now and that could go up.[/QUOTE] Well, if you knew anything about lotr you would know there are 3 books (6 actually), and thats much more material than was EVER written for world of warcraft
I LOVE WOW SO MUCH I AM A LEVEL 76 DRUID WHO SPECIALIZES IN ELEMENTAL DICK AND THIS ONE TIEM UM I WENT TO THE SUMMIT OF MOUNT NAGRPHONLY AND WHEN I GOT THERE UM I HAD TO FIGHT GANDOLPH THE DRAGON WHO WAS AN ELEMENTAL DRAGON AND $H!T AND WHEN HE STARTED BREETHING ICE I JUST CAST MY FLAME RESIST +5 SPELL AND MY BUDDY CAST +5 COMRADERY AND THE UM MADE ME INCINCIBLE TO GANDOLPHS ATAX AND WE TOALLY PWNED HIM IT WAS GREAT
World of Warcraft, but I warn you, its more work than it is a game.world of warcraft . vs . lord of the rings online
LOTR because its actually fun to play not a task.
The sensible thing to do would be to wait for a free trial to come along (WoW has one on atm) and play both...choosing teh one you prefer. It doesn%26#39;t matter what people here say is better it%26#39;s up to you :)But...for what it%26#39;s worth...my prefernce is LOTR:Online. The license is not really an issue to me and the game has bundles of atmosphere :) Ade.
I would go with LOTRO since it%26#39;s still very early and to soon to say if Turbine has screwed it up. LOTRO has time to grow and improve, and its first major update is coming in a month. However, I must warn you LOTRO currently lacks the mindless fun factor that WOW has, and so the game can really only be played in stints as it gets boring. It%26#39;s not something I would say you can marathon, at least not yet in my experience with it.As for WOW, it%26#39;s glory days are behind it. Blizz ruined everything that was great about the game with the expansion.
I have been playing World of Warcraft for more then a year and I love it. I am in a very big guild. I do want to try LOTR Online but am waiting for free 14 days. I will make my vote then.
WoW
Lotr is full price right now and these games tend to be buggy when new (Never played so guessing on that :) )Wow is 20 bucks and you get a free month and it%26#39;s a proven game. If the cartoony graphics don%26#39;t turn you off then its still the best out there.
I havent tried either but based on what you guys are saying I think Il go and try WoW
LotRO without a question. It has an actual story to it (imagine that) and, unlike many newer MMORPG%26#39;s, it is pretty much bug free. Turbine did a really nice job with the game. So far the community seems a lot better than WoW%26#39;s but, then, I can%26#39;t imagine any game community being worse than WoW%26#39;s. WoW is seriously overrated.
lotro
I can%26#39;t stand fantasy games (or movies or books). The idea of paying to play one online boggles my mind!
wow gets boring fast IMO I played the preview for lorto. The impression it gave me was bad, because there were so many players it made questing hard, and take 5x as long. Plus i was playing on low graphic settings. I%26#39;d go with Vanguard if you can run it. It has the most features by far
[QUOTE=''Sleepyz'']Lotr is full price right now and these games tend to be buggy when new (Never played so guessing on that :) )Wow is 20 bucks and you get a free month and it%26#39;s a proven game. If the cartoony graphics don%26#39;t turn you off then its still the best out there.[/QUOTE]That is the one great thing Turbine did with LOTRO it had one if not the best MMO launches ever. No Major bugs and runs very smooth.
After playing WoW for 2 1/2 years and LotR for all of 3 days. I%26#39;ll say that WoW is the better game, but that doesn%26#39;t mean it%26#39;s the one to buy or play. I think that the gameplay is more flushed out and the stability on it is really good. There is a deep lore in WoW now that might be missed if you do grind out to 70 without paying attention to it, and the lore in LotR is great obviously but I%26#39;m concerned that it might get limiting to the games development as you only have the 2 books to base the game on.My initial opinion of LotR is that it is a quality game and I%26#39;m having fun with it. I%26#39;d rate WoW the better game, but I%26#39;m not planning on playing that in the near future as it has just grown sooooooo stale.One other note: I played AC back in the day and one of the great things was that Trubine always did a monthly update where they added new content, and they had some live events that changed the world. In my time in WoW nothing in the world has actually changed. Sure they added instances and stuff, but the barren is the barrens and has never changed. To me the world just isn%26#39;t dynamic and I%26#39;m hoping to see that out of LotR based on my history with Trubine.WoW is a 9/10 all timeLotR is an 8/10 right now and that could go up.
[QUOTE=''Icky27''] After playing WoW for 2 1/2 years and LotR for all of 3 days. I%26#39;ll say that WoW is the better game, but that doesn%26#39;t mean it%26#39;s the one to buy or play. I think that the gameplay is more flushed out and the stability on it is really good. There is a deep lore in WoW now that might be missed if you do grind out to 70 without paying attention to it, and the lore in LotR is great obviously but I%26#39;m concerned that it might get limiting to the games development as you only have the 2 books to base the game on.My initial opinion of LotR is that it is a quality game and I%26#39;m having fun with it. I%26#39;d rate WoW the better game, but I%26#39;m not planning on playing that in the near future as it has just grown sooooooo stale.One other note: I played AC back in the day and one of the great things was that Trubine always did a monthly update where they added new content, and they had some live events that changed the world. In my time in WoW nothing in the world has actually changed. Sure they added instances and stuff, but the barren is the barrens and has never changed. To me the world just isn%26#39;t dynamic and I%26#39;m hoping to see that out of LotR based on my history with Trubine.WoW is a 9/10 all timeLotR is an 8/10 right now and that could go up.[/QUOTE] Dead on with the content updating. The change of seasons and stuff was great. I remember the good ol%26#39; days of land rushes when they released housing. Hopefully Turbine continues that trend. The game has huge potential, just needs some work. WoW IS the more polished as far as content, but they%26#39;ve also had how many years to develop it? I haven%26#39;t bought LOTRO yet, still waiting to see how it develops.
LOTRO because you don%26#39;t need to dedicate your life to it.
[QUOTE=''Icky27'']the lore in LotR is great obviously but I%26#39;m concerned that it might get limiting to the games development as you only have the 2 books to base the game on.
WoW is a 9/10 all timeLotR is an 8/10 right now and that could go up.[/QUOTE] Well, if you knew anything about lotr you would know there are 3 books (6 actually), and thats much more material than was EVER written for world of warcraft
I LOVE WOW SO MUCH I AM A LEVEL 76 DRUID WHO SPECIALIZES IN ELEMENTAL DICK AND THIS ONE TIEM UM I WENT TO THE SUMMIT OF MOUNT NAGRPHONLY AND WHEN I GOT THERE UM I HAD TO FIGHT GANDOLPH THE DRAGON WHO WAS AN ELEMENTAL DRAGON AND $H!T AND WHEN HE STARTED BREETHING ICE I JUST CAST MY FLAME RESIST +5 SPELL AND MY BUDDY CAST +5 COMRADERY AND THE UM MADE ME INCINCIBLE TO GANDOLPHS ATAX AND WE TOALLY PWNED HIM IT WAS GREAT
UT3 will be Direct X 10
link :o and I still have a DX 8 video card :PUT3 will be Direct X 10
[QUOTE=''gs_gear'']link :o and I still have a DX 8 video card :P[/QUOTE]by that time i hope i have a new computer with vista+good video card
UT3 will be Direct X 10
all the screens we have seen are dx9? if thats true then it doesnt bother me :)
[QUOTE=''gs_gear'']link :o and I still have a DX 8 video card :P[/QUOTE]I have Vista and a Geforce 8800GTS 640MB card, so I am good to go.
[QUOTE=''zero9167'']all the screens we have seen are dx9? if thats true then it doesnt bother me :)[/QUOTE]
a fair amount of the crysis media we've seen has been effectively DX9, too.
Hope it will be DX9 compatible.Don%26#39;t want Vista right now and DX9 cards have not been pushed to their limits yet, and this DX10 tecnology sucks because of that. If Dx9 was still the most advanced for this whole year, DX10 and DX10 cards would be cheaper AND better.
DX 9 will be fine.
It will be DX9 compatible. The UE3 engine is almost based entirely on DX9, so there%26#39;s no way it%26#39;s DX10 only. They would need to do a complete rewrite of their engine if that was truly the case.
Awesome, can%26#39;t wait till its out.
lol, why isnt there a poll option saying something along the lines that we are happy about this? seems a bit biased. any me personally i dont really care since i dont plan on getting the game unless it is extra ordinary!
[QUOTE=''Makari''][QUOTE=''zero9167'']all the screens we have seen are dx9? if thats true then it doesnt bother me :)[/QUOTE] a fair amount of the crysis media we%26#39;ve seen has been effectively DX9, too.[/QUOTE]yeah all most all of the early media was dx9... isnt it great? :D
[QUOTE=''gs_gear'']link :o and I still have a DX 8 video card :P[/QUOTE]by that time i hope i have a new computer with vista+good video card
UT3 will be Direct X 10
all the screens we have seen are dx9? if thats true then it doesnt bother me :)
[QUOTE=''gs_gear'']link :o and I still have a DX 8 video card :P[/QUOTE]I have Vista and a Geforce 8800GTS 640MB card, so I am good to go.
[QUOTE=''zero9167'']all the screens we have seen are dx9? if thats true then it doesnt bother me :)[/QUOTE]
a fair amount of the crysis media we've seen has been effectively DX9, too.
Hope it will be DX9 compatible.Don%26#39;t want Vista right now and DX9 cards have not been pushed to their limits yet, and this DX10 tecnology sucks because of that. If Dx9 was still the most advanced for this whole year, DX10 and DX10 cards would be cheaper AND better.
DX 9 will be fine.
It will be DX9 compatible. The UE3 engine is almost based entirely on DX9, so there%26#39;s no way it%26#39;s DX10 only. They would need to do a complete rewrite of their engine if that was truly the case.
Awesome, can%26#39;t wait till its out.
lol, why isnt there a poll option saying something along the lines that we are happy about this? seems a bit biased. any me personally i dont really care since i dont plan on getting the game unless it is extra ordinary!
[QUOTE=''Makari''][QUOTE=''zero9167'']all the screens we have seen are dx9? if thats true then it doesnt bother me :)[/QUOTE] a fair amount of the crysis media we%26#39;ve seen has been effectively DX9, too.[/QUOTE]yeah all most all of the early media was dx9... isnt it great? :D
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)