Re: 0.6 compatibility with low-end comps
 

I'm not upset at all. I'm just trying to save people some money. I don't have an awful lot of it myself, and I bet a lot of other folks don't either.

You've got to admit though, 500$ for a video card is a rippoff. You can buy a PC for that much. I'll probably upgrade to a XT once the price comes down, they aren't bad cards at all. Just too expensive.

FYI, I'll post some 'fps 1' screenshots of Orel in a day or two. I get 99fps at full settings.

Re: 0.6 compatibility with low-end comps
 

I do buy cards for longevity, although my plan is a new one every two years. more precisely, I usually skip a generation.
but you missed the point, while going from GF4 to R350 is a good move, choosing an XT over its cheaper cousins at this point is not. you get a PRO for considerably less and a non-PRO for practically nothing. and those cards simply will not be obsolete before XT. they have the exact same technology, they're only clocked slower. The difference in power between an XT and the PRO is insignificant, and it will never be something you'll notice even in the future. Three years down the road you'll sit there with your XT and get like 50 fps in "Quake 5", while the guy with the PRO will get 46-47. a wise investement? I think not.

Re: 0.6 compatibility with low-end comps
 

Seriously. Some people have the wrong idea about computers, and some video card companies have excellent advertisements to give them that wrong idea.

Re: 0.6 compatibility with low-end comps
 

Radeon 9800 XT has a 16fps edge over the 9700 Pro and 7fps over the 9800 Pro in Unreal Tournament 2K3.

Radeon 9800 XT has a 13fps edge over the 9700 Pro and 3fps lead over the 9800 Pro in Battlefield 1942

Radeon 9800 XT : $433.oo
Radeon 9800 Pro : $332.oo
Radeon 9700 Pro : $208.oo

So opting for a 9800 XT over a 9800 Pro means that you'll be spending $100.00 for ~5fps difference.

Opting for a 9800 XT instead of a 9700 Pro means that you're spending $220.00 for a ~14.5fps difference.

Sure newer game engines will increase the spread a little bit, but the price differences seem to be a blatant waste of money.

Re: 0.6 compatibility with low-end comps
 

Well my view on the matter is the same as it was on the day of defeat forums.


Get a job you cheapasses, upgrade your commodore 64s and stop making the mod comunity downgrade the high quality models and skins they could be using because they have to make them available to low end users.

Re: 0.6 compatibility with low-end comps
 

You're sorta missing the point. . . people are complaining because many of the maps and models are overkill, and people would rather be able to play the game instead of complaining that the T-34's lug nuts are only 30 polys or that they can't make out the serial numbers on the feeding assembly of the Garand.

BF1942's engine is a bit of a patchwork affair. In order to get 64 people online in the same map they've had to make some sacrifices graphic and object wise so that 80% of the target demographic isn't stiffed due to system constraints. Also a lot of the servers are struggeling as it is to play some maps (Orel for one). When a server has to take into account the actions of 64 people, plus all the objects they are interacting with, it can sometimes cause people with ever "1337" systems to experience slowdowns.

Also some of us would love to drop $300 on a new video card or what have you, but we're too busy using the money from our part-time jobs to pay for university, rent, food, and utilities.

Re: 0.6 compatibility with low-end comps
 

Exactly. I am spending my saved $2000 to get my GF to come visit me from another country. There are far more important things to spend money on, then upgrading a comp every half a year. I will upgrade (rather by a new one) my comp eventually when a new game comes out that demands it. But i will not upgrade a comp for a mod that runs on the same engine but requires 10 times the resources.

It requires too many resources because it's unoptimized (i said it a million times, and i will say this again (since noone ever replied) - remove the invisible bullet casings from the tank's coax! they are not seen, but only lag the game), because the map makers decide not follow Dice's example of making maps, with limited objects on it, but they decide they are smarter and will cluster the maps to the limit, forget about other people's computers, and because we are adding 2000 poly ammo boxes.

Do you think Dice was lazy when they didn't put more bush into the maps? No, it was a strategic move to reduce the system requirements. Why? So that more people could play it. It does not look like FH devs want people to play thier mods, considering the system requirements and the lack of any public relations with the community.

And don't tell me "if you want something too look nice and real, you need lots of polys". Look at EoD's grass. They have heaps of it, and it does not lag. Look at DC's city maps. They have huge huge cities with enourmous amount of objects, and still it lags less then FH maps (and i am not even talking about Orel, i am talking about other "emptier" maps).

Most of this is due to unoptimization. I understand that this is basically a first-release (plus a patch), but when we got people on the forums asking more and more useless polys, then we got a problem

Re: 0.6 compatibility with low-end comps
 

$2000?

Shes only going to leave you anyway.

Re: 0.6 compatibility with low-end comps
 

i have a 600 mhz, 128 mb sd ram, gfx2 mx 200

(640x480x16 - 20% texture quallaty, 78% view, all settings off/at minimum)
max FPS in BF: about 20-30 - SP even 35 sometimes
max FPS in FH: about 1-15 - SP even ~20-25 sometimes

but in the last build i had about 10 FPS alltime ... looks like in the new one (where i mainly have just 1 fps, on the same maps than before) there is a network bug or something ... we have to check that

Re: 0.6 compatibility with low-end comps
 

I couldn't have said it better myself!

Does anyone care if there is a chair in the third storey of a building? You can't sit in it, and it makes lousey cover! Why even bother having it?

Also, do trees really need to sway? Does that Tank really need the hubs of the roadwheels to be perfectly round? Does that ammo box really need to to have more than 15 polys? Why are there 3D cleaning rods on the side of the King Tiger? Have any of you see more than 2 pictures of a King tiger at the front with all it's tools still attached? Or even it's fenders and mud guards?

When was the last time you gave a flying f*ck what an ammo box looked like?

I don't know about the rest of you guys but I'd rather have 10 populated servers running FH as opposed to 3 just because some people like their shell casings to be rendered with 3d firing pin marks.