Creston wrote on Oct 4, 2011, 13:57:
It does do something amazingly spectacular. Tried to run it on my box at work, which has two graphics cards in it. An FX4800 and an FX320, both of which power one monitor. (Hey, it's a box I cobbled together from spare parts.)

Every single game I play simply defaults to the FX4800, which is connected to a 30" monitor.

Rage, however, seems to only want to play on the FX320, which powers a 22" monitor. Try as I may, I can't get it to play on the graphics card that's 90 times more powerful. (other than disabling the FX320, I guess.)

Errr, okay, John Carmack. I'm glad you're doing all the auto-detecting for me, I guess?

Creston

Lorcin wrote on Oct 4, 2011, 12:14:

Halo wrote on Oct 4, 2011, 12:06:
Right because the amount of PC games with adjustable video settings is comparable to people wanting to regear a transmission.

Apparently so - if your complaining you can't change how the game is setting itself up. It seems a lot of PC gamers think they know the way their PC architecture, memory buses, background services and iD's own engine interact efficiently better than iD do.

Lorcin wrote on Oct 4, 2011, 12:26:
Or maybe it's just obsolete nowadays - remember when we as gamers had to tailor autoexec.bat and config.sys to cram as much low memory as we could while still enabling the cd-rom and soundcard etc? That all stopped with the introduction of Windows 95. Now with graphic options getting fewer and fewer over the last few years we're obviously getting to the point where the systems CAN configure themselves correctly to provide what the game designers have decided is how they want the game to look.