Quinn wrote on Apr 13, 2013, 12:51:Other than the horrible default resolution of course, what issues do you have with the graphics?
the graphics were just horrible.
Darks wrote on Apr 12, 2013, 16:09:Heh, it's funny you said that, as I was just thinking: damn, this guy is to pc gaming what the Westboro Baptist Church is to Christianity.
I’m a pc extremist.
Verno wrote on Apr 4, 2013, 13:22:Ahem.
Verno wrote on Mar 27, 2013, 12:40:I've never understood this claim. Granted, my experance with asset creation is limited to a bit of modding here and there, but in what I have done it's always been harder to target lower end hardware. I mean it's easy to make models look good when you can throw however many polygons you want into them and texture them with as high of resolution texture as you like, but when trying to keep things running smooth on lesser hardware it takes more work ceate something which is asteticly pleasing.
The lower end hardware could work in their favor since dev costs are so insane for higher quality assets.
LurkerLito wrote on Mar 25, 2013, 12:39:
Well I installed these, ran the Tomb Raider benchmark and I am very happy with the performance on my GTX670. When set to Ultimate at 1920x1200, I get an average of 44.8 fps. That for me is more than playable. The benchmark seemed a lot smoother.
Cutter wrote on Mar 22, 2013, 04:32:No, it's not, much as Canada and Mexico are not a matter of also when speaking of North America.kyleb wrote on Mar 22, 2013, 01:11:Cutter wrote on Mar 21, 2013, 23:11:No, it's not a matter of also, both are regions which span sections of the two American continents, Central America being a region within the region of Middle America.
There's also Central and Middle America too.
Yes, but they're all considered distinct regions with their own distinct countries, hence the names, so it's very much also.
Cutter wrote on Mar 21, 2013, 23:11:No, it's not a matter of also, both are regions which span sections of the two American continents, Central America being a region within the region of Middle America.
There's also Central and Middle America too.
gobehz wrote on Mar 20, 2013, 12:30:I'd prefer the option to skip the rest of the cutscene as soon as the loading is completed, like so many other games allow.Moog wrote on Mar 20, 2013, 10:14:would you rather just look at a loading screen?
Check out May Payne 3 then - more cut scene than game!
Dev wrote on Feb 21, 2013, 17:01:Sure, but I'll bet it pales in comparison to what they make off their Virtual Battlespace products. Our governments love to dump buckets of cash on such things.
they should have a huge pile of cash from all the ARMA 2 sales
Bopper wrote on Feb 21, 2013, 09:08:I've enjoyed the 152 hours I've put into Skyrim and will be getting the DLC and playing plenty more at some point, but the way Bethesda scales the world around the player character isn't even a good thing in my book, let alone a great one. I much prefer the style of game where many areas, including those of the additional content, are filled with enemies that a character with low level gear has absolutely no chance will get utterly decimated by. Put simply, Bethestda games don't provoke anywhere near the sense of danger and accomplishment that one gets when playing something along the lines of Dark Souls.
The great thing about Skyrim DLC is the fact that it invites you to start a new game as you can jump into the DLC and skip all the stuff you did the first playthrough as I am doing now.
Bhruic wrote on Feb 21, 2013, 07:19:Those first two sentences you quoted do explain why some early next generation multi-platform games won't necessitate 64 bit for the PC versions, but I've no doubt others will.
It's interesting how you managed to explain the reason they won't switch to 64 bit immediately in your first two sentences, but still suggested they will in your last.
Bhruic wrote on Feb 21, 2013, 07:19:Quite to the contrary, because it's there it will get used. Not by all games of course, and not efficiently by many developers at least early on, but some are bound to have already been working on ways to use it in games that will come out along with the launch of the new consoles or shortly thereafter.
Not to mention the fact that there's no reason for them to make use of the 8gb of RAM. Just because the system has it available, doesn't mean it will necessarily get used.
Rigs wrote on Feb 20, 2013, 21:10:Because money. There's a lot more people with PS3s and 360s out there to buy the game than there will be people with PS4s and the new Xboxs for a long time.
Bungie said 'Destiny' would be released for PS3 and PS4, but why?
mag wrote on Feb 21, 2013, 00:00:MS proved such feats possible with both the 360 and original Xbox, but I wasn't holding my breath, and am not expecting the 360's GPU to be much different than the PS4's.
Come on. Did you really expect them to stick a $500 video card in a $400 console?
jacobvandy wrote on Feb 21, 2013, 02:42:It is, much like PC games which are later converted to run on Linux are ports. That said, a lot of people incessantly misuse the the term port to refer to what are actually multi-platform developed games.
I know we're all used to calling PC versions ports... But with identical hardware, it's not really a port, is it?
Bhruic wrote on Feb 21, 2013, 05:35:When designing games to utilize anywhere near the 8gb of RAM on the consoles for more than just fancier graphics, they're going to have to use 64 bit for the PC versions.
If you think that developers will immediately switch to 64 bit simply they are making it for PS4/XboxWhatever, you're delusional.
Jivaro wrote on Feb 20, 2013, 19:13:The PS2 has a huge install base which justifies continued support, the original Xbox didn't.
I can still buy and use PS2 games
Jivaro wrote on Feb 20, 2013, 19:13:It's Sony's first Blu-ray player which came out over 6 months after the 360, and which was the first Blu-ray player to come out because Sony was the driving force behind the creation of Blu-ray technology, while the PS3 didn't come out until nearly another 6 months after that. Those are facts, and there's nothing disingenuous about facts, though it seems I was expecting too much of you when I assumed you'd be able to comprehend the implications of such facts.
Saying that Sony had it 6 months after the XBOX 360 had been out is disingenuous. The PS3 came out after the XBOX 360...so of course it did.