Panzer76

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Maximus: the N64. Speaking of which, I can't believe that they still make games for the PSX. Geez, talk about an out-of-date system when the PS2 is a 128-bit system.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> How many PSX is there? How many PS2 is there? MUCH bigger market for PSX.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Shatter: yet, but I think the Voodoo 5500 AGP looks better than the Geforce 2 GTS.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I remember when I had my good old Voodoo1, when 3Dfx and Glide was king of the hill, oh, how sweet Quake was, or was it DoomII, benn awhile! But see what happens, 3Dfx becomes arrogant, and suddenly nVidia is the king, any similarities with Intel vs AMD perhaps?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Shatter: Ya, after going to school and getting a degree in computer networking. I think I know when something is just a software or hardware or a setting related problem. I installed the Geforece into my other PC and the same thing happend. I think it was probably just a bad card. Anyways I like the look of Voodoo 5500 better anyway. [ 08-23-2001: Message edited by: Shatter ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> As you said yourself, it must be a bad card then. Because the problems you are describing isn't a regular problem with the GeForce2. You made it sound like the GeForce2 card in general had lots of problems, which it has not.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Shatter: Nothing but problems, was not impressed at all with the card. Although it was nice looking graphics wise, I think the Voodoo 5500 AGP is better. Plus damn thing made games flicker,crash,sound was all screwed up. For instance background sounds in games would skip really bad. Now I know it was Shatter<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> It has do be some software/hardware settings on your PC that led to this, the GeForce2 itself is a good gfx card.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Wolfe: Now this is just silly. 4xFSAA on the V5 is a *HUGE* improvement. Not only do objects seem more '3D' because object edges are straighter and don't "crawl" across the screen, but the amount of pixel popping and texture shimmer is reduced by a couple orders of magnitude! Turning FSAA completely off in CM is almost nauseating. The difference is really enormous. I don't know how I stood it before. (...) Turning things up to 1600x1200 doesn't even come close to the image quality you get with the V5 at 1024x768 w/ 4xFSAA (or even at 800x600x16x4). Believe me, I tried. [ 08-22-2001: Message edited by: Wolfe ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> FSAA uses a large amount of memory, and you even worse still if you try to run it in 32 bit mode. Example: 16 bit 640*480 FSAA 2x2 = 7.4MB 16 bit 640*480 FSAA 3x3 = 16.6MB 32 bit 640*480 FSAA 2x2 = 15MB 32 bit 800*600 FSAA 2x2 = 23MB 16 bit 1280*960 No FSAA = 7.4MB As you can see, you are dependent of large amounts of memory to use FSAA efficently, and I would rather run my game @ 1280*960 with no FSAA than @ 640*480 with FSAA 2x2. However, gfx cards are getting more and more on board RAM, but still it would have problems with, lets say 32 bit 1280*960 FSAA 2x2. I think its a personal preferance, of which I prefer the higher resoultion and colour depth instead of FSAA. Ofcourcem the best thing would be both

The other day I was playing RiskII with some friends on the LAN, and the thought struck me, how cool would it be if it could be more than 2 players in CM TCP/IP games in CM? Think about it, you could either split the points with you allied and buy seperartly or just split the forces. Think how this would effect communication and control? You had to actually plan with your allied where to strike, what to do and so forth. You could let one person handle the AFV and the other the infantery, then you would really have a combined arms effort! Obviously, you would have to be able to communicate with your partner, via chat or something. So this way you could have a game with 3 or 4 players. I don't think it would be nesescary for more players as it would be impractical. With 5 or more players it would hardly be any forces left for you to command! So, what do you think about it?

*bump*

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Schrullenhaft: expensive as a GeForce3 right now. It won't have all of the GeForce3's performance, but it looks like a good <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> The on board gfx card on the nForce MB will be nowhere NEAR as powerfull as GeForce 3. It's also worth noticing, that the MB is not fininshed, and therefore we don't even know if its gonna be a good performer (but I think so). Also, you will have to buy this MB when it's just reached the shelves which means that you can expect to fork over some big money to get it. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Schrullenhaft: The Voodoo 4/5 series cards are a bargain right now. They have a very nice FSAA routine. However the minor bugs that [ 08-22-2001: Message edited by: Schrullenhaft ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Who needs FSAA anyway, this is just for marketing hype! Instead of playing a game @ 800x600 and FSAA x2, just play it at 1024x768 etc. If you have high resolution, then you don't need FSAA since the high resoultion fixes the "problems" FSAA are supposed to do, the jaggies.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Greenman: In other words, "IF I'm not getting everything I want, then PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE gimme"? Like I said, we sound like spoiled children.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I can think of MUCH more that BTS can't POSSIBLE include in the game! If you think that makes us sound like spoiled children, fine. I don't think so. Should we then just be happy with the state of the engine and never ask for improvements, because then we are spoiled children, because, it's a great game already(that was a long sentence! )? Not in my opinion. We disagree, let's just accept that.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Greenman: another way. Ok Panzer if you're so gung-ho for BTS to shoot for mid-range systems, how would CM be different? What improvements are you talking about that you wouldn't get with the BTS' philosophy on system requirements (that is, to include low-end systems as well)? [ 08-22-2001: Message edited by: Greenman ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Well, as it has been noted, I would hate to bring content to the thread at this time! But, to answer your question; if you have the patiance to read through my posts (as Im sure nobody has now ) you will see that my point was this: IF the development of the new 3d engine was hampered because BTS was trying to include low end systems, I suggested they should stop supporting it. Of course I want CM to be as good as it can be! But, tof course limits, thats why I wrote that IF so was the case they should rather aim at the mid-top end market. But, for a number of reasons this topic is to early to begin to discuss, and proberly no point in anyway as I think BTS very well will follow their own strategy which as been formed already. Is that an anwers enough? And could we now please leave this topic alone and get back to the real posts with no content?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by GenSplatton: And Panzer, I think the phrase you were looking for was "Ready, Fire, Aim!" <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The price/performancer champion right now is in fact KyroII. But, my suggestion is wait so long as possible before buying a video card, with new cards are being developed with regular intervals, and thus making the former generation video card cheaper. When it comes to KyroII, it really shines on high resolution, 32 bit, 3D games. If you are mainly going to play CM2 I would not choose KyroII since the smart rendering engine in KyroII will not be properly used in CM2 plus the lack of DirectX8 support (for future games) and T&L on chip (for other games), I would rather pick an ATI og nVidia game. But with KyroIII, ATI Radeon2 and GeForce3 MX being launched in the near future, hang in and select one WHEN you must pick one. And oh, don't get any 3Dfx cards now! They are out of buisniss, you will not get any more support and it is outdated by a fair margin. [ 08-22-2001: Message edited by: Panzer76 ]

Yes, I know, this is an old interview, it even stated so in the subject title. But I read it just now and there where a couple of details mention I didn't know of. So well worth checking out if you haven't read it or just need a refresher while you wait. (where is that bloody game, this is taking ages!! ) http://www.cgonline.com/previews/combatmiss-02-p1.html

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by thewood: technology. Developing at the bleeding edge is not good business. The risks of not working with the various setups and configurations goes up exponentially as one develops closer to the leading edge of technology. I imagine that BTS can't afford to do that. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Developing only for bleeding edge has never been proposed by anybody in this thread anyway.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Subvet: I currently have a celeron 366 (although, I run it at 550), a TNT 16MB<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Isn't OCing a bitch? Try to get an Cel600 or 533/66, these baybies are real OC friendly. I know, I had a Cel 600@926. And you can get them for almost free now!

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Slapdragon: Chokepoints in the computer system included for computer games: VRAM speed / capacity Processor Power Disk Speed I/O Data pipe size (32bit or 64bit to processor)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Among a number of other things.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Marco Bergman: I have to say that most of the people responding here have systems which seem to be far in excess of that which most of the people I know here in New Zealand posess... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> What are the prices for computers/parts in New Zealand. BTW. I was born in Nelson! Panzer

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Sgt CDAT: I have the 1 GHz AMD with a Geforce 3 and I built it with CMII in mind. BTW I think this <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> GeForce 3? Man, thats expensive! I hate to buy "top of the line" stuff as you can bet your empty wallet that the price will drop more rapidly than the Nasdaq! Better to buy the value or last generation stuff IMO. But its sure is fun I can imagine! <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Sgt CDAT: is what you intended this post for! My hat is off to you for the way you have handled the post fired your way!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Thanks. Panzer

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jarmo: Panzer, I hope you haven't taken my posts as "a jump in the face", I disagree with you, but no nastyness intended. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Ceritanly not. Disagreeing its just fine. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jarmo: John K, Hahaa! Your pixellated tanks going at 5 fps are no match for my High Res equipped 20 fps cruisers. You're doomed! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Panzer [ 08-22-2001: Message edited by: Panzer76 ]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by dalem: No, what a bunch of us have been gently trying to point out is that "all of it" could have been avoided if had used a different tone in your original post. Now I understand that. -dale [ 08-22-2001: Message edited by: dalem ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Or even better, this all could have been avoided if people stopped reading stuff into my post and stopped assuming and instead asked for a clarification if they were in doubt! Ask first, shoot afterwards would be the correct military metaphore her I think. As a bunch of other people had pointed out. But enough, Im tired of all this, maybe I could have used another tone, but remeber, english isn't my fluent language. But maybe my "assuming everything" opposits could take some self critizism instead of jump in my face and call me arrogant etc. Panzer

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by YK2: BTW MR "I got a lean mean powerful machine" I thought your original post was indeed a tad arrogant, I don't agree with <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> So, all of it would be avoided if I had a worse machine? I'm sorry if people thought it was a "my machine is better than yours" thread, but it wasn't. Personal I think people who reacts that way (better/worse machine) has a "unter-machine complex". If some other guy have a much better/worse machine, guss what, I don't care, because it's not important to me. Panzer

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kingfish: Not my intention. Just trying to point out on how you are taking two different stances on the same subject. a) Hurt sales by dumping a sizable percentage of the customer base. Don't hurt sales by keeping the PC market alive. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Ok, but the whole "keeping the PC market" thing as I've said was just a reply to Slapdragon on a very hypotetical and unrealistic scenario and had nothing to do with the actual discussion (and not the same subject). But I think we just have to agree to disagree. Anyway, no hard feelings. Panzer BTW: You really should upgrade for the next CM!

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by GenSplatton: so. Kind of like walking by a car wreck, I just had to stop and gawk with the rest of the crowd. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> So who is the car wreck ? Anyways, I'm not from Australia, I study here, I'm from Norway. Good on you mate! Panzer

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by GenSplatton: p.s. Damnit, slow down Panzer. You go two replies in in the time I typed the one. [ 08-21-2001: Message edited by: GenSplatton ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I know, I'm tring to go to bed (I live in Australia) but I can't, gotta answer msg.'s!! BTW. Thanks for your support. Panzer

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by xerxes: Bungie started as a Mac-only game developer. They have been acquired by Microsoft which will probably prove unfortunate, we'll see. - xerxes<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I stand corrected. Thanks for the info. Panzer