Yikes. I'll stay away from something so horribly unbalanced, thank you.All i can say to the guy speaking of the titan camping, be glad you had no unlocks, it is better to deal with support newbies, then it is to deal with det-pack recon uber newbies.
Cuc >_>... Radeon 9700 does have SM2.0 <3.Cucumba said:That would be why it doesn't work pride, it requires SM 2.0 to work. It won't work on my wife's laptop for the same reason.
Yeah man, I thought of the same irony. But I'm mad--this isn't a new engine or anything like that, it's just higher requirements for the same gimped one BF2 ran on, that's why I was mad.Big C-Man said:You know what I find ironic about that Pride, when everyone was *****ing about the PS3 at one point requiring a 1080p HDMI digital on interface for blueray movies to show, thus requiring a $1000+ television upgrade, you were all for it, claiming that progress has to be made for better image quality. Well, you just got the fruits of that on the PC end, lol.
Not a personal attack, just an observation that has me chuckling. I'm not to happy about the ever climbing system requirements. For instance, Win XP has to be activated to function, right? What happens when XP is not longer supported by M$? Are we going to have copies of XP that cannot be reinstalled? F.E.A.R. is another game that has insane system requirements, I couldn't even play it for more than 16 fps with my last computer on low. My current comp, a AMD x2 939 platform, can't run it past an average of 40 fps. Farcry and Doom3 were similar ball busters, requiring new video cards to be manufactured to meet the specs of the games, same with HL2 lost coast's HDR. It's a trend that bothers me look at what is going to happen when vista comes out, want DX10? Be prepared to pay out the ass for it! New video card, new OS, ouch. That new game Crysis is going to be another ball buster, it's going to require the AGEIS Phys-X phsics processor, and a DX10 card with SM3.0.
It's a modified engine thus the specs for pc requirements WILL change.SaiyanPrideXIX said:Yeah man, I thought of the same irony. But I'm mad--this isn't a new engine or anything like that, it's just higher requirements for the same gimped one BF2 ran on, that's why I was mad.
I dunno. My frustration with PC games lately has made my acquisition of the Xbox360 all the sweeter, honestly....
Essentially, they added SM2.0 elements in the rendering engine, and were to lazy to make another rendering mode.itr said:It's a modified engine thus the specs for pc requirements WILL change.
bull****! generals sucked so damn hard! well ur right, it cant be compared to c&c games.Demonic Spoon said:Eh.
EA is not necessarily bad for buying out companies...after all, the owners of the company CHOOSE to accept EA's cash at the price of soverignty. EA does, however, tend to overadvertise and **** over series, and can be pretty bad to the developers. Generals was a good game, no doubt, but it was NOT a command and conquer game. Only in name could Generals and C&C be compared.
A good example of a publisher I like is THQ. They are very good at communicating between the dev team and the community (to put it frankly, EA sucks balls in this regard), they don't whore their name everywhere (you see the developers' logo as much or more than the THQ logo), and they don't put unreasonable deadlines or demands on the developers. You can tell this because THQ games are typically far more polished than most others. Lack of polish is usually a sign of unreasonable publisher deadlines.
The 9700 did(does) have it. I've heard BF2142 really is just... boring. You move too slow on foot, and vehicles are just overpowered. And nice screenshot, SaiyanPrideXIX.frsrblch said:Isn't SM2.0 old? I know my 9800 runs it fine, did they not have it in the 9700?