Major chug, perhaps mitigated with low enough visual settings, but we're talking major chug. SC2 is over 5 years old now, even at ultra, it's not much of a comparison to current releases that are much less weighty than Ashes.
Based on 533Mhz ram and it being a quad, his board should be one of the earlier LGA 775 chipsets, by the time they started using 2.0, the minimum DDR3 was 800Mhz. It would have to be a non-standard memory configuration that someone filled in with much slower ram than was available. Don't under estimate the load on the CPU either, under DX11, I burn almost 50% CPU at game start, and I'm running a 2500k overclocked to 4.2GHZ, a 980 would eat his system for l
His problem will be that the mobo/cpu is almost surely PCI-E 1.1, and has a fourth of the throughput of the modern 3.0 lanes. My 680 GTX, which is merely passable for Ashes, can't quite run full bore on an original 16x PCI-E, and the typical game has nothing like the bandwidth usage going on with Ashes. Now, if he's got a PCI-E 2.0 motherboard and CPU(I don't know if they even made any) then he'd probably be golden aside from power issues as long a
Time for a new computer, dude. :( A GTX 260 isn't DX11 compliant, I wouldn't expect anything older than a 400 series GTX to behave at all based on them only being DX10 compliant. Even if it were, even two of those is insufficient processing power, and I wouldn't be surprised if you were incapable of running the game well even with a GPU upgrade. Your system is severely dated, the ram is extremely slow by today's standards, you have very littl
Such things should be said with the caveat that you need to have sufficient processing power to make the DX11 processing requirements inconsequential. You can be CPU bound with a Geforce just fine, it's a little harder, but not that much harder once you factor in a CPU intensive game on top of it. You'll get killed if you think you can maximize a 980 Ti on a 5 year old cpu in games with high load to begin with.
[quote]Looks like AMD CPUs are really bad in this benchmarks. i3 4330 beating FX 8370. Is this just a bug or true performance of FX CPUs?[/quote] It's hyper-threading versus piledriver most likely. A Haswell i3 clocked at 3.5Ghz is massively more powerful, core to core, than anything AMD can put out. They'd need to break 6Ghz stock to compete with Intel right now, and then HT can give boosts in the range of 30% with high thread counts and wel
Smarty's are rather long range, the problem with them is more the usage than their balance. I place them on cliffs and well back behind the front line, they can't really accomplish anything on their own. Vision ranges are non-existent compared to firing ranges, they AI needs to either support them, or build up in advance of them, instead of clustering them around a solitary point. Before they'll end up at all useful to the AI, you'll make them insanely broken
[quote]well why does vanilla balance even pass validation as basis for an argument when fixed balance is sitting right there awaiting criticism? no. just take FAF balance and see that EXPs more than absolutely have their place.[/quote] Having a third of ten times as much damage as other units have hit points is still just as bad or worse than Sins titans, and they just wreck hundreds of fleet points in frigates like they're not even there. You li
[quote]that is wrong. I don't understand why people keep making assumptions about a game before having played it.[/quote] Clearly, someone doesn't remember the original Supreme Commander... The MonkeyLord was a god, it did not simply die to a dozen T3 artillery like it does in Forged Alliance. The FA version is tissue paper by comparison, it would take three of them to kill an original. T3's were sign
The experimentals may be broadly liked, but they're like super units in any other game. They take the existing balance between the rest of the fleet/army, and piss all over it. Did you build a carefully constructed army, heavily defended behind shield walls with three layers of regenerating defense, missile countermeasures, and range supremacy? No problem, we'll just walk this spider bot over and it will blow them all up as it sweeps that energy weapon across the fie
Core i5 2500k, GTX 680 4GB, 32GB DDR3, Windows 7. I'm waiting for the dx12 build to bother upgrading to 10. :)
Units don't appear to fire on radar pings that are in range. They also have extremely short view ranges, even when on a hill, or similarly advantaged. This results in all engagements being pretty close range, having longer ranged units doesn't seem to be of much help beyond being able to have more units shooting things at once. The rocket turrets are particularly objectionable, as you basically have to set them up well behind the front lines for them to benefit from
Just ran through a skirmish, won before I could get into the enemy base from captured computronium, and I'd pretty much only captured the stuff in a line to their base. Not sure on the other resources yet, but I can safely say that acquiring that stuff is a wee bit easy at present, perhaps it gains more quickly based on the relative number of captures and the AI just wasn't, but if it's a flat rate it's way too fast for a system to prevent stalemates.
IPAB is already public, was from the start, it even went to SCOTUS just recently. You need a more viable conspiracy theory, the existence of a death panel being mysterious is just a case of the populace being too stupid to read. :)
People are trashing previous processors, and expressing doubt about their ability to deliver, not trashing future processors. Maybe Zen will be the best thing since sliced bread, but aside from the economy market they haven't accomplished squat since Intel's Pentium 4 flopped over going with sdram instead of rdram and being unable to actually utilize it's bandwidth capabilities and knock the K8 architecture off it's pedestal. My old 900mhz Athlon w
[quote]They do. they simply have both 32 and 64 bit versions. It's native 64-bit application. Won't run on 32 bit system.[/quote] Making a 64 bit version of your 32 bit game designed around all the limitations of 32 bit, is not making a native 64 bit game. It's an import job. That a 64 bit executable wont run on 32 bit operating systems goes without saying. It's like a console port versus a native pc game, the console port doesn
Considering Jafo's setup will be surpassed by Skylake, which comes in the third quarter of this year, before AMD's next generation rolls out in 2016, it's a bit of a foregone conclusion that his system wont be the top of the food chain next year regardless of whether Zen does better or not, unless Intel decides to stick with 4 cores as the max.
Unfortunately there is a big difference between technically working, and performing adequately. If you can run a first person shooter, without crashing, but attempting to aim at something means the game hangs for thirty seconds and then your view jumps to a position before hanging for another thirty seconds, it doesn't actually work. The minimum should be what is required to have the game perform it's basic functionality at base settings,
See forum he's posting from. Wrong game dude, they're talking about AOTS.
Same here, I didn't play SupCom zoomed out either, but a full screen minimap was invaluable. I've got multiple displays, so if we end up with me being able to put the minimap on a secondary then it wont affect me personally, but a tiny little minimap isn't anything like the full screen tactical display capability of strategic zoom for getting a quick overview of the state of things.
If you're keeping track of it, they announced the impending end for GC3 pretty far in advance of the termination.
It would be very nice to be able to disable the computronium victory. I don't really know how fast you should try to make games. An hour to travel across is a long time for a game, it sounds epic for the scale of the game, but not so epic if you're actually having to travel for an hour. It should be fine if you're able to use logistical methods to transport things around faster, or it's reasonable to direct your production across the map so t
I don't expect to be able to do much on my 3mb wi-max connection, but if a dozen guys on fiber want to play with each other, it would be cruelty to restrict it to 4 players if the engine could handle 20 just because of bandwidth considerations based on your typical player.
Wait, you mean to say that all your promo games aren't with team special ed? If I don't carry hard, I don't win a promo game. Naturally, I main support.
[quote]UI feature wise I am wondering if we will see something like the strategic zoom from Supreme Commander, where you can always get a quick overview by zooming out and seeing icons. I think such a feature is vital to remain in control over huge battlefields. Only having a close up view and a minimap is not feasible at all if you are trying to beat Supreme Commander or Planetary Annihilation in terms of scale.[/quote] This is pretty much a guarantee. There have