Jump to content

Maybe GRIN shouldn't do tactical games?


Recommended Posts

For sales and support does that make sense? not really. Do you think if the game is too steep in the specs that is unplayable to all but a small percentage of users it will be around in 1-2 yrs? I doubt it, it will long since have become a bargain bin game and there WILL be better looking games long before that that WILL be playable and not bring most peoples machines to their knees. QW:ET comes to mind tho not a wholly tactical shooter the enviroments will absolutely dwarf GRAW and will look spectacular AND be scaleable to todays machines and tomorrows.

This has always been my beef with GRAW there is NO scaleability to it. When did 20-30 fps @800x600 become acceptable especially for an FPS game? I really do hope in upcoming patches they seriously take some time to optimize it, the fact that you accept it running at such low res and fps is rather sad. I mean you can clearly see the already present performance tricks(low texture buildings at very short distaces at Medium anyway) yet 30-40 fps is acceptable. doesnt make sense to me.

The gameplay is not in question for me that I have very few issues with but the IQ vs performance is sorely lacking and the excuse that its for "the future" doesnt hold alot of weight .

For all those whom don't know, Enemy Territory: Quake Wars

some piece of forest fodder....... with no specs except it's only multiplayer !!! NO SP RUN & GUN SHOOPTER [FPS] and an endless timetable ..due out this millennium. IMHO Poor comparison to GRAW !!!! polygon count under 1/4.

BUT MP run'gun :P human aint AI :shifty:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 92
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I know what I need. But anyway those 2 my post are about high system requirements that are not good for all. And many people want to have more perfomance in the game. Maybe patch will some solve this problem.

@'RLT-Olegrus'

Maybe patch will sort out performance....but I think not.

I remember an old game called Geoff Crawford’s GRAND PRIX 4 and it pushed PC machines to the limit when it was released !!! and everyone who loved it complained !!! why...but the answer was the graphics load had multiplied 4x and our poor little Asus Riva TNT 16Mb card could not handle it !!! and I had to buy something new from nVidia called a GPU Graphics card !!! GeForce 2 !!! [year was 2000-2002] yes four years ago.... Since then we've had

Geforce 3 / 4 / 5 /6 and now 7 Series !!! all in 4 years......

[and yes the Geforce was released 1999, but I couldn't buy one then !! and had to wait].

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For all those whom don't know, Enemy Territory: Quake Wars

some piece of forest fodder....... with no specs except it's only multiplayer !!! NO SP RUN & GUN SHOOPTER [FPS] and an endless timetable ..due out this millennium. IMHO Poor comparison to GRAW !!!! polygon count under 1/4.

you completely missed the point.... :stupid:

NOTHING to do with gameplay just enviroment size and IQ. the rest of your "fodder" is all pure speculation.

Im also getting a little tired of your self righteousnous. You think because you have Supporter under your name and the one of the fastest PC's you can build your above reproach your not...People have issues and ALOT of them are performance related and these are people with above spec machines so plz step down a notch you didnt always have that machine and understand that the majority of users WON'T have a machine of that spec.

Edited by LT.INSTG8R
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Case closed. :rolleyes: Must be nice to be able to waste $50 and not whine about it. :P

poor guy, couldnt he tell from the demo he wasnt going to like the game and could avoid buying it that way or did he preorder it before trying the demo? I learned ages ago always wait for the demo, nothing worse than wasting 50 bucks on something not right for you. its like buying a car without taking it for a test drive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone, please be patient with this game. It has a HUGE amounts of potential.

The GRIN support has been top notch so far. 2 patches already and a main one in June. They will be adding: more MP modes, adding AA, modding options, and server options.

People, they are listening, thay have all along. I mean the developers we're in these forums interacting with all of us, that's unheard of I think.

GRAW is definately a TACTICAL game, there is nothing "arcade-like" about it. If it looked or played anything like a "console" version, no "die-hard" PC gamer/[GR] fan would buy it.

The mods and expansion packs will come........HAVE PATIENCE!!!!!!! I'm sure Alpha Squad is already hard at work. As highly respected as they are regarding their GR mods, show some due respect and throw them a bone like any true GR fan has already done in the past. I know I did.......... :)

I really hope no one here has got the "too much info before the release" syndrome. I got it by looking up everything and anything on the internet regarding Star Wars 2: Attack of the Clones. I HATED THE MOVIE! Knowing this, I backed off knowing everything that there is to know about GRAW. The result: I LOVE THIS GAME.

Playing [GR] forever, GRAW is a fantastic upgrade to GR. Of course it has flaws, of course there are things I don't like about it, and of course things are different from [GR]. I assure you, if this game was exactly like [GR], it would be a horrible disaster.

In closing, [GR] took some time to again a following. GRAW will get there as well..........if...........everyone has patience......... :g_withgrin:

See y'all in Mexico City,

Fresh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote name='Freshmixture' date='May 29 2006, 10:10 PM' post='380740']

Everyone, please be patient with this game. It has a HUGE amounts of potential.

The GRIN support has been top notch so far. 2 patches already and a main one in June. They will be adding: more MP modes, adding AA, modding options, and server options.

People, they are listening, thay have all along. I mean the developers we're in these forums interacting with all of us, that's unheard of I think.

GRAW is definately a TACTICAL game, there is nothing "arcade-like" about it. If it looked or played anything like a "console" version, no "die-hard" PC gamer/[GR] fan would buy it.

The mods and expansion packs will come........HAVE PATIENCE!!!!!!! I'm sure Alpha Squad is already hard at work. As highly respected as they are regarding their GR mods, show some due respect and throw them a bone like any true GR fan has already done in the past. I know I did.......... :)

I really hope no one here has got the "too much info before the release" syndrome. I got it by looking up everything and anything on the internet regarding Star Wars 2: Attack of the Clones. I HATED THE MOVIE! Knowing this, I backed off knowing everything that there is to know about GRAW. The result: I LOVE THIS GAME.

Playing [GR] forever, GRAW is a fantastic upgrade to GR. Of course it has flaws, of course there are things I don't like about it, and of course things are different from [GR]. I assure you, if this game was exactly like [GR], it would be a horrible disaster.

In closing, [GR] took some time to again a following. GRAW will get there as well..........if...........everyone has patience......... :g_withgrin:

See y'all in Mexico City,

Fresh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This has always been my beef with GRAW there is NO scaleability to it. When did 20-30 fps @800x600 become acceptable especially for an FPS game? I really do hope in upcoming patches they seriously take some time to optimize it, the fact that you accept it running at such low res and fps is rather sad. I mean you can clearly see the already present performance tricks(low texture buildings at very short distaces at Medium anyway) yet 30-40 fps is acceptable. doesnt make sense to me.

I said i wouldn't do this (compare)but here is the answer... GR1! The cards it was released on if you turned shadows on would average with a higher end card at the time, the same thing i get now with GRAW 35-40fps... but at 800x600 or a horrible 640 x 480. I bought a geforce 256 to play GR1 at 160$ and it still only got 30 FPS in 16 bit color!. Again you forget what GR1 on release was really like. 32mb cards were 200$... same as 256 6800GS's which i have now.

Hell 128mb 5200fx's were still only pushing 45fps without tweaking them about a year ago.

Anyone ever go back and turn high settings on in GR1 2 years after the release with 128mb cards? It was fantastic!

Now think... imagine with new cards 2 years down the road what GRAW will look like.

Didn't anyone hre play the GR1 demo when it comes out? No one seems to remember it's issues before I.T.

Edited by ROCOAFZ
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ROCO post above...topman 100%

name='Toniezz' date='May 29 2006, 04:22 PM' post='380488'

post on this thread.

Great post…..thanks for trying to explain !!! and I still think there’s something gone wrong in the translation of, sunny days in Russia !!

For all those whom don't know, Enemy Territory: Quake Wars

some piece of forest fodder....... with no specs except it's only multiplayer !!! NO SP RUN & GUN SHOOPTER [FPS] and an endless timetable ..due out this millennium. IMHO Poor comparison to GRAW !!!! polygon count under 1/4.

you completely missed the point.... :stupid:

NOTHING to do with gameplay just enviroment size and IQ. the rest of your "fodder" is all pure speculation.

Im also getting a little tired of your self righteousnous. You think because you have Supporter under your name and the one of the fastest PC's you can build your above reproach your not...People have issues and ALOT of them are performance related and these are people with above spec machines so plz step down a notch you didnt always have that machine and understand that the majority of users WON'T have a machine of that spec.

Why do we have to start on the wrong foot ? First you talk to others about there attitude, then you criticize me for saving up for 4 years [since 2002] and buying an upgrade this year.

Before I commented on the Quake Wars [game] I tried to do some reading….

and all in all, the only solid material was what I pointed out…….

The maps may be big and I left that out because you mentioned it, but what you did not mention is that the map is filled with nothing. GRAW is filled with intractable objects and adds to the GFX load.

Im also getting a little tired of your self righteousness. You think because you have Supporter under your name

May I apologise for trying to support this forum in more than a post !! It would be better if you became a forum supporter in this way too, instead of saying that the “SUPPORTERS” believe themselves [or is it myself] to be above everyone else !!!! and I thought “RLT” had translation problems only…

=========================================================

I know people have issues, I have them too….dude

Just try to be more constructive on the subject, I don’t have to mention 50x my FPS is 30-45. I posted it in the PINNED THREAD and that is that !!!

And a little help for you too, If you ever do save up and buy a fast machine !!! it does not help that much……. Re all the posts from people with 78xx & 79xx gfx cards with poor FPS….

THIS AIN'T NO QUAKE COPY running 300+ FPS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow seriously, Olegrus, go camping and huge a tree, fgs. You seem to love the forest maps a little too much.

Yea, funny. Thank you for your anxiety.

BUT I REPEAT AGAIN. The natural maps of Ghost Recon is a principal difference from other games. It doesn't matter that game must include only forset maps. It could be deserts or somthing else. By other words... It should to be in the game. :)

About campering in the forest. (I think many ppl compare forest maps with campering). Many people don't like campering. But Ghost Recon is a tactical game. And many people say about it. It's not a stupid arcade shooter when you must to kill them all, running like mad. If you want campering in the forest that's your chioce. If you like to run like a deer in the field that's your choice. But in many cases you will be shot.

The tactical game means using many tactical methods. You can make advancing fire or you can outflank enemy, be silent and invisible. I like last method. And campering is not a bad method. But campering should be smartly. If you move slow and silently, then it is a smart campering.

It is a simulator of real war. So you should to think before do something.

So if you like to run in the games then maybe you shouldn't to play GR?

I know people have issues, I have them too….dude

Just try to be more constructive on the subject, I don’t have to mention 50x my FPS is 30-45.

Hmm... I have x1600 pro and I have 30-45 fps too. But your videocard more powerfull then mine.

Edited by RLT-Olegrus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow seriously, Olegrus, go camping and huge a tree, fgs. You seem to love the forest maps a little too much.

I REPEAT AGAIN. The natural maps of Ghost Recon is a principal difference from other games. It doesn't matter that game must include only forset maps. It could be deserts or somthing else.

Many people don't like camping. But Ghost Recon is a tactical game. And many people say about it. It's not a stupid arcade shooter when you must to kill them all, running like mad. If you want campering in the forest that's your chioce. If you like to run like a deer in the field that's your choice. But in many cases you will be shot.

The tactical game means using many tactical methods. You can make advancing fire or you can outflank enemy, be silent and invisible. I like last method. And campering is not a bad method. But campering should be smartly. If you move slow and silently, then it is a smart campering.

It is a simulator of real war. So you should to think before do something.

So if you like to run in the games then maybe you shouldn't to play GR?

This is your problem 'RLT-Olegrus' you miss understand the text....

'luger' is making a joke , and you are suppose to laugh, he is saying you like too many trees

in your text about the map from GRAW, you need to go camping in real life and you will have many trees..... JOKE 'ENGLISH JOKE'

RLT, you need a friend to help translate post text.

It's not so bad on this forum....only misunderstanding.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understood him, Viper. DON'T REPEAT ABOUT MY MISSINGS to me... I know that he knows about my love to trees and nature and etc. :) But I just made a parallel with a game. Maybe you don't understand me?

Edited by RLT-Olegrus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm... I have x1600 pro and I have 30-45 fps too. But your videocard more powerfull then mine.

I only posted with TECH SUPPORT FORUM, I don't like to say there is a problem here because this forum is not for TECH PROBLEMS. but yes, I run 7900GTX-OC in SLI and in 1920x1600 get 30-45 max for a normal game with some peaks of 85 but the game does not run 85 FPS always.

http://www.bfgtech.com/7900GTX_512_PCIX.html

http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Hardware...900_gtx_oc_sli/

GRIN know there are problems with preformance but this game has a very high polygon count and the real time calculations are..... like no other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I said i wouldn't do this (compare)but here is the answer... GR1! The cards it was released on if you turned shadows on would average with a higher end card at the time, the same thing i get now with GRAW 35-40fps... but at 800x600 or a horrible 640 x 480. I bought a geforce 256 to play GR1 at 160$ and it still only got 30 FPS in 16 bit color!. Again you forget what GR1 on release was really like. 32mb cards were 200$... same as 256 6800GS's which i have now.

Hell 128mb 5200fx's were still only pushing 45fps without tweaking them about a year ago.

Anyone ever go back and turn high settings on in GR1 2 years after the release with 128mb cards? It was fantastic!

Now think... imagine with new cards 2 years down the road what GRAW will look like.

Didn't anyone hre play the GR1 demo when it comes out? No one seems to remember it's issues before I.T.

I started playing [GR] on a PIII 600/TNT2 32MB so Im aware of how well it ran back then. I then upgraded to a P4 2.4C/Ti4200 128M.(oh and BTW FX5200 were dogs right out of the box I know, I thought I was "upgrading from the Ti only to own it for about 30 min. and realised it ran no better than the Ti and never would and ended up buying a 9600 for the same price and found the bliss of Anti-Aliasing and never looked back at NV again)

The real difference is that [GR] could be turned down to a level that it could be playable on, this game is still lacking that. [GR] was a useable product out of the box(issues aside) it was playable on lower end machines.

My current machine is high end yet 1 generation behind(P4 3.2.X800XT) and sure it plays but sadly not too much better than current gen hardware. In a Month I'll be building a Opty 170 with an X1900XT for now with the option to go Crossfire later but I dont expect to see a whole lot of improvement just the option to run things on High.

Edited by LT.INSTG8R
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...