That's probably very true, although where can you get a laptop body with screen?lacktheknack said:
Shattered Horizon: Graphic Overload
- Thread starter Flames66
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Was. None of my gamer friends still use Windows XP, they've all moved to Vista or 7.Flames66 said:
A. Gutting.Delusibeta said:
B. Junkyards.
C. Specialty stores.
D. Prayer, and a holy choir descends and puts it into your hands gently, then ascends to heaven again on a perfect R5R4R cadence.
Good Lord, I need to sleep,
I blame the Xbox for this mess. Game haven't gotten any prettier in the last 4 years because of it. I'm running an OOOOOLD 8800GT (I bought it in 2007!), and it still works at 1080p, max settings for better than 97% of the games I own. Shattered Horizon is one of maybe 2 or 3 exceptions.
The OP really pissed me off with his constant complaining. Saying that Source engine games work great and therefore expecting all games to work great is just laughable. Yes, Source games ARE great, and scalability is something it does well. Other engines should also do this well, but they don't. Whining about it isn't going to change anything. If you are expecting the cutting edge of graphics and performance, then go buy yourself a better machine, and upgrade when you aren't satisfied with your frame rate being below 60.
I guess what bugs me most is the OP sounds like a console-tard trying to get into PC gaming. I'm not trying to be PC elitist, but console owners usually jump into PC gaming with certain unreasonable expectations, and then cry loudly when those expectations are not met. Anyone crying about their PC not running a game has no one else to blame but themselves for not keeping up-to-date with their PC. Yet they want to point the finger at the dev instead. The only time I would find that acceptable is when the devs made some design decision that probably didn't need to be made. Lack of options in graphics settings, or DX9 support(as previously mentioned) are valid griping points, but noting to rage about. I've been bummed out on several occasions on a devs decision to use Shader Model 3, because not all my friends have SM3 on their cards. Yet you will not see me calling for the dev's heads because they decided to move forward with graphics technology, and not stayed in the past. Instead I try to encourage my friends to find a cheap upgrade.
All that said, I think that devs need to offer as much scalability as possible. Games like WoW have been extra successful because it is so damn scalable. The PC gaming base is so small compared to the number of PCs out there, so the more of those PCs your game runs on, the better sales you can get hope for. Most people aren't going to upgrade their PCs at a whim because the new hot title came out, so if you want your game to sell, it should run on all the PCs of people who want to play it. So often though, devs don't really have a lot to show for their game except by making it pretty, so the better the graphics, the better the sales. Obviously though, that doesn't make a game better, so maybe they don't do the scalability for the sake of trying to not let people realize their game is crap once the initial "Wow! Pretty!" factor wears off.
The OP really pissed me off with his constant complaining. Saying that Source engine games work great and therefore expecting all games to work great is just laughable. Yes, Source games ARE great, and scalability is something it does well. Other engines should also do this well, but they don't. Whining about it isn't going to change anything. If you are expecting the cutting edge of graphics and performance, then go buy yourself a better machine, and upgrade when you aren't satisfied with your frame rate being below 60.
I guess what bugs me most is the OP sounds like a console-tard trying to get into PC gaming. I'm not trying to be PC elitist, but console owners usually jump into PC gaming with certain unreasonable expectations, and then cry loudly when those expectations are not met. Anyone crying about their PC not running a game has no one else to blame but themselves for not keeping up-to-date with their PC. Yet they want to point the finger at the dev instead. The only time I would find that acceptable is when the devs made some design decision that probably didn't need to be made. Lack of options in graphics settings, or DX9 support(as previously mentioned) are valid griping points, but noting to rage about. I've been bummed out on several occasions on a devs decision to use Shader Model 3, because not all my friends have SM3 on their cards. Yet you will not see me calling for the dev's heads because they decided to move forward with graphics technology, and not stayed in the past. Instead I try to encourage my friends to find a cheap upgrade.
All that said, I think that devs need to offer as much scalability as possible. Games like WoW have been extra successful because it is so damn scalable. The PC gaming base is so small compared to the number of PCs out there, so the more of those PCs your game runs on, the better sales you can get hope for. Most people aren't going to upgrade their PCs at a whim because the new hot title came out, so if you want your game to sell, it should run on all the PCs of people who want to play it. So often though, devs don't really have a lot to show for their game except by making it pretty, so the better the graphics, the better the sales. Obviously though, that doesn't make a game better, so maybe they don't do the scalability for the sake of trying to not let people realize their game is crap once the initial "Wow! Pretty!" factor wears off.
just because 37% of steam users use xp doesn't mean shit. A huge majority of those people play casual games on steam and are not hardcore gamers.
*Receives high five*Hiphophippo said:
Congratulations, you're now my favourite person of the day.
Firstly, I have never owned a console in my life. I have always been an exclusively PC gamer. I have no expectation about what a game should be, only requirements if I am going to buy it. This game lacks a basic one, scalability in its graphics, therefore I will not be buying it and I am advising others to do the same.Signa said:
No.Mazty said:
he's an arrogant fool. He's complaining about not being able to play a game, then refuses to upgrade a 4 year old GPU.
These are the breaks of PC gaming. upgrade or don't play. Simple as that. Don't like it? GTFO then. Don't QQ.
These are the breaks of PC gaming. upgrade or don't play. Simple as that. Don't like it? GTFO then. Don't QQ.
Oh very well then here I go. I have made a thread making a valid point and requesting discussion. I stated my opinion at the start and then opened up the floor to debate. You have come into my thread with nothing but massive generalisations, insults and closed mindedness, assuming that everyone thinks the same way as you.jason27131 said:
In future, please refrain from posting in serious discussions unless you have something relevant, understandable and most of all polite to add.
When you make four of the five paragraphs of your original post about how much trouble you had running a specific game because you didn't check the system requirements against your hardware, that is what people are going to talk about.
Next time you want to discuss the "current trend for constantly expanding the graphics, at the expense of other aspects of gameplay and of lower end users" then try a post like this:
"With the free weekend of Shattered Horizon on Steam, I decided to download it and give it a go. What I got was a game who's graphics my system could barely touch with a 20 foot pole. But it got me thinking about games in general and how there seems to be almost no push for better writing, characters, sound and music, or innovation in any area besides how a game looks. Etc."
See? Doesn't that look much more concise, to the point, and not talking about a single game for most of the post?
Now, try to realise a few things before your next post:
1) Graphics technology has been the only area of true innovation in video gaming, paticularly PC gaming, since Windows 95. Why? Because that is what people get into the industry to do. If they wanted to create better writing, they would ahve become a writer. If they wanted to create better paintings, they would have become a painter. People have had this conversation before over several generations of gaming hardware which is why they aren't too keen on rehashing it again.
2) Talking about how your laptop can run Source engine games and that's all it should ever need to run lalalalalalal makes you sound like an arrogant douchebag. Believe it or not, some people don't like Valve's games, some people want to play more than Source engine games, and some people do find the way a game looks to be an important, if not the most important, factor. YOU are NOT the sole benchmarker for the video game industry whether thats for graphics or characters or music or story. Don't act like it. You are. Stop. Backhandedly telling people they are stupid (even if you don't think you are doing this it sure reads like it) for wanting more than Valve's idea of good graphics is worse than just calling them stupid.
3) Not checking a game's system requirements against your own hardware is stupid. You're going to have to accept this fact. If you can't, much of what you say becomes (especially in relation to your constant reference of Source engine games) meaningless.
Next time you want to discuss the "current trend for constantly expanding the graphics, at the expense of other aspects of gameplay and of lower end users" then try a post like this:
"With the free weekend of Shattered Horizon on Steam, I decided to download it and give it a go. What I got was a game who's graphics my system could barely touch with a 20 foot pole. But it got me thinking about games in general and how there seems to be almost no push for better writing, characters, sound and music, or innovation in any area besides how a game looks. Etc."
See? Doesn't that look much more concise, to the point, and not talking about a single game for most of the post?
Now, try to realise a few things before your next post:
1) Graphics technology has been the only area of true innovation in video gaming, paticularly PC gaming, since Windows 95. Why? Because that is what people get into the industry to do. If they wanted to create better writing, they would ahve become a writer. If they wanted to create better paintings, they would have become a painter. People have had this conversation before over several generations of gaming hardware which is why they aren't too keen on rehashing it again.
2) Talking about how your laptop can run Source engine games and that's all it should ever need to run lalalalalalal makes you sound like an arrogant douchebag. Believe it or not, some people don't like Valve's games, some people want to play more than Source engine games, and some people do find the way a game looks to be an important, if not the most important, factor. YOU are NOT the sole benchmarker for the video game industry whether thats for graphics or characters or music or story. Don't act like it. You are. Stop. Backhandedly telling people they are stupid (even if you don't think you are doing this it sure reads like it) for wanting more than Valve's idea of good graphics is worse than just calling them stupid.
3) Not checking a game's system requirements against your own hardware is stupid. You're going to have to accept this fact. If you can't, much of what you say becomes (especially in relation to your constant reference of Source engine games) meaningless.
agreed to all of the above points. You're saying im closed-minded.Go back and read your posts, and you'll realize that you
a) refuse to upgrade
b) arrogantly thinks valve engine is the best and everything else sucks
That's called closed-minded.
Generalizations? I don't see where i generalized anything, other than saying a 800$ pc will play every game there is on high, which is completely true. Finally, as for insults, well, it's kinda of hard to not insult someone who complains about pc gaming when he has a shitty pc and also thinks he's entitled to be able to play every game there is on max details on a 4 year old pc.
a) refuse to upgrade
b) arrogantly thinks valve engine is the best and everything else sucks
That's called closed-minded.
Generalizations? I don't see where i generalized anything, other than saying a 800$ pc will play every game there is on high, which is completely true. Finally, as for insults, well, it's kinda of hard to not insult someone who complains about pc gaming when he has a shitty pc and also thinks he's entitled to be able to play every game there is on max details on a 4 year old pc.
Yes it is more concise, however it doesn't convey my point as well.kibayasu said:
I personally do not believe you. Some games designer are in it for the graphics, true. Not all of them however. People go into things for all sorts of reasons, graphics is only one of them.kibayasu said:
I did not say source is all it should ever need to run. I am fully aware that I am not the "sole benchmarker" and I am not trying to call anyone stupid. in fact I have not used any insults, put downs or any other derogatory comments in my posts, feel free to check.kibayasu said:
All I have done here is stated my opinions and asked for the opinions of others. I have always stated what is my opinion and what is fact and I have always researched my facts before putting them in.
You want to know why I didn't fully read the requirements? Because I was exited by the concept of zero gravity combat and wanted to try it out.kibayasu said:
That's a great excuse. "I was too excited to see the giant orange letters in front of my face!".
Seriously, unless you have massive myopia and you don't wear glasses (which i doubt), there is no way you couldn't see the warning before installing.
As for your "opinions", you clearly tried to put down everyone who disagreed with your points, even though you didn't say dirogative words. From your words, it seems like you meant that if people disagreed with your points, they're automatically a dumbass.
Seriously, unless you have massive myopia and you don't wear glasses (which i doubt), there is no way you couldn't see the warning before installing.
As for your "opinions", you clearly tried to put down everyone who disagreed with your points, even though you didn't say dirogative words. From your words, it seems like you meant that if people disagreed with your points, they're automatically a dumbass.
How about you go back and read my posts.jason27131 said:
a) refuse to upgrade. yes completely true. I spent over five hundred squid on my laptop and I intend to get several years of use out of it.
b) arrogantly thinks valve engine is the best and everything else sucks. Not what I said at all. I said that Valve, in my opinion and that is all, have a better approach to games design. getting as much use out of each engine as they can rather than ditching it and making a new one for every game.
I installed the game directly from the update new page, rather than the Steam store page. No warning was featured on this page and that is not what I'm talking about.jason27131 said:
As I said, reread my posts, if you find at any point me deliberately trying to put someone else down, point it out.jason27131 said: