UT 2004 officialy declared useless with a slow vid card an..

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.unreal.tournament2003 (More info?)

by me. Must be something wrong with the online design, when its nearly impossible to
play against others with faster machines. Either that or they are all aimbotting scum.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.unreal.tournament2003 (More info?)

>
>> by me. Must be something wrong with the online design, when its
>> nearly impossible to play against others with faster machines. Either
>> that or they are all aimbotting scum.
>

We knew we needed high cpu/vid/memory way back when ut2003 came out. We've
always known we need broadband. Did you just wake up after a 5 year nap?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.unreal.tournament2003 (More info?)

"OscartheGrouch" <tondaleo@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:i8GdnaVnAYmw7I3fRVn-uA@speakeasy.net:

>
>
>>
>>> by me. Must be something wrong with the online design, when its
>>> nearly impossible to play against others with faster machines.
>>> Either that or they are all aimbotting scum.
>>
>
> We knew we needed high cpu/vid/memory way back when ut2003 came out.
> We've always known we need broadband. Did you just wake up after a 5
> year nap?
>
>

What's high for requirements ? I don't have a fancy video card
(Geforce4MX440 128MB) 1GB RAM P4 2.66gHz 1.2Mbps internet connection & I
have no problems save for occassionally lag which everyone experiences now
& then. There are some good optimization sites out there as well, one I
used is:

http://sv1.3dbuzz.com/vbforum/unr_showthread.php?s=&threadid=64960

Which has helped me & many of my friends to squeeze more performance out of
UT2004.


www.1sws.com - sWs» Gaming Clan, home of Wicked ONS!

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.unreal.tournament2003 (More info?)

Got broadband, and I'm no doubt expecting more than this very old vid card can deliver
(don't laugh Matrox g450) ok, stop laughing.

I don't feel like spending for a new card, as my next one will be pci-e.

My point is, the designers of the game made the hardware too critical in online play.
Shouldn't the game be fair to anyone playing it, as long as there's enough framerate to
see the action?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.unreal.tournament2003 (More info?)

On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 01:17:09 -0500, Tim Sniioker wrote:

> My point is, the designers of the game made the hardware too critical
> in online play. Shouldn't the game be fair to anyone playing it, as
> long as there's enough framerate to see the action?

What do you think produces the "enough framerate"???

Get a clue.

--
If you're not on the edge, you're taking up too much space.
Linux Registered User #327951

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.unreal.tournament2003 (More info?)

Folk wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 16:59:24 +0100, Major Ursa <majorursa@iname.com>
> wrote:
>>Can you say anything about the visual cost of lowering these two
>>parameters? Since you probably have the 'low' for a longer period now,
>>do you feel you 'mis' something?
>>Also, it could be that faster hardware responds more specific to some
>>settings. What card u use?

> It looks like ass. <G>
>
> Actually, the difference is not too bad, but that would be one of
> those "eye of the beholder" kind of things. It doesn't bother me, but
> then I've never been one to value eye candy over playability in an FPS
> type game.

I noticed some maps (eg. BigDam) that become 'transparent' when World
Detail is not at High. Maps like that become virtually unplayable
because the terrain level is so important for stategy.

Maps that behave normal are hardly less attractive when on 'Low'.

> Vid card doesn't really come into play on this game unless yours is
> *really* ancient. UT2004 (and the Unreal engine for quite some time
> now) is CPU bound. As a 'for instance', I went from a GF4 Ti4400 to a
> 6800 GT and saw exactly ZERO improvement in framerates in UT2004. The
> only improvement I got from the 6800 GT was the ability to run at 4X
> AA and 8X AF with no penalty. (I did see huge improvements in other
> games though.) To speed up UT, you need a faster CPU.... period.

So I won't upgrade graphics untill I get bored with ONS, which might
take a long time 🙂.

Still, it seems odd to me that typical graphics related settings like
detail and projectors are making such a difference and a graphics card
upgrade wouldn't. This suggests that some of these functions are
performed outside the graphics hardware. Could that be the case, and if
so, why?

Ursa..

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.unreal.tournament2003 (More info?)

On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 16:12:29 +0100, Major Ursa <majorursa@iname.com>
wrote:


>Still, it seems odd to me that typical graphics related settings like
>detail and projectors are making such a difference and a graphics card
>upgrade wouldn't. This suggests that some of these functions are
>performed outside the graphics hardware. Could that be the case, and if
>so, why?

Yes, it most certainly is the case. I read an article about it a
while back, and to be honest most of it was over my head, but what I
recall is that Epic decided to use the CPU rather than the GPU to
calculate a lot of the geometry functions. They indicated that using
the processor rather than the GPU makes it easier to write the code.
Otherwise, they would have different routines depending on the mfg. of
the GPU.

This is true with the current Unreal engine and all previous versions
of the engine. I have a feeling that the one they are working on now
will depend more on the GPU.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.unreal.tournament2003 (More info?)

"goPostal" <none@this.time> wrote in message
news:KZuTd.5790$rK6.4500@fe02.lga...

>
> Hey Bungle I just upgraded to the beta 67.66 drivers. The 66 series were
> giving me some graphic "tearing" in several of my games. Do you like the
> 71's better than the 67? I was thinking of giving them a go.
>

I've been runnin' 71.80 from guru3d.com and have had zero probs....

I was going to try 75.90 but I've been reading that Chronicles of Riddick
has errors using that driver and I'm thinking about buying that game soon.

Use Coolbits 2.0 (or a similar program) as well for more available
settings...



!bungle

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.unreal.tournament2003 (More info?)

"!bungle" <stratosrally@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:fuvTd.43746$Bx5.28587@fe1.texas.rr.com...
>
> "goPostal" <none@this.time> wrote in message
> news:KZuTd.5790$rK6.4500@fe02.lga...
>
>>
>> Hey Bungle I just upgraded to the beta 67.66 drivers. The 66 series were
>> giving me some graphic "tearing" in several of my games. Do you like the
>> 71's better than the 67? I was thinking of giving them a go.
>>
>
> I've been runnin' 71.80 from guru3d.com and have had zero probs....
>
> I was going to try 75.90 but I've been reading that Chronicles of Riddick
> has errors using that driver and I'm thinking about buying that game soon.
>
> Use Coolbits 2.0 (or a similar program) as well for more available
> settings...
>
>
>
> !bungle
>

I've got Riddick too and it's an OK game. Nice gameplay but it's a little
bit "coarse" for my taste. It's got a lot of f-words for no apparent reason
besides to get the M rating. It's overly violent for violence's sake, if
that makes sense. I never finished it, but I probably will go back to it.
You'd be better off with HL2 or Doom3.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.unreal.tournament2003 (More info?)

"goPostal" <none@this.time> wrote in message
news:WjwTd.5836$gJ7.5788@fe02.lga...
>
> "!bungle" <stratosrally@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:fuvTd.43746$Bx5.28587@fe1.texas.rr.com...
>>
>> "goPostal" <none@this.time> wrote in message
>> news:KZuTd.5790$rK6.4500@fe02.lga...
>>
>>>
>>> Hey Bungle I just upgraded to the beta 67.66 drivers. The 66 series were
>>> giving me some graphic "tearing" in several of my games. Do you like the
>>> 71's better than the 67? I was thinking of giving them a go.
>>>
>>
>> I've been runnin' 71.80 from guru3d.com and have had zero probs....
>>
>> I was going to try 75.90 but I've been reading that Chronicles of Riddick
>> has errors using that driver and I'm thinking about buying that game
>> soon.
>>
>> Use Coolbits 2.0 (or a similar program) as well for more available
>> settings...
>>
>>
>>
>> !bungle
>>
>
> I've got Riddick too and it's an OK game. Nice gameplay but it's a little
> bit "coarse" for my taste. It's got a lot of f-words for no apparent
> reason besides to get the M rating. It's overly violent for violence's
> sake, if that makes sense. I never finished it, but I probably will go
> back to it. You'd be better off with HL2 or Doom3.
>

I have played the demos of most of the newer games and enjoyed them all
somewhat, but UT-style Deathmatch seems to be what I return to over and
over.

I did buy Doom3 and after finishing it I just don't see myself playing it
again- it was great visually, but not "fun". I like the gameplay in HL2 (and
to a lesser extent FarCry and Tribes Vengeance) but I'm not sure how much
I'll play them after finishing the single-player portion, either.

I'd love to find other games similar in gameplay to UT, but everything is
set up for online gaming- whereas I'd rather play against bots (with good
AI, though). Years ago, I played the original HalfLife online with some
friends and had some good times, but there were so many jerks screwing
around or getting angry... it got old and I quit. Nowadays I play DM against
the bots in UT, UT2K3, and UT2K4 using a lot of downloaded levels and
mutators to spice things up- and sometimes I play Onslaught and rarely the
other gametypes.

There are some things that give me a warm glow in my stomach- the Gravity
Gun in HL2, using sniper weapons in FarCry and Tribes Vengeance, the visual
effects from the "Hell" portions of Doom3...

On the other hand, I dislike biting creatures like the headcrabs (HL2) and
cherubs (Doom3), most "puzzle" sequences (although HL2 made them pretty
interesting), team/tactical/squad/strategy gametypes, "helpful" characters
(the doctors in Doom3 come to mind).... you get the picture.

I'd like to try a demo of Riddick if they ever release one, but I hear ya on
the language issue. I personally don't mind the F-word or the S-word, but I
have a particular aversion to the B-word. We have enough violence towards
women in our world already. I'd actually like to get rid of that bit of
taunting in UT. To each his own, I suppose? Maybe we should record all of
our own taunts to replace those that bother us. I wouldn't mind having some
movie-dialogue taunts... Ripley from Alien, HAL from Kubrick's 2001: Space
Odyssey, Agent Smith from The Matrix, etc.

(I'm really just riffing on FPS games in general here...)

Anyone remember "Shogo: Mobile Armor Division"? The bit where you're in a
mech-suit and jumping from building to building while blowing up vehicles in
the street was fantastic.

The original "MDK" had some great stuff, too. I liked the sense of humor in
that one...

That new "Oddworld" console game looks hilarious and I really want them to
port that one.

The only thing I liked about "GTA: Vice City" was driving around in the
rain.

I've never been able to properly explain my dissatisfaction with Quake3.
Somethin' bugs me about it, though.

I want more destructible environment! Exploding fuel canisters are a
wonderful thing!

When the in-game characters look like human beings I get a little creeped
out after slaughtering a hundred or so- I much prefer killing things I'm not
likely to ever encounter in real life. The sounds that the robot skins in
UT2K4 make when you blast one are perfect. Sizzlin' sparks and tin cans
rattlin'.

I gotta confess that I feel a little strange for being such a UT junkie at
40yrs of age. Nohing comes close...

So, could someone help a brother out and recommend me a FPS with DM against
bots with good AI?



Good night and thanks for playing,


!bungle


p.s. I heard that one of the StarWars games might fit the bill... anyone
care to comment?