rec.autos.simulators

What game is hungry?

Donov

What game is hungry?

by Donov » Sun, 29 Sep 2002 04:44:48


> I will be buying a 9700 soon (upgrading from a Ti500) and am looking for
> a few demos or games that really stress video and cpu. I'm a pretty avid
> PC  gamer but at this time I'm hard pressed to point to any one game
> that stands  out above the rest to push ones system.

> Sure any game at 16x12x32bit with 4xAA will be pretty slow but it use to
> be most games at 10x7x16bit with noAA would be in the ***s to 20s
> fps-wise really stressing even the best systems.

> It's almost as though hardware has passed games in the race for power.
> Perhaps developers misjudged the rate of hardware improvements?

> Anyway, Comanche 4 would be my best first choice of a horsepower hungry
> game..I guess.

> Anyone have an opinion to what's a good game to make my card/system
> wanna puke its guts out?

> P.S. Heck, now that I think about it, I'm second guessing myself on why
> should I upgrade since my system runs what I play just fine (for the
> most part). Guess I'm simply digging the fact that the new ATI can do AA
> so well with hardly any performance hit.

 Panzer Elite S.E. with any of the 3rd party special affects addons
-included on the CD- will give your Card a real kick in the FPS
department. When the original Panzer Elite was released, one reviewer
described it as brilliant but unplayable on any known or existing
hardware configuration.
 It's a damn good thing hardware has caught up somewhat with this sim,
because it really is great!

Donovan

Fly'in high in the NW skies

Mantar, Feyelno nek dus

What game is hungry?

by Mantar, Feyelno nek dus » Sun, 29 Sep 2002 14:42:07

 Boot up mame and try Sinistar. :D

David Traver

What game is hungry?

by David Traver » Tue, 01 Oct 2002 08:04:35

Comanche 4 (more CPU dependant than GPU)

Unreal Tournament 2003

Jedi Knight (high res full textures anti-aliasing switched on)

Battlefield 1942

All good games for stressing your card at 1024 * 768 * 32 bit and
anti-aliasing switched on.


John Mille

What game is hungry?

by John Mille » Fri, 04 Oct 2002 07:42:24




only runs just about acceptable.  I think I'll upgrade to a 9700 Pro but I'm
not sure my Athlon XP2000 will be able to drive it to the limit, I may be
better off getter a XP2600 instead :\

Tony Ra

What game is hungry?

by Tony Ra » Sun, 06 Oct 2002 05:03:44



An update on my ghosting problem....
No matter what I've tried, new power supply, BNC cable, new good
quality 15pin cable, the ghosting is still there. I even tried another
card, this time unlike the original card which is a Hightech
Excalibur, I tried a retail ATI. Ghosting is still there.

Lastly, I tried what I should have done in the first place, I
connected my brothers cheapy 17" Viewsonic E70, which is relatively
new. My monitor is a 21" Viewsonic P810 which is around 6 years old.
To my amazement there is no ghosting what so ever with that 17"
monitor. I find this very odd since my P810 had no problem at all with
my previous GF3 Ti500. Obviously the 9700 is doing something that my
P810 just does not like. Oh well, I was considering a new monitor
anyway :)

Oliver Richma

What game is hungry?

by Oliver Richma » Mon, 07 Oct 2002 11:36:55

GTA3:
Diamond Multimedia Monster Fusion (Voodoo Banshee) - Textures don't render,
Driver Crashes during some cut scenes





> Comanche 4 (more CPU dependant than GPU)

> Unreal Tournament 2003

> Jedi Knight (high res full textures anti-aliasing switched on)

> Battlefield 1942

> All good games for stressing your card at 1024 * 768 * 32 bit and
> anti-aliasing switched on.



> > I will be buying a 9700 soon (upgrading from a Ti500) and am looking for
> > a few demos or games that really stress video and cpu. I'm a pretty avid
> > PC  gamer but at this time I'm hard pressed to point to any one game
> > that stands  out above the rest to push ones system.

> > Sure any game at 16x12x32bit with 4xAA will be pretty slow but it use to
> > be most games at 10x7x16bit with noAA would be in the ***s to 20s
> > fps-wise really stressing even the best systems.

> > It's almost as though hardware has passed games in the race for power.
> > Perhaps developers misjudged the rate of hardware improvements?

> > Anyway, Comanche 4 would be my best first choice of a horsepower hungry
> > game..I guess.

> > Anyone have an opinion to what's a good game to make my card/system
> > wanna puke its guts out?

> > P.S. Heck, now that I think about it, I'm second guessing myself on why
> > should I upgrade since my system runs what I play just fine (for the
> > most part). Guess I'm simply digging the fact that the new ATI can do AA
> > so well with hardly any performance hit.

Marc de Vrie

What game is hungry?

by Marc de Vrie » Tue, 08 Oct 2002 05:43:36

On Wed, 02 Oct 2002 22:42:24 GMT, "John Miller"




>> Unreal Tournament 2003

>> Jedi Knight (high res full textures anti-aliasing switched on)



But NOT with high res full textures and anti aliasing switched on.
B Pallet

What game is hungry?

by B Pallet » Tue, 08 Oct 2002 07:45:13

Try Battlefield 1942 with full settings and 59 bots.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------
Best Wishes,
B. Pallett.
http://www.btinternet.com/~cosmosweb
----------------------------------------------------------------


> On Wed, 02 Oct 2002 22:42:24 GMT, "John Miller"



> >> Unreal Tournament 2003

> >> Jedi Knight (high res full textures anti-aliasing switched on)


> But NOT with high res full textures and anti aliasing switched on.

Vern Peller

What game is hungry?

by Vern Peller » Tue, 08 Oct 2002 15:13:10

UT2003
Gonz

What game is hungry?

by Gonz » Tue, 08 Oct 2002 16:15:10


Understatement of the year! Time to upgrade once again.  ***it, UT is
better anyway.  Wonder if I can get my $40 back.

Vern Peller

What game is hungry?

by Vern Peller » Wed, 09 Oct 2002 03:21:18




>> UT2003

>Understatement of the year! Time to upgrade once again.  ***it, UT is
>better anyway.  Wonder if I can get my $40 back.

So I'm not the ONLY one who thinks that UT is better than UT2003?

The graphics are obviously better in UT2003.  But the gameplay in UT2003 seems
more Quake-like.  I'm not sure how to describe it, but the original UT just
seems more fun than UT2003.  And the weapons in UT2003 are just a little odd.  
I liked the original UT weapons better.  They were a bit simpler and more FUN.

Gonz

What game is hungry?

by Gonz » Wed, 09 Oct 2002 04:16:53






> >> UT2003

> >Understatement of the year! Time to upgrade once again.  ***it, UT is
> >better anyway.  Wonder if I can get my $40 back.

> So I'm not the ONLY one who thinks that UT is better than UT2003?

> The graphics are obviously better in UT2003.  But the gameplay in UT2003
seems
> more Quake-like.  I'm not sure how to describe it, but the original UT
just
> seems more fun than UT2003.  And the weapons in UT2003 are just a little
odd.
> I liked the original UT weapons better.  They were a bit simpler and more

FUN.

The UT2003 newsgroup is full of postings like yours FWIW.

IMO what they screwed up in UT2003 is:

1)Weapons are weaker and simply lame compared to the UT weapons.
2)Level design is too small and to Quakish looking
3)Announcer is annoying
4)Netcode is worse than UT
5)3 Gigs of HD space??

What's good OTOH:

1)Pretty (low fps) graphics
2)Skeletal physics are nice
that's about it.

Hopefully a patch and some user made maps will help resolve SOME of these
issues.

PAPADO

What game is hungry?

by PAPADO » Wed, 09 Oct 2002 07:07:03

They ruined the character models...all the UT Characters looked
great...like individuals...these all look exactly like Quake. I dont
plan on buying UT2003

PAPA DOC

Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand
Never Forget Never Forgive September 11, 2001
www.papadoc.net
Maj. Bryan Hilferty, a spokesman for the
10th Mountain Division:"If they want to bring in
more people so we can kill them,We're happy to oblige."

Oliver Richma

What game is hungry?

by Oliver Richma » Wed, 09 Oct 2002 10:55:53

FWIW, I know you probably mean "quake 3 like".

But FWIW I think that the original 4 quake episodes contained some of the
most well designed levels of all time. Nearly each one was a true
masterpeice of space. In quake 2 and to a leser extent 3, the level design
SUCKED. Even though the games were much better. for multiplayer.

-frl








> > >> UT2003

> > >Understatement of the year! Time to upgrade once again.  ***it, UT
is
> > >better anyway.  Wonder if I can get my $40 back.

> > So I'm not the ONLY one who thinks that UT is better than UT2003?

> > The graphics are obviously better in UT2003.  But the gameplay in UT2003
> seems
> > more Quake-like.  I'm not sure how to describe it, but the original UT
> just
> > seems more fun than UT2003.  And the weapons in UT2003 are just a little
> odd.
> > I liked the original UT weapons better.  They were a bit simpler and
more
> FUN.

> The UT2003 newsgroup is full of postings like yours FWIW.

> IMO what they screwed up in UT2003 is:

> 1)Weapons are weaker and simply lame compared to the UT weapons.
> 2)Level design is too small and to Quakish looking
> 3)Announcer is annoying
> 4)Netcode is worse than UT
> 5)3 Gigs of HD space??

> What's good OTOH:

> 1)Pretty (low fps) graphics
> 2)Skeletal physics are nice
> that's about it.

> Hopefully a patch and some user made maps will help resolve SOME of these
> issues.

Bill Gate

What game is hungry?

by Bill Gate » Wed, 09 Oct 2002 15:56:29

Their is not  PC that can do that and get a framerate over 5fps (:

On Sun, 6 Oct 2002 22:45:13 +0000 (UTC), "B Pallett"


>Try Battlefield 1942 with full settings and 59 bots.


rec.autos.simulators is a usenet newsgroup formed in December, 1993. As this group was always unmoderated there may be some spam or off topic articles included. Some links do point back to racesimcentral.net as we could not validate the original address. Please report any pages that you believe warrant deletion from this archive (include the link in your email). RaceSimCentral.net is in no way responsible and does not endorse any of the content herein.