Can't buy weapons in low resolution
TekJ
Join Date: 2011-08-13 Member: 116212Members
Join Date: 2011-08-13 Member: 116212Members
<div class="IPBDescription">With a overpowered computer</div>All is in the title.
<img src="http://img337.imageshack.us/img337/2466/trolololw.jpg" border="0" class="linked-image" />
Indeed, by having a very large resolution, selection icons are not ... selectable as the description window is too large.
I advise just the high authorities to inform them to think a shortcutexample to choose our weapons, it would be faster for some, and other can play with their GL when he wants. I seem to be in the Soviet army during World War II. I've had ammunition, gotta wait for the death of Tovaritch to take his weapon. :D
<img src="http://img337.imageshack.us/img337/2466/trolololw.jpg" border="0" class="linked-image" />
Indeed, by having a very large resolution, selection icons are not ... selectable as the description window is too large.
I advise just the high authorities to inform them to think a shortcutexample to choose our weapons, it would be faster for some, and other can play with their GL when he wants. I seem to be in the Soviet army during World War II. I've had ammunition, gotta wait for the death of Tovaritch to take his weapon. :D
Comments
A quick fix would be to have 'short cut' key buying, similar to CS, which should probably be in there anyway.
So we can press 4 for gren launcher or whatever it is.
The only thing you're picking holes at is the fact that lower resolutions should be not be selectable. Anything lower than 1024x768 is just unnecessary.
BS community response from guy with £1000 setup that I can't afford.
I know that when I lower my resolution in NS2, I get almost no performance increase. I'd be surprised if there's a terrible decrease if you were to up your settings.
As if ns2 would ever be playable on the same hardware requirement as 7+ year old halflife2... ppl are crazy.
The minimum requirements already silently disappeared on uwe pages (at least i think i remember that there were some somewhere at some point?)
I would orient my self more on something like the Battlefield 3 minimum requirements (even tho ns2 only uses directx 9)
OS: Windows Vista or Windows 7
Processor: Core 2 Duo 2.4 GHz or Althon X2 2.7 GHz
RAM: 2GB
Graphic card: DirectX 10 or 11 compatible Nvidia or AMD ATI card, ATI Radeon 3870 or higher, Nvidia GeForce 8800 GT or higher.
Graphics card memory: 512 MB
Sound card: DirectX compatibl sound card
Hard drive: 15 GB for disc version or 10 GB for digital version
So i guess the minimum will get your fps around 30fps @ 1024*768 super ugly settings after some more polish in the future...
Minimum requirements dont say what their definition of playable is and for which resolution... i dont really think bf3 min requirements would get you in a really enjoyable fps region. (also not for bf3)
So it might as well mean around 20fps @ 800*600 or lower...
I chose the lowest resolution, it's only to be able to claim to be effective against players with good FPS.
And yet I have not too bad configuration :
Proc : i5 2,80Ghz
RAM : 4,00 Go
GC : ATI HD 4500
Graphics card memory: 512 MB
:(
There's your problem then. That's like me trying to play WoW (2004) with a PC made for HL/Quake (1996/97).
<img src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_867cCBuLxd8/TIGZ2D_dsnI/AAAAAAAAAM8/t4DURnbxxkU/s400/fuuuu.jpeg" border="0" class="linked-image" />
And yet I have not too bad configuration :
Proc : i5 2,80Ghz
RAM : 4,00 Go
GC : ATI HD 4500
Graphics card memory: 512 MB
:(<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Just realised, you're playing on a system with a graphics card which isn't designed for gaming. The 4500 is in the category of HTPC/media graphics. The 4870 in the 4xxx series was the next designated gaming GPU. That could account for why you have to use a low resolution, your 80 stream graphics card can't handle games at all well.
Well, yes, I work with my computer primarily for making sound. With software requiring no graphics capability. The only game I play is NS2. With my current setup, what card do you advise me to play seamlessly without much pushing the resolution? (1024 is enough, with middle graphic details)
I would wait a couple of months because (atleast AMD) will bring out the new generation and prices for HD 5xxx/6xxx will drop.
If you can not wait for around 180$ you can get a HD6850 (some of them are unlockable to a HD6870)
Here is a price per performance chart:
<a href="http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu_value.html" target="_blank">http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu_value.html</a>
Also as other have stated, changing resolution won't likely give much, if any fps increase as the game is so heavily capped by CPU rather than gfx atm.
If you can not wait for around 180$ you can get a HD6850 (some of them are unlockable to a HD6870)
Here is a price per performance chart:
<a href="http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu_value.html" target="_blank">http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu_value.html</a><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Thx to you :)
<img src="http://i119.photobucket.com/albums/o153/Notyerd/speccy.png" border="0" class="linked-image" />
The only thing you're picking holes at is the fact that lower resolutions should be not be selectable. Anything lower than 1024x768 is just unnecessary.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
no idiot. i play at 800x600 fool
They're graphics cards aimed at the 'casual' gamer, by that, AMD means those that want to play the crappy 2D windows type things like Minesweeper, chess etc. who just want to be able to watch DVDs on their PC.
In AMD terms a X570 is your HTPC/cheap nasty budget card. X770 is your entry level gaming, X970 is your mid-level gaming and X870 is your high level gaming. Your X870 X2 is your super-high gaming card.
If you stick AMD and are upgrading from your 4570 or 5570 I'd go with one of the following cards: 6870, 5870, 6970 and if you're really stuck for a cash a 5770. They're the upgrades above you capable of playing the games of today.
lol, the 970 is mid and 870 is high end...
anyway, I'm using a 8400gs at the moment, because my 5850 died. Annoying stuff.
But yeah, I tried playing the game, firsly, it's unplayable, secondly, it's unplayable, thirdly, It's unplayable, fourthly, it'... uh... resolution is too low to buy guns, I have to get others to buy guns foir me.
anyway, I'm using a 8400gs at the moment, because my 5850 died. Annoying stuff.
But yeah, I tried playing the game, firsly, it's unplayable, secondly, it's unplayable, thirdly, It's unplayable, fourthly, it'... uh... resolution is too low to buy guns, I have to get others to buy guns foir me.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Bleh seems the 69xx series is the other way round. The 58 and 4870 was always the better option than the 970. Silly AMD.
Although you get the point atleast that you need to actually look at what graphics card you buy xD
Thats actually not true. I switched my resolution to 640*480 and nearly doubled my fps.
Before 15-30 with avg of 23. In combat 8-18
After 30-50 with avg of 42. In combat 15-25
I have a hp g62 notebook with i5 m460; mobile ati hd5470 and 4 gb of ram.
Its even worse than the current igp of intel cpus (HD3000)
Such a laptop costs nearly 600€...
For 650€ you could currently buy a nearly Top-end desktop: (German prices, so its even a bit less in US)
i5 2500k, AMD 6870, 4gb ram(more than enough for gaming), 700w psu, Scythe Mugen 3 cpu cooler, cheap case, dvd burner, 250gb hd, assuming you already have a monitor, keyboard and mouse(which would add around min. 160€ if good 24" full hd monitor)...
(if you already have a case, harddisk and maybe a 600watt psu you would save 130€)
This should play all current games at high settings @fullhd resolution (and should give around 60+fps in ns2 currently if overclocked)
my $1200 pc get(welll go, because my 5850 is broken now) 27fps on max.
performance is more important than model numeros...
anyway. As Max said in the interview with NS2HD about occlusion culling, the game is cpu AND graphics card bound... at the moment. Meaning if you have a slow cpu OR a slow graphics card, you will get ###### performance. In the next build, theyre supposed to have fixed this problem using a software occlusion system. Meaning that the game may run a little slower on older cpus, but overall performance will be improved.
In fact, even on older cpus, because the new occlusion culling is a bit more optimized, it could even be faster.
Yes I know its laughable, I do plan to get something better. That said, I can and do play ns2 with it. Usually I do respectably well, especially if you consider my pc. Even with the big lack of optimization in ns2 currently. 20 fps is my baseline more or less. I can post specs if it humors anyone.
Bottom line, thanks for making a fun game UWE, even on my pc.