Hermits make me laugh, LoL!

Crysis runs at around 30 FPS on the highest settings because its features massive enviornments, tons of enemies, and an unprecedented amount of raw detail.

What's Metal Gear Solid 4's excuse?

[QUOTE="Blackbond"][QUOTE="DaGamingGod"][QUOTE="Blackbond"]

Sigh....

Look Hermits were bragging about being able to run Crysis at 30FPS which is well under the norm of the Hermits 60FPS which Hermits use to their advantage.

Essentially Hermits play at 60FPS while saying that console owners play First Person Shooters at 30FPS. But when people were playing Crysis at 30FPS then it was kind of hypocritical that Hermits were playing at 30FPS which is what they mocked.

I don't know where you are getting less then 30FPS from. Those comments only came from Hermits maxing the settings and seeing how fast the game would run.

This thread just reeks of desperation. At least be accurate.

lolkie_81

Seriously why do I even bother? Its right there infront of you.

I really dont know why you bother, you obviously are just to smart for these people on SW. Lets all bow down to Black Bond and his obsession with WWE.:lol:

>_>

Crysis runs at around 30 FPS on the highest settings because its features massive enviornments, tons of enemies, and an unprecedented amount of raw detail.

What's Metal Gear Solid 4's excuse?

t3hTwinky

Maybe that its running on non upgradable hardware..... Wow thats a thought, as it is, I hardly noticed any slowdown if any. Crisis on the other hand, Im sure when it was released few computers had a easy time running it at the time. Funny how people that post on these forums act like they dont have a clue, and need everything explained to them.

You know what? 1)You are right. Why should I have to factually prove to you that mgs4 is a good looking game? Is that how we win arguments on systemars? If you have seen the game you know for yourself. 2)Its my mistake to think other people on these forums would be honest *like me* and not need some link to back something everyone already knows. If you want to nitpick this to death, 3)Yes it is my opinion mgs4 looks fantastic not being true hd. 4)You didnt win anything5)But only proved that you are no better than the other lame posters on this board.6)The funny thing is I won the argument, and all you can do is demand links to other *people's opinions* say it is a great looking game. I really dont care about this lame argument, 7)Im just not going to let some random poster try to push me around. I could go on all night, but 8)I realized other than your funny gifs, you are just a another ****

lolkie_81

1. You can't win a debate with an opinion. Likewise you can't win a debate without some kind of concrete proof, facts, or evidence. Have you ever seen a debate won based on an opinion :?
2. To be honest is to agree with your "OPINION" Like Zombie said. For people who are playing Crysis on HIGH or MAX. MGS4 isn't an amazing looking game
3. Yet you are still trying so desperately to push your opinion as fact.
4. I wasn't aware SW gave out prizes :|
5. Yay personal attacks on lameness. I guess we are back in Elementary School again :roll:
6. Um maybe you never got the memo in any sort of Educated like Debate or Law. But you don't win arguments based on opinions you win them based on facts. The mere thought of you thinking you can win an arguement without a fact is just utterly infathomable.
7. Touchy touchy. Hey man you're the one throwing around the Grade School insults not me.
8. Oh darn you got me. Your grade School insults are just oo much for me to handle. What ever shall I do :lol:

[QUOTE="anshul89"][QUOTE="lolkie_81"]I think hermits just want some attention. No one on these forums consider the pc as part of systemwars except hermits. They can upgrade there hardware when ever thay want, they are not held at the same standards. I personally dont think they should even be a part of the discussion, who else is sick of *console graphics* Treads ,being over run with,* crisis tread/* posts? No one gives a crap lets settle it now the pc is better, it always will be better as long as upgradeable hardware is available. Now hermits just move on and never post here again because frankly noone gives $h*t. Pc only gamers are missing out on more good games than console only gamers, if they own all three. If I really thought pc gaming was so great I would buy one. I have never had the desire to own a rig.
lolkie_81

And your link matters how? Looks like a bunch of hermits posting to me. I dont have anything against hermits, Im all for gaming, it just dosent belong being directly compared to console gaming. If the 360 or ps3 could have upgradeable ram every year that would be a different story, What is so hard about understanding that?

Sorry but general opinion is against you lol.

You yourself said "all the hermits posting.." and all the posts stating "crysis tread/" which I'm sure you mean as crysis /thread. Anyway, if no one cares, who's posting?

Hermits are lucky enough to have complete control over how much they sacrifice in frame rates to get better looking in games.

[QUOTE="t3hTwinky"]

Crysis runs at around 30 FPS on the highest settings because its features massive enviornments, tons of enemies, and an unprecedented amount of raw detail.

What's Metal Gear Solid 4's excuse?

lolkie_81

Maybe that its running on non upgradable hardware..... Wow thats a thought, as it is, I hardly noticed any slowdown if any. Crisis on the other hand, Im sure when it was released few computers had a easy time running it at the time. Funny how people that post on these forums act like they dont have a clue, and need everything explained to them.

Well, when I played Crysis, I didn't notice any slowdowns or choppiness at all. And even though I haven't played MGS4, I'm pretty certain it runs poorly on most PS3s.

See whut I did thar?

[QUOTE="lolkie_81"]

[QUOTE="anshul89"][QUOTE="lolkie_81"]I think hermits just want some attention. No one on these forums consider the pc as part of systemwars except hermits. They can upgrade there hardware when ever thay want, they are not held at the same standards. I personally dont think they should even be a part of the discussion, who else is sick of *console graphics* Treads ,being over run with,* crisis tread/* posts? No one gives a crap lets settle it now the pc is better, it always will be better as long as upgradeable hardware is available. Now hermits just move on and never post here again because frankly noone gives $h*t. Pc only gamers are missing out on more good games than console only gamers, if they own all three. If I really thought pc gaming was so great I would buy one. I have never had the desire to own a rig.
DAZZER7

And your link matters how? Looks like a bunch of hermits posting to me. I dont have anything against hermits, Im all for gaming, it just dosent belong being directly compared to console gaming. If the 360 or ps3 could have upgradeable ram every year that would be a different story, What is so hard about understanding that?

Sorry but general opinion is against you lol.

You yourself said "all the hermits posting.." and all the posts stating "crysis tread/" which I'm sure you mean as crysis /thread. Anyway, if no one cares, who's posting?

Like I said, the hermits .

[QUOTE="lolkie_81"]

[QUOTE="anshul89"][QUOTE="lolkie_81"]I think hermits just want some attention. No one on these forums consider the pc as part of systemwars except hermits. They can upgrade there hardware when ever thay want, they are not held at the same standards. I personally dont think they should even be a part of the discussion, who else is sick of *console graphics* Treads ,being over run with,* crisis tread/* posts? No one gives a crap lets settle it now the pc is better, it always will be better as long as upgradeable hardware is available. Now hermits just move on and never post here again because frankly noone gives $h*t. Pc only gamers are missing out on more good games than console only gamers, if they own all three. If I really thought pc gaming was so great I would buy one. I have never had the desire to own a rig.
DAZZER7

And your link matters how? Looks like a bunch of hermits posting to me. I dont have anything against hermits, Im all for gaming, it just dosent belong being directly compared to console gaming. If the 360 or ps3 could have upgradeable ram every year that would be a different story, What is so hard about understanding that?

Sorry but general opinion is against you lol.

You yourself said "all the hermits posting.." and all the posts stating "crysis tread/" which I'm sure you mean as crysis /thread. Anyway, if no one cares, who's posting?

Like I said, the hermits .

[QUOTE="DAZZER7"][QUOTE="lolkie_81"]

[QUOTE="anshul89"][QUOTE="lolkie_81"]I think hermits just want some attention. No one on these forums consider the pc as part of systemwars except hermits. They can upgrade there hardware when ever thay want, they are not held at the same standards. I personally dont think they should even be a part of the discussion, who else is sick of *console graphics* Treads ,being over run with,* crisis tread/* posts? No one gives a crap lets settle it now the pc is better, it always will be better as long as upgradeable hardware is available. Now hermits just move on and never post here again because frankly noone gives $h*t. Pc only gamers are missing out on more good games than console only gamers, if they own all three. If I really thought pc gaming was so great I would buy one. I have never had the desire to own a rig.
lolkie_81

And your link matters how? Looks like a bunch of hermits posting to me. I dont have anything against hermits, Im all for gaming, it just dosent belong being directly compared to console gaming. If the 360 or ps3 could have upgradeable ram every year that would be a different story, What is so hard about understanding that?

Sorry but general opinion is against you lol.

You yourself said "all the hermits posting.." and all the posts stating "crysis tread/" which I'm sure you mean as crysis /thread. Anyway, if no one cares, who's posting?

Like I said, the hermits .

So let me get this straight, in order to validate your point, you choose to disregard a whole section of this community's opinion. You really are THE man! :lol:

So let me get this straight, in order to validate your point, you choose to disregard a whole section of this community's opinion. You really are THE man! :lol:

DAZZER7

Well, to be fair, his original argument was that nobody cares about hermits except hermits, but really that argument can be made about anybody. I mean, who the hell cares about the sheep? The sheep, that's who. We might as well just cut them out of system wars entirely. :roll:

But then again, "nobody caring about hermits except hermits" doesn't really explain this topic now does it? :lol:

[QUOTE="DAZZER7"]

So let me get this straight, in order to validate your point, you choose to disregard a whole section of this community's opinion. You really are THE man! :lol:

t3hTwinky

Well, to be fair, his original argument was that nobody cares about hermits except hermits, but really that argument can be made about anybody. I mean, who the hell cares about the sheep? The sheep, that's who. We might as well just cut them out of system wars entirely. :roll:

But then again, "nobody caring about hermits except hermits" doesn't really explain this topic now does it? :lol:

Sorry twinky are you agreeing with me? I cant tell must be too early in the moprning to get my brain in gear.

[QUOTE="lolkie_81"][QUOTE="t3hTwinky"]

Crysis runs at around 30 FPS on the highest settings because its features massive enviornments, tons of enemies, and an unprecedented amount of raw detail.

What's Metal Gear Solid 4's excuse?

t3hTwinky

Maybe that its running on non upgradable hardware..... Wow thats a thought, as it is, I hardly noticed any slowdown if any. Crisis on the other hand, Im sure when it was released few computers had a easy time running it at the time. Funny how people that post on these forums act like they dont have a clue, and need everything explained to them.

Well, when I played Crysis, I didn't notice any slowdowns or choppiness at all. And even though I haven't played MGS4, I'm pretty certain it runs poorly on most PS3s.

See whut I did thar?

Dude, crisis was realeased years ago, back then many computers had running it as its supposed to be run. Now it is different. What are we arguing about again? oHH thats right.. that pc shouldnt be compared to consoles in terms of graphics. Whats wrong with that again?

[QUOTE="lolkie_81"][QUOTE="t3hTwinky"]

Crysis runs at around 30 FPS on the highest settings because its features massive enviornments, tons of enemies, and an unprecedented amount of raw detail.

What's Metal Gear Solid 4's excuse?

t3hTwinky

Maybe that its running on non upgradable hardware..... Wow thats a thought, as it is, I hardly noticed any slowdown if any. Crisis on the other hand, Im sure when it was released few computers had a easy time running it at the time. Funny how people that post on these forums act like they dont have a clue, and need everything explained to them.

Well, when I played Crysis, I didn't notice any slowdowns or choppiness at all. And even though I haven't played MGS4, I'm pretty certain it runs poorly on most PS3s.

See whut I did thar?

Dude, crisis was realeased years ago, back then many computers had running it, as its supposed to be run. Now it is different. What are we arguing about again? oHH thats right.. that pc shouldnt be compared to consoles in terms of graphics. Whats wrong with that again?

All this shows is how ignorant some console gamers are of PC games and their developers.

PC games can't be custom made for one specific PC, they have to be generalised for millions of different configurations which makes it hard to get great FPS on every one person's computer since there are a crapload of differences between each persons PC setup.

Also, I think any PC recently made could get 30 FPS on MGS4 ...

All this shows is how ignorant some console gamers are of PC games and their developers.

PC games can't be custom made for one specific PC, they have to be generalised for millions of different configurations which makes it hard to get great FPS on every one person's computer since there are a crapload of differences between each persons PC setup.

Also, I think any PC recently made could get 30 FPS on MGS4 ...

SimpJee

Quite right and even modest gaming rigs would exceed that even further considering the low res textures and small environments that would be rendered.

Dude, crisis was realeased years ago, back then many computers had running it, as its supposed to be run. Now it is different. What are we arguing about again? oHH thats right.. that pc shouldnt be compared to consoles in terms of graphics. Whats wrong with that again?

lolkie_81

Um Crysis hasn't even been out for a year yet man what are you talking about? It came out November 2007. We aren't even in November 2008 yet :|

*yawn*

Its the console fanboy banner wavers, who seem to try and 'battle' against the hermits who are the most laughable.

crysis on 8800gt in 720p = no less than 30fps and often 50-60fps, and has huge multipathed environments which are totally destructable.

mgs4 = 586p with pre defined levels and it fails to run 60fps while crysis can be run on very high settings in 586p @ 60fps no prob. it can even be run perfectly smooth with 16x AA at that res.

cod4 on ps3 = 600p with med setting while 8600gt can basicly max it out on pc at twice the res

crysis on 8800gt in 720p = no less than 30fps and often 50-60fps, and has huge multipathed environments which are totally destructable.

mgs4 = 586p with pre defined levels and it fails to run 60fps while crysis can be run on very high settings in 586p @ 60fps no prob. it can even be run perfectly smooth with 16x AA at that res.

cod4 on ps3 = 600p with med setting while 8600gt can basicly max it out on pc at twice the res

imprezawrx500

I really hate to do ths but...

.../thread

[QUOTE="imprezawrx500"]

crysis on 8800gt in 720p = no less than 30fps and often 50-60fps, and has huge multipathed environments which are totally destructable.

mgs4 = 586p with pre defined levels and it fails to run 60fps while crysis can be run on very high settings in 586p @ 60fps no prob. it can even be run perfectly smooth with 16x AA at that res.

cod4 on ps3 = 600p with med setting while 8600gt can basicly max it out on pc at twice the res

DAZZER7

I really hate to do ths but...

.../thread

crysis on 8800gt in 720p = no less than 30fps and often 50-60fps, and has huge multipathed environments which are totally destructable.

mgs4 = 586p with pre defined levels and it fails to run 60fps while crysis can be run on very high settings in 586p @ 60fps no prob. it can even be run perfectly smooth with 16x AA at that res.

cod4 on ps3 = 600p with med setting while 8600gt can basicly max it out on pc at twice the res

imprezawrx500

Ummm.... NO... just NO.... use facts and stop making stuff up.... most of the environment is not destructible in FACT!

[QUOTE="imprezawrx500"]

crysis on 8800gt in 720p = no less than 30fps and often 50-60fps, and has huge multipathed environments which are totally destructable.

mgs4 = 586p with pre defined levels and it fails to run 60fps while crysis can be run on very high settings in 586p @ 60fps no prob. it can even be run perfectly smooth with 16x AA at that res.

cod4 on ps3 = 600p with med setting while 8600gt can basicly max it out on pc at twice the res

Veterngamer

Ummm.... NO... just NO.... use facts and stop making stuff up.... most of the environment is not destructible in FACT!

What??? YES it is mate lol.

...and we're not talking about scripted destruction we're talking full physics as in take a panel of the roof and throw it at someone, punch the walls through and the roof collapses in on you. The only thing I can think of that isnt destructable are the korean porta-cabin type things and the mains structures/buildings. Thats it, everything else, guard towers, trees, fences, cars, trucks.

Let me ask you this then, what game has more of a destructable environment ?

[QUOTE="Veterngamer"][QUOTE="imprezawrx500"]

crysis on 8800gt in 720p = no less than 30fps and often 50-60fps, and has huge multipathed environments which are totally destructable.

mgs4 = 586p with pre defined levels and it fails to run 60fps while crysis can be run on very high settings in 586p @ 60fps no prob. it can even be run perfectly smooth with 16x AA at that res.

cod4 on ps3 = 600p with med setting while 8600gt can basicly max it out on pc at twice the res

DAZZER7

Ummm.... NO... just NO.... use facts and stop making stuff up.... most of the environment is not destructible in FACT!

What??? YES it is mate lol.

...and we're not talking about scripted destruction we're talking full physics as in take a panel of the roof and throw it at someone, punch the walls through and the roof collapses in on you. The only thing I can think of that isnt destructable are the korean porta-cabin type things and the mains structures/buildings. Thats it, everything else, guard towers, trees, fences, cars, trucks.

Let me ask you this then, what game has more of a destructable environment ?

Many structures are not destructible, only small buildings & shacks are, some trees are not destructible.... barrels are not destructible... I could go on and on, if I wanted to load up the game and make a list, but i don't care that much

Fact is, the game is not fully destructible.... not even close, actually..... as for a game that has a more destructible environment.... well none that I know of.... but I never made any such claim to begin with, now did I..... I'm just being real about what Crysis is... and what it is not.

[QUOTE="DAZZER7"][QUOTE="Veterngamer"][QUOTE="imprezawrx500"]

crysis on 8800gt in 720p = no less than 30fps and often 50-60fps, and has huge multipathed environments which are totally destructable.

mgs4 = 586p with pre defined levels and it fails to run 60fps while crysis can be run on very high settings in 586p @ 60fps no prob. it can even be run perfectly smooth with 16x AA at that res.

cod4 on ps3 = 600p with med setting while 8600gt can basicly max it out on pc at twice the res

Veterngamer

Ummm.... NO... just NO.... use facts and stop making stuff up.... most of the environment is not destructible in FACT!

What??? YES it is mate lol.

...and we're not talking about scripted destruction we're talking full physics as in take a panel of the roof and throw it at someone, punch the walls through and the roof collapses in on you. The only thing I can think of that isnt destructable are the korean porta-cabin type things and the mains structures/buildings. Thats it, everything else, guard towers, trees, fences, cars, trucks.

Let me ask you this then, what game has more of a destructable environment ?

Many structures are not destructible, only small buildings & shacks are, some trees are not destructible.... barrels are not destructible... I could go on and on, if I wanted to load up the game and make a list, but i don't care that much

Fact is, the game is not fully destructible.... not even close, actually..... as for a game that has a more destructible environment.... well none that I know of.... but I never made any such claim to begin with, now did I..... I'm just being real about what Crysis is... and what it is not.

You said "most" in your post. I will acknowledge that the game is not totally destructable. However, that takes little away from the genuine technical feat that the game is.

I mean what is with the "Ummm.... NO... just NO...." ? the overall point of imprezawrx500's post was that pick any technical aspect of mgs4 to crysis and crysis wins. All you did was say that crysis's environments are not totally destructable. Whiel you may be right, you're kinda missing the point ;)

Crysis runs at around 30 FPS on the highest settings because its features massive enviornments, tons of enemies, and an unprecedented amount of raw detail.

What's Metal Gear Solid 4's excuse?

t3hTwinky

[QUOTE="imprezawrx500"]

crysis on 8800gt in 720p = no less than 30fps and often 50-60fps, and has huge multipathed environments which are totally destructable.

mgs4 = 586p with pre defined levels and it fails to run 60fps while crysis can be run on very high settings in 586p @ 60fps no prob. it can even be run perfectly smooth with 16x AA at that res.

cod4 on ps3 = 600p with med setting while 8600gt can basicly max it out on pc at twice the res

DAZZER7

You said "most" in your post. I will acknowledge that the game is not totally destructable. However, that takes little away from the genuine technical feat that the game is.

I mean what is with the "Ummm.... NO... just NO...." ? the overall point of imprezawrx500's post was that pick any technical aspect of mgs4 to crysis and crysis wins. All you did was say that crysis's environments are not totally destructable. Whiel you may be right, you're kinda missing the point ;)

All i commented on was the fact that Crysis is NOT fully destructible.... it was a lie on his part to claim that it was... I said nothing else about anything else that he said.

I wish hermits made me laugh. Instead I get all bloated and gassy around them. :|PBSnipes

Crysis runs at around 30 FPS on the highest settings because its features massive enviornments, tons of enemies, and an unprecedented amount of raw detail.

What's Metal Gear Solid 4's excuse?

t3hTwinky

Btw, the original post isn't too difficult to understand is it folks?

[QUOTE="t3hTwinky"]

Crysis runs at around 30 FPS on the highest settings because its features massive enviornments, tons of enemies, and an unprecedented amount of raw detail.

What's Metal Gear Solid 4's excuse?

lolkie_81

Maybe that its running on non upgradable hardware..... Wow thats a thought, as it is, I hardly noticed any slowdown if any. Crisis on the other hand, Im sure when it was released few computers had a easy time running it at the time. Funny how people that post on these forums act like they dont have a clue, and need everything explained to them.

[QUOTE="lolkie_81"][QUOTE="t3hTwinky"]

Crysis runs at around 30 FPS on the highest settings because its features massive enviornments, tons of enemies, and an unprecedented amount of raw detail.

What's Metal Gear Solid 4's excuse?

DaGamingGod

Maybe that its running on non upgradable hardware..... Wow thats a thought, as it is, I hardly noticed any slowdown if any. Crisis on the other hand, Im sure when it was released few computers had a easy time running it at the time. Funny how people that post on these forums act like they dont have a clue, and need everything explained to them.

but what about cell and it's 4D graphics and games at 120fps :P

All this shows is how ignorant some console gamers are of PC games and their developers.

PC games can't be custom made for one specific PC, they have to be generalised for millions of different configurations which makes it hard to get great FPS on every one person's computer since there are a crapload of differences between each persons PC setup.

Also, I think any PC recently made could get 30 FPS on MGS4 ...

SimpJee

[QUOTE="t3hTwinky"]

Crysis runs at around 30 FPS on the highest settings because its features massive enviornments, tons of enemies, and an unprecedented amount of raw detail.

What's Metal Gear Solid 4's excuse?

DaGamingGod

Btw, the original post isn't too difficult to understand is it folks?

i would point out two things :-

(1) Crysis had motion blur which makes the low res less noticeable. Did MGs 4 has that ?

(2) On Pc people had choice to play crysis as they liked (unless they had very old computers) for ex: i had a choice b/w very high-settings@ 20-25 fps or high-settings @ 35-40 fps or highly tweaked high-very high settings @ 30-35 fps, so i could play as i like. Did MGS 4 had that choice ?

If answer to both is yes, then i really don't think people should have a reson to complain about MGS 4 fps (obviously, that they should not complain in the first place)

Cows get one good game and they kick off....... was bad enough wth the rabid lemmings :)tenaka2

c'mmon be fair they got their first 9.0+ after 2 years of waiting. it's a big deal for them

Btw, the original post isn't too difficult to understand is it folks?

DaGamingGod

Whos to say, its the usual stuff and not worth reading.

[QUOTE="DaGamingGod"][QUOTE="t3hTwinky"]

Crysis runs at around 30 FPS on the highest settings because its features massive enviornments, tons of enemies, and an unprecedented amount of raw detail.

What's Metal Gear Solid 4's excuse?

naval

Btw, the original post isn't too difficult to understand is it folks?

i would point out two things :-

(1) Crysis had motion blur which makes the low res less noticeable. Did MGs 4 has that ?

(2) On Pc people had choice to play crysis as they liked (unless they had very old computers) for ex: i had a choice b/w very high-settings@ 20-25 fps or high-settings @ 35-40 fps or highly tweaked high-very high settings @ 30-35 fps, so i could play as i like. Did MGS 4 had that choice ?

If answer to both is yes, then i really don't think people should have a reson to complain about MGS 4 fps (obviously, that they should not complain in the first place)

2. PC gamers do have a choice to run the game how they like but I just found it funny how they settled for a framerate that dipped under 30fps but went after console fanboys once they found out about MGS4 and GTA4 had trouble with the fps. Btw, I have both and I really don't notice the lag unless I'm online playing with a bunch of folks who are shooing tons of rockets/bullets everywhere, LoL!

[QUOTE="DaGamingGod"]

Btw, the original post isn't too difficult to understand is it folks?

tenaka2

Whos to say, its the usual stuff and not worth reading.

[QUOTE="DaGamingGod"][QUOTE="Gaming4_Life"][QUOTE="DaGamingGod"][QUOTE="Gaming4_Life"]I made you laugh? Awesome!! :D Glad I can do some good in your negative little world of yours. Gaming4_Life

That's not all you blow.

[QUOTE="DaGamingGod"][QUOTE="lolkie_81"][QUOTE="t3hTwinky"]

Crysis runs at around 30 FPS on the highest settings because its features massive enviornments, tons of enemies, and an unprecedented amount of raw detail.

What's Metal Gear Solid 4's excuse?

naval

Maybe that its running on non upgradable hardware..... Wow thats a thought, as it is, I hardly noticed any slowdown if any. Crisis on the other hand, Im sure when it was released few computers had a easy time running it at the time. Funny how people that post on these forums act like they dont have a clue, and need everything explained to them.

but what about cell and it's 4D graphics and games at 120fps :P

Here's a recent ATI tech demo, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzquM5Td6bM

[QUOTE="tenaka2"][QUOTE="DaGamingGod"]

Btw, the original post isn't too difficult to understand is it folks?

DaGamingGod

Whos to say, its the usual stuff and not worth reading.

Its always good for hermits to post in PC hate threads, console gamers tend to be too young to post anything worth reading, the general points are always the same.

[QUOTE="naval"][QUOTE="DaGamingGod"][QUOTE="t3hTwinky"]

Crysis runs at around 30 FPS on the highest settings because its features massive enviornments, tons of enemies, and an unprecedented amount of raw detail.

What's Metal Gear Solid 4's excuse?

DaGamingGod

Btw, the original post isn't too difficult to understand is it folks?

i would point out two things :-

(1) Crysis had motion blur which makes the low res less noticeable. Did MGs 4 has that ?

(2) On Pc people had choice to play crysis as they liked (unless they had very old computers) for ex: i had a choice b/w very high-settings@ 20-25 fps or high-settings @ 35-40 fps or highly tweaked high-very high settings @ 30-35 fps, so i could play as i like. Did MGS 4 had that choice ?

If answer to both is yes, then i really don't think people should have a reson to complain about MGS 4 fps (obviously, that they should not complain in the first place)

2. PC gamers do have a choice to run the game how they like but I just found it funny how they settled for a framerate that dipped under 30fps but went after console fanboys once they found out about MGS4 and GTA4 had trouble with the fps. Btw, I have both and I really don't notice the lag unless I'm online playing with a bunch of folks who are shooing tons of rockets/bullets everywhere, LoL!

1. You are changing the original point from "comaprison with crysis" to "MGS doesn't has any lag"

2. I played at above 30 fps, i think many people would have done the same. you have the choice , whether you use it or not.

[QUOTE="naval"][QUOTE="DaGamingGod"][QUOTE="lolkie_81"][QUOTE="t3hTwinky"]

Crysis runs at around 30 FPS on the highest settings because its features massive enviornments, tons of enemies, and an unprecedented amount of raw detail.

What's Metal Gear Solid 4's excuse?

DaGamingGod

Maybe that its running on non upgradable hardware..... Wow thats a thought, as it is, I hardly noticed any slowdown if any. Crisis on the other hand, Im sure when it was released few computers had a easy time running it at the time. Funny how people that post on these forums act like they dont have a clue, and need everything explained to them.

but what about cell and it's 4D graphics and games at 120fps :P

techdemo is a techdemo. the yare meant to show the new cards power in a limited envoiremnet, that's all. did they say games are going to look like that ?

[QUOTE="DaGamingGod"][QUOTE="tenaka2"][QUOTE="DaGamingGod"]

Btw, the original post isn't too difficult to understand is it folks?

tenaka2

Whos to say, its the usual stuff and not worth reading.

Its always good for hermits to post in PC hate threads, console gamers tend to be too young to post anything worth reading, the general points are always the same.

GS = 10/10. Nuff said my friend.DaGamingGod

because gamespot is so reliable...?

naval, the tech demo is meant to show off the new cards. They expect folks to buy into the marketing bull and buy their cards. It's the same as Sony and their 4D/1080p talk.DaGamingGod

techdemoes are meant to so power of the cards, but that's it. i remmebr nvidia's tech demo where it was written something like actual gamesthe resul will/may defer etc. they never said games are goign to look like this like sony said.

anyways i was just joking there, taking a dig at ps3 fanboys who believe cell is uber powerfull and and can make up for the non-upgradeable hardware