Performance in the future/at release

This game is already optimized and plays on computers with low specs much better than 90% of other modern games.

The problem is your hardware really is archaic, it wouldn't cost much to upgrade and if you can't then you shouldn't blame the developer. Why would they stunt their game and make it worse for such a small market.

"

bobzebrick wrote:

This game is already optimized and plays on computers with low specs much better than 90% of other modern games.

The problem is your hardware really is archaic, it wouldn't cost much to upgrade and if you can't then you shouldn't blame the developer. Why would they stunt their game and make it worse for such a small market.

What? I'm not asking them to stunt anything about the game. It would still look EXACTLY the same, for those that kept everything enabled. I'm just asking about whether or not we'll have the option to disable a few things. Note how I'm not even saying they should, nor am I asking them to just asking a question, if anyone knows if they will or not. Folks in this thread are acting like I'm demanding they change the entire graphical engine.

"

modicasolis wrote:

"

redscores wrote:

A Hint, don't use apple products, get a fucking pc. You can get a good PC for 600 euro, a good macbook costs fucking 2000 euro.

Your argument is NULL, you failed by buying a macbook, if you would have bought a good pc to start with, you would have ENOUGH money left to buy a second pc 2 years later or 3.

This is just a whine thread from a mac moron... seriously.

The MacBook I'm going to get is going to be $1300, a far cry from 2000 euro, and it will be able to play most things pretty decently including this game. And this MacBook that I have now only cost $1000. So your numbers are rather incorrect.

Dude, then get a normal laptop for 800 dollar and you can play EVERYTHING on full on it....

Link: http://www.amazon.de/X93SV-YZ225V-Notebook-2670QM-NVIDIA-GT540M/dp/B0069HZ3N2/ref=sr_1_29?ie=UTF8&qid=1342229544&sr=8-29


Why would you buy a macbook thats not half as good as this and pay more? crazy?

"

bobzebrick wrote:

This game is already optimized and plays on computers with low specs much better than 90% of other modern games.

The problem is your hardware really is archaic, it wouldn't cost much to upgrade and if you can't then you shouldn't blame the developer. Why would they stunt their game and make it worse for such a small market.

"

Xendran wrote:

This game also likes to run hot, and i can agree it's poorly optimized (and im running a 3570k overclocked to 4.6 and a GTX 570)

"

bobzebrick wrote:

This game is already optimized and plays on computers with low specs much better than 90% of other modern games.

The problem is your hardware really is archaic, it wouldn't cost much to upgrade and if you can't then you shouldn't blame the developer. Why would they stunt their game and make it worse for such a small market.

He's just asking for the ability to turn the graphics down even more for older computers - not ancient computers.

This would not effect the high end users as they would still be able to play the game with the settings turned all the way.


Who cares whether he is on a Macbook or a PC, the point is still a good one IMO.

"

redscores wrote:

"

modicasolis wrote:

"

redscores wrote:

A Hint, don't use apple products, get a fucking pc. You can get a good PC for 600 euro, a good macbook costs fucking 2000 euro.

Your argument is NULL, you failed by buying a macbook, if you would have bought a good pc to start with, you would have ENOUGH money left to buy a second pc 2 years later or 3.

This is just a whine thread from a mac moron... seriously.

The MacBook I'm going to get is going to be $1300, a far cry from 2000 euro, and it will be able to play most things pretty decently including this game. And this MacBook that I have now only cost $1000. So your numbers are rather incorrect.

Dude, then get a normal laptop for 800 dollar and you can play EVERYTHING on full on it....

Link: http://www.amazon.de/X93SV-YZ225V-Notebook-2670QM-NVIDIA-GT540M/dp/B0069HZ3N2/ref=sr_1_29?ie=UTF8&qid=1342229544&sr=8-29


Why would you buy a macbook thats not half as good as this and pay more? crazy?

You do realize a 540M is about the equivalent of 7000-8000 GT?

The reason I go with MacBooks over others is for a few reasons. I don't game much. I play this. I played some Diablo 3. I played Starcraft 2. And EVE. And that's about all I've played (in terms of PC games, anyway) in the past...five years. Since shortly before I got my current MacBook, basically.

What I do on the computer is pretty low-key. A lot of writing, a lot of reading, a lot of browsing. That's about it. Coupled with the fact that I'm pretty much a laptops only kinda dude, I wanted to go with something that had:

- A really good touchpad so I didn't need to carry around a mouse or have a USB slot taken up

- A really nice screen that wasn't super-duper glossy (and keep in mind this was back in 2008 when glossy screens were all the rage on the high-end Windows laptops)

- Excellent battery life

This was the best option and at 1100, only a hundred or two hundred dollars more than a similar Windows laptop. And with it, I got an awesome screen and a phenomenal touchpad that eliminated any need for a mouse whatsoever (except for the rare ocasions when I played games).

The current market's a different story. Vizio's got some excellent laptops coming out soon. And there's a few contenders in the touchpad side of things. But at this point, I've really grown to prefer OSX's way of doing things. Every time I boot into Windows, I'm reminded of so many design functions about Windows that I just can't stand now. There's things about OSX that annoy me too, don't get me wrong, but there's far more annoyance on the Windows side of things. That said, I do really like Windows 8.

The laptop I just posted has a good screen and long battery life.... I don't see your point. And if you want as long battery life as a macbook air, just use battery saving mode (the laptop will have the same power as the macbook air then, but you still have the possibility to get MORE power out of it).

Or get a ultra book, has even better battery life and the screens of new laptops are atleast comparable to macbooks, beside maybe retina, but the retina sucks in a way, because if it is destroyed, you need a completely new macbook (can't be replaced).

"

redscores wrote:

The laptop I just posted has a good screen and long battery life.... I don't see your point. And if you want as long battery life as a macbook air, just use battery saving mode (the laptop will have the same power as the macbook air then, but you still have the possibility to get MORE power out of it).

Or get a ultra book, has even better battery life and the screens of new laptops are atleast comparable to macbooks, beside maybe retina, but the retina sucks in a way, because if it is destroyed, you need a completely new macbook (can't be replaced).

Screens have stepped up in the last couple years and that Asus has a decent one. It's still got a crap touchpad, though, as the one on that laptop is way too small. Additionally, I lose the capacity to do multitouch gestures, which is kind of a big thing for me since I have my trackpad set up to do a lot with just gestures.

In Chrome, I have several different custom gestures, such as a three-finger swipe up to open tabs (and down to close them), four-finger tap to reload pages, three-finger swipe left/right to change tabs, shift+five finger tap to open my bookmarks manager. And that's not even getting into the dozen or so gestures I use to make Pages and Word a lot simpler to use.

I've been able to create a very optimized system for how I use my computer that is contingent on the multitouch gestures and the headaches and annoyance it saves me is worth the small price increase. And if I get to avoid using Windows as a primary OS, well that's even better because frankly, I can't stand the way Windows operates.

But mostly, I just have a history of real bad luck with technology. Things tend to break, get lost, get stolen. The previous two laptops I had made it a year, a year and a half before they were damaged beyond repair and pretty much non-functional. This one has made it four years with very little wear and tear. None of my habits have changed. The build quality on these things is top-notch, while I've found that the build quality on most laptops is rather lacking. Things break easily and for me, who for some reason is prone to having things break, I'd prefer it to take as long as possible.

But here's what I don't get: The laptop you linked is 977$ when you convert it from Euros. MacBook is $1100. I get a better touchpad, better build quality, better screen, slightly worse graphical capability (that I don't even need), slightly slower processor, a better OS IN MY OPINION, for 130$. I don't see the big deal here.

"

You do realize a 540M is about the equivalent of 7000-8000 GT?

Are you high?

The 540M scores twice as high on benchmarks than an 8600GT.

Don't get me wrong, laptop GPUs generally suck, but frankly a lot of the blame can be put on the manufacturers.
For example GDDR5 is almost never used, despite the fact it improves the card quite a lot.
Cooling solutions in laptops are generally sub-par, my Asus G1Sn has plenty of room for a good cooling solution, but it has probably one of the worst.
And that's a "gaming" laptop.

Decent thermal paste, decent cooling systems (we have the alloys needed!), and standardizing GDDR5 RAM would go a long way towards making gaming on laptops better.
I applied my own paste (5 years old = no more warrany anyway), and mangled my chassis for better cooling.
I've OCed it, and it went from 10-15FPS on lowest, to handling shadows, 8x filtering, and 2xAA @40FPS.

Point? Laptop gaming isn't as bad as people claim.