Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Rainbow Six : Vegas , SM 3.0 ?

Last response: in Video Games
Share
January 2, 2007 5:47:54 PM

I almost bought this game saturday for my pc, I began to read the system requirments adn it says that it requires a video card that support Shadder Model 3.0. Is this true or will i be able to play this game with my x850xt taht is SM 2.0?

More about : rainbow vegas

January 2, 2007 5:57:50 PM

Good question... I find it hard to believe that they would limit themselves only to current generation video cards. :roll:

I would also have to update if it is true and all my other games look great as it is.
January 2, 2007 6:25:53 PM

Yes, unfortunately you must have a card that is SM 3.0. Which sucks, i don't know why they did that, its really limited the number of users. So don't buy it, unless they release a patch or something that allows for SM 2.0 or maybe there is a driver out there that can trick it to believe that its running with SM 3.0 when its really running SM 2.0 card.
Related resources
January 2, 2007 6:55:41 PM

Thanks for the info man, guess i will what until i get my DX10 card befor i play that game. Which means that i will probably never play the game because something better will be out by then.
January 3, 2007 4:22:12 AM

true, such a stupid move by ubisoft, i can't believe they did that.
January 3, 2007 9:47:11 AM

I think thats the first game that only supports sm3. Maybe Im wrong and someone please correct me if I am but I cant think of any other games out at the moment that wont play on sm2
January 3, 2007 11:49:21 AM

I wonder how much money they have lost on the PC front from all the returns that i am sure have happened. I would have just wrongly assumed that the game could play on my comp and bought it.
January 4, 2007 4:37:58 AM

that's true, some people out there don't know much about computers. some just ask others to build their computer, and they might buy it the game and not notice the specs and stuff. So this is really bad for those people.

The same with those who know about computers, i and most people assumed that it would work on a SM 2.0 card, but unisoft had to make it a must sm 3.0.
January 4, 2007 12:12:20 PM

yeah, i thought i knew more than the average joe out there, but this is another learning experience i guess. Makes you want to stick to consoles more...

my card is a great card (of course there are better) but, i can play a lot of games at there highest settings (I am not going to get into an Oblivion battle here). But, Ubisoft seems to be porting that game to the PC because of course the 360, and PS3 support sm3, but there are still a ton of people out there with ati 9xxx card and nvidia 5xxx cards that will not upgrade just for this game. Just doesnt make sense, unless its just a quick port from consoles...
January 4, 2007 2:58:32 PM

Sorry you're all upset but somebody had to do it first. And it had to be a big player or it might have killed them. Frankly, I think it's about time someone stepped it up. DX10 is right around the corner and we're finally getting games that require DX9 hardware. :?

I wouldn't knock them for moving the industry along, but it is pretty sad that they didn't advertise the requirement better.
January 8, 2007 2:09:27 PM

Finally getting games that require DX9 hardware… You might not have noticed but a fair few games require DX9 hardware. Not only because they simply won’t run like they did with this stupid SM3 requirement. But because DX8 and 7 hardware simply was not fast enough.

A game that does not support older versions of hardware is not progress, you might not know this but SM3 dose not offer much at all over SM2 apart from the ability to have more lighting effects. This seems to me that they simply could not be bothered rewriting the code and simply just released a direct port with some very minor changes.

Oh and I believe the new Splinter Cell port for the PC has the same Issues.
January 8, 2007 6:03:54 PM

:roll: Name three. "Not fast enough" doesn't equate to "required". I'd admit I haven't kept close tabs on this as I already own high-end DX9 hardware, but I haven't seen complaints about anything else yet. All the big engines I've seen work on old hardware. High settings, high res, and high framerates? Of course not, but that still doesn't mean required.

So you're a programmer now too? Well, as one programmer to another, not supporting older hardware is the definition of progress. Upgrade if you want to play, don't flame because it rubs you wrong. Unreal Engine 3 isn't a stupid decision by developers, even with steep system requirements. You'll be playing with it for years, and once you upgrade you'll like it.

Am I the only one who sees this hypocritical point of view. "I don't want games to leave me in the cold because I have old hardware." * Insert upgrade here * "Why don't developers make games to truly use my PC's power?"
January 9, 2007 8:19:33 AM

After a bit of reading I can see now that Shader Model 3 is a requirement of the Unreal3 Engine. So any game that is released on this engine will only work on the latest versions of DX9 cards (DX9c to be more specific). The Problem is this is the first engine that has strictly needed a minimum shader model to run. Every other engine that has been created is a lot more flexible with the option of 3.0 being their if needed while being able to scale down to model 1.1 if the graphics card is not powerfull enough to run any higher.

It sounds that the minimum level of shader model is more of a flaw in the code of the Unreal3 engine rather than strict progress. It is not hard to work other versions of shaders in to an engine as is evident by every other game you can buy to date bar Oblivion which only has rudimentary 1.X shader version support, but it is still there non the less. To make the jump from all games supporting cards as old as the GeForce3 to cutting off all cards that where made before the X1800 that I believe is only 2 years old, if that. Is absolutely insane and sounds like a stunt by Nvidia more than anything else.

And to mention any game that will not run on anything less than a DX9 card, try running a lot of games on a GeForce4 TI the last of the DX8 cards. You will be surprised at how many games will be unplayable in the frame rates even with everything reduced to the lowest setting. If you cant, just think of this, a 9700Pro is twice as fast.
January 9, 2007 1:09:48 PM

I agree with you that games should progress with the new technology, all I'mying is that I wont be upgrading to play this game.
January 9, 2007 1:59:41 PM

Well it is fair to say that software drives hardeware and games are the main force behind this movement. Just wish my card would have lasted longer. Once UT2007 comes out looks like i will need to upgrade again :roll:

Well i guess that gives me a new mod project :twisted: Need to see how fast this card can go on water cooling even though its "not fast enough" :roll:
January 9, 2007 2:36:50 PM

do i see volt mod in your future
January 11, 2007 4:45:24 PM

well....complain to the publisher and developers. I saw this game on the xbox 360 and had to buy it immediately when it was released on the PC. It's a direct port from the 360 so that's why it doesn't support sm2.0. It also runs like complete sh*t unless you have a really high end PC. Many people in other forums are complaining about the direct port and how the publisher and developers did nothing to optimize this game for the PC.

I hate to say it, but I see this same scenario around the corner. Publishers are so focused on delivering titles for the next gen-console market as a first release and just doing the quick and easy solution of a direct port for the PC. It cost money to ensure that a game is optimized for a platform and if it get's in the way of development time or cost to the publisher, then they will let the PC end-users suffer. I love and hate what the next generation consoles are doing to the true die hard PC gamers.

Just wait and let's see what the PC port of Geas of War looks like. They haven't released a version so I'm assuming that they are spending time making sure it's optimized correctly. <crossing-fingers>

my 2 cents
January 12, 2007 9:00:59 AM

Just wanted to comment on this, just to show how badly devised the Unreal 3 engine is. The Crysis engine which seems to be a much greater step than what the new Unreal engine is to gaming, will be supporting PS2.0.
!