E307: Enemy Territory: Quake Wars First Impressions

Ghost9

Distinguished
Nov 4, 2006
112
0
18,680
i for one am glad it's not dx10. I'm sick of microsoft trying to force people to vista when there's so many issues with it and frankly i'm surprised that toms hardware is helping to push it with comments like what was in the article. everyone knows dx10 could have easily been for XP but the only reason it's not is to force people to vista(a crappy os with more potential to spy on you than run your software).
 

3Ball

Distinguished
Mar 1, 2006
1,736
0
19,790
I enjoy the beta, but visually im not as impressed as the author was. I run it at 1680 x 1050 and most everything on high and shaders on ultra. The game jumps in an out of frames while vsync causes it to drop 30 frames rather than stay at a constant 60, and for whatever reason after they patched the beta when I go inside the sewer building I find my computer loosing even more frames. IDK, maybe my comp just isnt good enough, but I am getting enough frames to recieve tears, so Im really not sure what to think yet...honostly if I play for more than one round the visual quality begins to give me a headache. Just my two cents I suppose...I have actually been thinking of switching my reserve to the 360 version since it may be better optimized than that of the PC version since they know what hardware to work with...we will see I suppose!

Best,

3Ball
 
Isn't Quake Wars using OpenGL? That would make it look the same on whatever system it'll run - except Vista, since Vista OpenGL drivers suck big time...
'looks best and plays best on XP, Linux and MacOS' - the wonders of 3D.
 

c4onastick

Distinguished
Jun 10, 2005
48
0
18,530
No kidding. "...Unfortunately, it wasn't running on Vista..." Thank goodness it wasn't running on Vista. Its like this performance wise: What DX10 giveth, Vista taketh away.
 

jimbo99

Distinguished
Jan 26, 2003
174
0
18,680
It's full of ads. NO way am I going to buy it even though I've played ET for years. I will not support a company that places advertisements in their game. I pay for the game I don't want to pay for advertisements. Advertisements have NO place in the game.

Frankly, they shouldn't even be releasing it, ads are that pathetic.

I encourage everyone to not purchase nor play the game. Ads are bad. It's that simple.
 
@3Ball: you're using an Ati card. Ati cards suck - big time - in any OpenGL app they haven't tweaked their driver for. To get a better taste of the game, either switch to an Nvidia card or ask AMD/Ati for a better OpenGL-enabled Catalyst driver.
 

cafuddled

Distinguished
Mar 13, 2006
906
1
18,985

Well your loss.
 

BigMac

Splendid
Nov 25, 2003
5,636
0
25,780


So you don't watch (live) television either? I pay for my cable tv but I still get ads.
 

Paradjin

Distinguished
Jul 16, 2007
1
0
18,510
@Jimbo99:

So, you only play free games like ET?
Battlefield 2142 has ingame ads and I don't even see them anyway.

On topic, a burning question for me:

Was there a difference between the beta and E3 demo?

 

jimbo99

Distinguished
Jan 26, 2003
174
0
18,680
I played bf2 but passed on bf 2142 due to the ads. Ads are bad. No ads, period. I've already paid for the game. I'm not paying for ads. As far as TV goes I haven't turned it on in a long time. Once you start putting ads into a game you set the stage for doing more. Small ads may be the start but then it moves on to larger ads, more ads. Ads, ads ads. I'm not playing the game to look at ads. I'm not going to buy their products. I don't want to see the ads as they are often uninformative and manipulative. At least the EU has strict rules for advertising.

If you permit them to present ads you permit them to take further liberties down the road. We've seen this with products such as Microsoft's DRM, with Microsoft's WGA/WGN, with the 47 programs under Vista that collect information about you and what you do and report it back to Microsoft.

Once you give them the liberty to do one thing then they will take advantage of your giving nature and take more. It always happens. Always has.

Let's say you buy a car, should you allow the maker to stick ads on your windshield in a form of heads up display? Should you let them put ads inside on the roof or door? The bottom line is that you bought the car, you paid for it. There's no reason to be subject to those things. How about a cell phone? Would you like your cell phone provider pushing ads to you in the middle of your phone call? Would you allow them to text message you about all sorts of deals? How about your email? Would you permit them to send you spam? You have spam filters. Those filters are there because we don't want to see the advertisements in our email. We have ad blockers and pop up blockers to keep them from popping up ads in our browsers.

SO DON'T F'ING TELL ME IT IS MY LOSS. You should not be opening the door that affects me. Call them and tell them you'll accept ads as long as they don't send them to everyone. Tell them that they can put you on a list of those that will accept ads and then they can target you and those willing instead of those of us that don't accept that sort of intrusion.
 

BigMac

Splendid
Nov 25, 2003
5,636
0
25,780


Since you are the one not liking something I propose YOU take action and tell them that they can put you on a list that does not accept ads, and that you have a huge following, which will all not buy games with ads in them.

I wish you good luck.