I can never understand the idiot decision by some developers (and mod makers) to over use effects and particles to the point that you either can't tell what's going on, or to the point the game crawls to a halt (and got a pretty good gaming PC).
So recently I decided to give SOTSII another try with a mod. It all works well as long as you use basic lasers or missile. But more esoteric weapons (and mass drviers) are a jumble of effects.
I WANT TO PLAY A GAME; NOT WATCH A SLIDESHOW
Just upgrade your rig to be even better, that way it won't matter how many effects they use.
1 Blizzard and MOBAs do it = if we copy them it's going to sell millions!
2 To hide shitty graphics underneath
1 and 2 are correlated.
...
Asuka a shit.
Not when she is giving you a footjob
Asuka wearing glasses?!? user you've made the fatal mistake of posting an image more interesting than your thread content.
They did that with Crysis 2. Concrete blocks with millions of polygons and rendering a body of water that you couldn't even see most of the time.
Didn't Crysis 3 render an entire map beneath the open world just to push system reqs?
OP made the mistake of using asuka in the first place, evangelion is shit and its fan are even more shit. R.I.P thread, it will turn into rei vs asuka with a slight dash of whatever the fuck that purple haired sluts name is
For one thing, stop playing shit, user.
Hi Riot Games shill
I had no issues playing any other games.
Skyrim with pretty mods, Crysis series, etc..
I'm not at my gayming PC atm, so I couldn't post a screenshot. And was lazy to search.
Plus, Asuka a qt and I got a few reaction images of her
It's not THAT bad.
Diplomacy is wonky, the UI can use improvement, basic (ambient) music is shit, and pirate raids are bullshit, but it's not bad.
It was to cripple AMD's performance. nVidia had better tessellation performance at the time, so they had Crytek add a giant tessellated plane underneath the game world just to make it seem like AMD cards were worse than they are.
Post specs
Alienware neon chrome edition
Most of what it does well, SotS1 does better. The two things I could argue with you on are the stations, and the full solar system maps which do give you some interesting tactical options.
The issues with the UI go beyond that, as you are required to use fleets, making your strategic options limited by your admiral count. They make them out to be a big deal, but I don't remember them ever having a noticeable influence on the gameplay other than those annoying interception messages that only displayed on fleets that I wanted to sit still, already gave the order to, were on other missions, or were not combat fleets at all. The order system is okay, I guess, but the home base system is not good at all, and fucks over humans hard. You need a certain number of docking points I can't remember the name for however many ships; you get more by building up your stations; this is fine, and would be a nice limit on doom stacks on its own.
Related to all this is the extremely limited fleet sizes bigger battles, my ass. You have a hard limit on how many ships can be in a fleet, and command ships are obviously bigger targets as taking more than one for any fleet, unless its a leviathan, is a waste of resources. Then they made supply dreadnoughts a not-guaranteed tech for most races; most galling of all is the humans who are fucked over hardest by these changes on account of the way their FTL travel works.
Oh, and the way they handled the tech tree is also worse. It just adds time to how long you take researching shit and then they force you to prototype new ship designs, which is again a nice touch, but results in less smooth gameplay. They also start you with cruiser tech, but nothing that I remember being that threatening to cruisers. The entire reason people bee lined for cruisers in SotS1 was because early game weapons were not very threatening to cruisers compared to destroyers and it was a pretty cheap, and easy to get tech.
Because more graphics = gooder game
Real answer? I'm gonna guess that due to there not being as many hardware limitations in game development as there used to be, it's given way to devs that'll go hogwild with the tools they're presented with.
Why bother optimizing your game when you can just tell people to get a better rig to run it?
The only real exception I can think of to this is EDF, in which they were aware the game ran like ass because of all the enemies they were cramming in, but were okay with it and shipped it like that.
It's an acquar
Oh, stop playing on coffee machine then.
Source?
after all, video games are just an advertisement medium these days
Not if in high heels.
Cognitive dissonance.
Related to your topic
Nip games why? Why make me sit through an episode of Dragonball Z just to use my fucking ultra move. And what is it with their hard-ons for ridiculously overinflated damage numbers? 900,000,000,000 dmg doesn't meant dick when minibosses have more zeroes in their healthbars than Dawn of the Devs has in their playable characters roster.
It does kind of feel like the video games are created for the sole sake of feeding the advertising industry, doesn't it?
...
KEK
No real source, just all the support nVidia gave Crytek, and rumours of nVidia paying Crytek.
This really bothers me.
Overwritten. Thanks, user.
well sole purpose is a bit of a stretch but for the most part its just merchants trading money around and doing under the table deals that the consumers pay for.
i think theres still a creative spirit in there somewhere but its a flickering flame that they dont really want you to see.
I'll admit, I was against the Fleet system at first, but realize it's a simulation of how fleets work in RL.
RL fllet are stationed to bases. RL fleets have to constantly return to re-supply and to give crews some time off. A fleet CAN'T work non-stop for years. In that sense, the system makes sense. I wouldn't call ti worse. It's just different.
Not sure admirals were necessary (too bad you can't customize one), but you get a big number of admirals the more naval bases you have (and naval bases are the cheapest). I only had a shortage early on.
Regarding bases, I never had trouble stationing any fleet on any owned world. Even a 1 planet system can hold a normal fleet (54-66 point).
then again, I make a habbit out of putting a naval base at every major node crossroad if playing humans. Node drive is fast, but limited to node links that can fuck you up. And you don't even need supply ships most of the time as human - there are energy techs you can apply to engine sections (like Plasma Focusing), modules that can be installed (Camel module) as well as weapon combos that use up less supplies. I can easily make warships with 10 turn endurance
I'm not concerned with the fleet sizes (though I do miss the reinforcement system). SOTS 2 goes into more graphical detail and ships are more durable and modeled in more detail (armor layers and grid, power generation, crew, critical components). Not to mention that DN's can have a 100 tracking turrets in many independently tracking banks, spewing particles everywhere (while most 4X game ships either don't have turrets modeled, they are static and weapons fire 360°, or they only have a few turrets that all shoot at the same target).
The amount of resources and calculations needed per ship is huge.
Into the oven with you!
But she's the best.