EVE Search - We don't want the graphics to be increased again in Winter 2009 !

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Issues, Workarounds & Localization

We don't want the graphics to be increased again in Winter 2009 !

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
DJ Shuffle	Posted - 2009.09.30 16:46:00 - [1] Please do not upgrade the graphics to require no less than Shader Model 3.0 as I won't be able to logon to Eve with one of my accounts from my laptop and my desktop graphics [card] processor unit (GPU) will barely be supported. I had to purchase a new GPU to be compatible with Shader Model 2.0 and I can't find any AGP/PCI GPU that will work for my 10 year old computer. I plan to buy a new desktop and laptop but don't have the money right now due to the economy. I cannot upgrade my graphics card on my laptop because it is integrated into the motherboard. Right now I can run the Eve Client just fine with awesome clarity and no real performance issues. However, if the Eve Client is graphically updated to Shader Model 3.0 my GPU will have a hard time rendering and will create regular performance issues for me. If anyone else will have similar issues please reply to this thread so CCP will be fully informed and not make a decision soley based on brand new computer specifications.
Lork Niffle Gallente External Hard Drive	Posted - 2009.09.30 17:32:00 - [2] Edited by: Lork Niffle on 30/09/2009 17:34:49 From what i remember CCP have decided against from discontinuing Shader Model 2 since a much larger portion do not have a SM3 compliant rather than SM2.0 compliant. But for SM3 you need a nVidia Geforce 6000, ATI Radeon X1000 or above. All of these include large ranges of AGP cards with the Radeon series continuing up to the 4650 release not long ago fitting on the AGP 8x bus. For AGP solutions on the bottom end. The Geforce 6800 Ultra 256mb AGP card is the best ever made in the 6800 for AGP and the Radeon X1950XT AGp being on teh ATI side. All of these can be easily bought for ú50/$70 and much lower. EDIT: in regard to new computer models, you do know that SM3 was brought in in August 2004. That's getting close to 6 years. ------------------------------------- Don't click the links or even the forum topics.
Frangela	Posted - 2009.09.30 18:14:00 - [3] Originally by: DJ Shuffle Please do not upgrade the graphics to require no less than Shader Model 3.0.... /sign
knkk	Posted - 2009.09.30 18:19:00 - [4] Edited by: knkk on 30/09/2009 18:22:28 Edited by: knkk on 30/09/2009 18:19:23 i suggest you spend $50 and get a new video card.. for crying out loud sm2 is ancient like someone pointed out its like 6+ years old now...
DJ Shuffle	Posted - 2009.09.30 22:41:00 - [5] Originally by: knkk Edited by: knkk on 30/09/2009 18:22:28 Edited by: knkk on 30/09/2009 18:19:23 i suggest you spend $50 and get a new video card.. for crying out loud sm2 is ancient like someone pointed out its like 6+ years old now... I'm more concerned about my laptop because it doesn't support Shader Model 3.0. I don't have the money to replace my laptop at the moment. If Shader Model 2.0 is at least 6 years old then Shader Model 1.0/1.1 is even older and the Eve Client was just changed 7 months ago to discontinue its [SM1] support. In my opinion it would be better to wait to require Shader Model 3.0, especially in today's economy. I just don't want to see a situation in where people will decide to close their Eve account if they are unable to upgrade/purchase their computers to support Shader Model 3.0. I have a friend who is in a situation where he can't afford to play Eve at the moment because he cannot afford the subscription nor upgrade his computer. In Apocrypha, March 10th [2009], we discontinue support for ShaderModel 1, making ShaderModel 2 (GeForce FX (5 series) or ATi R300 series cards or compatible) the minimum requirement and discontinue the "Classic client" version of EVE, replacing it with "Premium Lite" (http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=615) The first [and previous] graphical update was in the Trinity patch came out in December 5th, 2007. Why can't CCP wait till at least March 10th, 2011 to discontinue Shader Model 2.0? If they haven't decided to delay Shader Model 3.0 required on the Eve Client already. Or will it be another 7 months when it's decided to make Shader Model 4.0 a requirment to play Eve? Excerpt from EVE: Trinity Post-Deployment Feedback Thread (http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=651182 Posted - 2007.12.05 23:48:00 - [1] The EVE: Trinity expansion has been deployed and Tranquility has returned to service. Where the other thread is for patch-related Issues, this thread is for thoughts, comments and feedback on the expansion itself. I'm not trying to stir up a ruckus or cause problems and I want everyone to be mature, respectful, and professional when replying to this thread but I believe there are plenty of people in the Eve Community who share a similar situation as me and I just want CCP to understand who will be truly impacted by that kind of update. In the Winter Expansion 2009 we are considering discontinuing support for ShaderModel 2 and make the minimum specification ShaderModel 3(GeForce 6 class cards or ATi x1300 or compatible) We know this will affect some players out there. What we don't know is exactly how many. We estimate that about 95% of all subscribers currently have hardware that is SM2 compatible. We further predict that in q4 this year over 97% of subscribers will have SM3 capable hardware. This means that an estimate of anywhere from 3%-5% of current subscribers would have to update their computers or graphics cards to be able to continue playing. http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=615 My goal is simply for informational purposes which I hope CCP sees this post as well. As stated above from a Dev blog written in January 13th, 2009 CCP predicts a minimum of 3% will be affected by a Shader Model 3.0 requirement on the Eve Client. At almost any given moment you can find about 30,000 people playing Eve, and that's just at one moment in time. However, 3% of 30,000 people are 900 people that won't be able to play Eve with a Shader Model 3.0 requirement until they update their GPU or laptop graphics card. That's just a snapshot of people and not reflecting the total number of Eve Online subscriptions. Would most people agree that laptops usually carry an on-board integrated graphics processor? How much is it for a new laptop that can support Shader Model 3.0 with good performance?
feffrey	Posted - 2009.10.01 05:41:00 - [6] actually there is a agp shader model 3 vid card Nvdia 7800 gs. I had one for the longest time before upgrading to a 8800gt. It is THE best agp card out there, but good luck finding one.
DJ Shuffle Eve Radio Corporation	Posted - 2009.10.01 05:56:00 - [7] Edited by: DJ Shuffle on 01/10/2009 05:57:55 Well that is good news. Does it have Windows XP SP3 compatibility? Hope I don't also have to upgrade my PSU again. I have a 500w PSU. Still, the problem of my laptop not supporting SM3 is again still an issue. I really would like to find out how many people would have to upgrade thier computer or purchase a new desktop/laptop if the Eve Client required Shader Model 3 (SM3) as a minimum requirement. Originally by: feffrey actually there is a agp shader model 3 vid card Nvdia 7800 gs. I had one for the longest time before upgrading to a 8800gt. It is THE best agp card out there, but good luck finding one.
Lork Niffle Gallente External Hard Drive	Posted - 2009.10.01 06:12:00 - [8] ATI have made AGP cards right up to their 4650, which is a very powerful card. Since it is the 4000 series it is compatible with XP right up to Win7. If you really need to stay on the AGP bus get the 4650. ------------------------------------- Don't click the links or even the forum topics.
kan han Gallente	Posted - 2009.10.01 06:34:00 - [9] You should buy more free software so that you really have a chance to participate in such decisions. With a vendor lock in, like with EVE, you can get real problems in such situations where you can't do what the vendor like you to do for whatever reasons. And all this: hey, the world don't stop spinning, buy yourself something NEW because this or that is so OLD stereotype: That something still works flawless is important, not if it's new or old. I find it pretty much reasonable to have the demand to not upgrade to a new shader model. An I could imagine that there should be a way to offer sm 2 replacements for those systems who do not have sm 3. CCP won't be the only company facing such a case I guess.
Leellu Multipass Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2009.10.01 17:13:00 - [10] Edited by: Leellu Multipass on 01/10/2009 17:15:22 Originally by: feffrey actually there is a agp shader model 3 vid card Nvdia 7800 gs. I had one for the longest time before upgrading to a 8800gt. It is THE best agp card out there, but good luck finding one. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102730 3850 will smoke the 7800gs for $89 better yet he can get a 4650 which is even faster: http://techreport.com/articles.x/15559/6

Some Advisor	Posted - 2009.10.01 18:27:00 - [11] interesting that one guy talks about "we"... i woudlnt mind upgrading to shadermodel 4 so what now? shall i say "we want shadermodel 4" ? you only speak or yourself
illford baker Pilots of Damnation death from above..	Posted - 2009.10.01 21:59:00 - [12] i am able to play eve all max settings on a vid card 3 gens old, poor graphics. we need new and better graphics, maby bring back the low and high graphics clients for those with old vid card? though there is no excuse to have a video card that old, you can get a new one that supports eve for the cost of dinner, eat roman noodles for a week and you can afford it! we cant keep holding back for a few losers.
Lork Niffle Gallente External Hard Drive	Posted - 2009.10.01 22:30:00 - [13] Originally by: illford baker DIRECT X 11 SUPPORT!??! Why? I cannot see EVE gain any performance of graphical benefits from moving to DX11. DX9 and DX11 are very similar in graphic quality. What DX11 brings is a much more efficient way to provide this. EVE does not have enough graphic complexity to yet take advantage of this improvement. ------------------------------------- Don't click the links or even the forum topics.
illford baker Pilots of Damnation death from above..	Posted - 2009.10.01 22:34:00 - [14] Originally by: Lork Niffle Originally by: illford baker DIRECT X 11 SUPPORT!??! Why? I cannot see EVE gain any performance of graphical benefits from moving to DX11. DX10 and DX11 are very similar in graphic quality. What DX11 brings is a much more efficient way to provide this. EVE does not have enough graphic complexity to yet take advantage of this improvement. 1. i said it for the lols 2.you mean DX 10 and 11, 9 and 10 are very different. 3.but i do want DX 10 support, with windows 7 out no reason to have XP and be locked out of 10, W7 only $99 with free shipping on newegg.com, W7 is much better than vista and xp.
Lork Niffle Gallente External Hard Drive	Posted - 2009.10.01 22:37:00 - [15] Originally by: illford baker 2.you mean DX 10 and 11, 9 and 10 are very different. Nope DX11 brings very little visual difference but simply backend improvements. Similar to Win7, looks the same, feels similar but works a lot better. DX9 looks like DX10 therefore DX9 looks like DX11. ------------------------------------- Don't click the links or even the forum topics.
illford baker Pilots of Damnation death from above..	Posted - 2009.10.01 22:45:00 - [16] Originally by: Lork Niffle Nope DX11 brings very little visual difference but simply backend improvements. Similar to Win7, looks the same, feels similar but works a lot better. DX9 looks like DX10 therefore DX9 looks like DX11. ....no. 9 and 10 are so diffrent, 10 could not be used with XP or old video cards, 11 is halfway backwards compatible with 10.1 cards, and 11 can be used on vista. you don't know what your talking about. also, this 9 Vs 10
Lork Niffle Gallente External Hard Drive	Posted - 2009.10.01 23:02:00 - [17] Edited by: Lork Niffle on 01/10/2009 23:02:54 Yeah, I know DX10 cannot be officially installed on XP. But with many games in the first 2 years not moving onto DX10 they innovated their methods so that modern games, I.E Not Crysis, look exactly the same on DX10 as they do on DX9. The only reason that crysis has the comparison is taht it was brought on at the beginning of DX10. A lot has changed in the nearing 4 years. And yes i know DX11 is backcomp with DX10 but mid end current gen cards will not be able to use it and have to default to either DX9 or 10 since they implemant their own forms of tesselation and whatnot which conflicts with the standard DX11 brings in. The only big end in the graphics market game that has done anything to use DX10 and then 11 to the fullest but providing no visual clues it does is STALKER. ------------------------------------- Don't click the links or even the forum topics.
illford baker Pilots of Damnation death from above..	Posted - 2009.10.01 23:10:00 - [18] i give up, if you cant see the difference then you just have a bad eye for graphics. eve need better graphics, the end.
Lork Niffle Gallente External Hard Drive	Posted - 2009.10.01 23:13:00 - [19] Yeah, I can see the difference. Back in 2006 when DX9 was nowhere near maturity. It was easy to make DX10 look better. Now the only game that is currently doing it is STALKER and they are moving to DX11 where it's simply performance issues. Now DX9 has been used so extensively that there is little need to invest time in DX10 when you have to retrain everyone for the same results. I would wait until about 2011 when DX10/11 shines through properly and the developers find the neat tricks to make games look that much better. But for now DX9 does the same thing. ------------------------------------- Don't click the links or even the forum topics.
DJ Shuffle Eve Radio Corporation	Posted - 2009.10.02 00:00:00 - [20] Originally by: illford baker i give up, if you cant see the difference then you just have a bad eye for graphics. eve need better graphics, the end. illford baker, why does Eve need better graphics? Are you willing to sacrifice performance just to have better graphics? I'm not. Also, I don't see what's wrong with the current graphics, it looks amazing. Does anyone that have all thier display/graphic settings set to max disagree? Please continue to be respectful and mature in this thread.

illford baker Pilots of Damnation death from above..	Posted - 2009.10.02 00:24:00 - [21] Originally by: DJ Shuffle illford baker, why does Eve need better graphics? Are you willing to sacrifice performance just to have better graphics? I'm not. Also, I don't see what's wrong with the current graphics, it looks amazing. Does anyone that have all thier display/graphic settings set to max disagree? i am not saying get rid of all low end graphics, i am just saying, i like to look at nice things when i mine, or see the big explosions when i pvp. and i dont need to sacrifice preformance when i upgrade my vid card more than every 10 years. (note, learn how to build your own computer, its easy, and cheap)
DJ Shuffle Eve Radio Corporation	Posted - 2009.10.02 01:51:00 - [22] Maybe CCP could still support Shader Model 2 and have an optional upgrade or feature built in for people who want to use Shader Model 3. All problems solved.
Elaron Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2009.10.02 02:12:00 - [23] Edited by: Elaron on 02/10/2009 02:14:16 I'm pretty sure that after the kerfuffle there was surrounding CCPs decision to no longer support the Classic graphics client, they decided to keep SM2.0 support for the time being. See this dev blog. Edit: Originally by: DJ Shuffle Maybe CCP could still support Shader Model 2 and have an optional upgrade or feature built in for people who want to use Shader Model 3. All problems solved. They do already. SM2.0 is also known as Premium Light, while having 3.0 gives full resolution textures, bloom, etc.
Hatch Minmatar 4 Marketeers Rura-Penthe	Posted - 2009.10.03 15:48:00 - [24] Edited by: Hatch on 03/10/2009 15:51:00 I would like to point out, GRAPHICS DON"T MAKE THE GAME. This has been a real problem in the gaming industry for the last 5 years. The shiny graphics don't make game play any better, they just make it pretty. And frankly, i'd rather have a game that had the original graphics engine from dragon and have a game that works with few problems, than a game that constantly burns up video cards from nvidia. And for those of you who are saying, "Buy a new system and get with the times", I'll expect a new computer arriving from you by the end of the year. not all of us can afford to have mommy and daddy buy us a new computer at the drop of a hat. I work for a living, have a wife, a kid, and a mortgage. you pay for one of those for a year and i'll buy both of us a new computer. Otherwise, that arguement holds no water.
Lork Niffle Gallente External Hard Drive	Posted - 2009.10.03 17:05:00 - [25] Well Hatch let's see those points. Lower quality or lacking consistent graphics =/= constant commercial sucess. You do not need to get a new system. With the drop of SM1 90% of all the systems that we're now incompatible could buy a cheap graphics expansion card at anywhere from ú$20 - ú$100. The drop of SM2 is not going to happen soon. But remember this, it's nearing 6 years old, it won't be too long before it has to go. ------------------------------------- Don't click the links or even the forum topics.
Trioxi	Posted - 2009.10.03 23:27:00 - [26] Sorry but I would love to see EvE move into Direct X 10 only, and really push the boundaries. It cannot keep supporting outdated hardware.
DJ Shuffle Eve Radio Corporation	Posted - 2009.10.03 23:52:00 - [27] So far this thread has been getting much attention from both sides. I appreciated all input whether you are for or against CCP requiring Shader Model 3 this Winter [2009]. I do hope that for those (and myself) who can't play Eve with Shader Model 3 as a requirement CCP does in fact decide to delay or still offer Shader Model 2 as a minimum requirement. I can honestly speak for myself I will really get crackin' at saving my money for a new laptop and desktop so I can run Eve in future upgrades that may or may not require Shader Model 3 (or above ~ hopefully not SM4). I urge everyone to also do the same but at the same time going to Shader Model 3 this Winter in my opinion would be too fast, too soon. Even if Shader Model 2 is so old, if that is the case. Bottom line, all of us can expect going to only Shader Model 3 in the upcomming future but as far as this Winter 2009 goes we urge CCP not to get rid of Shader Model 2 support until the next major expansion pack. I think that would be fair to everyone on both sides whether you want more graphics or not. It may cost a lot of money to get a uber computer/laptop to run all these new graphics upgrades that may or may not happen but I guess that's the direction the Eve client will go in the future. So if CCP holds off to upgrade the client to only Shader Model 3 all of us have plenty of time and fair warning what we can expect at some point. Please reply and let me know what you think of my proposal to CCP reguarding this topic.
Soma Khan	Posted - 2009.10.04 00:06:00 - [28] Kinda stupid, aren't you? From CCP Zulupark on Jan 19, 2009: "Based on your feedback we are going to commit to making ShaderModel 2 the minimum requirement (graphics wise) in the Apocrypha release, as well as replacing the Classic client with Premium Lite which will contain the same graphics and models as the regular Premium client but downmix the textures to increase performance on lower end computers. We will however not pursue going to ShaderModel 3 as a minimum, at least for now. It's quite apparent that while an overwhelming majority has no problems with moving to ShaderModel 2, there are still quite a few (mostly laptop) users out there that cannot support ShaderModel 3 yet. We're going to continue monitoring hardware trends closely and will revise our plan on a regular basis." ___
Lork Niffle Gallente External Hard Drive	Posted - 2009.10.04 00:41:00 - [29] As much as it makes sense to only support the latest stuff i do not wish CCP to, the negative feedback of dropping their clients on the low end would be too much. I have said that a few times along with some other people, they dropped SM1 since they had a very low percentage still only able to use it. They then rethought from the feedback they got from it and since even more people can't support only SM3 they decided not to. They have already done this, this was decided months ago. ------------------------------------- Don't click the links or even the forum topics.

CCP Explorer	Posted - 2009.10.05 21:21:00 - [30] Graphics requirements in 2009 (red text at top) and general system requirements 2009. Erlendur S. Thorsteinsson Software Director EVE Online, CCP Games


Cadde Gallente FireworX	Posted - 2009.10.06 00:08:00 - [31] The question now is, when will CCP take the step into the future and discontinue SM2 because lets face it. If 40% of eve's playerbase are running on SM2 hardware and cannot be arsed to find the cheapest solution to THEIR problem running on hardware that belongs in a cave ... while another 40% are ok with the current game but have upgraded to GeForce 9x series and above or the ATI equivalent and would at some time in the near future demand better visuals or leave for another game... What would be the best path for CCP to take here? Remain "loyal" to the fellas that sit on their yabbadabbadoo laptops and SM2 PC's or should they invest in the future? So, i am fine with waiting another 6 months after dominion for more graphic detail and fidelity but after that i cannot tell you how I'll feel. All i know is i was really looking forward to dynamic HARDWARE accelerated particle physics as shown in Fanfest 2008. After all, i bought a GeForce 260GTX and now i wanna see it being utilized by all games i invest my time in. Mind you, I am not a wealthy man... But I'd rather live a non glamorous life for the sake of pushing gaming forwards into more stunning graphics, physics and gameplay options. One could say i ... live through my gaming. But at least it's cheaper than going to the pub every weekend, destroying your body and soul. IMHO. My opinions belong to me, you can't have them!
Trioxi	Posted - 2009.10.06 02:13:00 - [32] Originally by: DJ Shuffle Maybe CCP could still support Shader Model 2 and have an optional upgrade or feature built in for people who want to use Shader Model 3. All problems solved. Or you should buy a half decent computer, sorry but you cannot expect EVE to sit back with outdated graphics.
illford baker Pilots of Damnation death from above..	Posted - 2009.10.06 02:18:00 - [33] Edited by: illford baker on 06/10/2009 02:18:48 i know we gotta move forward, and i want new graphics. i also now it is a bad move for business if you just cut em off with little warning. CCP, tell em now that they will lose eve if they don't upgrade by the next expansion(after winter). to give them a fair bit of warning. perhaps even throw in some surveys to make sure everyone is ready, who doesn't like a good surveys?
DJ Shuffle Eve Radio Corporation	Posted - 2009.10.09 01:34:00 - [34] Originally by: CCP Explorer Graphics requirements in 2009 (red text at top) and general system requirements 2009. Thank you CCP Explorer in showing us CCP's latest decision to continue support for Shader Model 2 as a minimum requirement for the Eve Client. Also thank you for all the players who also showed us similar proof. Will the next expansion pack, Dominion, also have Shader Model 2 as a minimum requirement? From the post you showed us I'm assuming yes but I want to ask just for clarification purposes. As of this point forward it has been stated, with proof, that the Eve client will still support Shader Model 2 as a minimum requirement throughout Winter 2009. As far as the people who have been posting "just buy a new computer" I want to say that most people just don't buy new computers at a random moment in time, unless 1) your rich or 2) you save up for a new computer; especially a laptop. I would upgrade my laptop if everything wasn't integrated. Now that I know, at some point other than Winter 2009, the Eve client will eventually discontinue support for Shader Model 2 we all can start saving up money for a new computer/laptop. As you all know laptops are generally more expensive than desktops especially laptops designed for gaming. I am for sure going to save up to replace both computers. At this point this thread has helped CCP to still support Shader Model 2 and made all of us aware of thier decision and status on the graphical requirments on the Eve client; past, present, and future. I would like to continue this discussion to all those who would like to comment about what you think the direction of the graphics should take in Eve. I have to admit that graphics are a small important aspect about a game, in my opinion. I've played for about 4 years and I've never had any complaints about the graphics in Eve, especially since the Apocrypha patch.
DJ Shuffle Eve Radio Corporation	Posted - 2009.10.09 01:39:00 - [35] Originally by: illford baker Edited by: illford baker on 06/10/2009 02:18:48 i know we gotta move forward, and i want new graphics. i also now it is a bad move for business if you just cut em off with little warning. CCP, tell em now that they will lose eve if they don't upgrade by the next expansion(after winter). to give them a fair bit of warning. perhaps even throw in some surveys to make sure everyone is ready, who doesn't like a good surveys? I agree, surveys would be a great idea for getting viable information about when people are ready to make the big leap forward in requiring Shader Model 3. In my opinion the most important factor for business is to take care of your customers. If a lot of people are cut off of being able to play Eve, for any reason, there is a chance to lose money/profits. I think this thread has helped shaped Eve, even just a little bit, and more importantly have made us aware of the graphical changes that will/may happen in the future. At least for now we can rest assured that these changes will not take place Winter 2009. Woot!
Sleepkevert Amarr Rionnag Alba Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.10.09 08:05:00 - [36] Originally by: DJ Shuffle Originally by: illford baker Edited by: illford baker on 06/10/2009 02:18:48 i know we gotta move forward, and i want new graphics. i also now it is a bad move for business if you just cut em off with little warning. CCP, tell em now that they will lose eve if they don't upgrade by the next expansion(after winter). to give them a fair bit of warning. perhaps even throw in some surveys to make sure everyone is ready, who doesn't like a good surveys? I agree, surveys would be a great idea for getting viable information about when people are ready to make the big leap forward in requiring Shader Model 3. In my opinion the most important factor for business is to take care of your customers. If a lot of people are cut off of being able to play Eve, for any reason, there is a chance to lose money/profits. Even better, just have the client report the graphic capabilitys of a system, much like steam does nowadays. That way you have a decent report of what EVE's main stream pc's look like. _ Add your own line!
DJ Shuffle Eve Radio Corporation	Posted - 2009.10.11 02:39:00 - [37] Originally by: Sleepkevert Even better, just have the client report the graphic capabilitys of a system, much like steam does nowadays. That way you have a decent report of what EVE's main stream pc's look like. I would also be in favor of the client reporting functionality in the Eve Client (as described above) as long as it didn't sacrifice performance or security.
Lork Niffle Gallente External Hard Drive	Posted - 2009.10.11 10:09:00 - [38] Originally by: Sleepkevert ]Even better, just have the client report the graphic capabilitys of a system, much like steam does nowadays. That way you have a decent report of what EVE's main stream pc's look like. It does. They found SM1 to SM2 capabilities i.e being only able to support 1.0/1.1 to be in the minor percentages so they were able to make a business move to stop supporting it. The SM2 to SM3 capabilities on the other hand is still very high so they decided against it. It was the same with supporting a linux based client. They found not only thenumber of people using Linux on EVE being very low 0.1% but of those people actually using the Linux client instead of Wine being a small percentage of that so they discontinued it. Illford, Crysis =/= Good graphics, Crysis is unoptimized to hell and no where matches STALKER and most people wouldn't be able to play that. What can you really offer seriously in a Space game? Kinda hard to put all the effects in in Space. They are alreay redesigning the planets and nebulae, and it looks good in SM2. SM3 and 4 don't really offer much more to the table along with DX10/11 ------------------------------------- Don't click the links or even the forum topics.
Charcul	Posted - 2009.10.13 00:38:00 - [39] Edited by: Charcul on 13/10/2009 00:38:45 Originally by: DJ Shuffle I plan to buy a new desktop and laptop but don't have the money right now due to the economy. I love that, lol. Dude, just be honest and say you got sacked. we're adults here..... I for one am completely in favour of bigger and better graphics, with more shiny bits. Its a minority that can't run shader model 3.0 and the rest of use could be seeing better graphics. Really, a system to run shader model 3 will set you back what, 300 euro? just stop smoking for a month and hey presto!
Charcul	Posted - 2009.10.13 00:47:00 - [40] Originally by: DJ Shuffle Originally by: illford baker i give up, if you cant see the difference then you just have a bad eye for graphics. eve need better graphics, the end. illford baker, why does Eve need better graphics? Are you willing to sacrifice performance just to have better graphics? I'm not. Also, I don't see what's wrong with the current graphics, it looks amazing. Does anyone that have all thier display/graphic settings set to max disagree? Please continue to be respectful and mature in this thread. i would dissagree. The planets and moons are decidedly plain, as are the ship models. sure, they have pretty lights and such, but the engine plumes, the weapons, the well everything really on the ships look pretty basic. if max settings still looks basic compared to the rest of the games coming out these days then its time for a major upgrade.

Tranka Verrane Angelic Industries	Posted - 2009.10.13 11:59:00 - [41] Dude, they aren't. Why is this non-issue thread still going? Player Since 2005 Over 4000 hours logged
DJ Shuffle Eve Radio Corporation	Posted - 2009.10.21 04:48:00 - [42] Originally by: Tranka Verrane Dude, they aren't. Why is this non-issue thread still going? People are just responding with thier views and ideas. We have already established that Shader Model 3.0 isn't going to be required this Winter. Check previous posts in this thread. If you have any questions please ask and if we can answer it we will. My opinion, I really do want to upgrade my computer and right now I can't. Sure you can get a cheap computer for around $500 USD, as I'm in USA, but it will be laggy and poor performance with Eve. That's just the way it is. So for a decent setup on a laptop especially you are looking to spend at least $1,000 USD. A desktop would be a different story, estimating around $800 USD + monitor-- that includes the operating system. If you can find a laptop build equally as good for less than $1,000 USD please let me know. And please link it. Feel free to link UK computer setups but as for me ordering a computer from UK or anywhere else than USA is impratical for me and I'm sure for other USA-based players. Please don't respond with "just upgrade your computer, doesn't cost that much" anymore please. As that is an opinion and not a fact since all of us don't have as much money as you.
Tranka Verrane Angelic Industries	Posted - 2009.10.21 08:38:00 - [43] Originally by: DJ Shuffle Originally by: Tranka Verrane Dude, they aren't. Why is this non-issue thread still going? People are just responding with thier views and ideas. We have already established that Shader Model 3.0 isn't going to be required this Winter. Check previous posts in this thread. If you have any questions please ask and if we can answer it we will. My opinion, I really do want to upgrade my computer and right now I can't. Sure you can get a cheap computer for around $500 USD, as I'm in USA, but it will be laggy and poor performance with Eve. That's just the way it is. So for a decent setup on a laptop especially you are looking to spend at least $1,000 USD. A desktop would be a different story, estimating around $800 USD + monitor-- that includes the operating system. If you can find a laptop build equally as good for less than $1,000 USD please let me know. And please link it. Feel free to link UK computer setups but as for me ordering a computer from UK or anywhere else than USA is impratical for me and I'm sure for other USA-based players. Please don't respond with "just upgrade your computer, doesn't cost that much" anymore please. As that is an opinion and not a fact since all of us don't have as much money as you. Yes but they, as you, are responding and arguing over things that are completely irrelevant. Shader 3.0 isn't coming in this winter. If it ever does become required we'll be given a great deal of advance notice, we always are. By the time it is required getting a new pc may well be a requirement for you for other reasons anyway. Enough people are 'only just' running shader 2.0 that there is no immediate threat. For 3.0 to be truly required the majority of us would have to be smoothly running 2.0 at maximum and champing at the bit for better. This is clearly not yet the case. When we get to the point when 3.0 is looming we'll have this discussion again, legitimately. In the meantime, wtf, leave it alone. Player Since 2005 Over 4000 hours logged
DJ Shuffle Eve Radio Corporation	Posted - 2009.11.01 10:06:00 - [44] Originally by: Tranka Verrane Enough people are 'only just' running shader 2.0 that there is no immediate threat. For 3.0 to be truly required the majority of us would have to be smoothly running 2.0 at maximum and champing at the bit for better. This is clearly not yet the case. When we get to the point when 3.0 is looming we'll have this discussion again, legitimately. In the meantime, wtf, leave it alone. Nicely summarized and full of LOL's because this is pretty much exactly what I wanted to see happen. This should be the last post on this thread but wanted to say a big "thank you" for closing this thread with an undoubtly explanation that cannot be countered. FTW!!
Kelly Luzita Minmatar Republic Military School	Posted - 2009.11.01 15:21:00 - [45] I just wanted to add that the newest agp cards 4650 and the 4670 support SM 4.1. I too don't have the money to upgrade right now to a new PC. But picking up a new agp card for 85$ to 124$ is probably with in most peoples budget. Even the 2600 cards suport Shader Model 4.0 if you can find one that old. For a lap top you could look at this. How ever it is 300$ with a card and 199 with out. http://www.villagetronic.com/vidock2/index.html The nice thing is it takes desk top PCIe 2.0 cards.You do need a ExpressCard 2.0 slot on the lap top.
Mkiaki Gallente Center for Advanced Studies	Posted - 2009.11.01 17:06:00 - [46] Yup this is why you should all be upgrading, and why EVE should be DX10 already
illford baker Pilots of Damnation death from above..	Posted - 2009.11.02 00:18:00 - [47] Edited by: illford baker on 02/11/2009 00:20:45 people wont upgrade if they don't see a reason why. introduce a 2nd DX11 client(lets face it, DX11 can run on DX10 card and vista/7, it would be a waste to use DX10). once they see how good it looks they will be more insensitive to upgrade. DX11 is the future, it will happen and IS GOING TO HAPPEN. so start collecting money in your piggy bank and upgrade, you wont look back, you wont regret it. just pop over to newegg.com and shop(best buy is a rip off). you can find video cards for $60 windows 7 OEM for $99, single core CPUs for $40, 2 core for $50 and quad core for $100.
Dealer bob Gallente The Industrialist's Trade Society	Posted - 2009.11.02 02:08:00 - [48] +1 for dx11 eve spaceships . screw these guys
Talon Aidian Interstella Fleet	Posted - 2009.11.07 04:44:00 - [49] Several things to keep in mind. 1) The Devs promised 'Premium-Lite' which was supposed to help those players with lower-end systems continue to play the game, and to release this alternative client simutanously with the retirement of the 'Classic' client and the upgrade in graphics. They upgraded the graphics and retired the Classic client....and never released 'Premium-Lite'. Don't believe everything they say. 2) The attitude of some players that those with technical difficulties with continuing increases in system requirements to benefit those players who have state-of-the-art systems and replace their system every year should also replace their own system or quit the game is also the demonstrated attitude of the game developers. My own system worked well with the Classic client, and has been borderline since the graphics changeover. The end result of a series of troubleshooting sessions was just that.."Get a new system, or leave the game." 3) This is the way EVE will continue to go. The graphics will continue to expand in requirements to pander to those players who cannot tolerate a system more than a year old, and leave the players who can't keep purchasing new systems with nothing more than fond memories of when the gameplay mattered more than the eyecandy. Sad, but proven true by the actions of the Devs.
Ilyashen Caldari Teamsters Union	Posted - 2009.11.07 19:06:00 - [50] I am all for moving on in graphics quality. EVE has pushed the graphics with every generation of their engine. I see no reason to move on to DX11. That is, of course if they find a way to still accommodate players with lower end systems. Engines can scale to the hardware. Let's look at Half Life: 2. It supported DX7 (and DX6 kinda), through DX9, and partially DX10. That is a broad range. DX11 can offer these features to EVE: Tessellation - Much more detail to ships, stations, everything. Planets can have visible height on continents and much, much, more can be enhanced with it. But remember, it's only a map, so if you can't support it it's fine. Unified Pipeline - Better performance for everyone that has support for the hardware. DX11 I believe has a mandatory 4x AA, and we all know that EVE can really use some official Anti-Aliasing. There is much to be gained from upgrading the engine, but we do not need to leave the lower end players behind.

Sharthe	Posted - 2009.11.09 22:52:00 - [51] no increased min req's - signed.
Koyama Ise Caldari Equestrian Knight Order of Lolicon	Posted - 2009.11.10 00:27:00 - [52] Originally by: Talon Aidian The Devs promised 'Premium-Lite' which was supposed to help those players with lower-end systems continue to play the game, and to release this alternative client simutanously with the retirement of the 'Classic' client and the upgrade in graphics. They upgraded the graphics and retired the Classic client....and never released 'Premium-Lite'. Don't believe everything they say. You've been misinformed. The "Premium-Lite Client" was really a misnomer. Premium-Lite was never intended to be a separate client, It's just someone in their great wisdom decided to call it that. "Premium-Lite" was really just the scalability of the graphics. Before they removed classic there were a few settings in the ôPremium-Clientö namely; HDR, Shadows and Bloom. There werenÆt any Shader settings or Texture settings, these two limited the Premium-Client to Shader Model 3.0 cards. Premium-Lite expanded the Premium-Client to Shader Model 2.0 by allow the Shader settings to be turned down. However, since a large number of Shader Model 2.0 cards are old they also had to allow the reduction of the texture quality to keep performance. Releasing a separate ôPremium-Liteö client would have been redundant, as the purpose for removing the Classic-Client was to reduce the work load of maintaining not only two different engines but also creating duplicates of every Art Asset added to the game so there was one for the Premium-Client and the Classic-Client. Finally Originally by: Talon Aidian This is the way EVE will continue to go. The graphics will continue to expand in requirements to pander to those players who cannot tolerate a system more than a year old, and leave the players who can't keep purchasing new systems with nothing more than fond memories of when the gameplay mattered more than the eyecandy. Yes I like eye candy, but no my system is a few years old now. Assuming the graphics card didnÆt die in my other system my almost eight year old system could play on the ôPremium-Clientö though the graphics card was updated to one from around August 2004. Which by the way is five years old, not one year old. ______________________________ I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
Crommi Gallente	Posted - 2009.12.01 17:27:00 - [53] Originally by: Ilyashen Tessellation - Much more detail to ships, stations, everything. Planets can have visible height on continents and much, much, more can be enhanced with it. But remember, it's only a map, so if you can't support it it's fine. To actually see terrain elevation changes from space, you'd have to have friggin' huge mountains. Tesselation itself does not add details in any way, it just subdivides the mesh into far higher polycount. Visually,only differences would be increased surface smoothness and much more round silhuettes. Also, it is not a texture map or anything like that. More than new fancy DX versions, I'd love to see scaleable UI. It would be nice to use higher resolutions without having to invest into binoculars to read mission texts.
InViz0 Caldari Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2009.12.01 21:30:00 - [54] Edited by: InViz0 on 01/12/2009 21:34:15 Here is a mature reply for you: Facts: 1.) Several NEW MMOs with cutting-edge technology are coming out (Star Trek, The Old Republic). 2.) These MMOs appeal to the same player-base that EVE has. 3.) These MMOs are going to be superior on the graphical side when they release. 4.) It has been proven that 40% of a game's entertainment for most people comes from VISUAL stimulation. Suggestions: 1.) Push the envelope on the graphic department to attract new players. 2.) The amount of player-base you gain from having a technologically-proficient game is going to heavily outweigh the player-base that cannot afford to upgrade their computers. In conclusion you guys have to realize that gaming is a luxury not a necessity, and like all luxuries they don't come cheap, their should be no reason you have not upgraded your pc for even the last 3-4 years in my opinion. Every year i spend about $150-$200 and that alone keeps my computer top notch. This is coming from a 20 year old college student that has (with a high school diploma) put himself through a UC and dormed completely independent. All it took were a few stock market trades and a high-tech internship. And the standard computer for everyone right now should be: GeForce 8800GT Dual core or better CPU 2.5ghz+ 4GB DDR2 RAM The Ram i think is like $40 lol, the cpu and mobo can cost as low as $150, and that video card is $150 or less right now.


Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.