| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 7 post(s) |
MHayes
   |
Posted - 2007.10.15 13:21:00 -
[1]
Isn't SM3 4 years old, if your graphics card is over 4 years old then no shiny ships for you. This is your fault not CCPs fault. Be glad they are still allowing you people to use the old client.
strokes 7900GTX which is like 2 years old but still does the business.
|
MHayes
|
Posted - 2007.10.15 13:55:00 -
[2]
Edited by: MHayes on 15/10/2007 13:56:52
I see what you are saying, there are some cards with only SM2 but have a lot of horsepower and could probably run the game.
But at the same time EVE has always had good graphics, when I started playing when it was released it was amazing and I doubt a 3 year old card could run it so why change it now. I don't want graphics technology to be slowed down by some tightwad with a 3 year old ú50 graphics card.
Besides it is ATIs fault, Nvidia managed to get SM3 into the 6000 series so why didn't ATI get it in the X800s?
|
MHayes
|
Posted - 2007.10.15 14:26:00 -
[3]
Edited by: MHayes on 15/10/2007 14:30:05
agree, screw all thes SM2 fanboys, show us some DX9 SM3 screenies, or even better DX10 (and yes I will need a new GCard also for DX10 but I am not complaining because to have good graphics you gotta have good hardware. Shock horror!!).
|
MHayes
|
Posted - 2007.10.15 14:31:00 -
[4]
But that is ATIs fault, not Eve, should have reserached what he was buying ey? it is like me buying a new card now that doesn't support DX10.
|
MHayes
|
Posted - 2007.10.16 09:20:00 -
[5]
You knew it only had SM2 when you got it, or if you didn't you should have read the specs. the 6000 series was available but you decided to go ATI. How is this CCPs fault or problem?
It is like me buying a 8800GTX now and then complaining next year that it isn't DX10.1 compatible. If you are upgrading often then it doesnt matter because by the time a game comes out that needs 10.1 this card will be hold hat and I will have upgraded. If I was planning to keep the card for a while I would think, "hmm better get one with SM4 support."
I agree that if SM2 support is easy to implement then make it so but I assume it isn't or they would have done it.
|
| |
|