| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Gone'Postal
Aztec Industry
   |
Posted - 2009.01.19 21:25:00 -
[31]
 Originally by: Ki Tarra
Edited by: Ki Tarra on 19/01/2009 21:00:00
Originally by: Gone'Postal
Just think, Without all that "premium" overhead, You could run 8 accounts with tollerable lag
Nope
E-Peen Beating.
You need to get out more and read Sarcasm. |
CyberGh0st
Minmatar
Tribal Liberation Force
|
Posted - 2009.01.19 21:27:00 -
[32]
I think EVE Online always tried to provide us a balance between good content a deep player experience and nice graphics.
To keep this balance, SM 1.x support has to go.
Anyone who can not grasp this is just being stubborn.
However I agree that dumping SM 2.0 is way too early, dropping 2 Shader Models in 1 year is just not very smart.
The way to go forward for CCP is imho :
1. Release a barebone client with the following :
- A still image of the station you are in and the ship you are flying on the background.
- The complete interface as you have on the normal client.
- Only allow logon on this client when previously docked in a station.
- You can not exit the station with this client.
2. Create the Premium Lite client ( customizable Premium client ? )and dump SM 1.x
3. Keep support for SM 2.0
4. Only allow SM 3.0 users to Walk in Stations
|
Ki Tarra
Caldari
Ki Tech Industries
|
Posted - 2009.01.19 21:34:00 -
[33]
Edited by: Ki Tarra on 19/01/2009 21:34:22
Originally by: Gone'Postal
You need to get out more and read Sarcasm.
Sorry, I thought you really believed that the Classic client had less overhead than the Premium client. I will be sure to take your future posts less seriously. |
Gone'Postal
Aztec Industry
|
Posted - 2009.01.19 21:54:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Ki Tarra
Edited by: Ki Tarra on 19/01/2009 21:34:22
Originally by: Gone'Postal
You need to get out more and read Sarcasm.
Sorry, I thought you really believed that the Classic client had less overhead than the Premium client. I will be sure to take your future posts less seriously.
It does have a lower overhead on the graphics card. (classic being more CPU based then GPU)
Since the main issue with these threads is the higher graphical requirement for the future clients I kinda assumed you would have picked up on that, however since you listed your prices for your PC and forgot to say the cost of your G-card. I should have guessed you didn't.
and for that, I'm deeply sorry.
|
Ki Tarra
Caldari
Ki Tech Industries
|
Posted - 2009.01.19 22:35:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Gone'Postal
Since the main issue with these threads is the higher graphical requirement for the future clients I kinda assumed you would have picked up on that, however since you listed your prices for your PC and forgot to say the cost of your G-card. I should have guessed you didn't.
You don't need the G-card, that is why I didn't specify its price.
The graphics card built into motherboards for the past 5 years have enough graphical power to run the new specs.
If you bought 3 year old technology 4 years ago then it is time for an upgrade.
If you can set aside half of the cost of an Eve subscription for the past year, then you can afford to upgrade your 7 year old computer to bring it up to speed. |
Lazyeye Larry
|
Posted - 2009.01.19 22:44:00 -
[36]
If you're gonna upgrade, go all out and get a nice SM3 card so you can avoid having to upgrade again during the next decade apparently. 
Really though, gamers with 7 year old hardware != gamers. :) |
Mezikk
Earned In Blood
|
Posted - 2009.01.19 22:53:00 -
[37]
guess no upgrades for the baja for a little while 
trinity is so....shiney though |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |