|
|
|||||||
| PC Gaming Discuss all PC games, past and present. Talk about your favorite games, share tips and strategies, and anything else relating to computer games. |
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
Aug 25, 2006, 10:45 AM
|
#2 |
|
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location:
 Columbus, OH
Posts: 3,989
 
|
really? awesome! thanks, great thread A++++ would read again! Fast shipping! |
|
|
Aug 25, 2006, 03:26 PM
|
#4 |
|
Radeon R700
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 900
|
Lomack or Lockon what ever the title still looks better than this but i guess we will need a DX 10 card to see how good MS flight sim could theoretically look.
__________________
----------------------------------- 290x+290 Crossfire Intel i7 4930K @ 4.5 16 gigs G.skill DDR3 1300 watt EVGA Supernova Asus Sabertooth X79 Logitech G27 wheel ASUS MG279Q [email protected] ------------------ |
|
|
|
Aug 25, 2006, 03:49 PM
|
#5 |
|
Radeon Arctic Islands
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location:
In front of my PC
Posts: 12,063
|
I also have to question the timing of the demo. The graphics themselves weren't that bad. ((They are very tweakable) But the stability was horrible. |
|
|
|
Aug 25, 2006, 05:18 PM
|
#6 |
|
Radeon Volcanic Islands
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location:
 New Zealand
Posts: 3,607
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 25, 2006, 05:19 PM
|
#7 |
|
Up and away!
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Newcastle, England, UK
Posts: 1,824
|
Apparently, according to those in the know and involved in the FS:X Betas the demo which was released was actually an earlier version from the Beta versions which were being tested some time ago, and they have furthered the development from the Beta versions even more since then, so. I'll keep my fingers crossed that, a) it was an old demo. b) they couldn't put too much in it to keep the download size down. |
|
|
|
Aug 25, 2006, 07:07 PM
|
#8 |
|
Going Nowhere Fast
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location:
 Torino
Posts: 4,661
|
I'll keep my fingers crossed as well. As a (ex) flight sim enthusiast, I feel kind of sad that graphics in FSX are still maintaining a "cartoonish look". Not to mention blurriness, which stands out almost as unacceptable nowadays, where more and more games make use of high-res textures. Besides an overall revamp (water finally looking like water), I get an uncomfortable feeling of deja-vu when flying around, and everything seems, well, sort of outdated. Performance-wise, I find it hard to believe they can't get this game to run reasonably even on high end machines. Speculations on the net are that dual-cores aren't going to do much in making it run better. Although my life isn't going to change that much, I'm afraid FSX will disappoint me. It would be my first time skipping a version of this program, while I was really looking forward to it! Oh well, I'll post a couple of screenshots. The second one is from X3, a space simulation game which makes use of wonderful textures and is quite heavy both on CPU as well as GPU, but ends up running fine with settings maxed on a fairly high-end machine. I'm not trying to make a comparison, rather showing two games which are almost a year apart. And I think it doesn't show if you look at the FSX picture. p.s. both screenshots have undergone minor re-touch.   |
|
|
|
Aug 25, 2006, 07:27 PM
|
#9 |
|
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location:
 Vandelay Industries
Posts: 16,729
|
Last edited by Pr()ZaC : Aug 25, 2006 at 07:34 PM. |
|
|
Motherboard
CPU
Graphics
Memory
Cooling Solution
Display
Soundcard & Speakers
Hard-Drives
Optical Drives
Power Supply
Case
Input Devices
Operating System
Linear Mode
