surf dtoid with 
Rising (10+)
People you follow
They can't do that! It's bad PC gaming marketing if they set it to only work with High-tier PCs.
That's one of the wonders of MW 2, it can run perfectly on low settings on my PC while Plants vs Zombies can't run perfectly at full settings.
That's one of the wonders of MW 2, it can run perfectly on low settings on my PC while Plants vs Zombies can't run perfectly at full settings.
Another game that says no to XP users. Meh.
If you're like me and don't see the point in upgrading your OS every time something new comes out, don't worry. You aren't missing much by skipping this one.
If you're like me and don't see the point in upgrading your OS every time something new comes out, don't worry. You aren't missing much by skipping this one.
Evey developer for major pc games on the pc will be made for windows vista or win 7 due to direct x 11 being implemented in the games.I personally find win 7 to be better than any previous os.
Capcom can usually make really good ports, but no a 360 controller is not needed for a shooter game. They will probably do something stupid like they did for RE5, which made it to where you can only use the laser sight with 360 controllers, on this game. In which case moders will just well mod the thing and make it to where it never happened.
Those are some pretty heavy requirements compared to the usual stuff around.
And the game looks shit...
Does not compute...
And the game looks shit...
Does not compute...
A fucking quad core? That's overkill for this game. Still, this game sucked worse than 1, so why do I even care?
@matt: Finally someone who knows the graphics power for that game on the pc. This is why I generally will patiently wait 6 months for a capcom port, cause they can fucking do it right. Control wise they have always sucked :P.
I don't have DX11. GTX 280's don't support it :(, or at least last time I checked they don't. Will probably upgrade at Christmas when everything is on sell :).
I don't have DX11. GTX 280's don't support it :(, or at least last time I checked they don't. Will probably upgrade at Christmas when everything is on sell :).
@Matthew Blevins
"Dude, XP has been around for 8 years, TIME TO UPGRADE. I skipped Vista, but Windows 7 is great stuff."
Why? Because a certain number of years have passed?
I upgraded from 2000 to XP because 2000 was giving me problems. If I were to upgrade now, it would only be because I wanted to play a couple games that don't run on XP. Games that, I should point out, have to have special attention drawn to that fact because XP is still around on a lot more PCs than those devs care to admit.
So far, the big selling point of the newer versions of Windows has been DirectX 11. The big selling point of DX11? Slightly nicer shadows.
Right now, I have neither the disposable income, nor the interest, to buy a whole new operating system for a slight improvement in graphics. And I shouldn't have to, because that's silly.
"Dude, XP has been around for 8 years, TIME TO UPGRADE. I skipped Vista, but Windows 7 is great stuff."
Why? Because a certain number of years have passed?
I upgraded from 2000 to XP because 2000 was giving me problems. If I were to upgrade now, it would only be because I wanted to play a couple games that don't run on XP. Games that, I should point out, have to have special attention drawn to that fact because XP is still around on a lot more PCs than those devs care to admit.
So far, the big selling point of the newer versions of Windows has been DirectX 11. The big selling point of DX11? Slightly nicer shadows.
Right now, I have neither the disposable income, nor the interest, to buy a whole new operating system for a slight improvement in graphics. And I shouldn't have to, because that's silly.
@flea friend,
"I have neither the disposable income, nor the interest to buy a whole new operating system for a slight improvement in graphics".
Are we forgetting about EVERYTHING else windows 7 does other than gaming?
"I have neither the disposable income, nor the interest to buy a whole new operating system for a slight improvement in graphics".
Are we forgetting about EVERYTHING else windows 7 does other than gaming?
Guys, learn to read. These are the RECOMMENDED specs. They are not required. The game will run on XP and doesn't need a quad core or an Xbox controller.
@Narishma
I couldn't find the minimum specs around, so I just went with what was in the blog post.
@Kytherno
Is this going to be like the PS3 commercials, "it only does EVERYTHING"?
But no, I don't know much beyond that. What does it have to offer a guy who uses his computer for gaming, word processing, and the internet? Sell me on it!
I couldn't find the minimum specs around, so I just went with what was in the blog post.
@Kytherno
Is this going to be like the PS3 commercials, "it only does EVERYTHING"?
But no, I don't know much beyond that. What does it have to offer a guy who uses his computer for gaming, word processing, and the internet? Sell me on it!
@Matthew Blevins
"Compared to the time between other Windows OS's (95-98-2000-2002) the time between XP's release and now- 8 years- is huge. I don't think it's unreasonable, at this point, for people to expect you to have upgraded to 7 or Vista. Especially if you game on your PC."
So, yes, I should upgrade because a certain number of years have passed.
I only have 2GB of RAM. That, combined with my GPU and CPU, is all I've needed to play every game that has come out in the past few years at a high resolution with all the trimmings and graphical tweaks. The only ones I have not been able to run well are sloppy ports like Saint's Row 2 and games that require 7 or Vista.
Therefore, I see no reason to spend over $100 for a few improvements to lighting and cloth effects that have yet to be fully realized. I'm not an early adopter; When all that takes off and a lot more games start to show off those features, I'll start thinking about it. In the meantime, I just can't justify the pricetag of a new OS.
"Compared to the time between other Windows OS's (95-98-2000-2002) the time between XP's release and now- 8 years- is huge. I don't think it's unreasonable, at this point, for people to expect you to have upgraded to 7 or Vista. Especially if you game on your PC."
So, yes, I should upgrade because a certain number of years have passed.
I only have 2GB of RAM. That, combined with my GPU and CPU, is all I've needed to play every game that has come out in the past few years at a high resolution with all the trimmings and graphical tweaks. The only ones I have not been able to run well are sloppy ports like Saint's Row 2 and games that require 7 or Vista.
Therefore, I see no reason to spend over $100 for a few improvements to lighting and cloth effects that have yet to be fully realized. I'm not an early adopter; When all that takes off and a lot more games start to show off those features, I'll start thinking about it. In the meantime, I just can't justify the pricetag of a new OS.
follow
