Quake3World

Do you know if any developer has ever thought about or is going to produce a FPS/action/adventure game that takes place in something like the Revolutionary war, Civil war, French revolution, or any other historical war that predates WW1?

I think the gore factor in a game like this could be pretty good - lots of close combat and whatnot...as well as things like combat on horseback, etc, etc....I'm playing CoD2, which is good enough, but man do all of these ww2 games start to blend together. Still, its a lot better than Brothers in Arms was, although the AI of your comrades is still pretty shitty. Can't tell you how many times I hear them yell "enemy grenade, run!" and then stand right on top of the damn nade while it blows them up. Its funny though.
On that note, having played this on the PC at maxxed settings, I can say that it is much better than playing it on the 360...I can't see how one of the reviewers (gamespot or somewhere) said it actually looked better on the 360.

tnf wrote:DI can't see how one of the reviewers (gamespot or somewhere) said it actually looked better on the 360.

It's like they were paid off, or something.

tnf wrote:Do you know if any developer has ever thought about or is going to produce a FPS/action/adventure game that takes place in something like the Revolutionary war, Civil war, French revolution, or any other historical war that predates WW1?

I think the gore factor in a game like this could be pretty good - lots of close combat and whatnot...as well as things like combat on horseback, etc, etc....I'm playing CoD2, which is good enough, but man do all of these ww2 games start to blend together. Still, its a lot better than Brothers in Arms was, although the AI of your comrades is still pretty shitty. Can't tell you how many times I hear them yell "enemy grenade, run!" and then stand right on top of the damn nade while it blows them up. Its funny though.
On that note, having played this on the PC at maxxed settings, I can say that it is much better than playing it on the 360...I can't see how one of the reviewers (gamespot or somewhere) said it actually looked better on the 360.

I agree with you, A game like that would be extremely sweet, Some people have tried mods, and failed miserably. They say it looks better on 360 because, to be honest, it does, If I could take screenshots I would but I can't cause I don't have any VIVO... But think about it, it is pretty much a midrange pc with unique instruction sets and shaders built in and stuff, oh yea not to mention 3 processors. Once they learn to really code for this, (look at the xbox, the last wave of games looked pretty fucking good imo), It will look fucking sweet.

And by PC On maxxd settings, you're playing at 1080i right? 1920x1080 resolution? How much did you pay for that rig? Not everybody has the cash to burn on a rig like that, most of us can play on mid-high settings at 1280x1024 if that, and our rigs cost 1500~ when we bought them, the 360 costs 400 (for the premium), and It looks pretty damn close to what we have, but in high-def and the games will progressively look better as the console ages.

:icon32:

primaltheory wrote:

tnf wrote:Do you know if any developer has ever thought about or is going to produce a FPS/action/adventure game that takes place in something like the Revolutionary war, Civil war, French revolution, or any other historical war that predates WW1?

I think the gore factor in a game like this could be pretty good - lots of close combat and whatnot...as well as things like combat on horseback, etc, etc....I'm playing CoD2, which is good enough, but man do all of these ww2 games start to blend together. Still, its a lot better than Brothers in Arms was, although the AI of your comrades is still pretty shitty. Can't tell you how many times I hear them yell "enemy grenade, run!" and then stand right on top of the damn nade while it blows them up. Its funny though.
On that note, having played this on the PC at maxxed settings, I can say that it is much better than playing it on the 360...I can't see how one of the reviewers (gamespot or somewhere) said it actually looked better on the 360.

I agree with you, A game like that would be extremely sweet, Some people have tried mods, and failed miserably. They say it looks better on 360 because, to be honest, it does, If I could take screenshots I would but I can't cause I don't have any VIVO... But think about it, it is pretty much a midrange pc with unique instruction sets and shaders built in and stuff, oh yea not to mention 3 processors. Once they learn to really code for this, (look at the xbox, the last wave of games looked pretty fucking good imo), It will look fucking sweet.

And by PC On maxxd settings, you're playing at 1080i right? 1920x1080 resolution? How much did you pay for that rig? Not everybody has the cash to burn on a rig like that, most of us can play on mid-high settings at 1280x1024 if that, and our rigs cost 1500~ when we bought them, the 360 costs 400 (for the premium), and It looks pretty damn close to what we have, but in high-def and the games will progressively look better as the console ages.

:icon32:

It dont look as good.. sorry..

For the money, yes the 360 looks quality, but saying it looks as good or BETTER than the PC version is bullshit..

Theres so many things you can point out in the first 5 min of playing the 360 version its not even funny..

Great port, Not as good tho

Ok, So you're saying you can play any game at 1080i, full settings, 0 lag, and the image quality is still good? How much did you pay for that rig?

360 Looks just as good if not better then a pc of equal price (hell it looks better then a 1200$ pc)

Are you simple? They're comparing this game specifically.

Stop hijacking the thread you faget.

EDIT: @primal..

mrd wrote:Stop hijacking the thread you faget.

It's faggot faggot

primaltheory wrote:Ok, So you're saying you can play any game at 1080i, full settings, 0 lag, and the image quality is still good? How much did you pay for that rig?

360 Looks just as good if not better then a pc of equal price (hell it looks better then a 1200$ pc)

1300 bucks actually.. 7800GTX and 2gigs of ram, ect..

Period, PC looks better..

And yes, i have no problem playing in the highest rez games support..

You, lose kiddo..

Foo wrote:Are you simple? They're comparing this game specifically.

Very evidently..

There is no real clear answer for PC VS console.. and it is pritty dumb to argue it imo considering all consoles past Xbox are just PC's anyway.

primaltheory wrote:

mrd wrote:Stop hijacking the thread you faget.

It's faggot faggot

Spelling flaemes. Unreal.

mrd wrote:

primaltheory wrote:

mrd wrote:Stop hijacking the thread you faget.

It's faggot faggot

Spelling flaemes. Unreal.

No. This is quake.

tnf wrote:Do you know if any developer has ever thought about or is going to produce a FPS/action/adventure game that takes place in something like the Revolutionary war, Civil war, French revolution, or any other historical war that predates WW1?

I think the gore factor in a game like this could be pretty good - lots of close combat and whatnot...as well as things like combat on horseback, etc, etc....I'm playing CoD2, which is good enough, but man do all of these ww2 games start to blend together. Still, its a lot better than Brothers in Arms was, although the AI of your comrades is still pretty shitty. Can't tell you how many times I hear them yell "enemy grenade, run!" and then stand right on top of the damn nade while it blows them up. Its funny though.
On that note, having played this on the PC at maxxed settings, I can say that it is much better than playing it on the 360...I can't see how one of the reviewers (gamespot or somewhere) said it actually looked better on the 360.

i've been wondering the same thing for years, and always come back to the same thing: the weapons. take the musket for instance, a weapon capable of an astonshing 3-4 rounds per minute. sure, you could speed that up a little, but it would still be like playing with a railgun made of wood. that leaves swords etc, and in my experience fps gaming with melee weapons is a bit like a retard fight, at least when using a keyboard/mouse setup

still, sinking enemy frigates with cannon could be fun, and i guess a horse would make an interesting vehicle

primaltheory wrote:

mrd wrote:

primaltheory wrote: It's faggot faggot

Spelling flaemes. Unreal.

No. This is quake.

:icon27:

I think a fight with less advanced weapons would be kinda cool. What about a game about the war of 1812 or something. I guess they can't make that cuz everyone would get all faggy about who actually won it.

mrd wrote:I think a fight with less advanced weapons would be kinda cool. What about a game about the war of 1812 or something. I guess they can't make that cuz everyone would get all faggy about who actually won it.

true...what about the civil war? that would turn into a lol u r deh rednex noes lawl u r deh yankeh flamefest, online or not... It would generically be too controversial

In case you hadn't noticed, there's a whole world beyond America.

Battlefield Vietnam seemed to go down okay, anyway.

I'm really tired of WW2 games, Cod2 is basicly more of the same.

hence the reason we suggested WWI

primaltheory wrote:Ok, So you're saying you can play any game at 1080i, full settings, 0 lag, and the image quality is still good? How much did you pay for that rig?

360 Looks just as good if not better then a pc of equal price (hell it looks better then a 1200$ pc)

No, you can build a PC for 1200 that will look better than a 360.

BTW - I'm running fear maxxed, but not at the ultra high resolution - I'm at 1024x768. Everything else is cranked up. Runs fine, with the exception of a few hardcore firefights.

My system is an athlon XP64 3500+, 1 gig of corsair XMS ram, a BFG 6800GT OC, and a SATA drive. COD2 on that looks better than on the 360, FEAR looked like it was in an entirely different league than anything on the 360. And this machine is not a $1900+ machine...not even close.

Foo wrote:In case you hadn't noticed, there's a whole world beyond America.

Battlefield Vietnam seemed to go down okay, anyway.

Me? I'm talking about historical wars in general.

yeah, im not too sure what foo was going on about there.

especially with the vietnam war happening after ww2...

I still cant get CoD2 to run. Shitsout after loading if i have DX9 enabled. It will play in DX7, but damn, i havea great rig, why should i play with duhards config?

Console fanboys keep forgetting that they also need a $1000 HDTV in addition to their $400 console to be able to compete with an "expensive" PC when it comes to image quality.