| |
Site Navigation
Main
News
Forums
Games
Games Database
Top 100
Release List
Support Files
Features
Reviews
Previews
Interviews
Editorials
Diaries
Misc
Download
Gallery
Music
Screenshots
Videos
Miscellaneous
Staff Members
Privacy Statement
|
|
|
|
red_dog_1515
Village Dweller
Joined: 30 Jan 2002
Posts: 15
|
This game is so full of bugs! It's basically the new Ultima IX Ascension (also riddled with bugs and bad programming code). You know it's funny, Return to Castle Wolfenstein, Alice, Sacrifice, MOH:AA, and every new game I have played which have graphics 10 times better than Gothic run super smooth on my computer. But for some reason, this blocky graphics, slow-ass Gothic runs like crap!
Gothic has great gameplay and story, but the graphics leave something to be desired, and the graphics engine is absolutely horrible! Hopefully, Xicat Interactive (or whoever made this game) can get their act together and hire some decent programmers for Gothic 2 (if it ever even comes out). |
Thu Jan 31, 2002 4:08 pm |
|
|
Shrapnel
Rocket Scientist
Joined: 03 Jan 2002
Posts: 1325
Location: Newark, NJ |
*yawn*
are you speaking? |
|
Thu Jan 31, 2002 4:14 pm |
|
|
Llama
High Emperor
Joined: 11 Oct 2001
Posts: 509
Location: Earth |
See, you're computer is not powerful enough to handle the demands Gothic puts on a system. In all those lame games you mentioned all you run is the engine and a small portion of AI for what is around you, many enemies are static (no AI) until you come close enough to trigger that.
In Gothic you have a living breathing world, where people whether you see them or not, walk around, TALK with eachother, do daily functions, bath, drink, eat, go to the bathroom, animals stroll about the woods, get hunted by larger predator animals, and life generally keeps on moving whether you're there to see it happen or not.
With the hundereds and hundereds of NPC's AI to keep track of, each having their own daily tasks, and hundereds and hundereds of enemies to keep track of, again each one of them having their own AI, it kinda puts a strain on a computer processor.
Bad programming? Not hardly, pick another game that has this much AI in it that runs this smooth. Let me save you the time, there isn't one. Halo for the Xbox is the next closest thing, and guess what, it's capped at 30 fps, just 5 more than Gothic. Guess that game is crap too huh? Oh wait, it's only the single best 3rd person shooter to ever hit a PC or console in gaming history, if you don't believe me, check it out yourself.
Top of the line means flashy graphics and tiny maps (Quake 3 engine games). Top quality means large persistant worlds, with several hundereds NPC's, and several hundered enemies/monsters/animals wandering about doing what an animal does.
Perhaps if we all had 10ghz computers with 3 gigs of RAM we would handle the strain that Gothic puts on a system and run it, and the AI at an amazing 60fps, but it's not going to happen. Movies are filmed at 25fps, I run a steady 18-20 when I play Gothic, and it's very smooth to me. But again, my brain hasn't been dumbed down by the 100fps desires that mindless games put on someone. |
|
Thu Jan 31, 2002 4:30 pm |
|
|
Guest
|
All console games have a fixed frequency depending on the tv system. this is 30 fps for ntsc and 25 fps for pal.
btw, movies have 24 fps. |
|
Thu Jan 31, 2002 5:04 pm |
|
|
OctU
Keeper of the Gates
Joined: 24 Jan 2002
Posts: 114
Location: On an island beyond the realm of the Sea Barons |
Every application or OS is going to give you minimum REQUIRED specs you need to run it, but that doesn’t mean that those are the minimum RECOMMENDED specs. Win98’s minimum memory requirements, for instance, is only 16MB of RAM, but would you REALLY want to run it with that?
In my 1.1GHz Athlon T-Bird system, I had 128MB of Corsair PC150 CAS2 SDRAM -- set Virtual Memory to 512MB, game ran decent but was still choppy at times. Ordered and recently received another 128MB of the Corsair memory. Game now runs like a CHAMP.
Though some might think it’s a shame that Gothic can’t be played on a sub-standard system, I would rather it contain the AI and graphic intensive content that it has, rather than dumbing down the AI or making the world graphically less realistic.
For Gothic, it seems that the minimum recommended specs should be DOUBLE what their stated minimum requirement specs are – 800MHz processor instead of 400MHz, 32MB video card instead of 16MB, 256MB of RAM instead of 128MB. Those specs are the minimum to make the game very playable with minimum to zero hang-ups or choppiness. Obviously a system with better specs will run the game that much more smoothly.
|
|
Thu Jan 31, 2002 5:39 pm |
|
|
Llama
High Emperor
Joined: 11 Oct 2001
Posts: 509
Location: Earth |
There are several games on the gamecube that run 50-60fps |
|
Thu Jan 31, 2002 5:40 pm |
|
|
wesmjohn
Baron of the Court
Joined: 27 Dec 2001
Posts: 326
Location: Kentucky |
I agree about a few of the bug issues, but don't knock the graphics of Gothic. It has some of the best-looking graphics I have ever seen in any game, so long as you turn up the effects, resolution, and your video card's performance options.
Walk up to a light-generating surface in 1024x768x32 and see the way the light dances off your armor and sword. Look up at the barrier and see how it shimmers and the bolts of lightning fly. Look up at the excellent sun effects and your mind will be momentarily fooled into thinking you're really outside.
Do all this, and if you still tell me the graphics in Gothic are not good, you should be institutionalized. |
|
Thu Jan 31, 2002 5:41 pm |
|
|
Shrapnel
Rocket Scientist
Joined: 03 Jan 2002
Posts: 1325
Location: Newark, NJ |
Sounds to me like this guy has a piece of shit system and so instead of blaming his machine, he want to try and blame it on the game, LOL!!! 
He's the kind of guy that would try to chop wood with a butter knife and complain "waaaa! The wood is too tough! The Bark is too hard, Waaaaa, momma!
Haha, get a REAL axe before you go choppin wood, Troll 
(ie - get a REAL machine if you wanna play a REAL game)
|
|
Thu Jan 31, 2002 6:22 pm |
|
|
wesmjohn
Baron of the Court
Joined: 27 Dec 2001
Posts: 326
Location: Kentucky |
quote:
On 2002-01-31 12:22, Shrapnel wrote:
Sounds to me like this guy has a piece of shit system and so instead of blaming his machine, he want to try and blame it on the game, LOL!!!
He's the kind of guy that would try to chop wood with a butter knife and complain "waaaa! The wood is too tough! The Bark is too hard, Waaaaa, momma!
Haha, get a REAL axe before you go choppin wood, Troll
(ie - get a REAL machine if you wanna play a REAL game)
Couldn't have said it better myself, Shrap. Sometimes getting the most out of a game means having a system on par with its demands. |
|
Thu Jan 31, 2002 6:25 pm |
|
|
Jeff
Eager Tradesman
Joined: 05 Nov 2001
Posts: 33
|
I have a kickass system and the game is friggin loaded with bugs. To say this game has no bugs, you must either be a pirhana employee or fu*kin moron. I have never seen a buggier game like Gothic in my life. Although, this game is just to good not to play so thats the only reason why I have not returned it to EB.
Windows XP
Asus A7V
Duron 1gig
256 pc133
Geforce 2 Ultra 64meg
Sound Blaster Live Value
Toshiba dvd 12x |
|
Thu Jan 31, 2002 7:23 pm |
|
|
soltys
Magister of the Light
Joined: 12 Jan 2002
Posts: 386
Location: Poland, Warsaw |
From programmers' point of view Gothic is awesome job. Beauty of this game lies in details and there're so MANY of them. World of Gothic IS ALIVE in the way no game before it has been able to achieve. Also graphics engine is great - I have rather low end system at the moment (p3 450, 192 ram, gf2mx, p2b mainboard) and was able to play Gothic with almost no problems (Summoner was much slower). Moreover Gothic's engine is capable of renedring outside (and quite detailed) world very efficiencly. There're very few games that reneder both interiors and exteriors at good performance. And bugs ? What bugs ? There're hardly bugs in this game. I encountered only one through all the game (Lares' guards after joining old camp, with easy workaround). Some of people encountered other bugs. And fps - this is not q3 / ut where you need 60 - 70 fps to be competetive. |
|
Thu Jan 31, 2002 7:32 pm |
|
|
red_dog_1515
Village Dweller
Joined: 30 Jan 2002
Posts: 15
|
For those of you that think Gothic has a right to be more demanding on a computer than Return to Castle Wolfenstein just because Gothic has some gay AI, well guess what? RTCW has plenty of AI too, and on top of that RTCW has graphics far far more advanced than Gothic and pushes probably 50 times the polygon of Gothic.
I have a top of the line system I built myself with the best parts: Athlon 1900 XP+, 512mb PC2100 DDR RAM, MSI K7T266Pro2 Raid motherboard, 80GB Western Digital ATA 100 7200 rpm hard drive, Sound Blaster PCI 512 Sound Card, Hercules Geforce 3 video card. My system gets 7080 on 3DMark 2001, much more than a Gothic could ever need, and probably a higher score than 99% of you gamers on this message board get. Every one of my games run super fast and flawless.
I run Windows XP and Gothic has major problems on XP despite what any of you newbies say. Gothic's graphics engine is nothing compared to the Quake 3 or Unreal graphics engines. Gothic has tons of bugs and bad prgramming code. Gothic was made by some unknown little software developer named Piranha Bytes or something, that alone explains why the game is not very well made.
Gothic is not state-of-the-art by any means. If you want to see state-of-the-art, then go download the Return to Castle Wolfenstein single player demo. Technically, Gothic is a joke compared the the other new big name 3D PC games out there. And just because you newbies are running Win98 on some weak systems, and Gothic happens to be compatible with them, doesn't mean it's a state-of-the-art PC game. Because it's not even close. So you newbies, go learn something about software development, what state-of-the-art means, and get a clue. |
|
Thu Jan 31, 2002 7:33 pm |
|
|
Jaz
Late Night Spook
Joined: 20 Jan 2002
Posts: 9708
Location: RPGDot |
quote:
On 2002-01-31 13:23, Jeff wrote:
I have never seen a buggier game like Gothic in my life.
Ehm, I did see one in my time. Daggerfall. I mean, c'mon, a game that came over here with a 20+ MB bugfix ALREADY ON THE GAME CD! And despite installing the bugfix you still fell through floors and disappeared in the ground... and some scripted sequences never happened in some games... I mean, I spent 7 months actually playing it and still couldn't finish the game because one event I needed somehow never took place... but DESPITE all of its bugs, I just loved it.
Of course Gothic is buggy. Not the buggiest game in the world, but still buggy. Yet I absolutely love it!
Oh yes, and what Llama said, the part about graphics and the AI... remember (even if not a RPG) Thief? The graphics weren't up to date when it came out - too low-poly even then- , the Dark engine just wasn't a shiner, but the game atmosphere and AI were terrific. I had a state of the art machine then, yet when in the game a guard on my floor raised the alarm, my machine stood nearly still all of a sudden... because the alarm raised ALL the guards in the house, too much for my processor to handle.
'I can hear you, taffer!'
=Edit: Red Dog. Get yourself a bucket of cold water and calm down. Gothic was running fine on my machine when I had 98, and it's running smoothly under XP too. I also own RTCW (as I own about all 3D shooters in the world  ), and I loved it. It was THE game I had waited for since W3D came out, and I of course got it instantly. It looked nice. Nice atmosphere there, too. When I started to play I thought there was no game that could measure up to it. The AI seemed even kind of smart (if you didn't compare it to those of all the Dark engine games).
But I was through in, say, 6 hours, it was so linear you didn't have to be afraid of ever doing anything wrong, and the impression the game left was not enough to keep me thinking about it for hours on end, as did less beautiful games like, say, the above mentioned Thief or Daggerfall or Gothic.
Beauty ain't everything.=
[ This Message was edited by: Jaz on 2002-01-31 13:52 ] |
|
Thu Jan 31, 2002 7:41 pm |
|
|
Gorath
Mostly Harmless
Joined: 03 Sep 2001
Posts: 6327
Location: NRW, Germany |
How impressive. You compare the first installment of a new engine focussed on huge areas and a lot of AI with the third (?)generation of an engine optimized for small areas and only a few NPCs. |
|
Thu Jan 31, 2002 7:42 pm |
|
|
Jeff
Eager Tradesman
Joined: 05 Nov 2001
Posts: 33
|
Why do you people judge a game by its graphics? I hate you people who pick up a pc game andlook at the box and say, WOW! look at the graphics, this game must be good. Gothic is an amazing game. Sure it can't compare to those repetitive 3d shooter graphics, but thats not what this game is about. Why don't you try playing the game and not constantly think about the textures. Trust me when I say this is game is great. There is one thing you are right about, and thats the bugs. This game is buggier then a 100 foot ant hill, but hopefully this will be fixed with a patch. |
|
Thu Jan 31, 2002 7:51 pm |
|
|
|
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next
All times are GMT. The time now is Tue Apr 16, 2019 6:03 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
