Main MenuOverheardThere is always an easy solution to every human problem -- neat, plausible and wrong. -- H. L. MenckenAdvertisementsSearch TSNOnline
There are 0 registered users online.
You are an anonymous user. You can register for free by clicking here |
|
So what about everyone else?
13 Jun 05 I know there's sort of a tradition of upgrading your rig for big game releases, but it's pretty rare for a game to demand it of a large chunk of their fan base. The Battlefield 2 demo came out on Friday. It doesn't support Nvidia's GeForce 4 series or below. That's a huge group to exclude. I'm not sure I understand it either. Battlefield is supposed to be about smooth, tactical action that allows you to experience the ebb and flow of battle first hand. Eye candy is nice, but it's not the heart of the experience like a Doom 3 or Far Cry where the atmosphere defines the gameplay. And we're talking about online FPSers who will turn down all the graphics for any edge in a match. Then there's the needs of the players. Your enjoyment of the game is directly tied to the quality and number of people you're playing with. It's also tied to whether people are playing when you have the time and the desire to play. All these things encourage the largest player pool possible, so why limit that pool in the name of graphics? I'm all for games that push the high end. I like a game that can't be played with max video options on any card available at release (again Doom 3 and Far Cry come to mind). But the hallmark of PC gaming is scalability. The huge range of hardware is a headache, but it's also the strength of the PC. While you can always count on the hardcore to have the high end, the bulk of gamers are more casual. They want that PC to do its three years of duty before the next. They just want to have fun online, not worry about griefers, team killers or cheaters. They certainly don't want to worry about upgrading just to play one game. I have seen the theory put forth that there is a simple reason for the eye candy and its entry bar. It's a little mod called Desert Combat. The theory goes that the online gameplay of Battlefield 2 doesn't feel significantly different from that mod. Sure there are more options, sides and the commander feature, but the feel is the same. So DICE is trying to wow you with the eye candy, so you don't have people turning the graphics down where it's hard to tell if your playing Battlefield 2 or Desert Combat. I have no way of knowing if there's any truth to that. I'll trust that there's not. Oh, I added some X3 screenies to the site Here. This week's game is another from the Total Gaming dot Net collection. It's Nexagon: Deathmatch (official site) from Strategy First. It's a realtime tactical game where you are a disembodied criminal intellect (how did they know?) controlling your thralls in bloody battle to try to win your freedom. Build your impenetrable base and assault your opponent's while defending yours with death pits in between. You earn credit to buy more powerful units. Your survivors gain strength with experience. You can even take control of some of your defenses manually when the thralls just aren't enough. Nexagon is available now. Jason
|
Polls
Which looks better to you?
Forum Activity
Other Stories
Categories Menu
LoginPast Articles
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||