Why limit your customer base?

I'm running a Radeon X800 which I have had no problems running any other games I've wanted to play until now. I can run Fallout 3 just fine with it. I've felt no need to upgrade and them Demigod comes out and REQUIRES Pixel Shader 3.0 which my card doesn't support. I know that the game would run fine if I wasn't forced to use Pixel Shader 3.0. And I know Radeon X800 is a few years old, but I've had no need to upgrade and still don't feel as if I have reason enough so far. I don't need any posts of people saying "Buy a new graphics card, you can get a Pixel Shader 3.0 card cheap." I'm well aware, don't tell me what I already know. The reason I'm posting is because of the principle of the matter. The dev team could have EASILY added in Pixel Shader 2.0 support. It seems like good business sense to me to release a game capable of running on as many systems as possible if financially feasible. Is the cost of what it will take to make your game more readily compatible less than the sales you would receive from the compatibility? Put simply: Is it profitable? It seems to me that it would be. Can it really be that expensive to support Pixel Shader 2.0 as well as Pixel Shader 3.0? I know it isn't a "one or the other" thing. Many other games have Pixel Shader 3.0 as an optional graphics feature. I, personally, really don't care if a game supports Pixel Shader at all. I would rather have a game that looks decent and runs smoothly than a game that looks great but runs like shit unless you have the latest everything. I have other things to spend money on in life than buying new computer parts every month. Could I upgrade my card if I really wanted to? Yes. Do I feel like the money I would spend on a new card is worth what I would get out of it? No. Almost none of the games I play would run any better than they do now. Pixel Shader is a minor "extra" feature and should not be required. FSAA is a much greater feature and games don't even require 2x. You can disable it if you want. As it should be.

So my point: Why require Pixel Shader 3.0 if you don't have to? Only thing I can figure is the graphics card companies are "bribing" these developers into requiring negligible hardware features to drum up more sales of their cards in a slow economy. There are still many gamers out there with Pixel Shader 2.0 cards and happy with them. I've seen forums all over the net of people irritated by the handful of games now requiring this: Demigod, GTA IV, Lord of the Rings: Conquest, and a few others. Personally, I'd rather do without the game than be required to buy a new video card. If nothing else, just because I'm expected to. There are plenty of better games out there that don't require Pixel Shader 3.0. Games with greater replay values.

I reiterate: It cannot be too difficult to allow Pixel Shader 2.0 support. Or even allow an option to disable Pixel Shader altogether if you don't have Pixel Shader 3.0 hardware. Why not? I would gladly do without if it allowed me to play the game. And I say it can't be too difficult because a small group of 3rd party programmers released a patch for Bioshock to disable Pixel Shader 3.0 and allow lower end cards to play it, and the game ran fine. The fix was very small and was as simple as deleting a few files and editing a few others to prevent the game from accessing Pixel Shader 3.0 features.

The Bioshock fix can be found here:
http://www.shadershock.tk/

Furthermore, another 3rd party program was released some time ago when this problem arose with the onset of Pixel Shader 2.0. This little program, called 3D-Analyze, is capable of emulating any Pixel Shader version up to Pixel Shader 2.0 on cards that have earlier versions of Pixel Shader. It's also capable of skipping the loading of Pixel Shader 2.0 or earlier altogether. Therefore eliminating the need for the user to have a card with that feature.

If these basement programmers can do it, why can't Stardock? Why not release a patch to let those of us with "ancient" cards still play the game with Pixel Shader 2.0? If that's too difficult or time-consuming for you, then why not at least give us an option to disable Pixel Shader completely? A loader to set the graphics options before loading the game and a simple little box to tick to turn the all important Pixel Shader off. Surely you guys are capable of that.

In beta, you claimed that the game would eventually have Pixel Shader 2.0 support. Then at release, the minimum requirements changed and that idea was scrapped. What happened? Did you just not have enough time to implement it before release? Fine, that's understandable. But what's stopping you from releasing a patch for it now? Do you just think they're aren't enough people in need of it to be worthwhile? Search the net, there are a LOT of potential moneybags out there that wish this game could be played on their Pixel Shader 2.0 cards. That's more income for you. These people have either decided not to buy or have returned the game to the store because of this one problem. What's standing in your way?

I really support Stardock and the values that you guys stand for. Which is why I don't understand what the problem is with allowing Pixel Shader 2.0 support. Is there a law against it? Or are the guys in that department just too lazy to take a few days to build a patch? You tell me.

 

69,035 views 47 replies +1 Loading…
Reply #1 Top

Maybe it was a business decision (time/cost/technical issues/ect vs projected amount of players they felt they would pickup)...and not them "being lazy".

I tell ya...I have a real contempt for the kids these days who run around calling developers "lazy"...it's unbelievable.

Reply #2 Top

nice post,  +1 for you.

I was in the same boat as you and follow them all through beta hoping pixel shader 2.0 would be supported.  This game uses the supcom engine and supreme commander had pixel shader 2.0.     I eventually upgraded my computer so I don't care about this anymore but I'm still bitter about it.

You kept mentioning it's easy to add ps2.0 but maybe it's not easy after all.  My theory is that Demigod is a low budget game and they had to cut corners somewhere.  Maybe it cost $200,000 to add shader 2.0 support (redrawing all the graphics again) and it would delay the game another 2 month.   They then did a market analysist of how much money they can make and probably won't recover that $200,000. 

Another reason behind it I think is if you did have a 3+ year old video card with 2.0 only.  Then your cpu will also be the bottleneck.  Since this game doesn't run that well on single core cpus or cpus 3+ year old.   So adding shader 2.0 didn't seem worth the money so they dropped it.

I think Dawn of War2 didn't have shader 2.0 support as well, so we will start to see a trend as you have mentioned.   Luckily Starcraft2 will support it from what I read although no official word on the system reqs.   I also read somewhere that Windows 7 has emulation that it can make any videocard run up to pixel shader 3.0 so windows7 should be better for gaming.

Reply #3 Top

I can see the OP's point even if I don't find it all that terrible that it requires Pixel Shader 3.0.

Pixel Shader 3.0 has been around for quite a few years now though.  I don't upgrade my video card that often either and to be honest it isn't even something I consider as a factor anymore because it has been around long enough that it has almost been a non issue for at least 2-3 years.

Simply put, I imagine that that GPG simply figured that the majority of players would already have support given the relative age of Pixel Shader 3.0 or would be upgrading in the very near future.  Targetting systems up to 3 years (possibly longer) doesn't sound unreasonable to me, that's still pre-Core2 era and includes P4 PCs.  From that perspective, if the (overwhelming?) majority of your target workstations already support the newer standard then it may well not have been cost effective to code in legacy support.

Just some thoughts.

-dolynick

Reply #4 Top

The proportion of PC gamers who regularly buy new games and who don't own 3.0 capable graphics is still rather tiny. There's enough data (steam surveys for example) out there about gamers systems to know how many people you'll realistically be excluding.

 

Also, I think you might be seriously trivialising how "easy" it is to make something pixel shader 2.0 compatible that isn't to begin with and no extra development costs is insignificant. Nor can you just "run the game without pixel shader", without it the display just wouldn't work and another system would be need to be developed to replace it instead.

 

I'm afraid it's reaching the same point as Windows 98, at some point it's good business sense not to include support for it anymore, there's just not enough people it would apply to for the work it would require. It's not something against you or a conspiracy with the graphics card vendors.

Reply #5 Top

As the game manual says, "Any $40 graphics card will do"

If you don't have or can't afford a $40 graphics card....

Reply #6 Top

Shader Model 3 has been around for five years; the Geforce 6800, the game's min req, was released in Spring of 2004. ATI lagged a bit in SM3 adoption, but it's definitely been around for quite a while now.

There simply comes a point in any hardware's life when "old" becomes "too old". Requirements go up and they won't be going back down.

Reply #7 Top

Quoting InfiniteVengeance, reply 5
As the game manual says, "Any $40 graphics card will do"

If you don't have or can't afford a $40 graphics card....
End of InfiniteVengeance's quote

 

This

 

I always have to laugh when I read about the pixel 2.0 shader crew appearing on forums (they did it with Bioshock too) demanding recently released games work on their very out dated hardware. Pixel shader 3.0 cards have been around since 2004 and it's been over 5 years now since that hardware was made available to pc gamers. Gaming on the PC means you'll have to upgrade to play newer games it's just something you need to come to terms with. Picking up a geforce 6 series or above card now days is extremely cheap which fulfills the 3.0 requirement

Reply #8 Top

OP to put it simple. It's like you are playing on a Playstation 2 and demand it to play Playstation 3 games.


If you want to keep up with PC gaming you will need to upgrade every 2-5 years depending on what you want to play and how nice the graphics you want look at decent FPS. The same goes with consoles. Sure some games come out for PS2 still, but the best ones come out for PS3 and 360, obviously.

 

It's probably someone with your kind of mindset on PC gaming hardware that comes into our games and lags it up with 2-4 sim speed and still thinks the games broken when the problem is actually the 5 year old Compaq you are running it on. Then that person comes to the forums and cries bloody murder on the game, all because their hardware is junk.

Reply #9 Top

X800 is like ridiculously oudated.  Time for a new computer, You can get a top notch tower for like 1100 with a core i7 chip and radeon 4850. 

My computer lasted 5 years before I upgraded, I was using a radeon 9800, which came out shortly before the x800.

Im going to have to agree with  Kstampy here, You may be able to run the game but it runs like shit,  Its nobodys fault but your own.

Bottom line:  Stop being a cheap skate, get a decent computer and have a nice gaming experience.  I never thought a Rig would make a difference in my gaming but its boosted my "skills" or rather, Skill output a good 25-35% in RTS and in FPS games because of graphics view distances and FPS, resolution, it all makes a difference.  You're lagging behind in 2003 dude. The best mentality I can say, Build a computer to smoke games for like 2-3 years, with a good motherboard to upgrade with.  Now with SLI and CF you can easily boost your gaming power without dropping more than 150-200 dollars

Reply #10 Top

While I can run Demigod perfectly, I kinda feel with the TC. I use to (until recently) run around with a GeForce FX 5200 (AGP baby), and it was annoying as hell not being able to play any game. Understandably, my GC got much love. Now that I use an 8600GT (still not ideal, but works), a lot of my friends are still playing on their $600 laptops they bought last year and the only games we ever play at LAN parties on the PC are WC3 and SC. PC gaming is a very expensive hobby, but you get what you pay for I guess.

Reply #11 Top

ATI were very slow on the uptake with SM3.0. You should blame them for your card being obsolete. It is just too old tech to support. Hell I remember playing games atleast a couple of years ago that required SM3.0.

Another thing is that if your PC is that dated, you'll probably have a real hard time playing anyways, because the game is very CPU intensive. I wouldn't personally play it on anything much less than my CPU, a C2D e6600 (conroe) 2,4ghz (which is getting old, 3 years since launch). With it i get around 2 SIM in 4v4. That's bordering on slow motion.

Reply #12 Top

Quoting Shock0311, reply 7
I always have to laugh when I read about the pixel 2.0 shader crew appearing on forums (they did it with Bioshock too) demanding recently released games work on their very out dated hardware. Pixel shader 3.0 cards have been around since 2004 and it's been over 5 years now since that hardware was made available to pc gamers. Gaming on the PC means you'll have to upgrade to play newer games it's just something you need to come to terms with. Picking up a geforce 6 series or above card now days is extremely cheap which fulfills the 3.0 requirement
End of Shock0311's quote

You should've seen the Eve Online forums early this year when they gave an almost 3 month heads up that they were going to start requiring Pixel Shader 2.0 support. (Not a typo, they wanted to require PS 3.0 by the end of the year, but backed off on that part.)

Reply #13 Top

This is why I never buy top end. My wife's 7600GT runs this, and cost a lot less than an X800. Every time a PS 3.0 game comes out (for how many years now? Haven't you guys gotten tired of whining on game forums yet?), everyone with a pre X1000 ATI card complains, but PS 3.0 doesn't go away. Buy midrange, and if you can't afford it, buy a good low end. If you can't get that, why are you spending your time playing videogames when you should taking classes at the local CC or something to get a better job?

Reply #14 Top

40$ graphics card will not run this game unless your running a quad core.  HAHA.  But then again, who in their right mind buys ATI?

Reply #15 Top

Even if you could play no one would want to play with you because your sim speed would be beyond bad bad. If you are using an x800 im sure your processor is pretty bad to. Its 2009 this is a pretty intensive game since they chose to use the supcom engine.

Reply #16 Top

Maybe it was a business decision (time/cost/technical issues/ect vs projected amount of players they felt they would pickup)...and not them "being lazy".

I tell ya...I have a real contempt for the kids these days who run around calling developers "lazy"...it's unbelievable.

End of quote

 

If you read (assuming you CAN read) I already covered that. It's a POOR business decision. Let's break down your comment:
Time - It can't take that much time to put a simple code to disable Pixel Shader support altogether. You can barely even see a difference in Pixel Shader period, much less between 2.0 and 3.0. Requiring an upgrade (or buying a card solely for that 1 feature) is retarded. Furthermore, if it was time, they could easily release a patch post-release.
Cost - Considering they already have license to utilize Pixel Shader 3.0 and were planning on coding 2.0 support AND the fact that SupComm (the engine this game uses) supported 2.0 as well, this is highly unlikely. If anything, they likely REMOVED 2.0 support from the base engine. And again, as I mentioned before, there's no way this "cost" could have been greater than the additonal sells they would have received on this game from us casual gamers who have better things to do than pimp our PCs out to compensate for our...anatomical shortcomings. Pun intended.
Technical Issues - See Supreme Commander Engine & Demigod based thereupon.
ect - See etcetera...ETCetera etc. = abbreviation for ETCetera

As for your little middle school aged comment: I stated that it's either a ploy between game developers and graphics card manufacturers to force players to buy new cards when they don't really need them. The stupid generally do. And for reference to this, Crysis had a "required" feature that forced players to buy new hardware...until a 3rd party released a fix that simply bypassed the check for this feature and the game ran perfectly without it. Yet, without the fix, the game wouldn't boot if you had the older hardware...strange...

Also, I think you might be seriously trivialising how "easy" it is to make something pixel shader 2.0 compatible that isn't to begin with and no extra development costs is insignificant. Nor can you just "run the game without pixel shader", without it the display just wouldn't work and another system would be need to be developed to replace it instead.
End of quote

I doubt you really know for sure. Furthermore, my point is that Bioshock "required" Pixel Shadoer 3.0, too. Until someone with more than half a brain and the programming knowledge made a workaround that allowed the game to run on 2.0 cards WITH NO PROBLEMS. This was done by a 3rd party with nothing to gain from it and was done with only 1 programmer to at most a handful of programmers and no money spent. Tell me it's that difficult. And I'm well aware that Demigod runs on a different engine, but theoretically, based on these facts, it IS still possible. Especially since it uses an engine that has the capability of supporting 2.0. It just hasn't been done. Furthermore, if Pixel Shader is so complicated and just HAS to have the hardware...explain why 3D-Analyze was able to emulate 2.0 on 1.4 cards or even 1.0 cards. It CAN be done with software but uses more processing power and memory. And Pixel Shader COULD be disabled with minor tweaks. I may not be a programmer, but I do know how some things work. The game would simply need an alternate rendering mode that doesn't use Pixel Shader and an option to disable it. It wouldn't take much work, I'm sure. Just a little time and the know-how. The whole system wouldn't need to be replaced, just a portion of it. And my understanding is that Pixel Shader is a post-render process as it is simply a shader and uses a reference to tell it where and how the shading is to be done. Similar to bumpmapping but with shades instead of texture elevations. The reference could still be there, but the process blocked and thus no requirement for a card that could process it. Or at least only use the 2.0 features and cancel any 3.0 only features.

Quoting InfiniteVengeance, reply 5
As the game manual says, "Any $40 graphics card will do"

If you don't have or can't afford a $40 graphics card....
End of InfiniteVengeance's quote

I could've swore I said:
I don't need any posts of people saying "Buy a new graphics card, you can get a Pixel Shader 3.0 card cheap." I'm well aware, don't tell me what I already know. The reason I'm posting is because of the principle of the matter.
End of quote

And...
Could I upgrade my card if I really wanted to? Yes. Do I feel like the money I would spend on a new card is worth what I would get out of it? No. Almost none of the games I play would run any better than they do now. Pixel Shader is a minor "extra" feature and should not be required.
End of quote


Do you people not read? It seems too many people on here just THINK they have something insightful or intelligent to say. You're like those kids that yell "Mommy, watch this!" and then jump haphazardly with limbs flailing in a completely unappealling, subpar, and not at all impressive manner yet expect their mom to say "Wow! Good job, honey! That was amazing!"

Quoting Shock0311, reply 7

I always have to laugh when I read about the pixel 2.0 shader crew appearing on forums (they did it with Bioshock too) demanding recently released games work on their very out dated hardware. Pixel shader 3.0 cards have been around since 2004 and it's been over 5 years now since that hardware was made available to pc gamers. Gaming on the PC means you'll have to upgrade to play newer games it's just something you need to come to terms with. Picking up a geforce 6 series or above card now days is extremely cheap which fulfills the 3.0 requirement
End of Shock0311's quote

Yea, and plenty of people all over the net are pissed that this game requires something it could play without. Yes, they did it with Bioshock, too. And guess what!? Someone out there, instead of posting completely useless and innane replies to forum threads did something about it. What was he thinking? He would've been SOOOOOO much cooler if he just flamed those people. But that complete loser in all his stupid thinking, created a fix to make Bioshock run on Pixel Shader 2.0 cards. How about that? You CAN accomplish things other ways than just looking for threads to flame because you have no life and nothing but free time since your mommy pays all your bills. You know, mature people see someone post something they don't agree with and they either a) post a MATURE and educated reply as to why they disagree OR b) they just go on to a thread on a topic they actually know something about and post there. The little nerdy kids that got made fun of for playing Magic: The Gathering, Pokemon, and Yugioh in school...now those awesome guys, they have to take an opportunity to brag about how much of their time and money they spend making love to their computer parts. I just can't compare to guys like you. I only have a computer that does everything I need it to and plays 99.9% of all games I care about just fine and I didn't have to buy new parts every 6 months. But then, after I turned 18 and got out in the real world I stopped playing games as much and immersed myself in the REAL world most of my time. I mean, don't get me wrong, I got cranky when I had to do homework and couldn't play EverQuest all day and night, too...when I was 15. Now I play games 2-3 hours a week and have to spend most of my time working, with family, or with an actual female. Not one of those female avatars in your game you stare at and put skimpy clothes on to get your chubs. And not one of those "females" you give money and free items to online. Nope, this female isn't a wood elf, so I guess I'm just not cool.

Quoting kstampy, reply 8
OP to put it simple. It's like you are playing on a Playstation 2 and demand it to play Playstation 3 games.


If you want to keep up with PC gaming you will need to upgrade every 2-5 years depending on what you want to play and how nice the graphics you want look at decent FPS. The same goes with consoles. Sure some games come out for PS2 still, but the best ones come out for PS3 and 360, obviously.

 

It's probably someone with your kind of mindset on PC gaming hardware that comes into our games and lags it up with 2-4 sim speed and still thinks the games broken when the problem is actually the 5 year old Compaq you are running it on. Then that person comes to the forums and cries bloody murder on the game, all because their hardware is junk.
End of kstampy's quote

Uh-huh, uh-huh, actually it's nothing like that. You're comparing a minor graphical process to an entirely different engine and format. I challenge you to try and spot any difference running a game with PS 3.0 and then with 2.0. The difference is negligible. It's a bigger difference to go from 4xFSAA to 8xFSAA and I can hardly tell a difference there. Apparently you know nothing about the subject. Btw, just another point: many developers release the same titles on PS3 and PS2. They have completely different hardware and yet they easily, quickly, and cheaply, develop the game to run on multiple platforms just fine. Most others are on PS3, XBox360, and Wii. And the Wii has nowhere near the graphical power of the 360 or PS3.

X800 is like ridiculously oudated. Time for a new computer, You can get a top notch tower for like 1100 with a core i7 chip and radeon 4850.

My computer lasted 5 years before I upgraded, I was using a radeon 9800, which came out shortly before the x800.

Im going to have to agree with Kstampy here, You may be able to run the game but it runs like shit, Its nobodys fault but your own.

Bottom line: Stop being a cheap skate, get a decent computer and have a nice gaming experience. I never thought a Rig would make a difference in my gaming but its boosted my "skills" or rather, Skill output a good 25-35% in RTS and in FPS games because of graphics view distances and FPS, resolution, it all makes a difference. You're lagging behind in 2003 dude. The best mentality I can say, Build a computer to smoke games for like 2-3 years, with a good motherboard to upgrade with. Now with SLI and CF you can easily boost your gaming power without dropping more than 150-200 dollars
End of quote

Another useless, redundant post from someone who can't read. I never said the X800 isn't outdated. Unlike most people on this forum, my life does not revolve around my computer and games. Gaming is a HOBBY not a lifestyle. People need to learn moderation for Christ's sake. Nonetheless, I have every intention of buying a new system...when I feel it's warranted. There's no point in doing it just because I can't play one mediocre game. I can still play most of the mainstays I play just fine. Such as Fallout 3 and occasionally DAoC or WoW as well as all the ones inbetween I play here and there such as CSS, TF2, and others. As old as my X800 is, I've never had a single problem running anything until now. When a game I absolutely have to have and can't play comes out, I'll upgrade. What you illiterate simps can't seem to comprehend is that I made this post to voice my bitterness based on principle. It has nothing to do with wanting to play the game or not being able to afford an upgrade. I guess it's my fault as I often forget how ignorant most people that frequent forums are. You take someone and add a lifetime of ridicule, subtract a girlfriend and social life, add in a lot of free time, subtract any real responsibilities or aspirations and you get forum knowitalls. The kinds of people that seem to post on every single thread posted and actually think that anyone gives a damn about their point of view or what they're saying, which is often grossly over-estimated by the knowitall. Thinking he's posted something profound or witty, he fails to realize that the words he's left behind give readers an image of a scrawny boy with long greasy hair and the bangs covering one or both of his eyes. Face scarred by acne while he grins in self-satisfaction showing his braces until he covers them to take a drink of his 2 liter mountain dew and return to his griefing in any random online game or perhaps to build up his all important score on that FPS he's been playing for 6 hrs straight now. A scrawny kid who doesn't realize that everyone around him wishes he'd wash his hair and go outside once in a while and they're starting to wonder if he's gay or just completely unattractive to the opposite sex. All the while he's drooling over whatever female representation he happens to see on his computer screen. Thinking that that prostitute in GTA is hot and that he's somehow the one she's hooking up with and not just the character he's playing. In his dimented little mind he thinks he just got laid when the car rocked a few times. Sadly, he continues to repeat this act over and over, getting some kind of excitement from watching a car rock and imagining the "hot" cluster of pixels in front of him is having sex with the other cluster of pixels that is his studly self.

Quoting J3ph42, reply 13
This is why I never buy top end. My wife's 7600GT runs this, and cost a lot less than an X800. Every time a PS 3.0 game comes out (for how many years now? Haven't you guys gotten tired of whining on game forums yet?), everyone with a pre X1000 ATI card complains, but PS 3.0 doesn't go away. Buy midrange, and if you can't afford it, buy a good low end. If you can't get that, why are you spending your time playing videogames when you should taking classes at the local CC or something to get a better job?
End of J3ph42's quote

Why aren't you taking classes at your local CC to learn how to read? If you don't like reading threads of people complaining about it...don't read them. Simple solution. You're tired of it yet you continue to post replies to them? You know what I'm sick of? People who walk into a sauna and say "It's too hot in here!" That's the mentality of all the egotistical Americans these days. Americans already think they own the world, now they think they own every one else, too. Whenever an American doesn't like something that someone else is doing, they try to change it instead of staying away from it. It's like all the states that have passed laws against smoking in bars instead of letting the bar owners decide. Why? Because people like this complained. "I walked in a bar and they were smoking!" "Then why didn't you just walk back out?" "I shouldn't have to! If I want to go in that bar and not be exposed to smoke, I should be able to!" You people think everything should be your way and whatever you believe is the only thing that's right. If you don't smoke, then everyone that does is disgusting. If you're an atheist, then anyone who's religious is stupid or naive. If you spend your life in front of your computer and all your money on games and hardware, anyone who doesn't is cheap or poor. Get a life, then grow up.

Quoting Shortlived99, reply 14
40$ graphics card will not run this game unless your running a quad core.  HAHA.  But then again, who in their right mind buys ATI?
End of Shortlived99's quote

People who don't buy into hype or fall for advertising tricks. I used to buy GeForce cards back when the Radeon 9700 first came out. I bought the best GeForce on the market and discovered that some games I played still had low framerates and graphical glitches. I then bought the Radeon 9700, but before installing it, ran the GeForce through 3DMark. Then I swapped cards and ran the 9700 through it. The overall score on the 9700 was over 6 times higher than the GeForce and I had double the framerates. The best part: The 9700 was cheaper. The people that think ATI sucks are the same kinds of people that prefer Macs or Intel. AMD processors are much faster than their Intel equivalents, run a lower temperatures, and overclock much easier and with less risk.

Quoting Chaoticon, reply 15
Even if you could play no one would want to play with you because your sim speed would be beyond bad bad. If you are using an x800 im sure your processor is pretty bad to. Its 2009 this is a pretty intensive game since they chose to use the supcom engine.
End of Chaoticon's quote

And SupComm ran fine for me, even online.

Now, for all you morons that couldn't read that I said I didn't want any retard replies: Don't waste my time or yours. If you can't comprehend that your comments are not only a waste of space and time, but completely unfounded since you obviously didn't read what I wrote. I don't know if youre attention spans are just as short as your pricks or your IQ is so low you just don't really understand words too well. Either way, move on to a thread about who's got the bigger porn collection or something you can actually participate in. You morons have just missed the entire point. You pick out one or two sentences, read nothing else, and then post a reply that makes you sound like a 12 year old. To break down my post in small words you can understand....I hope:

Me have old video card. Me know this. Me not spend lots of ching ching on pornogamobox parts. Me buy what me need to do what me want. Me not care if you say me should buy new card. Me not care that much about playing Demigod game. Me's life not all about games and porn. Me have life. Me spend money on more important things. Important means things that mean more to me than practice sitting. Me no care you's dumb thoughts. Me almost give up trying to help yous understand words. Yous too stupid to learn. If yous no like what me say or no agree with me, then ignore me and go somewhere else. Me no give a shit what you think. Me ask for mature and smart responses. Me no get any.

Is that understandable to you simps? Now, let me reiterate what I've been saying a million times and you just can't seem to comprehend: They had planned on supporting 2.0, but changed that at release. If times was an issue, a patch could've been released later. This game is based on the SupComm engine which DID support 2.0. It would not have been that expensive or difficult for them to support 2.0. There's really nothing they would have lost by supporting it. In business, when gain is more than cost, it's smart to proceed. You continue to argue that it can't be done yet 3D-Analyze was a program that emulated 2.0 on earlier cards that ran 1.4 or 1.0. It may very well support emulation for 3.0 in the future...it may not. Bioshock "REQUIRED" 3.0 but a simple, extremely small fix was released by an independent 3rd party programmer to support 2.0. If this was done by some wiz in his basement or whatever, you can't tell me an entire company can't do it. There's no excuse. Unless you're a video game programmer that worked on Demigod in the rendering department, I don't want to hear anything you have to say about how hard/expensive it is to do, etc. etc. etc. blah blah blah. You can act like you know whatever, but I don't give a shit. Unless you worked on THIS GAME specifically with Pixel Shader support...DON'T post anything pretending you know how it's done.

Furthermore, DO NOT POST ANYTHING ABOUT BUYING A NEW VIDEO CARD. Apparently the 40 other times I said it didn't get through. I'm well aware of my video card situation, thank you. As I've stated, I don't care enough to do so at this point in time, thank you for your concern. I'll upgrade when I please and how I please, if you don't mind. I don't care to hear your opinions on what I SHOULD do or when and how I should upgrade or anything having to do with me upgrading whatsoever. Is that clear enough? Can everyone understand this or is it going to continue to be ignored by all the dumbfounded products of incest that read this paragraph and sit there glassy-eyed and mouth agape staring at their monitor not knowing what I mean by: I DON'T CARE ABOUT ANYONE SAYING ANYTHING ABOUT ME UPGRADING MY F***ING VIDEO CARD!!!

Now that that's been said....again. The point I've been TRYING to make is the principle. The developer could have supporteed 2.0 and lost nothing for doing it and gained extra sells as well as been commended for better customer service, but didn't. It CAN be done, it's been done by less knowledgeable people in the past. Yes there are many casual gamers out there that don't spend all their cash on computer parts because they have other priorities in life. This doesn't mean they're cheap or poor. Why don't you go buy a bigger water heater? How about a prettier faucet? One of those that don't drip after a lot of usage? Why don't you? Because you don't need/want to. It's not a priority. Could you afford it? Yes. Do you want to buy it? No. Right now, a new video card to me is like buying a bigger water heater. So drop it already.

My primary point is that game developers and hardware companies make these off-the-record deals. My guess about what happened here: The graphics card manufacturers made a deal with some game developers, like this one, to make their game require PS3.0 so gamers will have to buy new video cards that ordinarily may not for a while. A game like this comes out and gamers (just like you idiots that keep clammering "Buy a new card, Ahyuck!") run and buy a new video card, thus driving up their sales. In return they might pay the developers or cut them deals on permission to use their technology, etc. Put quite simply: They could suppor 2.0 but didn't and won't, most likely because they're getting something out of forcing it to drive hardware sales. Case closed.

Anything having to do with why they didn't - Not needed, don't care, keep it to yourself.
Anything having to do with me upgrading - Already coverd...numerous times...f*** off, I'm sick of your stupidity and I'm tired of pointing out the obvious.

EDIT: The quoteblocks are all f***ed up but I really don't care enough to go back and find the problem.
Reply #17 Top

so now its a conspiracy? 

 

sounded pretty reasonable when Kryo said "old card is old". 

 

thats just how PC gaming is. go bug Radeon about legacy support. 

Reply #18 Top

Well made post. However, you're being naive. It is definitely time for you to upgrade your graphics card. I honestly I don't know how you could enjoy playing Fallout 3 with a card like that. Makes my eyes hurt just thinking about it.

All I can say is, it's definitely time for you to upgrade. I'd recommend an ATI 4770. It is only a 100 bucks but is more powerful than cards 40-50 bucks more expensive. And paired with another 4770 in crossfire, it is the most powerful set up you can get for 200 dollars. Just so you know, dual 4770s are more powerful than a GTX 280. And a GTX 280 is around 350 dollars.

And another thing OP, STARDOCK DIDN'T DEVELOP THE FUCKING GAME OR CREATE THE GRAPHICS ENGINE. GPG games did.

 

Reply #19 Top

You have rage issues. Also, people are probably ignoring the large majority of what you post because most of it can be summed up in a pargraph. Also, YOUR COMPUTER WILL NOT RUN EVERY NEW VIDEO GAME TO COME OUT EVER. The "principle" you're trying to justify is wrong. That is like expecting a 486 that you bought in the 90s to run games of today because of "principle". If you cannot come up with a reason other than the "principle" that your 6 year old computer cannot run a game in 2009 then you should probably just ask for a refund and gtfo.

 

One last edit, no one personally attacked you until you started slinging the poo. So take your rage to anger management and gtfo.

Reply #20 Top

Quoting transitive, reply 17
so now its a conspiracy? 

 

sounded pretty reasonable when Kryo said "old card is old". 

 

thats just how PC gaming is. go bug Radeon about legacy support. 
End of transitive's quote

 

LMFAO, since when is dirty business a conspiracy? You're really gullible/naive if you think this doesn't happen every day. Thousands of times a day all over the world. Business make deals like these all the time, it isn't that far-fetched. Not at all overshadowed by the fact that GPG is owned by Microsoft and Bill Gates himself stole his design for Windows from Xerox. Microsoft's rise to power is seeded in dirty dealings.

Quoting Protocept00, reply 18
Well made post. However, you're being naive. It is definitely time for you to upgrade your graphics card. I honestly I don't know how you could enjoy playing Fallout 3 with a card like that. Makes my eyes hurt just thinking about it.

All I can say is, it's definitely time for you to upgrade. I'd recommend an ATI 4770. It is only a 100 bucks but is more powerful than cards 40-50 bucks more expensive. And paired with another 4770 in crossfire, it is the most powerful set up you can get for 200 dollars. Just so you know, dual 4770s are more powerful than a GTX 280. And a GTX 280 is around 350 dollars.

And another thing OP, STARDOCK DIDN'T DEVELOP THE FUCKING GAME OR CREATE THE GRAPHICS ENGINE. GPG games did.

 
End of Protocept00's quote

I'm not the lease bit naive. What part about me not giving a shit about an upgrade right now can't you people understand? Do all of you speak English as a second language or something? You just continue to post the same redundant innane shit that's already been covered. I feel like I'm listening to a record skip and can't reach the needle to make it stop. Fallout 3 runs flawlessly for me. I'm perfectly aware of what cards and when to upgrade. I've been building and repairing computers for 12 years now. Every computer I've ever owned I built myself. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't remember ever saying anything about Stardock developing the game. Although the wording in the last paragraph could be construed that way. That doesn't mean, however, that Stardock is innocent.

Reply #21 Top

If you can't comprehend that your comments are not only a waste of space and time
End of quote

They sure ARE a waste of space since you quoted every single post ever made in the history of the forum first.  Talk about a wall of text!

Me have old video card. Me know this. Me not spend lots of ching ching on pornogamobox parts. Me buy what me need to do what me want. Me not care if you say me should buy new card. Me not care that much about playing Demigod game. Me's life not all about games and porn. Me have life. Me spend money on more important things.
End of quote

Then this is the bottom line - buy a $40 video card or the $50 game you bought WILL NOT RUN.  That's it.  If you are unwilling or unable to pay the extra $40 then don't bother typing another word - return the game and move on with your life.  It's a wonder you paid for the game already if you're so damn stringent about purchasing anything to improve your PC's performance.  (Wait....you did buy the game...right?)

This is how PC games are.  If anything I think the requirements are too low, since the way the connectivity is designed it drags down people who can run the game well to the level of the person running the game the worst.  But that's not entirely the issue here.  If you cannot meet the minimum requirements needed by the game then you cannot play it, period.

Reply #22 Top

Quoting Zoobi07, reply 19
You have rage issues. Also, people are probably ignoring the large majority of what you post because most of it can be summed up in a pargraph. Also, YOUR COMPUTER WILL NOT RUN EVERY NEW VIDEO GAME TO COME OUT EVER.
End of Zoobi07's quote

Yea, and one simple sentence seems to continually get lost: I DON'T GIVE A MOTHERF**K ABOUT UPGRADING. STFU about how cheap the cards are or ANYTHING HAVING TO DO WITH IT WHATSOEVER. It's sickening. And did I ever say my computer would, douchebag? I don't think I did. Did I say anything anywhere about my computer running every game? Most of these guys on here just don't know how to read or can't understand English, but you just make shit up entirely. The whole point here is that this game could and would run fine on my computer if not for an unnecessary requirement being hardcoded in the game. Is that too difficult to understand? Really? It's a simple concept.

And yes I have rage issues. I have rage issues with people who continually post the same retarded drivel over and over again after I've specifically addressed the very thing they're posting on in my original post. LONG before the first reply. I still see it every other post.

And you know what? That's the problem. They're ignoring a majority of what I write and still think they've read enough to reply. If it's so boring you need to ignore it...ignore ALL of it and go post in another thread. You don't chime in on a conversation you've only heard part of.

Reply #23 Top

The point I've been TRYING to make is the principle. The developer could have supporteed 2.0 and lost nothing for doing it and gained extra sells as well as been commended for better customer service, but didn't.
End of quote

Oh missed this - the principle that you are trying to avoid is that people with 2.0 shader cards have CRAPPY COMPUTERS.

Crappy computers run the game poorly.  Computers that run the game poorly have low sim speeds.  Low sim speeds drag down online performance for EVERYONE in the game.

Not supporting 2.0 is for the good of everyone.  I'm sorry you can't see that.

Reply #24 Top

And you know what? That's the problem. They're ignoring a majority of what I write
End of quote

Has the thought ever crossed your mind that perhaps it is you who is ignoring a majority of what everyone else is saying?

Everyone has provided the solution.  You are the problem.

Reply #25 Top

Quoting InfiniteVengeance, reply 24

And you know what? That's the problem. They're ignoring a majority of what I write
Has the thought ever crossed your mind that perhaps it is you who is ignoring a majority of what everyone else is saying?

Everyone has provided the solution.  You are the problem.
End of InfiniteVengeance's quote

 

This.