Just As We Predicted With Generals

[GhostHunter]

The online community for such a large, new project is INSANELY small. And know why? Not because of the gameplay, settings, characters etc but ah my friend it's the system requirments that screwed the Generals online community over. Just as we forsaw

[DukeLeto]

True, you need at LEAST a 1.8 GHz proc w/GeForce 4, but is that REALLY asking so much these days? ::)

[Khan]

I have only GeForce 3 and it works fine on my comp.

[nemafakei]

Pardon my ignorance, but what, roughly ARE the requirements (seriously)?

[Khan]

800Mhz 128MB ram 1.8 Gig hard drive 32 MB graphics card, GeForce 3 around about. Windows 98 onwards.

[nemafakei]

Flipping hell!

That's absurd! You need to have a PC bought within the last year or two for that (three if you were willing to pay an exorbitant amount when you got it).

How stupid!

[Terror]

i have only a mediocore system (t bird 1,33 ghz, geforce 4 ti4200, 512 mb ram) and the game runs fine in 1600x1200x32... so it's not as bad as some think it is.

[Terror]

Flipping hell!

That's absurd! You need to have a PC bought within the last year or two for that (three if you were willing to pay an exorbitant amount when you got it).

How stupid!

? That's with all games.... helloooooooo... where have you been the last 5 years ::) . Anyway, Splinter Cell for instance require a 1 ghz system. GTA 3 and Warcraft 3 are quite demanding on your system as well, not to forget UT2003/Unreal 2 etc. Generals' sys requirements is not that bad compared to some others

[nemafakei]

I have a mediocre system. 500MHz K6-2, 128MB RAM, ATI 16MB graphcs card.

[Terror]

well yes, it's mediocore for all the windows applications... except games. Realy, you probably hardly play them, but the point is. Games require powerful system with powerful graphix cards. And when it comes to games, you have an old system :-

[Apollyon]

The online community for such a large, new project is INSANELY small. And know why? Not because of the gameplay, settings, characters etc but ah my friend it's the system requirments that screwed the Generals online community over. Just as we forsaw

I agree, and in a petty, spiteful way I must say I'm quite glad. Damn EA think they can screw us over - well thats what you deserve!

[nemafakei]

This never used to be the case with games. Games manufacturers used to be aware of the fact that most people didn't have really up-to-date systems.

Example: you could run RA1 on a 486 with 8MB (I think), despite the fact that the standard minimum for machines on sale was 32MB P133s as I recall, and four or five years beforehand, you could have purchased such a 486 at the same price.

[exatreide]

will my

550 MHZ Pentium three

212 ram

16 meg tri star graphics chip run it on the lowest settings?

[ken124578]

Nope, sorry, i myself have a 866 mhz P III 32 mb graphic card and it doesn't work, just because my 32 mb graphic card isn't a Gforce 2 or higher but from the older TNT series >:(

[Terror]

This never used to be the case with games. Games manufacturers used to be aware of the fact that most people didn't have really up-to-date systems.

Example: you could run RA1 on a 486 with 8MB (I think), despite the fact that the standard minimum for machines on sale was 32MB P133s as I recall, and four or five years beforehand, you could have purchased such a 486 at the same price.

yeah i guess, but times have changed. Games can be made very impressive these days, the technology to create them is here. But most computers just can't run all the newest stuff, so they have to tune down the graphix, untill a better processor comes available.

Generals is not a must have game, it's just very nice. If your comp can handle it. I'd advice to buy it. But there are plenty of other, older games that are good too.

[lowzeewee]

EA is just screwing things up....like what ghosthunter is trying to say :)

[Anathema]

Keep in mind that RTS was basicly "the poor mans" genre, because they usually didn't require as good machines as FPS games. With my previous AMD 400ghz comp I had for example no problem running Starcraft or Earth2150 on high graphic settings.

I have 1,5ghz now and 512 ram. But I have a louzy GeforceII 32mb video card. Because of that I can only run Generals on low sets.

[thomas]

I have a 933mhz :( comp but it has 512 ram :D and a nvidia ti440? geforce 4 64mb ;D ;D

[Terror]

Well, that will run Generals, i dunno how well though

And i think that generals on lower graphical settings doesn't look THAT good, only the engine is still quite impressive. However, in 1600x1200 it looks amazing. All the tanks and other vehicles look so sharp, as do the planes. The only thing that does not look incredible IMO is the infantry. But i'm glad it has infantry.

Earth 2150 is great game, but i just miss that infanty :-

[Anathema]

Well, Earth 2160 will fix that part :)

I haven't played Generals much, but I did take a quick glance at the engine. In comparison to the Earth2150 engine it does have a few disadvantages. In Earth 2150 you can zoom out much further, and change the camera angle. In Earth2150 you can alter the terrain using bulldozers, and I doubt you could do this with an engine like that of Generals. In Earth 2150 ground is actually "solid", meaning that a small ridge or a minor elevation can mean that most guns can't fire across it, unless it's a weapon that fires with arcs.

[Terror]

Earth 2150 has a nice engine yes, weather effects, and their result on in the battle is impressive, the way lakes are created and stuff all looks good. One thing i don't like about the earth 2150 engine is air units. They are made quite bad, as they are just land units, somewhat above ground, but they don't fly like air units. In Generals this is ok, but not too good either. The way units drive though, is very nice in Generals, Earth2150 does this pretty good as well. Total annihilation has the air untis that i wish were in every game. Fighters going into dogfight with others and hunting down bombers, while bombers just drop a line of 10 bombs, and strategical bombers doing the same, but with 15 bombs and it also has a gun turret for defence against fighters, however this only works if the bombers are in a squadron, otherwise they will have no chance against the fighters. You also have torpedo bombers, who simply drop torpedoes in the water that then run out into an enemy ship, and VTOL craft, which can be compared to helicopters, but unlike helicopters in let's say generals and earth2150, they are not completely still in the air, they make certain manouvres, as they do in reality. In Generals and Earth2105 they are just so static

[Navaros]

Don't matter if you have all the best hardware on the Market.

That is totally irrelevant.

Even then, Generals is STILL gonna be an uber-lag-fest due to GameSpy. LOL

[Khan]

It's not that laggy Arohk.

[DukeLeto]

Don't matter if you have all the best hardware on the Market.

That is totally irrelevant.

Even then, Generals is STILL gonna be an uber-lag-fest due to GameSpy. LOL

Actually, there is no lag at all if both of you have good hardware/connections. Allow me to explain how GameSpy, indeed any such service works.

Matchmaking services such as GameSpy, MSN, WOL, or Bnet are exactly that: matchmaking services. once everybody is connected, they are out of the picture. Everything goes through the host computer. (In 3 player+ QM, the one with the fastest connection is automatically shosen as "host".) Once the game is over, the score is transmitted by the host computer back to the network.

As you can see, GameSpy, WOl, Bnet...it doesen't matter. They have no effect whatsoever on the amount of lag.

As a side note, you don't play Generals through a seperate GSA client, it's all built in.

[drahgoon]

I have a mediocre system. 500MHz K6-2, 128MB RAM, ATI 16MB graphcs card.

you think thats bad i have two computers. one is 200 mhz, 48 MB RAM, 16 MB video card and the computer that is actually mine is 150 mhz CYRIX PROCESSER WHICH IS THE EQUIVALENT OF A DOLLAR STORE PROCCESSER and that means it runs @ 133 mhz but will run 150 mhz games fucking slow