How Ironic

[Darth Ni]

Ok... so you got to play it before us. Will the bugs reported in KotOR II for XBOX be fixed for the PC Version? Yes and it will be out in 1 1/2 months anyways. Its not a huge wait especially since games like HL2 are out which are PC only if I might remind...

[EnderAndrew]

Or you could own both PC and XBox and do whatever you want whenever you want.

[Darth Ni]

Yea... but wouldn't it be a waste of money to buy the same game twice? Patience my friend...

[ampulator00]

This reminds me; Maybe it's time for a minor cpu + memory upgrade.

[Ostkant]

Perhaps it is... are you ready to empty your bank account?

[Darth Ni]

If u could run KotOR I, you will probably be able to run KotOR II. See how it runs first before an upgrade or just wait until they release the sytem requirements. The system requirements are not 100% accurate though due to the variations in PC configurations. If your processor is for example 200mhz slower than the requirements but your video card is waaay above them, you will still be able to run the game. KotOR required something like 1.2 GHz and I ran on 900 so don't upgrade just yet. Try playing the game on your PC and see how it goes.

[The Coordinator]

@Darth Ni

 

Are we resorting to insults now? Is it not possible to have a civil discussion or do I need to read crap such as "do not be so rude like handicapped child". I was just giving specifications and you come in and act like a smartass, who is being rude now? For your information, Athlon-64 processors are on sale and they have been for atleast a year and yes they use the hypertransport technology which has a 1600mhz - 2000mhz bus speed. As I said, please visit the Alienware website or if you want check out www.tigerdirect.com. If you can show me tangible evidence that is contrary to what i posted, show it to me. In other words, Link it.

 

//Athlon cpus with 64bit support are not all the same! Oh man.

There are, as I wrote before:

 

a) athlon 64cpu"winchester3000+ upwards"/and "clawhammer" for socked 939 with 1000mhz/1600 fsb max!

 

b) athlon64 opteron"sledgehammer" for socked 940 run with 800mhz fsb max.

 

c) athlon64 newcastle/sempron/sledgehammer for socked 754 with 800mhz fsb max.

 

d) athlon fx with 2000mhz fsb max. The only one. Very expensive(around 1000$) and not yet available in great numbers-many reteilers have them in their list, but NOT available for shiping!//

 

Look here for info: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/displ...lon64-fx53.html

 

 

--"Up to"...coming next year "maybe". But right now it

[Darth Ni]

This is turning more into insults than discussion. About the "most things you write aren't true", you are incorrect. Accepted, I didn't know the X600 came only as PCI-Express. Also, there is nothing else you can do but overclock the card or unmask the extra pipelines. Don't post incorrect facts.

 

But everything upwards from 25 fps is fluent, a natural fact! Thank you. I have nothing against you but your inaccurate posts and wrong data

 

One more thing, its 30 FPS so don't post wrong information :D. The human eye can only notice a drop if the FPS goes below 30.

 

In the interests of not continuing this pointless discussion, I recommend you stop posting garbage. For your information, you did not win, I just dont see the point of arguing this.

 

Calm down, get a glass of water...

[ampulator00]

Perhaps it is... are you ready to empty your bank account?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I wouldn't have to.

 

I'm looking only for the best band for the buck, without much additions or removeals, so I won't lose a lot.

[Mongoose]

One more thing, its 30 FPS so don't post wrong information :D. The human eye can only notice a drop if the FPS goes below 30.

Actually, that's untrue. The human eye's ability to notice changes depends on the amount of change and movement in question. If the scene is a black screen, then you don't need more than 1 FPS (in fact, you don't need more than a single frame). If something is moving, then you need as many frames as possible to cover the movement with no gaps in the movement from one frame to the next. Thus, the faster something moves, the more frames per second you need, because the object moves more distance per time.

 

24 FPS is the usual quoted rate for movies, and movies don't even need that much, because they include motion blur to tween together frames. The eye notices no gaps because the film media blurs the image from the movement during film exposure. Games and animation, whether cel or digital, have no such easy way out; with no motion blur, if something moves faster than the frame rate, it will create gaps in its movement animation that the eye can easily see. Thus, the faster the game, the more FPS you need. Something like a fighting game or first person shooter needs to be 60 FPS due to the herky-jerky movement in the game, while something like a strategy game can do fine at 30 FPS.

 

Of course, movies aren't actually shown at 24 FPS either. To make sure that you can't notice the black gaps between film frames, each frame is actually flashed three times so that you don't notice when the film switches frames. So, films are actually shown at 72 FPS. 24 FPS is way too slow to fool the human brain into not seeing the black flickers between frames on the film. As digital animation has no concept of film, games don't have to account for this black flicker problem. (This is a refresh rate problem, rather; It'd be the equivalent of having a 24 Hz (ouch) versus a 72 Hz refresh rate on your monitor.)

[Jad'en]

Perhaps it is... are you ready to empty your bank account?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

yes im ready, my parents are rich though... so i dont have much chance of cleaning them out :D

[The Coordinator]

One more thing, its 30 FPS so don't post wrong information :D. The human eye can only notice a drop if the FPS goes below 30.

Actually, that's untrue. The human eye's ability to notice changes depends on the amount of change and movement in question. If the scene is a black screen, then you don't need more than 1 FPS (in fact, you don't need more than a single frame). If something is moving, then you need as many frames as possible to cover the movement with no gaps in the movement from one frame to the next. Thus, the faster something moves, the more frames per second you need, because the object moves more distance per time.

 

24 FPS is the usual quoted rate for movies, and movies don't even need that much, because they include motion blur to tween together frames. The eye notices no gaps because the film media blurs the image from the movement during film exposure. Games and animation, whether cel or digital, have no such easy way out; with no motion blur, if something moves faster than the frame rate, it will create gaps in its movement animation that the eye can easily see. Thus, the faster the game, the more FPS you need. Something like a fighting game or first person shooter needs to be 60 FPS due to the herky-jerky movement in the game, while something like a strategy game can do fine at 30 FPS.

 

Of course, movies aren't actually shown at 24 FPS either. To make sure that you can't notice the black gaps between film frames, each frame is actually flashed three times so that you don't notice when the film switches frames. So, films are actually shown at 72 FPS. 24 FPS is way too slow to fool the human brain into not seeing the black flickers between frames on the film. As digital animation has no concept of film, games don't have to account for this black flicker problem. (This is a refresh rate problem, rather; It'd be the equivalent of having a 24 Hz (ouch) versus a 72 Hz refresh rate on your monitor.)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Well done! You have the patience left to write that all down. Thank you.

[Jad'en]

Nice one Darth Ni.... you have 20 times more patience with me.... i gave up explaining mediocrly ages ago

[GhostofAnakin]

yes im ready, my parents are rich though... so i dont have much chance of cleaning them out  :D

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Do your rich parents have any interest in adopting me? I'll send them Christmas and birthday cards in return for them buying me a new computer.

[Darth Ni]

Thanks Jad'en but i think you were referring to Mongoose. Mongoose, not to start a flame war but I have to make a few points. However let me just start off by saying that you are right about one thing, my original statement was wrong. This prompted me to do a little research...

 

With Computer Video Cards and computer programming, the actual frame rate can vary. Pushing the Human Eye past 30 FPS to 60 FPS and even 120 FPS is possible, ask the video card manufacturers, an eye doctor, or a Physiologist. We as humans CAN and DO see more than 60 frames a second. You see, the reason this is true is because we dont see in frames. The Human Eye perceives information continuously. You could say we perceive the external visual world through streams, and only lose it when our eyes blink.

 

I will attempt to explain to you how the Human Eye can perceive much past the misconception of 30 FPS and well past 60 FPS, even surpassing 200 FPS. We humans see light when its focused onto the retina of the eye by the lens. Light rays are perceived by our eyes as light enters - well, at the speed of light. Information is continuously streamed to us due to the fact that we live in an infinite world. Our retinas interpret light in several ways with two types of cells; the rods and the cones. These cells are responsible for all aspects of recieving the light rays from our retinas.

 

Calculations such as intensity, color, and position (relative to the cell on the retina) are all forms of information transmitted by our retinas to our optic nerves. The optic nerve in turn sends this data through its pipeline (at the nerve impulse speed), on to the Visual Cortex portion of our Brains where it is interpreted.

 

Rods are the simpler of the two cell types, as the really only interprets shapes. Since Rods are light intensity specific cells, they respond very fast, and to this day rival the quickest response time of the fastest computer. Rods control the amount of neurotransmitter released which is basically the amount of light that is stimulating the rod at that precise moment. Scientific study has proven upon microscopic examination of the retina that there is a much greater concentration of rods along the outer edges.

 

Cones are the second retina specialized cell type, and these are much more complex. Cones on our retinas are the equivalent of RGB inputs that monitors use. The three parts of the cones absorb different wavelengths of light and release differing amounts of different neurotransmitters depending on the wavelength and intensity of that light. Each cone has three receptors that receive red, green, or blue in the wavelength spectrum. Depending on the intensity of each wavelength, each receptor will release varying levels and types of neurotransmitter on through the optic nerve, and in some cases, no neurotransmitter. Due to the fact that our cones have 3 receptors as opposed to 1, their response time is less due to their complexity.

 

Our Optic nerves are the path by which our lens, then retina transmit the visual data on to our Brain for interpretation. This all begins with a nerve impulse in the optic nerve triggered by a neurotransmitter in the retina. This entire option takes less than a picosecond to occur. A picosecond is one trillionth of a second, so in reality, theoretically, we can calculate our eyes "response time" and then to theoretical frames per second (However, this isn

[Darth Ni]

yes im ready, my parents are rich though... so i dont have much chance of cleaning them out  :D

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Do your rich parents have any interest in adopting me? I'll send them Christmas and birthday cards in return for them buying me a new computer.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I'll second that, can they adopt me too? Please? I'll send them candy too not just cards. And then, they could celebrate my birthday by you know, purchasing a Plasma, a new PC, that kind of stuff. I'm sure it wouldn't compromise their financial situation... right? There are people who just don't realise how much they have and don't realise how generous they can be..... Its worth a try right???

[nehwon_death]

I had KotOR for both, PC and XBOX.. For the PC i never experienced lag, crashes or anything of that nature.. and that was on a high resolution, and graphics selection.. but on the XBOX it did have on occasion, problems where it lagged, mainly on the Star Forge, and in Dantooine..

 

So for this version i have chosen  to get the PC version because i have more guarantee, seeing as this game uses the same engine that it will be presented better.

 

Go my PC! Woohoo!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Played kotor on my pc with a geforce 4mx graphics card and had no problems, my fiancee has the x-box version and says that she had no issues with lagging whilst playing...strange. <_<

[Mongoose]

Thanks Jad'en but i think you were referring to Mongoose. Mongoose, not to start a flame war but I have to make a few points. However let me just start off by saying that you are right about one thing, my original statement was wrong. This prompted me to do a little research...

Interesting read. I don't know if there's any flaming possible, really, because there's nothing that I disagree with (or don't know enough of). I didn't mean to imply that 60 FPS will guarantee smooth movement for games, if that's what you're contending, just that more FPS is needed for games that involve fast movement as compared to, say, Freecell, and that the eye can detect things at more than 30 FPS.

[DSLuke]

Excactly is has to do with how fast the characters/items are moving in a game and in what detail.

[Darth Ni]

No I'm just saying that we can witness things much faster than 60 FPS its just that our brain filters it out. For example, we have an excellent sense of hearing but the majority of sounds get blocked out. For example, if you were at a party, you could hear everyone within 100 meters breathing, you could hear their heart beats, you could hear all their conversations. You can pretty well imagine that we would go insane after hearing this because its simply too much for us to process. Similarily (this is all theoretical), its possible that we can see over 200FPS but it would cause a tremendous strain on the eyes if we viewed every single one of those frames. I was merely saying that you're incorrect if you think that 60 FPS is the same as 90 FPS or 120FPS for the human eye. Btw, that 200FPS is quite a conservative estimate and its also due to the limited ability of computer hardware, the more advanced technology becomes, the higher FPS we will be view. I don't know how exactly this is true because I'm not a neuroscientist but that's what they (doctors, scientists, g.c. manufacturers etc.) say.

 

 

the eye can detect things at more than 30 FPS.

Definetly, I was wrong and I admit that.

[mkreku]

This thread has become sickeningly friendly! Go back to flaming, please!!

[DSLuke]

This thread has become sickeningly friendly! Go back to flaming, please!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

We are civilized PC users here. We need Xboxers to start a flame war :cool:

[Darth Ni]

This thread has become sickeningly friendly! Go back to flaming, please!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

No thanks I'd rather not unless you would like to start a flame war with the Coordinator. I don't really care, I just don't see the point of arguing on technical specifications...

 

"We are civilized PC users here. We need Xboxers to start a flame war "

 

Exactly.

[GhostofAnakin]

This thread has become sickeningly friendly! Go back to flaming, please!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Swedish people wear pink women's panties and smell like canola oil.

[EnderAndrew]

I....don't.....want.....to.....know.