alanschu Posted November 7, 2006 Posted November 7, 2006 I'm giving taks a hard time because he started off with saying that my LCD and running the game at it's native resolution was the problem and then turns around and says he never said my monitor was the problem. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Setzer, since you insist on saying he was trying to change what he said, I went back and looked at the original posts, and I noticed something rather important: V-sync is off - I have that manually turned off in the nvidia control panel. I tried running with shadows off and it gave me a +5 to FPS(went from 20 to around 25). I also have the latest nvidia drivers(93.71). The only way the game runs good is if I turn off AA/AF, turn off all lighting effects, set my resolution to 1280x960, which doesn't look good on a ws 20" lcd) and then I get 40-50 outdoors but the game looks horrible. oooohhh... you have an LCD. sorry. yeah, that could be a killer. LCDs need to run in their native which is probably 1600x1200? that would be murder on most vid cards. this would be the one "catch" i failed to mention above. the high resolution requirements of most LCDs makes gaming difficult sometimes, even with uber video cards. i have a 21" samsung at work (well, one here, too, the 213T) and it looks horrible with everything, even winders, on anything less than 1600x1200. unfortunately, i don't have a vid card strong enough to power that resolution at 75 Hz refresh, 32-bit color and any nifty options. so it sits unused. When he was talking about your monitor, he was talking about video quality, not performance. Since the performance was subpar at the high resolutions, you tried dropping it down but then complained that the game looked horrible. At no point did he say that your monitor was causing poor performance in this post that you mention. If anything, I think you just misinterpretted his post, and then continued onwards. He said the large LCD monitors can be poor for gaming because their native resolution is excessively high, and can outstrip the performance of a video card very easily if you want to play in the native resolution (i.e. the best quality). He never said it was the cause of poor performance. You misread his post, and then continued on an argument with him with that misinterpretation, which naturally made him defensive. Unfortunately, even when you went back to look at his post, you failed to look at the post directly above his post that was yours, where you made a comment about how the image quality was poor. In essence, you took his quote out of context, and incorrectly assumed (again) that he was talking about your monitor being the cause for the performance problem. To reiterate, the comment about the monitor was referring to the poor image quality at lower resolutions.
roshan Posted November 7, 2006 Posted November 7, 2006 In the greater scheme of things this dumbing down of RPGs is a part of the leftist outlook, for which I have nothing but contempt and derision as it ends up dragging the entire human race down to the level of the least common denominator. I don't think Jack Thompson is a "leftist".. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Who exactly is Jack Thompson?
Pop Posted November 7, 2006 Posted November 7, 2006 (edited) In the greater scheme of things this dumbing down of RPGs is a part of the leftist outlook, for which I have nothing but contempt and derision as it ends up dragging the entire human race down to the level of the least common denominator. I don't think Jack Thompson is a "leftist".. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Who exactly is Jack Thompson? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Jack Thompson, the one man who protects innocent, pure American children from the foul corrupting touch of violent, obscene, trashy video games. Obviously, a weak liberal relativist in every sense of the term. Edited November 7, 2006 by Pop Join me, and we shall make Production Beards a reality!
@\NightandtheShape/@ Posted November 7, 2006 Posted November 7, 2006 (edited) Doesn't smell write to me, the ruleset for the most part isn't exactly a world apart from NWN, which ran and systems with alot less power. and was considerably less graphics intensive. NWN had a lot of problems when it was first released, too. as a matter of fact, i'm having major issues running WCoC (premium module) even now (major stutters, with daggerford as well). NWN2 is hardly "graphically intensive"(That's in terms of the eventual result) when compared with other games from many many genres. I've never seen a table in D&D which I would think of as being large, but there are and have been methods for storing tables, and working with tables inside of code, sine table springs to mind, a technique often used to cheaply calculate sine values. but they still sit in memory, which is slow. RAS/CAS latency is a killer. Oh come on blaming the hardware for slowing down the ruleset is comical to me, you're not speaking to some n00b. We all KNOW that RAM is slow, but the ruleset is not something that needs to be scheduled to even run every frame, most of it only needs to be running when required, once a frame maybe twice. Good logic can avoid alot checking aswell. checking IS logic. Well i won't dispute that, checking is logic, I think it's dense to say that though especially when you consider that my comment was pretty straight forwards (seems I missed of out, general typo), but I'll expand and clarify. Basically, if the coder makes a check against the correct thing early enough he needs not commit to extra checks later, thus avoiding extra checks via GOOD LOGIC. Is that better? What I mean by Balancing out is that the code under the hood somewhere is poor, it HAS to be poor to require such a high end machine. It's a simple fact. again, you don't know that without knowing what the code is actually doing. how much of the graphics features are truly offloaded to the GPU vs. the CPU is one in particular. something has to generate the data for the dynamic lighting and shadows and water reflections/refractions, for example, before handing it off to the GPU. it is impossible to tell what the bottleneck is unless you are actually using the library itself. I doubt I'll get to see the code, so I cannot say, but most should be offloaded onto the GPU. See that's what i can do, I can say how it SHOULD be, and if it's not like that i wanna know WHY! I'm not saying oh the bottleneck is this and this, but what i am saying is there is a bottleneck. Somewhere there is a bottleneck in the code, it may be obscure, but it's there. certainly, but that doesn't mean it is poor code. again, remember, there is much more detail in what we see in NWN2 than a game like oblivion. how that is handled is at best, a guess by either you or me. bottlenecks are not always unavoidable. taks WTF are you saying, I find that hard to believe because to be honest I don't see much going off that is worthwhile. In terms of the technology I see either bad code or bad decisions. Edited November 7, 2006 by @\NightandtheShape/@ "I'm a programmer at a games company... REET GOOD!" - Me
Diamond Posted November 7, 2006 Posted November 7, 2006 certainly, but that doesn't mean it is poor code. again, remember, there is much more detail in what we see in NWN2 than a game like oblivion. how that is handled is at best, a guess by either you or me. bottlenecks are not always unavoidable. taks WTF are you saying, I find that hard to believe because to be honest I don't see much going off that is worthwhile. In terms of the technology I see either bad code or bad decisions. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> When you have to integrate your code with existing (heterogeneous) codebases, achieving good performance is much more tricky than just "writing good code", you, as a programmer, should know that. I find your claim about that "the code is bad because nothing worthwhile is going on" to be especially surprising. You can't judge code quality until you see it yourself, because there is a lot of factors to consider.
@\NightandtheShape/@ Posted November 7, 2006 Posted November 7, 2006 certainly, but that doesn't mean it is poor code. again, remember, there is much more detail in what we see in NWN2 than a game like oblivion. how that is handled is at best, a guess by either you or me. bottlenecks are not always unavoidable. taks WTF are you saying, I find that hard to believe because to be honest I don't see much going off that is worthwhile. In terms of the technology I see either bad code or bad decisions. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> When you have to integrate your code with existing (heterogeneous) codebases, achieving good performance is much more tricky than just "writing good code", you, as a programmer, should know that. I find your claim about that "the code is bad because nothing worthwhile is going on" to be especially surprising. You can't judge code quality until you see it yourself, because there is a lot of factors to consider. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> (My comments in no way reflect my opinion of NWN2 game, I think the game is awesome, but there are technical issues which Obsidian, with time, will I am sure smooth out... that said my opinion, is that there's been alot of hacking happening and not enough optermization) The entire graphical side was gutted and rewrote, atleast that is the impression I have been given from developer comments. It is not impossible, to implement a new render engine with minimal loss. heck the first thing i would have done is read the code base and made notes of how everything was working, potential pitfalls so to speak. Implementation of Dynamic Lighting, realtime soft-shadows, and bloom aren't exactly the most computationally expensive algorithms. My opinion is that there has been some bad coding happening somewhere to force such a huge jump is system specification - it's a time thing, not an ability thing. When you have someone saying "MAKE THIS WORK!", you make it work and hope you'll have time to make it work lovely later. The guys at obsidian probably now know the engine inside out, every quirk, and with time... We'll see it running smooth, but now... It's got parental issues. "I'm a programmer at a games company... REET GOOD!" - Me
The Named One Posted November 7, 2006 Posted November 7, 2006 My impressions after playing a few hours: I turned everything on low except texture detail which is on high and character models are actually quite pretty as such. Chain mail armour looks great up close. However, I can't say I'm overly enjoying my experience so far (just been told to go to the swamp). First, the game makes me feel like it begrudges moving anywhere. The camera throws itself around haphazardly, and no setting I've tried seems to allow for a nice fluid experience. The most I could do is turn down the mouse sensitivity for the middle mouse button control, but that seems to effect the speed at which the screen moves when you push the edges. Hopefully I'll find some way of dealing with the camera that makes the game at the very least playable. I also now see what reviewers mean when they talk about the sheer quantity of items you receive. Yes bag space is plentiful, but it'll take ages sorting through all this stuff. I liked conversations, and that skirmish with the bladelings and dwarves alongside the town militia et al was quite fun. But when I finished for the night I felt more relief than yearning to continue. I hope that changes.
Diamond Posted November 7, 2006 Posted November 7, 2006 (My comments in no way reflect my opinion of NWN2 game, I think the game is awesome, but there are technical issues which Obsidian, with time, will I am sure smooth out... that said my opinion, is that there's been alot of hacking happening and not enough optermization) The entire graphical side was gutted and rewrote, atleast that is the impression I have been given from developer comments. It is not impossible, to implement a new render engine with minimal loss. heck the first thing i would have done is read the code base and made notes of how everything was working, potential pitfalls so to speak. Implementation of Dynamic Lighting, realtime soft-shadows, and bloom aren't exactly the most computationally expensive algorithms. My opinion is that there has been some bad coding happening somewhere to force such a huge jump is system specification - it's a time thing, not an ability thing. When you have someone saying "MAKE THIS WORK!", you make it work and hope you'll have time to make it work lovely later. The guys at obsidian probably now know the engine inside out, every quirk, and with time... We'll see it running smooth, but now... It's got parental issues. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yes, that is almost what I meant; however the biggest problem, I believe, is not rewriting the graphics engine, but integrating all new goodies with Aurora, which is not a trivial task. Hopefully the engine will get into shape in a month or two and will be polished in 4-6 months.
Walsingham Posted November 7, 2006 Posted November 7, 2006 Can I just ask where in the name of sainted Feargus all these references to politics came from? Jeez, you guys. I thought I was bad... "It wasn't lies. It was just... bull****"." -Elwood Blues tarna's dead; processing... complete. Disappointed by Universe. RIP Hades/Sand/etc. Here's hoping your next alt has a harp.
Gfted1 Posted November 7, 2006 Posted November 7, 2006 (edited) Ok, so I finally finished the tutorial and entered chapter 1. I like the game but have to admit the controls are driving me crazy. The camera is the pits, plain and simple. I have to play with my hands crossed so my right hand is on the mouse and my left hand is on the arrow keys for the friggin 8 billion view adjustments you have to do merely walking 10 feet. Dont even get me started on indoor areas. I also dont like how your party members just wander off screen to do their thing and you cant see what the hell is going on with them until you click their portrait. I do like the battles but I have to get used to the wierd pause between swings where everyone is just kinda standing there. I like the spell animations and my Warlock seems to be kicking some decent butt. I suppose if I fool with the AI I can make my party members stop running off to fights off screen but whoever made those camera controls needs to be horse whipped. EDIT: Oh yeah, got a pretty good giggle when Amie got blasted by the Githyanki mage. Edited November 7, 2006 by Gfted1 "I'm your biggest fan, Ill follow you until you love me, Papa"
taks Posted November 7, 2006 Posted November 7, 2006 (edited) NWN2 is hardly "graphically intensive"(That's in terms of the eventual result) when compared with other games from many many genres. i didn't say it was. i said it had problems running on many systems. Oh come on blaming the hardware for slowing down the ruleset is comical to me, you're not speaking to some n00b. i didn't blame the hardware for slowing down the ruleset. i blamed a complicated ruleset for slowing down the hardware. We all KNOW that RAM is slow, but the ruleset is not something that needs to be scheduled to even run every frame, most of it only needs to be running when required, once a frame maybe twice. really, and you know this because you helped write the code for the engine? Well i won't dispute that, checking is logic, I think it's dense to say that though especially when you consider that my comment was pretty straight forwards (seems I missed of out, general typo), but I'll expand and clarify. your straightforward comment clearly said "good logic can avoid checking." that's nonsense. the checking IS the logic. Basically, if the coder makes a check against the correct thing early enough he needs not commit to extra checks later, thus avoiding extra checks via GOOD LOGIC. the code has to check every time to verifty that something has not changed. think about what you said, btw, just for a second. if you have to check something, and then keep track of that result, then every time the check would otherwise come up, you have to check the result again to see what it is. this is simple programming. Is that better? nothing personal, but you don't give the impression of being someone that has ever written any code. I doubt I'll get to see the code, so I cannot say, but most should be offloaded onto the GPU. See that's what i can do, I can say how it SHOULD be, and if it's not like that i wanna know WHY! you can say what it SHOULD be all day, but you still don't know what is going on. I'm not saying oh the bottleneck is this and this, but what i am saying is there is a bottleneck. obviously there is a bottleneck otherwise it would run well on everyone's system. however, you do not know if the bottleneck is due to bad code, or due to simply complex code that cannot be reduced any further (er, streamlined). in your own statement you acknowledge a lack of insight to the code, so how can you say anything else other than this without truly seeing it? WTF are you saying, I find that hard to believe because to be honest I don't see much going off that is worthwhile. In terms of the technology I see either bad code or bad decisions. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> so you're applying subjective opinion to come to the seemingly objective conclusion that there must be bad code or bad decisions? taks Edited November 7, 2006 by taks comrade taks... just because.
Dark_Raven Posted November 7, 2006 Posted November 7, 2006 You guys are ruining this thread with the technical mumbo jumbo. Hades was the life of the party. RIP You'll be missed.
taks Posted November 7, 2006 Posted November 7, 2006 The camera throws itself around haphazardly, and no setting I've tried seems to allow for a nice fluid experience. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> i think this is what most are complaining about when referring to camera controls being horrid, in particular, volourn. this is probably where my comments about such controls as being "nearly identical" to NWN1 are confused. i'm strictly speaking about the user aspect of the controls, which are the about same. it does bounce around a lot until you can figure out how to deal with it effectively (which only helps, it does not cure). can't argue that. the solution is probably better fading for buildings and walls, which seems to work well for trees. taks comrade taks... just because.
Arilou Posted November 7, 2006 Posted November 7, 2006 I'm deeply ambivalent. I like it in many ways and it is in almost every way a step up from NWN1.... But also it has some problems. The bad: -The Voice-acting, while still better than most of the competition, is far worse than in the BG-series, PS:T or KOTOR. Maybe it's the lack of experienced voice-actors? -Too many of the dungeons thus far feel "generic" (IE: A single cave, kill everything, reach boss, kill him, repeat) Both graphically and game-play. BG2 usually tried to vary the encounters a bit, and had puzzles and special-locations to solve (Shade Dungeon, Watcher's Keep, etc. etc.) In many ways NWN2 feels like a step back. -Only two romances. The Good: -The NPC interaction is excellent. Very well done. -The Story is actually rather engaging (Though I preferred the giths to stay around a bit more...) -The music is wonderful. (Although I could use another "tavern" song )
Setzer Posted November 7, 2006 Posted November 7, 2006 I'm giving taks a hard time because he started off with saying that my LCD and running the game at it's native resolution was the problem and then turns around and says he never said my monitor was the problem. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Setzer, since you insist on saying he was trying to change what he said, I went back and looked at the original posts, and I noticed something rather important: V-sync is off - I have that manually turned off in the nvidia control panel. I tried running with shadows off and it gave me a +5 to FPS(went from 20 to around 25). I also have the latest nvidia drivers(93.71). The only way the game runs good is if I turn off AA/AF, turn off all lighting effects, set my resolution to 1280x960, which doesn't look good on a ws 20" lcd) and then I get 40-50 outdoors but the game looks horrible. oooohhh... you have an LCD. sorry. yeah, that could be a killer. LCDs need to run in their native which is probably 1600x1200? that would be murder on most vid cards. this would be the one "catch" i failed to mention above. the high resolution requirements of most LCDs makes gaming difficult sometimes, even with uber video cards. i have a 21" samsung at work (well, one here, too, the 213T) and it looks horrible with everything, even winders, on anything less than 1600x1200. unfortunately, i don't have a vid card strong enough to power that resolution at 75 Hz refresh, 32-bit color and any nifty options. so it sits unused. When he was talking about your monitor, he was talking about video quality, not performance. Since the performance was subpar at the high resolutions, you tried dropping it down but then complained that the game looked horrible. At no point did he say that your monitor was causing poor performance in this post that you mention. If anything, I think you just misinterpretted his post, and then continued onwards. He said the large LCD monitors can be poor for gaming because their native resolution is excessively high, and can outstrip the performance of a video card very easily if you want to play in the native resolution (i.e. the best quality). He never said it was the cause of poor performance. You misread his post, and then continued on an argument with him with that misinterpretation, which naturally made him defensive. Unfortunately, even when you went back to look at his post, you failed to look at the post directly above his post that was yours, where you made a comment about how the image quality was poor. In essence, you took his quote out of context, and incorrectly assumed (again) that he was talking about your monitor being the cause for the performance problem. To reiterate, the comment about the monitor was referring to the poor image quality at lower resolutions. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I was talking about PERFORMANCE not how bad the game looked. My problem was when I tried to run the game at 1680x1050 my FPS was terrible outdoors and the only way I could get the game to run decent was to drop the resolution to 1280x960 and turn everything off, then my FPS jumped to where the game played smoothly but of course didn't look good. So, this is a problem with poor FPS and not how bad the game looks. I'm trying to figure out why I get poor FPS when I'm running this game at 1680x1050 because I don't get it when I'm playing Oblivion, WoW, or Dark Messiah at that resolution. Taks responded with, "ooohhh... you have an LCD. sorry. yeah, that could be a killer. LCDs need to run in their native which is probably 1600x1200? that would be murder on most vid cards." Ok, where in that statement is he talking about the game looking bad at lower resolutions on a large LCD monitor? From that statement he's saying that running the game in my monitor's native resolution(1680x1050) would be "murder" on my video card, which to me means, the game isn't going to perform very well at my monitor's native resolution. My only solution to fix this problem would be to drop my resolution down or get a smaller monitor thus my large LCD monitor and it's native resolution being the cause of my performance issues. He even goes on to say... "i have a 21" samsung at work (well, one here, too, the 213T) and it looks horrible with everything, [/b] even winderson anything less than 1600x1200. unfortunately, i don't have a vid card strong enough to power that resolution at 75 Hz refresh, 32-bit color and any nifty options. so it sits unused." Here he refers to his video card not being powerful enough to run anything at his monitor's native resolution, 1600x1200. Ok, now he's implying that if you don't have a good enough video card then don't expect to run anything at your monitor's native res.(1680x1050). My video card is a 7900GT 512mb, I should have no problems running my monitor at 1680x1050 and I don't for everything except NWN2. I understand that running the monitor in a resolution other than it's native is going to make anything look horrible but again, this is NOT my problem. My problem is running NWN2 at 1680x1050 and having poor FPS.
Lare Kikkeli Posted November 7, 2006 Posted November 7, 2006 I'm giving taks a hard time because he started off with saying that my LCD and running the game at it's native resolution was the problem and then turns around and says he never said my monitor was the problem. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Setzer, since you insist on saying he was trying to change what he said, I went back and looked at the original posts, and I noticed something rather important: V-sync is off - I have that manually turned off in the nvidia control panel. I tried running with shadows off and it gave me a +5 to FPS(went from 20 to around 25). I also have the latest nvidia drivers(93.71). The only way the game runs good is if I turn off AA/AF, turn off all lighting effects, set my resolution to 1280x960, which doesn't look good on a ws 20" lcd) and then I get 40-50 outdoors but the game looks horrible. oooohhh... you have an LCD. sorry. yeah, that could be a killer. LCDs need to run in their native which is probably 1600x1200? that would be murder on most vid cards. this would be the one "catch" i failed to mention above. the high resolution requirements of most LCDs makes gaming difficult sometimes, even with uber video cards. i have a 21" samsung at work (well, one here, too, the 213T) and it looks horrible with everything, even winders, on anything less than 1600x1200. unfortunately, i don't have a vid card strong enough to power that resolution at 75 Hz refresh, 32-bit color and any nifty options. so it sits unused. When he was talking about your monitor, he was talking about video quality, not performance. Since the performance was subpar at the high resolutions, you tried dropping it down but then complained that the game looked horrible. At no point did he say that your monitor was causing poor performance in this post that you mention. If anything, I think you just misinterpretted his post, and then continued onwards. He said the large LCD monitors can be poor for gaming because their native resolution is excessively high, and can outstrip the performance of a video card very easily if you want to play in the native resolution (i.e. the best quality). He never said it was the cause of poor performance. You misread his post, and then continued on an argument with him with that misinterpretation, which naturally made him defensive. Unfortunately, even when you went back to look at his post, you failed to look at the post directly above his post that was yours, where you made a comment about how the image quality was poor. In essence, you took his quote out of context, and incorrectly assumed (again) that he was talking about your monitor being the cause for the performance problem. To reiterate, the comment about the monitor was referring to the poor image quality at lower resolutions. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I was talking about PERFORMANCE not how bad the game looked. My problem was when I tried to run the game at 1680x1050 my FPS was terrible outdoors and the only way I could get the game to run decent was to drop the resolution to 1280x960 and turn everything off, then my FPS jumped to where the game played smoothly but of course didn't look good. So, this is a problem with poor FPS and not how bad the game looks. I'm trying to figure out why I get poor FPS when I'm running this game at 1680x1050 because I don't get it when I'm playing Oblivion, WoW, or Dark Messiah at that resolution. Taks responded with, "ooohhh... you have an LCD. sorry. yeah, that could be a killer. LCDs need to run in their native which is probably 1600x1200? that would be murder on most vid cards." Ok, where in that statement is he talking about the game looking bad at lower resolutions on a large LCD monitor? From that statement he's saying that running the game in my monitor's native resolution(1680x1050) would be "murder" on my video card, which to me means, the game isn't going to perform very well at my monitor's native resolution. My only solution to fix this problem would be to drop my resolution down or get a smaller monitor thus my large LCD monitor and it's native resolution being the cause of my performance issues. He even goes on to say... "i have a 21" samsung at work (well, one here, too, the 213T) and it looks horrible with everything, [/b] even winderson anything less than 1600x1200. unfortunately, i don't have a vid card strong enough to power that resolution at 75 Hz refresh, 32-bit color and any nifty options. so it sits unused." Here he refers to his video card not being powerful enough to run anything at his monitor's native resolution, 1600x1200. Ok, now he's implying that if you don't have a good enough video card then don't expect to run anything at your monitor's native res.(1680x1050). My video card is a 7900GT 512mb, I should have no problems running my monitor at 1680x1050 and I don't for everything except NWN2. I understand that running the monitor in a resolution other than it's native is going to make anything look horrible but again, this is NOT my problem. My problem is running NWN2 at 1680x1050 and having poor FPS. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> give it up, champ. everyone else gets it except you.
Setzer Posted November 7, 2006 Posted November 7, 2006 (edited) give it up, champ. everyone else gets it except you. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No one gets it, not even you. Again, thanks for your insightful input in helping me to get my game running smoothly. Edited November 7, 2006 by Setzer
roshan Posted November 7, 2006 Posted November 7, 2006 Can I just ask where in the name of sainted Feargus all these references to politics came from? Jeez, you guys. I thought I was bad... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Based on NWN2, I am willing to bet that most Obsidian devs vote for the democrats.
Lare Kikkeli Posted November 7, 2006 Posted November 7, 2006 give it up, champ. everyone else gets it except you. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No one gets it, not even you. Again, thanks for your insightful input in helping me to get my game running smoothly. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> three people, including myself have explained it to you. taks wasnt saying that your LCD sucks, he was just saying that because LCD's require high resolutions to look good, they're not really fit for gaming since few vid cards can actually run a game like nwn2 in 1600x1200. he wasnt saying it was your LCD. talking about
@\NightandtheShape/@ Posted November 7, 2006 Posted November 7, 2006 (edited) **** IT! Edited November 7, 2006 by @\NightandtheShape/@ "I'm a programmer at a games company... REET GOOD!" - Me
maia Posted November 7, 2006 Posted November 7, 2006 -Only two romances. Please, tell me who! I don't have the game yet, but I am going crazy trying to decide on a character (not big on replaying the beginning countless times, makes me sick of a game) and this aspect is very important to me, as I am a very meticulous player and thus don't replay much. I want to get some the first time through! Oh, and is it feasible to play an intelligently evil character? Or at least a self-centered mercenary one, who actually profits in-game by such attitude? And which social skills are best for such? I was thinking about bluff and taunt or intimidate, but heard that it is actually diplomacy that allows one to successfully demand higher rewards?
Setzer Posted November 7, 2006 Posted November 7, 2006 (edited) give it up, champ. everyone else gets it except you. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No one gets it, not even you. Again, thanks for your insightful input in helping me to get my game running smoothly. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> three people, including myself have explained it to you. taks wasnt saying that your LCD sucks, he was just saying that because LCD's require high resolutions to look good, they're not really fit for gaming since few vid cards can actually run a game like nwn2 in 1600x1200. he wasnt saying it was your LCD. talking about <{POST_SNAPBACK}> LMFAO Seriously man, go back and read what's going on before you post. Not once did I take what taks was saying as "My LCD sucks". Where the hell did you get that? According to taks, my poor FPS issues has to do with my large LCD monitor and trying to run NWN2 in it's native resolution of 1680x1050. If I had a small LCD with a lower native res. or a CRT monitor then I wouldn't be having these issues. So, how is this not the problem of my large LCD monitor? Apparently if I want the game to look and play well I'm going to need a smaller monitor. Edited November 7, 2006 by Setzer
Setzer Posted November 7, 2006 Posted November 7, 2006 NWN2 seems to have the ability to auto-adjust the aspect ratio of your selected resolution to the wide-screen LCD <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I tried setting the resolution, in game, to 1280x1024 and all it did was stretch the screen out. Is there something I need to enable in game or in the .ini file in order to make this work? Maybe it's just a feature of your monitor?
Lare Kikkeli Posted November 7, 2006 Posted November 7, 2006 give it up, champ. everyone else gets it except you. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No one gets it, not even you. Again, thanks for your insightful input in helping me to get my game running smoothly. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> three people, including myself have explained it to you. taks wasnt saying that your LCD sucks, he was just saying that because LCD's require high resolutions to look good, they're not really fit for gaming since few vid cards can actually run a game like nwn2 in 1600x1200. he wasnt saying it was your LCD. talking about <{POST_SNAPBACK}> LMFAO Seriously man, go back and read what's going on before you post. Not once did I take what taks was saying as "My LCD sucks". Where the hell did you get that? According to taks, my poor FPS issues has to do with my large LCD monitor and trying to run NWN2 in it's native resolution of 1680x1050. If I had a small LCD with a lower native res. or a CRT monitor then I wouldn't be having these issues. So, how is this not the problem of my large LCD monitor? Apparently if I want the game to look and play well I'm going to need a smaller monitor. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> he's not saying it's your lcd. he's saying its your lcd and your video card.
Setzer Posted November 7, 2006 Posted November 7, 2006 give it up, champ. everyone else gets it except you. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No one gets it, not even you. Again, thanks for your insightful input in helping me to get my game running smoothly. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> three people, including myself have explained it to you. taks wasnt saying that your LCD sucks, he was just saying that because LCD's require high resolutions to look good, they're not really fit for gaming since few vid cards can actually run a game like nwn2 in 1600x1200. he wasnt saying it was your LCD. talking about <{POST_SNAPBACK}> LMFAO Seriously man, go back and read what's going on before you post. Not once did I take what taks was saying as "My LCD sucks". Where the hell did you get that? According to taks, my poor FPS issues has to do with my large LCD monitor and trying to run NWN2 in it's native resolution of 1680x1050. If I had a small LCD with a lower native res. or a CRT monitor then I wouldn't be having these issues. So, how is this not the problem of my large LCD monitor? Apparently if I want the game to look and play well I'm going to need a smaller monitor. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> he's not saying it's your lcd. he's saying its your lcd and your video card. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> LOL Now you're making yourself look bad. Please, just stop already.
Recommended Posts