Full featured benchmarking suite.
Why?
Most benchmarks are synthetic in nature (ie - madonion / futuremark etc). Game-based benchmarks give you a very good idea of what different vid cards do in those games, and make a very real difference at time of purchase.
Also, games that have real benchmarking suites get free advertising from the sites that use them - ie how many times does HardOCP use UT2k3 to bench? EVERY review.
Talking to HardOCP would be great too - they seem to have a real handle on the whole concept of real benchmarking and the grain of salt that must be taken with it.
Thanks in advance!
thrax basically said no to this in the first Q/A.
thrax basically said no to this in the first Q/A.
missed it.
shoulda beaten some sense into him @ uva. :)
Marweas 09-09-2003, 03:27 PM We're using a licensed engine. I don't see why someone would use some other Unreal engine game for benchmarking besides Unreal.
Now if thrax could build in a heart-rate monitor into the thing, then I'd show you some benchmarks!
We're using a licensed engine. I don't see why someone would use some other Unreal engine game for benchmarking besides Unreal.
Now if thrax could build in a heart-rate monitor into the thing, then I'd show you some benchmarks!
the reason is that you guys are really ripping the rendering up a lot tho - map size, etc....
also, there's a lot of different opportunities for types of rendering done, what with flight etc.
but hey.... ut2k3 already has the benchmarks, so maybe it's a moot point.
hiya, marweas, by the way. :)
Piata 09-09-2003, 03:50 PM That's a stupid feature.
A much better feature would be to introduce body checking. Imagine a HO body checking an LD halfway across the map. That would own. Body checking with swords would be even better.
Rabid Poop 09-09-2003, 03:54 PM after buying ut2k3 the other day for 20 dollars I realize what a great choice the unreal engine was. I can run the game at all max details at 1024x768 with 6x AA, and 16x AF and get very playable fps.
Piata 09-09-2003, 04:12 PM after buying ut2k3 the other day for 20 dollars I realize what a great choice the unreal engine was. I can run the game at all max details at 1024x768 with 6x AA, and 16x AF and get very playable fps.
the only thing I ever liked about UT2k3 was the engine. I still have my doubts that it can do tribes justice.
|MrSniper|Nyx 09-09-2003, 04:24 PM the only thing I ever liked about UT2k3 was the engine. I still have my doubts that it can do tribes justice.
Well no engine has done Tribes justice yet, so lets hope.
Piata 09-09-2003, 06:59 PM Well no engine has done Tribes justice yet, so lets hope.
I dunno... I consider the T1 engine amazing for its time.
jotun 09-09-2003, 07:06 PM I dunno... I consider the T1 engine amazing for its time.
truth
kwago 09-09-2003, 07:17 PM I dunno... I consider the T1 engine amazing for its time.
even though it was a bug with the engine that made the game awesome
jotun 09-09-2003, 07:20 PM it wasn't a bug
it just wasn't intended to be used that way
and I think he means the graphics engine.. not physics
Ixiterra 09-09-2003, 07:20 PM even though it was a bug with the engine that made the game awesome
Welcome to Thrax's ignore list.
kwago 09-09-2003, 08:34 PM cool
Piata 09-09-2003, 08:40 PM it wasn't a bug
it just wasn't intended to be used that way
and I think he means the graphics engine.. not physics
Ya. I never meant anything about the physics aspect (although the way a projectile carries your inertia is pretty fucking cool imo - never saw that in a game before tribes). But T1 had an amazing engine graphics wise. There's just so many things in it that were never done before or never done right until tribes. Rocks, hills, rain, skies... I remember trashing stuff with the chaingun just to see how it changed as it took damage.
|MrSniper|Nyx 09-09-2003, 09:37 PM Actually I was wrong in my last comment. The T1 engine was good for its time. I remember thinking the graphics were so sweet. Same thing with T2 actually, if you compare its graphics to other games that were released around the same time, T2 was far superior. Albiet the engine was chuncky and didn't run as well as it could/should, the graphics were still good.
SarcaStick 09-09-2003, 09:41 PM Welcome to Thrax's ignore list.
hahahah so true
destroyer193 09-09-2003, 11:07 PM Actually I was wrong in my last comment. The T1 engine was good for its time. I remember thinking the graphics were so sweet. Same thing with T2 actually, if you compare its graphics to other games that were released around the same time, T2 was far superior. Albiet the engine was chuncky and didn't run as well as it could/should, the graphics were still good.
I totally agree.. A gaming engine at that time that could generate and run terrain like it did was pretty damn cool. The gameplay was quite unique at the time as well. Very new 'technology' i guess you could say, when tribes 1 was released. Technology, as in new styles of gameplay, movement, etc...
kwago 09-09-2003, 11:42 PM btw i think adding a benchmarking utility is a great idea, it can really do no harm and will offer free publicity...only hard thing is to make it so awesome it will be an enjoyable bench to watch while simultaneously giving the video card a good workout.
|