[Lemmy]

If you play a game for it's playability and not eye candy, then you don't need all the newest hardware.

[rant - not directed at couslee specifically...you just triggered it ]
Having higher requirements DOESN'T mean the game is all graphics!
Higher requirements can make the game a lot better by having a complexer and more advanced AI.
I'm so tired of TBSers accusing anyone who even comments about low requirements of being a teenage kid playing Doom3 on their 2.4 Ghz computer bought by their parents, e.g. a graphics hippie.
These low requirements are either unplayable, or are seriously holding the game back a lot. Traditional AIs (which Moo3 has) NEED procesor power if it wants to be any good, how can a game be playable if the AI sucks, because the are keeping the requirements down
[/rant]

Background info on rant:
The other day on i was on IRC with a computer game reviewer, and we started talking about Moo3.
Well...here's the log.
It starts with me commenting on the fixed resolution:
[21:35] Lemmy> ugh...800x600
[21:35] JonahFalcon> Tough noogies, Lemmy
[21:35] JonahFalcon> This is a strategy game, not DOOM III
[21:35] JonahFalcon> I still have fun with MOO2.
[21:35] Lemmy> smac is strategy, which is 1024x768
[21:35] JonahFalcon> And features lower res, too
[21:36] Lemmy> yes, but moo3 is 800x600 max
[21:36] JonahFalcon> I hope you don't think strategy games need hot graphics to be good. LOL
(this is when i sort of annoyed...assuming i only care about graphics because i think 800x600 is a low resolution)
[21:36] Lemmy> resolution isn't about graphics
[21:37] Lemmy> il ike SMAC, smac has arguably the worst graphics of ant strategy game
[21:37] Lemmy> bigger resolution = more info = less windows
[21:38] Lemmy> less windows to click through
...
[21:46] JonahFalcon> If MOO3 is DESIGNED for 800x600, your argument about interface are invalid
[21:46] JonahFalcon> Plus, much more visibility with 800x600
[21:50] Lemmy> ehm, i'd say much more visibility at 1024, 1280
[21:50] Lemmy> or*
[21:50] JonahFalcon> Says who?
[21:50] Lemmy> you could see a lot more of the map with a higher res
[21:50] JonahFalcon> This isn't HOMM4
[21:50] JonahFalcon> Says who?
[21:51] JonahFalcon> You do understand the concept of resolution, RIHGT?
(had absolutely no idea where he was trying to go with this...)
[21:51] JonahFalcon> 800x600 does not mean "less info".
[21:51] JonahFalcon> It only means "less detailed"
[21:51] Lemmy> yes, as a computer science student, and programmer, i understand the concept
[21:51] JonahFalcon> As in, the # of pixels used to create an object
[21:51] JonahFalcon> Obviously, you're getting an "F" in classes LOL
(so now he's trying to be funny..without even reading my arguments)
[21:51] Lemmy> with more pixels, you can show more objects
( ^ see, my argument)
[21:52] JonahFalcon> I've been reviewing games for 15 years, and playing them for 25.
[21:52] JonahFalcon> How old are you?
(and that is his defense!? )
[21:52] Lemmy> lol..
[21:52] Lemmy> i'm 20
[21:53] JonahFalcon> So, I've been reviewing games since you were in preschool?
(by now i just wanted to end the conversation, since this obviously wasn't going anywhere, but i didn't want to give him the satisfcation of feeling like he was right, so...)
[21:53] Lemmy> and...?
[21:53] Lemmy> you can't deny that a higher resolution can show more objects, at the same detail level
[21:53] JonahFalcon> No
[21:53] JonahFalcon> Wrong

well, after this the conversation just went downhill...but it did annoy me, since i was disconnected, and he left after some great monologue...and now he thinks he's right about the resolution thingie, and that i'm just a 20 year old scriptkiddie who plays Doom3.

(sorry for the long post)

[ January 27, 2003, 20:52: Message edited by: Lemmy ]