The Crystal Ball

[addman]

Originally Posted by ACE-OF-ACES

Words like 'looks' are subjective and personal.. But I do agree most 'other' games out there focus more on the eye candy.. Why? Because eye candy is about all they got going for them..

Hence what I said when I said Flight sims are not your run of the mill eye candy game that only requires a good vid card


Also subjective.. depends on your definition of 'complex'.. By my def I disagree with you, and here is one example.. AI.. Which do you think is more complex..

1) A fps bot waiting for a 'trigger' to start shooting at you from behind a wall
2) A flightsim bot pilot that has to maneuver his plane into position before shooting at you

For me it is the #2

Which is why I disagree with your statement.. With regards to games other than flight sims


Words like 'better' and 'stable' are also subjective.. As with all things in life the devil is in the details.. Loftie statements like yours say more about you and your expectations than CoD IMHO

Ok, maybe I need to be more clear, there are games that are more technically impressive than CloD which runs fine on non-nuclear rigs. A games artistically esthetics is subjective, polygon numbers and physics effects are not. I'm talking about PC horsepower and it's relation to games performance. I know CloD will be better with time, especially soon when MG have "replaced" the porked engine it's got now.

Thing that bugs me is that some people try to excuse the game all the time with the "your rig is not powerful enough for CloD" attitude. I have 8 gigs of RAM in my computer, does CloD use that much? no, not until it's 64-bit. I have a quad core CPU that handles ANY game out there without any hick-ups but CloD struggles, not because it's got super advanced A.I or physics (float planes that can't land on water, Blenheims that dogfights you with F-16 maneuvering, suicide wingmen so on so fourth...) but because it's a poorly made game engine.

Ask yourself, why are they overhauling the game engine?