Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 10/21/06 in all areas

  1. well... you'll find it here, on our page... "The Adventures of Bill & John Episode II : Danger Attacks at Dawn" has been nominated at the 2006 NYC Machinima Film Festival for: Best Picture, Best Direction, Best Puppeteering, Best Voice Acting, Best Sound Design, Best Writing, Best Editing, Best Cinemtography, and Best Independent Work The awards ceremony will take place in New York on november 4th. it was hard work for us, we hope you'll enjoy viewing it. KBS Team
    1 point
  2. Well after having master boot table corruption twice in 10 days (double bad luck I hadnt for a decade) I decided to buy a new hard drive to hold the OS. The old one still seems to operate well, even though Im not sure if it was the cause of its failiure wich started the problem. I keep all my most demaning aplications on my new drive (a western digital 160 SATA2 drive as opposed to my old maxtor Sata 150). The older drive holds all my multimedia files as well as the paging file. I have allocated this drive to place the paging file at the beggining of it and seems to be working pretty well. With both drives working independently, one loads LOMAC data and the other uses the page file silmultaneously has improved smoothness. Loading time are better also. I just wanted to give a heads up for those who are considering aquiring 2 drives instead of just one. BTW RAID0 is not an option, they have slighly different real sizes (150 VS 152GB). On a side note, I always preferred Western digital over any other brand. I went maxtor the first time in this PC due to stock problems. The WD drive is much quieter and smoother in loading and writing operations than the maxtor. Even though they have been benchmarked and shown to be almost identical in perfomance. I had past experiences that WD drives dont get as much sluggish as others when getting full. This maxtor plunges down noticeably after 50% is taken.
    1 point
  3. Hi Eagle Dynamics, What i cant seem to understand is WHY? Why Lomac will not run on High Scenes with High visibility on low altitude with over 10-15fps? (Throw a few shilka's in there on a multiplayer game and your looking at a slideshow) Why did You Eagle dynamics tell us its built for future systems, when this game is over 2 years old and it doesnt run on these settings on monster systems of today? I Have a monster system and always wondered why you fed us your nonsense about lomac running with high settings on future systems.(Let me guess when you meant future systems, You pictured the lomac community with grey hair and a beard still playing this game) Having this game on high settings in a multiplayer scenario is impossible, and those who say it can be done, are wrong and argue for the sake of arguing and hinder improvement of this game. Problem I see here is, what is the point of releasing BlackShark, when we cant get the full immersion factor of lomac? Im sorry but flying a helicopter in BF2 is more immersive than flying BS on low scenes over mountains that look like cardboard cuttings. Its obvious to me and alot of others that you dont give a damn about fixing or updating this issue of the faulty code in the game, instead you pump out new flyables which will be useless to have if the game base code is just riddled with errors. My last question to you Eagle dynamics. WHY wont Lomac run on full visibility and high scenes on ANY computer out there? Thats right, your code is screwed up. I guess I answered my own question after all. Now i wonder if you had some? Translate this Webpage to Russian: http://http://www.humanitas-international.org/newstran/more-trans.htm
    1 point
  4. Try flying over kraznador on all high in any aircraft with 25,000 objects showing and post your fps anyone? That is without any AI or ground units even. Not playable with view distance on high scenes medium/water medium on my rig. :( Thinking about conroe and g80 but i doubt it will help a whole lot in a city of this size with ground units/flares and 4X50,000 poly su25T's in the air. And how many poly is the ka50? Basicly a 200% improvement in hardware from 3 years ago to today results in a 10-20% improvement in lockon. Not sufficient for the "Tomorrow's Hardware" we heard back then. Then again no one has a g80/conroe rig to test this but I'd say my calculations will be fairly accurate. We will find out next month I guess. And, Vamp you're only rendering about 150 trees in that screenshot a p4 2.8 with 9800pro can prolly pull those fps in that pic. *Rant*And another thing after my conroe/g80 rig i will have exhausted my last activation for FC cause of upgrading my hardware so much for this damn sim. So will I have to pay again to play this sim on "Tomorrow's hardware"? *End Rant*
    1 point
  5. Hahaha yea that is certainly true AS. Finally someone who speaks it out loud :thumbup: Maybe BlackShark is taking so long because you guys are trying to fix this.....but it probably will be to late.....FighterOps is going to whipe lockon away. But.....I also love lockon, its netcode is wonderful and it made tight formation flying possible. Though I have to run lockon on its lowest possible settings together with all possible FPS tweaks out there to get a acceptable frame rate for formation flying.
    1 point
  6. I totally agree with =RvE=--AS--. ..
    1 point
  7. ED....please make the fire and smoke longer for explosions???
    1 point
  8. I'm sorry Red Hammer but i already told you over at the ubi forum, ED will not add the J-11A or the F-18. There is simply not enough time and Lock on ends with Black Shark. They don't even plan on making a new 3d model of flanker, let alone actually build a whole new version of it. Of course i would like to see it but its just not going to happen. And no one can build their own cockpit and add it into the game because we don't have the tools for it. Every new model has to go through ED first, and even if you give them a cockpit and a model, they probably can't make it into a flyable. Because they still need to do a lot more work on their side such as aircraft performance data...etc. And a manaual just can't provide that precise information. So don't be offended if you sent information to them and they can't build it. If you can find the info on the internet or somewhere, I'm pretty sure they have it too.
    1 point
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...