What games would you like to see tested in an upcoming comparison article

B

Brent_Justice

Moderator
Joined
Apr 17, 2000
Messages
17,755
I am purposeful putting this in the video card section.

We have another comparison in the works and want to see what new games you guys would like to see tested in it, we've done BC2, AvP and Metro to death. So now we are going to do something different. We are going to include Mafia II... other than that, what other games would you guys like to see?
 
Last edited:
is there even anything new out that is worth using for a test? i personally have not found any games more demanding than metro 2033 or bfbc2.
 
Ive heard Final Fantasy XIV is supposed to kick the crap out of things. As is Lost Planet 2.

Metro 2033 and AvP are amonst the only DX11 games outside of Stone giant type benchmarks and Nvidia tech demos. The only ones coming up now are Civ 5 and F1 2010...I'm not sure how intensive either of those games are...

The recent popular games haven't been so intensive (starcraft 2...)
oh oh oh! THIS I want to see if you are 733t HaX0rs!!!
 
Basically, we are going to be performing another round of comparison video card testing, this time using some different games and are looking for suggestions. Obviously Mafia II... any interest in Starcraft 2 and City of Heroes Going Rouge?

What others...
 
Hello Kitty Island Adventure

...kidding

Maybe The Settlers, RUSE, ARMA II, Kane & Lynch 2 or Singularity? If the comparison will still be a while, the new F1 game, Dead Rising 2, Civ 5 or Darksiders which all come out with the next few weeks.
 
Starcraft 2 or Dragon Age since both "benefit" from Multi Core CPU's.
 
Dragon Age Origins (It's popular and sequel coming soon)

Starcraft 2 (It's popular)

Batman: AA (Sequel coming for this game soon, might be worthwhile to some people)

Lost Planet 2 (Supposedly intensive)

My suggestions :)
 
Sweet, keep the suggestions coming... BTW, this article will be done next week, so can only use what games are available now.

We of course may do more comparisons like this as new games come out, I too am interested in all the new games coming out in the next few months.
 
Brent, I know BF3 is not out yet but I think there's a lot of us who would like to see that game tested with different combination of CPUs and GPUs.
 
What about STALKER: Call of Pripyat?

Its still an intensive game that had some DX11 options (although visibly minimal additional dx11 effects).
I know you guys have used it in the past, but it certainly isn't as worn as Crysis as a benchmark.
 
Crysis/Crysis Warhead - that way we can get better idea of how the cards you test now compare against cards you tested in yester-year without having to do a large scale review.
As I'm gaming on a GTX 260, that card is usually not included in you current video card review arsenal.
 
Starcraft 2 is a good one- even though it may not be the most intensive- its new, very popular, and will be interesting when looking at CPUs as well.
I'd say keep Crysis around for a little yet just because it still hammers hardware, and is a good way to compare to previous gen hardware.
 
FFXIV has both a beta client (avaliable only till the 19th) and a benchmark.
Folding at home could be cool to generate interest in the project.
SC2 would be nice.

Offtopic: I wouldn't mind seeing something showing how much Tripple channel memory, and CPU speeds really do or do not affect gaming in both single card and SLI and crossfire solutions.
 
kuyaglen said:
Crysis/Crysis Warhead - that way we can get better idea of how the cards you test now compare against cards you tested in yester-year without having to do a large scale review.
As I'm gaming on a GTX 260, that card is usually not included in you current video card review arsenal.
Click to expand...

This. I would like to keep one older game (esp. one that is still demanding and still can't be maxed on most/all single GPU systems) in the reviews so everyone can directly compare them against their older cards.

Also, I third Folding@Home.
 
Games I would like to see tested:
BC2 (Still popular)
SC2
Arma 2 OA
Mass Effect 2
Just Cause 2

Over in the General Hardware subforum, a lot of the gaming PCs there were built for WOW in mind. So maybe a future review of the upcoming WOW expansion pack might be a good idea? The specs requirement has continually changed over the past few years so results from a few years ago might not be a good indication of WOW in its current state
 
you have to use games people play, combined with games that will perform like games people WILL play.

so a new crysis game is coming out. everyone will be using that when it does. so I'd include the latest current crysis game.

starcraft 2 is a big title people are playing. so I'd include that.

there are constantly BF games being made. the new MOH will also use that engine. so I'd include the latest BF. there may be a similar argument for a COD game.

synthetic benchmarks stink, but they DO show off new technology. rather than using a synthetic benchmark though, I'd use a new game that similarly pushes technology, even if not a lot of people play it. so I'd include a metro 2033 or stalker type of game.

I thought hawx represented the difference between video cards well, but nobody plays it and it kind of sucks. so I wouldn't likely include it.

I think just the above games cover what needs to be covered. can you really glean any more information from more games? is it really worth the time?
 
World of Warcraft.

Might seem a bit odd to suggest a game that has been around for so long but just consider the sheer number of people who play it. People who primarily play an MMO are no less gamers than those who prefer to play first person shooters, but they are severely underrepresented when it comes to hardware reviews.

And despite being old, there have been many improvements to the World of Warcraft engine over the years. Running at max settings can bring even new systems to their knees.

Here are some benchmarks for WoW showing clear improvement going all the way up to the 5970:

http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,...est-DirectX-11-graphics-card/Reviews/?page=10
 
I have to agree, ARMA II is very neat and it would be cool to see how much these cards can do with it.

Oh, when it comes out, Dead Space 2!
 
GotNoRice said:
World of Warcraft.

Might seem a bit odd to suggest a game that has been around for so long but just consider the sheer number of people who play it. People who primarily play an MMO are no less gamers than those who prefer to play first person shooters, but they are severely underrepresented when it comes to hardware reviews.

And despite being old, there have been many improvements to the World of Warcraft engine over the years. Running at max settings can bring even new systems to their knees.

Here are some benchmarks for WoW showing clear improvement going all the way up to the 5970:

http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,...est-DirectX-11-graphics-card/Reviews/?page=10
Click to expand...
Umm, a 285 ran it at 45FPS average on max settings in the game. That means anything you'll buy for more than 200$ today will run it on max settings at 2560x1600. What exactly do you intend to show?
 
F1 2010 (Out next week)
Arma 2
Anything Triple Monitor (great job lately including that)
 
Brent I know you and kyle are looking for something immediate for a upcoming article. But for god sakes the moment it's available even if it's a demo. Please add Crysis 2 :D

As for now, mafia 2 is awesome, Starcraft 2 is a must, Dirt 2, Just Cause 2, GTA 4 expansion packs, Metro 2033, Crysis Warhead.
 
One rts game (Starcraft 2). One MMO (Wow? FFIV?). One likely CPU intensive game (Civ 5). One UE3 game (like or not this is a very popularly licensed engine). One racing game (F1 2010? Dirt 2?). Not just a dozen or so fps games.

Also perhaps include testing of older game engines (such as Source engine ones), since with 120hz LCDs now, many people are looking to take advantage of the higher refresh.

I think a few people would like a simulator (MS Flight simulator) done as well.

Also if the game has hardware physx, maybe do a real world gameplay comparison with it. For instance Mafia 2, it would be interesting to see how the GTX 460 compares with the 5770/5830/5850 when factoring physx and what kind of performance.
 
kuyaglen said:
Crysis/Crysis Warhead - that way we can get better idea of how the cards you test now compare against cards you tested in yester-year without having to do a large scale review.
As I'm gaming on a GTX 260, that card is usually not included in you current video card review arsenal.
Click to expand...

this, I know its been done to death but its a good way to back compare without wasting time as its still murder on the cards.
 
think Metro 2033 falls into the Crysis basket, almost all other new games are meh ! SC2 seems to be far to CPU limited to be a good test. BC2 is a good test , new expansion is coming. Mafia II has far to many Phsyx issues to be a good benchmark (might change with patches). World in Conflict is a good rts benchmark. And i second F1 2010.
 
Not a game suggestion and I'm not sure if it's worth your time to do it, but some confirmation of how well they run on multi-monitor rigs would be awesome.

I really wouldn't mind seeing some SCII numbers either.
 
Not so much a game recommendation, but can you make 2x Anti Aliasing a minimum for playable settings. I've got so used to AA now, that it is unplayable with it off! I realise that this may be a stretch for the lower end cards at the moment but this will add some longevity to the benchmarks.

EDIT: Oh and when testing Nvidia cards with PhysX enabled games, please can you test nVidia cards with PhysX both enabled and disabled. Not only will this make it fairer for AMD based cards, but it will also illustrate how much physics calculations are sapping the graphics cards.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top