Don't Buy Global Agenda - [H] Editorial

Status
Not open for further replies.
Kyle, you know what? Who gives a flying fuck about Eyefinity with 5760x1200 and 3600x1920 resolutions. I mean really here....you are bitching and complaining about settings only the rich and most extreme can even use anyways, and then practically boycotting the game maker because they don't support this? LOL, Kyle with all due respect give your head a shake man, you’re so out in left field it isn't even funny when it comes to what is really used today. I suggest you pay attention to Steams spec charts and see what is really out there in PC gamers hands. Not some rich dude with 6 monitors side by side geez...
 
Eyefinity, when it's supported properly and in the right type of game, does give an advantage. It gives you more peripheral vision than a standard or widescreen display does, allowing you to see much further off to the sides than a normal display. This can translate directly into an advantage for players that do have it - at least, it does in theory, and I imagine that people need to get used to it for a while before they can start to gain that edge.

That being said, having a faster computer also gives an advantage, but no one's trying to enforce the same frame rates or screen resolution. But let's not kid ourselves: having extra peripheral vision *is* an advantage.

That being said, I always recommend people play games they're having fun playing and to stop freaking out over little technical issues. If the game's fun, play it on one of your three monitors. Frankly, there are just too few good games out there to discount most of them due to little technical stuff. And for those who can't play a game just because the scroll wheel doesn't work in one of the menus, well, please stop acting as PC gaming's ambassadors for the rest of us normal people. :)
 
Fail said:
$170 per monitor, that's not bad at all, do they all have to be the same brand and model to work correctly or does that not matter? I'd imagine it wouldn't matter, but I'm just wanting to make sure.

Best part is if, that's the case, you can just buy them incrementally as you go, which would be easier on the wallet as well.
Click to expand...

Yes, the monitors can mix/match brands. So you could have a 22" dell + 22" hp + 22" viewsonic or whatever combo you want. You can mix/match size too like a 24" dell, 22" hp or whatever. You can mix/match resolutions as well. I agree with you that $170.00 per monitor is not too terribly expensive. Ram can be more expensive and I can't tell you how many average-joes I see who have 4GB of ram and buy an additional 4GB of ram for $200.00 bucks when they aren't even using over 2-3GB at any given time. At least with eyefinity, you'll 'see' a difference. Har Har Har, pardon the pun.

Fail said:
Doing a side job just to get an Eyeinfinity setup? Is that really [H]? I think so!
Click to expand...

This part of your comment I don't really understand. It seems like your being sarcastic? but sarcasim is hard to read on the Internet.

If you can't budget to save $170.00, you might be spending/living a lifestyle beyond what your income can provide. Nobody says you have to buy all your monitors right-now. If something's really worth it, its probably worth waiting for till you can afford it. $170.00 in comparison to say the cost paid by those people who bought 8800 Ultras brand new for 700+ dollars is quite reasonable considering the impact it has on gaming. Really, if you a gaming hobbist, a lot of people will spend this amount every month or two on games and much more in the x-mas season.
 
BF 2142 did the same thing except for widescreen users; they did not support wide screen resolutions up until the last patch when they realized it was retarded not to because of how common they became. Until then I believe if you were running widescreen you had to either run with black bars or stretch it. Might have been the same case with bf2, not sure though.

I should clarify that they stated the same "because it's an unfair advantage" excuse back then but eventually came around
 
I had not heard about this game until now, and like most of the population I don't have an eyefinity setup. That being said I will now go check out this game because it looks pretty cool.
 
maleficarus said:
Kyle, you know what? Who gives a flying fuck about Eyefinity with 5760x1200 and 3600x1920 resolutions. I mean really here....you are bitching and complaining about settings only the rich and most extreme can even use anyways, and then practically boycotting the game maker because they don't support this? LOL, Kyle with all due respect give your head a shake man, you’re so out in left field it isn't even funny when it comes to what is really used today. I suggest you pay attention to Steams spec charts and see what is really out there in PC gamers hands. Not some rich dude with 6 monitors side by side geez...
Click to expand...

I have to agree that it affects an extremely niche market right now... yes it sucks if you're an early adopter of it, but it's not really a reason to write off a game in my opinion. I endured plenty of games that didn't support widescreen years and years ago until it became more standard. I imagine in time the same will happen here. I just don't see it as a major issue yet.
 
I was joking about the side job thing, sort of. We're in a bad economy, there's no shame in taking a side job for some extra cash to fuel a hobby, it doesn't even have to last long. I'm considering going that route over the summer.

Not everyone has a silver spoon in their mouth.

Sure Eyeinfinity is here to stay, but I'd be more willing to buy into the technology if I saw AMD/ATI bucking up and pulling some of that TWIMTBP'd stuff with some game devs to get their games running with Eyeinfinity, if that happened we'd all see more Eyeinfinity happening.

You guys can slam Nvidia all you want, but they at least seem to make the effort to get with the devs of games and get their TWIMTBP'd stuff on there, if AMD pulled a similiar campaign revolving around Eyeinfinity, we'd all see more benefits from that.

It seems like Kyle is more worried about the trend of not supporting Eyeinfinity, which is reasonable, because we're all interested in going forward here on H, not backwards.

Now that most of you have gotten a taste of 22+ inch widescreen gaming, nobody wants to go back to 15 inch CRT's, right? Well, same thing here basically.

Eyeinfinity just has to get to the point to where it's more widely supported and affordable then sooner or later all the Average Joes will have it and we'll all benefit.
 
This is not the first time that i hera this crap. Back on Diablo and Diablo II days the resolution was locked on the very low end, so that players didn't see more of the surroundings.

End result?

I played Diablo at the PS1, and NEVER touched Diablo II.
 
Kyle makes a perfect point when he mentions the advantage of 2560x1600 against 1600x1200.

So the guy who doesn't have the $1000 plus for a 3007 or 3008 gets punished because he can afford three P2010's (which give him a slightly larger palette)? How is that fair? You should be rewarding that guy because he is on the bleeding edge- even without the big bucks. I think HR Studios is convinced that everyone doing something like Eyefinity is a baller who has more cash than sense, instead of an enthusiast who gets ahead of the curve any way he can.

And Kyle- I am utterly heartbroken over the lack of Parhelia love.;)
 
Fail said:
You guys can slam Nvidia all you want, but they at least seem to make the effort to get with the devs of games and get their TWIMTBP'd stuff on there, if AMD pulled a similiar campaign revolving around Eyeinfinity, we'd all see more benefits from that.
Click to expand...

Yep, they got PhysX into a bunch of key titles (Mirror's Edge, Batman Arkham Asylum come to mind, even though it wasn't game-altering it was great eye candy) to help their own marketing: sure it was to benefit them, but it also benefited us. It would be good to see ATI doing the same with Eyefinity, frankly: there's no excuse for not pushing multi-monitor gaming to devs just as they are to consumers.
 
I don't even have Eyefinity, let alone SLi. Such technology is beyond my monetary means as an up and coming graduate student. However, purposely hindering a gamer's experience from said game by not allowing full use of Eyefinity is going backwards in technology, even bending backwards and taking one.
 
Right, Mr. Bennett, if you want to make more of a difference, and we all know you do, you should try encouraging AMD to interact more with game developers to get this technology implemented in their games from the get go, and then rants against games like this, ME 2, and Bioshock 2 won't be neccessary and you can just sit back and enjoy your games, TWIMTBP'd, (ironic, i know)
 
Hmm this sounds really odd I'm curious to see what their eventual real explanation is for purposely locking people out of higher resolution setups unfair advantage seems like a silly excuse. We're playing on PC we are one big goddamn niche market.
 
This is really a bad move from you, Kyle. I never heard of this game and probably won't hear about it if this article is not posted by you and made as a sticky. I'm pretty sure that the developer will benefit more from your posting because of the free (bad) publicity. If you didn't post about it, I'm think that most people here won't even know about this game. I won't buy the game because of their stand but now people who didn't care about multi monitor gaming will know about this game and become interested in it.

Edit: Why don't you create a sticky to stop people from going to my website, I won't mind at all ;)
 
Finger said:
Eyefinity, when it's supported properly and in the right type of game, does give an advantage. It gives you more peripheral vision than a standard or widescreen display does, allowing you to see much further off to the sides than a normal display. This can translate directly into an advantage for players that do have it - at least, it does in theory, and I imagine that people need to get used to it for a while before they can start to gain that edge.
Click to expand...

Exactly! I can understand why a game maker would not support this tech. The market for this is below 1% of the gamer population so why support it in the first place? Also, there is a huge difference between saying a faster system has an advantage over a slower system in gaming. Having a faster system dosen't allow you to see more then anyone else where as Eyefinity does. It would almost be like using an OSD to see through walls then claiming it dosen't give an advantage...
 
Fail said:
Right, Mr. Bennett, if you want to make more of a difference, and we all know you do, you should try encouraging AMD to interact more with game developers to get this technology implemented in their games from the get go, and then rants against games like this, ME 2, and Bioshock 2 won't be neccessary and you can just sit back and enjoy your games, TWIMTBP'd, (ironic, i know)
Click to expand...

And who said I was not? I would suggest that you have not been on my phone calls and in my emails for a while now. :) I had a phone call just this morning with Rebellion and AMD. Heck even at 7am to facilitate the guys in London.
 
I have no interest in multidisplay gaming currently, but this does seem like a pretty ridiculous excuse for limiting their game resolution. Not that I was going to get the game anyway...
 
Enough isn't being done on the AMD team side, and that seems to be reflected in how games aren't supporting Eyeinfinity, it isn't solely the game developer's responsibility to optimize their games to be played on Eyeinfinity setups, AMD needs to shoulder some of the burden if they want to see their technology take off.

I don't care who comes out on top, but I bet you Nvidia, when they get their setup rolling, are going to be helping the devs with TWIMTBP branding get their stuff working right from the get go, maybe not perfectly but the Nvidia support will be there.

AMD is bungling this by not being more proactive, they could easily grab more of a market share if they ensured that Eyeinfinity consumers like yourself were adequately supported so you'd feel satisfied with your investment. They are dropping the ball there.
 
maleficarus said:
Exactly! I can understand why a game maker would not support this tech. The market for this is below 1% of the gamer population so why support it in the first place? Also, there is a huge difference between saying a faster system has an advantage over a slower system in gaming. Having a faster system dosen't allow you to see more then anyone else where as Eyefinity does. It would almost be like using an OSD to see through walls then claiming it dosen't give an advantage...
Click to expand...

Look! Its a giant straw man! Lets burn it!

You are completely and utterly missing the point. They said "its an unfair advantage", which opens a door to many other things. Their claim is basically saying they removed the possibility of Eyefinity to make the game fair to everyone. Ok, fine, so why don't they force everyone to play at the same frame rate? After all a higher frame rate can be a huge advantage. Why don't they limit everyone's connection speed to be the same? Being able to get information to and from the server faster is an advantage. Or maybe they should limit everyone to 1280x1024 resolution because there is a HUGE difference between someone gaming at 1280x1024 versus someone playing at 2560x1600 (which is a resolution they allow). Oh, but wait, its unfair if one player is better than another so they need to gimp the better player to make it more fair.

I completely stand by my statement on the first page, its only a problem for people who suck. They're limiting the game because some people suck.
 
they should make everyone take an IQ test the first time you start the game, and then you will only be matched against people with similar intelligence. Would only be fair right?
 
alg7_munif said:
This is really a bad move from you, Kyle. I never heard of this game and probably won't hear about it if this article is not posted...<snip>
Click to expand...

I was pretty sure I would avoid this post by authoring the intro I did, but I guess you missed that part.
 
Fail said:
Enough isn't being done on the AMD team side, and that seems to be reflected in how games aren't supporting Eyeinfinity, it isn't solely the game developer's responsibility to optimize their games to be played on Eyeinfinity setups, AMD needs to shoulder some of the burden if they want to see their technology take off.

I don't care who comes out on top, but I bet you Nvidia, when they get their setup rolling, are going to be helping the devs with TWIMTBP branding get their stuff working right from the get go, maybe not perfectly but the Nvidia support will be there.

AMD is bungling this by not being more proactive, they could easily grab more of a market share if they ensured that Eyeinfinity consumers like yourself were adequately supported so you'd feel satisfied with your investment. They are dropping the ball there.
Click to expand...


So do you actually have solid sources in the industry, or do you just make this shit up?
 
Fail said:
I don't care who comes out on top, but I bet you Nvidia, when they get their setup rolling, are going to be helping the devs with TWIMTBP branding get their stuff working right from the get go, maybe not perfectly but the Nvidia support will be there.
Click to expand...
The article clearly states that the developers did not want it to work. Having AMD's or NVIDIA's hand in it would have had no impact.

Sure, NVIDIA could say "Hey, make NVIDIA Surround work" and the developer could retort by saying "No", but that doesn't really get us anywhere.
 
Not enough games are supporting Eyeinfinity, so common sense indicates that AMD could do more to put their technology into the public consciousness. They can make the hardware, they still have to make people want to invest in it and buy it. If people aren't investing in it, game developers aren't going to support it. If AMD isn't doing it's part to help game developers get it right, then people will be less interested in Eyeinfinity. Someone said what, 1 percent of all gamers have an Eyeinfinity setup? That says it all right there.

phide. I never said "global agenda" I meant TWIMTBP'd games in general.

But you're right, the devs did make a mistake here by not supporting Eyeinfinity and they should be railed against, that wasn't my point though.
 
i wouldnt buy this game anyways. its not my style but i agree. even tho i dont have eyefinity its ridiculas that these game companie's are not supporting the new Technology.
 
Fail said:
Not enough games are supporting Eyeinfinity, so common sense indicates that AMD could do more to put their technology into the public consciousness. They can make the hardware, they still have to make people want to invest in it and buy it. If people aren't investing in it, game developers aren't going to support it. If AMD isn't doing it's part to help game developers get it right, then people will be less interested in Eyeinfinity. Someone said what, 1 percent of all gamers have an Eyeinfinity setup? That says it all right there.
Click to expand...

The bottom line is: It's not freakin' hard to make a game Hor+ instead of Vert-. That's a design decision that goes beyond Eyefinity, it's an issue that's been there ever since widescreen monitors started rolling out. I've tried literally 50 different games with my setup, there's practically only one thing that a game needs to be "eyefinity ready" - Make it Hor+ ! Making the HUD / menus "Just right" for a triple monitor setup is rare and an extra plus, but by no means necessary.

I also don't think it's engine based at all. Arkham Asylum had perfect compatibility and it's UE3, yet so many other UE3 games just fail. It really bugs me since this type of 'publicity' has already been out there. FOV fixes etc. are NOT a triple monitor gripe, widescreengamingforums speaks for itself.
 
You can honestly set up an eyefinity system for less than 600 dollars. A HD 5770, 3 E190S monitors from dell outlet, and a DP to VGA adapter, http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16812270279

If you really want IPS, Dell Outlet had the 2209WA forsale for $199. Or if you can live with a TN panel, Dell has alot of them in the outlet store for a decent price. You don't have to buy brand new to get good quality monitors with a warranty. Also look at the other manufacturers for refurbished monitors.
 
I don't believe in developers dictating fairness in online games. That should be up to individual server settings and admins.

Those are all the reasons for encouraging mediocrity in gameplay and not allowing people to improve or grow. Those are the excuses Infinity Ward flaunted for not having dedicated server or mod support for MW2, that "fairness" and "newbie friendly gameplay" were reasons to push out "elite" dedicated server communities of players. They wanted the game to be nice and gentle and fair to everyone. I hate that reasoning.

In anything fun and competitive, there should be advantages if you are willing to go out and develop your skills and pay for greater technological advantages.

Back in 1999 if I was playing Counter-Strike and the guy with the more expensive and faster internet connection and more expensive videocard and bigger monitor at higher resolution was getting an FPS and Ping advantage on me with a 17" CRT with dot pitch so bad I couldn't snipe properly, so be it!
 
Personally, I could care less about Eyefinity. I tried it for an hour or so at my neighbor's place, and while I was impressed, I could not get past the bezels. But that's just me.

What bothers me is the crazy humping they give to standard, widescreen monitors. My 1680X1050 22" LG is going on three years old. I love it, and will not be replacing it soon. BUT, they kill MY fov as well. Here are two pictures from the forum Kyle linked that say it all...

22" monitor horizontal/landscape:
globalagenda20100210000.jpg


Same res, vertical/portrait:
globalagenda20100210000o.jpg


(sorry about size, too lazy to re-size)


Same horizontal fov either way. How does that make any damn sense? Someone with an old 4:3 monitor is going to see more than me, horizontally. When was the last time you saw a 4:3 monitor in a store?

Someone with an eyefinity setup will barely see the character!
 
The game is pretty shitty too. Unfortunately, I already gave them my 50$ so I could try the beta early. Really, its just TF2 with a central city. There is not much of an mmorpg aspect to it.
 
Spare-Flair said:
I don't believe in developers dictating fairness in online games. That should be up to individual server settings and admins.

Those are all the reasons for encouraging mediocrity in gameplay and not allowing people to improve or grow. Those are the excuses Infinity Ward flaunted for not having dedicated server or mod support for MW2, that "fairness" and "newbie friendly gameplay" were reasons to push out "elite" dedicated server communities of players. They wanted the game to be nice and gentle and fair to everyone. I hate that reasoning.

In anything fun and competitive, there should be advantages if you are willing to go out and develop your skills and pay for greater technological advantages.

Back in 1999 if I was playing Counter-Strike and the guy with the more expensive and faster internet connection and more expensive videocard was getting an FPS and Ping advantage on me, so be it!
Click to expand...

Too many people these days can't stand the thought of losing. In their minds they are the best at everything they do and they won't accept defeat. If they lose it isn't because someone was better than them its because the other person cheated or had an unfair advantage over them. They're whine and bitch and scream and call the winner a cheat/hacker/whatever and they will refuse to believe that they weren't the best ever at the game. I have a name for these people, but I'm not sure Kyle would appreciate me saying it on these forums so I'll give the more PC version: Overly Competative Assholes (OCAs).
 
Well from everything Kyle's review's have shown us, Eyefinity is an advantage. Unfortunately I don't believe the gaming company has the right to lock out those users though.

So while they are right, in the end they are wrong.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top