MoH/Pacific Demo GPU exercise

Balderdash

Gawd
Joined
Jun 25, 2003
Messages
744
My system - 3200XP Athlon speed, eVGA 6800GT at default speeds and the 66:00 driver:
Game set at 1280x1024@85mhz
FRAPS says a good steady 43 when I turn everything in the game on and high, and the driver set at 'application' for AA and AF and High Quality.

Nice demo, nice videocard exercise, use the PS 2.0 option if you can, this demo makes even FarCry look like yesterdays news...

This demo rates as a "Wow" in my book. The download is big though - huge as a matter of fact, five hundred plus in the download department, but well worth it if you have a good download speed, this stuff rocks. great new videocard challenge if you ask me...


http://downloads.guru3d.com/download.php?det=859
 
You have got to be kidding?!? What are you talking about? I've played FarCry extensively with many different settings, and it looks great, fantastic even, but I noticed immediatly that when this game booted up the first time that this was a step beyond...

Did you play this demo or are you refering to the original MoH game?
 
Circuitbreaker8 said:
Uh this game looks nowhere near as good as FC...
I also wasn't that impressed with the graphics. It looked nice, but for the detail I would expect a higher framerate.

What really killed the game for me was the complete lack of AI. It made imps in Doom III seem like potential Einsteins.
 
I Think it looks pretty damn good , runs perfect on my Athlon 64 3000+ / eVGA GeForce 6800 GT / 512mb Ram @ 1280x1024 all on high an everything
 
CrAzYsPyDeR said:
I Think it looks pretty damn good , runs perfect on my Athlon 64 3000+ / eVGA GeForce 6800 GT / 512mb Ram @ 1280x1024 all on high an everything
How does it run on your
Intel Pentium 4 [email protected]
ABIT AA8 DuraMax
512MB Cosair XMS DDR2
ATI Radeon X800 XT 256MB PCI Express
35GB WD Raptor Serial ATA
DVD-RW
compared to the A64 / GT?
 
I just now played it again, and I'd already played it twice before I posted originally, but I had to play it again because I had to make sure that I wasn't completely nuts, the way some of you guys were saying that the graphics were only so-so.

But I'm sticking with my first assesment, the game looks great, very nice graphics, exceptional even, but I'm not talking about the game's AI, only the graphics.

If you turn all the game options on, so that you have as much detail as possible, it looks really good, I have a hard time believing that you guys are playing it at top quality and you say stuff like its 'okay.'
 
Don't look at the game as a whole... compare screenshots. Because if you look at the game as a whole, you're going to say "dude... it looks just like call of duty... or medal of honor" which it does... because it's the same types of backgrounds/characters etc.

But if you look a little closer, you'll notice that these same backgrounds/characters have much higher poly counts/better textures/lighting/everything. Far Cry is shiny with lots of specular on many things that shouldn't have specular. This one is darker and grimier... just like real life...

I would agree that the graphics are at least on par with Far Cry if not better
 
kick@ss said:
How does it run on your
Intel Pentium 4 [email protected]
ABIT AA8 DuraMax
512MB Cosair XMS DDR2
ATI Radeon X800 XT 256MB PCI Express
35GB WD Raptor Serial ATA
DVD-RW
compared to the A64 / GT?

Im currently in the process of breakin up that machine an selling it heh.
 
the basic texture quality in this game is more believable than in fc, imo.
 
Back
Top