Advertisers love numbers because they are a simple and straightforward way to convey the idea of improvement. For example, version 2.0 is always better than version 1.0, a clock speed of three gigahertz simply must be faster than two gigahertz, and four gigabytes of RAM are better than three gigabytes. Rarely will somebody challenge the universally-accepted truth that more is better.
Unfortunately, the real world is a lot more complex than the simple numbers suggest. Sometimes version 2.0 loses the elegant interface that made version 1.0 so compelling. Sometimes 3 GHz clock speeds are slower than 2 GHz if they are based on an inferior architecture. And sometimes, more RAM doesn't make a difference.
Graphics card manufacturers have been exploiting the amount of RAM as a marketing tool since the very beginning. Back in the day, you needed a certain amount of RAM on the graphics card to simply run a resolution like 1024x768. As time went on and 3D accelerators emerged, RAM on the graphics card was employed to store textures and allow for features like anti-aliasing (AA), post-processing, and normal mapping.
The focus of this article isn't to dig into the minutia of where your graphics card RAM is being used. Instead, we're more interested in looking at the tangible impact that different amounts of graphics card RAM will have on your gaming experience. Our goal is to let you know exactly what advantage, if any, you can expect from a graphics card that has more RAM on-board.
Following Left 4 Dead's undying legacy, the developer of the game shares that a new likewise project is in the works.
L4D had potential to be so much more. The issue was that the release of the second game just one year after the first added a decent amount of content which was much needed, then there was nothing except for a few small content updates spread far between.
This is one of the only games I can think of that benefits from a yearly release, or at least a yearly DLC so it doesn't split the player base.
The games just got too samey and lack content.. it's a shame they didn't keep up the pace, I know you can download new maps but it doesn't change the overall game or add new enemies etc.
Regardless of what Valve officially said they didn’t need to do a sequel that fast, things could have easily been added to the original overtime and the sad thing is the characters and atmosphere of the original was better than the sequel. I mean we went from the dark, grim city streets to the sunny south where we are hitting massive menacing tanks with frying pans.
I honestly believe Valve killed it because it was a Turtle Rock game at its core and Valve wanted it to be known as an Valve only IP moving forward
They even brought back the original survivors just to kill one of them off (even though in the original they were heading North to Canada)
Lol L4D2 came out in 2009, and you are saying it should have been a 2020s type live service game. It's just a great game, it doesn't need battle passes and skins.
This attitude is why devs are afraid to make any multiplayer game that isn't a live service.
Also in these current economic times live services is just a no go when people are being more frugal with their purchasing power. I don't do any subscription services anymore which means I can't do multiplayer on a console even if I wanted too. Something the console manufacturers should think about if they want to get players to even try their online stuff.
GTA IV turned GTA into a more grounded franchise where storytelling and immersion became just as engrossing as wrecking up open-world sandboxes.
Holger Frydrych has just released a cool VR Mod for the 2007 version of Crytek's first-person shooter, Crysis.
Playing it right now looks amazing! :D
so much fun, i hope they make a vr mod for crysis 2 / 3 too!
This is amazing. This is the direction VR should go in to boost adoption. Since I have beaten every Crysis except 1, this is now a good excuse to correct that problem.
a couple weeks ago i seen a graphics card on walmart.com that cost about 1500, it had i think 1.8gb of ram, i went to alienware website after that and seen a full computer for the same price with a graphics card with the same amount of ram...not that any of that has any real revalance but still
people all ways go on about not seeing diffence between 1080p and and 720p on a screen 32'' or lower so how do people notice the diffence with 1600p in 19''-30'' monitor oh and another qustion ps3 and 360 are made in certain resolution like 720p or 1080p or sometimes lower what are pc games made in ?
I'm livin' it up with my 128MB Radeon 9200. Ohhhh yeahhhhh.... This badass mother got a whole 3 and a half stars from CNET back in 2003. Uh huh, you all know you're jealous.
Ok, now back to some hardcore graphic intense games like SC3K and the Sims 1. That's right, my computer is just too good for The Sims 2 and 3. *sniffle*
lol
1000 gigawatts
Happens alot, they throw in extra ram. Remember a test long time ago, testing 256mb to 512mb. No difference.
Go for speed before ram.
As long as you have decent amount of ram in your motherboard, your good to go.
Considering for most people 1920x1200 is overkill and with x4aa.
Don't get me wrong, that's a very nice rez:)
The last part about L4D,did make me chuckle.
Old engine,Poor textures,Poor everything.
And no collision physics.
But a fun game.