Brad Schoonmaker on 1/11/2000 at 01:28
xman
Thanks for the info. I think it's worth getting, too. I even saw it for $20 U.S. at Media Play and EB. Beleive it or not, I saw SS1 bundled with two other Origin games there, too. It was $25.
Brad S.
twisty on 1/11/2000 at 05:34
X-man, Id love to hear how that extra 128 stick went as Im also in the position of buying an extra 128 ram as well. Unfortunately the price of games are really high in OZ. Ultima 9 goes for $120 (about US $60)
<HR>
Check out my New FM
The Ritual
(
http://twistalot.cjb.com/dromed.htm) http://twistalot.cjb.com/dromed.htm
xman on 7/11/2000 at 12:22
OK, I've got that extra 128MB RAM.
I tried it with U9 to see what's improved, and here are my conclusions:
Here I remind you of my previous parameters, when I "only" had 128MB (I'm not sure about the exact names but you should find them easily):
MeshCacheMemorySize = 20000000
FarClippingPlane = 8000 (a pretty good value, bigger than the default maximum value)
MiddleClippingPlane = 5000 (pretty far too)
MipMapping = off
TextureCompression = on (I have a GeForce 256 DDR)
Now here are a few tests with 256MB
1 - If you still keep mip-mapping off and slightly increase the meshcachesize to 30000000, you can visit all Britannia (even Britain!) quite smoothly. With only 128MB, it was rather smooth except in Britain and a few towns.
When I say smoothly, I mean, after all the new meshes are loaded, you can look around without problem. For example, go to the center square of Britain, make a 360° turn (which might be terrible because of all the meshes to load). If you make a second 360° turn, it should be smooth.
2 - If you turn Mip-mapping on, you get what I got with only 128MB and mipmapping off: i.e. quite acceptable but not very smooth in towns.
Anyway, I run the game in 1280x960 so that the pixel noise due to the absence of mip-mapping is not annoying. Thus, 256MB are quite interesting.
However:
1 - I suppose you need 512MB (which I cant afford and don't need except for that game) in order to have a smooth game w/ mip-mapping.
2 - The loadings of meshes generate slowdowns. But if you pump up the MeshCache, they'll stay in memory but it will slow the game down anyway because it will take longer to handle the cache (search through the cache to see it the mesh is already in memory, remove unused meshes from the cache, etc...)
As a conclusion:
- U9 is "playable" with 128MB (and good optimization of the ini file and mip-mapping off)
- U9 runs a bit more nicely with 256MB
- U9 will run like heaven is 3 years with 3GHz CPU and 1GB RAM computers.
PS: I've just finished playing U7. The first time I tried it was on a 386sx16.
Inline Image:
http://www.ttlg.com/forums/ubb/wink.gif I had 1 frame every 2 seconds and I enjoyed the game anyway. Now, it runs great and I had countless orgasms!
Inline Image:
http://www.ttlg.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif Inline Image:
http://www.ttlg.com/forums/ubb/wink.gifxman on 9/11/2000 at 14:25
Small addendum:
After a few other testings, it appears that it works fine, even with mip-mapping on when you have 256MB. Even in towns.
Inline Image:
http://www.ttlg.com/forums/ubb/biggrin.gifYou get a little hard-disk activity and then you can run through all Britannia without much loading slowdowns. 256MB rule! (too bad my two SDRAM don't like each other and I had to reduce my overclocking.
Inline Image:
http://www.ttlg.com/forums/ubb/frown.gifDrakus Blackthorn on 24/12/2000 at 20:45
Ultima 9.. psh. What a bloody joke. I cannot believe that I wasted more than 50 bucks on that piece of debris {I did buy the special edition however.. the one where a UC cd, tarot cards, black spellbook with a pentagram upon the cover, and an ankh accompanies it. That package was quite cool}. The graphics are wondrous {besides the Titanic bugs that hinder them} and the music was fantastic in my opinion. As a game, however, I was sorely disappointed. The storyline seemed to be working fine for quite awhile but eventually I ran into devastating loopholes. I must complain that fighting was a bit too choppy for my tastes. Even as a fighter I found it difficult to slay anything {of course lag contributed to this problem as well}. They could have simplified it a bit {I'm being kind..}. The game was too slow and that is quite infuriating considering that my computer is a PII! My best friend was unable to install his U9 program and he had a PIII. He still has it from a year ago. *sigh*
What happened to the promises Origin made?? What happened to their oath to make this game the greatest of the series? Such a lie twas. I swear it, I didn't even get beyond Destard. A bug, there, hindered me as well and I refused to toil with it any longer. I simply quit. Recently I tried installing it again, with the 'new', ''patched'' version I received in the mail in February. I was thinking that perhaps the changes they had made would make me see the game as a very enjoyable, memorable experience. Wrong I was indeed and foolish was I to let my hopes fly so high. Same bugs, loopholes... everything that was corrupt before. I angrily uninstalled it from my computer.
Oh yes.. Ultima 8 had its problems as well.. but at least THAT GAME was playable! Looking at the two in comparison I must say that Ultima 8 beats 9 to the ground. The storyline was lacking a bit and the gameplay was a bit too short but at least twasn't a complete failure. I would still appreciate it if in the future Origin would come to their senses and perhaps recreate the two games, especially 9. Perhaps they could actually make an ULTIMA instead of a medieval Tomb Raider. I doubt it however. Garriott has since left the company and without him I find it very difficult to look at Origin in a positive light anymore. UO has gone down the drain from the looks of it and twill even go further down into the Abyss since Garriott left {I used to revere him as a God, so to speak, for his genius. HE brought UO so low}. Twas ruined for me when twas impossible to even attempt to be an evil character {whats a game without evil?!}.. not to mention the lag I experienced.
Let me state this.. those of you who wished for Origin to make a third Underworld.. be ecstatic that they didn't. The producer of the Underworlds {I forget his name} has left {I don't blame him}. Without him, They would have completely slain it. Twould've been something that I could not have stood. Let the Underworlds stand as they are {besides, what I've seen/heard of Arx is excellent. It looks like it could be an unofficial Underworld 3 indeed, but we shall see}.
Ultima: 1981-1994
Brad Schoonmaker on 25/12/2000 at 17:11
Well, I didn't have that attitude about the game, but I did run into bugs. I still like the game, but it does have its share of faults as do the other Ultimas.
It surprises me that it doesn't work better on a PIII machine, though.
I, too, thought highly of Richard Garriot all those years playing the games and I'm amazed that he isn't with Origin anymore. They sure did great work.
Calling U9 a medieval Tomb Raider is strange. Just about any FPS can be compared to that game in one way or another. Also, SS1 was called a thinking man's version of Doom or something like that.
I look forward to ARX like the rest of you. I hope it carries on the the Underworld theme as well as add new elements to the genre. The System Shock series did! It looks to do both pretty damn well.
Brad S.
Brad Schoonmaker on 25/12/2000 at 17:13
Well, I didn't have that attitude about the game, but I did run into bugs. I still like the game, but it does have its share of faults as do the other Ultimas.
It surprises me that it doesn't work better on a PIII machine, though.
I, too, thought highly of Richard Garriot all those years playing the games and I'm amazed that he isn't with Origin anymore. They sure did great work.
Calling U9 a medieval Tomb Raider is strange. Just about any FPS can be compared to that game in one way or another. Also, SS1 was called a thinking man's version of Doom or something like that.
I look forward to ARX like the rest of you. I hope it carries on the Underworld theme as well as add new elements to the genre. The System Shock series did! It looks to do both pretty damn well.
Brad S.
[This message has been edited by Brad Schoonmaker (edited December 25, 2000).]
Kalirion on 27/12/2000 at 19:00
From what I hear, the engine from the beginning was meant to work with 3dfx cards, and D3D was an afterthought. Think of it as Unreal to the next power. That's why a Voodoo2 will probably run the game better than a TNT2. So if you have a Voodoo3+ 3dfx card and a fast CPU the game will probably run fine, if not necessarily smooth. But dont expect to play at 1280x1024 with your brand new Geforce2Ultra on a 1.1GHz Thunderbird.
Excoriator on 30/12/2000 at 05:42
U9 was a big disappointment...and so was U8. I still played them. I even liked them (U8 moreso). My biggest gripe with U9 (aside from the fact that it isnt U7 Part 3 with 3D) is that even though I specially upgraded my system to play it, it still choked. I managed to finish the game, though. Now that I've upgraded yet again, I think I'll play through it once more soon. But first, Thief 2 beckons again...
