F.E.A.R. Demo Thread


Recommended Posts

B) No matter how BAD the performance is on ATI cards (it seems nVidia cards do a bit better, maybe not...)

586339003[/snapback]

No, you're right -- Monolith screwed ATI users over, because it runs like crap on every ATI system I've played it on or my friends.

That girl in the red dress appearing and then disintergrating as you go down the ladder... that scared the **** out of me  :ninja:

586339970[/snapback]

Yeah that bit made jump!

So the next time i played the demo i jumped over the railings so i wouldnt have to go through that again.... :unsure:

AMD x2 4400+ @ 2.4

7800GTX OC'd @ 470mhz/1.32ghz

2gig ram

1024x768 everything at max, runs fine, slight slowdown in places although that could just be the game design, maybe should run it with fraps on

be nice if it had a built in benchmarker

586340244[/snapback]

What you on? You say it goes slow in places when you have that spec? If it goes slow, then I doubt your PC is that powerful then. No way would it lag on that spec lol.

I loved the demo, and I think it ran pretty fine for a system like mine: (posting this makes me feel so obsolete, everyone and their topnotch systems :p) AMD XP 2500+ Barton + 512mb ram + 9800 Pro 128mb). The settings I played at were aumatically detected + a few manual options (soft shadows enabled, detailed chars, etc). The resolution was 800x600 if I recall correctly.

586338029[/snapback]

you dont have to feel too obsolete, i'm still running a barton 2500+...of course, i have mine OC'ed to 2.4ghz so it's more like a 3700+ or 3800+ or something like that....with a gig of ram and a 256 meg radeon 9800 pro, it ran quite smoothly for me on 800x600. I thought about trying 1024x768, but after playing through it once, i didnt feel the need to play it again. it sure was fun, but it was a hell of a big download for about 5 minutes of gameplay :rolleyes:

As a Sierra game I'm quite surprised they didn't use the Source engine which I think would have provided superior results.  That is one thing I have to hand to Valve, they kept the feel of the original and thats as good as it gets IMO.

586335958[/snapback]

Sierra its just the publisher. The game its made my Monolith and its powered by their inhouse engine called Lithtech

1) FEAR is a PC game, post it then in PC gamer section

Does it really matter?

2) There is a main thread for FEAR

Never saw it, cheers.

https://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?show...view=getnewpost post it there

3) you don't need .net framework for fear

You did with the ati drivers.

4) you haven't mentioned what video/sound cards you have

9800 pro.

5) demo specifically asks for directx 9c (june)

April, i can take a screenshot if you wish.

What you on? You say it goes slow in places when you have that spec? If it goes slow, then I doubt your PC is that powerful then. No way would it lag on that spec lol.

586340266[/snapback]

well, i'm guessing that the game was slow for him in similar places that it was slow for me...there are a couple times when it has to render something or do something that is a little more graphic and/or processor intensive than the rest of the game...so it makes sense that it would lag a tiny bit, even on that system...

plus, he said that he was running fraps and i dunno what experience you have with fraps, but whenever i run it when i'm playing a game, it slows me down quite significantly

My specs:

P4 3.0ghz HT

1GB RAM

6800GT

Ran the game maxed out at 1024 and very smooth. Looks like it was meant for nVidia cards. They don't seem to be making many compromises with those that own ATI cards though... :no:

Overall: Sweet game. I'll be buying. :yes:

I can totally believe this game will lag on the best systems. There is definately something wrong :p 6800 GT/X800 XL cards and up should be able to at least do 1280x1024, not a lowly 1024 just to be playable. By maxed out (you people with nVidia cards), do you mean full AA/AF as well or just everything on max quality settings?

definatly had more elements in this game than doom 3's comparison on being scary, plus the water effects are amazing too bad my system is ou, tdated and doesnt play this game well. first time i was loaded into the interactive level after the intro i was instantly noclipped fell threw thew ground.

That's just... awesome!

Yeah I seem to have lots of problems with games crashing early, I had exactly the same problem with GTA:SA :s Dammit, I really want to play this game >.<

btw, specs are

AMD 1800+

Geforce 4 MX440

265MB RAM

I know it's crap, but it still should run dammit :pinch:

586340480[/snapback]

thats just disgraceful system, burn it asap and buy a new one.

Deal, as soon as you give me money to buy a new one :rolleyes:

586340694[/snapback]

best bet; complain to the manufacturers that their hardware isn't fast enough - if they ask which product you have be sure to quickly reply " but it was suposed to run games, i hate you"

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • This got me thinking, would you rather a self driving car prioritise protecting its passengers or everyone else? I'd choose the one that keeps me and my kids safest. At some point, these cars have to make those choices already, don't they? Wonder if we have a way to find out what way they lean.
    • The proportion (or number of iterations) has nothing to with this aspect of Copyright I am describing. In short, it doesn't matter how many times the manager tells you to change something or how. Your work product is always YOURS until and unless you then assign that to the person representing the client/company, usually for financial compensation -- either in salary or as a subcontract work for hire payment. if iterations determined copyright, then businesses would have learned to just keep making changes until they could claim they owned the copyright, without having to compensate the artist for their work. And that would be BAD. The only place where the amount of changes does have a role is in how much does a human modify a previous public domain work (from any source) before it is considered fair use or their own work, etc. For example, if a human makes substantial changes to a public domain (re: AI, by definition) work, then they can then claim that derivative work as their own...but NEVER the original version, of course. That's why anyone can make a movie about Dracula, for example, as long as it is based on the public domain novel, but not if they take new ideas from copyrighted movies made afterwards. As one of the people who personally advised the US Copyright Office on their recent ruling on these very issues, be assured that I specifically used the terminology precisely -- though I made it simple enough for laymen to understand it. If I made this confusing by doing so, I apologize. But, to be clear regarding your assumption that I would agree to your second statement that I quoted above -- the answer is NO. If AI does the work, no matter how much "direction" you give it, it cannot be copyrighted. All AI generated content is in the Public Domain and therefore the copyright cannot be assigned to ANYONE, even you -- until and unless substantial modifications are made to it BY A HUMAN BEING (yourself or a contracted artist/writer/etc.) and then that copyright on the derivative work is legally (in writing) transferred to you. This is a critical distinction. And it is important that people, especially AI sloppers, understand this. For example, YouTube is not paying AI slop generators for the copyright, etc. of their AI slop. What YouTube is doing is sharing AD REVENUE for permission to publish your AI slop. Copyright/ownership/rights never come into it. Importantly, that means that anyone can copy any AI slopware on YouTube, etc. and rehost it anywhere they want, even back on YouTube, and there is nothing legal that YouTube can do about it with regards to copyright protections, ownership, DMCA, etc. Anyone is legally free to use any AI slopware in any way they want. When this ruling was pending, I warned Disney legal of all of this before they did their OpenAI deal -- that it would literally dilute their entire IP portfolio forever. They ignored that warning for the PR and stock bump. But that is why, when the ruling came down last year, Disney quickly extricated themselves from that OpenAI deal, even eating the initial upfront fees -- followed closely by OpenAI ending their entire AI video generating business model. They adjusted their PR release dates to make this less obvious to shareholders, of course. Phew. I hope that this clears up the key distinctions for you and anyone reading. If you have any additional questions or even hypotheticals about AI and Copyright, please feel free to ask.
    • Each of the devices displayed on this page now has a little volume meter next to it to show if there is audio actively playing. About time.
    • Owing to the nature of Windows feature enablement updates, it was distributed over Windows Update services as a complete system upgrade rather than as an ordinary cumulative update
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      561
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      188
    3. 3
      Michael Scrip
      78
    4. 4
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      74
    5. 5
      neufuse
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!