DavidNewbould

err... I use winroute pro to share my cable modem, and i dont need to map any ports to use MSN messenger. just enable NAT for the NIC that's connecting you to the net, and away you go. DONT enable DHCP, instead manually assign an IP for each PC that's connecting, and make the connecting PC the default gateway.

*sigh* Come on people, look what he said: Quote: and turned on Antiliasing to the highest This is obviously the problem, he's running FSAA at 4x4 - hasn't told us what CPU he's got. For all we know, he's got a K6-III 450 or something shite like that... As for the V-sync issue, half-life seems to limit the fps to 30 if v-sync on, so make sure it's off. Make sure you've got SP1 on there as well, and you should find games run perfectly.

Hail to the king, baby

? ------------------ In the year of our Lord 1314, patriots of Scotland, starving and outnumbered, charged the fields at Bannockburn. They fought like warrior poets. They fought like Scotsmen. And won their freedom.

C:\con\con

Livingston, Scotland (near Edinburgh) :D:D:D:D:D:D => sig

For all your nVidia driver needs go here: http://64.39.224.22/nVidialist.html

Perth!!! Is that Perth Australia or Perth Scotland??? In regards to your problem - /me shrugs

umm i dont think there is a way to do this - have you tried running the win2k installation and chosing "repair" ?

¨p

Right. My monitor is severely, severely, fukced, so i have it looking alright by using a colour profile. Ie: Display properties-->settings-->advanced-->colour correction Now. This is ok, it makes everything look ok (it was really really green), and windows applies it to games. But movies are still green - windows doesnt apply the colour correction to video playback. This shouldnt be because of a performance issue, because its applied to games, and they run at same speed... Any ideas?

I was one of the 2 to vote Athlon Classic I was first of the two actually /me gloats God I'm pathetic...

May i start my rant in regards to Serious Sam: I installed it, and it ran really badly on my rig. (Which gets 50-60fps in CS) I turned all the texture detail, resolution etc down, and it still ran badly. Now people may say "oh this game rocks, it runs great on my Athlon 1.2Ghz" I see it as shite programming. A game, that runs poorly even what ALL the settings are set low, which makes it look no better than a 5 year old game, compared to a game that looks great and runs great - for example Half-Life. "Oh no, no no no, the half life game engine doesnt support as many polygons, and is no where near as advanced" SO???? can you SEE A DIFFERENCE ?!??! can you fück. The only difference you see is speed. So the ppl who are bringing out really slow *but new* game engines should stop and think about getting it RIGHT, not getting it done. Classic example: V-Rally2 - Installed it, played it, ran at 80fps constantly, looked great, very realistic, great. Colin McRae rally 2 - Installed it, played it, ran at 15fps, looked piss, nothing felt right, car didnt handle right, shite. Why is this?? Because the ppl who made CMR2 knew that they could make this game as slow as they liked because it would run OK on ninja spec PC's. Lazy attitude. == End Rant == Basic System Specs: AMD K6-III 450 Asus P5A-B 100Mhz 192Mib PC100 RAM nVidia Riva TNT2 M64 32Mb Ensoniq PCI Audio Sound Card 48X CD-ROM Windows 98 SE / Whistler Beta2 ------------------ In the year of our Lord 1314, patriots of Scotland, starving and outnumbered, charged the fields at Bannockburn. They fought like warrior poets. They fought like Scotsmen. And won their freedom. [This message has been edited by DavidNewbould (edited 11 April 2001).]

I'm not moaning about my hardware not being up-to-date. I'm saying, for the last time, that people who code games can find alterior ways to enhance a players experience of a game, and these ways are inherently faster than the techniques currently used. <lets breath out> There is [size:18]NO[/color] need to flame me for this, I'm not trying to insult your integrity, nor am I challenging you, I'm just making a point about the necessity of certain things in a game. Ok. Ok, I'm done. Peace.

Almghty...Totally... In referall to previous posts...Why not make a game to work on 2 year old technology? As long as it LOOKS good, which can be easily achieved on 2 year old technology. A basic example. 3D Mark2001. In "game mode", at LOW detail setting, the game looks terrible. I mean really, really terrible. It looks like its 5 years old. BUT, if you look at the source code, you can see that the polygon count is far superior to anything seen before, etc etc. Switch it to looking good, and it barely runs. On £1000 PC's, it struggles. And yet we switch over to another game, not neccesarily Half-Life, but any;- Lets take Kingpin. You can play this game on a low-end machine, at high resolution, high texture detail, so it looks really good. It LOOKS really good. And it goes like a rocket. So. We have something that runs bad and looks even worse. And we have something that runs fast and looks great. Although the technology behind the games may be different, the output is what counts. Remember, these are examples, it applies to many games. ------------------ In the year of our Lord 1314, patriots of Scotland, starving and outnumbered, charged the fields at Bannockburn. They fought like warrior poets. They fought like Scotsmen. And won their freedom. [This message has been edited by DavidNewbould (edited 14 April 2001).]

Argh! Listen, i can understand technology is moving forward, all im saying is slow down!!!! Game developers are requesting more and more faster and faster - faster than a lot of people can upgrade. Eye candy can be achieved in faster and more efficient ways than they are currently - NOT T&L and such things, but basic techniques. Sheesh... ------------------ In the year of our Lord 1314, patriots of Scotland, starving and outnumbered, charged the fields at Bannockburn. They fought like warrior poets. They fought like Scotsmen. And won their freedom.

Yes. I can respect the fact that ppl pay a lot of money for fast machines, and want to see them reaching their full potential, in terms of eye candy. But this eye candy can be achieved in different ways, aside ripping up polygon counts etc Programmers should investigate more efficient ways of doing this. ------------------ In the year of our Lord 1314, patriots of Scotland, starving and outnumbered, charged the fields at Bannockburn. They fought like warrior poets. They fought like Scotsmen. And won their freedom.

Hardware isn't the issue here. I'm just trying to say, that game programmers dont give a **** about tweaking the game theyre making, because they know that ppl will upgrade to play. I am using 5.32 Dets btw - these are the fastest for my card (TNT2 family). Anyway, all im saying is that programmers should think about designing a game to run well on lower end machines, this way it'll incorporate a wider market and keep the high-spec ppl happy, as the game will run even faster. ------------------ In the year of our Lord 1314, patriots of Scotland, starving and outnumbered, charged the fields at Bannockburn. They fought like warrior poets. They fought like Scotsmen. And won their freedom.

*sigh* You're missing the point. My card has 32Mb of onboard memory ffs as well. My K6-III 450 has 256KB of L2 cache. And im afraid Half-Life looks way better than serious sam at the settings needed for it to run above 10fps. The GTS system i was referring to was a friends, K6-III 450, 192MB ram, GeForce2 GTS - runs TFC at about 30-50 fps, while mine runs at 40-60.

Is it really. It's funny then, how my system out-preforms a PC with the same RAM, same CPU, but with a GeForce2 GTS Yes, mine runs games faster. How?!??! Because its tweaked, tuned. This is a software change, NOT hardware, which enables mine to be faster. Next point?

I think the bottleneck is with the CPU - the upgrade from the Cyrix to the K6-2 isnt a huge one, the AMD chip has no L2 cache, which kills games performance. Im not too sure how good the chipset it also, doubt it's any good. My advice = upgrade CPU+mobo --------------- http://www.deathmatcharena.co.uk http://www.razorreviews.com ICQ - 86423724 ------------------ In the year of our Lord 1314, patriots of Scotland, starving and outnumbered, charged the fields at Bannockburn. They fought like warrior poets. They fought like Scotsmen. And won their freedom.

Start--->Control Panel--->User Accounts then "change the way people log on and off" Uncheck "use the welcome screen" =) ------------------ In the year of our Lord 1314, patriots of Scotland, starving and outnumbered, charged the fields at Bannockburn. They fought like warrior poets. They fought like Scotsmen. And won their freedom.

In win2k i use 7.17 and divx movies play fine. I use the same driver set in wniXP beta2 and the divx playback is somewhat choppy. Anyone eXPerience anything similair ?! ------------------ In the year of our Lord 1314, patriots of Scotland, starving and outnumbered, charged the fields at Bannockburn. They fought like warrior poets. They fought like Scotsmen. And won their freedom.

Quote: <font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Bier: Hi! I had an Geforce1 256 32mb DRR for a few days</font> What happened to the nVidia card? I had a banshee, it didnt like win2k at all so i bought a TNT2 M64 \o/ ------------------ In the year of our Lord 1314, patriots of Scotland, starving and outnumbered, charged the fields at Bannockburn. They fought like warrior poets. They fought like Scotsmen. And won their freedom.

~