Fallout 3

[snoopy369]

The x800 is not going to be supported because it's not PS3.0 compatible ... it's a great card, but for whatever reason they didn't make it PS3.0 compatible. It's the problem I had with Bioshock ... You can get a card that will run it for under $50 nowadays, though.

Quillan, what do you consider 'max' on the texture size? Small or Large? I ran it on Small (which I interpreted as smaller, more numerous textures) and it seems to not look that good - i'm guessing I got it wrong, and Small/Large refers to how complex the texture is, but I'm not sure (and it makes me reboot the game to change it, which is annoying).

I've got an AMD X2 something or another (3600? I forget), which is a quite old CPU (2005 era), an 8600GTS/256, and 2GB Ram, running at 1600x1080 (native), 4x AA, 8xAF, no frame rate issues anywhere yet (everything else set to default level). I haven't maxed out the view distances yet, but usually I don't - I actually like having a short view distance of some things, more realistic.

[Asher]

Probably gonna get this on PC because the SO has a lot of 360 games to play...so this way I can play it sometime soon.

[Adagio]

After a few hours play I got the first problem, a nice freeze (had to start task manage using ctrl+alt+delete to get back to desktop, to see a nice "Fallout3.exe has stopped working". Next time I started the game it froze again (before even seing the intro video). Uninstalling ffdshow fixed the problem, but that shouldn't be the solution to the problem

[EPW]

Originally posted by snoopy369
The x800 is not going to be supported because it's not PS3.0 compatible ... it's a great card, but for whatever reason they didn't make it PS3.0 compatible. It's the problem I had with Bioshock ... You can get a card that will run it for under $50 nowadays, though.

I did a bit of research on the Bethsoft boards and found that Fallout 3 will support PS2.0:

Tentatively, as the list of officially supported video card chipsets included the Radeon X850 series, Fallout 3 will have a Shader Model 2.0 path, as the X850 does not support Shader Model 3.0. Likewise, that means that there are a few other, at least comparable, video cards that are left off of the list, like the Radeon X800 series. Furthermore, there are a number of weaker SM 2.0 cards that are readily more powerful than some of the SM 3.0 cards listed as supported, such as the Radeon 9800 and X700 series, which rival the power of the supported GeForce 7300 series.

It might be ugly but it should run.

[Quillan]

Originally posted by snoopy369
Quillan, what do you consider 'max' on the texture size? Small or Large? I ran it on Small (which I interpreted as smaller, more numerous textures) and it seems to not look that good - i'm guessing I got it wrong, and Small/Large refers to how complex the texture is, but I'm not sure (and it makes me reboot the game to change it, which is annoying).

I'd say large is the max, although I don't recall for certain what it set mine as. Usually texture size refers to the base size of a texture square, so 256x256 is smaller than 512x512 (which thus has more detail in it). I have no idea what the engine is actually using, 1024x1024 or larger. I don't really keep up with the textures, though I do remember that 128x128 was the limit on some of the older games like Thief.

[snoopy369]

Originally posted by EPW


I did a bit of research on the Bethsoft boards and found that Fallout 3 will support PS2.0:



It might be ugly but it should run.

Hmm, that's good news for you if it does. The x800gtx is a good card. It surprises me because of BioShock not supporting it, but perhaps they learned from BioShock's complaints?

[Asher]

Fallout 3 is based on an older engine than BioShock was. The old engine had SM2.0 support already, Bioshock would need to code their own SM2.0 path..makes no sense.

[DrSpike]

Had more time to read reviews tonight and if anything I'm even more impressed.

I particularly noted that a common theme is how open-ended and replayable the game is, as well as making progress in a number of areas. Who said that modern gaming is stagnant with limited replayability?

[Alinestra Covelia]

Well then again it builds on the foundations of two games that were famous for that. If they deviated from that, they'd probably lose a large number of the old games' following...

I'm still waiting for my roommate to get his copy.

[snoopy369]

Originally posted by Asher
Fallout 3 is based on an older engine than BioShock was. The old engine had SM2.0 support already, Bioshock would need to code their own SM2.0 path..makes no sense.

Ahh, right, Fallout3 has been in development for a long time, hasn't it ...

[DrSpike]

Originally posted by Alinestra Covelia
Well then again it builds on the foundations of two games that were famous for that. If they deviated from that, they'd probably lose a large number of the old games' following...

True, but not really relevant to the point.

[Asher]

Originally posted by snoopy369


Ahh, right, Fallout3 has been in development for a long time, hasn't it ...

It's not that, it's just that it's based on the Oblivion engine...

[Vesayen]

This game has thoroughly knocked my socks clear off.

Originally posted by snoopy369
Played a bit last night, just beyond the opening section ... as a non-FPSer, this game is **** hard (on Normal) (after the opening section, of course). If I don't use VATS, I'm pretty much screwed.

I definitely would like more of a Mass Effect style movement system (auto-ducking into cover) ... I miss that a lot. Unless I'm missing how to do that ...

I am a veteran FPS player, insofar as i've been playing them since they existed. I go to cover when I run out of VATS points and let it recharge.

[FrostyBoy]

Originally posted by Asher

No, you don't. Not in Fallout 3.

VATS is for woosies.

[snoopy369]

You don't NEED to be able to do that...

Also, you can't really do that on the PC either. The aiming reticula is too small and you don't appear to have much zoom ability (so far...)