QUOTE(jason18689 @ Sep 26 2010, 11:41 PM)
So, to those who wants to play Starcraft 2 without any lag has to use SSD or RAID 0 ?
That would a joke of the year isnt it?
the above posts/explanation didnt got through? lol
Added on September 27, 2010, 8:54 amQUOTE(crashtec @ Sep 27 2010, 05:28 AM)
All i can say is. Blizzard had 10 years of development time to make a great game, campaign and multiplayer features.
I'm going to compare what S2 did with HoN (although i find it stupid to merge with Pirate King <--- ), They did most of the online features right in just 2 years of development.
Says loads about Blizzard now. You had 10 years Blizzard, at the very least you could have foreseen disconnect issues in official tournaments or matches like what HoN did. 10 Years! 10 Years to figure out who'd be your best partner in the industry, 10 years to figure out the best things to be included in an online system.
There is no excuse for something that took that long to develop or plan (or learn from) to make so many mistakes during its release. Pfft, if i could vote for all things listed, i would have. The game isn't bad, but i'd expect better from a company of their stature.
i would disagree and agree personally. though yeah, with so many years behind, and being blizzard and all, no doubt expectations are a lot higher than something like say, HoN
Added on September 27, 2010, 9:05 am» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «
QUOTE(Ash @ Sep 27 2010, 06:08 AM)
No offense here brother but I find your post to be extremely misleading and untrue not to mention the fact that you even tried to bash the others just because they were doubting you which simply shows your ignorance. HDDs DO NOT affect the performance of SC2 in game as long as you have a decent 7.2k RPM HDD but of coursse unless we are talking about the game loading time which is the last thing we would want to care about or else a 7.2k rpm HDD will do just fine.
The issue jason18689 is facing is due to his mid end graphic card. Supposedly, 5770 should be more than sufficient for starcraft 2 but we all know how stressful it will be for our graphic cards to handle when it comes to a huge battle with a large amount of units in 3D (Ultra settings) not to mention the fact that Blizzard type of games are usually pro Nvidia. Heck, even a high end Nvidia GTX470 will give me similar problems when there are hundreds of units engaging in a battle for a 4v4 game, let alone a mid end 5770.
Before you start questioning my credibility, yes I've tried SC2 on different systems (including systems with SSD) and made relevant comparisons so I obviously know what I'm talking about here. SSD will no doubt improve your gaming experience due to the faster loading time but graphic card is still the most important thing when it comes to 3D gaming experience.
I would not say I'm satisfied with what Blizzard is providing in SC2 but the disconnection issue is definitely not their problems. I have not seen any disconnect issues in a huge tournament but have personally experienced once in Malaysia and obviously it was due to the organizers router problems and our unreliable ISP. As much as I would like to blame Blizzard for not including LAN option in SC2, we should know better why they have came up with this decision. The piracy problem is just reaching unacceptable stage for game developers when we have platforms like flying spaghetti monster and etc which do not really require gamers to purchase a genuine copy playing the games. However, the unacceptable thing for me is the fact that they did not include chat channels system but it seems that it will be implemented soon based on what I've read from the Blizzard interview about Patch 1.2.
it does to a certain extent during game (of course, this is subjected to how much rams you have available, and will most certainly affect 32bit users as to say, 64bit users), and it most certain affects your loading times
and unless you're looking to being lumped together with the few previous posters, NO ONE said anything about NEEDING SSDs or RAID0's.
In case you did not know, almost HALF the settings in the graphic options are based on your processor, NOT graphic card. and what jason18689 is "facing", is his inquiry on sc2 support towards quad core. and with this post, AND his signature, considering he is on 4gb ram, he is probably having VRAM page filing during game and that WILL be affected by HDD. also, with more units, more effects will be present, and more PHYSICS calculation will be needed. THAT is affected by processor, NOT graphic card.
so no, while it may be the most important thing for games like FPS (lol crysis), when it comes to Blizzard games like WoW/SC2, it definitely will not be the most important thing and it most certainly wont matter when you're bottlenecked by your CPU (or in rare cases, HDD/RAM)
in case you're missing his post, refer this:
http://forum.lowyat.net/index.php?showtopi...post&p=36239715lastly, fanboyisms aside, regardless if blizzard games are pro-nvidia or not, ATI drivers are known to be, "problematic" and tend to not ultilize the card's full potential. how else is Nvidia still friggin alive when almost every card ATI releases are cheaper and performs better than nvidia in terms of raw performance.
all in all, if you think im bashing/flaming/trolling without any base, think again.
This post has been edited by Quazacolt: Sep 27 2010, 09:05 AM 
Sep 27 2010, 05:28 AM
Quote
0.0487sec
0.92
6 queries
GZIP Disabled