Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Stiebler
Von Helsching said:
Quote:
|
Can you please elaborate on the "uncritically every conceivable mod" part?
|
I don't doubt that the GW team considered carefully (or critically) every alternative for every mod that was added to GW, and then selected the one they liked best. And we needn't argue about how one defines 'best'; we can all agree that sometimes judgements have to be made.
What troubles me is whether anyone asked critically if a mod had to be added at all. The much criticised sea-floor textures provide a good example. What purpose did they serve? Did anyone demand to have them? And - most important of all - how come they were not tested on a *standard* computer (meeting SH3 minimum specifications), instead only on a top-end computer? The problem must have been seen at once if tested with a standard computer.
Stiebler. |
I used the seafloor texture even before GW came out and they never caused problems. They look absolutely fantastic. What I don't understand is that they are allegedly causing such a fps hit, because without GW they ran fine on my system.
I cannot comment on testing policies but I think that GW definitely is too large. A week ago I started downloading it from an internet cafe and had to quit halfway. For a mod this large two separate gameplay/graphics packages are almost a must.
I will finally get to play it one day, but I don't think I can keep up if every patch is 400MB and upwards. Also keep in mind that with all this stuff ends up in memory, so the size adds to the fps problems.