Caltrops - Go Back to Quake





	[quote name="Entropy Stew"][quote name="Ray of Light"]Maybe you could point out what elements of those TF2 scenes justify the 60-fold reduction in pixel output?[/quote] The modern engine that doesn't look like Q3. [quote]I'm no expert, have at 'er, I'm sure to be impressed. But I bet no justification exists.[/quote] You fucking retard, Quake 3 is a 10 year old game designed for 10 year old hardware. It runs on a fucking <a href="http://code.google.com/p/quake3-iphone/">iPhone</a>. It also looks like a pile of anus when compared to TF2. [quote]In that interview, JC talks about how the engine is universally super fast.[/quote] JC wrote it 10 years ago, therefore it runs fast on 10 year old hardware. Wow. [quote]It is that way because of things he did, like programming and working with driver makers to make it fast. These are the kinds of things a genius does.[/quote] Source engine games consistently clock up very high framerates in benchmarks. Buy a vid card that isn't made out of leaves and pine cones. And you don't think that motherfucking <i>Valve</i> can get on the horn with nVidia or ATI any time they need to? You don't think they have a direct line to people at both companies? You don't think the Source engine is part of the standard vid card regression tests, like Quake 3? Idiot. [quote]In contrast, many parts of the TF2 engine appear sloppy and disinterested (particle effects[/quote] What?! Ok, here's what I think your problem is: you don't understand TF2's art direction. [quote], the previously mentioned pain of switching video modes in game, the absence of vid_restart, more).[/quote] Might be the DirectX vs. OpenGL thing. Alt-tabbing is a big problem in most games. [quote]That is how I can so confidently claim that Quake's engine is the superior effort.[/quote] You're blind, retarded. You can run TF2 at 1900x1200,4xAA,16x ansio w/ HDR on a single 8800GTX. -/ES/-[/quote]