World in Conflict

That can't be Seattle - it's much to brown. I know "realistic" really just means "brown" these days, but that's still not Seattle.

Thanks for the review, you guys do a great job.

I really want this game now!

hmm was that with a 8800gts 320mb or 640mb

Originally Posted by Woodstock
hmm was that with a 8800gts 320mb or 640mb

320 I *think*, what do I look like? Some kind of hardware journalist?! ;)

Originally Posted by CardJoe
320 I *think*, what do I look like? Some kind of hardware journalist?! ;)

Yea, that's what I'd have guessed. Had something along 14 fps on high/DX9 with my GTS/640.

Interesting read again. I think I'll give it a try. Loved the beta. Triple-nuke anyone? ;)

Yep, it's a 320MB

Originally Posted by CardJoe

Quote:

Originally Posted by Woodstock
hmm was that with a 8800gts 320mb or 640mb

320 I *think*, what do I look like? Some kind of hardware journalist?! ;)

what if i said yes *ducks for cover

Runs fine in DX10 on an 8800GTX at 1,920 x 1,200 ;)

I hate how I can only play US peeps online 'till Friday with the office copy.

only 10FPS on 8800GTS 320MB?!?

can someone explain to me why does the in-game benchmark scores so low while gameplay is still playable?

No idea - it may be to do with the sheer amount that's going on whereas gameplay is more focused on doing one thing at a time. Either way, I had no FPS problems with gameplay at all - but I did choose the point in the benchmark which seemed to stress the PC the most.

I get 9FPS on my GTX, but it is with full everything and at 2560*1600 res. This game rocks though, but my demo keeps crashing to desktop because the gfx drivers crash. I hope that when i buy the full game, i won't suffer the same problems.

Sam

Originally Posted by wuyanxu
only 10FPS on 8800GTS 320MB?!?

can someone explain to me why does the in-game benchmark scores so low while gameplay is still playable?

My justification would be that the benchmark is a far heavier stress test which has to last into the future, but people want to play the game NOW so it's toned down a bit ;)

i played the beta of this game so much, its a really magnificent game. the graphic/smoke effects are just sick. go get it people

Sounds good, I'll probably end up having a look...

Abso-jawsum-lovely.

btw:

Page 2 para 11 "Tim will still jump out of his seat in excitement, hooting about how he set the Russians ‘up the bomb’." - missing how.

This. Game. Rules.

You didn't cover the VoIP function that's integrated though :( It's actually very easy to use and is clear, unlike some other games I've played recently.

The multiplayer is ranked on the Massgate site, like BF2142.

Tim! The last .5 you could give it. Once you register your massgate name and set up a profile, you can set your avatar on their forums. This avatar becomes decal's on your units. Think of it, you could have relix HINDs flying around :D

I haven't played the singleplayer on the full version yet, but the SP on the demo was nice, tutorial told you everything you needed to know.

this game makes me want to call in sick.

Originally Posted by Hells_Bliss

Tim! The last .5 you could give it. Once you register your massgate name and set up a profile, you can set your avatar on their forums. This avatar becomes decal's on your units. Think of it, you could have relix HINDs flying around :D

Thanks for the tip!

Originally Posted by Archangel
I hate how I can only play US peeps online 'till Friday with the office copy.

Don't worry, I'll be on from Friday at about 5PM. Until Sunday night. Solid.

Originally Posted by Hells_Bliss
This. Game. Rules.

I could not agree more; it's an absolute riot - no needing to build bases/turtle, just order some units and head straight into the action. It's pure tactics and skill, baby. Words cannot describe how much fun I've been having with the demo.


(Haven't read the review yet, sorry guys. I'll get round to it, but I don't really need to know what the game's like, because I know how much it rocks already.)

must. upgrade. must. buy. this.

Originally Posted by aon`aTv.gsus666

Quote:

Originally Posted by CardJoe
320 I *think*, what do I look like? Some kind of hardware journalist?! ;)

Yea, that's what I'd have guessed. Had something along 14 fps on high/DX9 with my GTS/640.

Interesting read again. I think I'll give it a try. Loved the beta. Triple-nuke anyone? ;)

We pulled the card out today to swap in something a bit more powerful for testing so I checked and it was actually a 640MB version just FYI peoples.

Processor is an X2 4800 and there's 2GB of RAM in there

Great review, glad I upgraded in time. Looks like I'll be playing this for a while.

Bit-tech should have an uber low end rig like mine to test these out and just scare me by telling us how it performs.

"As the levels load a brief exposition is given by a disembodied voice accompanied by some very pretty watercolour pictures....."

The voice is actually Alec Baldwin a good narrator if you ask me him or James Earl Jones both good in my opinion.

I just ran the in-game benchmark myself on the system in my sig (except GFX card @ stock) and here are my results:

taken from fpsdata.txt:

Resolution: 1600*1200
Detail Level: Very High
Average fps: 29
Min fps: 16
Max fps: 56
TotalFrames: 1474

My settings:

http://img216.imageshack.us/my.php?image=wic2007092023564953mr0.png http://img216.imageshack.us/my.php?image=wic2007092023565501eg8.png http://img523.imageshack.us/my.php?image=wic2007092023570650zt4.png

Screen of benchmark:

http://img216.imageshack.us/my.php?image=wic2007092023564500yb3.png

Why are my results so much better with the same GFX card, the same amount of RAM and a (admittedly more powerful) CPU? Does WiC scale that much with CPU power?

Anyways... I'm pretty pleased with the results. ;)

RTS games do tend to be quite CPU intensive (not flight sim levels but still....)

Am I the only one who prefers the normal Napalm/Tank Buster/Laser Guided Bomb to the OMGWTFBBQ Tactical Nukes?