Darthbobo wrote:
AGain here is my point, what your saying is that only people with an i5 should play this game? So the FAF market is limited to only i5's? How fucking retarded is that.
AGain here is my point, what your saying is that only people with an i5 should play this game? So the FAF market is limited to only i5's? How fucking retarded is that.
Did you even read my post?
Darthbobo wrote:
Seriously, you complain about a -2
Yes, if I want to do something freaking boring I watch a kid video with my 2 year old nephew.
Darthbobo wrote:
but I just had a fluent game with a -1 speed and it was fine. The problem is these elitest people like yourself
Good for you, slomo elitist. I hate the guts out of slowdowns.
Darthbobo wrote:
This game was made like 10 years ago and these CPU's weren't even out by then
So what? Plenty of games are only decent playable many years after they come out or only when buying high-end. It's how nVidia / Intel and company sell hardware. Something new comes out that requires more performance and people go out and buy it. Actually, the game is 7 years old. I've played it for many years on LAN parties. And nobody could stand it more than one round per day, because it was freaking slow.
Darthbobo wrote:
and your saying that its only possible to have a good game with an i5
Nope, I've pointed out that today's Pentium's, CPU's >25% cheaper than your AMD run this game fine. But that boils down to point 1: you didn't read my post.
Darthbobo wrote:
Look at the facts mate, if you limit your market to just i5+ then its going to be a small community.
Look at the facts: most people hate your slowdowns and apparently they still have a bunch of games after kicking all the laggers. Now, you say "there are many players out there who have the same issue". This would mean you can perfectly well play together and enjoy your -2 games while not bothering the people who did do some basic research before buying a CPU and don't want your slowdowns.
Darthbobo wrote:
If you don't like someones score in the lobby kick them at the start, don't fucking wait 30 minutes to tell them they cant play because of the score.
I usually include "no lag" in the title. You know what you're in for when joining. And I play a lot at low-activity hours; I can't particularly be bothered by watching it fill up fullscreen.
Two weeks ago I hosted a <230 CPU Setons game and when it filled up I kicked a 260 guy. Most fluent setons ever
Darthbobo wrote:
So really learn to live with some peoples shitty cpu scores
Nope, don't have to and won't. People with shitty cpu scores should stay with smaller maps or get used to not being allowed in with a lot of bigger games. It's actually quite rude: 7 other people in that game might waste half an hour on your -2 nonsense. That's 3.5 manhours wasted just because you couldn't do basic research before buying a CPU? I don't think so!
Darthbobo wrote:
but its better than making people wait hours in lobby because you want a better CPU game.
I'd rather have 10 minutes more in lobby and 15 minutes less lag. Heck, I'd even rather have 20 minutes more in lobby than 15 minutes lag.
Darthbobo wrote:
And even more, that CPU might a bit down on the list but ofcourse all the xeon processors take up the first 30 places.
Funny. You didn't really read my post, but did click the link. There are 9 Xeons in the top 30. But you probably didn't want to see the two i3's and the Pentium in the top 30?
Here's a fun fact to make this perhaps more bearable for you: my nickname on this forum refers to the CPU in my old desktop. I still use that one sometimes, including for FAF. I simply don't play any Setons on it.
Statistics: Posted by E8400-CV — 05 Dec 2014, 05:10
]]>
