Will a no-T&L-required patch be released?

[Milan's Warrior]

My question is in the topic: Will a no-T&L-required patch be released?

 

[De Lorimier]

The game has a lot of great graphics, even on low settings. I wouldn't count on it, but that's just me...

 

[Cironir]

I don't see how they can realistically do that without throwing away the graphics engine. I think it's unlikely.

 

[Goombaz]

T&L is not some whiz-bang buzz feature like Bumpmapping or Triple-Strawberry-Vanilla bumpmapping. It is more like "the stepping off point for modern 3D cards."

The people you should firebomb and hiss at are intel for making those evil little cards, because that is just customer cruelty.

 

[Carver]

My question is in the topic: Will a no-T&L-required patch be released?

They may release a patch for the ATI cards problem but not one that is designed for non T&L usuage.

 

[Cironir]

*nods* T&L has been around for years ... five or six now, and even old cards like the GeForce 3 support it. I think the real issue here is with notebooks that are preferred by many "typical Civ players". It's a bit unfortunate ... video chipsets in notebooks have been really improving lately, so in a year or two this won't be an issue, but it's probably quite annoying for mobile users right now.

 

[CustodianV131]

I think it would be vary hard to do, even if they wanted to. Firaxis seems to aim quite low with graphics so that they can reach a great audience. I think that the T&L requirement was needed to get this graphic quality.

Indeed that's hard on notebook owners, who often have a bad graphics card and no way to upgrade.

When I need a new work laptop I always make sure I can relax with it also. Makes me work better!

 

[Milan's Warrior]

When I need a new work laptop I always make sure I can relax with it also. Makes me work better!

In addition to my personal laptop; I also have my employer's laptop, but I would never even consider to install a non-work related software on it.

 

[Milan's Warrior]

The people you should firebomb and hiss at are intel for making those evil little cards, because that is just customer cruelty.

Yeah, that is, because my laptop is way above minimum specs in all other respects and my videocard is also reasonably good (64MB ram) is just does not have T&L

But I still don't think it is Intel's fault. It is many years that I have noticed the tendency affecting all videogame houses to produce lesser and lesser quality games while improving the graphics. Maybe I am just getting old, but they don't seem to make anymore games as fun as those we had 20 years ago

 

[Willem]

Not a chance. Firaxis has stated all along that T&L would be a requirement of the game. Why should they even bother producing a patch? Even if they could, which I doubt.

 

[Craterus22]

Not a chance. Firaxis has stated all along that T&L would be a requirement of the game. Why should they even bother producing a patch? Even if they could, which I doubt.

Perhaps to "broaden" thier audience?

I doubt it will happen (too much work)... when they said they wanted to improve the graphics I didn't think they wanted to go to the top 33%'rs

its a shame really... playing civ on laptops has always been a past time for me.

 

[Willem]

Perhaps to "broaden" thier audience?

I doubt it will happen (too much work)... when they said they wanted to improve the graphics I didn't think they wanted to go to the top 33%'rs

its a shame really... playing civ on laptops has always been a past time for me.

Well you could get yourself a new laptop, one with a half decent video card. They do exist. And they haven't gone for the top 33%, the cards that have been working have been pretty run of the mill. People have been buying T&L capable cards for the past 5 years now, it's just that the laptop manufacturers have been slow in catching up to the rest of the industry in that regard.

 

[Shakes]

My question is in the topic: Will a no-T&L-required patch be released?

Very very unlikely, since you'd have to rewrite the entire graphics engine.

T&L has been around since the original geforce card, which came out in 1999. Making a game work on hardware that's more than 6 years old is never going to be a priority. I'm sure before they even started work on the game they made a decision that the number of people with hardware that's basically an antique in computer terms wasn't great enough to justify the extra expense (and lower quality graphics) in making an engine that works on it.

Especially since there's probably a strong correlation between people who spend money to reguarly upgrade their system and people who spend money buying games.

 

[neriana]

They're broadening their audience by having better graphics. The specs on the game are EXTREMELY low.

It's not only not likely, it's probably not possible in the real world. Graphics cards do not just make things shinier and prettier. You really might as well ask to run it on a Tandy.

 

[Goombaz]

They're broadening their audience by having better graphics. The specs on the game are EXTREMELY low.

It's not only not likely, it's probably not possible in the real world. Graphics cards do not just make things shinier and prettier. You really might as well ask to run it on a Tandy.

That is what I keep trying to get across. This is viewed as if it was Doom 3 or Battlefield 2. The sad truth is this is a bottom-rung game hardware requirement wise. Stuff that is easier to run than this is below the ladder!

I also get tired of all the trash talking about "Better Graphics." 3D is fun! I am sorry, but I do NOT buy this argument that 3D is some arch-enemy that cannot exist with good gameplay. Good graphics and good gameplay will sometimes show up apart, a game will often lack one or the other. I also beleive that ultimately gameplay IS more important than 3D. However, I do get a little sick of this "you enjoy good graphics so you are more shallow than me." Bull I say.

 

[Mujadaddy]

It's not only not likely, it's probably not possible in the real world. Graphics cards do not just make things shinier and prettier. You really might as well ask to run it on a Tandy.

I miss my Tandy!!

 

[haleigh1000]

I ran CIV I on a Tandy
Typed in programs for a TI-99
Played M.U.L.E. on a Commodore 64
Be nice to us old timers

and I'm not that old

 

[TastySheriff]

The thing with graphics and consumers is that consumers either want a computer that can play games, or they want one for home office use. Problem with Civ is that this target audience falls inbetween, so there are bound to be some dissapointed people who opted for the office lappy and wouldnt have needed any sort of decent graphics for anything but civ. To be honest, i woulda been happy with Civ3 style graphics, but i should be able to handle Civ4, and im sure ill enjoy the new graphics engine... i just dont think that itll add too much to the game.

 

[Hugbear]

Firaxis will have to talk to its marketing people and decide whether the cost of production is worth the potential for profit - maybe someone who knows more about comp programming has a better clue.

From a consumer's point of view, I have a 1 yr old Toshiba laptop w/o T+L, so I will simply buy the game if there is a patch and not buy the game otherwise. I have no complaints, but Firaxis is potentially giving up a corner of the market of "casual" gamers for Civ4, its expansions, and future installments. I've enjoyed Civ since Civ1 but am willing to try other games (esp. more graphically appealing games that will run on my laptop) that might hold my interest.

 

[move_quietly]

From a consumer's point of view, I have a 1 yr old Toshiba laptop w/o T+L, so I will simply buy the game if there is a patch and not buy the game otherwise. I have no complaints, but Firaxis is potentially giving up a corner of the market of "casual" gamers for Civ4, its expansions, and future installments. I've enjoyed Civ since Civ1 but am willing to try other games (esp. more graphically appealing games that will run on my laptop) that might hold my interest.

i think that's exactly where a lot of people are at. a lot of civ players only play civ, and they just aren't going to go out and get a desktop just to run civ on it. a few will, but most won't. i'm sure the game maker has their demographic all figured out, but i just can't imagine that your typical civ player is the same as your typical gaming geek. i mean i'm sure there are a few over-clocking "fear" players out there who just couldn't wait to get their hands on civ iv, but i'd be willing to bet there were a lot more teachers, engineers, and corporate executives excited about the release. and a lot of those "normal" folks are using laptops, desktops with integrated graphics, etc, i mean how many regular folks actually go out and buy a gaming video card. and i'm doing the same, i'm just playing age of empires iii instead. i'd rather play civ iv, but what the hell ... i didn't leave them, they left me ...