Related Games / Will NE Support an RCT3 Spotlight?

  • Dixi%s's Photo
    ^ lol @ your post. :lol:

    Firstly, nobodies asking YOU to switch.
    Secondly, you need to figure out what you want from the game, because you contradict your self repeatedly.
    And thirdly see Corky's post.
  • Carl%s's Photo
    @tyandor

    You are saying RCT3 doesn't meet your high standards for 3D graphics, and the fact remains that RCT3 already takes a super computer to run as it is, then logically it would follow that a version of RCT3 that did meet your standards for 3D graphics would require a computer with exactly how much speed? How many years in the future will it be before a computer is around that is fast enough to run a version of RCT3 that meets your standards for 3D graphics?
  • ACEfanatic02%s's Photo

    @tyandor

    You are saying RCT3 doesn't meet your high standards for 3D graphics, and the fact remains that RCT3 already takes a super computer to run as it is, then logically it would follow that a version of RCT3 that did meet your standards for 3D graphics would require a computer with exactly how much speed? How many years in the future will it be before a computer is around that is fast enough to run a version of RCT3 that meets your standards for 3D graphics?

    The power doesn't really exist yet to create open-ended simulation games in 3D that look good. An FPS gets higher quality graphics because the designers control what's visble. Simulation games don't have that luxury.

    I agree with tyandor here... but go ahead and have RCT3 parks. It'd be interesting to see what comes of it...

    -ACE
  • tyandor%s's Photo
    @Phil
    I never said I was forced to switch, but I sometimes get the idea that you are expected to switch just because there's a new version (I guess LL players will recognize that). My problem with Magnus's post was the word 'ignorance'.

    @ride exchanger
    You are missing the point. When RCT3 was released about 1.5 years ago. At that time I still had one of the better systems, minus some small upgrades. It ran like crap. Now we finally have some hardware that can run rct3 a bit more decent. They actually released a game that couldn't even run normally on top of the line hardware when the parks got big. IMO then just wait with the game or don't make it all.
    But technical graphics isn't my biggest problem with rct3. It's the style of graphics and one of those factors is the too cartoony look for instance, but also the horrible unsmooth track. Also the landscaping system is annoying. You were as lot better in charge of the look of it in rct2/LL then in rct3. I always thought they would make a rct3, but in my mind it would look and feel a lot more different style. The strange thing is that I have some interesting coaster on paper here, but they are impossible with rct2. But the same goes with rct3. It lacks the freedom to make your tracks. That is something I thought was a lot more important than just extra coaster types...
  • Magnus%s's Photo
    What I was refering to is, that most people here didn't give RCT3 any chance because of it being 3D and the site also didn't give the game a chance with the only RCT1/2 rule, which was never written anywhere, but it was pretty obvious that NE didn't accept RCT3.

    All I wanted to say it. Give the game a chance. RCT1 and 2 are horrible games either. Poor physics, bad graphics, horrible interface, but what we made of the game is what makes it so much fun and enjoyable. I don't see why that shouldn't be possible with RCT3 aswell.
  • Six Frags%s's Photo
    ^Very true..

    You need to have a good computer though, to run rct3..
    That's the difference with the previous versions.
    Furthermore it comes down to the same basics, imo..

    SF
  • Carl%s's Photo
    I see your point now tyandor, and I agree

Tags

  • No Tags

Members Reading