Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

plus 40mins only of Counter Strike: Source (hate it, what a terrible game full of free hacks),

lol i bet most of them wernt hacking if you played me and pauly you would call me a hack within 5 mins some nights

so no more CSS pauly or you will just play a bit of both

Well i have

STALKER it came into work on monday, and like i said it will be average and thats what i think of it. Like i said it suffers from being in development for too long.

Sure it is fun and know doubt i'll complete it, it just isn't what it could or was going to be if it was released on time.

It is out today retail so pick it up if you've been hanging for it cos you will certainly enjoy it. And there is a CE and standard edition so remember that if you want the fancy one.

My old 80gig hdd just gave up the ghost a few weeks ago so i purchased a 73 gig 10,000 rpm sata drive. nice and fast and future proof. I'll just use my new 250 gig drive for movies, torrents, mp3's etc.

yer i dont think that much of it. To some it might be just another FPS. My pc runs it sweet, UNDER XP ONLY. Good thing ive kept xp and vista dual boot still. Dont get me wrong it works and installs in vista, but theres heaps of vid problems ive had in game.

My pc specs- x2 3800+((2.4ghz), 2gigram, 7900gt, a8n32, 74g raptor etc etc...this runs it up all max settings fine with no lag. But i have heard others with 8800's have to turn down some lighting effects, so who knows...

If your not a hard core FPS player, id say dont bother.

Personally I like the idea however the combat sucks balls, the weapons are inaccurate unless up close and don't pack much punch. It generally feels very clumsy, I shot a guy in the head with a shotgun and he didn't die.

Wtf? just seems very sloppy, Id like to be able to go prone and get a headshot with the ak from 50m however you can barely do that from 10m away.

how comfortably can I run stalker kralster, I have Core 2 Duo E6600, 750gb in 3 sata2 250gb hdds (no raid, f**k raid lol), 2 gigs of Kingston DDR2 800, nVidia 7950GX2 1gb DDR3 (512x2 shared). is this a stupid question, In stalker videos they talk of how the game will be independant of hardware spec and will only be limited to whatever the hardware can max out on?

Pauly your pc should run it very sweetly, in fact i'd love to see it run on your pc.

I'm running it on a athlon 64 3200+, 1 gig or ram, geforce6600GT, and i'm running it at 1377x768, on medium setttings quite nicely.

So you should have no problem.

Would love to see some screenies too!

Im currently running Stalker on a AMD 4000+, 2GB RAM, 512mb 7900GT @ 1680x1050 with max everything and i can really see that if i had a higher spec PC then it would look so much more crispy.

It doesn't jerk or lag but it could run alot smoother thats for sure!

EDIT: He was hacking, he openly admitted too it, from what i could tell he was coding, walling and aim bot

Edited by MADGT4
  • 4 weeks later...

ok, this has been really pissing me off, i have had to reformat (4th time in 3 weeks) :D :D :angry::rant:

i have been trying to run a few videos and my media player won't locate the codec needed to run .WMV files:( it locates it and will only play the audio off of it. Is there anyway to install codecs manually and where can i find them? i have googled it and haven't come up with much.

lol sorry for the nooby question, but this is pissing me off and i can't figure it out :thumbsup:

PS I F*&^ING HATE WINDOWS

http://www.champcar.nl/pages/news.php?id=2851&lg=us

got our first review over the sim we are making :P at the moment it still uses rfactor (for file set up while we are building our full commercial product)

looks like people pver in th eUS have really taken to our game, which is good for us :bunny:

ok, this has been really pissing me off, i have had to reformat (4th time in 3 weeks) :P:D:rant: :rant:

i have been trying to run a few videos and my media player won't locate the codec needed to run .WMV files:( it locates it and will only play the audio off of it. Is there anyway to install codecs manually and where can i find them? i have googled it and haven't come up with much.

lol sorry for the nooby question, but this is pissing me off and i can't figure it out :bunny:

PS I F*&^ING HATE WINDOWS

Run Windows Update...

and....

Do you install codec packs? I've found they can be a real pain in the arse; some completely screw the video playback and even after uninstalling they still leave it stuffed.

3rd Party... I find I only ever need/use Xvid and Divx.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • I know why it happened and I’m embarrassed to say but I was testing the polarity of one of the led bulb to see which side was positive with a 12v battery and that’s when it decided to fry hoping I didn’t damage anything else
    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
×
×
  • Create New...