🚀 go-pugleaf

Folk wrote:

> Thanks for the link.   I was already familiar with those stats
> (they're quite fascinating) since I've used them for reference before.
> The average system is quite modest. 
> 
Very much so - no question that we can feel a little spoiled :-)


> 
> There's a considerable percentage of hardcore PC gamers that would run
> their games in wire frame at 8 bit 640 x 480 if they thought they
> could get an extra 10 fps.  :)
> 
Tell me about it - at lan parties I've seen people play with the 
weirdest colour settings to optimize their advantage. I must say that I 
do draw the line at manipulating the textures as in my book it's cheating.

I remember when UT2003 came out - the grass on the maps would sometimes 
obscure view like when running over a hill. If you played with low 
details settings there was no grass - ugly but more effective. Same 
thing with smoke and other effects. I all ways played with all details 
but I guess some would say having a big screen was an advantage so it 
sort of leveled out.

>> I shall try and do some testing in the weekend. Perhaps I can make a 
>> graph showing what's the limit in my system - just for the fun of it.
> 
> I've wasted entire weekends doing just that sort of thing.  Are we
> geeks or what?

I must admit to not getting round to benchmarking this weekend. It sort 
of went into a outdoor action thing instead as the weather turned out 
better than expected.

However I do still thing the label "geek" fits fine :-)

That is of course if my love of riding mountain bikes plus owning a 
Miata does not disqualify me!?

Kind regards
Bruno


PS. I once read somewhere that the difference between boys and men are 
the price of their toys.