Joint Operations

PJ · Post by PJ » Mon Jun 21, 2004 11:00 am

i tryed it on my dads pc. which is a hell lot better than mine. anyway forget what ever i said b4 this is how i realy feel: frist off the control of the vechicles was amazing. i found the graphics just as good as cod. i think cod still has better game play, all in all it wasnt what you guys said it was. Nova could have done a hell lot better job on this game. its almost like they threw it together

BadAsh · Post by **BadAsh** » Mon Jun 21, 2004 11:01 am

I Had to turn some of the effects down as well and I'm pretty sure it's because I only have 512mb of ram. I want to upgrade to 1 gig but probably won't be able to afford it for awhile. I find that a lot of the new games are pigs when it comes to RAM. I'm sure going from 512MB-1GB will be a nite/day difference in a lot of my games.

Imperil · Post by **Imperil** » Mon Jun 21, 2004 11:15 am

Switching from a 512MB system and making my new gaming system a 1GB system (and wanting another 1GB lol) I noticed probably one of the biggest differences ever, especially in games. Pretty much ALL games run better, especially since I was able to put my AGP aperature at 256MB and have a lot more physical memory to address.

I wouldn't say CoD has better game play.. but different game play. It is more of a slower pace, camping, etc war game, whereas JointOps is more like a purely updated BF Game really.

I mean to me CoD is just a thrown together game on the Quake3 engine, but I don't say it's a bad game, because it has an amazing fan base. To me CoD is Quake3 with new models and playing on 60% speed mode.. but that won't make me say its a bad game because I know it's an amazing game.. just not my type of thing, I like the fast action.

Post by **Archangelus** » Mon Jun 21, 2004 11:29 am

*slaps Imperil*

Do not sully the good name of CoD!

I agree CoD has different gameplay. JO to me is more like BF1942 while CoD is more like SOF2. Same category of FPS, but they are different type games. Games like BF1942 require a lot of teamwork, while CoD actually can have a successful team of good individuals w/o a lot of coordination and teamwork.

Also, I agree with the memory statement. All of my gaming systems are 1GB and I have noticed a difference in performance of my system as a whole.

-Arch

midnightservice · Post by **midnightservice** » Mon Jun 21, 2004 11:36 am

yes and you would get pwned by a one armed man in CoD. That is why you dont play it

-Mid

Imperil · Post by **Imperil** » Mon Jun 21, 2004 11:41 am

nah I don't play it because I am impatient =]

I like to run around and shoot when I play an FPS, I don't like camping, slow movement, waiting, etc. Also I don't agree at all that the gameplay of SOF2 is comparable to CoD, because SOF2 was a lot faster paced.

PJ · Post by PJ » Mon Jun 21, 2004 12:15 pm

really, i find cod very fast pace, but i dont camp often

Imperil · Post by **Imperil** » Mon Jun 21, 2004 12:21 pm

CoD is actually one of the slowest pace FPS games if you compare it to it's predisesors.. mainly Quake3 and SOF2.

Although it does add more realism into the game imo.

Post by **Archangelus** » Mon Jun 21, 2004 12:51 pm

I disagree w/ your opinion about SOF2 not being like CoD, but that's what's great about opinions.....everyone has one.

Your's just stinks.... j/k

-Arch

Imperil · Post by **Imperil** » Mon Jun 21, 2004 12:54 pm

LOL

well CoD is like SOF2 in some regards, but I wouldn't agree gameplay-wise.

Let's get off the topic of me ripping on CoD though, because I think it's an amazing game, I just prefer the faster-paced and team-based games.

Levangles · Post by **Levangles** » Mon Jun 21, 2004 2:06 pm

k - tried JO this morning (first day off work in god knows how long) and its really choppy and sloppy.
--my specs: Athlon 2800+, 1GB ram, here's the shitty part: radeon 8500 64mb vid card
i know my vid card is shitty- but is it shitty enough to ruin the game (or make it inoperable?)

- what vid card should i purchase? (i have a slightly tight budget, i'm thinking somewhere around the range of like 200-250 CAD, so like..... 150-180 USD- i know its tight, but is there anything in that range that will help me run this game better? (or if there's something that doesn't require buying anything taht will help me run the game better?)

thanks fellers,
Lev

ShiftyPowers · Post by **ShiftyPowers** » Mon Jun 21, 2004 2:24 pm

The demo is alittle choppy for me but thats becuase most of my ram is already used by my older games moh,bf1942,sof2 and some other games that are not that big on the market but are nonetheless fun.

Post by **Archangelus** » Mon Jun 21, 2004 2:43 pm

Are you trying to run all of the games at the same time? Otherwise, your other games shouldn't have any affect on your RAM.

Lev - I think you can get a 5700 Ultra in the price range you are looking at, but with the next-gens being released, I would guess that your buying power should increase.

-Arch

midnightservice · Post by **midnightservice** » Mon Jun 21, 2004 3:00 pm

also lev there is a known bug listed ont her site for the 8500 9000 and 9200 ati cards witht hsi game. they ay you need to install the latest catalyst drivers which helps alot and some other things.

Here si there response

Graphic Card / Video Issues

Q: Iâ€™m having display/graphics problems with my ATI Radeon video card. How can I fix them?

A: At the time of writing, there are a number of known issues with the Radeon 8500, 9000, and 9200 cards. Most can be fixed by installing the latest Catalyst drivers from the ATI website, version 4.5 or newer. Some of these issues are scheduled to be fixed with the Catalyst 4.7 drivers, which will be released shortly after the Joint Operations initial retail release date. If this doesnâ€™t help, setting shadows to â€œOffâ€ in the Options menu might also fix these issues.

Levangles · Post by **Levangles** » Mon Jun 21, 2004 3:05 pm

thanks a lot mid.... appreciate it greatly!