Yeah, I've got a 1 year old Alienware M17x laptop with all last year's tech and it's still above and beyond recommended settings. I can't play everything on perfect graphics, but I'm still in the medium-high range. I've got dual NvIDIA (however you spell that lol) GTX280s. Now they've got like GTX460s or something and I'm like, don't need that thanks. lol

Fallout 3 / Fallout NV is using a nearly 10 year old graphics engine....good luck with your hopes and dreams....

I do think they should add some sort of installation / configuration utility that correctly identifies mutli-core and Hyperthreading processors and sets the correct .INI file settings during the install. Having to tweak the .INI files to get a game to run reliably is inexcusable.

That does not mean it can't be heavily modified, just look at Call of Duty 4. It is a very heavily modified Quake 3 engine, yet you wouldn't be able to tell just by playing both games. Besides, They aren't using the same Gamebryo engine they did for Morrowind. Oblivion was an updated Gamebryo, Fallout 3 was more updated, New Vegas will most likely be a more advanced modification.



For games that are released since Quad cores became widely available maybe, but Fallout 3 is 1 1/2 years old. The mainstream CPU then was still a dual core. Only enthusiasts really had them in their rigs.

Updated or "modified" engines are one thing, but hardware support for mutli-GPU interfaces isn't something you can just "update". It has to be built into the game engine up front (one of the reasons you DON'T see more games supporting it at this point). It's similar to trying to put multi-player support into the Gambryo....isn't going to happen.

Also, I doubt Bethesda is too keen on spending a lot of development resources on a feature that would only benifit the PC version of the game. PC gamers need to understand that the money in this industry is made more and more on the consoles and less and less on the PC. It's a sad fact but it won't be long before games won't ever be developed on a PC....just ported over (it's already happening to a ton of games). The benifits of making a cutting edge PC game just to show of how pretty it is are already being questioned and the answers aren't what PC gear-heads are going to want to hear.

Actually, all they need to do is change the ini file to preinclude the quad core tweak, have it as an option in the launcher, or automatically detect quad core and write it to the ini file.

As for the, "It's a sad fact but it won't be long before games won't ever be developed on a PC....just ported over (it's already happening to a ton of games).", this reminds me of the people that starting saying that PC gaming was dying 10 years ago and still say it today. There's nothing but anecdotal evidence this is true.

I'm not sure "dying" is the word I would use, but it's certainly different than it was 10 years ago (I've been gaming on computer since some old Star Trekish ASCII game on my dads Datapoint Mini computer). I could write a book on how it's different and why, but he bottom line is that Developers are going to be FORCED to develop for the money platforms and the PC is becoming less and less of a money making prospect (for a myrid of reasons). If you seriously think all the evidence is "anecdotal" you should take a better look around.

Try this on for size. I used to play a Star Trek text game on a computer with those big round tape boxes you slid into the slot in the 6' tall cabinet, then have to flip a couple switches. No screen but you had a keyboard in front of a wide printer that printed everything you typed and then what happened. Could only play at my dad's work though which wasn't often. He was in Navy in the electronics dept that worked on the flight simulators. My first computer was a Commodore PET, the original model with the "chic-let" keyboard and cassette tape drive.

I have quad crossfireX so I really hope for better support this time round

OMG... This thread is OLD! But this hasen't been denied or confirmed, afaik

I just seen a general paper ad on panoramic gaming, and I'm wondering if it will be supported? My eyes are a little larger than my wallet at this time, but it would be worth drooling over.

Isn't it just a matter of supporting the appropriate resolution? I thought the video driver took it from there.


Lol...the .NET framework isn't massive, and it isn't slow unless you're doing it wrong. It's actually nicer and speedier than the Java runtime in my experience, and I rarely hear anyone complaining about that.

I believe so, but I don't know if FNV will support that high res.