Simviation Forum - I SHOULD HAVE WAITED!!!!!!

	Search the archive:

Simviation Main Site | Site Search | Upload Images

Simviation Forum › Combat Flight Simulators › Combat Flight Simulator 3 › I SHOULD HAVE WAITED!!!!!!

(Moderators: Mitch., Fly2e, ozzy72, beaky, Clipper, JBaymore, Bob70, BigTruck)

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

Pages: 1

I SHOULD HAVE WAITED!!!!!! (Read 494 times)

Oct 11^th, 2003 at 6:58pm

Politically Incorrect Offline
Colonel
Personal opinion given
free of charge!
Williamsport, PA

Gender:
Posts: 3915

Yes I should have but I went out and bought cfs3. After installing I was more than ready to fight.
But according to the sim, my video card is not compatiable!!
I have a :
32mb ATI RAGE 128 ULTRA 6.13.10.5004
According to the minimum requierments all I need is 16mb/3d.
FS9 works just fine with this card why wont cfs3??
It tells me to update my driver so I went to the ATI site and the most recent driver available was done in 2001.
Besides buying a new card anyone know what I should do?

IP Logged

Reply #1 - Oct 12^th, 2003 at 4:15am

Mathias Offline
Colonel
Toy Maker
Germany

Gender:
Posts: 558

Go to http://microsoftgamesinsider.com/CFSInsider/default.htm?nc=1
and get the 3.1 patch, that might help since they have bettered the support for ATI cards with this one

Mathias&&

IP Logged

Reply #2 - Oct 12^th, 2003 at 2:15pm

Iroquois Offline
Colonel
Happy Halloween
Ontario Canada

Gender:
Posts: 3244

First of all the RAGE 128 is very old to begin with. CFS3 needs a very powerful system. Even my Geforce FX5200 with 128mb ram has trouble so I'm waiting for the new Nvidia drivers.

You may wish to buy a new card. A Geforce FX card would be best and they are fairly inexpensive.

I only pretend to know what I'm talking about. Heck, that's what lawyers, car mechanics, and IT professionals do everyday. Wink

&&The Rig: &&AMD Athlon XP2000+ Palomino, ECS K7S5A 3.1, 1GB PC2700 DDR, Geforce FX5200 128mb, SB Live Platinum, 16xDVD, 16x10x40x CDRW, 40/60gb 7200rpm HDD, 325w Power, Windows XP Home SP1, Directx 9.0c with 66.81 Beta gfx drivers

IP Logged

Reply #3 - Oct 12^th, 2003 at 5:06pm

Politically Incorrect Offline
Colonel
Personal opinion given
free of charge!
Williamsport, PA

Gender:
Posts: 3915

I have tried the 3.1 patch and still no luck.
I was wondering about the RAGE 128 ULTRA because ATI doesn't offer any driver updates, except for one for the 128 pro family I tried it and it said it wouldn't work with my card.
My computer is only a year old
Dell Dimension 4500 but obviously they (Dell) use outdated parts when charging the price for a "new" computer.
I also contacted a M$ rep that was trying to help me with a problem with FS9 and displayed my anger to the fact that you have to fork out the $30 for the game before you find that it won't be compatable with your computer, which at that point you can no longer get your money back because the software has been opened, I smell conspiracy!!!!
As far as the FS9 problem (wouldn't connect to the net for real world weather) I finally fixed that myself.
I removed sp1,all hot fixes and any other Windows updates that were installed and now my computer runs better than it did when I first got it!!
But now I have a $30 program that will end up costing a few hundred more before I can even enjoy it, Thanks Microsuck!

IP Logged

Reply #4 - Oct 14^th, 2003 at 3:05pm

Attack_Cabbage Offline
Captain
Earth - I think!

Gender:
Posts: 3

Sorry friend, no conspiracy, you sadly, did'nt research your PC very well before you bought it!

12 Months is a long time in the PC graphics card market!!!

Any decent machine from 12 months back, I'd gone out and bought , would have at least had a current - which then would have been a Geforce 4 - graphics card.

I know how frustrated you feel, I've completely changed my PC since getting CFS3, frankly its still pretty crap (CFS3 that is!) just about every other game I have plays great since I've upgraded.

Sadly, CFS3 collects dust these days, I now play CFS2 at stupidly high rez, full settings, anti-alaising etc etc etc something my old PC could never do.

So, thanks microsoft for improving my machine so greatly, its a shame the product I had to upgrade for ultimately was'nt worth the bother! (IMHO)

Lifes a bitch, then you die - or marry one first!

IP Logged

Reply #5 - Oct 14^th, 2003 at 7:14pm

Politically Incorrect Offline
Colonel
Personal opinion given
free of charge!
Williamsport, PA

Gender:
Posts: 3915

I'll agree that maybe I didn't look into my system well enought at the time of purchase, but don't let Microsuck off so easy!
If they are reqired to place content ratings on their package they should be required to place more relistic minimum requierments!
The box tells me that I need a minimum of 16MB/3D. So then my 32MB/3D card sould be more than enough, correct?
The box says nothing about the fact that even though I have 32MB or what ever that my card might not work at all.
All the box says "These are the specifcations a computer must have to run this game, increased performance will be noticed on more powerful systems"
So to me that says my computer will run the game but will probably look like crap!
So I don't think that this is my mistake, I bought the game with the assumption that it will run but the quaility would be poor. Not that I will buy it just for it to tell me that I need new hardware.
So in my opinion this is a true case of false advertising!
The software package is as misleading as it would be if you bought it planning on combat fighting and ended up playing Pac-man! Case Closed!
I also feel that even though the software has been opened I should be allowed a refund, because I had no warning that this software would not be compatible with my system, because according to the packaging my system had more than enough to run it.
I know that I'm not the only one who has been taken advantage of and it is not right. Something as simple as a note or some other information on the packaging could save people money and headaches.

IP Logged

Reply #6 - Oct 16^th, 2003 at 3:04pm

4_Series_Scania Offline
Colonel
He who laughs last, thinks
slowest.
Stoke on Trent England U.K.

Gender:
Posts: 3638

A rather absurd thing these "Minimum requirements" - ,rather, it should read "Software will function, but at a very basic level offering terrible performance in general"

Usually, you'll find if you regard the recommended spec as a minimum, then add a fast (Geforce 3ti / 4ti or better) you may find better results.

I hav'nt seen CFS3 run well on any 64MB 3D Card - Even 64MB Ti4200's seem to struggle.

CFS3 seems to be relatively happy with a 128MB 3D Card which is thankfull in my case, hardly fitting for those minimum requirements.....

Posting drivel here since Jan 31st, 2002. - That long!

IP Logged

Reply #7 - Oct 17^th, 2003 at 5:20am

Politically Incorrect Offline
Colonel
Personal opinion given
free of charge!
Williamsport, PA

Gender:
Posts: 3915

We should petition M$ to get them to change their "mim-req"
I like yours!!
I still think that it is a marketing stratagy to get people to belive their machines can handle it, so they fork out money!!
But we must be the "dumb" ones because we continue to do so. Grin

IP Logged

Reply #8 - Oct 19^th, 2003 at 1:14pm

1danny Offline
Colonel
I love YaBB 1G - SP1!

Posts: 150

i bought my first comp a compaq 9000 2.4 blah blah,
saved up and paid cash paid $50 for the game, bought the side winderfeed back joystick. alll with this game in mind.(played and loved cfs2 on a buddy machine). hooked my new baby up insatllled cfs 3 and ???well we all know the messege i recieved
i was pissssssed. but on the bright side i learned how to intall a vid card nvida gforce4 64.a ram card 246.

thank fully ms left this game open for changes i play the hell out off it thanks to the help of this neighborhood. i am still tweeking
play with no clouds flak a minor problem pretend its concussion bluring my vision

IP Logged

Pages: 1

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

« Home

‹ Board

Top of this page