![]() This card provides computing parallelism derived from 800 stream processors, that churn out a peak collective computational power of 1000 GFlops. You might be able to squeeze out 6-7 and you're inept and don't want it to end. Sep 4th, 2008 01:01 Discuss (24 Comments) Within this month, AMD will release a FireStream GPGPU card based on the successful RV770 graphics processor. If you really don't believe me on the length or writing aspects, feel free to check out the Steam reviews, the users and their playtime, which is roughly 3-4 hours long. I, for one, prefer games that I would play more than once. Opinions on this interactive moviegame are torn, it's really a love or hate scenario. It feels more like you're playing through a real game's DLC sidestory. I don't even think it's possible to get lost, considering it's constantly holding your hand through everything and it's just that linear. The people praising the game are bandwagoning the hell out of it for the time being, but that will fade away soon enough. It requires no skill to play and the writing is so badly vague that you're continuously left in the dark. Just like The Witness, a game which is just a bunch of puzzles strewn throughout a huge island of nothing, it's pretentious western indie noise catered towards the casual non-gamers who want to "experience" what their friends are talking about. reality, which are neat, and I feel like I'm giving it far too much credit than it deserves, because such cheese wouldn't even sell in a local bookstore but hey, people will try to make as much as they want out of what little they have received. It has a bunch of silly metaphors of escapism vs. It doesn't even have the fundamentals of the "premise, explanation, resolution" of most movies. Within this month, AMD will release a FireStream GPGPU card based on the successful RV770 graphics processor. It has a vague, dump-the-player-into-the-picture premise, a leave-it-up-to-the-interpretation-of-the-player story, and the plot which doesn't actually go anywhere. If we consider it a game, it's a game in first person of which the player is expected to walk around looking at objects while some girl talks to you over the walkie-talkie for 3-4 hours. If you're not into these types of games, or interactive stories, or whatever you wanna call them, cool - why not ignore them and let other people that *do* enjoy them get on with enjoying and recommending them?īecause I spent money on the game and I am in a justified position to speak about my purchase? ![]() CardinalNZ wrote:Question: why are you so apparently fired up about what people deem a game or not? I've never understood the whole, vehement "IT ISN'T A GAME!" thing / argument. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |