je_saist

Unfortunately no.

The game has it's own detection mechanism that is not user modifiable.

Just because "other"... well... "insert noun of your choice here" performs a "insert verb of your choice here" does not, I repeat, DOES NOT, mean that "inserted verb here" is okay and should also be done.

Thing is, I'd have a hard-time classifying the trailer as dramatic. The only storyline theme it tries to create is a theme that just is not present in "City of Heroes" which other players have already addressed.

I'd also have a hard-time classifying the trailer as entertaining. It's just a jumble of quick shots that... again... don't go anywhere. There is no unifying theme or point to the trailer other than a bunch of shiny keys being jangled in potential players faces.

So, in the style of Nash... let's do the math:

• Non-dramatic trailer

plus

• Non-entertaining trailer

plus

• Misleading elements of trailer

equals

• Misspent marketing resources.

You might also be interested to know that there actually are standing laws in most countries against false and misleading ads. the US Federal Trade Commission actually has an entire sub-section devoted to the subject: http://business.ftc.gov/documents/bu...net-rules-road

In all fairness most video game ads, even outright misleading and/or fraudulent ads, typically cover their rear-ends with boiler-plate statements about how game experience may differ online, or blanket statements about how sections of games shown may not be available in all countries. In most cases such boiler-plate clauses are a good enough legal shield.

To reiterate, just because a company can get a way with a misleading advertisement, doesn't mean they should. It also does not give carte-blanche to marketing companies to just do whatever they feel like doing to promote a product.

Thankfully for the ad-companies the results really come down to what the consumers think. If you think what was done was dramatic and entertaining in your opinion, and that misleading elements of an ad do not matter, then the ad-company has succeeded in reaching you.

Very: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814150540

The RadeonHD 5770 / 6770 (it's the same card: http://www.techarp.com/showarticle.aspx?artno=88&pgno=3)
is perfectly capable of driving all Ultra-Mode options in 1920*1200: http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showthread.php?t=219534

Problem is, you are going to need a new power supply. Yes, you can get a RadeonHD 5770 / 6770 to run full clocks on a 300-watt power supply, but you won't be running anything else (e.g. hard-drives, dvd-drive, system fans, and you'll need a mobile or ultra-low-volt processor). With a typical system load you'll be looking at around 450 watts for a starting point.

If you are trying to keep your total purchase price around $150 this Thermaltake will probably work for your system: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16817153023

yes it's a 430 rather than a 450, but Thermaltake's sustained power is typically good enough it shouldn't be a problem.

Wouldn't matter. Manga or I would see it regardless of where he posted the question.

I'm going to assume that the original poster is actually asking a serious question and isn't just trying to be funny with this post.

To the Original Poster: no, it will not.

Currently most of the shipping Apple Imac Systems, as well as all existing Apple laptops, are not-capable of running Ultra Mode graphics.

The starting point for all Ultra-Mode options in Low is around the Desktop AMD RadeonHD 4850 / Nvidia Geforce GTS 250.

The starting point for all Ultra-Mode options in High is around the Desktop RadeonHD 5770 / Nvidia GTX 460

Currently shipping Imac's say they come with RadeonHD 67xx or 69xx cards. What is not made clear on Apple's site is that those Imac's use the MOBILE edition of the chipsets.

These mobile chips are below the starting point for Ultra-Mode High performance, but they are in range of running some Ultra-Mode options:

Desktop Theoretical Numbers: http://www.techarp.com/showarticle.aspx?artno=88&pgno=3
Mobile Theoretical Numbers: http://www.techarp.com/showarticle.aspx?artno=88&pgno=3


Now, I'm going to assume that because you linked to a USB card thinking it was a real graphics card.

It is not.

Neither Nvidia nor AMD make their graphics cards available in USB formats.

The don't use USB because USB is too freaking slow to run high performance graphics.

Now, if you want to be cute about, yes, you can actually hook a High-Powered PCI-Express graphics card up to a laptop with an ExpressCard slot: http://www.techradar.com/news/comput...adaptor-915616

This option probably isn't available to you since, as far as I am aware, no shipping Apple laptop has an ExpressCard slot.

In short: if you have an Apple Laptop, an Apple Imac, or an Apple Mac Mini, you are stuck with whatever graphics card it shipped with. There is no upgrade path available for you.

I started a thread on the AMD dev forums about the problem located here: http://forums.amd.com/devforum/messa...&enterthread=y

as of yet there's been only one other person... EVER... to post in that thread besides me.

Wouldn't mind having more data to give AMD, but for the most part, many of the subscribers here just don't seem to like the idea of actually doing anything to get driver problems addressed.

If you are interested in trying to help out in getting AMD the information, please go post in the AMD forum thread with your hardware and software specifications.

It was explicitly mentioned in a Ustream that a fix was being worked on.

Quote:

Graphics Card: Radeon HD 6950

http://support.amd.com/us/gpudownloa...ition&rev=11.4

Try using a driver that isn't known to have issues with the game.

That being said the possibility of Transgaming selling itself has been a recurrent possibility over the years with suitors ranging from Valve (reportedly for Steam-Linux integration), Activsion-Blizzard (reportedly Blizzard wanting the tech), to Electronic Arts (as one of Transgaming's best clients bringing the tech in-house seemed like a good idea at the time). I don't know who this new possible buyer is supposed to be outside of it's not supposed to be Apple.

Among the candidates touted this go-around are Intel, Google, Nvidia, and Amazon. For the sake of readers here who might be interested I'll go into a quick list of why these 4 are being mentioned in the, as of right now, rumors.

Intel is a long-time hardware partner of Transgaming through GameTree.TV. Bringing the Cider/G.T.L. software-package internally would give Intel a cozy software weapon if Microsoft decides to go ahead with forcing every Windows 8 user into Metro. As far as Intel would be concerned they could just focus their gaming efforts on OSX and Linux, and just use Cider/G.T.L. as a legacy compatibility pacakge.

I wouldn't put it past Google to snap up Transgaming just to be a thorn in both Apple and Microsoft's sides... but honestly... Google is more the type of company to play by Open-Source rules. Direct case in point being the changes made to run Picasa under WINE getting submitted back to the WINE dev trees. That being said Cider/G.T.L. fits more with the usage of open-licensed, but non-gpl'd software, in Android/Linux and Chromium/Linux. Picking up the Cider/G.T.L. translation layer and associated programmers would give Google a weaponized gaming advantage for it's Android/Linux and Chromium/Linux platforms. That being said, as far I am aware the Cider/G.T.L. tech is largely optimized for x86. While there are, and will be, Chromium notebooks with x86 processors, the majority of Android systems are, and will continue to be, ARM based. Kind of a sticky development problem.

Nvidia is more of a puzzle since they don't exactly have that much money to be spending. However Nvidia is making a push into the mobile market with Tegra, Tegra2, and the upcoming Project Denver. There's also the standing offer from Nvidia to help developers get their games running on Android/Linux. Transgaming's tech would be an attractive purchase for Nvidia. That being said the same x86 limitation applies here. The Cider/G.T.L. tech might be useful for Nvidia to win over a few devs and enhance it's software capabilities... but there's going to be a lot of engineering work before this happens.

For those unaware of Amazon's latest Kindle it's now an Android Tablet. Amazon has been looking to get into a proper digital download store to compete with Valve's Steam for well... a pretty long time. While Amazon does have an App store, it's fairly safe to say that it isn't as game-focused as Transgaming's existing GameTreeMac. Bringing Cider/G.T.L. in house would give Amazon a leg up on it's gaming digital distribution, but the same x86 limitations are in play.

Just to be clear:

• I do not know if any of these listed companies are actually considering purchasing Transgaming and it's associated Technologies.
• I do not know how close Transgaming is to actually selling itself and or it's technologies.
• This is just a summary of the various rumors that have been floated around various tech forums and interested parties.
• If Transgaming does sell itself and/or it's technologies I do not yet know how this will impact NCSoft's contract with Transgaming for the official OSX client.

Heh, a lot of players on this board don't care for what I have to say, most likely because of jealousy. Either that or my style of covering every single little detail in long-drawn out posts leaving no room for any counter-argument just invites players looking for every tiny in-accuracy they can find just so they can throw insults and feel better about themselves.

Anyways I commented on this particular subject earlier in this thread: http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showp...&postcount=141

As far as several players on these forums are concerned they were forced to buy Going Rogue in order to unlock Incarnate Access. To those players it does not matter that Incarnate Content was never part of the Going Rogue retail release. All that matters is that Incarnate Content was placed behind a paywall.

There is also the less that subtle marketing positioning found here: goingrogue.na.cityofheroes.com/en/game-info/incarnates/overview.html Whether NCSoft likes it or not Paragon Studios was pretty explicit about promoting the Incarnate system THROUGH the Going Rogue expansion. Paragon Studio's own website demonstrates this marketing positioning.

This is kind of where we get into a sticky positioning of how MMO content works: At what point is Content associated with what a player has paid for?

For City of Heroes: Freedom it appears that NCSoft has decided to distribute content based on retail packages alone rather than following issue updates. As such the Incarnate System has been decoupled from the Going Rogue purchase requirement and made fully part of the Subscription requirement. Like-wise the Architect Entertainment system has been decoupled from it's retail box association, although unlike the Incarnate System, the AE was never placed behind a separate paywall.

On a personal level I do not agree with this positioning of game content taken by NCSoft. My own personal opinion is that NCSoft missed a perfect marketing opportunity with the Incarnate System, which I also already addressed in other comments in this thread: http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showpost.php?p=3895925&postcount=146

This particular marketing move would encourage players to buy up remaining boxed copies of Going Rogue for the retail codes, which would be nothing but gravy for NCSoft.

Additionally it would let players who were convinced that Incarnate Content was part of Going Rogue retail release, a perception influenced by the placing of Incarnate Content behind the Going Rogue Retail paywall, feel they had gotten a bit more value for their money. Ultimately it wouldn't cost NCSoft any more additional resources outside of setting up the data-base to recognize the difference between Going Rogue retail codes and Going Rogue: Paragon Market.


That being said I still favor the idea of putting at least some Incarnate Access behind a Veteran / Paragon Rewards wall. For me it comes back down to marketing 101 which I'm not sure NCSoft has a strict handle on.

The marketing reality is that an invisible, and inaccessible, Incarnate System won't matter to Premium Players. Yes, Premium Players will see VIPS wandering around with Alpha Slots, Lore Pets, Interface Boosts, and Judgement Nukes, but one of the biggest draws in F2P games is letting players experience the game-play.

The marketing reality is that very few players are going to look at a subscription and try it for the Incarnate Content. Why do I say this with such conviction?

Well, keep in mind something Blizzard once admitted about WoW: kotaku.com/5469238/most-new-world-of-warcraft-players-dont-go-past-level-10

The website link pretty much spells that point out. Now combine it with something that was said during Issue 17 testing. I can't find a red name quote so here's something from Fleeting Whisper: http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showp...9&postcount=12

Based not just on the performance of other games but on the past history performance of this game alone, a large number of players are probably not going to hit level 50. Based on the performance of other games among those that do hit level 50 only a fraction will actually become subscribers. Based on the performance of this game alone not all of those subscribed 50's are going to take part in Incarnate Content.

Ergo, what is the logical conclusion?

Oh yeah, that's right: Less and Less people are going to be running Incarnate Content. This is highlighted by another quote from Mr. Miller: http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showp...&postcount=312

So, in the style of Nash's WTFIWWY let's do the math:

• Empirical evidence says that very few of the incoming Premium Players will hit level 50.
• Empirical evidence says that even fewer of the incoming Premium Players will be interested enough to invest in a subscription.
• Empirical evidence suggests that future content will lesson the ability for existing subscribers to play existing content

What do we get when we add all of this up?

LOCKING INCARNATE CONTENT BEHIND A SUBSCRIPTION WALL IS A FREAKING BAD IDEA.

Okay, in all fairness, maybe I am overthinking the implications of the hybrid F2P model City of Heroes has right now.

Maybe I am seeing "Doom and Gloom (tm)" where there is none.

Or maybe, just maybe, I've actually bothered to think the implications of the marketing positioning of the game out based on available marketing data... something that all existing empirical evidence (e.g. the Paragon Market) indicates NCSoft hasn't done at all.

I'd really like to see you try and back this insult up.

But I think I would die of old age before you could come up with enough times where I was inaccurate.

Not necessarily. There have been cases in the past where the player-base has asked for something / demanded something resulting in that something coming to pass. Major case in point being power-customization.

What we can do now, as players, is at least voice our opinions here, where Paragon Studios staff can easily collect and collate the posted information.

That way the next time NCSoft-Korea holds a business meeting and starts to ask Mr. Miller questions about players leaving the game; about the lack of sustained sales in the Paragon Market; or why there was a sudden drop-off in VIP's; Mr. Miller has a nice set of print-outs on hand detailing what the players think and said.

Will that result in a change of direction?

I don't know. Again, I'm assuming that Mr. Miller and other Paragon Studios staff are not calling the shots here. He (Mr. Miller), nor any of the other Paragon Studios staff for that matter, look like they've sustained massive injuries to the head so I'm not inclined to think their responsible for the questionable positioning of content access.

If we're going to look at compromises that NCSoft might find acceptable since I really don't see NCSoft stepping back and putting Incarnate Access behind a Paragon Rewards barrier:

Premiums who bought Going Rogue Retail: note: retail, not Paragon Market version

• -allow for slots up to Tyrant trial
• -allow for access to I-trials up to Tryant trial

This enables players who bought Going Rogue Retail to play out the storyline of the expansion and let's NCSoft live up to the spirit of the advertising by Paragon-Studios.
This also locks future Incarnate content, such as the Battalion, behind the paywall, at a point when Incarnate Content would likely be separated from Going Rogue content.

BetelGeuse
BetelGeuse
BETELGEUSE!