Show Your Computer Specs.

[gold639]

duffarama you are terrific man......you crack me up each post you make

 

[duffarama]

duffarama you are terrific man......you crack me up each post you make

Thanks mate. It is also been proven that if you eat fish, your stench will entice laughter. Even through virtual reality.

 

[h-mAin]

Well..it depends when he bought it...the first computer we bought was 2GB 16 RAM and 166MHZ and it costed about 4000-5000 dollars... :confused:::confused:
It was in 1993 or something...

 

[fardin]

that means i got ripped off man i am so dissapointed' i am getting emotional after all those hard works they ripped me off' oh god i am going to take this back to cricus city and give them back' oh god what if brian lara international doesnt work damn

 

[duffarama]

Does anyone want to update their specs after 3 months? Or does anyone have a new computer?

Please post your specs in this thread. Don't worry, no-one will bag you. :cheer

 

[fanirama]

AMD Athlon Thunderbird 1 Ghz
384MB RAM
128MB ATI AIW Radeon 8500
120GB HDD

I play Cricket 2004 at max settings with 1024x768 at 32-bits and it looks superb. Playing on another --
AMD Athlon64 3000+
512MB RAM
120GB HDD
128MB ATI Radeon 9800

the quality was virtually the same.
This proves you don't need to spend big bucks to enjoy this game. Kudos to Cricket 2004 for being a game you can play without fancy hardware. Intel/AMD trick people into buying the gazillion GHz PC when you don't even need it.

 

[duffarama]

Farinama, did you 'half-steal' my name?

Thanks for your specs by the way.

 

[brad352]

This proves you don't need to spend big bucks to enjoy this game. Kudos to Cricket 2004 for being a game you can play without fancy hardware. Intel/AMD trick people into buying the gazillion GHz PC when you don't even need it.

All it proves is how terrible the graphics in Cricket 2004 are- and do you use AA/AF?

 

[barmyarmy]

P4 2.6Ghz
180GB HD
512 MB RAM
ATI Radeon 7500

 

[gold639]

P4 3.0 Ghz(New....I had a 1.5 processor before)
40GB HD
1024 RAM
nVidia GeForce 6600 GT(its agp not pci express,I have an outdated motherboard )

This comp can play Far Cry at full settings,BFME at Ultra High,and Half Life and DOom 3 at almost full setting

 

[Maxkarter]

New comp got it at the end of last year:

P4 3,2 Ghz
220Gb (two different ones)
256MB of miserly RAM
Nvidia GeForce FX5700LE
17" Monitor
Cheap ZAR 500 Surround Sound System

 

[fanirama]

brad352 -- you're very ignorant. How does it prove graphics are terrible in Cricket 2004 ? I think you have a personal bias against Cricket 2004 and are not seeing the product for what it is. I'd suggest you put aside your views and give it a non-biased review. I'm sure you'll like the game. Anti-aliasing is a must to remove jaggies. I'm sure you know people enable AA. Making blind statements without backing them up is not wise.

What I'm waiting for is half-life2 like graphics in Cricket games.
Besides you haven't seen it on my computer so you cannot tell anyways. Graphics are nowadays mostly handled by the video cards. Have a powerful video card and you'll be fine if you meet the minimum specs of the game. Granted Cricket 2004 is not perfect, but neither is BLC99 or the upcoming BLIC. ( what only 3 official stadia you say ? )

Most sports games don't require fancy hardware anyway. I play MaddenNFL 2005 and it looks superb even with all the action on the screen. Check out its specs --- http://www.gamespot.com/pc/sports/maddennfl2005/techinfo.html
See what i mean ?

 

[brad352]

brad352 -- you're very ignorant. How does it prove graphics are terrible in Cricket 2004 ?

Low poly models, low res textures, poor animation- all to ensure that the large part of the casual gaming consumers with poor PC's can play it and be happy

I think you have a personal bias against Cricket 2004 and are not seeing the product for what it is.

The product is a half-arsed attempt by EA to cash in on the lack of cricket games on the market

I'd suggest you put aside your views and give it a non-biased review.

Reviews are by nature based on your personal thoughts, how can that possibly be non biased?

I'm sure you'll like the game.

You're sure? You don't know me, or anything about me. And no, I don't like the game- terrible gameplay, terrible graphics, terrible bugs, great features (domestic teams, tournaments etc)

Anti-aliasing is a must to remove jaggies. I'm sure you know people enable AA. Making blind statements without backing them up is not wise.

It was a question, not a statement- surely you know the difference? And you didn't respond about AF (Anisotropic Filtering if you don't know?)

What I'm waiting for is half-life2 like graphics in Cricket games.

If you've seen the BLIC screenshots, you'll know that won't be for a long time

Besides you haven't seen it on my computer so you cannot tell anyways.

What statement implied that I had? I've seen it on my computer with everything on full and it looks like crap, why would I need to see yours?

Graphics are nowadays mostly handled by the video cards.

Well that is implied by the fact that they're called video or graphics cards, no?

Have a powerful video card and you'll be fine if you meet the minimum specs of the game.

So by your logic, playing Doom 3 with an Athlon XP 1500+ and 384MB of RAM coupled with a 6800 Ultra will run very well? The video card will be horribly bottlenecked

Granted Cricket 2004 is not perfect,

Nothing is perfect, but most things look like at least some effort has been made

but neither is BLC99 or the upcoming BLIC.

Did I say they were?

( what only 3 official stadia you say ? )

I don't think clicking on "Melbourne" instead of the MCG is a major issue

Most sports games don't require fancy hardware anyway.

Because a large part of the people that play them are casual gamers without good PC's

I play MaddenNFL 2005 and it looks superb even with all the action on the screen.

Superb by your definition

 

[duffarama]

Now I must say that was entertaining Brad. Good stuff, I think you have knocked some sence into this bloke.

 

[fanirama]

brad352 -- You say it looks like "crap on your pc", but say at the end - "superb by your definition."
So I think you may agree that it boils down to a matter of perspective.
In my opinion, I like Cricket 2004 and I derive joy from it. If you dont thats your problem. I just think you need to make better informed statements that have something to back you up.
Do you know how many polygons are in Cricket2004. You've concluded its low on what basis ? Also you'll notice in my original post, I also quote a top notch AMD Athlon64 3000+ PC. Quite modern by today's standards. I've also quoted Half life 2 graphics. Obviously you're too self involved in your own world of bias to pay attention.
So its not a poor PC by any standards.
BLIC screenshots don't look that superb compared to Cricket2004, Like you said based on my personal thoughts. When its specs come out, do open your eyes and read them.
"So by your logic, playing Doom 3 with an Athlon XP 1500+ and 384MB of RAM coupled with a 6800 Ultra will run very well? The video card will be horribly bottlenecked"
How do you conclude this ? Have you tried it and seen ? You keep making blind comments without any backup at all. Have you read what its minimum specs are ?
Do you know what frame rate means ? Do you know what fluid motion is ?

It seems you're ignorant and assume you know everything there is to know. I think you're just one of those dumb kids who assume they're very knowledgeable simply because they can put down a product simply they have some personal bias against EA. Cricket 2004 is not a half product. I can play a full game of cricket and I enjoy it very much. and I don't have time to indulge ignorant people like you in senseless word-war that has nothing to do with the posted topic.