Star Wars Knights of the Old Republic II: The Sith Lords (PC)

Danhill · Feb 7, 2005, 06:20 AM

Of the three original Star Wars films, the general consensus is that The Empire Strikes Back is the best of the lot. As the middle part of the trilogy, George Lucas was free to play around with his characters, muddy up the waters, so to speak, and give more nuance and shades of gray. This, after all, was the movie where we found out that Ben Kenobi wasn't the saintly old wizard he had appeared to be in the first movie.

Read more: Gamespy

Jitter · Feb 7, 2005, 07:25 AM

Well that is a good review although I have to question its validity on some of the bug reports. What kinda serious Gamer reviews games w/ a rig like his

" Pentium 4 2.53 GHz, 1 GB RAM, Windows XP, DirectX 8.0, 128 MB GeForce4 Ti 4600 video card, SoundMax sound card, 16x DVD-ROM drive, 120 GB hard-disk space, Mouse, Keyboard."

Danhill · Feb 7, 2005, 07:28 AM

lol, yeah good one, but I think that most of the people out there don't have high end stuff really like many of us do here, but I think its still a good indication of showing how the game performs on his system compared to others.

Jitter · Feb 7, 2005, 08:03 AM

My PC certainly isnt highend, I am not even sure if it would be considered midrange now, but I would think if you work for somekinda game related site, or are going to be reviewing games you should have at least somewhat updated hardware/software. I dont think the game is really meant to be run on that hardware/software, so I dont think its a fair review for a new game. If he ran it on a high end PC then that one and compared it that would be cool. The buggy AI probably wouldnt change I am just cuious if some of the graphic glitches would be resolved w/ a DX9 card and DX9. Hopefully a few more reviews will come out soon, I was really looking foward to this game.

LeanWolf · Feb 7, 2005, 10:27 AM

seems fine for a turn-based rpg to me

kalx · Feb 7, 2005, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeanWolf

seems fine for a turn-based rpg to me

lol

Zelig · Feb 7, 2005, 11:58 AM

Sound good, after a patch or two. Planescape: Torment and the Baldur's Gate games (especially 1) are some of my all time favorite games, so chances are that I'll like this one if the story stacks up well.

When I played through the first one, I had some bugs too though... not playing with AA would cause the game to flicker really badly, and I managed to get force speed stuck on for about a quarter of the game, among others, but there was nothing really game breaking.

Chubby_C · Feb 7, 2005, 03:47 PM

Quote:

There are also far too many examples of raw, seemingly unfinished artwork in the game. A particular egregious one is a Hutt crime lord you'll need to deal with during the game that's missing a ton of detail.

Could have something to do with his 128mb GeForce Ti4600 and Direct X 8.

You have to wonder what all the image quality settings were set to.

I do also like the fact that he felt the need to list keyboard and mouse as part of his system specs, otherwise I would have been left wondering how he managed to play

Jitter · Feb 7, 2005, 05:25 PM

lol I was amused at the keyboard/mouse listed there as well. I liked the first one so much that i played it through all the level changing crashes. Come to think of it, before I patched the game is was totally unplayable it would like freeze up and go in slo-mo, but after the patch it was fine except for the level change crashess and a few minor annoying things here and there.

redsolar · Feb 7, 2005, 05:41 PM

I had very few problems with the original. I am surely hoping his "missing textures" and "unfinished artwork" were shader-related. After all, a game like this is not meant to be a showcase of a graphics engine, nor an FPS test, just what Bioware said about the original, since you could not really get above 30 fps no matter what, and it seemed quite choppy at times, even on powerful (at the time) hardware.

Feb 7, 2005, 06:20 AM	#1
Danhill DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: May 2003 Location: Sweden Posts: 4,112 Rep Power: 0	Star Wars Knights of the Old Republic II: The Sith Lords (PC) Of the three original Star Wars films, the general consensus is that The Empire Strikes Back is the best of the lot. As the middle part of the trilogy, George Lucas was free to play around with his characters, muddy up the waters, so to speak, and give more nuance and shades of gray. This, after all, was the movie where we found out that Ben Kenobi wasn't the saintly old wizard he had appeared to be in the first movie. Read more: Gamespy __________________ MOBO: [color=white]ASUS A8N-SLI Premium[/color] CPU: AMD 64 3200+ (Venice) @ 2,50 Ghz MEM: 2 x 512 DDR 466, VGA: 2 x 6600 GT in SLI, HDD1: WD Raptor HDD2: Maxtor Diamond Plus 9, Case: Antec Plus View 1080, PSU: ThermalTake PurePower 500W, MX 1000, Dell 2001 FP, Aud. 2 SZ

Feb 7, 2005, 07:25 AM	#2
Jitter HardwareHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 534 Rep Power: 0	Well that is a good review although I have to question its validity on some of the bug reports. What kinda serious Gamer reviews games w/ a rig like his " Pentium 4 2.53 GHz, 1 GB RAM, Windows XP, DirectX 8.0, 128 MB GeForce4 Ti 4600 video card, SoundMax sound card, 16x DVD-ROM drive, 120 GB hard-disk space, Mouse, Keyboard." __________________ Sony Vaio PCV-RX670 P4 1.8ghz XP Pro SP2 1 GB PC2100 RAM ATI All in Wonder 9700 pro Audigy 2 ZS Aquamark ~29,500 3dMark03 ~ 5,000

Feb 7, 2005, 07:28 AM	Thread Starter #3
Danhill DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: May 2003 Location: Sweden Posts: 4,112 Rep Power: 0	lol, yeah good one, but I think that most of the people out there don't have high end stuff really like many of us do here, but I think its still a good indication of showing how the game performs on his system compared to others. __________________ MOBO: [color=white]ASUS A8N-SLI Premium[/color] CPU: AMD 64 3200+ (Venice) @ 2,50 Ghz MEM: 2 x 512 DDR 466, VGA: 2 x 6600 GT in SLI, HDD1: WD Raptor HDD2: Maxtor Diamond Plus 9, Case: Antec Plus View 1080, PSU: ThermalTake PurePower 500W, MX 1000, Dell 2001 FP, Aud. 2 SZ

Feb 7, 2005, 08:03 AM	#4
Jitter HardwareHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 534 Rep Power: 0	My PC certainly isnt highend, I am not even sure if it would be considered midrange now, but I would think if you work for somekinda game related site, or are going to be reviewing games you should have at least somewhat updated hardware/software. I dont think the game is really meant to be run on that hardware/software, so I dont think its a fair review for a new game. If he ran it on a high end PC then that one and compared it that would be cool. The buggy AI probably wouldnt change I am just cuious if some of the graphic glitches would be resolved w/ a DX9 card and DX9. Hopefully a few more reviews will come out soon, I was really looking foward to this game. __________________ Sony Vaio PCV-RX670 P4 1.8ghz XP Pro SP2 1 GB PC2100 RAM ATI All in Wonder 9700 pro Audigy 2 ZS Aquamark ~29,500 3dMark03 ~ 5,000

Feb 7, 2005, 10:27 AM	#5
LeanWolf alpha male Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Skyrim Posts: 5,714 Rep Power: 84 System Specs	seems fine for a turn-based rpg to me __________________

Feb 7, 2005, 11:58 AM	#7
Zelig HardwareHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Canada Posts: 3,187 Rep Power: 71 System Specs	Sound good, after a patch or two. Planescape: Torment and the Baldur's Gate games (especially 1) are some of my all time favorite games, so chances are that I'll like this one if the story stacks up well. When I played through the first one, I had some bugs too though... not playing with AA would cause the game to flicker really badly, and I managed to get force speed stuck on for about a quarter of the game, among others, but there was nothing really game breaking. __________________ --

Feb 7, 2005, 05:25 PM	#9
Jitter HardwareHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 534 Rep Power: 0	lol I was amused at the keyboard/mouse listed there as well. I liked the first one so much that i played it through all the level changing crashes. Come to think of it, before I patched the game is was totally unplayable it would like freeze up and go in slo-mo, but after the patch it was fine except for the level change crashess and a few minor annoying things here and there. __________________ Sony Vaio PCV-RX670 P4 1.8ghz XP Pro SP2 1 GB PC2100 RAM ATI All in Wonder 9700 pro Audigy 2 ZS Aquamark ~29,500 3dMark03 ~ 5,000

Feb 7, 2005, 05:41 PM	#10
redsolar Off duty Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Las Vegas, USA Posts: 1,242 Rep Power: 0 System Specs	I had very few problems with the original. I am surely hoping his "missing textures" and "unfinished artwork" were shader-related. After all, a game like this is not meant to be a showcase of a graphics engine, nor an FPS test, just what Bioware said about the original, since you could not really get above 30 fps no matter what, and it seemed quite choppy at times, even on powerful (at the time) hardware. __________________ Real_Men_Do_Not_Use_Space_Bar Main rig: Intel Core i7 930 @ 4.0 Ghz \| Corsair H50 Push/Pull \| 12GB OCZ DDR3 \| ASUS Radeon HD 5850 \| 3x 1TB Samsung F3 RAID5 on Dell PERC 5i SAS + 1TB Hitachi \| MSI X58 Pro-e \| 850W Antec Truepower Quattro \| RocketFish by Lian Li Full Tower Case \| Gateway XHD3000 30" LCD \| Dell 2408WFP 24" LCD \| Dell 2407WFP 24" LCD \| Logitech Z-5500 Speakers \| Windows 7 Ultimate x64 Laptop: Samsung x360-34P \| Core 2 Duo SU9400 1.4 GHz \| 4GB DDR3 \| 128GB Samsung SSD \| Intel 4500M w/ HDMI \| WiFi \| Bluetooth \| 13.3" WLED 1280x800 \| Windows 7 Professional x64