Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Grizzle

  1. That will definitely help, but I had 1 gig too and I still got a little hitching until I defragged with O&O.
  2. quote:Originally posted by Cruis.In: so really with 900 being used, its using the hard drive to simulate the rest of ram needed, which even I know isn't so good right? Bingo.
  3. I'm pretty sure [PerfectDisk] er DiskKeeper will defrag your swap file in offline mode too...look for the option. It's your main RAM, 256 on your vid card is plenty.
  4. Ah I missed the 512mb ram in your specs. Yeah, from what I hear the game uses 900 mb when fully loaded. You must be getting a lot of HD thrashing especially when you use max textures. You really need to upgrade to 1gb. A single stick of 512 isn't too expensive these days. Also, what defrag proggie do you use? You would really benefit from one that does offline/boot defrag to defrag your swap file. You should download the trial of O&O Defrag. Or, get your hands on a DOS boot disk, turn of the swap file in windows, boot into DOS, delete the swap file, then reboot into windows, defrag then turn swap back on. This should give you a nice clean spot for the swap file to reside as it's likely yours is fairly fragmented. Lastly I'd suggest you keep soft shadows off, the performance hit isn't worth it.
  5. Cruis.In, I had those same hitches at first. Then I created a dedicated partition on my HD just for F.E.A.R. and defragged it using O&O Defrag and setting it to defrag by file access. Haven't had a single hitch since. Don't think you need to create a new partition like I did, but if you uninstall the game, then defrag using a 3rd party defragger (O&O or PerfectDisk) then install the game and defrag again after you run it once or twice that should do the trick.
  6. Saw Tommy's mugshot on Drudge a little while ago and I just couldn't resist having some fun with it...
  7. quote:Originally posted by Prez: Well, I pray for guidance in all things as well. What does that make me? Unfit for President.
  8. Aperson, A second term President is usually focused on creating a legacy. GWB doesn't seem to care, but what do you expect from a man who gets his direction straight from God?
  9. I went into a local EB Games on Monday to see if they had F.E.A.R. The PC game section was but one narrow 3ft wide rack buried in the corner. I wouldn't be surprised if the new Gamestop/EB stops selling PC titles altogether. I know now that I will never go back there looking for PC games, it's a wasted trip. They didn't have F.E.A.R. by the way but my local Best Buy had it and Quake4 in abundant quantities on Tuesday.
  10. quote:Originally posted by Aperson: On a related note, what the heck does this thread title have to do with the news article. Just that Teddy is despised by an awful lot of people. I think he must have stolen some money from them sometime or maybe he just dated their sisters. It's gotta be something like that.
  11. Sorry Matchoo in the black and white world of Soback, all you would deserve is a "nice try". Can we imagine what the headlines would have been if Teddy had done nothing?
  12. quote:Originally posted by $iLk: quote:Originally posted by Commander Shih: Try to set them all to MAX,and 1280*1024 or above,you can see what happen~ Seriously though... what is the point of playing a game at that resolution? My LCD monitor has a native resolution of 1280 x 1024 so I need to run all my games at that res. Granted with my sweet Sony LCD it's not too bad at 1024, but it just looks so much better at 1280 and once you get used to playing games at that res it's hard to go back.
  13. quote:Originally posted by Aperson: quote:Originally posted by Grizzle: Remo, I don't think they are government donations.You sure? The link Judge gave has "Goverment donors" over the amount he quoted. Yeah, I saw that too after I posted. It might be certain government agencies, which essentially amounts to the government. In any event I personally don't think our government should be donating money to UNICEF if that's the case. That should be the first thing they cut from the budget next time around. Let us private folks deal with the UNICEF thugs when they roll around to our workplaces insisting on meeting their quota. Mind you, I give them credit for the good they actually do, but just think how much more good they could do without all those "paid volunteers" and high marketing budgets.
  14. Remo, I don't think they are government donations. I'm pretty sure when they cite international statistics, that the donations are all from private individuals and corps. I've never heard of any gov't giving money directly to UNICEF, especially when they can give it directly to the cause at hand. I could be wrong, but that's my take on it. In any event I agree, it's pretty useless to argue about it. But I can understand some posters taking offense at the "U.S. is the be all, end all of everything" stance. BTW, at the pull my finger joke.
  15. Played the MP demo, got my butt kicked. I'm going to chalk it up to poor FPS to sooth my ego. I'm guessing the SP game will be much more enjoyable, so I might get it when it's released (Monday or Tuesday I think.)
  16. LIS, It was made for Belgian TV because the artist that created the Smurfs was from Belgium. A little home town flavor eh?
  17. Um, exactly what makes you think they are slamming the U.S.? Surely not a guilty conscience... (Pssst... I think you're being a bit hyper-sensitive and you might want to turn off FOX News before they get their hands on this one.) I never liked UNICEF because of their politics of persuasion and strong arm, guilt laden tactics. This just seems like par for the course for them. Everyone should be skeptical of any charitable organization that spends so much money on advertising in an effort to raise more money.
  18. quote:Originally posted by Prez: quote: Considering that my IQ is higher than Einstein's and given that all I've got to show for it is this board (not some Earth shattering fancy equation) I'd say that the IQ tests are probably rigged and that someone should sue and take it all the way to the Supreme Court. Well that just proves that Einstein would have made an excellent Fleet Commander in UC:AWA. He would totally "pwn' all of us!! No, Einstein would be stuck on wondering what strange new laws of physics operate in the BC/UC Universe.
  19. $ilk, it's the market of travellers waiting at the airport they're after and there's a ton of 'em.
  20. Hold your horses everyone, this is the same old crap we hear every time before a new console is released. Repeat after me... M a r k e t i n g.
  21. LOL. Although, academic acheivement isn't everything. Einstein wasn't exactly the best student or a shining star in academia either. Not that I'm saying Miers could be an Einstein. But yeah, Bush probably screwed the pooch on this one. (ech, I guess that means I kind of agree with Ms. Coulter too...)
  22. Prez, No apologies necessary, the respect is mutual. Soback, what can I say? You're more of a contrarian than I am, and that's saying something! I've never met a liberal, democrat, conservative or republican who wishes to harm this country. They (and we) all just want what's best for her. We just disagree on exactly what that is. It's the one and only true difference as far as I'm concerned, so it's not about who does what to whom and how. Anyhow, I've once again come to the end of my part in this discussion. And even if we'll never agree on anything, I do find your tenacity entertaining, so thanks for that. Oh, and about the fish, it will probably help to generate revenue through advertising. So really now, is it all that bad? I'm sure there are far more wasteful pork projects to rant about.
  23. Soback, it's called a progressive tax system and no it's not the most fair, but it's the way it is. Would a flat tax be more fair? I don't think so because then it would place a greater burden on those that earn less. 20% flat tax on someone earning 16,000 hurts a hell of a lot more than 20% on someone earning 160,000. There isn't another tax scheme that would result in complete equality across the board, so we are left with the progressive tax which places the burden on those that can afford it. Besides, even if the rich have a higher tax burden they also have more means at their disposal to place their earnings in tax shelters offsetting the amount they actually pay out regardless of their tax bracket. Don't you recall the tax statistics released about John and Teresa Kerry only paying 14% on their multi-million dollar income? I don't envy the rich, and I certainly don't pity them either. Prez, if your point is that the terminology is used by the dems/liberals to enrage then I would tend to agree, but it's not without basis in actual data. How much more harmful is it then the "Terror Alert" or "Bird flu" tactics used by the current administration to keep people in a perpetual state of fear? Our strings can only be pulled if we allow them to be. Meh. I really don't care to engage in a pissing match either. I think I've been pretty clear in the past that I inherently distrust politicians in toto. As far as taxes go, I happen to be in the highest percentage bracket but earn much less than the richest who pay the same rate and I'm not complaining one bit. I do however take some issue with how it is spent as I think we all do.
  24. quote:Originally posted by Prez: quote:Tsk tsk Prez... That statement is patently false. With all due respect Grizzle, it is you who are deliberately spreading untruths with your "taxcuts for the rich" garbage. There has NEVER been any such thing whatsoever as a tax that benefits ONLY rich people. You are merely playing the politics of envy, and it is quite sad, really. NEWSFLASH!!!! The people who pay the most taxes will by default see the most benefit from any taxcut. The top 1% of wage earners pay one third of all taxes in America. Why wouldn't they see a bigger benefit than a guy making $30,000 a year? It is a matter of mathmatics, not of politics. I never claimed that tax cuts benefit only the rich, you're putting words in my mouth. I stated that the tax rate paid by the rich will decrease by a larger percentage than other taxpayers. There are many ways to slice the pie to make it appear that they don't actually benefit more. Or how since they have a higher income, they pay a larger share... um yeah. But since our tax system is based upon percentage the only true way to measure it is not with actual dollars paid or their share (in percentage) of overall taxes paid, but to measure it by the change in the rate of individual percentage they pay. Over the course of the Bush tax cuts the effective individual tax rate for the top earners will decrease by a maximum of 6.9% whereas the middle class tax rate will decrease by a maximum of 1.9%. That being said, the decrease does fluctuate for all tax brackets, but the rich consistently receive the largest decrease until the tax cuts expire. So yes everyone benefits, but the rich benefit more... which is why your statement is false. It is you who have been bamboozled. As for envy, not me, I really couldn't care less. I was just trying to set the record straight when you claimed that the statement "tax cuts for the rich" was a liberal fallacy. However, I will concede that the wording is a bit loaded and should be reframed as "tax cuts that benefit everyone but favor the rich." I'm not even going to entertain the notion of whether or not it's justified, because that's not the point and as I already stated I really don't care. More power to 'em.
  • Create New...