No wonder it's gone wrong. . .
jkflipflop
Join Date: 2010-10-13 Member: 74423Members
Join Date: 2010-10-13 Member: 74423Members
Comments
Either Intel paid them or it's free publicity.
8086 actually (four generations older), 80386 is too young. And i'm fairly certain they <strike>used</strike> are also using 8087 co-processors
I vaguely remember a "Because NS2 happens in a different universe/reality" answer from a dev in reply to a "Why do we not have lasers in NS2?" question.
If you check the equipment send into space for satellies or the ISS, or critical systems on earth you will notice that usually pretty old systems are used simly due to the face that these have been around for quite a while and been prooven working. That's the reason in some modern critical environment even the good old Intel 80386 is still being used.
Weird, usually the answer is more along the lines of "because the TSA have a limited budget, and xyz is cheap and easy to mass-produce".
<!--quoteo(post=1781195:date=Jul 20 2010, 06:49 PM:name=Squeal_Like_A_Pig)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Squeal_Like_A_Pig @ Jul 20 2010, 06:49 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1781195"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I think you need to look at it less like taking our existing world and moving forward in time, and thinking of it more as an alternate future universe. Stylistically there are a lot of choices made that work better for establishing the kind of look and feeling that we want for our sci fi setting. It doesn't just apply to the projectile weapons, but throughout the environments. Big clunky computer terminals and monitors don't realistically make sense, given the fact that current technology is getting smaller and slimmer every day, and everyone has flat screen tv's and iphones etc. But for the sorts of industrial environments we have sleek, tiny computers don't really fit.
Nanotechnology is being developed already with the attempt making fabrics that can harden into body armor on the fly. Soldiers of the future might only need to wear a uniform and no body armor, but how cool does that look? Lasers and energy based weapons, while more "futuristic" feeling, lack the sort of grittiness and rawness that we want in NS.
The main thing is developing an internal logic to the universe that is consistent and believable throughout that particular game/movie/etc., not that it necessarily has to conform to the rules of the "real world". You can see this same approach in plenty of other games and movies, such as Starcraft 2, for example.
--Cory<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?showtopic=110123&view=findpost&p=1781195" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/in...t&p=1781195</a>
it's a general rule of thumb that weapons come from the lowest bidder.
I understand that, but I have trouble with a future/current/alternative reality that has intergalactic space travel, jetpacks, hovering robots, exoskeletons, AI, etc. that runs on todays P4 technology. Simply put, modern PC computing isn't really up to the task of any of this, yet in the world of the TSA, P4's can do all that?
The moral of the story is that you either 1) make up all of the components so you can say magic tech XYZ solves problem ABC you've identified or 2) make the tech consistent with the real-world examples you're modelling them from.
A P4 could do a lot of things you think it couldn't do if you made your software specifically for it. Consoles are a prime example of taking a chipset and making specialised software which "over performs" your expectations.
For the same reasons they use Turing machines in <i>Alien</i>.
I should add something else, but... ######, can't think of anything ... HEY LOOK OVER THERE *points then punches you in the face.