A new mod... why bother?

...or a company using the success of a product to work their way up to bigger and better games.

I'm glad to see the investment.  This isn't Crysis or some new megas release.  Eve Online runs on single cpu systems and most of us aren't multitasking while we play Sins.

It's a step in a good direction.  We'll let ya know on the forums how fun it is

I do understand, I really do. But SINS doesnt need to be "bigger",  its fricking huge already, you just cant access that hugeness without encountering enough lag to make CIV 5 look like a finely tuned machine...

Just make it better I mean seriously, its the only game of recent years that could actually get away with adding nothing but multicore support and a graphics engine polish, then slapping a sticker saying "sins 2" on the box and we would all flock to buy it with pleasure and joy!!

As for eve, thats a very different kettle of fish as EVE`s server side code is multi core based. only the client system is single core, and for good reason.

As one Admin of CCCP forum once told me, "eve code is its like a vengeful, sentient snake made of spite, hatred and irony. Thus working on it, especially updating the old stuff, is only a job for coding superheroes"

With regards to SINS, I`m just longing for a sequal.  Remember, the world ends in 2012, they need to get their skates on :p

It's true...would love to see the game brought closer to current specs just to know it will 'stay around" that much longer.  Not having seen all the new things in it, I'm intrigued to but i think just like with Entrnchment  to Diplomacy that while some things may be "meh" for change, others will be great.  We'll have to wait and see.

I just read a player created (Goon Squad) paper from Eve on how to create and extend virtual boxes in game which form around an observer and can never merge with another observer's box but  can be extended nearly infinitely though only existing so long as the observer remains in his perspective within them and no other observer enters them--causing them to be destroyed and recreated as an entirely new box.  It read like a Einstein's descriptions of time travel.  Can't imagine the coding there.

I see what your saying but Honestly most of us wouldn't. We would be pissed that we spend 40 bucks to buy a new sequel with one new feature no matter how large it is(not to mention the game is playable with its current single core support for most of us). Im just stating the obvious.

I'm hoping its more than one new feature.  First, it does improve the engine and graphics as well as address bugs and provide new content.  So I'm optimistic.

Well, it is a standalone expansion. they might add the multicore support if the engine overhauls are that significant.

Well Yarlen has confirmed that it will not have multicore support, so unless they dramatically change their minds don't get your hopes up.

Seriously--the obsession with multicore.  You're talking apples and oranges.  An imporvement on the game with added content or a radical rewrite and complete recreation.  Multicore isn't offering anything unless they glam the game up enormously--and while it would help with the large maps some, it isn't a deal breaker to expand Sins without it.

I do video editing and use multicore but you can do a lot on single core systems, especially at the level of Sins.  I've never had my cpu time out playing or had the game stutter to a halt on my old system which is a single core Athlon XP.

Then you're special, as most of us have. Perhaps it's just your choice of game setups, but most games I play end up coming to a crawl with the single core being used maxed out. In those cases, there's not much room for discussion on how important being able to use the other 50% (or more) of your processing power would be.

That said, as much as I'd love to see this supported, I don't see the lack of it making things any worse, or at least not significantly so. What are we getting? New factions? New Techs? New ships? New gameplay options? Perhaps there will be additions that further strain system resources, but for the most part what I'm expecting is variety, and being able to do things differently doesn't neccessarily mean it'll be any more demanding.

And who knows, perhaps they'll "optimize" a few things so it runs even better.

I understand your point (yes, I am special).  Before some of the patches I did have a heavy load peaking at over 90% but that was when there were some terrible bugs and glitches and it was only on large, large games.  What was more of a problem back then was minidumps and desyncs for me.  Most of that got fixed to a degree making it playable.  Some of the "sluggish" performance (which I did see) was completely alieviated by using TSOP.

So now we are looking at adding the beta to this and it promises changes in the engine and graphics methods to allow a real improvement in game play.  I think it might work.

My view isn't, "If it's not perfect kill it" mine is, "If it's not perfect, perfect it".

I have let a 10 player game run for six hours and the worst that happened was the game crashed on quitting or took an inordinately long time to shut down.  I also ran the LAA executable and have run the beta and my comp with it and no adverse effects.

Wait until the new release is out, see if it lives up to the billing, then explain what's wrong.

the LAA fix is probably what you need if you have a multi-core system and are having issues. what is you system specs?

I only say "if you have a multi-core system..." because they are found in fairly good recent systems.

And strategy games are probably the best target for heavy multithreading that can be carried out on two cores - by having an AI and a simulation thread.

Timing issues, however, make that horrendeous to code...