This is a question for the dear moderator.  You closed another thread I replied to for being too 'old', yet it was still on the first page when I replied to it...  I find that strange.  Especially since my comment was regarding that very same topic.

You complain about other topics spawning new and 'pointless' threads, yet close one I reply to that had a valid point.

I'm still having problems with this game and my Radeon 9800 Pro 256 card.  I've tried several different versions of their drivers and the game still crashes almost hourly.

So, here you go.  I made a new topic to re-hash something that was already being 'actively' discussed.  Obviously active is totally relative considering there are probably more crickets here right now than posters...

I wonder what response this topic will get?  Locked?  A warning for being a pain?

Right now I could care less.  I spent good money to upgrade my video card and buy this game.  So far there is no news, unsupported reasons for the lack of news, arguing all over, and I have a game that still doesn't work.

They've been closing and threatening to close the threads left and right regarding our discussions for the fix.  Now they're closing tech related topics?  That's horrible...

Here are a couple of threads over at LucasArts that might help... and if you already read them, I'm only trying to help.

ATI Radeon Users- What Drivers Are Working For You?

This may be a way to solve a perfomance issue with RADEON cards

Game crashes on loading a save game

Video Cards

The general consensus is to use the Catalyst 6 drivers.  I'm running a Radeon 9000 Pro 128MB on WinXP with the older drivers and get good response.  I've seen posts from others running a Radeon 9800 Pro that are having good results as well, so it is possible.  Some have suggested it could be an issue with those running certain SoundBlaster cards.  One big issue to look at is the Motherboard's BIOS settings... the default AGP aperture size is usually 64MB for most mobos, but since you are running a 256MB card, that might need to be increased to 128MB or higher.  Also, it's entirely possible that the mobo can't handle that powerful of a card; or that the power supply isn't getting enough power to the card through the AGP slot and crashes while running the game.

This very well could be a problem with JA - I'm not saying it isn't.  But be sure to look at all other considerations as well.  Does the card run other graphics intensive games like JA fine?  Or is this the only/first one since buying the card?  After I installed my Radeon 9000 Pro, I had to upgrade my power supply because it kept crashing my computer whenever I tried to play Dungeon Siege.  With as powerful of a card as the 9800 Pro 256, I wouldn't run anything less than a 400watt Antec True Power supply (distributes equal power to everywhere, unlike standard power supplys), especially if I had any other USB or power hungry peripherals installed, such as a really big harddrive. And since the 9800 Pro 256 card is so cutting edge, if the motherboard is more than a year old it probably can't handle the throughput properly with the default BIOS settings.

Be sure to visit your motherboard manufacturer's website and see if there's any issues with the newest graphics cards on your mobo's model.  They might also have a directory or help section which explains the different BIOS settings related to AGP performance.  If you haven't contacted them yet, do so and see what they have to say, since they might appreciate hearing your experience with the Radeon 9800, or have maybe heard from others.

Good luck...

dilmonen: the thread in question was closed because it was a week old before you posted in it. the rules here, are and always have been, that if you "bump" an old topic it gets locked. 3 or 4 days is OK but any older and if seen by a mod it will get closed. it doesn't matter that it was still on the first page. it's the age that counts. same goes for multiple posts, if you bump in that manner it will also get closed.

Hey Wolf... you might want to make that rule about week old threads a little more visible in a sticky or something, since I wouldn't have known that one myself, and it's a little unusual for an active forum community.  I too would've simply looked for another thread that was already discussing the topic regardless of age, versus starting a brand new one.  That's standard practice and often a rule on most of the forums I participate in elsewhere.

Who do we speak to about that rule? You know I've voiced my opinion on it to you as well and logically posting in old threads if you have something relevant to say is far better than creating a totally new thread, especially as a lot of people go on to say "you could've searched and found this, they were talking about it there".

Maybe a poll in the general forums could be a good idea? See what the concensus of the entire board is, at least it's fair that way.

I've made a poll here http://forums.ravensoft.com/ib/ikonboard.pl?act=ST&f=7&t=25929 to get a more true view of the boards opinions. See how it turns out eh?

I think the thread that was closed was one I started.  I am a little miffed that it was closed because the problem raised is still not resolved and users were actively comparing experiences, which is helpful in user self-troubleshooting (which seems to be the only type of troubleshooting occuring, since Raven is ignoring us).  I understand that there is a forum rule, but following the rule blindly without considering the nature of the post is just inane.  I mean, I'm a law student, and even real rules are bent if the matter is relevant.  Please don't consider this a flame Wolf because I understand that you are just doing your job as a moderator.  But I am questioning the actual rule itself.  Especially since it is an obscure (until it is made sticky) and nonstandard rule that is probably not found in any other forum.  In reality what is the difference between 4 days and 7 days if the issue is still unresolved?  Why put a statute of limitations on it so to speak?

And as to the Catalyst problem.  Using 3.6 is probably the best for JA, but 3.6 does not run that well in some other games.  I've been living using 3.8 despite the instability rumors and seem to be doing ok.  The comment about OpenGL 1.04 incompatibility was really helpful, and I hope more like it come to help rectify the situation where those of us investing in nice equipment are getting some of the worst performance.

There is that games such as Tron pull of very similar glow effects with no problems, but hey, I bet they sold their souls to ATI.