The Glorious PC Gaming Master Race

PuckFuppet

Entroducing.
Jan 10, 2009
314
0
0
lacktheknack said:
PuckFuppet said:
lacktheknack said:
PuckFuppet said:
@lacktheknack: I've never understood the argument that "a bit of experimentation" is a bad thing. Chances are its just a matter of reading the readme again or even accessing the wellspring of knowledge and guides on the internet. Consoles of all stripes engaged in exactly that kind of activity at one stage or another, it may just have been me being a little slow but I often had trouble picking up on the nuances of certain game mechanics without reading through the manual that came with said game.
I just learned earlier in this thread that some console players don't want to change to PC because of freaking DRIVERS.

If you can't even treat DRIVERS (SERIOUSLY, DRIVERS) as neutral things, you'll have to watch your wording and context with "a little experimentation", that's for damn sure.
>GFX card has disc/USB marked "DRIVERS/INSTALL GUIDE"
>Access disc/USB
>Auto-run opens splash window with "INSTALL DRIVERS" as option
>Click "INSTALL DRIVERS"
>Success
>Read INSTALL GUIDE
>Discover links to driver update page
>Download/Install as needed

Thing is I remember when I first got my Xbox360, had to play Halo 4, I spent a good four hours trying to figure out why I couldn't find the "skip" option on half of what it wanted me to do. Why do I need an Xbox Arcade Avatar? Why is this required for me to play my game? I have to subscribe to another digital service to play online? I already have an internet connection...?
Pretty much.

If someone has decided that they straight-up don't want to switch, they'll say the silliest, pettiest things to avoid switching.
What I don't understand is why it is such a big deal to enjoy games regardless of the device at hand. I still remember having both an N64 and a PSX, admittedly console generations lasted a little longer then so there was more time to adapt, while equally enjoying the games I had for both.

@80sboy: My current rig celebrated its 1st birthday a few days ago, so far no problems whatsoever!
 

takfar

New member
May 22, 2013
8
0
0
Muspelheim said:
I think takfar on page four deserves a bleedin' medal. Now that is what I want to see! Straight to the point and friendly help!
Thanks! I based that on my own PC-building experience, but you could find some even more in-depth info on sites like maximum PC and tom's hardware, as mentioned by other posters. Here's a couple links:

Maximum PC, $1100 to $3500 builds
http://www.maximumpc.com/article/features/build_pc_recommended_builds_may_2013

Tom's Hardware, $600 to $1600 builds
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/build-a-pc-tahiti-le-crossfire-overclocking,3454.html

Muspelheim said:
Thing is, even if Microsoft certainly has been eager to help, it wasn't the rapidly diminishing perks of console gaming that made me stick to PC. It was all the weird little titles that the console publishers wouldn't have given the time of day to. Like Operation Flashpoint, and its true heir, the ArmA-series. Or the ridiculously complex titles Paradox keep making. Playing PC, to me, means playing a fascinating, rough gem some lone person, somewhere, have been lovingly coding and patching for years. Often available for free, or for a very reasonable price. Not to mention the mods, which even making wading through the refuse to find the ones you like all worth it.
Yes, I couldn't live without Total War games and the games by Paradox, especially the Europa Universalis/Victoria/Crusader Knights series (OK, i could probably *live*, but you get my point). And I spent a couple hundred hours last year on ArmA (especially DayZ) and Guild Wars 2, both of which can't be played on consoles. There's just a lof of games that can only work on PC, and don't get me started on how superior Mouse+keyboard is to double-analog when controlling FPS games.

Muspelheim said:
It's certainly more problematic and fiddly than console gaming, but to me, it's well worth the effort.

Now, a good, or even great, PC might be discouragingly expensive, but if you're willing to settle for the next best, I'd say you can come off fairly cheaply. And remember that even the cheapest PC you could find will still have alot of utility outside gaming.
Yes, it can be more problematic (but not by much if you buy good parts) getting everything running with all games, and it's more expensive when you start, but you get so much more customizable content, fast game updates, free and discounted game content, etc, that it is certainly worth it.

Full disclosure: I'm a PC/Nintendo guy, myself. PC gets most of my gaming time, but I really enjoy the nintendo first-party games, and their consoles always have some great local-multiplayer games that I can just have simple fun with when I manage to get a bunch of friends together.
 

Hyakunin Isshu

New member
May 2, 2011
64
0
0
lacktheknack said:
Hyakunin Isshu said:
lacktheknack said:
Hyakunin Isshu said:
Lord! I don't even know where to start with old Ben Croshaw! For One thing, he keeps boxing in Sony with Microsoft, as if Sony is going to ever block used games. Sony said they won't! Get your facts straight. Sony may or may not do something about used games in the future, but they didn't say anything yet, so stop attacking them, as if they did!

And secondly, he's wrong on every point. From games being more expensive to create, to "we always had backwards compatibility back in my day" He is mostly wrong.

In other words, we really, really, *really* need new consoles, for a fresh new start and for new ideas to be made. Period.

P.S. about that stupid Bertha, what if Bertha got Mass Effect 3 on the Wii U instead? If Bertha wanted to play Mass Effect 1 or 2, then.... well then you would need a PS3/360 to play them all, wouldn't you?
How does one platform change ruin his Assassin's Creed example?

Like... at all?

It's unfortunate that Mass Effect only has 3 on a Nintendo console, but's it's equally as unfortunate that Assassin's Creed DOES have the previous games on the previous console but they can't be played on the new one.

And of those two situations, guess which is easier to fix?

Also, about the new ideas that consoles would allow... so far, I hate all of them. That's a bad sign, don't you think?

1. My point is: Ben Croshaw is trying to make this into a black & white situation. Them vs us. Evil vs good. It's more gray then that. ("Only a Sith deals in absolutes" -Obi-Wan ;) )

2. Nes, Snes, N64, Gamecube and many, many more consoles didn't have backwards compatibility. Heck, My brother sold the Nes before I could ever get to play Megaman 4, 5, or 6. So I got bigger problems then backwards compatibility. Like not able to play my old console at all. And you know what? Some of my old games won't play on the newer windows! Want to play X-COM? Well too bad! because now you have to re-buy them from a site all over again! 'Why should I re-buy? I payed for it once!'

3. When talking about Halo 4, Ben Croshaw seemed to have a problem with it being a '4'.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/columns/extra-punctuation/10063-How-to-Title-Your-Stupid-Sequel
What the Heck?! But whatever his dumn point was, doesn't it go for the other games as well? Like playing Final Fantasy VII, Resident Evil 4, Megaman X4, Megaman 7, MGS4, or Dune 2 for the first time without playing the games before? If you really want to play the other games that came before, then won't you need a way to play the old games? Like getting the old consoles? I can't see why Ben Croshaw is acting like this is a new thing! If you started Assassin's Creed by playing Assassin's Creed IV, then it's your own fault for buying a game that has a *4* in it. Either buy the old consoles, or wait for Assassin's Creed 5.

4. About the 'new ideas', what I meant was now we may see new and old genres coming back. Like RTS, 4X, Simulation and more. There was some great games on this Gen that couldn't have *never* been made for the Last-Gen, like Red Faction: Guerrilla, Dead Rising, XCOM: Enemy Unknown, From Dust, Hydrophobia, Half-Life 2, Portal 2 and many more. Just think of all the crazy new gameplay ideas we can do in the Next-Gen!
1. You kind of utterly failed to get that point across in the first point. In fact, you berated him for being "wrong on every point". If you say he's wrong on every point, and ALSO that he's made it into a two-sided issue... then doesn't that mean that you're ALSO making it a two-sided issue, just from the other side?

2. It's understandable if a console iteration changes absolutely EVERYTHING, so it can't be backward-compatible. (Where do you jam the Mario 64 cartridge in a Gamecube?) However, when the Gamecube gave way to the Wii, even though the controller, hardware, software and much else changed, it still took the same input (tiny disc) and lo and behold, it was backwards compatible. However, the Xbox 360 -> Xbox 1 and PS3 -> PS4 changes only hardware and software. There's no bloody reason they can't have a simple architecture emulator on it to run the old media (I have several emulators OPEN right now, they're common and not excessively hard to make). NONE.

As for X-COM, lrn2DosBox. Seriously. If you buy X-COM from gog.com, all they give you is an exact copy of the original physical copy wrapped up with a DosBox emulator.

Here, it's right here: http://www.dosbox.com/

It requires a bit of experimentation, but that's the one downside to it being free (and if you're of a certain disposition, getting the game working is fun and rewarding in and of itself).

3. It's not a new thing, but it still sucks, especially because there's no bloody reason for it. I understand if I play FFVII, and find out that I have to play the first one on an NES (you don't anymore, by the way, you can get it on your phone). However, imagine if you bought a sequel on a PC that ran Windows 7, and found out that the first game would ONLY run on Windows XP, despite not actually relying on XP-specific features. This would be annoying enough. What makes it worse is that 64 bit Windows 7 -> 32 bit Windows XP emulators exist (I have one), but they won't do an Xbox One -> Xbox 360 emulator.

This leaves the question hanging: WHY NOT?

4. Just to show you how utterly lost you are, Half Life 2 WAS last-gen.

Furthermore, what's so special about games like Portal? Portal used the idea of "set two locations, touch one, teleport to the other". This was based off a pretty crappy student project. Furthermore, there's a flash game based on Portal, which is the technological equivalent of an early PS1. They didn't need the Xbox hardware they used, and they most certainly didn't need the Xbox 360/PS3 hardware they used to add the various gels and extra character they added to Portal 2.

Also, there's nothing inherently excellent about your other examples that are exclusive to this gen. Red Faction's first game, for instance, was released in 2001 on early PS2 hardware. The idea of "alter the landscape" was already in effect. Dead Rising just uses lots of NPCs and creative weaponizing that isn't inherent to the hardware. Every cool weapon combo or use was programmed in individually, which is how it's been done since video game characters began picking up items. And while newer hardware was needed to allow for higher-res models in large groups, it's hardly a new idea.

XCOM: Enemy Unknown is NOT a new idea. You damn well know this, seeing how you were saying that you can't play the first X-COM mere paragraphs ago.

Etc, etc.

You wanna know what kind of cool new ideas the new consoles from Sony and Microsoft CAN achieve? They can do better graphics and AI. That's... more or less all. And the AI isn't even all that useful outside of 4X, RTS and simulation games, which the consoles aren't going to have, because they haven't changed the controller that was stopping those genres in the first place.

Look, I'm all for new consoles that do cool things, but currently, what Xbox One is offering me is a platter of social networking integrated features, a cable box, and a permanent spy camera with none of the good stuff that you seem to think it will manage. There's currently NO reason to buy one any more than I would buy a new cable box with the words "CONTAINS UNCONTROLLABLE CAMERA FOR YOUR CONVENIENCE" plastered on it. Sony doesn't seem to have any cool new things up the chute either.

At least the Wii U is backwards compatible with the Wii and is actually trying a REAL attempt at innovation, but at this point, Yahtzee's pretty damn justified in thinking that PC gaming is an avenue he should try out again.
(sigh) Oy vey!

Look, You haven't changed my mind, even a bit.

What I said wasn't clear enough, but it still stands. Like for one (just one) example, Half-life 2 can in some way run on the "Last-Gen", but *only* on the first xbox. It can NOT run on the Gamecube, and it can NOT run on the PS2. And the graphics was A *lot* less better, and it even had frame-rate problems.

Now I can go over everything else, but I don't want to. Maybe I'll come back after a few days, but I think it's pointless now. Question is, are you still willing to talk then? Because if not,then this will end now, and I have to say good bye.
 

tardcore

New member
Jan 15, 2011
103
0
0
From what I've seen there is no end of e-peen stroking braggadocio on either side of the fence. And games on both platforms are almost completely under the heel of juggernaut companies that could give two shits about quality control, value for money, or their customers actual feelings. Seems a no score draw at the moment. The only reason I currently own a powerful PC is because I do many things outside of gaming with it. If the only thing I was able use a console or a PC for was gaming, I wouldn't waste money on either.
 

Kinitawowi

New member
Nov 21, 2012
575
0
0
80sboy said:
I have, if not for the sake of upgrading itself, I've had to do it when one part goes bad and I have to buy a replacement. I've been building PCs since 2006 and since then I've just about had to replace EVERYTHING to keep the rig upgaded and - most of all - working!

-replaced a case 1x
-replaced a motherboad 1x
-replaced Ram 3x
-replaced processor 1x
-replaced the power sourse 2x
-replaced the hard drive 1x
-replaced graphics card 2x

Only thing - up till now - I haven't replaced that remains from my old 2006 model is the disc player, but that's gone bad too now finally... guess it's time to replace that too. :/
My 2003 build (Athlon 2000, a present to myself from my first proper job) lasted me to 2011 with:

-one new CPU (Athlon 3200, grabbed off eBay near the end of Socket A's lifetime)
-new MOBO and CPU (Athlon 3400-64 - the original incredible A7N8X mobo finally carked it in 2008)
-three new RAM sets in the first six months, then one new set that lasted to the finish (seriously, don't buy no-name RAM; that £185 I spent on 1Gb of Corsair DDR1 was an awesome investment)
-four new graphics cards (Ti 4200 / 6600 / Radeon X1950 / 3650)
-one new PSU (for the 6600)
-two new DVD drives (it had a CD-RW to start with)
-about six new HDDs (I upsized fairly regularly, and ran with a small OS / big data paradigm long before SSDs made it cool)
-one new cooler (the stock one on the 2000 couldn't handle the 3200)
-two new HDD cables and one new floppy cable

By the end, all that was left from the original was the case and the floppy drive. I still can't bring myself to throw it away (it currently functions as an XBox shelf). It'd probably still work fine with not much more than a dustout and a new HDD...

Also: to the people in love with PC's backwards compatability, please tell me how to get Civilisation 2 working on 64-bit Windows 7 - it's wrecked support for most 16-bit apps.

Also also: to the dirty console peasants, sorry, but yes; PCs require work and effort to purchase and maintain effectively. Software installation is a million times easier than it used to be (although most of my Steam stuff still seems to want to install on the wrong drive) but if you're going to buy a system you need to research more than which exclusives, what colour and how big the hard drive. And that's not an unreasonable demand - if you're going to fork out £500 for something then I'd expect you to actually look into what it is you're buying, and make the effort to try and understand some of its terminology. If that's too much like hard work then tough.
 

takfar

New member
May 22, 2013
8
0
0
Kinitawowi said:
By the end, all that was left from the original was the case and the floppy drive. I still can't bring myself to throw it away (it currently functions as an XBox shelf). It'd probably still work fine with not much more than a dustout and a new HDD...
Heh. I live less than 4 kilometers from the beach. The case is one of the first things to go. If I had a case from 2003 still around, it'd probably amount to a little mound of rusty dust by now.
 

lacktheknack

Je suis joined jewels.
Jan 19, 2009
19,316
0
0
Hyakunin Isshu said:
lacktheknack said:
Hyakunin Isshu said:
lacktheknack said:
Hyakunin Isshu said:
Lord! I don't even know where to start with old Ben Croshaw! For One thing, he keeps boxing in Sony with Microsoft, as if Sony is going to ever block used games. Sony said they won't! Get your facts straight. Sony may or may not do something about used games in the future, but they didn't say anything yet, so stop attacking them, as if they did!

And secondly, he's wrong on every point. From games being more expensive to create, to "we always had backwards compatibility back in my day" He is mostly wrong.

In other words, we really, really, *really* need new consoles, for a fresh new start and for new ideas to be made. Period.

P.S. about that stupid Bertha, what if Bertha got Mass Effect 3 on the Wii U instead? If Bertha wanted to play Mass Effect 1 or 2, then.... well then you would need a PS3/360 to play them all, wouldn't you?
How does one platform change ruin his Assassin's Creed example?

Like... at all?

It's unfortunate that Mass Effect only has 3 on a Nintendo console, but's it's equally as unfortunate that Assassin's Creed DOES have the previous games on the previous console but they can't be played on the new one.

And of those two situations, guess which is easier to fix?

Also, about the new ideas that consoles would allow... so far, I hate all of them. That's a bad sign, don't you think?

1. My point is: Ben Croshaw is trying to make this into a black & white situation. Them vs us. Evil vs good. It's more gray then that. ("Only a Sith deals in absolutes" -Obi-Wan ;) )

2. Nes, Snes, N64, Gamecube and many, many more consoles didn't have backwards compatibility. Heck, My brother sold the Nes before I could ever get to play Megaman 4, 5, or 6. So I got bigger problems then backwards compatibility. Like not able to play my old console at all. And you know what? Some of my old games won't play on the newer windows! Want to play X-COM? Well too bad! because now you have to re-buy them from a site all over again! 'Why should I re-buy? I payed for it once!'

3. When talking about Halo 4, Ben Croshaw seemed to have a problem with it being a '4'.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/columns/extra-punctuation/10063-How-to-Title-Your-Stupid-Sequel
What the Heck?! But whatever his dumn point was, doesn't it go for the other games as well? Like playing Final Fantasy VII, Resident Evil 4, Megaman X4, Megaman 7, MGS4, or Dune 2 for the first time without playing the games before? If you really want to play the other games that came before, then won't you need a way to play the old games? Like getting the old consoles? I can't see why Ben Croshaw is acting like this is a new thing! If you started Assassin's Creed by playing Assassin's Creed IV, then it's your own fault for buying a game that has a *4* in it. Either buy the old consoles, or wait for Assassin's Creed 5.

4. About the 'new ideas', what I meant was now we may see new and old genres coming back. Like RTS, 4X, Simulation and more. There was some great games on this Gen that couldn't have *never* been made for the Last-Gen, like Red Faction: Guerrilla, Dead Rising, XCOM: Enemy Unknown, From Dust, Hydrophobia, Half-Life 2, Portal 2 and many more. Just think of all the crazy new gameplay ideas we can do in the Next-Gen!
1. You kind of utterly failed to get that point across in the first point. In fact, you berated him for being "wrong on every point". If you say he's wrong on every point, and ALSO that he's made it into a two-sided issue... then doesn't that mean that you're ALSO making it a two-sided issue, just from the other side?

2. It's understandable if a console iteration changes absolutely EVERYTHING, so it can't be backward-compatible. (Where do you jam the Mario 64 cartridge in a Gamecube?) However, when the Gamecube gave way to the Wii, even though the controller, hardware, software and much else changed, it still took the same input (tiny disc) and lo and behold, it was backwards compatible. However, the Xbox 360 -> Xbox 1 and PS3 -> PS4 changes only hardware and software. There's no bloody reason they can't have a simple architecture emulator on it to run the old media (I have several emulators OPEN right now, they're common and not excessively hard to make). NONE.

As for X-COM, lrn2DosBox. Seriously. If you buy X-COM from gog.com, all they give you is an exact copy of the original physical copy wrapped up with a DosBox emulator.

Here, it's right here: http://www.dosbox.com/

It requires a bit of experimentation, but that's the one downside to it being free (and if you're of a certain disposition, getting the game working is fun and rewarding in and of itself).

3. It's not a new thing, but it still sucks, especially because there's no bloody reason for it. I understand if I play FFVII, and find out that I have to play the first one on an NES (you don't anymore, by the way, you can get it on your phone). However, imagine if you bought a sequel on a PC that ran Windows 7, and found out that the first game would ONLY run on Windows XP, despite not actually relying on XP-specific features. This would be annoying enough. What makes it worse is that 64 bit Windows 7 -> 32 bit Windows XP emulators exist (I have one), but they won't do an Xbox One -> Xbox 360 emulator.

This leaves the question hanging: WHY NOT?

4. Just to show you how utterly lost you are, Half Life 2 WAS last-gen.

Furthermore, what's so special about games like Portal? Portal used the idea of "set two locations, touch one, teleport to the other". This was based off a pretty crappy student project. Furthermore, there's a flash game based on Portal, which is the technological equivalent of an early PS1. They didn't need the Xbox hardware they used, and they most certainly didn't need the Xbox 360/PS3 hardware they used to add the various gels and extra character they added to Portal 2.

Also, there's nothing inherently excellent about your other examples that are exclusive to this gen. Red Faction's first game, for instance, was released in 2001 on early PS2 hardware. The idea of "alter the landscape" was already in effect. Dead Rising just uses lots of NPCs and creative weaponizing that isn't inherent to the hardware. Every cool weapon combo or use was programmed in individually, which is how it's been done since video game characters began picking up items. And while newer hardware was needed to allow for higher-res models in large groups, it's hardly a new idea.

XCOM: Enemy Unknown is NOT a new idea. You damn well know this, seeing how you were saying that you can't play the first X-COM mere paragraphs ago.

Etc, etc.

You wanna know what kind of cool new ideas the new consoles from Sony and Microsoft CAN achieve? They can do better graphics and AI. That's... more or less all. And the AI isn't even all that useful outside of 4X, RTS and simulation games, which the consoles aren't going to have, because they haven't changed the controller that was stopping those genres in the first place.

Look, I'm all for new consoles that do cool things, but currently, what Xbox One is offering me is a platter of social networking integrated features, a cable box, and a permanent spy camera with none of the good stuff that you seem to think it will manage. There's currently NO reason to buy one any more than I would buy a new cable box with the words "CONTAINS UNCONTROLLABLE CAMERA FOR YOUR CONVENIENCE" plastered on it. Sony doesn't seem to have any cool new things up the chute either.

At least the Wii U is backwards compatible with the Wii and is actually trying a REAL attempt at innovation, but at this point, Yahtzee's pretty damn justified in thinking that PC gaming is an avenue he should try out again.
(sigh) Oy vey!

Look, You haven't changed my mind, even a bit.

What I said wasn't clear enough, but it still stands. Like for one (just one) example, Half-life 2 can in some way run on the "Last-Gen", but *only* on the first xbox. It can NOT run on the Gamecube, and it can NOT run on the PS2. And the graphics was A *lot* less better, and it even had frame-rate problems.

Now I can go over everything else, but I don't want to. Maybe I'll come back after a few days, but I think it's pointless now. Question is, are you still willing to talk then? Because if not,then this will end now, and I have to say good bye.
No, I'm willing to talk later.

But before you come back, make sure you're not mixing up "cool new ideas" with "prettier graphics".
 

Kinitawowi

New member
Nov 21, 2012
575
0
0
takfar said:
Heh. I live less than 4 kilometers from the beach. The case is one of the first things to go. If I had a case from 2003 still around, it'd probably amount to a little mound of rusty dust by now.
Yeah, mine just moved around cities (Manchester -> Stoke -> London). I started out less than 400 yards from the beach, but that was well before I built a PC.

But yeah. I've still got the original invoice for that build kicking around somewhere. That case was rubbish from day one - the plastic front drive bay covers never quite lined up with the actual drive bays and the single piece three-side lid was a pain to realign, and so, so retro, but it had a charm and it was my first build and I was still proud of it. (Here's [http://www.aria.co.uk/Products/Components/Cases/Full+Tower/N880+Full+-+Tower+ATX-300W+USB+Case+?productId=806] a picture. I loved full towers at the time...)
 

Stryc9

Elite Member
Nov 12, 2008
1,294
0
41
ResonanceSD said:
Stryc9 said:
ResonanceSD said:
The Creator Speaks! AND I LISTEN!!

Stryc9 said:
I really wonder if Microsoft isn't doing all this shit with the Xbone so that they can have the easy excuse of "We're discontinuing our console gaming department due to poor sales of our last console." or not. It really seems like with all the mixed messages and that half-ass announcement makes it look like their heart really isn't in it anymore and that may be for the best for Microsoft as a whole.

^Why would they launch a console they wanted to fail? They could just..you know, NOT release the console.
How about they're going to try and pass this bullshit and if it sells that's great and if it doesn't they have a ready made excuse to bow out of the market?

Why would anyone blow hundreds of millions of dollars? Companies are adverse to risk taking by definition, this is the most ridiculous conspiracy theory I've seen, ever. The Xb1 is a logical progression in terms of being an entertainment hub that began in the X360 era, nothing more.
There's no conspiracy theory here, I'll make this as plain as I possibly I can. I don't think Microsoft really gives a shit if the Xbone does well or not. Either it does and they make yet another mountain of money, or it doesn't and they say, "Well, that didn't go very well and we're done." They've already proven they're willing to do exactly that, when's the last time Microsoft announced a new Zune?
 

EvilRoy

The face I make when I see unguarded pie.
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
1,675
345
88
Stryc9 said:
ResonanceSD said:
Stryc9 said:
ResonanceSD said:
The Creator Speaks! AND I LISTEN!!

Stryc9 said:
I really wonder if Microsoft isn't doing all this shit with the Xbone so that they can have the easy excuse of "We're discontinuing our console gaming department due to poor sales of our last console." or not. It really seems like with all the mixed messages and that half-ass announcement makes it look like their heart really isn't in it anymore and that may be for the best for Microsoft as a whole.

^Why would they launch a console they wanted to fail? They could just..you know, NOT release the console.
How about they're going to try and pass this bullshit and if it sells that's great and if it doesn't they have a ready made excuse to bow out of the market?

Why would anyone blow hundreds of millions of dollars? Companies are adverse to risk taking by definition, this is the most ridiculous conspiracy theory I've seen, ever. The Xb1 is a logical progression in terms of being an entertainment hub that began in the X360 era, nothing more.
There's no conspiracy theory here, I'll make this as plain as I possibly I can. I don't think Microsoft really gives a shit if the Xbone does well or not. Either it does and they make yet another mountain of money, or it doesn't and they say, "Well, that didn't go very well and we're done." They've already proven they're willing to do exactly that, when's the last time Microsoft announced a new Zune?
Although that makes sense from the perspective of Microsoft as a single entity, it doesn't really work as well in terms of Microsoft as a collection of small entities.

I'm totally with you in that the BOD and majority shareholders would have absolutely no problem cutting off a limb for the sake of the whole, and they may not even be that interested in trying to keep the problem from reaching that point, but that limb is fighting for its life right now. If the console subdivision of Microsoft gets 'restructured' a lot of employment changes are coming. Management jobs are usually the first to go, and the managers know that, so they are likely doing everything they can to make sure their division remains solvent, if for no other reason to avoid having to cash in on a severance package that they should have negotiated harder on.
 

Ph33nix

New member
Jul 13, 2009
1,243
0
0
I had a friend who worked for Microsoft in the Xbox Live dev department. He left because the people there honestly believed that "content push" (see adds) was what the consumer wanted.
 

Bato

New member
Oct 18, 2009
284
0
0
A good gaming computer about 6 years ago that is just under the power of a PS3. Was about as much as a PS3.
Okay you're getting a little less power for the same price that's a bit of a concern. But I use my computer for hundreds of other things that aren't just games. And the games themselves can be gotten cheaper on the computer. Because there's a lot of competition between the Digital Distribution sites.

And also while the PS3 is going to be replaced with the PS4 soon. I'm still using that same computer, and will for a long while. I might drop an extra $200 for a new processor sometime but I don't really need to.

To me, the computer is the cheapest of the lot.
 

Thunderhorse31

New member
Apr 22, 2009
1,818
0
0
*slow clap*

I've felt the same exact way, for just about the same exact time - for years I've played consoles exclusively thanks to their being easier to access, less time-consuming to maintain, cheaper initial investment, etc. Not to mention the fact that people can actually come over and play together with me.

Since the beginning of this year however, seeing the next-gen trends with DRM and always online bullshit and the like, I've finally been sucked into Steam and it's ilk, and I seriously don't see any good reasons to pick up the new gen of consoles (except maybe, MAYBE a PS4). Not with all the barriers they're trying to erect for no good reason.

By the way, best line of the piece:

"Physically active and somehow capable of enjoying motion controls, but simultaneously so bone idle that they want all their entertainment devices integrated into one that they can use without leaving their seat."

Genius.
 

Danceofmasks

New member
Jul 16, 2010
1,512
0
0
Kinitawowi said:
Also: to the people in love with PC's backwards compatability, please tell me how to get Civilisation 2 working on 64-bit Windows 7 - it's wrecked support for most 16-bit apps.
Depends on which version of Civ2 you have.
Only the very first release was 16 bit.

More info here.
http://pcgamingwiki.com/wiki/Civilization_II
 

Rad Party God

Party like it's 2010!
Feb 23, 2010
3,560
0
0
'Been PC gaming since 2004. Happily PC gaming ever since, non stop.

And no, a decent PC gaming isn't as expensive as many people belive, at least if you choose the right components.
 

Aardvaarkman

I am the one who eats ants!
Jul 14, 2011
1,262
0
0
Howling Din said:
Um... Little point out. The term "Master Race" comes from racism, not elitism. Two different things, you know.
Not really. Racism is just a form of elitism.
 

svenjl

New member
Mar 16, 2011
129
0
0
Just the idea of next gen is starting to make me feel sick and soiled. All those poor people who came away from the PS4 and Xbone reveals covered in corporate bullshit. I used to PC game, but couldn't afford to upgrade after finishing uni and having kids etc. So I got a 360 and have never looked back except for the occasional bout of Battlefront II, Modern Warfare, and KOTOR on my wife's new laptop ;-)

My 2008 Xbox has never hit a hurdle, and was still faithfully chugging away last night. Buy a game, open the box, put the disc in the tray, press A and the next 2 hours are glory. I'm going to keep this gen alive by buying a PS3 next year and working through a backlog of Sony exclusives, aside from the great list I still have for the Xbox. This is gaming at it's most simple and effective (my opinion). F**k the internet requirements, Kinnect and anyone who tries to handcuff used games sales.
 

Elate

New member
Nov 21, 2010
584
0
0
neppakyo said:
SonOfVoorhees said:
But as ive said to many people. Consoles are for gamers who enjoy playing games. PC's are for people that want top of the range graphic, high def and 60fps.
I can't play console games anymore. The shitty 30FPS and below are horrible. I see flickering, lines, and it makes me nauseous. I need the FPS to be at least 40 for my eyes and brain.

So games at 60FPS are awesome, and smooth. Plus I dont feel like throwing up
Similar problem, I see the lack of AA on console games. The poor definition makes me strain my eyes to hurting point, monitors are just more crisp. Combine that with unresponsive controllers, horrible FoV, and aforementioned crappy frame rate which makes it feel even MORE unresponsive.. Consoles, for me, are just a test of patience, I can't/don't enjoy playing anything on them.
 

accipitre

New member
Apr 24, 2012
143
0
0
SupahGamuh said:
'Been PC gaming since 2004. Happily PC gaming ever since, non stop.

And no, a decent PC gaming isn't as expensive as many people belive, at least if you choose the right components.
This.

A year and a half ago, I spent $700 on what was then a standard late 2011 built - i5 2500k, p67 chipset (cheap mobo), GTX560ti. I won't feel obligated to upgrade the processor for another three years minimum, I might drag it out to four with the power of overclocking. The GPU is good for another two years easily, and 4 if I'm frugal and don't care about running future games on mid-high settings (I do happen to care, so I'll upgrade probably after the GTX8** series hits). My hard drives are transferable. My power supply and case are transferable. My mobo will need an upgrade if I decide to SLI or upgrade my CPU, neither of which are likely to happen within 3-4 years.

In the meantime, I get the resolution of my choice. I get to decide which peripherals I want - inform me when the Xbone can interface with a 20-year-old keyboard and the gamepad of my choice. I get a vast library of games, and - get this: Consoles brag about their exclusive titles. The Master Race gets entire exclusive fucking genres - MOBA, RTS, and MMORPG spring to mind. I get MULTIPLE FUCKING MONITORS. Have you ever used a dual-monitor computer? Triple-monitor? There's nothing like it. Call me in 7 years when consoles can do that too (my response will be to use 6 monitors for the sake of e-peen).

Plus I get mods. I just spent five hours playing a poorly-translated, buggy, hardcore mod for S.T.A.L.K.E.R: Call of Pripyat. It was fucking awesome. I squeezed about a hundred extra hours out of Skyrim just from mods. I've gotten more gameplay out of Mount&Blade mods than I have from vanilla. I get to play titles like EYE: Divine Cybermancy, and S.T.A.L.K.E.R, and League of Legends, and ARMA... the list goes on.

I can run whatever operating system I want. I can play more PS2 games than the PS3 can. I can run emulators for most platforms out there. If I don't have an emulator and I have the knowhow, I can make my own, ffs! Qemu is a beautiful thing. I can dig out decade-old CDs, install them, and play games I loved when I was a kid. I can trade my disks with my friends, or use Steam and have all the cloud features that the current console gen brags about... and I don't have to pay for service, I get a platform for chatting and forming groups, and I get really awesome sales on a regular basis where I can pick up AAA titles for half off, or more.


Cost? Heh. I've saved enough via Steam Sales alone to make up the difference between buying a console and buying my PC. And if I don't want to, I don't have to upgrade my computer for 4 years, and I'll still be able to play modern titles. 2017, I can play new releases. I could probably hold out even longer if I settled for low settings. How much will you spend when your controller dies or you get the RROD and have to buy a replacement because you got screwed by microshaft's warranty system? How much will you spend on Xbox Live, when I just have to pay my internet bill? Sure, now you can access Facebook and watch Netflix now on your console... but I've been able to do that all along (it's nice to be able to alt-tab out and stay connected).

Yeah, and all this was for a mere $700. And that's because I splurged on the case and power supply, bought a new monitor, and went with an SSD in addition to my 1.5tb storage drive (gotta keep that anime somewhere... speaking of which, don't you plebs still have to transcode your movies to watch them on console?)


Elate said:
neppakyo said:
I can't play console games anymore. The shitty 30FPS and below are horrible. I see flickering, lines, and it makes me nauseous. I need the FPS to be at least 40 for my eyes and brain.

So games at 60FPS are awesome, and smooth. Plus I dont feel like throwing up
Similar problem, I see the lack of AA on console games. The poor definition makes me strain my eyes to hurting point, monitors are just more crisp. Combine that with unresponsive controllers, horrible FoV, and aforementioned crappy frame rate which makes it feel even MORE unresponsive.. Consoles, for me, are just a test of patience, I can't/don't enjoy playing anything on them.
30 FPS is disgusting. And yeah, no AA is a massive boner-killer. Most console games render at pitifully low resolutions and then upscale each frame in the hopes that you're sitting back from the TV and won't notice. That's why it looks disgusting if you hook a console up to a 1080p monitor and play with your face as close to it as it would be with a PC.