For God's sake MAKE A CHOICE....

A 560ti with a decent CPu of the time can still play modern games at 720p 1080p-ultra settings, a low range card released in 2010. So stop trolling.

I like my pc gaming accessible and welcoming.

Stop spreading false information about PC gaming... lol..are people just pretending to be dumb? ..upgrading a new video card every 6 months? or even 1 year?....its fine if that's your thing (benching/overclocking)..but to say you *have* to upgrade to every new video card that comes out to play games is beyond false & plain idiotic. :P

Such ignorant thread, taking everything to their extreme is just moronic

You can buy a gaming pc for around $1000 that will last 4-5 years, granted the games in 4 years won't run in super ultra maxed out everything but they will run on high and will be still far superior to console counterparts, then you can upgrade again. No need to go upgrading every 6 months to get the best of pc, i upgrade every 3 years and i almost always play at ultra.

This is correct. I'm happy with my GTX 780 and I shouldn't need to upgrade until at least 2 more years from now.

Wish I knew how to make such fucking stupid threads. Would be fun..

Instead of saying need you should say want too. AS that 780 will still play games at 1080p just fine for the next 5-6 if not more years. Hell a GTX 8800 can still play games like the latest tomb raider on pc no problem at higher resolutions then a ps3. When people say need it only confuses the people like the TC further.

Seriously, are you bored?

My PC has 2 GTX 970s and I find the performance to be pretty good.

It easily performs 6-8 times better than the PS4 so very few games will even stress my PC.

The only game I have tried that hits my PC hard is the new Total War game but I maxed it out completely with 4xMSAA and 1440p res and still keep above 30fps with 10s of thousands of NPCs on the screen.

That game is a PC exclusive and wouldn't run well on consoles to begin with but most games are tailored to the limits of consoles so I don't really have to worry about bad performance.

I can max out new games like Dying Light at 4k resolution and still run the game just fine.

I just got done playing Ryse at 1440p and a constant 60fps.

While it's not a great game It was short and it was nice to look at.

^ Ryse on my 1440p monitor was great. My 770 could do do 40fps. Not that great a game but damn is it one hell of a looker on pc.

You didnt get my point

You people choose

Either we WANT to have demanding games and the mandatory upgrades ever 6 months

OR we want to have modest hardware and no need to upgrade.

I'd already have a choice. PS4 baby

Isn't it when new engines really start being used that upgrades should occur? That disparity between consoles and pc is about to happen with things like the new Unreal Engine.

thread over.

Seems you're missing some of the main points about PC gaming. Choice, flexibility, customisation. A new GPU every 6 months is certainly unnecessary for 1080p gaming in any circumstance though.

@MBirdy88 said:

thread over.

This exactly.

Seems y'all missing the point of the thread.

Consolites will always tell you that you need a $2000 rig to game and then upgrade it every year or so.

Then, in the same breath, they'll tell you that there're no games that utilize your SLI Titans.

I say pick one, bastids.

It might be hard to upgrade every six months now a days anyway as PC tech is releasing a bit slower than it used to.

I like building a custom PC and labeling it out of date before I'm even done. This way I know for sure there won't be any surprises.

but with the crap hardware consoles have that is already oudated by pc standards is not really going to have that much of an impact.

wouldn't it be confusing to have your xbone and pc named the same?

I have pills and therapy for any other confusion. One pill is so I stop randomly punching myself in the balls in public. :-{

why would they want you to stop punching your balls in public? it is both hilarious and you are doing something positive for humanity.

Well, you are right and wrong. I'm no developer so I don't know how much being a console actual benefits the innards(and no i'm not suggesting they are magically superior). What I am saying is that at some point it is possible that last gen game design will finally be elaborated upon. What this could mean is more complex game design overall. In turn, pushing even the dated console visuals would still require more power on the pc to pull off all the fancy effects and at higher resolutions. Personally I've been going back and fourth on whether or not to build up a machine. If I were to do it I am going to wait until it is clear which engines are going to be used most and then build around that.

Who seriously upgrades their GPU every 6 months?

I just ordered a New Graphics Card and my current PC is going on it's 3rd Year and playing games like Metal Gear Solid V and Dragon Ball XV like a boss.

awwww yeahhhhhh

@superbuuman: that's all fine and good, but it gets annoying the hypocrisy as some of the same people will show in threads that have nothing to do with pc (console game resolution threads) and circle jerk about dual 4k monitors... acting like most pc gamers have that. Which is completely wrong. That is an extreme niche.

I think you are over analyzing things, i am pretty positive if you buy a decent rig right now it can handle anything you throw at it for the next years, regardless what new technology comes out. I had a 9800gt around the time ps3 and x360 came out and it still ran games like a champ.

There is both ....it's called choices and it's what the pc does best.

Try it sometime.

Seems True Gamer Truly knows **** all about Hardware Games or Gaming.

We have threads that cry why there isnt a game that pushes 4 Titan Xs in Quad SLI.

Link? I'd love to see that.

pc gaming is overhyped see my thread.

Your 770 could not play Ryse at 40fps max settings at 1440p.

The 770 gets around 45fps at 1080p max settings.

At 1440 you would be getting around 25fps.

that upgrade every six months myth is BS,unless you are like me and can't settle for anything less than 4k@60fps@ultra settings.

@Motokid6: not really we pay 400 and get the best out of it you pay titan and games look like console games or not 8 billion 12gb ram impressive!

why would I upgrade my GPU every 6 months?

My GTX 670 is still doing fine

Lies,you can't play at 4k 120fps with it.

Just crank up the DSR :P

PC games should be able to scale well with different hardware, although most devs will target consoles for multiplats so Xbone/PS4 will always be the target. PC can get easy things like higher res textures and added AA and resolution, but expecting larger worlds, more detailed levels, better AI etc. is just not going to happen.

"best" 900p and 30 fps with low-medium settings.

Peasants and their low standards xD

I'm pretty sure the point of this thread is "would you rather games that push the latest hardware to its limits, or games that don't require the latest and greatest to be played?"

I have to say, it's a fair question. I've seen people bitch about the price of a high-end pc and the cost of always playing at max settings, but at the same time I've seen people bitch about console gaming holding pc gaming back because of the weak hardware, when high-end gaming pcs are capable of so much more. So yeah, the TC isn't spreading any misinformation, or saying that everybody needs a gpu upgrade every six months...

@ianhh6: why not have both

I don't wanna. You're not my Dad.

The problem with your "point"is that there isn't new hardware every 6 months.....

You bring up a good point. I've said it for years, PC gamers hold back PC gaming more than the consoles do. Every time a game's minimum specs are revealed to be slightly higher than expected from the norms people flip out. Then people turn around and say PCs do not take advantage of their hardware enough.

The thing is games can't be programmed to be as flexible graphically as people believe. You can't just have a massive range of graphic settings to be able to run the game on a massive amount of hardware. Graphics already influence the level design and art by quite a bit. but there comes a point where graphics actually do influence the gameplay.

What if your game features limb regeneration? Blow of a limb and watch it slowly regrow. It takes a lot of graphical features to sell that gameplay well. What if you're making a stealth game that puts heavy emphasis on multiple layers of dynamic shadows? Can't just have people turning off shadows to improve their FPS on older machines.

Furthermore a lot of developers have a vision for their final product and do not want some extremely ugly version of it to be available to people just so it could run on older software. A lot of devs would rather people just upgrade their hardware than include an 1998 graphics mode for tablets just to increase their potential market.

To top it all off it's even more difficult for the devs to build top-of-the-line games. New tech like DX12 and Vulkan gives engines a lot more flexibility, but even DX11 in its current state is barely used by devs. Properly utilizing modern tech requires the rewrite of a lot of legacy code. Games devs don't have infinite budgets and timelines. In order to stay profitable and keep the company running, most devs need to put out new content. This means they cannot sit and wait for a year while the engine gets rewritten to fully take advantage of DX11 features. So not only do they have to worry about adaptation rates for the new tech, they also need to worry about how long it would take to properly implement the new tech. Entire game engine's need huge overhauls to really take advantage of what the new tech offers.

There is a reason why DX9 lasted for so long, and it's not because of the consoles.

I much rather have 900p and 30fps for a much more cinematic experience. :P

You can't have both for a huge number of reasons. It's not as simple as just having a huge range of graphic options. You need to worry about the underlining tech of a game, the adaptation of that tech, the gameplay implications of turning off graphical features, keeping your game looking presentable if certain features are omitted, giving artists new tech to replace old techniques, and hundreds of other variables.

Imagine if a game used tessellations for all of their LoDing and details. This means traditional LoDing is completely gone and traditional models are gone too. This means your game physically does not have 3D models that are super high resolution. They have very base models that get tessellations applied to them. This is easier on the artist as now they only have to make 1 LoD model and the engine takes care of the scaling. However now your game absolutely requires a DX11 or better card with a tessellation unit that can actually perform well. This limits your user base but uses new tech. You're not going to have the time to have your artists also build and polish multiple LoD models the traditional way so you absolutely cannot allow the user to turn off tessellations.

So now we've got graphics mixed in with a part of the development process. You're getting way better models but at a major sacrifice of flexible hardware requirements.

This is actually the reason why tessellations have been so grossly underused. Developers are unwilling to fully apply the tech and would rather rely on older methods for 3d models. This holds back tech.

@Wasdie: though if I remember correctly, the last few times people have "flipped out" about min specs its because the specs appear to be bullshit

@Wasdie: I didn't mean both in one game.