I'mma buy a gaming PC because of this game. Unfinalized specs in sig. How 'bout you?
This topic is locked from further discussion.
360 for some reasons.
1.Too skint to affford a new rig, tattoo and car come first right now.
2.Most of my friends apart from 2 are getting it on PC and theres 8 of us buying on 360 so might aswell squad up with them partially related to 1.
3.64 player cap doesnt bother me too much, as long as i get jets :P
Um consoles only get 24 players?360 for some reasons.
1.Too skint to affford a new rig, tattoo and car come first right now.
2.Most of my friends apart from 2 are getting it on PC and theres 8 of us buying on 360 so might aswell squad up with them partially related to 1.
3.64 player cap doesnt bother me too much, as long as i get jets :P
razgriz_101
[QUOTE="razgriz_101"]Um consoles only get 24 players?360 for some reasons.
1.Too skint to affford a new rig, tattoo and car come first right now.
2.Most of my friends apart from 2 are getting it on PC and theres 8 of us buying on 360 so might aswell squad up with them partially related to 1.
3.64 player cap doesnt bother me too much, as long as i get jets :P
ocstew
re-read, the key word is dosent cause im pretty happy with 24 *shrugs*
I'm not really interested in it, I'd rather just stick to MW3 if I even buy one. I might give it a rent down the road if the trophies aren't too hard.
PS3, even if it is better on xbox. I say this not as a fanboy, but because my xbox came back from the dead and I really have no idea how long it is going to last.
PC, I know people get mad with their "oh I don't have a proper pc{I clearly just post on a toaster}, or my 'friends' all play on {insert console}'" But, console version is doing it wrong. :)
--Edit, since people keep reading 1/2 a page, then quoting this--
I just mean the console version is noticeably inferior, regardless of your friends/pc, it should be conisdered that you're paying more for less. Unlike most multiplats, where they're basically the same game, this one is not so much.
PC, I know people get mad with their "oh I don't have a proper pc{I clearly just post on a toaster}, or my 'friends' all play on {insert console}'" But, console version is doing it wrong. :)Inconsistancy
I disagree. Having performance issues in the middle of gameplay is very annoying. I'm not talking frame drops either. I bet this game has been somewhat consolized, anyways.
[QUOTE="Inconsistancy"]PC, I know people get mad with their "oh I don't have a proper pc{I clearly just post on a toaster}, or my 'friends' all play on {insert console}'" But, console version is doing it wrong. :)Heirren
I disagree. Having performance issues in the middle of gameplay is very annoying. I'm not talking frame drops either.
Please explain? I very interested in what it is you have to say.:roll:
[QUOTE="Inconsistancy"]PC, I know people get mad with their "oh I don't have a proper pc{I clearly just post on a toaster}, or my 'friends' all play on {insert console}'" But, console version is doing it wrong. :)Heirren
I disagree. Having performance issues in the middle of gameplay is very annoying. I'm not talking frame drops either. I bet this game has been somewhat consolized, anyways.
64 players vs 24, yea... in an mp game, I think the consoles are doing it wrong, it's hardly the same game.And what do you mean by "Having performance issues in the middle of gameplay is very annoying. I'm not talking frame drops either." What besides FPS is a performance issue?
It's not like pc's can't solve performance issues by lowering settings, consoles are stuck at one, and can get bad performance in areas that you can't mend.
[QUOTE="Heirren"][QUOTE="Inconsistancy"]PC, I know people get mad with their "oh I don't have a proper pc{I clearly just post on a toaster}, or my 'friends' all play on {insert console}'" But, console version is doing it wrong. :)Inconsistancy
I disagree. Having performance issues in the middle of gameplay is very annoying. I'm not talking frame drops either. I bet this game has been somewhat consolized, anyways.
64 players vs 24, yea... in an mp game, I think the consoles are doing it wrong, it's hardly the same game. And what do you mean by "Having performance issues in the middle of gameplay is very annoying. I'm not talking frame drops either." What besides FPS is a performance issue? I think he's talking about the ever prevalent BLUE SCREEN OF DEATH! :o They happen like ALL the time. Heck just the oth-- *BSOD*I think he's talking about the ever prevalent BLUE SCREEN OF DEATH! :o They happen like ALL the time. Heck just the oth-- *BSOD*MrSelf-Destruct'Scuse me It's Blue Screen of Paradise, calling it anything else will offend Windows Me, it was just there for when the computer decided, 2 hours of uptime was a bit much, and it needed a break. Man, get off Me's case.
Windows Me, the greatest OS ever created. FACT, no other OS ever simulated an organic lifeform's necessity to sleep as well as it.
[QUOTE="Heirren"]
[QUOTE="Inconsistancy"]PC, I know people get mad with their "oh I don't have a proper pc{I clearly just post on a toaster}, or my 'friends' all play on {insert console}'" But, console version is doing it wrong. :)C_Rule
I disagree. Having performance issues in the middle of gameplay is very annoying. I'm not talking frame drops either.
Please explain? I very interested in what it is you have to say.:roll:
He used the phrase, "Oh I don't have a proper pc." In my , I have an i5 4gig laptop with a geforce gt425 1gb. In all fairness, my experience would probably be better suited towards consoles. I play Arma2 on medium/some high, and there are times where my system will just stop and think for a moment. I'm going to expand the memory to 8 gigs for work purposes, and to be frank I like to keep my pc as game free as possible.
Well, you don't have a proper pc. :| I wouldn't say ARMA is anything of an optimized masterpiece though... And the console version is doing it wrong, I didn't say 'you're doing it wrong' it's the version that's wrong.He used the phrase, "Oh I don't have a proper pc." In my , I have an i5 4gig laptop with a geforce gt425 1gb. In all fairness, my experience would probably be better suited towards consoles. I play Arma2 on medium/some high, and there are times where my system will just stop and think for a moment. I'm going to expand the memory to 8 gigs for work purposes, and to be frank I like to keep my pc as game free as possible.
Heirren
It's not like pc's can't solve performance issues by lowering settings, consoles are stuck at one, and can get bad performance in areas that you can't mend.
Inconsistancy
That really depends on how well the game optimization is, guess we will find out today in Jimmy Fallon console showcase.
Well, you don't have a proper pc. :| I wouldn't say ARMA is anything of an optimized masterpiece though... And the console version is doing it wrong, I didn't say 'you're doing it wrong' it's the version that's wrong.[QUOTE="Heirren"]
He used the phrase, "Oh I don't have a proper pc." In my , I have an i5 4gig laptop with a geforce gt425 1gb. In all fairness, my experience would probably be better suited towards consoles. I play Arma2 on medium/some high, and there are times where my system will just stop and think for a moment. I'm going to expand the memory to 8 gigs for work purposes, and to be frank I like to keep my pc as game free as possible.
Inconsistancy
Exactly. What is your point? Are you saying the game can't be enjoyed on consoles? The campaign will be the same. The multiplayer levels will be the same. If I could properly run the game I'd likely get it for pc.
Well, you don't have a proper pc. :| I wouldn't say ARMA is anything of an optimized masterpiece though... And the console version is doing it wrong, I didn't say 'you're doing it wrong' it's the version that's wrong.[QUOTE="Inconsistancy"]
[QUOTE="Heirren"]
He used the phrase, "Oh I don't have a proper pc." In my , I have an i5 4gig laptop with a geforce gt425 1gb. In all fairness, my experience would probably be better suited towards consoles. I play Arma2 on medium/some high, and there are times where my system will just stop and think for a moment. I'm going to expand the memory to 8 gigs for work purposes, and to be frank I like to keep my pc as game free as possible.
Heirren
Exactly. What is your point? Are you saying the game can't be enjoyed on consoles? The campaign will be the same. The multiplayer levels will be the same. If I could properly run the game I'd likely get it for pc.
Did you read that first sentence, bold it and just jump to a random conclusion? The version is wrong, it'll be less fun, you can still have all the fun you want, it's just the blatantly inferior version.[QUOTE="Heirren"][QUOTE="Inconsistancy"] Well, you don't have a proper pc. :| I wouldn't say ARMA is anything of an optimized masterpiece though... And the console version is doing it wrong, I didn't say 'you're doing it wrong' it's the version that's wrong.
Inconsistancy
Exactly. What is your point? Are you saying the game can't be enjoyed on consoles? The campaign will be the same. The multiplayer levels will be the same. If I could properly run the game I'd likely get it for pc.
Did you read that first sentence, bold it and just jump to a random conclusion? The version is wrong, it'll be less fun, you can still have all the fun you want, it's just the blatantly inferior version.Did you read what my original response was to?:?
What, the performance issues? That's 'cause you don't have a good pc, I already addressed that. (a gt425m isn't a good card) And ARMA isn't all that impressively optimized(from what i remember) , so it just hitching at random doesn't isn't the best example of poor performance.Did you read what my original response was to?:?
Heirren
What, the performance issues? That's 'cause you don't have a good pc, I already addressed that. (a gt425m isn't a good card) And ARMA isn't all that impressively optimized(from what i remember) , so it just hitching at random doesn't isn't the best example of poor performance.[QUOTE="Heirren"]
Did you read what my original response was to?:?
Inconsistancy
He was stating that not having a proper pc was not an excuse
What, the performance issues? That's 'cause you don't have a good pc, I already addressed that. (a gt425m isn't a good card) And ARMA isn't all that impressively optimized(from what i remember) , so it just hitching at random doesn't isn't the best example of poor performance.[QUOTE="Inconsistancy"]
[QUOTE="Heirren"]
Did you read what my original response was to?:?
Heirren
He was stating that not having a proper pc was not an excuse
And he's right, it isn't an excuse. If you don't have a gaming PC, get one.[QUOTE="Heirren"]
[QUOTE="Inconsistancy"] What, the performance issues? That's 'cause you don't have a good pc, I already addressed that. (a gt425m isn't a good card) And ARMA isn't all that impressively optimized(from what i remember) , so it just hitching at random doesn't isn't the best example of poor performance.
C_Rule
He was stating that not having a proper pc was not an excuse
And he's right, it isn't an excuse. If you don't have a gaming PC, get one.Not worth it for me, sorry.
PC... No contest whatsoever.
64 player multiplayer
1080p glory at possible 60 fps(PC pending)
Do the math, the PC version is 2.6 times better than the console versions. :P
Good friend getting it on the 360. I choose console over PC gaming any time. Also don't want to spend another few 100's or a 1000$ to update my pc for a single game. A game that by the way won't look way greater on PC. LustForSoulYou are disturbingly misinformed if you are saying that BF3 won't look better on PC compared to consoles. o.O BF3 actually has potential to aim for graphics king. When a PC gamer says that a game has potential for graphics king, I can guarantee you that its looks are pretty solid. Finally, 64 players games disagree.
Good friend getting it on the 360. I choose console over PC gaming any time. Also don't want to spend another few 100's or a 1000$ to update my pc for a single game. A game that by the way won't look way greater on PC. LustForSoulYeah, it'll only play different. :roll: 64 players > 24 players
[QUOTE="LustForSoul"]Good friend getting it on the 360. I choose console over PC gaming any time. Also don't want to spend another few 100's or a 1000$ to update my pc for a single game. A game that by the way won't look way greater on PC. DragonfireXZ95Yeah, it'll only play different. :roll: 64 players > 24 players Make that 32 players. :P And I was talking graphics. PC gamers act as if it's a difference of day and light. We'll see about that. :o Bring the heat PC gamers.
[QUOTE="DragonfireXZ95"][QUOTE="LustForSoul"]Good friend getting it on the 360. I choose console over PC gaming any time. Also don't want to spend another few 100's or a 1000$ to update my pc for a single game. A game that by the way won't look way greater on PC. LustForSoulYeah, it'll only play different. :roll: 64 players > 24 players Make that 32 players. :P And I was talking graphics. PC gamers act as if it's a difference of day and light. We'll see about that. :o Bring the heat PC gamers. Fairly certain BF3 is only 24 players on consoles... Got a link to prove otherwise?
PC of course. As someone else said above: If you're doing it on consoles, you're doing it wrong.
Also, have to laugh at the supposed "performance issues" with the game on PC. The game hasn't even come out yet and console fanboys are already bringing up this tired, outdated argument.
I'll tell yout his much *BSOD*
Eh, As I was saying modern PC's are rock soli *BSOD*
Ok, I'm now writing this on my xbox 360, as I was saying PC's are the be- *RROD*
::sigh:: ok, I'm on my PS3 now, and as Iw as sayi- THIS IS YURI, HACKER FROM WINTERY RUSSIA. I NOW HAVE YOUR CREDIT CARD INFORMATION. PAY ME.
Oh cr@p.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment