The people saying this means a strong chip realize that "APU" means a low end CPU that includes a low end GPU right? They are meant for mom & pop "Facebook stations" and all-in-ones where the PC and monitor is one piece of kit. This is a LAPTOP CPU with a GPU strapped to it. It's probably less powerful than a stock clocks i7 920.
Myounage's forum posts
Jealous console plebe?
To be fair SWTOR is an awful game.
GW2 will not flop. Tortanic = people vocally hated the beta / early access. GW2 = everyone loves the beta.GW2 will flop too
Jankarcop
It will still be Master Race. You can't play Gaikai games if someone else is using your internet seriously / your internet is having a bad day. And there is a constant, slightly noticeable input lag on even the best (~30ms) connections. Roomate torrenting in college dorm? Congrats. You just lost all your games for the next 2 hours.oh wow if this takes off how do you think it will effect the PC?
Masterx1220
Overwhelming joy.
I would move on. PC is my primary so it wouldn't phase me much. Plus I have enough scrambling to do with the games I want that are upcoming.
Though speaking in a more global realistic tone, I can't imagine what that would do to the economy, not to mention give Nintendo a Monopoly.
Mozuckint
In all likelihood there would be an Apple machine on market soon enough in that situation.
Planetside 2 is a PC exclusive.
It doesn't need all the colors filtered out and everything blurred to hide poor quality visuals :).
[QUOTE="MK-Professor"]
[QUOTE="XVision84"]
Hermits need to make their own victories, it's the only thing that gets them through their half-assed console ports, crippling DRM practices, Windows Live, and lack of quality exclusives ;).
XVision84
by "half-assed console ports" you mean the superior maltiplats...
and by "lack of quality exclusives" you mean more quality exclusives than any console...
I see, the damage control goes strong here, because it is hard to accept that 3840x2160 is 9 times bigger than 1280x720...
superior multiplats? You mean games like Mass Effect 3 that look like consoles at maximum settings? Or bad ports like Assassin's Creed that have DRM? Heck even From Software said Dark Souls may not be running as well as it should on PC. Face it, games aren't as optimized on PC, and some don't even make it to PC. Where's Marvel vs Capcom, Red Dead Redemption, SSX, Fifa Street, Dragon's Dogma, etc. on your PC? Let's not forget that Diablo III requires you to stay online just to play singleplayer.
The only exclusive I see for PC recently is that Civ V expansion pack and Diablo 3. What about Halo 3? The Last of Us? The Last Guardian? Metal Gear Solid? Gears of War? Forza? How can a platform be the definitive gaming experience if it's missing out on so many fantastic games?
Huh? ME 3 looks much better than the console versions at max. Ditto ME 2. The only one that didn't look noticeably better right away was 1, and even then you could play it in 1080P instead of 720P. Anyway, Dragon's Dogma is deeply flawed, Halo is a bad franchise (shooters? With a pad? lmfao), Fifa doesn't interest me even slightly, I have DIRT 3 for racing (which looks and runs miles better than any console racer), TLOU may as well be called Uncharted With Zombies, RDR does look interesting, and I have no intention of being nickel and dimed by Capcom with on-disc DLC for any of their games. I should ask you: Where are all the strategy games? Civ V, Starcraft II, Sins, Crusader Kings, C&C, the Total War series? What's available on consoles? Civ Rev, Halo Wars, and a few other watered down imitations that look kind of like strategy games if you squint? Where are the best MMOs? Most MMOs are PC only and console gets an extremely limited selection (often a sub-par one). The biggest MMO on console right now is DCUO, which flopped hard on PC because it is a sub-par MMO. So the current "best" console MMO couldn't make it as a PC title. Interesting. And shooters? Don't even get me started. Console shooters are to PC shooters what "alcohol free bottled beverages" are to beer. Ubiquitous, linear, bloody screen soreel, auto-aim, much slower-paced, being skilled at multiplayer is mostly about knowing maps and knowing the best way to exploit the auto-aim, all copying CoD, and all reliant on a controller -- an objectively worse way to control an FPS. This is not an opinion but a fact, as no console FPS team has ever beaten a PC team on record -- not even when the console team uses tournament players. Until that happens a lot of times (to make up for the deficit) controllers are a vastly inferior control scheme, making every multiplat shooter on console automatically worse. Where's fast-paced, skill-reliant games like Tribes:Ascend? Oh wait, they cancelled the console version of Tribes:Ascend because even with heavy auto-aim it was simply unplayable with a controller. Where's hardcore games like DayZ? As for multiplats ... Battlefield 3. I don't even need to explain but I will. Mouse control, far superior visual oomph, higher player counts, the original unaltered maps, and better balance (semi autos and burst guns are UP on console because of controllers being terrible for precise aim -- vehicles are OP on console because of less players thus less competent engineers). Skyrim. Creation kit. Month delay for DLC? Meh. My copy of Skyrim has: 2012-level visuals, vastly superior magic / archery controls, a revamped UI with more functionality, higher stability, dozens of new, high-quality armors and weapons that fit into the game world (no anime / skimpy crap), revamped perk trees and enchantments to close exploits and create new builds, an unarmed perk tree (inside of the 1H tree, unarmed levels 1H and benefits from it), two separate archery trees for different purposes (shortbows and longbows), a vampire tree, vastly improved enemy AI, the ability to build my own riverside home with different themes, the ability to GO TO ELSWEYR, cloaks, and much, much more. And it runs at a higher FPS than the console version to boot with 1/4 or less the loading / waiting times. Honestly at this point Skyrim may as well be a PC exclusive. It is so much better than the vanilla PC version let alone the console version. Crysis. The console version came out years later and had invisible walls (not there on PC), missing buildings you could go into, so much bloom you can almost never see a cloud in the sky, less destructibles, FAR worse visuals, and an entire level of the campaign missing. Crysis 2. Despite being a letdown and clearly limited by having to be a console game too, it was far better on PC. Even when it looked worse than Crysis it still looked better than, outperformed, and played better than either console version of the game. The DX11 and texture patch only widened the gap. Today the game almost resembles what it should've been, and is far better than the console version. The Witcher 2. Came out on 360 a year later with massively downgraded visuals, stuttering, screen tearing, texture pop-in, far longer load times, and loading doors that weren't there on PC in the towns. Even still, it's an amazing game and probably the best looking console title. Metro 2033. Complete difference in atmosphere and quality of controls between console and PC. Lighting and environments on console feel very flat, while it's very emotional and "feelable" on PC. Look up comparisons. HUGE difference. And it's also fairly fast-paced, meaning it can be poorly suited to controller. Every single shooter that isn't a god-awful port. Mouse control + dedicated servers. 2012 Exclusives: Firefall (MMO FPS, Crysis level visuals, fast-paced). Tribes:Ascend (Arena FPS, very fast-paced) Planetside 2 (MMO FPS, Crysis+ level visuals, designed for PC so probably more fast paced than the average console shooter. Possibly 2013) More strategy games than I can remember right now Guild Wars 2 (MMO, action-based third person combat, beta was a lot of fun) Crytek's F2P FPS (not having high hopes but who knows) Dota 2 (funny how console gamers trash talk this genre despite never playing anything remotely like it. Delusional console sheep are delusional -- Dota 2 is great fun) Super MNC (Arena shooter) Probably more that I'll remember later, since I've spent way too much time on this.[QUOTE="themagicbum9720"][QUOTE="savagetwinkie"]Okay. Go make a circle in Photoshop. Don't use AA, single color. Now sit at your normal viewing distance. Can you tell that it isn't actually a circle? Yes? Congratulations there's room for improvement. Displays will be flawed until that day comes. Meanwhile you can export the same uncompressed image to an iPhone 4 / iPad 3 and it will actually BE a circle. Besides, big TVs actually use less of your field of view than a good monitor under typical situations. They use lower quality parts as well, at least the LCDs do. PC monitors are superior to HDTVs in every single way that isn't size, and a 27" on a desk is enormous.On a PC monitor, 1080p is as sharp as you'll ever need. Anything higher is simply not necessary, and besides it's not just about resolution there's also dynamic ratio and other behind-the-scenes technology to keep in mind. I'll take my 1080p 55" TV over a super high res 4k 27" monitor any day. Gaming on a much smaller screen is just not the same IMO.
savagetwinkie
Hmm...this is a nice test, and I see what you're saying, but 4k resolutions aren't even necessary. All that test proves is that at insanely high resolutions, jaggies and other imperfections wouldn't be as noticeable which is obvious, but having a resolution that big on a tiny monitor isn't going to do much for you gaming.
I am directly referring to the size when I talk about TV's, there are many high quality LED 3D TV's that can be bought for very cheap, and gaming on them just feels so much better. I just don't like gaming on a small screen, it doesn't pull me in as much.
TVs have kind of a psychological effect I find. When you sit at a desk (assuming a nice chair) with a monitor the monitor is actually "bigger" in the sense of how an elephant can be bigger than the moon (remember that video? lol). Anyway, the image quality of console games is just BAD bad on 1080P TVs. 1080P is not a multiple of 720P which means the scaling is inherently flawed even with the best available algorithms (and gaming at non-native resolution actually introduces extra input lag, but 120hz displays have lower to begin with). Ironically, 720P games would look better on a 1440P monitor (4:1 pixels exactly) than 1080P (blurred, messy). It's the same situation for 1080P content on 4K displays. When they arrive mainstream I predict the next consoles will be struggling to pull 1080P 30fps (albeit with nicer upscaling than this gen because of "perfect" scaling), while PC gamers run native 2160P and (usually) more than 30 FPS. It's feasible, considering current machines and high end cards can push 3 1080P displays at once.
[QUOTE="Krelian-co"]Good thing 360 has both! But the 360 only has **** that isn't on PC. Gears? It's a shooter on console. Repetitive gameplay. Brown and bloom. Chest high walls everywhere. SO ACTION PACKED SPEHHS MAREENS GRITTY YEAH BLOOD ON THE SCREEN art style. ****. Halo? FPS on console, which is even worse than 3PS. Automatically **** Gameplay has slowed down and become more casual as the series matured. CE is to this day the best.exclusives > some demo everyone is going to get
ps 3 > xbox
Badosh
Log in to comment