ryangcnx-2's forum posts

#1 Posted by ryangcnx-2 (1242 posts) -

4k right now is pointless. No games will be running in 4k this gen and I highly doubt next gen as well. As of now just to run games at 4k on PC you need SLI or Crossfire for a decent FPS. Now of course you can lower details and such, but then whats the point, 1080p and a higher fidelity of graphics is the better choice. For example DA:I at 4k on a GTX 980 runs around 20 fps. In SLI it bumps up to 32. Unless the PS5 and Xtwo have some of the beefist gpu's of the time when they are released, your not gonna be seeing 4k on them either. And devs are gonna improve the graphics as time progresses, which means 1080p will be able to push way better graphics than trying to force 4k. Sure, the next consoles will probably be able to play this gens games at 4k, but not the current ones at the time and make progression with graphics.

#2 Posted by ryangcnx-2 (1242 posts) -

@Old_Gooseberry said:

"I have only played like...2 or 3 new games in the last 5 or 6 years. Video games SUCK now."

I agree with some of what you said OP... but i think you need to branch out more and play more games. only 2-3 games in 6 years is like .01% of whats out there. And if you were only playing Call of duty type games, that there is your problem, these are scripted, linear, god awful games with a stupid storyline and A to B gameplay, and a gaming community filled with the scum of the earth and should be avoided.

I've played games pretty consistantly since the late 80s with pc and console games, and games are overall a lot better. But there are some gaps, i haven't played every game ever made, nobody has...

But i haven't played many games that i would consider instant classics as much now as i did maybe before.

So play more games, saying games suck after only playing 3 in the last 6 years proves you're not really into gaming anymore.

Theres so many games the majority like, but i don't... then theres some games not many like but I do like... so you have to take a few risks and try out some that you are interested in despite what their reviews get or what the majority say is good.

That was a bit of an exaggeration, it's more like 10 to 12 games, but still, yeah, not enough. And actually, half of the games I have played have been indie games. The BS that has happened in the game industry has put a bad taste in my mouth. But most games don't really hold my interest anymore. I like huge games, with deep story lines, and interesting characters. Mass Effect is a game like that, but there was something about the gameplay I didn't like, maybe it was the fact that it was a cover shooter, or the hud system was a bit over done.

Go play Dragon Age Inquisition

#3 Posted by ryangcnx-2 (1242 posts) -

@Old_Gooseberry: you end up hurting Bioware more than you hurt ea with those childish tactics. If you don't like origin get it on console.

I honestly don't undersrand this hate with origin, it's done nothing to wreck my PC, I never had trouble running games from it and they give me free games. Plus you actually get a return policy, something steam doesn't do very often.

So go ahead, whine and cry about a stupid hate you have for a client and hurt the devs that make excellent games.

#4 Posted by ryangcnx-2 (1242 posts) -

@elheber:

If your main complaint is that they don't show up all in one place...

Open up steam, go to games in the menu bar, and then click "add a non-steam game to my library". They will now show up in your steam library and you can even click play and launch it from steam. You still need origin but you won't have to open it once you do this.

Now you have no excuses to NOT purchase one of the best games released this year. Bioware created this game, not EA, EA just fronted the check for development.

#5 Posted by ryangcnx-2 (1242 posts) -

@intotheminx: I would rather run a game at 720 and 900p at high settings than 1080p at low. All APU's in computers are significantly weaker than the APU used in the PS4 to boot.

#6 Posted by ryangcnx-2 (1242 posts) -

No doubt it is a TN panel. Call me crazy, but that is surprisingly cheap for a 5K monitor. it would likely be twice as expensive if it were an IPS, or PLS panel.

Dell is one of the leading manufactures of LCD monitors. I highly doubt this would use a TN panel. My Dell 27" U2713HM is a IPS panel and cost me 500 bucks on sale, but retails normally for about 300 bucks higher. If this features many if Dells high end features it's more than likely a IPS panel. Dell is one of the premium companies for monitors, I highly doubt they would advertise this as a premium monitor and have it be a TN panel. They typically focus more on graphic designers than than they do everyday people for the premium stuff.

#7 Posted by ryangcnx-2 (1242 posts) -

Holy crap... that almost costs almost as much as an OLED HDTV at 50". I think I'm good with my Dell Ultrasharp 27" IPS 1440 monitor I have right now. Let alone my GTX 680 already gets a sweat from running in that resolution.

#8 Posted by ryangcnx-2 (1242 posts) -

@pacific90: Honestly if your looking for good games, Dragon Age Origins, Witcher 1 and the Witcher 2 are the only ones that come to mind.

#9 Posted by ryangcnx-2 (1242 posts) -

@cswan19 said:

I am looking to get a PC to play the Sims 4 and was wondering if you guys could tell me if either of these PC's will run the Sims 4 smoothly.

Here are the system requirements for the sims 4:

Recommended Specs

REQUIRED: Internet connection required for product activation.

OS: 64 Bit Windows 7,8, or 8.1

PROCESSOR: Intel core i5 or faster

AMD Athlon X4

MEMORY: 4GB RAM

HARD DRIVE: At least 9 GB of free space with at least 1 GB additional space for custom content and saved games

DVD-ROM: DVD ROM drive required for installation only

VIDEO CARD: NVIDIA GTX 650 or better

SOUND CARD: DirectX 9.0c Compatible

DIRECTX: DirectX 9.0c compatible

INPUT: Keyboard and Mouse

And here are the two computers I am looking at:

1. Toshiba -

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/toshiba-satellite-15-6-laptop-intel-celeron-4gb-memory-500gb-hard-drive-jet-black/7351008.p?id=1219265947912&skuId=7351008&st=pcmcat138500050001_categoryid$abcat0502000&cp=1&lp=1

2. Asus -

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/asus-15-6-laptop-intel-celeron-4gb-memory-500gb-hard-drive-black/7288011.p?id=1219262036899&skuId=7288011&st=pcmcat138500050001_categoryid$abcat0502000&cp=1&lp=2

If you have any other computer recommendations please feel free to post them. But I must say my spending limit is $250 as I will really only use it for the Sims and possibly other lower grade games.

Thanks for your help :)

DO NOT BUY ANYTHING WITH A CELERON CPU!!!

Seriously, if your gaming do not go with a celeron. I would even have a hard time recommending a i3 CPU but would before that. the celeron is their lowest end CPU. For 250 I would have to say buy a PS3 or 360. 250 bucks will not get you anything good. I would even say if your over 18 apply for a Best Buy Credit card, Amazon Credit Card, New Egg credit card, Dell store card or any other who offer it if you could make monthly payments to pay it off in time. Also, unless your really need a laptop go desktop. Personally I have a desktop and a alienware m17x r3 laptop. I got the laptop when I was in college and needed a beefy portable computer I could take class to class for 3D Design, it benefited my need and it has been a fantastic laptop, but I would recommend a desktop to the everyday user unless like me you also need a powerful portable computer. But keep in mind all gaming laptops are gonna cost more than 1k for a good one. I had to put my m17x r3 on 12 month interest free to afford it, but in the end was worth it.

I hate it when people by the laptops/desktops with celeron cpu's and then complain it's slow. They think just because it's new it should run fast even though they cheaped out big time. If your gaming budget cant go past 250, again I just urge you to get a PS3 and forget the Sims 4. A PS3 will give you alot more games and way better performance.

#10 Posted by ryangcnx-2 (1242 posts) -

Honestly I need a gpu with lots of VRAM. As I use my rig more for 3d modeling in 3ds max. My 680 does a decent job but it's 2gb of vram is holding it back. I will be disappointed if the 980 doesn't beat a 780 ti though. Even if they release a 8gb 980, if it still lags behind a 780 ti in performance then I will just continue on waiting or just grab a GTX 780 6gb model if its decently cheaper.

We won't know until the full story comes out, but I'm hoping a new architecture means a significant performance boost that easily beats a 780 Ti. I want the next 8800 GTX honestly. And I'm stuck buying Nvidia for Cuda since Autodesk supports Nvidia more than they do AMD. But also for games Nvidia has always done better with support though so I'm always willing to pay the nvidia tax over AMD, but I want a large jump, not a tiny one.