A few truths about PC gaming.

  • 160 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for True_Gamer_
True_Gamer_

6750

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#151 True_Gamer_
Member since 2006 • 6750 Posts

[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"][QUOTE="Bgrngod"][QUOTE="Vandalvideo"]Thats funny. My acceptable standard is 800X600 at 30 FPS. I guess it is subjective and changes from person to person. As far as upgrading every 2 years? WRONG! You can scale down any game to work on any 3D accelerator card within reason to the point where you do not have to upgrade over the span of ageneration. If you purchase a rig that outperforms consoles in 2006, you can scale down any and all games to that level where the average still look better, and perform well on that same rig over the span of a generation. I repeat, YOU DO NOT HAVE TO UPGRADE.Bgrngod
"within reason"? That 4800 vid card and 2.23ghz CPU were outperforming the PS2 and Xbox when I bought it, and I HAD to upgrade it to play Doom III. Explain that to me. Explain to me how I could have run Doom III at even 800x600 on that rig. Not possible. I repeat, I HAD TO UPGRADE. And that was just to keep up with a game that came out a few years later. This doesn't even take into account F.E.A.R. and BF2 (garbage game btw). That rig would be 5 years old in a few months if I still had it. There is no chance in hell it would handle most of the games I have bought in the last 3.

Its simple, you could have used tweak software and CVARs to scale down the game to a point where it could run on that hardware. It may not have looekd like the secks, but it would look like every other game that ran on the hardware at the time, and for all intents and purposes is the same quality, if not higher than the console. I ran Stalker on a TI4,1.4ghz proc, and 512mb ram the other day. 800X600 30FPS just fine. I didn't really look like Stalker though. Looked more like.............hmm........OpenArena.

No it isn't simple. I don't know, and certainly didn't know how to use that software. And I have no interest in scaling down a game so that it looks 4 years old. Graphics aren't everything for games, but they sure as hell are important to me. I want to experience the game the way the developers intended.

 

Do you know the way that the PUBLISHERS (im sick of that cr@p about the holy poor developers, they are nothing more than emploees of a publisher, its like loving the guy that fits the windows at the BMW factory) intended?

Let me guess: Isnt it the how MOST peoples' computers run? Medium-Low? So THE MOST money is made? So you have to play on medium-low if you want to play it the way that the publishers inetned.

Avatar image for AdrianWerner
AdrianWerner

28441

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#152 AdrianWerner
Member since 2003 • 28441 Posts
No it isn't simple. I don't know, and certainly didn't know how to use that software. And I have no interest in scaling down a game so that it looks 4 years old. Graphics aren't everything for games, but they sure as hell are important to me. I want to experience the game the way the developers intended.Bgrngod



but that';s just some mistical mumbo jumbo that's in your head, it doesn't exist in reality. Reality is that ater 3 years pc games even on medium look better than console ones. You say that you have no interest in scalling down the game for it to look like 4 years old(altough even on lowest settings games won't look that bad) but I fail to see how it's any diffrent from consoles. On consoles those games still look like old pc games, like scalled down games. The only diffrence is that on Pc you can buy new hardware and make them better, on consoles no matter what you do you will always have to stick with that outdated look


Avatar image for HuusAsking
HuusAsking

15270

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#153 HuusAsking
Member since 2006 • 15270 Posts
[QUOTE="HuusAsking"][QUOTE="Vandalvideo"][QUOTE="HuusAsking"][QUOTE="Choad-Warrior"]

That is because lately the acceleration of PC technology has doubled since 2 years ago.

Now, you can squeeze out muscle from your cards. There are still some great performing AGP cards on the market. They may not run games at max, but they will still run games.

The biggest trick isn't hardware power, but language. Ala Open GL or DirecteX 9/10 standards. Unfortunately due to timing RIGHT NOW, it will be hard yes to upgrade a handful of components.

But my rig is still kicking after 4 years. I am running even current gen games right now. Sure it isn't running at max, but I am content. 4 years is ENTIRELY possible, and piece by piece upgrade is as well after that 4 mark.

I am just mad that PCI E2 is out, SATA2. Those are the biggest hurdles to avoiding system upgrades. Because DDR2+ RAM, you don't need to jump to those levels. DDR RAM still has kick to it.

Vista preferred doesn't mean Vista needed. And I am confused... are games requiring Vista to run? I have not heard that yet. Link?

EDIT:spelling

AdrianWerner

There are two Vista standards: Vista-Capable and Vista-Preferred. Only Vista-Preferred allows DirectX10 (as in, you can use the new desktop system--it's build around DX10). And since DX10 is a black-and-white standard, you're either in or out. And Microsoft has already said that Games for Vista will require DX10. BioShock and Alan Wake are confirmed Games for Vista.

With a little elbow grease you can run those games on XP. -_-. Games for Vista is a viral marketing campaign paid for by Microsoft which in no way gives them any jurisdiction over the game. There are set standards to be a "Games for Vista/Windows", but they do not actually control the development process of said games.

Can you prove that? I've been told all Games for Vista will require DirectX 10, and DirectX 10 happens to be a black-and-white standard. You must have a DX10 card to play a DX10 game. Certian games like Crysis and UT3 are simply DirectX 10-enhanced. But they're not Games for Vista (simply Games for Windows).

GFW has many requirements(altough MS is making exceptions from them), two biggest are: dx10 support and 360 pad support. Now it does not mean the game will be Dx10 only, only MS' own games will be like that. If they would try to enforce it on 3rd party devs then those devs would simply not support GfW brand and stick to traditional "PC DVD" logo, heck, most actualy are sticking, GFW is struggling like hell right now. Aside from few MS own games you won't see any Vista-only games for the next couple years

But the thing is, though, two are already on the docket: BioShock and Alan Wake (and I think BioShock is a third-party--2K Games is publishing). You're saying you can redo a Vista game to work outside of Vista?

Okay, I'd like to see you try.

Avatar image for HuusAsking
HuusAsking

15270

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#154 HuusAsking
Member since 2006 • 15270 Posts
[QUOTE="Bgrngod"] No it isn't simple. I don't know, and certainly didn't know how to use that software. And I have no interest in scaling down a game so that it looks 4 years old. Graphics aren't everything for games, but they sure as hell are important to me. I want to experience the game the way the developers intended.AdrianWerner



but that';s just some mistical mumbo jumbo that's in your head, it doesn't exist in reality. Reality is that ater 3 years pc games even on medium look better than console ones. You say that you have no interest in scalling down the game for it to look like 4 years old(altough even on lowest settings games won't look that bad) but I fail to see how it's any diffrent from consoles. On consoles those games still look like old pc games, like scalled down games. The only diffrence is that on Pc you can buy new hardware and make them better, on consoles no matter what you do you will always have to stick with that outdated look


Not necessarily. With fixed hardware specs, devs can optimize better and make bleeding-edge optimizations. You can't do that in PCs becasue doing so cuts out the vast majority in the lower end of the graphics spectrum.
Avatar image for AdrianWerner
AdrianWerner

28441

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#155 AdrianWerner
Member since 2003 • 28441 Posts
[QUOTE="AdrianWerner"][QUOTE="HuusAsking"][QUOTE="Vandalvideo"][QUOTE="HuusAsking"][QUOTE="Choad-Warrior"]

That is because lately the acceleration of PC technology has doubled since 2 years ago.

Now, you can squeeze out muscle from your cards. There are still some great performing AGP cards on the market. They may not run games at max, but they will still run games.

The biggest trick isn't hardware power, but language. Ala Open GL or DirecteX 9/10 standards. Unfortunately due to timing RIGHT NOW, it will be hard yes to upgrade a handful of components.

But my rig is still kicking after 4 years. I am running even current gen games right now. Sure it isn't running at max, but I am content. 4 years is ENTIRELY possible, and piece by piece upgrade is as well after that 4 mark.

I am just mad that PCI E2 is out, SATA2. Those are the biggest hurdles to avoiding system upgrades. Because DDR2+ RAM, you don't need to jump to those levels. DDR RAM still has kick to it.

Vista preferred doesn't mean Vista needed. And I am confused... are games requiring Vista to run? I have not heard that yet. Link?

EDIT:spelling

HuusAsking

There are two Vista standards: Vista-Capable and Vista-Preferred. Only Vista-Preferred allows DirectX10 (as in, you can use the new desktop system--it's build around DX10). And since DX10 is a black-and-white standard, you're either in or out. And Microsoft has already said that Games for Vista will require DX10. BioShock and Alan Wake are confirmed Games for Vista.

With a little elbow grease you can run those games on XP. -_-. Games for Vista is a viral marketing campaign paid for by Microsoft which in no way gives them any jurisdiction over the game. There are set standards to be a "Games for Vista/Windows", but they do not actually control the development process of said games.

Can you prove that? I've been told all Games for Vista will require DirectX 10, and DirectX 10 happens to be a black-and-white standard. You must have a DX10 card to play a DX10 game. Certian games like Crysis and UT3 are simply DirectX 10-enhanced. But they're not Games for Vista (simply Games for Windows).

GFW has many requirements(altough MS is making exceptions from them), two biggest are: dx10 support and 360 pad support. Now it does not mean the game will be Dx10 only, only MS' own games will be like that. If they would try to enforce it on 3rd party devs then those devs would simply not support GfW brand and stick to traditional "PC DVD" logo, heck, most actualy are sticking, GFW is struggling like hell right now. Aside from few MS own games you won't see any Vista-only games for the next couple years

But the thing is, though, two are already on the docket: BioShock and Alan Wake (and I think BioShock is a third-party--2K Games is publishing). You're saying you can redo a Vista game to work outside of Vista?

Okay, I'd like to see you try.

No, I'm saying games will work on both Vista and XP. Bioshock will work on XP, it doesn't require Vista for play. Alan Wake is diffrent matter, but that's MS' published game 

Avatar image for AdrianWerner
AdrianWerner

28441

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#156 AdrianWerner
Member since 2003 • 28441 Posts
[QUOTE="AdrianWerner"][QUOTE="Bgrngod"] No it isn't simple. I don't know, and certainly didn't know how to use that software. And I have no interest in scaling down a game so that it looks 4 years old. Graphics aren't everything for games, but they sure as hell are important to me. I want to experience the game the way the developers intended.HuusAsking



but that';s just some mistical mumbo jumbo that's in your head, it doesn't exist in reality. Reality is that ater 3 years pc games even on medium look better than console ones. You say that you have no interest in scalling down the game for it to look like 4 years old(altough even on lowest settings games won't look that bad) but I fail to see how it's any diffrent from consoles. On consoles those games still look like old pc games, like scalled down games. The only diffrence is that on Pc you can buy new hardware and make them better, on consoles no matter what you do you will always have to stick with that outdated look


Not necessarily. With fixed hardware specs, devs can optimize better and make bleeding-edge optimizations. You can't do that in PCs becasue doing so cuts out the vast majority in the lower end of the graphics spectrum.



Of course, optimisation helps, thanks to it console games don;t look horrible a year after launch.
But there's a limit to how much optimisation can do. Brute force will always win the in end.
No matter how much you optimise, how much juice you squeeze from platorm 3 years after launch even it's best games will look medicore compared to best PC ones. So for over half of generation you're forced to play games that look outdated like hell compared to PC ones.
Avatar image for TOAO_Cyrus1
TOAO_Cyrus1

2895

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#157 TOAO_Cyrus1
Member since 2004 • 2895 Posts

I'm a PC Gamer and I can tell you right now, mods are not as great as you hermits claim it to be. For example everyone uses Oblivion mods as ownage. Total BS. Oblivion mods suck. I'll understand HL2 mods, those are great, but not all mods are good.Kayrod29

 

Have you used quarls texture pack? It makes the graphics twice was good. There are a bunch of nice mods that add alot of nice unique items/weapons/armour to find instead of all the generic stuff you usually find.

Avatar image for cametall
cametall

7692

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#158 cametall
Member since 2003 • 7692 Posts
Your 9th "truth" is a bit off. 64 man BF2 anyone? Unless you are referring to PCs and not Servers. Still I have seen 32 man CS:S games on a beefed up PC.
Avatar image for Drathyl
Drathyl

363

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#159 Drathyl
Member since 2006 • 363 Posts

It was the best list I've ever seen. It had the good and the bad sides of PC's, but you hermit fanboys had to come in ruin it. Most of your counter arguments are just fanatical in nature. Just face it hermits, PC's aren't perfect. I've built 3 computers, I know it isn't cheap. Maybe in the USA, but here in Finland you'll be laughed out of your pants if you try asking tips for a gaming PC under 500 euros. I've used computers since dos 6.2, I know they ain't easy. I had NES, I know that was easy. I know my computer can't handle hosting over 8 man games. I can buy a dedicated server but that ain't free. And even the smallest dedicated servers cost as much as xbox live or more. PC gaming is awesome, but it ain't perfect. Deal with it and stop whining.

Avatar image for BK-Sleeper
BK-Sleeper

2686

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 41

User Lists: 0

#160 BK-Sleeper
Member since 2006 • 2686 Posts
I'm a total console gamer and even I know how awesome mods are. But then again, I do have my own small stack of PC games. ( WoW, Sims, C&C, BF2 ) I just want to get Morrowind and go all mod-crazy on that ****.
Avatar image for HuusAsking
HuusAsking

15270

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#161 HuusAsking
Member since 2006 • 15270 Posts

No, I'm saying games will work on both Vista and XP. Bioshock will work on XP, it doesn't require Vista for play. Alan Wake is diffrent matter, but that's MS' published game 

AdrianWerner
I concede the point on BioShock. It's only a Game for Windows and thus will only be DirectX10-enhanced. But what about Alan Wake, which has been confirmed both by Remedy and Microsoft to require DirectX10 to play and uses many of the features found only in DirectX10 such as the Geometry Shaders, Integer Instruction Sets, etc. I honestly don't see how you can make a game with such a high-end spec work on Windows XP (which is limited to DirectX 9) unless you can hack DX10 to work on XP.
  • 160 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
Browse Boards
Jump to Top

×

Move topic to another board

Pick a board and hit submit

  • (Or search for a more specific forum)
    • Close