The PC is the superior gaming platform - Definitive Edition

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for Legend002
#601 Posted by Legend002 (13381 posts) -

@farrell2k:

@naz99 said:

Still lacking dat evidence we are waiting ..come on..

Need dat evidence on how paper is made too?

Avatar image for Dasein808
#602 Edited by Dasein808 (790 posts) -

@Legend002 said:

...The simply fact that Ryse isn't coming to PS4 should of at least tickle something in your brains.

Yeah, it's called Crytek has been in financial disarray as of late and likely can't afford / don't want to risk the licensing fees required by Sony when they know they're trying to shovel a mediocre game.

Nah, far too plausible...

It seems much more likely that MS gave them the go ahead for a PC version but not a PS4 version just to spite the handful of PS4 players interested in the game. /s

Avatar image for naz99
#603 Edited by naz99 (2832 posts) -

@Legend002 said:

@farrell2k:

@naz99 said:

Still lacking dat evidence we are waiting ..come on..

Need dat evidence on how paper is made too?

Lol really, is that all you have you are getting worse with every response, carry on your digging your own hole

Avatar image for mikhail
#605 Posted by mikhail (2697 posts) -

@naz99: Dragons are real. There is one sitting right here in my garage RIGHT NOW. But it's invisible.

You can't prove me wrong, can you? Where's your evidence? LOL OWNED LMFAO LLOLOLOLOL

Avatar image for Legend002
#606 Posted by Legend002 (13381 posts) -

@Dasein808 said:

@Legend002 said:

...The simply fact that Ryse isn't coming to PS4 should of at least tickle something in your brains.

Yeah, it's called Crytek has been in financial disarray as of late and likely can't afford the the licensing fees required by Sony when they know they're trying to shovel a mediocre game.

Nah, far too plausible...

Alan Wake, Dead Rising 3, Conviction, etc. Especially with Conviction I'm sure Ubisoft ignored a Playstation version because they are low on money. /sarcasm

Avatar image for Dasein808
#607 Edited by Dasein808 (790 posts) -
@Legend002 said:

Alan Wake, Dead Rising 3, Conviction, etc. Especially with Conviction I'm sure Ubisoft ignored a Playstation version because they are low on money. /sarcasm

Neither Ubisoft, nor any of those other studios have anything to do with Crytek and their current financial situation, Cranler II.

Avatar image for Legend002
#608 Edited by Legend002 (13381 posts) -

@Dasein808: Same deal, there's the pub/dev agreement. Terms varies but the core is usually the same. Crytek can't bring Ryse to Playstation even if they tried. Not now anyway.

Avatar image for Dasein808
#609 Edited by Dasein808 (790 posts) -

@Legend002 said:

Crytek can't bring Ryse to Playstation even if they tried. Not now anyway.

They could legally port it, but financially, it makes no sense.

They know that they're trying to a peddle a turd.

It has nothing to do with disdain for one console platform over another.

Avatar image for Legend002
#610 Posted by Legend002 (13381 posts) -

@Dasein808
No they can't. They would if they could.

Avatar image for Dasein808
#611 Edited by Dasein808 (790 posts) -
@Legend002 said:

@Dasein808

No they can't. They would if they could.

Reread the devs' response and try to understand the difference between a "partner" and the "IP owner."

Avatar image for Legend002
#612 Posted by Legend002 (13381 posts) -

@Dasein808

Hmmm less than 200 post. No offense but I won't debate with a newbie.

Avatar image for naz99
#613 Edited by naz99 (2832 posts) -

@Legend002 said:

@Dasein808

Hmmm less than 200 post. No offense but I won't debate with a newbie.

Why? you have over 6000 posts and you still can't debate,the eveidence is right here in this thread.

Avatar image for Dasein808
#615 Posted by Dasein808 (790 posts) -

@Legend002 said:

@Dasein808

Hmmm less than 200 post. No offense but I won't debate with a newbie.

Lol.

K.

Avatar image for naz99
#616 Posted by naz99 (2832 posts) -

@Dasein808 said:

@Legend002 said:

@Dasein808

Hmmm less than 200 post. No offense but I won't debate with a newbie.

Lol.

K.

It's because he does not want yet another person picking apart his flimsy arguments i don't think he could take it.

Avatar image for Legend002
#617 Posted by Legend002 (13381 posts) -

@naz99 said:

@Legend002 said:

@Dasein808

Hmmm less than 200 post. No offense but I won't debate with a newbie.

Why? you have over 6000 posts and you still can't debate,the eveidence is right here in this thread.

Evidence? Where? lol

Avatar image for naz99
#619 Posted by naz99 (2832 posts) -

@Legend002 said:

@naz99 said:

@Legend002 said:

@Dasein808

Hmmm less than 200 post. No offense but I won't debate with a newbie.

Why? you have over 6000 posts and you still can't debate,the eveidence is right here in this thread.

Evidence? Where? lol

where?

"Right here in this thread"

There!

Can you read?

Avatar image for alcapello
#620 Edited by Alcapello (1396 posts) -

@farrell2k said:

@Legend002 said:

@farrell2k:

lol why are keeping linking me to that? Is say anything we didn't already know.

It's not for you. It's to show everyone else how stupid your replies and arguments are. Their benefit, not yours.

http://venturebeat.com/2014/08/07/amid-turmoil-crytek-plans-to-publish-ryse-for-pc-with-deep-silver/

Avatar image for Legend002
#621 Posted by Legend002 (13381 posts) -

@naz99: Tell me what you think it said?

Avatar image for naz99
#622 Posted by naz99 (2832 posts) -

@Legend002 said:

@naz99: Tell me what you think it said?

what?

This all started because you made nonsense claims with no basis in fact and then continued to babble on and have yet to provide one piece of evidence,yet claim you won the argument,and now you want me to breakk it down and spell it out for you...LOL

Why would i even waste my time,it's already written down over the past few pages if you can't comprhend that it is not our fault.

Avatar image for Legend002
#623 Edited by Legend002 (13381 posts) -

I'm just educating you guys how these agreements work. Can't exactly call it an argument.

Avatar image for naz99
#624 Edited by naz99 (2832 posts) -

@Legend002 said:

I'm just educated you guys how these agreements work. Can't exactly call it an argument.

And there you go again..just because you make a post on a forum it does not mean it is fact.....how have you educated anyone? you have just stated an opinion and failed to back it up....

Lol a lost cause if ever i saw one

Avatar image for Legend002
#625 Posted by Legend002 (13381 posts) -

In the console world 1st party studios fight for exclusives on their platform. You don't get that with PC so I might understand why this concept is so new to you guys.

Avatar image for mikhail
#626 Posted by mikhail (2697 posts) -

@Legend002: Ponies are made out of pixie dust and childrens' dreams. This is common knowledge to everyone who knows anything about ponies...I can't help it if you guys are too dumb to see that. PROVE ME WRONG.

Everyone Else: Here's why you are wrong: (Lists a bunch of facts and logical arguments)

@Legend002: LOL NO

Everyone Else: ...

Avatar image for naz99
#627 Posted by naz99 (2832 posts) -

@Legend002 said:

In the console world 1st party studios fight for exclusives on their platform. You don't get that with PC so I might understand why this concept is so new to you guys.

........*facepalm* i think it is best if we just leave you to your ignorant bliss.

Avatar image for Legend002
#628 Posted by Legend002 (13381 posts) -

Although I am great I won't rub it in like some of you are trying to make it appear.

Avatar image for naz99
#629 Posted by naz99 (2832 posts) -

@Legend002 said:

Although I am great I won't rub it in like some of you are trying to make it appear.

Truly spoken like someone suffering from acute delusion,i am actually starting to feel sorry for you,it must be hard to live in a world where common sense and actual facts are alien to you.

Avatar image for mikhail
#630 Posted by mikhail (2697 posts) -

@Legend002 said:

Although I am great I won't rub it in like some of you are trying to make it appear.

...

Avatar image for Dasein808
#631 Edited by Dasein808 (790 posts) -
@Legend002 said:

In the console world 1st party studios fight for exclusives on their platform. You don't get that with PC so I might understand why this concept is so new to you guys.

PCs are beyond peasants' "exclusive" concerns as long as developers tune their multiplat titles accordingly (i.e. don't give me a controller based UI unless it's: a platformer, fighting game, or sports game.)

Most PC gamers are not about excluding consolities. We just don't want your inclusion impinging on our experience due to the limitations of console platforms, or having supposed "multiplat" games designed around the limitations of a console and its controller.

I don't know that I've ever seen a petition from PC gamers to keep a supposed "exclusive" title from appearing on other platforms.

I can't say the same for consolites.

Avatar image for naz99
#632 Edited by naz99 (2832 posts) -

@mikhail said:

@Legend002 said:

Although I am great I won't rub it in like some of you are trying to make it appear.

...

Kind of makes responding unnecessary doesn't it :P

Avatar image for mikhail
#633 Posted by mikhail (2697 posts) -

@naz99 said:

@mikhail said:

@Legend002 said:

Although I am great I won't rub it in like some of you are trying to make it appear.

...

Kind of makes responding unnecessary doesn't it :P

Notice any similarities between Legend002 an AmazonAngry? I'm not saying they are the same person, but the only thing missing is an "Another herm bites the dust" gif.

Avatar image for Legend002
#634 Posted by Legend002 (13381 posts) -

Sure rag on console gaming. Feel any better knowing you'll never get to play Zelda or TLoU?

Avatar image for Dasein808
#635 Edited by Dasein808 (790 posts) -
@Legend002 said:

Sure rag on console gaming. Feel any better knowing you'll never get to play Zelda or TLoU?

Who is making fun of console gaming and how?

I'm pretty sure if people cared enough about either of those titles then they'd just purchase the appropriate console required to enjoy them.

Avatar image for mikhail
#636 Edited by mikhail (2697 posts) -

@Legend002 said:

Sure rag on console gaming. Feel any better knowing you'll never get to play Zelda or TLoU?

It's not ragging on McDonalds to say that filet mignon is amazing and better in every way way than a Big Mac. It's just better.

Avatar image for RoboCopISJesus
#637 Edited by RoboCopISJesus (2222 posts) -

I don't see an issue,

A console fan can easily make this kind of thread for their favorite system, simply listing several of the fact based pros....

Instead they opt for troll and attack threads.

Avatar image for mikhail
#638 Posted by mikhail (2697 posts) -

@RoboCopISJesus said:

I don't see an issue,

A console fan can easily make this kind of thread for their favorite system, simply listing several of the fact based pros....

Instead they opt for troll and attack threads.

I'll list the pros of a console over PC:

Avatar image for bldgirsh
#639 Posted by BldgIrsh (3044 posts) -

@mikhail said:

@RoboCopISJesus said:

I don't see an issue,

A console fan can easily make this kind of thread for their favorite system, simply listing several of the fact based pros....

Instead they opt for troll and attack threads.

I'll list the pros of a console over PC:

Couch Gaming

Plug and Play

Better Games

Got nothing.

Avatar image for CrownKingArthur
#640 Posted by CrownKingArthur (5262 posts) -

i think mass effect is the best example of what he's talking about.

between me1 on xbox 360 and me1 on ps3, a little over 5 years passed, which sounds about right for a exclusive publishing contract with regards to competing consoles.

but at the same time i'm not presenting direct evidence. this is indirect evidence which fits the model.

Avatar image for Cranler
#641 Posted by Cranler (8809 posts) -

@Dasein808 said:
@Cranler said:

Show me at least 2 examples of not addressing counterpoints since I may have missed a point someone made here and there. What did i distort? When did I lie? Where did I derail? What irrelevant comparisons?

Why, so you can ignore them again? I'm referring to every irrelevant / distorted comparison ("250GB HDD," trollolol), lie that you made to try and prove your point.

Myself and others have already pointed out your derailing and ignoring of others' counterpoints.

Like this:

@Cranler said:
@kittennose said:

...

You compared a company's extreme effort to optimize code for obsolete hardware on one set up with it's complete lack on another while pretending the result said something about the efficiency of the two set ups. That would be merely myopic, but with the addition of the asinine gloating it is nothing more then trolling so poor as to be an insult to everyone's intelligence. Given how far you have doubled down on the concept, it is just tiring. The three sixty didn't accomplish this via merit, it managed it via an adoption rate that was only high because of just how hard Sony dropped the ball.

If you want people to stop "making you out to be the bad guy" then stop sticking your nose into every PC thread, spewing doofisms, then publicly basking in your own cleverness. Heck, if you actually wanted to present a realistic picture of a twenty gig launch 360 trying to run Rage, it would have been three flashing red lights encircling a power button.

What does any of this have to do with the fact that you needed a top of the line pc from 2005 and then some to keep up with the 360?

Your question was answered by kittennose in the opening sentence of the first paragraph, but it's more fun to not address any of the points made, and instead stick your fingers in your ears, as you repeat the latest revision of your troll claim.

Even though it's a point that I've already made, and one which you also conveniently ignored, I'd also like to repeat that you have a peculiar habit of deliberately choosing benchmarks that use GPUs that barely exceed the devs' minimum requirements, running at higher resolutions with more effects; instead of a legitimate comparison using the devs' recommended GPU(s) at the same 720p resolution with same amount of reduced effects.

You just love to pretend that PCs are technologically bound by the limitations of console lifespans when you pick your "evidence."

I'm not playing this moronic game with you.

Your ignorance, lack of reading comprehension, and tenacious trolling are not my problem.

Go flush yourself.

I feel his points are irrelevant but of course you conveniently left out the rest of my reply where I directly addressed his post.

I said "Your point only matters if Skyrim is behind the curve on pc optimization, so prove it."

Then again even if he could prove that a top of the line pc from 2005 can run Skyrim or any other multiplat as well as the 360 with better optimization then it simply means the 360 can run games as well as a $2,000 pc from 2005.

Most multiplats need an 8800 gt with a core 2 duo to beat the 360 performance and whether it's due to lack of optimization or lack of unified shaders on the pre 8 series is really irrelevant.

Avatar image for mikhail
#642 Posted by mikhail (2697 posts) -

@Cranler: Newsflash, it's 2014 not 2005.

Avatar image for Cranler
#643 Posted by Cranler (8809 posts) -

@mikhail said:

@Cranler: Newsflash, it's 2014 not 2005.

Dasin is the one who made a mountain out of a little remark I made about how powerful the 360 was for it's time.

Avatar image for lostrib
#644 Posted by lostrib (49999 posts) -

@Legend002 said:

Sure rag on console gaming. Feel any better knowing you'll never get to play Zelda or TLoU?

why not?

Avatar image for RyviusARC
#645 Edited by RyviusARC (5675 posts) -

@Cranler said:

@Dasein808 said:
@Cranler said:

Show me at least 2 examples of not addressing counterpoints since I may have missed a point someone made here and there. What did i distort? When did I lie? Where did I derail? What irrelevant comparisons?

Why, so you can ignore them again? I'm referring to every irrelevant / distorted comparison ("250GB HDD," trollolol), lie that you made to try and prove your point.

Myself and others have already pointed out your derailing and ignoring of others' counterpoints.

Like this:

@Cranler said:
@kittennose said:

...

You compared a company's extreme effort to optimize code for obsolete hardware on one set up with it's complete lack on another while pretending the result said something about the efficiency of the two set ups. That would be merely myopic, but with the addition of the asinine gloating it is nothing more then trolling so poor as to be an insult to everyone's intelligence. Given how far you have doubled down on the concept, it is just tiring. The three sixty didn't accomplish this via merit, it managed it via an adoption rate that was only high because of just how hard Sony dropped the ball.

If you want people to stop "making you out to be the bad guy" then stop sticking your nose into every PC thread, spewing doofisms, then publicly basking in your own cleverness. Heck, if you actually wanted to present a realistic picture of a twenty gig launch 360 trying to run Rage, it would have been three flashing red lights encircling a power button.

What does any of this have to do with the fact that you needed a top of the line pc from 2005 and then some to keep up with the 360?

Your question was answered by kittennose in the opening sentence of the first paragraph, but it's more fun to not address any of the points made, and instead stick your fingers in your ears, as you repeat the latest revision of your troll claim.

Even though it's a point that I've already made, and one which you also conveniently ignored, I'd also like to repeat that you have a peculiar habit of deliberately choosing benchmarks that use GPUs that barely exceed the devs' minimum requirements, running at higher resolutions with more effects; instead of a legitimate comparison using the devs' recommended GPU(s) at the same 720p resolution with same amount of reduced effects.

You just love to pretend that PCs are technologically bound by the limitations of console lifespans when you pick your "evidence."

I'm not playing this moronic game with you.

Your ignorance, lack of reading comprehension, and tenacious trolling are not my problem.

Go flush yourself.

I feel his points are irrelevant but of course you conveniently left out the rest of my reply where I directly addressed his post.

I said "Your point only matters if Skyrim is behind the curve on pc optimization, so prove it."

Then again even if he could prove that a top of the line pc from 2005 can run Skyrim or any other multiplat as well as the 360 with better optimization then it simply means the 360 can run games as well as a $2,000 pc from 2005.

Most multiplats need an 8800 gt with a core 2 duo to beat the 360 performance and whether it's due to lack of optimization or lack of unified shaders on the pre 8 series is really irrelevant.

Ummm no....

An 8800gt performs much much better than the 360.

Heck in Crysis 2 it performs around 3x better.

I know someone who has a much weaker 8600gts that can still outperform the 360.

And unified shaders tech is always relevant. It is the main reason the 360 performs much better in shader intensive games compared to PC GPUs from 2005 and before.

If you were abled to incorporate unified shader tech into the specs of a high end 2005 GPU then it would perform better than the Xbox 360 in shader intensive games.

In non shader intensive games a high end 2005 GPU will easily outperform the 360 as seen with earlier games of last gen.

Avatar image for Cranler
#647 Posted by Cranler (8809 posts) -

@RyviusARC said:

@Cranler said:

@Dasein808 said:
@Cranler said:

Show me at least 2 examples of not addressing counterpoints since I may have missed a point someone made here and there. What did i distort? When did I lie? Where did I derail? What irrelevant comparisons?

Why, so you can ignore them again? I'm referring to every irrelevant / distorted comparison ("250GB HDD," trollolol), lie that you made to try and prove your point.

Myself and others have already pointed out your derailing and ignoring of others' counterpoints.

Like this:

@Cranler said:
@kittennose said:

...

You compared a company's extreme effort to optimize code for obsolete hardware on one set up with it's complete lack on another while pretending the result said something about the efficiency of the two set ups. That would be merely myopic, but with the addition of the asinine gloating it is nothing more then trolling so poor as to be an insult to everyone's intelligence. Given how far you have doubled down on the concept, it is just tiring. The three sixty didn't accomplish this via merit, it managed it via an adoption rate that was only high because of just how hard Sony dropped the ball.

If you want people to stop "making you out to be the bad guy" then stop sticking your nose into every PC thread, spewing doofisms, then publicly basking in your own cleverness. Heck, if you actually wanted to present a realistic picture of a twenty gig launch 360 trying to run Rage, it would have been three flashing red lights encircling a power button.

What does any of this have to do with the fact that you needed a top of the line pc from 2005 and then some to keep up with the 360?

Your question was answered by kittennose in the opening sentence of the first paragraph, but it's more fun to not address any of the points made, and instead stick your fingers in your ears, as you repeat the latest revision of your troll claim.

Even though it's a point that I've already made, and one which you also conveniently ignored, I'd also like to repeat that you have a peculiar habit of deliberately choosing benchmarks that use GPUs that barely exceed the devs' minimum requirements, running at higher resolutions with more effects; instead of a legitimate comparison using the devs' recommended GPU(s) at the same 720p resolution with same amount of reduced effects.

You just love to pretend that PCs are technologically bound by the limitations of console lifespans when you pick your "evidence."

I'm not playing this moronic game with you.

Your ignorance, lack of reading comprehension, and tenacious trolling are not my problem.

Go flush yourself.

I feel his points are irrelevant but of course you conveniently left out the rest of my reply where I directly addressed his post.

I said "Your point only matters if Skyrim is behind the curve on pc optimization, so prove it."

Then again even if he could prove that a top of the line pc from 2005 can run Skyrim or any other multiplat as well as the 360 with better optimization then it simply means the 360 can run games as well as a $2,000 pc from 2005.

Most multiplats need an 8800 gt with a core 2 duo to beat the 360 performance and whether it's due to lack of optimization or lack of unified shaders on the pre 8 series is really irrelevant.

Ummm no....

An 8800gt performs much much better than the 360.

Heck in Crysis 2 it performs around 3x better.

I know someone who has a much weaker 8600gts that can still outperform the 360.

And unified shaders tech is always relevant. It is the main reason the 360 performs much better in shader intensive games compared to PC GPUs from 2005 and before.

If you were abled to incorporate unified shader tech into the specs of a high end 2005 GPU then it would perform better than the Xbox 360 in shader intensive games.

In non shader intensive games a high end 2005 GPU will easily outperform the 360 as seen with earlier games of last gen.

Ummmm......I said the 8800 gt beats the 360's gpu.

I know someone that has the 8600 gts that can just about match the 360.

These benches don't show the 8600 gts being any better than the 360 http://www.bit-tech.net/gaming/pc/2007/08/30/bioshock_gameplay_graphics_and_performance/9

And if they had put unified shaders into 2005 gpu's then they would have cost $1,000. So instead of needing a $2000 pc to match the 360 you would need a $3,000 pc.

Avatar image for bldgirsh
#648 Posted by BldgIrsh (3044 posts) -

@Cranler said:

@RyviusARC said:

Ummm no....

An 8800gt performs much much better than the 360.

Heck in Crysis 2 it performs around 3x better.

I know someone who has a much weaker 8600gts that can still outperform the 360.

And unified shaders tech is always relevant. It is the main reason the 360 performs much better in shader intensive games compared to PC GPUs from 2005 and before.

If you were abled to incorporate unified shader tech into the specs of a high end 2005 GPU then it would perform better than the Xbox 360 in shader intensive games.

In non shader intensive games a high end 2005 GPU will easily outperform the 360 as seen with earlier games of last gen.

Ummmm......I said the 8800 gt beats the 360's gpu.

I know someone that has the 8600 gts that can just about match the 360.

These benches don't show the 8600 gts being any better than the 360 http://www.bit-tech.net/gaming/pc/2007/08/30/bioshock_gameplay_graphics_and_performance/9

And if they had put unified shaders into 2005 gpu's then they would have cost $1,000. So instead of needing a $2000 pc to match the 360 you would need a $3,000 pc.

Honestly, one of you two need to make a "360 graphics vs PC graphics in 2004." Because it keeps being a derailed topic for some reason on many threads.

Avatar image for RyviusARC
#649 Edited by RyviusARC (5675 posts) -

@Cranler said:

@RyviusARC said:

@Cranler said:

@Dasein808 said:
@Cranler said:

Show me at least 2 examples of not addressing counterpoints since I may have missed a point someone made here and there. What did i distort? When did I lie? Where did I derail? What irrelevant comparisons?

Why, so you can ignore them again? I'm referring to every irrelevant / distorted comparison ("250GB HDD," trollolol), lie that you made to try and prove your point.

Myself and others have already pointed out your derailing and ignoring of others' counterpoints.

Like this:

@Cranler said:
@kittennose said:

...

You compared a company's extreme effort to optimize code for obsolete hardware on one set up with it's complete lack on another while pretending the result said something about the efficiency of the two set ups. That would be merely myopic, but with the addition of the asinine gloating it is nothing more then trolling so poor as to be an insult to everyone's intelligence. Given how far you have doubled down on the concept, it is just tiring. The three sixty didn't accomplish this via merit, it managed it via an adoption rate that was only high because of just how hard Sony dropped the ball.

If you want people to stop "making you out to be the bad guy" then stop sticking your nose into every PC thread, spewing doofisms, then publicly basking in your own cleverness. Heck, if you actually wanted to present a realistic picture of a twenty gig launch 360 trying to run Rage, it would have been three flashing red lights encircling a power button.

What does any of this have to do with the fact that you needed a top of the line pc from 2005 and then some to keep up with the 360?

Your question was answered by kittennose in the opening sentence of the first paragraph, but it's more fun to not address any of the points made, and instead stick your fingers in your ears, as you repeat the latest revision of your troll claim.

Even though it's a point that I've already made, and one which you also conveniently ignored, I'd also like to repeat that you have a peculiar habit of deliberately choosing benchmarks that use GPUs that barely exceed the devs' minimum requirements, running at higher resolutions with more effects; instead of a legitimate comparison using the devs' recommended GPU(s) at the same 720p resolution with same amount of reduced effects.

You just love to pretend that PCs are technologically bound by the limitations of console lifespans when you pick your "evidence."

I'm not playing this moronic game with you.

Your ignorance, lack of reading comprehension, and tenacious trolling are not my problem.

Go flush yourself.

I feel his points are irrelevant but of course you conveniently left out the rest of my reply where I directly addressed his post.

I said "Your point only matters if Skyrim is behind the curve on pc optimization, so prove it."

Then again even if he could prove that a top of the line pc from 2005 can run Skyrim or any other multiplat as well as the 360 with better optimization then it simply means the 360 can run games as well as a $2,000 pc from 2005.

Most multiplats need an 8800 gt with a core 2 duo to beat the 360 performance and whether it's due to lack of optimization or lack of unified shaders on the pre 8 series is really irrelevant.

Ummm no....

An 8800gt performs much much better than the 360.

Heck in Crysis 2 it performs around 3x better.

I know someone who has a much weaker 8600gts that can still outperform the 360.

And unified shaders tech is always relevant. It is the main reason the 360 performs much better in shader intensive games compared to PC GPUs from 2005 and before.

If you were abled to incorporate unified shader tech into the specs of a high end 2005 GPU then it would perform better than the Xbox 360 in shader intensive games.

In non shader intensive games a high end 2005 GPU will easily outperform the 360 as seen with earlier games of last gen.

Ummmm......I said the 8800 gt beats the 360's gpu.

I know someone that has the 8600 gts that can just about match the 360.

These benches don't show the 8600 gts being any better than the 360 http://www.bit-tech.net/gaming/pc/2007/08/30/bioshock_gameplay_graphics_and_performance/9

And if they had put unified shaders into 2005 gpu's then they would have cost $1,000. So instead of needing a $2000 pc to match the 360 you would need a $3,000 pc.

You acted like you needed at the very least an 8800gt to beat the 360 when in fact there are many gpus below the 8800gt that have no problem performing better than the 360.

The 8600gts is not much more powerful than a 360 so the difference is not as large but you will see less of a difference in benchmarks that were performed early in it's lifespan because of the infancy of the drivers. An 8600gts on average will perform a little better than the 360.

The 360 performance wise is between an 8600gt and 8600gts.

And since you can overclock your video card you can get an addition performance boost.

I have a GTX 570 that performs better than a stock GTX 580 because I oced the GTX 570 from a core clock of 742mhz to 950mhz.

And stop pulling price figures out of your ass. You have no clue of the expense for adding unified shader tech to 2005 GPUs.

I do not deny that the 360 was a great performing console for it's time but that is due to it having certain features early than others.

Too bad this gen consoles are so under-powered that it's laughable.

That would be like if the 360 came out with a GPU comparable to a 2001 GPU and getting outperformed by a 1999 CPU.

Avatar image for Cranler
#650 Posted by Cranler (8809 posts) -

@RyviusARC said:

@Cranler said:

@RyviusARC said:

@Cranler said:

@Dasein808 said:
@Cranler said:

Show me at least 2 examples of not addressing counterpoints since I may have missed a point someone made here and there. What did i distort? When did I lie? Where did I derail? What irrelevant comparisons?

Why, so you can ignore them again? I'm referring to every irrelevant / distorted comparison ("250GB HDD," trollolol), lie that you made to try and prove your point.

Myself and others have already pointed out your derailing and ignoring of others' counterpoints.

Like this:

@Cranler said:
@kittennose said:

...

You compared a company's extreme effort to optimize code for obsolete hardware on one set up with it's complete lack on another while pretending the result said something about the efficiency of the two set ups. That would be merely myopic, but with the addition of the asinine gloating it is nothing more then trolling so poor as to be an insult to everyone's intelligence. Given how far you have doubled down on the concept, it is just tiring. The three sixty didn't accomplish this via merit, it managed it via an adoption rate that was only high because of just how hard Sony dropped the ball.

If you want people to stop "making you out to be the bad guy" then stop sticking your nose into every PC thread, spewing doofisms, then publicly basking in your own cleverness. Heck, if you actually wanted to present a realistic picture of a twenty gig launch 360 trying to run Rage, it would have been three flashing red lights encircling a power button.

What does any of this have to do with the fact that you needed a top of the line pc from 2005 and then some to keep up with the 360?

Your question was answered by kittennose in the opening sentence of the first paragraph, but it's more fun to not address any of the points made, and instead stick your fingers in your ears, as you repeat the latest revision of your troll claim.

Even though it's a point that I've already made, and one which you also conveniently ignored, I'd also like to repeat that you have a peculiar habit of deliberately choosing benchmarks that use GPUs that barely exceed the devs' minimum requirements, running at higher resolutions with more effects; instead of a legitimate comparison using the devs' recommended GPU(s) at the same 720p resolution with same amount of reduced effects.

You just love to pretend that PCs are technologically bound by the limitations of console lifespans when you pick your "evidence."

I'm not playing this moronic game with you.

Your ignorance, lack of reading comprehension, and tenacious trolling are not my problem.

Go flush yourself.

I feel his points are irrelevant but of course you conveniently left out the rest of my reply where I directly addressed his post.

I said "Your point only matters if Skyrim is behind the curve on pc optimization, so prove it."

Then again even if he could prove that a top of the line pc from 2005 can run Skyrim or any other multiplat as well as the 360 with better optimization then it simply means the 360 can run games as well as a $2,000 pc from 2005.

Most multiplats need an 8800 gt with a core 2 duo to beat the 360 performance and whether it's due to lack of optimization or lack of unified shaders on the pre 8 series is really irrelevant.

Ummm no....

An 8800gt performs much much better than the 360.

Heck in Crysis 2 it performs around 3x better.

I know someone who has a much weaker 8600gts that can still outperform the 360.

And unified shaders tech is always relevant. It is the main reason the 360 performs much better in shader intensive games compared to PC GPUs from 2005 and before.

If you were abled to incorporate unified shader tech into the specs of a high end 2005 GPU then it would perform better than the Xbox 360 in shader intensive games.

In non shader intensive games a high end 2005 GPU will easily outperform the 360 as seen with earlier games of last gen.

Ummmm......I said the 8800 gt beats the 360's gpu.

I know someone that has the 8600 gts that can just about match the 360.

These benches don't show the 8600 gts being any better than the 360 http://www.bit-tech.net/gaming/pc/2007/08/30/bioshock_gameplay_graphics_and_performance/9

And if they had put unified shaders into 2005 gpu's then they would have cost $1,000. So instead of needing a $2000 pc to match the 360 you would need a $3,000 pc.

You acted like you needed at the very least an 8800gt to beat the 360 when in fact there are many gpus below the 8800gt that have no problem performing better than the 360.

The 8600gts is not much more powerful than a 360 so the difference is not as large but you will see less of a difference in benchmarks that were performed early in it's lifespan because of the infancy of the drivers. An 8600gts on average will perform a little better than the 360.

The 360 performance wise is between an 8600gt and 8600gts.

And since you can overclock your video card you can get an addition performance boost.

I have a GTX 570 that performs better than a stock GTX 580 because I oced the GTX 570 from a core clock of 742mhz to 950mhz.

And stop pulling price figures out of your ass. You have no clue of the expense for adding unified shader tech to 2005 GPUs.

I do not deny that the 360 was a great performing console for it's time but that is due to it having certain features early than others.

Too bad this gen consoles are so under-powered that it's laughable.

That would be like if the 360 came out with a GPU comparable to a 2001 GPU and a CPU comparable to a 1999 CPU.

Prove your performance claims.

If people were willing to pay $500 for a 7800 gtx then how much would they pay for a much better gpu? Look at the pricing of those high end AMD cpu's from 2005.

Your timeline is off. The 6870 was the top amd card 4 years before the 360 launch.

The PS 4 is weak for its time which makes it's graphical dominance even more amusing. The only exclusive the hermits have as a counter is a game which the hermits have to fund themselves. Some people have actually bought a $1,000 pre order package for Star Citizen.