- Time
- Post link
Video Games - a general discussion thread — Page 103
- Time
- Post link
i will do them one by one because there are so many things ive wanted to discuss lately and this is definatly the time to do it.
first off let me point out that there are some people in this thread that are so biased towards one manufacturer its sad.
whether your a sony, microsoft or nintendo fan, its pathetic to try and see someone back up their system by putting down the flaws of another.
my point here is that EVERY!! system has their flaws. i wont go into them but its a proven fact that no system launches without problems.
especially as the technology gets better and companies get more greedy. they want to release their system faster and therefore overlook certain things.
example here, shortages. each console had a shortage at their release. i dont care if one had it worse off than the other because so far people are still having a damn hard time getting their hands on a Wii which is supposed to have the best launch of the 3.
the point here is that no console is better than the other. anyone who says that is a ignorant fanboy. each system has their pros and cons and no one can say different. saying that i would like to point out a couple corrections made by people in this thread..
1) for the person who was talking about grand turismo costing money... false. sony has since abandoned that idea. they as well as everyone else realized it wouldn't fly and has since cancelled GT:HD and are putting all their work into GT 5. it was a stupid idea to begin with and a very similar situation happened during the ps2 version of GT 3. so before people continue to try and put sony down, this is false.
2) that entire article about Sony being a technological dissapointment is accurate in some cases but is definatly jumping on the hate sony bandwagon. they mention the DS outselling the PSP and this is supposed to be disapointing how? the fact that sony even survived against nintendo is achievement enough. Nintendo has held the portable market for years and years. so because they're not beating a company who has had such a great record with handhelds that makes them a bad company. maybe its just me but that makes no sense at all. theres no way sony would ever beat nintendo in the handheld market.
i started to write a complete paragraph on all the shortcomings of this article but its a waste of time...
point is, this guy is nitpicking in most of the cases, excluding the rootkit (that was just plain bad news from the beginning) and battery recalls (and problems like these arise in many companys)
3) someone said pc gaming was dying. this is the biggest joke of a statement if i've ever seen one. but from coming from someone who may not play pc games its not a surprise. when you stick to a specific format you tend to lose grasp on anything outside of your own format. its happens with everyone. but if you look at a game like crysis for example. crysis has so far cost over 27 million dollars to develope. are you telling me that they're putting all this money into a dying format? they're not stupid, they want to make money. take a look at the majority of online games such as Counterstrike, Battlefield 2, or how bout MMORPG's like World of Warcraft or Everquest. World of Warcraft alone has over 7 million subscribers. Sims games are dominating the female market in games (which is impressive because more and more females are becoming gamers.) the fact of the matter is PC gaming is not dying and will never die. as long as games are made on computers they will always have a market.
4) and im not picking on darth chatlab here but he sums up my next point perfectly and i want to thank him for that.
Hm... I don't know what to tell you, Sage. I've enjoyed PC gaming, but anymore it's so hard to keep up with the technology curve that I really can't get into PC gaming anymore.
i agree with him 100%! more than 100% because this is my major gripe with games today. however there is a major flaw to his argument which many people fail to notice.
earlier he said.
I understand full well the Wii is nowhere near as powerful as the PS3, and I don't care. I played a PS3 at Wal-Mart and well, it was a PS2 game with better graphics. (Some NBA or NCAA Basketball game)
Graphics aren't what made me want a GC--Super Smash Bros Melee was. And online Smash Bros Brawl is ultimately what sold me on the Wii. (It's my email address for crying out loud.)
i agree with him 100%! more than 100% because this is my major gripe with games today. however there is a major flaw to his argument which many people fail to notice.
earlier he said.
I understand full well the Wii is nowhere near as powerful as the PS3, and I don't care. I played a PS3 at Wal-Mart and well, it was a PS2 game with better graphics. (Some NBA or NCAA Basketball game)
Graphics aren't what made me want a GC--Super Smash Bros Melee was. And online Smash Bros Brawl is ultimately what sold me on the Wii. (It's my email address for crying out loud.)
so if graphics aren't what made you a fan of certain games why do you feel the need to keep up with technology?
i hear people say this all the time. "PC's cost too much to maintain if you want to play games on them"
this is about the worst possible excuse in the world. if you dont want to play games with all the bells and whistles. guess what? you dont have to. you can still play a game on low graphics or medium graphics and get the same amount of enjoyment out of it. will better graphics give you a better experience. in some cases yes, probably (depending on who you are i suppose.) but there is no rule that says you must upgrade. that is just a pissing competition between pc gamers which has been around forever. just as it is with the ps3 and xbox 360. fans of the two will be bitching at eachother for years trying to one up the other. and its so old.
the point im making in this regard is that gaming computers are not expensive. they are only expensive if you want them to be.
you could pick up a video card today for about the same amount of money as an xbox 360 and be able to play games that look just as good as the xbox. if a game comes out in a couple years, you can still play it on medium or low settings and have it look like the xbox 360 or (if your a graphics whore) you can spend more money to play a game that will look better than the xbox 360. the whole point is the pc has never been more expensive than a console. if anything its been cheaper.
but who cares at the end of the day?
we all have our favorite games and genres... and rather than bitching about which is better we should just be happy with what we have.
today the game market has been taking a downward trend with graphics first and gameplay second. unfortunatly some gamers out there believe this is the way of the future for games. me personally? i think its the downfall. you can make a game look a fuckin real as possible but i would still take a second rate game like The Legend of Zelda (gold cartridge) over it anyday. in fact i would go as far as saying, if i were allowed 1 game for the rest of my life it would be that. Keep your FEAR and Farcrys and Doom3's away from me. without gameplay a nice looking game is just a movie. Gameplay is what companys should be focusing on, and graphics should take the backseat. i have all the time in the world to watch games get pretty. no need to rush it.
wow my fingers are sore. thanks to those who read my rant.
please try not to quote it.
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: Luke Skywalker
i agree with him 100%! more than 100% because this is my major gripe with games today. however there is a major flaw to his argument which many people fail to notice.
earlier he said.
I understand full well the Wii is nowhere near as powerful as the PS3, and I don't care. I played a PS3 at Wal-Mart and well, it was a PS2 game with better graphics. (Some NBA or NCAA Basketball game)
Graphics aren't what made me want a GC--Super Smash Bros Melee was. And online Smash Bros Brawl is ultimately what sold me on the Wii. (It's my email address for crying out loud.)
Hm... I don't know what to tell you, Sage. I've enjoyed PC gaming, but anymore it's so hard to keep up with the technology curve that I really can't get into PC gaming anymore.
i agree with him 100%! more than 100% because this is my major gripe with games today. however there is a major flaw to his argument which many people fail to notice.
earlier he said.
I understand full well the Wii is nowhere near as powerful as the PS3, and I don't care. I played a PS3 at Wal-Mart and well, it was a PS2 game with better graphics. (Some NBA or NCAA Basketball game)
Graphics aren't what made me want a GC--Super Smash Bros Melee was. And online Smash Bros Brawl is ultimately what sold me on the Wii. (It's my email address for crying out loud.)
Yeah, Chaltab! Why do you have to be so flaky? J/K! This would also be my complaint. And I really don't care a thing about graphics. One of my most often played games is still Dark Forces for the pc. Trust me, I do not care about graphics. And yet my biggest gripe about PC games is that you cannot keep your technology updated enough. In my case, and I can easily imagine in the case of Darth Chaltab, this has nothing to do with graphics. This has merely to do with the fact that we would like to be able to PLAY them, period. With computer gaming they are constantly making things better, it seems every few years it slows down for a little while, then they start making huge leaps again. I went from a console gamer, to a PC gamer, to no gamer at all because I suddenly woke up one morning and couldn't play any of the new games I was interested in, while a few months ago they all worked beautifully. It has absolutely nothing to do with graphics. In this manner PC gaming gets to be pretty expensive. Also, I don't think anybody has really gotten into any console wars crap, we are just saying our opinions of the new systems. Just because we say that we think Sony is in trouble, doesn't mean we are pissing on Sony because we are Mario or Microsith fanboys. In my opinion Sony, always releases mostly decent products, for quite a bit more money because it bears their brand name. I don't think in any product they are particularly worth it. My friend spend a considerable amount more on a Sony DVD player that he would have on any other brand, and he got less features for it, my little apex DVD player could play discs without any challenge, while his Sony skips with little provocation. I am not saying apex is better than Sony, but that Sony has a pretty bloated price tag for what it is. I think it is the same with any of their products, including the PSX, PS2, and yes the PS3. Looking at the game selections and the systems, I would give my vote to the 360, but then again, the wii looks pretty impressive in the new technology section, while the other two seem like they just have a larger processor and graphics chips. There have been no extremely bias opinions of anything to complain about. If you would like to mediate a console war, I think IGN's forms may be the place to join up.
Ah, your argument against the PC gaming bash, is that you should just stick to the older games, but we are not talking about that. Of course there will always be millions of games to play on the PC, but if you would like to play anything new, then you DO have to upgrade, so there is sort of a rule about it, if you want to play you have to upgrade. There is probably hardly a single PC release this year (other than some stupid casino games) that my system could even consider running.
"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: casualimp
The Gears of War song is entitled "Mad World" by Gary Jules (which is a Tears for Fears cover) that can be found on the Donnie Darko soundtrack. Hope that helps.
The Gears of War song is entitled "Mad World" by Gary Jules (which is a Tears for Fears cover) that can be found on the Donnie Darko soundtrack. Hope that helps.
Cool. Thanks!
http://ttrim.blogspot.com
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: Luke Skywalker
so many things to talk about in this thread....
i will do them one by one because there are so many things ive wanted to discuss lately and this is definatly the time to do it.
the point here is that no console is better than the other. anyone who says that is a ignorant fanboy. each system has their pros and cons and no one can say different. saying that i would like to point out a couple corrections made by people in this thread..
No, statements like this are ignorant. The market decides which console is better. Yes, they all have pros and cons, but if one weren't "better" than the other then the Sega Dreamcast wouldn't have tanked.
Well, let's see, if I have a 1.8ghz CPU on my pc, and Crysis requires a dual-core 3.2ghz minimum, what are my options? A motherboard can only support so much CPU before it needs to be replaced. Then you're still stuck with bottlenecks in the BUS and misc other issues. So, yeah, I can throw a new MB, memory, VID card, etc into my system, but this is being forced to upgrade. This is a fact. The games will not run. Not sure how you turn that into a pissing contest.
the point im making in this regard is that gaming computers are not expensive. they are only expensive if you want them to be.
you could pick up a video card today for about the same amount of money as an xbox 360 and be able to play games that look just as good as the xbox. if a game comes out in a couple years, you can still play it on medium or low settings and have it look like the xbox 360 or (if your a graphics whore) you can spend more money to play a game that will look better than the xbox 360. the whole point is the pc has never been more expensive than a console. if anything its been cheaper.
so many things to talk about in this thread....
i will do them one by one because there are so many things ive wanted to discuss lately and this is definatly the time to do it.
the point here is that no console is better than the other. anyone who says that is a ignorant fanboy. each system has their pros and cons and no one can say different. saying that i would like to point out a couple corrections made by people in this thread..
No, statements like this are ignorant. The market decides which console is better. Yes, they all have pros and cons, but if one weren't "better" than the other then the Sega Dreamcast wouldn't have tanked.
1) for the person who was talking about grand turismo costing money... false. sony has since abandoned that idea. they as well as everyone else realized it wouldn't fly and has since cancelled GT:HD and are putting all their work into GT 5. it was a stupid idea to begin with and a very similar situation happened during the ps2 version of GT 3. so before people continue to try and put sony down, this is false.
You're obviously taking what I said out of context, deliberately or not. What I said was that I saw this reported on X-Play. I did not say it would now and forever be the truth. I understand better than most that in technology businesses things change rapidly.
Again you're making statements with no basis in fact. If you'd actually quoted my previous posts about PC gaming these errors would have been apparent, but since you chose not to I'll refresh your memory:
I've been playing games on PC since the original shareware Doom, and before that I played text-based RPGs on the Vic 20 and C64, Zork on the Apple IIe, custom games on my Tandy Sinclair, so right off the bat your accusation that I may not play pc games is ludicrous. Take a walk into an EB or Gamestop, look at the shelf-space devoted to Console games vs pc games. It's another situation of market forces at work. Is Gears of War being ported to PC? What about Vice City Stories? Bully? Justice League Heroes? God of War? Mortal Kombat?
Is the pc market completely gone? No. Is that what I said? NO. I said that it was DYING.
i hear people say this all the time. "PC's cost too much to maintain if you want to play games on them"
this is about the worst possible excuse in the world. if you dont want to play games with all the bells and whistles. guess what? you dont have to. you can still play a game on low graphics or medium graphics and get the same amount of enjoyment out of it. will better graphics give you a better experience. in some cases yes, probably (depending on who you are i suppose.) but there is no rule that says you must upgrade. that is just a pissing competition between pc gamers which has been around forever. just as it is with the ps3 and xbox 360. fans of the two will be bitching at eachother for years trying to one up the other. and its so old.
You're obviously taking what I said out of context, deliberately or not. What I said was that I saw this reported on X-Play. I did not say it would now and forever be the truth. I understand better than most that in technology businesses things change rapidly.
3) someone said pc gaming was dying. this is the biggest joke of a statement if i've ever seen one. but from coming from someone who may not play pc games its not a surprise. when you stick to a specific format you tend to lose grasp on anything outside of your own format. its happens with everyone. but if you look at a game like crysis for example. crysis has so far cost over 27 million dollars to develope. are you telling me that they're putting all this money into a dying format? they're not stupid, they want to make money. take a look at the majority of online games such as Counterstrike, Battlefield 2, or how bout MMORPG's like World of Warcraft or Everquest. World of Warcraft alone has over 7 million subscribers. Sims games are dominating the female market in games (which is impressive because more and more females are becoming gamers.) the fact of the matter is PC gaming is not dying and will never die. as long as games are made on computers they will always have a market.
Again you're making statements with no basis in fact. If you'd actually quoted my previous posts about PC gaming these errors would have been apparent, but since you chose not to I'll refresh your memory:
I've been playing games on PC since the original shareware Doom, and before that I played text-based RPGs on the Vic 20 and C64, Zork on the Apple IIe, custom games on my Tandy Sinclair, so right off the bat your accusation that I may not play pc games is ludicrous. Take a walk into an EB or Gamestop, look at the shelf-space devoted to Console games vs pc games. It's another situation of market forces at work. Is Gears of War being ported to PC? What about Vice City Stories? Bully? Justice League Heroes? God of War? Mortal Kombat?
Is the pc market completely gone? No. Is that what I said? NO. I said that it was DYING.
i hear people say this all the time. "PC's cost too much to maintain if you want to play games on them"
this is about the worst possible excuse in the world. if you dont want to play games with all the bells and whistles. guess what? you dont have to. you can still play a game on low graphics or medium graphics and get the same amount of enjoyment out of it. will better graphics give you a better experience. in some cases yes, probably (depending on who you are i suppose.) but there is no rule that says you must upgrade. that is just a pissing competition between pc gamers which has been around forever. just as it is with the ps3 and xbox 360. fans of the two will be bitching at eachother for years trying to one up the other. and its so old.
Well, let's see, if I have a 1.8ghz CPU on my pc, and Crysis requires a dual-core 3.2ghz minimum, what are my options? A motherboard can only support so much CPU before it needs to be replaced. Then you're still stuck with bottlenecks in the BUS and misc other issues. So, yeah, I can throw a new MB, memory, VID card, etc into my system, but this is being forced to upgrade. This is a fact. The games will not run. Not sure how you turn that into a pissing contest.
the point im making in this regard is that gaming computers are not expensive. they are only expensive if you want them to be.
you could pick up a video card today for about the same amount of money as an xbox 360 and be able to play games that look just as good as the xbox. if a game comes out in a couple years, you can still play it on medium or low settings and have it look like the xbox 360 or (if your a graphics whore) you can spend more money to play a game that will look better than the xbox 360. the whole point is the pc has never been more expensive than a console. if anything its been cheaper.
This is even more ludicrous. I just built a bare-bones gaming pc for my parents (my father plays Call of Duty) with 1GB RAM and a 256MB Video Card for over $700 with no monitor. Until this recent generation of consoles I'd like you to show me an XBOX, PS, or Nintendo system that cost that much. And anyone spending that much and not getting a pc out of it is lost. There's not a console in the world at this time that will give what a pc is giving, and I don't need to purchase a high-def tv to get hi-def graphics from my pc.
I don't think one must sacrifice graphics to have good game play. I think Unreal Tournament 04 for PC is one of the best gaming experiences I've ever had because of the variety of play and also the scalability of the graphics. Far Cry was also exceptional, with some of the best graphics I've ever seen in addition to the most difficult A.I. I've ever played. Standard tvs are not capable of the same resolution of a pc monitor, and that's why I feel that the console experience is somewhat lessened for me because the lack of graphics depth. However, there are some console games that just blew me away, like Resident Evil 4, Hulk Ultimate Destruction, and some of the WWE games. The Sega Genesis was a great experience for me, especially with the sports games (so I'm not only a Nintendo fanboy).
http://ttrim.blogspot.com
- Time
- Post link
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: Number20
JediSage is correct. PC gaming is hard because you have to be constantly upgrading to the latest and greatest video card or some other peice of hardware the moment it comes out or you are 'out of date' and can't play the latest games. It seems to have gotten much more ridiclous in the last few years. The games I play on the PC are mostly older games, such as MS flight Simulator, Red Baron 3D, and similar stuff. But I think one of the major reasons consoles have held as strongly as they have, is because it is much cheaper to have a console than a gaming PC and keeping the gaming PC up to date.
JediSage is correct. PC gaming is hard because you have to be constantly upgrading to the latest and greatest video card or some other peice of hardware the moment it comes out or you are 'out of date' and can't play the latest games. It seems to have gotten much more ridiclous in the last few years. The games I play on the PC are mostly older games, such as MS flight Simulator, Red Baron 3D, and similar stuff. But I think one of the major reasons consoles have held as strongly as they have, is because it is much cheaper to have a console than a gaming PC and keeping the gaming PC up to date.
I've actually thought over the last few years that the pc upgrade cycle had slowed down. I haven't bought a new pc since...01, I believe. Only thing I've bought since then was a new vid card, but it wasn't keeping me from gaming on my older stuff. That being said, I can't come close to playing QIV or HL2 and other stuff that's out.
http://ttrim.blogspot.com
- Time
- Post link
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: Number20
I haven't noticed that the PC gaming hardware requirements have slowed in the need to upgrade. I remember that about 5-6 years ago, one could buy a pretty good off-the-shelf computer and play anything out there. Today, you need a special "gaming PC" in order to play some of the high-end games. As I said before, in consoles, the manufacturers are locked into certain hardware requirements, so you don't have that as an issue.
I haven't noticed that the PC gaming hardware requirements have slowed in the need to upgrade. I remember that about 5-6 years ago, one could buy a pretty good off-the-shelf computer and play anything out there. Today, you need a special "gaming PC" in order to play some of the high-end games. As I said before, in consoles, the manufacturers are locked into certain hardware requirements, so you don't have that as an issue.
Exactly. My computer is a year old, 2.8 GHz 1024 MB Ram
...And I can play Freedom Force vs The 3rd Reich, The Movies and Command and Conquer Generals. No other games made after 2001 have worked on this computer.
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: C3PX
Yeah, Chaltab! Why do you have to be so flaky? J/K! This would also be my complaint. And I really don't care a thing about graphics. One of my most often played games is still Dark Forces for the pc. Trust me, I do not care about graphics. And yet my biggest gripe about PC games is that you cannot keep your technology updated enough. In my case, and I can easily imagine in the case of Darth Chaltab, this has nothing to do with graphics. This has merely to do with the fact that we would like to be able to PLAY them, period. With computer gaming they are constantly making things better, it seems every few years it slows down for a little while, then they start making huge leaps again. I went from a console gamer, to a PC gamer, to no gamer at all because I suddenly woke up one morning and couldn't play any of the new games I was interested in, while a few months ago they all worked beautifully. It has absolutely nothing to do with graphics. In this manner PC gaming gets to be pretty expensive. Also, I don't think anybody has really gotten into any console wars crap, we are just saying our opinions of the new systems. Just because we say that we think Sony is in trouble, doesn't mean we are pissing on Sony because we are Mario or Microsith fanboys. In my opinion Sony, always releases mostly decent products, for quite a bit more money because it bears their brand name. I don't think in any product they are particularly worth it. My friend spend a considerable amount more on a Sony DVD player that he would have on any other brand, and he got less features for it, my little apex DVD player could play discs without any challenge, while his Sony skips with little provocation. I am not saying apex is better than Sony, but that Sony has a pretty bloated price tag for what it is. I think it is the same with any of their products, including the PSX, PS2, and yes the PS3. Looking at the game selections and the systems, I would give my vote to the 360, but then again, the wii looks pretty impressive in the new technology section, while the other two seem like they just have a larger processor and graphics chips. There have been no extremely bias opinions of anything to complain about. If you would like to mediate a console war, I think IGN's forms may be the place to join up.
Ah, your argument against the PC gaming bash, is that you should just stick to the older games, but we are not talking about that. Of course there will always be millions of games to play on the PC, but if you would like to play anything new, then you DO have to upgrade, so there is sort of a rule about it, if you want to play you have to upgrade. There is probably hardly a single PC release this year (other than some stupid casino games) that my system could even consider running.
Originally posted by: Luke Skywalker
i agree with him 100%! more than 100% because this is my major gripe with games today. however there is a major flaw to his argument which many people fail to notice.
earlier he said.
I understand full well the Wii is nowhere near as powerful as the PS3, and I don't care. I played a PS3 at Wal-Mart and well, it was a PS2 game with better graphics. (Some NBA or NCAA Basketball game)
Graphics aren't what made me want a GC--Super Smash Bros Melee was. And online Smash Bros Brawl is ultimately what sold me on the Wii. (It's my email address for crying out loud.)
Hm... I don't know what to tell you, Sage. I've enjoyed PC gaming, but anymore it's so hard to keep up with the technology curve that I really can't get into PC gaming anymore.
i agree with him 100%! more than 100% because this is my major gripe with games today. however there is a major flaw to his argument which many people fail to notice.
earlier he said.
I understand full well the Wii is nowhere near as powerful as the PS3, and I don't care. I played a PS3 at Wal-Mart and well, it was a PS2 game with better graphics. (Some NBA or NCAA Basketball game)
Graphics aren't what made me want a GC--Super Smash Bros Melee was. And online Smash Bros Brawl is ultimately what sold me on the Wii. (It's my email address for crying out loud.)
Yeah, Chaltab! Why do you have to be so flaky? J/K! This would also be my complaint. And I really don't care a thing about graphics. One of my most often played games is still Dark Forces for the pc. Trust me, I do not care about graphics. And yet my biggest gripe about PC games is that you cannot keep your technology updated enough. In my case, and I can easily imagine in the case of Darth Chaltab, this has nothing to do with graphics. This has merely to do with the fact that we would like to be able to PLAY them, period. With computer gaming they are constantly making things better, it seems every few years it slows down for a little while, then they start making huge leaps again. I went from a console gamer, to a PC gamer, to no gamer at all because I suddenly woke up one morning and couldn't play any of the new games I was interested in, while a few months ago they all worked beautifully. It has absolutely nothing to do with graphics. In this manner PC gaming gets to be pretty expensive. Also, I don't think anybody has really gotten into any console wars crap, we are just saying our opinions of the new systems. Just because we say that we think Sony is in trouble, doesn't mean we are pissing on Sony because we are Mario or Microsith fanboys. In my opinion Sony, always releases mostly decent products, for quite a bit more money because it bears their brand name. I don't think in any product they are particularly worth it. My friend spend a considerable amount more on a Sony DVD player that he would have on any other brand, and he got less features for it, my little apex DVD player could play discs without any challenge, while his Sony skips with little provocation. I am not saying apex is better than Sony, but that Sony has a pretty bloated price tag for what it is. I think it is the same with any of their products, including the PSX, PS2, and yes the PS3. Looking at the game selections and the systems, I would give my vote to the 360, but then again, the wii looks pretty impressive in the new technology section, while the other two seem like they just have a larger processor and graphics chips. There have been no extremely bias opinions of anything to complain about. If you would like to mediate a console war, I think IGN's forms may be the place to join up.
Ah, your argument against the PC gaming bash, is that you should just stick to the older games, but we are not talking about that. Of course there will always be millions of games to play on the PC, but if you would like to play anything new, then you DO have to upgrade, so there is sort of a rule about it, if you want to play you have to upgrade. There is probably hardly a single PC release this year (other than some stupid casino games) that my system could even consider running.
you say, "I went from a console gamer, to a PC gamer, to no gamer at all because I suddenly woke up one morning and couldn't play any of the new games I was interested in, while a few months ago they all worked beautifully. It has absolutely nothing to do with graphics. " so if its not graphics than what is it? the only thing i can think of is a hardware problem or something may have went on your computer.. either way this has nothing to do with upgrading. maybe you have to reinstall?
as for the console wars things and people being biased, i do recall someone saying "Im hearing a sony fanboy crying right now or something along those lines" Sorry but if thats not being biased i dont know what is.
and when did i say anything about sticking to older games? seriously? i said that you can play any game on the pc without all the bells and whistles on if you dont care about graphics. and NO YOUR WRONG ABOUT HAVING TO BUY NEW STUFF TO PLAY ANY NEW GAMES! i've played every new game this year with a setup i made about 2 years ago. but at least with the pc you are given a choice! im not saying you will never have to upgrade your pc, you will have to one day, just as you will have to buy a new console.
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: JediSage
This is even more ludicrous. I just built a bare-bones gaming pc for my parents (my father plays Call of Duty) with 1GB RAM and a 256MB Video Card for over $700 with no monitor. Until this recent generation of consoles I'd like you to show me an XBOX, PS, or Nintendo system that cost that much. And anyone spending that much and not getting a pc out of it is lost. There's not a console in the world at this time that will give what a pc is giving, and I don't need to purchase a high-def tv to get hi-def graphics from my pc.
I don't think one must sacrifice graphics to have good game play. I think Unreal Tournament 04 for PC is one of the best gaming experiences I've ever had because of the variety of play and also the scalability of the graphics. Far Cry was also exceptional, with some of the best graphics I've ever seen in addition to the most difficult A.I. I've ever played. Standard tvs are not capable of the same resolution of a pc monitor, and that's why I feel that the console experience is somewhat lessened for me because the lack of graphics depth. However, there are some console games that just blew me away, like Resident Evil 4, Hulk Ultimate Destruction, and some of the WWE games. The Sega Genesis was a great experience for me, especially with the sports games (so I'm not only a Nintendo fanboy).
Originally posted by: Luke Skywalker
so many things to talk about in this thread....
i will do them one by one because there are so many things ive wanted to discuss lately and this is definatly the time to do it.
the point here is that no console is better than the other. anyone who says that is a ignorant fanboy. each system has their pros and cons and no one can say different. saying that i would like to point out a couple corrections made by people in this thread..
No, statements like this are ignorant. The market decides which console is better. Yes, they all have pros and cons, but if one weren't "better" than the other then the Sega Dreamcast wouldn't have tanked.
Well, let's see, if I have a 1.8ghz CPU on my pc, and Crysis requires a dual-core 3.2ghz minimum, what are my options? A motherboard can only support so much CPU before it needs to be replaced. Then you're still stuck with bottlenecks in the BUS and misc other issues. So, yeah, I can throw a new MB, memory, VID card, etc into my system, but this is being forced to upgrade. This is a fact. The games will not run. Not sure how you turn that into a pissing contest.
the point im making in this regard is that gaming computers are not expensive. they are only expensive if you want them to be.
you could pick up a video card today for about the same amount of money as an xbox 360 and be able to play games that look just as good as the xbox. if a game comes out in a couple years, you can still play it on medium or low settings and have it look like the xbox 360 or (if your a graphics whore) you can spend more money to play a game that will look better than the xbox 360. the whole point is the pc has never been more expensive than a console. if anything its been cheaper.
so many things to talk about in this thread....
i will do them one by one because there are so many things ive wanted to discuss lately and this is definatly the time to do it.
the point here is that no console is better than the other. anyone who says that is a ignorant fanboy. each system has their pros and cons and no one can say different. saying that i would like to point out a couple corrections made by people in this thread..
No, statements like this are ignorant. The market decides which console is better. Yes, they all have pros and cons, but if one weren't "better" than the other then the Sega Dreamcast wouldn't have tanked.
1) for the person who was talking about grand turismo costing money... false. sony has since abandoned that idea. they as well as everyone else realized it wouldn't fly and has since cancelled GT:HD and are putting all their work into GT 5. it was a stupid idea to begin with and a very similar situation happened during the ps2 version of GT 3. so before people continue to try and put sony down, this is false.
You're obviously taking what I said out of context, deliberately or not. What I said was that I saw this reported on X-Play. I did not say it would now and forever be the truth. I understand better than most that in technology businesses things change rapidly.
Again you're making statements with no basis in fact. If you'd actually quoted my previous posts about PC gaming these errors would have been apparent, but since you chose not to I'll refresh your memory:
I've been playing games on PC since the original shareware Doom, and before that I played text-based RPGs on the Vic 20 and C64, Zork on the Apple IIe, custom games on my Tandy Sinclair, so right off the bat your accusation that I may not play pc games is ludicrous. Take a walk into an EB or Gamestop, look at the shelf-space devoted to Console games vs pc games. It's another situation of market forces at work. Is Gears of War being ported to PC? What about Vice City Stories? Bully? Justice League Heroes? God of War? Mortal Kombat?
Is the pc market completely gone? No. Is that what I said? NO. I said that it was DYING.
i hear people say this all the time. "PC's cost too much to maintain if you want to play games on them"
this is about the worst possible excuse in the world. if you dont want to play games with all the bells and whistles. guess what? you dont have to. you can still play a game on low graphics or medium graphics and get the same amount of enjoyment out of it. will better graphics give you a better experience. in some cases yes, probably (depending on who you are i suppose.) but there is no rule that says you must upgrade. that is just a pissing competition between pc gamers which has been around forever. just as it is with the ps3 and xbox 360. fans of the two will be bitching at eachother for years trying to one up the other. and its so old.
You're obviously taking what I said out of context, deliberately or not. What I said was that I saw this reported on X-Play. I did not say it would now and forever be the truth. I understand better than most that in technology businesses things change rapidly.
3) someone said pc gaming was dying. this is the biggest joke of a statement if i've ever seen one. but from coming from someone who may not play pc games its not a surprise. when you stick to a specific format you tend to lose grasp on anything outside of your own format. its happens with everyone. but if you look at a game like crysis for example. crysis has so far cost over 27 million dollars to develope. are you telling me that they're putting all this money into a dying format? they're not stupid, they want to make money. take a look at the majority of online games such as Counterstrike, Battlefield 2, or how bout MMORPG's like World of Warcraft or Everquest. World of Warcraft alone has over 7 million subscribers. Sims games are dominating the female market in games (which is impressive because more and more females are becoming gamers.) the fact of the matter is PC gaming is not dying and will never die. as long as games are made on computers they will always have a market.
Again you're making statements with no basis in fact. If you'd actually quoted my previous posts about PC gaming these errors would have been apparent, but since you chose not to I'll refresh your memory:
I've been playing games on PC since the original shareware Doom, and before that I played text-based RPGs on the Vic 20 and C64, Zork on the Apple IIe, custom games on my Tandy Sinclair, so right off the bat your accusation that I may not play pc games is ludicrous. Take a walk into an EB or Gamestop, look at the shelf-space devoted to Console games vs pc games. It's another situation of market forces at work. Is Gears of War being ported to PC? What about Vice City Stories? Bully? Justice League Heroes? God of War? Mortal Kombat?
Is the pc market completely gone? No. Is that what I said? NO. I said that it was DYING.
i hear people say this all the time. "PC's cost too much to maintain if you want to play games on them"
this is about the worst possible excuse in the world. if you dont want to play games with all the bells and whistles. guess what? you dont have to. you can still play a game on low graphics or medium graphics and get the same amount of enjoyment out of it. will better graphics give you a better experience. in some cases yes, probably (depending on who you are i suppose.) but there is no rule that says you must upgrade. that is just a pissing competition between pc gamers which has been around forever. just as it is with the ps3 and xbox 360. fans of the two will be bitching at eachother for years trying to one up the other. and its so old.
Well, let's see, if I have a 1.8ghz CPU on my pc, and Crysis requires a dual-core 3.2ghz minimum, what are my options? A motherboard can only support so much CPU before it needs to be replaced. Then you're still stuck with bottlenecks in the BUS and misc other issues. So, yeah, I can throw a new MB, memory, VID card, etc into my system, but this is being forced to upgrade. This is a fact. The games will not run. Not sure how you turn that into a pissing contest.
the point im making in this regard is that gaming computers are not expensive. they are only expensive if you want them to be.
you could pick up a video card today for about the same amount of money as an xbox 360 and be able to play games that look just as good as the xbox. if a game comes out in a couple years, you can still play it on medium or low settings and have it look like the xbox 360 or (if your a graphics whore) you can spend more money to play a game that will look better than the xbox 360. the whole point is the pc has never been more expensive than a console. if anything its been cheaper.
This is even more ludicrous. I just built a bare-bones gaming pc for my parents (my father plays Call of Duty) with 1GB RAM and a 256MB Video Card for over $700 with no monitor. Until this recent generation of consoles I'd like you to show me an XBOX, PS, or Nintendo system that cost that much. And anyone spending that much and not getting a pc out of it is lost. There's not a console in the world at this time that will give what a pc is giving, and I don't need to purchase a high-def tv to get hi-def graphics from my pc.
I don't think one must sacrifice graphics to have good game play. I think Unreal Tournament 04 for PC is one of the best gaming experiences I've ever had because of the variety of play and also the scalability of the graphics. Far Cry was also exceptional, with some of the best graphics I've ever seen in addition to the most difficult A.I. I've ever played. Standard tvs are not capable of the same resolution of a pc monitor, and that's why I feel that the console experience is somewhat lessened for me because the lack of graphics depth. However, there are some console games that just blew me away, like Resident Evil 4, Hulk Ultimate Destruction, and some of the WWE games. The Sega Genesis was a great experience for me, especially with the sports games (so I'm not only a Nintendo fanboy).
so if the market decides genius then which company has tanked? so far all systems seem to be selling well right? so in fact there is no better system right? thats what im saying!!!! people are nitpicking about stupid shit, and automatically saying "ohhhh sony is doomed" or "nintendo looks like shit, they're going to lose" WRONG!!!
and i didnt take what you said out of context, i was just simply correcting you so people didnt recieve the wrong information. i dont think its fair to mention things about a console which may further tarish its image if its not true. thats all. i dont see whats wrong with that?
again i was not refferring to you not being a pc gamer, but console gamers in general. many people dont look at pc games when they play a console. i mean why would they? i dont look at console games much. but ebgames is a smaller chain. go into a bestbuy or futureshop and then compare them. different chains carry different amounts. and again you must stay current with your info, there are plans to port both Bully and Gears of War to the PC. more platforms more money. thats all these companys care about in the end. hence why GTA4 is going to be multiplatform (except maybe for the Wii, not sure)
but that argument makes just as much sense as saying, will company of heros or world of warcraft be ported to any console. NO? so does that mean console gaming is dying? no lol
as for your computer, this is not the computers fault. point is, usually people will upgrade their cpu every 5 years or whatnot. you claim to be a pc gamer but your computer sounds extremely out of date. so i dont think you've been a pc gamer lately. just like going from a ps1 to a ps3, its gonna cost ya $$$. but im not saying your going to need a $1000 computer. not even.
as for call of duty, no offense but if you were building for that game in general you went overboard. i played the first call of duty with 512 of RAM and 128MB video card (im talking geforce 4 here) and i played it with everything maxed. today you could get that for under $100 prolly. if they still make geforce 4's. this is what i mean when i say people really dont know what they need. now your dad would have no problem playing call of duty 2 i bet or any game after that. you've invested for a couple of years, just as you would on a console. plus they dont even sell regular xbox's anymore. nor will the make games for it. ps2s are already being phased out.
ive said what i needed to though..
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: Darth Chaltab
Exactly. My computer is a year old, 2.8 GHz 1024 MB Ram
...And I can play Freedom Force vs The 3rd Reich, The Movies and Command and Conquer Generals. No other games made after 2001 have worked on this computer.
Originally posted by: Number20
I haven't noticed that the PC gaming hardware requirements have slowed in the need to upgrade. I remember that about 5-6 years ago, one could buy a pretty good off-the-shelf computer and play anything out there. Today, you need a special "gaming PC" in order to play some of the high-end games. As I said before, in consoles, the manufacturers are locked into certain hardware requirements, so you don't have that as an issue.
I haven't noticed that the PC gaming hardware requirements have slowed in the need to upgrade. I remember that about 5-6 years ago, one could buy a pretty good off-the-shelf computer and play anything out there. Today, you need a special "gaming PC" in order to play some of the high-end games. As I said before, in consoles, the manufacturers are locked into certain hardware requirements, so you don't have that as an issue.
Exactly. My computer is a year old, 2.8 GHz 1024 MB Ram
...And I can play Freedom Force vs The 3rd Reich, The Movies and Command and Conquer Generals. No other games made after 2001 have worked on this computer.
personally i think everything on that sounds fine so far... what video card are you running?
if anything that may be the only problem.
- Time
- Post link
I'm not sure what exactly what mine is--it came with the system, and it doesn't have Hardware TnL, so a lot of games that I could theoretically run in memory alone don't work because of that requirement.
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: Luke Skywalker
you say, "I went from a console gamer, to a PC gamer, to no gamer at all because I suddenly woke up one morning and couldn't play any of the new games I was interested in, while a few months ago they all worked beautifully. It has absolutely nothing to do with graphics. " so if its not graphics than what is it? the only thing i can think of is a hardware problem or something may have went on your computer.. either way this has nothing to do with upgrading. maybe you have to reinstall?
as for the console wars things and people being biased, i do recall someone saying "Im hearing a sony fanboy crying right now or something along those lines" Sorry but if thats not being biased i dont know what is.
and when did i say anything about sticking to older games? seriously? i said that you can play any game on the pc without all the bells and whistles on if you dont care about graphics. and NO YOUR WRONG ABOUT HAVING TO BUY NEW STUFF TO PLAY ANY NEW GAMES! i've played every new game this year with a setup i made about 2 years ago. but at least with the pc you are given a choice! im not saying you will never have to upgrade your pc, you will have to one day, just as you will have to buy a new console.
you say, "I went from a console gamer, to a PC gamer, to no gamer at all because I suddenly woke up one morning and couldn't play any of the new games I was interested in, while a few months ago they all worked beautifully. It has absolutely nothing to do with graphics. " so if its not graphics than what is it? the only thing i can think of is a hardware problem or something may have went on your computer.. either way this has nothing to do with upgrading. maybe you have to reinstall?
as for the console wars things and people being biased, i do recall someone saying "Im hearing a sony fanboy crying right now or something along those lines" Sorry but if thats not being biased i dont know what is.
and when did i say anything about sticking to older games? seriously? i said that you can play any game on the pc without all the bells and whistles on if you dont care about graphics. and NO YOUR WRONG ABOUT HAVING TO BUY NEW STUFF TO PLAY ANY NEW GAMES! i've played every new game this year with a setup i made about 2 years ago. but at least with the pc you are given a choice! im not saying you will never have to upgrade your pc, you will have to one day, just as you will have to buy a new console.
Okay, when I said "suddenly I woke up one morning and couldn't play games anymore" I meant it as a figure of speech. I was refering to my system finding itself outdated. I do not need to reinstall anything, I do in fact need an upgrade if I were to want to play most modern games. This is a fact, there is nothing in denying it. Not every game has the function to turn down all the "bells and whistles" and even when they do, you can turn it down all the way and it still plays lousily. I would have loved to play Battlefront when it came out, but it is not going to happen. Not without buying new hardware.
"NO YOUR WRONG ABOUT HAVING TO BUY NEW STUFF TO PLAY ANY NEW GAMES!" Dude, calm down! Why are you getting so bent out of shape about this. Not everybody is as big into gaming as you seem to be. When I was in highschool I was big into games, at that time I owned a SNES and a N64 and felt the Playstation sucked (I owned one of those too, but never found any games half as good as my N64 games), at that time I would have been very happy to participate in console wars. High school is now a very distant memory to me, and I could care less about pissing on other consoles. The line Ric said about the PS fanboy crying somewhere, was more of a joke, not to be taken seriously. Just an off handed comment not meant to rough up anyone feathers.
"i've played every new game this year with a setup i made about 2 years ago"
If you have played every new game this year, then you have a hell of a lot more money on your hands than I have. I also do not have the money to buy a new system every two or three years. It is just my opinion that consoles, being just a few hundred with no extra troubles are a much cheaper than a $700 dollar system every three years or so. If you do not agree with this, it is not going to hurt you. The world is not going to end. We can all live in harmony. Your PC gaming experience is a good one. Mine ended when my system, which I am quite fond of and have no intention of replacing or throwing more money into, became outdated and could not handle new games. Yes it is my fault because I did not commit to buy a new system or a new graphics card. I would much rather buy a new console system than a new computer, thus PC gaming is not worth it for me. I know plenty of others who agree with me. But hey, it is okay. PC gaming is still there, your games aren't going anywhere. And some of us still feel that sony is going to lose this round. We might be wrong. That is part of the fun and beauty of making predictions like this, you might be wrong and you can look back and say, "man, I really thought the dreamcast was going to rule."
"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape
- Time
- Post link
hey if you like consoles thats totally fine with me. im just really getting sick of hearing people bash other systems because they dont like them thats all.
the only times i really have time to play any sort of game is on xmas break and summer due to my full time enrollment in university. i just wish everyone would support their consoles with positive comments rather than put down others with negative ones.
i work at futureshop and have to deal with fanboys on a daily basis. i think thats one reason why i really had to vent in this thread. so i meant no harm by any of my comments. movies and games are my passion. they are the best forms of escapism for me. by the way i may purchase my first console since the ps1. got my name in a raffle for a wii at work. i hope im not dissapointed.
- Time
- Post link
- Time
- Post link
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: Windexed
Man, I've been trying to find a DS Lite to no avail. These things are about as scarce as Wiis and PS3s.
Man, I've been trying to find a DS Lite to no avail. These things are about as scarce as Wiis and PS3s.
Funny, I've not had any trouble finding DS Lites in my area. I just don't have the money to upgrade.
- Time
- Post link
we've been sold out of the pink ones forever now.
a lot of girls have really taken to the DS lite, my girlfriend included. i'd love to borrow hers sometime but unfortunatly pink isnt my colour. so i only play it in the comfort of my home.
my work also finally got their ps3 demo unit hooked up. so far i am not very impressed. the only game that really did make my jaw drop was motorstorm and thats not due out for a lil while. sports games look identical to the xbox360 ones and are still nothing innovative.
plus the unit froze on us a couple times.. lol.
im hoping we get our wii demo unit in real soon.
on another note i am curious at what all you gamers are really looking forward to on the games horizon. whether it be a pc title, console title, handheld or even mobile title.
as early as it is i am absolutly dying to see even the slightest bit of information on the next grand theft auto game.
i hoping we get an early xmas gift from rockstar in the form of a teaser or screenshot or something. the game is set for the october 2007 release which makes it under a year away. i cant wait!!
how about you guys?
- Time
- Post link
1. (PS2, Bandai Namco) Gundam SEED: Federation vs ZAFT II - 337,559
2. (PS2, Sega) Yakuza 2 - 274,822
3. (DS, Pokemon) Pokemon Diamond - 98,859 / 1,996,275
4. (X360, Microsoft) Blue Dragon - 80,348
5. (DS, Pokemon) Pokemon Pearl - 75,206 / 1,669,367
6. (Wii, Nintendo) Wii Sports - 72,382 / 248,549
7. (DS, Nintendo) Kirby Squeek Squad - 66,421 / 465,462
8. (Wii, Nintendo) Wii Play - 62,863 / 237,160
9. (DS, Nintendo) Jump Ultimate Stars - 62,068 / 278,640
10. (DS, Nintendo) Common Knowledge Training - 55,208 / 720,752
11. Love and Berry DS Collection
12. New Super Mario Brothers
13. Momotarou Dentetsu 16
14. 1000 DS Receipes
15. Animal Crossing Wild World
16. More Brain Age
17. Zelda no Densetsu: Twilight Princess
18. Tales of Destiny
19. Yakuza (PS2 The Best)
20. Final Fantasy VI Advance
21. Brighter than Dawning Blue
22. Power Pro Kun Pocket 9
23. Odoru Made in Wario
24. Kirarin Star Revolution Naasan to Issho
25. Brain Age
26. Mario Kart DS
27. 200 Mannin Kanji
28. DS Cuisine Navigator
29. J League Winning Eleven 10
30. English Training DS
- Time
- Post link
http://ttrim.blogspot.com
- Time
- Post link
- Time
- Post link
Well-I was a big console gamer, but then I just got tired of forking over 50.00 for a copy of a game I wanted (I remember I bought Republic commando and Lego Star Wars when they came out at the same time for 90.00---thats alllooootttt of dough for a 12 year old to be forking over (it was all christmas money) just for the system to become obsolete after a few years-With the computer (which I have invariably switched to, my brother plays the ps2, I play it seldomly) I can play games form 10 years ago with no problem, I can also play all my ps1 games, with a system emulator (Metal Gear Solid, looks better than it does with the Ps1) after some trial and error with the video plugins------I can also surf the web, etc. on the computer-I have tried (under a small budget ;P) to try to emulate the console experince on my PC, with the use of controllers, joysticks, arcade games also are great (I play Metal Slug X from time to time with the full aircraft joystick---thats pretty sick!) with the PC too. Well, I guess it is'nt dieing, but its still competeing with the more user-home friendly consoles (plug-and-play as I would call them) and with the launch of Vista (which is very intresting----You cannot upgrade to DirectX 10 without it-which has pissed alot of people off----) it is supposed to be more and more like a console experince (no more installing--just put the disk in and your there)
Only time will tell---
- Time
- Post link
My Projects:
[Holiday Special Hybrid DVD v2]
[X0 Project]
[Backstroke of the West DVD]
[ROTS Theatrical DVD]
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: ricarleite
What the DS is going to provide is a way to play the upcoming Pokemon for the Wii using it as a controller.
What the DS is going to provide is a way to play the upcoming Pokemon for the Wii using it as a controller.
Interesting that they are going to use the DS as a controller. Its a good idea, too bad its taken so long to get it done. One story I've heard is that the failed Atari Jaguar was going to use the handheld Atari Lynx as a controller. They planned on using the screen on the Lynx as a motion tracker for an Aliens Vs. Predator sequel, and as a tricorder for a planned Star Trek game. Maybe a system with proper support, like the Wii is getting, will finally be able to do stuff like this. I think it would be pretty fun.