The Glade 4.0

"Turn the lights down, the party just got wilder."
It is currently Fri Nov 22, 2024 3:16 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 148 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: PC Elitism
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 10:15 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 8:22 am
Posts: 385
Talya wrote:
Consoles have their place, but lets not pretend console RPGs can for a second even try to compete with PCs.


Can't quite go that far myself. For one reason, and I know personal taste has a sizable influence on this, is that for the past several years, for every PC RPG that's come that I've really liked, there's been a half dozen console RPGs that I've liked nearly as well.

Quote:
The much loved FF7 was crap compared to even old Ultima series (for DOS!) games on PC, let alone greats from this decade.


Only partly agree with this one too...and I was a huge Ultima fan in the old days. IMO, I'd have to say:

FF7 > Ultima 1, 2, 3, and 5
FF7 = (or close to) 4, and 6
FF7 < Ultima 7, and 7 part 2
FF7 >>>> Ultima 8 and 9.


Last edited by Coren on Thu Feb 25, 2010 10:21 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 10:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:59 pm
Posts: 9412
Oh, let's not forget how atrocious VATS targetting is on console vs. PC.

And "adequate" was a poor word choice, I was hedging in case somebody brought up the half-assed click-to-move option KotOR added instead of giving the camera a better PC-oriented control scheme.

_________________
"Aaaah! Emotions are weird!" - Amdee
"... Mirrorshades prevent the forces of normalcy from realizing that one is crazed and possibly dangerous. They are the symbol of the sun-staring visionary, the biker, the rocker, the policeman, and similar outlaws." - Bruce Sterling, preface to Mirrorshades


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 10:27 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 8:22 am
Posts: 385
Hopwin wrote:
Lenas wrote:
FarSky wrote:
I prefer MMORPGs on the computer. Everything else, console.


I left MMORPG out of my statement because, well, they don't really exist on the consoles :p


Can console people play FPS against PC people or are the servers independant?


Missed this question.

It's not quite console vs PC, but, Unreal Tournament on the PS3 does let you play with mouse/keyboard, and it's a server option wether or not to allow the two to mix.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 10:46 am 
Offline
I got nothin.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 11160
Location: Arafys, AKA El Müso Guapo!
Kaffis Mark V wrote:
Oh, let's not forget how atrocious VATS targetting is on console vs. PC.


Really? I never had a problem with it on my console at all.

_________________
Image
Holy shitsnacks!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 11:03 am 
Offline
The Dancing Cat
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 2:21 pm
Posts: 9354
Location: Ohio
Screeling wrote:
Raltar wrote:
They ported Starcraft to the Nintendo 64. It was bad, from what I've heard.

And it was like 2 or 3 years after it came out on PC. Basically, everybody who wanted to play StarCraft already played it on the PC.

I would argue the three games I listed above are the greatest strategy games and I don't see how you could port any of them to a console in any playable way. I've seen them try to port Civ and other similar strategy games to the DS and they were godawful. YMMV.

_________________
Quote:
In comic strips the person on the left always speaks first. - George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 11:24 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 8:22 am
Posts: 385
Hopwin wrote:
I would argue the three games I listed above are the greatest strategy games and I don't see how you could port any of them to a console in any playable way.


With consoles supporting mouse/keyboard now, it wouldn't be so bad.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 12:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:59 pm
Posts: 9412
Müs wrote:
Kaffis Mark V wrote:
Oh, let's not forget how atrocious VATS targetting is on console vs. PC.


Really? I never had a problem with it on my console at all.

You must be machine psychic. I played it on both, and am glad I got the PC for myself, because trying to cycle body parts on the X-Box VATS was infuriating -- I couldn't figure out any rhyme or reason to how it decided what to switch to next. With a PC, you click where you want to shoot with your mouse cursor.

_________________
"Aaaah! Emotions are weird!" - Amdee
"... Mirrorshades prevent the forces of normalcy from realizing that one is crazed and possibly dangerous. They are the symbol of the sun-staring visionary, the biker, the rocker, the policeman, and similar outlaws." - Bruce Sterling, preface to Mirrorshades


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 1:04 pm 
Offline
of course

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 6:56 am
Posts: 383
Location: CDC EOC
Talya wrote:
Gorse wrote:
However I have a number of console friends that have to have every new game, especially all the sports games, as soon as they are released, which are $50-$80 a pop. Again, it goes to gaming preferences and choices on how you spend the money, but I don't see how anyone can claim console gaming as not nearly as expensive as PC gaming unless you are comparing something other than titles.


With the $1200-$2500 cost for a gaming computer, compared to the $300 cost for a console, you've gotta make up $900-$2000 cost difference with game titles. (And that's assuming you're not upgrading the PC.)

You cannot count the price of the games in their entirety. One assumes the PC Gamer is going to buy as many game titles as the console gamer, assuming the same level of interest in the hobby. So what you have to compare is the difference in cost between PC and Console games. Ignoring exclusives (which every platform has), it's fairly easy. Dragon Age, for example, costs generally $10 more for PS3 or XBox than it does for the PC. Most titles seem to hold to this (it's the licensing fee the companies pay to Sony/Microsoft to develop games for them.)

To make up the $900 cost difference, you need to buy 90 games.

That's a lot of games, and that's a very low end gaming PC.



I still disagree. While the consoles are now down to $300 it has taken years for them to reach that. In addition, my PC is used for a lot more than games, but even so, there is no need to spend over $1000 for a gaming PC unless you want the latest and greatest. It is easy to buy/build a gaming PC for $500-$600, and far less if you want to use 3-5 year old technology.

Also, there is no reason to update your entire computer every year/two years, unless again you want to spend the money to be on the front end of technology. My current PC, complete package, including 22" ultra-sharp flat panel monitor was under $800 four years ago and still runs current games without problems (Dragon Age being the latest purchase) and has not been upgraded or had parts replaced.

While we are at the "comparing" price thing, don't forget to add the cost of the TV you are plugging your console into as well. Dollar for dollar it would be easy for either (PC or console) to spend a lot or spend a little, but saying one far exceeds the other doesn't seem the fair assessment to me.

_________________
Gorse


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 1:33 pm 
Offline
Oberon's Playground
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:11 am
Posts: 9449
Location: Your Dreams
Gorse wrote:
I still disagree. While the consoles are now down to $300 it has taken years for them to reach that. .



I don't see how that's a point in your favor. While yes, it's taken years for consoles to reach $300, that's because they used to be $100. They're way UP in price with each new console generation.

A low end gaming PC and monitor isn't going to come in much under $1000. The cheapest reasonable gaming video card costs as much as a PS3 on its own. Nothing you built for $500 will look half as good as a 3 year old PS3 or Xbox360. (And this is coming from a person who much prefers PC gaming).

A high end gaming computer will easily break $2000. But a $600 PC is likely to have integrated intel video, a hard drive that will be full in a week, and a 3 generations old CPU -- likely single core at that. And that's without a monitor or operating system.

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me

█ ♣ █


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 1:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 8:22 am
Posts: 385
Talya wrote:
Gorse wrote:
But a $600 PC is likely to have integrated intel video, a hard drive that will be full in a week, and a 3 generations old CPU -- likely single core at that. And that's without a monitor or operating system.


Not at all.

A quick search turned up a $489 computer with 6gb DDR 2, dual core E5300 2.6 Ghz, 1 TB HDD, Windows 7, DVD-RW, etc on Tigerdirect.com. A video card that will run pretty much anything short of Crysis can be had for under $100 now.

And if I were to find the parts and assemble it myself, I could easily come in under $489, probably with video card.

I think the last PC I built handled LotRO like a dream for $350ish (went cheap on it because it was a second PC.) I think the PC we built for Ber went even cheaper than that, IIRC.

As for the monitor, well, I just plugged it into the same display I plug my PS3 to, so if you want to add that cost to the PC, you'd have to add it to the PS3 too.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: PC Elitism
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 1:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 8:22 am
Posts: 385
Or, for $499 (Plus display), this would run pretty much anything out there quite adequately

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications ... =N500-3000


Last edited by Coren on Thu Feb 25, 2010 1:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 1:58 pm 
Offline
Oberon's Playground
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:11 am
Posts: 9449
Location: Your Dreams
First of all, that CPU is crap. If I were going to go something that low end, I'd get an AMD Phenom...the new phenoms run faster, cooler and cheaper than anything in the Core-2 line. On the Intel side, the i5 is as low-end as is worth buying on a new gaming PC.

Secondly, how are you getting off playing current games on anything less than a Radeon 4850 (which is still rather long-in-the-tooth. I would go for anything less than a directX 11 5800 series or higher at the moment, or else I'm better off gaming on my PS3.)

I can't build a gaming PC even close to $600 from any PC store i've found. This place has good prices -- http://www.lucomputers.com

Hell, a PSU capable of handling a reasonable video card is going to cost $100 on its own.

edit -- That "barebones" system you posted after needs another 2GB for a minimum memory configuration, but that's minor. The video card is suspect, and it's a power hog. That thing doesn't have enough power to reliably run its own parts. It also doesn't has about a quarter of the hard drive space I've already got used...on a 5 year old computer. It also lacks an OS ($120) and monitor ($200).

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me

█ ♣ █


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 1:59 pm 
Offline
Web Ninja
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 8:32 pm
Posts: 8248
Location: The Tunt Mansion
Gorse wrote:
While we are at the "comparing" price thing, don't forget to add the cost of the TV you are plugging your console into as well. Dollar for dollar it would be easy for either (PC or console) to spend a lot or spend a little, but saying one far exceeds the other doesn't seem the fair assessment to me.


Don't act like you wouldn't have a TV if you didn't have a console. They are separate expenses.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 2:01 pm 
Offline
Oberon's Playground
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:11 am
Posts: 9449
Location: Your Dreams
Lenas wrote:
Gorse wrote:
While we are at the "comparing" price thing, don't forget to add the cost of the TV you are plugging your console into as well. Dollar for dollar it would be easy for either (PC or console) to spend a lot or spend a little, but saying one far exceeds the other doesn't seem the fair assessment to me.


Don't act like you wouldn't have a TV if you didn't have a console. They are separate expenses.



Furthermore, if you have a TV, you may have a console, even if you never game at all. The PS3 is worth it just as a media box.

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me

█ ♣ █


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 2:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 8:22 am
Posts: 385
Lenas wrote:
Gorse wrote:
While we are at the "comparing" price thing, don't forget to add the cost of the TV you are plugging your console into as well. Dollar for dollar it would be easy for either (PC or console) to spend a lot or spend a little, but saying one far exceeds the other doesn't seem the fair assessment to me.


Don't act like you wouldn't have a TV if you didn't have a console. They are separate expenses.


And anymore, it's trivial to just plug the computer into that same TV. *shrug*

It's been many years since I've had to buy a seperate computer monitor hehe.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 2:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:59 pm
Posts: 9412
Talya, your bleeding edge is showing.

_________________
"Aaaah! Emotions are weird!" - Amdee
"... Mirrorshades prevent the forces of normalcy from realizing that one is crazed and possibly dangerous. They are the symbol of the sun-staring visionary, the biker, the rocker, the policeman, and similar outlaws." - Bruce Sterling, preface to Mirrorshades


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 2:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 8:22 am
Posts: 385
Talya wrote:
First of all, that CPU is crap. If I were going to go something that low end, I'd get an AMD Phenom...the new phenoms run faster, cooler and cheaper than anything in the Core-2 line. On the Intel side, the i5 is as low-end as is worth buying on a new gaming PC.



You don't need an i5 yet to run anything out there quite well. I've still got PC's sitting here far older that'll still get 30+ FPS in Dragon Age, Mass Effect 2, etc, and is something you could probably build for $300-$350 now.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 2:11 pm 
Offline
Oberon's Playground
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:11 am
Posts: 9449
Location: Your Dreams
Coren wrote:
You don't need an i5 yet to run anything out there quite well.


Possibly not, but if you're not getting an i5 or better, you're better off going with AMD, as I said. The new Phenom Quads are cheaper, cooler, use less power and perform better than the Core 2 line. They're actually what I'm looking at right now.

Kaffis: I generally clock in at about half the "bleeding edge" prices when pricing out a gaming PC. That's why I started them around $1200 (The most I can reasonably justify paying, the least powerful I'd consider getting).

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me

█ ♣ █


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 2:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 8:22 am
Posts: 385
Talya wrote:
Coren wrote:
You don't need an i5 yet to run anything out there quite well.


Possibly not, but if you're not getting an i5 or better, you're better off going with AMD, as I said. The new Phenom Quads are cheaper, cooler, use less power and perform better than the Core 2 line.


Well, that's not a computer I would buy personally. It was just a quick search result, that showed you could get a lot more than you claimed you could get for $600, for a lot less than $600 now. =)

Edit: Though I keep my main system pretty bleeding edge, if it were to burst into flames and I had to start over, I'd be quite happy gaming on a PC that I could build for under $400 while I wait for the new GeForce cards to come out to rebuild it.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 2:21 pm 
Offline
I got nothin.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 11160
Location: Arafys, AKA El Müso Guapo!
Coren wrote:
Talya wrote:
Coren wrote:
You don't need an i5 yet to run anything out there quite well.


Possibly not, but if you're not getting an i5 or better, you're better off going with AMD, as I said. The new Phenom Quads are cheaper, cooler, use less power and perform better than the Core 2 line.


Well, that's not a computer I would buy personally. It was just a quick search result, that showed you could get a lot more than you claimed you could get for $600, for a lot less than $600 now. =)

Edit: Though I keep my main system pretty bleeding edge, if it were to burst into flames and I had to start over, I'd be quite happy gaming on a PC that I could build for under $400 while I wait for the new GeForce cards to come out to rebuild it.


Except ATI is better :p

Its hard to be bleeding edge with a blunt knife :P

_________________
Image
Holy shitsnacks!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 2:22 pm 
Offline
Oberon's Playground
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:11 am
Posts: 9449
Location: Your Dreams
Coren wrote:
Well, that's not a computer I would buy personally. It was just a quick search result, that showed you could get a lot more than you claimed you could get for $600, for a lot less than $600 now. =)



Well, as i said, it needs at least another another 2 GB of RAM ($50), a 1TB hard drive ($100), a stronger PSU (even for what it already has to power - $75), better video card ($220 for a Radeon 4890 if you want to go with an older, budget card, or $330 for a Radeon 5850 if you want something DX11 compatible), in addition to an operating system (Windows7 Home Premium 64 $140), and possibly a monitor ($200 for a cheap samsung 22")

Mus wrote:
Except ATI is better :p

Much.

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me

█ ♣ █


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 2:24 pm 
Offline
I got nothin.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 11160
Location: Arafys, AKA El Müso Guapo!
Talya wrote:
Coren wrote:
Well, that's not a computer I would buy personally. It was just a quick search result, that showed you could get a lot more than you claimed you could get for $600, for a lot less than $600 now. =)



Well, as i said, it needs at least another another 2 GB of RAM ($50), a 1TB hard drive ($100), a stronger PSU (even for what it already has to power - $75), better video card ($220 for a Radeon 4890 if you want to go with an older, budget card, or $330 for a Radeon 5850 if you want something DX11 compatible), in addition to an operating system (Windows7 Home Premium 64 $140), and possibly a monitor ($200 for a cheap samsung 22")

Mus wrote:
Except ATI is better :p


At the low end, yes. The i5 and i7 are a lot better than anything AMD makes, but you pay for that improvement.


Apples, meet oranges :p

ATI/Geforce = Vid cards ;)

_________________
Image
Holy shitsnacks!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 3:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 8:22 am
Posts: 385
Talya wrote:
Coren wrote:
Well, as i said, it needs at least..


Well 1) If you're going to add all that stuff, I wouldn't add it to that PC, because you could do it a hell of a lot cheaper.

And 2) You don't *need* all of that stuff. People have been building Crysis capable machines for $500 for awhile now. The one I linked, one of the comments said it was getting 35-40fps in Crysis on high settings even, so you wouldn't *need* to buy another $300 video card, etc.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 3:14 pm 
Offline
Oberon's Playground
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:11 am
Posts: 9449
Location: Your Dreams
Coren wrote:
Talya wrote:
Coren wrote:
Well, as i said, it needs at least..


Well 1) If you're going to add all that stuff, I wouldn't add it to that PC, because you could do it a hell of a lot cheaper.

And 2) You don't *need* all of that stuff. People have been building Crysis capable machines for $500 for awhile now. The one I linked, one of the comments said it was getting 35-40fps in Crysis on high settings even, so you wouldn't *need* to buy another $300 video card, etc.



Wait...you don't need an operating system? And Windows will barely run on 2GB of memory, not to mention that Windows+Crysis (I have no interest in Crysis, but it seems the comparison to make, even if it's over a year old) and you've got a full hard drive. :p

Let's put it more simply:

The $500 you quoted is less powerful than a PS3, and could have been topped by a reasonable gaming computer 2-3 years ago. It's not a gaming PC. Just because you can game on it, doesn't make it a gaming PC.

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me

█ ♣ █


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: PC Elitism
PostPosted: Thu Feb 25, 2010 3:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 8:22 am
Posts: 385
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications ... CatId=3669 $91 Card
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications ... CatId=4297 $130 CPU
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications ... u=C13-6084 $75 4gb RAM
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDeal ... mbo.325690 $110 Case/650watt PSU
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications ... =H450-9002 $85 TB Hard Drive
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6823109156 $22 Keyboard/Mouse
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications ... 1362%20OEM $28 DVD drive
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications ... u=V18-2234 $159 22" Monitor
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6832116754 Windows 7 $107

Just peaked over $700 for a computer system that would rock any game out on the market with no issues, and with a lot of room to cut costs further (I didn't spend time hunting for the cheapest, just basicly clicked something that showed up on the first page for each category, and everything on there is more than you need to run everything). Even included the monitor which is arguable because these days you can plug it right into whatever the PS3 is plugged into.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 148 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 203 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group