G71 and UT2007 - Page 4 - Techist - Tech Forum

Go Back   Techist - Tech Forum > Computer Hardware > New Systems | Building and Buying
Click Here to Login
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 12-11-2005, 10:24 PM   #31 (permalink)
Super Techie
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 351
Default

ok, but if i could say one final thing, im pretty sure people were sayign this about the new ps2 and xbox that came out, but look how the PC came though it, it just keeps hammering away. The same issue has cycled round again and people are saying the same things again, end of PC this, end of PC that, well be laughing about it in a few years.....
__________________

espeed is offline  
Old 12-11-2005, 10:34 PM   #32 (permalink)
Lord Techie
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 5,280
Send a message via AIM to beedubaya
Default

One more thing I must say too...and this ties back into UT2007. There are 2 ways PC gaming can survive, if one of these things doesn't happen, PC gaming will be a thing of the past sooner than any of us think.

First, game developers need to get the hint that they are pushing the graphical envelope too far for the hardware people have. Yes, technology needs to advance, but its getting rediculous. Look at FEAR, you NEED a 6800GT for it to run smooth at decent settings. How many people actually have 6800 series cards? Most people have Integrated graphics or low end FX series cards. That is freaking rediculous. How about expand upon existing engines that look good instead of every shooter game existing for the sole purpose of featuring an engine that blows every other engine previously released out of the water. How about they focus on gameplay.

The second thing that needs to happen is HP/Compaq and Dell need to put out better PCs to the mainstream. All the manufacturers are about now is selling the cheapest PC with the whimpiest specs to the computer illiterate of the world. And these are the PCs most everybody have. There is no reason they can't at least put a decent graphics card in manufactured PCs. Im not talking about 7800GTX, but something like a 6200 or 6600 regular would be an excellent addition to manufactured PCs. However, they will never do that.
__________________

beedubaya is offline  
Old 12-11-2005, 11:10 PM   #33 (permalink)
Build Guru
 
PP Mguire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
Posts: 28,310
Default

This has happend before, it will happen again. Ounce the consoles get old and ppl are tired of buying the cheasy games they will go back to their PCs just like when the Xbox and PS2 got old. Simple as that. Its been happening sense the N64 came out.
__________________
"Resolution is just a number." #Ubisoft
Origin/Steam = PP_Mguire Twitch = pp_mguire Instagram = ppmguire PSN = PP_Mguire

Access to my Plex PM me.
PP Mguire is offline  
Old 12-11-2005, 11:50 PM   #34 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,327
Send a message via AIM to Flanker
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Chankama
I hope everyone can appreciate the fact that an un-upgradable, pre-built system is MUCH cheaper to manufacture than a traditional PC.
I only made about 200 posts in the 3 major PC vs. Console threads about that, and basically, this forum is MADE UP of PC fanboys who will refuse to accept the truth. The above comments are your proof.

But yea, another PC vs. Console thread would be the end of TF, haha.
Flanker is offline  
Old 12-12-2005, 12:16 AM   #35 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,241
Send a message via AIM to Powerslave
Default

Whats with everyone saying it's going to take a freaking 6800 series card to run the **** game at low? it says a 9700 or fx 5700 on the website.

Anyways I'll just play cs source until it dies then I'll switch to consoles.
Powerslave is offline  
Old 12-12-2005, 03:37 AM   #36 (permalink)
Junior Techie
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 68
Send a message via AIM to CrimsonGX
Default

I was able to run FEAR at 800x600 with a PCI 9200 Radeon. It looked bad, but played fairly well(It got choppy at 1024x768).

Quote:
And before someone brings up this "can't upgrade, so consoles suck" nonsence, well how often do u upgrade your PC anyways? 3 years after the PS3, I will go down to the store and buy a PS4. It will cost me $400 as well. Do the math
Except - the pattern has been every five years, not three, pal. You also can't say 'it will cost me $400 as well' (has Sony even confirmed a price? ) - I'm sure alot of people were expecting consoles to be $300 this year, too. So you might be paying $500, never know.

Regarding the first post: Who knows, maybe Unreal 3 engine will be such an technological achievement it'll be able to run on microwaves. Just gotta wait and see. I'd really just get what you want to get *right now*, because a month after you wait for that new cutting edge part, something is gonna come out that runs twice as fast and can do laundry.
CrimsonGX is offline  
Old 12-12-2005, 06:36 AM   #37 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,479
Default

fear doesn't need that power pc to play it smoothly, i have 6600(not gt) and it runs it fine at 1024x768 win med/high setting
maroon1 is offline  
Old 12-12-2005, 11:08 AM   #38 (permalink)
Super Techie
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 419
Default

some ppl want to runt it at ultra high.
efd753 is offline  
Old 12-12-2005, 11:49 AM   #39 (permalink)
Techie Beyond Description
 
Apokalipse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 14,559
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Flanker
this forum is MADE UP of PC fanboys who will refuse to accept the truth. The above comments are your proof.
actually, I love consoles. I still play PS1 games. but I still think PC's are best for gaming.

in reality, there is not much difference between a console and a PC.
a console is non-upgradable, and uses a TV, but is less expensive.

see, what a console is really made for is money. they are designed to last for a period of time and become obsolete, so you will buy the next model up the company makes. they are a system designed to entertain people.
they're one of those things that people buy "because it's so cool"
they essentially are PC's that have only one purpose.

PC's are designed to be upgradable. that's why they're more expensive. they are designed to be able to do anything you want them to. not just game. although they can also do that very well.

PC's can do things like control a factory, calculate large numbers, host an internet site, browse the internet, mix music, render movie scenes, simulate protein folding (folding@home), search for extra-terrestrial intelligence (seti@home), etc etc.....
it is because PC's can do so much more than consoles that consoles will never replace PC's.

now I'm not trying to bash consoles. they do what they were designed to do very well, and I like playing consoles often. but they just won't replace PC's.
__________________
Apokalipse is offline  
Old 12-12-2005, 02:30 PM   #40 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
Chankama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,523
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by espeed
ok, but if i could say one final thing, im pretty sure people were sayign this about the new ps2 and xbox that came out, but look how the PC came though it, it just keeps hammering away.
I think the most prominent reason for this was the fact that consoles and PCs didn't "overlap" too much in that generation in their capabilities.

In the older generations (Playstation), as far as I know, the "controls" you could have were pretty limited. I don't believe you could even have like a mouse or a keyboard. And no internet access!

Then you have the PS2 generation. The XBox still couldn't accomodate a standard mouse I believe. Where as, the PS2 perhaps could. Not sure about this. And the xbox for example, "didn't" have internet access (XBox Live) from the beginning.

There was obviously a "lack of features" compared to PCs back in the day. But, clearly starting with the PS2 generation, the "gaming similarities" were starting to merge together with the PCs.

The Console domination has been coming for a while now. From the days of the PS2. And I think the XBox 360 and PS3 will bring the coffin out and open it and put the PC inside it. The nail on the coffin "might not" come in this generation, but will certainly in the next.

Quote:
Originally posted by CrimsonGX
Except - the pattern has been every five years, not three, pal. You also can't say 'it will cost me $400 as well' (has Sony even confirmed a price? ) - I'm sure alot of people were expecting consoles to be $300 this year, too. So you might be paying $500, never know.
I said PS4 for dramatic effect - since I was talking about the PS3 just before. If you didn't get the gist of what I meant, "I meant" the "next generation of gaming systems". Companies don't have to release them at the same "time" you know. Even with this generation, the XBox released their system a full year before the PS3. If they release XBox 720 (or whatever) in 4 years it will be "PS3 + 3 years".

We are seeing a downward trend in PC gaming. As beedubaya said, the PC games are not too prominent in some stores.

It'll be interesting to see how the economics of this plays out. Companies like Microsoft and Sony wouldn't want to put gaming systems out too often - b/c they lose money b/c of the h/w. Where as, companies like NVidia and ATI do want more console changes, b/c that's how THEY make money. And these companies are "partners". Interesting isn't it?

As for the Sony NOT costing $400, that's not a bet you want to take up. The Sony system will cost MORE than $400 to make. BUT, they wouldn't have much of a choice. Rumours has it that Microsoft is planning on cutting their prices leading up to the release date of the PS3. Simple economics - you don't even need rumours to know that they'd do it. What will SOny do?.. If they keep the prices up, no one will buy them. Their market base will be tiny, and they won't make money off games (s/w).

They don't have a choice but to cut prices. This is why monopolies are bad for consumers. Scenarios like this don't happen.

Quote:
Originally posted by apokalipse
see, what a console is really made for is money. they are designed to last for a period of time and become obsolete, so you will buy the next model up the company makes. they are a system designed to entertain people.
they're one of those things that people buy "because it's so cool"
they essentially are PC's that have only one purpose.
Yup exactly. That's why they are cheap.

Quote:
Originally posted by apokalipse
they are designed to be able to do anything you want them to. not just game. although they can also do that very well. PC's can do things like control a factory, calculate large numbers, host an internet site, browse the internet, mix music, render movie scenes, simulate protein folding (folding@home), search for extra-terrestrial intelligence (seti@home), etc etc.....
it is because PC's can do so much more than consoles that consoles will never replace PC's.
Only thing is, you don't need an expensive video card (except for rendering) and the "ability to be upgradeable" to do any of these things. I can put together a "really" cheap computer to do all that stuff. All of us can. Instead of a $2000 gaming system, we can have a $400 console (isn't the XBox 360 core only $300 US?) and a very cheap PC system for our other tasks.

For the longest time, I used my PIII system as one of my work machines. Until like 2004. And everything I wanted to do, I could do on that system as well. Obviously, I am a very heavy computer user - except I didn't game that much during that period.

Also, what the XBox 360 and PS3 does is give you a system that is "top of the line" compared to what's out there already. So they won't need "upgrading" to begin with. The coders of the games know their system EXACTLY. They will try to get the best out of the h/w instead of depending on h/w that only a handful of people will have.

Any programmer knows that it is much easier to program for a uniform platform. And you can make things be more efficient.

Quote:
Originally posted by Flanker
I only made about 200 posts in the 3 major PC vs. Console threads about that, and basically, this forum is MADE UP of PC fanboys who will refuse to accept the truth. The above comments are your proof.
You remember that poll I made in the Off Topic forum? Think "PCs" won out. haha .. TF is not too representative of the real market.. All of us (especially me) love computers. Heck, that's why I am a computer engineer .. I just don't think a traditional PC systems is where the future of "gaming" is at.
__________________

Chankama is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off




Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:21 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.