All these graphics, and the best FPS is still Counter-strike?

[Axon]

Graphics don't make a game good.

 

[thegimp03]

Originally posted by: NamelessMC
Gears of War is the best game in 2006 I have played, and I only need $350 for the game and a "system" to play it on max settings.

I've always considered myself a PC gamer though, I was just addicted to WoW so long, I never got to see the actual game market slowly deteriorate.

That's the same problem as me. I've been addicted to Q3a since it came out. Yeah, I've tried all the other major FPS games that have come out, but nothing can hold my interest like Q3. The second longest I've played a game in the last 7 years since Q3 came out is probably a tie between Battlefield 2 and Far Cry.

Doom 3 forgot to live up to the 2+ years of hype, HL2 got slow so I never beat it, was never a big fan of CS, Far Cry was gorgeous but playing it on the nearly impossible Realistic mode got me so mad I quit, FEAR and Rainbow 6 Vegas became boring after 2 days of playing them, and UT2k4 ran out of most of its good Onslaught mode servers, although, I had more fun it playing online than all other games I've listed with the exception of Q3a.

All the while I continue to upgrade my PC to stay relatively current, with the exception of C2D and DX10 cards.

I guess I'm looking forward to Crysis (system probably isn't enough) and UT2k7. Although Crysis looks like another Far Cry and I'm hoping that there is a good online scene. Though, maybe I'm just dreaming since the general public won't or can't pony up the cash and buy an 8800.

 

[NamelessMC]

Yeah when Far Cry, Half Life 2 came out, I enjoyed PC gaming again. Doom 3 didn't live up to the hype, but really what was the hype anyway? I mean, I know Doom and Doom 2 were huge, but look at what they were up against when they came out? If you ask me, Quake is more of a franchise to live up to than Doom. Quake 1, in my opinion was more huge of a release than Doom was. (Fully 3d camera angles, crazy story, hardware requirements)

Quake 3 Arena was the last PC title that has ever released that's really changed how I felt about PC gaming. Half Life was before that. Counter-Strike, I was a late bloomer on, and didn't really get into it until I played it again on Source engine.

I was never into the Unreal Tournament hype, but I know UT and UT2K3 are the last huge ones. UT2K4 was practically ignored. The only reason I'm looking forward to UT2K7 is because Gears of War uses the same engine.

I guess the only reason I'm finishing my recent build, is to have a good platform to use media with, but I don't have any PC games I look forward to playing with my new build?

It seems like lately, if you can play World of Warcraft at max settings, you don't have a reason to buy new hardware.

 

[adairusmc]

UT2003 was the game that was ignored, UT2004 was released as an apology for everything that 2k3 did not have. You have those two backwards.

 

[JBT]

Originally posted by: Srfrbum

Originally posted by: KeithTalent
I have an X1900XT and I can not even play CS:Source with max everything and at my native resolution (1900x1200) and still get decent frames, which is one of the reasons I am considering an 8800/R600

Your X1900XT must be broken because in my other computer, a 6800 Ultra AGP, AMD 3800+ Single core and 1GB of ram, lets me play 1920x1200 on my dell on high settings, max aa with FPS above 100 constanly. CSS isn't too much of a graphics demanding game.

FYI. if you wre choosing 6XAA which is the highiest it goes in HL2 based games you wre really running at 0XAA as Nvidia doesn't do 6x and when its selected its really 0x.

 

[Elderly Newt]

It seems like everyone complaining about upgrading thinks they need to spend $500 every month for the new video card. Yeah, right. I'm gaming on my Athlon XP 2500+, 9700 pro, 1GB RAM. And Oblivion is quite playable.

 

[nitromullet]

I think you just have a lot more choice now than you used to... That's why you see such few "big titles". I mean, consider FEAR MP... FEAR MP is a blast, seriously, it is really fun. However, in a sea of BF2, BF2142, Q4 MP, HL2 MP, CSS, people still playing Q3, plus the steep hardware requirements of FEAR, it just isn't ever going to be as huge as CS. Had FEAR come out with the exact same MP (and contemporary graphics) come out in like 1999, it would have been huge also

As far as future FPSes go, I'm really hoping that Huxely can pull off the MMOFPS well, since it just seems like a really cool combination. Mix the idea of single player and multi-player into a single game, and give people the chance to level up and form clans within the game - awesome. MP with more than just the goal of killing each other.

Too bad, but I think that after a mulittude of delays, STALKER is going to be a letdown (both graphically and gameplay wise). My guess is that they had to bring something (anything) to market after all this time, and most of the original ideas of the game were either sacked or just turned out to not be realistically doable. Hopefully, I'm wrong.

 

[ebeattie]

Well....my two cents here. Fuel Of War= Battlefield killer (Go Frank!) Quake Wars:Enemy Territory is another Battlefield killer, Stalker looks fun, BioShock is coming out..... oh yeah and Crysis. ......... Yeah future of PC gaming is dead. I spent the money to make my rig kick ass because when it comes down to it, I dont like console controls, titles, or culture (sorry) plus I like to know that I can do hundreds more things with my PC thatn I could ever do with a console.

Yeah, some games that force you to upgrade your hardware suck, but would you seriously consider a game as killer as Crysis and all the other games planned for DX10 "not worth it" because you need hardware that can process a better DX?

While I might not have the best or fastest hardware (cept the GTX) out there, I got a feeling it'll be able to shred any game that comes my way to pieces and still get bad ass frame rates on max settings.

So I guess my point is that you could game on a console, but that would be like gaming on a Mac.