apoppin
Lifer
Originally posted by: ja1484
Originally posted by: apoppin
some PC gamers - [gasp, didn't you know?] - consider themselves "elite" and look down disdainfully at "the children and rednecks playing consoles"
-this silly attitude is 'noted' - over my personal objection as a PC gamer
Which only makes is that much sweeter for those of us who play on ALL platforms and look down our nose at silly pretend-elitists who willingly restrict themselves for the sake of maintaining a pretend-allegiance.
I have one cause: Hedonism. The rest of it, I couldn't give a fuck.
Not so much. It's more that regardless of what I say, you're not here to base your position on available information - you're here to try and force agreement with your point of view through argument, either because you're emotionally attached to your position for some ridiculous reason or you're a troll. Those are the options.
I really don't care what other people like or why. What's retarded is when people try to argue opinion as fact, which is pretty much what the PC and Console Gaming Forums here at AT are - a "my opinion is better than yours" circle jerk, which is exactly what I was getting at in the original quote above.
awesome ... you pick on the poster, not the topic
and thanks for your permission to completely ignore you .. i will take that advice.
You misread. I am not picking on you. I am laughing at this farcical establishment. There is a massive difference.
I did describe one of the two reasons you're here, but that's just truth, which is not picking on anyone in any way.
QED again, in fact, as your only option aside from your weak "I'm ignoring you now" defense (basically running away) is to attempt to force my agreement with your point of view.
Checkmate. Have fun ignoring me
A family who buys a $400 budget dell and a xbox 360 have 2 devices at the same time, while a family who buys a $400 budget dell and upgrade the graphics card have 1 device only - so its either work or play... instead work and play at the same time (a family has more than one member, after all).
Convenience is the biggest factor for console gaming... not only in issues like driver, installation, patch upgrades, etc; but also in playing. It is easy for 2 person to play on a console, but will be more troublesome to do so on a PC.
apoppin
Lifer
it appeared to me that you were picking on me ... i am also laughing at this establishmentOriginally posted by: ja1484
You misread. I am not picking on you. I am laughing at this farcical establishment. There is a massive difference.
I did describe one of the two reasons you're here, but that's just truth, which is not picking on anyone in any way.
QED again, in fact, as your only option aside from your weak "I'm ignoring you now" defense (basically running away) is to attempt to force my agreement with your point of view.
Checkmate. Have fun ignoring me
So ... have you issued me a *challenge*?
if so, i will accept ... but then ... if so, you must take the subject seriously and not just 'hit 'n run'
i'll start
--You don't know my PoV nor can you say i am "forcing" anything here,
- it is made clear by your very reply to me in this post that you do not understand
MmmSkyscraper
Diamond Member
- Jul 6, 2004
- 9,472
- 1
- 76
Can we stick to the topic instead of petty arguing like children in the yard? If you want to flame each other, do us a favour and take it to PM's.
BFG10K
Lifer
- Aug 14, 2000
- 22,709
- 3,003
- 126
I have to agree with Sweeney as Intel's GMA sucks balls for gaming. I tried my G33 chipset derivative in UT2004 and even at 320x240 it dropped as low as 14 FPS in some places.
Average Joe likely has a GMA and when he tries a game he'll automatically think PCs suck for games because he doesn't know what else is out there. Then he?ll try his console that works without fuss and he?ll be converted.
Average Joe likely has a GMA and when he tries a game he'll automatically think PCs suck for games because he doesn't know what else is out there. Then he?ll try his console that works without fuss and he?ll be converted.
Dude...this is nice work. Truly needs to be its own thread IMHO. Again, nice job. At least superficially (sans further critical analysis) appears to greatly dispel the rumor of PC gaming's demise.
AstroManLuca
Lifer
- Jun 24, 2004
- 15,628
- 5
- 81
I'm guessing that Activision number will be way, way higher once the Blizzard/Activision merger goes through. I also wonder if they are including money from subscriptions (WoW, XBL, etc.) and/or micropayments (XBLA, PSN, whatever the one for the Wii is, etc.).
Originally posted by: apoppin
that's because this IS the PC gaming forum
some PC gamers - [gasp, didn't you know?
-this silly attitude is 'noted' - over my personal objection as a PC gamer
Yep because we all know that children and rednecks play consoles.
About price of pc's that can play games then it shouldnt be an issue.
I just built a gaming machine for the first time for many many years. Intel 8400 cpu, 4gb ram, nVidia 9600 and these bits are not expensive at all. If just you would add a 9600 card into any mainstream computer sold in the last year you would have an awsome gaming pc.
I can even run Crysis at highest settings for everything except shadows at 1600x900.
I just built a gaming machine for the first time for many many years. Intel 8400 cpu, 4gb ram, nVidia 9600 and these bits are not expensive at all. If just you would add a 9600 card into any mainstream computer sold in the last year you would have an awsome gaming pc.
I can even run Crysis at highest settings for everything except shadows at 1600x900.
Originally posted by: apoppin
So ... have you issued me a *challenge*?
if so, i will accept ... but then ... if so, you must take the subject seriously and not just 'hit 'n run'
Christ no, where's the fun in that? I'm not here to win arguments, I'm here to amuse myself.
WhipperSnapper
Lifer
- Oct 30, 2004
- 11,442
- 32
- 91
People would have played UT3 and the game probably would have been a success had Epic not done such a despicable job with the server browser, user interface, and just about everything else that surrounds the actual game play. UT3 released as a buggy beta at a strategically retarded time.
It's not the UT game play itself that no longer appeals to people; it's just that Epic has become retarded or chosen not to package it properly.
WhipperSnapper
Lifer
- Oct 30, 2004
- 11,442
- 32
- 91
I posted this on Epic's forums but their moderators deleted all threads related to the Sweeney interview.
------------
At another forum I came across a thread that reported that in an interview Tim Sweeney had suggested that UT4 would be a console-only game and my heart sank. So with that, speaking for fans of the PC-versions of UT99, UT 2004, and UT3, I implore Epic:
Please don't abandon the PCs!
It will be a very sad day indeed when Epic abandons the PCs. I think what Epic's people have failed to realize is that UT3 for PC did poorly, not because people don't want to play PC games (see World of Warcraft, The Orange Box, Call of Duty 4, and perhaps even Sins of a Solar Empire) but because UT3 itself was severely flawed in addition to being released at a bad time.
Could a new UT game ever be successful on the PC? Yes--by going back to the roots of what made the original UT99 successful. A year or two from now a UT4 would need to be treated as a new game without a lineage since so few current gamers would know much about the series (given the failure of UT3 on the PC).
Here's the strategy for a successful UT4 (or even a re-released and newly-marketed UT 3.5) on the PC:
1. Don't increase the hardware requirements above UT3. You're trying to sell the fun of the game play and the online multiplayer experience; not more pretty graphics and the game will sell better if more people can buy it without having to upgrade.
2. Release the game with a server browser that is as functional as the UT 2004 server browser and provide a user interface that offers abundant tweaking and customization options while being fast and smooth. Also, no one should ever have to wait to load a main menu nor have to leave a server to check the server browser. In other words, scrap everything that UT3 did in this area and replicate and improve upon the UT 2004 user interface and server browser. Dump Gamespy.
3. Tweak the UT3 game play so that it feels more like the original UT99 game play--the most successful game in terms of long-lasting online player counts and activity and the one that established the series. Go back to what worked. It's an online cyber bloodsport and not an adventure game and you're selling online multiplayer competition, so who cares if it feels similar to previous versions.
4. Keep Warfare, CTF, vCTF, and Deathmatch but also bring back UT99-style Domination, Assault, Invasion, and perhaps Bombing Run.
5. Return to a simple, transparent file and folders structure like what UT99 and UT 2004 had to the extent that it's possible while also being compatible with Vista. Maps should go into the Maps folder and textures should go into the Textures folder, etc. Also allow mappers to bundle custom content into a MyLevel type of file that would stick with a mapping project as it's revised and as the name of the map file changes.
6. Make sure the game is polished, as bug-free as is reasonably possible, and near-perfect before it's released and make sure that the Demo is good.
7. Release the game at a strategic time with marketing.
8. Perhaps include a single player game to go along with the online multiplayer aspects but have it be similar to the original Unreal in terms of its design and storyline or just scrap any pretense of a story and have single players play through the maps tournament-style.
If you guys had done all of that with UT3 for the PC it probably would have been successful and if you could do that with a UT4 I don't see any reason why it wouldn't be successful.
Also, it would be good to have a built-in IRC browser (just simply copy over the one from UT 2004) even if you couldn't or wouldn't supply a default IRC server or channel; folks who want to use it will ask around in game servers or read about it on forums and figure it out.
Can a UT4 on the PC be successful? Yes--but it has to be done properly and the server browser and user interface need to be polished at to at least UT 2004 standards at the time of the Demo's release.
You guys had a very successful PC game once and a rabidly loyal and enthusiastic fanbase. You can establish a new one if you have a sincere desire for it.
The simplest and perhaps least expensive way to do this would be to keep the UT3 game play and engine, add some more game types and maps, polish it up, scrap the current user interface and replace it an exceptional server browser and user interface, and repackage and market it as UT4.
WhipperSnapper
Lifer
- Oct 30, 2004
- 11,442
- 32
- 91
Problem is...will a stock cheap PC power supply be able to handle a powerful power-hungry video card?
WhipperSnapper
Lifer
- Oct 30, 2004
- 11,442
- 32
- 91
There is an area where the PC's still whip the consoles: Online Multiplayer.
Can you build and design your own custom, user-made map or mod on a console? No. Can you easily download, install, and manage custom content on a console? No.
Can you connect to the IRC on a console? No. Can you join stand-alone Teamspeak or Ventrilo servers on a console? No. Can you share URLs with your gaming buddies over the IRC on a console? No. Can you set up organized clan-match style games spontaneously and then have everyone join their team's Teamspeak channel to play a clan-style match? No. Can you read discussion forums related to the game you're playing while waiting for people to sign up on IRC and to pick teams to play those spontaneously-organized clan-match style games (called pickup games)? No.
PCs are the masters of online multiplayer games and custom content and that's why many of us are concerned. Between the Original UT99 and UT 2004 there must have easily been over 10,000 custom maps and mods (five of which are mine) which dramatically increased the game's values and replayability. There were also active leagues filled with clans, organized matches, and competition. The UT games weren't merely silly computer games; they were semi-social competitive online cyberbloodsports.
Those folks who missed out on the golden age of the UT series (say 2000-2001) have no idea what they missed. You can't replicate anything like that on a console. Unfortunately, Epic failed to understand any of that as evidenced by UT3.
AstroManLuca
Lifer
- Jun 24, 2004
- 15,628
- 5
- 81
There are graphics cards out there that still easily provide 10x the gaming performance of Intel GMA integrated graphics without sucking down much power. They're not high end cards but they'll run even recent games at modest settings.
Of course, mentioning those plays right into the hands of console gaming enthusiasts because with those cards, they might be fine for now, but they won't be able to run the most recent releases in a year or two. But the higher end cards will.
Actually, what sort of PSU does a typical cheap desktop PC ship with these days? Something terrible, I'm sure...
You need to remember that most people don't know crap about upgrading their PCs. Way too many people forget that the vast majority of consumers out there are frightened to click on certain buttons in their OS let alone open the case and insert a card. Then there is the process of picking the card which blows the minds of most people. They have no idea what to buy. On top of that, they do not understand that just buying a good card is not enough. They need to consider other requirements such as their power supply. Then they need to figure out how to find the specs of their current power supply which might require them to take it out to look at the sticker which might be placed on an inconvenient location on the PSU. So ya...it's a mess and the average consumer has no idea that they need to consider many more things beyond reviews and price tags.
On the other hand, purchasing a console relieves the consumer of those problems. It's a quick fix. No matter how you slice it though, the true reason is that it boils down to the games. If a game is on PC and consoles then odds are your average consumer will purchase it for a console. If it is PC only and the consumer really wants to play the game then that might be enough for them to buy a new PC from Dell since that is the next easiest option. The minority amongst the consumers (namely people like us) who are technologically educated will manually upgrade our PCs if that is what we prefer since the hassle of doing so is hardly any different than buying a whole new PC or console. It comes down to the money and attachment for us.
Schadenfroh
Elite Member
- Mar 8, 2003
- 38,416
- 4
- 0
As usual, that final decision will be based only on the estimated number of dollars they will get out it.
I think Tim is right. It's unfortunate, but a growing gaming industry needs to support a platform that people can unbox, plug-in, and play on. The PC was a great platform back when the market was geeks, but saying that it has an open slot and can be upgraded doesn't mean much to the average buyer. If they pick up an xBox they can buy and run every title made for it, without thinking about it at all. Further, those titles are simpler to get into, being engineered for the controller and a very limited interface.
Epic is just adjusting their business view to suit reality. The PC is already dying on the desktop anyway. How many people who aren't system geeks/gamers go out and buy a big desktop box anymore? Almost all the non-tech folks I know work on 15" or 17" laptops now. Those are barely adequate to run games, and aren't easily upgradable. Various computing tasks are diverging and settling onto specialized platforms: consoles for gaming, mobile for... uh, mobile, laptops for hybrid use, and desktop workstations for professional developers, designers, artists, etc. I think this trend is irreversible and will accelerate.
Epic is just adjusting their business view to suit reality. The PC is already dying on the desktop anyway. How many people who aren't system geeks/gamers go out and buy a big desktop box anymore? Almost all the non-tech folks I know work on 15" or 17" laptops now. Those are barely adequate to run games, and aren't easily upgradable. Various computing tasks are diverging and settling onto specialized platforms: consoles for gaming, mobile for... uh, mobile, laptops for hybrid use, and desktop workstations for professional developers, designers, artists, etc. I think this trend is irreversible and will accelerate.
ZzZGuy
Golden Member
- Nov 15, 2006
- 1,855
- 0
- 0
Makes me wonder what impact a company which for a small fee (you got to make money somehow) would tell you the biggest bang for your buck with different price ranges for upgrading your current rig. I mean people who REALLY know what they are talking about, and tell what you currently have by getting customers to download and run a program to detect your current hardware and email the results (i know there is one program that will do this and tell you what drives you have along with it).
Make upgrade decisions easy and reliable (your friend may be a [X] brand fanboy) for those without a clue and i would suspect a boom in PC gaming will follow. For those who don't even know what/where the PSU is, most small computer stores will install parts/software for the cost of the labor.
In short, I think a company like that would fail. Here is why:
I would say that your biggest issue with a company like that is demand. You have to give people a reason to choose to go that route over purchasing a new rig from Dell. Part of the reason it might fail would be warranty. People do not want to have to figure out which part is broken and call the manufacturer for that part. Instead they just want to throw the problem in Dell's lap so they can figure it out and fix it.
I assume your idea also includes the purchasing and assembly of these new upgrades? If not then that would be an issue too. People buy through companies like Dell so they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of price shopping and assembly. Keep in mind that assembly requires shipping to and from the customer which comes with it's own bag of problems for a company.
Also, you will have to figure out how to make this service attractive to more than just the customer pool of gamers otherwise you will not make much money.
Next, you have to consider compatibility issues. Let's face it. Companies that manufacturer mobos, memory, video cards, etc do put in the amount of testing for compatibility when it comes to error proofing and performance than what we would prefer. Your service will need to acquire that info in order to be competitive with Dell/Alienware because I can tell you from experience (I used to work for Alienware) that they both have teams whose job is take parts, combine them, and test the hell out of them. Once they find a great combination, that is what they sell.
In the end, no matter what this company does, it needs to be able to offer a service which is more attractive, much cheaper, and makes the whole process of upgrading very convenient in comparison to buying a full rig from Dell, Best Buy, Alienware, etc and it will still need to net you profit. I don't see how this is possible.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter