KBG29 said:
crissindahouse said:
Crystalchild said:
JEMC said:
Crystalchild said:
@Xbox: it is rumored that this thing has 2GB Ram? Isnt that a bit low? Sure, the OS will consume far less than Windows (for example) since we're talking Console here, but i think one of the most important aspects of the next gen will be highly detailed textures, and those will cost a lot of memory.
|
We still ignore if those 2GB are the total RAM or only the system RAM, with the GPU having their own amount of memory (maybe another 2GB like current AMD cards).
But even then, PC game reviews have shown that 1GB is enough at 1080p.
|
any proof? Not that i want to question the truth behind it, but thinking to see 2011 games performing well on 1080p with 1GB of Ram on a Computer is hard to believe, since my OS (Windows 7) alone is using a whopping 1,5GB. Of course it just takes so much because there is enough to be taken (Even tho' 4GB in total aint that much today anymore) and MSN, WMP and Firefox are running all the time, but yeah - as a Media centre, the next Xbox will need to have more, or otherwise, the same thing will happen as with PS3/360 - calling the Homemenu while playing a game wont run fluid.
@JEMC regarding the 7k GPU:
Yeah i agree, and i think they dont want their new console to hit stores with a 599$ Pricetag. (My guess is that they keep it well below 400$)
|
what does crysis 1 need with highest settings? i think 1gb isn't enough for that... even if they would try as hard as they can. crytek knows that they wouldn't sell so many games on the next consoles if they would be too expanisve but if they still say the want minimum 8gb ram this has to have a reason. sure more ram means not so hard work for them to develop it for a not so good machine but i don't think they would say minimum 8gb if they think 1gb is enough for every game.
and it really makes me sad noone will pay more for consoles then this gen because we earn more then as well. why doesn't someone pay 15% more if he earns 20% more? $100-150 more is nothing if you think about how much you will pay for everything in one gen but this would make a console much better. inflation is everywhere but we don't accept that for our hobby?
if i pay 3000 or 3150k common does this make the diffenrecne even if you couild play better games then? i think i payed more than 5k for 360 alone (xbox-live, games, controllers, bigger harddrive) and my tv's aren't in this calculation which many bought for their 360 as well. but noone wants to pay 100 more for the console to get a better one lol.
|
Thank you.
This is one of the things that disgusts me most about consoles. They are looked at in such an odd light. You look around electronics and people are willing to spend big dollars on TV's, phones, computers, tablets, surround sound, and more. Yet when it comes to consoles they want to cheap out.
To me it makes absolutly no logical sense. If you buy a nice TV you really have nothing. Sure you can watch netflix, and some other streaming services, if you pay a little more, but that is terrible quality. Why would you not be willing to spend a good dollar to have a device that can really make your TV shine. If consumers had a good understanding they would relise a low end TV attched to a high end componet box is mush more impressive than the opposite.
Additionaly as you said people make a lot more money now than in 2005.
-The US minimum wage has went from 2005 $5.15 to 2011 $7.25.
-US gas average 2005 $2.60/g 2011 $3.20
-Average home US 2005 $297,000 2010 $272,00
-US home loan rates 2005 6.5% 2011 4.5%
Lastly, consoles have made a dramatic change in what they are supposed to do. Now they are expected to stream Live TV, Movies, Music, ect. More and more people are expecting to be able to download their games to the system instead of having hard copies. They want instant access to all data and the lowest possible load times.
I just wish poeple could see that a $300 dollar TV and a $1000 dollar entertainment console is a much better investment, than a $1000 TV, and a $300 console.
|
