By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Epic focusing on console titles claims PC gaming is currently in "disarray"

naznatips on 14 February 2008
Final-Fan said:
That's exactly what I mean. OBVIOUSLY no one expects today's PC (especially a sub-$600 one) to run a 5-years-in-the-future game at maximum settings because today's PC can't even run Crysis at maximum settings! (I read an article recently about how some PC gaming publication tried to build a monster rig that cost ungodly amounts and would play Crysis at completely maxed out settings ... they got it to run but at like 17fps IIRC.)

I'm not a big PC gamer, but I do play some games on the PC AND I am a friggin' computer tech so I would appreciate it if you didn't assume I have no idea what I'm talking about when it comes to computer hardware naznatips.

If your computer is new I would certainly expect you to be able to play games on it 3 years from now in some fashion but tell me with a straight face you won't be staring longingly at new video cards/CPU/whatever in less than 18 months, especially if your ENTIRE RIG cost "in the same price range as consoles". Consoles last longer and that's a fact.

As I said before, we crossed into a new operating system, which includes a leap in technology.   Again, if you view each operating system as a new generation of PC hardware, it's fairly reasonable to say that a PC built in 2002 could play most games out right now, with the possible upgrade of a new GPU, and you can bet your ass that PC played every game released multi-plat between the Xbox and PC.  

Along with that, prices of PC hardware are falling at a rapid rate.   It certainly does not take thousands of dollars to make a Crysis capable gaming rig.  Crytek has promised a $600 one at GDC, and although I'm skeptical until I see proof, they certainly wouldn't have made such a claim without some basis for it. 

You're right, I'll certainly buy another $150 GPU in 18 months or so, but I'll still be playing multiplat games even without that upgrade. I can play Crysis right now on medium-high as it is.  It's not like every game tries to make the technical leap that Crysis did.  You only get one game like that every 4 years or so at the most. Even if we consider that some PC exclusive games will move far above 360 and PS3 technology, I'll still be playing all these multiplats.   

Again, this is another of those misconceptions that as soon as a game like Crysis is released, every other game will follow suit in technology and you'll never have anything to play.  



Around the Network
Final-Fan on 14 February 2008
veiam said:
@Elnino: It's not just personal, not one Blizzard game has tanked as far back as I can remember. Meanwhile I have seen Nintendo games sucking. You also have to keep in mind that Blizzard is one company that up until WoW was somewhat small.
I've played every Blizzard game since StarCraft to death (except WoW because it would eat my life) and I would agree that their quality is comparable to Nintendo but not superior. 

Yes, Nintendo has had bad games and Blizzard has not, but would that still be true if Nintendo released as few games as Blizzard?  Look at the numbers,i f you try as many things as the Big N does of course not EVERY idea will pan out. 

 



Tag (courtesy of fkusumot): "Please feel free -- nay, I encourage you -- to offer rebuttal."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
My advice to fanboys: Brag about stuff that's true, not about stuff that's false. Predict stuff that's likely, not stuff that's unlikely. You will be happier, and we will be happier.

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Sen. Pat Moynihan
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The old smileys: ; - ) : - ) : - ( : - P : - D : - # ( c ) ( k ) ( y ) If anyone knows the shortcut for , let me know!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I have the most epic death scene ever in VGChartz Mafia.  Thanks WordsofWisdom! 

elnino334 on 14 February 2008
veiam said:
@Elnino: It's not just personal, not one Blizzard game has tanked as far back as I can remember. Meanwhile I have seen Nintendo games sucking. You also have to keep in mind that Blizzard is one company that up until WoW was somewhat small.

Well you have to keep in mind that Nintendo is big which is why they may have more games that may have sucked but overral they have way morere games that rocked.  Though you may say is the same game just the zelda series compares to all the blizzard games in terms of quality.  Please don't include the cd-i zelda lol.  Seriously let me know if anyone else who thinks blizzard has more quality games then Nintendo.  Hell take out WoW and Blizzard might not even be here though that is pure speculation.



naznatips on 14 February 2008
Final-Fan said:

So you're assuming that 5 years from now everyone will still be running Vista?
W95-1995
W98-1998
W2K-2000
WXP-2001
WV-2006/7
It seems to me that XP's lifespan was the exception, not the rule. Maybe 5/6 year lifespans for OSes is the new rule but then again maybe not.

Now here we get into something that I truly don't know as I haven't closely followed computer hardware for more than a few years. Would a 2002 PC that cost a MODEST amount truly run Bioshock and CoD4 without ANY newer-than-2002 hardware and without looking like week-old dogshit? What graphics card would you recommend, and what did it cost at the time?


Oh please, Final-Fan, don't sink to that level.  You're a compluter tech, you know very well that 95 and 98 were nearly identical, and offered no major changes to graphics or development technology until XP.  Please let's not go down that road.  Not every new OS is a major OS.

Not without looking like week-old dogshit no, but you have to remember that today's week-old-dogshit is yesterday's top-of-the-line tech.  PC gaming still has generations...



Bozotheclown on 14 February 2008

Naznatips, I'm waiting for your response to my post.



AU FOREVER

Around the Network
Final-Fan on 14 February 2008
naznatips said:
Final-Fan said:
That's exactly what I mean. OBVIOUSLY no one expects today's PC (especially a sub-$600 one) to run a 5-years-in-the-future game at maximum settings because today's PC can't even run Crysis at maximum settings! (I read an article recently about how some PC gaming publication tried to build a monster rig that cost ungodly amounts and would play Crysis at completely maxed out settings ... they got it to run but at like 17fps IIRC.)

I'm not a big PC gamer, but I do play some games on the PC AND I am a friggin' computer tech so I would appreciate it if you didn't assume I have no idea what I'm talking about when it comes to computer hardware naznatips.

If your computer is new I would certainly expect you to be able to play games on it 3 years from now in some fashion but tell me with a straight face you won't be staring longingly at new video cards/CPU/whatever in less than 18 months, especially if your ENTIRE RIG cost "in the same price range as consoles". Consoles last longer and that's a fact.

As I said before, we crossed into a new operating system, which includes a leap in technology. Again, if you view each operating system as a new generation of PC hardware, it's fairly reasonable to say that a PC built in 2002 could play most games out right now, with the possible upgrade of a new GPU, and you can bet your ass that PC played every game released multi-plat between the Xbox and PC.

Along with that, prices of PC hardware are falling at a rapid rate. It certainly does not take thousands of dollars to make a Crysis capable gaming rig. Crytek has promised a $600 one at GDC, and although I'm skeptical until I see proof, they certainly wouldn't have made such a claim without some basis for it.

You're right, I'll certainly buy another $150 GPU in 18 months or so, but I'll still be playing multiplat games even without that upgrade. I can play Crysis right now on medium-high as it is. It's not like every game tries to make the technical leap that Crysis did. You only get one game like that every 4 years or so at the most. Even if we consider that some PC exclusive games will move far above 360 and PS3 technology, I'll still be playing all these multiplats.

Again, this is another of those misconceptions that as soon as a game like Crysis is released, every other game will follow suit in technology and you'll never have anything to play.

I'm certainly NOT trying to say that every game will suddenly have Crysis' system requirements, but if there's a game like that NOW then I think it's absolutely fair to think that most games five years from now will have comparable requirements, unless you show me counterexamples or other evidence to the contrary. 

Honestly I think you are looking at my argument and thinking I'm saying something else based on other less reasonable opinions you have run into.  Am I wrong? 

If you have to upgrade the GPU, then that adds $150 or so to your price every 2-3 years (or $80-100 every year and a half) and suddenly it's not as cheap an investment as the console was which is my whole point.

Tag (courtesy of fkusumot): "Please feel free -- nay, I encourage you -- to offer rebuttal."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
My advice to fanboys: Brag about stuff that's true, not about stuff that's false. Predict stuff that's likely, not stuff that's unlikely. You will be happier, and we will be happier.

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Sen. Pat Moynihan
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The old smileys: ; - ) : - ) : - ( : - P : - D : - # ( c ) ( k ) ( y ) If anyone knows the shortcut for , let me know!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I have the most epic death scene ever in VGChartz Mafia.  Thanks WordsofWisdom! 

Final-Fan on 14 February 2008
naznatips said:
Final-Fan said:

So you're assuming that 5 years from now everyone will still be running Vista?
W95-1995
W98-1998
W2K-2000
WXP-2001
WV-2006/7
It seems to me that XP's lifespan was the exception, not the rule. Maybe 5/6 year lifespans for OSes is the new rule but then again maybe not.

Now here we get into something that I truly don't know as I haven't closely followed computer hardware for more than a few years. Would a 2002 PC that cost a MODEST amount truly run Bioshock and CoD4 without ANY newer-than-2002 hardware and without looking like week-old dogshit? What graphics card would you recommend, and what did it cost at the time?

Oh please, Final-Fan, don't sink to that level. You're a compluter tech, you know very well that 95 and 98 were nearly identical, and offered no major changes to graphics or development technology until XP. Please let's not go down that road. Not every new OS is a major OS.

Not without looking like week-old dogshit no, but you have to remember that today's week-old-dogshit is yesterday's top-of-the-line tech. PC gaming still has generations...

Hahah, yeah I'll give you that but what about W2000?

And if you concede that it looks like dogshit compared to other PC games then to maintain the comparison you have to assert that the new games on the console bought at the same time as the old PC ALSO look like "dogshit" (not just "not as good" but dogshit) compared to the new PC. 


Tag (courtesy of fkusumot): "Please feel free -- nay, I encourage you -- to offer rebuttal."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
My advice to fanboys: Brag about stuff that's true, not about stuff that's false. Predict stuff that's likely, not stuff that's unlikely. You will be happier, and we will be happier.

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Sen. Pat Moynihan
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The old smileys: ; - ) : - ) : - ( : - P : - D : - # ( c ) ( k ) ( y ) If anyone knows the shortcut for , let me know!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I have the most epic death scene ever in VGChartz Mafia.  Thanks WordsofWisdom! 

naznatips on 14 February 2008
Bozotheclown said:
Naznatips, I'm waiting for your response to my post.

I see no reason to respond to your post that PC gaming is in any way dying.  You have no evidence of that, and a clearly lack of understanding PC sales, which have grown signifficantly over the last few years.  



naznatips on 14 February 2008
Final-Fan said:
naznatips said:
Final-Fan said:

So you're assuming that 5 years from now everyone will still be running Vista?
W95-1995
W98-1998
W2K-2000
WXP-2001
WV-2006/7
It seems to me that XP's lifespan was the exception, not the rule. Maybe 5/6 year lifespans for OSes is the new rule but then again maybe not.

Now here we get into something that I truly don't know as I haven't closely followed computer hardware for more than a few years. Would a 2002 PC that cost a MODEST amount truly run Bioshock and CoD4 without ANY newer-than-2002 hardware and without looking like week-old dogshit? What graphics card would you recommend, and what did it cost at the time?


Oh please, Final-Fan, don't sink to that level. You're a compluter tech, you know very well that 95 and 98 were nearly identical, and offered no major changes to graphics or development technology until XP. Please let's not go down that road. Not every new OS is a major OS.

Not without looking like week-old dogshit no, but you have to remember that today's week-old-dogshit is yesterday's top-of-the-line tech. PC gaming still has generations...


Hahah, yeah I'll give you that but what about W2000?


Well, 2000 was an oditiy.  It's half 95/98, and half XP.  It's the real exception to the rule, and Microsoft learned their lesson with it. 



Bozotheclown on 14 February 2008
naznatips said:
Bozotheclown said:
Naznatips, I'm waiting for your response to my post.

I see no reason to respond to your post that PC gaming is in any way dying.  You have no evidence of that, and a clearly lack of understanding PC sales, which have grown signifficantly over the last few years.  

Now,  was that so hard?  Instead of threatening to ban members that don't share the same opinions as you,  why dont you debate?



AU FOREVER