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

Forums - Sony - Play Magazine Enters "Lair", Wants to Have Its Babies

Kwaad said:
your mother said:
Kwaad said:
your mother said:
Kwaad said:

I've been building computers for years. I will tell you this much, that you can not build a computer to rival the PS3 graphically for 500$.

(mumbo-jumbo)

Now you wanna show me how you build a system that can do what the PS3/360 can for 400-600$ Be my guest.

Wow - for years! I thought I was the only one...

Two things I do know for sure:

- A 500$ computer will allow me to be far more productive than I ever will be on a PS3 with its Linux and limited RAM for my non-gaming tasks (and before you say anything, the PS3 is not just a game machine - we both can agree on that, right? I mean, with the CELL processor being 10x faster than the average PC and all that...)

- A 500$ computer will allow me to play any game released for the PC that came out this year. Actually, my 2-year-old computer still handles Doom3 at 720p with aplomb at high settings, and manages 20fps on ultra settings. Being 2 years old, I reckon it costs much less than 500$. Not too shabby.

As for how to build a system that cheap, well, you have years of experience building computers - you go figure that out.


My PS3 can play Crysis style games. Can your 500$ computer play them?


That's incredible that your PS3 can play games that aren't even available yet.

I was wrong - I simply cannot argue against logic like that. The PS3 truly is future-proof!

Let me ask you this: Can your PS3 multitask like my 500$ PC can (check my previous post to see what kind of apps I run on a daily basis) ?

Oh, and my 2-year-old PC that was worth 500$... two years ago? I wonder how much something like that would cost today new...



Well, what can your PC do a PS3 cant do?

Typical workday: multitask Photoshop CS2 (several 100+ layered files@1024x768), Firefox with 15 tabs open, Dreamweaver, Illustrator (print-quality files), Office (Word and Powerpoint) and Lotus Notes all on at the same time...

Oh, and listening to music, chatting with Skype, Yahoo, MSN, and so onn and so forth. These are all applications I have on the whole time (among others that get turned on and off, but the aforementioned apps I keep running all day because of my job nature).

 



Around the Network
Kwaad said:

This aint worth arguing. The 500$ PC reigns supreme, and is better than a PS3, becuase the PS3 sucks.

And I said Crysis like games.


 Which current PS3 game is "Crysis like" that you have played?



akuma587 said:
Man, watch out. The PS3 can't do word processing and burn DVD's. Man, looks like you will have to shell out $300 for a computer that can do that. O wait, that is still less expensive than a high-end computer whose processor and video card and RAM must be replaced AT LEAST every two years in order to remain competitive.

Why are people still trying to make the argument that computer gaming isn't that expensive compared to console gaming?

BneKenobi88 already told you that he upgrades every 3-4 years - and he does play PC games.

Why are you so adamant that PC gamers are somehow forced to upgrade every two years?

And I for one am not arguing that PC gaming is more or less expensive. I just don't see why it is perceived as being so grossly expensive? It certainly is more expensive than console gaming, but hardly worth a small fortune as some would have you believe. 



your mother said:
Kwaad said:

This aint worth arguing. The 500$ PC reigns supreme, and is better than a PS3, becuase the PS3 sucks.

And I said Crysis like games.


Which current PS3 game is "Crysis like" that you have played?


 Well, I never said released either. Will your 500$ computer run any new games in 5 years? 8 years?



PSN ID: Kwaad


I fly this flag in victory!

your mother said:
akuma587 said:
Man, watch out. The PS3 can't do word processing and burn DVD's. Man, looks like you will have to shell out $300 for a computer that can do that. O wait, that is still less expensive than a high-end computer whose processor and video card and RAM must be replaced AT LEAST every two years in order to remain competitive.

Why are people still trying to make the argument that computer gaming isn't that expensive compared to console gaming?

BneKenobi88 already told you that he upgrades every 3-4 years - and he does play PC games.

Why are you so adamant that PC gamers are somehow forced to upgrade every two years?

And I for one am not arguing that PC gaming is more or less expensive. I just don't see why it is perceived as being so grossly expensive? It certainly is more expensive than console gaming, but hardly worth a small fortune as some would have you believe.


 Why didnt you say it that way. When I build a computer, I build it to last more than 1-2 years. I build them to last 4 or more.



PSN ID: Kwaad


I fly this flag in victory!

Around the Network

Might I request people move the PC discussion to a thread more appropriate to it? Maybe there's one already made for comparing consoles and PCs, but I don't feel like looking past the first forum search page. Maybe at least this thread about comparing two PCs would be a little more appropriate. http://vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=4597

 

 As for Lair, I think it looks like it could be fun, and I'd be interested in playing it some time.



 

Kwaad said:
your mother said:
Kwaad said:

This aint worth arguing. The 500$ PC reigns supreme, and is better than a PS3, becuase the PS3 sucks.

And I said Crysis like games.


Which current PS3 game is "Crysis like" that you have played?


Well, I never said released either. Will your 500$ computer run any new games in 5 years? 8 years?


So clue me in on this: How is it that you can somehow play games that haven't been released yet?

Your own words: "My PS3 can play Crysis style games. Can your 500$ computer play them?" How do you know this if you haven't experienced it yourself, as you yourself claim that these games haven't been released yet.

And about new games... you are right that my already 2-year-old PC won't be able to handle games coming out in the next few years.

But you also do realize that in 5-8 years time the PC will have games that far surpass anything the PS3 could muster - that the PC will be able to handle games far far more complex than the PS3 could even begin to dream of? And guess what? The entry point will still be around 500-700 bucks?



your mother said:
akuma587 said:
Man, watch out. The PS3 can't do word processing and burn DVD's. Man, looks like you will have to shell out $300 for a computer that can do that. O wait, that is still less expensive than a high-end computer whose processor and video card and RAM must be replaced AT LEAST every two years in order to remain competitive.

Why are people still trying to make the argument that computer gaming isn't that expensive compared to console gaming?

BneKenobi88 already told you that he upgrades every 3-4 years - and he does play PC games.

Why are you so adamant that PC gamers are somehow forced to upgrade every two years?

And I for one am not arguing that PC gaming is more or less expensive. I just don't see why it is perceived as being so grossly expensive? It certainly is more expensive than console gaming, but hardly worth a small fortune as some would have you believe.


 Because EVERYONE I know who is serious about computer gaming completely retools their computer at least every 2 years.  If you keep yourself behind a generation or two on PC games to save costs, then you sacrifice the PC's main advantage, cutting edge graphics, etc.  I don't even see the point you guys are trying to make anymore.



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

your mother said:
Kwaad said:
your mother said:
Kwaad said:

This aint worth arguing. The 500$ PC reigns supreme, and is better than a PS3, becuase the PS3 sucks.

And I said Crysis like games.


Which current PS3 game is "Crysis like" that you have played?


Well, I never said released either. Will your 500$ computer run any new games in 5 years? 8 years?


So clue me in on this: How is it that you can somehow play games that haven't been released yet?

Your own words: "My PS3 can play Crysis style games. Can your 500$ computer play them?" How do you know this if you haven't experienced it yourself, as you yourself claim that these games haven't been released yet.

And about new games... you are right that my already 2-year-old PC won't be able to handle games coming out in the next few years.

But you also do realize that in 5-8 years time the PC will have games that far surpass anything the PS3 could muster - that the PC will be able to handle games far far more complex than the PS3 could even begin to dream of? And guess what? The entry point will still be around 500-700 bucks?


 I bet you money, your computer cant run oblivion like my 1 year old computer. (as the graphics card in my computer cost nearly as much as your computer) Yet, I dont feel my computer will be able to surpass Heavenly Sword graphics. I know how to build a computer for your buck. And I know that if you pay less than 800$ your aim is too low, and you are saving money, but not getting as munch bang per buck either. Usually a 200-300$ processor is best, for 2gb of memory, your looking at, at least 150$, and even today, the graphics card that I have, is still the one that I reccomend, costs 300$. Add those 3 things together, your looking at almost 800$. That dosent even include a motherboard. Those are 3 parts. (the most expensive yes, but your still looking at ~1000$ to build a good computer today.



PSN ID: Kwaad


I fly this flag in victory!

akuma587 said:

Because EVERYONE I know who is serious about computer gaming completely retools their computer at least every 2 years. If you keep yourself behind a generation or two on PC games to save costs, then you sacrifice the PC's main advantage, cutting edge graphics, etc. I don't even see the point you guys are trying to make anymore.


Exactly my point. Just becuase you can run a next gen game, dosent mean it looks great, that's why I'm saying, you can buy a PS3 today for 500$. And it will run games that look as good (if not better) than Crysis by the end of it's life, and the point on that is, from what I have read about Crysis I'm not sure a 2000$ computer built today could run it at 100%.

EDIT: The more extreme to power your computer can do, the more extreme everything else *has* to be. I had a old computer that cost me 950$, and I went cheap on the case/Power Supply. I replaced the Powersupply 3 times, and becuase of the case, I had to leave the side off of the case, which in the long run fryed my motherboard after 3 years. This time I spent almost the exact same on hardware, just 130$ on my case and 90$ on my Power Supply. That's 220$ just on the casing! 



PSN ID: Kwaad


I fly this flag in victory!