First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next  Last
Post Reply "PC master race, console peasants"
5205 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / M
Offline
Posted 4/8/15
People who honestly think this are scum. Just enjoy the games. How you play doesn't matter. It also helps to have friends, that way you can try things you wouldn't buy yourself.
12457 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / California
Offline
Posted 4/8/15 , edited 4/8/15

rcsatcrunchyroll wrote:


dodgelikesbacon wrote:
Have you ever built a PC?


Mm-hmm. And I am aware it can be done cheaply if you are shrewd. But I am equally aware of more than a few people I have known who have spent the thousands of dollars, only to be quickly frustrated as the software outpaces their hardware. (Or they find that their graphics card is a little too powerful for their cooling system. Or that their version of Windows hates them. The list of problems goes on and on.)


So is it people combining older hardware w/ the latest hardware causing bottleneck issues, compatibility issues and whatnot? Or they just build it without even doing research? Gaming on a PC definitely has its fair share of problems but I just can't imagine building a PC that costs that much and the software would be able to outpace it that quick. I mean, I had an HP Pavilion 2010 desktop, w/c isn't even a dedicated gaming PC, and I ran games like DayZ (Arma 2 mod), Battlefield 3, Skyrim w/ mods, Torchlight II w/ mods, Batman Arkham Asylum and City, and Far Cry 3 on medium to high settings and all of those games came out after 2010. Lol. I also have friends that have gaming rigs that are 3-4 years old and they can still max out current games (in 1080p, constant 50-60 fps or sometimes higher) like Battlefield 4. Sucks to be those people you mentioned but I guess they were either unlucky or had bad builds, huh?
56910 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36 / M / Planet Sanno
Offline
Posted 4/9/15

dodgelikesbacon wrote:
Sucks to be those people you mentioned but I guess they were either unlucky or had bad builds, huh?


The point being that PC users should not brag of perfection when cases like this exist. And the rampant piracy I mentioned above.
12457 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / California
Offline
Posted 4/9/15 , edited 4/9/15

rcsatcrunchyroll wrote:


dodgelikesbacon wrote:
Sucks to be those people you mentioned but I guess they were either unlucky or had bad builds, huh?


The point being that PC users should not brag of perfection when cases like this exist. And the rampant piracy I mentioned above.


PC elitists, and fanboys in general, brag about their platform of choice because they probably feel the need to validate their purchase or they just have a sad life and feel the need to bring down others. Or they're just simply trolls trying to bait people. Lol. I can't speak for everyone who plays on PC but I purchase my games legitimately. A lot of my friends do, too. I just wait for 'em to be on sale though.

Cases like that do exist, but they're not unfixable. I just wanted to clarify that misconception that you have to upgrade your PC every year. It's really about knowing how to optimize your settings w/ each game. Although there are some cases where games are poorly optimized *looks at Watch_ Dogs and AC Unity*, most games should run fine w/ a little bit of tweaking if you have an older machine just like I did w/ my HP Pavilion back then. If you do enough research and take the time to learn how to build a new PC, you could build a future-proof PC that could last years before needing an upgrade. I just didn't want people who know nothing about gaming PCs but are interested in building one in the near future reading that statement about spending thousands of dollars on a gaming PC only to be outdated in less than a year and it just intimidates them or scares them right off or just simply dismiss it as the reality of PC gaming. That would be a shame because they might find something that they'll love and enjoy on there. After all, different platforms offer different experiences.
9200 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
35 / M
Offline
Posted 4/9/15

dodgelikesbacon wrote:


rcsatcrunchyroll wrote:


dodgelikesbacon wrote:
Have you ever built a PC?


Mm-hmm. And I am aware it can be done cheaply if you are shrewd. But I am equally aware of more than a few people I have known who have spent the thousands of dollars, only to be quickly frustrated as the software outpaces their hardware. (Or they find that their graphics card is a little too powerful for their cooling system. Or that their version of Windows hates them. The list of problems goes on and on.)


So is it people combining older hardware w/ the latest hardware causing bottleneck issues, compatibility issues and whatnot? Or they just build it without even doing research? Gaming on a PC definitely has its fair share of problems but I just can't imagine building a PC that costs that much and the software would be able to outpace it that quick. I mean, I had an HP Pavilion 2010 desktop, w/c isn't even a dedicated gaming PC, and I ran games like DayZ (Arma 2 mod), Battlefield 3, Skyrim w/ mods, Torchlight II w/ mods, Batman Arkham Asylum and City, and Far Cry 3 on medium to high settings and all of those games came out after 2010. Lol. I also have friends that have gaming rigs that are 3-4 years old and they can still max out current games (in 1080p, constant 50-60 fps or sometimes higher) like Battlefield 4. Sucks to be those people you mentioned but I guess they were either unlucky or had bad builds, huh?


It's just the specs that the games run on are so damned high.

I don't know how bad it is now, but in the past, being able to play certain games would be benchmarks for your PC. Which, BTW, it HAD to be a PC. The games weren't apple or linux friendly (linux now can play steam games as far as I know at least)

It also used to be that a game would come out JUUUUUUUUST after the newest hardware would be released, so you ended up having to buy the top of the line graphics card (usually it was graphics that made or broke your system), and laptop gaming was a pipe dream as your games required more RAM than could be fit onto a laptop.

Back then, the mentality was build it to hog your resources because that would drive the hardware companies to make better hardware.

Today, we're running out of improvements to make in a way, but the model is still kinda there. Especially with OS's that get bogged down in a year or two.


Consoles on the other hand, didn't need an OS really (it has one, but it's not the same), and the specs were actually comparable to a PC's or in some cases surpassed them because it was a machine built to be dedicated to gaming and solely gaming, both of which mean more of your resources would be directed straight to the gaming experience.

The whole "PC gaming" thing felt more like a reactionary response to consoles, which used to be the primary method of playing, and, quite frankly, got the bulk share of games, had better graphics than the ports to PC, and better controls, etc... (PC's on the other hand, had inter- and intra- net playing abilites. Hence the old LAN parties). Being a PC gamer used to mean you had "more geek cred" because you were into building computers too and less likely to be a casual gamer.

These days, however, consoles ARE like computers. Controllers are USB more often than not, so they can be used on PC or console. They have internet connectivity (in fact, damningly, they require it even for 1p games), and there's minimal difference between the two.

People just think the PC/Console wars are funny these days and reference it but I doubt many have actually lived through the painful days of PC gaming to understand the whole bitter war between the two.
725 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M / UK
Offline
Posted 4/9/15

demo_Animation wrote:

I gotta say, I do love reading youtube arguments between console and pc elitists.
It's SO funny watching them all brag about incorrect information, it's wonderful.


People on the internet making up facts to support their own viewpoint? Never!

Also we really do need a way to brag about playing games at 1080p 120fps, unlike you console peasants.
56910 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36 / M / Planet Sanno
Offline
Posted 4/9/15

serifsansserif wrote:
People just think the PC/Console wars are funny these days and reference it but I doubt many have actually lived through the painful days of PC gaming to understand the whole bitter war between the two.


Here, here! I remember all of this quite clearly. ... Spent more than a few days taking apart one old PC tower or another to fit something into it, only to find yet another laugh-out-loud compatibility issue. Especially with the sound cards. That used to drive me insane.

(Insert the old WAV file of the Footman from Warcraft II saying, in full brogue, "Your sound card works perrrfectly.")

The funny part: My favorite computer for gaming back in the day? The Amiga. Why? Because it had the internal architecture of a console (multiple processors acting in tandem instead of a single processor, an awesome sound card for the time, etc.)

And it goes both ways. The NES sound chip was a modified Commodore 64 sound chip, remember.
12457 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / California
Offline
Posted 4/9/15

It's just the specs that the games run on are so damned high.

I don't know how bad it is now, but in the past, being able to play certain games would be benchmarks for your PC. Which, BTW, it HAD to be a PC. The games weren't apple or linux friendly (linux now can play steam games as far as I know at least)


If you always want everything on ultra/max settings running at or above 60 fps at all times then sure, some (but a very limited number) of the latest games can definitely be demanding. It's a combination of how well developers optimize their game/s on PC and how willing you are to sacrifice performance over graphics and vice versa.

Gaming on today's modern hardware is actually not bad. Like I mentioned above, a few my friends are still running 3-4 year old builds and they can still max out most games today. Maybe at the cost of a few frames, but the game will still run smooth and is very much playable. And yup! Linux is getting more support w/c is awesome.


People just think the PC/Console wars are funny these days and reference it but I doubt many have actually lived through the painful days of PC gaming to understand the whole bitter war between the two.


I think both platforms have come a long way since then but I honestly don't know why there has to be a war between PC and consoles. There's clearly a market for both, you know? Also, in a way, it is funny because it's unnecessary drama. So maybe PC gaming might've been a pain back in those days but it was ultimately the person's choice to play on it in the first place. No reason to resent console gaming for it. That applies for console gamers who hate on PC gamers for various reasons as well.
9200 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
35 / M
Offline
Posted 4/9/15

dodgelikesbacon wrote:
I think both platforms have come a long way since then but I honestly don't know why there has to be a war between PC and consoles. There's clearly a market for both, you know? Also, in a way, it is funny because it's unnecessary drama. So maybe PC gaming might've been a pain back in those days but it was ultimately the person's choice to play on it in the first place. No reason to resent console gaming for it. That applies for console gamers who hate on PC gamers for various reasons as well.


Yeah, that's why I said now versus then. It was a pretty big deal back then, as you can see from rcs's comment above yours.

I was a console person because I could never afford a build that could play a decent game. I TRIED to with McGee's Alice (the original) but there were issues with video cards and graphics and patches that didn't work.. it was a nightmare so I went back to my consoles... *shrugs*
12457 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / California
Offline
Posted 4/9/15

serifsansserif wrote:


dodgelikesbacon wrote:
I think both platforms have come a long way since then but I honestly don't know why there has to be a war between PC and consoles. There's clearly a market for both, you know? Also, in a way, it is funny because it's unnecessary drama. So maybe PC gaming might've been a pain back in those days but it was ultimately the person's choice to play on it in the first place. No reason to resent console gaming for it. That applies for console gamers who hate on PC gamers for various reasons as well.


Yeah, that's why I said now versus then. It was a pretty big deal back then, as you can see from rcs's comment above yours.

I was a console person because I could never afford a build that could play a decent game. I TRIED to with McGee's Alice (the original) but there were issues with video cards and graphics and patches that didn't work.. it was a nightmare so I went back to my consoles... *shrugs*


Yup. I read his comment and I definitely think it's interesting. It's something that I never got to do/experience growing up. I played on my dad's PC as a kid but never really messed around w/ the hardware.

How much would it cost to build a decent PC back then? The beauty of console gaming is that you don't have to worry about whether a specific game will work or not. You just insert the disc and play. I remember being super excited when The Witcher 2 came out on the Xbox 360. There was no way in hell my non-gaming desktop could run a game like it even on the lowest settings. But I played it on my 360 just fine.
9200 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
35 / M
Offline
Posted 4/9/15

dodgelikesbacon wrote:


serifsansserif wrote:


dodgelikesbacon wrote:
I think both platforms have come a long way since then but I honestly don't know why there has to be a war between PC and consoles. There's clearly a market for both, you know? Also, in a way, it is funny because it's unnecessary drama. So maybe PC gaming might've been a pain back in those days but it was ultimately the person's choice to play on it in the first place. No reason to resent console gaming for it. That applies for console gamers who hate on PC gamers for various reasons as well.


Yeah, that's why I said now versus then. It was a pretty big deal back then, as you can see from rcs's comment above yours.

I was a console person because I could never afford a build that could play a decent game. I TRIED to with McGee's Alice (the original) but there were issues with video cards and graphics and patches that didn't work.. it was a nightmare so I went back to my consoles... *shrugs*


Yup. I read his comment and I definitely think it's interesting. It's something that I never got to do/experience growing up. I played on my dad's PC as a kid but never really messed around w/ the hardware.

How much would it cost to build a decent PC back then? The beauty of console gaming is that you don't have to worry about whether a specific game will work or not. You just insert the disc and play. I remember being super excited when The Witcher 2 came out on the Xbox 360. There was no way in hell my non-gaming desktop could run a game like it even on the lowest settings. But I played it on my 360 just fine.


More so than now, "decent" depended totally on what you wanted to do with it and where you got your parts.

A "decent" work computer that did word processing and basic internet over a 56K modem (which was what most people not located on a college campus could get away with, hence the LAN parties where you'd all wire up to a central server in your own home rather than going through the internet and hence the phone lines) would cost around $300 and that's what salvaged parts. You'd have 128MB RAM, a CPU around 700Mhz, and a crappy sound and graphics card.It might have a 1-2 GB hard drive.

A gaming computer could easily cost $1000 and just be "decent"

Alienware was big in the day for their custom mods which, when games set the pace for computing power, they were one of the best. You could easily drop 2K on their systems. It would still probably top out around 1Ghz-ish and your RAM MIIIIIGHT have been around 1GB, but even that might have been uncommon then. Also, that's a single chip, no dual or quad core processor like today, and RAM was still DDR1, not DDR3 or 4 like today, which means a LOT slower. Not sure what HD's were on the top models. HD's far outpaced RAM and processors.

I didn't build really. I've since swapped hard drives and installed RAM on laptops, but nothing really "building"

rsc will have better answers.
12457 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / California
Offline
Posted 4/9/15

More so than now, "decent" depended totally on what you wanted to do with it and where you got your parts.

A "decent" work computer that did word processing and basic internet over a 56K modem (which was what most people not located on a college campus could get away with, hence the LAN parties where you'd all wire up to a central server in your own home rather than going through the internet and hence the phone lines) would cost around $300 and that's what salvaged parts. You'd have 128MB RAM, a CPU around 700Mhz, and a crappy sound and graphics card.It might have a 1-2 GB hard drive.

A gaming computer could easily cost $1000 and just be "decent"

Alienware was big in the day for their custom mods which, when games set the pace for computing power, they were one of the best. You could easily drop 2K on their systems. It would still probably top out around 1Ghz-ish and your RAM MIIIIIGHT have been around 1GB, but even that might have been uncommon then. Also, that's a single chip, no dual or quad core processor like today, and RAM was still DDR1, not DDR3 or 4 like today, which means a LOT slower. Not sure what HD's were on the top models. HD's far outpaced RAM and processors.

I didn't build really. I've since swapped hard drives and installed RAM on laptops, but nothing really "building"

rsc will have better answers.


This was definitely an interesting read. Especially when you talked about Alienware. Was Alienware an independent company before or were they already under Dell? You know what, I'll just read up on their history now that it has already piqued my interest. Haha. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the 56k modem is the one with that unforgettable dial-up sound, right?

rsc definitely knows his stuff
104 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
16 / M / British Isles
Offline
Posted 4/10/15 , edited 4/10/15
That Meme was born from a video by "The Escapist"'s Zero Punctuation series. There are many alterations/parodies of it. Personally, I use PC AND Console. In fact, I have even been re-playing the original FF (ah memories) on my iPad recently.

(And to blast the myth out of the water, my current gaming PC cost ~£400 and has served me well for at least two years.
56910 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36 / M / Planet Sanno
Offline
Posted 4/10/15

dodgelikesbacon wrote:
rsc definitely knows his stuff


I'll admit to being out of practice; what I know is pretty vintage. (And money for building computers is not nearly as plentiful as it was before the recession, that's for damn sure.) I can back up what SSS said before, though. Back in 2003, the Windows XP PC I got as a gift from the folks after graduating university was about $1,200 (Sony Vaio, actually pretty good for a store-bought model), and it was decent. Great for browsing the web, but I had to get new RAM (1 GB DDR1) and new graphics and sound cards before I could even think of playing the games of the time in anything more than a stuttering, stop-and-go fashion.

And even then, it had trouble doing the big-time shooters. This was the time when Far Cry was used as a way of testing your hardware, rather than being played for its merits as a game. If you could run that bad boy, you had a rig worth keeping. ... I couldn't. LOL. And Alienware was the go-to company if you had serious money to burn.

Still a good computer, honestly. It's retired from active service, since the advent of HD video makes it unusable on the modern Internet, but it's still great for playing older games, especially the ones that can run under DOSBox.
9200 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
35 / M
Offline
Posted 4/10/15 , edited 4/10/15

rcsatcrunchyroll wrote:


dodgelikesbacon wrote:
rsc definitely knows his stuff


I'll admit to being out of practice; what I know is pretty vintage. (And money for building computers is not nearly as plentiful as it was before the recession, that's for damn sure.) I can back up what SSS said before, though. Back in 2003, the Windows XP PC I got as a gift from the folks after graduating university was about $1,200 (Sony Vaio, actually pretty good for a store-bought model), and it was decent. Great for browsing the web, but I had to get new RAM (1 GB DDR1) and new graphics and sound cards before I could even think of playing the games of the time in anything more than a stuttering, stop-and-go fashion.

And even then, it had trouble doing the big-time shooters. This was the time when Far Cry was used as a way of testing your hardware, rather than being played for its merits as a game. If you could run that bad boy, you had a rig worth keeping. ... I couldn't. LOL. And Alienware was the go-to company if you had serious money to burn.

Still a good computer, honestly. It's retired from active service, since the advent of HD video makes it unusable on the modern Internet, but it's still great for playing older games, especially the ones that can run under DOSBox.


Well, at least we didin't have to explain floppy floppies (5.25") vs. hard floppies (3.5")
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.