renesisX wrote..Do I hear the murmuring from the engine of a tuned up skyline from Gran Turismo 4 ?
So HL2 and Doom3 for the xbox. Yep, Sony is screwed right now.
mikestrike wrote..if a game producer makes a deal with a certain console, that's permanent. i think that they pay people to produce games for their console, im not sure though. that's why you rarely see the same game for 2 consoles
is it gonna be just xbox? they need to make a ps2 version cus ps2 is awsome.
xlokix wrote..Actually, I think the majority of games are multi-platform. From the standard stuff, like Crash Bandicoot, right up to some of the big names, like Grand Theft Auto, exist on at least two consoles in one form or another. Ditto with virtually all sports games.
if a game producer makes a deal with a certain console, that's permanent. i think that they pay people to produce games for their console, im not sure though. that's why you rarely see the same game for 2 consoles
MikeJ wrote..Hay guyz where da warez at???????
You can't really argue about gaming cost with a cs gamer. Some of them pirated their copy, not to mention the game itself will run on any POS system made past 1998.
Pharlap wrote...*clap* *clap* *clap* once again, well said.
there are many types of people that like to upgrade their computer frequently. i used to do that. but now i really cant be bothered any more, so i just buy the best i can afford, and make sure the hardware is set up correctly - so hopefully in the future i wont need to open the case for a few years. unless something breaks of course.
my computer would be considrered "shit" by any teen nerd out there who's life revolves around computers and virtual friends, but for me, like zero tolerance said, as long as it plays games at an acceptable level, then i really cant complain.
squeezing a few % extra performance out of a computer may be an interesting challenge, but it doesnt really interest me that much any more. as long as it does what i want it to do, im happy.
on a sidenote, i find it pathetic how many preboxed computers come with a pitiful 256mb RAM, even in this day and age, 256mb was what i had back in 1998. a year later it was 512mb, a year or so after that, 1gb. and i still felt it wasnt enough (damn you microsoft). i guess RAM chips are getting more and more expensive. especially those high speed DDR ones.
the computer industry is fuelled by money. as any other is im sure. but for computer companies, the lack of intimate knowledge of computers is what drives their sales higher and higher. people who think that price dictates performance are the types that the computer hardware industry aims for. a $500 video card ? pff, with a bit of tweaking im sure a sub $200 card will perform near as well as the one which probably costs more than your computer at present.
when people see huge numbers (9800XT, 5200, 3600 etc etc) they think, "big numbers = big performance". thats what hardware companies rely on. nothing could be further from the truth however. as a hardwrae engineer i know exactly what makes these components tick and what clever marketing tactics companies use. but people will just keep consuming and consuming regardless of what other "informed" individuals tell them. deep down inside they still think "big numbers and expensive prices = something worthy of it".
u say its a bad idea to buy ram more than once. what i do is buy the fastest RAM thats supported by the memory controller on the motherboard. buying anything faster will either result in instability or redundancy.
if you want the absolute best, then be prepared to pay (ie waste) a lot more. but if you have half a brain and any sense of money saving, then you would realise that buying something thats almost the best, but not THE best will save u a lot.
its like getting a porsche vs a BMW. a BMW will do almost the same as a porsche (get you from A->B), but slightly less quickly.
im being simple, im no car geek, but hope u understand the analogy.
all PCs perform the EXACT same funtions. except some do it faster than others. sometimes this increase in speed isnt justified by forking out such extortionate amounts of money ($500 for a gamers video card rolf). of course bloatware and artificial slowdown of software does prompt people to buy faster hardware - software and hardware companies are very closely linked in the way they help each other to achieve better sales.
good example is MS office. how many CDs does office 2004 take up now? is it something like 3? or maybe its one DVD. for what? exactly the same programs that were first introduced like 10 years ago? rediculous.
0 Tolerance wrote..Absolutely, there's nothing wrong with consoles, though I prefer to own both a console and a PC.
just to clarify, i dont think there is anything wrong with consoles and/or the games that are available to them, per se. nor do i believe releasing games on multiple platforms is wrong. i just believe gaming on a PC saves money (in the long run), and allows for a much better (and broader) gaming experience.
n8bowa wrote..Well I don't know places per se, but for a cheap alternative to the newer ATI cards, I've read that the Sapphire Radeons are virtually identical, with a different sticker slapped on 'em, and they run a great deal cheaper than the ATI brand in some places.
I'd like to know a place to get good deals on Graphics cards.
Comment