I dunno, I think PC gaming is looking more and more attractive.. If only they wouldn't make me run windows for the games I wouldn't need modern consoles at all
PC gaming world usually requires some sort of upgrade every few months to a year, console gaming doesn't need upgrades, plus I don't like PC gaming (aside from Diablo lol).
well, the actual hardware on my pc is better than my ps3 without even needing an upgrade, if i didn't need to run windows on top of the game requirements it should be able to run anything the ps3 can theoretically. my pc has hdmi out and displays on the tv great, using a gamepad with it should be just like a console. Course communism works in theory :-)
Any PC that came out within the last 5 years will have better hardware than consoles that came out 7 years ago lol. But games that have come out in the last year or 2 will run horribly on PC's that came out at the same time the current gen consoles were released. That's one of the biggest turn offs to PC gaming for me - always having something to upgrade to play the newest game(s). At least with consoles, you know it's going to run without any modifications (aside from maybe a software update for the game/system).
Any PC that came out within the last 5 years will have better hardware than consoles that came out 7 years ago lol. But games that have come out in the last year or 2 will run horribly on PC's that came out at the same time the current gen consoles were released. That's one of the biggest turn offs to PC gaming for me - always having something to upgrade to play the newest game(s). At least with consoles, you know it's going to run without any modifications (aside from maybe a software update for the game/system).
That is only true for a select few PC titles.
Most of what I'd be interested in playing works fine on pcs that are older than that.
Indie releases tend to be way less hardware intensive, practically by definition, since they can't afford the big graphics budgets.
Unlike consoles, the appeal of PC gaming is that small devs have a much larger percentage of available content (not market share, since they aren't selling more... they just account for more of what is actually out there).
AAA titles are nice once in awhile, but I can live without them.
Any PC that came out within the last 5 years will have better hardware than consoles that came out 7 years ago lol. But games that have come out in the last year or 2 will run horribly on PC's that came out at the same time the current gen consoles were released. That's one of the biggest turn offs to PC gaming for me - always having something to upgrade to play the newest game(s). At least with consoles, you know it's going to run without any modifications (aside from maybe a software update for the game/system).
That is only true for a select few PC titles.
Most of what I'd be interested in playing works fine on pcs that are older than that.
Indie releases tend to be way less hardware intensive, practically by definition, since they can't afford the big graphics budgets.
Unlike consoles, the appeal of PC gaming is that small devs have a much larger percentage of available content (not market share, since they aren't selling more... they just account for more of what is actually out there).
AAA titles are nice once in awhile, but I can live without them.
I have really been enjoying those humble indie bundles.. They come out faster than I can play them, though, I have a big backlog. Braid and Trine seem to be really good, but I need to get a nice long HDMI cable that reaches from my couch to the TV
I had a 3.8 GHZ Pentium 4 rig I built years ago, that lasted me forever. I'm no FPS guy, but the somewhat recent stuff I played was fine, mainly Starcraft 2. The power supply recently went, and I decided even though its was only a $30 fix, I would just sell the parts and start building a 6 core that will last me at least 5-8 years. I am really enjoying freebies lately, such as Abobo's Big Adventure and Super Mario Crossup.
Those Humble Bundles and other things got me up to 50 Steam games. Problem is I just went overboard and I don't even want to have Steam installed anymore as the few stand alone GoGames.com pickups I have serve me well. It's why I put the lot up on here if anyone wants a loaded steam acct and some of it is retail like civ5.
I had a 3.8 GHZ Pentium 4 rig I built years ago, that lasted me forever. I'm no FPS guy, but the somewhat recent stuff I played was fine, mainly Starcraft 2. The power supply recently went, and I decided even though its was only a $30 fix, I would just sell the parts and start building a 6 core that will last me at least 5-8 years. I am really enjoying freebies lately, such as Abobo's Big Adventure and Super Mario Crossup.
Starcraft 2 was really good at being able to scale back. You could pretty much slide the graphics slider down to the point where the thing had the same graphics requirements as starcraft 1 and still runs nice and smooth, just with less flash.
I had a 3.8 GHZ Pentium 4 rig I built years ago, that lasted me forever. I'm no FPS guy, but the somewhat recent stuff I played was fine, mainly Starcraft 2. The power supply recently went, and I decided even though its was only a $30 fix, I would just sell the parts and start building a 6 core that will last me at least 5-8 years. I am really enjoying freebies lately, such as Abobo's Big Adventure and Super Mario Crossup.
Starcraft 2 was really good at being able to scale back. You could pretty much slide the graphics slider down to the point where the thing had the same graphics requirements as starcraft 1 and still runs nice and smooth, just with less flash.
True, but I was running at about upper mid grade settings, and it was flawless. Most all modern PC games let you scale stuff. P4s at that clock rate were just raw power, and while they didn't have all the technical advantages of today's processors they would just meat through the tasks at hand, like an old muscle car that just ate up gasoline. Thing ran hot as hell though, and needed a huge fan.
My next CPU will be an AMD Bulldozer 3.3 ghz 6 core. Will be great for long term use. As of today it is only a mid grade processor, but as more things become created with multicores in mind, it will stay mid grade while other dual and quad cores drop off the charts. As long as you build your PC with the road ahead in mind, they can outlast console life spans.
Comments
Originally posted by: dra600n
Any PC that came out within the last 5 years will have better hardware than consoles that came out 7 years ago lol. But games that have come out in the last year or 2 will run horribly on PC's that came out at the same time the current gen consoles were released. That's one of the biggest turn offs to PC gaming for me - always having something to upgrade to play the newest game(s). At least with consoles, you know it's going to run without any modifications (aside from maybe a software update for the game/system).
That is only true for a select few PC titles.
Most of what I'd be interested in playing works fine on pcs that are older than that.
Indie releases tend to be way less hardware intensive, practically by definition, since they can't afford the big graphics budgets.
Unlike consoles, the appeal of PC gaming is that small devs have a much larger percentage of available content (not market share, since they aren't selling more... they just account for more of what is actually out there).
AAA titles are nice once in awhile, but I can live without them.
Originally posted by: arch_8ngel
Originally posted by: dra600n
Any PC that came out within the last 5 years will have better hardware than consoles that came out 7 years ago lol. But games that have come out in the last year or 2 will run horribly on PC's that came out at the same time the current gen consoles were released. That's one of the biggest turn offs to PC gaming for me - always having something to upgrade to play the newest game(s). At least with consoles, you know it's going to run without any modifications (aside from maybe a software update for the game/system).
That is only true for a select few PC titles.
Most of what I'd be interested in playing works fine on pcs that are older than that.
Indie releases tend to be way less hardware intensive, practically by definition, since they can't afford the big graphics budgets.
Unlike consoles, the appeal of PC gaming is that small devs have a much larger percentage of available content (not market share, since they aren't selling more... they just account for more of what is actually out there).
AAA titles are nice once in awhile, but I can live without them.
I have really been enjoying those humble indie bundles.. They come out faster than I can play them, though, I have a big backlog. Braid and Trine seem to be really good, but I need to get a nice long HDMI cable that reaches from my couch to the TV
Originally posted by: JBOGames
I had a 3.8 GHZ Pentium 4 rig I built years ago, that lasted me forever. I'm no FPS guy, but the somewhat recent stuff I played was fine, mainly Starcraft 2. The power supply recently went, and I decided even though its was only a $30 fix, I would just sell the parts and start building a 6 core that will last me at least 5-8 years. I am really enjoying freebies lately, such as Abobo's Big Adventure and Super Mario Crossup.
Starcraft 2 was really good at being able to scale back. You could pretty much slide the graphics slider down to the point where the thing had the same graphics requirements as starcraft 1 and still runs nice and smooth, just with less flash.
Originally posted by: cradelit
Originally posted by: JBOGames
I had a 3.8 GHZ Pentium 4 rig I built years ago, that lasted me forever. I'm no FPS guy, but the somewhat recent stuff I played was fine, mainly Starcraft 2. The power supply recently went, and I decided even though its was only a $30 fix, I would just sell the parts and start building a 6 core that will last me at least 5-8 years. I am really enjoying freebies lately, such as Abobo's Big Adventure and Super Mario Crossup.
Starcraft 2 was really good at being able to scale back. You could pretty much slide the graphics slider down to the point where the thing had the same graphics requirements as starcraft 1 and still runs nice and smooth, just with less flash.
True, but I was running at about upper mid grade settings, and it was flawless. Most all modern PC games let you scale stuff. P4s at that clock rate were just raw power, and while they didn't have all the technical advantages of today's processors they would just meat through the tasks at hand, like an old muscle car that just ate up gasoline. Thing ran hot as hell though, and needed a huge fan.
My next CPU will be an AMD Bulldozer 3.3 ghz 6 core. Will be great for long term use. As of today it is only a mid grade processor, but as more things become created with multicores in mind, it will stay mid grade while other dual and quad cores drop off the charts. As long as you build your PC with the road ahead in mind, they can outlast console life spans.