---

Originally posted by luckypotato
<Mod edit>

---

 
<Mod edit>
Re: OP
Try the 9600GT, 8800GT, or 4850. You'll probably get the most bang for your buck out of those (particularly the latter 2).

If you're feeling frisky, go for the GTX295.

It's a single-slot solution (but two cards SLId) that has consistently topped the charts. It's more expensive, but it usually gets between 10 and 20 FPS more than the 4870x2, unless the game unfairly favors ATI cards.

It will run you roughly $550 or less, but you can't find a better card on the planet. Especially for a single-slot solution.

Pfft. What's the difference anymore? Macs are becoming more like PCs all the time.

Remember when Apple switched to Intel CPUs? And remember when they switched to ATI/nVidia video cards? They never used either before. Currently they're offering BootCamp, allowing users to install another OS on Apple hardware if they so choose.

So, I have a question then. If you're playing on an Intel CPU with a nVidia card through Windows Vista/XP... Are you sure you're gaming on a Mac? No, you're not. What makes Macs "Macs" (with all the loaded terms that come along with the word) is the OS and the occasional elitest attitude.

At that point, you're paying $600 more for an operating system. The benefits of the OS are fairly mild, and mostly benefit novice users. I will give the OS that much. If you're just using the thing to type, play movies, and listen to music, Mac OS makes it fairly painless. Windows has a small learning curve when it comes to that stuff, but the gap is closing as MSFT focuses on usability issues with Vista and Windows 7.

Windows Vista has been rather stable for me. I built the computer I have for about $1400 and it's twice as powerful as its equivalent Mac. It hasn't crashed in about 8-9 months since I fixed my RAM voltage issues, and the thing is about a year old.

Hardware-wise I will openly admit Apple uses better components than most of the "PC" companies. Better than Dell, Compaq, etc. for sure. I do say "most," though, because once you get into the realm of IBM, Sony, and the high-end Dells - they're equivalent, if not far better. IBM laptops can be worlds more durable than any MacBook you could pick out, and the high-end Dell computers are made surprisingly well. Equivalent, for sure.

And that's really the jist of the issue. Macs use practically the same hardware. The computer itself is hardly any different than what you can buy or build yourself. The question becomes, is the usability of the packaged OS worth the extra $400-$600 (or more) to you?

If you're a novice user or an elitest, it certainly can be. There will always be people like that, and that's okay.

If you're a power-user, build your own PCs, or have used Windows before... I think it's proof enough that over 80% of the market belongs to Windows.

Mac may be the Lexus of the computer world (which I think is a far better analogy than Honda - Hondas are cheap, Macs are not), but PCs can range from the Chevies to the Customized 2009 Nissan GTR depending on the user. It's definitely that flexibility which has garnered so much of the market, and if Apple ever starts trying to match that flexibility, you'll probably see the same issues with the MacOS that you currently see with Windows.

That all said, everybody has their opinions. Some are just more corroberated by evidence than others.

I figure I can either spend 10 hours a week creating a complex character and flexing the right side of my brain, or i can spend 10 hours a week humping spreadsheets to find the best gear and flex the left side of my brain.

I generally choose the former, as tactics will usually (though unfortunately not always) out-do gear.

Plus, as the spreadsheeters are whining for more content or complaining about exploit XYZ I get to enjoy in-depth conversations with other people who share my interest.

Originally posted by fresh2daBone

swg blows who would wanna play that, the original swg was good, but comin bak do it, been there done that

Okay. So why do you want BioWare to make something almost exactly the same with slightly better graphics if it blows? And plenty of people want to play it... That's why there's the Pre-NGE emulation project going on.

btw i wanna be proven wrong so i will rant, i wanna see success in my eyes; ure writing doesnt exactly describe ure  an english major lol u tryin to impress somebody here?

You never had an objective thesis, so you can't be "proven wrong." Unless you mean that your subjective interpretation of what an MMO is supposed to be applied to a broader populace is your thesis/proof. In that case, I give you WoW. Fourteen-million subscribers, which is 10x more than its nearest competitor, and 100x that of most MMO's - and it's precisely what you're ranting against, so I'd say... Yes, you are wrong. Unless you can come up with a better thesis/conjecture or something to disprove WoW's popularity, you're pretty far in the hole.

But as I was saying, I can't "prove you wrong" if you don't have a cohesive thesis to begin with. The lack of a thesis is generally the sign of a rant or horrendously ill-informed piece of writing, which I believe this is. My notion is only further confirmed because you haven't used any quantitative proof since the inception of this thread - it's been purely your opinion, and you can't disprove opinions, only offer further proof to change the opinion.

So, explicitly state your thesis, supporting evidence, and conclusion... Then I'll be happy to disprove it.

Until then, I'll just have fun correcting your absolutely terrible grammar. I've seen four-year-olds spell better than you. And don't give me that "Oh! But I save time typing!" You don't. I type at 85wpm, a single letter takes up less than a second.

Your sentence:

swg blows who would wanna play that, the original swg was good, but comin bak do it, been there done that

What it should look like in English:

Star Wars Galaxies blows. Who would want to play that? The original Star Wars Galaxies was good, but coming back to it? Been there, done that.

Arbitrary Quantitative Improvement Score: 300%

Your sentence:

btw i wanna be proven wrong so i will rant, i wanna see success in my eyes; ure writing doesnt exactly describe ure an english major lol u tryin to impress somebody here?

What it should look like in English:

By the way, I'm going to rant until I'm proven wrong. Also, your colored text had nothing to do with being an English Major - trying to impress somebody?

Arbitrary Quantitative Improvement Score: 500%

P.S. - I had no idea what you meant by "I wanna see success in my eyes." No concrete verbs, only pronouns, and you haven't previously stated what 'success' is to you, so I had to leave it out of the correction.

P.P.S. - The English Major thing is in my signature. You'll notice it at the end of every one of my posts. I put it there so that people who accuse of me of being a "Grammar Nazi" are preemptively stifled.

Originally posted by fresh2daBone

Here's a cool idea,

how bout making the jedi or sith lord status difficult to obtain, and whoever does, has 1 life and if killed, the oppurtunity will go to the next player, but be warned you'll always be hunted, i kno it aint new

Gankfest. Plus it doesn't jive with the lore. Sith Lords are ostensibly difficult to kill - not push-overs to the nearest rabbit.

and who said swg was wrong, it wasnt right but not wrong and the world of star wars has absolutely no limits

No one said it was wrong. I believe people have been saying that it sounds like you want to play SWG - so go play it. Nothing is preventing you from playing SWG. There's resistance when you try to turn one game into another that it was never intended to be, though.

and ofcourse bioware is listening to us and incorporating economy and crafting in their game, why??? because they are listening!!

Yes, they are listening. Though your two examples are poor. Every MMO has to have a viable economy - especially if it  has crafting. An MMO without a viable economy means that rewards are superflous and the illusion of power becomes too insubstantial to hold onto. They've changed character models, and I can imagine BioWare changing many things in response to player feedback (particularly in the Betas) - but I doubt they're going to listen to anyone who opens and closes their posts with "this game is CRAP."

but 6 classes means you'll go through a similar story as everyone else, or you can decide to craft, but you'll be craftin the same ol' stuff as everybody else

I wasn't aware you had insider information. If BioWare's claim is true, that SW:ToR has more content than all of their previous games combined, then I highly doubt you'll meet lot of other "you"s running around. As for crafting - it's possible that you'll end up with the same recipes as everyone else. Of course. But they haven't revealed anything about crafting other than it's in the game and not their main focus. When there's more evidence than heresay and conjecture, then I'll take your stances more seriously.

you can decide for yourself the mmo you want, but you want to pay $15 a month for something similar?

Precisely many peoples' points. SWG already exists - why does it seem like you want BioWare to remake it?

i did check out darkfall and mortal online, and they sound sick, but truthfully i'm quiet sick of elves and orc...also i don't know if peeps computers will handle those games

Just about any half-decent computer can handle Darkfall at this point, unless they screw the pooch on coding. I have no idea about Mortal online. If you're sick of generic fantasy, try EVE - it's sandbox, has a completely player-run economy, loads of crafting, and doesn't have lore to trample upon.

i'm sure there's more to say...

I'm sure there's more you can write, but I doubt there's much more you can say.

Developer-generated Dynamic content takes too many resources, too much time, and does something very bad to their bottom-line: excludes a portion of their paying customers. Smaller studios and smaller MMO's can get away with slightly more dynamic content because the playerbase isn't really changing, the time is acceptable, and since it's mostly just world-changes at specific junctures - it's not really "dynamic" (more episodic) an doesn't take too many resources (as it's all planned).

Systems and programs can be developed that allows "GM"s to change the server dynamically in response to preset events - but it would come with costs. You'd have to download updates per server, if the GM wanted to change things based on User-input (like "raiding" a capital city or setting up a fortress) the GM would have to decide which group to change things for (is there ever less than a dozen "storylines" going on at any one time on most servers?). Assuming it's fiscally plausible to pay the 4-5 people required to run the "GM" spot alone (keep in mind they're excluded from technical support issues), the system was developed that allowed a person to change the game itself, and it worked well - the third problem still remains.

The main reason I believed companies are afraid to offer dynamic content is because it would exclude potential customers. Imagine buying a game, logging on to the first time, and seeing someone with an item - title - quest - etc. that could ONLY have been achieved if you were there the first two months. As childish as most of the prospective MMO fanbase is, I'm betting (and I think developers are as well) that after experiencing that, most would rather quit (even if "equitable" options were made available) instead of hanging around to get their special traits as well.

The only way dynamic content might be plausible is if you take the human-controlled GM element out of the equation most of the time and let an AI program act on current conditions - leaving the large events for approval by the GM (after a petition, of course). Then, to make sure no one is left out, concertedly offering a pseudo-server where players could go to experience older content if they wish, or implement item decay/repair so that the "old world" items are not as prevalent in the "new world" and don't make players jealous.

It's possible something like that might occur, and frankly - if done well - I'd be all for it. But developing the resources to dynamically change MMO servers would take a LOT of funding, and I think - particularly in the market of MMO failures - that it's not worth the risk for the larger companies. Maybe in a year or two.

Originally posted by mundus01

Hello,Yes computer problems can be a pain. Download a program called ccleaner its a free tools and run all the system clean up and reg.  clean up tools on it.  cant remeber if its   ccleaner  or cccleaner      software is free.

Unfortunately CCcleaner, as good as it is, can do nothing for him. If it's citing memory addresses in the BSODs (that's the 1x00000019 etc. number - a memory address block) then the likelihood of a registry issue is pretty far out.

Good product, though. Just not relevant to the situation. ;)

You're getting Memory errors, it's probably something to do with your memory. ;) Either you OS is unable to address the memory, or the physical sticks have gone kaput.

Find and download MemTest86+ and let that run for at least 4 hours or until you get an error. If you get an error, there are a few things you can try:

-If you're overclocking your RAM, set it back to regular clocks.

-If you're not overclocking, but are still getting errors, go into your BIOS (as long as you know how to navigate your BIOS, if you don't - don't try -I mean it) and up the voltage to your RAM very, very slowly until you pass the MemTest. Depending on what RAM you have, the sticks may not be able to withstand more than 2.5v and there's a real chance of frying them if you push it too far.

-Re-install your OS.

If those don't work, your RAM sticks are dead and you need to buy new ones. If you'd rather not re-install the OS, I'd put the RAM into another computer and see if the errors occur.

There's also a small chance that it might be the motherboard, but in my experience it's the memory going bad.

As always, if someone comes along who is more knowledgable than myself and can offer a better plan and explanation, listen to them.

Originally posted by tillamook 

Sorry to say guys, but your $14.99 per month for an MMO isn’t enough even with a 1 million subscribers. It takes a few years of operation before they break even with a large scale mmo and it isn’t a loss operating anymore. This why MMOs are failing so fast anyways, they don’t get the expected subscription revenue within the timeframe they predicted and they just end up closing it down.

I heard that Bioware broke the 100 mill mark building this game already. EA pitched in a bit of cash to keep this project going. I’m not sure what the break down is but even shelling out $15 x 1 million subs won’t cover everything. We don’t know how much money goes to their various licensing fees, server operating costs, design and build teams, travel expenses, marketing and advertising, publishing fees, store displays, taxes, it even goes as far as how much it costs to keep their lights on and flush their toilets.

I doubt Bioware has broken $100M on SWtoR so far. That's an absolutely ridiculous budget for a game that's probably a good year out and has loads of development to go, but I'd believe a credible source.

You're also forgetting box sales. $15 x 1M won't cover everything, but $50-$60 x 1M (even if they only take 20% of the total cost) gives a tremendous boost. Plus, if they are spending some $100M on development, a very large chunk of that is probably investor funded -  meaning it's not their cash.

Plus, the biggest problem facing them is not funding or even long-term upkeep - it's the game itself. You're not going to beat WoW with a doppleganger. If most of the elements feel like WoW, there's no reason for the customer base to play your game instead of WoW (and is one of the more poignant reasons I've not played an MMO in a while). If they can make their game different enough from WoW, then they should recoup money just fine.

Regardless, I'm fairly set against MTs. I wouldn't mind paying $20/month for a sub (Europeans can pay upwards of $30 - I don't mind closing the gap), but paying real money for fake items is just not my style. At least I know my sub goes towards new content, maintenance, wages, etc. MTs have a far more immediate and visceral reward; whatever you bought with your cash. Yes, some portion of the $3 goes towards all the other stuff, but the illusion is different. One rewards you subtly, the other gives you an item and calls it "even."

If a MT model is "necessary" (which I highly doubt) for turning a profit, at least WoW has some of the better ideas. Their TCG does have loot cards, but they're mostly vanity items with a plethora of vanity items obtainable in-game. I heard they're opening up paid transfers and such, which is a good idea. I've not heard of them requiring real money for gear, titles, or any type of game-reward.

I think I've ranted on long enough, and hopefully SWtoR will be MT-free. Bioware is an excellent game company, definitely one of my top 3 (the other two being VALVe and Blizzard North), and I believe they might have a shot at producing a decent WoW-rival as long as they don't try to imitate it wholesale.