| 2175 posts found | |
|---|---|
|
Games ARE systems. Systems are restrictions. Pushing the boundaries of those restrictions, or competing within the boundaries of those restrictions is the very definition of a game. If you're playing a game, then you're playing the system. |
|
|
Do you think, How much will the PSP Vita will cost when it is already in the market?
Console Gaming « General Discussion 11/24/11 9:06:59 PM
Originally posted by catlana http://www.gametrailers.com/users/MikeGT/gamepad/?action=viewblog&id=564513 That should answer your question about UMD games. I don't know why Sony doesn't just allow you to register your UMDs, linking the games to your Playstation account, with your current PSP. Although I would guess that it has something to do with the fact that not all PSP games are available at the Playstation store.
|
|
|
Apparently it requires a $20 dollar deposit. No other game at the store requires a deposit of any kind. You pay for your time and that's it. But I think I'm more offended at the fact that they're pulling this shit on a game that's 10 years old and retails for about $40. Throw in the fact that there are only about four multiplayer maps and the whole idea of demanding a deposit makes me wonder just what the upper management was smoking when they decided to follow through and just how hard would it be for me to score some of that shit too. Anybody else run into this problem? |
|
|
I refuse to buy a PS3 for one reason: Sony had the nerve to charge $700 for a fucking logo at launch. Yes, they've gotten their shit together on price. No, that doesn't change my mind in any way. At the time the PS3 launched, I could have built a half-way decent gaming rig that would run games head and shoulders above anything in the first gen PS3 library. I didn't like Mico$oft's policy of charging the consumer for a thousand additional services, but it was a damn sight better than being gouged up front. |
|
|
Really guys? Really? Why does it have to be either/or? Why the "Vs."? I swing both ways on this issues. Sometimes I want to blow shit up with a big fucking gun, and sometimes I want to blow things up by flamboyantly waving my hands around. The two genres really aren't that different. |
|
|
And my experience was completely different from yours. A lot can happen over that last mile of copper wire connection. The route that packets take to a speedtest site might be totally different from the route that they take to get to OnLive. The number of people sharing the total ISP bandwidth can vary from region to region and service to service. And there's always the possibility that your ISP is throttling any and all high volume traffic. But all of this is way off topic. I'm not arguing the quality of the service. That would be pointless since the quality can vary drastically with each network connection. My point was to just put some of the more obvious bullshit arguments to rest. Cloud gaming is going to happen. And I wouldn't be surprised if OnLive doesn't corner that market for no other reason than the fact that they were there first. Throw in the fact that more and more people are using the internet for high volume content like movies and you can see the trend developing from there. OnLive is pretty much optimized for current broadband capabilities. Any upgrades to internet infrastructure will only benefit them. The DRM/ownership argurment is only going to get louder as the service becomes stronger. Of course, if the service doesn't work for you then it doesn't work for you. It doesn't cost any money to find out one way or the other. You've found out that it doesn't work for you, and I've found out that it works fine for me at my current location. If I should move and get a new broadband connection, that could all change. But that's why I only rent games and don't subscribe to the service. That way I don't lose anything in the event that I can't use OnLive anymore. |
|
|
Yeah, your internet connection definitely plays a part in how you feel about the service. The only time that I found the lag to be unbearable was while playing racing games. There were also a few times when OnLive wouldn't even let me log on because my connection was experiencing too many packet drops durning log in. As for the graphics quality, I haven't encountered a single game that I would call unplayable. There are always going to be those people that want the highest possible image fidelity, and that's fine. But I think that most of us just want playable games. So far, the games on Onlive are more than adequate in that regard. Hell, Darksiders actually looked better through OnLive than it did running native on my XBox 360. |
|
|
I've found myself playing games through OnLive quite a bit over the last week. Mostly this was due to the Halloween specials that landed me full access to Dawn of War 2 for $1 and free three day rentals of Metro 2033, Orcs Must Die, and Darksiders. Having spent more than a thirty minute demo with the service, I've decided that I'm okay with it. But there are some arguements against OnLive that I feel I have to adress for the purpose of self validation. First, I've done cloud gaming before. I had a lifetime subscription to Gametap and I was a big supporter of Instant Action when it was still live. And I'm probably not the only person here that's ever wasted time on Kongregate. The idea of playing single player games online is nothing new to me and that probably has a lot to do with my attitude toward OnLive. The biggest problem with all of these services, for me at least, was that the libraries of games were fairly weak and had no stand-out titles. But the internet is full of dickishness and hate. So onward!! The main thing I want to adress is the idea that OnLive is the most opressive form of DRM ever devised. If this is the case, then it has to be the least annoying and intrusive DRM ever created. There's no CD Key to enter. There's not maleware that gets installed on you computer. Your executable file and CPU serial number don't have to be validated by some remote server. Hell, the game doesn't even install or patch. You just log in under one account, go to the games that you have access to, either through subscription or rental, and play the damn game. It's basically the same deal that you have when you rent a console game from a local video store or stream a movie from Netflix. But that right there is the problem, so say the detractors. You don't OWN the games. Which is absolutely true. But let me ask you something: When's the last time you BOUGHT a movie? You see, you don't own the movies that you watch on cable or rent from a video store and that doesn't bother you. You don't own the games tha you rent from Gamefly or the above mentioned video store and that doesn't bother you. You don't own the books that you check out of the library and that doesn't bother you. So why should renting games through an online streaming service bother you? If we're being completely honest with ourselves, we can admit that the rental system works pretty damn well for most single player games. For instance, I've played and completed every single Halo game by renting them over dedicated weekends. As a result, I've been able to enjoy that series for far less money that I would have spent had I bought the games new OR used. I don't have to bitch about games costing too much, because I only pay for the games when I feel like playing them, and then only pay what I feel that time is worth. By cutting out the idea of ownership, I actually maximize the amount of entertainment that I can squeeze out of my gaming dollar. "Okay," you say, "but isn't it a bit much to FORCE people to be online to play single player games?" Don't worry, I've got this one covered too. MMO players spend about $15 a month to play games that they have to be connected to internet in order to play. You'd be hard pressed to find an MMO player that didn't spend several hours in any given week playing solo. This is especially true in heavily instanced games where dungeons can be geared to specific party sizes and character levels. These players pay a monthly subscription to a game that they do not own, must be connected to the internet in order to play, and spend the majority of their time playing solo. Sure, they can chat with friends while they play, but you can do that with any game provided that you have a good VOIP app. Onlive has that chat functionality built in and still allows you play multiplayer in the games that support it. The only real difference between World of Warcraft and the OnLive version of Borderlands is the fact that your OnLive friends can watch you play before joining in and your WoW guildmates have to find you, or be teleported, first. So basically, the DRM/ownership argument is complete horseshit. You aren't likely to pick up a single player game after you've beaten it once, so paying full price for that experience is beyond retarded. Likewise, you're going to take the rental option every single time if you just want to play through the game one good time. If the game is so good that you think you might want to keep it, there are other options for purchasing and owning the game (Steam, Direct2Drive, Impulse, etc.). OnLive is not the gaming anti-christ. If anything, Onlive lowers the barrier to entry, allows you try games before you buy them, and makes our hobby cost one hell of a lot less. And if you aren't some elitist douchebag that wants to put velvet ropes around the hobby, I doubt that you can see the advantages as a bad thing. |
|
|
First, learn to hotlink. Cutting and pasting a link is so 1997. Second, tell us exactly what made you angry about the article. By leaving out this little detail, you just come off as a shill trying to generate traffic for the site, the author, or both. As for the article itself. . . . I felt that the writer was trying to hard to ape the conventions of game journalism. Poor attempts at humor and sarcastic hyperbole turned me off while also getting in the way of the articles entire point. A very, very weak point I might add. So yeah. Just tell us what pissed you off and we might have a discussion here. |
|
|
In 40 video games or less, define yourself as a gamer.
General Gaming « General Discussion 10/30/11 4:25:50 PM
Not quite sure how accurate a list of favorite games would be as a character profile. . . . But here are the games I keep coming back to, in no particular order:
|
|
Originally posted by Quizzical That's after rebate. . . . Still, $500 is pretty damn good for a machine that can run Dirt 3 on high settings and handle CoD:BO on medium settings. If you're more of an RTS or MMO gamer, this machine will do just fine. |
|
Originally posted by psyclum I've only had one power supply got out on me and it just stopped working. It didn't fry anything. It just didn't turn on. Aside from the power supply that I used to replace the one that burned out, all of my power supplies came with the cases. To put that into perspective, consider the fact that I started building computers in 1996 and I've only had about three cases. So thats about five years per case and only one gave out on me. Power supplies are usually not something that worry to much about. |
|
|
I really don't intend to sit this at a desk. My situation is a little awkward and space is at a premium. The room I'm sleeping in doesn't belong to me and there is no space for a desk. I'm kind of inbetween a lot of things in life so I don't want to accumulate a bunch of stuff and then have to move it somewhere else in the next few months. So buying a monitor AND a TV isn't really an option here. Basically, I'm setting everything at the foot of my bed. This means that I'll be over six feet away from the screen at all times. Not much of an issue with gaming since I mostly play shooters and action games. I do enjoy RTS games, but I don't think I'll have much of an issue playing Stracraft 2 on a TV. What I'm most concerned about is being able to use Open Office, Dreamweaver, and Adobe Acrobat Pro in this setup. I write for a living so. . . . BTW, I'm doing most of my writing on a netbook right now and it's really, really uncomfortable. I could just do my work on Google Docs with Chrome magnifying the page by 150%, but I'd lose a lot of the functionality that I need for work. |
|
|
Been thinking about this for a long time now since I can get a large 1080p TV for way cheaper than a similarly sized monitor. I also like the idea of gaming from the couch or recliner. I don't think the resolution will really be an issue, but I'm kind of concerned about how text will show up from across the room. I know from experience with certain games on XBox 360 (*cough* *cough* Ninja Blade *cough* *ahem*) that it can sometimes be difficult to read what's on screen. And that's from a device that was meant to be hooked up to a TV. So yeah. . . . Which do you guys like better? And is there anything I should know before trying to do this? |
|
Originally posted by cooms Okay, now for my dumb questions. . . . This build doesn't require a discrete graphics card? Can I even put a discrete graphics card in this thing without disabling the graphics core? Can I use this with a crossfire ready Radeon card? That motherboard is awefully small, couldn't I save a little money by using a compact form factor rather than a mid tower case? I can always shave costs by canabalizine the case and power supply off of a junker or bench beast, but your build hits the closest to the mark so far. |
|
|
The whole APU thing passed me by to be honest. I haven't built a rig since around 2007/2008. I'm going to google and find out what's what there. I didn't mean to go into rant mode, but outside of this forum I've run into more fucking snobs using their rig as some kind of overcompensation for their obvious character flaws than I care count or remember. I wasn't attacking anyone here, but the more I dig into this project the more I kind of get why console players hate PC gamers. To get in the club, or stay in it in my case, you have to deal with the most insufferable assholes and douchebags this side of 4chan. It's no wonder why so many people just leave the PC to itself. PC gaming rocks, but the more vocal of PC gamers suck. I've appreciated the help that I've gotten. And I've even met a few all around gamers like myself that really couldn't give a fuck less what a game is played on so long as the game is good. But the PC purists have got to fucking go. If we want PC gaming to grow and to thrive, we have to put this dickheads in their place. Otherwise, the community will just grow smaller and smaller until the only thing we're left with are iPhone games. |
|
|
I think I'm about to give this one to the console fanboys. You just can't build a decent gaming rig for the same price as a PS3. I'm sure that I could easily run Modern Warfare 2 on something along the lines of an Acer AX1420G, but you probably won't be able to run anything along the lines of Battlefield 3 on it. Oh yeah, and that machine costs MORE than a console. After combing the internet for advice and configuring for the target games, the closest that I could get to the target budget was just under $400. And that's before installing an operating system. Here's what I've gotten so far: ASUS M5A78L-M LX AMD Socket AM3+ Motherboard AMD ADX250OCGMBOX Athlon II X2 250 Dual Core Processor - 3.00GHz Kingston KHX1333C9D3B1/4G Desktop Memory Module - 4GB VisionTek 900367 Radeon HD 6750 Video Card
And that will probably run just about anything at medium settings. The problem is that after you add the OS, Windows 7 64-bit, and a low end monitor, you go so far over budget that it just makes more sense to buy an XBox 360 or PS3 at a quarter of the price.
So can we please ditch this bullshit that PC gaming is just as affordable, or even as desireable, as console gaming? Even when I build my own rig, choosing the cheapest parts I can find, I'm unable to reach the PC gaming standard config without going over the $300 budget AND canabalizing the input and display from a previous build. If your trying to build your first PC, you're going to spend WAY more than you would on a console that you can just hook up to a TV that you already own.
I hear PC fanboys constantly talking about how you don't need a high end system for PC gaming, but they also tend to talk down to anyone that doesn't have a certian minimum system spec. Like the guy above that ejaculated about his triple monitor setup. It's velvet rope syndrome taken to a fucking obnoxious level.
Just once, I'd like to hear a PC purist admit that they were just fucking elitist. I won't ask that you admit to being groundlessly elitist, that would be to much truth for you to speak, but I would just like to hear the raw truth for a change. Behind all the insults, baiting, and bantering, it all boils down to what's under the hood more than what's on the screen. It's more about the cash you poured into the box, and less about actually playing the games.
|
|
Originally posted by CalmOceans I second this one. Tablets are basically just portable media consumption devices and that isn't worth any more than $250 tops. Especially when you consider that there'll be a new crop of better tablets every six months. Seriously, unless you work in the shipping or warehouse industry and intend to use your tablet for inventory tracking, you really shouldn't blow your whole wad on an oversized smart phone. |
|
|
Tonight I mourn the passing of a marketing genius and make a few predictions about the future of his legacy. Jobs could have sold manure to people that lived in mud huts. He could have sold ice cubes to penguins. So let's take a moment of silence to remember this amazing prensentator for what he truly was: A fine ad man. Now,.. Remember 1994? You know? After Jobs left Apple? Yeah, it's the same situation now. All they really need to do is ditch the Mac in order to focus entirely on the iPad and it'd be deja vu all over again. For those of you that don't remember, they ditched the Apple IIgs in order to focus on the Mac the last time. Three years later, Apple had to be bailed out by Microsoft. So I'm thinking that without Jobs, Apple is going to get devored by Google and Amazon. Not surprising really. PDAs died and led to the Blackberry which lead to the modern smart phone. The iPad will die and lead to a better eReader which will lead to the future A portable media devices. But Apple will pretty much be done unless they can find another genius to do their marketing. [Mod Edit] |
|
Originally posted by Ridelynn
My other plan was to buy a barebone kit and stick a GTX 550 Ti in it. I would go a little over budget, but it seems like nVidia cardd have to have a -50 on them to be suitable for gaming while the Radeon cards have to have a --70 in the number. Not sure if that's the way that the two companies denote gaming cards, as opposed to multimedia cards, or not. |
|
Friends: vgchartz.com
Not a member? You can still subscribe to our newsletters and daily updates here!
May 19, 2013 3:53 AM
- Page Created in 2.108 seconds -
