Support NeoGAF

[Blizzard]

Have you actually played Crysis? This isn't unreal tournament where you need a $200 lazer mouse, 200fps and <40ms ping to enjoy the game. Crysis is more slow and methodical, you plan your ambush, rush in there and switch up your suit powers when needed. None of these actions require split second timing, presenting a gorgeous and lush Phillipine Island however does aid the experience in that it immerses you in the environment and helps you to actually notice small details that running on low settings wouldn't be as obvious, e.g. "maybe instead of running in guns blazing into that camp I'll jump up to that high ledge I saw using my binoculars enhanced by the high draw distance and pick off some sentries before applying my invisibility mode and sneaking in there to tear it up.". That would actually aid your gameplay experience, cutting down reaction times from 28ms to 20ms however wouldn't.

I would think if the sentry is walking around, sniping from a distance would work much better if your framerate was higher. Otherwise the head might jump enough from frame to frame that you wouldn't be able to pinpoint it. Or at least, such is my crazy theory!

At any rate, I don't mind Crysis with 30ish framerate since I feel it has good motion blur, but surely someone can agree that if your framerate is jumping from 20-50 fps then it detracts from the experience no matter what the game? In my opinion if you can palpably feel slowdown when certain things happen, it is irritating and distracting. BUT MAYBE I AM AN OLD MAN AND I AM JUST ASKING PEOPLE TO GET OFF MY LAWN.

 

[LCGeek]

Have you actually played Crysis? This isn't unreal tournament where you need a $200 lazer mouse, 200fps and <40ms ping to enjoy the game. Crysis is more slow and methodical, you plan your ambush, rush in there and switch up your suit powers when needed. None of these actions require split second timing, presenting a gorgeous and lush Phillipine Island however does aid the experience in that it immerses you in the environment and helps you to actually notice small details that running on low settings wouldn't be as obvious, e.g. "maybe instead of running in guns blazing into that camp I'll jump up to that high ledge I saw using my binoculars enhanced by the high draw distance and pick off some sentries before applying my invisibility mode and sneaking in there to tear it up.". That would actually aid your gameplay experience, cutting down reaction times from 28ms to 20ms however wouldn't.

Yes I have crysis and have commented on the title at various times in various gaming threads.

It matters in all games period with physics and tics being tied to controls which is just about every game. Unless the game has a simple mechanism of control a game with more fps will feel smoother. rarely do most power mice cost that much and laser mice suck compared to most power opticals.

Most games in singleplayer are running so fast in ms terms of online speed is not even worth it talking about the fallacy you used ms and fps while tied in speed aren't easy to compare. There are tons of types who have used various fps in various topics to demonstrate how tics and fps are vital to the feel of a title. Less tics or fps results in a less smooth play. 30fps vs 60 fps is nothing like 28ms vs 20ms difference. For the record you need 16ms or lower for each frame in a 60fps environment to be represented fully.

Whether it's ambushing, camping, or flanking higher fps still helps a lot. Most mice never breach 125hz with usb yet anyone with a decent mouse from logitech and other companies loses out using such mice because they will never operate in the manner they were used with a game running at 30fps or 30hz. A mouse running at 250hz or above will feel very different in fps runing at 30fps vs 60fps

Coolio explain the benefit of low sensitivity and high fps allowing player various advantages in a tac shooter over someone lacking either. Tac shooters aren't twitchy nor necessarily fast. Same for racers the difference with a good wheel and high fps vs something below that is quite evident as well. 60fps allows more data discretion in the same amount of time regardless if the pacing of a title is slow or fast 60fps always has it benefits. The cost is the problem and considering most games are console based I only make this an issue in pc land.

30fps is just compromise between power and practicality and high end play.

 

[Conflict NZ]

Excellent deduction! Truly, I've never thought of judging a game's graphics by a demo. But you have broken new ground with this discovery, brave young one! Carry on!

Maybe I'm wrong but it was my understanding that a demo is made to give the consumer a chance to judge a game's gameplay, graphics, multiplayer etc... before launch, not to put out an inferior, shitty looking version in order to scare the consumer away.

 

[Loxley]

Heard the PC version looks pretty good, only played 360 version and thought the actual game itself was pretty bad.

There are...uglier games out there. Here are some random grabs from the PC screenshot thread.








Yep. Still think it has Crysis beat on interiors.

 

[RadicalRad]

Building and/or purchasing a machine that can run Crysis costs more than a current gen console. Besides MMO's PC gaming is a dying genre. Which saddens me since I was always an avid PC fanboi until I couldn't afford to keep up with it anymore. (I still have the PC I built my senior year in high school in '04 that can run Oblivion)

It just came to the point I couldn't afford to play catch up with the genre anymore. I think that's another reason that there's so few PC games that are released anymore. A lot of people would rather pay half the cost for a console that will keep up with gaming for a few years, rather than drop equally or more money on a PC that they will have to upgrade in a year to keep up.

That and pirating... but that's been covered.

 

[elohel]

crysis looks amazing

 

[BobsRevenge]

it looks just like Crysis 1. Also the shot is taken from PC version, as it was said in this trailer.

I guess facial aniamtion will be better.

That definitely looks better than Crysis 1.

 

[Archie]

Building and/or purchasing a machine that can run Crysis costs more than a current gen console. Besides MMO's PC gaming is a dying genre. Which saddens me since I was always an avid PC fanboi until I couldn't afford to keep up with it anymore. (I still have the PC I built my senior year in high school in '04 that can run Oblivion)

It just came to the point I couldn't afford to play catch up with the genre anymore. I think that's another reason that there's so few PC games that are released anymore. A lot of people would rather pay half the cost for a console that will keep up with gaming for a few years, rather than drop equally or more money on a PC that they will have to upgrade in a year to keep up.

That and pirating... but that's been covered.

There is so much wrong in this post it makes my head spin.

 

[bhlaab]

Building and/or purchasing a machine that can run Crysis costs more than a current gen console. Besides MMO's PC gaming is a dying genre. Which saddens me since I was always an avid PC fanboi until I couldn't afford to keep up with it anymore. (I still have the PC I built my senior year in high school in '04 that can run Oblivion)

It just came to the point I couldn't afford to play catch up with the genre anymore. I think that's another reason that there's so few PC games that are released anymore. A lot of people would rather pay half the cost for a console that will keep up with gaming for a few years, rather than drop equally or more money on a PC that they will have to upgrade in a year to keep up.

That and pirating... but that's been covered.

So wait, you have a pc from 2004 that can run oblivion and yet PC gaming is dead because of the need for constant upgrades?

You do know that the Xbox 360 is pretty much a PC from 2005 that is inflated in price because it is a dedicated closed-box system and they can get away with it right?

 

[ghst]

Building and/or purchasing a machine that can run Crysis costs more than a current gen console. Besides MMO's PC gaming is a dying genre. Which saddens me since I was always an avid PC fanboi until I couldn't afford to keep up with it anymore. (I still have the PC I built my senior year in high school in '04 that can run Oblivion)

It just came to the point I couldn't afford to play catch up with the genre anymore. I think that's another reason that there's so few PC games that are released anymore. A lot of people would rather pay half the cost for a console that will keep up with gaming for a few years, rather than drop equally or more money on a PC that they will have to upgrade in a year to keep up.

That and pirating... but that's been covered.

the daily mail has a video games column?

 

[Technosteve]

bad company 2's audio beats crysis

 

[Salacious Crumb]

bad company 2's audio beats everything

Fixed.

 

[I NEED SCISSORS]

the daily mail has a video games column?

Where are all these Eastern European games coming from!?

 

[-SD-]

Crysis is 3 years old in November 2010.

Because Crytek haven't released [PC] Crysis 2 yet.

Quoted for truth (with a fix).

 

[DieH@rd]

New shots, but in 1080p. There is definetley aliasing visible in them and texture resolution is... fine for consoles.

 

[NIN90]

Wow that doesn't look so hot. Is that console or PC footage?

 

[DieH@rd]

Console, it seems.

 

[Widge]

I need to sit down and try Crysis again obviously. I played Warhead up until the point of some huge metal spider like alien mech. Was after the big freeze. Just felt completely uninvolved with the entire thing and didn't like the combat either. Just went invisible and killed things at my leisure, didn't get any of the involvement or tension that I got when playing something like Bioshock. Basically after that amount of playing through I didn't really give a shite to be blunt, Bioshock as an example again had me sucked in from moment one.

 

[Slo]

I need to sit down and try Crysis again obviously. I played Warhead up until the point of some huge metal spider like alien mech. Was after the big freeze. Just felt completely uninvolved with the entire thing and didn't like the combat either. Just went invisible and killed things at my leisure, didn't get any of the involvement or tension that I got when playing something like Bioshock. Basically after that amount of playing through I didn't really give a shite to be blunt, Bioshock as an example again had me sucked in from moment one.

Wrong thread?

 

[-SD-]

Just Cause 2

What? That game looks ugly as heck. Visual design is just awful.

 

[BobsRevenge]

I need to sit down and try Crysis again obviously. I played Warhead up until the point of some huge metal spider like alien mech. Was after the big freeze. Just felt completely uninvolved with the entire thing and didn't like the combat either. Just went invisible and killed things at my leisure, didn't get any of the involvement or tension that I got when playing something like Bioshock. Basically after that amount of playing through I didn't really give a shite to be blunt, Bioshock as an example again had me sucked in from moment one.

Crysis is a lot better than Warhead.

 

[kinggroin]

New shots, but in 1080p. There is definetley aliasing visible in them and texture resolution is... fine for consoles.

That looks completely uninspired. Almost like High Voltage got their chance to make an HD fps.

The first game was my favorite fps of 2008 and 2009 (couldn't play it in 2007), so I'm hoping for the best with this one, but everything I've seen looks pretty poo.

 

[Mr_Brit]

Crysis is a lot better than Warhead.

This.

 

[Vigilant Walrus]

Building and/or purchasing a machine that can run Crysis costs more than a current gen console. Besides MMO's PC gaming is a dying genre. Which saddens me since I was always an avid PC fanboi until I couldn't afford to keep up with it anymore. (I still have the PC I built my senior year in high school in '04 that can run Oblivion)

It just came to the point I couldn't afford to play catch up with the genre anymore. I think that's another reason that there's so few PC games that are released anymore. A lot of people would rather pay half the cost for a console that will keep up with gaming for a few years, rather than drop equally or more money on a PC that they will have to upgrade in a year to keep up.

That and pirating... but that's been covered.

PC gaming is not a genre, and it's not dying. It's doing great.

People should stop focusing on the negative. Look at all the positive things - Including casual games, Popcap, Java and Flash based gaming, Steam on Mac, the rise of F2P games payment model from the east and so on, and you got PC in as a popular state as it has ever been.


It's my opinion that the communities surrounding games like Starcraft, Counter-Strike, WoW, Lineage, Aion, Battlefield, Warcraft 3, Diablo 2 and such is significantly stronger and perhaps even more long term dedidcated to their brands than what you will find on consoles.

And maybe you would argue that it's because that there is little in the way of replacing many of these(admittedly old) games, but I personally believe it's due to them standing the test of time.

It reminds me of this recent update made by Adrian Werner; http://adrianwerner.wordpress.com/

The PC games displayed might not say anything to you, but for me, this pile of games represents much of the interesting things that is happening in gaming. I see the consoles leading the way in the Jerry Bruckheimer Transformers 2-ish blockbuster games. Your call of duties, gears of wars and such.

But... Things like Mount and Blade Warband, and Silent Hunter. These are different and interesting.

 

[Dan Yo]

Have you actually played Crysis? This isn't unreal tournament where you need a $200 lazer mouse, 200fps and <40ms ping to enjoy the game. Crysis is more slow and methodical, you plan your ambush, rush in there and switch up your suit powers when needed. None of these actions require split second timing, presenting a gorgeous and lush Phillipine Island however does aid the experience in that it immerses you in the environment and helps you to actually notice small details that running on low settings wouldn't be as obvious, e.g. "maybe instead of running in guns blazing into that camp I'll jump up to that high ledge I saw using my binoculars enhanced by the high draw distance and pick off some sentries before applying my invisibility mode and sneaking in there to tear it up.". That would actually aid your gameplay experience, cutting down reaction times from 28ms to 20ms however wouldn't.

30fps for some slower paced console games is merely acceptable, albeit still jerky, nasty, and generally undesirable. For a PC shooter, where your look speed is so much faster using the mouse, anything less than about 45-50fps is practically unplayable. 60 or above being the most ideal.

 

[RadicalRad]

It's my opinion that the communities surrounding games like Starcraft, Counter-Strike, WoW, Lineage, Aion, Battlefield, Warcraft 3, Diablo 2 and such is significantly stronger and perhaps even more long term dedidcated to their brands than what you will find on consoles.

I'll agree with that, I've been playing DotA since '04. Just started up on it again recently; it's still a blast.

So wait, you have a pc from 2004 that can run oblivion and yet PC gaming is dead because of the need for constant upgrades?

You do know that the Xbox 360 is pretty much a PC from 2005 that is inflated in price because it is a dedicated closed-box system and they can get away with it right?

Yes, that's exactly it. In fact, upgrading isn't even an option for me at this point. Since I built it so long ago the motherboard does not have PCIe. So I actually have to build an entirely new machine.

Yes I realize the situation with the xbox 360 but it's more accessible and it doesn't cost me $1,000+ to purchase an xbox that's going to keep up for a few years.

There is so much wrong in this post it makes my head spin.

the daily mail has a video games column?

Congratulations for contributing nothing to the thread. Obviously you disagree with me, and that's fine. Why not explain yourselves? We are all here to discuss.

 

[MjFrancis]

Maintaining a frame rate of 60fps becomes a lot more important without aim assist. That's why I don't get my panties in a bunch when a console shooter is locked at 30fps, but bring out the fire and brimstone with the slightest glimmer of jerky movement on my PC.

 

[DieH@rd]

30fps for some slower paced console games is merely acceptable, albeit still jerky, nasty, and generally undesirable. For a PC shooter, where your look speed is so much faster using the mouse, anything less than about 45-50fps is practically unplayable. 60 or above being the most ideal.

I think that playing without Fraps or its alternative should be MANDATORY for all GAF members.

 

[-SD-]

I long for the good old days when a PC older than a year was obsolete for the latest games. Those were exciting times. Just imagine what games we could be getting today if the same attitude still prevailed.

I have been thinking like this for a long time. It's so sad, and makes me angry. It's like we (the PC scene) had something really great going on but the advancement then just simply stopped. Now the whole thing seems to be in hibernation... waiting for (hopefully) better times, when it can flourish again :|

 

[PflargBlarg]

Building and/or purchasing a machine that can run Crysis costs more than a current gen console. Besides MMO's PC gaming is a dying genre. Which saddens me since I was always an avid PC fanboi until I couldn't afford to keep up with it anymore. (I still have the PC I built my senior year in high school in '04 that can run Oblivion)

It just came to the point I couldn't afford to play catch up with the genre anymore. I think that's another reason that there's so few PC games that are released anymore. A lot of people would rather pay half the cost for a console that will keep up with gaming for a few years, rather than drop equally or more money on a PC that they will have to upgrade in a year to keep up.

That and pirating... but that's been covered.

Ok, no...what.

A new pc now will obviously cost more than a new 360 now. The consoles are basically the same innards for however many years they've been around, so the price will just keep dropping. 360 was released in 2005. If you went and bought parts from 2005 to build a new PC today, it would probably be the same price or cheaper than a 360. In any case, a PC does more than just play games, so it's going to be more expensive.

PC gaming is not a dying 'genre', whatever that means. And seriously, whenever someone trots out this line, it's a clear indicator you have no idea what's going on in the PC world. There are enough great indie, mainstream, etc. games released in a year that you could probably buy an amazing game once a week.

And look, it's not like you don't get any benefit from gaming on a PC. You've got full access to the internet an alt + tab away. Games WILL look better in almost every case, and it is a bastion for all the games that just don't work on consoles, like all the great strategy/RTS games. Modding community is amazing, a lot of the stuff consoles have to pay for, PC gets for free, all the great online communities for PC gaming. It's really all the benefits that come of an open system not under one company's control.

Obviously PC gaming is not for you, as you say, but that does not mean that it is 'dying'. Saying it over and over again does not make it true.

 

[Mr_Brit]

30fps for some slower paced console games is merely acceptable, albeit still jerky, nasty, and generally undesirable. For a PC shooter, where your look speed is so much faster using the mouse, anything less than about 45-50fps is practically unplayable. 60 or above being the most ideal.

Are you serious?

So you mean to tell me that you seriously believe 30fps is unplayable?

:lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol

How about you turn off FRAPS and forget about the framerate and see just how unplayable <40fps is.

I think you need to pick up a 360 or PS3 and see just how 'playable' they are for yourselves. Here's a hint: Uncharted 2 and Halo at 30fps locked are perfectly playable experiences which would gain practically no benefit from doubling the framerate.

 

[Deleted member 17706]

Are you serious?

So you mean to tell me that you seriously believe 30fps is unplayable?

:lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol

How about you turn off FRAPS and forget about the framerate and see just how unplayable <40fps is.

I think you need to pick up a 360 or PS3 and see just how 'playable' they are for yourselves. Here's a hint: Uncharted 2 and Halo at 30fps locked are perfectly playable experiences which would gain practically no benefit from doubling the framerate.

Way to ignore the context he gave in his post?

When you are using a mouse and there isn't some kind of aim assist, then I really do agree that sub-60fps becomes very frustrating. Keep in mind this only counts for online FPS titles like Team Fortress 2, Unreal, Battlefields, Counter-Strike, Call of Duties, etc... etc... Personally I could get by with 45-50fps, but I totally understand what the guy is saying. 30fps in a fast-paced online shooter is crippling. This is different on the consoles since playing with a pad is already a very sluggish experience and there is usually a very generous amount of aim-assist present.

For single player games I don't mind lower FPS, though. 30ish is just fine depending on the game if it can give me more visual quality to enjoy.

 

[Mr_Brit]

Way to ignore the context he gave in his post?

When you are using a mouse and there isn't some kind of aim assist, then I really do agree that sub-60fps becomes very frustrating. Keep in mind this only counts for online FPS titles like Team Fortress 2, Unreal, Battlefields, Counter-Strike, Call of Duties, etc... etc... Personally I could get by with 45-50fps, but I totally understand what the guy is saying. 30fps in a fast-paced online shooter is crippling. This is different on the consoles since playing with a pad is already a very sluggish experience and there is usually a very generous amount of aim-assist present.

For single player games I don't mind lower FPS, though. 30ish is just fine depending on the game if it can give me more visual quality to enjoy.

Way to ignore my context which was in reply to his reply to me. We were both talking about slower paced offline games such as Crysis yet you're talking about fast paced online FPSs. How about you construct a valid reply now that you know the true context of the situation.

 

[teh_pwn]

To be honest I think you're seeing (in part) a realisation of the argument that moore's law has started to slow down significantly. I'm certainly not arguing with the previous posts re. the economic realities of developing pc exclusie AAA games, but it is something to consider.

That's a factor, but not a big one right now.

I think it will be a major one preventing PCs from looking significantly better than PS4/Xbox3 because looking at Intel's roadmap at least, they're just going to screw around with turning off cores in patterns to reduce heat so that 1 or 2 cores can run at a faster frequency for applications that are optimized for 1-2 cores. I'm not sure if the BUS & memory controller optimizations made with Nehalem can be repeated easily.

The limitations of the clock frequency with silicon have been hit, and PCIe is soon to be maxed out. Save for some sort of innovation in storing light in registers at low cost, allowing optical computing, we're going to hit a wall within 5 years.

Not to familiar with the limitations of GPU design, but they seem to have trouble getting their size and power down while increasing performance.

If next gen consoles get good hardware, copious amounts of RAM, I don't see PC visually beating it significantly for some time.

 

[luka]

Crysis is only a slow paced game is you play it slowly. At 30 fps or lower it becomes extremely difficult to hit moving enemies and you're basically forced to take a more methodical playstyle. At 60fps it's far easier to play reflexively or run and gun even on delta, and leading targets is cake.

 

[Vanillalite]

That's a factor, but not a big one right now.

I think it will be a major one preventing PCs from looking significantly better than PS4/Xbox3 because looking at Intel's roadmap at least, they're just going to screw around with turning off cores in patterns to reduce heat so that 1 or 2 cores can run at a faster frequency for applications that are optimized for 1-2 cores. I'm not sure if the BUS & memory controller optimizations made with Nehalem can be repeated easily.

The limitations of the clock frequency with silicon have been hit, and PCIe is soon to be maxed out. Save for some sort of innovation in storing light in registers at low cost, allowing optical computing, we're going to hit a wall within 5 years.

Not to familiar with the limitations of GPU design, but they seem to have trouble getting their size and power down while increasing performance.

If next gen consoles get good hardware, copious amounts of RAM, I don't see PC visually beating it significantly for some time.

While I am personally worried about PCIe that's about all I'm currently worried about.

Maybe I'm crazy, but I just have this suspicion that sandy bridge is gonna be a beast. Granted top of the line GPUs are having heat problems, but the more midrange stuff isn't that bad. 5850s and especially the 5770 are great GPUs without being tooo power hungry.

Plus SSDs are making huge strives in that area as well. The bigger key IMO will be optimization and utilization. I know Metro scales up to 12 cores, but it's an extreme rarity.

Next gen consoles should help jump start things. Right now a ton of the world is still stuck in DX9 mode.

That being said it's gonna get tougher and tougher each year.

 

[daxter01]

clear sky looks better than crysis

 

[Raistlin]

what?.. that game didn't even look that good, even for a real nintendo game (Liked the game though).

*thatsthejoke.jpg*

 

[Foliorum Viridum]

I'm playing Crysis for the first time after getting a new PC right now, running at 1650x1050 on Very High with 2xAA, and for me it's absolutely stunning and the 40-50fps average just makes it better.

I'm sure that when I get around to playing all of the other games in my backlog then there will be a few examples of where technology has surpassed the game, but to call Crysis anything other than beautiful is ridiculous. Of course, this is coming from someone who has played 360/PS3/Wii games almost exclusively for the last four years, but still.

I fear Metro 2033 will be the game that makes my 5850 quiver. :lol

 

[Raistlin]

Way to ignore my context which was in reply to his reply to me. We were both talking about slower paced offline games such as Crysis yet you're talking about fast paced online FPSs. How about you construct a valid reply now that you know the true context of the situation.

Here's my reply ...

30fps on an LCD monitor looks like a blurred POS. Defeats the entire purpose of high-end PC gaming.

 

[luka]

Here's my reply ...

30fps on an LCD monitor looks like a blurred POS. Defeats the entire purpose of high-end PC gaming.

The purpose of PC gaming is the high-res screenshot thread!

 

[PetriP-TNT]

76 fps or 125 fps ALWAYS. I <3 Q3 engine.

Seriously though, isn't the whole point of high end PC gaming 60 fps? I don't really see the point in paying 700 bucks to play with 40-50 fps :|

 

[antiloop]

Not sure since I haven't played Crysis for some time but BC2 campaign looks really good, at least for the performance I get out of it...

 

[Tworak]

So you mean to tell me that you seriously believe 30fps is unplayable?

definitely

 

[DieH@rd]

76 fps or 125 fps ALWAYS. I <3 Q3 engine.

:|

Q3 is the only game where i am still convinced today that better fps is responcible for better gameplay. Somehow, if you have more fps you can control your jumps and flight better [with pmovefixed off, of course].

And i dont think about 30-60 fps, am talking about 80-300fps.

 

[PetriP-TNT]

Q3 is the only game where i am still convinced today that better fps is responcible for better gameplay. Somehow, if you have more fps you can control your jumps and flight better [with pmovefixed off, of course].

Obviously, anyone can try this at home, but it's not really BECAUSE of the fps', it's because of Q3 Engine.

43/76/125 are the magic numbers.

 

[nolookjones]

I'm playing Crysis for the first time after getting a new PC right now, running at 1650x1050 on Very High with 2xAA, and for me it's absolutely stunning and the 40-50fps average just makes it better.

I'm sure that when I get around to playing all of the other games in my backlog then there will be a few examples of where technology has surpassed the game, but to call Crysis anything other than beautiful is ridiculous. Of course, this is coming from someone who has played 360/PS3/Wii games almost exclusively for the last four years, but still.

I fear Metro 2033 will be the game that makes my 5850 quiver. :lol

im in the same situation and am finally playing through crysis...im playing at 1080p, very high and no AA and im not monitoring the frame rate but only a few big battles have really slowed things down enough for me to notice...overall amazing game and its just crazy that its almost 3 years old!

 

[GHG]

30fps is more than playable in any game (especially so with Crysis because of the amazing post-processing going on).

I don't know what kind of wacky ass eyes you guys must have to say 30fps is unplayable... I mean... you do realise movies are around 24fps right? Do you see janky action secuences? I think not.

 

[Mr_Brit]

76 fps or 125 fps ALWAYS. I <3 Q3 engine.

Seriously though, isn't the whole point of high end PC gaming 60 fps? I don't really see the point in paying 700 bucks to play with 40-50 fps :|

It is due to people like you that we get trolls continuously bashing PC gaming with things such as "you need a $800 graphics card to max out crysis grafixzzzz". If PC gamers stopped being so elitist maybe we would get more people to pick it up and revitalise its struggling sales instead of shrugging it off as an expensive enthusiast hobby.

Bottom line: 30fps is more than fine for the majority of games except fast paced online shooters.

 

[ZombieSupaStar]

I'll agree with that, I've been playing DotA since '04. Just started up on it again recently; it's still a blast.



Yes, that's exactly it. In fact, upgrading isn't even an option for me at this point. Since I built it so long ago the motherboard does not have PCIe. So I actually have to build an entirely new machine.

Yes I realize the situation with the xbox 360 but it's more accessible and it doesn't cost me $1,000+ to purchase an xbox that's going to keep up for a few years.


Congratulations for contributing nothing to the thread. Obviously you disagree with me, and that's fine. Why not explain yourselves? We are all here to discuss.

Yes valid points, but building PC's (hell PC's in general) are dramatically cheaper for what they do than in the past, hell I remember when our first pc which was a POS Radio Shack Cyrix cpu equiped tower retailed for almost 3 grand, 2 years later it was choking on Diablo 2 act 2. at lowest settings.

My current 2-3 year old PC is still running most if not all games on high at 1080p at around 60fps, and i'd say all totaled it probably cost me around 1000 frankensteined together overtime.

But I pay it because the different games that PC have arent on consoles (insert dwarf fortress and Adrian Werner lists here), AND mods, Fallout 3, and ESPECIALLY oblivion are 10 times better with the community fixing, improving, and enhancing Bethesdas sandboxes.

If all I wanted was to play vanilla games (no mods, no weird indie stuff) I'd play on console (even if I think the online is still 10 years behind in player count, community building and server configurations).

Plus turning into a PC nerd landed me a cool job working with cool stuffs recently

76 fps or 125 fps ALWAYS. I <3 Q3 engine.

Seriously though, isn't the whole point of high end PC gaming 60 fps? I don't really see the point in paying 700 bucks to play with 40-50 fps :|

high end fps are nice to shoot for, but aside for online competitive games, they aren't a requirement, ironically all the "still popular" online competitive games can probably run at 60 fps on a mid range gamer rig anyways. :lol