Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mr.Singh)
    thats pretty damn impressive then!
    you can play HL2 maxed out....what gpu you got?
    Well, HL2 is six years old now. It's hardly a benchmark for graphical fidelity. It's just a 8800GT.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by estel)
    Well, I'm pretty sure you can, actually. My current PC cost ~£540 over two years ago, and can play COD and HL2 at max with that at 1920x1200. Under the same budget, you'd today get a top line graphics card like the 4870 or 5850 which, yes, would play Crysis or even GTA maxed out.
    what are these numbers? are these ATI graphics cards? anyway i doubt a ~£550 budget could get you a PC that can play GTA4 on max settings, i've got a pretty decent rig that cost me around a grand in summer '08 - granted it's not got the greatest graphics card, but you need a hell of a lot of graphic memory to be able to max out GTA4's graphics. i've got a 9800GTX+, btw.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by estel)
    Well, HL2 is six years old now. It's hardly a benchmark for graphical fidelity. It's just a 8800GT.
    well i meant ep1 and ep2, but ye thats cool. Nice price for the PC to get a 8800gt at that time, i remeber them goin for around 160-200 (depending on make) around 2 years ago. i recently gt a gainward 2gb gtx285 to replace my gtx260 because i wanted to play my FPS' on a bigger screen ( i used to play on a tiny 19" lmao) it was priccey but yeah, it is worth it. I was questioning should i get that, or a new 360 elite, and i chose the new gpu cos its new tech, and i wanted to experience better
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nfixlol)
    what are these numbers? are these ATI graphics cards? anyway i doubt a ~£550 budget could get you a PC that can play GTA4 on max settings, i've got a pretty decent rig that cost me around a grand in summer '08 - granted it's not got the greatest graphics card, but you need a hell of a lot of graphic memory to be able to max out GTA4's graphics. i've got a 9800GTX+, btw.
    Yeh, those rather silly sliders in GTAIV were the only thing that I was worried about. (Those are ATI cards).
    Offline

    0
    (Original post by Nfixlol)
    what are these numbers? are these ATI graphics cards? anyway i doubt a ~£550 budget could get you a PC that can play GTA4 on max settings, i've got a pretty decent rig that cost me around a grand in summer '08 - granted it's not got the greatest graphics card, but you need a hell of a lot of graphic memory to be able to max out GTA4's graphics. i've got a 9800GTX+, btw.



    Don't equate poor optimization to good graphics.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nfixlol)
    what are these numbers? are these ATI graphics cards? anyway i doubt a ~£550 budget could get you a PC that can play GTA4 on max settings, i've got a pretty decent rig that cost me around a grand in summer '08 - granted it's not got the greatest graphics card, but you need a hell of a lot of graphic memory to be able to max out GTA4's graphics. i've got a 9800GTX+, btw.
    Mine can just about do it for about £500.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I'm a games design student focusing on 3D modelling. I've grown up pretty much solely playing multiplayers, online, where personally I feel gaming is far more (hardcore) competitive than the console counterparts even today, and this is what does it for me, it's all I really care about in a game. I don't care how pretty or life like/realistic a game looks. There's a world outside my window to gaze at if I want to see realism.

    I live with 3 other games students, all with 360's...and PC's that they use to do their work, IM/Facebook, email etc.

    Most of the games they play are cross platform, the same games everyone seems to rave about these days :rolleyes: - CoD:MW2, Borderlands, L4D etc - usually of the FPS or Adventure genres.

    In the end after all the arguing it seemed like the people relatively new to gaming (say the recent 2004~+ boom) just didn't want the hassle of having to understand PC hardware, and simply liked the ease of access a console provides. They would look at the first item of hardware they find, look at the price, and without understanding its potential, discredit it, and think no more of it without shopping around for a good deal.

    As Estel pointed out:

    (Original post by estel)
    Hahahahahahahaha.

    You can max out the vast majority of /brand new/ games with little more than a 2 year old 8800GT, nevermind the much newer and similarly inexpensive 4850 range. This will produce graphical quality way ahead of what the PS3/360 can manage, and will cost < £500.

    I agree with everyone else bemoaning the FUD on this thread. For one: the myth of upgrading; which most sane people only will do every 3-4 years at a cost which is offset by the much cheaper cost of new games for PC when compared to consoles.
    Compared to people who game mainly on consoles, I tend to save ~£10-20 on every single new title. This alone justifies PC gaming.
    Just because a PC has the potential to play games at max settings, doesn't mean that developers optomize their games for PC to be played at these settings. Neither does it mean that you need the absolute latest hardware to be able to play them to a similar quality of consoles.

    Games are optomized for whatever they're to be played on - 360, ps3, PC, this means reducing model poly counts, memory usage etc. In the main (i.e. not Crysis), games developed for the PC are optomized to be run on low-spec machines. From a business perspective this makes sense as they're targeting a larger audience, - and I'm sure the developers are well aware that a lot of people have computers that aren't high spec, that they use simply for internet access or software used for work/homework(such as Word programes).

    I think in the end, people see a console as the 'thing' to game. Parents probably think like this when looking at gifts for christmas/birthdays, so they buy it.

    I also think that there is no definitive 'best' it depends entirely on what the user wants out of their experience. However I do think that a fair few of 'anti' pc arguments are flawed or mis-informed, and are quite easily solved on a PC. (I.e. 'I like controllers/steeringwheel'>buy a controller for PC)


    I myself was running the same rig I've used since 2003 up untill a week ago, playing MMO's with hundreds of players on screen at any one time. My new computer cost me just over £400. 4GB, Core 2 Duo E7400, 9800GT 512mb graphics card.

    And by todays standards, that's terrible...



    But more than enough to be able to play Diablo 3 when it's out :cool: .

    edit: and for my 3D work!
    Offline

    0
    Oh, one more thing...


    Proper (i.e. non-sissy) MP is infinitely better on PC and in the following spoiler is the reason why

    Spoiler:
    Show
    Lack of/Less Auto-aiming
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Boon!)
    I'm a games design student focusing on 3D modelling. I've grown up pretty much solely playing multiplayers, online, where personally I feel gaming is far more (hardcore) competitive than the console counterparts even today, and this is what does it for me, it's all I really care about in a game. I don't care how pretty or life like/realistic a game looks. There's a world outside my window to gaze at if I want to see realism.

    I live with 3 other games students, all with 360's...and PC's that they use to do their work, IM/Facebook, email etc.

    Most of the games they play are cross platform, the same games everyone seems to rave about these days :rolleyes: - CoD:MW2, Borderlands, L4D etc - usually of the FPS or Adventure genres.

    In the end after all the arguing it seemed like the people relatively new to gaming (say the recent 2004~+ boom) just didn't want the hassle of having to understand PC hardware, and simply liked the ease of access a console provides. They would look at the first item of hardware they find, look at the price, and without understanding it's potential, discredit it, and think no more of it without shopping around for a good deal.

    As Estel pointed out:



    Just because a PC has the potential to play games at max settings. Doesn't mean that developers optomize their games for PC to be played at these settings. Neither does it mean that you need the absolute latest hardware to be able to play them to a similar quality of consoles.

    Games are optomized for whatever they're to be played on - 360, ps3, PC, this means reducing model poly counts, memory usage etc. In the main (i.e. not Crysis), games developed for the PC are optomized to be run on low-spec machines. From a business perspective this makes sense as they're targetting a larger audience, - and I'm sure the developers are well aware that a lot of people have computers that aren't high spec, that they use simply for internet access or software used for work/homework(such as Word programmes).

    I think in the end, people see a console as the 'thing' to game. Parents probably think like this when looking at gifts for christmas/birthdays, so they buy it.

    I also think that there is no definitive 'best' it depends entirely on what the user wants out of their experience. However I do think that a fair few of 'anti' pc arguments are flawed or mis-informed, and are quite easily solved on a PC. (I.e. 'I like controllers/steeringwheel'>buy a controller for PC)


    I myself was running the same rig I've used since 2003 up untill a week ago, playing MMO's with hundreds of players on screen at any one time. My new computer cost me just over £400 pound. 4GB, Core 2 Duo E7400, 9800GT 512mb graphics card.

    And by todays standards, that's terrible...



    But more than enough to be able to play Diablo 3 when it's out :cool: .

    edit: and for my 3D work!
    QFT. especially the part about the newish gamers. having said that I started on a console(PS1), but got hooked by return to castle woflenstein, when a mate of my dads installed it on our pc for us. (which i actually brought of steam the other day and will play through again) although i have brought all the subsequent sony consoles, the pc is still my preferred platform. just going to wait till after uni to build a gaming rig.

    also the man has his priorities right (the edit)
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    I prefer gaming on consoles typically because I prefer to sit down on a couch and relax while playing my single player games. I also rarely (if ever) play Multi-platform games since they rarely interest me.
    I think consoles are better than PCs in regards to that - they're dedicated gaming centres. I don't like having a PC as my dedicated gaming platform because you're required to boot it up, optimise games, patch them, worry about compatibility issues and most often, are poor ports of consoles games. You rarely have this hassle with consoles and sitting back in a couch, sipping on a drink with a nice quiet system pumping through a nice tv is oh so sweet.

    But ofcourse, that's ignoring the very unique dimensions PCs bring to gaming. PCs are obviously the best platform for gaming. Ignoring Street Fighter IV (which is probably the only game I play online with consoles), I have absolutely no interest to play online games with 12 year olds on public servers. PCs still offer a far more rich online experience with games such as Counter Strike. The only reason I have a computer as powerful as mine (which isn't that powerful, Quad Core w/ hd 4850, 4gb RAM etc) is so I can play counter strike and Street Fighter IV.

    Games like Oblivion and Dragon Age SUCK on consoles. The customisability with the PC version of Oblivion (and let's not forget Morrowind) completely changes the game (for the better). Dragon Age is a completely different game to the console counterparts.

    So for me, I prefer gaming in comfort as opposed to being hunched over a keyboard and mouse. But when you're playing games like Counter Strike and Quake III competitively - there's no need for comfort.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mr.Singh)
    well i meant ep1 and ep2, but ye thats cool. Nice price for the PC to get a 8800gt at that time, i remeber them goin for around 160-200 (depending on make) around 2 years ago. i recently gt a gainward 2gb gtx285 to replace my gtx260 because i wanted to play my FPS' on a bigger screen ( i used to play on a tiny 19" lmao) it was priccey but yeah, it is worth it. I was questioning should i get that, or a new 360 elite, and i chose the new gpu cos its new tech, and i wanted to experience better
    ep1 and ep2 are'nt really any better graphically than hl2...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by biffyclyro27)
    ep1 and ep2 are'nt really any better graphically than hl2...
    cool....
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Phalanx)

    So for me, I prefer gaming in comfort as opposed to being hunched over a keyboard and mouse. But when you're playing games like Counter Strike and Quake III competitively - there's no need for comfort.
    :yep: very very true.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by biffyclyro27)
    ep1 and ep2 are'nt really any better graphically than hl2...
    Episode 2 is, at least, newer version of Source.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Hatman)
    Episode 2 is, at least, newer version of Source.
    still not much higher specs required. It's hardley anything to strive for in terms of computing power...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I found the best compromise: I have a PC with a wireless controller adapter, so I can use my xbox 360 controllers with it. And a surprisingly large number of PC games support split screen multiplayer.

    The benefit of PC gaming is that you save £10-£15 on each game; which is usually licensing money which goes straight to Microsoft/Sony/Nintendo.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Playboy King)
    I prefer the PS3.
    However, the best racing simulator I've ever played is on PC...rFactor - simply mindblowing. It makes PS3 simulation racing games seem like mediocre arcades.
    Ever played live for speed? It's not so customisable but it's got amazing physics and I love drifting in it.

    I'm a bit of a PC racer myself, Live for speed/GTR 2/Race On + G25 wheel = perfection
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Console all the way. Used to be a PC Gamer, but grew out of that a looooong time ago.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    Saving up for a gaming PC as we speak, its cheaper than a PS3, HDTV and a basic PC for general uni work on.

    And the games are a whole lot cheaper
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    in the short term yes, but in the long term consoles are still cheaper.
 
 
 
Poll
Which accompaniment is best?
Useful resources

Quick link:

Unanswered gaming threads

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.