- Files: GIF, JPG, PNG, Maximum:1000 KB, Thumbnails: 600x600 pixels
- Currently 2245 unique user posts. View catalogue
[ Return ] [ Entire Thread ] [ First 100 posts ] [ Last 50 posts ]
Posting mode: Reply[ Reply ]
Expand all images.
|>>|| No. 18769
It seems that Ubisoft actually limited the graphic performance of Watch Dogs on PC, when contrasted with the console editions. A modder found this out and has worked out how to restore the 'original E3 settings' (ie, a game which looks like the 'bullshots' shown in gaming conventions prior to release).
Why this was done is unclear. Some anons are alleging that Ubisoft was pressured by Sony and other console makers into limiting the PC graphics capabilities in order to make their consoles look less inferior by comparison. In any case Ubisoft haven't yet commented on the situation.
http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?t=390114 (the modder)
http://kotaku.com/modder-finds-files-for-better-graphics-in-watch-dogs-p-1591448324 (press coverage, not essential reading but a quick synthesis of what's going on)
|>>|| No. 18771
If this is true why does my computer still sound like a fucking jet engine even when I run it on the lowest quality settings? I've played it for about an hour total, what a fucking waste of 45 quid.
I'm just giving up on Ubisoft games from now on entirely. There's always something wrong with them, and often enough as you've pointed out it's intentional.
|>>|| No. 18772
This picture says it all.
There is a histrionic "journalist" over at PC gamer claiming this is a mod, which it clearly isn't. This guy didn't patch any of this stuff in he just turned what was already there on.
Ubisoft are going to be putting out fires for days, if not weeks over this. 4chan's /v/ have already got their claws into it and they are tenacious cunts when they are riled up.
|>>|| No. 18776
Apprently the gimped version of the game also hampered performance.
The hidden content actually optimized things further.
Rumour say it was to do with not having the PC stand out leaps and bounds beyond the consoles.
Hilarious stuff if you ask me. I couldn't give two shits about games, just amazed that companies can get away with this sort of stuff.
It'd like be buying a 4 bedroom house, but all the rooms bar one would be cemented over into a 1 bedroom.
|>>|| No. 18778
> I couldn't give two shits about games
Even if you don't like playing video games, I think this is an important consumer rights issue which should take anyone's notice.
|>>|| No. 18780
I didn't ignore it, I interpreted your post as being dismissive of the importance of this topic. No need to bully.
|>>|| No. 18781
No, I'm just amazed how people (ie: majority of gamers) are so fucking stupid that companies know they can get away with it.
Stuff like technology, programming, computing and especially games are rather esoteric to those that don't usually blow the whistle on scummy behaviour.
|>>|| No. 18782
Interesting - nVidia had a ton of marketing out about how they 'worked closely' with Ubisoft to create the best possible game. I know they're not nearly as big as Sony or Microsoft, but a pissed off nVidia can close a fair few doors for a publisher.
|>>|| No. 18783
I would argue the average PC gamer is pretty savvy, just because the majority will be building their own computers and the foibles that go along with that require at least a bit of grey matter. Anyone running a rig fast enough to max out even gimped watchdogs must have done a fair bit of research into benchmarking and other nerd crap, meaning they will and do notice things like this.
Then again there's presumably a tonne of PC gamers who just bought Alienwares and they're the stupidest of them all.
|>>|| No. 18787
Alienware PCs are very overpriced for what you get. You're paying a premium not just for the convenience of having it pre-assembled, but also for the branding. If you don't know how to build a PC, there are websites where you can buy custom built PCs which are as good as Alienware ones, but for a much lower price. Or if you have the time and patience to build a PC, you can save hundreds if not thousands of pounds compared to getting an Alienware.
|>>|| No. 18789
>>18787 Pretty much covered it - they're fine, but expensive. Really expensive. I had a look recently, and to buy an alienware with equivalent parts as the PC I built, It was exactly £950 more, which is very nearly double the price.
I didn't skimp out on my build either, going with aftermarket fans, cables, fancy LEDs, the works, all which shot the price up. Even at that, the alienware RAM had a slower clock speed, It had half the hard drive space and the CPU was air cooled rather than my closed water based system, meaning for almost half the price my setup has the capacity to perform better, though those last points can be marginal.
I'm not against 'complete package' type hardware, I'm an avid Macbook collector at this point, but for Alienware, I really can't see where all that extra money is going. They offer a warranty and service, but you can buy that for any PC for less than a grand, of course.
|>>|| No. 18790
When it comes to a PC, they're literally taking other brands components and sticking them inside a case. An alienware sticker doesn't make a CPU go faster, they're just buying it from Intel like everyone else. The only in house component is the case itself, which admittedly is nice, but that has almost zero bearing on the way the PC will operate.
This isn't an uncommon tactic, of course - I'm betting my Sony TV is full of chips made by the same factory that fires out Tesco own brand tellies, but it's far more difficult to build your own TV.
|>>|| No. 18791
>but for Alienware, I really can't see where all that extra money is going
But apparently you can with a Mac?
You are right there, though. You're paying all that extra money to get a shiny moulded case, some extra lighting, some gay teeth on your RAM, and a fancy badge. Oh, and a custom Windows theme.
|>>|| No. 18792
That in a nutshell. Alienware is fine if you really cannot be arsed and would really rather just plop down the dosh. And that's fine. It's not bad stuff you're getting, you're just trading time for expense. If a few hundred quid for something you'll enjoy for a year or two doesn't itch, then why bother.
|>>|| No. 18793
>you're just trading time for expense.
Rubbish. Assembling a PC takes a few hours for a beginner. Throwing hundreds of pounds away on this basis is a daft economy for anyone.
|>>|| No. 18795
I can't build a laptop, not a convenient one anyway. And even Apple are cheaper part for part in Mac Pros than Alienware PCs are, which is precisely my point - if you're overcharging more than Apple you know something's fucked.
|>>|| No. 18796
The point is though that you can get a much, much better PC built for you by someone like Overclockers.co.uk. They'll build you the same PC for an extra £50 overhead instead of £950. I know some people don't even want to think about it and just pay for the legwork, but even typing 'gaming pc' on amazon and picking one at random will do you better.
|>>|| No. 18797
This. Even I, fat-fingered cunt that I am, being really cautious, with a couple of fiddly bits that only just fit, went from a pile of boxes to bunging in the install disc on my first complete build in around three hours - including a tea break.
|>>|| No. 18798
>It's not bad stuff you're getting
Relative to the price you're paying, it absolutely is. Especially considering that the internals they don't advertise tend to be bottom-end dogshit.
And you're trading a really quite insignificant amount of time for a huge expense, at least in the case of >>18789. Assuming it takes a beginner four hours to assemble their first PC (which is far longer than I would estimate the average to be, but I'm feeling generous), that case would involve basically paying someone £240 an hour to save you from an afternoon's work. Work which is actually pretty enjoyable to most people who are interested in having a high-end PC in the first place, and is definitely useful if you intend to try to repair it yourself should something go wrong down the line.
Not him, but I don't find Macs to be comparable at all. Apple's products are innovative in a way that Alienware and the like simply aren't. Sure, you're paying a premium, but for that premium you're getting something you can't get elsewhere. The new Mac Pro is a great example. Creating a workstation level computer of that size while retaining efficient ventilation and still allowing for expandability is a phenomenal achievement. The market for stuff like Alienware is based entirely on ignorance, but while there's definitely a market of people who don't need a Mac at all but buy one (or get mummy and daddy to buy them one) because they're cool, plenty of people who know what they need and what they're getting with a Mac are more than happy to pay the premium. For proof, take a look at the sea of Apple logos observable at every developer conference.
|>>|| No. 18799
A friend of mine built his own PC from scratch with an SSD and from my understanding decent quality CPU, RAM and graphics hardware. Year or so down the line and he had nothing but trouble with it. I know this is very anecdotal evidence and it's possible that he just put it together/used it in a very stupid way (for a while it would go wrong so often that he just left half the case open so he could fiddle with the insides when it did) but I think it still shows that it's easy to fuck things up if you're not already competent.
Having said all this, I still think that for some people (possibly myself included though I'm currently too much of a poor student to use anything other than a dual-core laptop) having shit go wrong and fiddling/fixing/replacing bits is part of the fun. On the other hand for a lot of people the idea of a computer being anything other than a black box horrifies them - Apple and Alienware have seemingly found a niche in subsections of this market.
|>>|| No. 18800
Assistance in assembling a PC can be sought in PC shops or, as another poster has mentioned in this thread, can be assembled for you by people like overclocker. The market for 'Alienware' is just opportunism by ignorance-exploiting cads. There is no good reason to buy it.
|>>|| No. 18801
Just checked Alienware's site to see what it would've cost to buy what I have now pre-built and holy shit. It literally costs £350 to add a 250gb SSD. You can get a 250gb Samsung 840 EVO for under £100.
Also, there appears to be no GPU of a higer quality than a GTX 760ti available. That's not a bad card by any means, but I was spending close to two grand on a computer I'd definitely want something more powerful than that. And if you elect to get an i5 over an i7 (and you almost certainly should do), the best you can get is an R9 270. You're paying hundreds of pounds more, for a severely bottlenecked computer. What a fucking shitshow.
|>>|| No. 18802
>it's easy to fuck things up if you're not already competent
Absolutely. We're all nerds here so it's easy to forget just how confusing computer hardware and computer maintenance are to most people. They don't know which way the RAM goes, they have no idea how to install Windows, and they certainly have no interest in figuring any of this shit out. I've always enjoyed tinkering with computers, but I recognise that paying someone else to do the things you don't want to do is perfectly rational.
That said, Alienware's markup is pretty absurd. It appears to be providing them with substantial profit, so more power to them (the idea that they're exploitative is pretty silly, nobody is forced to buy an Alienware rig).
|>>|| No. 18803
But Alienware don't retail good quality PCs proportional to what you pay for. As has been posted exhaustively in this thread, companies and computer shops can assemble a PC for you in return for a minuscule fee relative to Alienware's absurd overhead. It's a fucking rip off drawn up to exploit the ignorance of consumers, little better than snake oil.
|>>|| No. 18804
I'm not going to start a new thread, but basically, is there any use in old technology?
Like, I have a really old PC from 1995 in my parents attic. Pentium 2, 4 GB, ??? Ram, 48x speed CD drive - is there a way of converting such a relic into something useful?
And can this apply to laptops as well?
|>>|| No. 18805
>But Alienware don't retail good quality PCs proportional to what you pay for.
I don't see how it's any different from other expensive consumer electronics companies; they charge a hefty premium and maintain a brand and people buy into it. If you don't like it, don't buy it, I'm certainly not going to.
Next you'll be telling me that Beats by Dre are a ripoff, I mean, their headphones aren't even all that great! The ways in which other people choose to squander their money is no business of mine, even if it is on absolutely gauche shit like the attached.
|>>|| No. 18807
>I don't see how it's any different from other expensive consumer electronics companies
Because while 'other expensive consumer electronics companies' like Bose or Seinnheiser may give you a good product for what you pay for, Alienware is garbage. It's pure snake oil, a con, a consumer rip-off, and your truism of 'if you don't like it then don't buy it!' is just an irritating, thought-terminating truism.
|>>|| No. 18808
>Apple's products are innovative in a way that Alienware and the like simply aren't.
Not really. They're just rounder and shinier. The guts of Apple computers use the same shit electronics as low-end prebuilt PCs. The larger parts are marked up something awful. Want an optical drive? That'll be £100 for something that can be had off Amazon for under £20. Want to take a 256GB HD and go up to 1TB? That'll be an extra £250. That said, the new MBPs use SSDs, and you'd better pick your carefully, because it'll be sealed into the unit beyond your reach. Want to upgrade from the bottom i7 to the next-from-bottom i7? That'll be an extra £200. Except if you were building yourself, you'd go for the no-brain option of that higher spec processor because it has exactly the same list price.
|>>|| No. 18809
You understand that their computer hardware is basically the same as everyone else's, right?
|>>|| No. 18810
If that's the case then what justifies the inflated price?
Please don't just repeat your 'if you don't like it don't buy it!' truism by way of response.
|>>|| No. 18811
>your truism of 'if you don't like it then don't buy it!' is just an irritating, thought-terminating truism
Nice tautology, by the way.
|>>|| No. 18812
>If that's the case then what justifies the inflated price?
That people are prepared to pay for it, same as any other product with a price inflated above its costs. There's no shortage of such products. People like status symbols.
|>>|| No. 18813
Circular logic. What gives a product 'status' when it is no better (indeed, blatantly inferior) to one available for a lower price? Perhaps I should start a business where I sell frozen dog turds online as 'luxury paperweights', charging a grand for them each, and justify my business because 'they're status symbols'.
|>>|| No. 18814
One might well argue that that is precisely what some designer brands do. The world of luxury goods, gentlemen.
|>>|| No. 18815
I bought a load of top-of-the-range parts from around 2001 and put together a rig with Windows 98 installed - I use it for playing games that just won't run on modern Windows. Cost me about £250 all told, including an old CRT.
It's a bit niche, though, so there's probably no point unless you're into that sort of thing.
|>>|| No. 18817
Well done - you've fathomed out how branding works. Welcome to the 1950s, where that's still a new concept.
|>>|| No. 18818
Do you think this post makes you seem intelligent? My entire point was that 'Alienware' is a shitty brand. Exactly what do you think you've contributed to this thread?
|>>|| No. 18819
Have you heard of gog.com? They specifically have optimized old games games just for that, and I think for £250 you'll have more games then you'll ever get around to playing.
|>>|| No. 18820
I've never heard anyone argue that the Alienware brand is desirable or high status. It doesn't indicate quality hardware than custom built systems at all.
|>>|| No. 18821
The fact that you're trying to make a point we all already know sound like something new and interesting.
We get it. Alienware are a shit brand, but branding has literally fuck all to do with the quality of a product, which no-one in this thread except you hasn't already got their heads around.
|>>|| No. 18822
I'm not him, but the argument was originally that Alienware's brand was quite good, was it not? Seems like this is going around in circles.
|>>|| No. 18823
I read somewhere that they torrent old games, optimise them for a modern OS and sell them for 100% profit.
They are proper pirates, and I love that they are making money from abandonware. I just wish I had though of it first.
|>>|| No. 18825
Sadly it's not true. They operate about as legally as you can in that particular niche - they have proper licensing agreements with the publishers and everything. The questionable bit is that some titles require otherwise unapproved patches or the use of emulation that is still a bit of a grey area. For the publishers, with back catalogues that have previously proven difficult to monetise, this has been pretty handy for them, not least because for them it's cheaper than the usual alternative of turning them into mobile apps (which requires actual development work).
|>>|| No. 18826
Yeah, GoG have been shown to be using scene cracks in their releases a few times before now. Given that it's under the auspices of the rights holders I doubt they're going to get stung for it.
|>>|| No. 18827
Sometimes they get the masters, sometimes they don't. Of course, this might create a perverse incentive with the DRM, since the publishers can impose even more onerous restrictions safe in the knowledge that when it comes time to push it out as catalogue they can rely on the scene to produce patches for them.
|>>|| No. 18828
Love GoG, main problem with it is I end up with hundreds of games I need to get around to playing. Also it lacks Toonstruck and The Neverhood, which are the games I want most from it.
|>>|| No. 18829
I had a look through GoG's lists and most of the games on there that would attract me I still have the original discs for.
|>>|| No. 18830
I remember hearing a good while back now, that the main bloke behind toonstruck was trying to get the rights to all the original assets to remake it. Not sure what happened with that.
|>>|| No. 18831
Yeah, I think the plan was for a remastered version with the cut content restored (half the game was cut in order to package up as a sequel which never materialised due to shitty sales of the first game). There was a petition in 2010 to gauge interest, and it only has 4000 signatures with a goal of 50000. I think the guy did get the rights in the end. Planned to announce the sequel/remake at ComicCon in 2011, and nothing. Though he posted last week on Facebook saying good news is due in the next few weeks. Not getting excited just yet though.
|>>|| No. 18832
I'm the lad that brough up GoG, and to be honest I just pirated a shedload of games. It's just too much hassle to whip out the card and piss away a tenner on something I'll get board of.
|>>|| No. 18833
A gog account's worth having because they sometimes give away free games, which you can reinstall on your machine at whim.
|>>|| No. 18834
They add them to my library automatically which is annoying as hell. I have to sift through shite that's so unpopular that they gave it away to look at the games I actually bought and want to play.
|>>|| No. 18835
> For proof, take a look at the sea of Apple logos observable at every developer conference.
That's assuming that developers are perfectly rational and not biased persons who also never "follow the herd".
I am not bashing Apple but I doubt that this sea's influxes are driven mainly by rationality or something like that. Sadly, but expectable. Conspicuous consumption and shit apply too.
|>>|| No. 18836
In this particular case I'd imagine it's a combination of a UNIX based OS, and better stability and support. Apple is a very smart choice for those actually utilising the power of their expensive machines. They may very well be going with the herd, but there's still a reason for that majority beyond 'it looks nice'
|>>|| No. 18838
It's also assuming that those developers have paid for their MacBooks.
Oh dear. Very poor effort there. See me after class.
|>>|| No. 18840
>It's also assuming that those developers have paid for their MacBooks.
|>>|| No. 18841
Very much that. I don't see many freelancers using them, but I do see a lot of people working in hipster shops who have them courtesy of their employers. They really aren't anything special, and the idea that they were better for some things is a hangover from the days when software was only available on certain platforms. For instance, in publishing in the late 80s there was a feedback loop between software only being available for Macs and the industry using Macs.
|>>|| No. 18843
Yeah, everyone with a Mac at a dev conference works for a "hipster shop" and the Mac was entirely the decision of their employer. That is definitely the most reasonable explanation.
|>>|| No. 18845
It's certainly been the case at most dev events I've been to that the Mac users were hipsters with expensed kit paid for by current or former employers.
|>>|| No. 18846
Apple almost certainly runs sponsorship contracts for events and corporations.
|>>|| No. 18855
Looking at it from a moral and (somewhat) objective standpoint, I find it hard to support sites like GOG. Sure it's a decent service they are providing, bundling up old games and getting them out so people can play them with less fuss.
But the fact is a lot of these titles are abandonware anyhow, and even the ones that aren't, I highly doubt any of the developers that actually worked on the game are getting royalties. I may as well just pirate it, I won't feel any worse, because buying it now is hardly putting money in the pockets of its creators.
It's like with second hand CDs or reprints of old albums by bands that have long since split up- People buy them because the industry has drilled this idea into their heads that the legal thing to do is the right thing to do, which it isn't; you're just propping up some businessman's empire. The actual content creators are the people who get the worst deal in both videogames and music.
|>>|| No. 18856
>I may as well just pirate it, I won't feel any worse, because buying it now is hardly putting money in the pockets of its creators.
Even in a case where absolutely nobody who worked on a game receives royalties from a sale on GOG, the creators were paid for their work. They are paid because they make money for their employers. With services like GOG, the increased longevity of a product can increase the value of games developers to their employers.
The comparison to music is rather shaky, principally because as technology has developed, music production and distribution has become much more accessible to emerging artists without the budget of a massive record label behind them, making the whole infrastructure rather an anachronism. With film and games, at least at the blockbuster/AAA level, the exact opposite is true. The budgets for major releases are rising, not falling, and the amount of money and the sheer manpower required to facilitate the production of those games is ridiculous (see the $500m Destiny headlines, the ACIV credits that makes Ulysses look brief, etc.). Unlike the music industry, the behemoths of the games industry can actually justify their existence with a straight face. That "businessman's empire" you're propping up is what allows the games industry as we know it to exist.
Obviously a lot of people, particularly at the bottom of the industry, get a shit bargain, but "the actual content creators" aren't getting a better deal if you take their shit without paying for it.
|>>|| No. 18857
You're sounding very Marxist in your sentiments. The fact is that businesses are facilitating that exchange, and it's up to you whether you want to pay it or not. I don't buy this idea that simply owning capital does not entitle you to anything (which is sort of what you're arguing here). One does not need to have had to create something to earn something from it, as distribution and awareness of a product are key factors as well.
People know they can pirate, and the choice is really up to them. So even if your first argument was true as well, you're being pretty patronising by criticising them for their own bloody choices.
|>>|| No. 18858
The formula for Watch_Dogs:
35% Person of Interest, 20% SR4, 10% Hitman, 10% Deus Ex, 10% Infamous, 10% Max Payne, 5% Original
|>>|| No. 18859
>I don't buy this idea that simply owning capital does not entitle you to anything
Not him, but that's basically money for nothing. Opposition to money for nothing doesn't seem particularly Marxist to me.
|>>|| No. 18860
>Opposition to money for nothing doesn't seem particularly Marxist to me
You guys crack me up.
|>>|| No. 18862
That's such a progressive way of thinking. If you ran a school I'm sure ofstead would give you an OUTSTANDING award. As long as you're not doing any terrorism or owt.
|>>|| No. 18863
I thought being a centre of jihad was a requirement for outstanding, or have things changed since the last labour government?
|>>|| No. 18864
It's a bit frowned upon these days, like pissing in the shower. Everyone does it but nobody can admit to it or they become pariahs. Don't worry though, I'm sure UKIP will sort it all out when they win 97% of the vote in the GE. They can't jihad us if they've all been voluntarily deported!
|>>|| No. 18866
Huh, I wasn't really going for a Marxist angle, but I suppose so. I don't think it's necessarily a lefty position, however.
Think of it from the opposite end of the spectrum- In a proper lasseiz faire, free market worldview, the "right" to distribute software, or anything in fact, in such a manner is nothing but a legal fiction. It's a arbitrary creation of that works only in our particular idiom of capitalism.
What's actually fundamentally immoral about pirating such work?
|>>|| No. 18867
It's still a Marxist position - you should read up on him, as that's pretty much what he advocates. It's a shame it doesn't really work, though.
This idea that communism is left wing is a bit bollocks really. You're thinking of socialism, which is what's meant to come in between.
|>>|| No. 18868
Do you have any idea of what Marxism is? Because that's literally the core tenet of it.
Jesus fucking Christ, the stupidity of some people.
|>>|| No. 18869
I know right? And I was accused of being a terrible troll for pointing it out.
|>>|| No. 18876
>You're thinking of socialism, which is what's meant to come in between.
Not according to Marxism - the only way to reach a supposed Marxist utopia is through the poor rising up from having no other choice. I've mentioned it before in another thread but a true communist should vote capitalist over socialist as the idea is for capitalists to fuck the poor so much that they have no choice but to do something about it, as opposed to socialism appeasing the poor but not being a true Marxist utopia.
I'm not a Marxist by the way but it's an interesting voter's dilemma.
|>>|| No. 18878
Marx's theory of history has socialism as what is established between capitalism and communism. You're thinking of social democracy, which was proposed by people like Bernstein and other revisionists.
Marx would have supported capitalism in societies he deemed not yet ready for a socialist uprising, but it's a pretty major mistake to think he'd've supported capitalism over socialism just to cause an uprising of the proletariat. That's aside from the fact that he and Engels revised their opinions towards the ends of their lives, understanding that the proletariat simply wouldn't explode in revolution as evidenced by the fact they never did - the German SPD, their own party, were social democrats because of this. They had long term and short term goals for the party: short term being making the proletariat ready for revolution, which involved education and social reform on the short scale. The revolution was long-term, but was considered inevitable by much of the party due to his "scientific" theory of history that they considered writ. Revisionists challenged this, saying revolution wasn't necessary (something I'm inclined to think Marx would have believed). On the other side, you had people like Gramsci who said revolution had to be brought about by intellectual leaders guiding the proletariat. The most extreme example od this was Lenin, who was an idiot.
|>>|| No. 18880
Anyone else experiencing deja vu? I swear we've had this exact discussion before.
|>>|| No. 18881
Why is this thread now about Marxism? Politics is boring as fuck. Go back to talking about video games please.
|>>|| No. 18882
>Me, me, me, it's all about me!
Fuck off. Are you that new lad from the chan that was so shit it shut down? I've noticed a rise in shitty posts since he turned up.
|>>|| No. 18883
Not him, but I'm the OP and I find the spinning of threads about video games on the video games boards towards political bullshit irritating also.
|>>|| No. 18887
Don't be silly, purple doesn't actually use .gs. Do you ever see drug dealers using their own products?
|>>|| No. 18890
Anyway, back on topic.
I've been going on for the last 5-6 years and saying that games are simply not worth buying anymore, bar for exceptions like GTA or Metal Gear Solid and the like.
Consoles are a joke, with no other purpose than to part you with your money as efficiently as possible. They stifle creativity massively, and as seen by OP, they place a cap on quality - due to their inherently inferior design - in that they can only have a fixed level of hardware that is already out of date when put into production. Getting a "fixed package" system 20 years ago would've made sense as PCs were expensive and it was far easier to design a dedicated console with a simple interface for people to enjoy games. Consoles now are essentially gimped PCs giving zero freedom to customize or upgrade.
If I were to design a console, I'd centre it around the PC design, make a modular, upgradable platform, where only the chassis is fixed and everything else can be upgraded over time. The screen would obviously be a HDTV, and peripherals can be easily bought, keyboards, touchpads, etc... It'd come with standard controllers and a 3rd touchpad interface (something like the WiiU) where you can control your console exactly like a PC.
I can't understand why this hasn't happened yet.
|>>|| No. 18891
I don't think there's necessarily anything wrong with games consoles for doing stuff like playing karting or fighting games with m8s, but they're no substitute for a good PC, as Microsoft and Sony seem to want them to be.
|>>|| No. 18892
Once again visionary business and product design insight goes to waste on gs when really it deserves to be changing the world.
|>>|| No. 18893
Modular consoles in this day and age would be the worst thing for consumers.
I can already hear various stockholders rubbing their hands together and the cha-ching in their pupils. This sort of thing will be exploited very similar to how DLC has been exploited.
Not to mention everything will be propriety and developers (or mostly publishers) would love to push component A so you can play Game B.
|>>|| No. 18894
Rubbish, how is this any different from a PC?
All that will be needed are standardized module sizes with appropriate connections.
|>>|| No. 18895
Because they'll probably be as expensive as customizing an apple computer. Put it this way PS Vita only allows proprietary memory cards which are significantly more expensive than your average memory card. Now imagine if you allow these people to price proprietary components which can be everything from the RAM, to the CPU to the GPU.
|>>|| No. 18896
You clearly know very little about how building PCs, and how the PC component market works.
|>>|| No. 18898
The PC's connected to the, telephone.
The telephone's connected to the, internet.
The internet's connected to my, motherboard.
My motherboard's connected to the, keyboard.
The keyboard's connected to the, mouse.
Left leg in, right leg out.
Everyone down to Dixons!
Check and mate.
|>>|| No. 18904
Razer have been working for quite a while on a concept that is basically exactly what you're on about.
Though Linus is quick to say it's ultra conceptual, knowing Razer it's closer than we think.
The problem, as mentioned already, is the cost. Honestly, if you can't build a PC these days you simply don't deserve one.
|>>|| No. 18906
Thats really cool, don't like the look though, but exactly what I was thinking.
And as he said, Razer would allow other companies to manufacture such modules - for all the negative neds poo pooing the concept.
|>>|| No. 18907
>If I were to design a console, I'd centre it around the PC design, make a modular, upgradable platform, where only the chassis is fixed and everything else can be upgraded over time. The screen would obviously be a HDTV, and peripherals can be easily bought, keyboards, touchpads, etc... It'd come with standard controllers and a 3rd touchpad interface (something like the WiiU) where you can control your console exactly like a PC.
The one huge benefit of a console is that you're always working with the same hardware, which makes optimisation much simpler. Your theoretical console is literally giving up the one advantage consoles have for no real benefit.
|>>|| No. 18910
How's your Razer Switchblade coming along? Like that, this is marketing fluff that's only intended to be vapourware. You are credulous.
|>>|| No. 18912
Why not just make a mini-itx PC? It is modular, upgradable and peripherals can easily be bought.
The main problem is that it would be more expensive than an atx PC as itx cases and motherboards tend to be more expensive.
|>>|| No. 18928
>pissing in the shower. Everyone does it but nobody can admit to it or they become pariahs.
I have never done this. There's always a toilet right next to a shower, why would you need to piss there?
>Your theoretical console is literally giving up the one advantage consoles have for no real benefit.
Exactly. GTAV managed to make my PS3 do a surprisingly good impression of my PC's GPU, despite the PS3's GPU being eight years old at this point. The console upgrading thing was horrible when they tried it, the 32X and N64 RAM expansion being the examples from history. If you want an upgradable system, get a PC or Steam box or whatever. I hope that neither Microsoft nor Sony offer performance upgrades on their respective platforms, it'd only serve to fracture their install base and they'd be far better off not doing so.
|>>|| No. 18935
> There's always a toilet right next to a shower, why would you need to piss there?
It saves time and money. It takes time for the shower to warm up, so I might as well piss in there then use the warming up water to flush it. The rest of the shower makes sure it's properly gone. So why not?
|>>|| No. 18941
>There's always a toilet right next to a shower, why would you need to piss there?
This hasn't been the case in any of the places I've lived. Well, there was that one house, but I'm not sure if it counts if there's a wall in the middle.
|>>|| No. 19302
>GTAV managed to make my PS3 do a surprisingly good impression of my PC's GPU
Get the same game on PC when it comes out and compare again. Wait a few months for the mod scene to get on the case and compare again.
|>>|| No. 19470
Seeing as this is the official shitty ports thread, Dead Rising 3 is the latest to be added to the list.
CPU: Intel Core i5-4570 or AMD FX-4100
RAM: 8 GB
Video Card: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 2GB or AMD Radeon 7970 2GB
File size: 30 GB
I mean, come the fuck on Capcom! Reports are coming in from people saying a GTX 780ti can't even max it with a stable frame rate.
I've come to the inevitable conclusion that Capcom must hate money, because PC gamers tend to pirate or just plain avoid games with issues like this.
|>>|| No. 19471
8 GB of RAM minimum! For one of those crappy Nipon looking games too? Jeez.
|>>|| No. 19560
I'd imagine they want to increase the number of zombies on screen at any one time.
[ Return ] [ Entire Thread ] [ First 100 posts ] [ Last 50 posts ]