R6 vegas 2?

Oh man! Ad-blocking software has been detected! :'(

This website is run by the community, for the community... and it needs advertisements in order to keep running. Blocking our ads means your killing our stats!
Please disable your ad-block, or become a premium member to hide all advertisements and this notice.

I have to agree that all this activation stuff is real weak. talk about splitting hairs.

Firstly i dont have 49 different PC's to want to install games to, and why id want to have them on more than one is beyond me??
Second...everyone knows this activation limits have a workaround but im sure these types of discussion are not allowed on this forum

I say its weak because you install the game..play it and finish it...end of story. Thats the way it generally goes.

 

Oh man! Ad-blocking software has been detected! :'(

This website is run by the community, for the community... and it needs advertisements in order to keep running. Blocking our ads means your killing our stats!
Please disable your ad-block, or become a premium member to hide all advertisements and this notice.

it beats just coming out and saying PC are superior because i said so

so by that logic your not going to install your games on the new HDD when it comes?

 

Your not becoming hostile because you NOW realise the actual point are you Thomas? ie;
pcs are the better machine technically.

and come off it..."activation limits"... ...that all you got left?

 

Heard of a full backup image...? lol...dont teach me stuff ( i refer to acronis and its backup capabilites) and then try to outwit me with the new found knowledge that you guys gave me ...;)

 

come on ITHurts don't lower the tone please

I dont find that hostile at all?

 

Well i said that (i prob meant bitter) because "coming out and saying pcs are better because i said so" is obviously not the message that i was trying to portray about PC's...and im sure you realise that...so i can only deduce that you were being ....bitter...in a joking manner...forget it anyway

As you can se anyway with the backup thing...your activation argument was indeed weak..

 

if its availible and your happy with it's intergraty, by all means I'm more a clean house kind of guy myself

 

Fair dos, its just a "clean house" typ of approach wih 170+ pc games is a bit tedious.

 

I haven't seen anyone say that on this forum yet... we've all given reasons. You may not agree with them... but we have given them.

 

I don't keep that many games installed at one time. I typically install a game, beat it, and uninstall it. There are certain exceptions, like Titan Quest, which remain installed because I play them every now and then... but FPSs don't generally stay installed for very long on my box.

I prefer to do a clean install every 18-24 months... shake out the crap that's built up which I may no longer use anymore. Keeps my system purring smoooothly.

 

Looks like you added stuff after I responded...

Mmmm... I'd much rather play games where I don't have to look at a portion of the screen. Give me multiplayer using separate devices any day!

And if you're talking about the "couch action"... you can set up a PC similarly.

Try copying those games and see how far you get. The copy protection exists now.

 

You said:

"Vista and Windows 7 you can kiss goodbye to most of your old games runing native on them"

I'm addressing that portion of your comment. I have yet to have a problem with old games running native on Vista.

As far as the games running like dogs... were you able to run them smoothly with XP? The performance difference between XP and Vista with gaming has been measured anywhere from 5-15%... nothing that would turn a smooth game into an absolute dog. Certainly I keep my gaming box as an XP rig instead of a Vista rig because of that fact. But could I dump XP for Vista? Certainly, if I am willing to accept that small performance hit.

With proper drivers, everything works. It's as simple as that.

 

The facts are irrelevant. Utterly irrelevant. All that matters in PC vs Console is what people like. Nothing more, nothing less. Consoles are successful because people buy them.

For reference, I grew up as a PC gamer, and only caved and bought a console a few years back because I had a shoddy pc, and was sick of specscouring on games. I now have a 360, and a DS. I tend not to do much PC gaming these days. The benefits that both bring to me are:

• Ease: When I buy a console game, I dont have to look at a ream of requirements to decide if I can play it (and believe me, on older PCs like I had, this is a major requirement). All im looking for is a single logo. If its on the box, I can play it.
• Ease of setup: Once I get the game home, theres no installation. I put it in the drive, turn it on, and away I go. I'm playing the game in about 2 minutes. Sure, I pay for this ease with longer load times on all the sections, but its a price im willing to pay.
• If the game is sh*te, or the Framerate shoddy, I can be fairly sure that its because the game was poorly developed. I dont need to worry about whether upgrading my RAM would improve performance
• I dont need to spend ages fine tuning graphics options to try and get the best balance between graphics, and performance
• I can easily play it on the sofa
• The missus can watch me playing comfortably. And even, depending on the game, we can both play together. In fact, this is so much a benefit im going to say it again: we can both play together, sitting side by side, using the same machine. I doubt you will find many games beyond simple games on the PC that allow that.

Additionally, the DS offers a little more benefit (with an obvious caveat of graphics) - I can play it anywhere.

There are still games that I think will play better on the PC. I'm looking forward to the release of Fallout 3 for instance. But the point is that the 360 offers comfort and ease that I have yet to find from a PC.

 

I was thinking more football/Soccer and WII games like WII sports, also the split and quad screens arn't all that bad on a 46" tv, not great but another level of fun(its like one of them mastercard moments, Your mates face after you rip him a new a hole at Fifa? Priceless!).

True but only with something as beautiful as the Alienware Hangar18

I agreed with you and then theres the fact that they are blue-ray, I did say that "I dont need to worrie about that", I have never needed to copy any of my console games.

 

True. Then, in three years, you're still tied to that platform, and game development decreases, then stops. Whereas my SIX year old PC can still play most of the games being released today!!! And can likely play ALL of them with a $100 upgrade.

That said, I can understand where a non-techie would not want to have to read through the requirements. But to be honest, I can't remember the last time I looked at a game's requirements before buying it. Most people don't have a box built from scratch for gaming, so I'll grant you that point.

2 minutes? Holy crap, dude!

I don't worry about it either. It's actually pretty easy to figure out what the bottleneck is with a game.

I must refrain from throwing out a comment about you being a programmer and not a tech... Must... Resist... Comment!!! Ah, crap, I've already done it. (just kidding! I promise! )

Neither do I. I set it to a level that looks good, and if it behaves, I run with it. Usually works on the first try. That said, I don't max out the resolution.

Didn't we address this point already that you can do that with a PC?

The kids and I enjoy playing Life on the PC together, and if they were interested, we could play football games together. Just about the only thing we can't play together are games like FPSs... and in that case, I don't want to play on the same screen as someone else. Granted, that's just personal preference. But it's not fair or accurate to say that "just simple games" can be played by multiple people on the PC.

That said, I do ultimately agree with your main idea that it comes down to personal preference.

 

I don't have a 46" TV. So you guys who are complaining about the cost of a $1200 PC can justify the cost of a $2400 TV?

Haven't ever seen the Hangar18. Personally, I'd hide the computer, so it wouldn't matter to me how beautiful it is.

 

you cant hide the Hangar18 , as for the TV I love my movies and tv and you cant beat Battlestar on a big hd telly

 

Its ultimately true that it is down to personal preference (dont know how many more times i have to mention that), but the point that people keep missing is that this topic was rooted from me saying/meaning that a PC is better TECHINCALLY than a console...not in terms of fun, because we have established that consoles have their place, but TECHNICALLY.

I dont know why people have such a hard time admitting that...instead the issue gets sidetracked and we get told that "consoles are also good because....."

All in all, YES i think we have all agreed in about 40 different ways that its down to personal pref in re to who likes using them...and without splitting hairs you have to admit and face up to the FACTS that a PC CAN and ALWAYS will blow a console TECHNICALLY out of the water if you so wished your rig to do so...

 

Additionally, PC gamers typically pwn XBox 360 players when playing against one another. I seriously doubt that all PC players are more dextrous than XBox players... it's gotta be the input method (keyboard/mouse vs. controller) that makes the difference. It *could* be the speed of the platform itself, but I don't think that's it.

Disclaimer: If you dig using a controller, more power to you... a personal preference thing. Just pointing out a few multiplayer statistics.

 

maybe true for some games (FPS and things like C&C) but i would contest that for fighting, driving and sport related games, my personal view of keyboards and mouse are they feel unnatural while controller are more arcadey, takes me back to my Mortal Combat:Arcade random button bashing days