DUST Search - Am I the only watching the "Xbox One presentation"?

11Up3Down wrote:

hooc order wrote:

Baal Roo wrote:

Who else is excited for the next round of overpriced mid-range PCs from Microsoft and Sony?

*crickets*

A $400 PC does not have the specs the PS4 has...so it is a CHEAP mid-ranged PC with a good GFX card in it.

Also a PS3 and an Xbox can both play Crysis 3...try and find a $200 to $300 PC made 5 years ago that can play Crysis 3.

Comparing Gaming power per dollar spent consoles win every time.

AMD FX-8350 8 Core CPU $200 Bucks at New Egg
ASUS GTX 660 $191 on Newegg

Assuming I put these items in an existing case I've met or surpassed at least the PS4, since MS hasn't released any information concerning the X1 GPU, hard to say, but I've probably met or exceeded it as well.

Also -
Crysis 3 system requirements (minimum)
CPU: 2.8 GHz dual core processor, Intel Core 2 Duo or AMD Phenom X2 or better
RAM: 2GB
Graphics: DirectX 10 graphics card with 1 GB RAM, Nvidia 400-series or AMD Radeon 5000-series.
Operating system: Windows Vista
DirectX 9c sound card
16 GB free hard drive space

Crysis 3 system requirements (recommended)
CPU: 2.4 GHz quad core processor, Intel Core i5 or better
RAM: 2GB (4 GB for 64-bit operating systems)
Graphics: DirectX 11 compatible video card with 1GB RAM, Nvidia GTX 500-series or AMD 6000-series or better.
Operating system: Windows 7, Win 7 64-bit is preferred
DirectX 9c sound card, dedicated audio card is preferred
16 GB free hard drive space

While not at the highest video settings, I'll bet that this $400 PC can run Crysis 3 at least as well as and with similar graphics to both the PS4 and X1. Both of those machines are using OUTDATED PC hardware. Oh and this computer: http://www.asus.com/Notebooks_Ultrabooks/G72Gx/ has ran all the Crysis Games with medium graphics and its a 3.5 year old laptop.

For the record, I still have the ASUS Laptop and am still using it and posting in this forum with it....only thing ever changed on it is the OS.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Baal Roo Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 1368	Posted - 2013.05.21 20:53:00 - [1] - Quote Who else is excited for the next round of overpriced mid-range PCs from Microsoft and Sony? crickets
Baal Roo Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 1368	Posted - 2013.05.21 20:56:00 - [2] - Quote Karl Koekwaus wrote: I wonder how lending games to friends is going to work, do they need to pay money to play them too? They should. If you want to play a video game, you should pay for the video game. There isn't any real difference between piracy and loaning a game to a friend. In each scenario, a second person plays the game without paying for it. Unless your argument is that there is nothing wrong with playing games without paying for them, I don't see the problem. Are you pro game piracy?
Baal Roo Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 1368	Posted - 2013.05.21 21:25:00 - [3] - Quote Arramakaian Eka wrote: Baal Roo wrote: Karl Koekwaus wrote: I wonder how lending games to friends is going to work, do they need to pay money to play them too? They should. If you want to play a video game, you should pay for the video game. There isn't any real difference between piracy and loaning a game to a friend. In each scenario, a second person plays the game without paying for it. Unless your argument is that there is nothing wrong with playing games without paying for them, I don't see the problem. Are you pro game piracy? So if you lend a book or a BD to a friend, you're pirating. That makes sense I think it's as stupid as you do, but if you look at the arguments against piracy it becomes clear that to be objective the same argument applies to lending books and BDs to a friend. Since digital media has no physical component, the argument from content providers (and most governments) is that what you are paying for is the right to access the media. If you lend a game to a friend, they are playing the game without paying for the right to do so.
Baal Roo Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 1368	Posted - 2013.05.21 21:41:00 - [4] - Quote Karl Koekwaus wrote: Baal Roo wrote: Karl Koekwaus wrote: I wonder how lending games to friends is going to work, do they need to pay money to play them too? They should. If you want to play a video game, you should pay for the video game. There isn't any real difference between piracy and loaning a game to a friend. In each scenario, a second person plays the game without paying for it. Unless your argument is that there is nothing wrong with playing games without paying for them, I don't see the problem. Are you pro game piracy? Lending something is not piracy, as you don't duplicate the media. If I loan it to someone, I can't play it anymore. http://n4g.com/news/1261976/no-live-tv-kinect-functions-outside-us-at-launch-for-xbox-one guess that was half of the features down the drain. The argument against piracy isn't about whether or not you can replay your game, rewatch your movie, or reread your book. It's about people paying for the right to consume the media. Again, it's not MY argument, but it is THE argument. It's illegal to pirate a copy of a game, book, movie, etc because the person who will be getting the product for free is not paying for the content. THAT is the supposed problem of piracy. I don't care if you can't reread your book or replay your game, you already read it, or already played it. You consumed the media, and now someone else is consuming the media for free. The physical medium is no longer relevant to discussion of piracy and intellectual rights, because we've seen time and time again that the digital information devoid of a physical delivery medium consistently priced AT or ABOVE the price of the same information when it is delivered to us with a physical medium attached. The only difference between a CD and a FLAC digital album is the medium the information is being held on. If, for the digital medium, the rules are that we are paying for "the right to consume", then it follows that the CD show be viewed within the same context.
Baal Roo Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 1370	Posted - 2013.05.21 22:41:00 - [5] - Quote Icy TIG3R wrote: Baal Roo wrote: It's illegal to pirate a copy of a game, book, movie, etc because the person who will be getting the product for free is not paying for the content. THAT is the supposed problem of piracy. I don't care if you can't reread your book or replay your game, you already read it, or already played it. You consumed the media, and now someone else is consuming the media for free. The physical medium is no longer relevant to discussion of piracy and intellectual rights, because we've seen time and time again that the digital information devoid of a physical delivery medium consistently priced AT or ABOVE the price of the same information when it is delivered to us attached to a physical medium. The only difference between a CD and a FLAC digital album is the medium the information is being held on. For a video game (for example), if you buy the newest CoD at gamestop delivered to you on a $0.10 piece of plastic, you pay $59.99, if you buy the newest CoD straight from PSN, without the plastic container, you still pay $59.99. It follows then that what we are paying for is the digital rights in each case, not the piece of plastic the game comes on. If, for the digital medium, the rules are that we are paying for "the right to consume", then it follows that a video game purchased on a plastic disc should be viewed within the same context. If you are pro-lending, the natural and obvious logical conclusion is that you are pro-piracy. I personally am both. Baal are you trolling or just stupid? When I buy something, I have the right to do whatever the f*** I want to do with it. End of story. They've already implemented online passes, in which you pay for the ability to use the online service. In that same definition that you're using, NOTHING you have belongs to you, you merely "rent" it. People like you are sending the industry down the drain. Way to completely miss my point. I see you are pro-piracy, I am too. We're on the same page here.
Baal Roo Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 1371	Posted - 2013.05.21 23:29:00 - [6] - Quote hooc order wrote: Baal Roo wrote: Who else is excited for the next round of overpriced mid-range PCs from Microsoft and Sony? crickets A $400 PC does not have the specs the PS4 has...so it is a CHEAP mid-ranged PC with a good GFX card in it. Also a PS3 and an Xbox can both play Crysis 3...try and find a $200 to $300 PC made 5 years ago that can play Crysis 3. Comparing Gaming power per dollar spent consoles win every time. By next year I guarantee I would be able to build you a PC that is as (or more) powerful as the PS4 for the cost of a PS4. If you look at the machine for strictly it's ability to play new games on low graphic settings, then yes, a PS3 could possibly beat a 5 year old PC... but only, depending on the computer and assuming the owner has not upgraded any components, by a fairly small margin. If you're already satisfied with playing with the lower graphics you get from a console, I don't see why downgrading a bit further would be a big deal honestly. However, try to check your email, browse the web, watch youtube videos, do your taxes, write a thesis, share files, edit videos and photos, produce music, etc, etc, etc on a PS3 and you'll be sorely disappointed. I'm not arguing that consoles have no purpose for techno-phobic people, but they really aren't that exciting for tech centric people. They are always behind the cutting edge of technology, and they aren't as capable as the machine most of us already have sitting in our homes. In reality, after the first 6 months to a year of a consoles release (which just so happens to be the time that they are of the least value), they are no longer particularly interesting from a performance standpoint and will have already started to lag well behind the PC gaming world. The PS4 and Xbox One will both likely release at a $500 price point, and for that price I can get extremely close in raw performance out of a PC (and if you know how to shop for deals, can likely beat it), but be able to continue to upgrade the system for another 5-7 years, staying at the front of the technological curve... AND do a lot more non-gaming stuff... AND save a lot of money on games. It's cool to buy consoles for their exclusives, or simply because you're uncomfortable with technology, but let's not pretend like they are particularly exciting from a pure performance and technology standpoint. I admit, my post was a bit flippant, but honestly, they aren't really showing us anything exciting. The specs/hardware isn't particularly impressive or revolutionary, they haven't really announced anything that we haven't seen before for functionality, and we haven't seen any exclusives yet (IMO, the saving grace of consoles).
Baal Roo Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 1371	Posted - 2013.05.22 00:24:00 - [7] - Quote 11Up3Down wrote: hooc order wrote: Baal Roo wrote: Who else is excited for the next round of overpriced mid-range PCs from Microsoft and Sony? crickets A $400 PC does not have the specs the PS4 has...so it is a CHEAP mid-ranged PC with a good GFX card in it. Also a PS3 and an Xbox can both play Crysis 3...try and find a $200 to $300 PC made 5 years ago that can play Crysis 3. Comparing Gaming power per dollar spent consoles win every time. AMD FX-8350 8 Core CPU $200 Bucks at New Egg ASUS GTX 660 $191 on Newegg Assuming I put these items in an existing case I've met or surpassed at least the PS4, since MS hasn't released any information concerning the X1 GPU, hard to say, but I've probably met or exceeded it as well. Also - Crysis 3 system requirements (minimum) CPU: 2.8 GHz dual core processor, Intel Core 2 Duo or AMD Phenom X2 or better RAM: 2GB Graphics: DirectX 10 graphics card with 1 GB RAM, Nvidia 400-series or AMD Radeon 5000-series. Operating system: Windows Vista DirectX 9c sound card 16 GB free hard drive space Crysis 3 system requirements (recommended) CPU: 2.4 GHz quad core processor, Intel Core i5 or better RAM: 2GB (4 GB for 64-bit operating systems) Graphics: DirectX 11 compatible video card with 1GB RAM, Nvidia GTX 500-series or AMD 6000-series or better. Operating system: Windows 7, Win 7 64-bit is preferred DirectX 9c sound card, dedicated audio card is preferred 16 GB free hard drive space While not at the highest video settings, I'll bet that this $400 PC can run Crysis 3 at least as well as and with similar graphics to both the PS4 and X1. Both of those machines are using OUTDATED PC hardware. Oh and this computer: http://www.asus.com/Notebooks_Ultrabooks/G72Gx/ has ran all the Crysis Games with medium graphics and its a 3.5 year old laptop. For the record, I still have the ASUS Laptop and am still using it and posting in this forum with it....only thing ever changed on it is the OS. Exactly. I'm by no means a PC elitist. I think consoles fill an important niche, and have some decent exclusives that make them worth picking up later in their life cycles. But it seems silly to get excited for what is, for all intents and purposes, just a budget gaming device that is filled with proprietary architecture that limits the software available on it.
Baal Roo Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 1371	Posted - 2013.05.22 00:36:00 - [8] - Quote Arramakaian Eka wrote: You guys are arguing about PC vs consoles? What are you, 14? There's no argument here. The question in the OP is who was excited about the xbox announcement, and we're having a discussion about it. Turns out, there's nothing particularly exciting about the new xbox, and we're discussing why that is the case. I'm not sure why exactly that would indicate a low maturity level.
Baal Roo Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 1373	Posted - 2013.05.22 01:25:00 - [9] - Quote slypie11 wrote: I've been playing on consoles all my life. I feel more comfortable with a controller than a mouse, and not having to put things together is a plus The xbox controller is plug and play in Windows Vista and up. You plug it in, and you play.
Baal Roo Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 1373	Posted - 2013.05.22 02:34:00 - [10] - Quote dustyvanilla wrote: Baal Roo wrote: They should. If you want to play a video game, you should pay for the video game. There isn't any real difference between piracy and loaning a game to a friend. In each scenario, a second person plays the game without paying for it. Unless your argument is that there is nothing wrong with playing games without paying for them, I don't see the problem. Are you pro game piracy? You sir are stupid. If I lend a game to a friend then I cannot play it because my friend has it. So for each copy of the game sold one person can play it. The whole piracy issue revolves around people making new copies of the game that weren't paid for. no need for insults. The reality is that the content creators don't care about whether or not you can replay your game or not. What they want is to be paid when someone plays their game. That's what Copyright and IP laws are for, making sure content creators get paid by the person consuming the work. It just so happens that technology has outpaced the laws. You are correct in so far as the current issue with piracy has to do with people making copies of media and proliferating those copies, but the problem here is in the fact that people are consuming the creator's work for free, not that the work is being copied in the first place. You could make 1000 copies of a game, but if no one is actually playing the copies you've made, it doesn't matter that the copies exist. If you lend your game to your friend, you have played the game, and now your friend is playing the game. That is two people who have played the game, but only one person who has paid for the right to do so. In the past, this was considered an acceptable loss because media was only shared in a purely physical medium (ie: words printed on a page, or a physical record with grooves engraved into it). Now that there is no difference between a Bluray with a file on it, and a HDD with the same file on it, these lines are blurring. A piece of media is no longer confined to the medium on which it was initially offered. Again, let me be clear. I am pro-piracy, pro-sharing, anti-IP. I agree that the premise of "owning information" is ludicrous. We are on the same side of this argument, whether you realize it or not. I'm just willing to examine the situation objectively and see how the anti-piracy arguments apply to "physical" media. Just because we don't like an argument, doesn't mean it isn't logical. In this case, pretending like the people making the content care whether or not you can replay your game a second time after giving it to someone else (resulting in a "lost sale") is wholly and entirely irrelevant to the content creators. If you can't understand this point, then there isn't much else to discuss.

Baal Roo Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 1373	Posted - 2013.05.22 03:41:00 - [11] - Quote Daxxis KANNAH wrote: @DustyVanilla - I never said Halo was the first - I just said that Halo did all that Dust seems to be trying to do sans progression years ago. I was responding to a post that said another poster was silly for saying that but if you look at current Dust it is very hard to say that this isnt Halo / Halo 2. Its very similar and for people trying to use that as a put down is funny. One day Dust maybe this great integrated sophisticated entity but currently its the MP portion of most shooter styled games and its very barebones - most of us have just bought into the reputation and vision but you couldnt blame anyone from balking and bolting after a couple of hours of gameplay. Aside from being an FPS, the basic sci-fi setting, and the design of the caldari suits, I just don't see the comparison.