Jimquisition: Children of the Resolution
- Thread starter Jimothy Sterling
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I haven't over-clocked a thing on a 2 year old pc and can play most things on highest settings, also, you can connect almost any gamepad you want to a pc. I'm not against consoles either, I've got a Ps3 and a X-box 360 for games that are exclusive to those consoles and for playing games with friends in splitscreen.josh4president said:
Just face it, pc is better when looking at almost all aspects. consoles are more user friendly and have better marketing (marketing for pc is for loose parts, unless you buy something like alien ware which are the same parts pre assembled and with a hefty price increase)
Pc has the potential for top graphics, a huge indie scene, mods, is a multifunctional platform (movies, music, games, work, etc) that works the way you want it to. it's also upgradeable part by part, you might spend 1000 euros (1340.20 U.S. dollars) for a new pc, but once you've got one ( a 600 euro pc will probably play anything that's optimized although not on max settings) you can periodically upgrade parts for 50-200 euros and be able to play anything released.
it does not have gta5.... that is a pretty big minus.... good thing it has fallout 2 , that evens it out a bit.
now i'm going to use my epic gaming pc to play minecraft and see if i can make my pc crash by exploding half a million tnt blocks.
Cheers
forgive me because I'm not technically savy but I remember MS even dare to say that the Xbox One will support 4K resolution (3840×2160) (2160p) video output and comes with a 4K grade HDMI... and all that becomes a blatant lie because it's stuck at 720p... am I right?
*Raises glass*
To Jim, so that his new reign shall bring justice and sexual terror to all.
Thank God for Jim!
As for the video, agreed ... but my PC can't run shit, which means I need a update.
... but I can't afford it. Q_Q
Once to, TO JIM, our new review editor!
To Jim, so that his new reign shall bring justice and sexual terror to all.
Thank God for Jim!
As for the video, agreed ... but my PC can't run shit, which means I need a update.
... but I can't afford it. Q_Q
Once to, TO JIM, our new review editor!
Well, I'm using 1080p for most of my gaming now, since I have my PC hooked up to my TV, but that's the lowest PC resolution I've used since I bought a monitor that could do better.
When was that again? Oh yeah! 1999.
(Okay, that's actually a lie. I prefer good lighting and effects and draw distance and all that jazz to a high resolution, so it used to be fairly common for me to run games at lower resolutions. I still had a 1200 pixel high monitor in the previous millennium though, so I've never quite gotten why people were ever excited about 1080.)
When was that again? Oh yeah! 1999.
(Okay, that's actually a lie. I prefer good lighting and effects and draw distance and all that jazz to a high resolution, so it used to be fairly common for me to run games at lower resolutions. I still had a 1200 pixel high monitor in the previous millennium though, so I've never quite gotten why people were ever excited about 1080.)
I really liked Sessler on TechTV... an he was about all G4 had going for it for quite a while thereafter. That said I certainly disagree with much of his opinions, but more than that I recall a time when he was lashing out at the public for impugning his credibility. I think this was regarding, as Jim has spoken about before, the oft moronic fan outrage over a review score, in this case a less than perfect but not remotely negative score for Killzone 3, if memory serves me. This is one of two big moments from his mouth to my ears, first because it was great that he stood his ground, but also because of the absolutely ridiculous way in which he seemed almost incredulous about the accusation of "journalistic" or reviewer bias. If you are paid to review something and it's sponsored by what you are reviewing that's what we, the smallbrains, call a "conflict of interest. Sessler should know better, and drop the rump-ache because his colleagues in the field have created a precedent around the idea that this is not only acceptable but encouraged from reviewer to reviewer. Too many reviewers have long become dishonest, shilling, pitchmen by now for anyone to deserve taking offense at having their motives questioned.
The other big moment was when he tried to take a stand against graphics as they were being reviewed at that time. Using a number of games as an example, he cited art direction over visual fidelity. Among his examples were BioShock. It illustrated a great point, and he was saying what I had been feeling for years; a game's art style is more important than it's graphics. One does rely on the other, yes, but a game built on an old engine that is highly stylized and holds it's own sheerly on aesthetics and insightful or clever creative design by a small modestly paid but dedicated team rightfully belongs on the same shelf as a game built on a humongous budget, with a multimillion dollar team of graphic's engineers and overpaid specialists. Jim has said this, and I agree with them both. It's why I can still play a 15 year old game and be more impressed by it's visuals than by the stodgy over-budgeted behemoths the next generation has to offer.
Incidentally, Jim's schadenfreude moment made my milk duds hard. It really is poetic seeing this all unfold like some kind of wild conjured monstrosity turning on it's master.
The other big moment was when he tried to take a stand against graphics as they were being reviewed at that time. Using a number of games as an example, he cited art direction over visual fidelity. Among his examples were BioShock. It illustrated a great point, and he was saying what I had been feeling for years; a game's art style is more important than it's graphics. One does rely on the other, yes, but a game built on an old engine that is highly stylized and holds it's own sheerly on aesthetics and insightful or clever creative design by a small modestly paid but dedicated team rightfully belongs on the same shelf as a game built on a humongous budget, with a multimillion dollar team of graphic's engineers and overpaid specialists. Jim has said this, and I agree with them both. It's why I can still play a 15 year old game and be more impressed by it's visuals than by the stodgy over-budgeted behemoths the next generation has to offer.
Incidentally, Jim's schadenfreude moment made my milk duds hard. It really is poetic seeing this all unfold like some kind of wild conjured monstrosity turning on it's master.
The mouse is a bigger contributor to carpal tunnel than a keyboard and the consequences of their use as been studied far more simply because millions of people use the mouse and keyboard for their livelihoods and now use them regularly in their spare time as well. That sort of use and that kind of study hasn't been put forward for controllers, or at least as far as I can tell, so your criticism at best is false and people do get carpal tunnel from video game controllers.irishda said:
consoles - kiddies, PC - grown ups, mature audience.hazydawn said:
Im not saying thats true but i think thats the concept.
the thing with ease and confort is the fact that its different for everyone. there is NOTHING more confortable to me than a regular square keyboard to me. i found the "confortable, ergonomic" keyboards to be ways to break your arms that you got to pay for. you canr argue easy and comfort as it is not universal.Keiichi Morisato said:
As far as beter control method, mouse is the best aiming method invented and we still ahvent invented anything that is more precise. whether its confortable or not is irrelevant to its accuracy superiority. however he claimed that keypad is superior.
Higher resoulution enables graphics. It does not mean higher graphics. In fact, better graphics are only small part of higher resolution advantages. dont mix the two.Reyold said:
Why woudl you be worried? I understand some peopel are jelous, some are angry (that their box isnt the most popular anymore), some genuinely hate it, but why would you be worried that people are choosing the better plantform?Akichi Daikashima said:
We got indie games that look better than 8 year old games. of course new games are going to look better than oens running on 8 year old hardware.Akichi Daikashima said:
Wrong. Resolution allows you higher view field, clearer text, ability to use higher resolution 2d sprites, which to be honest look brilliant, and plenty of other things. resolution isnt about AAA games looking big. It enables them to, but thats not where it ends.Luminos564 said:
Ill let you in on a little secret: not everyone play their games on constant 5 star treat. some people do go and look at pretty locales. even in FPS games. The original Crysis had pretty sweet looks that you could admore while spectating enemy camp planning your assault. Of course you could go in spray-and-praying but you dont have to.Makabriel said:
because nostalgia. because false rumors about pc being "complex". because humans.nodlimax said:
Ease of use? I find PC much easier to use. subjective.GoaThief said:
Size? because a large box and a slightly larger box is that much different.
Cheap initial outlay? you mean cheap as in doesnt have anything but basic functionality? Or that it cant do even 10% of tasts the PC does? or that it costs a , gasp, 50 dollars more to get same power out of PC?
Exclusives i can give you, this malpractive of restricting games to single platform to force costumers to buy it seems to still exist.
Titalfall. PC and Xbox One.aegix drakan said:What the hell was that mecha game with the jetpacks in the video?!That looks like so much fun! It's like mirror's edge with jetpacks, giant mechas and orbital drops!
When people realized that all else equal, higher graphics is better.Thanatos2k said:
You should never sacrifice gameplay for graphics. you should never sacrifice graphics for nothing.
Tell that to people who headshot you while running by without ever stopping, close range. no, they dont use bots.Aeonknight said:
Depends on what you think is good enough, thus there is no simple answer. we have been over this already.Lightknight said:
Ech, i remmeber my 10 year old monitor running on 1600x1200 (yes, thats 4:3 for you young people), 10 years ago, but then kinescopic tv went otu of fashion for light crystals and plasma, and my next one was actually a downgrade from that with 1440x900 resolution. Fech, widescreen, what its good for, aboslutely nothing!Callate said:
They are now doing a new podcast: http://dismaljesters.libsyn.com/Valderis said:
the sad thing with modern FPS is that they are more interesting to watch than play.RJ 17 said:
IM sure they would Though i already know their explanation of upscaling.QUINTIX said:
Congratulations on the job, I see your plan to dominate the world via Sterlingism is one step closer to fruition.
As for the video itself, agreed on all points, although as a person who is primarily a PC gamer, my current set-up is pretty far behind, so graphics mean even less to me than the average console gamer when it comes down to it.
As for the video itself, agreed on all points, although as a person who is primarily a PC gamer, my current set-up is pretty far behind, so graphics mean even less to me than the average console gamer when it comes down to it.
Ok, to be honest, the PC elitists actually annoy me more than any of the PS4/Xbone fanboyisms. I know people are entitled to your own opinions and yah-di-yah, but I really feel like PC is down for some criticism for once.
You know why PC's are so much better than consoles, when it comes to graphics? Why they can perform tasks that a puny console couldn't hope to do like 60FPS at whatever resolution it wants? Because they're ridiculously expensive, thats why. A high-end gaming PC that can do all those fancy graphics a console can't can cost over $1000, while a quick Google search suggests even an 'entry level' PC build costs over $600; suddenly Xbox One's $499 seems reasonable, especially when it has an extremely advanced camera thrown in, while the PS4 (which is often compared to a mid-range PC) is a downright steal at $399; not to mention the constant upgrading of PC's (often touted as a strong point of PC gaming) only adds to these astronomical costs, simply to play the latest games at the best quality.
It seems to be a point that people often ignore, to be frank. And why? It seems like PC's are getting off scott-free when it comes to criticism, with memes and jokes about how the 'PC gaming master race' laughs at anything related to consoles. As a person who much prefers gaming on consoles than a PC, its really irksome to have a barrage of PC players patronising us simply for our purchasing decision.
I realise what I've written kind of sounds like 'fanboy moaning', but to me, it seems like if PC players can poke fun at consoles, its perfectly valid for people like me to criticise PC's as well.
Edit: I'm going to add to this. Comparing a PC gaming platform to consoles is much like comparing a professional DSLR camera to a point-and-shoot camera. Sure, you have FAR more versatility with a DSLR and you can creating stunning images simply not possible with a point-and-shoot on one.
Of course, a DSLR does cost a LOT more than a point-and-shoot, and that cost only increases when you include lenses and stuff. For some people, thats ok; I have a DSLR and buy lenses and stuff because I'm willing to invest for great photographs. Same for PC's; its great for those who are willing to invest.
HOWEVER, does that make a point-and-shoot any worse, or those who buy them inferior to a DSLR user? Of course not. I perfectly respect people who prefer point-and-shoots, as they're MUCH cheaper, easier to use, and are a great way for people to experience photography beyond a camera phone.
In the same way, I wish PC users would stop patronising console users simply because we want a gaming system that is simpler and cheaper to use. They're both respectable platforms. Stop calling one of them inferior to the other.
You know why PC's are so much better than consoles, when it comes to graphics? Why they can perform tasks that a puny console couldn't hope to do like 60FPS at whatever resolution it wants? Because they're ridiculously expensive, thats why. A high-end gaming PC that can do all those fancy graphics a console can't can cost over $1000, while a quick Google search suggests even an 'entry level' PC build costs over $600; suddenly Xbox One's $499 seems reasonable, especially when it has an extremely advanced camera thrown in, while the PS4 (which is often compared to a mid-range PC) is a downright steal at $399; not to mention the constant upgrading of PC's (often touted as a strong point of PC gaming) only adds to these astronomical costs, simply to play the latest games at the best quality.
It seems to be a point that people often ignore, to be frank. And why? It seems like PC's are getting off scott-free when it comes to criticism, with memes and jokes about how the 'PC gaming master race' laughs at anything related to consoles. As a person who much prefers gaming on consoles than a PC, its really irksome to have a barrage of PC players patronising us simply for our purchasing decision.
I realise what I've written kind of sounds like 'fanboy moaning', but to me, it seems like if PC players can poke fun at consoles, its perfectly valid for people like me to criticise PC's as well.
Edit: I'm going to add to this. Comparing a PC gaming platform to consoles is much like comparing a professional DSLR camera to a point-and-shoot camera. Sure, you have FAR more versatility with a DSLR and you can creating stunning images simply not possible with a point-and-shoot on one.
Of course, a DSLR does cost a LOT more than a point-and-shoot, and that cost only increases when you include lenses and stuff. For some people, thats ok; I have a DSLR and buy lenses and stuff because I'm willing to invest for great photographs. Same for PC's; its great for those who are willing to invest.
HOWEVER, does that make a point-and-shoot any worse, or those who buy them inferior to a DSLR user? Of course not. I perfectly respect people who prefer point-and-shoots, as they're MUCH cheaper, easier to use, and are a great way for people to experience photography beyond a camera phone.
In the same way, I wish PC users would stop patronising console users simply because we want a gaming system that is simpler and cheaper to use. They're both respectable platforms. Stop calling one of them inferior to the other.
You just described how DSLR cameras are objectively better than point-and-shoot cameras and are technologically superior. They are even subjectively better by your own admission if you take time to learn how to use them and invest in them. Thats actually a good PC vs consoles analogy, but it seems you missed your own point. PCs and consoles both have their niche, but PCs are objectively technologically superior, have bigger game library (20 000+ released games, you can play all of them with relatively little worries about backward compatibilities), versatile (you can plug in whatever gamepad you want, VR capabilities coming soon, can play videos, mp3, PS1-PS2 games with emulators, whatever you can think of really). The only saving grace of consoles is that they are easier to use compared to PCs, but as with DSLR cameras it is easily remedied just by putting some effort into it.Simalacrum said:
As for PCs being more expensive, well, all things worthwhile generally are expensive. Such is life. But you can pick and choose PC components you want based on performance and price, and find eventually that you paid less than you expected to pay.
Edit: I don't hate consoles or console owners in general, I would even buy PS3/4 if I had extra money for it. It does, however, rustle my jimmies when console fanboys start loudly proclaiming how much their console is better than all PCs ever. It's just not true.
So he knocked off a point for blatant, disgusting misogyny, and he complained that Sony made it extremely inconvenient for him to make what is essential free promotional material for them on his popular youtube channel (which is a very time consuming thing to run and maintain). OH THE HORROR, THIS SURELY NEGATES ALL HIS YEARS OF INSIGHT AND EXPERIENCE.mjc0961 said:
Well, a 500$ PC is quite possible, it may play some XBone games on lower settings, but it will also play every PC game (including games on older consoles) with many of them supporting mods, having free multiplayer and being cheaper. Also, many people still need a PC, a somewhat powerful PC can be cheaper than both a console and a cheap PC.Simalacrum said:
9-button? Noob. Mine has 12 thumb buttons and a fourth button on top. Hell, I have a three button headset. A G600, a G930, and I'm typing this on a G19.maxben said:
Sometimes I think someone at Logitech might go just a bit too far.
All consoles can do 1080p at SOME games.nima55 said:
The thing is that raising the resolution is raising demand for processing power.
So does raising texture quality. And raising polygon count. And also raising the amount of AIs that can be seen at the same time on the screen. etc. etc.
WiiU can display a sort of games at 1080p,because these games are not demanding enough processing power on all the other departments. That's why you see most 1080p games the thing is running have simplistic,often 2d graphics.
And while people are arguing between 720p and 1080p,with the 290x graphics card the PC plays Battlefield 3 at Ultra Graphics settings at 4K resolution with more than 60 frames per second...
And these consoles aren't even out yet. Perhaps in 5 years by now we will be playing at 8k resolution and console players will still be at 720p LOL
And these consoles aren't even out yet. Perhaps in 5 years by now we will be playing at 8k resolution and console players will still be at 720p LOL