But that's not a downside of PC...that's a downside of the monitors. You know you can use a 3d-tv for a monitor?
But the OMFG120/240HZ!!! TV's aren't even real, eg. they can't do 60 or 120 frames per eye respectively.
So you can 'choose' to have a better picture and 30 frames per eye, or you can get a 120hz monitor and get full 60 frames per eye with no input lag due to repeated frames.
If I had a 120hz monit...
Actually yeah, people do, Crysis sold around 3 mill on PC alone...people care.
Only fanboys who are imtimidated by multiplats claim to not care, but you are here commenting using profanity, U mad bro, and you clearly care.
I've been playing a lot of games brua, I just have standards.
Some people are impressed by cookie cutter FPS games and tomb raider rip offs, I am not.
Hell yes, people need to pay their respects, I've been loving mario games for more than 15 years ( no i'm not 15 years old ), I haven't had a game wow me since mario64.
Lucky for me I smelled trash from a mile away and didn't buy it.
lol at console gamers logic as well.
A game runs bad on consoles: "the developers suck"
a game runs bad on PC " PC sucks"
....maybe it's still like the developers and stuff and that.
"O.G original gansta" damn that's a good song. I liked his Bodycount stuff too. Like old school Anthrax/P.E
Ice T/Bodycount
http://www.youtube.com/watc...
P.E/Anthrax
http://www.youtube.com/watc...
For a PC gamer you seem to be lacking the usual logic...
Screen size viewing distance ratio makes a 26" screen at 2 feet as big ( the amount of your vision field that is taken up by the sceen ) as 78" screen at 6 feet. The pixel pitch of larger screens is exponentially larger even with the same resolution so again...that makes that argument redundant.
PC's can also be connected to TV's as is mine.
'HD' was never a standard. HD is a term used to describe 720p...a resolution which is below standard, even though it is 'standard' for console gamers.
It just tickles me that the die hard Blu-Ray loyalists are content with gaming in 720p or less, shouldn't you like get a new PC or something...
See the PC screenshot thread in the forums, there is only one 'TrueHD' platform suckers, and Blu-Ray is not required for it.
It's because of attitudes like yours that we have NO innovation whatsoever.
I don't care what they change, change everything, just make it good. Different =/= bad.
Wow, this is seriously my dream article. I've wanted to play this game for a while but I can't take the die-hard nostalgic evaluations seriously. Playing a 7 year old game then playing it again now is one thing, but picking up a dated game for the first time and being able to enjoy it is always harder.
Gonna pick this sucker up now.
I wonder if I can run it *snigger* ( benchmarks with my card show like 170 fps maxed out in DX11 )
DRM cancer = skip though.
Nvidia have the TWIMTBP program...they have staff that help developers implement AA and additional features in their games FOR FREE. I hardly see it as being monopolistic or unethical. AMD/ATI owners should be glad the graphical bar is always being pushed by nvidia, unlike Dirt 2 and BFBC2 which are DX11 only in name, not in visuals, very weak sauce attempts by AMD.
The article is B.S. Crytek had DX11 features built into the engine since before they even started building the ...
Generic? you mean like that tomb raider rip off? Uncharted I think it's called, the one with all the aliasing right?
O.T
Crytek have said for like 8 months that they would announce the DX11 features ( 'after summer' ) this is no revelation, and no they definitely did not delay it for tesslation, PC features are easily implemented, it's the console they have trouble getting things into, 6 year old hardware is a bitch.
Even if ...
"crytek said that they can make the console versions look as good as the first one on the pc"
wow you are delusional
What makes you think that "look as good as the first one did on PC" means "the first one on PC on the very highest settings with maxed out AA at 1080p"
When they said it will look as good as the first one, they weren't lying...it will, it will look as good as the first one on pc on high and med...
Can't wait for #2
If you think getting game to looks good on one platform is a result of any kind of skill, you are retarded. Now getting a MULIPLAT to look and run amazing on all platforms, with 720p and 30 frames + 3d on both consoles, the 2 former being something much poorer looking games cannot always achieve, is an amazing feat.
I think you're the one who is brainwashed, look up gun related deaths per capita on the internet....the U.S is at the top with something like 20deaths per 100k per year. Japan has like 0.000000007 deaths per 100k per year on average....wtf does that tell you. Guns aren't making you safe brua.
If I wanted to go out and go on a rampage right now...I couldn't even find a gun, I don't know ANYONE who owns one, or even heard anyone claim to own one. You can't...
I think more to the point is that anyone is quoting fudzilla, they, along ith semiaccurate.com are the two most insane sites in existence, they make anything up for hits.
"My graphics card is a weird card. It's an Intel HD core I3"
lol, you don't even have a video card, that is what we call onboard graphics, aka you can play movies, but you sure as hell can't play games.
As for your first point, the games cost half the cost of console games if you look at the right places.
Fail blog is fail.
Your are making that famous console gamer mistake of thinking you need to buy an entire new PC to play games.
If you have a PC, add 1 $200 GPU and a $299 3d monitor
$500 for 3d gaming.
"cheaper than paying $300 for a PS3 and then buying a 3d monitor? "
It's certainly cheaper than buying a ps3 and a 3dtv.
+ the games will run at 1080p with AA and more than 30 frames per eye.
...