This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="johny300"]Controller and sit on a couch while playing.Arach666
A thing I can perfectly do with my PC,I don´t even know how this argument even exists in 2011.
Come on now johnny,really?
There's a difference between being able to do something and doing it well. Unless you have a shell replacement designed for use with only a gamepad, there's definitely room for improvement.There's a difference between being able to do something and doing it well. Unless you have a shell replacement designed for use with only a gamepad, there's definitely room for improvement.lowe0
That is opinion though.
I find keyboard and mouse from couch or bed more than controller.
Someone else might not though.
The point is that it can be done.
[QUOTE="lowe0"]There's a difference between being able to do something and doing it well. Unless you have a shell replacement designed for use with only a gamepad, there's definitely room for improvement.Hakkai007
That is opinion though.
I find keyboard and mouse from couch or bed more than controller.
Someone else might not though.
The point is that it can be done.
You enjoy that. I expect better ease of use than "**** it, it's working, we're done."[QUOTE="Arach666"][QUOTE="johny300"]Controller and sit on a couch while playing.lowe0
A thing I can perfectly do with my PC,I don´t even know how this argument even exists in 2011.
Come on now johnny,really?
There's a difference between being able to do something and doing it well. Unless you have a shell replacement designed for use with only a gamepad, there's definitely room for improvement. My point is that it is perfectly doable for playing games,it has been for a long time now,many people such as me have a chassis that is linked to the monitors and the tv so if I want to play a game with a controller on the PC using my tv I can do it just as easily as with a console game. Wether some people find it to be less convenient in any way is completely irrelevant,it´s doable,period.[QUOTE="lowe0"][QUOTE="Arach666"]There's a difference between being able to do something and doing it well. Unless you have a shell replacement designed for use with only a gamepad, there's definitely room for improvement. My point is that it is perfectly doable for playing games,it has been for a long time now,many people such as me have a chassis that is linked to the monitors and the tv so if I want to play a game with a controller on the PC using my tv I can do it just as easily as with a console game. Wether some people find it to be less convenient in any way is completely irrelevant,it´s doable,period. And if the thread title were "Can Consoles do a single thing that PCs can't", you'd have a valid point. It isn't, and you don't. The question is "Can Consoles do a single thing better than PCs", and I'd certainly consider a purpose-built shell that allows me to access every function of the device from startup to shutdown with just a gamepad to be "better".A thing I can perfectly do with my PC,I don´t even know how this argument even exists in 2011.
Come on now johnny,really?
Arach666
Unless you have a shell replacement designed for use with only a gamepad, there's definitely room for improvement.lowe0
Frontends such as GameEx do what you're wanting. Frontends run on top of the shell (like any other fullscreen program), so Windows itself doesn't change, but you could certainly set it to launch when Windows starts if you wanted to turn your PC into a permanently controller-friendly environment. Microsoft will be offering something like this themselves for Windows 8's alternate interface.
[QUOTE="lowe0"]Unless you have a shell replacement designed for use with only a gamepad, there's definitely room for improvement.garrett_daniels
Frontends such as GameEx do what you're wanting. Frontends run on top of the shell (like any other fullscreen program), so Windows itself doesn't change, but you could certainly set it to launch when Windows starts if you wanted to turn your PC into a permanently controller-friendly environment. Microsoft will be offering something like this themselves for Windows 8's alternate interface.
It's a start, but at this point I'm spoiled by XMB. I can flick one button on my gamepad, and the console boots up, sets my inputs on my receiver and TV for me (without the need for a universal remote), and provides every option on the machine by way of a simple X-Y interface - categories along one axis, items along another. (The 360's interface is designed very similarly, even if they don't adhere to the same visual metaphor.)My point is that it is perfectly doable for playing games,it has been for a long time now,many people such as me have a chassis that is linked to the monitors and the tv so if I want to play a game with a controller on the PC using my tv I can do it just as easily as with a console game. Wether some people find it to be less convenient in any way is completely irrelevant,it´s doable,period. And if the thread title were "Can Consoles do a single thing that PCs can't", you'd have a valid point. It isn't, and you don't. The question is "Can Consoles do a single thing better than PCs", and I'd certainly consider a purpose-built shell that allows me to access every function of the device from startup to shutdown with just a gamepad to be "better".[QUOTE="Arach666"][QUOTE="lowe0"] There's a difference between being able to do something and doing it well. Unless you have a shell replacement designed for use with only a gamepad, there's definitely room for improvement.lowe0
To bad your context was not that Lowe0.. You kinda just jumped in saying your opinion which was open ended with many different interpretations. When in a corner, you tried to retreat to the TC's original statement but at that point it was way out of context. Also, staing his point is void is pretty arrogant as he has just a right and valid as yours. Why try to change what Arach666 was stating to the rebuttle statement of "'Controller and sit on a couch while playing." It was a open ended statement and got a open ended reply. Nothing wrong with either person said here and both arguments are valid.
[QUOTE="johny300"]Controller and sit on a couch while playing.Arach666
A thing I can perfectly do with my PC,I don´t even know how this argument even exists in 2011.
Come on now johnny,really?
yeah but that situation doesn't work for a lot of people, like myself. my entertainment setup (hdtv, surround sound, 360 & ps3) is downstairs in the living room while my pc is upstairs in the study room. i mean, if you have your pc near an HDTV that works, lol but not everyone is setup like that. i'm not going to move my pc into my living room just so i can game from my couch, it's soooo much easier to do with consoles, you can't deny that. it's silly that you can't admit that consoles actually do that better and easier.
the controller thing i understand but even then not all games support controllers, even though i'd hope most do.
[QUOTE="dontshackzmii"]
Some hermits wont admit to anything . Consoles boot faster and last longer and are easyer to use that is and always will be the advatage of console gaming .
Xtasy26
"last longer"? You obviously haven't heard of Xbox 360's red ring of death. My old PC that used to have on the other hand lasted for 8 years and still runs till this day.
"easyer to use that is and always will be the advatage of console gaming" How hard is to click "download" and hit the "play" button on Steam?
My nes is like 25 years old now and still runs . Windows + hardware + steam is a lot more to deal with .
My point is that it is perfectly doable for playing games,it has been for a long time now,many people such as me have a chassis that is linked to the monitors and the tv so if I want to play a game with a controller on the PC using my tv I can do it just as easily as with a console game. Wether some people find it to be less convenient in any way is completely irrelevant,it´s doable,period. And if the thread title were "Can Consoles do a single thing that PCs can't", you'd have a valid point. It isn't, and you don't. The question is "Can Consoles do a single thing better than PCs", and I'd certainly consider a purpose-built shell that allows me to access every function of the device from startup to shutdown with just a gamepad to be "better". I guess you´re not familiar with the wireless mouse concept,you can just sit on your couch(since that seems to be such a big deal,go figure...) with the controller in one hand(or just laying on the said couch) while navigating the windows interface to start the game with your mouse in the other(in the couch´s arm,for instance),a thing that surely would take you like,a wooping 10 seconds. Surely you find that notion very inconvenient,I´m sure. Or maybe you could just start the game normaly on the PC then pick up the controller and sit down and play,or is that too much trouble? This is in some ways,the same story about patches,installs,etc,when they were a PC only thing they were seen as an inconvenience to most console gamers,but now that consoles have those,they´re great! Installs on consoles these days even have games that take more time to install than most PC games,like GT5,but back in the day it was bad and consoles were better because it was plug and play; not anymore and even less each day that passes. Anyway,I´m sure you can find ways to argue with those points as well I can do the same right after that,so whatever.[QUOTE="Arach666"][QUOTE="lowe0"] There's a difference between being able to do something and doing it well. Unless you have a shell replacement designed for use with only a gamepad, there's definitely room for improvement.lowe0
[QUOTE="dontshackzmii"]
Some hermits wont admit to anything . Consoles boot faster and last longer and are easyer to use that is and always will be the advatage of console gaming .
Kinthalis
My SSD i7 PC would beg to differ. It's about the same as an xbox 360 in boot time. Except that my PC is always on and goes to sleep when not in use. That means it BEATS out any console in boot time (2 seconds) 99% off the time. I can come home from work and be playing Team Fortress 2 in exactly 5 seconds flat.
I'd rather spend my time playing than looking for my DVD/waiting for a console to boot/waiting for a long loading time/waiting for updates to download (on my PC updates are done automatically in the background - I haven't had to update a game in 5 years!).
um no its still slower then my wii . SSD is a huge waste of money .
Your reply ignores a pretty critical part of his post:To bad your context was not that Lowe0.. You kinda just jumped in saying you opinion which was open ended.. When in a corner, you tried to retreat to the TC's statement but at this point that was way out of context. Also, staing his point is void is pretty arrogant as he has just a right and valid as yours. Why try to change what Arach666 was stating to the rebuttle statement of "'Controller and sit on a couch while playing." It was a open ended statement and got a open ended reply..
jedikevin2
Wether some people find it to be less convenient in any way is completely irrelevant,it´s doable,period.Arach666I'm simply pointing out that the topic of the thread is whether consoles are able to improve on the functionality of a PC in any meaningful way. I'd certainly consider a purpose-built interface that focuses solely on the use cases expected and is designed specifically for the environment in which it will typically be used to be a meaningful improvement. Considering that there are specific techniques for designing interfaces for such devices (ten-foot interfaces), I'd say it's not just an opinion, but an established part of the field of user interface design.
Arach: see the second section of my post; it pretty much constitutes a reply to yours as well. There's been plenty of thought put into how to design a UI for a consumer device; there's really no reason to be stuck with a desktop interface when something more usable exists. And while I could start the PC and subsequently the game with a keyboard and mouse, why bother when I already have a device that implements an appropriate UI for what I'm using it for?
[QUOTE="Arach666"]
[QUOTE="johny300"]Controller and sit on a couch while playing.lazerface216
A thing I can perfectly do with my PC,I don´t even know how this argument even exists in 2011.
Come on now johnny,really?
yeah but that situation doesn't work for a lot of people, like myself. my gaming setup (hdtv, surround sound, 360 & ps3) is downstairs in the living room while my pc is upstairs in the study room. i mean, if you have your pc near an HDTV that works, lol but not everyone is setup like that. i'm not going to move my pc into my living room just so i can game from my couch, it's soooo much easier to do with consoles, you can't deny that. it's silly that you can't admit do that better.
the controller thing i understand but even then not all games support controllers, even though i'd hope most do.
Position of your house is pretty much preference.. My computer is attached to my home entertainment center with a TV where I switch between my desktop setup to backing off onto my tv where I play games with friends through my PC on multiple controllers. For me, ease of use is for the Pc.. Its simple click and play(trackball or bluetooth wiimote which works as my mouse hehehe), grab controllers and go...Blur, split Second, Sonic Sega Allstars, NBA 2k11, Vanguard Princess, Melty Blood, millenium knights vermillion, big bang beat, and lately lara craft guardians of light.. Once in a while we rock l4d1 custom maps split screen on the tv as well. Its all preference though. I also have several consoles hooked to the main house living room and we do the same.
[QUOTE="lazerface216"]
[QUOTE="Arach666"]
A thing I can perfectly do with my PC,I don´t even know how this argument even exists in 2011.
Come on now johnny,really?
jedikevin2
yeah but that situation doesn't work for a lot of people, like myself. my gaming setup (hdtv, surround sound, 360 & ps3) is downstairs in the living room while my pc is upstairs in the study room. i mean, if you have your pc near an HDTV that works, lol but not everyone is setup like that. i'm not going to move my pc into my living room just so i can game from my couch, it's soooo much easier to do with consoles, you can't deny that. it's silly that you can't admit do that better.
the controller thing i understand but even then not all games support controllers, even though i'd hope most do.
Position of your house is pretty much preference.. My computer is attached to my home entertainment center with a TV where I switch between my desktop setup to backing off onto my tv where I play games with friends through my PC on multiple controllers. For me, ease of use is for the Pc.. Its simple click and play, grab controllers and go...Blur, split Second, Sonic Sega Allstars, NBA 2k11, Vanguard Princess, Melty Blood, millenium knights vermillion, big bang beat, and lately lara craft guardians of light.. Once in a while we rock l4d1 custom maps split screen on the tv as well. Its all preference though. I also have several consoles hooked to the main house living room and we do the same.
that's cool, that works for you. lol that's not gonna work in my house though. i prefer my desktop not be in the living room. so for me, ease of use is for the consoles.
[QUOTE="Kinthalis"]
[QUOTE="dontshackzmii"]
Some hermits wont admit to anything . Consoles boot faster and last longer and are easyer to use that is and always will be the advatage of console gaming .
dontshackzmii
My SSD i7 PC would beg to differ. It's about the same as an xbox 360 in boot time. Except that my PC is always on and goes to sleep when not in use. That means it BEATS out any console in boot time (2 seconds) 99% off the time. I can come home from work and be playing Team Fortress 2 in exactly 5 seconds flat.
I'd rather spend my time playing than looking for my DVD/waiting for a console to boot/waiting for a long loading time/waiting for updates to download (on my PC updates are done automatically in the background - I haven't had to update a game in 5 years!).
um no its still slower then my wii . SSD is a huge waste of money .
Huge waste of money? Obviously, you haven't opened heavy application...
Just with Firefox with 5-6 tabs open I can see a difference.
[QUOTE="dontshackzmii"]
[QUOTE="Kinthalis"]
My SSD i7 PC would beg to differ. It's about the same as an xbox 360 in boot time. Except that my PC is always on and goes to sleep when not in use. That means it BEATS out any console in boot time (2 seconds) 99% off the time. I can come home from work and be playing Team Fortress 2 in exactly 5 seconds flat.
I'd rather spend my time playing than looking for my DVD/waiting for a console to boot/waiting for a long loading time/waiting for updates to download (on my PC updates are done automatically in the background - I haven't had to update a game in 5 years!).
Bebi_vegeta
um no its still slower then my wii . SSD is a huge waste of money .
Huge waste of money? Obviously, you haven't opened heavy application...
Just with Firefox with 5-6 tabs open I can see a difference.
i am not spending 10 times the money just to apps to load a bit faster .
[QUOTE="jedikevin2"]
[QUOTE="lazerface216"]
yeah but that situation doesn't work for a lot of people, like myself. my gaming setup (hdtv, surround sound, 360 & ps3) is downstairs in the living room while my pc is upstairs in the study room. i mean, if you have your pc near an HDTV that works, lol but not everyone is setup like that. i'm not going to move my pc into my living room just so i can game from my couch, it's soooo much easier to do with consoles, you can't deny that. it's silly that you can't admit do that better.
the controller thing i understand but even then not all games support controllers, even though i'd hope most do.
lazerface216
Position of your house is pretty much preference.. My computer is attached to my home entertainment center with a TV where I switch between my desktop setup to backing off onto my tv where I play games with friends through my PC on multiple controllers. For me, ease of use is for the Pc.. Its simple click and play, grab controllers and go...Blur, split Second, Sonic Sega Allstars, NBA 2k11, Vanguard Princess, Melty Blood, millenium knights vermillion, big bang beat, and lately lara craft guardians of light.. Once in a while we rock l4d1 custom maps split screen on the tv as well. Its all preference though. I also have several consoles hooked to the main house living room and we do the same.
that's cool, that works for you. lol that's not gonna work in my house though. i prefer my desktop not be in the living room. so for me, ease of use is for the consoles.
But in the end,like you say it´s just preference,a personal choice,wich doesn´t mean it can´t be done,so the point still stands. ;)[QUOTE="Bebi_vegeta"]
[QUOTE="dontshackzmii"]
um no its still slower then my wii . SSD is a huge waste of money .
dontshackzmii
Huge waste of money? Obviously, you haven't opened heavy application...
Just with Firefox with 5-6 tabs open I can see a difference.
i am not spending 10 times the money just to apps to load a bit faster .
Hard drive and CD/DVD drives are the 2 slowest things in a computer if I remember correctly. SSD is a huge improvement in every way possible for hard drives. Its still very new technology in the market and will be a few years before prices/storage regulate themselves. Its not even a bit faster, its a heck of a lot faster.
[QUOTE="lazerface216"]
[QUOTE="jedikevin2"]
Position of your house is pretty much preference.. My computer is attached to my home entertainment center with a TV where I switch between my desktop setup to backing off onto my tv where I play games with friends through my PC on multiple controllers. For me, ease of use is for the Pc.. Its simple click and play, grab controllers and go...Blur, split Second, Sonic Sega Allstars, NBA 2k11, Vanguard Princess, Melty Blood, millenium knights vermillion, big bang beat, and lately lara craft guardians of light.. Once in a while we rock l4d1 custom maps split screen on the tv as well. Its all preference though. I also have several consoles hooked to the main house living room and we do the same.
Arach666
that's cool, that works for you. lol that's not gonna work in my house though. i prefer my desktop not be in the living room. so for me, ease of use is for the consoles.
But in the end,like you say it´s just preference,a personal choice,wich doesn´t mean it can´t be done,so the point still stands. ;)i agree, i just believe that consoles do the whole "gaming from your couch on an HDTV" thing better and more conveniently than PCs.
[QUOTE="Bebi_vegeta"]
[QUOTE="dontshackzmii"]
um no its still slower then my wii . SSD is a huge waste of money .
dontshackzmii
Huge waste of money? Obviously, you haven't opened heavy application...
Just with Firefox with 5-6 tabs open I can see a difference.
i am not spending 10 times the money just to apps to load a bit faster .
I think that you are operating under the erroneous assumption that any one here cares about your opinion on ssd drives. No one is telling you to spend money on them, and no one cares about you misinformed opinion on them. I simply pointed out how they allow my pc to cold boot into a game faster than an xbox. Faster than a wii too. I own one, so I know.[QUOTE="Bebi_vegeta"]
[QUOTE="dontshackzmii"]
um no its still slower then my wii . SSD is a huge waste of money .
dontshackzmii
Huge waste of money? Obviously, you haven't opened heavy application...
Just with Firefox with 5-6 tabs open I can see a difference.
i am not spending 10 times the money just to apps to load a bit faster .
Well it's alot faster... SSD have gotten better ...
If you're wanting faster startup time from your PC without investing in an SSD, put it into sleep or maybe hibernate instead of shutting it down. :)
I don't see why Sleep Mode for a PC would be considered a handicap. When my PC is on Sleep Mode, for all practical purposes, it's turned off. No power light, no blinking lights, no hard drive light, no spinning fans, no graphics card activity according to the monitor. The PC's dead quiet. But when I push the power button, it resumes right where I left off within a couple of seconds.
That better be sarcasm otherwise :lol:[QUOTE="anshul89"]
[QUOTE="caseypayne69"]
Another grip I have with pc gaming.
I just bought a new desktop yesterday. A HP with quad processors, and an AMD 840 something and 4 gbs of DDR3 and intergrated graphics card. I bet I can't play jack on it. Downloading Crysis for a test. Best I can't even run it. That is were PC gaming is a joke, This is a $650 dollar setup. And yet probably can't play s......
psn8214
:lol::lol::lol:
Oh god, I LOL'ed.
Took a look at his profile and he doesn't seem to be a pc gamer - so that wasn't sarcasm :lol::lol::lol:[QUOTE="psn8214"]
[QUOTE="anshul89"]That better be sarcasm otherwise :lol:
anshul89
:lol::lol::lol:
Oh god, I LOL'ed.
Took a look at his profile and he doesn't seem to be a pc gamer - so that wasn't sarcasm :lol::lol::lol: Sounds like he needs a graphics card and he'll be set to run the game. tutt3r has a point there, more games need it nowadays though.Run 2 hard drives in RAID 0 and you will get a nice boost in speed.
Hakkai007
or buy a momentus XT and have better boot times than a 10k RPM velociraptor. hybrid drives are affordable and fast.
gameplay,Bayonetta, Vanquish, SMG2 all have better gameplay than any PC game last year, consoles the vast majority of the time has better gameplay
attracts the cream of Japanese developers
attracts significantly more investment in general i.e bigger budgets
and as a result of this attracts more talent, being where the money is and so can afford the best
being a console, developers have complete control over the absolute final look of the game, (which is never possible on PC) so in most cases console games have a greater level of polish than PC games
of course im playing devils advocate here I like PC gaming, but the original question was a stupid one
The problem with that is that you can get a 360 for the price of just an SSD of a decent size (I don't consider under 100 GB decent size btw).[QUOTE="Guppy507"][QUOTE="Kinthalis"]
My SSD i7 PC would beg to differ. It's about the same as an xbox 360 in boot time. Except that my PC is always on and goes to sleep when not in use. That means it BEATS out any console in boot time (2 seconds) 99% off the time. I can come home from work and be playing Team Fortress 2 in exactly 5 seconds flat.
I'd rather spend my time playing than looking for my DVD/waiting for a console to boot/waiting for a long loading time/waiting for updates to download (on my PC updates are done automatically in the background - I haven't had to update a game in 5 years!).
edidili
You're right, ssd are too much costly. The point still stands though. I never turn my computer off so the booting time is way faster than that of a console.
Could the same not be said by somebody who never turns his/her console off?
Another grip I have with pc gaming.
I just bought a new desktop yesterday. A HP with quad processors, and an AMD 840 something and 4 gbs of DDR3 and intergrated graphics card. I bet I can't play jack on it. Downloading Crysis for a test. Best I can't even run it. That is were PC gaming is a joke, This is a $650 dollar setup. And yet probably can't play s......
caseypayne69
You buy a overpriced pre assembled PC from a **** manufacturer like HP and than are coming here to complain is performs like ****?
I you gave me the 600 buck I would have build you a so much better PC lol. Hell you can even buy the parts and let someone else assemble it. Will only cost you about 50$ more but will save the hassle.
You are a noob :D
No need for upgrades.
IMO a wider selection of "better" games. Even though I am at the moment a PC strictly gamer there havnt been many games that have come out that I liked the look of. Gimme bulletstorm though ;)
The ability to be more social; spilt screen.
Eaiser on a general basis to take round a friends house and link up.
also on the 1st reply to this thread about milking... we should just forget the nvida 9000 series and the 400 series shall we ;)
[QUOTE="MFDOOM1983"]Pc has split screen mp and the only console that's plug n play this gen is wii.
The question isn't what console's have that PC doesn't, it's what can consoles do BETTER, and Split-Screen IS better on consoles.
How is split screen better on consoles? even if there would be any pc games with splitscreen worth mentioning , you dont need to share one keyboard for input for both players , each player has his own gamepad[QUOTE="MFDOOM1983"][QUOTE="xYamatox"]How is split screen better on consoles? even if there would be any pc games with splitscreen worth mentioning , you dont need to share one keyboard for input for both players , each player has his own gamepadTo be fair, a PC has multiple USB ports, so that wouldn't be a problem. The problem isn't technical, it's marketing - is a split-screen feature going to drive sales on PC? If not, why spend the extra money to support it for a few people?The question isn't what console's have that PC doesn't, it's what can consoles do BETTER, and Split-Screen IS better on consoles.
AmnesiaHaze
[QUOTE="MFDOOM1983"][QUOTE="xYamatox"]How is split screen better on consoles? even if there would be any pc games with splitscreen worth mentioning , you dont need to share one keyboard for input for both players , each player has his own gamepadThe question isn't what console's have that PC doesn't, it's what can consoles do BETTER, and Split-Screen IS better on consoles.
AmnesiaHaze
So what do you say when follks each get their own controllers on splitscreen multiplayer for pc then? I know I use multiple controllers so everyone gets a controller so a bit confused on your statement.
Splitscreen is not "better" on consoles in this context... You would have to compare games not hardware to see a difference as consoles have more games that support splitscreen.
even if there would be any pc games with splitscreen worth mentioning , you dont need to share one keyboard for input for both players , each player has his own gamepadTo be fair, a PC has multiple USB ports, so that wouldn't be a problem. The problem isn't technical, it's marketing - is a split-screen feature going to drive sales on PC? If not, why spend the extra money to support it for a few people?[QUOTE="AmnesiaHaze"][QUOTE="MFDOOM1983"] How is split screen better on consoles? lowe0
Well since PC is so open, a developer can always find people who will enjoy it. Drive sales is more a console mentality in this regard.
A platform is the sum of its parts, including the software available for it.Splitscreen is not "better" on consoles in this context... You would have to compare games not hardware to see a difference as consoles have more games that support splitscreen.
jedikevin2
[QUOTE="jedikevin2"]A platform is the sum of its parts, including the software available for it.Splitscreen is not "better" on consoles in this context... You would have to compare games not hardware to see a difference as consoles have more games that support splitscreen.
lowe0
And I know that? Remember what the orginal member just wrote and what I was responding to.
[QUOTE="anshul89"]Took a look at his profile and he doesn't seem to be a pc gamer - so that wasn't sarcasm :lol::lol::lol: Sounds like he needs a graphics card and he'll be set to run the game. tutt3r has a point there, more games need it nowadays though. My wife purchased it. I was wanting sOmething with at least an I3 and stand alone graphics card. It's a strong pc, running lots at once with no hassle just a weak graphics card. Since it is integrated, do I have the ability down the road to purchase a graphics card and install or is there more to it since the current setup is integrated?[QUOTE="psn8214"]
:lol::lol::lol:
Oh god, I LOL'ed.
mitu123
[QUOTE="caseypayne69"]
Another grip I have with pc gaming.
I just bought a new desktop yesterday. A HP with quad processors, and an AMD 840 something and 4 gbs of DDR3 and intergrated graphics card. I bet I can't play jack on it. Downloading Crysis for a test. Best I can't even run it. That is were PC gaming is a joke, This is a $650 dollar setup. And yet probably can't play s......
Fusiondonut
You buy a overpriced pre assembled PC from a **** manufacturer like HP and than are coming here to complain is performs like ****?
I you gave me the 600 buck I would have build you a so much better PC lol. Hell you can even buy the parts and let someone else assemble it. Will only cost you about 50$ more but will save the hassle.
You are a noob :D
That's not nice, and you weren't aware Of all the details. I also have a $2,000 HP Elite book for work. An HP Mini, and a Dell laptop with a broken screen. My laptop has an i5 and I bElieve it is more powerful than my home desktop but oh well.[QUOTE="mitu123"][QUOTE="anshul89"]Took a look at his profile and he doesn't seem to be a pc gamer - so that wasn't sarcasm :lol::lol::lol:Sounds like he needs a graphics card and he'll be set to run the game. tutt3r has a point there, more games need it nowadays though. My wife purchased it. I was wanting sOmething with at least an I3 and stand alone graphics card. It's a strong pc, running lots at once with no hassle just a weak graphics card. Since it is integrated, do I have the ability down the road to purchase a graphics card and install or is there more to it since the current setup is integrated? Yes, there are tons of graphics cards to choose from to install, integrated has no affect on it, I recommend a mid range one for gaming within a budget.caseypayne69
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment