The results of lots of swearing and eye-straining
If I didn't pussy out near the end, I could've shaved a few more seconds.
This combo is too damn hard but so addicting.
If I didn't pussy out near the end, I could've shaved a few more seconds.
This combo is too damn hard but so addicting.
Doing this setting helped so much. There is now almost 0 perceived delay between my inputs and what I see on screen. In fact, it helped me so much that I've increased the force feedback from 60% to 80% and it feels perfectly natural now that I'm not fighting against what the car did 1/3 of a second ago. However, this doesn't help the fact that the F40 is still an absolute bitch to drive (which I guess is expected of an 80s supercar).
The directory to get to the dx11.ini is /steamapps/common/assettocorsa/system/cfg/dx11.ini
Change MAXIMUM_FRAME_LATENCY=1. In game, attempt to play with VSync off. If you play on your TV, check the manual and see if you can enable a "game mode" that reduces post processing and reduces visual delay.
The game feels so much more responsive and better because of this.
Last edited by Scatter, .
Okay, well I fixed some of the snap-oversteer issue by lowering the force feedback force from 75% to 65%.
The DFP is too slow to react to quick changes and at times, I was fighting the force feedback to correct a skid, only to find that the force feedback is preventing me from correcting my overcorrections fast enough. Now that I lowered the force feedback, I can correct much quicker and the wheel feels more communicative (too much FFB made the wheel feel more like an on-off switch).
However, the weight transfer in this game still feels a tad overexaggerated. By how much I don't know, but I wish I had a faster, more modern wheel to test it out.
EDIT: It's either the weight transfer, or the suspension systems are more temperamental than a corgi that was denied a treat.
The DFP is too slow to react to quick changes and at times, I was fighting the force feedback to correct a skid, only to find that the force feedback is preventing me from correcting my overcorrections fast enough. Now that I lowered the force feedback, I can correct much quicker and the wheel feels more communicative (too much FFB made the wheel feel more like an on-off switch).
However, the weight transfer in this game still feels a tad overexaggerated. By how much I don't know, but I wish I had a faster, more modern wheel to test it out.
EDIT: It's either the weight transfer, or the suspension systems are more temperamental than a corgi that was denied a treat.
Last edited by Scatter, .
Not sure about graphics. I get high track detail when I set it to high with 16X AF, 4X AA, (GPU uses in-game application settings) and shadows to maximum, but the performance hit is too much. FOV has a lot to do with it too and too high a FOV ruins the details (I'm comfortable with 60-65 degrees of FOV at 1080P).
I drive the DFP like you do. Kerb effects 100%, all other effects off. No in-game damping or filter, 70% in-game strength. This is the only racing game where I feel that the wheel is not fast enough to correct the car, so I have to forcibly countersteer. Sometimes I countersteer too quickly and cause the car to snap in the wrong direction. Finding the correct wheel settings helps a lot but...
I think you are right in that the cars snap-oversteer very violently. I know it's realistic that cars snap back and forth violently due to the suspension springing back to the opposite side, but the effect feels boosted in this game. Also, if you have tire wear on, the tires heat up unrealistically quickly making the car hard to handle after a lap or two of aggressive driving.
This feeling translates to all cars. It feels more natural for race cars because those cars are typically unforgiving, but the road cars share the same ultra-violent snap-oversteer and quickly deteriorating tires.
Of course this game is in Alpha and for an Alpha it feels pretty good. I hope they address these issues soon.
That isn't really the biggest problem in this case. That particular SLS in GT6 has the overtones of a 6-cylinder engine rather than an 8-cylinder engine.
So when it revs out to the top of its range, the pitch is more in line with something like http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2kVwpY1Ofs with much more tinniness. It's really obvious that it has a 6-cylinder engine pitch...
For reference here's the GT6 SLS GT3 again... http://youtu.be/f4w17uKTOQw.
Not at all like a V8... It bothers me that they got something as simple as the pitch and overtones wrong because each engine type has such a unique and easily identifiable sound.
Last edited by Scatter, .
The cars still seem to sound like vacuums... which is disappointing because I thought they were on their way to improve car sounds.
The rest looks alright though. Shame that you're forced to go through a tutorial and buy the car you don't want.
The rest looks alright though. Shame that you're forced to go through a tutorial and buy the car you don't want.
I had a shot at GT6 at the Nissan booth in the LA Auto Show. I was allowed to back out of the game and configure the T500RS they had there. Set the Steering mode to simulation, Force Feedback to 3. Turned all assists off in game.
Raced the N24 GTR around Matterhorn. Car felt pretty weighty and less on-rails than GT5. Definitely a step forward for the simulation accuracy.
However I hated the steering and force feedback with a passion. There was a large center force feedback deadzone on BOTH the wheels I used. This made it hard to place the car exactly where I wanted it because I couldn't feel where it went. It also made correcting very small slides impossible because with the steering wheel towards the center, I can't feel when the car lets go until it's too late, then the T500RS's massive force feedback kicks in at the wrong time (because the center force feedback deadzone was so annoyingly large).
I can't tell if it's the game, or the T500RS, or possibly even the TV lag. All I know is that my Driving Force Pro felt much more communicative.
Raced the N24 GTR around Matterhorn. Car felt pretty weighty and less on-rails than GT5. Definitely a step forward for the simulation accuracy.
However I hated the steering and force feedback with a passion. There was a large center force feedback deadzone on BOTH the wheels I used. This made it hard to place the car exactly where I wanted it because I couldn't feel where it went. It also made correcting very small slides impossible because with the steering wheel towards the center, I can't feel when the car lets go until it's too late, then the T500RS's massive force feedback kicks in at the wrong time (because the center force feedback deadzone was so annoyingly large).
I can't tell if it's the game, or the T500RS, or possibly even the TV lag. All I know is that my Driving Force Pro felt much more communicative.
So wait a minute. The setup on the 370Z was stock right? If that's the case, visually the body roll the car is going through is way overexaggerated. It litterally looks like the wheel is rubbing the fender well on cornering and when braking hard (I didn't even know a 370z could squat that low.)
Orange County? As in Southern California Orange County? I'm interested.
TVs, usually lower end flatscreen LCDs have a pretty high input lag AND response time compared to PC monitors.
Response time does not equal input lag. Response time is the LCD's ability to change from black, to white, to black again (or grey to grey). Higher response times causes things like ghosting.
Input lag is how long it takes for the TV to display an image after given info about it. TVs usually process the image before you see it. Examples are sharpening, color, 120hz conversion, smoothing, etc. This processing usually contributes to input lag.
When you combine high response time with high input lag, the game feels laggy and unresponsive. This is why some competitive FPS players (and even competitive Super Smash Bros players) like playing on CRT TVs or CRT monitors because they exhibit really low input lag and response times compared to even the highest end flat screen TVs.
Luckily, on a lot of TVs, there is a "Game Mode" that you can activate to lower the input lag by skipping the processing of the image the TV has to do. I use it when playing Gran Turismo 5, and it works pretty well.
Hell my Panasonic 32" LCD TV (TC-L32U3) doesn't even list the response time in its specs, but there is a "Game Mode" in there and it's perceptibly better playing with that on than with it off.
I don't think you need to worry about the apparent lag you see. It's probably attributed to the TV and I doubt it was put in a "Game Mode" that is used to lower input lag for playing games and such.
Though if you really want to make sure the massive input lag isn't coming from the game, test it on a high end PC monitor with very little input lag and response time. Also test with V-sync off and use a powerful single GPU (more info about input lag in this article: http://www.anandtech.com/show/2803)
Response time does not equal input lag. Response time is the LCD's ability to change from black, to white, to black again (or grey to grey). Higher response times causes things like ghosting.
Input lag is how long it takes for the TV to display an image after given info about it. TVs usually process the image before you see it. Examples are sharpening, color, 120hz conversion, smoothing, etc. This processing usually contributes to input lag.
When you combine high response time with high input lag, the game feels laggy and unresponsive. This is why some competitive FPS players (and even competitive Super Smash Bros players) like playing on CRT TVs or CRT monitors because they exhibit really low input lag and response times compared to even the highest end flat screen TVs.
Luckily, on a lot of TVs, there is a "Game Mode" that you can activate to lower the input lag by skipping the processing of the image the TV has to do. I use it when playing Gran Turismo 5, and it works pretty well.
Hell my Panasonic 32" LCD TV (TC-L32U3) doesn't even list the response time in its specs, but there is a "Game Mode" in there and it's perceptibly better playing with that on than with it off.
I don't think you need to worry about the apparent lag you see. It's probably attributed to the TV and I doubt it was put in a "Game Mode" that is used to lower input lag for playing games and such.
Though if you really want to make sure the massive input lag isn't coming from the game, test it on a high end PC monitor with very little input lag and response time. Also test with V-sync off and use a powerful single GPU (more info about input lag in this article: http://www.anandtech.com/show/2803)
Last edited by Scatter, .
Yes, if you want your programs or games to load faster, you want to put it on the SSD.
That being said, you can buy a 128 or 256 GB SSD that contains all of your programs and games, and then buy a larger 750 GB HDD for example, to store all of your pictures, movies, documents, etc.
Is it worth it? I say yes but there is a price to pay. For example, a 256 GB Crucial M4 costs about $220 here in the US. That's a lot of space to give up for the price, but I have a 750 GB portable HDD to store all the extra stuff I don't need to load fast.
However, seeing that you want more gaming performance, I would consider using that money on a better cpu/motherboard combo.
Last edited by Scatter, .
I'm in the same boat, debating whether to spend the $20 to get ARMA II for DayZ (it's on sale). Except my computer runs it pretty poorly and I'm not planning to upgrade my computer any time soon.
It seems like playing with other people is the best aspect of DayZ because it adds an element of uncertainty. You have no idea if you'll get killed. You might get lucky and run into a body full of loot. You might find some friendly people. You don't have a clue but you try your hardest to survive (and maybe amass some nice weapons).
Also, playing with friends is another aspect that adds or detracts to DayZ. If your friend is clueless, hilarity ensues while they screw themselves (or you) over trying to learn and fight their way through the world. If you have good team mates as friends, you can do some pretty amazing things together and greatly benefit each other.
However, DayZ is buggy. Zombies clip everywhere, they run too fast, they hit through objects, and in true ARMA fashion, it takes one or two seconds for them to respond to a gunshot.
But it is $20 right now, which is cheaper than a new game. If you did try it, it wouldn't hurt too much.
It seems like playing with other people is the best aspect of DayZ because it adds an element of uncertainty. You have no idea if you'll get killed. You might get lucky and run into a body full of loot. You might find some friendly people. You don't have a clue but you try your hardest to survive (and maybe amass some nice weapons).
Also, playing with friends is another aspect that adds or detracts to DayZ. If your friend is clueless, hilarity ensues while they screw themselves (or you) over trying to learn and fight their way through the world. If you have good team mates as friends, you can do some pretty amazing things together and greatly benefit each other.
However, DayZ is buggy. Zombies clip everywhere, they run too fast, they hit through objects, and in true ARMA fashion, it takes one or two seconds for them to respond to a gunshot.
But it is $20 right now, which is cheaper than a new game. If you did try it, it wouldn't hurt too much.
Yes, the Corsair is fine if you don't have too many things needed to be powered (like 4 drive bays or 4 hard drives or something).
Going off of Newegg prices here so bear with me (unless you're using Newegg as well).
An alternative to the Asus board is the ASRock B75 PRO3 LGA 1155 Intel B75. It's a little bit cheaper than your board and doesn't have Lucid Virtu (might be a deal breaker for you, but in my opinion and according to reviews about it, it doesn't work very well), but it has more SATA 6 GB ports and seems to be built a little bit better. Oh and it's ATX as opposed to micro ATX.
It's good if you have multiple hard drives (SSDs even) and want something built to last a little longer. It also boots very fast too.
An alternative for the Powercolor 7770 (seems to be about $130 on Newegg) can be the MSI R7770-PMD1GD5 Radeon HD 7770 GHz Edition or the HIS iCooler H777F1G2M Radeon HD 7770 GHz Edition. Reviews tend to favor the HIS. If you spend a little more money, I think you can get yourself a Radeon HD 6850. If you do that, you may want to upgrade your power supply.
Speaking of which this site is pretty useful for calculating how much power you need in your system. I don't know everything in your system so it's best for you to use it and figure it out. http://extreme.outervision.com/psucalculatorlite.jsp
An alternative to the Asus board is the ASRock B75 PRO3 LGA 1155 Intel B75. It's a little bit cheaper than your board and doesn't have Lucid Virtu (might be a deal breaker for you, but in my opinion and according to reviews about it, it doesn't work very well), but it has more SATA 6 GB ports and seems to be built a little bit better. Oh and it's ATX as opposed to micro ATX.
It's good if you have multiple hard drives (SSDs even) and want something built to last a little longer. It also boots very fast too.
An alternative for the Powercolor 7770 (seems to be about $130 on Newegg) can be the MSI R7770-PMD1GD5 Radeon HD 7770 GHz Edition or the HIS iCooler H777F1G2M Radeon HD 7770 GHz Edition. Reviews tend to favor the HIS. If you spend a little more money, I think you can get yourself a Radeon HD 6850. If you do that, you may want to upgrade your power supply.
Speaking of which this site is pretty useful for calculating how much power you need in your system. I don't know everything in your system so it's best for you to use it and figure it out. http://extreme.outervision.com/psucalculatorlite.jsp
Last edited by Scatter, .
That sucks about the PS3. The last thing that comes to mind is reflowing the board, but I doubt that can do anything about the temperatures (I don't know how hot it is where you live). Also, incorrect application of thermal paste or the thermal paste itself may be the problem. Finally, you might want to replace the thermal pads (the black squares) with something else. Maybe you can even try a 19 blade fan.
This page is dedicated to fixing PS3 overheating problems that plague the later fatter PS3s: http://www.squidoo.com/3-tips- ... m-models-cecha01-cechg01-
As for PC game incompatibility, it's a very rare issue.
For cooling. One fan in front and back will do the trick. If you have a vented side panel you can stick a fan there to cool the GPU.
If you're worried about the CPU overheating, you can get a new cooler for it. For example the Cooler Master Hyper 212 does much better than stock, and costs about $25 - $35. You get the benefit of running cooler (can overclock a bit if you want) and running with less noise.
As for upgrades, if you think your CPU isn't adequate, you might want a new CPU. But going the next generation up might require a new motherboard as well.
The GPU is where a good chunk of your gaming performance comes from, provided that your CPU is fast enough not to bottleneck the system. You probably want to spend more money here. Keep in mind that a more powerful GPU might require an upgraded power supply if your older power supply does not have the power to drive it. And make sure you pick a good power supply, because bad power supplies can wreak havoc on your entire system (pick a good one from Newegg for example, with a good amount of reviews).
Here is a best CPU for the money chart for July 2012 by Tom's Hardware: http://www.tomshardware.com/re ... eview-overclock,3106.html
Here's the GPU chart for July 2012 by the same guys: http://www.tomshardware.com/re ... ics-card-review,3107.html
This page is dedicated to fixing PS3 overheating problems that plague the later fatter PS3s: http://www.squidoo.com/3-tips- ... m-models-cecha01-cechg01-
As for PC game incompatibility, it's a very rare issue.
For cooling. One fan in front and back will do the trick. If you have a vented side panel you can stick a fan there to cool the GPU.
If you're worried about the CPU overheating, you can get a new cooler for it. For example the Cooler Master Hyper 212 does much better than stock, and costs about $25 - $35. You get the benefit of running cooler (can overclock a bit if you want) and running with less noise.
As for upgrades, if you think your CPU isn't adequate, you might want a new CPU. But going the next generation up might require a new motherboard as well.
The GPU is where a good chunk of your gaming performance comes from, provided that your CPU is fast enough not to bottleneck the system. You probably want to spend more money here. Keep in mind that a more powerful GPU might require an upgraded power supply if your older power supply does not have the power to drive it. And make sure you pick a good power supply, because bad power supplies can wreak havoc on your entire system (pick a good one from Newegg for example, with a good amount of reviews).
Here is a best CPU for the money chart for July 2012 by Tom's Hardware: http://www.tomshardware.com/re ... eview-overclock,3106.html
Here's the GPU chart for July 2012 by the same guys: http://www.tomshardware.com/re ... ics-card-review,3107.html
Last edited by Scatter, .
Yes, it's all preference in the end. Glad that gif brought laughs, it's a keeper!
Yes please.
As for the PS3. I hope it gets fixed. I miss my Gran Turismo 5 and I'm sure you will miss some nice games on it too (if your PS3 dies). Also, I'm assuming you have the fat PS3. I learned that the design of that PS3 (especially later on) was pretty bad (cheap thermal paste, bad fans to cut costs probably) which lead to the console failing after a few years (3 or 4 or so). My PS3 kept overheating which eventually burnt the motherboard out. I hope your PS3 hasn't overheated as often and you caught that early enough to change the thermal paste and keep the ps3 cooler.
Jesus Bose, that's pretty harsh. Ok, I should be at fault for overgeneralizing a lot of the points or making very stupid ones (yeah that productivity thing was a dumb one. I just woke up when I wrote that. Sue me.)
Maybe I should've been more specific then.
-The PC is more expensive than the console. But if you plan on buying a lot of games or doing something productive, then yes it is cheaper.
-Component failure is still a pain in the ass. How MUCH of a pain it is depends on the user. To me it's no big deal because I know how to work with a PC. To others it can become a convenience issue or challenge TO THEM. I owned a PS3 and I have fixed it on numerous occasions due to overheating caused by the thermal compound flaking out. That can be fixed. The motherboard fried later on. That couldn't be fixed because you can't transfer the GPU and CPU to another one (obviously) and I lost all my data because the PS3 prevents hard drives from being transfered to another PS3 without formatting it first (stupid on my part because I should've backed up often). So in my case and probably Boris' (I don't know him personally so I'm going out on a limb here) a PC is better because we ARE capable of working the innards of a PC. If he wasn't capable (and again, I don't know) well then that's a negative point.
-Viruses: Nobody is perfect. No system is secure. Chances of getting one depend on how smart the user is. It's still a point against a PC. How bad this may seem is up to the user. To me, hardly an issue at all. I don't run an anti-virus. I don't use Internet Exploder (though at this point it has gotten better). I don't mess with a risky click. To Boris, I don't know.
-The internet, porn, productivity argument. Forget it. It was stupid anyways.
-System slowdown. Again, I don't know Boris. Maybe he's aware of it. Maybe he isn't. I know people who clutter their computer full of crap and wonder why it takes forever for it to search folders or load programs. A few trips to the recycle bin and uninstaller along with a defrag speeds up the system noticeably for those people. Also, if I had an SSD, then I wouldn't have to worry about defragging because the read speeds and access times on those things are insanely high and defragging would just lower the life cycle of the SSD. Not everyone knows this and I'm not trolling. I actually clean out the crap off of my dad's and brother's PCs because they don't know shit. And guess how my dad's first laptop died? Clogged full of dust and burnt out. But I guess consoles do that too. It's still a point to bring up regardless and with lots more vents and holes in a typical PC case to get the air flowing, you bet it's a good idea to keep those clean.
-Ease of use. Game compatibility is an issue sometimes. Yes developers do whatever is feasible to them. But they aren't going to get every possible combination of PC set up at once. Still, it's a rare issue on my side so not a big deal to ME. But maybe not on other peoples' sides. I don't know. A console's hardware is pretty constant so it's harder to run into incompatibilities or performance issue but yes, some developers manage to screw that up.
-Updates. Actually both PCs and consoles have these (I forgot damnit.). Yes they're good, yes they help. No, that doesn't make them any less annoying. You know what, drop this argument. It wasn't great to begin with and I was probably nitpicking.
-Piracy: Yes it happens no matter what. That doesn't help the fact that the developers screwed everyone over (console or PC, though I'm not sure what developers do on the console front) to protect their shit. For the consoles however, modifying your console to play pirated games is riskier than just downloading the game and a few cracks and whatnot so it's not as popular on the console front. With the console sector taken care of the developers then turn their attention to the PC sector and then screw us over more because apparently they think everyone can and will pirate and they think that everyone WANTS to buy their game. People pirate shit they DON'T want too so whatever potential customer they thought they had doesn't exist. But enough of the piracy debate. In the end it screws everyone over, the PC more so than the console. And with new (supposed) developments to the consoles to prevent people from playing used copies, everything is going to shit.
Lastly I want to say this. I'm a PC person. But I'm trying to offer Boris as many perspectives into this as possible by providing as many views into this issue, good or bad, as possible. I want him to make an informed decision. Maybe I should've asked him how much he VALUES each of the positives or negatives. Maybe he can value those things himself. I just gave him all the information I could think of within 20 minutes of waking up from my 7 hour slumber. Yes the PC is superior to ME, to YOU, but maybe convenience of a console is more valuable to OTHERS. Maybe these people are technologically impaired or afraid to touch the innards of a PC because they THINK they are incapable of doing it themselves. Or whatever.
I hate threads like these. Everywhere. People try to help each other and it turns into a console vs. PC debate. I don't hate you Boris. In fact I'm glad to help. I just hate how things like this become debates everywhere.
Bose, I don't hate you either, but I hope you realize that I'm trying to help by listing the goods and bads of a PC. It isn't sunshine and rainbows over here.
As for the PC vs console debate:
Maybe I should've been more specific then.
-The PC is more expensive than the console. But if you plan on buying a lot of games or doing something productive, then yes it is cheaper.
-Component failure is still a pain in the ass. How MUCH of a pain it is depends on the user. To me it's no big deal because I know how to work with a PC. To others it can become a convenience issue or challenge TO THEM. I owned a PS3 and I have fixed it on numerous occasions due to overheating caused by the thermal compound flaking out. That can be fixed. The motherboard fried later on. That couldn't be fixed because you can't transfer the GPU and CPU to another one (obviously) and I lost all my data because the PS3 prevents hard drives from being transfered to another PS3 without formatting it first (stupid on my part because I should've backed up often). So in my case and probably Boris' (I don't know him personally so I'm going out on a limb here) a PC is better because we ARE capable of working the innards of a PC. If he wasn't capable (and again, I don't know) well then that's a negative point.
-Viruses: Nobody is perfect. No system is secure. Chances of getting one depend on how smart the user is. It's still a point against a PC. How bad this may seem is up to the user. To me, hardly an issue at all. I don't run an anti-virus. I don't use Internet Exploder (though at this point it has gotten better). I don't mess with a risky click. To Boris, I don't know.
-The internet, porn, productivity argument. Forget it. It was stupid anyways.
-System slowdown. Again, I don't know Boris. Maybe he's aware of it. Maybe he isn't. I know people who clutter their computer full of crap and wonder why it takes forever for it to search folders or load programs. A few trips to the recycle bin and uninstaller along with a defrag speeds up the system noticeably for those people. Also, if I had an SSD, then I wouldn't have to worry about defragging because the read speeds and access times on those things are insanely high and defragging would just lower the life cycle of the SSD. Not everyone knows this and I'm not trolling. I actually clean out the crap off of my dad's and brother's PCs because they don't know shit. And guess how my dad's first laptop died? Clogged full of dust and burnt out. But I guess consoles do that too. It's still a point to bring up regardless and with lots more vents and holes in a typical PC case to get the air flowing, you bet it's a good idea to keep those clean.
-Ease of use. Game compatibility is an issue sometimes. Yes developers do whatever is feasible to them. But they aren't going to get every possible combination of PC set up at once. Still, it's a rare issue on my side so not a big deal to ME. But maybe not on other peoples' sides. I don't know. A console's hardware is pretty constant so it's harder to run into incompatibilities or performance issue but yes, some developers manage to screw that up.
-Updates. Actually both PCs and consoles have these (I forgot damnit.). Yes they're good, yes they help. No, that doesn't make them any less annoying. You know what, drop this argument. It wasn't great to begin with and I was probably nitpicking.
-Piracy: Yes it happens no matter what. That doesn't help the fact that the developers screwed everyone over (console or PC, though I'm not sure what developers do on the console front) to protect their shit. For the consoles however, modifying your console to play pirated games is riskier than just downloading the game and a few cracks and whatnot so it's not as popular on the console front. With the console sector taken care of the developers then turn their attention to the PC sector and then screw us over more because apparently they think everyone can and will pirate and they think that everyone WANTS to buy their game. People pirate shit they DON'T want too so whatever potential customer they thought they had doesn't exist. But enough of the piracy debate. In the end it screws everyone over, the PC more so than the console. And with new (supposed) developments to the consoles to prevent people from playing used copies, everything is going to shit.
Lastly I want to say this. I'm a PC person. But I'm trying to offer Boris as many perspectives into this as possible by providing as many views into this issue, good or bad, as possible. I want him to make an informed decision. Maybe I should've asked him how much he VALUES each of the positives or negatives. Maybe he can value those things himself. I just gave him all the information I could think of within 20 minutes of waking up from my 7 hour slumber. Yes the PC is superior to ME, to YOU, but maybe convenience of a console is more valuable to OTHERS. Maybe these people are technologically impaired or afraid to touch the innards of a PC because they THINK they are incapable of doing it themselves. Or whatever.
I hate threads like these. Everywhere. People try to help each other and it turns into a console vs. PC debate. I don't hate you Boris. In fact I'm glad to help. I just hate how things like this become debates everywhere.
Bose, I don't hate you either, but I hope you realize that I'm trying to help by listing the goods and bads of a PC. It isn't sunshine and rainbows over here.
As for the PC vs console debate:
Last edited by Scatter, .
Don't forget upgradable heatsinks, all-in-one coolers, and even cases turned 90 degrees to facilitate better cooling (a la Silverstone Raven and Silverstone FT02)
One of the only things I can think of on the top of my head right now is the Steam Sales.
Oh and Amazon is having a nice sale too.
Here's a pretty comprehensive list for the Steam Sale. There is a link to the cheaper Amazon options within the list.
http://www.reddit.com/r/gaming ... ay_04_20120715_cities_xl/
Another thing is that if you buy a fast computer, you could use it's processing power to do CAD, 3D, batch photo editing, or video editing and effects pretty quickly. If that's your sort of thing.
Lastly, emulators. I didn't think I would play older games but I was interested in Chrono Trigger since I heard so many good things about it. I've been hooked for a while now.
Oh yeah, I forgot. Mods. Minecraft mods. DayZ for Arma II. 'Nuff said.
A new computer though, is obviously more expensive than a console. That doesn't mean going cheap is terrible though because Tom's Hardware has a system building marathon every quarter that shows what you can build for budgets ranging from $500 to $2000. And yes they benchmark them. Considering that the PS3 and Xbox run Battlefield 3 at 1280 x 720 at some lowered setting and this quarter's $500 PC can do 1280 x 1024 at Ultra quality running near 60 fps, I think a cheap PC can do really well in fact.
http://www.tomshardware.com/re ... w-To,4/Build-Your-Own,16/
Now I'll make some arguments against the PC.
- It is more expensive than a console.
- You can't really sell your games back. (edit: Kid222 says the EU might have allowed software reselling, lucky you. The US, nope.)
- Component failure is a pain in the ass to track down, though in that regard, if something fails on the console, you don't have many options.
- Potential for viruses and malware.
- Internet. Porn. Youtube. Your productivity goes way down.
- System slowdown. Eventually your computer slows down due to things like fragmented hard drives, additional clutter, dust preventing your computer from going faster without torching itself, etc. Got to keep it maintained like a car.
- Ease of use due to component difference over many PCs. Sometimes games don't work and you don't know why. Some games are hard to configure to run smoothly. Some games run better on a specific brand of hardware than others, and sometimes on different firmware despite the same brand.
- Updates. Windows updates, firmware updates. A sometimes necessary annoyance.
- I can't think of anything else.
Oh and here's a grey area: Piracy. It's good for some people in the sense that they can try before they buy (after all, who wants to spend a good chunk of money on a game they don't like?). It's also good for others in the sense that they don't have to pay a cent to play (shame on you if you do that). Piracy however drives these bigger companies insane in that they will screw over everyone to make sure that you play a legitimate copy (despite pirates circumventing those methods). A few examples are Diablo 3 and Assassins Creed (and a few others) requiring persistent Internet connection to play fully. Also some games are console only due to fear of piracy. One great example is Red Dead Redemption. Really really good game, but it's sad that it's a console exclusive.
Oh and Amazon is having a nice sale too.
Here's a pretty comprehensive list for the Steam Sale. There is a link to the cheaper Amazon options within the list.
http://www.reddit.com/r/gaming ... ay_04_20120715_cities_xl/
Another thing is that if you buy a fast computer, you could use it's processing power to do CAD, 3D, batch photo editing, or video editing and effects pretty quickly. If that's your sort of thing.
Lastly, emulators. I didn't think I would play older games but I was interested in Chrono Trigger since I heard so many good things about it. I've been hooked for a while now.
Oh yeah, I forgot. Mods. Minecraft mods. DayZ for Arma II. 'Nuff said.
A new computer though, is obviously more expensive than a console. That doesn't mean going cheap is terrible though because Tom's Hardware has a system building marathon every quarter that shows what you can build for budgets ranging from $500 to $2000. And yes they benchmark them. Considering that the PS3 and Xbox run Battlefield 3 at 1280 x 720 at some lowered setting and this quarter's $500 PC can do 1280 x 1024 at Ultra quality running near 60 fps, I think a cheap PC can do really well in fact.
http://www.tomshardware.com/re ... w-To,4/Build-Your-Own,16/
Now I'll make some arguments against the PC.
- It is more expensive than a console.
- You can't really sell your games back. (edit: Kid222 says the EU might have allowed software reselling, lucky you. The US, nope.)
- Component failure is a pain in the ass to track down, though in that regard, if something fails on the console, you don't have many options.
- Potential for viruses and malware.
- Internet. Porn. Youtube. Your productivity goes way down.
- System slowdown. Eventually your computer slows down due to things like fragmented hard drives, additional clutter, dust preventing your computer from going faster without torching itself, etc. Got to keep it maintained like a car.
- Ease of use due to component difference over many PCs. Sometimes games don't work and you don't know why. Some games are hard to configure to run smoothly. Some games run better on a specific brand of hardware than others, and sometimes on different firmware despite the same brand.
- Updates. Windows updates, firmware updates. A sometimes necessary annoyance.
- I can't think of anything else.
Oh and here's a grey area: Piracy. It's good for some people in the sense that they can try before they buy (after all, who wants to spend a good chunk of money on a game they don't like?). It's also good for others in the sense that they don't have to pay a cent to play (shame on you if you do that). Piracy however drives these bigger companies insane in that they will screw over everyone to make sure that you play a legitimate copy (despite pirates circumventing those methods). A few examples are Diablo 3 and Assassins Creed (and a few others) requiring persistent Internet connection to play fully. Also some games are console only due to fear of piracy. One great example is Red Dead Redemption. Really really good game, but it's sad that it's a console exclusive.
Last edited by Scatter, .
Physics feel different. It seems like a small change but it makes a world of a difference. The tires all feel grippier. Well not really but the transition between grip and slip feels much more gradual. It makes the cars feel noticeably less twitchy, especially when drifting. It seems like I can "feel" the wheel more as well when I'm using my DFP. Also, it feels like the cars have more body roll or something. I've actually jumped off the hill of Eiger Norwand crooked (as in one wheel landing first) quite a lot, which has almost never happened before before the update.
There's a upside-down "T" that shows where the bomb will land (around the point where the lines meet). Since the planes drop two bombs, you can tighten the bomb cluster by diving toward your target at an angle.
Using a lower ISO reduces digital noise and makes a cleaner image (makes a larger difference in darker scenes). This is mainly the reason why you want to aim for lower ISOs.
Lower ISO doesn't change depth of field though. Aperture changes depth of field. Lowering your ISO means you need more light to get a properly exposed image and doing that means lowering your shutter speed or increasing aperture size (lowering aperture number).
Lower ISO doesn't change depth of field though. Aperture changes depth of field. Lowering your ISO means you need more light to get a properly exposed image and doing that means lowering your shutter speed or increasing aperture size (lowering aperture number).
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG