Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
hmm maybe we should each take our own transcript of this debate to a pub, show it to all the birds, and see who gets the most sex.
On the off chance that your slight dusting of snow in the south has ground everything to a halt and you haven’t got into work Turks, give me a shout 🙂 Second day off today and going to give Civ a good bash.
I am still rather confused as to how you can make a top of the range PC for £350…
Well first of all we’re not talking about an absolute top of the range PC in this thread, we’re talking about an alternative for those on a stricter budget, such as would be the case for someone here considering a console over a PC for example. Also let me stress that this is a very quick search, based on the research I put in when specing my own upgrade, but below is a complete package in the range of £350:
CPU, Motherboard, and RAM – £131
GFX – £105
PSU – £15
Hardrive – £32
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=HD-206-SE
Case – £30
Blueray player – £42
Total – £355
Now I haven’t taken postage into consideration for the total cost, but allow me that because this was a quick search, and I deliberately choose brand new products to avoid any arguments about quality. I also chose buy it now prices but think you could get some of these components cheaper if you had the patience to enter an auction (I saw an auction on ebay.com earlier for the GTX 460 for example at two thirds the cost above). I’ve also chosen products that will give you the best bang for your buck (the gfx card in particular), and you could chose cheaper options for less longevity. It’s also worth noting that most people here would have a capable PSU, Case, HD, and DVD drive which could be used to save yourself what amounts to a third of the overall cost. The above rig will run everything today at top settings.
Your points regarding user friendliness are valid, but again we’re talking to a competent audience here, and as we’ve said before, if you can do it, anyone can 🙂
Your point about noise, I just don’t get though. I’ve never had an issue with the sound my PC makes, and it has never struck me as being louder than any consoles I’ve heard on. Clean your fans I think.
The intense statement is bizarre. What is it you mean by that? I take it you must be comparing some first person shooters, and perhaps it’s an intense level of concentration you’re referring to, but there are simpler games out there if that’s what you’re after.
The last two statements are also reasonably true, but you really need to be lagging far behind in technology for a high end machine to have any sort of gameplay advantage over you. Most decent games these days also incorporate a timer at the start of a round, which allows for slower PCs to load before the round actually starts. Games do get hacked, but that’s a cross platform problem, and while it’s probably more prevelant on the PC, you’ll not have any real issues if the game’s well supported.
Hang on, why are you making the Metro example about gameplay? You asked for a dx11 video of gameplay and dark or not, you can clearly see superior image quality. And just look at the BC2 comparison, it doesn’t matter what platform it was developed for, you can see dx11 is better.
And I do have a point, for those that dont want very pwetty GFX but can get enough without spending a small fortune, and I know you keep mentioning £100 for a card, but last time I looked you couldnt stick a GFX card in a shoe box on its own to be able to play games
and
The specs alone for that would cost over a grand easy which proves nothing on a versus basis
Atm I’ve only had a chance to play BC2 in dx10 because I’m limited to win XP, but I can now play this at full detail, with all bells and whistles turned up as far as they’ll go. Tomorrow I’ll have win 7, and I don’t expect to have to adjust my settings down for dx11. I refer you back to the op for how much this cost. You can add a tenner to that for win 7.
Gaming is for fun which is why consoles attract people, PC’s as popular as they are to some will never be as popular to all like they once were
Gaming is fun on both platforms, and while arguments regarding their relative popularity can’t be properly discussed without some figures, I have only noticed the trend you mention amongst a handful of people in XDC. One thing which struck me during my competitive TF2 adventure earlier in the year, for example, was how young everyone was, and to me this suggests PC gaming is still in a very healthy state.
Anyway, I digress. Consoles are the cheaper option for the masses, there’s no point really discussing that, but for the guys here for whom cost is a concern, this post proves there’s a cheaper way to upgrade your PC. The hardest part of this is pulling your motherboard out of your case, which requires the ability to use a screwdriver and note the shape of some connectors. Not exactly taxing, but it can be scarey notion if you don’t realise how easy it actually is. The cost of building this is within the budget range of your average console gamer, and easily less than the cost of next generation consoles on release (judging from the price of the XBOX 360 and PS3). When you take the price of games into consideration, we’ve already discussed how quickly any saving evaporates in taking a budget/lightweight console.
So in summary, the cost argument shouldn’t be an issue for anyone here, I’ve just proven how cheaply it can be done, and if I can do it, I dare say even Turks could do it.
ffs you just won’t back down will you 😛 It’s almost as if you think you have a point.
The game below appears to be a rip off of L4D on first impressions, but holy fuck this looks atmospheric, and much better than that video you posted (which looks like it’s 2 or 3 years old) and miles better than the stills you posted. Posted link so you can watch the HD version as well.
GTX 460 will run this no bother – cost 100 quid
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eg_RcB91x2o
[youtube:1d26mgxs]Eg_RcB91x2o[/youtube:1d26mgxs]
Something you could probably use as a direct comparison between your xbox and a PC, below is a framerate test for bad company 2, showing the game in dx9, dx10, and dx11. You’ll notice a significant difference between the image quality in dx9 (console level) and dx11.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLqgcetMRK8 (for selecting HD version)
[youtube:1d26mgxs]KLqgcetMRK8[/youtube:1d26mgxs]
Of course dx11 is relatively new, but will soon become the standard. Consoles will catch up with this eventually, while PC’s continue to act as pathfinders for them.
The future of console gaming, and soon to be present day PC standard.
I meant to post earlier in the week about those videos you posted as well Mike, as I was really confused. My old rig could have run that first game, and as exciting as the gameplay was made to look in the trailer, the graphics honestly looked dated. The second two videos were just stills, and I’ve no idea what argument clinching point they were trying to convey.
Battle at the end really was quite satisfying, that’ll teach him 😉
For that level though I think you were doing fine. The only problem you had was when the Aztecs war decced you, which seemed to catch you slightly unprepared, but tbh I get caught like that quite a lot as well. On my side of things the biggest difference was that I was managing to get hold of quite a few decent wonders which was inflating my score, and you seemed to be just missing out on them and others the AI was building. I’m not even sure if building wonders is really a good approach in the game, as the resources devoted to them could be channelled into an army instead, but it’s a real kick in the teeth when you invest so much time aiming for one and then miss out on the benefits of it.
The best guide to how you’re doing in the scheme of things is how fast your technology is going, and how much cash you’re bringing in. Your figures there seemed to be only slightly behind what I had, and it didn’t sound like you were wanting for much. That suggests you were doing alright, and maybe if you concentrate on your army, then steam roll Ghandi, then you’ll be flying.
I liked your tactic of keeping those aircraft carriers in reserve though, quite cunning not to panic and show all your cards at the first sign of trouble 🙂
That was a much better game last night Turks, and has helped me get back into it again. I had a short game the night before when I got completely steam rollered by AI, demonstrating how much I’d forgotten in the few weeks I’d not been playing, so I was a little worried going into our game last night 🙂 A couple of interesting things I noticed though, given the circumstances I was in, and along with a few of the questions you asked me as we were logging off, that sort of prompted me into posting this. This might also help a few others, but bear in mind the level we’re playing at is Prince, which is the level where neither the player nor AI receive any penalty or bonuses that may affect their game, and you may need to specialise more on harder levels.
Anyway, we both started off in similar circumstances last night in terms of how many cities we could build, but you were lagging behind slightly it seems in how you were coping with this. I had managed to build a relatively early second city, but that greedy land grabbing bastard Egyption very quickly boxed me in to the top corner of the land mass, preventing me taking control of some strategic and luxury resources nearby, which happened to also take up alot of the arable land I was hoping to expand into. Not to worry though, I had Iron (albeit 2 pieces), and my captial at least had some good farming tiles near it which would allow for quick population growth, and this appears to be the approach you take when you’re having to cope with a small number of cities early on.
Cities have a lot of drawbacks, and obviosuly you need to have enough happiness points and culture output to offset the penalties for building a lot of them. They each have a massive area of control, compared with earlier versions of civ, but it takes a long time for culture to naturally take advantage of this, and if you have a lot of cities you’ll not actually be able to make use of all the land they grab anyway. The only reason in my eyes for founding a city is to take control of strategic or luxury resources but, even then, the cost can become too much. Obviously with more cities you have more population potential, but again you’ll find this doesn’t actually come into play until much later in the game when you have enough happiness to afford the growth. The automatic happiness hit you take by founding a city, means that it’s actually easier to maximise your population when you have fewer cities, and that seems to be why I’ve been doing so well in this particular game.
To ensure you don’t fall behind larger civs though, you need focus on food production within the cities you have, but strike a balance so you’re losing not out on cash (which is king in civ 5) and production. This is why I suggested using the maritime city states, via which you can boost food production across all cities, without having to dedicate too many tiles for farming. I started off with one such ally for the early game, and this has allowed me to expand two cities into double population figures, and a second one now to keep things going. In the meantime, I’ve been able to place trading posts on almost all the plains around me, and about half the grassland, which gives me more than enough cash to maintain the ally status with the city state, and food comes in at a rate that keeps up with my happiness pool.
As for workers in general, your comments last night, regarding the automated workers clearing forrests, convinced me that automation is a bad idea. There might be an option somewhere in the game where you can instruct the AI not to remove forrests and jungles while automated, in the same way you can tell it to leave improvements you make manually, but even then it’s not optimal so I’d try to avoid automation. Obviously I’m still new to the game, and I’ve yet to find the perfect balance, but I’ll describe my thought process when choosing improvements below:
Grassland – best farming tile in game, but also has a good base rate for food production. I’ll build farms on them if early game I’m seeing double figures for the number of turns it takes for the next population gowth, but later in the game double figures can be a good thing as you’ll have less happiness to work with. The decent base rate for food production also allows you reasonable growth if using a trade post to improve it.
Plains – I’ll almost always put trading posts here, unless the city’s struggling for growth and there’s a lack of grassland around.
Forrest – Almost always a trading post, except maybe when you have a costal city surrounded by a lot of water and few production tiles, when a lumber yard might become a consideration. The only exception to never removing them is when a forrest is on top of a special resource. Forrests are much better in this version of civ, as they give you some food, production, and the trading post gives them a lot of trade.
Hills – The mining upgrade is disappointing, in that it only boosts production by 1 shield, and for this reason there’s an argument that the trading post boost of 2 gold, makes the trading post the more sensible option for them. The early problems I’ve had with production in this game though make me edge more towards building mines, although I find they’re normally left unworked until I select Production focus for my workers from within the city menu.
Any other land tile gets a trading post, unless there’s a resource on it.
That’s probably long enough a post for now 🙂
Yea I’m considering other options, and while I’ve heard O2 are good, and I’ve got an O2 phone, I’m looking at Be There instead because they appear to be the best across the board atm (going by think broadband comparisons). The only problem is that I’ll have to pay an installation fee for a BT line which ever provider I choose, and I can’t really afford that kind of lump sum while in a flat I could potentially be moving out of soon.
Speaking of think broadband, Virgin Media has really dropped in standard according to their ratings lately, which is supported by my own experience with them. Their customer service too is awful, something that I might rate 1 out of 10, reflecting how many calls I had to make before I got someone who could tell me something useful.
I am indeed. I’ll be online sometime between 7 and 9, most likely half 8ish.
Speaking of the space bullshit, as you put it, I totally agree with that sentiment. I fail to see any point in Space, Culture, Diplomatic, or Time victories, despite them being popular amongst civ fanatics. For me this game has always been, and will always be, about conquering the world through war mongering. The only possible case I’ve ever considered as being valid for selecting anything other than Domination/whatever it’s called, as a victory condition during game setup, is that perhaps some of the AI civs will perform better when they have a peaceful route to victory. If you see a civ nearing a space race victory, it can be fun because you have to launch an attack on them to prevent it. Considering lots of AI types are probably not far behind in the race, this can result in war on several fronts vs the most powerful AI nations, and if you’re in that position it is fun. So my advice is to always set out your stall for a military victory 🙂
The late game wars are also the best in the game, since you’re normally vying for control of the seas and air, to aid your land assaults. If you ever manage to get a fleet of fully loaded aircraft carriers around an enemy’s continent, you can very quickly bring them to their knees, destroying their infrastructure and units in equal measure 😈
This is working brilliantly now on my new setup, so might just pick it up again while I’m waiting for my connection to be fixed. My ping’s probably fine to play strategy games online though, so if anyone fancies a game give me a shout. Mulitplayer games tend to play a bit slower than single player, but there are ways to tweak this, and Turks if you were put off by the time it took us in our initial game, it’s safe to say a lot of that was down to my crap PC, which was loading turns as you finished yours.
