Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

SOE going console only!(At first)

1235»

Comments

  • ice-vortexice-vortex Xenia, OHPosts: 951Member
    Others won't call this guy a liar, but I will. He's a liar. SOE currently does not have a studio in Washington state. They closed it down back in 2011. If you read his follow up posts, he is obviously a Playstation fanboy.
  • OziiusOziius Baltimore, MDPosts: 1,388Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by CalmOceans

    A $200 card doesn't last 4 years and you're argument is striaght up dumb. 

    Really.

    ATI 4850, $199 on launch http://www.anandtech.com/show/2556

    5 years old

    running  tera without any laghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6V64aAJNNII

    running skyrim without any lag: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnzPXJG3Kl8

     

    You said you needed a $400 card every 2 years.

    That's funny... it's funny because there are cards newer then yours that can't seem to handle new games very well..

    http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/2012-vga-gpgpu/06-Crysis-2-DirectX-9-B-Performance,Marque_fbrandx32,2947.html

     

    These newer cards at the bottom are just cutting it, yet I'm to believe that your card out performs them?

    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-650-ti-benchmark-gk106,3318-11.html

     

    I suppose your card just runs better then the average gamer? Also, if you haven't upgraded in 4 years, what kind of monitor are you using? What resolution? On my 27" running 1920 x 1080, those games would not be "smooth" with your card. If you only upgrade once every 5 years.. you are not the average PC gamer... If you're playing with an old ass 15-17" monitor, then yeah, otherwise no. 

     

    I don't believe that a card every two years is excessive. 

  • drebiandrebian San Diego, CAPosts: 28Member
    Originally posted by Praetalus
    Originally posted by CalmOceans

    A $200 card doesn't last 4 years and you're argument is striaght up dumb. 

    Really.

    ATI 4850, $199 on launch http://www.anandtech.com/show/2556

    5 years old

    running  tera without any laghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6V64aAJNNII

    running skyrim without any lag: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnzPXJG3Kl8

     

    You said you needed a $400 card every 2 years.

    That's funny... it's funny because there are cards newer then yours that can't seem to handle new games very well..

    http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/2012-vga-gpgpu/06-Crysis-2-DirectX-9-B-Performance,Marque_fbrandx32,2947.html

     

    These newer cards at the bottom are just cutting it, yet I'm to believe that your card out performs them?

    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-650-ti-benchmark-gk106,3318-11.html

     

    I suppose your card just runs better then the average gamer? Also, if you haven't upgraded in 4 years, what kind of monitor are you using? What resolution? On my 27" running 1920 x 1080, those games would not be "smooth" with your card. If you only upgrade once every 5 years.. you are not the average PC gamer... If you're playing with an old ass 15-17" monitor, then yeah, otherwise no. 

     

    I don't believe that a card every two years is excessive. 

    Sorry, but you don't NEED to update a card every two years, unless you get a low to mid quality card every two years of course.

    I'm running an AMD Athlon II x4 620 2.6 GHz Quad Core Processor, 8 GB DDR3, nVidia Geforce GTX 285, and a 750 Gb RAID 0 setup that I built almost 4 years ago. The only updating I needed to do was to bring my RAM up to 8 GB from 6... I've run everything on max that I've come across so far without problems (with the exception of Skyrim with beautification mods and Dead Space 3), but upgrading my RAM by 2 GB fixed the Skyrim issue. Granted, I most likely will have to update my GPU soon, especially if I want to run Dead Space on graphics options higher than I have it set to right now, but it's worked well for me for almost 4 years now...

    If a person was to build a desktop PC today and install say an nVidia Geforce 660 TI (runs about $200), I would expect them to have similar results as to what I've hade with my 285...

    *EDITED because I entered the wrong processor... my bad for remembering precisely which model I had...*

  • TorvalTorval Oregon CountryPosts: 7,221Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Praetalus
    Originally posted by CalmOceans

    A $200 card doesn't last 4 years and you're argument is striaght up dumb. 

    Really.

    ATI 4850, $199 on launch http://www.anandtech.com/show/2556

    5 years old

    running  tera without any laghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6V64aAJNNII

    running skyrim without any lag: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnzPXJG3Kl8

     

    You said you needed a $400 card every 2 years.

    That's funny... it's funny because there are cards newer then yours that can't seem to handle new games very well..

    http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/2012-vga-gpgpu/06-Crysis-2-DirectX-9-B-Performance,Marque_fbrandx32,2947.html

    These newer cards at the bottom are just cutting it, yet I'm to believe that your card out performs them?

    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-650-ti-benchmark-gk106,3318-11.html

    I suppose your card just runs better then the average gamer? Also, if you haven't upgraded in 4 years, what kind of monitor are you using? What resolution? On my 27" running 1920 x 1080, those games would not be "smooth" with your card. If you only upgrade once every 5 years.. you are not the average PC gamer... If you're playing with an old ass 15-17" monitor, then yeah, otherwise no. 

    I don't believe that a card every two years is excessive. 

    I have a GTX260/1.8GB that came with my machine in 2009 and is just short of 4 years old.  The desktop is an i7/920, 9GB ram, GTX260, and a single 7200rpm hard drive with a 24" 1920x1080 monitor.  I run current games (GW2, TSW, Tera) along with older games (STO, LotRO, EQ2) on High+ settings with 35 - 60fps (depending on the game) and they still look better than console graphics.  Rift is the only game I've played in the last couple of years where I couldn't get above around 45fps on average no matter what settings I used.

    I could upgrade the card and power supply and have thought about it, but it's not worth it at this point.  Why would I?

    Not only can the system game, but I use it for work.  It runs a development sql server, visual studio 2010, office 2010, and other dev tools.  The console isn't going to do any of that.  So I'm paying several hundred dollars just for a dedicated gaming machine?  The value is questionable for me.

  • OziiusOziius Baltimore, MDPosts: 1,388Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by drebian
    Originally posted by Praetalus
    Originally posted by CalmOceans

    A $200 card doesn't last 4 years and you're argument is striaght up dumb. 

    Really.

    ATI 4850, $199 on launch http://www.anandtech.com/show/2556

    5 years old

    running  tera without any laghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6V64aAJNNII

    running skyrim without any lag: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnzPXJG3Kl8

     

    You said you needed a $400 card every 2 years.

    That's funny... it's funny because there are cards newer then yours that can't seem to handle new games very well..

    http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/2012-vga-gpgpu/06-Crysis-2-DirectX-9-B-Performance,Marque_fbrandx32,2947.html

     

    These newer cards at the bottom are just cutting it, yet I'm to believe that your card out performs them?

    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-650-ti-benchmark-gk106,3318-11.html

     

    I suppose your card just runs better then the average gamer? Also, if you haven't upgraded in 4 years, what kind of monitor are you using? What resolution? On my 27" running 1920 x 1080, those games would not be "smooth" with your card. If you only upgrade once every 5 years.. you are not the average PC gamer... If you're playing with an old ass 15-17" monitor, then yeah, otherwise no. 

     

    I don't believe that a card every two years is excessive. 

    Sorry, but you don't NEED to update a card every two years, unless you get a low to mid quality card every two years of course.

    I'm running an AMD Athlon II x4 620 2.6 GHz Quad Core Processor, 8 GB DDR3, nVidia Geforce GTX 285, and a 750 Gb RAID 0 setup that I built almost 4 years ago. The only updating I needed to do was to bring my RAM up to 8 GB from 6... I've run everything on max that I've come across so far without problems (with the exception of Skyrim with beautification mods and Dead Space 3), but upgrading my RAM by 2 GB fixed the Skyrim issue. Granted, I most likely will have to update my GPU soon, especially if I want to run Dead Space on graphics options higher than I have it set to right now, but it's worked well for me for almost 4 years now...

    If a person was to build a desktop PC today and install say an nVidia Geforce 660 TI (runs about $200), I would expect them to have similar results as to what I've hade with my 285...

    *EDITED because I entered the wrong processor... my bad for remembering precisely which model I had...*

    The card you mentioned cost $250 now... if you can find it.. which is hard as it was discontinued. Do you know how much it cost in 2009? More then $200.00. 

    Also... the 660 TI runs around $300. Not $200.

     

    Thanks, 

  • OziiusOziius Baltimore, MDPosts: 1,388Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Torvaldr
    Originally posted by Praetalus
    Originally posted by CalmOceans

    A $200 card doesn't last 4 years and you're argument is striaght up dumb. 

    Really.

    ATI 4850, $199 on launch http://www.anandtech.com/show/2556

    5 years old

    running  tera without any laghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6V64aAJNNII

    running skyrim without any lag: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnzPXJG3Kl8

     

    You said you needed a $400 card every 2 years.

    That's funny... it's funny because there are cards newer then yours that can't seem to handle new games very well..

    http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/2012-vga-gpgpu/06-Crysis-2-DirectX-9-B-Performance,Marque_fbrandx32,2947.html

    These newer cards at the bottom are just cutting it, yet I'm to believe that your card out performs them?

    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-650-ti-benchmark-gk106,3318-11.html

    I suppose your card just runs better then the average gamer? Also, if you haven't upgraded in 4 years, what kind of monitor are you using? What resolution? On my 27" running 1920 x 1080, those games would not be "smooth" with your card. If you only upgrade once every 5 years.. you are not the average PC gamer... If you're playing with an old ass 15-17" monitor, then yeah, otherwise no. 

    I don't believe that a card every two years is excessive. 

    I have a GTX260/1.8GB that came with my machine in 2009 and is just short of 4 years old.  The desktop is an i7/920, 9GB ram, GTX260, and a single 7200rpm hard drive with a 24" 1920x1080 monitor.  I run current games (GW2, TSW, Tera) along with older games (STO, LotRO, EQ2) on High+ settings with 35 - 60fps (depending on the game) and they still look better than console graphics.  Rift is the only game I've played in the last couple of years where I couldn't get above around 45fps on average no matter what settings I used.

    I could upgrade the card and power supply and have thought about it, but it's not worth it at this point.  Why would I?

    Not only can the system game, but I use it for work.  It runs a development sql server, visual studio 2010, office 2010, and other dev tools.  The console isn't going to do any of that.  So I'm paying several hundred dollars just for a dedicated gaming machine?  The value is questionable for me.

    The card you mention is around $200.00 to purchase at this moment. Do you know how much it cost back in 2009? Around $379-$400.

     

    Thanks, 

  • NilenyaNilenya TMIPosts: 364Member Uncommon

    Everquest was a defining mmo - and a pc title that went on to shape all mmo's to follow. It was from EQ1 that Tigole and Furor were hired to help lay out the design for World of Warcraft, both were guildleaders of successfull raiding guilds in EQ namely Legacy of Steel on the Nameless server and Fires of Heaven on the Veeshan server. - The idea that Everquest Next, Smedlys socalled innovating new MMO would be a console game is just beyond belief. - I would completely dismiss the notion if it wasnt for the fact that he also once thought the NGE was a great idea and went on to implement it and totally ruin a great mmo in the process. - It would mean that he out of hand dismisses the inate appeal the title would hold to millions of mmo gamers using pc's. - It would mean he believes that ps4 gamers not only would jump on an mmo first chance they get, but do so in larger numbers, with more subscription retention than classical pc gamers. - it would mean that Smedley is on some serious hardcore shrooms while still in charge over there at SoE.

     

  • HabitualFrogStompHabitualFrogStomp SydneyPosts: 281Member

    It wont happen with EQNext, or likely not even with Sony, but it will probably eventually happen. Who knows, maybe on the next generation of consoles? There in fact is a market there that is relatively untouched by the MMO genre that is just waiting to be had. Microsoft drops an exclusive title on Xbox, gets a few more console sales out of it, release it for PC maybe a year later.

    It doesnt make sense for Everquest, but it would make sense if the right title was developed with that intent.

  • TorvalTorval Oregon CountryPosts: 7,221Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Praetalus
    Originally posted by drebian

    Sorry, but you don't NEED to update a card every two years, unless you get a low to mid quality card every two years of course.

    I'm running an AMD Athlon II x4 620 2.6 GHz Quad Core Processor, 8 GB DDR3, nVidia Geforce GTX 285, and a 750 Gb RAID 0 setup that I built almost 4 years ago. The only updating I needed to do was to bring my RAM up to 8 GB from 6... I've run everything on max that I've come across so far without problems (with the exception of Skyrim with beautification mods and Dead Space 3), but upgrading my RAM by 2 GB fixed the Skyrim issue. Granted, I most likely will have to update my GPU soon, especially if I want to run Dead Space on graphics options higher than I have it set to right now, but it's worked well for me for almost 4 years now...

    If a person was to build a desktop PC today and install say an nVidia Geforce 660 TI (runs about $200), I would expect them to have similar results as to what I've hade with my 285...

    *EDITED because I entered the wrong processor... my bad for remembering precisely which model I had...*

    The card you mentioned cost $250 now... if you can find it.. which is hard as it was discontinued. Do you know how much it cost in 2009? More then $200.00. 

    Also... the 660 TI runs around $300. Not $200.

    Thanks, 

    The card I mentioned was just a little over $100 in 2009.  You can get a GTX280 from Newegg for $90, 7770 for $110, a 550ti for $130, 650ti for $145, AMD 7850 for $165.  So again, your point is weak.  You don't have to spend $200 every couple of years and if you buy a more expensive high end card for $300 it could easily last 4 or 5 years.

    The need or desire to upgrade depends on the quality of the original component and if you must have access to hardware that supports the latest feature set.

  • jdnycjdnyc Long Island City, NYPosts: 1,696Member
    Originally posted by HabitualFrogStomp

     

    It doesnt make sense for Everquest, but it would make sense if the right title was developed with that intent.

    Why not Everquest?  They've done it before.  It's owned by Sony, so it would be an exclusive.  And as you said there's an untapped market.

     

  • HabitualFrogStompHabitualFrogStomp SydneyPosts: 281Member
    Originally posted by jdnyc
    Originally posted by HabitualFrogStomp

     

    It doesnt make sense for Everquest, but it would make sense if the right title was developed with that intent.

    Why not Everquest?  They've done it before.  It's owned by Sony, so it would be an exclusive.  And as you said there's an untapped market.

     

    SOE isnt doing so well these days last I looked. Smedley has said countless times that EQNext is their baby, their flagship. In a sense I suppose they would be putting a lot of their eggs in one basket.

    That basket is not going to be a console. I think it would be hillarious if they did it,  I'd litterally camp out here just to watch the never ending bitching that would inevitably occur, wouldnt even need to buy the game then as that wouldnt be as entertaining.

    EQNext is not exactly a project title. If it didnt come to PC right off the bat, they'd lose a ridiculous amount of money.

  • TheThirdTheThird Austin, TXPosts: 2Member
    How many people are more willing to pay for something on PS vrs Comp.s??? And how many more people already bitch about PTP and cry its not FTP? After you spend all that money and people just want you to piss away all the time and money to make a game, yea I would rather take a gamble on PS, just my 2 cents.
  • asdarasdar Tequesta, FLPosts: 662Member Uncommon

    If they do make a PS4 EQ Next I will buy the PS4 to play. I know that's anecdotal, but I know a few friends that feel the same way. That being the case I think it at least would be somewhat successful in it's launch. I'd pay a monthly fee for it on the console too, in fact I'd rather pay a monthly fee to avoid any bullshit nickel dime transactions.

    I play both because PC's offer things that, like MMO's that consoles don't. If they make games that I like on the console then I'll choose the console every time. I don't like games that cross platforms, and hope they don't do that.

    Asdar

  • TwoThreeFourTwoThreeFour Virginia, VAPosts: 2,131Member
    Originally posted by superniceguy

    I am starting to get fed up of consoles, they seem to be turning more into low spec PCs (compared to the best PCs). The PS4 may be good now, but by the time it is released will not be so good, and by the time it gets going, will be outdated hardware

    If it is on console as well then it makes for a wider audience, but after the PS3/Xbox 360 I think I am done with consoles unless they end up being backwards compatible, and so if it is not on PC as well, then I will not get to play it. I will get Wii U as it is BC, but it will be years before I get a PS4 / next Xbox if at all.

    Until controllers and playing from your couch becomes popular on PCs, console gaming will not die.  The main difference between PC and consoles is the popular controlling choice. 

  • TwoThreeFourTwoThreeFour Virginia, VAPosts: 2,131Member
    Originally posted by TheThird
    How many people are more willing to pay for something on PS vrs Comp.s??? And how many more people already bitch about PTP and cry its not FTP? After you spend all that money and people just want you to piss away all the time and money to make a game, yea I would rather take a gamble on PS, just my 2 cents.

    That is very true. The percentage of the console population that is actually okay with paying for games is extremely high.

  • BurntvetBurntvet Baltimore, MDPosts: 2,948Member Uncommon
    They might as well, they haven't had a "success" on the PC in 6+ years... and no PS2 does not count as it is a F2P hackfest. Their previous "big title", DCUO, was an even bigger failure. Although that one did better on console, as it was clear that that is what the game was designed to be played on.
  • tixylixtixylix gfff, TNPosts: 1,208Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by CalmOceans
    Originally posted by tixylix
    Originally posted by Nadia

    SOE Fanfaire is in 5 months     Aug 1st - 4th

    https://www.soe.com/soelive/faq.vm

     

    God they're always so depressing to see, just a load of obese 40 year old geeks who have no social life and it's always in some horrible looking Vegas Hotel which is so cheap and tackey.

    While true, this has little to do with the actual game but more so with the United States.

    You can go to any tech event, to Blizzcon, E3,  CES, to any event in the US and you will find obese people at abnormal proportions.

    Don't blame a game for what is a nationwide problem in the US.

    I know many Japanese EQ players and none of them are obese.

    EQ players are in better shape than the average person in the US: http://www.livescience.com/2907-video-gamers-surprisingly-fit-older.html

     

     

     

    Eurgh, why don't people have respect for themselves, if I start putting on weight, what I do is stop eating and do exercise. People who say it sneaks up on them or whatever are so full of shit, it's obvious to notice when you cannot fit into your clothes, instead they're too lazy and just buy bigger clothes.

     

    My point was that SOE fanfaires are depressing.

  • PhryPhry HampshirePosts: 6,296Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by tixylix
    Originally posted by CalmOceans
    Originally posted by tixylix
    Originally posted by Nadia

    SOE Fanfaire is in 5 months     Aug 1st - 4th

    https://www.soe.com/soelive/faq.vm

     

    God they're always so depressing to see, just a load of obese 40 year old geeks who have no social life and it's always in some horrible looking Vegas Hotel which is so cheap and tackey.

    While true, this has little to do with the actual game but more so with the United States.

    You can go to any tech event, to Blizzcon, E3,  CES, to any event in the US and you will find obese people at abnormal proportions.

    Don't blame a game for what is a nationwide problem in the US.

    I know many Japanese EQ players and none of them are obese.

    EQ players are in better shape than the average person in the US: http://www.livescience.com/2907-video-gamers-surprisingly-fit-older.html

     

     

     

    Eurgh, why don't people have respect for themselves, if I start putting on weight, what I do is stop eating and do exercise. People who say it sneaks up on them or whatever are so full of shit, it's obvious to notice when you cannot fit into your clothes, instead they're too lazy and just buy bigger clothes.

     

    My point was that SOE fanfaires are depressing.

    Obesity has nothing to do with gaming of any kind, what it does have something to do with, is processed food, and a sedentary lifestyle, processed food generally contains high levels of salt and sugar, bulk and flavouring so to speak, its not just fattening, its also very bad for you in general, so if your at all bothered about your weight, don't buy processed food products, and try to eat more fresh veggies etc. And get outside more image and for info, macky d's is a good definition of a processed food, with or without the horse image

  • Loke666Loke666 MalmöPosts: 18,028Member Uncommon

    It makes some sense at least.

    For one thing is there still very little competition with console MMOs (even though I think Undead labs will be the winner against SOE). There are many millions console owners and no Wow.

    And making a game for a console means that you dont have to think about how well a zillion different graphics cards can run it.

    I also think Sony is behind this to boost PS4 sales.

    Then there is of course that bad things, like many of us MMO fans dont play console games and the fact that PCs usually are more flexible than consoles.

    But I can understand SOE if they do it like this. We all know that games made for both consoles and PCs usually are worse than games for one or the other, it is really hard to make a good UI that works on both,

    I dont like it though, but I understand it. And it is still just a rumor anyways, and even if it is true at the moment that might change before release.

  • Loke666Loke666 MalmöPosts: 18,028Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Phry

    Obesity has nothing to do with gaming of any kind, what it does have something to do with, is processed food, and a sedentary lifestyle, processed food generally contains high levels of salt and sugar, bulk and flavouring so to speak, its not just fattening, its also very bad for you in general, so if your at all bothered about your weight, don't buy processed food products, and try to eat more fresh veggies etc. And get outside more image and for info, macky d's is a good definition of a processed food, with or without the horse image

    Well, it have some things to do with gaming since sitting still in front of your computer all your spare time isnt very healthy either.

    As long as you spend some time moving around as well as playing it is no problem but I do know many raiders who does nothing else but play and sleep (and possibly work).

    Food do indeed have a lot to do with obesity, even though I think candy and softdrinks are more guilty than TV dinners (not saying they are good though).

    People today (in Scandinavia at least) eats half the amount of fat and about 3 times as much sugar and starch as people 50 years ago. That is still fine if you move 3 times as much but when you instead just game it is bad.

  • tixylixtixylix gfff, TNPosts: 1,208Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Phry
    Originally posted by tixylix
    Originally posted by CalmOceans
    Originally posted by tixylix
    Originally posted by Nadia

    SOE Fanfaire is in 5 months     Aug 1st - 4th

    https://www.soe.com/soelive/faq.vm

     

    God they're always so depressing to see, just a load of obese 40 year old geeks who have no social life and it's always in some horrible looking Vegas Hotel which is so cheap and tackey.

    While true, this has little to do with the actual game but more so with the United States.

    You can go to any tech event, to Blizzcon, E3,  CES, to any event in the US and you will find obese people at abnormal proportions.

    Don't blame a game for what is a nationwide problem in the US.

    I know many Japanese EQ players and none of them are obese.

    EQ players are in better shape than the average person in the US: http://www.livescience.com/2907-video-gamers-surprisingly-fit-older.html

     

     

     

    Eurgh, why don't people have respect for themselves, if I start putting on weight, what I do is stop eating and do exercise. People who say it sneaks up on them or whatever are so full of shit, it's obvious to notice when you cannot fit into your clothes, instead they're too lazy and just buy bigger clothes.

     

    My point was that SOE fanfaires are depressing.

    Obesity has nothing to do with gaming of any kind, what it does have something to do with, is processed food, and a sedentary lifestyle, processed food generally contains high levels of salt and sugar, bulk and flavouring so to speak, its not just fattening, its also very bad for you in general, so if your at all bothered about your weight, don't buy processed food products, and try to eat more fresh veggies etc. And get outside more image and for info, macky d's is a good definition of a processed food, with or without the horse image

     

    Yeh but I mean whenever I see them it's fat geeks with fat geeky G/Fs at SOE's fanfaires, At least Blizzcon or even that Minecon has a big mix of people. I just cannot follow it because I don't respect the people at them instantly, they're uncool and that says to me so are their games.

  • AeliousAelious Portland, ORPosts: 2,854Member Uncommon
    Some of this thread reminds me of something my seven year old daughter did. For no particular reason she artistically designed on a ziplock baggy, don't ask me as I don't know :), how we should not just people by on what's on the outside but rather on the inside.

    Enlightening to say the least.
1235»
Sign In or Register to comment.