Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

$600 Low-end gaming PC, want to run very specific games

Last response: in Systems
Share
April 7, 2012 11:12:21 AM

Hi there

I was wondering what would be the best shot for a full new computer (screen and peripherals included in the price range).

I'm currently with my Gateway NV53a notebook. It's really good, but not for gaming. It has a ATI Radeon Mobility HD 4200 Series with 256mb dedicated video memory.

I just want a rig to run BF2: Project Reality

System Requirements
Operating System: Windows XP, Windows Vista or Windows 7
Processor: 2 GHz minimum. A Dual-Core CPU with 2.4 GHz is recommended
Memory: 1 GB RAM. 2 GB recommended
Hard Disk: 8 GB free Hard Drive Space
Graphics Adapter: Graphics Card with 128 MB RAM. 512 MB recommended.
Sound: DirectX 9 compatible sound device. Dedicated sound card with EAX support
recommended for best experience.


I was looking around and found that the ATI Radeon HD 4770 are around $50 bucks and you can use two of them at the same time (pardon my ignorance on terms i find contemporary) and get 1GB on dedicated video memory. I think 4GB RAM should just do the trick. I don't want a really huge HDD 200GB+ should do it.

I know nothing of cases but i will go with the most cheapest :) 

I appreciate any help very much!

Thanks
April 7, 2012 11:41:09 AM

should be able to get an ok i3 based system for that will play that easy.always remember with game system requirements, the wanna sell as many games as possible so they set the bar alot lower than they should with minimum specs. i always look at the recommended specs as minimum decent gameplay. with your video cards if you run 2 512MB 4770s together (crossfire) you dont have 1 gb video memory u still have 512mb they just render alternating frames but the video memory only becomes an issue in higher resolutions. for a noob though i would stick to a single faster gpu as a crossfire setup might do your head in trouble shooting driver issues and being an older game i dont know what crossfire support for it is like. i can say it was sketchy at best with bf:bc2 with my 4850 crossfire setup at the time.
bf2 was an awesome game for its time dont get me wrong but dont you wanna system that can play bf3???????????
m
0
l
April 7, 2012 11:45:45 AM

I don't want a system that can run BF3 because, pardon me and my language, it is a shitty game.

As you can read in my post i'm talking about a mod for BF2 which is called Project Reality. It changes most of the game's mechanics making it more likely to be a war simulator rather than Quake Modern Warfare.

Thanks for the info though
m
0
l
Related resources
April 8, 2012 5:10:35 AM

asdfero said:
I don't want a system that can run BF3 because, pardon me and my language, it is a shitty game.

As you can read in my post i'm talking about a mod for BF2 which is called Project Reality. It changes most of the game's mechanics making it more likely to be a war simulator rather than Quake Modern Warfare.

Thanks for the info though


personally i like bf3 and i wouldnt even compare it to mw3 i got sick of the snipers jumping from behind rocks, holding there breath and getting the head shot still in mid air and all those ridiculous perks. i couldnt go back to bf2 graphically now i would be interested in pr if it was based on the frostbite 2 engine though that would be cool. have you actually played bf3 on pc or only a dumb console cos if thats the case i can see why u think its a shitty game. oh well u should be able to go pretty cheap on parts if thats all you wanna play get literally any cpu for 1155 start with an i3 if in your budget , any chipset you want will be fine just keep in mind it will have to be a p67/z68/z77 is you wanna overclock with a 'k' model and i would suggest against dual gpu with that game the 4770 should be fine
m
0
l
April 8, 2012 7:25:13 PM

The game business is like it is because of people that thinks like you, that graphics come before content.

That for me is really wrong.

Thanks for the info again.
m
0
l
April 9, 2012 4:30:18 AM

asdfero said:
The game business is like it is because of people that thinks like you, that graphics come before content.

That for me is really wrong.

Thanks for the info again.


your pretty quick to judge people just because i like bf3 im one of the modern warfare lovers, dont think so. i have been around for a while playing games on strictly pc for the last 20yrs and i think i have played most fps that have come out inbetween so dont pigeon hole me! yeah the maps are a bit more bunched up so you arent running for 2 minutes just to find someone to kill, but *** if you want reality join the army cos i play games to have fun, and forget about reality all while hearing awesome sound effects, seeing beautiful graphics on a high end machine. sounds to me like you have been stuck with a laptop and a shitty graphics card to long to know what your missing out on.
m
0
l

Best solution

April 9, 2012 5:01:56 AM

Lol you're being pretty brutally honest. But it's true, a lot of people would value graphics over content and that is the direction the industry is headed. The ME series was an exception though, great content.

As for a build check out my $650 build:
http://www.squidoo.com/electronicandmore

To be honest, I haven't played Project Reality but I do hear it's solid. I honestly can't stand bad graphics. Decent graphics and decent game is good enough for me. But graphics like ME1 I just can't stand even though it was a great game when I finished.

Share
April 9, 2012 7:05:31 AM

jasont78 said:
your pretty quick to judge people just because i like bf3 im one of the modern warfare lovers, dont think so. i have been around for a while playing games on strictly pc for the last 20yrs and i think i have played most fps that have come out inbetween so dont pigeon hole me! yeah the maps are a bit more bunched up so you arent running for 2 minutes just to find someone to kill, but *** if you want reality join the army cos i play games to have fun, and forget about reality all while hearing awesome sound effects, seeing beautiful graphics on a high end machine. sounds to me like you have been stuck with a laptop and a shitty graphics card to long to know what your missing out on.


I judged you that way because of what you said and stated on your previous post.

I won't join the army because i don't believe in war, nor the reason why soldiers (USA's or from any country) are going to war.
That; "If you are looking for reality join the army" argument is way out of bounds. So i find it invalid.

It's not only that the maps are bunched up, its the whole game's mechanics; shooting while jumping, bunny hopping, almost infinite ammo, not dying by 2 shots, etc. And i must say that i play games for FUN too, and seriously modern FPS are just not fun to me.

Again you're putting "beautiful graphics and beautiful sound effects" over content and gameplay. So i guess that my first guess was right.

I've played everything from BF:BC 1, 2. BF3. And the newer CoDs and i have to say, they are identical on gameplay and fun. And i said that i had too prove your "you have been stuck with a laptot and shitty graphics too long to know what your missing out on" statement wrong.

Well, i think this thread had digressed enough now.

PD: The only way that you'll run 2 mins to kill somebody is if you play war sims the way you would play modern FPS. Because killing the enemy is not the main goal, it's destroying their assets. Just call for a friendly chopper or APC to give you a ride and you'll be there sooner killing enemies ;) .

Peace
m
0
l
April 9, 2012 7:06:55 AM

Best answer selected by asdfero.
m
0
l
April 9, 2012 7:11:48 AM

aznshinobi said:
Lol you're being pretty brutally honest. But it's true, a lot of people would value graphics over content and that is the direction the industry is headed. The ME series was an exception though, great content.

As for a build check out my $650 build:
http://www.squidoo.com/electronicandmore

To be honest, I haven't played Project Reality but I do hear it's solid. I honestly can't stand bad graphics. Decent graphics and decent game is good enough for me. But graphics like ME1 I just can't stand even though it was a great game when I finished.


Hey man thanks for posting.

I know i'm being brutally honest and that sometimes has gotten me into trouble, but i guess i'm just one of those guys that just have to speak their minds.

I enjoyed ME1 in Xbox, great game but it does get somewhat boring after some time.

If you haven't played PR i recommend you do. As i said graphics are not 2012 like, but they're enough to make the gameplay more enjoyable (if you run them on Max). It's a GREAT strategic FPS, teamplay is a MUST otherwise you'll get killed if you play MW like. Great online community, and great developers too.

There is a PR mod for ArmA 2 too, that has much more powerful graphics but physics and gameplay wise i would dare to say that the BF2 mod is better.

I thank you very much for your link and info!

Peace
m
0
l
!