Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Theory - why PC gaming is on the decline

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
March 29, 2005 11:11:18 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

No, this isn't one of "those" threads. Not going to use the word
"console" outside of this sentence.

I've finally decided to upgrade from my ancient PC. So I'm shopping
around, local vendors, national vendors, whatever. And I can only come
to the conclusion that PC makers are mostly rip-off artists.

Unless you A) really research what you might need and B) are willing
to pay far more than the "sum of the parts", then you can't buy a
half-decent gaming system. The entire purchasing options and systems
of every computer manufacturer seems designed to prevent anyone with
any reasonable concern for fair value from getting a machine that can
play games.

I can't help but think this contributed to falling sales of PC games.
There must be millions of people out there who paid good coin for
substandard systems that resulted in a not-great game experience.

Has anyone else experienced this dilemna? Where do you buy your PCs?
Are there ANY reputable vendors who are satisfied to make a reasonable
profit for a decent system?

Joe

More about : theory gaming decline

Anonymous
March 29, 2005 11:11:19 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

F r e e wrote:
> "Chadwick" <chadwick110@hotmail.com> escribió en el mensaje
> news:1112086695.694054.311440@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> > Andrew wrote:
>
> Problems? Weeeeeeh!
>
> Whats the problem in getting for example a solid Asus mobo and a
processor,
> an Ati/Nvidia mid-range video card, a soundblaster, kick a stick of
RAM in,
> add a harddisk and connect the monitor, keyboard and mouse!!!!???
>
> Spending a couple of hours reading online or paper reviews (just in
case you
> know nothing about solid brands with good support) cannot be that
hard....
> Or just find a serious retailer and let them sort it out.

For you and me, no problem.
For Mr and Mrs Blogs, just wanting a games machine for little Johnny? I
bet they just want an easy life, someone to say, "buy this one".
Anonymous
March 29, 2005 11:11:19 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 07:11:18 GMT, Joe62 <NOSPAMjmcginn@shaw.ca> wrote:

> No, this isn't one of "those" threads. Not going to use the word
> "console" outside of this sentence.
>
> I've finally decided to upgrade from my ancient PC. So I'm shopping
> around, local vendors, national vendors, whatever. And I can only come
> to the conclusion that PC makers are mostly rip-off artists.
>
> Unless you A) really research what you might need and B) are willing
> to pay far more than the "sum of the parts", then you can't buy a
> half-decent gaming system. The entire purchasing options and systems
> of every computer manufacturer seems designed to prevent anyone with
> any reasonable concern for fair value from getting a machine that can
> play games.
>
> I can't help but think this contributed to falling sales of PC games.
> There must be millions of people out there who paid good coin for
> substandard systems that resulted in a not-great game experience.
>
> Has anyone else experienced this dilemna? Where do you buy your PCs?
> Are there ANY reputable vendors who are satisfied to make a reasonable
> profit for a decent system?
>

Well... I don't buy an off-the-shelf PC. I build my own and for under
$2000 and got a top line PC when it comes to gaming. Of course this
is not a solution for everyone. Also, the old adage "you get what you
pay for" applies, cheap $ = cheap PC.

For the average person, my advice is find a reputable small computer
shop and have them build you a custom PC. Stay away from built-in
(included in the motherboard) video & sound, by top-line cards (I
prefer NVidia video cards, but note that NVidia does not make video
cards just the video chip). Video cards should have high speed and
built-in memory (my NVidia = 128mb) and I still recommend the
Soundblaster line for audio. Almost forgot, with today's PC make sure
your case has at least a 450w power supply and I suggest installing an
extra case fan.



==== Tecknomage ====
"Patriotism means to stand by the country.
It does not mean stand by the President."
President Roosevelt

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com
Related resources
Anonymous
March 29, 2005 11:41:27 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

PC's are an expensive way to play some kinds of games. Building your
own PC is not that hard if you know what a screwdriver is, but that's still
beyond the capability or willingness of 90 percent of the population.

I haven't bought a prebuilt system in the last 6 years. It's not to hard
to build your own PC (the hardest part for me is wiring the pins for the
switches and lights to the motherboard), but it is a chore- which is one
reason I don't upgrade as often as I have been. Not to mention the price of
trying to "keep up" with the latest technology.
Anonymous
March 29, 2005 3:05:52 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Most gamers are PC hobbyists anyway. We actually enjoy looking up specs and
finding the best value for our buck. In my case, I buy last year's
technology just b/c its cheaper. For many of us, our rigs are modern-day hot
rods -- we're techno-geek greasemonkies. :) 

Newegg is probably one of the best online vendors for both parts and
systems. If you really have some coin to blow, Alienware rigs are pretty
sweet.

My 2¢,

f_f
Anonymous
March 29, 2005 4:14:41 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Chadwick" <chadwick110@hotmail.com> looked up from reading the entrails
of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs say:

>
>F r e e wrote:
>> "Chadwick" <chadwick110@hotmail.com> escribió en el mensaje
>> news:1112086695.694054.311440@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>> > Andrew wrote:
>>
>> Problems? Weeeeeeh!
>>
>> Whats the problem in getting for example a solid Asus mobo and a
>processor,
>> an Ati/Nvidia mid-range video card, a soundblaster, kick a stick of
>RAM in,
>> add a harddisk and connect the monitor, keyboard and mouse!!!!???
>>
>> Spending a couple of hours reading online or paper reviews (just in
>case you
>> know nothing about solid brands with good support) cannot be that
>hard....
>> Or just find a serious retailer and let them sort it out.
>
>For you and me, no problem.
>For Mr and Mrs Blogs, just wanting a games machine for little Johnny? I
>bet they just want an easy life, someone to say, "buy this one".


Yeah but that's just because they are lazy, uninformed and wish to
remain uninformed at all costs.

Building a computer is a bout as hard as playing with LEGO.
Static sensitive lego to be sure but...

People get what they pay for;
Informed people get decent computers or build their own, and the
willfully ignorant buy 21st century snake oil and then complain about it
later - because it couldn't _possibly_ be their fault.

Xocyll
--
I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of
a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably,
Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So
FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr
Anonymous
March 29, 2005 5:05:38 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Joe62" <NOSPAMjmcginn@shaw.ca> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:a40i41hdgt3vpno9mgqgoqqhlnndsom3e0@4ax.com...
>
> Has anyone else experienced this dilemna? Where do you buy your PCs?
> Are there ANY reputable vendors who are satisfied to make a reasonable
> profit for a decent system?
>

I've only bought 1 pre-built system - my first PC back in '91. Since then
I've been constantly upgrading/building my own systems, so I never
experienced the dilemma you face.
Anonymous
March 29, 2005 5:10:01 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Chadwick" <chadwick110@hotmail.com> escribió en el mensaje
news:1112086695.694054.311440@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> Andrew wrote:

Problems? Weeeeeeh!

Whats the problem in getting for example a solid Asus mobo and a processor,
an Ati/Nvidia mid-range video card, a soundblaster, kick a stick of RAM in,
add a harddisk and connect the monitor, keyboard and mouse!!!!???

Spending a couple of hours reading online or paper reviews (just in case you
know nothing about solid brands with good support) cannot be that hard....
Or just find a serious retailer and let them sort it out.

Of course, there are those that buy cheap and know not what they are buying,
but doesn't everyone have at least one friend or neighbour to get some
orientation form...?

amazing world :-)

f r e e
March 29, 2005 5:40:37 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 13:10:01 +0200, "F r e e" <free@spam.nothanx>
wrote:

>Whats the problem in getting for example a solid Asus mobo and a processor,
>an Ati/Nvidia mid-range video card, a soundblaster, kick a stick of RAM in,
>add a harddisk and connect the monitor, keyboard and mouse!!!!???

If all the components work first time, then nothing. It can be a bitch
to work out what is going wrong if one of the essential components is
duff and you don't have spares to hand and the knowledge to
troubleshoot.

I put a high end gaming PC together for a friend a couple of years
back. It all worked perfectly and he was happy with it. Two days later
he phones me up and says it is dead. I went through various options he
could try and nothing helped. He brought it back to me, I swapped
various components one at time into my PC to work out which bit was
broken. It turned out to be the processor. Unfortunately it killed my
motherboard so I ended up out of pocket, but at least I was able to
diagnose and resolve the problems.

I wouldn't recommend everyone building their own PC's from scratch.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.
Anonymous
March 29, 2005 11:47:04 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 08:55:33 +0100, Andrew <spamtrap@localhost.>
wrote:

>I would suggest that is because most people happily buy the cheapest
>bundle they can buy which aren't aimed at gamers. The bottom end price
>is what attracts most buyers rather than any meaningful specs.

Fair enough ... but what I'm finding is that their *middle* range
systems - say in the $600-$900 range are also generally not
game-capable. You have to go into high-range ($1000+) systems for the
vendors to even consider throwing in a capable graphics card (and even
there you're usually not getting money's worth).

>The main restriction is people
>who just buy based on price and don't use their brain...

Maybe so ... but to be fair I believe that computer vendors are
deliberately taking advantage of consumer ignorance, in particular on
the subject of graphics cards.
Anonymous
March 29, 2005 11:49:13 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 13:10:01 +0200, "F r e e" <free@spam.nothanx>
wrote:

>Whats the problem in getting for example a solid Asus mobo and a processor,
>an Ati/Nvidia mid-range video card, a soundblaster, kick a stick of RAM in,
>add a harddisk and connect the monitor, keyboard and mouse!!!!???

What you describe there is generally what the PC vendors DON'T offer
in any of their pre-built solutions (which is what most consumers buy
I would guess). It's the mid-range systems in particular where they
really gouge the consumer.
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 12:18:34 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Andrew" <spamtrap@localhost.> escribió en el mensaje
news:thii41tjckgpiieah77olkdjijhsningkh@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 13:10:01 +0200, "F r e e" <free@spam.nothanx>
> wrote:
>
>>Whats the problem in getting for example a solid Asus mobo and a
>>processor,
>>an Ati/Nvidia mid-range video card, a soundblaster, kick a stick of RAM
>>in,
>>add a harddisk and connect the monitor, keyboard and mouse!!!!???
>
> If all the components work first time, then nothing. It can be a bitch


:-)
I know how you feel, i have been the computer-man of my circle for long, but
it still is an exception in my experience. I have never had a faulty mobo,
processor, video, network or soundcard... but Ohh dear! when the harddisk or
PSU start to do strange things... =8)
Of course, i learn from these issues and enjoy them ;-) somehow... Of a
console i couldn't learn anything but to send it in for servicing...

But i repeat, a retailer can do all this and deliver a quite nice setup for
under 1000 $ or ?Euro.
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 12:22:34 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 05:27:42 -0600, "turk" <turk96@comcast.net> wrote:

>Bullshit. Got a great system for $1500.

You are agreeing with me then. There's no *monetary* reason why you
shouldn't be able to get a decent game system for $600-$800.
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 12:41:32 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

MICRO AMD SEMPRON 2600+:
ASUS A7V600-X:
HDD80GBATA1337200RPM:
512 MB DDR 400 KINGSTON:
case ATX 302
17 SAMSUNG SM793S 1280 0,27
kb GENIUS KB-09:
fan AMD SPIRE COBRE:
3 1/2 1.44:
DVDLG16X48XATAPI:
SVGA SPARKLE FX 5900XT 128 DDR TV DVI...:
LOGITECH WHEEL OPTICAL OEM:
CREATIVE INSPIRE 2.1 P380...:

= 683 EUROS !!! (tax and assembly INCLUDED =8)

Price as in Spain :-)
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 3:37:41 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Joe62" <jmcginnNOSPAM@radicalREALLYNOSPAM.ca> escribió en el mensaje
news:p 6ej4156h8h74nijce9tj3ptc2h7od31qf@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 05:27:42 -0600, "turk" <turk96@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>Bullshit. Got a great system for $1500.
>
> You are agreeing with me then. There's no *monetary* reason why you
> shouldn't be able to get a decent game system for $600-$800.

yep! just take the stupid gadgets like multiconfussion keyboards, firewire,
wireless, software packeges and some others out (including the latest 2%
faster processors :-P
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 3:46:19 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Thusly "Magnulus" <magnulus@bellsouth.net> Spake Unto All:

>Not to mention the price of
>trying to "keep up" with the latest technology.

Well, computer evolution is slowing down. At least as far as we gamers
are concerned. A two year old 9800 pro will play all games released
the next two years just fine; my 1700MHz AMD processor still handles
all games I've thrown at it.
That PC games are no longer developed for PC first, but pretty much
without exception are console ports, means that PC game complexity is
now tied to *console* hardware capacity - and a console generation is
5 years.
As a top spec gaming PC today will be able to play anything an xbox2
or playstation3 can play, there is no reason to think that anyone with
such a machine will have any need to upgrade until xbox3 or
playstation4 hits the shops. Five years from now.

You don't need a 3GHz machine with 1GB RAM and 256MB dx9-capable
graphics card to do spreadsheets, watch dvd's, surf, or play mp3's.
I wonder how long it will take before hardware producers like intel,
ATI, AMD, nVidia, or even Microsoft, realizes that when games no
longer push the hardware envelope, nothing does?
I think Microsoft has got the memo, seeing how they've shifted away
from PC hardware with the xbox2, thereby making porting to PC
difficult, but I'm pretty sure that's too little, too late.

Intel, AMD, ATI, nVidia etc don't seem to yet have realized that
slower generation times means fewer upgrades and less revenue. Not
that I think they can really do anything about it.

From the PC gamers point of view... Well, people with little money
will perhaps be happy that there is no more any pressure to upgrade
the hardware every year, but I'd say less ambitious games is a bad
thing. I don't think gaming technology is good enough to get
complacent yet.
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 7:03:39 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Joe62" <NOSPAMjmcginn@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:a40i41hdgt3vpno9mgqgoqqhlnndsom3e0@4ax.com...
> No, this isn't one of "those" threads. Not going to use the word
> "console" outside of this sentence.
>
> I've finally decided to upgrade from my ancient PC. So I'm shopping
> around, local vendors, national vendors, whatever. And I can only come
> to the conclusion that PC makers are mostly rip-off artists.
>
> Unless you A) really research what you might need and B) are willing
> to pay far more than the "sum of the parts", then you can't buy a
> half-decent gaming system. The entire purchasing options and systems
> of every computer manufacturer seems designed to prevent anyone with
> any reasonable concern for fair value from getting a machine that can
> play games.
>
> I can't help but think this contributed to falling sales of PC games.
> There must be millions of people out there who paid good coin for
> substandard systems that resulted in a not-great game experience.
>
> Has anyone else experienced this dilemna? Where do you buy your PCs?
> Are there ANY reputable vendors who are satisfied to make a reasonable
> profit for a decent system?
>
> Joe

First, what country are you in?

If it's the US, then here's some links that you might want to check out.

www.newegg.com
I've used this site to order pc parts from. If you don't mind building your
own rig.

As to prebuilt computers, it's a matter of finding one that will build a
gaming rig for you at a reasonable cost. Here's a few sites to check out.

www.cyberpowerinc.com (their rigs are usually cheap, but can't find much on
benchmarks)
http://www.ibuypower.com/mall/lobby.htm (they seem very similar to
cyberpower)
http://www.velocitymicro.com (these guys are usually in top 5 for fast
rigs, and cost is less than the big dogs)
http://www.alienware.com/ (their rigs are usually top performers, but also
cost top $)
http://www.falcon-nw.com/index.asp (another builder similar to Alienware)

You might want to check each site and tell them what you want in your
computer: play HL2 in high rez and get at least 70fps. Also, ask them if
there's a 30 day $ back guarantee. So if you order it, and you find out
that it runs HL2 at 2fps, then you can ship it back.

I was just on the Velocitymicro site and used their Live Chat feature to
talk with one of their reps. I asked him about returns and found out that
they have a 15% restocking fee. Course he added that most people don't ask
for a refund. Oh, and some very customized units are not returnable, but
would notify you in advance if your system was one of these. Systems
containing components followed by "*" are not returnable.

And on the iBuypower web link, they claim: 30-Day no question ask money
back guarantee. Whoa!

Even though you didn't bring up the C-word, I will. For the average Joe
Schome, it must be confusing as heck to walk into Best Buy, Fry's, or go
online and visit all of the different pc makers.

Get PCI, AGP, or PCIe video card?
Buy HP, Compaq, or Dell computer?
An IBM computer or AMD?

I still get a headache when I have to set down and figure out the latest
motherboards, BIOS upgrades, latest video cards, and what cpu is going to
get me the best bang for my buck.

Whereas, if you go into Best Buy and pick up a PS2, then it's going to be
the same as your neighbor's.
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 7:18:02 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"OldDog" <OldDog@city.pound> once tried to test me with:

> Whereas, if you go into Best Buy and pick up a PS2, then it's going to be
> the same as your neighbor's.

Unless you get the new thin version. In which case, it's not the same as
mine. ;P

--

Knight37 - http://knightgames.blogspot.com

Once a Gamer, Always a Gamer.
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 11:20:12 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Tue, 29 Mar 2005, Joe62 wrote:

i totally disagree with your view
this is yet another false myth about pc games, they being expensive
when its the other way around... pc gaming is very affordable, but
you must follow some guidelines

1... you will buy a pc not only for games but for many other tasks
everyone needs in daily life so your investment in never only for
gaming

2... no need to buy the most powerful hardware, instead buy a solid
middle range machine that will be a good start, no need to pay more
than 500 bucks for it

3... any current entry line graphic card by ati or nvidia with price
as low as 50 bucks will turn your pc into a good gaming machine, so
no need to spend more

4... don't ever start by buying pc games just released like, doom3
riddick or farcry... those should be played in 2 or 3 years time

5... with a good solid machine, a modern entry level graphic card
then you should turn your attention to choosing the titles to buy,
and its here the secret is... buy only pc games released at least 3
or 4 years ago so your 50 bucks graphic card will be able to run it
without any problem

6... two years from now, when the time has come to play doom3 and
riddick and farcry, then you should upgrade your graphic card, but
only the graphic card and again you will pay as low as 50 bucks,
for the then entry level model which will run those games perfectly

so like you see its so easy and cheap pc gaming!
we should be thankful for pc gaming being so easy, so affordable
and so popular and full of competition
long live pc games!

--
to check this post authenticity please read the thread "check for post
authenticity" in this group and if you have any doubt please email me
for further authenticity confirmation

this post is copyright of myself and cannot be used in any way without
my express permission with the only exception for being used to quote
part of my post in a direct follow-up, without any change in original
text

post made in a steam-free computer
i said "NO" to valve and steam

against steam campaign
http://nosteam.afterdarknet.at/

steamwatch - independent observatory about steam
http://www.steamwatch.org/

please sign petition "Say NO! to Steam!" available at:
http://www.petitiononline.com/nosteam/petition.html

what steam does to pc gamers in a million word worth picture:
http://www.nforce.nl/forum/images/avatars/1405845568421...
March 30, 2005 11:29:14 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 07:20:12 +0100, "sayNO2steam [authentic]"
<sayNO2steam@yahoo.com> wrote:

>3... any current entry line graphic card by ati or nvidia with price
>as low as 50 bucks will turn your pc into a good gaming machine, so
>no need to spend more
>
>4... don't ever start by buying pc games just released like, doom3
>riddick or farcry... those should be played in 2 or 3 years time

ROFL, the opinion of a "true PC gamer"! You really are the most stupid
person I have ever come across, and that is quite an achievement.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.
March 30, 2005 11:41:52 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Thus spake Xocyll <Xocyll@kingston.net>, Tue, 29 Mar 2005 12:14:41 -0500,
Anno Domini:

>"Chadwick" <chadwick110@hotmail.com> looked up from reading the entrails
>of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs say:
>
>>
>>F r e e wrote:
>>> "Chadwick" <chadwick110@hotmail.com> escribió en el mensaje
>>> news:1112086695.694054.311440@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>>> > Andrew wrote:
>>>
>>> Problems? Weeeeeeh!
>>>
>>> Whats the problem in getting for example a solid Asus mobo and a
>>processor,
>>> an Ati/Nvidia mid-range video card, a soundblaster, kick a stick of
>>RAM in,
>>> add a harddisk and connect the monitor, keyboard and mouse!!!!???
>>>
>>> Spending a couple of hours reading online or paper reviews (just in
>>case you
>>> know nothing about solid brands with good support) cannot be that
>>hard....
>>> Or just find a serious retailer and let them sort it out.
>>
>>For you and me, no problem.
>>For Mr and Mrs Blogs, just wanting a games machine for little Johnny? I
>>bet they just want an easy life, someone to say, "buy this one".
>
>
>Yeah but that's just because they are lazy, uninformed and wish to
>remain uninformed at all costs.
>
>Building a computer is a bout as hard as playing with LEGO.
>Static sensitive lego to be sure but...
>
>People get what they pay for;
>Informed people get decent computers or build their own, and the
>willfully ignorant buy 21st century snake oil and then complain about it
>later - because it couldn't _possibly_ be their fault.
>
>Xocyll

Of course, there's the 3rd type: lazy/busy professionals like myself who
know *exactly* what they want & pay someone to assemble it. My new rig
recently cost my company AU$3400 & I paid the place $70 to put it together.
My time is worth more than that :) 

--
Replace 'spamfree' with the other word for 'maze' to reply via email.
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 12:44:51 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 07:20:12 +0100, "sayNO2steam [authentic]"
<sayNO2steam@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Tue, 29 Mar 2005, Joe62 wrote:
>
>i totally disagree with your view
<snip>
>4... don't ever start by buying pc games just released like, doom3
>riddick or farcry... those should be played in 2 or 3 years time
>

According to the real sayNo (authentic), a true pc gamer will buy the
game as soon as it's released. So you sir must not be him.

<snip>
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 1:36:57 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Tue, 29 Mar 2005, Joe62 wrote:

i totally disagree with your view
this is yet another false myth about pc games, they being expensive
when its the other way around... pc gaming is very affordable, but
you must follow some guidelines

1... you will buy a pc not only for games but for many other tasks
everyone needs in daily life so your investment in never only for
gaming

2... no need to buy the most powerful hardware, instead buy a solid
middle range machine that will be a good start, no need to pay more
than 500 bucks for it

3... any current entry line graphic card by ati or nvidia with price
as low as 50 bucks will turn your pc into a good gaming machine, so
no need to spend more

4... don't ever start by buying pc games just released like, doom3
riddick or farcry... those should be played in 2 or 3 years time

5... with a good solid machine, a modern entry level graphic card
then you should turn your attention to choosing the titles to buy,
and its here the secret is... buy only pc games released at least 3
or 4 years ago so your 50 bucks graphic card will be able to run it
without any problem

6... two years from now, when the time has come to play doom3 and
riddick and farcry, then you should upgrade your graphic card, but
only the graphic card and again you will pay as low as 50 bucks,
for the then entry level model which will run those games perfectly

so like you see its so easy and cheap pc gaming!
we should be thankful for pc gaming being so easy, so affordable
and so popular and full of competition
long live pc games!

--
to check this post authenticity please read the thread "check for post
authenticity" in this group and if you have any doubt please email me
for further authenticity confirmation

this post is copyright of myself and cannot be used in any way without
my express permission with the only exception for being used to quote
part of my post in a direct follow-up, without any change in original
text

post made in a steam-free computer
i said "NO" to valve and steam

against steam campaign
http://nosteam.afterdarknet.at/

steamwatch - independent observatory about steam
http://www.steamwatch.org/

please sign petition "Say NO! to Steam!" available at:
http://www.petitiononline.com/nosteam/petition.html

what steam does to pc gamers in a million word worth picture:
http://www.nforce.nl/forum/images/avatars/1405845568421...
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 3:04:18 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

>> And I'm sorry if it sounds elitist, but the game requirements (hardware,
>> drive space, DirectX version, etc.) are written on the bottom of the box.
>
> I really wasn't calling you elitist - more "us" (as in the newsgroups)
> where we think everyone should just be able to open the case and pop in a
> graphics card. One poster in this thread likened building a computer to
> legos.

Certainly not like Legos, I'd agree. Many of us have years of experience and
workarounds under our belts just to get Windows and our assorted hardware to
work the way we want them to.

>
>> Caveat emptor, or "let the buyer beware."
>
> Again, agreed. But that's not how the marketing world works.
>
>

In my experience, I'd say that's how it works. If people have any buying
sense at all, they don't allow themselves to get repeatedly burned in their
purchasing decisions (in general). As far as marketing is concerned,
unscrupulous places like Blockbuster can scream and shout their monthly
specials to me all they want, but they will *never* get my business again
based on my past experience with them. This may also be a similar deterrent
for many folks with computer games -- they have had bad experiences in the
past and therefore don't bother with them (or choose to go the console route
instead). My point is there are many other purchasing decisions to consider
beyond whether or not a game will run well on a particular computer.

> I don't think Soccer Mom Suzy is
>> going to pick up Doom III for Lil' Johnny's birthday gift. "See son, you
>> get to fight legions of demons spawned from Hell. Sez so right here on
>> the box." C'mon. Same thing for Far Cry, Half-Life 2, etc. The action
>> game genre doesn't appeal to most consumers.
>
> ???

My point here is that it goes back contextual clues within the point-of-sale
marketing fluff on the packaging. Gotta know what you're buying.

> The type of people that action games do
>> appeal to (males, ages 15 to forty-something) are willing to open up
>> their boxes and upgrade if necessary.
>
> Again ??? I don't think most 15 to 40 y/o men who own a computer have
> opened them. I would guess less than 10% have.

Their loss then. Goes back to my "computers as exclusionary equipment"
point. By way of analogy, you wouldn't expect to soup-up a vehicle yourself
without popping the hood. Alternatively, you could buy a prebuilt hot rod.
Alienware, anyone?

I also don't know any guy within that age range that doesn't like to tinker
with stuff or at least buy a top-of-the-line product in order to have
bragging rights to the "best and baddest." And if they don't have that type
of personality then they probably don't play action-based computer games.

>> Computers have always been exclusionary pieces of equipment.
>
> They used to be. They aren't marketed that way anymore. They are marketed
> to... what did you call her... Soccer mom Suzy
>

Yes, they're marketed that way, but I don't believe they function that way.
Have you never had to help install a printer (an external device, mind you)
for a non-technical savvy friend or relative? It's relatively painless these
days for people like us, but there are still usability and technical issues
for the average user.

> It's just these
>> days there are so many things you can do on them that they are almost
>> getting as ubiquitous as television sets.
>
> Like buying a computer.
>

Everyone may have one, but that doesn't mean they know how to use it. ;) 
Another analogy: Most everyone has a VCR, but they probably only know how to
operate the simple buttons on the front of the player or on the remote.
Setting up a VCR to record a show while they're away would probably boggle
their mind.

> In this same vein, most games suited for "the
>> family computer" run fine on three to five year old hardware.
>
> Not true. Even The Sims 2 is a hog.

You got me there. ;)  However, I'd be curious to see the demographics on
people who purchased The Sims 2. I would assume they would be technically
savvy enough to check and see if their computers would run the game. Am I
wrong to assume someone would verify a purchase will work out for them
before they plunk down $50? Again, caveat emptor. Maybe I'm just more
careful with my money.

> Consider the
>> poor folks who have "switched" to Macs and must special-order their
>> software these days instead of being able to pop into BestBuy and pick
>> something up (and I should know b/c I have a Mac as a second computer at
>> work).
>>
>> I also don't see how our collective hobby is suffering either.
>
>
> Look at the shelves of your local retailer.

They look as barren as ever. :)  Probably due to my po-dunk surroundings. I
get more information from online gaming sites than I do browsing local
retail shop shelves. I also often have to order stuff online. I'm adapting
to perpetuate my hobby. :) 

I'd also suggest this is due to the marketing efforts on the part of the
game publishers.

>
> Last year was
>> great for PC gaming and this year is shaping up to be *almost* as good,
>> too. If developers continue to make money at something, they will
>> continue to produce (the level of quality is subjective, of
>> course...people vote with their wallets). And if you can't walk into your
>> favorite store to find a game, I suggest you order it online. I have to
>> resort to doing it for older titles.
>
> If it's not available in stores, that means it's not profitable to carry
> them. A bad sign.

To your point I'd argue that not every game is a winner and has the same
marketing budget or retail presence behind it based on the publisher.
Therefore, the fact that a game isn't on a storeshelf doesn't necessarily
mean it wouldn't be profitable for a retailer.

- f_f
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 3:50:50 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

> This is the issue. You buy a DVD player, and it plays all the DVD's you
> can buy off the shelf. You buy a TV, and it gets all the channels (it may
> not get them in high def, but it gets them without any performance hit).
> You buy a CD player, it plays all the CD's available.
>
> Given that, and given how PC's are marketed, is it unreasonable for an
> average buyer to expect a PC to play all PC games available?

I see your point, and it is unreasonable, but the term "PC" unfortunately
still encompasses a wide range of computers. That's marketing for you.

A few months ago I was envisioning a proprietary drive or device you could
hook up to any PC and basically use the mouse, keyboard and monitor to play
games. It would have the potential to thwart the nasty issue of software
piracy (since the discs would be encoded, much like DVD's) and would
virtually guarantee that any game branded as "PC" would play on a user's
equipment. Of course, the drive or device would have adequate processors
inside to run the game smoothly as well as project the graphics onscreen
anywhere between 30 to 60 fps. The most appealing aspect of the device would
be that you could rent the games instead of having to purchase them
outright.

And then I realized I was just thinking about consoles, especially the Xbox.
(Incidentally, I realize there are keyboard/mouse adapters available for the
Xbox and you can also route the video through a graphics card to be
projected on a monitor. I also know that DVD's and Xbox games can be decoded
and pirated.)

The sad fact remains that I am only interested in a handful of Xbox games,
and of those I would prefer to play them via mouse and keyboard and while I
was seated at my cozy desk (much like a PC game). Most of the games I'm
interested in eventually get ported over anyway, so it's not worth my coin
to configure an Xbox as I mentioned above. Plus, if I really needed to, I
could rent an Xbox for a few days without having to buy a unit.

Much like yourself, I would love to be able to buy (or rent!) any game off
the shelf, or online for that matter, and be virtually guaranteed that it
would work in my "PC". I would even resort to buying a device like I
mentioned above (let's just call it a PCbox) if the caliber of games were
appealing, which they are currently not on the Xbox. Unfortunately, this
isn't the current state of PC gaming and we must therefore adapt as well as
upgrade our computers every now and then to continue our little obsessions.
With the next round of next-gen consoles and HDTV, I think more and more
folks will bow out of being restricted to a desk and playing their games on
a computer. I truly believe that in the future we will need an affordably
priced device, like the PCbox, that can be quickly and intuitively hooked up
to our PC's so we can play games in the manner we feel most comfortable in.
More importantly, if the game were to be labelled as "PC", the device would
be able to adequately run the game.

My 2¢,

- f_f
March 30, 2005 10:35:18 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"faster_framerates" <nothanks@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:D 2em6j$5at$1@news.tamu.edu...
>>> And I'm sorry if it sounds elitist, but the game requirements (hardware,
>>> drive space, DirectX version, etc.) are written on the bottom of the
>>> box.
>>
>> I really wasn't calling you elitist - more "us" (as in the newsgroups)
>> where we think everyone should just be able to open the case and pop in a
>> graphics card. One poster in this thread likened building a computer to
>> legos.
>
> Certainly not like Legos, I'd agree. Many of us have years of experience
> and workarounds under our belts just to get Windows and our assorted
> hardware to work the way we want them to.
>
>>
>>> Caveat emptor, or "let the buyer beware."
>>
>> Again, agreed. But that's not how the marketing world works.
>>
>>
>
> In my experience, I'd say that's how it works. If people have any buying
> sense at all, they don't allow themselves to get repeatedly burned in
> their purchasing decisions (in general). As far as marketing is concerned,
> unscrupulous places like Blockbuster can scream and shout their monthly
> specials to me all they want, but they will *never* get my business again
> based on my past experience with them.

Interesting analogy, as Blockbuster changed their late fee policy die to
customer pressure.

Bottom line - the customer is always right, because they pay the bills. The
PC game industry is shooting itself in the foot by constantly releasing
stuff that just doesn't work.


This may also be a similar deterrent
> for many folks with computer games -- they have had bad experiences in the
> past and therefore don't bother with them (or choose to go the console
> route instead). My point is there are many other purchasing decisions to
> consider beyond whether or not a game will run well on a particular
> computer.
>
>> I don't think Soccer Mom Suzy is
>>> going to pick up Doom III for Lil' Johnny's birthday gift. "See son, you
>>> get to fight legions of demons spawned from Hell. Sez so right here on
>>> the box." C'mon. Same thing for Far Cry, Half-Life 2, etc. The action
>>> game genre doesn't appeal to most consumers.
>>
>> ???
>
> My point here is that it goes back contextual clues within the
> point-of-sale marketing fluff on the packaging. Gotta know what you're
> buying.


Not anymore than buying a movie, let's say. You wouldn't buy Dawn of the
Dead for a seven year old. But the point is, that movie would *work* on the
kid's DVD player.


>
>> The type of people that action games do
>>> appeal to (males, ages 15 to forty-something) are willing to open up
>>> their boxes and upgrade if necessary.
>>
>> Again ??? I don't think most 15 to 40 y/o men who own a computer have
>> opened them. I would guess less than 10% have.
>
> Their loss then.


No, it's PC gaming's loss. We can't have it both ways. We can't have oodles
of titles and groundbreaking stuff if it's going to be anti-mainstream and
exclusionary. We'll have to buy our games off the net from tiny developers
with small budgets. The PC gaming industry is less than 15 years old (as a
mainstream thing, meaning mainstream stores carrying games), and has likely
seen its best days.

Basically, you're saying the customer should bend to the product's wishes.


> Goes back to my "computers as exclusionary equipment" point. By way of
> analogy, you wouldn't expect to soup-up a vehicle yourself without popping
> the hood. Alternatively, you could buy a prebuilt hot rod. Alienware,
> anyone?


At 3k. It will never crack the mainstream.


>
> I also don't know any guy within that age range that doesn't like to
> tinker with stuff or at least buy a top-of-the-line product in order to
> have bragging rights to the "best and baddest." And if they don't have
> that type of personality then they probably don't play action-based
> computer games.

I know hundreds of people who have never cracked a case yet bought games.
I'm sure plenty of them bought a shooter.


>
>>> Computers have always been exclusionary pieces of equipment.
>>
>> They used to be. They aren't marketed that way anymore. They are marketed
>> to... what did you call her... Soccer mom Suzy
>>
>
> Yes, they're marketed that way, but I don't believe they function that
> way.

But that's the whole point the OP was making! That the games don't work on
low-end computers, and this will eventually hurt sales.

> Have you never had to help install a printer (an external device, mind
> you) for a non-technical savvy friend or relative? It's relatively
> painless these days for people like us, but there are still usability and
> technical issues for the average user.


MUCH easier than it used to be. Most stuff just "works" nowadays. Except
games, of course ;) 


>
>> It's just these
>>> days there are so many things you can do on them that they are almost
>>> getting as ubiquitous as television sets.
>>
>> Like buying a computer.
>>
>
> Everyone may have one, but that doesn't mean they know how to use it. ;) 
> Another analogy: Most everyone has a VCR, but they probably only know how
> to operate the simple buttons on the front of the player or on the remote.
> Setting up a VCR to record a show while they're away would probably boggle
> their mind.


correct. But it could still record that show with the push of a few buttons.
We're talking about computers not being able to play games no matter how
many buttons you push.


>
>> In this same vein, most games suited for "the
>>> family computer" run fine on three to five year old hardware.
>>
>> Not true. Even The Sims 2 is a hog.
>
> You got me there. ;)  However, I'd be curious to see the demographics on
> people who purchased The Sims 2.


everyone except me, it seems :) .


I would assume they would be technically
> savvy enough to check and see if their computers would run the game. Am I
> wrong to assume someone would verify a purchase will work out for them
> before they plunk down $50? Again, caveat emptor. Maybe I'm just more
> careful with my money.

You are. Most people *still* think "computer games run on computers" - any
computer.

>
>> Consider the
>>> poor folks who have "switched" to Macs and must special-order their
>>> software these days instead of being able to pop into BestBuy and pick
>>> something up (and I should know b/c I have a Mac as a second computer at
>>> work).
>>>
>>> I also don't see how our collective hobby is suffering either.
>>
>>
>> Look at the shelves of your local retailer.
>
> They look as barren as ever. :) 


They used to be MUCH fuller.


Probably due to my po-dunk surroundings. I
> get more information from online gaming sites than I do browsing local
> retail shop shelves. I also often have to order stuff online. I'm adapting
> to perpetuate my hobby. :) 
>
> I'd also suggest this is due to the marketing efforts on the part of the
> game publishers.


That's what we will have to do in the future - buy our games online.
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 10:35:19 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 18:35:18 GMT, "JWB" <jwb3333_spamtrap_@excite.com>
wrote:

>"faster_framerates" <nothanks@nowhere.net> wrote in message
>news:D 2em6j$5at$1@news.tamu.edu...
>>>
>>>> Caveat emptor, or "let the buyer beware."
>>>
>>> Again, agreed. But that's not how the marketing world works.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> In my experience, I'd say that's how it works. If people have any buying
>> sense at all, they don't allow themselves to get repeatedly burned in
>> their purchasing decisions (in general). As far as marketing is concerned,
>> unscrupulous places like Blockbuster can scream and shout their monthly
>> specials to me all they want, but they will *never* get my business again
>> based on my past experience with them.
>
>Interesting analogy, as Blockbuster changed their late fee policy die to
>customer pressure.

Actually, Blockbuster only increased the duration of rental from what is
officially listed on the ticket to 1 week after what is listed on the
ticket. After that time, you have a late fee relabeled as a
"restocking-fee" of some amount (probably 15%). If you keep it too long,
you are considered to have liked the movie so much that you wanted to keep
it.

>>>> Computers have always been exclusionary pieces of equipment.
>>>
>>> They used to be. They aren't marketed that way anymore. They are marketed
>>> to... what did you call her... Soccer mom Suzy
>>>
>>
>> Yes, they're marketed that way, but I don't believe they function that
>> way.
>
>But that's the whole point the OP was making! That the games don't work on
>low-end computers, and this will eventually hurt sales.
>

It's difficult to develop an "acceptable" game while still having it run on
the old computers. For example, RTCW:ET works on the onboard graphics
cards, but has framerates below 15 on maps with foilage (which is expected
to exist because it gives a tactical element.) Removing the foilage speed
up the game, but can give an unfair advantage foe those who minimize
detail.

While it's true that people expect a random game off the shelf to run on
any computer, it's just like expecting a Model T (a very old car) to be
capable of driving at 120 mph. The only difference is that computers
become obsolete much more quickly than anything seen before.

Even the greatest hits released years ago had minimum system requirements -
Doom refused to run if you didn't have at least 4MB of Phsyical Ram (and
even then, you needed all 4MB available - you couldn't load mouse support
or Smartdrv.)

>> Have you never had to help install a printer (an external device, mind
>> you) for a non-technical savvy friend or relative? It's relatively
>> painless these days for people like us, but there are still usability and
>> technical issues for the average user.
>
>MUCH easier than it used to be. Most stuff just "works" nowadays. Except
>games, of course ;) 


Games still seem to be coming along slowly, mainly because most programming
companies don't do a good job of checking their programs for errors. Even
when user reports a reproducable bug isolated to the game itself, most
companies insist on getting the latest driver update - even when the user
is running drivers that are at least 2 years newer than the game itself.

But there is hope, since at least one mainstream game works without coming
close to crashing (e.g. Half-Life 2.)
March 30, 2005 10:38:27 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"faster_framerates" <nothanks@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:D 2eots$8iv$1@news.tamu.edu...

>
> Much like yourself, I would love to be able to buy (or rent!) any game off
> the shelf, or online for that matter, and be virtually guaranteed that it
> would work in my "PC". I would even resort to buying a device like I
> mentioned above (let's just call it a PCbox) if the caliber of games were
> appealing, which they are currently not on the Xbox. Unfortunately, this
> isn't the current state of PC gaming and we must therefore adapt as well
> as upgrade our computers every now and then to continue our little
> obsessions.

we're in agreement on this. But the way I see it, this means that PC gaming
will continue its decline. The glory days of the mid to late nineties with
hundreds of games on the shelves of your local retailer are done.
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 10:38:28 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

> we're in agreement on this. But the way I see it, this means that PC
> gaming will continue its decline. The glory days of the mid to late
> nineties with hundreds of games on the shelves of your local retailer are
> done.

Yes, but in hindsight, how many out of those hundreds were truly "winners"?

- f_f
March 30, 2005 11:46:08 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Thus spake Andrew <spamtrap@localhost.>, Wed, 30 Mar 2005 07:29:14 +0100,
Anno Domini:

>On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 07:20:12 +0100, "sayNO2steam [authentic]"
><sayNO2steam@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>3... any current entry line graphic card by ati or nvidia with price
>>as low as 50 bucks will turn your pc into a good gaming machine, so
>>no need to spend more
>>
>>4... don't ever start by buying pc games just released like, doom3
>>riddick or farcry... those should be played in 2 or 3 years time
>
>ROFL, the opinion of a "true PC gamer"! You really are the most stupid
>person I have ever come across, and that is quite an achievement.

You hang around stupid ppl a lot then Andrew? ;-p

--
Replace 'spamfree' with the other word for 'maze' to reply via email.
March 30, 2005 11:46:09 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 19:46:08 +1000, Nostromo
<nostromo@spamfree.net.au> wrote:

>You hang around stupid ppl a lot then Andrew? ;-p

Usenet attracts them like a magnet ;-)
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.
Anonymous
March 30, 2005 11:52:29 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 03:03:39 GMT, "OldDog" <OldDog@city.pound> wrote:

>First, what country are you in?
Sorry, should have said - Vancouver, Canada.
March 31, 2005 1:39:22 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Thus spake Andrew <spamtrap@localhost.>, Wed, 30 Mar 2005 11:01:50 +0100,
Anno Domini:

>On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 19:46:08 +1000, Nostromo
><nostromo@spamfree.net.au> wrote:
>
>>You hang around stupid ppl a lot then Andrew? ;-p
>
>Usenet attracts them like a magnet ;-)

Might be the groups you're hangin around...?
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 12:46:33 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Xocyll wrote:
> Any random seven year old could build their own computer with only a
> tiny bit of instruction (about static and the need to be *very*
gentle
> adding the cpu and heatsink to the cpu), because most of the bits
only
> fit together one possible way. [Probably younger - though the manual
> dexterity might not be there younger.]
>
> The only "hard" part is getting the proper bits, putting it together
is
> child's play.

It's a lot harder than Lego, and I don't think a random 7 yr old would
get a working PC by themselves.

I agree that the hardest part is choosing which bits to get, because
the choice is bewildering and full of acronyms and techno-jargon -
different companies sometimes use different jargon for the same thing.
Even assuming you know what type of compenent you need and what
featrues ytou want on it and what size/format/form
factor/shape/whatever you need, you're still faced with trying to
decide which one is the best value for money.

Putting it together is the simplest bit, but even that isn't
straightforward. It's not just being gentle - you need to be firm and
gentle. Sometimes bits don't quite line up or you need to apply firm
pressure until it clicks. And which screws do you use? They all look
the same. Once you've done this a few times, it's easier, but so's
rewiring your house and I wouldn't attempt that. Static? Ah yes, the
silent killer. Well, it can fry your PC before you've even built it.
The first time I upgraded my memory I barely let go of the framework in
case I built up a static charge.

Assuming you get the thing working mechanically, you've then got the
final hurdle of getting all the software working properly. This is a
very close second behind buying the bits in terms of complexity,
difficulty and chances of failure.
>From the BIOS to the operating system, to anti-virus and firewalls,
email and internet browser, and all the other gimmicks and gadgets we
install, let alone the applications and games, the whole thing can be
borked at any time. I got everything up, installed ZonaAlarm and it
would crash and reboot as soon as it reached the desktop. Continuously.
It never managed to get stable. I doubt that Suzy Soccer Mum (or Little
Johnny) is going to be able to fix that. (I scrubbed the HDD and stated
again).

My point is that building a PC is not a simple task. There's a lot to
learn and a high cost of failure. It takes a lot of time and patience.
I do it because I enjoy doing it. For the opposite reason I never
attempt to service my own car (let alone build my own car).

Some people will enjoy building PCs (or cars). Or rewiring houses.
But Suzy Soccer Mum doesn't have the time or interest to do that, so
she'll buy a box from PC World and expect it to "just work".
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 3:23:50 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 07:20:12 +0100, "sayNO2steam [authentic]"
<sayNO2steam@yahoo.com> wrote:

>4... don't ever start by buying pc games just released like, doom3
>riddick or farcry... those should be played in 2 or 3 years time

Hypocrite.

--
"The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability
of the human mind to correlate all its contents." - H.P. Lovecraft
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 3:29:45 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 19:47:04 GMT, Joe62
<jmcginnNOSPAM@radicalREALLYNOSPAM.ca> wrote:

>On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 08:55:33 +0100, Andrew <spamtrap@localhost.>
>wrote:
>
>>I would suggest that is because most people happily buy the cheapest
>>bundle they can buy which aren't aimed at gamers. The bottom end price
>>is what attracts most buyers rather than any meaningful specs.
>
>Fair enough ... but what I'm finding is that their *middle* range
>systems - say in the $600-$900 range are also generally not
>game-capable. You have to go into high-range ($1000+) systems for the
>vendors to even consider throwing in a capable graphics card (and even
>there you're usually not getting money's worth).

Don't go with a vendor.

$1,000 isn't high-range anymore.
A top of the line PC is more than $5,000 these days.

--
"The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability
of the human mind to correlate all its contents." - H.P. Lovecraft
Anonymous
March 31, 2005 6:43:20 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

<snip>

> I doubt that Suzy Soccer Mum (or Little
> Johnny) is going to be able to fix that. (I scrubbed the HDD and stated
> again).

<end snip>

Suzy strikes again! And so does Lil' Johnny. Love it.

- f_f
Anonymous
April 1, 2005 12:54:21 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 16:07:18 -0600, "faster_framerates"
<nothanks@nowhere.net> wrote:
>And I'm sorry if it sounds elitist, but the game requirements (hardware,
>drive space, DirectX version, etc.) are written on the bottom of the box.
>Caveat emptor, or "let the buyer beware."

The problem is that there must be a lot games bought by uninformed
parents, friends, relatives, etc who have no idea what game requirements
mean.

My mum keeps buying my dad games on DVD-ROM that require Windows XP
(LotR: BfME and MoH:p A for instance), even though he is still running
Windows 98 and didn't have a DVD-ROM drive. And trying to explain to her
why it won't run on her MAC either, just because she has a DVD-ROM did
my head in.

There are still a lot of people that have no idea what's in their rigs,
or even what the manufacturer spec is for a ready-built system, or how
that relates to what it says in the required specs.

--
Alfie
<http://www.delphia.co.uk/&gt;
Confucius say: 'Boy who go to sleep with stiff problem wake up with solution in hand.'
Anonymous
April 1, 2005 12:58:29 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

JWB wrote:
> That's wrong. You are allowed to work on your own home if you do it
to code
> (which you can look up). Nobody has to check. New building permits
(for new
> construction) may require checking, but general repairs and
replacement do
> not.

Um... actually, in the UK, you can't fiddle with your electrics unless
you're qualified.
April 1, 2005 9:06:09 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Chadwick" <chadwick110@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1112374709.121987.307970@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> JWB wrote:
>> That's wrong. You are allowed to work on your own home if you do it
> to code
>> (which you can look up). Nobody has to check. New building permits
> (for new
>> construction) may require checking, but general repairs and
> replacement do
>> not.
>
> Um... actually, in the UK, you can't fiddle with your electrics unless
> you're qualified.

ahh, my mistake. Chalk it up to the usual "the internet begins and ends with
the US" attitude :) 
Anonymous
April 2, 2005 9:20:00 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Nostromo <nostromo@spamfree.net.au> looked up from reading the entrails
of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs say:

>Thus spake Xocyll <Xocyll@kingston.net>, Tue, 29 Mar 2005 12:14:41 -0500,
>Anno Domini:
>
>>"Chadwick" <chadwick110@hotmail.com> looked up from reading the entrails
>>of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs say:
>>
>>>
>>>F r e e wrote:
>>>> "Chadwick" <chadwick110@hotmail.com> escribió en el mensaje
>>>> news:1112086695.694054.311440@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>>>> > Andrew wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Problems? Weeeeeeh!
>>>>
>>>> Whats the problem in getting for example a solid Asus mobo and a
>>>processor,
>>>> an Ati/Nvidia mid-range video card, a soundblaster, kick a stick of
>>>RAM in,
>>>> add a harddisk and connect the monitor, keyboard and mouse!!!!???
>>>>
>>>> Spending a couple of hours reading online or paper reviews (just in
>>>case you
>>>> know nothing about solid brands with good support) cannot be that
>>>hard....
>>>> Or just find a serious retailer and let them sort it out.
>>>
>>>For you and me, no problem.
>>>For Mr and Mrs Blogs, just wanting a games machine for little Johnny? I
>>>bet they just want an easy life, someone to say, "buy this one".
>>
>>
>>Yeah but that's just because they are lazy, uninformed and wish to
>>remain uninformed at all costs.
>>
>>Building a computer is a bout as hard as playing with LEGO.
>>Static sensitive lego to be sure but...
>>
>>People get what they pay for;
>>Informed people get decent computers or build their own, and the
>>willfully ignorant buy 21st century snake oil and then complain about it
>>later - because it couldn't _possibly_ be their fault.
>>
>>Xocyll
>
>Of course, there's the 3rd type: lazy/busy professionals like myself who
>know *exactly* what they want & pay someone to assemble it. My new rig
>recently cost my company AU$3400 & I paid the place $70 to put it together.
>My time is worth more than that :) 

Well technically that still falls under category 1.

Xocyll
--
I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of
a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably,
Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So
FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr
April 3, 2005 12:01:40 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Thus spake Xocyll <Xocyll@kingston.net>, Sat, 02 Apr 2005 05:20:00 -0500,
Anno Domini:

>>>Yeah but that's just because they are lazy, uninformed and wish to
>>>remain uninformed at all costs.
>>>
>>>Building a computer is a bout as hard as playing with LEGO.
>>>Static sensitive lego to be sure but...
>>>
>>>People get what they pay for;
>>>Informed people get decent computers or build their own, and the
>>>willfully ignorant buy 21st century snake oil and then complain about it
>>>later - because it couldn't _possibly_ be their fault.
>>>
>>>Xocyll
>>
>>Of course, there's the 3rd type: lazy/busy professionals like myself who
>>know *exactly* what they want & pay someone to assemble it. My new rig
>>recently cost my company AU$3400 & I paid the place $70 to put it together.
>>My time is worth more than that :) 
>
>Well technically that still falls under category 1.

No it doesn't dude. Lazy, maybe, uninformed, most certainly not. I spec'd
out every single component (down to the ribbon cable ffs! ;-) & checked
*everything* over with a fine tooth comb after I received the box, both for
genuine componentry & proper configuration. So the only thing I left to the
'experts' who assemble the LEGO daily, is just that - the assembly, which
because I *don't* do it daily would've taken me a few hours (probably 2-4),
which I just couldn't be bothered with, as I have little if anything new of
value to learn from PC assembly (except I hadn't seen the newer SATA cables
as yet).
And then there's the whole 'accidents will happen', which no matter how
careful anyone is, can & do happen. And if they do, this way it's their
problem - they have to replace the cpu/memory/whatever that's been damaged
or blown by static or has a manufacturing defect, w/o 'no questions asked'
even coming into it :) .

--
Replace 'spamfree' with the other word for 'maze' to reply via email.
Anonymous
April 3, 2005 1:06:13 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Nostromo <nostromo@spamfree.net.au> looked up from reading the entrails
of the porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs say:

>Thus spake Xocyll <Xocyll@kingston.net>, Sat, 02 Apr 2005 05:20:00 -0500,
>Anno Domini:
>
>>>>Yeah but that's just because they are lazy, uninformed and wish to
>>>>remain uninformed at all costs.
>>>>
>>>>Building a computer is a bout as hard as playing with LEGO.
>>>>Static sensitive lego to be sure but...
>>>>
>>>>People get what they pay for;
>>>>Informed people get decent computers or build their own, and the
>>>>willfully ignorant buy 21st century snake oil and then complain about it
>>>>later - because it couldn't _possibly_ be their fault.
>>>>
>>>>Xocyll
>>>
>>>Of course, there's the 3rd type: lazy/busy professionals like myself who
>>>know *exactly* what they want & pay someone to assemble it. My new rig
>>>recently cost my company AU$3400 & I paid the place $70 to put it together.
>>>My time is worth more than that :) 
>>
>>Well technically that still falls under category 1.
>
>No it doesn't dude. Lazy, maybe, uninformed, most certainly not. I spec'd
>out every single component (down to the ribbon cable ffs! ;-) & checked
>*everything* over with a fine tooth comb after I received the box, both for
>genuine componentry & proper configuration. So the only thing I left to the
>'experts' who assemble the LEGO daily, is just that - the assembly, which
>because I *don't* do it daily would've taken me a few hours (probably 2-4),
>which I just couldn't be bothered with, as I have little if anything new of
>value to learn from PC assembly (except I hadn't seen the newer SATA cables
>as yet).
>And then there's the whole 'accidents will happen', which no matter how
>careful anyone is, can & do happen. And if they do, this way it's their
>problem - they have to replace the cpu/memory/whatever that's been damaged
>or blown by static or has a manufacturing defect, w/o 'no questions asked'
>even coming into it :) .

From my original message:

People get what they pay for;
Informed people get decent computers or build their own, and the
willfully ignorant buy 21st century snake oil and then complain about it
later - because it couldn't _possibly_ be their fault.

There's _two_ options listed there - 1. informed, 2. willfully ignorant.

Your example falls under category one, "get decent computer or build
their own".

Xocyll
--
I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of
a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably,
Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So
FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr
Anonymous
April 4, 2005 12:14:19 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Joe62 <NOSPAMjmcginn@shaw.ca> writes:

> The entire purchasing options and systems of every computer
> manufacturer seems designed to prevent anyone with any reasonable
> concern for fair value from getting a machine that can play games.

What about Falcon Northwest? With their ad in 3Dmark, their name is
known even here in remote Finland.

Other than that, I see a (desktop) PC as a collection of parts. You
can upgrade the parts you feel aren't up to speed. Hence I haven't
bought more than one PC system and that was back in 1990. I think I
still have the 5 1/4" floppy drive from that somewhere...
Anonymous
April 4, 2005 12:14:20 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Anssi Saari <as@sci.fi> wrote:

>You
>can upgrade the parts you feel aren't up to speed.

Outside of hardcore PC fiddlers, this is a myth. For a normal person
who buys a computer, and then wants to upgrade 2-3 years later once
they can no longer run games, upgrading does not exist. You need a new
graphics card. You therefore need a new CPU (so as not to be simply
CPU-bound). You therefore need a new mobo, and probably new RAM.
Everything's bigger now, get a new hard-drive. In other words, you
have to buy a new computer.

Joe
Anonymous
April 4, 2005 12:53:22 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Joe62 <NOSPAMjmcginn@shaw.ca> looked up from reading the entrails of the
porn spammer to utter "The Augury is good, the signs say:

>Anssi Saari <as@sci.fi> wrote:
>
>>You
>>can upgrade the parts you feel aren't up to speed.
>
>Outside of hardcore PC fiddlers, this is a myth.

Not really, because it is possible.

>For a normal person
>who buys a computer, and then wants to upgrade 2-3 years later once
>they can no longer run games, upgrading does not exist. You need a new
>graphics card. You therefore need a new CPU (so as not to be simply
>CPU-bound). You therefore need a new mobo, and probably new RAM.
>Everything's bigger now, get a new hard-drive. In other words, you
>have to buy a new computer.

You paint the blackest possible picture.

It won't run any new game at all, or won't run them acceptably?

Depending on the problem, it may be as simple as getting a new graphics
card to enable required features for the game to run. (See Morrowind for
example not running on a Voodoo3 because it required 32bit color.)

On the other hand it may be a cpu and/or ram issue and the graphics card
may not _need_ to be upgraded at all. (See a post made in this group
recently about the spiffy new card dying and the player falling back to
a Geforce3Ti200 and finding HL2 still played ok.)

It's all going to depend on what the existing hardware is, and what they
want the new hardware to be able to do.

Go back 3 years for cpu; and if they had top of the line then, it will
still probably be sufficient now, for most purposes. There may indeed
be benefit to having the fastest cpu speed now, but it isn't necessarily
_required_ in order to get the games to run.

Yeah, they'll have to upgrade everything if they want the maximum
possible performance with all the graphical bells and whistle in the
latest games, but that's a different scenario entirely from simply being
able to play the games.


What game out now has a _minimum_ requirement of a 3GHz+ cpu and a
latest generation video card in order to run at all?


Xocyll
--
I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of
a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably,
Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So
FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr
April 4, 2005 11:07:19 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Thus spake Joe62 <NOSPAMjmcginn@shaw.ca>, Mon, 04 Apr 2005 05:27:23 GMT,
Anno Domini:

>Anssi Saari <as@sci.fi> wrote:
>
>>You
>>can upgrade the parts you feel aren't up to speed.
>
>Outside of hardcore PC fiddlers, this is a myth. For a normal person
>who buys a computer, and then wants to upgrade 2-3 years later once
>they can no longer run games, upgrading does not exist. You need a new
>graphics card. You therefore need a new CPU (so as not to be simply
>CPU-bound). You therefore need a new mobo, and probably new RAM.
>Everything's bigger now, get a new hard-drive. In other words, you
>have to buy a new computer.
>
>Joe

If you plan ahead with your mobo/case/power supply you should get at least
one decent vidcard/cpu/memory upgrade out of it. If you skimp on the mobo,
you get what you pay for :) 

--
Replace 'spamfree' with the other word for 'maze' to reply via email.
Anonymous
April 13, 2005 6:07:49 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Alfie" wrote:

> Why is it that the stores that cover up the specs (probably believing

that no-one reads them anyway, which might be true) are also the ones
with a no-return policy?

Remember when the specs were not font size "Book Antiqua" Size 8 (or
smaller), but advertised clearly on the back on the (larger) boxes,
blending in with some of the finest artwork ever created (including
Kellogg's cereal boxes)? Those games were mostly upfront with their
specs, and had nothing to hide (well, *some* were under-spec'd, but
whaddya gonna do?).

As far as the "No Retrun" ploicy for unopened, mint condtion returns,
they can blow it out their booty-hole. Refuse to leave with a refund.

Mark wrote:

>> It's a fact - the older one gets, the harder it gets to read the
fine print. I suggest maybe asking Dad or Mum (or you) to write down
their comp specs, take them to the store, pick out a game, and ask a
sales clerk...

"Alfie" answered:

> We tried that one in the past, which is why she is now supposed to
check with me first before buying him games, and I usually give her a
list of appropriate games around Xmas and birthdays, but she will keep
buying stuff not on the list...

Your Mum wouldn't be carrying around Soccer kids, would she? :-)

No, I'm sorry to hear this, Alfie. Don't let it "do your head in". Grab
the receipts and the games, and return them when the unplayable games
are just idling away in the corner cupboard soon after the holidays
(don't wait to long). Then buy or trade for something Dad can play. Get
something for yourself, too. :-)

Mark
Anonymous
April 13, 2005 8:32:19 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On 13 Apr 2005 02:07:49 -0700, markparrish@mindspring.com wrote:
>"Alfie" answered:
>> We tried that one in the past, which is why she is now supposed to
>check with me first before buying him games, and I usually give her a
>list of appropriate games around Xmas and birthdays, but she will keep
>buying stuff not on the list...
>
>Your Mum wouldn't be carrying around Soccer kids, would she? :-)
>
>No, I'm sorry to hear this, Alfie. Don't let it "do your head in". Grab
>the receipts and the games, and return them when the unplayable games
>are just idling away in the corner cupboard soon after the holidays
>(don't wait to long). Then buy or trade for something Dad can play. Get
>something for yourself, too. :-)
>
It may have just been her 'evil plan'[TM] all along, but I'm taking my
spare XP Home PC down there this weekend for him to use. About time he
had an upgrade, and as he's stuck at home on medical retirement it'll
give him something new to play with :) 

Personally I've never had any trouble with returns, but then I worked in
contract law so can argue my point eloquently enough if required. It
will mean I no longer get the 'freebies' passed onto me when he can't
run them :(  C'est la vie :) )

--
Alfie
<http://www.delphia.co.uk/&gt;
Is a booby trap only dangerous for women ?
Anonymous
April 15, 2005 2:40:35 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On 14 Apr 2005 15:29:23 GMT, knight37 <knight37m@gmail.com> wrote:

>That Oddworld game is just kind of "eh" but Halo 2 is kick ass

Halo 2 is totally over-rated. Great multiplayer, but noring as hell
single player. Major step backwards from the original game.
!