Everybody who followed how badly Interplay was doing. BIS was doing fine, just not fine enough to save Interplay

BIS made Lionheart, didn't they? That game was awesome.

I dont think PC gaming is dying but I can still see what you are getting at.(Could go bad for PC gaming if companies like Microsoft through time keep going with baby steps to make gaming a constant subscription based service, dont no about you people but gamings costing me heaps these days and half the time its all hype and Im paying £40 for less than 5 hours play sometimes) I happen to have 5 PCs some of them good and tbh good graphics are over-rated but thats what many want. I have found myself playing really old games of late. Heres the thing I think because of all this graphics technology gameplay is going out the window. MY friend has bought one of the recent rainbow 6 games and while it looks very nice he completed it in 5 hours. That is a total afront for a company to be putting out a game with 5 hours worth of content and charging premium prices. I would like to see less emphasis on the latest and greatest lighting and anti-aliasing and what not and more emphasis on making games that have lots of content and great replay value so your comming back again and again months later to play them. (Has knowone else noticed that generally the price of games has went up and the content is much less? Im sure someone will say thats because of the graphics and technical issues but I want to see gameplay as a number one priority, I dont want to get started on this but when you think of DX10 for instance in some games that boasted it , coders have actually looked at the code and in some cases its been nothing more than a gimmick.)

In short I would rather be on the forums saying ow this game is great because it has challenged me for hours, rather than ow this games lighting looks great but Ive been through asnd seem it all within or less than 1 week and gameplay wise its just the same old concept with better graphics bringing 0 unique to the table.

Suppose thats why I am enjoying sins though, It runs well on many PCs , still has decent graphics and is deep.

This topic comes up alot in my group of friends. Myself and most of my friends all agree that the PC industry is dying. Back in the day, PC's were the best form of gaming over the consoles. Play Doom on the PC or Turbo grafix 16 game, Play Eye of the Beholder on PC or snes game. Today you have the option of buying the console version which you might miss out on alot of the PC mod's but with console online capability, and thier download features, it's a matter of time before consoles see mods (in some cases already exist). Not to mention buy a console play the most updated games for years, buy a PC and your screwed in 18 months. If PC gaming is going to last (in my opinion) it needs to follow console guidelines. Build the games to run GOOD on various machines, don't develop strickly for the high end. Keep games on the PC. The more games get ported to consoles the more damage your causing the PC game industry. Companies like Blizzard, Stardock, Bethesda, ID software ect. ect. Are compaines who keep the blood pumpin for the PC. Not so much for how much they have developed, but the quality they have givin us. PC games have absolutly NO RESALE VALUE! When was the last time you could walk into a game store and trade in your PC games for new ones. I'm a collector yes, but I trade in some of my console games for new ones. If you buy a crappy PC game your stuck with it. Most important POLITICS! Every day it seems a big time developer is swallowing up the small guys. PC was AWESOME for discovering indie games. Now it's EA donination of the game industry and that SCARES ME!!!!!! Anyway, I'm writing this as if this little post is actually going to mean anything to anyone LOL. It feels good to talk about this with new people.

DarkPaladin1130

No edit button , anyway just to add I agree what was said about game stability though and even certain technology on PCs, I think some of the technologies are getting put out before they are fully tested or have stable drivers. With certain brands of nvidia cards , nvidia SLI is a prime example of this. (Have worked with lots of sli PCs even with the correct ampage some variants of the top notch nvidia cards still have numerous problems in sli mode)

I know, the point is that Guitar Hero is ultra-simple, but they make it use an insane amount of fireworks.

I do both. I have many consoles and a good PC. I own them because I wanna have access to all the good games. Console vs PC whatever. Being a console gamer does not make anyone a better/worse gamer in anyway shape or form. People who own JUST a PC or console often than not express bias coments and opinions. Not that there bad, just not as open minded. Both formats have ups and downs on equal ground. Regardless of format, if a game is released I wanna play I'll get it and adjust what I have to. Alot of you are right, alot of good arguments and statements. In the end though, do any of us really have a clue whats going on? Video games as a whole beat out movies last year in $$. That says something right?

Quoted For Truth.

There is nothing inherent about PC games that make them arbitrarily better than console games. Some people like certain kinds of experiences that are commonly found on consoles. Other people like experiences that are commonly found on PCs. Some like both or some of each. Nothing is wrong with any of these.

The main problem with PC gaming is finding the market. Many people who might want to play certain PC games simply can't due to lack of hardware (most PCs use integrated video). If PC game developers want to sell their games, they should make games that work on PCs, not a small subset of PCs.

Motherboard ($90)

Processor ($190)

RAM ($30)

HDD ($90)

Video ($180)

PSU ($100)

Case ($50)

Optical ($30)

Total: $760. So I'm $10 over However, replacing the 8800GT with a similarly-spec'd 9600GT would put you at a little under $700.

DDR2 800 is DDR2 800. As long as it's not generic crap and has a decent voltage range, there's zero difference.



No, it isn't. That setup is as "top as the line" you can get without paying a retarded amount of money for components that give you a 2% performance increase.

Low-latency RAM hasn't been relevant for a while.



Performing within a statistically insignificant margin of error to a "top of the line" system is well enough. You can always make incrementally better PC parts. Regardless, I'm not getting into a debate over semantics.

Aha, QFTT.