Oh, yes, sure. Except these OS wars, hardware wars, browser wars and all that. I mean that shit is way more important to figure out than which console is best.
And, btw, saying that fanboys are the only people that buy consoles is just ridiculous.
Comment has been collapsed.
When AMD fixes their CF frame rating issues, then they will truly be king. But for single GPUs, I agree at this point AMD is knocking em out of the park. 7950 is easily the best bang for the buck, and this is coming from a guy who has a 670FTW.
Comment has been collapsed.
You are probably saying the 7950 is better just because it has more memory than the average affordable gtx card, plenty of tests were made to the new 700 series and the best affordable card right now is the 760, it's about the same as 670 and costs alot less. Prior to that it was the 660ti.
I also have a 670 and i made my research after the 700 series were announced and released on market. Not to mention gtx 670, 680 and 770 are roughly the same price as the affordable AMD cards and these have better perfomance for gaming.
Comment has been collapsed.
Ah I wasn't fully briefed on the 760's gaming performance. Good on Nvidia. It appears that GPU holds the best bang for the buck crown for now.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's still not the king in the field just because it's cheaper.
Since you really want to go by prices, i'll have to shut you up with this:
http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html
Now read the chart and compare the prices and perfomance of the cards, you will notice that a few selected cards are better than AMD cards.
And one last fyi, gtx 760, enough said.
Time to get off because you are boring me to death.
Comment has been collapsed.
asked a question, didn't state a fact. But since you bring it up... some LARGE percent of the people that buy the consoles are going to be fanboys for that console. It's going to be what, $500? Why on earth would you drop $500 on something you weren't a fan of?
Comment has been collapsed.
They don't want the DRM back, this is a punishment for M$ for trying to have this DRM. After it's being removed people are voting it back so the console will fail, I'm surprised it's not piss obvious to you people. The internet has pulled this shit before, multiple times.
Comment has been collapsed.
Always Online DRM is the inevitable future of gaming, having Always Online DRM opens new doors to new things in the future of the gaming industry. So better have it now rather than have it later and as result stalling the evolution of the gaming industry.
Comment has been collapsed.
lol stop repeating this like a mantra, it's just Microsoft's marketing. It's not the inevitable future, it's only what Microsoft is selling you. The future is what we make it. Always-on DRM indeed opens a lot of doors for Microsoft, but for the consumers it mostly closes doors. What Microsoft wants is to sell you a $500 wireless controller and stream the games to you like Onlive so they can control and charge everyone at every step of the process from end to end. Microsoft is a software company, they're one of the primary distributor of Cloud software and server technology worldwide, of course they want everyone to adopt their products. There is absolutely zero necessity for always-on DRM, try gog.com.
Comment has been collapsed.
"The future is what we make it." That's one hell of naive thing to say. Also your argument seems to be really affected by this console wars thing (hating on Microsoft), I don't use any console so I don't give crap what Microsoft said, I put up my argument from technical point of view. Tell me what always online DRM cause aside of problem if you don't have stable internet.
Comment has been collapsed.
Dude it's not naive it's the truth. You're being very pessimistic saying it's the inevitable future. I'm not hating on Microsoft, the policy I mention is the reality. They have the same objective with businesses, ideally what they want is to replace the traditional desktop computers by access terminals where employees directly log in on their virtual desktop (online, on a server) instead of storing data on local hard drives. This is to increase mobility and blablabla. Since they're already going in this direction, they're also trying to bring their gaming division on the same boat because it's convenient for them, but what makes sense for businesses doesn't necessarily make sense for home consoles.
Honestly I don't believe in the technical "advantages" they're announcing either for Cloud processing. Look at Sim City for instance, EA tell us that some of the calculations have to be processed on their servers and therefore the always-on DRM is necessary. But it's bullshit, the processing could be done locally on our hard drive like with every other game if they wanted. By engineering the game specifically to work on their servers, the always-on DRM BECOMES necessary. That's how they justify it. Hey you want that cool AI with Forza 5, well it requires Cloud processing. Does it really? Or do they use Cloud processing deliberately to make online play mandatory?
You're asking me to justify -not using- always-on DRM? Dude, that's completely backwards. Why on earth would you let someone bully you into going online to play a single player game? Maybe today you don't care because it doesn't cause you any problem, but you gotta think bigger. Let's say the DRM nonsense keeps going and nobody cares because, well, it doesn't cause most people any inconvenience. What if you moved to another country in a couple of years and realized all the games you'd bought online were IP-locked? Thanks for buying 50 games but Microsoft/Sony/XXXX doesn't have any authentication servers in that region, or your IP doesnt match the country you're from, so you can't play anything, fuck me right? Or in a few years, servers will be taken offline permanently for game XXXXX, sorry but the enemy AI/graphics/physics/data processing will no longer be streamed from the Cloud, have fun replaying your game with empty levels. But hey don't feel bad, here's an achievement for your continued loyalty!
Comment has been collapsed.
You haven't explained why "The future is what we make it." is the truth.
I have no idea what Microsoft said, but when I said it opens new doors I didn't mean cloud processing, or whatever they said. Th biggest problem is that you're on the mindset of that Always-Online DRM is such evil and bad thing, the only bad thing is the way some companies handled it, but it's bad because they didn't have the chance to experiment with it, and if people will be shit storming about they won't have alot of chance to experiment it and find a positive way to use it. And what you mention IP lock? always online DRM isn't IP lock, if some companies decide to use it, it makes the company bad. not the concept of always online DRM. And if the servers for the game is closed they could simply release a path that lets you to play the game offline. And that's also talking if the always online DRM is for a specific game, and not a platform wide.
Comment has been collapsed.
Because if customers don't like specific practices and massively reject a product, like we've seen with the Xbox One for instance, the companies have to listen and adapt to what people ask for if they want to keep making money. So the consumers decide which technology/practices they want to back with their money.
IP lock/region lock is a form of online DRM. A whole lot of Xbox live games on demand are already ip locked and region locked, I'm currently unable to even download the free games because of the ip lock, even though I have a legit account, it's ridiculous. DRM adds nothing but restrictions to games, I really don't understand why you like it so much. DRM is just an added layer of control/security on top of the programs, it's not part of the games themselves. Online features are fine but if you legally bought a game that can be played without an Internet connection, you should be able to play it offline if you want to. For instance with Steam, if you're online then you can enjoy plenty of benefits like Cloud saves, but you also have the option of going into offline mode for an extended period if you want to. Why do you want to be forced to be online at all times if you're playing Bastion for instance? How can this possibly be a good thing for you, a paying customer?
Comment has been collapsed.
Some cases a company might back off for a while in order to risk too much, but in the end they will find a way bring it one way or another, that's how it always been. Or you want to tell me that DLCs for every little thing is something costumers wanted? Or how they lock different content they made with a game just to sell it later as DLC?
I was supporting Always Online DRM, not IP/region locks. And I didn't say that currently there is actually any benefits to it right now, that's why only said it's good in order to open new doors in the future, to let companies experiment with it in order to shape it in a way that would bring more people (which is the goal of every company) AKA something that will interest us. (Steam for example, which at beginning seemed like just something in the way but in the end turned into something great)
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes it's about compromise, that's why you shouldn't blindly support the drm if there is no benefit for you. Ask them to make the product worthwhile BEFORE buying it, otherwise they have no incentive to refine it. If you want investors to back your project with a loan you have to provide some guarantees, they don't just blindly give you a pile of money to go "experiment", that's how it works.
When it comes to DLC, well that's because people are okay with it. They bitch and moan but they buy it so in the end they do support it. Every time you buy DLC or an online pass you actively endorse these practices. Maybe you think one person more or less doesn't change anything but it does, if DLC doesn't generate enough money companies have to adapt. Maybe by adding more content to future DLC packs, maybe by lowering the price, etc. If people buy 3 maps for $15, next time they'll try selling 2 maps for $15. However, if people refuse to buy 3 maps for $15, next time they'll try 4 maps for $15 instead, or 3 for 9.99 maybe. So, yeah, if there is all this shit DLC today it's because people ARE buying it. Maybe not you, certainly not me, but enough people to make it worthwhile. It's like online passes, people preorder games at full price AND buy the online pass on top because they want to play the game on release. Well if you're ready to pay $80 for a game, it's only natural that they try to sell it to you for $85.
Comment has been collapsed.
A product is much more likely to evolve to something better if experimented with, and not simply guessing how it would be better and throw it at people. Always Online DRM as it is doesn't hurt me so I don't mind that they would experiment with it.
But that's the point, if they kept the Always Online DRM thing, people would bitch, but they would still buy, I know that not alot of people pre-ordered xBox, but I don't think it would've stayed the same for long and even with Always Online DRM people would've eventually bought it.
Comment has been collapsed.
But there are many possible opportunities that can only be opened if online state is consistent.
Comment has been collapsed.
Some features that rely on consistent internet connection, I don't know. Because you can't think of one doesn't mean no one else could think of one.
Comment has been collapsed.
Microsoft's mistake was not taking it far enough. If it disallowed used game sales altogether it wouldn't have needed daily license checks. But because it tried to give people almost normal resales, just with a way to optionally force some of the money to go to the publishers, it met with "OMG NO USED GAME SALES" on one hand and "OMG ALWAYS ON DRM" on the other. Neither is the complete truth but people aren't really interested in minutia.
Comment has been collapsed.
I stopped being surprised by such things after Obama got re-elected.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm a PC gamer, I don't care about consoles so I signed it :D
Comment has been collapsed.
I know a couple of people who where bummed about Microsoft's 180. Not because of the DRM part, but because now you will need to have the disc in the console to play. They really liked the idea of both having a physical copy AND being able to play and share without using the disc every time. I can understand this as I used to patch the games I legally bought with no-cd cracks just so I wouldn't have to get the disc out every single time.
They still can buy their games online though so it's a moot point I guess. Since I've started using Steam, I never went back to physical discs. (And I was dead set against the idea of online distribution as I really liked to have physical copies of my games.)
Comment has been collapsed.
Probably PS3 and PC players acting like children.
Comment has been collapsed.
Why does he even compare always-on drm with Steam? Steam isn't always-on, and even has an offline-mode...
Must be a troll.
Comment has been collapsed.
761 Comments - Last post 14 minutes ago by BlazeHaze
295 Comments - Last post 52 minutes ago by Vincer
14 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by funnyduck99
580 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by MeguminShiro
46,890 Comments - Last post 4 hours ago by MeguminShiro
7 Comments - Last post 5 hours ago by Fluffster
42 Comments - Last post 7 hours ago by M0J
111 Comments - Last post 7 minutes ago by FAAY
2 Comments - Last post 13 minutes ago by Thexder
12 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by ThatDave
55 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by ThatDave
5,796 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by MasterJunior
162 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by Peiperissimus
2,796 Comments - Last post 3 hours ago by yugimax
This is very scary, why on earth would this many people sign a petition like this? I couldn't believe what i was reading but unfortunately this is sad but true.
article link: http://www.cinemablend.com/games/Stupid-Fanboys-Petition-Microsoft-Bring-Back-Xbox-One-DRM-57382.html
Comment has been collapsed.