Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[bombzero]

Oddly, my PS3 version runs much better then my PC version of Skyrim. My PC cost me ~700$ USD

unfortunately id say you probably fell victim to the numbers game.
GBs of ram don't mean power.
GBs of vram don't mean graphical power.

similarly;
megapixels don't mean quality.

[fqllve]

I dunno, my PS3 plays it better and my PC is pretty decent. PS3 is much quieter too. Probably still switch over to PC once the mods start rolling in though.

[Alastar]

At the exploration/navigation issue:
I want "uh oh, I'll have to draw a map of this" to be rare and only happening where thematically appropriate,  but it can work well and I find "follow the shiny arrow" for most of the game much more offensive.


On the casual issue: It's definitely possible to design good casual games of most genres. What I object to build something as a non-casual game then bastardizing it for supposed "casual" appeal:
Challenge without risk of losing.
Exploration without risk of getting lost.
Reward without effort.
Many modern design goals are fundamentally dishonest, and it severely hurts game quality.

[Leatra]

PC is more cheap if you know what hardware to get and where to get.

And following the shiny arrow is another reason why I think Bethesda is trying to pull more casual players.

I don't have anything against casual games. There are some good casual games that I enjoy but TES isn't meant to be like this. The reason why people liked Morrowind don't like this Skyrim and why people who liked Skyrim don't like Morrowind proves that.

[bombzero]

PC is more cheap if you know what hardware to get and where to get.

And following the shiny arrow is another reason why I think Bethesda is trying to pull more casual players.

I don't have anything against casual games. There are some good casual games that I enjoy but TES isn't meant to be like this. The reason why people liked Morrowind don't like this Skyrim and why people who liked Skyrim don't like Morrowind proves that.

yeah it was more the false pretense. the game presents itself in many ways like a more hardcore RPG, however all the core elements are indicative of casual RPGs.
combined with the fact that the earlier games in the series were also more hardcore RPGs lowers it a bit in my eyes.
combine that with the easy enemies that are apparently the 'scourge of the land' or 'dangerous undead abominations that killed hundreds' that i stroll into and kill with my bare hands, and its just not very exciting.

@computer costs: simply never buy a prebuilt computer that's exactly as you want it, you will be getting ripped off, alienware is overrated, and most 'gaming' computers are quite sub par.
for most games you should be fine with a cheap core system that's centered on movie watching and development stuff, then just grabbing a decent plug-n-play GPU, and possibly a processor upgrade depending on what you used as a base.
(looking it up, the statistical equivilant of my PC costs about 600-700$ depending where you but it, but i only payed about 500 total for computer/GPU/keyboard&mouse. building your own is much cheaper.

does anyone know some good RPG games that are more towards hardcore, and preferably where the player isn't the 'chosen one' (i.e. near demigod powerful making all other entities in the game look like children. the chosen one thing is a bit done to fucking death.)

but not a total grindfest(im looking at you MMO's...  )

[Rex_Nex]

Oddly, my PS3 version runs much better then my PC version of Skyrim. My PC cost me ~700$ USD

unfortunately id say you probably fell victim to the numbers game.
GBs of ram don't mean power.
GBs of vram don't mean graphical power.

similarly;
megapixels don't mean quality.

Naw, I just think my Skyrim copy is bugged or something. I dont have extremely high numbers anywhere, but I know enough to know my rig is decent. Here is what I have:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Processor: AMD FX-4100 Quad Core 3.6GHz
Video card: AMD Radeon 6770
RAM: 4GB DDR3 RAM
Hard Drive: 500GB (+500MB External)
Resolution: 1280x1024 (dont make fun of me!)
Motherboard: ASUS M5A97
OS: Windows 7 64-bit

Price: ~750$

Here's the catch: It's just as choppy on ultra high as it is on low.

[Cecilff2]

And following the shiny arrow is another reason why I think Bethesda is trying to pull more casual players.

I don't have anything against casual games. There are some good casual games that I enjoy but TES isn't meant to be like this. The reason why people liked Morrowind don't like this Skyrim and why people who liked Skyrim don't like Morrowind proves that.

It's weird because there was an obvious solution for both parties.

Clairvoyance.  Quest Arrow folks get what they want, non-quest arrow folks don't have some blaring quest marker saying "THIS WAY IDIOT"


It just sucked cause it didn't actually work.

[bombzero]

@Rex_Nex
Ill have to look up some stuff about that card real quick...

ok... with AA on for that card you will get horrible framerate in skyrim, anti aliasing doesn't do jack shit anymore anyways.
...
PCIE is good... but it isn't a major advantage over PCI
the processing architecture seems to be gaming oriented... but im not too experienced with AMD cards in particular.
oh... its a DDR3... DDR5 cards take advantage of available bandwidth better... not sure if DDR3 cards can handle newer games that well.

heres a link to my decent GPU.
http://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gt-440-channel/specifications
and one to your card, which seems good.
http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/graphics/amd-radeon-hd-6000/hd-6770/Pages/amd-radeon-hd-6770-overview.aspx#2
i believe your card was actually top of the line when it was released. probably damned phenomenal for most games at the time.

so possible reasons.
DDR3 memory is slower than DDR5, the speed allows it to take advantage of bandwith, stock cards are also not overclocked by default, and overclocking is slightly dangerous but mandatory for any true gaming geek. 
my card runs at about 824 clock speed, with DDR5 memory.
(note. the clock value above is my core clock speed, the memory clock is set to 1600(default) and shader clock should always be double the core clock just to ensure stability.)
can't locate your cards clock speed on its spec page, but unless its well above 800, your card is probably struggling to keep up with the rate it needs to draw frames at.
its also a bit earlier than my current card.

fortunately, a hellishly good card could be obtained for about 100$. so just remember a few things.
GPU;
DDR5 over DDR3 memory
VRAM doesn't matter much, but at least 512 is a good idea. 1 GB is better.
the number of CUDA cores is directly tied to how much information the card can process. more is better.
CPU;
having too much RAM but not enough processing power will actually slow down your computer due to it being able to hold more information then it can effectively process.
there is also a sort of 'optimum' amount of RAM and core speed for every motherboard, going over or under it hurts your performance.

(does anyone know just how substantial the deference is between DDR3 and DDR5 is? its a good bit, but im not 100% certain its the culprit here.)
[/geek]

[fqllve]

Naw, I just think my Skyrim copy is bugged or something. I dont have extremely high numbers anywhere, but I know enough to know my rig is decent. Here is what I have:

That is like my rig exactly and you should be able to run on medium settings well. Are your drivers up to date because that's what it sounds like. If they are I've heard that some BIOS with the FX chips default to the integrated graphics, are you sure you're running through the video card?

[Leatra]

Huh

My rig:
Nvidia GeForce 9800 GT
Intel (Quad) Core i3 CPU 3.07GHz
3.5 GB RAM
Windows XP

Runs very well on medium-high settings.

[Rose]

My rig:

2gb ddr2 ram.
2.5ghz E5200 dual core processor.
GTX 460 videocard.
Windows 7 x64.

Runs the game on max settings with only occasional slowdown.

[bombzero]

GTX 460 videocard.

.... so you have a GTX 460 GPU...
not a bad card.. but um... videocard?  my couple of friends who are severe computer geeks would probably kill you for saying that lol.
no really they insist on calling it a graphical processing unit. not even saying GPU or anything. im glad i don't have tooo many friends like that.

also i just derailed a thread... nerd style... 

anyways, thinking about it while playing skyrim a bit for fun, the game would in fact have some merit, if not for the cover saying "The Elder Scrolls: Skyrim.
I think that making a game part of a series near forces people to compare it to previous games, marring any hope of a 'simplification' in some parts of the game going over well.
this came to my mind when i considered that the only time a sequel ever gets positive praise from that nigh-cultist inner circle of long time players is when they add more complexity and content, without falling into the 'content spam' trend most companies do.

so therefore, few series get positive praise due to a majority of them adding next to nothing (CoD and such), simplifying(Skyrim, etc), or content spamming, (also CoD and others).
so while doing these things attracts new players to the series, they irritate a number of people who played earlier games.

ive only really ever seen a few successful series longer than 2-3 games who don't fall into one of the errors above. (several lesser known ones i know of that didn't).
but in general it seems like quite a difficult design block to push past, either fall into the faults, or give up on a well developed series if you cant create truly new ideas for it.

lets see... a few examples i can think of that kinda messed up.
the Assassins creed series following Ezio for three games, while the series is actually about Desmond. UbiSoft simply didn't want to drop such a well received character, so the 'main' storyline stalled.
the Call of Duty series while a decent game (the playerbase is why i hate it, not the game itself.), has fallen into 'content spam' quite badly by simply adding new maps and guns, but not refining very many core concepts every game.
Minecraft had some difficulty 'letting go' of concepts that were not working, though that's honestly more symptomatic of indie development in general, since the original project lead is often writing a game for themselves, I only have a serious problem with this when its a game that's paid for, not free.

so... yeah, just a few thoughts as to the causes of these flaws so often seen in series.

[Sordid]

no really they insist on calling it a graphical processing unit. not even saying GPU or anything. im glad i don't have tooo many friends like that.

Do they also call their fridge a nutrient refrigeration unit and their razor a facial hair removal unit? IT'S A FUCKING VIDEOCARD!
Sheesh.

[Leatra]

Graphical processing unit? It's just a fucking video card. It sounds like a spaceship part when you say it like that

It's like cleaner = hygiene technician. Just a douchey name

[bombzero]

and how at the dealership my stepdad works at the car salesmen are called 'sales technicians'... honestly i think everyone just think that the word technician makes people sound smarter.
and im a forum response composition technician, not a poster.