Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

General PC games master race thread. Everything about games. EVERYTHING.


LoooSeR
 Share

Recommended Posts

This thread is for PC gaming, but let's mention that the console industry is basically in the process of imploding:

http://www.techradar.com/us/news/gaming/ps4-5-release-date-news-and-rumors-all-the-latest-on-sony-s-playstation-4-upgrade-1319621

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/xbox-one-scorpio-getting-trade-in-programs-from-re/1100-6441638/

Microsoft and Sony are both slated to release new consoles (which they've couched as "upgrades" - not that that helps the MSRP any) for winter 2016, just three years after the release of the last generation.

Why? No surprise to us PC builders; RAM has gotten way cheaper, graphics cards and processors have zoomed ahead, and SSDs have gotten far, far cheaper. I worked at a video game store in 2014 and it was obvious to me that the XBOX One and PS4 were simply doomed; too little too late. They had been in development too long and by the time they were released didn't represent a very good value.

The console is in its death throes, I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We're only just at the point where a PC is a more cost effective solution than a console, that giant window during the ps3/360 age where PCs could be cheaper and/or more capable basically hasn't existed for the bone and ps4. RAM has gotten way cheaper, but processors have done basically jack shit, if they're going to get a processor improvement it's going to be at the cost of moving from small cores to big cores in their design (and for back-compatibility reasons hoping that a virtual core on a hyperthreaded Zen design is worth a cat core) with the attendant cost in transistors. GPUs have gotten considerably more powerful for the price, but that's a borderline constant in the computer space (and in fact is quite possibly slowing down as well). SSDs getting cheaper is great but it still isn't relevant to the sort of bare minimum machine that would compete with consoles or with consoles that actually install their games.

 

What there is though, is a much sounder policy with the console makers to buy more performance with time rather than by asking their customers to fork over more money. As long as the now legacy consoles last well into the lifespan of their "successors", it's a much better model than subsidizing overly expensive hardware and then getting the customers to pay it back by riding an archaic console for too long with no upgrade path in sight. Xbone and PS4 have been pretty great consoles considering their low price tag, and have been a roaring success as far as sales go.

 

Incidentally, PC hardware is incredibly stagnant compared to any time in recent memory and isn't looking to get much better. The only huge advances in processors recently are Skylake having a killer memory controller which is great for people who like taxing their 980 Ti SLI, 1070 SLI and 1080 (SLI or otherwise), Broadwell-E is the worst E series in basically ever, with Haswell-E being straight out better considering the price hikes on BW-E, and GPU space finally got a node shrink and it's kind of a disappointment, with AMD seemingly having to hammer their chips with volts like goddamn Frankenstein and NV one step closer to Intel's business model of underwhelming performance upgrades and unprecedented price increases.

 

The days of the 8800 GT and C2D are long behind us. Heck so are the days of the 4870, Sandy Bridge and basically all the really really good stuff. There's only so much juice left in making transistors smaller and there's only so much design optimization left to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IIRC, PCs were only ever more expensive than consoles of comparable power because consoles were sold at a loss (with a few exceptions, notably the wii).

 

Try and assemble a more capable gaming system than the xbone or ps4 using contemporary parts and doing it for cheaper. Neither of those was sold for a loss. The APUs they put in them are legitimately a really solid piece of gaming silicon. It's surprisingly difficult because they've gotten good at using the GPU for compute.

 

This goes triple if we're including the price of a windows license. Good luck with that one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Try and assemble a more capable gaming system than the xbone or ps4 using contemporary parts and doing it for cheaper. Neither of those was sold for a loss. The APUs they put in them are legitimately a really solid piece of gaming silicon. It's surprisingly difficult because they've gotten good at using the GPU for compute.

 

This goes triple if we're including the price of a windows license. Good luck with that one.

 

So they ditched the loss leader model after Xbox 360?  Interesting.

 

How did the console mfgs keep prices down then?  Economies of scale?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dark Souls question:

I have begun playing DS1, and I've found it pretty annoying from a combat perspective. "Oh, well, that's how it's supposed to be, see you die a lot; get good" is the kneejerk response I've seen a lot on the Internet to any complaints about DS, so I'll get this out of the way. No, twinkle toes, I am not an idiot and I've played hard games before. The Witcher 3 is hard, Unreal Tournament is hard, Far Cry is hard, STALKER is hard, etc. I've played and beaten these games on their hardest difficulties.

And Dark Souls isn't any different, but I think I might be happier with one of the later installments, which is why I am getting on here. Combat in DS1 is very similar to TW3 and TW2 (the latter of which came before DS1), with basic roll/quick attack/strong attack/utility pad set up. There are some differences that are jarring (weak attack is on RB, strong attack is on RT, two placements that are heresy to me coming from the Witcher games, and Soul Calibur 2 ages ago that righteously put strong/weak on the button pad), and the game apparently doesn't let you configure the controller, like something from the 1990s, but whatever, I guess I'll just deal with it.

What's getting on my nerves is the camera. The camera is awful, and I routinely find it shoved up the boss's ass when I am trying to roll-dodge-roll underneath him. Hard to duck between his legs when all I'm getting is a closeup of 2011's fur textures all over my screen.

So, is the camera something you learn to manage (which sounds like a pain), or should I just buy DS2/3 because their combat is better anyway and I can change the control config, or what?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Camera issues are alleviated by playing unlocked on some bosses. On the boss you spoke of (The Asylum Demon), yes, you can get a little camera fucked. 

 

But you've only fought one boss so far. Get through half of them for a proper perspective, methinks. Also, have you managed to learn how to backstab or parry enemies yet? Because those are very good skills to have. 

 

Dark Souls is challenging and rewards patient players who learn patterns and plan ahead. It's a game that also rewards exploration of an area. Lore and items are hidden everywhere. The path between bosses is littered with stuff, so go have fun. 

 

As far as the controls are concerned, they put the attacks in those positions so that jumping attacks (Forward RT) and rolling attacks (Rb out of a roll) are easier to pull off. And those attacks are fantastic for mix-ups during PVP and can be very useful in PVE. 

 

I'm not sure how much customization DS2/3 has as far as the controls are concerned. I do know that they changed the way you jump (Because DS1's jumping mechanic is difficult to master, while sprinting hit the sprint button again? Weird.), but give the controls some time, dude.

 

I say give it time because you've literally only hit the FIRST area. You killed the tutorial boss. You've got Taurus Demon, Capra Demon, Gargoyles, Quelana, etc left before you hit the real brick wall bosses in the game.

 

My one gripe about the original game is that the four-direction rolling is kind of a pain. It's not really bad if you stay locked on and strafe around while dodging, but DS2 introduced omnidirectional rolling and increased I-frames (That were tied to a stat called Adaptability). In my opinion, tying I-frames with a stat that you could level made the game FAR to easy. Because you can roll through any attack, no matter how big.

 

Anyway, as for the Lore, I suggest you checking out Vaati's videos about characters and main story lore.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You say "give it time" like you think I'll give up and post a negative review to Steam, hahah.

Essentially, the combat system feels VERY familiar, since I've played both Witcher 2 and 3 multiple times. From a movement and timing perspective, I am having no trouble at all, until I reflexively hit "X" by accident or the camera goes up the butt of a demon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fun fact, you can get the Asylum Demon to keep doing the big butt-stomp attack if you continuously attack the butt. Maybe that's what the camera was telling you to do. :P

 

But no, that's one boss fight that does have a strange camera. There are others that are much better in my opinion. It'll take time to get really good with the attacks and distancing if you're coming from The Witcher. 

 

I'm gonna post this again, because lore is awesome. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a ladder to your right as you enter the arena. Climbing up it lets you kill the two archers. If you agro the boss and lead him to there, you can climb up the ladder and do a plunging attack onto the boss for like 400 damage. #Protips

 

Heh. I found the archers, but that's a good tip.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...