OT - Brute Force
Steven Flegel
Brute Force.
- SF
Mike Kohary
wrote:
>For the next few weeks and the foreseeable future, just two words:
>Brute Force.
I don't understand. Please help.
Mike
Lonnie
> >For the next few weeks and the foreseeable future, just two words:
> >Brute Force.
>
> I don't understand. Please help.
Jeez Mike, sometimes you are
sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
thick.
;)
Lonnie, deep within the bunker at the Colorado Seahawk Sanctuary
wolfbane
"Steven Flegel" <a...@defghijklmno.com> wrote in message
news:3ED43F67...@defghijklmno.com...
> For the next few weeks and the foreseeable future, just two words:
> Brute Force.
That's right Stevie! If she doesn't want to give up the snatch the easy way
then we'll just have to do it the hard way........
wolfbane
______________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Still Only $9.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
GravyCat
"Lonnie" <Duckst...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:70db059e.0305...@posting.google.com...
> Mike Kohary <mko...@earthlink.net> wrote
>
> > >For the next few weeks and the foreseeable future, just two words:
> > >Brute Force.
> >
> > I don't understand. Please help.
>
> Jeez Mike, sometimes you are
>
sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooo
> thick.
>
> ;)
They're X-Box geeks - that's all. "Brute Force" just came out, and they're
all exited at the prospect of another FPS, even if it is just a rehashed
Halo clone. The single-player campaign sucks, and the multi-player game
(it's strength) only works for multiple players on the same X-Box (can you
say split-screen?) or 2-4 locally networked X-Boxes. NO SUPPORT for X-Box
Online. But who would want to play a squad-based FPS on the Internet anyway
(Tribes anyone?).
Mark Diller
"GravyCat" <pat...@pugetsound.NOSPAM.net> wrote:
> But who would want to play a squad-based FPS on the Internet anyway
> (Tribes anyone?).
I would. Though I'm still waiting for the game that fulfils the genre's
promise.
I'm surprised how many Xbox titles are still coming out without Xbox
Live support. Microsoft isn't doing a very good job of bringing
developers to that platform.
Mark
Mike Kohary
<pat...@pugetsound.NOSPAM.net> wrote:
>They're X-Box geeks - that's all. "Brute Force" just came out, and they're
>all exited at the prospect of another FPS, even if it is just a rehashed
>Halo clone. The single-player campaign sucks, and the multi-player game
>(it's strength) only works for multiple players on the same X-Box (can you
>say split-screen?) or 2-4 locally networked X-Boxes. NO SUPPORT for X-Box
>Online. But who would want to play a squad-based FPS on the Internet anyway
>(Tribes anyone?).
Oh, I get it. Yeah, I don't pay any attention to X-Box, so how the
hell would I know? ;)
By the way, FPS games on consoles suck, because the controller simply
isn't made for such games. Keyboard+mouse is the only way to go. I
seriously don't know why anyone with a decent computer would play a
console FPS. Flame away.
Mike
--
"Worry is like interest paid | Mike Kohary
in advance on a debt that | mko...@earthlink.net
never comes due." | http://www.kohary.com
Seattle Seahawks http://www.kohary.com/seahawks GO HAWKS!
john wallace craven
On Wed, 28 May 2003, Mike Kohary wrote:
> On Wed, 28 May 2003 22:42:42 GMT, "GravyCat"
> <pat...@pugetsound.NOSPAM.net> wrote:
>
> >They're X-Box geeks - that's all. "Brute Force" just came out, and they're
> >all exited at the prospect of another FPS, even if it is just a rehashed
> >Halo clone. The single-player campaign sucks, and the multi-player game
> >(it's strength) only works for multiple players on the same X-Box (can you
> >say split-screen?) or 2-4 locally networked X-Boxes. NO SUPPORT for X-Box
> >Online. But who would want to play a squad-based FPS on the Internet anyway
> >(Tribes anyone?).
>
> Oh, I get it. Yeah, I don't pay any attention to X-Box, so how the
> hell would I know? ;)
>
> By the way, FPS games on consoles suck, because the controller simply
> isn't made for such games. Keyboard+mouse is the only way to go. I
> seriously don't know why anyone with a decent computer would play a
> console FPS. Flame away.
Dude... you need to pick up some of the latest console FPSes. For one
thing, the controls are radically different now; speaking as a long-time
mouse-and-keyboard guy, the two-joystick, two-trigger method is just as
easy to use, and in addition since the hardware is always the same you
don't have to worry about aspects of Halo, Hitman, or Splinter Cell to not
work quite right on your computer.
The computer still has a monstrously large space for gaming... think
strategy (real-time and Civ-style turn-based games are still
mega-popular) and sim games like Rollercoaster Tycoon or The Sims.
Consoles work better for FPS, sports, racing, and (if you're into that
sort of thing) fighting games. They appeal to different interests;
overall, one isn't going to be pushing the other aside any time soon.
John Craven
Bill Bessette
@defghijklmno.com:
> For the next few weeks and the foreseeable future, just two words:
> Brute Force.
Oh yeah... (if I can break away from Planetside... :D )
Bill
Bill Bessette
news:HFMCF...@news.boeing.com:
> X-Boxes. NO SUPPORT for X-Box Online. But who would want to play a
> squad-based FPS on the Internet anyway (Tribes anyone?).
Thousands and thousands of people. Tribes and Tribes 2 ruled, and
Planetside is awesome.
Bill
Bill Bessette
news:s6madvkcd1o75dm73...@4ax.com:
> By the way, FPS games on consoles suck, because the controller simply
> isn't made for such games. Keyboard+mouse is the only way to go. I
> seriously don't know why anyone with a decent computer would play a
> console FPS. Flame away.
Get used to the controller, and it becomes easy and fun.
Dismiss the controller and you'll never "get it".
Bill
Mark Diller
Mike Kohary <mko...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> By the way, FPS games on consoles suck, because the controller simply
> isn't made for such games. Keyboard+mouse is the only way to go. I
> seriously don't know why anyone with a decent computer would play a
> console FPS. Flame away.
Maybe because, having purchased that "decent computer," they don't want
to get stuck into an upgrade path that requires them to buy new video
cards, RAM, and sometimes even mother boards in order to play the latest
and greatest. To me the greatest advantage of the console is the
hardware is fixed, and game designers can't pretend that it's perfectly
reasonable to require their customers to spend several hundred dollars
in order to play their $40 game.
That being said, I still don't play console FPS's, 'cause I don't like
twitch games. Halo showed some promise until it turned into a Half-Life
clone, with mutants coming at you from every direction. That game was a
lot more interesting when it was still on the drawing board, and was
described as a squad-based, third-person military action game.
Incidentally, I was interviewing for an editorial position with the
X-box group last summer (didn't get it, but it was only a three month
contract anyway), and I heard gossip that there was extreme discontent
within the Bungie group brought in from Chicago to continue developing
Halo as an Xbox-only title (before the buyout it was slated to be a
cross-platform PC game). Apparently the creative types didn't like how
much their efforts were being dictated by marketing. I didn't think much
of it then, because when do creative types ever get along with
marketing? But I was reminded of that when I heard that Halo 2 was
slipping past the Christmas release window, in part because Bungie was
insisting on spending time porting Halo 1 to the PC -- a project that
the suits wouldn't much care about, since it won't drive sales for
Microsoft hardware. I can only imagine the meetings with marketing that
were going on during that period, and I'm a little surprised that I
couldn't hear the shouting from my apartment in Queen Anne.
Mark
Peter Reggio
"Mark Diller" <spamta...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:spamtarget915-C70...@news.chatlink.com...
Console makers require you to buy their latest and greatest console
machine (NES, SNES; PS, PS2, etc). It's just more stratified than being
able to upgrade whenever you wish to or can afford to. The question would
be, then, whether upgrading to a certain level allows you keep up with
PC-game technology for a longer period of time than the typical console
cycle.
Regis
DrGruesome
"Peter Reggio" <ire...@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:SvuBa.789301$Zo.164025@sccrnsc03...
> Console makers require you to buy their latest and greatest console
> machine (NES, SNES; PS, PS2, etc). It's just more stratified than being
> able to upgrade whenever you wish to or can afford to. The question would
> be, then, whether upgrading to a certain level allows you keep up with
> PC-game technology for a longer period of time than the typical console
> cycle.
>
> Regis
>
>
I'm not a hardcore gamer, so the upgrade path isn't a big deal for me.
However, I'd like to mention that upgrading your PC gives you additional
benefit, assuming you use your PC for more than just a game console and
e-mail appliance. Upgrading a console sometimes allows you to upgrade your
DVD player, which can be a good thing if your player needed upgrading.
Speaking of which, I was wondering - do the modern consoles play MP3-encoded
CDs as well? What about progressive scan? Which, if any, consoles are HDTV
resolution native? I am thinking it could be a way to go to upgrade our old
DVD player.
I have always prefered PC-based games to consoles because the graphics are
much higher resolution, the control interface is much more flexible
(keyboard/mouse for one game, keyboard/joystick for another,
keyboard/control pad for another, etc.), and the command mapping can be much
more intuitive (press W for weapons rather than Button 7).
I've pretty much lost interest in the modern games, because I have been
bitten too many times by the triumph of eye-candy over playability. Unless
it's a game that comes very well recommended to me for gameplay, I won't
even buy it. This also puts me behind the technological curve, so the
upgrade path for me is easy to handle as it more closely matches my other
computing needs.
Michael Johnson
tadperry
news:Xns9389F1002D5F6d...@216.168.3.30...
A real video game player can master any controller hardware, even a trakball
game.
tvp
Bill Bessette
news:Q_DBa.1041998$F1.124214@sccrnsc04:
The mouse/keyboard combination *is* the best control solution for FPS
games.
That being said, the controller can be mastered to the point where you
don't even think about it any more (I did that with HALO.)
Bill
Mark Diller
"Peter Reggio" <ire...@attbi.com> wrote:
> "Mark Diller" <spamta...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:spamtarget915-C70...@news.chatlink.com...
> > In article <s6madvkcd1o75dm73...@4ax.com>,
> > Mike Kohary <mko...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> > > By the way, FPS games on consoles suck, because the controller simply
> > > isn't made for such games. Keyboard+mouse is the only way to go. I
> > > seriously don't know why anyone with a decent computer would play a
> > > console FPS. Flame away.
> >
> > Maybe because, having purchased that "decent computer," they don't want
> > to get stuck into an upgrade path that requires them to buy new video
> > cards, RAM, and sometimes even mother boards in order to play the latest
> > and greatest. To me the greatest advantage of the console is the
> > hardware is fixed, and game designers can't pretend that it's perfectly
> > reasonable to require their customers to spend several hundred dollars
> > in order to play their $40 game.
> > Mark
>
> Console makers require you to buy their latest and greatest console
> machine (NES, SNES; PS, PS2, etc). It's just more stratified than being
> able to upgrade whenever you wish to or can afford to. The question would
> be, then, whether upgrading to a certain level allows you keep up with
> PC-game technology for a longer period of time than the typical console
> cycle.
Agreed, that is the question. The lifetime of a console is probably
about three years, maybe four, before the next version comes out. I'd be
surprised if upgrades on the PC side -- a video card, for instance --
get the same mileage without the player accepting significant
performance lag towards the end of the hardware's window of utility. And
bear in mind that the price of a console gets you farther -- three or
four hundred dollars, which can easily be eaten up by a single video
card (if you're buying at the bleeding edge), not to mention RAM (in a
bad market) or (much worse) a processor upgrade. PC gaming can be damned
expensive. Lots of guys are happy to pay the money so they can play id's
latest and greatest, of course, and more power to them; I just reached
the point where I didn't want to be continually upgrading anymore.
Mark
john wallace craven
On Fri, 30 May 2003, Bill Bessette wrote:
> "tadperry" <tadp...@attbi.com> wrote in
> news:Q_DBa.1041998$F1.124214@sccrnsc04:
>
> > "Bill Bessette" <dsqu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:Xns9389F1002D5F6d...@216.168.3.30...
> >> Mike Kohary <mko...@earthlink.net> wrote in
> >> news:s6madvkcd1o75dm73...@4ax.com:
> >>
> >>
> >> > By the way, FPS games on consoles suck, because the controller
> >> > simply isn't made for such games. Keyboard+mouse is the only way
> >> > to go. I seriously don't know why anyone with a decent computer
> >> > would play a console FPS. Flame away.
> >>
> >> Get used to the controller, and it becomes easy and fun.
> >> Dismiss the controller and you'll never "get it".
> >
> > A real video game player can master any controller hardware, even a
> > trakball game.
>
> The mouse/keyboard combination *is* the best control solution for FPS
> games.
It's a very good solution, I'll agree, but I'll be damned if there's any
real difference between it and the two-joystick system. If anything, I
think it's easier to ready/change weapons and do secondary actions in the
console version of Splinter Cell and so on than it is in its PC
counterpart.
>
> That being said, the controller can be mastered to the point where you
> don't even think about it any more (I did that with HALO.)
And pretty quickly, at that... and since all FPS shooters use basically
the same system, once you master the technique with one game, you've
mastered it for all of them.
John Craven
Bill Bessette
news:Pine.A41.4.44.030530...@dante42.u.washington.edu:
> On Fri, 30 May 2003, Bill Bessette wrote:
>>
>> The mouse/keyboard combination *is* the best control solution for FPS
>> games.
>
> It's a very good solution, I'll agree, but I'll be damned if there's any
> real difference between it and the two-joystick system.
I'll have to disagree. I still think that the Mouse/Kbd combination is
much faster and far more precise.
Bill
Mike Kohary
> In article <HFMCF...@news.boeing.com>,
> "GravyCat" <pat...@pugetsound.NOSPAM.net> wrote:
>
> > But who would want to play a squad-based FPS on the Internet anyway
> > (Tribes anyone?).
>
> I would. Though I'm still waiting for the game that fulfils the genre's
> promise.
Counterstrike. Available only on the PC. :)
Mike
Mike Kohary
> thing, the controls are radically different now; speaking as a long-time
> mouse-and-keyboard guy, the two-joystick, two-trigger method is just as
> easy to use, and in addition since the hardware is always the same you
> don't have to worry about aspects of Halo, Hitman, or Splinter Cell to not
> work quite right on your computer.
I understand the benefits of the standardized hardware. It's the old PC vs
Console argument, and the downside is that the consoles are not upgradeable.
That's the tradeoff and the price you pay for standardized hardware. The
PC's tradeoff is increased complexity.
But that's all beside the point. The control scheme for consoles is simply
not ideal for FPS games. I have played some recent FPS on consoles - Halo
is a great game - but the fact is Halo will be even better on the PC,
because no joypad will ever approach the precision of a mouse.
Just play GTA3 on the PS2, then on a PC. The difference in control is
astonishing.
> The computer still has a monstrously large space for gaming... think
> strategy (real-time and Civ-style turn-based games are still
> mega-popular) and sim games like Rollercoaster Tycoon or The Sims.
> Consoles work better for FPS, sports, racing, and (if you're into that
> sort of thing) fighting games.
I disagree with that completely. There's nothing a console can do that a PC
can't, but the opposite is not true. The PC is not just a "strategy"
platform, and particularly when it comes to FPS, the PC is vastly superior.
That's where FPS was born, where it became king, and where it remains king.
Until consoles come up with something as precise as a mouse, that's how it
will always be.
Mike
Mike Kohary
But I guarantee that when Halo comes out on the PC, you will be an even
better player, due to the precision the controls provide you with.
Mike
Mike Kohary
trakball
> game.
That's silly. The hardware matters.
Mike
Mike Kohary
news:Pine.A41.4.44.030530...@dante42.u.washington.edu...
>
> It's a very good solution, I'll agree, but I'll be damned if there's any
> real difference between it and the two-joystick system.
Have you ever played an FPS on a PC with the mouse/keyboard combo? If you
have, I don't see how you can make that statement and keep a straight face.
Mike
Mike Kohary
news:s_vBa.35677$3t6.5...@news.xtra.co.nz...
>
> I've pretty much lost interest in the modern games, because I have been
> bitten too many times by the triumph of eye-candy over playability.
Unless
> it's a game that comes very well recommended to me for gameplay, I won't
> even buy it.
I only buy games that I've read reviews on, from both professional
publications and players. Mostly I rely on Computer Gaming World, PC Gamer
and gamespot.com.
Mike
DrGruesome
"Mike Kohary" <mko...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:bbdnti$jrd$0...@pita.alt.net...
The only problem I have with the magazines is that they are trying to
promote the genre so they can stay in business. I don't mind buying games
when they've been out for a while, so I have no problem waiting until some
of my acquaintences buy them and tell me if they like them or not.
I really like the Heroes of Might and Magic strategy game series, but I have
heard from people that the new version with cooler graphics blows donkey in
gameplay. As much as I would like to continue in a series that I like, I'm
not going to buy it until it hits the bargain bin, and only then just to
complete the series.
Michael Johnson
Bill Bessette
@pita.alt.net:
> "Bill Bessette" <dsqu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns938B49A8CEC84d...@216.168.3.30...
>> That being said, the controller can be mastered to the point where you
>> don't even think about it any more (I did that with HALO.)
>
> But I guarantee that when Halo comes out on the PC, you will be an even
> better player, due to the precision the controls provide you with.
I don't need a sell job. A mouse/keyboard player would smoke
a two-joystick player of equal skill any day.
However it was a great game on the console, and the control
scheme was excellent. I did not feel handicapped in anyway.
Bill
john wallace craven
The actual mouse-keyboard aspect of it, okay. However, when you lump the
2-joystick system in with the array of easily accessible and
easy-to-tell-apart-by-touch buttons, I think they're pretty damn even.
>
> Bill
>
john wallace craven
CGW and PC Gamer have both been reviewing beta versions of games recently.
That can lead to some absolutely terrible reviews. I'd stick with Computer
Gamer (formerly known as Computer Games Strategy Plus).
John Craven
john wallace craven
On Sun, 1 Jun 2003, Mike Kohary wrote:
Absolutely. In fact, there was a time when I was pretty good at it. That
being said, when you take *everything* into account (including the easy to
access secondary buttons), I think they come out pretty equal.
John Craven
john wallace craven
On Mon, 2 Jun 2003, Bill Bessette wrote:
> "Mike Kohary" <mko...@earthlink.net> wrote in news:bbdnlo$jcn$0
> @pita.alt.net:
>
> > "Bill Bessette" <dsqu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:Xns938B49A8CEC84d...@216.168.3.30...
>
> >> That being said, the controller can be mastered to the point where you
> >> don't even think about it any more (I did that with HALO.)
> >
> > But I guarantee that when Halo comes out on the PC, you will be an even
> > better player, due to the precision the controls provide you with.
>
> I don't need a sell job. A mouse/keyboard player would smoke
> a two-joystick player of equal skill any day.
If I took the time to get the buttons laid out exactly the way I wanted
them, and then played the game for several hours until I could feel my way
around the keyboard, then yeah, I would kick a two-joystick player
straight out. However, I don't particularly enjoy having a steep learning
curve on my twitch games (well, if the learning curve involves how to be
stealthy like in Hitman or Splinter Cell or tactics like in Halo, that's
fine; it's just the actual learning of the controls that drives me up the
wall). And to answer an upcoming question, no I don't play fighting games.
Beyond the simple ones like Mario Kart, Twisted Metal, and Powerstone, I
can't stand them.
John Craven
DrGruesome
Since it seems many games these days are released in what would have to be
considered beta versions, perhaps CGW and PC Gamer are doing the right
thing? I like that you can get updates for games off the net. I hate that
so many games are released in buggy, featureless versions that demand you
upgrade what basically amounts to the remainder of the game that didn't come
on the CDs.
Michael Johnson
Mike Kohary
> >
> > I only buy games that I've read reviews on, from both professional
> > publications and players. Mostly I rely on Computer Gaming World, PC
> Gamer
> > and gamespot.com.
> >
> > Mike
>
> The only problem I have with the magazines is that they are trying to
> promote the genre so they can stay in business. I don't mind buying games
> when they've been out for a while, so I have no problem waiting until some
> of my acquaintences buy them and tell me if they like them or not.
Sure, it comes down to how much you trust the resources you choose to use.
I trust the ones I listed above; they've never been shy about trashing
games, even high-profile games arriving with plenty of hype from big
companies.
> I really like the Heroes of Might and Magic strategy game series, but I
have
> heard from people that the new version with cooler graphics blows donkey
in
> gameplay.
That's what I've heard too (and both CGW and PC Gamer trashed it as well).
Mike
Mike Kohary
Those seem to be two contradictory statements. A mouse/keyboard player has
the advantage, but you didn't feel handicapped with a gamepad. That's quite
a trick. ;)
Mike
Mike Kohary
The mouse alone tilts the balance - that kind of precision is key. I see no
advantage to "secondary buttons" - the keyboard is equivalent.
Mike
Mike Kohary
news:Pine.A41.4.44.030601...@dante54.u.washington.edu...
>
> That can lead to some absolutely terrible reviews. I'd stick with Computer
> Gamer (formerly known as Computer Games Strategy Plus).
CGW's policy is to never review betas or patches - they review only shipping
product. I don't know what PC Gamer's policy is, but do you have an example
of a beta product they reviewed?
Mike
Mike Kohary
> In article <s6madvkcd1o75dm73...@4ax.com>,
> Mike Kohary <mko...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> > By the way, FPS games on consoles suck, because the controller simply
> > isn't made for such games. Keyboard+mouse is the only way to go. I
> > seriously don't know why anyone with a decent computer would play a
> > console FPS. Flame away.
>
> Maybe because, having purchased that "decent computer," they don't want
> to get stuck into an upgrade path that requires them to buy new video
> cards, RAM, and sometimes even mother boards in order to play the latest
> and greatest.
It's kind of become an urban myth, that once you buy a computer it's
obsolete in 3 months. True, if I want to play the absolute latest FPS
games, my 4-year-old Dell PII/400MHz isn't going to cut it. But it cut it
just fine for Quakes 2 and 3, Half-Life, No One Lives Forever, Serious Sam 1
and 2 and System Shock 2, all fine FPS games. (And of course it handles
older FPS games just fine.) So, 4 years on a computer is a pretty good
return on my investment, I think. And that's just for games - for
everything else "productive", it would easily last another 10 years.
But you're right that it becomes obsolete for games eventually, and that's
why I've just ordered a new baby - an Alienware PIV/3GHz machine. That
should handle the latest and greatest just fine. :)
> But
> To me the greatest advantage of the console is the
> hardware is fixed, and game designers can't pretend that it's perfectly
> reasonable to require their customers to spend several hundred dollars
> in order to play their $40 game.
Well, I didn't really intend my comments to be construed as Console versus
PC. Both have their place, and I have a grand time playing Mario Party with
my daughter on the Gamecube (and Rogue Squadron or Resident Evil on my own).
But sure, that's the advantage to consoles. The disadvantage: you can
never upgrade that machine. There are other pros and cons to both, but it's
a personal choice and I don't consider one "superior" to the other. I was
only referring to FPS games, which are at home on the PC as compared to
consoles IMO.
> Incidentally, I was interviewing for an editorial position with the
> X-box group last summer (didn't get it, but it was only a three month
> contract anyway), and I heard gossip that there was extreme discontent
> within the Bungie group brought in from Chicago to continue developing
> Halo as an Xbox-only title (before the buyout it was slated to be a
> cross-platform PC game). Apparently the creative types didn't like how
> much their efforts were being dictated by marketing. I didn't think much
> of it then, because when do creative types ever get along with
> marketing? But I was reminded of that when I heard that Halo 2 was
> slipping past the Christmas release window, in part because Bungie was
> insisting on spending time porting Halo 1 to the PC -- a project that
> the suits wouldn't much care about, since it won't drive sales for
> Microsoft hardware. I can only imagine the meetings with marketing that
> were going on during that period, and I'm a little surprised that I
> couldn't hear the shouting from my apartment in Queen Anne.
Interesting...thanks for the good gossip. :)
Mike
DrGruesome
"Mike Kohary" <mko...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:bbg94s$ito$0...@pita.alt.net...
> It's kind of become an urban myth, that once you buy a computer it's
> obsolete in 3 months. True, if I want to play the absolute latest FPS
> games, my 4-year-old Dell PII/400MHz isn't going to cut it. But it cut it
> just fine for Quakes 2 and 3, Half-Life, No One Lives Forever, Serious Sam
1
> and 2 and System Shock 2, all fine FPS games. (And of course it handles
> older FPS games just fine.) So, 4 years on a computer is a pretty good
> return on my investment, I think. And that's just for games - for
> everything else "productive", it would easily last another 10 years.
I am not disagreeing that it is a fine machine capable of doing quite a bit.
However, your 10 years estimate I think is a bit of a stretch. The 64-bit
processor is looming on the near horizon, and with it will come 64-bit OSs
and 64-bit apps. While I don't think it will have the same impact as
Windows95, I expect another rather large bout of hardware obsolescence.
That PII of yours will be about as useful as a 486 is now, which is to say
not useless, but don't pretend you can run anything modern on it including
business apps.
I would love to have a machine like that as a spare, to use with a lot of my
old games. I pine for the likes of Duke Nukem 3D, and to revisit the awful
graphics of the Space Quest and Wing Commander series. Come to think of it,
I have some parts lying about... I'll have to price a case/power supply and
a KVM switch now...
Michael Johnson
Mike Kohary
>
> I am not disagreeing that it is a fine machine capable of doing quite a
bit.
> However, your 10 years estimate I think is a bit of a stretch. The 64-bit
> processor is looming on the near horizon, and with it will come 64-bit OSs
> and 64-bit apps. While I don't think it will have the same impact as
> Windows95, I expect another rather large bout of hardware obsolescence.
> That PII of yours will be about as useful as a 486 is now, which is to say
> not useless, but don't pretend you can run anything modern on it including
> business apps.
It's not hard to imagine small businesses still running Pentium computers
with Win95 and Office 95. Those are almost 10 years old, and while clearly
obsolete from a technical standpoint, are still perfectly productive and
useful in the business world. That's all I'm saying...I myself wouldn't
want to use one, of course. ;)
> I would love to have a machine like that as a spare, to use with a lot of
my
> old games. I pine for the likes of Duke Nukem 3D, and to revisit the
awful
> graphics of the Space Quest and Wing Commander series. Come to think of
it,
> I have some parts lying about... I'll have to price a case/power supply
and
> a KVM switch now...
I saw a refurbished PIII/800 with a GeForce II at my local shop for about
$250. Something like that would be a fine "spare" machine. I plan to keep
my PII/400 (which I've upgraded and tried to keep current over the years -
it has a CD-RW, GeForce II and SB Live; even runs WinXP and OfficeXP) to
network with my new machine. It'll be great for the kids and wife to use
indefinitely, and they'll never notice it's a little long in the tooth
(kid's games, internet and e-mail, all of which it'll be good for basically
forever).
Mike
DrGruesome
> It's not hard to imagine small businesses still running Pentium computers
> with Win95 and Office 95. Those are almost 10 years old, and while
clearly
> obsolete from a technical standpoint, are still perfectly productive and
> useful in the business world. That's all I'm saying...I myself wouldn't
> want to use one, of course. ;)
>
We'll disagree there :)
Win95 is not a stable OS, and isn't USB-capable (except for the rather buggy
version C). If you are talking about the business world in Nepal, then I'd
agree it still has life in it. But in the US, the only role I would see
that sort of machine having would be as a terminal in a Citrix environment,
and even then I would much prefer a Win98 machine simply due to the
availability of peripherals. When is the last time you tried to upload even
a 2 megapixel photo from a camera to a computer using a serial connection?
Transferring files to your PDA? What's your time worth?
As far as Office95, I don't believe that it can open even Office97 files
unless they are saved as previous versions (Excel in specific I think has a
version incompatibility there).
All in all you are talking about a much higher cost of ownership with that
machine than even upgrading to Win98/Office97. I hardly see that as
perfectly productive and useful.
Michael Johnson
Mike Kohary
Well ok, Win 98 and Office 97 then. But those can run on that same
8-year-old Pentium as well. Again, I'm not saying it's a solution I'd even
dream of using myself. But I guarantee there are small businesses out there
using even DOS today. The point is, to us tech-heads, "obsolete" comes
quickly. To Joe Schmoe, he may not even think about it.
Mike
DrGruesome
> Well ok, Win 98 and Office 97 then. But those can run on that same
> 8-year-old Pentium as well. Again, I'm not saying it's a solution I'd
even
> dream of using myself. But I guarantee there are small businesses out
there
> using even DOS today. The point is, to us tech-heads, "obsolete" comes
> quickly. To Joe Schmoe, he may not even think about it.
>
> Mike
There are always specialized applications that can, or must, use old
technology. I know of a machine shop that made parts for NASA using CNC
machines that were controlled by DOS-based 80286 desktop computers without
hard drives.
When you raise the bar to Windows98 and Office97, then you're talking about
the beginnings of viable office systems. The last company I worked for
still used some old P-133 Compaqs, running Win98 and Office97. Everyone
single hard drive had failed and been replaced, but the old boards were
still kicking.
Still, the days are numbered for those machines, and when the industry moves
to the 64-bit OS, those machines will be as useful as 386s were after the
release of Windows95. They were 16-bit machines in a 32-bit world and were
simply not viable. Modern machines might limp by a bit longer, as the 486
did, but the end is near for them as well.
One of the basic factors is RAM. Just as the size of WindowsXP would have
been inconceivable on a 386 machine, so will the size of future applications
be inconceivable (you keep using that word - I do not think it means what
you think it means) in terms of the machines running now. Current 32-bit
machines can have about 4 gigabytes of RAM. 64-bit machines can have 16
exobytes. Storage and memory technology must advance to relieve the
bottleneck, but that's nearly inevitable. If you think we have bloatware
now, just wait.
Michael Johnson
Bill Bessette
> "Bill Bessette" <dsqu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns938DCEC4CD1B8d...@216.168.3.30...
>> However it was a great game on the console, and the control
>> scheme was excellent. I did not feel handicapped in anyway.
>
> Those seem to be two contradictory statements. A mouse/keyboard
> player has the advantage, but you didn't feel handicapped with a
> gamepad. That's quite a trick. ;)
No it's not. Mouse and keyboard is superior, but the two
joysticks on the controller worked very well once you got
used to it. Nothing contradictory about that at all.
Mouse/KBD players and controller players aren't playing head
to head against each other. It's controller against the computer
or controller against other controller players.
Bill
Bill Bessette
I've been a CGW subscriber for over a decade, and I've watched the
slow decline... It's been pretty grim watching the magazine get
thinner and thinner (more ads, less content.) I'm still a
subscriber, but PC Gamer is where it's at right now (I subscribe to that
too.)
Bill
Bill Bessette
@pita.alt.net:
> games, my 4-year-old Dell PII/400MHz isn't going to cut it.
I think you left off an I on that Pentium.
Bill
john wallace craven
On Mon, 2 Jun 2003, Mike Kohary wrote:
> "john wallace craven" <john...@u.washington.edu> wrote in message
> news:Pine.A41.4.44.030601...@dante54.u.washington.edu...
> >
> > On Sun, 1 Jun 2003, Mike Kohary wrote:
> >
> > > "john wallace craven" <john...@u.washington.edu> wrote in message
> > >
> news:Pine.A41.4.44.030530...@dante42.u.washington.edu...
> > > >
> > > > It's a very good solution, I'll agree, but I'll be damned if there's
> any
> > > > real difference between it and the two-joystick system.
> > >
> > > Have you ever played an FPS on a PC with the mouse/keyboard combo? If
> you
> > > have, I don't see how you can make that statement and keep a straight
> face.
> >
> > Absolutely. In fact, there was a time when I was pretty good at it. That
> > being said, when you take *everything* into account (including the easy to
> > access secondary buttons), I think they come out pretty equal.
>
> The mouse alone tilts the balance - that kind of precision is key. I see no
> advantage to "secondary buttons" - the keyboard is equivalent.
You'd think so... until you actually start using them. You can't tell by
touch what the "e" key is and what the "r" key is, and it's kind of a pain
to get the muscle memory for all those controls. The cool thing about the
X-Box is, if you learn where the buttons are in, say, Morrowind, then
you'll be using pretty much the same ones in Splinter Cell or Halo or
Metal Gear: Solid.
John Craven
john wallace craven
The magazine formerly known as Computer Games Strategy Plus actually ran
an article about this last month. It seems that CGW's stated policy was
notably absent in an issue in January or February, when they got a chance
to "scoop" their competition by reviewing a beta (I think it was for
Splinter Cell, but I'm not completely sure, and I don't have the mag with
me at school). PC Gamer did the same thing that month for the same game.
For the game I'm thinking of, that's a real problem because while the
gameplay was incredible, it was also over incredibly quickly.
Computer Games Magazine is kind of the rogue of the bunch. The fact that
they *never* review a game until it's actually on the shelves means that
they regularly get scooped. It's also indicative of the magazine as a
whole; the chances of an Outpost scandal occurring on the pages of CG are
very, very rare. There was even a guest article in the same issue that
spoke of the willingness of the other 2 magazines to review betas that
told folks to go out and buy a $500 computer and get a good video card
instead of paying $2500 for a brand new box. They also have an eye on the
old school gamer, the kind of person who appreciates knowing that
LucasArts is working on sequels to Full Throttle and Sam and Max Hit The
Road. Also, while I really enjoy reading PC Gamer at times with its
Stranger-like attitude towards game reviews, it seems to me that CG is,
for the most part, more intelligent.
I don't want to sound like a shill for these guys, but this is the
magazine that I read back when I was selling this stuff, and the
differences are still apparent. I've never been a huge fan of the
Ziff Davis titles.
John Craven
Mike Kohary
Sadly, I didn't. Pentium 2, 400Mhz. It's about time I got a new rig,
eh? ;)
Mike
--
"Worry is like interest paid | Mike Kohary
in advance on a debt that | mko...@earthlink.net
never comes due." | http://www.kohary.com
Seattle Seahawks http://www.kohary.com/seahawks GO HAWKS!
Bill Bessette
> On Mon, 02 Jun 2003 22:53:32 -0000, Bill Bessette
> <dsqu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>"Mike Kohary" <mko...@earthlink.net> wrote in news:bbg94s$ito$0
>>@pita.alt.net:
>>
>>> games, my 4-year-old Dell PII/400MHz isn't going to cut it.
>>
>>I think you left off an I on that Pentium.
>
> Sadly, I didn't. Pentium 2, 400Mhz. It's about time I got a new rig,
> eh? ;)
>
Pentium II??@?! You should have said something. I have
like 4 computers sitting here that I never use that are
faster than that... My two linux machines are faster...ROFL.
Bill
Mark Diller
"DrGruesome" <mjoh...@burntmail.com> wrote:
If you're lucky. Take 2 fired the development team immediately after the
release of Myth 3 (a game I was looking forward to, but never bought
when I saw how buggy it was), so there was no one on the ground
available to patch the bugs. I think they did eventually contract the
patching out to another house, but by then the community was already
permanently alienated. Seriously, some people in the gaming world have
all the class and business ethics of a pickpocket in Times Square.
Mark
Peter Reggio
Astounding...you sound as though you'd never had any typing or keyboard
class. Have schools stopped teaching it? I was in high school before the
compute craze, so I had a typing class, but I would suspect schools switched
over to teaching keyboards when computers really took off.
There's one trick you need to know and the rest follows easily...the "f"
and "j" keys have a raised line on them that helps you find them. Once you
have your index fingers placed on them, the rest falls into place.
Regis
Peter Reggio
That's a new one on me...what's an exobyte? I always assumed the
natural progression would go from giga to tera to quadra (to quinta, etc).
Regis
Mike Kohary
> "Mike Kohary" <mko...@earthlink.net> wrote in
> news:bbfv0d$sf8$0...@pita.alt.net:
>
> > "Bill Bessette" <dsqu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:Xns938DCEC4CD1B8d...@216.168.3.30...
>
> >> However it was a great game on the console, and the control
> >> scheme was excellent. I did not feel handicapped in anyway.
> >
> > Those seem to be two contradictory statements. A mouse/keyboard
> > player has the advantage, but you didn't feel handicapped with a
> > gamepad. That's quite a trick. ;)
>
> No it's not. Mouse and keyboard is superior, but the two
> joysticks on the controller worked very well once you got
> used to it. Nothing contradictory about that at all.
But by definition (mouse/keyboard is superior), you were handicapped by
using the gamepad.
> Mouse/KBD players and controller players aren't playing head
> to head against each other. It's controller against the computer
> or controller against other controller players.
Ok, in that sense you weren't literally handicapped in direct competition,
but I was speaking more generally than that.
Mike
Mike Kohary
I subscribe to both also. I love CGW's brand of humor, and their blunt
reviews. PC Gamer gets high marks from me too - I like both rags quite a
bit, and don't have any skepticism about their objectivity. Neither
magazine is afraid to call a dud a dud.
Mike
Mike Kohary
>
> > The mouse alone tilts the balance - that kind of precision is key. I
see no
> > advantage to "secondary buttons" - the keyboard is equivalent.
>
> You'd think so... until you actually start using them. You can't tell by
> touch what the "e" key is and what the "r" key is, and it's kind of a pain
> to get the muscle memory for all those controls.
Do you touch-type? The F and J keys have a small raised line on most
keyboards. You put your index fingers there, and if you touch-type,
everything else falls into place. For an FPS game, it's not that much
different - line up your index, middle and ring fingers on D, S, and A
respectively, and once you learn to "touch-type" an FPS, everything again
falls into place. W and S are forward and backward, A and D strafe left and
right, ctrl to crouch, space to jump, E to "use", R to "reload"...it isn't
that hard. :)
> The cool thing about the
> X-Box is, if you learn where the buttons are in, say, Morrowind, then
> you'll be using pretty much the same ones in Splinter Cell or Halo or
> Metal Gear: Solid.
Ditto on the PC - I use the same control scheme for every FPS, based on
Half-Life. So, "The cool thing about the PC is, if you learn where the keys
are in, say, Half-Life, then you'll be using pretty much the same ones in
Medal of Honor, Castle Wolfenstein or No One Lives Forever." ;)
Mike
john wallace craven
Well, other than when a reviewer of CGW also writes the strategy guide to
a game...
I like PC Gamer, too; my only problem with their and CGW's reviews is that
the majority of their really bad reviews are of games that everybody knows
are going to be awful ahead of time, like the newest Deer Hunter. They'll
rip apart the big-ticket items every now and then, too, but more often
than not it seems like there's a baseline of around 70-75% for games that
it thinks aren't that good but are made by companies with a decent
reputation (and, if you're into conspiracy theories, companies that are
likely to give them good info on upcoming releases and industry
scuttlebutt). I've long learned not to even bother with any game that gets
under a 70% from PC Gamer... well, other than smaller-name titles.
My other problem with both them and CGW is that they tend to completely
overlook games created by smaller publishers. Often those games will be
lacking in graphics, but that's not always a necessity for a really great
game. For example, the strangely addictive The Corporate Machine got a
paltry 62% from them, while the newest Unreal Tournament, which is not a
whole lot more than a souped-up version of the original designed to make
display computers in stores look really cool, got an 88% (2% away from
being an Editor's Choice, and the exact same rating as Europa
Universalis, which is an absolutely incredible game). They don't even
bother with text sims like Front Office Football or Out of the Park
Baseball, even though those games knock the pants off of anything out
there for the sports strategy grognard. You can argue that the place of
PC Gamer and CGW is to highlight the stuff that looks really cool on the
newest, latest machines, but personally I'd rather buy a game that will
entertain me for hours on end.
Not to say that I don't like those mags; I think they have their uses, and
as I've said, I enjoy reading PC Gamer's review of obviously crappy games
as much as anybody else. The problem is, I guess, that what I look for in
a computer game isn't the same thing that much of the staff of PC Gamer
does.
John Craven
DrGruesome
"Peter Reggio" <ire...@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:9E_Ca.1096434$F1.133266@sccrnsc04...
>
> That's a new one on me...what's an exobyte? I always assumed the
> natural progression would go from giga to tera to quadra (to quinta, etc).
>
> Regis
Megabyte, gigabyte, terabyte, petabyte, exobyte. It's about 18 zeroes, I
think.
Michael Johnson
Bill Bessette
> "Bill Bessette" <dsqu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns938EBFBBEDAAAd...@216.168.3.30...
>> "Mike Kohary" <mko...@earthlink.net> wrote in
>> news:bbfv0d$sf8$0...@pita.alt.net:
>> > Those seem to be two contradictory statements. A mouse/keyboard
>> > player has the advantage, but you didn't feel handicapped with a
>> > gamepad. That's quite a trick. ;)
>>
>> No it's not. Mouse and keyboard is superior, but the two
>> joysticks on the controller worked very well once you got
>> used to it. Nothing contradictory about that at all.
>
> But by definition (mouse/keyboard is superior), you were handicapped
> by using the gamepad.
No, I was playing the game as it was intended to be played.
A mouse and keyboard combination would be like an ordinary
human having bionic legs. ;)
The game was designed to be used with the controller, and after
I got used to it, I did not feel handicapped in any way.
I play FPS using the mouse and keyboard every single day, and
I'm telling you that the controller, when learned, is well suited
to succeeding at that game. I did not miss mouse/kbd. Not even
for a moment.
Bill
Mike Kohary
Yeah, agreed and agreed. But still, what I was saying was...well, what was
I saying? Did I even have a point? ;)
Mike
Mike Kohary
Um...I can't even remember which game we're talking about anymore. :)
Mike
tadperry
That it doesn't make sense to make something that's perfectly usable
completely obsolete?
tvp
Mike Kohary
wrote:
>> Yeah, agreed and agreed. But still, what I was saying was...well, what
>was
>> I saying? Did I even have a point? ;)
>
>That it doesn't make sense to make something that's perfectly usable
>completely obsolete?
On the other hand, we don't want technological progress to stop. Hm,
what a dilemma...
TMA
> On Wed, 04 Jun 2003 19:18:01 GMT, "tadperry"
Mike K ? I love your Hawk site dude. Way to go.
AkreM
Mike Kohary
wrote:
Thanks. :)
Mike
--
"Worry is like interest paid | Mike Kohary
in advance on a debt that | mko...@earthlink.net
never comes due." | http://www.kohary.com