anwaypasible
Distinguished
- Oct 15, 2007
- 990
- 0
- 19,060
i agree highly.
hardcore gamers could stem from the traditional 'hardcore' classification of simply playing games often and being serious about the results that they dish out.
'hardcore' could be transformed into a situation where gamers have the choice of spending hundreds of dollars for extremely high graphics, while the consoles are much more laid back for casual cost.
it would be weird to see almost life-like game graphics on the computer with extremely dumbed down graphics of the same game for a console.
use this video for an example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g4S7cQEXR70&hd=1
those graphics are absolutely fantastic.
but the game available on PC, xbox, and playstation looks much worse.
i dont think such a difference in visual quality is fair.
but narrowing the gap would help.
PC gamers spend the same price of a console every year or two.
its possible for us to drop $200 every 9 months on a new graphics card.
why dont we get some reimbursement for all those hundreds of dollars?
console players spend about $200 - $300 for their game system.
PC players spend about $900 - $1,200 for their game system.
we havent been rewarded for all of that extra money.
i'm sure console players would be upset.
but they shouldnt be, considering how little they have had to spend for the same graphics.
they can browse the internet on those things.. AND they come with a blu-ray player.
$900 - $1,200 doesnt always include a blu-ray player.
either PC gamers get better quality than consoles, or consoles browse the internet more.
i know its not an extremely equal power of change, but us PC gamers are rewarded with the ability to fully browse the internet.
the internet has information that can teach us things.
we can lookup words we dont know.
we can buy things and have them shipped.
we can browse items on sale at the grocery store.
continuing to be idiots that spend $200 - $500 dollars on a new graphics card every year cannot continue.
i wanna play some video games with graphics in the youtube video..!
and i dont wanna spend $900 - $1,200 to do it while console players spend $300
the internet isnt worth the extra $600 - $900
and that really helps the unequal change of power.
consoles that can browse the internet more freely isnt going to satisfy us PC gamers.
we expect more when we spend more.
and considering the industry has taken our extra money for such a long time, we need to see some improvement for those extra dollars.
anyways.. about the comment that states directX is an attempt for microsoft to stay in the game.
microsoft has been in development for more years than the government is willing to share with general consumers.
but they have been around since the hardware was hardly a calculator.
you arent gonna turn your back on that much invention and design.
besides.. saying such things would constrain you to the thought that directX is for windows operating systems only.. and that directX has no visual computation properties at all.
getting a video game from your brain to a computer takes computer code.
there's no sense in stating that the code required is to be re-written.
they general operation of computer processors arent going to be re-designed from the ground up.
therefore the data needed to make a video game function is also not going to be re-written from the ground up.
its like saying directX has the math needed to make the visuals work on a computer.
and you are talking about re-writing math.
but math is already here, and for the most part is perfect in every way without any chance of being edited.
asking to extend the area of math used in the api is one thing.
and trying to extend math's limits is also another thing.
but trying to edit anything inbetween is absurd.
the data of directX is probably copyrighted.. and that copyright would have to be sold if microsoft ever went out of business.
then it could be stripped of all the important graphical properties as the operating system bypass mechanism is removed.
but it may be that the code for 3D video is not owned by microsoft, and that directX takes what it wants from the dictionary of the code and applies a proprietary mechanism to function with the operating systems.
computer processing and all of the mandatory data needed for those processors to function are the property of human-kind.
and thats just another way of saying 'government'
if the C.I.A. is the most powerful organization you know of that keeps this planet from self-destructing and/or being destroyed.. then that is who owns it.
all of the kings and queens and tribe leaders boil down to 'world leaders' that manage and supervise these things.
its not a political thing when something is created for all of humanity.
thats high in the chain of responsibility.
helping the world go round and round day after day is a corparation of people.
if you think you have what it takes to replace decades of manual labor.. i'd say you are mistaken.
hardcore gamers could stem from the traditional 'hardcore' classification of simply playing games often and being serious about the results that they dish out.
'hardcore' could be transformed into a situation where gamers have the choice of spending hundreds of dollars for extremely high graphics, while the consoles are much more laid back for casual cost.
it would be weird to see almost life-like game graphics on the computer with extremely dumbed down graphics of the same game for a console.
use this video for an example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g4S7cQEXR70&hd=1
those graphics are absolutely fantastic.
but the game available on PC, xbox, and playstation looks much worse.
i dont think such a difference in visual quality is fair.
but narrowing the gap would help.
PC gamers spend the same price of a console every year or two.
its possible for us to drop $200 every 9 months on a new graphics card.
why dont we get some reimbursement for all those hundreds of dollars?
console players spend about $200 - $300 for their game system.
PC players spend about $900 - $1,200 for their game system.
we havent been rewarded for all of that extra money.
i'm sure console players would be upset.
but they shouldnt be, considering how little they have had to spend for the same graphics.
they can browse the internet on those things.. AND they come with a blu-ray player.
$900 - $1,200 doesnt always include a blu-ray player.
either PC gamers get better quality than consoles, or consoles browse the internet more.
i know its not an extremely equal power of change, but us PC gamers are rewarded with the ability to fully browse the internet.
the internet has information that can teach us things.
we can lookup words we dont know.
we can buy things and have them shipped.
we can browse items on sale at the grocery store.
continuing to be idiots that spend $200 - $500 dollars on a new graphics card every year cannot continue.
i wanna play some video games with graphics in the youtube video..!
and i dont wanna spend $900 - $1,200 to do it while console players spend $300
the internet isnt worth the extra $600 - $900
and that really helps the unequal change of power.
consoles that can browse the internet more freely isnt going to satisfy us PC gamers.
we expect more when we spend more.
and considering the industry has taken our extra money for such a long time, we need to see some improvement for those extra dollars.
anyways.. about the comment that states directX is an attempt for microsoft to stay in the game.
microsoft has been in development for more years than the government is willing to share with general consumers.
but they have been around since the hardware was hardly a calculator.
you arent gonna turn your back on that much invention and design.
besides.. saying such things would constrain you to the thought that directX is for windows operating systems only.. and that directX has no visual computation properties at all.
getting a video game from your brain to a computer takes computer code.
there's no sense in stating that the code required is to be re-written.
they general operation of computer processors arent going to be re-designed from the ground up.
therefore the data needed to make a video game function is also not going to be re-written from the ground up.
its like saying directX has the math needed to make the visuals work on a computer.
and you are talking about re-writing math.
but math is already here, and for the most part is perfect in every way without any chance of being edited.
asking to extend the area of math used in the api is one thing.
and trying to extend math's limits is also another thing.
but trying to edit anything inbetween is absurd.
the data of directX is probably copyrighted.. and that copyright would have to be sold if microsoft ever went out of business.
then it could be stripped of all the important graphical properties as the operating system bypass mechanism is removed.
but it may be that the code for 3D video is not owned by microsoft, and that directX takes what it wants from the dictionary of the code and applies a proprietary mechanism to function with the operating systems.
computer processing and all of the mandatory data needed for those processors to function are the property of human-kind.
and thats just another way of saying 'government'
if the C.I.A. is the most powerful organization you know of that keeps this planet from self-destructing and/or being destroyed.. then that is who owns it.
all of the kings and queens and tribe leaders boil down to 'world leaders' that manage and supervise these things.
its not a political thing when something is created for all of humanity.
thats high in the chain of responsibility.
helping the world go round and round day after day is a corparation of people.
if you think you have what it takes to replace decades of manual labor.. i'd say you are mistaken.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram