Results 41 to 60 of 67
09-12-2012, 04:16 PM #41
yeesh... shame on you for not giving microsoft hundreds of dollars every few years!
09-12-2012, 05:22 PM #42
10-12-2012, 03:12 PM #43
Is it not $200 for Windows anymore? (actually I think I have heard that you can upgrade from 7 to 8 for cheaper, but I think to go from XP to 7 is gonna run close to $200, no?)
10-12-2012, 03:29 PM #44
My upgrade to Win7 a couple years ago was $130.
Win8 is, for anybody with an existing copy of Windows (which is everybody under the sun), $40.
10-12-2012, 03:38 PM #45
Oh I didn't realize it was any copy. So you can upgrade from XP to 8 for the reduced price? That's cool, I guess. I'm hoping to hang on to 7 for as long as possible. I didn't upgrade from anything (though I bet I could have found a way to get that price) because XP is still on my other machine, and win 7 went on a new machine.
10-12-2012, 03:44 PM #46
Yes, you can upgrade from XP to 8 with only $40. Indeed, that's the entire purpose of their price-point: To kill XP once and for all.
10-12-2012, 04:16 PM #47
- Join Date
- Aug 2011
OK, time for my 2 cents. I carried my PC downstairs and hooked it up to my TV. Big Picture mode was cool I guess, but it really just provides solutions to problems that I won't encounter. I don't need a way to chat with friends while only using a controller, because if I'm only using a controller, then I'm only playing SP games. If I'm only playing SP games, I don't even sign into my friends list, therefore I will not need an easy way to chat.
As for PC gaming on the TV itself...WOW! I have been fucking missing out. Most games I tried I was already used to playing with a controller anyway, like Arkham City or AC. However, kicking back on the sofa and not having to wear headphones (I was hooked up to my HTS) felt awesome. The combination of the enhanced graphics of the PC and the big screen of console gaming was just a match made in heaven. Now, here's where things got interesting:
I fired up Borderlands 2. I lowered my FOV just a hair (higher than standard console FOV, but lower than when I was sitting 2 feet away from a 24" monitor). I turned on aim assist, or rather, it was turned on automatically once the game detected my controller. I also increased the HUD scale a bit so I could read things all the way from my couch. I played a bit as Zero and Gaige. It actually played really well. The aim assist gives you just a little bit of "grab", just enough to help someone who can't aim great with a gamepad stay on target. Now, I couldn't run into an area and just instantly quickscope everyone like when I had my mouse. In a way though, it made the game fun again. I had to actually use cover now, and wait for my shield to recharge. Don't get me wrong. I was still blowing people's heads off all over the place, but it wasn't like with my mouse, where I might only miss 1 out of 10 shots. Overall I had a blast with it.
Now this is what really shocked me. Skyrim. I turned off all my PC-tailored interface mods, like SKYUI. I kept on iHUD, with permanent crosshair and compass. The game looked great at the default FOV. No need to bump it up to 90 like when I played on my monitor. Again, I rather liked the controls. I removed my "no auto-aim" mod, so shooting the bow really wasn't that much more difficult. Again, I couldn't shoot down a hawk from a half mile out like with my mouse, but I could hit a wolf or a dragon. The one thing I absolutely loved about the controls, was that the thumbstick gives you a ton of different movement speeds, unlike walk, run, or sprint on PC. It's so much more fluid to sneak up on someone with the thumbstick. Now, I couldn't whiz through my inventory or shop menus nearly as quickly as before, but again, that's a fair tradeoff for being able to lie down on the sofa and not have to wear headphones. Also, something about the combination of the lower FOV and the big screen made the world just look freaking MASSIVE. I was standing in the fields outside of Whiterun, taking in all the mountains, and the game just looked bigger than it ever had. I was more wowed than when I first played it on release day.
Anyhow, I took my computer back upstairs last night to play some MP FPS. There's no way I would ever do that with a controller. Sometime in the next month or so, I will move my PC back down to the TV, at least until we move to a bigger house. Oddly enough, I have no desire to go back to playing BL2 or Skyrim on my tiny little monitor. I'm already looking forward to hooking my PC back up to the TV, once I get all the splitters and cables I will need."game sales for consoles destroys pc games completely why do u think they are so cheap on steam lol."
-Random console gamer
10-12-2012, 05:04 PM #48
To me the big problem is that--even for controller-friendly titles--PC resolutions result in interfaces that are decidedly not good for a TV. This is most obvious if you try to play a PC-exclusive game, where the thought of playing while sitting six feet or more from the screen never entered the developers' collective mind; try playing Civilization V or Crusader Kings II on your TV to see what I mean.
10-12-2012, 05:20 PM #49
10-12-2012, 05:23 PM #50
EDIT: Just wanted to point out that multi-platform titles (and a few exclusives like STALKER, the first Crysis) mostly have UIs that are similiar to their console counterparts, so no worries there.
Playing a strategy game with a motion controlled mouse,
Is definitely a unique experience though. Nothing gives you the same level of megalomania as directing hundreds of soldiers to doom or victory using a dark wand :P
Last edited by mashakos; 10-12-2012 at 05:27 PM.
10-12-2012, 05:31 PM #51
Give this a try when you have everything set up:
10-12-2012, 05:34 PM #52
Lads, Steam can't do anything about the fact that the guys behind Civ 5 didn't envision you playing their game on a 32" tv. What do people actually expect from them?
10-12-2012, 06:15 PM #53
10-12-2012, 06:27 PM #54
- Join Date
- Aug 2011
10-12-2012, 07:43 PM #55
10-12-2012, 07:56 PM #56
- Join Date
- Jun 2011
Whilst I've been keen on the idea of a 'Steam PC' for a while - the idea of it being Linux-based is fucking hilarious...
It would be commercial suicide akin to the idea of releasing the iPod with the limitation it could only play Bluegrass or the iPhone which would only work in Swahili...
A Steam PC >HAS< to be Windows-based - even if it's just an option (tho that's like making tyres optional on a car) - there's zero point doing it otherwise...Creator of Steam Greenlight LITE
10-12-2012, 08:02 PM #57
As it stands, Wine is rapidly becoming useful (it is probably already there, honestly). Combine that with a developer who is:
2. Well funded
3. Properly motivated
and we could have almost the entire back catalog functional in Linux within a year or two. That just leaves new releases, and if Valve's push works, the devs and publishers will handle the ports/linux versions of those.
In case that was too hard to follow/unintuitive:
Wine allows for (some/many/most/a few) Windows games to be played in Linux. When it works, it is beautiful. When it doesn't, it is all the bad parts of Linux rolled into one.
If Valve were to dedicate resources to a Wine alternative (or just buy out whatever organization maintains it), they could resolve almost all usability issues.
So that means that Steam would have two kinds of Linux games: Linux games ported by the developers (many indie games, potentially new releases) and games that Valve have, with the permission of the developers/publishers, set up profiles for so that Wine/whatever can make it runnable. But as far as the user is concerned: They all install with a double-click.
While there would be a LOT of the latter to begin with, it is not a stretch to realize that publishers would start allocating resources to make a linux-friendly binary for new releases whenever feasible, especially if their preferred digital distribution platform (Steam) is pushing for it.
Last edited by gundato; 10-12-2012 at 08:35 PM.Steam: Gundato
If you want me on either service, I suggest PMing me here first to let me know who you are.
10-12-2012, 08:28 PM #58
No need to lug your box around. Just wire and network it appropriately. Hell, since this is Steam we're talking about, you can have multiple machines and use the same library, so there's a wealth of setups you can try.
10-12-2012, 08:49 PM #59
11-12-2012, 12:02 PM #60
I'm not clear but I don't thing Gave said it definitely would be 'nix. For purposes of wild speculation anyway.