I showed MGS2 for PC fanboys.

I agree 110% with Bossieman!

You got my vote pal!

/FAST

PS: Min bror jobbar på Ericsson

I have to say that it is pretty interesting this console vs PC thing, we cant just look at numbers anymore, this market is exploading, the human race waste more money on games then movies!! and it has just started.
But for every new console and generation every game costs millions of dollars too make, its not like the good old c64 time.
I know from my own experience that the console games just gets better and better, so do the PC games, but not at the same speed, with this new consoles, developers can do things that was just not possible to do before.
I know that a lot of PC developers wants a standard PC.
they dont want to make games that works on a PII 400 MHz, they want to do games for a 1,5 Ghz TB, but they cant because almost every consumer is sitting with PII computers at 400 MHz.
The console market is safer, you now what you are dealing with, you can consentrate too maximum the software for the hardware.
I´m not an PC expert but I read a lot about PC, I know there is several factors in PC that make them not good to maximum software, the GC is superior the main CPU.
The PIV is according to several sources (toms hardware. and more) a joke! I want to see computers with 64 bits or 128 bits proccessors not 32 bits!!
Come with new technology for God sake, we dont want technology from the 70;s (x86).
I´m sick of Microsoft and windows, I dont want to wait 1 minute to boot my computer, 5 sec not more, the year is 2001 for God sake.
I hate my computer! But I need it.
I have played so many PC games that just doesnt work as good as the could.
A friend of mine has problems with B&W, the game goes extremely slow when he walkes near a mountain and stuff. he has a geforce 2 and a PIII 500 Mhz!!
Whats wrong? I can go out and buy B&W for my PC but I wait until the PS2 version arrives, I know it will work every time without slowdowns.
Am I the only one that thinks that the PC is so sad too play on that you think its something wrong when a game works perfectly?

Originally posted by datamage
Sorry pal, but I can say that. 30fps does not cut it. I\'ve seen the demo myself running on my PC, and while it should run better on a GeForce 3, it\'s not going to be 6x better.

You cannot judge the performance of that demo based upon your own PC\'s performance. You don\'t know how much better it will or will not be on the GF3, since the GF2 doesn\'t have the programmable pixel shaders and vertex shaders.

A good example is the famous \'Tree\' demo for the original GeForce256 cards. When this demo first appeared it ran great on the GeForce256 but poorly on all other cards, since other cards didn\'t have hardware T&L support. Even my PC with a Voodoo3 will not match the performance of the old GeForce256 for that demo!

Have you seen the Inevitable Evolution demo running on the GF3 and XBox?

http://www.msxbox.com/images/march/inevitable/inevitable1.jpg

http://www.coremagazine.com/movies/xevo.mpg

This demo makes great use of pixel/vertex shaders and will certainly not run smoothly on your GF2 equipted PC.

Demos are just showing graphics, not doing true calculations/physics/ai/collision/etc. Those kind of graphics are not achieved in a real-time game.[/B]

Yes, I know there is a difference between a demo and a game, however demos are great ways of demonstrating the power and features within any new graphics hardware.

Originally posted by datamage
People have their own standards, but to me 30fps with a card that costs $300+ is unacceptable.

Sorry, but this arguement over 30fps is nonsence.

Firstly, even if the card was 10 times more powerful, you could still produce a demo which reduces the framerate to 30fps or even less!

Secondly, we do not know the framerate of that nature demo or even how much processing was involved!

Take a complex object like a tree for example. If it\'s static, then the only processing involved would be to render the tree itself. If you want to make the whole tree sway in the wind, then additional processing power will be needed. If you wanted the branches to sway independently, then even more power is needed. Finally, if you wanted each leaf on each branch of that tree to flutter in the breeze, then significantly  MORE processing power is required.

The point? Well in each case we have a demo of a tree, but the processing power required for the demo varies greatly!

Bossieman, du har sååå rätt

/FAST

Originally posted by Bossieman
When can I play games on my 1 Ghz TB with a geforce 3 card that uses all that power?

Have a look at the following;

http://www.nvidia.com/Products/GeForce3.nsf/games.html

And let\'s not forget forthcoming PC games like Doom3 and Unreal2, both of which make extensive use of the GF3!

Also, because of Directx8 and Nvidia\'s technology on the XBox, more and more game developers will have the knowledge and ability to push the graphics technology of the PC even further than before. In otherwords, the XBox will have a positive effect on the PC IMO.

----

And finally -

My comments here are not a claim that PC gaming is superior to console gaming. I enjoy BOTH because each offers a great but different gaming experience. I\'m argueing purely on technical terms, and as such, the PC is superior.

Yes it\'s true that the nature of the PC means that developers cannot \'max out\' the hardware in the way they can with consoles, however this situation is improving each year as new advancements surface for PC owners (Directx8 and the Geforec3 being the latest).

You made some good points here, but in terms of PC vs console gaming, nothing has really changed in the 10 years I\'ve been playing PC games (I was a gamer long before that however)! All the arguements about cost, ease of use, stability, reliability, upgrades etc are basically the same. All the arguements of some that the latest consoles will mark the end of PC gaming is also the same.

5 years from now, the PC market will be bigger than it is today (with the same pros and cons)! But continuing the trend we saw in the 90\'s, the console games market will grow faster than the PC games market.

How can the PC be superior dr?...remember you told me xbox would be herald as the graphics champion for years to come because(nvidia being the only source for this) agpx4 can never handle the same "theoretical" polygons xbox can...

fact is...xbox technology is DOA....when compared to the PC graphics we will have fall2001..

Also, nvidia better dust off those gigapixel designs or start useing EDRAM because their current set-up is going no where and is becoming obsolete....they have hit a brick wall with geforce3...expect innovations in PC graphics from bitboys ati and img...

Originally posted by Unicron!
Dr Yassam you have lots of knowledge in technology.Are you self tought or do you study anything that has to do with hardware?
I am impressed

Thanks Unicron!.

In terms of knowing about PC/console gaming technology, I guess I am self taught. Mostly this is from articles in magazines and websites, but I\'ve also learnt alot from participating in newsgroups and forums such as this.

Anyway, I really didn\'t want to get into a technical discussion in this thread (since they take up too much time ), so this will be my last post in this thread for now.

Happy Easter everyone!

Originally posted by Nplayer-2
How can the PC be superior dr?...remember you told me xbox would be herald as the graphics champion for years to come because(nvidia being the only source for this) agpx4 can never handle the same "theoretical" polygons xbox can...

No I didn\'t Nplayer (search my posts and provide a link!) I CLEARLY said that, like MOST consoles, the XBox will have superior polygon power upon release, however the PC should retake the graphics lead once AGP8x and the GeForce4 are available!

Here\'s a thread where we discussed that same point;

http://194.47.16.181/forums/showthread.php?threadid=6448&perpage=25&pagenumber=2

To quote myself "The XBox is no different. It has been designed to obtain the maximum performance out of nVidia\'s NV2A in a way that current PC\'s are unable to do. Once AGP8x and GeForce4 are available, the PC will match/surpass the XBox for polygon pushing power."

You were saying?

fact is...xbox technology is DOA....when compared to the PC graphics we will have fall2001.[/B]

Not until AGP8x and the GeForce4.

....they have hit a brick wall with geforce3...expect innovations in PC graphics from bitboys ati and img... [/B]

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

LOL...bull****, you edited your post....

like i said xbox technology is DOA this fall when put up against PC\'s....agpx8 will be here LONG before xbox games will ever have 125mpps...the same number that is(according to it\'s only source: nvidia) is impossible on agp x4...

This is interesting, very good.
I will today go down to my local gamestore and check out the newest PC games! Lets hope they dont looks like high reolution PSone games.

Since we\'re on the subject of graphics, I\'d just like to ad that PC and PS2 cannot be compared. For example, Unreal Tournament on PC looks a lot better than UT for PS2, but my PC could probably not do such games as Metal Gear Solid 2. It all depends what effects are being used, and what kind of game it is. Usually, FPS games look much better on PC.

Second, to the person who said that MGS2 was the best looking Playstation 2 game. Take a look at the screenshots for The Getaway (also on PS2).

You mean take a look at the FAKE screenshots for the Getaway. The first screens were concept art, which they admitted, and I guarantee it won\'t look like that when it comes out. No way.

True. They look TOO good. Maybe it\'ll only have on level and one car

Originally posted by Bossieman
This is interesting, very good.
I will today go down to my local gamestore and check out the newest PC games! Lets hope they dont looks like high reolution PSone games.

I´m back. Nothing that looks good, B&W looks good but there is almost only rts and flightsimulators.
I`ll stick to my PS2, I go and check out the PC games next year.