PC vs Consoles

Which platform is home to you?

  • Total voters
    62
to be fair though norik, mac in itself truly is a unix OS just like linux is. its just alot of the cool stuff is hidden from the eye ;)
 
hahaha trust me when i say windows 8 is hundreds of times worse.

once you figure out a mac, its actually really nice to use mac os. especially if you're like me, and you do most of your stuff from the terminal anyways. of course, i prefer linux above all else anyways, because it doesnt have any of the silly restrictions of a mac, and can essentially be the os YOU want it to be - with a little bit of work of course.

besides, the hardware in macs are actually really good stuff, and really well made. you can actually even play oblivion with texture mods on em, or skyrim on relatively high settings with a bunch of mods.

however, if he doesnt wanna deal with macOS, he could just install linux. or if he really must stick with an MS system, he could install windows 7. just avoid windows8 like the plague...ugh...
 
My laptop came with Windows 8 and to be honest I'm ok with it. Once you unlearn the mouse behaviors that make it go nuts, lock it to the desktop permanently, and stick a Start button to your taskbar, you've got Windows 7 with an improved task manager and much better driver support for things like printers. Sure, I'd never recommend or install Windows 8, and I think it was a retarded move by Microsoft, but at least it's not OSX.

At the end of the day, Linux and Win7 remain the undisputed kings.
 
Norik said:
My laptop came with Windows 8 and to be honest I'm ok with it. Once you unlearn the mouse behaviors that make it go nuts, lock it to the desktop permanently, and stick a Start button to your taskbar, you've got Windows 7 with an improved task manager and much better driver support for things like printers. Sure, I'd never recommend or install Windows 8, and I think it was a retarded move by Microsoft, but at least it's not OSX.

At the end of the day, Linux and Win7 remain the undisputed kings.
Click to expand...
i actually dont like the new windows 8 taskmanager - it gives me alot of useless information that i dont need - which was already stuff that i could find under "properties" in the few cases that i DID need it.

as for the mouse behaviors when i was using win8, i just completely disabled all mouse twiddles.

but actually what bothers me about win8 is the backwards compatibility issues it has with older PC games, and a bunch of emulators.

plus the driver support is still crap. either you have a computer that works with windows 8, or you're gonna be crashing to desktop for no reason, ALOT.

and i sure as hell dont feel that a touchscreen on my PC/laptop is efficient at all. dont get me wrong - touchscreens can be great for some things like graphic design and stuff like that, but they just arent any good at all for a standard programming/documenting environment. plus they suck balls for gaming.

windows8 is nothing but a queen serf. LINUX and windows7 are the Kings!!!

long live the kings!!! hail to the kings!!!
 
The quality of this thread is now slightly back up.

Mage should keep a tight leash on some of the troublemakers here.
 
Norik said:
Most old games I play work fine on DOSBOX, so I might not be seeing the full picture in terms of BC.

Also, fuck touchscreens.
Click to expand...
well the old games i am mainly talking about are those made essentially in the time period between the end of the DOS era, and the end of the windows XP era(beginning of the windows Vista era)

it is because of such problems, that for example, i have been forced to write a compatibility guide for my favorite game, Diablo1, which you may find here:

http://www.lurkerlounge.com/forums/thread-13200.html

of course i dont expect you to read all of that. in short, diablo has run into issues with newer windows operating systems involving Color Artifacting, CD's not being recognised, Online play not working(or at least not properly) LAN play not working without an IPX-UDP wrapper(because IPX is a dead protocol nowdays - dead as in not even supported by windows anymore), Fixes to crashes that happen when the game is run over multiple cores(multi-core PC's didnt exist back when diablo was made, so it experiences instability unless limited to 1 core) and also the game now(as of windows 8) is subject to extreme driver issues involving directx, which can actually cause the game to not start up, or not start up properly(the only fix to which is either to run the game in a very hacky fashion, or to essentially run the game over and over until it DOES work.) other minor issues involve the game's volume controls not functioning 100% properly(but these can be adjusted from the desktop anyways...) also due to the recent shifts in resolution, i do fear that diablo's native resolution(640x480) will eventually be phased out. certainly there are mods compatible with the original game to get it running at higher resolutions, but those are glitchy at best, and tend to crash alot. also there is the issue of operating system permissions which can prevent you from doing things such as saving your progress in singleplayer, creating multiplayer save files in multiplayer. and firewall issues can result in blocking diablo from even playing multiplayer to begin with(though these are very easy to fix, its still a problem.)

i suppose you could consider aspect ratio issues to be another compatibility problem, but i'll actually attribute that to personal preference and configuration. some people like proper aspect ratio, others just want the game to fill their whole screen.

but in anycase while i may have specialized in this game's compatibility, that does not mean that there are not other games out there that require some sort of fixes/hacks in order to run properly on newer operating systems. and most of these games, unlike diablo here, never actually get the support you need.

of course you could just say "well why not just run the game in a virtual machine?" but the problem with that is a) directX/direct3D support in virtual machines are still lacking, and virtual machines are also unable to adjust/scale up to the hosts resolution, which in the case of diablo for example, forces you to play the game in either a little tiny window, or a fullscreen window of X resolution, of which displays a massive black box on all sides of the game admist a tiny little play area, which can be very hard on the eyes to read text, not to mention just flat out unappealing.

if you would like, i can even go as far as to post pictures and videos of what diablo looks like with all the compatibility settings on, and of what happens when diablo is just run raw with no fixes on a modern windows OS.

of course while there isnt really much difference between vista and windows 7 compatibility issues(mostly just aesthetic, with a few stability issues), windows 8 suffers from some of the same, and some newer issues(issues which are arguably more severe, because they effect the ability to even start up the game.)

and then there are even more issues with Diablo: Hellfire - the expansion. amongst the new problems are also inability to patch the game by standard means, because while Hellfire is a 32-bit game, the patch itself is a 16-bit application, and thus completely incompatible with 64-bit operating systems. however, because it is a 16-bit application that is written for windows, and not DOS, you cant even run the patch in DOSBOX. the only way to patch the game is through complex setup in a virtual machine that accesses host machine folders, or better yet, to download a "re-written" fanmade patch which provides the same exact fixes as the old patch. though depending on how things go - that can actually end up being quite a hassle as well.

and there are many other issues with old 16-bit windows programs as well.

But lets just end this off by saying there's a huge compatibility gap that is left unfilled between the DOS era, and the 64bit windows era.
 
aWZ41NZ_460s_v1.jpg
 
You're all missing out on the latest and greatest thing to hit the human race... dun dun dun!!

http://shop.ouya.tv/products/ouya-console

Slayer_X64 said:
well the old games i am mainly talking about are those made essentially in the time period between the end of the DOS era, and the end of the windows XP era(beginning of the windows Vista era)

it is because of such problems, that for example, i have been forced to write a compatibility guide for my favorite game, Diablo1, which you may find here:

http://www.lurkerlounge.com/forums/thread-13200.html

of course i dont expect you to read all of that. in short, diablo has run into issues with newer windows operating systems involving Color Artifacting, CD's not being recognised, Online play not working(or at least not properly) LAN play not working without an IPX-UDP wrapper(because IPX is a dead protocol nowdays - dead as in not even supported by windows anymore), Fixes to crashes that happen when the game is run over multiple cores(multi-core PC's didnt exist back when diablo was made, so it experiences instability unless limited to 1 core) and also the game now(as of windows 8) is subject to extreme driver issues involving directx, which can actually cause the game to not start up, or not start up properly(the only fix to which is either to run the game in a very hacky fashion, or to essentially run the game over and over until it DOES work.) other minor issues involve the game's volume controls not functioning 100% properly(but these can be adjusted from the desktop anyways...) also due to the recent shifts in resolution, i do fear that diablo's native resolution(640x480) will eventually be phased out. certainly there are mods compatible with the original game to get it running at higher resolutions, but those are glitchy at best, and tend to crash alot. also there is the issue of operating system permissions which can prevent you from doing things such as saving your progress in singleplayer, creating multiplayer save files in multiplayer. and firewall issues can result in blocking diablo from even playing multiplayer to begin with(though these are very easy to fix, its still a problem.)

i suppose you could consider aspect ratio issues to be another compatibility problem, but i'll actually attribute that to personal preference and configuration. some people like proper aspect ratio, others just want the game to fill their whole screen.

but in anycase while i may have specialized in this game's compatibility, that does not mean that there are not other games out there that require some sort of fixes/hacks in order to run properly on newer operating systems. and most of these games, unlike diablo here, never actually get the support you need.

of course you could just say "well why not just run the game in a virtual machine?" but the problem with that is a) directX/direct3D support in virtual machines are still lacking, and virtual machines are also unable to adjust/scale up to the hosts resolution, which in the case of diablo for example, forces you to play the game in either a little tiny window, or a fullscreen window of X resolution, of which displays a massive black box on all sides of the game admist a tiny little play area, which can be very hard on the eyes to read text, not to mention just flat out unappealing.

if you would like, i can even go as far as to post pictures and videos of what diablo looks like with all the compatibility settings on, and of what happens when diablo is just run raw with no fixes on a modern windows OS.

of course while there isnt really much difference between vista and windows 7 compatibility issues(mostly just aesthetic, with a few stability issues), windows 8 suffers from some of the same, and some newer issues(issues which are arguably more severe, because they effect the ability to even start up the game.)

and then there are even more issues with Diablo: Hellfire - the expansion. amongst the new problems are also inability to patch the game by standard means, because while Hellfire is a 32-bit game, the patch itself is a 16-bit application, and thus completely incompatible with 64-bit operating systems. however, because it is a 16-bit application that is written for windows, and not DOS, you cant even run the patch in DOSBOX. the only way to patch the game is through complex setup in a virtual machine that accesses host machine folders, or better yet, to download a "re-written" fanmade patch which provides the same exact fixes as the old patch. though depending on how things go - that can actually end up being quite a hassle as well.

and there are many other issues with old 16-bit windows programs as well.

But lets just end this off by saying there's a huge compatibility gap that is left unfilled between the DOS era, and the 64bit windows era.
Click to expand...

^ No, the graphical data of the DOS in comparison to the 16-bit windows works well but the frame rate reduction is modified by the aspect ratio in accordance with the 32-bit Vister XP, the program stability refresh rate at 64-bits exceeds the numerical value of the XP, thus exceeding the previous refresh rate numerical size differential of the screen in ratio with the reduction in frames!!!!!!

*Has a Nergasm and dies*
 
Ishimaru Jinrai said:
You're all missing out on the latest and greatest thing to hit the human race... dun dun dun!!

http://shop.ouya.tv/products/ouya-console



^ No, the graphical data of the DOS in comparison to the 16-bit windows works well but the frame rate reduction is modified by the aspect ratio in accordance with the 32-bit Vister XP, the program stability refresh rate at 64-bits exceeds the numerical value of the XP, thus exceeding the previous refresh rate numerical size differential of the screen in ratio with the reduction in frames!!!!!!

*Has a Nergasm and dies*
Click to expand...
I'm not actually sure what you're trying to say here. but let me re-iterate what im saying.

16-bit WINDOWS (not DOS. for DOS, we have DOSBOX, end of story.) programs work fine on a 32bit windows operating system. they however, do not work at all on a 64-bit operating system. also DOS programs wont run natively on a 64bit windows OS without DOSBOX.

32bit programs generally work on a 64bit operating system, but early generation 32bit programs have widely known issues, because of the way they were designed.

now there are ALOT of incompatibilities with early 32bit programs, because alot of them use 8bit colors or 16bit colors which do not work properly on a 64bit OS. also alot of these programs used alot of older display methods (outdated ddraw functions that dont exist anymore, or dont function the same as they did, and the like) which are mostly incompatible with modern display methods - combine that with driver issues on top of that, and you get access violation CTD's, and segmentation faults. from there you have to do alot of hacky work just to get the program you want to run, let alone properly.

dont forget alot of older programs were also never designed to be run on more than 1 core. some things will run great on multiple cores despite this, others will become very unstable and crash within minutes.

even sound can be buggy on some of these older programs, depending on how the sound was written, and what libraries it depended on.

anyways also to boot, even if most of these old games do run much faster, they all have FPS limiters, so they dont really move faster than they actually did before, and even most old games just render extra frames while keeping the actual game speed fixed(looks nice on a 120hz monitor, say, but the game runs the same speed regardless.)

also to boot, this is more of an issue with the way windows was developed, rather than a 64bit operating system issue, but because microsoft has locked down the operating system very tightly, alot of games will struggle to function properly without admin privileges. this is another reason why i always discourage installing anything into program files, because microsoft has it marked as a protected folder, and it is that very protection which fucks with how older programs operate.
 
Norik said:
He's just writing gibberish in an attempt to be funny (and failing pretty bad at it).
Click to expand...

Went into a PC s console topic. Bashed console's graphics compared to PC's.

Went on about how 1980's games graphics don't matter compared to current gen.

FAIL!!!!!!!

^ Solo likes this post.
 
Norik said:
He's just writing gibberish in an attempt to be funny (and failing pretty bad at it).
Click to expand...
meh.

Ishimaru Jinrai said:
Went into a PC s console topic. Bashed console's graphics compared to PC's.

Went on about how 1980's games graphics don't matter compared to current gen.

FAIL!!!!!!!

^ Solo likes this post.
Click to expand...
graphics dont matter regardless. so long as you are capable of seeing what is going on, that is all that matters.

perhaps you should try playing a roguelike to see what i mean. it might be good for you, and who knows - you might even enjoy it. i know i have.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back