The Gaming Den

I always liked how the battle progress in "everywhere else" was basically just some kind of morale percentage thing (presumably based on how well you're doing and whether or not your sub-general is Guan Yu, as he will win the level for you if you don't tell him to sit back), but the moment you get there it changes everything and there are actual people with names and it suddenly decides what is happening.

Still, that's definitely something for which I prefer the Playstation controller. But I guess if I were using a dedicated gaming machine, I'd just have some kind of third party controller that works just as well.

No, you can totally just use your PS3 controller, there are 3rd party drivers for it on windows, and when used wired works natively OSX.

That's even better. If I one day get a dedicated gaming machine, I'm totally doing that.

[Late to the conversation] Can't you just get a Vidock to have laptops play games instead of straight up buying a rig with a better videocard? I don't have one myself but I remember a friend telling me about'em a few months ago.

The next generation console war is a battle for the mainland Chinese market.

Sony has combined their Asia and Japan divisions into one.
Microsoft has been paying more attention to China too.


I think the government would be giving Sony a lot of trouble though, having a Japanese company be dominant in a Chinese market hurts their pride.

Kaelik wrote:

name_here wrote:It is empirically proven that you can play Starcraft on a console. I don't know that you should, but you can.

My entire point is that the controls are shit, not that it is impossible to make the game for consoles. Now ask anyone ever in the entire world who played starcraft on the 64 (well, no one did, but whatever) and on the PC, and they could tell you that a fucking nintendo controllers does not give you the same control.

Which is my actual point. Strategy games aren't on consoles because of controls, not hardware.

Herzog Zwei and Pikmen's a lot of fun though

Count Arioch the 28th wrote:No, you are trying to "win" and you perceive me as a less dangerous target than Kaelik, so you're picking apart what I'm saying even if you have to pull a completely unrelated argument out of thin ass to beat me. Since the argument is "RAM doesn't count as much as the anti-console people claim" and "PC games are a crap-shoot as far as whether it works in an actual computer system because that's such a huge target it's not likely to hit yours by sheer probability" rather than "DSMatticus knows more about computers than Count Arioch", I don't know why you're wasting your time continuing to prove that you know more about computers than I do. Good for you?

Arioch wrote:If 512 ram is so restrictive then why does my xbox play games that my $1200 laptop can't when it has 8gb? You harp on the ram when from my experience it isn't an issue.

Arioch wrote:And yet the Xbox can play Borderlands 2 without graphical lag to the point of being unplayable while my computer cannot. I'm thinking the "512 megs of ram" issues is being overstated.

Every post you have made on this topic has been that RAM doesn't matter because "I have 8 gigs of it and I can't play BL2." I do not know how you think the repeated attempts to explain that lots of system RAM is a red herring are irrelevant, because they are a direct refutation of your original statement and every statement since. If you wanted to do an honest not-stupid comparison of your computer and the X-Box 360, you could tell us your CPU and GPU specs, and we could point out that your laptop fails because the CPU and/or GPU are shitty. Or we might even find that your laptop GPU has less or no dedicated VRAM than the x-box 360, and if so in a very valid and meaningful way it would be appropriate to say your laptop has less RAM for videogames than the X-Box 360 despite its 8 gigs of system RAM.

Also: stop trying to attach yourself to the things Kaelik said, which are different than the things you said, in an effort to retroactively not be wrong and make this a strawman proxy war or whatever "you're being an elitist computer douche instead of arguing" defense you're trying to muster up. When I want to argue with Kaelik, I'll just argue with Kaelik, which is exactly I was doing until Kaelik stopped posting things I thought needed to be the topic of Important Internet Arguments and you started.

You need to get laid.

Who not?

Korwin wrote:Who not?

Good point. Everyone, go get laid. RIGHT NOW. Just don't pick me, I am not available.