I suck at BF1942

[Organichu]

Plus, old laptops are okay at running old games with moderate settings. I took this video of me playing around in BF1942 and I was like, hey, who needs a top of the line gaming computer?

A top of the line gamer, I guess.

This is BF:1942 on medium settings. It's running on my 15.1 inch Lenovo laptop. The laptop has 512 RAM, completely integrated graphics (an Intel chip), and a processor that isn't remarkable. While it isn't absolutely stunning quality, it is certainly passable for those days on a train or when on vacation or when taking a break from studying in the library. It's pretty much always over 15 fps, usually over 20 fps, and doesn't have any real, noticeable slowdown to speak of. It actually looked much, much better than that before compressing the Fraps video and allowing Youtube to downsize it.

So uh, I guess purpose of this thread: unless you need to play the newest games or games on the absolute highest settings, it's not really necessary to have a thoroughly pimped out computer.

[WBBIRL]

A better computer can make a big difference in a players performance in games like that.

The computer I have is easily twice as powerful as any other machine in my house, and can play any games we have over 40FPS in 720p (I have my PC hooked up to my HDTV).

My brother plays COD2. On his PC he plays at:

1024x768 with all settings set to medium

on mine he plays at

1280x720 with all settings set to high

He gets about 20 more FPS and his KDR improves a lot.

[Organichu]

A better computer can make a big difference in a players performance in games like that.

The computer I have is easily twice as powerful as any other machine in my house, and can play any games we have over 40FPS in 720p (I have my PC hooked up to my HDTV).

My brother plays COD2. On his PC he plays at:

1024x768 with all settings set to medium

on mine he plays at

1280x720 with all settings set to high

He gets about 20 more FPS and his KDR improves a lot.

Oh yeah, I don't at all doubt that a better GPU and more memory would improve playability. My point, though, is that it is 100%, absolutely 'playable' on a laptop- even an archaic one. If the video sliders were set to low quality, I'd get well over 30 FPS.

I think people get the wrong idea from certain PC gaming enthusiasts. They say a $100 GPU is laughable and pretty much useless when onboard video can definitely play most older games.

[WBBIRL]

You have to understand where those guys are coming from.

If your that into computers and computer gaming, why would you be limited at a game that you play (probably very competitvely) by the GPU in your computer. If you play 10% better on a better computer, and your a very good player, that 10% can make a big difference.

Those games may be playable, but enthusiasts don't want to be hindered by the graphics solution at all.

[Organichu]

You have to understand where those guys are coming from.

If your that into computers and computer gaming, why would you be limited at a game that you play (probably very competitvely) by the GPU in your computer. If you play 10% better on a better computer, and your a very good player, that 10% can make a big difference.

Those games may be playable, but enthusiasts don't want to be hindered by the graphics solution at all.

But that's not the issue. I completely understand the need to have 'the best' in the things that you're most interested. I am a pianist- a passionate pianist. That's why my instrument costs thousands of dollars and isn't a Casio keyboard from the mid 90s.

But gamers send out the wrong message- that playing games is pretty much impossible on any rig that doesn't have a $1,000+ price tag. Not all people play games that compulsively.

Put it this way: if someone told me "hey John, I want to sort of get into piano... how would this $900 synthesizing workstation work out for me?"

I'd say "pretty good, you can definitely have fun and learn the basics of keyed instruments".

I wouldn't say "man, get a Steinway or it ain't even worth it".

In this vein I've seen people get very bad advice on internet forums that led to them spending hundreds more than they needed to fit their purposes.

[WBBIRL]

That does make a lot of sense.

To be honest most people giving that kind of advice are the enthusiasts because not many other then them are out giving advice on things like this.

You can play those games and have fun on an integrated graphics card. You won't have the same experience as the high end rig, but if your not in a top rated CAL-I team then its not going to be that big of a deal.

I better understand what your getting at now

[Organichu]

That does make a lot of sense.

To be honest most people giving that kind of advice are the enthusiasts because not many other then them are out giving advice on things like this.

You can play those games and have fun on an integrated graphics card. You won't have the same experience as the high end rig, but if your not in a top rated CAL-I team then its not going to be that big of a deal.

I better understand what your getting at now

I think deep down I might just be bitter that I don't have an 8800 GTS lol.

[Invain]

It definitely depends on what you want to do. Besides being able to play newer games at high settings, your forgetting that a faster computer lasts longer. Cheap computers with lower grade hardware tend to outdate way to fast and a couple years down the road you may be looking at something new to keep up with the times. I splurged on my laptop, but I definitely plan on it lasting all 4 years of undergrad school.

I'm definitely not a hardcore gamer, but I do like to play around on my freetime. At least with my computer I can still play newer games even 2 - 3 years down the road.

[WBBIRL]

I love my 8800GTS lol, I kinda regret it seeing as how it was the first DX10 card, but its pwning in rare form so you can't beat it.

[Invain]

Why do you regret it? Technically it wasn't the first dx10 card, the whole 8xxx line was, but you know....

I'm kickin with a 8600 GT.

[WBBIRL]

I think in about 8 more months (or right before SC2 comes out) a much better DX10 card will be out for the same price I just paid for the 8800GTS. That and I don't really need it right now, my card plays everything I need at max settings with 60+ FPS.

[Invain]

Yeah, and then 6 months later something else comes out again.

That's the only thing I hate about computers and gaming. 'Seems like stuff ages the instant you install it.

[sharkall2003]

I think there will come a point in time when the advancements are minimal and it comes to a halt.

[redFury]

I think there will come a point in time when the advancements are minimal and it comes to a halt.

We'll most likely all be dead when that happens... there are a lot of problems left to solve in technology, ones that we have been trying to solve since the 70s.

[WBBIRL]

For one, things we have now are no where near the potential for what we could have.

Most of the stuff the government has at their disposal is much more powerful that what the average joe gets. They have bandwidth capabilites that can send 4+ GB of data around the world (across water) in a few seconds as well as hard drives that can read and write that quickly to make such a transfer meaningful.

Games are what kill the life expectancy of hardware. If it weren't for gaming the average hardware component might last twice as long before becoming obsolete.