10 hours is not a lot.
on
Yakuza Review
·
· Score: 1
I have never sat down and played a game for 30 minute sessions. If a game is good and engrosses the player, then hours can pass by without your knowledge. With that said, I'm a fan of 250+ hour games (mainly RPG).
Obviously the author had an opinion that they wanted to share or they wouldn't have reviewed the the hardware so "one-sided". With regards to recognising the positive/negative aspects of a certain product, raises the question of who is sponsoring an author to write the review or what their motives are. The negative factors are almost NEVER raised, as for some reason people seem to think that testing/covering a peice of hardware limits them to telling readers what they LIKED about the product.
I personally, am an Intel person. Not that I wish swift death to AMD fans or whatever, but simply because I've never had a reason to look for a different solution (perhaps I haven't experienced "Greener pastures"). However, I always find Tom's Hardware quite good for hardware reviews.
http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/09/10/four_cores_ on_the_rampage/
Everyone has a different opinion (much like, "I can honestly tell you right now that almost every application that is memory bandwidth limited is going to perform better on an AMD K8 chip than Core2/conroe. The K8's integrated memory controller supports much better memory throughput."), but it all depends on the overall build of the system. You can have one hell of a CPU and memory, planted on a motherboard that would serve better as toilet paper.
Anyway thats enough out of me, for now.
Slashdot Mirror
I have never sat down and played a game for 30 minute sessions. If a game is good and engrosses the player, then hours can pass by without your knowledge. With that said, I'm a fan of 250+ hour games (mainly RPG).
Obviously the author had an opinion that they wanted to share or they wouldn't have reviewed the the hardware so "one-sided". With regards to recognising the positive/negative aspects of a certain product, raises the question of who is sponsoring an author to write the review or what their motives are. The negative factors are almost NEVER raised, as for some reason people seem to think that testing/covering a peice of hardware limits them to telling readers what they LIKED about the product. I personally, am an Intel person. Not that I wish swift death to AMD fans or whatever, but simply because I've never had a reason to look for a different solution (perhaps I haven't experienced "Greener pastures"). However, I always find Tom's Hardware quite good for hardware reviews. http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/09/10/four_cores_ on_the_rampage/
Everyone has a different opinion (much like, "I can honestly tell you right now that almost every application that is memory bandwidth limited is going to perform better on an AMD K8 chip than Core2/conroe. The K8's integrated memory controller supports much better memory throughput."), but it all depends on the overall build of the system. You can have one hell of a CPU and memory, planted on a motherboard that would serve better as toilet paper.
Anyway thats enough out of me, for now.