Do you think I would notice this MB slowdown? I'm an avid gamer, but I still run a P3 500 with a cheap Geforce card (mx 440). I don't have the super high-end system I used to have (hehe), so I'm curious if the hardware would be that noticeable to me, considering many of you are running 2ghz CPUs, etc.:)
I guess speed could be in the mind's eye of the beholden?
Looks like Red Faction a bit, which is definately a plus! (right FURY?) I often wonder how people play FPS on console, because after GTA's 3rd person success, I'm thinking first person is not nearly as good. Look at Enter the Matrix, for example. There is a title that switches in and out of first person, but the bulk of it is in 3rd person (following Rockstar's example with GTA3 & Vice). This is the right way to do games for console, IMHO. The wrong way? Take a look at Quake 3 for PS2. OUCH. Same with UT. Hard to control and really wonky gameplay result. Both of the games are great in PC because of the mouse/keyboard combo, but for console they were a bit of a disappointment.
Is this issue really the show-stopper preventing you from using Macs? Seems kind of odd.
The only thing stopping me currently is a lack of funds, and an uneasy feeling that Apple might not be right for me. I've tried it at college a few times and the graphics generated by Photo Shop for Mac are better than PC for some reason (I have no idea why since it's the same product, different platform).
After cash is concerned, this is going to sound so shallow, but, Mac has typically been a chick thing. Girls are from Venus, where Mac must be from, and Guys are from Mars, where IBM forged PCs with hammers and the might of Valhalla! Seriously, to get me to switch to Mac, there will have to be carnage involved, or a scary-looking skin/theme mod for OSX.
I think after those two things settle, I would gladly switch. There was a parody video against the Switch ads that made me think twice. The guy in it hates the Mac and complains about things that scare me, too.
Maybe when I can free up a couple grand (note: Canadian Funds), I'll pick one up and never look back.
One thing I have heard is that everyone who is a Mac lover is loyal to the bone. That has to count for something, IMHO.
I have been thinking of switching over to Apple, and now that many designers are coming up with cool products with OSX support, I am paying much more attention to Mac. I can remember back in the day when I first saw an Apple 2e, and I thought that it was so much better than my TI 99/4A, because of the games mostly. Oh and it had it's own monitor, and at the time I needed a TV for my TI.:)
I like the idea that Mac develops the hardware and software together under one roof. I think following the process from all angles like that would make for a better product. It's a better philosophy than the Windows/PC mish-mash way of thinking, primarily because no person sees all ends of the production for PC, and you can bet that there are quality issues with computability under PC that just aren't there with Apple (or at least that is what one would expect). So looking at Hyper Transport, at this stage, I'm a tad leery of it because it didn't come from Apple. I'm worried that it might have some kind of negative impact on the technology.
The necessary question is; is this going to be the next evolutionary step for Apple, or is it just an added hardware feature that is relatively minor?
I was aware of FFXI's MMORPG nature, and yet even in a traditionally non-linear system like this, there is plenty of room for false expectations. My thoughts were that they could still try to have too much cinema or linear dungeon crawls where you wait for the guys to finish talking about this and that and then you get to click twice and move to the next area. It likely won't be that way, but like I said before, I am leery of this product, fundamentally. Who knows, it may be as good as the shots for glitter and gloss, but that is by far only the most superficial aspect of a game.
I still play Counter-Strike because of the gameplay, and while Quake 3 and UT look great, they can't hold a candle to the Half-Life engine. I'm guessing Half-Life 2 will look way better, but will be at the core a very fantastic game because of the gameplay and how seriously the designers take their products â" seriously enough to listen to the audience and deliver on promises 110%.
FFX was hyped up quite a bit, as I remember, and everyone said it was going to be an amazing game, but it was far from it because it was possibly closer to being a toon-based interactive TV show, than a game. Look at some other games that have been around for thousands of years, like chess. It's a simple game with rules and it makes sense. The tension in the gameplay matters to the audience and players because it makes the game interesting. Today we are still pitting computers against humans and wondering what the outcome will be â" it's a fantastic game. But what if chess had fewer outcomes? What if we know there could be only ten specific outcomes? Even ten outcomes to a video game is a giant undertaking for designers, because the desire for quality is so high. There are many more pieces in a video game, and that's the trade off. Counterbalance with gameplay and thought and rich environs and you're looking at a winner. Deflect audience reactions and you are possibly too artsy to design games.
Designing games is political, too. It's a vast undertaking that attacks every aspect of business and promotes art as a secondary option to what sells. FFX sold, and it was made to sell. This MMORPG undertaking is going to have only two outcomes; it will be a good experience or it will be a bad one. The experience will likely be the same as all other MMORPGs, except for Gary Gygax's Lejendary MMORPG, because Gary has the insight to produce a role playing game worthy of all our time. Specifically, he didn't produce Lejendary MMORPG, but his involvement in Dream Interactive's project was key to a success there.
FFXI has a chance to be something good, and that's enough for me to watch the reviews and see what people say, but after being burned on FFX, if only because I like a game with robust control paired with many outcomes and strategy, I will have to wait and see what they all say first.
To me, graphix are second to gameplay. I'm just picky about that. I think that this looks like a nice MMORPG, but the Lejendary MMOPRG to me seems to be a better bet for an MMORPG, as Gary Gygax is involved in the project.
I bought FFX for PS2 and was unsatisfied. I'm leery about the next one. Maybe I'm picky? The big problem I had was the highly scripted nature of FFX. The game felt like a movie with a couple of clicks here and there, but it was too linear. To make FFXI raise the bar, I hope they addressed this issue, and I'm guessing they did. I don't think I'm alone in thinking that what makes a game great is game play, and nice environs don't hurt either, but if the game play is off at all, the experience is going to be below average.
The Final Fantasy stories are wonderful, IMHO, but story can't possibly carry a game because games aren't meant to be only moderately interactive -- they are meant to improve upon the status quo, and often the more they improve and innovate, the better and longer they are remembered.
Slashdot Mirror
Do you think I would notice this MB slowdown? I'm an avid gamer, but I still run a P3 500 with a cheap Geforce card (mx 440). I don't have the super high-end system I used to have (hehe), so I'm curious if the hardware would be that noticeable to me, considering many of you are running 2ghz CPUs, etc. :)
I guess speed could be in the mind's eye of the beholden?
This is so cool! I didn't know we could do this. Mac is looking good to me more and more, the more I read about it. :)
:/
What about the mouse? Can we get a multi-button mouse for Mac? That single clicker bugs me.
Looks like Red Faction a bit, which is definately a plus! (right FURY?) I often wonder how people play FPS on console, because after GTA's 3rd person success, I'm thinking first person is not nearly as good. Look at Enter the Matrix, for example. There is a title that switches in and out of first person, but the bulk of it is in 3rd person (following Rockstar's example with GTA3 & Vice). This is the right way to do games for console, IMHO. The wrong way? Take a look at Quake 3 for PS2. OUCH. Same with UT. Hard to control and really wonky gameplay result. Both of the games are great in PC because of the mouse/keyboard combo, but for console they were a bit of a disappointment.
:)
Bah I guess I'm a PS2 guy.
After cash is concerned, this is going to sound so shallow, but, Mac has typically been a chick thing. Girls are from Venus, where Mac must be from, and Guys are from Mars, where IBM forged PCs with hammers and the might of Valhalla! Seriously, to get me to switch to Mac, there will have to be carnage involved, or a scary-looking skin/theme mod for OSX.
I think after those two things settle, I would gladly switch. There was a parody video against the Switch ads that made me think twice. The guy in it hates the Mac and complains about things that scare me, too.
Maybe when I can free up a couple grand (note: Canadian Funds), I'll pick one up and never look back.
One thing I have heard is that everyone who is a Mac lover is loyal to the bone. That has to count for something, IMHO.
I have been thinking of switching over to Apple, and now that many designers are coming up with cool products with OSX support, I am paying much more attention to Mac. I can remember back in the day when I first saw an Apple 2e, and I thought that it was so much better than my TI 99/4A, because of the games mostly. Oh and it had it's own monitor, and at the time I needed a TV for my TI. :)
I like the idea that Mac develops the hardware and software together under one roof. I think following the process from all angles like that would make for a better product. It's a better philosophy than the Windows/PC mish-mash way of thinking, primarily because no person sees all ends of the production for PC, and you can bet that there are quality issues with computability under PC that just aren't there with Apple (or at least that is what one would expect). So looking at Hyper Transport, at this stage, I'm a tad leery of it because it didn't come from Apple. I'm worried that it might have some kind of negative impact on the technology.
The necessary question is; is this going to be the next evolutionary step for Apple, or is it just an added hardware feature that is relatively minor?
I was aware of FFXI's MMORPG nature, and yet even in a traditionally non-linear system like this, there is plenty of room for false expectations. My thoughts were that they could still try to have too much cinema or linear dungeon crawls where you wait for the guys to finish talking about this and that and then you get to click twice and move to the next area. It likely won't be that way, but like I said before, I am leery of this product, fundamentally. Who knows, it may be as good as the shots for glitter and gloss, but that is by far only the most superficial aspect of a game.
I still play Counter-Strike because of the gameplay, and while Quake 3 and UT look great, they can't hold a candle to the Half-Life engine. I'm guessing Half-Life 2 will look way better, but will be at the core a very fantastic game because of the gameplay and how seriously the designers take their products â" seriously enough to listen to the audience and deliver on promises 110%.
FFX was hyped up quite a bit, as I remember, and everyone said it was going to be an amazing game, but it was far from it because it was possibly closer to being a toon-based interactive TV show, than a game. Look at some other games that have been around for thousands of years, like chess. It's a simple game with rules and it makes sense. The tension in the gameplay matters to the audience and players because it makes the game interesting. Today we are still pitting computers against humans and wondering what the outcome will be â" it's a fantastic game. But what if chess had fewer outcomes? What if we know there could be only ten specific outcomes? Even ten outcomes to a video game is a giant undertaking for designers, because the desire for quality is so high. There are many more pieces in a video game, and that's the trade off. Counterbalance with gameplay and thought and rich environs and you're looking at a winner. Deflect audience reactions and you are possibly too artsy to design games.
Designing games is political, too. It's a vast undertaking that attacks every aspect of business and promotes art as a secondary option to what sells. FFX sold, and it was made to sell. This MMORPG undertaking is going to have only two outcomes; it will be a good experience or it will be a bad one. The experience will likely be the same as all other MMORPGs, except for Gary Gygax's Lejendary MMORPG, because Gary has the insight to produce a role playing game worthy of all our time. Specifically, he didn't produce Lejendary MMORPG, but his involvement in Dream Interactive's project was key to a success there.
FFXI has a chance to be something good, and that's enough for me to watch the reviews and see what people say, but after being burned on FFX, if only because I like a game with robust control paired with many outcomes and strategy, I will have to wait and see what they all say first.
To me, graphix are second to gameplay. I'm just picky about that. I think that this looks like a nice MMORPG, but the Lejendary MMOPRG to me seems to be a better bet for an MMORPG, as Gary Gygax is involved in the project.
I bought FFX for PS2 and was unsatisfied. I'm leery about the next one. Maybe I'm picky? The big problem I had was the highly scripted nature of FFX. The game felt like a movie with a couple of clicks here and there, but it was too linear. To make FFXI raise the bar, I hope they addressed this issue, and I'm guessing they did. I don't think I'm alone in thinking that what makes a game great is game play, and nice environs don't hurt either, but if the game play is off at all, the experience is going to be below average.
The Final Fantasy stories are wonderful, IMHO, but story can't possibly carry a game because games aren't meant to be only moderately interactive -- they are meant to improve upon the status quo, and often the more they improve and innovate, the better and longer they are remembered.