Alexandru's forum posts

#1 Posted by Alexandru (345 posts) -

@forkboy said:

Not before you get a doctor to look at your ears, no

kiss my ass.

#2 Posted by Alexandru (345 posts) -

When next gen hits I plan on moving to consoles for about 2 years, and then move back to PC (I did the same this gen, where I gamed mostly on PS3 until 2009 when I build a gaming PC).

I don't know however if I should upgrade now one last time for the games that are coming out in 2013, or if I should just wait.

I have a Q6600 CPU and a GTX 560 TI and just installed 4 GB of RAM (2 GB were getting slow). This setup has served me well and as I said in some other posts, even with the old Q6600 CPU I can play the last year's powerhouses (Battlefield 3, The Witcher 2) and this year's Sleeping Dogs at 1680x1050 with most/all details maxed out and get over 40 fps.

But I don't know how this system will handle Far Cry 3 and the upcoming Bioshock Infinite. I know I won't max them out, but I don't know what kind of performance I can expect from them and what details.

Should I just keep this setup and the upcoming games will run well enough on it, or do you think I should just do one last major upgrade?

#3 Posted by Alexandru (345 posts) -

@Fattony12000 said:

Would you BioShock Infinite.

Yes, but I'll have to kill you at the end of the game.

#4 Posted by Alexandru (345 posts) -

I know that having more download services will just split our games across multiple accounts, and that in itself sucks. But Ubisoft is known as a company that delays it's PC games, uses draconic DRM and their ports are not always that great (although better than people give them credit for).

But with Far Cry 3, this seems to be completely different. It's a game that launched day-and-date with the console versions, it's clearly superior to the console versions that I don't even know I wanna call it a port, and it only has the one time login.

And this got me thinking. Is this game so good on PC simply because consoles are so old, or is it something more to it? Could it be because of Uplay, and Ubisoft made this game like it's poster child?

#5 Posted by Alexandru (345 posts) -

Yes, most people I know. And even those that buy games still pirate some. I seem to be the only one that hasn't pirated a game since 2008. I live in romania though, and piracy is rampant in eastern europe. Valve games seem to be less pirated here, since everyone seems to have portal 1/2, half life games and counter strike.

#7 Posted by Alexandru (345 posts) -

I already have Seaman, I dont need yours.

#8 Posted by Alexandru (345 posts) -

@Mnemoidian said:

@StarvingGamer said:

Is there still hype for this game? I feel like the excitement for this game peaked around a year-and-a-half ago and has gradually dwindled to cautious skepticism.

Yeah... I really dislike the extreme amounts of hype publishers drum up for some games ~6 months before (they think that) the game will be out. Makes situations like this super-awkward. Either way, I hope it's a good game.

Thats where 2k should come in. Its the marketing team's job to create hype. We better see that next year. From what i saw of that game, it doesn't look cheap. 400k like the first one would be a disaster.

#9 Posted by Alexandru (345 posts) -

I was reading up on Bioshock Infinite, and it crossed my mind that despite looking really good it might not sell. I know Bioshock 1 did pretty good, but that was at the beggining of a generation. If you look now, most games don't sell that good anymore. I know some people may say that Bioshock is a known name, but Bioshock 2 didn't do so hot.

Do you think good reviews will be enough to make Bioshock Infinite sell? Bioshock 2 had a decent marketing campaign and it didnt help (although it was profitable still)..

#10 Posted by Alexandru (345 posts) -