Trylks's forum posts

#1 Edited by Trylks (829 posts) -

Years ago the RAM memory of average PCs would increase wildly, maybe doubling every year and consoles were way behind.

This (new) generation we see consoles that have more RAM than an average PC and the RAM memory of an average PC seems not to increase at all.

Are we at the end of the road for the RAM?

#2 Posted by Trylks (829 posts) -

I have a windows 8 PC with windows in German, which is great to practice (by reading) the language on the go. German, as a beautiful language it is, is quite annoying (to me) when playing games, it's specially confusing when fighting against Nazis.

I didn't try to download and play a game (yet) and I would like to ask beforehand because maybe I should change something on the settings (or do anything, I have no idea).

I would like to know, basically, if I download and install a game (e.g. saints row the third) whether I will be able to configure the language from the menu inside the game (or any other place).

I'm asking this because the last time I tried to change the language of a windows 7 machine I was unable to do so (windows 7 was sold in one language and just one, you could choose which one to buy, but other languages were sold separately AFAIK), and last time I tried to configure the language in a XBox360 this was impossible, it was system-level setting for the whole XBox.

Thank you.

#3 Posted by Trylks (829 posts) -
#4 Edited by Trylks (829 posts) -

If you are moving between only two houses, probably you can buy two desktops for about the same price of a laptop. That won't be any annoying after you sync your saved games with something or decide to play different games at different places.

If you are moving between more houses, then a laptop is the way to go because a desktop is going to be utterly annoying about two times a week, carrying a desktop may make sense about once in a month at most, for me.

#5 Edited by Trylks (829 posts) -

@brendan said:

Honestly we kind of got more than we deserved last gen. We got machines that cost hundreds more to build than we bought them for, and the huge gap in technology actually priced many mid-tier developers out of the market. This may seem like a crazy opinion to many but I believe the gap was too large last gen.

That's a very good point. Not only they were losing hundreds on each sale, in the previous generation we saw horrible failure rates and very high prices in what was a strong fight between Microsoft and Sony to become the leader. Meanwhile the Wii was selling millions with a better profit margin due to different ideas.

In this case, they seem to be taking it easy on the technology and trying to add some ideas to make a difference, like kinect and integration as a very smart TV for Microsoft and a stronger focus on the social and online aspect for Sony.

IMHO, they will need to get some momentum (i.e. AAA exclusives) fast, before the steam machines arrive, or we will see a strong pricefight (I really hope to see it).

#6 Posted by Trylks (829 posts) -

The way I see it, usually the excitement, interest and hype happens before they are out, with trailers, announcements, etc. Before trying them, before opening the box.

However I'm not noticing that with this generation, this may be a matter of my perspective or be there. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but before evaluating whether it is a good, bad (or none of the previous) thing, I would like to know whether it is a thing.

#7 Posted by Trylks (829 posts) -

If so, in which ways?

The only difference I know about is the force feedback in the triggers.

Thank you for the info.

#8 Edited by Trylks (829 posts) -

I don't even know what defines or delimits a "Golden Age".

I only see nostalgia speaking in this thread.

Zelda: a Link to the Past was awesome, and so was Mechwarrior and Donkey Kong Country (specially the 2nd). I loved those games. SuperMetroid was probably awesome as well, but too hard for me at that time.

Then Super Mario 64, Blast Corps 64, and Zelda: Ocarina of Time.

I had lots of fun with Age of Empires, Monkey Island 3, Dungeon Keeper, Theme Hospital and Grim Fandango. And I had addiction with StarCraft.

I enjoyed a FPS for the first time with Halo, I only had frustration previously with Doom 2, Turok and Half-Life. Oddworld: Stranger's Wrath was really memorable to me.

Then lots of fun with Gears of War and a really interesting universe in Mass Effect. Darksiders looks like Zelda meets God of War.

I look at the past and certainly Darksiders doesn't have the epicness of Zelda. Fable tries to capture some of that feeling, but it's hard to give the feeling of the duty of a child against Ganondorf while you stress the nature of freedom and options. On the other hand, having options is great. When I look at Fable 1, 2 and 3, I see what probably Zelda 1, 2 and 3 were, and I hope there will be better Fable games in the future, that are to Fable 1, 2 and 3 what Zelda: a Link to the Past and Zelda: Ocarina of Time are to Zelda games 1, 2 and 3. Even if it's not called Fable anymore and it stands by the name of Kingdoms of Amalur, or any other name.

I miss games like Monkey Island, Grim Fandango and Broken Sword, but when comparing Broken Sword: The Serpent's Curse with Titanfall, I feel more like playing the latter than the former. New games shadow those of the past, and so happens with genres.

I never played Civilization games or Sim City games, but I hope they become more serious, similarly to what Democracy and Capitalism games are trying to do. I think those games are more fun when they are more interesting/serious. I think we will keep seeing how games evolve and improve, and the games in the past may be special because they achieve an interesting artistic value, but the technological value of new games shadows those of the past.

We can only hope the future games, that will make use of better technology, will have at least the same artistic value as games in the past, wrt story and feelings. As I say, Zelda a Link to the Past is not one of the games that are usually considered as a prime example of what is art, but being a child in the dark, fighting rats with a recently found sword and nothing else is something with an important artistic value. This may be more significant in games like Dark Souls, though. But I don't think there is any place in Dark Souls that feels like a relief of a constant danger as Kakariko is in Zelda.

I really hope games do not become too market oriented and try to achieve quality and artistic value even if that means reducing the return of the investment, but I'm afraid this is only going to happen by chance or mistake. Mass Effect was great, but there were great complains about the ending in Mass Effect 3. After all, if that's the end and there is no ME4 planned, there is no reason to bother at all, or there is?

#9 Posted by Trylks (829 posts) -

I played the first one and I don't feel like playing any other AC game.

So maybe you can consider it's a great game because it's completely satisfying...

#10 Posted by Trylks (829 posts) -

@ki11tank: playing easy games is dull and boring, its actually like the worst work in the world, a bunch of things to do that are not any rewarding because they were not any challenging.

You can see my activity here: http://raptr.com/trylks/wall

Last time I played a game was september. I may not play much, but if I play I want a challenge. If a game lasts for 80 hours, that usually means a whole year, and I'm fine with it. There are quite a few interesting games out there, but if I don't play all of them I'm fine with it, because I have a life and going through a game is not a priority in my life, I don't need to have finished any number of games by the end of the year or month.

Work hard, party hard, play hard.

If I'm too tired to play, which happens sometimes, I spend some time on the forums, I watch some series, read a book, whatever. Games are there for the challenge. The story may be good or not, but usually TV series have better stories (and are "easier").

"I don't know why people get so sensitive"

I don't like people making false statements. But I'm just a PhD student with a crappy salary that cares about that to publish (correct) papers, if I was an executive in finance maybe I could be thinking wrongly (with a flawed logic and implicit wrong assumptions), stating wrong things and basing my decisions in wrong information, why not?