安裝 Steam
登入
|
語言
簡體中文
日本語（日文）
한국어（韓文）
ไทย（泰文）
Български（保加利亞文）
Čeština（捷克文）
Dansk（丹麥文）
Deutsch（德文）
English（英文）
Español - España（西班牙文 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙文 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希臘文）
Français（法文）
Italiano（義大利文）
Bahasa Indonesia（印尼語）
Magyar（匈牙利文）
Nederlands（荷蘭文）
Norsk（挪威文）
Polski（波蘭文）
Português（葡萄牙文 - 葡萄牙）
Português - Brasil（葡萄牙文 - 巴西）
Română（羅馬尼亞文）
Русский（俄文）
Suomi（芬蘭文）
Svenska（瑞典文）
Türkçe（土耳其文）
tiếng Việt（越南文）
Українська（烏克蘭文）
回報翻譯問題
討論區規矩與守則
檢舉此篇文章
Most 2008-2012 GPU's can and will put out well over 60 FPS with High - Max gpu settings.
95% of the TIME its poor coding or 'console ports' that require Phenomial GPuS to blast through, same with Early Access Games.
Todays Games are in an area of unoptimzation. Lets Power our way through. Legacy is never a forethought. Things are literally being geared towards making and wanting a PC user to upgrade in 1-2 years - Like Console Users.
The resoultions aren't getting better, the textures aren't being created 'prettier' , todays Game tech (aside from VR) is extremely Stagnant and has been. There is only so much you can do besides creating a whole new way to display images.
******* Anyone seen multi-rowed - sliding LCD screens? its the future. just saying. 3D without all the 'tech' play and math. *******
it's all a farce. Still rocking GTX 480. Still maxing most games.
Learn about crappy drivers and bloatware. Learn about proper pc setup. A streamlined PC from 2008 still knocking over AAA games on a 32" 1080 TV.
I thought we were the Master Race. We should know better than this, but we don't. The pc gamer today is so uneducated in the matters of general pc maintence it's embarassing.
The answers and questions I read and see given on steam forums as steadily declined in usefullness and increased in obscure, irrelevant or such generalized retorts (common sense - ie. did you verify game integrity through steam.... any pc gamer would know the tool he uses everyday or should, and it's options )
Gamers are lazy and have no interest in learning anything besides how to troll and abusing ingame glitches. F this place. and F this stupid PC upgrade mentality you all seem to have.
and stuff.
Minimal is a 750 Ti.
I really don't see the issue here. Technology is ever changing and games are requiring more and more power to run them. A GPU isn't just about visual effects anymore either. We now have physics and other calculations being added to the mix.
In a year or so, that 970 will be less then $200 as a normal price and there will be an even better card out at it's current price point.
and when Oculus first came out I told people that before the year is over the oculus specs would be the same specs for most AAA games.
I said that less than a month ago.
however just hang tight the cost for the same power is going to drop a LOT before the year is over. likely as a new card though
Well we are into PC gaming why would we not want the best out of a game instead of just purchasing it on Consoles.
I understand I worded it wrong when I said required.
Also we honestly don't know if the 970 will be $200 look at websites they try and sell the 770,780,780ti for more than the 970 now.
I just hope not every AAA game coming out this year the store page will say recommended GTX 970
I've never expected the best graphics and count myself lucky if I can get them. Even my worst is still better then a console.
GTX 770's are mostly out of stock, so the price has gone up a bit, but most I found were around $200-$250 usd.
Average price for a 970 is $350, so it will be about $250 in a year or so. $200 was based on your statement of $300 for the GTX 970.
Unless you have the income to spare, then never expect the max settings for a game.
I know I don't have it to spare, but I'm still happy with my AMD 7970 3GB.
Even if future games suggest a 970, just means I need to start saving up for when the 970 becomes the minimal.
Consoles usually don't have this issue however, you can simply boot up from the get go. But no doubt there's been cases of games running better on other consoles, Hyrule Warriors Legends (Despite being on a handheld) recently is a big example of this.
honestly I strongly suspect that there is some serious fraud going on in the console market.
I mean do we really believe that a console that came out nearly 2 years ago with sub-standard hardware is really running games that PCs need a 970 for? I dont believe it but its is what they are specing.
anyway...the reason (in my mind) to PC game has changed a lot in just about 6 years. Now its more because of indie titles then it is to out perform the console AAA titles.
Look at PC exclusives made by small dev teams like The Forest. Excellent graphics and very well optimised (especially for early access).
A lot of new pc gamers don't know their computers and you're absolutely right, they come from consoles because they hear about all the great things a pc can do(or just to play a specific game), get sold an overpriced potato by the eqivilant of a used car salesman at a big box store and then don't understand why it isn't as simple as turning it on and pressing play. Not to mention prebuilts tend to come with so much useless crap on them that they run at an extremely low efficiency.
1. there was a time when AAA hyper hype ultra hype games that were available for PC where actually graphically not that interesting compared to what the PC could do. That was because the console hardware was 7 friggin years old so mega titles didnt want to touch things like DX10. During these years this PC gamer was a pissed off PC gamer.
2. MS and Sony I believe are releasing newer version this quickly for two reasons. 1. VR. good VR requires good hardware 2. the indie market is now something to pay attention to and they are starting to make high end games also with graphic engines being nearly free to use until you make money we can assume this trend will move upwards. Thus consoles cant hold the PC hostage like it did the last generation.
3. I find if extremely suspicious that the new generation of consoles that are 1. nearly 2 years old. 2. came out under-powered by everyone's expectations. 3. based on a PC architecture. contains some kind of black magic that makes it a requirement for a PC to use a 970 to run the game....very suspicious
Keep in mind. most of the truly successful PC games over the last devcade have bucked that tred. Hell Look at Mine craft , and such. Honestly it's game play that stands out. Graphics are just made for pretty screen shots.
true..
although to be fair it really does require a math coprocessor to run a game with specific kinds of graphical demands (as a very old example). however, your right thta doesnt mean by default that its 'better'
but with that said I find if very odd that this generation of consoles that are 1. nearly 2 years old. 2. came out under-powered by everyone's expectations. 3. based on a PC architecture. contains some kind of black magic that makes it a requirement for a PC to use a 970 to run the game....very suspicious
Quake needed a math co-processor absolutely, and in fact to work as Carmack and Abrash intended it needed some very specific features pertaining to the Pentium's integrated FPU; it could execute integer and floating-point instructions simultaneously on Pentium but not 487. But I'd argue if you want to go down the rabit hole of how Quake was intended to be played, it should have been running on a GL card and not FPU ;)