Dark_Fuzzy

Expects a huge game to come out in 3 years while the industry average is 5 years for experienced developers. Toppest of the keks.

Just fyi this thread is more for newcomers to the forums, the computer community, and PC gaming. Veterans, feel free to read but you might find yourselves going "Well duh, of course that's how it works".
 
I was goofing around online the past hour or two and reading about the latest GPU's, Vega info, et cetera and I stumbled upon a comparison of the 3GB and 6GB variants of the 1060. I was curious, watched the video. The man in the video brought up an interesting point:
 
A majority of people playing games today, at this very moment, have Maxwell or Kepler GPU's or older. And these same people running these cards are either on Ivy Bridge/Sandy Bridge or for AMD, Bulldozer/Piledriver, MAYBE Haswell at the latest. This means their computers are anywhere from 3 to 6 years old, and their graphics cards are 2 or more. If I grabbed a 680 or a 780 today and booted up Witcher 3 at 1080p, it'd still run at medium to high detail. Why? Because if it didn't it wouldn't sell. Lemme explain.
 
Battlefield 1 is coming out this month. The company selling it is going to want roughly 50 million copies sold to make up for the cost of producing it. But according to the Steam hardware survey, most people fit into the demographic described above. Well, that's a bit of a problem. If the game ends up having been designed for Maxwell and Pascal and people are on 700 and 600 series GPUs they can't play this game! And thus, that 50 million copies goal becomes very hard to reach. The solution?
 
They design the games to run on hardware up to 5 years old.
 
Take AwesomeSauce Kyle's video on Sandy Bridge for example (he now goes by BitWit). In his video he demonstrated that Sandy Bridge is still a more than adequate CPU platform and that building a system with an i5-2xxx or i7-2xxx and an LGA1155 board is a great idea on a budget. The reason it still works so well does indeed have to do with the fact that Intel designs their chips to last, and computer hardware slowed down around the time Sandy came out, but it also has to do with the fact that game designers make their games so-called "backwards compatible" with older hardware so that the people who can't afford a whole new system every 2 or 3 years still have the ability to play newer games.
Now don't get me wrong, you're not going to be maxing out games at ultra detail with 1440p resoultion. But if you stick with 1080p, or simply upgrade your GPU to a 980, 980ti, 1060 6GB, 1070, or 1080, then 1440p isn't that hard to achieve. And instead of spending tons of money on a new computer, you either A) Didn't need to upgrade at all or B) Only upgraded the GPU for half to one-third of the cost of a whole new gaming system.
 
The whole point of this thread is to let newcomers know that if they have a 5 year old system, chances are you only need a GPU upgrade, not a whole new system (unless you have an i3, Pentium, or Celeron CPU, in which case you also need a CPU upgrade) and also to bury the myth that if you don't upgrade EVERY TWO OR THREE YEARS you won't be able to keep up with games and will quickly be left behind. When you build your new PC, don't overspend because you're trying to "beat the three year limit" or whatever people call it these days. Don't buy a Titan because you think it'll last you longer and save money in the long run. And before you re-build, make sure you REALLY need to, before you unnecessarily waste money. Hope this helps at least a few people. Stay awesome guys

Absolutely. People come over from console gaming hearing that a PC can out perform a console for $100 more than the console's price, or even the same price as the console, and they assume that it's this $500 beast that renders theater grade movies in 2 seconds. Then they're all confused when a "console smasher" is the bottom of the barrel for PC gaming. And they argue with you when you try explain how weak consoles really are! LOL.

I think so, $100 off a new S7 or something sounds pretty good to me, if ur dumb enough to assume everything made by samsung explodes, then good luck with your 850 evo ssd.

You're going to blast him because he sent you exactly what you ordered in a timely fashion and held to his return policy when you screwed up? Dude, go away. Buyers like you are why eBay's gone to hell. 

negative feedback for a mistake YOU made? because YOU didn't check the item and return policy properly? get lost, ebay doesn't need people like you around.

I am the Ebay Seller that is apparently scamming this buyer.
 
Here is what happened.
 
The buyer purchased a black 4S iPhone LCD digitizer. After purchasing, the buyer sent me a message to let me know that he ordered the wrong one and asked if I can send a white one instead. When I saw the messages, I saw the "Buyer wants to cancel order" message.
 
So, I messaged the buyer and said that I can can send the White LCD digitizer instead of the Black one that was ordered. I said that there was no need to cancel the order. I then asked if the buyer would still like to cancel the order anyway.
 
More than a day later, still no reply from the buyer. Yes, I read my messages. Yes, I sent you a reply to your message. Look in the Ebay message center!
 
I was getting my orders ready to drop off at the Post Office and still never received a reply from the buyer. So, I packaged a White LCD iPhone 4S digitizer.
 
I dropped off the packages at the Post Office. Even though it is the Thanksgiving long weekend. The Post Office has a mail drop off box. I mark the orders as shipped as soon as the packages leaves my hands and is in the possession of Canada Post.
 
However, the Post Office will not be shipping your order until the mail goes out tomorrow (Tuesday) afternoon.
 
I will phone the Post Office first thing in the morning and get the package back. Then I will refund your purchase.
 
I was notified about this thread from a forum reader and was warned that a buyer was planning on leaving me a Negative or Neutral feedback. I have received 2 Negative feedback in the past 9 months out of 3500 transactions. That should say something about the level of customer service that I provide. In the 4 years of selling online, I have never taken more than 24 hours to reply to any customer message, even on weekends and holidays.
 
Here is a complete timeline of events.
 
Friday, October 7th at 6:01 pm: Buyer makes purchase
Friday, October 7th at 6:03 pm  Buyer sends message asking if I can send White iPhone 4s LCD instead of the Black one that was purchased
Friday, October 7th at 6:05 pm Buyer requests to cancel order
Friday, October 7th at 7:07 pm  I replied to buyer message to let the buyer know that I can ship the White LCD no problem and that there is no need to cancel the order. I still asked if the buyer would like to cancel the order anyway.
Saturday, October 8th at 10:58 pm, I marked the order as shipped, half an hour after I dropped my orders off at the Post Office. Yes, sometimes I do drop the packages off at the Post Office late at night.
 
Question for the buyer: Do you ever check YOUR messages??? If you checked the Ebay message center, you would see the message that I sent. I just checked to make sure that the message did get sent. It did.
 
Another question. Why didn't you sent me another message instead of complaining that I am a scammer on a public forum?

You don't know what you're talking about.
 
For some ISP's in some areas with some internet methods (such as satallite internet), data caps make a great deal of sense.

You still don't know what you're talking about.
 
Let me elaborate.... No company in the world enjoys pissing off its customers, nor do they go out of their way to do so. ESPECIALLY when it comes to ISP. The IDEAL business model would be to provide everyone with infinite internet bandwidth and 100% reliability and charge everyone a fixed rate for that privilege. They could fire all their employees, have 0 customer service representatives, and just rake in pure monthly profit with absolutely 0 invested work and be bajillionares in no time. if they could do it they would LOVE to do it... Such a thing is simply not possible.
 
Take a look at something like water. you get up in the morning, and whether you're thirsty or need a shower or gotta flush your toilet or whatever it is you want to do, you typically have access to pressurized clean water. Now if everyone in your city all wanted to turn on all the taps in their house all at the same time, everyone would get very little water (if any). the infrastructure is simply not designed to keep up with that kind of workload. Same thing with electricity, if everyone turned all of their appliances on and lights, and everything like that across a city or country, there would be rampant power outages everywhere in no time.
 
From power and water to roads and transportation... No industry or infrastructure is designed to allow everyone infinite use. That people think that internet doesn't follow these same limitations simply because its not a tangible object is ludicrous.
You don't know what you're talking about. If its bandwidth is limited, then its overall data is limited (they are literally the very same thing)
 
The limiting factor in satellites is the same as any wired or wireless connection: total bandwidth. You cannot push an infinite amount of data through any connection, and satellites have a lower threshold for this than most other connection types. Once again "data" and "bandwidth" equate to literally the same thing (bandwidth is the amount of data per second being used).
 
 
 
Here is another analogy... Roads. everyone uses them on a regular basis with their vehicles. Most people use them for daily use like getting to and from work. I shall use these to explain in a very simple way why there are caps on internet, since everyone understands how roads work. In this analogy the "roads" are your internet and the "cars" are your own personal experience with your internet connection. For normal everyday use, most people can use roads just fine. they can go from point A to point B with relative ease, and everyone can do this pretty much whenever they want to. If you live in a big enough city with roads advanced enough you might even have access to a highway/freeway (a connection like fiber), allowing you to go much faster than you could otherwise. However, if everyone in your city all wants to go driving at the same time you run into issues. Rush hour, traffic jams, and so on. If everyone tries to use it at the same time, EVERYONE gets super slow. The roads in a city have very limited amount of "bandwidth" (cars that can be in use it at the same time). Adding more cars than the roads can handle simply slows everyone down. If you can understand this, then you should have no issue understanding why ISP's do what they do.
 
This is the issue that is the purpose of Data caps. The internet (and many other kinds of business models and infrastructure models) works in exactly the same way. If everyone was allowed to use it all at the same time, as much as they want, infinitely, the system breaks down. Of course your response is going to be "well they should just build new roads", or "faster roads", or "more freeways" or whatever you want to say. They do this literally all the time (i work for a small local ISP of a few thousand customers and even we do this at least on a monthly basis to increase our "roads" for our customers).
 
Another way to look at it (another road analogy) is that the roads that are in place are only designed to handle so much speed. If you went out and bought a brand new Bugatti Veyron (super fast sports car, something equivalent to 4k streaming, downloading large files, and so on) and wanted to drive it on a normal road, you would not be able to drive it at full speed (due to the government placing speed limits on the roads for very good reasons). Of course this makes perfect sense, and of course you understand the reason for that. but would you call your local government and swear at them for having insufficient roads for your Veyron? Would you cus them out, threaten them, and then move to another city (whose roads are likely no better for exactly the same reasons). This is a perfect analogy for why there are bandwidth caps (and peoples resulting insane rage for why there are bandwidth caps).
 
People who think there should be an infinite amount of speed, or think that ISP's are evil, or whatever it is you think, simply do not understand the completely practical issues behind why your internet is capped/limited.
 
 
 
TL;DR "You don't know what you're talking about"

Let's say I have a  monthly data cap of 250GB. I have an internet speed of say 32Mbps. If I were to utilize this pipe 24/7, I should be able to download 10,125GB of data.
 
Oh wait, but I have a data cap of 250GB, so in reality my average data rate is about 800kbps.

One more post...
 
The whole point of data caps isn't so much that everyone wants infinite instantaneous bandwidth. People will (hopefully) understand that there is a limited size pipe with limited resources and can only service so much. But it's when all conditions are ideal, there's no real reason why there needs to be an arbitrary data cap that's significantly lower than the maximum amount data the pipe can deliver over time.
 
So here's my analogy on the situation. It would be like if you sent a couple of letters every day by your postal service. The postal service charges you by weight and how fast you want it delivered. For the sake of consistency, the weight is more or less constant, but you'd like to have everything sent First Class or whatever the fastest method is. However, let's say when you want to send your 21th letter, they decide "Oh, sorry, you already sent 20 letters so you can't use First Class anymore, you have to use Media Mail (the US's slowest mail service, so replace this with your equivalent one). By the way, we're still charging you the same rate as First Class mail." Except they can still deliver the letter by First Class, there's plenty of resources to do it.
 

that's not it
here, and mostly in the Eastern Europe, it is the wild west of the internet - not like in The US where some piece of shit ISP can claim an entire city because he made a deal with the Local Government

But who decides which thoughts are "putrid piss trenches"?

lol, the worst part is. Unless google takes extreme measures, google will throw a roit and trash their office. skype will be devastated as all the insurance money will have to be paid out, but collecting it from google will be impossible as they are far too poor.
 
What a time to be alive.

"Have no place in society". We have the right to free speech. It doesn't matter if someone is a neonazi or a racist, he has a right to express his opinion freely and I will defend that no matter what. When you take away that right from some people then you become just as bad as the ideas they express. That is not democracy. Besides, I do not see how having such opinions very public is bad. They will only get ridiculed from sensible people. If the society is affected by such stupid ideas, then the problem lies within the society rather than those ideas.

The "N" word is a cultural thing and is very specific. If you live outside of the US, white,black,yellow,pink,purple or whatever else, it's irrelevant to you. Also, those people that are offended by it are more than happy to use it to address themselves and their friends. So yeah, here's another word: Hypocrisy. 
 
 Words are just words. If I insult you, there are laws that protect you. Sue me. But taking away my right of free speech is dictatorship. In today's world I can simply b1tch about something I don't like and if I do it enough it will be censored. Who's to decide what is allowed to be said and what is not? Random groups that protest about literally anything?

Ohhhh yeah because the black people that live now personally experienced slavery and they have a right to be offended. It is like a Greek like me hating the Turks because we were under their command for like 400 years. But that's stupid because they did nothing wrong to me. Just like it is stupid getting angry at a word that has a history from like 200 years ago. Also the pen is mightier than the sword, but I am sure this quote does not mean people that get triggered by a word. More like the ideas that get expressed through words are as powerful as a sword. Thanks for knowing about my intelligence or education and making assumptions without even knowing me. I could say that offended me and your post should be censored, but no thank you I am a sensible person

At the risk of sounding like a racist, I can think of plenty of reasons why someone might want to use the word nigger.
It's the same reason why we use any swearwords, and that's emphasis or intention to hurt. If you're really mad at some black person then you shouting "you black person!" will sound really silly, but if you shout "you nigger" then all of a sudden the sentence has a real impact, because of the history.
"Shut up" and "shut the fuck up" have two different levels of seriousness to them as well.
 
Like someone at /pol/ was hinting at but never said is that it's not the words that are bad, it's the intent. Some people are probably wincing that I used "the n word" in this post but I don't think that's a problem, because it was not used with the intent of hurting someone. It was used for emphasis.
And that's what the person at /pol/ was getting at. You can ban words if you want, but as long as people have the intent of hurting others then will just start using other words to express their thoughts/feelings.
In the last couple of years "white male" has become a derogatory term used by SJWs.
 
Speaking of "white male", I find that phrase offensive because it is often used by SJWs with the intention to hurt/belittle someone. Does that mean that the phrase should be added to the list of "bad words" we are no longer allowed to say? If it's not, why not? Why is "white male" OK but "nigger" not OK? Who gets to decide that? To me, the phrase "white male" is more offensive. Aren't my feelings just as important to protect as those of a black person?
So different people will find different things offensive, so where do we draw the line? You can find people being offended by essentially anything, so we can't just cater to the lowest common denominator because then all speech would be banned.

Oh I don't really hate it you know? It is my defacto main OS (Since I spend more hours per week on my work laptop, Windows 10 on that rig) I just like to remind people that a few games here and there are not worth the headache. You know, resident butthead and all that.

We were never a thing, at best we kinda were fuck buddies but on and off so I wouldn't call it a break up....wait I think I took the metaphor too far here....

Neither. Wait for ps4 pro and buy that, easily the smartest and best move to make this year. 

In a lot of games, only a few scenes really stand out from the crowd and really wow me, but UNDERTALE, the whole way through, kept up the waves of powerful emotion, even in the subtle undertones. I know a lot of people won't agree with me about my stupendously high praise of UNDERTALE, but, hey, that's what opinions are for!

Why...Just why, it could be a selling point for the next samsung phones

Am I the only one who thinks one port on a phone isn't a big deal?
 
Just be smart and manage your battery life better, what sort of a madman plays intensive games and charges the phone at the same time that imo is a very bad thing for the battery.
 
The outrage at the MacBook 1 port thing was justified but this is just a massive overreaction from people who would never buy an iOS device anyway.

In the latest news. Youtube has changed their TOS and attacking all content creators all around. Apparently Youtube is preventing Monetization for many youtubers, including MrRepzion, Philip DeFranco which they have said is basically a form of censorship.
 
Apparently many of the videos that are getting "censored" due to the following rules that youtube has created shown in this twitter post. A.K.A "Advertiser friendly "
Many people including Philip DeFranco, thought this was a mistake however when his network manager called Youtube apparently it wasn't.
 
This is a shitty ass attempt at censorship, what is the point? How is Philip DeFranco suppose to talk about the news? Sugar coat them? No there is a reason why he talks the way he talks, he gives the entire new story and talks about them.  Youtube this is completely ABSURD. What are you thinking!? Your censoring nearly 99% of Youtubers, because I know everyone uses swear words, Pewdiepie probably isn't going to be affected in anyway, cause why? He's the top dog of Youtube. 
 
Youtube has proceeded to shoot itself in the foot, am pretty sure most fans are going to blow this shit up and force youtube to change, cause you know what? That's the only way big companies will submit, if enough noise is created they know clearly they fucked up, really bad and be forced to revert back to the old terms, cause this is non-sense, so basically Youtube is trying to be super politically correct, and it's going to backfire heavily. Youtube is a place where people can post any types of videos ( OKAY MAYBE NOT PORN, KILLING PETS OR ANIMALS ON PURPOSE !  and other crazy shit)
 
Youtube mate you don fudged up, I hope your prepared for the aftermath of this.