Taja

Depends on the game, the person and every single game experience they've ever had in the past.
Depends on the game, the person and every single game experience they've ever had in the past.
 
From my experience with 60-144 fps(depending on the game) on a daily basis for the past two years on PC and 20-60 fps(depending on the game) on console for well over a decade, to sum it into one sentence... My consoles collect nothing but dust. It's all about what else a PC can do to games that makes PC my preferred platform.
 
I know this subject isn't about console vs PC but I feel it's relevant towards the topic at hand. There isn't one single thing a console can do better than my PC(that I care about anyway). You might find something that is better that I actually might care about but it would be new news to me. 30 fps is not "unplayable". To me, it's just downgrading the experience you could be experiencing. People are different. Different personalities. Different perspectives. Different amounts of money in their banks.

I prefer a constant 45 fps than 50-60 fps with frametimes all over the place. It depends on a lot of factors, higher fps is better for competitive games (though I played dota 2 most of my life with 40-60 fps and it was 100% fine)
 
Overall fps matters to me mostly on first person games, ir really fast paced stuff. For cities skylines for example, even 20 fps is pretty playable. 

CDPR is not indie, larian and dontnod are indie, but that does not matter - I am talking about game quality in recent games - the games matter, not the developers.
 
Fallout 4 was not mediocre - it was an tremendous success. That does not mean the game is GOOD, because thay is 100% subjective. I find Fo4, Fo3 and NV to have its own merits and flaws, and the one I most enjoyed was Fo4, followed by NV.
 
Calling Life is Strange garbage is not only wrong, its falacious. You can find the game bad, thats an opinion, but calling it "garbage" sounds like it was poorly done - which it wasnt. It is a masterpiece and considered as such, even if some people dont like it/hate it.
 
Bioshock Infinite was very well received, and though its true there were scandals involving the game, overall its very positively reviewed. And the ending is not bad at all - again that is only an opinion.
 
The difference between calling a game "good" or "bad" lies in so much more than subjective things. I call fallout 76 BAD because it has a lot of problems, bugs, ita poorly done, etc. I may even enjoy the game, but even then I have to admit it is a bad game - also a game being "bad" is based on general public opinion and reception. Like every art form, you can find something unenjoyable but still acknowledge that its well done, and vice versa.
 
 
 

Just look for the good games. Like everything EVER, there are good and bad stuff at any point in history (ofc trends do exist and "golden ages").
 
Just to list a few amazing (IMO) games that are not old:
 
The Witcher 3 (classic)
Divinity Original Sin 2 (insanely good)
Fallout 4 (some ppl dont like it for valid reasons, but overall i like it a lot)
Dark Souls 3 (not for everyone, but still very mainstream)
Nioh (soulslike but japanese with cool stuff but also grind)
Life is Strange (really short but beautiful)
Bioshock Infinite (playing it now, really enjoying the experience)
 
Thats just a few examples, people with different tastes will add other games or maybe disagree with me too, but thats alright. Its a big industry and as such, there is a lot of good and a lot of bad.
 
Some ppl say the same about books. Or music. Or films. Just pick some art form/enterteinment category and this discussion will go on forever.
 

While I agree with you to a certain extent... that some AAA have been crappy both in terms of commercial practices and just bad games...
 
I am 32 years old, I've been a gamer for over 20 years now....You know what? I'm going to go out and say it here: There has NEVER BEEN A BETTER TIME TO PLAY VIDEO GAMES than right now.
 
- There is more choice than ever, be it Indie titles, or AAA games, whatever you are into. Both PC and consoles.
- There are dozens of games coming out every week, in every genre (strategy, puzzle, racers, shooters, RPG, Adventure, etc. etc) way more than there used to be
- The production values of games are AMAZING, games like Battlefield V, Legend of Zelda Breath of the Wild, etc. just look BREATHTAKING.
- Stories in games are rivaling movies in terms of story, acting, character development, music, etc.
- There are still plenty of AAA games that are really good (just naming a few that come to mind for me personally from the past few years): Hitman, Battlefield 1, Zelda BOTW, Witcher 3, Fallout 4, God of War, Uncharted 4, Horizon Zero Dawn, ...
- There are gaming technologies now that we could only dream of back in the day: VR, motion controls, remote play, etc.
- There are console quality graphics on the go now: Nintendo Switch, PS Vita, or solutions like the Nvidia Shield. Compare that to my old Game Boy (1st gen): HAH
- There are game "platform" improvements now better than ever: cloud saves, resume features, playing online with friends, sharing gameplay with friends, achievements, social features, buying digital games without ever leaving your home, etc. etc.
 
So yeah... for sure there are things that could be better. But nobody is forcing you to play THOSE particular games. There ARE plenty of good games, you just have to be careful what you buy, as always was the case.
 

thanks dude, I didnt know about that but that was my mindset. its just ridiculous to pretend your stuff is not really yours, using shady practices and bullshit terms of service. BUYING a game and RENTING a game should be (and are) two different things. if you pay for a license with a limited amount of time, then the stuff is not yours. but if you pay for the thing itself, then there should not be any doubts.
with physical goods that is really simple, so why make a mess out of digital stuff?

You do own the games that you purchase through Steam. Australia's High Court ruled specifically on this very matter recently, and the EU top court has ruled on it, too. And the US Supreme Court has ruled that people may resell their copyrighted goods without the copyright-holder's permission.
 
The Steam ToS isn't a binding agreement. Like lots of EULAs, it's largely just noise.
 
 
In Western countries, it is pretty strongly established that people own their software and therefore the first sale doctrine applies and people may resell their software per their sole discretion.
 
If Valve choose to condition access to those purchased games on the Steam account, and the games cannot be transferred independently of the account, then it stands to reason that the account must be transferable for the sake of people being able to exercise their right to resell their games.
 
 
Australia:
 
http://www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/judgments/Judgments/fca/single/2016/2016fca0196#_Ref445465996
 
The EU:
 
EU Court: When You Buy Software You Own It
EU Court Says, Yes, You Can Resell Your Software, Even If The Software Company Says You Can't
European Court confirms the right to resell used software licences
Top EU court upholds right to resell downloaded software
 
The US:
 
US Supreme Court affirms first-sale doctrine applies to copyrighted goods, US software association throws a tantrum
 
 
So, if Valve claims you cannot transfer your account, that claim is ignorable. Also, Valve does allow the transfer of accounts in practice and also facilitates transferring them if they're asked to, such as when one person wills their Steam account to another person. The same authority of ownership that enables a person to will their Steam account to another person is the authority by which a person sells their account to another person.

Nintendo looks like a good, family friendly company. But they ate litigious af and dont care about logic or doing the right thing. Honestly, I dont think Nintendo should have the "good guy" rep.

Nintendo looks like a good, family friendly company. But they ate litigious af and dont care about logic or doing the right thing. Honestly, I dont think Nintendo should have the "good guy" rep.

Nintendo looks like a good, family friendly company. But they ate litigious af and dont care about logic or doing the right thing. Honestly, I dont think Nintendo should have the "good guy" rep.

Yes, that is right. Some.
Companies should lose all their copyright for software that they no longer sell. It is anti-consumer otherwise and harms the company in no way.
If nintendo wants my money, then they can sell the roms themselves, otherwise, they shouldn't cry when I download a rom.
Nintendo is disgustingly anti-consumer with this along with how they treated youtubers.

Another product rushing to be "first!" but has poor implementation.
The device is too wide when folded up Has this thick top border where the cameras are (contributes to the above point) Is thick when folded up, due to the "Surface Book"-style gap. Looks like you can fit a finger. And based on ZTE Axon M, the "first!" dual screen phone rushed to market, Android is not good at this dual screen. I am not seeing that they have done anything to solve that.  
Another words, they slap this thing together to make a splash thinking they'll get big or get investors on "how innovative they are", and "they beat the big companies!" It might fool people, but it is clear that the big players are actually (at least I hope so) solving these issues, hence the time needed and delays. Not to mention, that in my opinion, it feels like a prototype design.
 
Foldable OLED screen, is something that we have seen for a while. The issue is not that, the issue is the rest of the package to deliver a great experience, a device that feels complete, and well though out. I am not saying that Samsung will get it day 1 either, but they sure be, at worst, close.

I use netflix because it was the first true alternative to piracy in brazil (well, ofc there is still piracy, but the service is still good and very convenient)
 
Also I pay for games that I like (mostly by good devs) and for music, spotify is very convenient (althought I use mostly my gf's account so i dont really pay for it)

An extra 1.5 seconds? What turbocharged HDD are you using?
On my 7200rpm HDD it took 15 seconds for chrome to open, but on my 860 EVO it takes .5 sec. Literally Night and Day

if you destroy your pc so someone can buy you a new one, i hope they give you a chromebook.

So you think that "overclockers" means everyone overclocking is trying to get a world record running liquid nitrogen?
 
Well, actually no, most "overclockers" are normal people who overclock their CPU by a few hundred MHz with a good air or liquid cooler in order to get a bit more performance out of it.
Almost all of these people have never delidded a CPU before.
Delidding and lapping is something only very few people do in order to try breaking world records.
 
Maybe the word you're looking for is "extreme overclockers" or "competitive overclockers", which is like 0.00001% of people who overclock.

Nothing wrong here. Why are ppl whining?
 
And for the love of god, just DONT PRE ORDER. I have preordered only 2 gamee because I knew I would play them no matter what, and I know that I cant complain because I preordered and that was my choice and Mine alone.
 
And why are ppl getting mad about tomb raider? Ppl sound like babies, "oh I paid full price and now that its cheaper thats bad because other people will have it better than me" - stupid logic of not wanting other people to have good things when you dont.

I have recommend the regular G5 to a couple of people and they all have been happy with it  

i have a g5 plus

Neither better nor worse - its a different game. You cant compare ESO to Skyrim, or WoW to Warcraft 3. At least not in a meaningful way.
 
Also the game is not out and like every other online multiplayer, it will go thru a lot of changes in its lifespam.

lets compare The Elder Scrolls V and GTA V, they both have “V” in them.. and they are both open world.. whoo! 

Neither better nor worse - its a different game. You cant compare ESO to Skyrim, or WoW to Warcraft 3. At least not in a meaningful way.
 
Also the game is not out and like every other online multiplayer, it will go thru a lot of changes in its lifespam.

Never have and never will buy flagships/high end phones, so for me its not a thing. but I really dont like this trend of phones being a fashion statement, but thats what sells and people like so thats what will happen. for me every phone will  have its case because I drop it at least twice a week anyway.

I have a feeling some people in this thread would have acted very differently if it was an AMD card that had been obtained and reviewed before the official publishing date. 
 
 
At the end of the day, this could and probably will hurt other reviewers, which is a shame. 
NDAs disclosure agreements exist so that reviewers get a fair chance to test the card without having to rush something out the door to not be "late" with their review. This is just very bad manners. 

Legally yes, as I said:
 
No, and I disagree with how Nvidia handled this launch. This is an ugly trend from multiple manufacturers that needs to be stopped. 
 
I completely disagree. Nvidia did not publish this review. Nvidia did not just hand H a card without an NDA. I really don't see how not giving someone a product necessarily hurts other reviewers. That part required action from H. It was H's decision to publish early, even with stated knowledge of the embargo lift date. Once again, legally H did nothing wrong. Ethically, on the other hand, I would argue that they did. They could have just of easily waited until the same time as other reviewers to publish (something that is not unprecedented by the way; GN has done this in the past) out of respect for the honest work that others have put in to their reviews. Instead, whatever their intentions to nobly stand up to Nvidia or whatever, the reality is that others have now lost clicks (and therefore revenue) because of H.