Intel announces Skull Canyon NUC. I7 6770HQ, 32GB of max RAM and eGFX support.

[MrDynamicMan]

On 17/03/2016 at 5:58 AM, GidonsClaw said:

With the iGPU you already have better than console level performance in graphics

But that's not saying much. *cue "why PCs can't optimize like consoles mantra" *

I'm interested. But my wallet isn't. 

[MrDynamicMan]

On 21/03/2016 at 11:42 PM, SurvivorNVL said:

Many people use a 4-core with 32gb of ram.  I could see getting this, 32gb of ram, and two 1TB NVME SSD's, and the Razer-core, a 1080 or 490x and running that until Cannonlake.  It's a desktop replacement.  The 6770HQ should perform damn near the 6700K and if you don't use the graphics, you get 128MB of cache to play with, if the programs can even leverage it.  Desktop performance with less physical space.

I disagree. If you're hitting at that kind of performance ($3500ish) you could do much better in a PC. You can get a extreme series CPU, SLI/CF gpu, at least a 1Tb ssd, 32GB of ram, and have enough cash for WC. Or you can go ITX with m.2 and a beastly GPU, and have enough cash for a TV. 

 

It's a desktop replacement with worse price:perf than a pre-built. 

[patrickjp93]

9 hours ago, Mihle Gaming said:

are you serious? you really think those a great but Wither isnt? its something strange going on with you. and all those games 

 

"Just because there are flaws doesn't mean the game isn't great"

yes, exaclty thats why Witcher 3 is one of the best games in later time in my mind. games like total war has more flaws than witcher 3.

 

but Opinion I guess. at least you did not say skyrim or something.

W3 had trite writing and a half-baked dark/moody atmosphere. It's like Torchlight II trying to pick up where Diablo II was the last real dark dungeon crawler in gaming. Many mechanics improved, but the writing and the graphics approach just failed to deliver the atmosphere.

 

One of the best in our era does not make it comparatively good on the whole.

[Curufinwe_wins]

1 hour ago, patrickjp93 said:

W3 had trite writing and a half-baked dark/moody atmosphere. It's like Torchlight II trying to pick up where Diablo II was the last real dark dungeon crawler in gaming. Many mechanics improved, but the writing and the graphics approach just failed to deliver the atmosphere.

 

One of the best in our era does not make it comparatively good on the whole.

If I may,  I think the main reason most people see Witcher 3s story as either amazing or shit is whether or not the type of behaviors they imagine themselves to make in the situation were available to be made. 

 

This game, while being an amazing rpg really constrained to what Geralt is. His character for the most part is already set and so you are only living/affecting  it on the fringes and the appearance for real growth is diminished. 

 

This is however a conscious choice. It is telling a story you help in rather than making your own (as is common in "best" rpgs).  If you look at witcher 3 instead from that perspective, (an interactive novel) I think you would appreciate it more.  [even if that by your standards disqualifies it from the best of the best]. 

 

At least so it was for me.  I am an intellectual, but more than that a philomath.  I do not share Geralt's incessant disdain for poetry or so many other things not killing, drinking, gambling or having sex. 

 

There were numerous times in which I was forced to make completely immersion breaking choices because I am not Geralt,  and cannot make Geralt sufficiently me. For a while,  this really soured my view of the game. I love rpgs  and this immersion destruction was brutal and unavoidable (for the record I have no trouble making tough decisions, but suboptimal ones?).  

 

Indeed, even though so many people derided the repetition, by far my favorite rpg to date is Dragon Age Inquisition. I have never had so much fun in a game in my life, and for whatever reason,  it was also the closest I've ever gotten to a "these are actually the steps I would take anyways"  full game. 

[shdowhunt60]

15 hours ago, patrickjp93 said:

Someone has to pave the way for new styles of gameplay. Just because there are flaws doesn't mean the game isn't great. Need I go back to "Pitfall" which was a great game despite its many flaws? 

There are franchises with games I  could say that for. Sonic games for example. While admittedly technically flawed, they're a ton of fun and innovative (at least till they got to the point where Sonic is copying Crash Bandicoot and Mario).

 

You can't say that for Skyward Sword though. It's a more linear Zelda that's padded out to the point with an infuriatingly boring story. Nevermind the obnoxious motion controls. There have been far better Nintendo games, and there have been far better Zelda games.

[patrickjp93]

1 hour ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

If I may,  I think the main reason most people see Witcher 3s story as either amazing or shit is whether or not the type of behaviors they imagine themselves to make in the situation were available to be made. 

 

This game, while being an amazing rpg really constrained to what Geralt is. His character for the most part is already set and so you are only living/affecting  it on the fringes and the appearance for real growth is diminished. 

 

This is however a conscious choice. It is telling a story you help in rather than making your own (as is common in "best" rpgs).  If you look at witcher 3 instead from that perspective, (an interactive novel) I think you would appreciate it more.  [even if that by your standards disqualifies it from the best of the best]. 

 

At least so it was for me.  I am an intellectual, but more than that a philomath.  I do not share Geralt's incessant disdain for poetry or so many other things not killing, drinking, gambling or having sex. 

 

There were numerous times in which I was forced to make completely immersion breaking choices because I am not Geralt,  and cannot make Geralt sufficiently me. For a while,  this really soured my view of the game. I love rpgs  and this immersion destruction was brutal and unavoidable (for the record I have no trouble making tough decisions, but suboptimal ones?).  

 

Indeed, even though so many people derided the repetition, by far my favorite rpg to date is Dragon Age Inquisition. I have never had so much fun in a game in my life, and for whatever reason,  it was also the closest I've ever gotten to a "these are actually the steps I would take anyways"  full game. 

Not even. It was reasonable, but it just wasn't compelling.

[patrickjp93]

11 minutes ago, shdowhunt60 said:

There are franchises with games I  could say that for. Sonic games for example. While admittedly technically flawed, they're a ton of fun and innovative (at least till they got to the point where Sonic is copying Crash Bandicoot and Mario).

 

You can't say that for Skyward Sword though. It's a more linear Zelda that's padded out to the point with an infuriatingly boring story. Nevermind the obnoxious motion controls. There have been far better Nintendo games, and there have been far better Zelda games.

It was ground-breaking and pushed the Wii's hardware to its limits. OOT was supposed to contain the 4 temples that went into Majora's Mask after all. It wasn't perfect, but I can truly appreciate both what was achieved and where the devs were going if they could have achieved their ideals. And to be fair, no one has gotten fluid motion control right yet.

[shdowhunt60]

Just now, patrickjp93 said:

It was ground-breaking and pushed the Wii's hardware to its limits. OOT was supposed to contain the 4 temples that went into Majora's Mask after all. It wasn't perfect, but I can truly appreciate both what was achieved and where the devs were going if they could have achieved their ideals. And to be fair, no one has gotten fluid motion control right yet.

Ground breaking? In what way? I can think of far better looking Wii games, Metroid Prime 3 and Sonic Colors immediately come to mind.

[patrickjp93]

42 minutes ago, shdowhunt60 said:

Ground breaking? In what way? I can think of far better looking Wii games, Metroid Prime 3 and Sonic Colors immediately come to mind.

Dungeon Design, Interactability, and a far more open concept than Zelda has had in a long time. The visual appeal is not the deciding factor.

[Mihle]

if a game is better than the last in the same series does not meen its a great game.

 

I likte that games have a set character, because the story is better 90% that the time than games that you can change your character to hell.

I am almsot always getting  immersed in the characters I play, if the game is good with great story. 

 

many times , if people have the wrong expectations when they try a game, that will make them not like the game, even if the game is great. I did almost have no expectations of W3, and I fell in love.

 

I am just not going to say more to patrick in this tread about what games is good. because he says something in a way that he think its facts when it is opinion. 

 

 

 

[shdowhunt60]

2 hours ago, patrickjp93 said:

Dungeon Design, Interactability, and a far more open concept than Zelda has had in a long time. The visual appeal is not the deciding factor.

Which is a good thing, because Skyward Sword looked like the unhappy compromise between Wind Waker and Twilight Princes. It looked really ugly.

 

But aside from that, that doesn't save it from being bleedingly boring. If it's a more open Zelda that you want, there's a wonderful game called Dark Souls you should look into. In the meantime, I'll maintain that Skyward Sword bored me to tears.

[Curufinwe_wins]

3 hours ago, patrickjp93 said:

Not even. It was reasonable, but it just wasn't compelling.

This may be pedantical of me, but see that is the type of thing I am thinking about. I could see how a Geralt character would do those things, given the prior that he is Geralt (ie it is reasonable), but I am not as moved by a character arch so already developed except in the ways I can't change (ie it isn't compelling.)

 

11 minutes ago, Mihle Gaming said:

if a game is better than the last in the same series does not meen its a great game.

 

I likte that games have a set character, because the story is better 90% that the time than games that you can change your character to hell.

I am almsot always getting  immersed in the characters I play, if the game is good with great story. 

Ahh but the illusion of choice is important. When you say click on a dialogue choice that you would mean frankly and sincerely, and the character says it in the most mocking way possible, that breaks immersion in a huge unpleasant way. Naturally that issue dissolves itself the more like the character you actually are, or by choosing to take yourself out of the driving seat.

[Mihle]

4 minutes ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

This may be pedantical of me, but see that is the type of thing I am thinking about. I could see how a Geralt character would do those things, given the prior that he is Geralt (ie it is reasonable), but I am not as moved by a character arch so already developed except in the ways I can't change (ie it isn't compelling.)

 

Ahh but the illusion of choice is important. When you say click on a dialogue choice that you would mean frankly and sincerely, and the character says it in the most mocking way possible, that breaks immersion in a huge unpleasant way. Naturally that issue dissolves itself the more like the character you actually are, or by choosing to take yourself out of the driving seat.

i was more talking about giving the character name and your own look than dialogue options btw. I like dialogue choice, I like the way its done it W3, none of the dialogue options I made that I remember did brake my immersion.  I dont like trying to be a character I have "designed" for myselves, I get very little immersion with that. I like where the character is pre made by the developers of the game, but the character has to be interesting for me in some way, and the game have to guide you a little bit in how the character are, but not to much. I feel like Geralt personality isnt super strong, and that allows for choice.

 

I may or may not get what I meen out in the right way here.