PDA

View Full Version : New levels of retardedness



Pages : [1] 2 3

abachler
03-12-2008, 09:35 PM
I just got another game 'Settlers: Rise of an Empire' that has some fly by night copy protection that of course doesnt work with any DVD drive thats more than 3 days old. Last Ubisoft product I buy, this is the 2nd game of theirs this has happened with. Of course if I buy it online I get an activation code and can run it without DVD but since I bougth it in the store and have a CD-KEY I cant play it. At what point did companies decide that it was better to alienate paying customers than to let hackers get the single player only version of their game a few hours earlier? I mean it should be blatantly obvious at this point that no form of copy protection will ever stop the hackers, all it does is inconvenience the paying customers.

brewbuck
03-12-2008, 09:39 PM
A lot of companies make it so hard to actually pay them for their software, even if you are perfectly willing to do so, that it's easier to just pirate it. It's their own fault.

Elysia
03-12-2008, 09:51 PM
Get yourself a No-CD/DVD crack, mate :) In this case, I think we can actually recommend it so that you can play the game you bought legally.
Sometimes I tend to use such to get rid of copy right crap such as SecuROM.

MacGyver
03-12-2008, 09:57 PM
Get yourself a No-CD/DVD crack, mate :) In this case, I think we can actually recommend it so that you can play the game you bought legally.
Sometimes I tend to use such to get rid of copy right crap such as SecuROM.

Such software can get your flagged by anticheat software. This is not a recommended procedure for online games, even if you legally have purchased them and have issues.

@OP: UBI sucks. Don't buy their games.

Elysia
03-12-2008, 10:00 PM
Another solution is sometimes to do a 1:1 copy of your DVD or just a copy and enable emulation with Deamon Tools for example. Though I haven't really needed to do this myself, so I can't vote for how well it works. Copy protection plays nice with my DVD drive...

zacs7
03-12-2008, 10:26 PM
UBI seem to LOVE the Unreal Engine (and weird copy protection, ie starforce), which I'm not a fan of. Terribly bloated and the way it works (dumping C++ class states to file for example) sucks. Although one thing good about Unreal is how it stops wall hackers... (just get the server to tell the client who they can see!).

Ubisoft is also stupid in other areas, for example the Far Cry 1 developers have NOTHING to do with Far Cry 2. Yes that's the Crytek developers, and if you've seen Crysis I can't see why they wouldn't want them involved.

Nothing but stupidity.

VirtualAce
03-12-2008, 11:45 PM
Ubisoft is horrible with their copy protection. Complaints are all all over their forums that the copy protection is either broke, breaks your game, or hoses something else on your system.

Personally I do not see why companies waste money on copy protection b/c usually within a day of release it's been hacked. Seems to be a waste of money and all the copy protection is doing is keeping the legit players from playing while the hackers enjoy a free for all. Some of the more recent copy protection systems seem to me to be more like spyware or malware than actual spyware and malware programs. I don't like extra stuff being installed behind the scenes that I have to go through a full page of instructions to remove from my drive later.

Just let me play my games.


Terrible business practices. Get rid of copy protection. It's like PunkBuster. It only boots legit people.

Elysia
03-13-2008, 05:29 AM
I think gamers have been complaining for years, but companies just don't want to listen.
Betheda, the creator of The Elder Scrolls, released Oblivion w/o copy protection (yay!), but unfortunately, they slapped SecuROM protection on the Shiver Isles expansion ;(

abachler
03-13-2008, 08:36 AM
SecuROM has been broken since the day it was hatched. We honestly need legislation that forces companies to make their copy protection hardware friendly. They tried to get SecuROM made a standard years ago, adn one fo the reasons that the IEEE refused was because of engineering issues with the way it works, or rather doesnt work with drives that otherwise meet the standards. There are two very good copy protection systems out that work perfectly fine and do not prevent legitimate users form playign te game. Neither of them invovles proprietary methods and so are cheaper for companies to use, but they continously try to use these 'flawed media' copyprotection systems that fail in half the drives on the market.

The two that work are - CD-KEY's for the online content, since the key has to be valid and is verified by the server when connecting, this is just abotu fool proof. The other is reading the bar-code on the CD. If the drive supports barcodes and the barcode isnt the legitimate one, then fail to run, but if the drive doesnt support it or it is correct, run the software.

UBI is definately grey-listed, and unless they just impress the hell out of me fixing this problem, they will be blacklisted after this is over.

Mario F.
03-13-2008, 09:07 AM
Key generators have long past defeated CD keys. Codebars aren't a reality today and if they were they would also be easily defeated.

The problem is real and it doesn't pay to blame this or that company to try and protect their investment. How many of us here have illegally copied a CD or used an illegal CD in the recent past? It would be better to drop the superlatives and agree these companies do have a point.

It is becoming a mess, I agree. But not because they aren't trying hard for it to become better. The fact is that our hardware is open and was created to stay open. It's the whole concept of today's computers. Until this changes, any copy protection mechanism is only going to act like a patch to the open architecture we have been enjoying for the past years.

The problem is that if you get on one end an ever growing crowd of crackers, and on the other hand an ever growing community of disgruntled users, soon enough the economy will try and face the issue head on. And that may as well mean the end of the Open Architecture.

Elysia
03-13-2008, 09:09 AM
What I'm truly against is crapware like SecuROM and Starforce. Things that force me to close down favorite programs such as Process Explorer should be destroyed. And crapware that puts that crap into the computer that limits what you can do, and sometimes even things that doesn't limit copying of the program, such as StarForce, should not be allowed to exist.

Starforce is the worst copy protection there is and SecuROM isn't much better.

mike_g
03-13-2008, 09:25 AM
Key generators have long past defeated CD keys.
Yes, but it wont defeat the online validation. I agree with abachler here, the only effective way to deal with piracy without causing grief for your customers it to use keys.

Fair enough its not perfect, but like bubba said most protection systems are effectively malware. At the moment they scan you computer detecting what software you have installed, for example Alcohol or Nero then deny you the right to use your game because they find something they don't like. Why not simply root though all you files building a personality profile then calculate if you are a 'good' or 'bad' person. As far as I am concerned these software nazis should all be put on a rocket and sent of out into space. Hopefully never to return.

Mario F.
03-13-2008, 09:47 AM
They do defeat online validation in terrible ways. Suddenly your legit key may not work anymore because it was generated by someone else. The amount of grief is now twofold. You still can't use your CD online and now have to prove it is legit.

Wraithan
03-13-2008, 09:59 AM
That is why you use something like blizzard did with a couple of their games, there are a ton of valid keys for single player, 99% of which are invalid for online play, it takes a large amount of time to find a key that actually works online, to the point that almost everyone gives up before it works. Also if your key gets banned, from a IP that isn't yours (especially if it is an IP that is far away) often times you can send in your CD case, or manual (where ever they store the key) and they will give you a new one.

abachler
03-13-2008, 10:27 AM
Key generators have long past defeated CD keys.

Only for single player. A keygen cant defeat online play unless it hacks the database of valid keys. Online verification is a two stage process. First it is mathematically verified, i.e. a potentially valid key, this is all that single player can do, since it doesnt usualy have a copy of the valid key database, nor woudl having it make it secure, since you coudl then just hack the local databse. The second stage is checkign that the key actually exists int eh database, this is also how you invalidate a key, by removing it from the database.

barcodes cant be defeated on current drives, as few drives can write them, although this is less secure than keys, since the program can be hacked to ignore the barcode. But then that is all SecuROM and the others are doing, is just reading a much mroe complicated and flawed method of barcoding the disk.

Open architecture isnt the problem, There are cracks for XBOX and PS3 too, both closed architectures.

MacGyver
03-13-2008, 12:15 PM
It's like PunkBuster. It only boots legit people.

Statements like these detract from the problem at hand, and make your case and credibility appear flimsy. When you make a blanket statement that you probably know is false and can be easily verified as such, then you come across as a whining individual that is only making your statements out of anger. Hardly something that should come from someone that is supposed to be of your calibre.

It may make you feel better to mash the keyboard and tell everyone in the world that you think PB or whatever other software sucks and does the exact opposite of what it should do, but that's about all it does for you.

Frankly, I would agree with you in one certain aspect, namely that I'm not happy with how PB operates. For the type of program it is, however, it does OK, but as I posted elsewhere, I believe the entire solution to anticheating should not even be in that format. It should be entirely heuristic in nature. This should right away help alleviate many of the issues of PB in general, in addition to providing much better detection.

As far as copy protection, it doesn't work. The solution for online games is to make a successful online validation system. If you purchase an account or a key instead of "a license to run the software" or some other garbage, and the software is free, then you're in a safer area. Keys and accounts can be further tied to other statistical information, thereby limiting the access of people that even eventually gain access to the key/account through illegit means.

abachler
03-13-2008, 02:20 PM
While I agree that it is an overly broad statement, the fact is Ive been booted by PB for no apparent reason on several occasions.

zacs7
03-13-2008, 02:24 PM
CD-Keys and bar-codes can be beaten, and have been beaten -- they're not the answer to stopping piracy stop thinking so. Basically if the data is there, it can be read.

As for CD-keys, there are a large handful of games where generated cd-keys will work online. Regardless if they don't, the game can still usually be played online without a valid key. Take Steam for example, there has been countless 'Steam cracks', rather 'Steam emulators' (Such as SteamDown) that allowed people to play steam games -- any game they wanted! Without paying a cent, the irony is it used Steams database of accounts to do it (you needed a legit account, which are free anyway). Just shows 'pay-to-play' doesn't really work either.

As for PB, I'd say I like it 50/50, Sometimes it's great sometimes it sucks ass. All you have to do is play Americas Army for 5 minutes to see the amount of people it removes for no good reason. 'MD5 query tool failure', 'PbA failed to communicate with PbB', etc. In-fact I coped a 5 minute PB ban yesterday for no reason at all.

abachler
03-13-2008, 02:29 PM
A few flawed implimentations fo cd key verification does nto mean teh technology is broken. If it checks a private database and uses non-trivial key generation, then it is effectively impossible to crack. The problem comes in when copy protection is an afterthought adn the suits freak otu and buy a shrink wrapped bandaid.

zacs7
03-13-2008, 02:31 PM
> If it checks a private database and uses non-trivial key generation, then it is effectively impossible to crack.

No, not really. I don't think you read my example on Steam. Saying 'impossible' is rather silly, almost everything is possible.

Mario F.
03-13-2008, 02:50 PM
The key being on a private server means nothing. The generation algorithm being non-trivial means nothing either. The server is never cracked. What happens is that the key generation algorithm is simply inferred.

This issue is simple - and its the second time this week I hear this ridiculous advertisement of this or that security measure being perfect; There is no current full-proof solution to copy protection. Probably never will until we change our computers open architecture.

MacGyver
03-13-2008, 03:41 PM
In-fact I coped a 5 minute PB ban yesterday for no reason at all.

Must have been your ub3r 1337 h4x. Turn 'em off! :p

maxorator
03-13-2008, 03:43 PM
This issue is simple - and its the second time this week I hear this ridiculous advertisement of this or that security measure being perfect; There is no current full-proof solution to copy protection. Probably never will until we change our computers open architecture.
For single player games, it's true. But for online games cd keys are a full-proof solution since even brute-force won't give you any results.

zacs7
03-13-2008, 04:58 PM
> But for online games cd keys are a full-proof solution since even brute-force won't give you any results.
No! You're as bad as Ubisoft.

VirtualAce
03-13-2008, 05:31 PM
Hardly something that should come from someone that is supposed to be of your calibre.


Well thanks for the vote of confidence but I'm also a gamer and one that is getting extremely annoyed at all the completely flawed tactics being used to detect cheaters and thieves. The cheaters and thieves run rampant while legit players have nothing but trouble. Companies won't do anything about it and yet keep using things like PB to cheat-proof their games when every gamer who is anything in the gaming world knows that PB is a huge flaming pile of poo. It boots the wrong people all the time, throws up errors in the console about not being able to read this PB packet or that PB packet, and in general just sucks.

I believe we do have a right to 'whine' about this topic. I have purchased all of my games and firmly believe that a company has a right to its just due and compensation. However I will cease to give said compensation when they start tampering with my system. It took me an hour or so of research just to remove the crappy Starforce or whatever it is. It uses some unsupported characters in the folder names which causes Windows to vomit when you try to delete them. It also uses NULL reg keys in your registry so you can't remove them without a tool from sysinternals. These are NOT in any way shape or form valid ethical business practices and do not belong in any game or professional product. These are folks that are fighting hacking by becoming hackers and they are hacking my machine.

I'm beyond tired of it and since I own around 290 games now I'd say I have a fairly good grasp of most of what is being used now for copy protection. My point is it is a waste of money b/c the 'bad guys' are already playing the game even with the copy protection schemes being used. Copy protection just makes it harder for legit players and legit buyers to run the game b/c they are the only ones who play by the rules. If you don't play by the rules...you usually aren't affected by them either. I will always buy my software, CD's, movies, etc. I've been ridiculed for doing so but it's just how I am. Buy it or don't buy it - anything else is stealing. But tampering with my system w/o my permission is absolutely unacceptable regardless of the intent.

MacGyver
03-13-2008, 09:38 PM
You're mixing the issues of copy protection and cheating.

Starforce or whatever that copy protection software is called is a piece of garbage from what I hear. I wouldn't want software to hide stuff on my machine and all that other stuff.

PB on the other hand is not Starforce, and they do not employ those kind of tactics as described for Starforce, to my knowledge. PB's problem is trying to detect cheats the wrong way.

As far as PB's technical issues are concerned, yeah there are issues. I don't deny that, but many issues can be resolved. For some of the people saying they've been kicked "for no reason", they should consider how that comes across. It gives no information on the problem, and I would wonder if anybody complaining here has even bothered to contact EB and get any technical assistance.

Altogether, as programmers, it would be nice if we could make a difference. Frankly, I think most games coming out these days suck terribly bad. I'm rather depressed with the state of online gaming. Cheating is only getting worse, and many of the anticheat groups are becoming political. Games aren't even finished before they come out, and before the players can even digest one game, the next sequel is out. What's the difference? Who cares? Another sequel will be out soon thereafter and the last one will be forgotten.

I like some aspects of EA, and I think they have some things done from the right angles. I've heard Blizzard is a good company, but I can't stand their games, so I can't comment on them. The one game company I really do not like is UBI.

Now with regard to UBI and Starforce, I think this is rather interesting:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubisoft#Controversies


On April 14, 2006, Ubisoft confirmed that they would stop using StarForce on their games citing complaints from customers.[8]

Almost 2 years ago they said they would stop using Starforce. So why is this topic still getting notice? Are they still using Starforce, or do people just enjoy threatening to boycott UBI for a two year old screwup?

Edit: Or are they using some other equivalent protection program currently?

zacs7
03-13-2008, 10:26 PM
They may not be using starforce anymore, but that doesn't mean they're not using something else. Point is the trust in Ubisoft is lost, and they don't deserve it back... ever. You can't forgive them, they knew what they were doing, and planned to get away with it -- Starforce did not ship with Ubisoft games by mistake.

abachler
03-17-2008, 01:47 PM
The key being on a private server means nothing. The generation algorithm being non-trivial means nothing either. The server is never cracked. What happens is that the key generation algorithm is simply inferred.

This issue is simple - and its the second time this week I hear this ridiculous advertisement of this or that security measure being perfect; There is no current full-proof solution to copy protection. Probably never will until we change our computers open architecture.

So you are saying if I generate a 128 bit cd key, and the verification stage is that the public key has to decode it to have repeated digits such as FF88EE22 and I keep the database on a private system then you can trivially reverse my encryption process using the public key, wow if thats true mario you need to be working for the NSA, not posting here. Since there are only 2^64 correct keycodes, adn 2^128 possible keycoides, even knowing the verification algorithm does nothing, since you will still only find one potentially valid keycode for every 2^64 codes you try. Good luck with that any time before the game becomes so outdated that its considered a historical artifact.

UBI uses some other copy protection now, but some of their starforce games are still on shelves, which means thye are still at fult for continuing problems. Unless they recall the starforce infected games (and yes I mean infected) they havent 'stopped using it' just stopped printing new media with it. I believe they use SecuROM now, which is almost as bad sicne it doesnt work on about 30% of drives out there.


> If it checks a private database and uses non-trivial key generation, then it is effectively impossible to crack.



No, not really. I don't think you read my example on Steam. Saying 'impossible' is rather silly, almost everything is possible.

Apparetly you didnt read the part about bad implimentations being poor examples et al. And I didnt say impossible, I said 'effectively impossible'. That is to say it wouldcost more to crack one key than to just buy the game.

Mario F.
03-17-2008, 03:03 PM
Abachler,

Get a piece of paper, now start drawing...

Where is the key generated?
What is the workflow behind the key generation process?
How does the software you have at your home validates against the generated key?

Grab your sketch. And pinpoint the weaknesses. Don't answer me; I'm tired of your babbling. Just do this exercise because I'm not going to do it for you. Happy enlightenment.

abachler
03-18-2008, 08:29 AM
Don't answer me; I'm tired of your babbling.

Back off noob. Follow your own advice, until then stay under the rock.

On second thought Ill just add you to my ignore list. I don't know what bug got up your ass (although I suspect what it was), but that is irelevant. You disagree that CD-KEY protection can be made secure enough to thwart hacking, yet you give no evidence that my algorithm is flawed adn instead go off half cocked claiming that I need to prove my own arguement wrong because you cant be bothered.

Do Your Own Homework.

Mario F.
03-18-2008, 09:31 AM
Hehe. Thank you for the laugh. Over and out.

indigo0086
03-18-2008, 09:32 AM
Brown Paper, white paper, stickin' together with the tape, the tape of looove....THE STICKY STUUUF OOOH YEAAHEAHH!!

Cheeze-It
03-18-2008, 10:31 AM
A lot of companies make it so hard to actually pay them for their software, even if you are perfectly willing to do so, that it's easier to just pirate it. It's their own fault.

Uh, no. It's the pirates' fault. The industry's extreme
copy protection is a direct response to all the piracy.
It's frustrating as hell; it sucks, but put the blame on
the pirates for forcing the industry to do this.

Or just abandon PC gaming and focus on consoles
which more and more PC developers are starting to
do because they get screwed over by pirates.

maxorator
03-18-2008, 12:04 PM
Or just abandon PC gaming and focus on consoles
which more and more PC developers are starting to
do because they get screwed over by pirates.
I hate consoles. I couldn't imagine to have an expensive device with lots of powerful stuff in it which only allows me to play games. It's an overkill. I would never buy a rock. I only need useful machines.

Elysia
03-18-2008, 12:13 PM
Love a console. Never again suffer choppy framerates or have to upgrade hardware to run games.

mike_g
03-18-2008, 12:13 PM
Lol, consoles don't stop piracy. Especially since they no longer rely on system specific cartridges. Console users generally just know less about how computer systems work than PC users do, thats all.

abachler
03-18-2008, 01:31 PM
Console games are just as prone to piracy as computers. Just that the people that are technically saavy enough to rip a game are generally mroe interested in computers. Force them to play on consoles and the problem will just move. Its not because they have magic architecture, its just a matter of statistics.

Mario F.
03-18-2008, 01:43 PM
Lol, consoles don't stop piracy. Especially since they no longer rely on system specific cartridges.

And even when they do...

I'm still amazed at how fast PSP was cracked.

brewbuck
03-18-2008, 02:12 PM
Uh, no. It's the pirates' fault. The industry's extreme
copy protection is a direct response to all the piracy.
It's frustrating as hell; it sucks, but put the blame on
the pirates for forcing the industry to do this.

As somebody who works on commercial code with lots of complicated licensing features, I have to disagree. The pirates are doing what is natural. Data can be copied, and they copy it freely. What is unnatural is expecting to be able to limit the spread of information in an environment which is fundamentally set up to allow the spread of information.

I do not know of any modern company which has been put out of business or even provably impacted by pirate activities. But I do know of several companies which have suffered because users were unwilling to tolerate onerous licensing mechanisms. They will switch to a product which is easier to install and use.

I have more than once paid for a piece of software, then downloaded and installed the crack so that I don't have to suffer through license problems. The authors of those software programs are lucky that I decided to be honest, because the "paying for it" part is completely optional.

(My personal income directly depends on people purchasing our products instead of pirating them.)

abachler
03-18-2008, 02:28 PM
While few companies ever went broke making console games, PC games are where the real money is. By and large PC gamers buy more games per user per anum than console gamers. I buy around 20-30 games a year myself.

Neo1
03-18-2008, 02:40 PM
Love a console. Never again suffer choppy framerates or have to upgrade hardware to run games.

So true!

Mario F.
03-18-2008, 02:50 PM
The pirates are doing what is natural. Data can be copied, and they copy it freely. What is unnatural is expecting to be able to limit the spread of information in an environment which is fundamentally set up to allow the spread of information.

This is really what is at the heart of the problem. As I said before any in-place security measures intended to prevent the cracking of a software are always be either insufficient or patchy, no matter what some noobs in this thread may advertise.

The open architecture of today's computers is not lenient on any attempts to protect any kind of business related rights. This however never stopped anyone from making money. On the contrary, some companies emerged and become colossus in the industry pushed by crackers and payed by legit consumers.

Most of the money that is made doesn't even come from direct sales. As a company grows it becomes less and less affected by crackers. And when it is small, the more crackers interested in their products the more exposure they must/will have. Many shareware developers I talked too throughout the years have very interesting things to say about the cracking of their products when you ask them privately.

I'm not advertising crackers are an healthy addition to the industry. However, in the presence of a problem that is simply not going to go away, one better try to make the most of it. Or at least understand the phenomena for what it is.

Elysia
03-18-2008, 03:22 PM
While few companies ever went broke making console games, PC games are where the real money is. By and large PC gamers buy more games per user per anum than console gamers. I buy around 20-30 games a year myself.

Huh? Is that why they're moving away from PC games?
More on more embrace consoles, and more leave the PC in dust.
The PC market is hard to develop for because all computers are different. That means buggy software since companies cannot spend eternal money on ironing out the bugs.
Plus the PC is not a fixed platform, so the developers has to ensure it works on a minimum specs and a recommended/maximum specs, which again, means more time, more complexity. Not to mention they have to develop for both ATI and nVidia.
And because computers are so expensive, people cannot afford to upgrade all the time, which makes all the new games crawl or not work at all, which is another issue.

All in all, this is killing the PC market. In fact, some companies have banded together to save it from shriveling up. No, it won't shrivel up completely due to games like Oblivion and its healthy community, but other games are an entirely different manner.

abachler
03-18-2008, 04:34 PM
Keep dreaming, PC's will always outperform consoles in both total cost of ownership and performance. Go try to upgrade your PS1 to run newer games, not goin to happen at any price. Most games don't require you to have the latest and greatest hardware unless you want to run every setting at its maximum. Computer graphics blow away anything you can get on a console regardless of any argument to the contrary, its just facts. Consoles have a low res monitor, TV is approx 720 x 480 IIRC (its actually some oddball number near that), which is why they can keep the frame rate up, not because they are superior. PC gamers don't want to run things that low, most modern PC graphics cards wont even support anything below 1024x768.

The whole PC vs Console argument needs to be added to the "List Of Horses That Have Been Sufficiently Beaten And Will No Longer Be Discussed".

Neo1
03-18-2008, 04:41 PM
Keep dreaming, PC's will always outperform consoles in both total cost of ownership

No, a console will always be cheaper than a PC.


and performance

This is true however.


Go try to upgrade your PS1 to run newer games, not goin to happen at any price.

It is not a problem, since all games will run on the consoles they are released for, so there is no need to upgrade anything.


Consoles have a low res monitor, TV is approx 720 x 480 IIRC (its actually some oddball number near that), which is why they can keep the frame rate up, not because they are superior.

Ever heard of HD? Both the Xbox360 and the PS3 supports full HD, 1920x1080...



PC gamers don't want to run things that low, most modern PC graphics cards wont even support anything below 1024x768.

This just isn't true, my Radeon X1600Pro has no problems with 800x600, or 640x480 for that matter, if i could find a game that would go lower, it'd probably cope with that too, why shouldn't it?

abachler
03-18-2008, 05:10 PM
No, a console will always be cheaper than a PC.



You misread what i said. I said total cost of ownership, not sticker price. TCO is how much you spend per year keeping it updated versus how much you spend each year buying the newest consoles.

Neo1
03-18-2008, 05:14 PM
You misread what i said. I said total cost of ownership, not sticker price. TCO is how much you spend per year keeping it updated versus how much you spend each year buying the newest consoles.

There is not a new console generation each year, more like every 3rd year. So the total cost will still be higher for a computer, atleast if you want a machine that can play all new games in Full HD..

abachler
03-18-2008, 07:53 PM
I can play any computer game (that isnt broken), and I only spend ~$200 a year, and since I also use my computer for work, I only count half that. I can play the games I bought 20 years ago without having to have an emulator. Try that with a console. Last console I owned was the Super Nintendo, IMO they havent improved much since. Why should I spend $200 on a console when i can spend that much on my computer, and since I have to have a computer anyway, not buying a console just means I have a better computer. And I dont have to buy a new computer every year either, so your 3 year plan doesnt mean much.

Elysia
03-19-2008, 12:29 AM
Keep dreaming, PC's will always outperform consoles in both total cost of ownership and performance.
This is just not true. It will always cost more for a PC games for worse experience because you need up-to-date hardware. Yes, PCs will probably always outperform consoles if you nVidia 9800GTX x 3 or the like. But that's ridiculously expensive.


Go try to upgrade your PS1 to run newer games, not goin to happen at any price.
So what? PS1 is outdated at this point, and the PS2 is dirt cheap, and the Wii is $250, if you can find it, of course, and there's still one further argument that I'll bring up below.


Most games don't require you to have the latest and greatest hardware unless you want to run every setting at its maximum.
You still get choppy framerates, however. Unless, of course, you do have very top notch hardware.


Computer graphics blow away anything you can get on a console regardless of any argument to the contrary, its just facts.
This is just not true. For newer games, yes, the graphics does evolve, and yes they can beat the console, but no, this is not always the fact.


Consoles have a low res monitor, TV is approx 720 x 480 IIRC (its actually some oddball number near that), which is why they can keep the frame rate up, not because they are superior.
For NTSC, yes. But not for PAL. It has higher, around 720 x 540 I think.
But regardless, it is irrelevant. No one claimed consoles are superior. They are just platforms where games are targeted and where the developers can tune the performance so they know that everyone get the same performance, which is unlike PCs, because the hardware can differ.
And don't forget HDTV which can run up to 1920 x 1080. That's pushing the limit of what the PC can do.
And the last thing that I will argue about is that graphics is irrelevant. All that matters is that the game is fun. Mario Galaxy isn't as detailed and graphically intensive as Xbox 360/PS3 games, nor was Metroid Prime 3, nor is Smash Brothers Brawl, but hey, they're fun, and we get to play them as 30/60 FPS, so who cares about the graphics?


PC gamers don't want to run things that low, most modern PC graphics cards wont even support anything below 1024x768.
Again, a pretty poor claim since it's just not true.

maxorator
03-19-2008, 03:19 AM
This is just not true. It will always cost more for a PC games for worse experience because you need up-to-date hardware. Yes, PCs will probably always outperform consoles if you nVidia 9800GTX x 3 or the like. But that's ridiculously expensive.
Do you think that consoles are magical machines with magical powers? They aren't. They also consist of processors, video cards, memory, just like PCs. The difference between consoles and PCs are that you can't choose the pieces you put into your console. So the problem is that PC games get more and more complex by time, which console ones cannot do.

The problem would be solved if PC game developers wouldn't use all the power that the newest hardware can supply.

Anyway, why do you always need the newest games on PC? There are thousands of games you CAN play normally, and a few which you CAN'T, and then you complain that games won't run? Why does that frustrate people that there are FEW games you cannot play since they're too powerful? If there wouldn't be such games, everyone would be happy, so how does the existence of such games frustrate people? Greediness, I suppose.