- Nintendo 64 Forever
- →
- Everything Else!
- →
- Social Board
- →
- What I hate about computers and/or video gaming
| Welcome to Nintendo 64 Forever. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| What I hate about computers and/or video gaming | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Sep 12 2007, 06:43 AM (685 Views) | |
| Kerr Avon | Sep 12 2007, 06:43 AM Post #1 |
Senior Member
|
Yesterday I spent approximately four months (subjecively that is, objectively it was around two to three hours) fixing my mate's PC. I won't bore you with the details (every strain of spyware known to man, Windows crashing at every opportunity, the CD burner not being recognised, DLL errors at every turn, three weeks boot up time, but my mate had NOT been messing with it, oh no...) as we've all suffered clueless PC owners who shouldn't even own a digital watch let alone a PC, but as I'm still riled, I thought I'd post a general hate list about PCs (and consoles). It's either that or brain my mate with his PC (which is probably knackered again now anyway, seeing as how it's been about twelve hours since I fixed it...) Here we go: * The excess heat modern computers generate, especially laptops (my laptop, which isn't even particularly poweful, gets too hot to ever use on my lap, so maybe there's a Trading Standards case to answer to). This is just waste energy, which not only costs us money, but causes polution and the greenhouse effects. Why don't they make CPUs only draw in as much power as they need, and convert none (or at least much, much less) of that electricity to heat? * The way Windows occasionally messes up all of the icons on the desktop. Why isn't there a STORE and RESTORE function for the icon settings? * Dave Goss * Windows asking if I want to send the information to Microsoft whenever something goes wrong, even if I'm not on-line. Why is there no "NO, DON'T ASK AGAIN" option? * The way, when you're copying files in Windows, if it encounters a file with the same name as the one you're about to copy, you simply get the options YES/NO/YES to ALL/CANCEL. Where is "NO to ALL"? Where is the "RENAME FILE" option, that the Atari ST presented in the same circumstance twenty-odd years ago....? And why doesn't Windows examine both files and see if they're identical, and then inform you so? And why, if you hit an error, does all copying stop, without informing you which files were and weren't copied? And why in the copying box with the useless flying paper animation, doesn't it say something like "12 files of 35 copied"? * Exclusive games. A real nuiscance when a game you want doesn't come out on your system(s). * The way PCs are sold as consumer items, like TVs and VCRs, when instead they do need occasional maintenance by people with some knowledge and experience. I know a few people who shouldn't have a PC at all... * Viruses and Spyware. Obviously, but I HATE them. And I hate going to fix a friend's PC, and finding x amount of malware on there, because they can't understand the concept of on-line safety. * PC owners who "haven't done anything, I just switched it on and it was like that", when you know damn well they've been messing with their machine, even though they know about as much about computers as the poor bloke who invented the C64. * Games that have checkpoint saving, when the checkpoints are too far apart (*cough* Turok 2 on the N64 *cough*). * David Goss * First Person Shooters that don't have (good, definable) bots in multiplayer games. Many multiplayer first person shooter games are unplayable as there's no one playing them online or you don't have anyone with you to play splitscreen, or the only on-line players are cretins who just want to mess about and not play properly. Well written bots play when you want, the game type and rules you want, they don't cheat or quit the game when they're losing, and can be very good fellow team-mates or enemies. Alright, so it's not as good as playing against real humans, but they're a good alternative, and a few good bots can pad out a game with too few humans. Yet bots are becoming less and less common in first person shooters. * Games that have major flaws that would have been detected and fixed if they'd have been properly tested before release. * Wannadoo. My ISP, and they're rubbish. The connection breaks off when it feels like it, I get more Spam than that cafe on Monty Python, and the speed varies sooooo much. But if I change ISPs then I lose the e-address I've had for about nine years. * CDs. Remember how they were advertised in the 1980s? Set on fire, stood on by an elephant, etc, and WOW! they still worked! And then there's reality... * Modern computer magazines. They cost a fortune, are full of reviews for software that costs £60+ and still recieves 4 out 5 stars for value, and the magazines are nowhere near as good as the 1980s magazines. Yes, I know that nostalgia colours our memories, especially us retro-fans who spent our childhoods in the 80s, but thanks to Mort's scans, we can compare modern and old magazines, and Crash, Your Spectrum etc, were *definately* much better than the mindless, unenthusiastic modern bore-fests. * The ever climbing system requirements for PC games. Alright, so it's progress and so on, but it stops the programmers from pushing themselves and the hardware. And despite what people say, you don't usually upgrade graphics cards, hard drives, memory etc. You almost always REPLACE the parts with new ones. Which means more landfill, more expense for something that does the same as your (few months) old card but slightly faster. And then the new drivers sometimes don't work right... * The way console games are more expensive than PC games. Why? Surely it's more work (hence more expense) to write a game for the PC than a console, as a console has fixed, unchangeable, and (I'd imagine) wel documented hardware, unlike the PC, with it's millions of combinations of sound and graphics cards, memory, CPU speeds and types, etc? * Forum moderators who haven't got a clue  * PC owners who think that consoles are for kids. * Console owners who think that PCs are for word-processing and 'net access (but no good for games). * DavID Goss * The way Windows XP (and presumably Vista) insists on searching through .zip files when it's searching for something. I don't want this, it just slows everything down. But there's no option to disable this "feature". I did find a registry hack to fix it, but it didn't work. * The way later versions of Microsoft Word (and maybe other M$ products) won't correctly read documents produced by earlier versions. * Fanboys who think that their prefered console manufacturer is infalible, and that all consoles made by any other company is total ****. Idiots. * Microsoft using cheap, varying brand DVD drives in the (original, don't know about the 360) XBox. My current (replacement) drive is now having trouble reading some discs. Aside from that, the XBox is very well made, so why ruin it with cheap DVD drives? * Microsoft killing off the XBox, in favour of the 360. Alright, so they were free to stop producing the XBox at any time, and also to stop writing games for it, if they so chose, I agree. But since only M$ know the special codes necessary for original DVDs to work on the XBox, only M$ could burn games to disc for commercial sale, and M$ aparently stopped making working DVDs of other company's games, therefore making it impossible for any more XBox games to ever be released. Which isn't fair, if other companys (who, unlike M$, don't have a vested interest in pushing the XBox 360) wanted to continue writing for the ol' XBox (and there are lots of people who, like me, still keep their original XBox and don't have a 360) then they should be allowed to do so, but since M$ are the only company capable of burning XBox code onto compatable DVDs, then the companys are stuck. Just what the world needs - another reason to hate Microsoft... * The XBox only having 64MB of RAM (which is shared between the program and the video RAM). The game authors did wonders with this tiny amount of RAM, but more would have been better. Actually, I'm not sure if this belongs in this list, as the XBox did get along alright with it's 64MB, and by including this it means I should really add similar wishes, such as "I wish the XBox had a port of Unreal Tournament", "I wish Windows had a built in spam killer" etc. Still, a pity. * Goss, David. * PC owners who say that the PC is the best platform for first person shooters. Erm, Goldeneye and Perfect Dark (N64 only). * DRM (Digital Rights Management). Gits. * The whole format war between Microsoft and Apple. * Gameshark devices on the Nintendo 64. Was there ever a piece of hardware on any format that was so unreliable? * Bad game ports, such as Carmageddon 64  . An awful, awful port. They couldn't even port the right game (they called it Carmageddon 64, when it was a port of Carmageddon 2, not the superior Carmageddon 1). There's any number of bad ports on all machines anyway, too of course, feel free to name and any others.* Dissapointing sequels. Such as Bomb Jack 2 or Renegade 3 on the Spectrum, Deus Ex: Invisible War (sequel to the superb Deus Ex) on the PC/XBox. Unreal Tournament 2003, the sequel to the amazing Unreal Tournament. And so on. It's a long list. * The dumbing down of modern games. Well, first person shooters, which is all I really play. I don't know if other game types are going the same way, but I wouldn't be surprised. You know what I mean, you come to a gate, and the game prompts you to "Use your laser cutter here", instead of letting you work it out for yourself, for example. * The ever declining number of user definable options (in first person shooters). You want to disable automatic aiming. Nope, you're stuck with it. Alter the controls for alternate fire? No chance. Arrrgggghhhh! This applies to console games more than PC games, at least at the moment. * The way Windows occasionally refreshes open windows for no aparent reason, meaning that if you were partway through the scroll bar whilst copy some files from that window, then the scroll bar returns to the top, and you lose your place. * The way Windows occasionally choses to lock up a program or window, so that when you click on it the whole thing just turns white but doesn't respone. Alright, so Windows supporters might claim that it's the third party program at fault, but WinXP is supposed to check every program instruction before performing it, so there's no excuse. And it can happen when all you have open is two or three explorer windows and no third party programs. * People who have never used any OS other than Windows (and don't even know what an OS really is) who persist in defending Windows against all criticism; "It must be the best, because everybody uses it". Okay... These same geniuses see nothing wrong with forking out for the next version of Windows, or M$ Office, or whatever, even though these new programs do nothing usefull that the older version didn't, even though the new versions introduce new bugs, even though these new versions frequently necessitate the purchasing of new hardware, and even though that same person then has to spend time learning to use the new software, when they had no problems using the old version. * Why can't PC owners keep their driver discs somewhere where they can be found? You go to fix their PCs, and the second thing you ask (the first being "what's the problem?", although you know the answer you'll recieve will be probably vague and definately misleading) is always "right, where's the driver discs?", and the same answer you always get is "eh?" And probably loads more things, that I can't think of at the moment. But this'll do for the moment. Edit: Forgot to mention, I don't like Gossy much either* * actually, he's my best mate. But we pretend to hate each other so no-one realises just how close we really are 
|
 |
 
|
| Rapueda (retired) | Sep 12 2007, 07:45 AM Post #2 |
Gemini Squadron
|
 Errr...... ...... maybe it's time for a new hobby? 
Yeah, they're missing out on some of the greatest games of all time.
I've noticed that, generally speaking, exclusive games tend to be better than games that come out on all of the systems. Of course this isn't always true, but it seems like that's often the case. And there's just been too many sloppy ports of great games. 
It didn't seem to really negatively affect any of the games.
Definately not. |
| |
|
|
|
| dagoss | Sep 12 2007, 11:59 AM Post #3 |
Smarty Pants
|
One thing that always eluded me was the fact that most PC gamers are highly computer literate. That isn't to say all of them are, but if someone plays PC games they are more likely to know more about their computer than someone who does not. Further, it seems such people are more inclined to use **nix operating systems on their desktop computer, since it is difficult to know about your computer and to not dislike what Microsoft does. I'd imagine a high percentage of people that use Ubuntu and OpenOffice and such are also PC gamers. So why has PC gaming not migrated in that same direction? (The answer is no doubt the vast amount of money required to produce a modern game compared to the resources need to make more utilitarian programs. I don't think it is OS or technology related, though a few years ago that certainly would have been the case) Perhaps the migration is happening (NWN1 and Doom 3 were both available for Linux) though it is happening slowly. And it is David! You can't have the personal signifier without the ID! </dry psychoanalytic joke> |
|
|
|
| Mop it up | Sep 20 2007, 11:16 AM Post #4 |
Forum Urban Legend
|
I think it is because companies don't have to pay royalties to the console manufacturer when they make PC games. |
|
|
|
| Deleted User | Oct 6 2007, 04:46 PM Post #5 |
|
Deleted User
|
I generally dislike PC gaming; compatibility issues, the widly varying specification standards, the expense of upgrading, the fact that most stores don't accept returns on PC games that have been opened, not being able to use my TV and various other factors all contribute. I especially dislike playing games with a keyboard and mouse, regardless of how precise it is, it just doesn't feel as good or as immersive as a controller, IMO. |
|
|
|
| dagoss | Oct 6 2007, 04:56 PM Post #6 |
|
Smarty Pants
|
I semi-agree. Sitting at my computer feels like work, not a game. I'd much rather lean back in my rocking chair and lounge about. Unfortunately there have been some really high quality games for PC and gaming experiences that a console simply can't do. |
|
|
|
| Deleted User | Oct 6 2007, 05:20 PM Post #7 |
|
Deleted User
|
Consoles nowadays can do anything a PC can, even down to things like keyboard and mouse support. Did you mean stuff like PC game mods, etc? |
|
|
|
| dagoss | Oct 6 2007, 05:57 PM Post #8 |
|
Smarty Pants
|
While a console can do Keyboard/mouse, how many games do? Who would use it anyway? Who wants to play a game on their couch with a keyboard on their lap? I'm not a console gamer or a PC gamer. I think it is rather silly to be exclusive with things like this. Things PC can do that console's con't: -Multiplayer is, for the most part, free. MMORPGs cost money, but most everything else is free. No XBL fees to pay. And from personal experience, online play with PC games is far less frustrating. -Mods. This has the potential to change with XBL, but the fact that I can mod my games myself or install other player's mods quickly and easily is something consoles are not going to reproduce for a long time. -Patches. Consoles can sort of do it now, but the games that receive updates are the big name titles like Halo. Almost all PC games, however, will receive patches. It is easier and cheaper to distribute. -Keyboard/mouse lend themselves to PC-style RPGs and RTS games, both of which are almost non-existent on console. There are some amazing games like Baldur's Gate or Age of Empires that would be nearly impossible on a console without a mouse/keyboard. And if you're using a mouse/keyboard, you might as well just use your computer with TV out. Things Consoles can do that PC's can't: -Lan parties with consoles are infinitely easier to organize and set up. 16 player Halo requires 4 Xboxes. 16 player Counter-strike requires 16 computers and use of an entire house to set up. Non-online multiplayer doesn't happen too often. -Last longer. PCs become outdated faster than consoles. I last upgraded in 2003 and games are now starting to come out that I simply can't run. Even some that I can run look pretty bad. (Of course, one does more with their PC than play games, so price is really hard to compare here). -Some genres work better on console. Who wants to play a fighting or platform game on PC? As a mild observation, PC seems to attract more smaller developers than consoles, probably because of the cheaper development costs. Once and a while you get these little games (like Darwina) that are great but couldn't be made for console simply because the developer couldn't afford to do so. |
|
|
|
| Deleted User | Oct 6 2007, 06:55 PM Post #9 |
|
Deleted User
|
This is one of the good things about Xbox Live Arcade as it can open up possibilities to smaller developers. Virtual Console could do the same but Nintendo seem less willing to attract smaller games developers and more interested in reselling older Nintendo games. |
|
|
|
| Applepieman | Oct 7 2007, 12:14 AM Post #10 |
Veteran
|
I remember reading something at IGN about how Nintendo is also going to do something like Xbox and get completely new games made for users to download. As for the topic, the only games I really play on my computer is: Warcraft 3, Starcraft, Diablo 2. All Blizzard games. I did play WoW for about 2 months but got bored with it. Though with Blizzard's upcoming Starcraft 2 I hope my computer can support it. Blizzard never been about the graphics but this time around it looks like I'm actually going to have to buy a better graphics card. I remember my old computer could run Warcraft 3, do to the low standards needed. It's really dissapointing that developers for the PC are more about making fancy graphics then the actual gameplay. 
|
|
|
|
| Valek | Oct 7 2007, 07:20 AM Post #11 |
Established Member
|
err... I hesitated a long time, wondering whether or not I should reply... but I just can't read that and not react, seriously. Saying the PC is a better platform for one particular genre than consoles does not mean there CAN'T be good games on these consoles, it just means it's more adapted. Let's see, on the one hand we have gaming mice being able to handle 500 to 1000hz polling rate, with large mousepads and skates to ensure the mouse glides smoothly, and on the other hand we have a pad with one analog stick not remotely as precise, AND known for it's wear issues. I can understand why you like GoldenEye and Perfect Dark, I do like them too (at least the single player part), but they are good games _despite_ the control scheme. I'm not flaming or anything, but imo it's just silly to compare a joystick and a mouse for FPS gaming... doesn't mean you can't have fun playing with a pad, you sure can, but it's not nearly as precise / adapted to the genre as the mouse, that much is certain. So, to sum up my point. Yes, the PC is the platform that best suits FPS games. And yes, there are good console FPSes anyway.
They're still far behind for online gaming 
And play AoE in 480i ? No thanks  On a HD TV with a vga input tho, why not, I guess.
err, and what are you basing that on? |
|
|
|
| Deleted User | Oct 7 2007, 08:46 AM Post #12 |
|
Deleted User
|
On the other hand, you have people like myself. Whilst it's true that a mouse and keyboard are more precise, to me they feel totally wrong. I enjoy playing FPS with a pad far more than I do playing with a mouse, mainly because it just feels better to be pulling a trigger than clicking a mouse. And the lack of force feedback makes the whole setup feel even less immersive.
I completely disagree, although I can understand you point of view. In my opinion the precision you get with a mouse compromises too much in the immersion that you can get from a pad with a nice trigger and good force feedback. I've played FPS on PC many times, and I've played some of the best ones; Half Life 2, Doom 3, Americas Army to name but a few. To me, the controls feel shallow and empty, so much so that I'd rather wait for console versions of the game, even if in some cases the console versions aren't as polished as the PC (Xbox Half Life springs to mind). And we've not even discussed how good (and how bad) the Wii's controls can be with shooting games. RE4 has really raised the bar and Metroid Prime 3 (which I haven't played yet) seems to wipe the floor with everything else on Wii so far... even RE4. |
|
|
|
| dagoss | Oct 7 2007, 08:59 AM Post #13 |
|
Smarty Pants
|
That is absolutely a false stereotype. There are just as many console games with high ends graphics and poor gameplay as their are PC games. You'll have a hard time declaring that Valve cared nothing for gameplay when they developed Half-life 2. Or that Civilization 4 was all about the graphics. Even games with steep requirements (like Supreme Commander) can't be dismissed in whole-sale fashion. |
|
|
|
| Deleted User | Oct 7 2007, 09:14 AM Post #14 |
|
Deleted User
|
True, there's also a lot of very basic flash games for the PC where the emphasis is on gameplay rather than graphics. Alien Hominid is a good example... and it became so popular that it made the jump to consoles. |
|
|
|
| dagoss | Oct 7 2007, 09:44 AM Post #15 |
|
Smarty Pants
|
Alien Hominid is great. However, I really don't understand this view that a game can't emphasize graphics and gameplay. They aren't mutually exclusive. Super Mario Bros 3 and Half-life 1 had state-of-the-art graphics and no one says they lack gameplay (And if they do, I will murder their entire family). |
|
|
|
| Valek | Oct 7 2007, 10:01 AM Post #16 |
|
Established Member
|
I see your point about immersion, and, while I'd personally prioritize precision, it's valid... but to be honest I was more thinking about multiplayer, since I don't enjoy SP FPSes much. Anyway, from a multiplayer perspective, the immersion isn't a valid concern imo, and there, the lack of precision flattens the skill curve drastically. |
|
|
|
| Deleted User | Oct 7 2007, 10:52 AM Post #17 |
|
Deleted User
|
Agreed. Games like Oblivion prove that gameplay and graphics can work well together. And in their day N64 games did the same. |
|
|
|
| « Previous Topic · Social Board · Next Topic » |
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
 6:35 PM Jul 13
|
Hosted for free by ZetaBoards · Privacy Policy