You compare old tech instead of modern tech, and you're trying to run a 2003 game on a 1999 computer
Well, with my saturn post, I was just responding to the guy who decided to bring the past into the convo, so that's why I brought up the sega saturn in the first place.
And computer age shouldn't matter too much, I could run Phantasy Star Online 2 (2012 release) and Modern Warfare 3 well on my computer from 2006, so idk.
My computer is pretty subpar for today standards too.
Originally Posted by Auxilium
Well, with my saturn post, I was just responding to the guy who decided to bring the past into the convo, so that's why I brought up the sega saturn in the first place.
And computer age shouldn't matter too much, I could run Phantasy Star Online 2 (2012 release) and Modern Warfare 3 well on my computer from 2006, so idk.
My computer is pretty subpar for today standards too.
My only real gripe with your argument is the fact that you brought up something from a completely different time, and are acting like it is relevant to a discussion now. Your arguments for the Saturn are from a time where gaming on a PC was not yet big or really wanted. PC gaming was still poking around trying to find out where it belongs, and hardware tech was very very expensive then too. However, since then, hardware began advancing in leaps and bounds, flying past the graphical and physical capabilities of a console at an extremely fast speed. PCs were looked at then as work stations designed for doing work, and only a specifically designed box for gaming would be needed to play games. Once the tech started moving giving the PC true gameplay potential, consoles got left in the dust.
Originally Posted by Auxilium
Well, with my saturn post, I was just responding to the guy who decided to bring the past into the convo, so that's why I brought up the sega saturn in the first place.
And computer age shouldn't matter too much, I could run Phantasy Star Online 2 (2012 release) and Modern Warfare 3 well on my computer from 2006, so idk.
My computer is pretty subpar for today standards too.
Computer specs back then was extremely low, and MW3 has the same engine from MW2, so the graphics is just a bit better
Now sure about Phantasy, since I've never heard of it
Originally Posted by 666HiddenMaster666
Computer specs back then was extremely low, and MW3 has the same engine from MW2, so the graphics is just a bit better
Now sure about Phantasy, since I've never heard of it
MW3 used a similar engine from MW2. Small discrepancy, but people seem to be still set on the whole CoD uses 20 year old engine olol. Irrelevant I know, but the engines have been upgraded as much as they need to from year to year.
Originally Posted by Auxilium
What kind of answer is that? Is it because you're trying to avoid saying a reason yourself? I read every post on this thread, so perhaps I need a little help.
Originally Posted by ZeroTroubles
Ofcourse. And I did say that I was just making an example, I could have been talking about anything. But RAM is easier to explain since its just numbers instead of dual/quad core @ 2.3 Mhz etc.
RAM doesn't really matter in this case, but it was just an example (no way you gonna use 16 gigs of ram just for a game atm!)
Originally Posted by 666HiddenMaster666
