This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

i will say this about this Gen PC games

  • Topic Archived
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
  1. Boards
  2. PC
  3. i will say this about this Gen PC games

User Info: vlado_e

4 months ago#41
arleas posted...
Right, but a lot of small advances eventually equal one big advance.

The problem is determining where one starts and stops. And since it's a complex thing to begin with, not to mention there is a lot of fluidity, as I said, it ends up with the "generations" not really being discrete but more continuous with overlaps. That's why "generations" don't work the same way and is a bad analogy to work with.

The cranky hermit posted...
vlado_e posted...
in PC you get multiple smaller jumps over each period, that further need some time to propagate and become the norm - e.g., a new generation of video cards is released but the vast majority of gamers won't rush to get them, so you might need to wait for a year to have the safe assumption that a significant portion now have that.

So what happens when Nintendo is the first to introduce a next-gen console and nobody buys it? Does that pose a problem for defining console generations?

*shrug* I'd say it comes off to mass adoption.
We do what we must / because we can. / For the good of all of us. / Except the ones who are dead.

User Info: AsucaHayashi

4 months ago#42
stav8 posted...
Eventually a pc will become outdated and unable to use newer software if it no longer meets the minimum specs but a standard user would upgrade before this time hits. If you were to buy a new pc today the CPU could last you 10 years, ram 10 years and GPU up to 5 years

it's guaranteed that any decent gaming-capable hardware purchased today will still have enough juice to play many new games say 20 years in the future barring any mechanical failures.

a game like:

from a few months ago constitutes as "new software" and is playable on current 10+ year old hardware.

User Info: speedforce131

4 months ago#43
Generations do exist on PC. They go along with DX. Each DX version had GPU's made for specifically for it. The lines between generations are blurred because of compatibility. But if you pay attention to the micro-details, you can see it. For example we went from floppy to CD, from CD to DVD and digital. We went from physical media install with no centralized service to Steam and the appearance of GFWL which itself marked a new generation where console controllers and controller interfaces were popularized.

User Info: SinisterSlay

4 months ago#44
arleas posted...
I don't know about that. My experience was that it might sorta run, but it wouldn't run perfectly without some work, a mod, a fix, or whatever. Like for example there's a game from the 90's called MDK that "runs" on modern computers, but because it depended on the Glide API it doesn't work right without extra work.

In any case, even if you COULD just take a windows 95 disc, pop it into a windows 10 computer and install and play 100%, there's a startling difference between 1995 and there SHOULD be. Standards change, new technologies come into play, everything evolves...

Requiring glide means it needed a voodoo card. That's not really a generation.
And if your talking graphics or gameplay, the former is barely better and the latter is arguably worse.
That's a 1997 game. Supports features even now that games don't support including every object being destructible (if enabled, it's a switch, so you can use models as driving objects instead of destructables). The game has over 7000 tracks and 7000 trucks, making it far larger than any modern game. And is fully moddable.
He who stumbles around in darkness with a stick is blind. But he who... sticks out in darkness... is... fluorescent! - Brother Silence
The cranky hermit 4 months ago#45
arleas posted...
you're basically saying that someone else did the extra work for you so it doesn't count as needing extra work?

Yes, and I'm not seeing the problem with that syllogism.

It makes sense to me, just like it made sense to you to put in mainframes as if anyone here has had one to play on.

Mainframes make sense. Whether anyone owned one is irrelevant; people did get to play on them, and seminal titles like Zork, Rogue, Oubliette, and Tetris all came from that era.

Putting Leisure Suit Larry and Duke Nukem 3D in the same generation, on the other hand, does not make sense. Nor does saying BioShock 1 is a current-generation game. If your OS-centric schema made sense to you, it's because you didn't think about it enough.

Because that's the closest thing in my mind to a generation gap that PC has. They also kept making games with 32 bit executables so if you wanted to be pedantic about it (and of course you do) then you could argue that they didn't really shift generations until games started requiring 64 bit OSes. Except that muddies things up because there's still games being made that will work just fine on XP, but it was made in the era of 64 bit.

You're the one with this OS-centric schema, not me. Pointing out more holes in your own system just further shows how inadequate it is.
Year-by-year analysis of the finest gaming has to offer, and (eventually) more!
  1. Boards
  2. PC
  3. i will say this about this Gen PC games

Report Message

Terms of Use Violations:

Etiquette Issues:

Notes (optional; required for "Other"):
Add user to Ignore List after reporting

Topic Sticky

You are not allowed to request a sticky.

  • Topic Archived