Vyor
My influence grows!
this is still not true
Computer Specs Discussion/Argument Thread
- Thread starter Agent23
- Start date
this is still not true
Vyor
My influence grows!
Certainly, but that resistance track doesn't follow ohm's law because of it using rising and falling pulses of current rather than linear current. On top of that, the major issue in node design isn't heat... it's electron migration and quantum tunneling.
Now, both of these can be solved with something very simple: more insulation. But the more insulation you add to your wires and contacts the less you can compact the transistors. So, what do you do? Recently, the trend has been towards using Cobalt instead of Copper for the metal layers and contacts, even the Wires. Under traditional logic this would be a bad idea because Copper is just a lot more conductive... except that it needs a lot more insulation at such small scales to prevent electron migration, a problem that Cobalt doesn't have.
With cobalt you can, effectively, halve both the green and blue barrier layers and get less resistance than if you were to use copper thanks to the increased diameter/width!
One of the most important parts of games is gameplay, and gameplay has stagnated for nearly 20 years (maybe even longer for some genres)
So if the most important part of games isn't getting better, why do we need 10x the processing power? Graphics are nice up to a certain point, then they become redundant.
Does seeing the pores on character's skin REALLY improve your experience? Did you ask for that to be in games?
Vyor
My influence grows!
AI is getting more complex for one.
More NPCs, more varied worlds, more detailed environments, less/no load times.
bintananth
behind a desk
No matter how fast your computer is you're going to think it's a slow piece of shit the moment you have to wait for it to do something you told it to do.
It it really? Enemies kind of just stand around or take pre-scripted 'cover' actions, aside from that how are they complex?
Cyberpunk's AI seems worse than FEAR's or even CoD WaW's AI.
And my favorite Genre, RTS, tends to just have the AI flat out cheat nowadays because nobody knows how to make RTS AI's anymore.
I don't believe this claim, which games nowadays have complex AI's? What makes them complex?
Load times basically got extinguished with SSD's which have been on the market for years now, that's hardly a new thing. And detailed environments do not a game make.
Where's the gameplay? The play part of the game? What makes 'shooty bang bang' any more demanding with CPU's and GPU's than older shooty bang bang?
If your game requires 1000 particle effects to sell, it might not be a good game.
Not going to lie, my PC is pretty average and I love how responsive it is. I've had to use a shitty laptop lately and god damn it takes about 3-5 seconds for a letter to show up once you've typed it.
bintananth
behind a desk
Blame software bloat for that.
The laptop in the trunk of my car is an old i5 quad-core with 16GB of RAM shoved into it. It can handle large Revit models. It'll just take its sweet ass time when it does while complaining, loudly.
It has more than enough RAM for the games @Scooby Doo mentioned in his OP and it needs all of it.
Yeah we're heading into the era where we need 32 gigs of RAM, which is absolutely fucking insane because if you asked someone in 2010 that games will need 32 gigs of RAM, their idea of games would be some sort of universe simulator or star-citizen-but-if-actually-released game, not 'Call of Duty...Again' lmao.
I guess the saving grace is that RAM is pretty cheap compared to other computer bits.
Vyor
My influence grows!
... Cyberpunk doesn't even really use the CPU much. If you want an RTS game that makes use of all your CPU horsepower that doesn't cheat with the AI? Ashes of the Singularity. Large amounts of units, very complex pathfinding.
Which, btw, is the major thing that takes compute power for AI: pathfinding.
This is objectively wrong, but ok.
Ok, go back and play Daggerfall instead of a modern open world. Go ahead, do it.
Depends. Multiplayer? Probably having more players, larger maps, and more detailed maps. As in, able to enter large buildings and weave in and out of them. Oh, and having better physics.
It isn't the number of shader's, it's the complexity of them.
And you know what? If graphics don't change anything go ahead and play, oh, the original RE4 instead of getting the remake.
Face it, graphics matter to the experience. Always has, always will.
Mm, yes, the 2010 call of duty supported... 150 player maps(not counting AI which is also present in some game modes).
Gee, I wonder why more RAM is needed than when it only supported, what, 16 players in a lobby total? With the entire game only being 12 gigs in size and the most complex map in the multiplayer has a single building in it that you can go into? And the primary textures and game resolution was 720p? 608p on the consoles? With no shadows?
bintananth
behind a desk
Our secretary's hand-me-down Revit box has 64. Autodesk says you can get by with only 8.
Uh, yeah, no that ain't gonna work because CAD software eats RAM in ways which are comparable to what a hungry teenage boy does to an unlocked pantry.
Vyor
My influence grows!
Revit has always had really low minimum requirements, to the point it's unreasonable. They expect you to do only really, really simple tasks on it.
I didn't get the remake exactly for the reason that I refuse to buy bloated games.
The OG game with the fan-made HD pack runs on potato PC's, keeps the style of the game, and merely makes the textures reasonable on modern displays.
It holds up shockingly well.
Vyor
My influence grows!
Aaaand RE4 itself is a pain to get running on modern PCs, not that you want to with how shit the controls are. Of course, the remake is also adding new enemies and removing quick time events...
bintananth
behind a desk
Meanwile someone like me - who probably has at least one Revit session running in the background they forgot about - doesn't limit themselves to the "really, really simple tasks".
Wut? I got it to run within like ten minutes. You want a game that is hard to get running on modern PC's? Try Empire of the Ants.
Vyor
My influence grows!
Got one better: Fallout 3
That one is easy! TTW for NV lets you play FO3 on NV.
I still can't get Empire of the Ants running even with DGVoodoo2.
Vyor
My influence grows!
TTW is cheating and you know it.
Its fun though!
How can you possibly say that with a straight face?
Games like "Midnight Ghost Hunt" or "The Sparkle: Evo 2" are going to need a LOT of computer strength to run. Just one look at them and you can see this so yes, granted.
But I said OFTEN, not ALWAYS. The 2018 game "Foxtail" used the Wintermute engine. It looks like a game that would have come out with the mid-1990's DOS game "Inherit the Earth." It sounds and plays like it too. Chapters 1 & 2 could even play on the 2001 Sony VAIO laptop, and it can't even play "Undertale." Chapter 3 needed the SCUMMVM app (2.2 or later) but it ran. Now they are switching to a form of (phooey!) Unity engine, so I guarantee it will no longer run on older devices, and SCUMMVM will not likely try to handle a Unity game. So in effect the same game became more demanding.
There are DOS games for sale on Steam which, if run AS DOS games, run on the puny Sylvania Windows CE netbook with those mobile DOS emulators and GAPI of all things- but to get the Steam versions running with those "shells," well, go there and look up "Bombuzal" for starters. Why?
My philosophy is that if a game does not NEED high specifications then it should not have them. The website Deviantart.com use to run nicely with Opera Mini 5 even on that netbook- now with that ugly and demanding new site design the only reason it runs on that Sony VAIO at all is because of the folks over at MSFN and their modified SSE browsers, and even in XP mode (dual-boot device) it takes much longer. Poor people are out in the cold. And for what? Same with games.