New G5 commercial...

[Whaxx]

First, I'd like to say, glad to be posting on the new System Wars, and alot of you knew me as "Whoop" but because of these new boards, I will now be known as "Whaxx"
Lets get on with buisness. Have you guys seen the new MAC G5 commercial, where the guy gets blown out of his house, because his computer is a G5? I just laughed at it, and pitied it, c'mon, its so bad. Not to mention its a MAC so really its got nothing.

[trebor]

<div class=\"smallfont\">First, I'd like to say, glad to be posting on the new System Wars, and alot of you knew me as &quot;Whoop&quot; but because of these new boards, I will now be known as &quot;Whaxx&quot;
Lets get on with buisness. Have you guys seen the new MAC G5 commercial, where the guy gets blown out of his house, because his computer is a G5? I just laughed at it, and pitied it, c'mon, its so bad. Not to mention its a MAC so really its got nothing.</div>

The new G5's actually crush the top of the line P4's that are currently out, speedwise. Not to mention superior design and stability. I suppose using a computer that rarely crashes and does what it is supposed to do is kind of a scary and unfamiliar sensation for most PC users.

Ta ta.

[Whaxx]

<div class=\"smallfont\"><div class=\"smallfont\"></div>

The new G5's actually crush the top of the line P4's that are currently out, speedwise. Not to mention superior design and stability. I suppose using a computer that rarely crashes and does what it is supposed to do is kind of a scary and unfamiliar sensation for most PC users.

Ta ta.</div>

BAH!! Since I pretty well use Xbox, I am familar with no crashing.

[trebor]

<div class=\"smallfont\">&lt;div class=\&quot;smallfont\&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;

BAH!! Since I pretty well use Xbox, I am familar with no crashing.</div>

Well, it's a Micro$oft product, so I'm guessing you'll enjoy a tasty "Blue Screen of Death" pretty soon. Or it will just stop working for absolutely no reason at all.

But anyways, it's kind of hard to work on an Xbox, so I think I'll stick with my Macs.

[Fragmastar]

<div class=\"smallfont\"><div class=\"smallfont\"></div>

BAH!! Since I pretty well use Xbox, I am familar with no crashing.</div>

What!? You prefer an Xbox over a Mac G5!!?! I pity you.... Of course, the Mac G5 isn't the next Alienware but it sure kicks a lot more ass than Xbox!

Mac G5:

- High quality graphics (atleast 1024 by 768 pixels)
- High quality sounds (on any friggin' sound card!!!!)
- Cool new adaptable controls (a lot better than Xbox's crappy controllers)

And so what if Mac G5 crashes? Getting it fixed is like a piece of cake

[Whaxx]

You do realize, that its not the hardware, its the games. And Xbox has em, all PCs including the new MAC, don't. Good hardware is all well and great, but without games that support the HW, its nothing.

[trebor]

<div class=\"smallfont\">You do realize, that its not the hardware, its the games. And Xbox has em, all PCs including the new MAC, don't. Good hardware is all well and great, but without games that support the HW, its nothing.</div>

Umm...you seem to believe that PC's, specifically, don't "have" the games, but next time your in a electronics store, check out the PC gaming section compared to the Xbox gaming section. Considering the best the Xbox can do these days is to get PC ports, it's kind of silly to make such a claim. In fact, I'd say ALL consoles are inferior to PC's when it comes to gaming.

Macs, on the other hand, are utterly pathetic when it comes to games - but the professionals who actually use their computers to work probably don't care (I don't).

[iVirtual]

<div class=\"smallfont\"><div class=\"smallfont\"></div>

What!? You prefer an Xbox over a Mac G5!!?! I pity you.... Of course, the Mac G5 isn't the next Alienware but it sure kicks a lot more ass than Xbox!

Mac G5:

- High quality graphics (atleast 1024 by 768 pixels)
- High quality sounds (on any friggin' sound card!!!!)
- Cool new adaptable controls (a lot better than Xbox's crappy controllers)

And so what if Mac G5 crashes? Getting it fixed is like a piece of cake</div>


1024 x 768?? read the specs man! the G5 supports the ATI radeon 9800Pro with resolutions above 1920x1200.

Sound Card? The only computer on the market with built in OPTICAL surround Sound.

not to mention 64bit processing, the best OS in the market which is UNIX based. No windows crashing BS.

The G5 outperforms any P4 on the market, it better quality, better design and you can get a Dual 2.0GHz for $2699 student Price. An almost equiivalent PC will go up to 4200$ and its not even 64bit, with no Airport, Optical and Apple Quality.

Apple is just the Lamborghini or Rolls Royce of computers,. You dont see many around but you sure get quality and SPEED.

[Renzatic Gear]

Thats right folks! For $3000 dollars more than your average PC you can render the teapot test in 3D Studio Max 2 SECONDS FASTER! And that Radeon 9800Pro will absolutely SCREAM when it plays those amazing 3D games that came out on the PC 2 years ago!

Speaking of that R9800, you'll end up spending at least an extra $200 on it than you would buying it for the PC. But hey, that's the price you pay for being better than everyone else.

And we all know that Macs don't crash, they decide to quit cooperating with you. It's true! I used a mac once and the OS ACTUALLY FROZE CUZ I WASN'T GOOD ENOUGH TO USE IT!

It's true. I was listening to Yoko Ono (music for superior people such as I) on my $600 iPod and I realised just how stupid everyone in the PC scene is. It was an amazing experience, and made me realise just how much I love being a mac snob. I guess this is what being a god feels like.

[trebor]

<div class=\"smallfont\">Thats right folks! For $3000 dollars more than your average PC you can render the teapot test in 3D Studio Max 2 SECONDS FASTER! And that Radeon 9800Pro will absolutely SCREAM when it plays those amazing 3D games that came out on the PC 2 years ago!

Speaking of that R9800, you'll end up spending at least an extra $200 on it than you would buying it for the PC. But hey, that's the price you pay for being better than everyone else.

And we all know that Macs don't crash, they decide to quit cooperating with you. It's true! I used a mac once and the OS ACTUALLY FROZE CUZ I WASN'T GOOD ENOUGH TO USE IT!

It's true. I was listening to Yoko Ono (music for superior people such as I) on my $600 iPod and I realised just how stupid everyone in the PC scene is. It was an amazing experience, and made me realise just how much I love being a mac snob. I guess this is what being a god feels like.</div>

You mean the average PC costs $0? Since the top tier G5 costs $3000, and that is $3000 more than the average PC, it must mean the average PC is free. Does that mean you can get paid to own a lower than average PC? Awesome!

Hey, just for fun, price out a top o' the line PC at Alienware and then get back to me about how "expensive" Macs are.

[Renzatic Gear]

Average Alienware price for a top end model is between $1835-2500. They're good systems, but why would I want to go through a 3rd party manufacturer when I could build my own with the exact same specs for about 1/3rd the price?

See, Macs don't have most of the advantages over the PC that they used to. 95% of the software most of the professionals would want to use a Mac for is now available on a Windows platform, not only that but the speed difference between the 2 is actually almost nil. Apple more or less cheated on their benchmarks by only using programs that were optimised for their platform...not exactly a fair comparison.

The only way I could see an equivalent PC costing double what the G5 costs is if Apple used an Itanium processor and then threw in a RAID5 for good measure. I could build a good 64 bit machine for about $1900 easily and use only brand name parts. It's all marketing hype on Apple's part.

And stability is a moot point. I've seen a Mac running OSX crash more often than an XP machine before, it's all dependant on the knowledge and skills of the user.

[Whaxx]

<div class=\"smallfont\"><div class=\"smallfont\"></div>

Umm...you seem to believe that PC's, specifically, don't "have" the games, but next time your in a electronics store, check out the PC gaming section compared to the Xbox gaming section. Considering the best the Xbox can do these days is to get PC ports, it's kind of silly to make such a claim. In fact, I'd say ALL consoles are inferior to PC's when it comes to gaming.

Macs, on the other hand, are utterly pathetic when it comes to games - but the professionals who actually use their computers to work probably don't care (I don't).</div>

Sorry I wasn't more clear.........."Umm...you seem to believe that PC's, specifically, don't "have" the games, but next time your in a electronics store, check out the PC gaming section compared to the Xbox gaming section."

I'm not saying that PC doesn't have games, I'm saying that PC's may have the Hardware but the PC's games don't support it. The highest reccomendation for a PC is P2, Geforce 2, 800 MHZ, is it not? I know it is. As time goes on the PC will get better quality games but right now..........it aint workin'!

[Renzatic Gear]

There's no such thing as a P2 800, Whaxx. And mind you most minimum system requirements are there so you'll know how fast a machine you have to have to run the game like total ass with all the cool graphical effects toned down.

The recommended specs for most high tier games is around a 1.1ghz with at least a Geforce 3, the optimal specs are around a 1.5-2ghz with a Geforce 4 equivalent.

Hey, since PCGR is so close now I should get the rest of the PC guys in on this now.

[Whaxx]

<div class=\"smallfont\">There's no such thing as a P2 800, Whaxx. And mind you most minimum system requirements are there so you'll know how fast a machine you have to have to run the game like total ass with all the cool graphical effects toned down.

The recommended specs for most high tier games is around a 1.1ghz with at least a Geforce 3, the optimal specs are around a 1.5-2ghz with a Geforce 4 equivalent.

Hey, since PCGR is so close now I should get the rest of the PC guys in on this now.</div>

BAH! obviously you missunderstood! I said, PENTIUM 3, 800 MHZ! Geforce 2. And your reccomendations are WAY off, theres not one PC that comes close to those reccomendations!
and BTW, sure get all those PCGR guys over, they are probably all little geeks who have to much time on their hands, not like your self I'm assuming, but anyway if you wanna sink that low, by all means.......

[Renzatic Gear]

Aight, We're gonna do this again since you dodged this question last time.

Show me one game on the Xbox you think the PC can't do and I'll show you a game on the PC that blows it away.

Easy as that.

Oh yeah, UT2004 system requirements

Pentium III or AMD Athlon 733MHz processor (Pentium® or AMD 1.0GHz or greater recommended)
128MB RAM (256MB RAM or greater recommended)
3GB HDD space REQUIRED
8X CD-ROM or DVD
Windows® compatible sound card
DirectX® version 8 compliant video card (32-128MB VRAM recommended)
DirectX® version 9 (included on game disc)
Internet (TCP/IP) and LAN (TCP/IP) play supported. Internet play requires a 56.6 kbps or faster modem (broadband recommended)

[Renzatic Gear]

Haha, I knew you wouldn't respond to that..you never do. ;)

Anyway, I'm gonna use this time to test something out...


<marquee direction=left height=100>OOH! PURDY</marquee>

<marquee direction=right height=100>I am so damn leet!</marquee>

<marquee direction=left scrollamount=65><marquee scrollamount=5 direction=up behavior=alternate>I'm about to get sick!</marquee>

*throws up*

[Whaxx]

<div class=\"smallfont\">Aight, We're gonna do this again since you dodged this question last time.

Show me one game on the Xbox you think the PC can't do and I'll show you a game on the PC that blows it away.

Easy as that.

Oh yeah, UT2004 system requirements

Pentium III or AMD Athlon 733MHz processor (Pentium® or AMD 1.0GHz or greater recommended)
128MB RAM (256MB RAM or greater recommended)
3GB HDD space REQUIRED
8X CD-ROM or DVD
Windows® compatible sound card
DirectX® version 8 compliant video card (32-128MB VRAM recommended)
DirectX® version 9 (included on game disc)
Internet (TCP/IP) and LAN (TCP/IP) play supported. Internet play requires a 56.6 kbps or faster modem (broadband recommended)</div>

I was away for a bit so don't think I'm not done yet my friend!

It's not about what each system can or cannot do, it's what they WILL or WILL NOT do, I'm sure you heard my little rant about why PC game developers won't enahance their graphics to Xbox's, and one game on PC doesn't match all the games that Xbox has that are superior to PC's. To name a few:
DOA 3
Splinter Cell(sorry face it, the lighting is more enchanced for Xbox, as is all of Xbox's games)
Still say Halo will always look best and play best on Xbox.
I would also like to compare KOTOR to PC version.
and it is already speculated that Half-life2 will be graphically enahced for Xbox, as will Doom 3. And lets not forget about Halo 2. And chances are UT2004 will come to the Xbox and will be enhanced just like Unreal: Awakening was.

[Renzatic Gear]

Aight, lets break down your list...

DOA 3: Probably the best looking Xbox game out right now. PC's just don't do fighters, its one of those genres that doesn't translate well from a gamepad to a keyboard/mouse combo. Of course the reason it looks the best on the system is because all the graphic muscle is being concentrated towards 2 characters in relatively small arenas.

Splinter Cell: Looks exactly the same on the PC as it does on the Xbox. Save for higher resolution lightmaps and textures on the PC version.

Halo: Looks exactly the same on the PC unfortunately. The game is starting showing its age on even the Xbox and I was kinda disappointed to see that it wasn't improved in any way for the PC.

KOTOR: Not super impressive to begin with, still looks alright though and it'll look exactly the same on the PC.

And where is it being speculated that Doom 3 and HL2 will look better on the box than it will on the PC? Only time I've ever heard that is from you. Even the devs themselves don't mention any improvments that'll be made to the games graphics, just that the Xbox will be able to handle em.

And UT2004? Epic wasn't even able to do UT2k3 on the box without constant framerate hits and plenty of cut corners..what makes you think they'll be able to do they sequel any better....and with graphical improvments?

[Whaxx]

<div class=\"smallfont\">Aight, lets break down your list...

DOA 3: Probably the best looking Xbox game out right now. PC's just don't do fighters, its one of those genres that doesn't translate well from a gamepad to a keyboard/mouse combo. Of course the reason it looks the best on the system is because all the graphic muscle is being concentrated towards 2 characters in relatively small arenas.

Splinter Cell: Looks exactly the same on the PC as it does on the Xbox. Save for higher resolution lightmaps and textures on the PC version.

Halo: Looks exactly the same on the PC unfortunately. The game is starting showing its age on even the Xbox and I was kinda disappointed to see that it wasn't improved in any way for the PC.

KOTOR: Not super impressive to begin with, still looks alright though and it'll look exactly the same on the PC.

And where is it being speculated that Doom 3 and HL2 will look better on the box than it will on the PC? Only time I've ever heard that is from you. Even the devs themselves don't mention any improvments that'll be made to the games graphics, just that the Xbox will be able to handle em.

And UT2004? Epic wasn't even able to do UT2k3 on the box without constant framerate hits and plenty of cut corners..what makes you think they'll be able to do they sequel any better....and with graphical improvments?</div>

Thats just to name a few.....
Where is speculated that Doom 3 and HL2 will look better on Xbox? OXM, now I know you'll say that OXM is full of ***** however they get all thier info from the game devopers and publishers of Microsoft and thats what they said, abour those two games. And that last thing about unreal? UT2k3 doesn't even look that good to start with, Xbox could handle it easily.

[Renzatic Gear]

So if UT2k3 didn't look that good to start with then why is it that Epic scaled back some of the details for the Xbox version and it still ran like crap? I mean you go on live and you can't get more than 8 people on a server without the framerate stuttering into the low teens.

And of course theres your famous quote about how PC devs never use the tech available and how they're at least 4 generations behind the times. If that were true you wouldn't even see games like UT2k3 or Splinter Cell on the PC..and you have games like STALKER which take advantage of the GeforceFX 5900/Radeon 9800 effects on full detail and the Deus Ex 2/Thief 3 engines which REQUIRE at least a Geforce 3 to run at all.

That OXM article you were talking about? Maybe it mentions looking best among the other consoles but not the PC version. Most of the big name games coming out nowadays require at least a Geforce 3 to run smoothly...when I installed UT2k3 and Morrowind on my old PIII with a Geforce 2 MX I found that they ran like crap even on the lower settings.

[Whaxx]

Ok, about the Unreal thing, you were obviously talking about onine play, some people have slower internet connections then others and because of one player it lags down the whole game, especially if thier are only 8 players playing.

"you have games like STALKER which take advantage of the GeforceFX 5900/Radeon 9800 effects on full detail......" Ok sure it does take advantage of the video HW, HOWEVER, just because it enhances it a little, does not mean all of a sudden the game is so much better looking then what it was before, or better looking then the average Xbox game.

"That OXM article you were talking about? Maybe it mentions looking best among the other consoles but not the PC version. "

No, because, HL2 and Doom 3 or only on PC and Xbox, are they not?
They specically said that the Xbox version "will of course be enhanced"
and for Doom 3 "atmospheric lighting effects will be enhanced"

[Renzatic Gear]

Ok, about the Unreal thing, you were obviously talking about onine play, some people have slower internet connections then others and because of one player it lags down the whole game, especially if thier are only 8 players playing.

No, I'm talking about framerate hits..something an internet connection has nothing to do with. Basically the Xbox hardware starts to choke when its dealing with all the player models, the high polygon enviroments, and doing dedicated server work.

you have games like STALKER which take advantage of the GeforceFX 5900/Radeon 9800 effects on full detail......" Ok sure it does take advantage of the video HW, HOWEVER, just because it enhances it a little, does not mean all of a sudden the game is so much better looking then what it was before, or better looking then the average Xbox game.

Kinda contradicting yourself aren't you? Before you were saying that since the Xbox is supposedly at least 2 generations ahead of the PC scene it could outdo it easily, but now that you admit that the PC is actually 2 generations ahead it doesn't matter? What gives?

No, because, HL2 and Doom 3 or only on PC and Xbox, are they not?
They specically said that the Xbox version "will of course be enhanced"
and for Doom 3 "atmospheric lighting effects will be enhanced"

Okay, assuming that you're not pulling this OXM article out of your ass..HOW can they improve the lighting effects in Doom 3 over the PC version? I've played the alpha leak of the game and the lighting was amazing in it..you have shadows that bend realistically according to swinging lightsources, bumpmaps everywhere that cast perfect shadows and really high detailed models. It's a game that tests the latest and greatest PC hardware to its limits, how can the Xbox and its Geforce 3 equivalent improve on that? You might say Halo 2, but it uses the same technology that Doom 3 is and if you pay attention to it you'll notice that the backgrounds are somewhat low poly and the textures aren't very high res. Its still amazing looking, but from a technical standpoint Doom 3 on the PC blows it away.

[Whaxx]

Ok, fine, I'll let the little Unreal framrate thing go, stupid developers... ;)


"Kinda contradicting yourself aren't you? Before you were saying that since the Xbox is supposedly at least 2 generations ahead of the PC scene it could outdo it easily, but now that you admit that the PC is actually 2 generations ahead it doesn't matter? What gives?"

Believe it or not that combined with the other rant, was my point the whole time, relentless, how illegible I wrote it.


"Okay, assuming that you're not pulling this OXM article out of your ass..HOW can they improve the lighting effects in Doom 3 over the PC version? I've played the alpha leak of the game and the lighting was amazing in it..you have shadows that bend realistically according to swinging lightsources, bumpmaps everywhere that cast perfect shadows and really high detailed models. It's a game that tests the latest and greatest PC hardware to its limits, how can the Xbox and its Geforce 3 equivalent improve on that? You might say Halo 2, but it uses the same technology that Doom 3 is and if you pay attention to it you'll notice that the backgrounds are somewhat low poly and the textures aren't very high res. Its still amazing looking, but from a technical standpoint Doom 3 on the PC blows it away."

I don't know, the article didn't get THAT specific, but it indeed wrote a long the lines of "HL2 will be enhanced for Xbox"
"Doom 3 will have atmosphere lighting effects enhanced for Xbox"

and your forgetting, Xbox has amazing bump-mapping and Lighting capabilites, that combined with MS's kickass game devlopers adds up to some awesome graphical improvements.

PS.......how do you do that quote thing.......where you add the quotes?

[Renzatic Gear]

lol, all you have to do to add a quote is type [QUOT E](quote should be one word, had to space it out so I could show you)[/QUOT E]

And to put it to good use...and your forgetting, Xbox has amazing bump-mapping and Lighting capabilites, that combined with MS's kickass game devlopers adds up to some awesome graphical improvements.
Never said it didn't. If it's able to do HL2, Deus Ex 2, Thief 3 and Doom 3 it's gotta at least be fairly good at it. Thing is that you get what you pay for. You can't expect a 200 buck machine to compete with a comp that'll cost you around a grand. Thats actually the big advantage the consoles have over the PC's. You got a system that you'll keep for about 4 or 5 years, but if I wanna keep up with the best games I have to throw down about $250-300 every 2 years on a new graphics card. The games will always look better, but you have to pay for it.

[Whaxx]

Thanks for the help on the quote thing.......although.......
[QUOTE] You got a system that you'll keep for about 4 or 5 years, but if I wanna keep up with the best games I have to throw down about $250-300 every 2 years on a new graphics card. The games will always look better, but you have to pay for it.[QUOTE]
I do agree with you, to an extent, I strongly feel that Xbox has the capabilites to keep of with the best of the best games for a rather lenghy term.