That's why more and more consoles and internet connections for them are becoming the play-things of the rich. Lucky me I have a friend that has an Xbox360, Xbox360 Live, and one of the best games I've played for Xbox360 (I want it for the computer) Call of Duty 2.Bad thing about consoles is online play is really really untidy. Its all subscription based from what I know too. So you pay your internet bill, your bill for the console, buy the game, and THEN they milk you for more money after you've got it?
PC / PS3
-
Zax_Gentoo_Box
- 1337 Haxor
- Posts: 497
- Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 11:00 pm
- Location: Caves of ice, Xanadu
I will pipe in on this because I have been following the PS3 pretty well. I am pumped about UT2007, and I have done some research into upgrading my PC. The cost for me to upgrade my PC, pretty much amounts to building a new one. The problem is, outside of UT2007, they upgrade really doesn't serve a purpose. Right now my PC pretty much does everything else just fine.
With the PS3, mods will be supported, a keyboard and mouse will be supported and the Sony network is free and open for developers, which Reiner has applauded. I don't see any reason why the UT2007 network interface will work any differently on a PC versus a PS3. Sony doesn't want any money for connectivity, so unless Epic decides to charge for online service I imagine it will be just like a PC. The only thing I am afraid of is that PC and PS3 can't play on the same servers, but with the map and mod support I doubt it.
If I get a PS3 I will have a system geared just towards the game. I will have the same control via, keyboard and mouse. I get a BR player. I get to play on a big ass TV. It just doesn't make fiscal sense to me to upgrade my PC to play the game when a cheaper option is to buy a PS3.
On a side note the PS3 doesn't actually run Linux as an OS. You can install Linux on the PS3. check out Yellow Dog Linux. Oh and via Linux I will be able to stream media from my computer to the PS3, yet another bonus.
With the PS3, mods will be supported, a keyboard and mouse will be supported and the Sony network is free and open for developers, which Reiner has applauded. I don't see any reason why the UT2007 network interface will work any differently on a PC versus a PS3. Sony doesn't want any money for connectivity, so unless Epic decides to charge for online service I imagine it will be just like a PC. The only thing I am afraid of is that PC and PS3 can't play on the same servers, but with the map and mod support I doubt it.
If I get a PS3 I will have a system geared just towards the game. I will have the same control via, keyboard and mouse. I get a BR player. I get to play on a big ass TV. It just doesn't make fiscal sense to me to upgrade my PC to play the game when a cheaper option is to buy a PS3.
On a side note the PS3 doesn't actually run Linux as an OS. You can install Linux on the PS3. check out Yellow Dog Linux. Oh and via Linux I will be able to stream media from my computer to the PS3, yet another bonus.
only time will tell, but I will be very surprised if anyone can get the same quality of experience playing ut2007, need for speed carbon - whatever - from a console vs a computer. consoles are getting better, I totally agree, but you have so much more control with a computer. editing ini files, working on custom mapping, etc. - could this be done in the ps3 linux environment that you are all talking about?
when a patch comes out, which will a bunch of times because we all know the UT series have been a bug fest, then how would that work on the PS3 - that's if they even write updates as often for the ps3 as they do for the pc. I would imagine since you cant rewrite the disk, the updates would have to go onto the hard drive. Is this going to affect game play and speed?
as far as microsoft sucking - well I had nothing but macs for 5 years, and wasted every second of that time on them. expensive, crappy, no-balls machines with one generation old hardware and no easy control over upgrades. Since I have moved to windows XP I love it. I have had 0 blue screens of death and 0 hang-ups. It's all about setting it up right the first time. I also find it hilarious how many people attack Bill Gates - nothing but jealousy. Anyone here wouldn't think twice of being as powerful and rich as he is - I don't think he owes anyone an apology. As far as you guys saying Microsoft is allowing infection of people on purpose, it doesn't add up to me considering he bought out Giant antispyware and is now giving out what used to be pay-only software for free - and is rumored to be doing it for anti-virus as well.
as far as linux - I have heard it is awesome - and would always consider it - but I don't have the time to sit down and learn a new os like I did in college. maybe some summer when I'm bored... :compress:
when a patch comes out, which will a bunch of times because we all know the UT series have been a bug fest, then how would that work on the PS3 - that's if they even write updates as often for the ps3 as they do for the pc. I would imagine since you cant rewrite the disk, the updates would have to go onto the hard drive. Is this going to affect game play and speed?
as far as microsoft sucking - well I had nothing but macs for 5 years, and wasted every second of that time on them. expensive, crappy, no-balls machines with one generation old hardware and no easy control over upgrades. Since I have moved to windows XP I love it. I have had 0 blue screens of death and 0 hang-ups. It's all about setting it up right the first time. I also find it hilarious how many people attack Bill Gates - nothing but jealousy. Anyone here wouldn't think twice of being as powerful and rich as he is - I don't think he owes anyone an apology. As far as you guys saying Microsoft is allowing infection of people on purpose, it doesn't add up to me considering he bought out Giant antispyware and is now giving out what used to be pay-only software for free - and is rumored to be doing it for anti-virus as well.
as far as linux - I have heard it is awesome - and would always consider it - but I don't have the time to sit down and learn a new os like I did in college. maybe some summer when I'm bored... :compress:
Cheers, Damnidge
Well, you can consider OSX to be a unix varient and you can consider a Linux system to be Unix like. But that is as close as they come.DW_Hornet wrote:You can consider the mac os to be a derivative of linux.
OSX is based on a Mach kernel with a BSD subsystem. Now, you can run many GNU (GNU is Not Unix) tools on it to make it act very similar to a linux system from a user's standpoint.
In fact, when I did Solaris admin full time, usually one of the first steps was to install a GNU set of tools to make my life easier. For example, the Solaris version of tar does not support gzip compression whereas the GNU version does.
So, for me to unzip and uncompress a tar.gz file in one command required really two commands (this is from my head, so I may be a bit off):
gunzip -c filename.tar.gz|tar xvf -
With GNU tar, the example is:
tar zxvf filename.tar.gz
That was just one little example.
Now, Linux in its purest form, is really just the kernel. The anal people out there expect everyone to call, say RedHat or Ubuntu, a Linux/GNU system. This is because the GNU project really does most of the userland things such as commands and libraries, etc.
This is important to note because at this time NO ONE (I am talking to you SCO), has proven anything about any UNIX (copywrited) code being included in the Linux kernel or GNU tools.
This is different than the BSD derivatives of ATT's original UNIX code. And in fact, because of the BSD license, much of that code appears in other places. For example, the original TCP/IP code in windows (not sure if it has been replaced at this point) is copied from the BSD varients. In fact, if you do a "strings" on some of the Windows binaries, you will see the University of Berkley Reagents copywrite notice.
Anyways... Just a bit of Unix history. And it is a long and complex history.