I've got mw and mw2 for pc and love the playability. I haven't noticed any bugs in them. I really want to get the pc version of black ops but am very worried since it's such a fast port. Any help is greatly appreciated.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
none other than that fact that it refuses to start on single core computers (probably got good money from intel and amd)
and dont even start with that "who has single core anyway ?"
same game engine as mw2 and mw2 ran on max detail on a 2000mhz amd , also both games look like puke in todays standards
they shall burn in hell for this
Zombie mod is still pretty buggy because it uses the crappy match making system from MW2 but the muliplayer seems to use cod4's server browser. Overall there are some bugs in it. I paid full price and wish i hadn't it's not worth it. it's not even worth paying the standard PC game price of £30. Wait till it hits half price before you buy it by then all the problems with performance, crashing, poor match making etc should be fixed.
P.S i have owned all of the COD games at one point or another. I'm a massive gamer and have been since my teens. It's just a shame activision like money, stock prices and screwing people becuase if they had left IW to do their thing MW2 and BO would have been way more enjoyable.
p.p.s on second thought you'd be better off getting MOH and then waiting for crysis 2
Oooooooooooh man I love the Crysis series, although I expected more out of Warhead. Have you played any of the Splinter Cells? I haven't played the recent one.
I noticed Infinity Ward didn't do black ops. Why did they get dropped?
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
souljaboy said:
none other than that fact that it refuses to start on single core computers (probably got good money from intel and amd)
and dont even start with that "who has single core anyway ?"
same game engine as mw2 and mw2 ran on max detail on a 2000mhz amd , also both games look like puke in todays standards
they shall burn in hell for this
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
wrong wrONG WRONG.
MW2 and BO are two diff studios producing the games, therefor CANNOT be based off of the same engine (Treyarch VS IW). If you are trying to game on a single core computer, GTFO the gaming community and go back under that rock you have been hiding under for the last 5 years. Both games look great pent up against todays current standards for online FPS games. MAX detail && MAX AA/AF @ 1920x1080 and the game looks great.
befor you go flaming a game because you cant afford a computer good enough to play it.. might wanna do some research, or actually play the game. KTHXBAI
ArabianRATA said:
I've got mw and mw2 for pc and love the playability. I haven't noticed any bugs in them. I really want to get the pc version of black ops but am very worried since it's such a fast port. Any help is greatly appreciated.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There are still alot of bugs in the game. One of the few ive noticed is random client crashes/freezes... This happens on both my system and my roommates system. Both of our computers are mid/high end gaming machines and are pretty closely spec'd with a few brand differences. Another is some server side issues with random crashes/server reboots. Ive owned a BO server for almost 2 months now and its a knows issue that Treyarch/Gameservers.com are trying to work out(this happens on both gameservers.com servers and official treyarch servers).
Another bug. Say you purchase the Aug + 4 attachments. $2000(for aug) $7000(for attachments). When you prestige, the game will charge you $9000 for the aug and make you purchase the attachments all over again. IDK if this is a wide spread problem, but thats how it is for me... of course i dont mine, i play alot of wager matches or clan matches and have over $100k credits.
ArabianRATA said:
Oooooooooooh man I love the Crysis series, although I expected more out of Warhead. Have you played any of the Splinter Cells? I haven't played the recent one.
I noticed Infinity Ward didn't do black ops. Why did they get dropped?
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Infinity Ward didnt make BO because they were promised alot as a studio for MW2 but Activision didnt follow through with the promises. IW refused to make BO. Rumor has it that they are working on a title all on their own thats supposed to give the CoD series a run for its money.
Hope this information helps.
jeallen0 said:
Infinity Ward didnt make BO because they were promised alot as a studio for MW2 but Activision didnt follow through with the promises. IW refused to make BO. Rumor has it that they are working on a title all on their own thats supposed to give the CoD series a run for its money.
Hope this information helps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well my information is pretty much that except for a couple of differences. My understanding is that the 2 founders of infinity ward now have a new studio that works with EA and that half of the original IW staff quit or were fired when activision fired West and Zampella. IW didn't refuse to work with treyarch, they can't because IW is owned by activision and has been for a while. The refusal came from the founders who still own the rights to the COD brand and a few of the underlying technologies. Unfortunately this doesn't include the engines. BO does use the MW2 engine for the single player. Infact the MW2 engine is almost identical to the engine used in COD4 with the only major difference being in the multiplayer anti cheat change to VAC and the matchmaking.
In BO's multiplayer this is evident if you compare the server browser to the the one included in COD4. It has pretty much the same look and feel and the big give away is the bug that prevents you clicking on a listed entry until about 10 seconds after a refresh start. That bug is present in COD4.
Games from different developers can use the same engine. For example, the MOH single player uses the Unreal engine iirc (the multiplayer was made by Dice and so frostbite and that's also why the multiplayer looks a lot better than the campaign) and i've lost count of the amount of games that used the various quake engines. It's all a matter of licencing
M3PH said:
Games from different developers can use the same engine. For example, the MOH single player uses the Unreal engine iirc (the multiplayer was made by Dice and so frostbite and that's also why the multiplayer looks a lot better than the campaign) and i've lost count of the amount of games that used the various quake engines. It's all a matter of licencing
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is true for the most part. BO is using a deviation of the engine used in WaW. its pretty obvious in gameplay. if you look at the code for the COD4 and MW2 engine, they are basically the same thing(with a few tweaks in gameplay and physics), but the engine running WaW and BO are pretty different(but similar to eachother in code style).
jeallen0 said:
This is true for the most part. BO is using a deviation of the engine used in WaW. its pretty obvious in gameplay. if you look at the code for the COD4 and MW2 engine, they are basically the same thing(with a few tweaks in gameplay and physics), but the engine running WaW and BO are pretty different(but similar to each other in code style).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The engine in WaW is as little as makes no difference identical to the COD4 engine. There has been very little evolution on it. Please bear in mind that between cod2 and cod4 (cod3 was another treyarch game and didn't feature on the PC) there was something like a 4 year gap. That gap was because IW were building the COD4 engine from the ground up. The only reason we have had a cod game every year since is that Activision (who own both treyarch and IW) are more focused on making money and not innovation. Hence no really engine improvements.
Hell, i just read an article that suggests that the real reason west and zampella were fired wasn't over bonus' but over the proposal from activision to charge a monthly subscription for the MP. It also says that Activision have brought in a third studio to help develop future releases. This only means one thing. More releases per year = more money.
Personally, after playing all (except cod3 coz I'm a PC gamer) of the cod games and then seeing the lacklustre attempt that is black ops I'm done with cod. It's been turned from a ground breaking and enthralling first person shooter into a way of conning uneducated teenagers out of their parents money.
It's too bad.. I really enjoyed WaW and COD MW2
Now I'm getting Black Ops and your all saying it's junk. At least I got it used for $35.00 bones.
And I've moved to console as it seems a lil' bit slower paced then the PC Based version.
Infinity Ward didnt make BO because they were promised alot as a studio for MW2 but Activision didnt follow through with the promises. IW refused to make BO. Rumor has it that they are working on a title all on their own thats supposed to give the CoD series a run for its money.
Hope this information helps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks to all, very informative! I hate to hear all the negativity surrounding black ops. I'm a console gamer to an extent but I enjoy pc gaming alot more. I guess I will wait till it drops in price before
I jump on it.
I never played multiplayer on the pc versions, I will have to check it out.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
avgjoegeek said:
It's too bad.. I really enjoyed WaW and COD MW2
Now I'm getting Black Ops and your all saying it's junk. At least I got it used for $35.00 bones.
And I've moved to console as it seems a lil' bit slower paced then the PC Based version.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
lol, its not ALL junk, imho i like the subtle improvements over MW2... RCXD is fun, and the wager matches are EPIC. SAS and SHP are my fav wager types. console is a bit slower paced but thats because its been dumbed down for controller use rather than a mouse and keyboard. imho its just not the same on console.
jeallen0 said:
befor you go flaming a game because you cant afford a computer good enough to play it.. might wanna do some research, or actually play the game. KTHXBAI
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
noob my comp would prolly **** on urs , game requrements are one thing and making code to force users to buy new stuff even if the game would run without is called fraud and ripoff , glad i pirated this pos game
souljaboy said:
noob my comp would prolly **** on urs , game requrements are one thing and making code to force users to buy new stuff even if the game would run without is called fraud and ripoff , glad i pirated this pos game
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ohh i scurred, whats your specs mr big****?
You do realize that if they coded it to run on a single core pos machine that the game would look like ****, right?
yea sure , a 1.6ghz hyperthreaded atom is much faster than a 3.4ghz single isnt it , too bad cod will load up on the atom and not the other one that could play it ... but why am i wasting my words ...
Children, children, children! can we please stop the bickering and trolling and get back on topic?
The reason there is a core number restriction isn't because they are trying to rip you off its because the game engine needs the processing power. The MW engine doesn't rely entirely on the graphics card to run the math calculations required to draw the physics objects. If it did everyone would need sli or crossfire setups with 3 or 4 cards. So the restriction is actually doing us a favour because dual core cpu's are cheaper than 4 gtx580's hell a dual core cpu is cheaper than just one gtx580.
End of the day writing code to stop you playing a game when your pc doesn't meet the minimum specs is a good thing. It's telling you to actually spend some money and get a new pc coz the one you have is about to become a grandad
souljaboy said:
yea sure , a 1.6ghz hyperthreaded atom is much faster than a 3.4ghz single isnt it , too bad cod will load up on the atom and not the other one that could play it ... but why am i wasting my words ...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is that a question or a joke?
If it's a question then errr no not really. if anything the single core would out perform the atom.
If it was a joke then your not funny
M3PH said:
Is that a question or a joke?
If it's a question then errr no not really. if anything the single core would out perform the atom.
If it was a joke then your not funny
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
if u know what ht is , it causes the os to see 2 different cores , hence , games that are hardcoded to run on 2 cores will run , on the single core , they wont .
my point is , its a silly limitation and is only to make money for cpu vendors
M3PH said:
End of the day writing code to stop you playing a game when your pc doesn't meet the minimum specs is a good thing. It's telling you to actually spend some money and get a new pc coz the one you have is about to become a grandad
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
End of the day writing code to tell you dont get coverage in health insurance when your body doesn't meet the minimum health conditions is a good thing. It's telling you to die or get a new life coz the one you have is about to become a corpse
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
do you see urself in Saw now ? telling the old guy what he should do ? is it still a good thing ?
i dont need anyone telling me when i should , if it would require a sse4 (and utilized it) its fine , if it require dx11 gpu (and utilized it) , its fine , but pulling the carpet from single cores when it has the same engine as "world at war" which will max out on a single , gimme a break
souljaboy said:
do you see urself in Saw now ? telling the old guy what he should do ? is it still a good thing ?
i dont need anyone telling me when i should , if it would require a sse4 (and utilized it) its fine , if it require dx11 gpu (and utilized it) , its fine , but pulling the carpet from single cores when it has the same engine as "world at war" which will max out on a single , gimme a break
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
obviously trying to discuss something with you is like trying to discuss something with a pre-teen just getting her rag... you will never get the point or the big picture. end of discussion.
BACK ON TOPIC.
as i said earlier, a few random client freezes, a few random server crashes, and a bug with prestiege and purchasing weapons after... but then again, what game has been perfect on launch? treyarch is working on it, and quite diligently i might add, so i give them props there.
MW2 < BO < COD4 IMHO.
Engadget survey wants some feedback from us about our NookColor devices...
http://www.engadget.com/2011/02/11/how-would-you-change-barnes-and-nobles-nook-color/
Perhaps our feedback might influence some tweaks in the future. Prolly not, but hey...ya never know!
For the average user...some of the things requested are understandable...
However, lots of people that frequent Engadget and other tech sites should be opening their devices to the fullest potential. My NC currently runs at an OC'd 1.1ghz (stable) gets terrific battery life (way better than my Galaxy S phone)...runs HC off internal memory (unofficial release) and blows away ANY other device at THIS pricepoint.
Asking for more...while more is always betta, is just ludicrous. Unless, of course we wanna pay twice as much. I would be happy with an official 2.2 firmware update...but only so our XDA devs can tweak it even further!!
I won't bother.. Most of those idiots are asking for 2560x1280 resolution, 4Ghz quad core processor, 8G of ram, two weeks of battery life, 250g weight, and Android 5.0.
Reading those comments reminded me why I stay away from "tech" forums frequented by Joe Sixpack and Soccer Mom.
Agree wasted of time if they really want to know they should come here to find out what's going on. My 2 cents
Sent from my Incredible using XDA App
Agreed...that's why I was hoping we'd filter some of our XDA maturity and knowledge into the comments!
khaytsus said:
I won't bother.. Most of those idiots are asking for 2560x1280 resolution, 4Ghz quad core processor, 8G of ram, two weeks of battery life, 250g weight, and Android 5.0.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wait. What's so unreasonable about 8 GB of RAM, two weeks battery life and Android Lollipop? Granted the quad core processor is extreme, but I see no problems with the other stuff. Lollipop kicks ass.
Can someone please post the following there? I don't have any of their accounts.
Enable Bluetooth and give it per network connection proxy and proxy autoconfig.
Thanks!
Homer
Not Android related by any means, but just perusing the net I stumbled upon an article about a phone called the xpPhone 2 running Win 7 & 8.
The thing that caught my eye though was its combined storage capacity of 112gb. & 18.5 hours of talk time and the ability to upgrade the ram, all within a 4.3" screen.
Currently it's only available in China.
http://en.xpphone.com/news/kuaibao/114.html
I spoke to them
I already spoke to them and it seems like a very interesting toy/weapon. Being a road warrior this would really lighten the load. Will follow how it develops closely!
1 inch thick Phone with extra battery and packing a Netbook processor.
Sounds severely underpowered for Windows but an Intel Atom would smoke any mobile processor lol.
I doubt it. At 1.6 single core. Thing blows. My phone is faster than my netbook.
CBowley said:
I doubt it. At 1.6 single core. Thing blows. My phone is faster than my netbook.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Cores & GHz don't mean anything. x86 is a very fast, and faster than ARM. Arm just is better performance for power use. Plus you could install Androidx86.
Intel displayed something at ces that had a atom proc. If you watch mwc I bet they will have something about it too ...supposed to be bad ass
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
Please dont believe that you will get a smartphone with this device.
Using xpphone1 showed me that it is a UMPC with a small phone-function. There is no automatic sync with outlook and no calendar with a reminder-function. The phone-software is very unstable and so you are not always reachable like using a "normal" handy. The camera for skype and photos is not in place, under the lens there is simply nothing. These are only examples out of the long list of problems. Questions to ITG (even if these problems are solved with xpphone2) are not answered. So if you need more than a technical gimmick any other smartphone will do a better job.
Hey guys,
I didn't really know where else to turn apart from the XDA forums so I'm hoping you guys can help me out.
Basically, I currently own a Acer Aspire 5734z laptop, but it's no good for gaming so I'm looking to upgrade but I'm completely oblivious to the terminology of PC specifications so I'm lost. Here are my current specs;
OS- Windows 7 Home Premium SP1
Processor- Pentium(R) Dual-Core CPU T4500 @ 2.30GHz
RAM- 3gb
Video card- Mobile Intel(R) 4 Series Express Chipset Family (Pixel Shader version- 4.0, Vertex Shader version- 4.0, Dedicated Video RAM- 64 MB)
320gb hard-drive.
My current options are to upgrade my laptops video card (if possible) and upgrade my RAM to 4gb (My laptop will only support up to 4gb) or to buy a PC and use my 32" TV as a monitor. I'd rather buy a new PC if I can get a cheap enough deal (Under £300 would be perfect, the cheaper the better). I'd want to run a few higher-end games, even if its just on low quality, as long as it's playable I'll be happy. It'll probably be used to play games like Guild Wars 1+2, Diablo 3 (If possible), Starcraft II, Battlefield 3 etc.
Any ideas? What kind of specs on a PC should I look for? What graphic cards are useful for me and what ones aren't?
I'm also from the UK, and I'd prefer to buy in-store than to buy online as shipping is normally an expensive nightmare.
Thanks, I appreciate any help.
Your laptop video isn't upgradeable, your cpu and ram are way too weak to play the mentioned games as well. $300 PC no matter 300 pounds wouldn't likely ether. Your best bet is to build in stages if you need more help picking parts I can help.
Sent from my SGH-I747M using xda premium
$300 isn't enough to buy a pc for playing those games and in the laptop it would be difficult so you better be step by step and saving more money
Check this video is a $900 pc for playing Diablo 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MYZ4qrehCk0&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Sent from my R800i using xda app-developers app
Building a custom would be a lot cheaper by the sounds of it then.
Thanks for the replies, I appreciate it, any recommendations on budget hardware?
Edit-
I'm sure I have an old tower + monitor in the attic, I might dig that out and see what parts it has then use that a base for upgrading. But I remember it constantly crashing so there must of been something wrong with it (It would crash every 15 minutes which made it useless)
try re installing a os on it, maybe ubuntu?
ross231 said:
try re installing a os on it, maybe ubuntu?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd want to use it for gaming so Ubuntu wouldn't be much use (As far as I'm aware most games aren't compatible with Ubuntu, or is that my stupidity shining?), I could reinstall XP on it.
Im thinking about building my first gaming PC. I quickly threw some parts together and I want to see what you guys think. I'm also not 100% sure of everything I need to build from start to finish so advice/suggestions are greatly appreciated. Keep in mind that my budget maxes out at $1,000.
Also, how would these parts I've chosen compare to the PS4 in terms of performance?
Thanks guys!
Tower: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811129021
Motherboard: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...&cm_re=AMD_motherboard-_-13-128-514-_-Product
Ram: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231314
Hard Drive: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822236345
CPU: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113284
GPU: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814202103
Why do i get a notification on tapatalk about this thread?
Sent From A Samsung Galaxy S2 With AOSB Project ROM .
Why isn't this in the dedicated Desktops & Laptops thread? http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1765837
And I never did see the point of AMD/ATI for Gaming. The 'Powered by Nvidia' splashscreen in every game isn't there for decoration... You'll never be able to use PhysX, for instance. And a lot of games have issues with AMD.
As for compared to the PS4... Even an IntelHD (do not buy an IntelHD GPU) on an i5 will have a better rating than a PS4. The hardware in the 'new' consoles is severely outdated.
ShadowLea said:
Why isn't this in the dedicated Desktops & Laptops thread? http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1765837
And I never did see the point of AMD/ATI for Gaming. The 'Powered by Nvidia' splashscreen in every game isn't there for decoration... You'll never be able to use PhysX, for instance. And a lot of games have issues with AMD.
As for compared to the PS4... Even an IntelHD (do not buy an IntelHD GPU) on an i5 will have a better rating than a PS4. The hardware in the 'new' consoles is severely outdated.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
outdated doesn't matter because it's only needed to run the games
Sent From A Samsung Galaxy S2 With AOSB Project ROM .
DanielBink said:
outdated doesn't matter because it's only needed to run the games
.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, in 720p at 30fps without AA, Dynamic shading and every other HD setting. I'm not paying several hundred quid for something my PC did 8 years ago.
Hello, please refer to Post 3 for a link to the **Desktops and Laptops Thread**. No need to start a new thread about the same type of subject.
Thread closed.