TechSpot

Weekend tech reading: Porn stars on net neutrality, GTX 980 OCd to 2GHz, digital goods overpriced?

By Matthew
Nov 16, 2014
Post New Reply
  1. Once designed to protect retail from an inevitable future, overcharging for digital games now threatens the industry. Two versions of a game go on sale. Both of them have precisely the same content, precisely the same experience...

    Read more
     
  2. treetops

    treetops TS Evangelist Posts: 1,953   +162

    Didn't the xbox 360 and ps3 have 60 fps? Being a pc gamer I really can't stand 30 fps. I guess ignorance is bliss. Especially if I'm playing a fps or fpmeleee game. I pretty much demand 60 fps out of every game I play. Some lucky people get 120 fps with sweet 120 hz monitors.

    It is pretty mind boggling that consoles release a game that runs on a 7 year old machine and the current generation. Yet they cannot achieve 60 fps on current consoles? Or even 1080p half the time on xbox one.
     
  3. davislane1

    davislane1 TS Evangelist Posts: 3,564   +2,372

    First, one of those chicks was packing an extra 40lbs. How did she get cast?

    Second, it should serve as a giant warning flag that NN proponents would advertise the legislation as if their target audience has sub-100 IQs (yes, I know it was meant to be tongue-in-cheek).

    Third, if my neighbor wants to pay an extra $50 for a higher data priority, it is his prerogative to do so. Likewise for business entities that use the lines. All data is not equal, for a myriad of reasons.

    Fourth, both legislative sides are composed of "old rich guys." The guys running the ISPs are "old rich guys." The guys running the FCC are "old rich guys." The only people who aren't "old rich guys" are the ones being puppeted around by "old rich guys."

    No sale, ladies.
     
    cmbjive and stewi0001 like this.
  4. TomSEA

    TomSEA TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 2,559   +598

    They were advertised at having that capability - on a 720p TV. And even then very few games were able to hit a true 60 fps. More often than not at a reduction in graphics quality.

    The whole console vs. PC debate is ridiculous. Consoles are about convenience and multiplayer. That's why they have all the sports, dancing, racing and "Guitar Hero" type games. So you can play on a sofa with your friends and family in front of an HDTV.

    If you want eye candy, flexibility, mods and state-of-the-art gaming, you play on a PC.
     
    m4a4 likes this.
  5. treetops

    treetops TS Evangelist Posts: 1,953   +162

    True but it would be nice if they would aim at 60 fps for first person shooters..

    p.s.
    It looks like Plants vs Zombies modern warfare has 60 fps, well at least the ps4. Idk about the xbox one version but I have enjoyed it so far on xbox1. I was just thinking about my experiences with that shooter after my comment and I decided to look up its frame rates.

    One major advantage of playing console games is that your not paying to win, everyone has the same hardware, the same fps, the same res. Your not getting schooled by someone because they have a better rig. Even playing field.
     
    Last edited: Nov 16, 2014
    SantistaUSA likes this.
  6. Skidmarksdeluxe

    Skidmarksdeluxe TS Evangelist Posts: 6,514   +2,059

    Ubisoft are certainly changing the gaming landscape by showing everybody how not to release a game.
     
    Matthew and davislane1 like this.
  7. Jam Jack

    Jam Jack TS Rookie Posts: 20   +6

    I'm interested to hear what advantages you think someone has over another in gaming if they have a better computer. Do you think it has something to do with frame rate or visual fidelity?
     
  8. loading

    loading TS Enthusiast Posts: 66   +13

    On the topic of coil whine on GPU's.

    The only time I hear a "coil whine" are during some startup game logos that don't cap framerates. Skyrim is a good example of this. I've seen my frames reach upwards of 3000 fps at 100% GPU usage. Quick fix for that is to limit my frames to 60 which it should be anyways. No more coil whine.
     
  9. BrianMontanye

    BrianMontanye TS Enthusiast Posts: 43   +21


    So first off you are putting down a woman because you didn't find her attractive, good start.

    The internet is a multi use tool. We already have speed differences in what package you want to purchase from your ISP. This isn't going to give your neighbor any more options than he already has. What this will do is increase subscription fees, and limit what an ordinary person can accomplish on the internet. But this is America, where the almighty dollar rules supreme and it doesn't matter whom you trample on the way. Keep drinking the corporate koolaid.
     
  10. davislane1

    davislane1 TS Evangelist Posts: 3,564   +2,372

    The casting manager and director, actually. If you're going to use sex to sell something to a general audience, you don't use fat girls to do it. This is a concept as old as civilization itself. And even if you do, you don't put her off to the side of two average girls, you put her in the middle to balance the image. I'd make a similar jeer if someone made the brilliant decision to asymmetrically arrange two midgets and a giant.

    Also, why are you using a gender-specific noun to describe my criticism? Why do I have to be putting down a "woman" instead of a "person"? Do you mean to imply that I wouldn't have made a similar comment had the trio been composed of Peter North, Lexington Steel, and Ron Jeremy? Furthermore, who told you what I'm attracted to? I merely pointed out that she was bigger than the other two girls. That statement reveals no more about my sexual preferences than my favorite color reveals about what I like for dinner.

    Which is exactly what I was alluding to. Net neutrality does not improve the service at all; it makes the Internet more expensive and less efficient.
     
  11. BrianMontanye

    BrianMontanye TS Enthusiast Posts: 43   +21

    I used it because you implied it by saying "Chicks" , very nice.

    Net Neutrality is a necessity. Once you start letting folks discriminate on the basis of income, it is most certainly NOT going to be less expensive or efficient, unless you are paying out the nose for it. Take off the blinders for a while. I would love to see a breakdown on why you think this would be at all helpful to anyone on the end user side.
     
  12. davislane1

    davislane1 TS Evangelist Posts: 3,564   +2,372

    Every good and service in this country discriminates on the basis of income, or rather one's ability to pay. In the case of regulation of basic services, this comes in the form of taxes and higher fees. One needs only look to public transport or public education and compare them to their private counterparts to determine the demonstrable inferiority of the former and consequent price premium of the latter.

    By reclassifying the Internet as a basic (public) utility, regulation of both data flow and content necessarily follows. The impact will be slower development timetables for ISPs as a result of reduced incentives, higher costs for subscribers in the form of taxes and increased ISP charges, and increased barriers to entry for both new ISPs and content creators as a result of eventual licensing and/or compliance efforts. The basis for these assumptions is exiting norms for basic (public) communications services, such as radio and television, where a two-tiered system exists.

    There is a finite amount of bandwidth available to move data across the infrastructure. By removing the power of ISPs to discriminate on the basis of price and giving the FCC the power to discriminate on the basis of "merit," the Internet in this country will stagnate technologically and become as dysfunctional and bureaucratic as every other public utility and infrastructure system we have. Meanwhile, major ISPs will make off like bandits, as new regulations will make the market more prohibitive to future competition, among other things.

    Simply put, net neutrality is good for ISPs and the gov't while being a net negative for end users and content creators.
     
  13. treetops

    treetops TS Evangelist Posts: 1,953   +162

    FPS, response times, mouse accuracy and field of view. If you have experienced game play on a low-mid system compared to a high end system, the difference is astounding in twitch and fast paced timing sensitive based games

    A low end system is like blinking while trying to catch a Frisbee with thick gloves.
     
    Jam Jack likes this.

Similar Topics

Add New Comment

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...