Steam+ Deals Mega Thread (All PC Gaming Deals)

Neuro5i5

Neuro5i5

CAGiversary!
Feedback
151 (100%)
This thread will attempt to provide a place to discuss past/present/future PC gaming deals. While mainly focusing on Steam games, any standout sales may also be presented. I will not be updating every Daily/Weekly/etc. sale. The tools to help individuals become a smarter shopper will be provided below.

See this POST for links to store sale pages, threads of interest and other tools to help you become a more informed PC game shopper.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 12 Downvote
Different strokes.  I had a lot of fun just cruising around and busting shit up and getting into trouble.  But if the worst you can say is that a game is best played by playing the game well, hey, that works too.

 
Syntax Error said:
Different strokes. I had a lot of fun just cruising around and busting shit up and getting into trouble. But if the worst you can say is that a game is best played by playing the game well, hey, that works too.
Click to expand...
The cruising around and open-world stuff was just "meh" to me in FC2. It was one of the aspects of the game I was looking forward to there, but....eh, it just seemed very repetitive & boring here. While I liked the game b/c of the main quest missions - yeah, that would be about it. I expected more of this title, back when it launched.

 
Syntax Error said:
It is, however, playable on his PC whereas FC3 likely is not.

FC2 is a great shooter. It's not always a great game but it's a great shooter.
Click to expand...
Far Cry: Primal is the best shooter ever.....AMIRITE?!?!?!

Have some poop:

Yury Steam QFIT8-DEKMN-KTXVI Cube Master Steam A6BPV-G9L6D-MPINM 1 Vs 1 Steam AIZ4P-5RMY3-YH0BN RYAN BLACK Steam VMTKV-7QTCH-3KH9A JiPS Steam VTVCW-C8I4L-0CG84 Revenge of Roger Rouge Steam VNQ2C-AJEG0-ZMP37 Notrium Steam AFMWQ-L8RN6-FTAG0 Time Ramesside (A New Reckoning) Steam KKF2F-2V9N7-I9N6V Doodle God Steam FGPWM-JBXAF-NX4MB

skullgirls 4GRJ4-E5PHH-HWGPI

 
Last edited by a moderator:
rcsample said:
JiPS Steam VTVCW-C8I4L-0CG84
Click to expand...
Spoiler because it's a horrible joke...

f.gif

 
I've complained about it before and it probably happens on other sites too, but why do people give asinine and unsolicited advice when people ask very specific (and most of the time reasonable) questions?  If you don't have anything productive to add then don't say anything.  

Telling someone to buy a new laptop when they very reasonably asked about getting an old ass game to run better on their current laptop which should run the game fine is not helpful in any way.

I notice people do it with other stuff.  "Hey, I have X amount to spend on something, what do you recommend?" and you get a ton of "DON'T DO IT!  IT'S WORTHLESS!  SPEND 10X ON THIS OTHER ITEM!"

I don't know, just something annoying I've noticed.  I mean on rare occasion, people have a legitimate reason to recommend someone save more money, but most of the time it just feels like people with nothing helpful to say just wanting to insert themselves in a discussion.  

 
FoxAssGamer said:
most of the time it just feels like people with nothing helpful to say just wanting to insert themselves in a discussion.
Click to expand...
Hey this also reminds me of my co worker Cindy.

Edit: seriously this is now my favorite thread.

jk it has always been

 
Last edited by a moderator:
FoxAssGamer said:
I've complained about it before and it probably happens on other sites too, but why do people give asinine and unsolicited advice when people ask very specific (and most of the time reasonable) questions? If you don't have anything productive to add then don't say anything.

Telling someone to buy a new laptop when they very reasonably asked about getting an old ass game to run better on their current laptop which should run the game fine is not helpful in any way.

I notice people do it with other stuff. "Hey, I have X amount to spend on something, what do you recommend?" and you get a ton of "DON'T DO IT! IT'S WORTHLESS! SPEND 10X ON THIS OTHER ITEM!"

I don't know, just something annoying I've noticed. I mean on rare occasion, people have a legitimate reason to recommend someone save more money, but most of the time it just feels like people with nothing helpful to say just wanting to insert themselves in a discussion.
Click to expand...
I think you see the spend 10x discussion frequently because there is an absolute landslide of crap manufactured. With the way reviews are bought and paid for a lot of people still cling tightly to price being an indication of quality because at least then you have the hope of better customer service if the item breaks or has other issues.

I mainly just wanted to insert myself in the discussion though.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
FoxAssGamer said:
but why do people give asinine and unsolicited advice when people ask very specific (and most of the time reasonable) questions?
Click to expand...
Here's some unsolicited advice:

You don't tug on superman's cape
You don't spit into the wind
You don't pull the mask off that old lone ranger
And you don't mess around with Jim

I have also riported you for off-topic complaining about off-topic thread discussion and now I have to riport myself also. THANKS FOR THAT, FOXASS!!!!!!

 
FoxAssGamer said:
I don't know, just something annoying I've noticed. I mean on rare occasion, people have a legitimate reason to recommend someone save more money, but most of the time it just feels like people with nothing helpful to say just wanting to insert themselves in a discussion.
Click to expand...
Buying a laptop when someone isn't looking to buy a laptop is one thing, but telling someone to avoid a product in lieu of a better product (despite price) isn't the same thing.

My reason comes from my high school days. My parents bought me $20 shoes which wore out completely in about a month when I was active. When I spent $40-50 on "name brand" shoes, it ended up lasting 12+ months with the same activity level. Do you think telling someone to spend $50 on shoes when they were going to buy those $20 pair for running would still be unsolicited advice?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
rcsample said:
Far Cry: Primal is the best shooter ever.....AMIRITE?!?!?!

Have some poop:

Yury Steam QFIT8-DEKMN-KTXVI Cube Master Steam A6BPV-G9L6D-MPINM 1 Vs 1 Steam AIZ4P-5RMY3-YH0BN RYAN BLACK Steam VMTKV-7QTCH-3KH9A JiPS Steam VTVCW-C8I4L-0CG84 Revenge of Roger Rouge Steam VNQ2C-AJEG0-ZMP37 Notrium Steam AFMWQ-L8RN6-FTAG0 Time Ramesside (A New Reckoning) Steam KKF2F-2V9N7-I9N6V Doodle God Steam FGPWM-JBXAF-NX4MB

skullgirls 4GRJ4-E5PHH-HWGPI
Click to expand...
Now that's what I call a steaming pile o' Steam! Can I getta...wait for it...wait for it...AMIRITE?!

 
elessar123 said:
My reason comes from my high school days. My parents bought me $20 shoes which wore out completely in about a month when I was active. When I spent $40-50 on "name brand" shoes, it ended up lasting 12+ months with the same activity level.
Click to expand...
Eh, what Fox is describing is rarely a $20 price difference.

If someone says they're thinking about a 500GB drive and someone else says "Hey, for $30 more you could get a 1TB drive" then, sure. Doesn't hurt to give the options. When someone asks if there's a difference between the Asus 1050 and the Gigabyte 1050 and someone says "You really should buy a 1070Ti" then they aren't being helpful.

As for yesterday's example, I trust that people already know that a $800 computer will almost always perform better than a $200 one and they have their own reasons for using the $200 model.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Syntax Error said:
Eh, what Fox is describing is rarely a $20 price difference.

If someone says they're thinking about a 500GB drive and someone else says "Hey, for $30 more you could get a 1TB drive" then, sure. Doesn't hurt to give the options. When someone asks if there's a difference between the Asus 1050 and the Gigabyte 1050 and someone says "You really should buy a 1070Ti" then they aren't being helpful.

As for yesterday's example, I trust that people already know that a $800 computer will almost always perform better than a $200 one and they have their own reasons for using the $200 model.
Click to expand...
Yep, and to add to that, $40-50 is double $20, which could be significant to someone. I'm just saying, sometimes people only have $20 to spend on shoes and telling them shoes that cost twice as much are better, while possibly well-intentioned, isn't necessarily helpful or even something they didn't know. So they might just want to hear from fellow $20 shoe wearers or would benefit more from something like "Hey, you should check Ross or Marshall's if you have any near you. They sometimes have name brand shoes for $20 that will be better than the ones at Walmart or Target. Even Amazon sometimes has some decent $20 shoes if you sort by size and price."

 
FoxAssGamer said:
Yep, and to add to that, $40-50 is double $20, which could be significant to someone. I'm just saying, sometimes people only have $20 to spend on shoes and telling them shoes that cost twice as much are better, while possibly well-intentioned, isn't necessarily helpful or even something they didn't know. So they might just want to hear from fellow $20 shoe wearers or would benefit more from something like "Hey, you should check Ross or Marshall's if you have any near you. They sometimes have name brand shoes for $20 that will be better than the ones at Walmart or Target. Even Amazon sometimes has some decent $20 shoes if you sort by size and price."
Click to expand...
Another counter point, the $40 is already from Ross or Marshall's, on sale. In this specific case, if the person is going to spend $20 and it for sure will end up with the person having to buy 3 pairs of $20 shoes because he will need to replace it for sure, I'm still going to recommend the $40-50 shoes that will last longer. In the realistic time frame, it's still going to end up cheaper.

Another real world example is flatware. The 18/8 sets will be like 40% the cost of the 18/10s, but the 18/10s last 10x as long. I bought two sets of 18/8 flatware, and both sets rusted within 5 years. I switched to 18/10s and I don't expect to have to replace them until I actually feel like changing them.

Although I will admit, I would (and have, including to you) recommend high quality chairs, because if you spend 1/3 of your day on it, why wouldn't you spend as much as a quality mattress? But that's also in the mindset of "spend $1k to avoid $10k of medical issues."

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Okay, here's a trollbait question, but I'm really asking for an answer: is there any reason to prefer Battlefront II on PC over XBOX or vice-versa?

Also, are the current sales worthwhile or will the price plummet on this title fairly quickly? (That one is for the market prognosticators or people with crystal balls.)

 
elessar123 said:
Another counter point, the $40 is already from Ross or Marshall's, on sale. In this specific case, if the person is going to spend $20 and it for sure will end up with the person having to buy 3 pairs of $20 shoes because he will need to replace it for sure, I'm still going to recommend the $40-50 shoes that will last longer. In the realistic time frame, it's still going to end up cheaper.

Another real world example is flatware. The 18/8 sets will be like 40% the cost of the 18/10s, but the 18/10s last 10x as long. I bought two sets of 18/8 flatware, and both sets rusted within 5 years. I switched to 18/10s and I don't expect to have to replace them until I actually feel like changing them.

Although I will admit, I would (and have, including to you) recommend high quality chairs, because if you spend 1/3 of your day on it, why wouldn't you spend as much as a quality mattress? But that's also in the mindset of "spend $1k to avoid $10k of medical issues."
Click to expand...
Counter counter counter counter point!

Seriously though, if you are buying athletic shoes at Marshall's or Ross that are clearance-priced at $40 or above that means you are getting either Jordans or Under Armour and Jordan's are some of the worst "athletic" shoes you can buy and UA are overpriced.

Now a serious counterpoint, some people are going to buy $20 shoes and wear then until they absolutely have to buy new shoes and not buy a new pair a month. And some people are going to buy cheap silverware that is prone to rusting and if it rusts they'll just be eating with rusty silverware until they lose every last piece and have to buy more.

 
FoxAssGamer said:
Now a serious counterpoint, some people are going to buy $20 shoes and wear then until they absolutely have to buy new shoes and not buy a new pair a month. And some people are going to buy cheap silverware that is prone to rusting and if it rusts they'll just be eating with rusty silverware until they lose every last piece and have to buy more.
Click to expand...
I know, but that person will end up spending more at the end of it, which is my point.

And I did use my $20 shoes until they absolutely had to be replaced. The quality was so bad that it fell apart and was unsafe after a month of heavy use. As in, I fell multiple times because they were more like skates than shoes after a month. All ended after buying shoes that lasted a year.

FoxAssGamer said:
Seriously though, if you are buying athletic shoes at Marshall's or Ross that are clearance-priced at $40 or above that means you are getting either Jordans or Under Armour and Jordan's are some of the worst "athletic" shoes you can buy and UA are overpriced.
Click to expand...
Probably, but the point is still that they'll last. Or are you recommending $200 Brooks for someone who was going to buy $20 el cheapo shoes?

Edit: I understand there are people who can't afford it. I've been there. But I've also known some wealthy people who were extremely cheap, including one that was hospitalized for severe food poisoning for refusing to toss questionable food. At some point, the cheapness ends up being more costly.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
FoxAssGamer said:
Counter counter counter counter point!

Seriously though, if you are buying athletic shoes at Marshall's or Ross that are clearance-priced at $40 or above that means you are getting either Jordans or Under Armour and Jordan's are some of the worst "athletic" shoes you can buy and UA are overpriced.

Now a serious counterpoint, some people are going to buy $20 shoes and wear then until they absolutely have to buy new shoes and not buy a new pair a month. And some people are going to buy cheap silverware that is prone to rusting and if it rusts they'll just be eating with rusty silverware until they lose every last piece and have to buy more.
Click to expand...
Another counterpoint.... maybe there are some people who never wear shoes and just want a pair to wear once and don't care if they can get a better pair that will last....

Although this example doesn't work well with shoes, you get the point.

I didn't really have anything helpful to add, just felt like piliing on.

 
Why are we talking about someone's cheap shoes and forks?

If someone says "Hey, I was thinking of buying this El-Cheapo Off Brand hard drive for $75" then a reasonable answer may be "Here's a much more reliable hard drive with half the storage for about the same price but it's going to last longer and has faster transfer speeds".   A reasonable answer is not "lol HDDs suck get Samsung 960 Evo M.2 drive for $265".  If someone is asking about a desk chair with shitty bonded leather, I'd try to steer them towards a more durable cloth or synthetic chair for the same price, not say "You need this $2,500 full grain leather chair".

Also, if you can't afford silverware that isn't rusting in your mouth, it's time to cut bait and head to the restaurant supply warehouse and buy 1,500 plastic forks for $19

 
Last edited by a moderator:
FoxAssGamer said:
I've complained about it before and it probably happens on other sites too, but why do people give asinine and unsolicited advice when people ask very specific (and most of the time reasonable) questions? If you don't have anything productive to add then don't say anything.

Telling someone to buy a new laptop when they very reasonably asked about getting an old ass game to run better on their current laptop which should run the game fine is not helpful in any way.

I notice people do it with other stuff. "Hey, I have X amount to spend on something, what do you recommend?" and you get a ton of "DON'T DO IT! IT'S WORTHLESS! SPEND 10X ON THIS OTHER ITEM!"

I don't know, just something annoying I've noticed. I mean on rare occasion, people have a legitimate reason to recommend someone save more money, but most of the time it just feels like people with nothing helpful to say just wanting to insert themselves in a discussion.
Click to expand...
B/c in the long run, if the dude actually likes PC games and wants to run them properly (i.e. at 30fps or 60fps and at a worthwhile resolution to his screen's ratio) - well, b/c he has a not-so-hot laptop and wants to actually play some PC games with it, he's going to have to either ditch PC gaming (b/c it's too pricey) or just get a better one.

If he thinks PC gaming sucks from that experience w/ a weak rig - well, that's what happens when you actually have a weak system; it's a crap-shoot. If he goes for something better - that's gonna be more $ spent, instead of just buying something decent from the get-go; and he has a better chance of maybe liking what PC gaming can do. Unfortunately, that's just the way this works.

Getting older or weaker systems to run PC games properly, whether old or new, just can be a royal pain-in-the-ass. With things like trying low-end solutions, having issues w/ old games on newer OS's and hardware/software, maybe even just trying to get things to sync properly and/or get them to even run worth a damn - eh, it can really suck and be a crapshoot. And this is me literally speaking from experience here, as I have before bought a weak laptop and tried to run some older stuff on it. Seriously, Intel integrated graphics cards are pretty much be a waste of time; and it's not really worth that hassle most of the time, TBH.

If we're talking worthwhile older FPS's to run on some Intel integrated graphics cards - Old-school classic Doom games (Doom 1, Doom 2, Final Doom) and Quake stuff (i.e. Quake 1 & 2) run really well with some Source Ports. Hotline Miami 1 also ran quite well for me.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
warreni said:
Okay, here's a trollbait question, but I'm really asking for an answer: is there any reason to prefer Battlefront II on PC over XBOX or vice-versa?

Also, are the current sales worthwhile or will the price plummet on this title fairly quickly? (That one is for the market prognosticators or people with crystal balls.)
Click to expand...
Granted, I don't have DICE's SW: BF2...so, I can't speak from experience.

Anyways, I would guess it's probably the usual pro-PC version reasons (over the console-versions), of course...provided you have the system to do this all properly: to run the game at 60fps; to run the game at a better resolution; to run the game w/ more graphical settings than the console version offers; more customization on PC version; etc etc.

I have found DICE's games on their Frostbite Engines over the years to be usually very scale-able on the PC, so...that probably helps too.

Also...if you really are curious about PC performance for DICE's SW: BF2, go check this article about that stuff:

https://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/star-wars-battlefront-ii-performance-guide/

 
Last edited by a moderator:
MysterD said:
B/c in the long run, if the dude actually likes PC games and wants to run them properly (i.e. at 30fps or 60fps and at a worthwhile resolution to his screen's ratio) - well, b/c he has a not-so-hot laptop and wants to actually play some PC games with it, he's going to have to either ditch PC gaming (b/c it's too pricey) or just get a better one.

If he thinks PC gaming sucks from that experience w/ a weak rig - well, that's what happens when you actually have a weak system; it's a crap-shoot. If he goes for something better - that's gonna be more $ spent, instead of just buying something decent from the get-go; and he has a better chance of maybe liking what PC gaming can do. Unfortunately, that's just the way this works.

Getting older or weaker systems to run PC games properly, whether old or new, just can be a royal pain-in-the-ass. With things like trying low-end solutions, having issues w/ old games on newer OS's and hardware/software, maybe even just trying to get things to sync properly and/or get them to even run worth a damn - eh, it can really suck and be a crapshoot. And this is me literally speaking from experience here, as I have before bought a weak laptop and tried to run some older stuff on it. Seriously, Intel integrated graphics cards are pretty much be a waste of time; and it's not really worth that hassle most of the time, TBH.

If we're talking worthwhile older FPS's to run on some Intel integrated graphics cards - Old-school classic Doom games (Doom 1, Doom 2, Final Doom) and Quake stuff (i.e. Quake 1 & 2) run really well with some Source Ports. Hotline Miami 1 also ran quite well for me.
Click to expand...
Look, the OP never said he thought PC gaming sucked or even complained about it. He mentioned he played HL2, enjoyed it, but had screen-tearing issues he would prefer to resolve.

THAT WAS IT!

 
FoxAssGamer said:
Look, the OP never said he thought PC gaming sucked or even complained about it. He mentioned he played HL2, enjoyed it, but had screen-tearing issues he would prefer to resolve.

THAT WAS IT!
Click to expand...
Never said he did. Hence the word if.

Anyways, messing around w/ running HL2 Ep 1 on my desktop PC. Not getting any weird graphical issues of tearing or anything of the sort on my GTX 970 - with V Sync on (with 60fps) or off unlocked framerates (i.e. no V Sync, getting over 200 frames here).

Gonna test it on my Intel integrated tablet, as I have had graphical issues before w/ Vampire: Bloodlines (another Source Engine game) of tearing on that.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Screen tearing has nothing to do with your graphics card not being fast enough. It just means the frames being fed to the display aren't in sync with display's refreshing, so it's drawing information from multiple frames. You could either have a shitty display, or it's possible not that your integrated graphics isn't fast enough to draw the frames, but that your integrated graphics or its firmware simply weren't designed to be able to sync variable frame-rate video, probably because it was intended mainly for displaying web pages or videos at standard frame rates. Newer integrated graphics chips luckily don't have that problem as they do seem to be designed lately with more light gaming in mind. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I saw you mention hooking it up to your tv. Did you always have a second display hooked up? Because Ive seen funky things happen with multiple displays and tearing because the gpu doesnt know which screen its supposed to be sync'ing to, and then you get tears.  Havent seen it in a few years, but you never know, maybe intel still has the issue

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ex~ said:
Newer integrated graphics chips luckily don't have that problem as they do seem to be designed lately with more light gaming in mind.
Click to expand...
Good overall info but he said he's using Intel 620 graphics which are Kaby Lake generation so I doubt it's as simple as the chip being outdated.

[Edit: Well, he said it was Intel 620. Not sure if that's actually the case for the Ideapad 110]

 
Last edited by a moderator:
warreni said:
Okay, here's a trollbait question, but I'm really asking for an answer: is there any reason to prefer Battlefront II on PC over XBOX or vice-versa?

Also, are the current sales worthwhile or will the price plummet on this title fairly quickly? (That one is for the market prognosticators or people with crystal balls.)
Click to expand...
Battlefront isn't a satisfying shooting experience. You should join the Army.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top