Did something happen with The Division recently that made it better? I thought the general consensus was that it was a shitty wannabe MMO, with some rampant exploits (may have been fixed).
- INMATEofARKHAM likes this
Jump to content
Posted by MysterD on 28 December 2016 - 03:02 AM
Posted by MysterD on 27 December 2016 - 10:59 PM
On my ultrawide I have to zoom in to even read what people post here.
Same w/ my 28'' 4K screen.
My indecisiveness paid off. A 470 showed up on Newegg for $147
Now to find a monitor
y you no bai Samsung 28'' 4K TN-panel from Best Buy on Black Friday or frum Amazon right before Black Friday for $250?
Posted by MysterD on 27 December 2016 - 05:42 AM
Heh heh, his post didn't rub me the wrong way. I, myself, love getting things as cheap as possible through deals. That said, I'll pay higher prices for the things that I enjoy, but saving whatever I can in the process, is a huge plus
It's funny, I have a few titles in my Steam library (via backing games on Kickstarter), and they all vary in performance. Mighty No. 9 demo runs like crap, Bloodstained demo runs... ok I guess, Yooka-Laylee Toybox demo runs fine (like 25-30fps from what I can tell), Sonic All-Stars Racing: Transformed crawls at around 5-10fps (lol), but my Shantae: Half-Genie Hero (review/press code) full game download, runs buttery smooth. Doesn't matter too much, I guess, since 98% of my games are on consoles/handhelds.
If you ain't sure about your in-game framerates, go into Steam Settings/Preferences; Look at In-Game sections; and turn on the In-Game FPS Counter to display somewhere.
You could also go download MSI Afterburner and play with on-screen display settings for that, too. You have more control there, as you can even set specific games to have specific FPS caps, if you need them to utilize such a thing.
Posted by MysterD on 27 December 2016 - 05:06 AM
Lol, fair enough. Being new to Steam sales, I jumped on it because I figured that's the lowest it would ever go in the foreseeable future. How low has it went in the past? As far as my PC goes, these are the specs, according to what my system information displayed:
HP Pavilion 17 Notebook PC
OS Build 14393.447
Windows edition: Windows 10 Home
© 2016 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
Processor: AMD A10-5745M APU with Radeon HD Graphics 2.10GHz
Installed memory (RAM): 8.00GB (7.19GB usable)
System type: 64-bit Operating System, x64-based processor
Pen and Touch: Touch Support with 10 Touch Points
I have zero clue as to what any of this means, as I'm not a technical guy. I bought it from QVC in late 2014 (during one of the specials they were running at the time), for around $700 after everything. Max resolution it supports is 1600x900p. Originally shipped with Windows 8.1.
First, about your APU on your laptop:
It's usually best to avoid any sort of integrated CPU's+GPU's, if you want to do some modern AAA titles - whether on a desktop or laptop. You really want separate pieces for both the CPU+GPU to be dedicated to be doing their own thing in their own full-swing, TBH.
If you're doing titles that are a bit older and less demanding or some not-so-demanding Indie games, you should do just fine w/ those. Give whatever games you got a shot, see what happens - since you've already got your machine. Just find some settings+resolutions that works for you, as long as you're doing console-like 30FPS (or better).
These days to play modern AAA stuff - for GPU's, if you're going Nvidia, you really want something in the NVidia GTX 900 series (i.e. probably 950M and above - say 950M, 960M, 970M) or 1000 mobiles series (i.e. 1050 or above) range; or something in the AMD R9 mobile range. I'm not too familiar w/ AMD's R9 mobile cards for GPU's (since I'm pretty much a NVidia guy), so maybe someone else can speak on it.
For actual CPU's, if you want to do some serious gaming in the AAA realm - if you're going w/ Intel here, you might want something in Intel's own i5 and i7 line of CPU's. Not really sure what the AMD equiv's would be (since I'm pretty much an Intel guy on CPU's here), so someone else could probably speak on that.
Personally, I have a gaming laptop w/ an Intel i7 4720HQ, 4GB 960M, 16 GB RAM, Windows 10 64-bit - and I can run most games at at least 30FPS (frames per seconds) w/ Medium settings at either 900p or 1080p.
Posted by MysterD on 26 December 2016 - 01:28 PM
It's actually cheaper on Steam and with these old games I'm fairly sure you can run it independent of Steam if you care about the DRM free bit.
Granted, I still have this from retail.
Not sure if the original Arx Fatalis EXE is DRM-FREE on Steam. Don't have this yet via Steam.
Since the game doesn't run so hot natively, you're best off running this w/ Arx Libertatis Source Port on modern systems, which has No DRM w/ that EXE. Go grab it in the link below from the Downloads section:
If you want to run Arx Fatalis w/ Arx Libertatis Source Port (which is how I recommend everyone plays this game on modern OS's) through Steam directly [so it time-tracks and all of that cool Steam-stuff], it looks like you will have to replace the original Arx folder (or rename that original folder to Arx Fatalis Old or something) and make Libertatis's folder the main folder.
Instruction on Steam on modding Steam-version of Arx Fatalis w/ Libertatis Source Port directly over on Steam:
I had to basically do the same thing w/ Steam-version of Arcanum to run the Arcanum Multiverse Edition directly via Steam.
Anytime you plan to do a "take original game + replace it" or mod the original game-folder heavily (especially on a Steam-version), I usually store the old-version (clean and unmodded version) for back-up somewhere else (especially for bigger sized games) or even place the old-version within Steam game's actual game-folder (if it's something smaller, like Arcanum). That way, if something goes wrong - you don't have to redownload stuff (in case you got weak Internet or don't feel like blowing-up a data-cap if you have one); it's easy enough to find and grab it.
Posted by MysterD on 26 December 2016 - 02:23 AM
Posted by MysterD on 25 December 2016 - 02:29 PM
I am trying to figure out what game I might be able to play some on the holiday without getting grief from the visiting relatives. Currently I have been playing a lot of Far Cry Primal. Probably good time to break out the Wii U for some party games.
Make sure you break out Mortal Kombat XL and pull off as many Fatalities as possible.
Witcher 3 might be good one, as well.
Posted by MysterD on 24 December 2016 - 08:06 PM
I didn't like FO4. I liked Vegas better. FO4 was disappointing to me.
FO:NV is much better RPG-wise + decision making-wise over FO4. Not even a comparison there. NV also is much better w/ its narrative, storytelling, dialogue, writing, and the old-school dark humor from FO1+2.
FO4 just plays better as a shooter and Action-RPG. If you loved NV, yeah - in the way NV delivered (as a RPG), FO4 is definitely disappointing.
In an ideal world, we'd get a mix of Bethesda's FO4 with its much improved gunplay + ARPG elements right along with Obsidian's NV with a much-better narrative, storytelling, humor, decision-making, and RPG elements. I'd love to see Obsidian do another FO game w/ their expertise on the FO4 Engine.