News Crysis 2 to include stereoscopic 3D

There are very few games that require good cpu's (Supreme Commander being one).
For most games a AMD cpu and a high end GPU is much better for gaming then a faster Intel CPU and bargin graphics cards or dare I say Inte integrated graphics failures.

Also all current Consoles use some form of graphics card or (in the case of the PS3) extra graphics cores.

Just buy this and you will be much more happy with your PC and it's in your budget. Add to that you can upgrade later with more screens and try eye-finity.

http://3xs.scan.co.uk/ShowSystem.asp?SystemID=1054

or for 40 pounds more get this pre-over-clocked version

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=FS-237-OK

 

Both those systems are over £700 (if you add an OS to the OCers one). That's not really in budget.

I agree thought that you're better off buying a machine with a half-decent graphics card like the 5770, which you should be able to do with £600. Using onboard/on-CPU graphics is never going to run recent games reasonably well

D

 

The original did already.

 

Why is it that console players can have 3d on 5 year old hardware and 3d tv, while pc gamers need to spend nearly £500 if we want the same experience? Someone clearly discovered (ahm... Nvidia) that pc gamers are money cows

 

I'll trade the 3D experience for a fun stable game. kthx

 

Educate yourself

It can be done with turds as well

 

I'm not really convinced by the whole 3d thing, but time will tell whether it will become the norm or not.

 

While I understand your point, this system is not a 'gaming rig'. It's just a budget-conscious family computer.

It's going to be sat in the living room and used as a media centre and for general computing. My priorities in building it are longevity and an upgrade path without spending a bomb. It will be always on, so it must be quiet and energy efficient, and it will live in a cabinet with little air flow so a hot system is out of the question. My budget is £500-600 including OS. I'm looking at getting:

Antec Mini P180
OCZ ModXstream pro 500w
Core i3 530
Gigabyte GA-H55M-USB3
4GB DDR3 1600Mhz

This works out at about £400 atm, which is ideal for me. I've got spare bits to make that into a whole system and I will try linux for a while and see how I get on. If not I can get Win7 Home Premium for £80-100. I figure that by getting a decent case and psu I can swap out the i3 and replace it with an i5-750+GPU in years to come.

Anyway, my original point was that if I need a £700-800 'gaming rig' to appreciate a game then I'll pass.

I Stand corrected

 

Who says they aren't focusing on both. I have never experienced a game in 3D so I can't say whether or not I'm in the boat on this or not.

 

3D, while an interesting concept, is something that I am instantly wary of and all because of how everyone, mainly companies, is latching onto it. I'm not one of these people who jump on the latest craze because it's the "in thing to do". I'd rather wait until a technology has gotten over its first few teething issue before jumping right in. I waited when the HD format war started and I'm going to wait while until the dust has settled on this 3D format war.

With that said, I might simply wait until auto-stereoscopic 3D is readily available, as the thoughts of wearing 3D glasses just to enjoy 3D isn't something appealing to me, especially when the polarized 3D glasses substantially reduce the overall brightness of the image.

 

you only really need 50. A 25 FPS minimum for each eye to make it appear fluid. Below 25 FPS and it'll appear stuttery.

 

The only problem with this tech is that nvidia is the only card company that has this tech and if you want all the eye candy graphics and 3d you will have to buy there new cards 480gtx or 470gtx the new cards have one 2 major problem cost and heat

 

but my eyes are ninja eyes - they need 60 fps each eye or it looks like a fast slideshow!

 

I'm not interested in 3d games to be honest. I've tried them a few times and yeah impressive but only in a gimmicky kind of way. As it stands I could quite happily do without.

 

You will probably do best with EEasypeasy Linux as it comes with all the gfx drivers and medi codecs included and is based on Ubuntu LTS (1.04 I think... the lastest version that just came out)
Other wise you will have to use the console.....

Which just takes a little time to get used to.

 

I really don't feel the need for it either. When I watch a film or play a game, it's to relax. I don't want to have to focus on more than one plane!

 

I'll stick with my trusted 2D for maximum visual clarity not with some half baked 3D shady glasses.

 

The ridiculous 3D hype machine at the moment is happening because, for technology companies, it's the holy grail of profit.

TV manufacturers have an excuse to sell new TV's (even if your current TV is perfectly fine). Movie studios get to sell tickets at higher prices. Console manufacturers have another gimmick to sell consoles with.

Basically, it's the perfect excuse to fleece the customer. But there is a problem, nobody has stopped to ask if consumers actually want 3D in their home.

 

I'll only be interested in stereoscopic 3D when I can get it working correctly on a 3x1 Eyefinity (or similar) setup on a single card at playable framerates on all the major titles that I play.

Basically, I'm not ever going to be interested in stereoscopic 3D.

 

I sometimes wonder if the negative nancys on this site post before their caffeine fix.

I imagine if you do not want to run it in 3dS you do not have to, Crysis 2 will be another watershed game, play it or not, that is up to you.

As far as console vs PC and making a 600 pound Gaming PC, I doubt you can make one for that cheap that will last more than a year. Lets see 600 B.Pounds is 888 Banana Republic dollars. Since a decent GPU runs 400$ (and you guys have to pay more for the same kit) I do not think a decent "I can use this for 2 years with regular upgrades" PC gaming computer can be made for that much.
Gaming is a hobby and you need to put at least 700 pounds a year into it, more if you want to play the best games at the best settings. It sounds like some people should just buy consoles and play on that inferior platform, it sounds like they would be happy there.

As to any new innovation, the market will be the judge, if this 3d is crap it will die, if not people will adopt it. All the negative posters here, I wonder how many of them have TRIED the damned tech. Forgive me, but I will have to test it before making a decision, I am strangely scientific that way.

Yours in Experimental 3-D Plasma,
Star*Dagger