Four Great Games Your PC Can Play

Also, I love how gradual everything in HL is. You slowly build up a reputation... no, you don't have a reputation stat or anything, but you notice these things slowly start to appear in the world around you. Or how the -situation- slowly escalates around you... it's really amazing.

Oh, I agree. The story is told in a unique and immersive way, even if it isn't incredibly interesting by itself.

But the "platforming"? Awful. Your character moves stupidly fast and the first-person only view only makes it worse. Thankfully, there's not much of it (except in Xen oh god I hated that).

As far as I Wanna Be the Guy is concerned, I suppose there is SOME skill involved, mostly through the standard run-and-gun and double jumping mechanics. But it's like if somebody gave you a bow and arrows and told you to shoot a target 100 meters away. You have no prior experience, so it's just a matter of shot after shot until a little bit of gained skill coincides with a little bit of luck, and you make the shot.

In other words, while good game design gently eases you into the difficulty, IWBTG has a near insurmountable learning curve. Again, this is the point of the game, I suppose, but that still doesn't make it fun.

You mean rather like the vast majority of old-school platformers?

Like none of the good ones.

I can't actually think of any old platformers that don't require a large degree of foreknowledge to avoid dying several times every level. Not even the likes of Mega Drive-era Sonic.

I dunno. I think in something like Super Mario Bros., one is perfectly able to asses a new situation as it comes, and then conquer it by applying general skills, without dying. Foreknowledge helps, but it's not like you were unable to get past 1-1 without dying every five steps because some trap activated without any notice or warning.

Even SMB had some stuff like that. Some blind jumps, some hidden enemies, etc.

It's just what was done.

While I agree that such a thing is poor game design and generally not fun, I do appreciate it in stuff like IWTBTG. Why? Because if the entire point of the game is that it's supposed to be like that, then it's fun.

You can save often, and most of the entertainment comes from wondering what unfair trick it's going to try next.

If you couldn't save often, or if the game wasn't revelling in being grossly unfair (instead of the annoying moderately-unfair that most NES platformers went for.) then yeah, it would suck.

And a version of it that was entirely fair probably would be better, but would also, I think, be infinitely more frustrating.

I think The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion deserves to be in the top 4 PC games...

It had enough content to keep me hooked on the game for nearly 2 full years, and not alot of games have that kind of effect.

One word;


*craft

Originally Posted by Kitsuné

A lot of difficulty in gaming is because of poor design. Think about it--who hasn't completed Resident Evil 4 and Ocarina of Time? (if you have those games, which you should)

*cough*

On PC gaming: I always kinda has a mental prerequisite that I be quaranteed to be able to play the game, (and that I have fun, which I find impossible with PC gaming, but that's beside the point) and with PC gaming I can never assure myself that I'll be able to play the game and have fun.

You can get an Xbox 360 for £200 (americans, get ready to convert)--show me a PC you can buy for £200 that can play, let's say, sea's list of games. All of them.

(hey, at least is some smart alleck somes out with a link, I can bookmark it for the future)

(lolbrackets)

£200 converts to $296.62 US.

Let's look at Crysis, the highest intensity game (it won't run on your 360) on Sea's list:

CPU: Intel Pentium 4 2.8 GHz (3.2 GHz for Vista), Intel Core 2.0 GHz (2.2
GHz for Vista), AMD Athlon 2800+ (3200+ for Vista) or better
RAM: 1GB (1.5GB on Windows Vista)
Video Card: NVIDIA GeForce 6800 GT, ATI Radeon 9800 Pro (Radeon X800 Pro for Vista) or better
VRAM: 256MB of Graphics Memory
Storage: 12GB
Sound Card: DirectX 9.0c Compatible
ODD: DVD-ROM
OS: Microsoft Windows XP or Vista
DirectX: DX9.0c or DX10

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819116027 - $80
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814130461 - $68

$148

Throw these in your machine and, assuming you have 1 Gig of RAM (You should, and if you don't it's incredibly cheap) you should be able to play every game on Sea's list.

However, you don't need a high-end or mid-range PC to play new games, as I've already shown. You can probably play most, if not all the games I listed on your machine right now.

As far as I Wanna Be the Guy is concerned, I suppose there is SOME skill involved, mostly through the standard run-and-gun and double jumping mechanics.

Well... it IS a platformer. Isn't that the kind of skill involved in most platformers?

But it's like if somebody gave you a bow and arrows and told you to shoot a target 100 meters away. You have no prior experience, so it's just a matter of shot after shot until a little bit of gained skill coincides with a little bit of luck, and you make the shot.

I think an experienced archer would argue with you, and tell you that skill is a very large part of shooting.

No real foreknowledge is needed to shoot the target, besides how to shoot really well (which I would describe as a skill)

I think you're just buthurt that IWbtG was too hard for you

I'd never do any of that stuff myself. I'd break it :>

So that thing could have all those games installed and still run the internet and other pure PC games? I could have, say twenty games on there and still be fine with the internet, messengers and stuff? Nice.

(although it's kinda cheating--I was looking for a whole PC under £200)

Originally Posted by Kitsuné

I'd never do any of that stuff myself. I'd break it :>

It's about as complex as putting a NES cart into a NES. If you're really not willing to learn how to do that then I suppose you deserve to get vastly overcharged by PC and console manufacturers.

So that thing could have all those games installed and still run the internet and other pure PC games? I could have, say twenty games on there and still be fine with the internet, messengers and stuff? Nice.

The amount of games you have installed will not impact performance.

EDIT: also, what do you mean by 'pure PC games'?

(although it's kinda cheating--I was looking for a whole PC under £200)

Why would you want that? One best parts of owning a computer is being able to easily upgrade it instead of just throwing it out every four years and replacing it, like with a console.

Originally Posted by 8bit

Well... it IS a platformer. Isn't that the kind of skill involved in most platformers?

The boring ones, sure. Most good platformers add in things like power-ups, grappling hooks, wall-climbing, dashing, and all sorts of variety to mix up the action. I Wanna Be the Guy has a pea-shooter and a double-jump, and that's it.

I think an experienced archer would argue with you, and tell you that skill is a very large part of shooting.

Right, but my point was no one will start you off shooting a target 100 meters away. They first teach you how to draw and hold the bow, and then start the targets close so that you can develop your skills in a fun and rewarding way. That's the mark of a good recreation; building skill is gradually rewarding.

IWBTG, however, places you in the thick of things right from the onset, giving you no sort of gradual training as far as the skill thing is concerned, which is why few make it past the second screen. I suppose that's part of the novelty, but I can't recommend it as a good game just because it's "supposed to be that way."

I think you're just buthurt that IWbtG was too hard for you

Maybe, I got as far as the battle with Wart. Every time I loss to Wart, I would have to replay Bowser. Assuming I made it past Bowser (which takes a few minutes assuming I don't die), I wouldn't have much time to analyze Wart's pattern before I got creamed again, then I had to re-play Bowser, then repeat. That's another symptom of the bad game design; you want to place respawn points directly before challenging areas. It's not that I wasn't willing to continue, I just got tired of trudging through tedious stuff I had already played to do so.

And Kits, part of owning a gaming computer is the fact that it's blessed with functionality far beyond your console. Think of what you paid for both your current computer and your game console, and let that be your bottom line, because a gaming PC will consolidate both.

Originally Posted by Dr. von Fish

The boring ones, sure. Most good platformers add in things like power-ups, grappling hooks, wall-climbing, dashing, and all sorts of variety to mix up the action. I Wanna Be the Guy has a pea-shooter and a double-jump, and that's it.

Well, there ARE 6 power ups....

EDIT: There's also wall-clinging and wall-jumping in the game, in certain areas.

Right, but my point was no one will start you off shooting a target 100 meters away. They first teach you how to draw and hold the bow, and then start the targets close so that you can develop your skills in a fun and rewarding way. That's the mark of a good recreation; building skill is gradually rewarding.

If you're going to go for the farthest target in the world, why should I waste my time, and waste your time setting up closer targets? I'm sure you've probably had quite a bit of experience with closer targets.

IWBTG, however, places you in the thick of things right from the onset, giving you no sort of gradual training as far as the skill thing is concerned, which is why few make it past the second screen. I suppose that's part of the novelty, but I can't recommend it as a good game just because it's "supposed to be that way."

I'll assume you hate every megaman and ninja gaiden game?

Maybe, I got as far as the battle with Wart. Every time I loss to Wart, I would have to replay Bowser. Assuming I made it past Bowser (which takes a few minutes assuming I don't die), I wouldn't have much time to analyze Wart's pattern before I got creamed again, then I had to re-play Bowser, then repeat. That's another symptom of the bad game design; you want to place respawn points directly before challenging areas. It's not that I wasn't willing to continue, I just got tired of trudging through tedious stuff I had already played to do so.

Wart was pretty easy :O

It's the third and final part of that battle which is difficult, but both the first and second parts only take a few seconds to beat.

Perhaps you should have taken the up path first. It's much easier.

I'm upset that only one other person even mentioned a Tim Schaffer adventure game.

You're all heathens!

Originally Posted by 8bit

It's about as complex as putting a NES cart into a NES. If you're really not willing to learn how to do that then I suppose you deserve to get vastly overcharged by PC and console manufacturers.

I never had a NES!

Originally Posted by 8bit

The amount of games you have installed will not impact performance.

EDIT: also, what do you mean by 'pure PC games'?

Games that I already have on my PC because they are only for PC.

Originally Posted by 8bit

Why would you want that? One best parts of owning a computer is being able to easily upgrade it instead of just throwing it out every four years and replacing it, like with a console.

Because I'm looking for a PC that can play these games, not two components that can.

Building a PC isn't hard at all.

The toughest part is deciding what parts to buy (and making sure that they're all compatible.)

The actual assembly is much easier than it seems, with most hardware even coming with nice pictorial guides now.

Still, it doesn't hurt to have someone who knows where all the parts go helping you out.

I'm still in kind of a "if it ain't broke don't fix it mentality".

Originally Posted by Kitsuné

I'm still in kind of a "if it ain't broke don't fix it mentality".

That's fine too. If you're of that mentality then why buy a 360? Your computer aint broke, so why replace it?

Of course, if you're looking for something that can play modern, triple A games then it is kind of 'broke' and you can either spend quite a bit on an extremely restrictive console which is already out dated to 'fix' it, spend a lot less on comparable upgrades for your computer, or spend the same or more on a far superior computer or parts.

Games that I already have on my PC because they are only for PC.

Yes, these will most likely still work fine. (I can't guarantee anything, as there might be driver errors or something similar, however, if your games didn't work after upgrading this would be an anomaly. As such, one should expect them to work fine.)

It is important to note that most console games take different discs than most PC games, and as such, if you already own copies of 360 or PS3 games (or older generation games) you'll need to purchase Windows compatible versions of your games.

If you have extremely old games (two generations ago) for consoles which you want to play on a computer it is legal (I believe) to back these games up and play them on emulators, so long as you owned the original game and you are getting the copy from the game you own.

Because I'm looking for a PC that can play these games, not two components that can.

These are however the two most important components in a gaming PC. You already have them in your computer, you probably just have inferior versions, and once you purchase these components and swap out your old ones you'll have a machine which can play the games you want it to play.

Originally Posted by 8bit

That's fine too. If you're of that mentality then why buy a 360? Your computer aint broke, so why replace it?

Of course, if you're looking for something that can play modern, triple A games then it is kind of 'broke' and you can either spend quite a bit on an extremely restrictive console which is already out dated to 'fix' it, spend a lot less on comparable upgrades for your computer, or spend the same or more on a far superior computer or parts.



Yes, these will most likely still work fine. (I can't guarantee anything, as there might be driver errors or something similar, however, if your games didn't work after upgrading this would be an anomaly. As such, one should expect them to work fine.)

It is important to note that most console games take different discs than most PC games, and as such, if you already own copies of 360 or PS3 games (or older generation games) you'll need to purchase Windows compatible versions of your games.

If you have extremely old games (two generations ago) for consoles which you want to play on a computer it is legal (I believe) to back these games up and play them on emulators, so long as you owned the original game and you are getting the copy from the game you own.



These are however the two most important components in a gaming PC. You already have them in your computer, you probably just have inferior versions, and once you purchase these components and swap out your old ones you'll have a machine which can play the games you want it to play.

I feel now is a prudent time to mention I didn't actually want/need information about PC gaming because I want to play more games on my PC, just for examples. I prefer playing games on consoles because I have more fun playing games of consoles. I can't get into a game whilst sitting in front of my computer. Never could.

That's fine too. If you're of that mentality then why buy a 360? Your computer aint broke, so why replace it?

I never replaced my computer, because I've never played any games on my computer (and aside from little fun for ten minutes online games, I've never wanted to). I've never had a system capable of playing the majority of this gen's games, and a 360 was a sound investment.

If you want like a big list of reasons why, I'd be happy to provide. I like how you're taking my gaming preferences as an insult xD

Originally Posted by Kitsuné

I feel now is a prudent time to mention I didn't actually want/need information about PC gaming because I want to play more games on my PC, just for examples. I prefer playing games on consoles because I have more fun playing games of consoles. I can't get into a game whilst sitting in front of my computer. Never could.

You can configure a computer to display through a television set fairly easily, and you can use an Xbox 360 controller, wireless mouse, and a wireless keyboard to play from there.

That's actually one of the setups I have right now, however I don't use it to play games so much, I use it to record and watch TV, however, if I threw a decent video card in that box it would be great for playing games on the big screen. I just personally prefer the higher resolution PC display to the low resolution SD and HD TV displays.

http://www.jakeludington.com/hdtv/20...c_monitor.html

Recording/watching TV through it is a little more work, but I wouldn't call it hard. Setting it up to play games through your TV, though, is a snap.

I never replaced my computer, because I've never played any games on my computer (and aside from little fun for ten minutes online games, I've never wanted to). I've never had a system capable of playing the majority of this gen's games, and a 360 was a sound investment.

But you could have upgraded to a more powerful machine for cheaper than a 360. D:

If you want like a big list of reasons why, I'd be happy to provide. I like how you're taking my gaming preferences as an insult xD

Insulted? Nah.

A big list of reasons? Yeah, that would be nice, considering I went through the processes of pricing a new CPU and a new GPU for you; the hardest part of modifying a computer.

Solitaire, Pinball, Minesweeper, and Hearts.

Originally Posted by Ringo Starr

Solitaire, Pinball, Minesweeper, and Hearts.

WHAT!? Pinball sucks!