Krangthebrain said:It takes like 15 minutes, and even a tech moron like me could do it.
how dare you talk down to me pretty boy
Krangthebrain said:It takes like 15 minutes, and even a tech moron like me could do it.
schel said:There has to be more to it than "several processors stacked on top of eachother". Otherwise the stupid chip would heat up your entire house Even with all that speed, there are software limitations. We can't make programmers a thousand times better either. It's still a great thing though, now programmers can't use the excuse, "hardware is holding us down, so we removed a feature or two... uhh... about 50 to be exact."
Krangthebrain said:Got one for Christmas (or a late Christmas present) and haven't been disappointed.
I still use my PS2, but Xbox is more than marginally better.
Shane H said:I have all three. Call me a homer but I prefer the Gamecube to all of them. Faster load times IMO and is just a great machine.
Shane H said:I have all three. Call me a homer but I prefer the Gamecube to all of them. Faster load times IMO and is just a great machine.
bratwurst said:last console I owned was the first playstation. Haven't had a console since 97.
my pc does quite well, thank you.
There are already ways to do this without a console. I would say the average user would find it difficult to set up though. So it's not really a console, just a simplified monitor-to-TV converter?Krangthebrain said:Supposedly (according to a game magazine I get, Game Informer) there is a PC game console coming out. Play PC games on your TV....sounds like a good idea.
schel said:There are already ways to do this without a console. I would say the average user would find it difficult to set up though. So it's not really a console, just a simplified monitor-to-TV converter?
Chaplin said:I believe, though, that it's strictly a game player--it wouldn't be exactly like hooking your PC up to the television. There probably would be a lot of different components more specifically aimed towards gaming.