When Intel's new Pentiums bowed over a year ago, many budget gaming enthusiasts were excited. A cheap, overclockable pair of Haswell cores that fit on 1150-socket motherboards, offering a great upgrade path? It seemed as if Intel had a serious player in the value-CPU segment (previously dominated by AMD).
Fast forward in time, and the new Pentiums - and when I say Pentiums, my point of reference is the Pentium G3258 - are not looking so rosy after all. Their performance is beyond question. Intel has been smacking AMD around in CPU benchmarks for a few years now. The problem with the Pentiums does not come from any performance shortfalls. The problem comes from the number of processing threads the CPU has: two. Two cores, no hyper-threading. Two.
There have been a lot of recommendations on websites all over the internet (such as here, here, here, and many more) that the Pentium is the best bargain CPU on the market for performance-to-cost ratio. Not only does it have better performance per CPU core than many AMD CPUs (even the FX-series), the purchaser would have the option to upgrade the CPU to and i3, i5 or i7 in the future without swapping out the motherboard. One user even recommended the Pentium G3258 over an FX-6300.
Here's the issue.
More and more games are utilizing multiple CPU threads. How does this affect the Pentiums? Because more and more games are requiring multiple CPU threads - like, four. Which immediately hampers the Pentium. Want to play Dragon Age Inquisition on a Pentium G3258? You can't. Need four CPU threads, bro. What about Watch Dogs or Grand Theft Auto V? Still need four threads. Far Cry 4? Four threads.
This discussion is frequently couched in an Intel vs. AMD dichotomy, but that is really beside the point. People build computers to do jobs. If someone is building a budget gaming computer, its job is TO PLAY GAMES. Maybe at a reduced resolution and low graphical settings, but that is still the point of the build. And everyone who built a budget system with a Pentium thinking they would be able to play the latest games are either upgrading sooner than they expected or are stuck playing "old" games (not knocking old games, I love them).
The situation is not as bad as depicted in this article from PCWorld.com: "Far Cry 4 woes with dual-core processors point to a bleak future for budget PC gamers." The author seems to associate budget gaming exclusively with Intel and the Pentium CPUs, which is misguided and narrow-minded to say the least. He even refers to the Far Cry 4 situation as shouting "game over" at budget gamers (first line of section 3, entitled "The Beginning of the End?"). Seriously? No budget gaming without Intel's Pentiums?
What bothers me is that many people are still recommending the Pentium CPUs, despite the fact that more and more games are requiring multiple cores (some flaming in this thread - you have been warned).
Here's the deal:
AMD has currently won the budget gaming war with the Athlon 860k. It is reasonably fast, overclockable, and is PCI-e 3.0 compatible. And most importantly, it has four CPU threads / cores for the same cost as a Pentium G3258 (the prices fluctuate).
Want to build a budget Intel gaming rig for the sake of the upgrade path (performance is roughly comparable with the Athlon 860k)? Get a Core i3, which has hyperthreading and 4 CPU threads. Currently an Intel Core i3 is about $40 than an Athlon 860k. That's a value judgment that the builder / buyer would have to make. Either CPU will let the purchaser play the latest games. As I said earlier, it's not about AMD vs. Intel. It's about building the right computer for the specified job within the specified budget. If the Core i3 fits within that budget, great. If the Athlon 860k is the most a buyer can afford, that's fine too. They're both capable. Paired with the right graphics card, either one can handle The Witcher 2 or Assassin's Creed IV on medium settings @1080p without bottle-necking. Either one can be the solid beating heart of a computer that a budget gamer needs.
But let's stop pretending the Intel Pentiums are a budget gamer's dream, okay? Jeez.
Showing posts with label gaming. Show all posts
Showing posts with label gaming. Show all posts
Sunday, April 19, 2015
Monday, March 9, 2015
On Nintendo and YouTube
There is a lot of controversy surrounding "let's play" (LP) videos on YouTube. In a "let's play" video, someone records themselves playing a video game - sometimes edited, sometimes not. Sometimes with commentary, sometimes not. Frequently an LP video will be part of a series the usually involves that user completing an entire video game. Some game companies are completely cool with the idea of LP videos, seeing them as free advertising. Others claim that LP videos displaying a game in its entirety violates copyright law and issues take-down notices by the thousands.
Who am I kidding. I'm talking about Nintendo. Nintendo, famous issuing a take-down notice if so much as a sneeze sounds like Mario, has created a revenue-sharing platform that will enable them to receive the advertising monies generated by a YouTube video of their game. They will potentially share some of this revenue with the YouTube uploader, but only if the video is properly licensed and registered with them. A lot of users have cried foul (like they have for years with Nintendo-based LP videos). At the moment there is no indication of any change from the game company.
LP videos are incredibly useful for people contemplating purchasing a game, or who are stuck in a game at a certain point. I don't own a Playstation, nor will I in the immediate future, so I am happy to watch The Last of Us via an LP video. But on the other hand, the core part of any video game is the experience the game provides. YouTube "let's play" videos share that experience. Is the experience copyrighted? No, it is not. Because not everyone will have the same experience, even in a linear first-person shooter. The game that generates the experience is copyrighted, but not the experience of playing it. And this is what is shared via YouTube LP videos: one version of the experience of playing a game. There is no interaction with an LP video, aside from clicking Play. Nintendo's attempt to receive money from users' recorded gaming experiences is greedy, grasping, and controlling in the extreme.
The issue goes further. "Let's play" videos are not reviews of the game, but in Nintendo's over-reaching desire to be in control of everything that mentions their products, they frequently lump Review channels in with LP channels (and hit all of them with take-down notices). Whether you're talking about an LP from PewDiePie or a review from AngryJoe (or even, in that later's case, a preview video that he had Nintendo's permission to make!), Nintendo wants to control the dialogues on YouTube that people have about their games.
If I see a game via an LP and like it, my first step will be to go out and see where I can purchase it for myself (because pirating is for, well, pirates). I'm not thinking I experienced a game because I watched a "let's play." I shared someone else's experience, but it was not MY experience. This is how LP videos drive sales. On the other hand, what if someone watches an LP and decides they don't want to buy the game? Shortsighted companies see this as a lost sale. Which it is, but take the thought one step further. What comes after someone is disappointed in a game? The negative review. LPs actually help filter out people who would otherwise provide negative reviews of a game, helping it keep a positive reputation. So yes, a sale is lost, but so is the bad press.
As someone who was thinking of doing a few LPs and streams (seriously, though, do Twitch and YouTube need another LPer?), this story gave me pause. I'd rather I could just share experiences of my gaming without the need for all this legal mud, but unfortunately that's not the way the world (or YouTube) works. I genuinely believe that people do "let's plays" because they love the games they play. When a company like Nintendo starts acting like an evil dictator, they spit on that love and do their best to tear it down, to cover it up. Almost like they are saying, "We don't care how you feel, so long as you don't share it with anybody."
Surely we as a society are better than that.
Sunday, February 22, 2015
On Gaming the "Right" Way
I was trawling the forums yesterday, and I came across a thread started by a someone who said:
"Hi all, I'm new to [Game X]. I'm loving it so far. Anybody have any tips for helping me play the right way?"
This started me thinking. Is there really a "right" way to play a video game?
I don't think so. Here's why.
Video games are viewed as an entertainment experience by many. But in many games, and in RPGs in particular, they are more than just a beginning, middle and end. They represent a problem to solve. Playing "right" or playing "wrong" is not the point of video gaming, because players who hold themselves to someone else's standard of right and wrong play are fated to be disappointed in the experience the game provides. It's like trying to pick up every collectible and read every little note and sheet of paper within a game; it is too easy to lose track of the game objective. The player becomes adrift on a sea of secondary objectives and minutiae, never experiencing the game for himself / herself. The "right" way to play a game is to grapple with it yourself, and find your own solutions.
Finding your own solutions involves making mistakes. Some of those mistakes wound a gamer's pride. Like going into a boss battle with only one health potion. That is unquestionably stupid. And it is wrong. The game lets you know this by forcing you to die repeatedly until you get the message. The question then becomes, are you going to reload a save from before the boss fight, purchase a boatload of potions, then fight the boss, or are you going to throw your hands up in the air in disgust at your own stupidity? (Or worse, blame the game for your own problems?) But wait a minute: the concept of "making a mistake" implies that there IS indeed a "right" and a "wrong" way to play.
Perhaps instead of thinking of de facto right and wrong way to play, it is better to conceive of a video game's "path to success." I define a "path to success" as a method of playing a video game such that all primary objectives are completed without undue frustration on the part of the player. Some games offer multiple paths to success. Some offer only one. It can be fun to mix parts of different paths (in games that permit that), and come up with your own path to success. When presented with multiple paths, the question of the "right" or "wrong" way to play becomes moot, because how to play the game devolves entirely onto the player's personal preference. The Mass Effect games are a great example of this. When presented with a single path, playing "wrong" is not really possible (thinking of Alan Wake here); there is one way to go - all that needs to be done is traverse the path that is laid out.
Now, if someone asks the right way to play a specific path, it is possible to receive a more objective answer. Like how to take the Stealth path in Deus Ex: Human Revolution, or how to lead the Shimazu clan to domination in Shogun II Total War. But if someone asks the "right" way to play Deus Ex: Human Revolution or Shogun II Total War in general, that tells me that maybe the asker is someone afraid to make a mistake and learn from it. Or perhaps the asker simply has seen people having fun with the game and wants to have the same fun - and thinks that playing the way their friends play will impart the same amount of joy. Or perhaps the asker is looking for a quick-start shortcut to getting the most out of the game en route to consuming it as quickly as possible before moving on to the next game.
They are missing the point of playing video games in the first place. Video gamers are fascinated by discovery, creativity and problem solving, whether the game under discussion is Farmville, Age of Empires, Saints Row or Dragon Age Inquisition. What is the right way to play? Who cares. Have FUN!
"Hi all, I'm new to [Game X]. I'm loving it so far. Anybody have any tips for helping me play the right way?"
This started me thinking. Is there really a "right" way to play a video game?
I don't think so. Here's why.
Video games are viewed as an entertainment experience by many. But in many games, and in RPGs in particular, they are more than just a beginning, middle and end. They represent a problem to solve. Playing "right" or playing "wrong" is not the point of video gaming, because players who hold themselves to someone else's standard of right and wrong play are fated to be disappointed in the experience the game provides. It's like trying to pick up every collectible and read every little note and sheet of paper within a game; it is too easy to lose track of the game objective. The player becomes adrift on a sea of secondary objectives and minutiae, never experiencing the game for himself / herself. The "right" way to play a game is to grapple with it yourself, and find your own solutions.
Finding your own solutions involves making mistakes. Some of those mistakes wound a gamer's pride. Like going into a boss battle with only one health potion. That is unquestionably stupid. And it is wrong. The game lets you know this by forcing you to die repeatedly until you get the message. The question then becomes, are you going to reload a save from before the boss fight, purchase a boatload of potions, then fight the boss, or are you going to throw your hands up in the air in disgust at your own stupidity? (Or worse, blame the game for your own problems?) But wait a minute: the concept of "making a mistake" implies that there IS indeed a "right" and a "wrong" way to play.
Perhaps instead of thinking of de facto right and wrong way to play, it is better to conceive of a video game's "path to success." I define a "path to success" as a method of playing a video game such that all primary objectives are completed without undue frustration on the part of the player. Some games offer multiple paths to success. Some offer only one. It can be fun to mix parts of different paths (in games that permit that), and come up with your own path to success. When presented with multiple paths, the question of the "right" or "wrong" way to play becomes moot, because how to play the game devolves entirely onto the player's personal preference. The Mass Effect games are a great example of this. When presented with a single path, playing "wrong" is not really possible (thinking of Alan Wake here); there is one way to go - all that needs to be done is traverse the path that is laid out.
Now, if someone asks the right way to play a specific path, it is possible to receive a more objective answer. Like how to take the Stealth path in Deus Ex: Human Revolution, or how to lead the Shimazu clan to domination in Shogun II Total War. But if someone asks the "right" way to play Deus Ex: Human Revolution or Shogun II Total War in general, that tells me that maybe the asker is someone afraid to make a mistake and learn from it. Or perhaps the asker simply has seen people having fun with the game and wants to have the same fun - and thinks that playing the way their friends play will impart the same amount of joy. Or perhaps the asker is looking for a quick-start shortcut to getting the most out of the game en route to consuming it as quickly as possible before moving on to the next game.
They are missing the point of playing video games in the first place. Video gamers are fascinated by discovery, creativity and problem solving, whether the game under discussion is Farmville, Age of Empires, Saints Row or Dragon Age Inquisition. What is the right way to play? Who cares. Have FUN!
Saturday, February 21, 2015
Side-Quest: Getting Crysis to Run on PC (64-bit)
Despite having poured thousands of hours into my favorite games, I somehow missed out on Crysis (the first one). So, when it was on sale on Steam over Christmas, I picked it up.
Then I tried installing it. Dun dun dun... CRASH! Repeatedly. Turns out this is a common problem.
There are lots of problems getting the game to even launch. Then there are problems using the 64-bit executable. Now I have no trouble executing some complicated "back up x file, then change setting y" type of stuff, but there's some consumer outrage whenever I have to do that. I paid for a working product. It darn well better work. If it doesn't, the question becomes whether I want to go through the trouble. For Crysis, there are some simple steps to follow that result in a working game without having to modify any game files.
You will need an Origin account.
1. Purchase Crysis on Steam or on disc (if you purchase on Origin, go to step 3). The game has been steeply discounted during major holidays, so wait until for a sale if possible.
2. Activate the game's license key with EA, so that it will appear in your Origin library. The tricky part here is that if you try to activate Crysis using the Origin software, you could get an "Invalid Key" error. To activate it, you have to enter the key on EA's support website. Activating here will successfully add Crysis to your Origin library.
3. Download and install Crysis from Origin.
4. You might think you're done, but the minute you try to launch the game, it will crash once again. You might think that the game is simply broken, but that is not the case.
5. Navigate to the folder Crysis is installed to (in my case, F: > Games > Crysis
6. I want to run Crysis using the 64-bit executable, so go into the Bin64 folder.
7. Double-click Crysis.exe to launch the game.
(This solution only works on computers with 64-bit operating systems.)
The game should launch. Exactly why the game launches directly from the executable and not from Origin is a mystery to me.
If you use this method for Steam (install Crysis via Steam, go into the Steam Crysis folder and launch using the executable), the game will still crash. A bait-and-switch move to get more people to use Origin? Who knows. The Origin version of Crysis does use a patched version of EA's infamous Securom DRM; it now uses your Origin credentials to verify ownership. So you DO need to be logged in to Origin to run the game.
Crysis runs smooth and solid now, and still looks amazing for an older title.Unfortunately the multiplayer component is off-line, but hey: what price nostalgia (or, in my case, discovery)?
Quest Completed.
Bonus: EA's support site activation service will also work with Crysis 2 and Crysis Warhead.
Then I tried installing it. Dun dun dun... CRASH! Repeatedly. Turns out this is a common problem.
There are lots of problems getting the game to even launch. Then there are problems using the 64-bit executable. Now I have no trouble executing some complicated "back up x file, then change setting y" type of stuff, but there's some consumer outrage whenever I have to do that. I paid for a working product. It darn well better work. If it doesn't, the question becomes whether I want to go through the trouble. For Crysis, there are some simple steps to follow that result in a working game without having to modify any game files.
You will need an Origin account.
1. Purchase Crysis on Steam or on disc (if you purchase on Origin, go to step 3). The game has been steeply discounted during major holidays, so wait until for a sale if possible.
2. Activate the game's license key with EA, so that it will appear in your Origin library. The tricky part here is that if you try to activate Crysis using the Origin software, you could get an "Invalid Key" error. To activate it, you have to enter the key on EA's support website. Activating here will successfully add Crysis to your Origin library.
3. Download and install Crysis from Origin.
4. You might think you're done, but the minute you try to launch the game, it will crash once again. You might think that the game is simply broken, but that is not the case.
5. Navigate to the folder Crysis is installed to (in my case, F: > Games > Crysis
6. I want to run Crysis using the 64-bit executable, so go into the Bin64 folder.
7. Double-click Crysis.exe to launch the game.
(This solution only works on computers with 64-bit operating systems.)
The game should launch. Exactly why the game launches directly from the executable and not from Origin is a mystery to me.
If you use this method for Steam (install Crysis via Steam, go into the Steam Crysis folder and launch using the executable), the game will still crash. A bait-and-switch move to get more people to use Origin? Who knows. The Origin version of Crysis does use a patched version of EA's infamous Securom DRM; it now uses your Origin credentials to verify ownership. So you DO need to be logged in to Origin to run the game.
Crysis runs smooth and solid now, and still looks amazing for an older title.Unfortunately the multiplayer component is off-line, but hey: what price nostalgia (or, in my case, discovery)?
Quest Completed.
Bonus: EA's support site activation service will also work with Crysis 2 and Crysis Warhead.
Friday, February 20, 2015
Side-Quest: Disabling V-Sync in Mass Effect 3
Waiting for my graphics card to get back from its second warranty repair (c'mon, Asus, you're better than this!). Meanwhile, I'm getting by with my backup video card, a Radeon 6670 with 1GB of GDDR5. Needless to say, graphics performance is greatly reduced, to put it mildly. People wouldn't need "backup" graphics cards, of course, if their primary hardware functioned as it should.
Having to turn a lot of settings down, but one thing I don't want to compromise: resolution. And right there, I am really limiting myself, but there it is. My monitor has 1080p native, and if I go with anything else in a large number of games, the visuals simply look like crap. So 1080p it is then. That means lots of jaggies and screen tearing, unfortunately, because Vertical Sync causes a lot of lag on an under-powered system.
TL:DR.
Mass Effect 3 has appreciable stutter and lag when running on my 6670. The problem is that the card is not powerful enough to render the game at a constant 60fps, so all that needs to be done is to disable V-sync. But there is no option to disable Vertical Sync in its options menu. It is still possible to turn it off, however, by editing the GamerSettings.ini in the Config folder (always back up core files before altering them!) Thanks to user evilsofa on hardforum.com for this solution.
1. Find GamerSettings.ini, and open it in Notepad.
2. At the bottom of the [SystemSettings] section, add these three lines:
UseVSync=True
SmoothFrameRate=True
MaxSmoothedFrameRate=62
I only need the V-sync setting, so I guess you could just add that without the other two. Since it was listed as part of the solution, though, I'm including it.
3. Change the "UseVSync" value from True to False. Click "save" and exit Notepad.
And voila! Stutter eliminated. Mission accomplished.
Collateral Damage: Screen tearing is now omnipresent.
Having to turn a lot of settings down, but one thing I don't want to compromise: resolution. And right there, I am really limiting myself, but there it is. My monitor has 1080p native, and if I go with anything else in a large number of games, the visuals simply look like crap. So 1080p it is then. That means lots of jaggies and screen tearing, unfortunately, because Vertical Sync causes a lot of lag on an under-powered system.
TL:DR.
Mass Effect 3 has appreciable stutter and lag when running on my 6670. The problem is that the card is not powerful enough to render the game at a constant 60fps, so all that needs to be done is to disable V-sync. But there is no option to disable Vertical Sync in its options menu. It is still possible to turn it off, however, by editing the GamerSettings.ini in the Config folder (always back up core files before altering them!) Thanks to user evilsofa on hardforum.com for this solution.
1. Find GamerSettings.ini, and open it in Notepad.
2. At the bottom of the [SystemSettings] section, add these three lines:
UseVSync=True
SmoothFrameRate=True
MaxSmoothedFrameRate=62
I only need the V-sync setting, so I guess you could just add that without the other two. Since it was listed as part of the solution, though, I'm including it.
3. Change the "UseVSync" value from True to False. Click "save" and exit Notepad.
And voila! Stutter eliminated. Mission accomplished.
Collateral Damage: Screen tearing is now omnipresent.
Thursday, February 19, 2015
Welcome to My Blog!
My name's Abe.
I like video games.
I enjoy a lot of other stuff, too. Cake (screw you, GLaDOS), chocolate, movies, music, daily news and events. But mostly games. Sometimes I'll post a lot. Sometimes I might let weeks lapse between posts. I expect I'll post a little bit of everything here.
But still, games. I guess it's best to give my gaming history.
I loved hanging out in arcades when I was a kid. No surprise that I play a lot of video games now, I guess. Though it's taken me a while to get here (I'm over 30). My first game was Quake 2, which I first played in 2002. Then I tried out Age of Empires II (with the Conqueror's Expansion), and played nothing else for a while. Next up was the Total War series. The first Medieval Total War was a great companion; I have no estimate of the number of hours I whiled away while dealing with yet another resurgent Papacy. Then Rome Total War launched, and I played a bit of that. Probably my most-played title was Medieval II Total War. I really got into the whole mod scene. I tried out one mod after another, never really playing them much, but awed at the amount of variety.
And that takes me to 2013. I had a lot of events happening in my life, and contracted pneumonia in February of that year. A lot of things changed. I decided to explore more things that I might enjoy, instead of constantly trying to please other people. I discovered YouTube "let's play" videos of people playing video games. One of the first games I started to observe was a play-through of an old game called Assassin's Creed. The game plus its sequel was cheap on Amazon, so I bought it.
So it began.
Playing games started as a distraction. It was still a new experience to me, so every time Al-tair made a jump I was slightly elated. Every time he lost a little bit of sync, my hands would scrabble around my keyboard, desperately trying to do better. Still a distraction. Then I played Alan Wake. Now, Alan Wake has its limitations, as anyone who has played it will know. But I never knew that games could be like that. That they could have gripping stories, beautiful scenes, and moving characters. Even now that I have played many more games and realized that Alan Wake has a linear story-line and repetitive combat, it still holds a special place for me.
From there, it was a hop and a skip to more games of even greater caliber. The Assassin's Creed franchise has some superb moments (Black Flag is one of my favorite games). The Batman Arkham series is forever installed on whatever computer I am currently using. So is the Mass Effect trilogy (almost have a maxed manifest in Mass Effect 3 multiplayer). Dragon Age Origins, The Witcher, Tomb Raider (2013), Deus Ex: Human Revolution, Red Faction: Guerrilla, Saints Row. The list goes on and on.
Point is, I was late to gaming. Nearly two years on, there are still so many games I haven't played, and so many games that I want to revisit. For video gaming, I think we live in a great time. Games can be better than ever, with better graphics than ever, with better voice actors than ever. Hardware companies are making new strides in all phases of computers - more processing power for less electricity, great value-for-money computers that are easy to build yourself. Even as duplicity, corruption and strife run rampant in the societies of the world, there has never been a better time to play video games.
I'm starting this blog because there is more that I want to say than can be fit into a single game review. And though video games and the tech required to play them remain primary, I expect to be sharing and commenting on a number of issues and events that happen in the world as well.
So, welcome to Abe's Mission Control! Glad to have you aboard.
I like video games.
I enjoy a lot of other stuff, too. Cake (screw you, GLaDOS), chocolate, movies, music, daily news and events. But mostly games. Sometimes I'll post a lot. Sometimes I might let weeks lapse between posts. I expect I'll post a little bit of everything here.
But still, games. I guess it's best to give my gaming history.
I loved hanging out in arcades when I was a kid. No surprise that I play a lot of video games now, I guess. Though it's taken me a while to get here (I'm over 30). My first game was Quake 2, which I first played in 2002. Then I tried out Age of Empires II (with the Conqueror's Expansion), and played nothing else for a while. Next up was the Total War series. The first Medieval Total War was a great companion; I have no estimate of the number of hours I whiled away while dealing with yet another resurgent Papacy. Then Rome Total War launched, and I played a bit of that. Probably my most-played title was Medieval II Total War. I really got into the whole mod scene. I tried out one mod after another, never really playing them much, but awed at the amount of variety.
And that takes me to 2013. I had a lot of events happening in my life, and contracted pneumonia in February of that year. A lot of things changed. I decided to explore more things that I might enjoy, instead of constantly trying to please other people. I discovered YouTube "let's play" videos of people playing video games. One of the first games I started to observe was a play-through of an old game called Assassin's Creed. The game plus its sequel was cheap on Amazon, so I bought it.
So it began.
Playing games started as a distraction. It was still a new experience to me, so every time Al-tair made a jump I was slightly elated. Every time he lost a little bit of sync, my hands would scrabble around my keyboard, desperately trying to do better. Still a distraction. Then I played Alan Wake. Now, Alan Wake has its limitations, as anyone who has played it will know. But I never knew that games could be like that. That they could have gripping stories, beautiful scenes, and moving characters. Even now that I have played many more games and realized that Alan Wake has a linear story-line and repetitive combat, it still holds a special place for me.
From there, it was a hop and a skip to more games of even greater caliber. The Assassin's Creed franchise has some superb moments (Black Flag is one of my favorite games). The Batman Arkham series is forever installed on whatever computer I am currently using. So is the Mass Effect trilogy (almost have a maxed manifest in Mass Effect 3 multiplayer). Dragon Age Origins, The Witcher, Tomb Raider (2013), Deus Ex: Human Revolution, Red Faction: Guerrilla, Saints Row. The list goes on and on.
Point is, I was late to gaming. Nearly two years on, there are still so many games I haven't played, and so many games that I want to revisit. For video gaming, I think we live in a great time. Games can be better than ever, with better graphics than ever, with better voice actors than ever. Hardware companies are making new strides in all phases of computers - more processing power for less electricity, great value-for-money computers that are easy to build yourself. Even as duplicity, corruption and strife run rampant in the societies of the world, there has never been a better time to play video games.
I'm starting this blog because there is more that I want to say than can be fit into a single game review. And though video games and the tech required to play them remain primary, I expect to be sharing and commenting on a number of issues and events that happen in the world as well.
So, welcome to Abe's Mission Control! Glad to have you aboard.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)