rpgsearcherz

Eh, I would go with Kubuntu but I have issues with the fact that a lot of games won't run on it(unless they're made with Linux clients as well.)I'm a very big gamer, so that's a big issue for me.And yeah, there are some programs out there that will "allow" you to play Windows games on Linux, but a lot of games still aren't supported even with that.The other issue was finding my drivers on Linux, .I honestly don't know enough about it to determine whether or not it would be an easy transition though. As long as I am still able to use XP I won't worry about it, but if I find out Vista is the only choice on my next computer, I'm going to search more in depth.

A lot of companies are starting to move towards peer-to-peer too. For example, FunCom has just now used torrents to get their clients out to the players. It was kind of weird for me, as I have always looked at torrents as being for illegal purposes, but even other games are starting to use it now.For that reason, I would vote that it shows torrents are the best way to share files from one person to another. If it's good enough for multi-million dollar companies to use, it's good enough for us!

Wow, reading these replies just confuses me. You're all explaining the "fourth dimension" using a scientifical point of view.The only type of "fourth dimension" I have heard of is like those at Disney World. "A Bugs Life - 4d!" where the fourth dimension means the ability to feel and smell, not just see. I'm not completely sure if this is what it is really supposed to mean or anything, but that's what they call it, .

Eh, that's a good point, but I feel we need them here. They benefit us more than they hurt us.I do understand the point about not letting them over here and all, but think of it like this. How would we possibly stop them? It's a biggggg border.On top of that, why would it be seen as right to block out Mexican immigrants but not Cuban ones?(My understanding is our reason for letting Cubans over is because the US is against Fidel Castro - but we put him in power anyways)

I also vote for Nero. The number of options available in it are just outstanding, along with the speed of which it burns. If you look online, there are like 40+ extra little mini programs you can get as addons as well.I've had a few issues with it though, such as trying to burn dvd movies off home videos(mpg) but if I burn them directly onto discs it's fine. I'm assuming that's just my burner or pc, and not the program itself, though I could be wrong.

Just wondering...Is the Playstation 3 kind of overrated?Like...Most people I've talked to either won't buy one or have not gotten one yet, due to price generally.I just think that since most games will come out on the 360(which I sold mine - not enough good games) and PC anyways.Grand Theft Auto is a definite example of this. It will at some point come to the PC, where it can be customized and everything.But Final Fantasy on the other hand....Is it very good when compared to like....Final Fantasy 7? I must say that FF7 by far set the standard for the rest of the rpg's I play/played, and nothing so far has even COMPARED to how great it was. I don't know if it's just that it was my first rpg ever or what, but for some reason I find it very hard to find another game that I like more.So as to answering your question directly. I don't have a ps3, and most likely will not get one solely because there's really no use for one in my eyes. Especially not with the high cost and then adding on the cost of the games.

Kind of glad that I never had to deal with them.I always assumed that bigger companies would obviously have better customer support. I mean if they didn't have good support, everyone would know about it.(I'm not saying they didn't screw you over)It's just getting sad how many things companies can do these days to screw over their customers, yet still keep their reputation just as high as it was previously.

I've heard of it before. Honestly I've done a lot of research into it and all but I decided not to take the "programming" route or anything that I had once planned.I decided instead to follow my dream of being in the FBI as a criminal profiler, but alas, that dream is slowly getting changed as well(I want to go the interrogator route now)Anyways, in terms of ratings for it....It's really hard to judge a school solely by what other people say. You have to consider that some are more "computer proficient" than you, some less. Some people may enjoy certain things, some may not. So the only good judgement is really that of yourself.I've had tons of things people told me I would like that I didn't, and the same thing goes the other way as well.Honestly if I had to go solely by what I've seen, have heard, and have read, I would say that it's a pretty decent college. But keep in mind that it is a "vocational school", meaning it's really not as good as going to an actual university.

The worst part about it isn't even that it takes 512 mb of ram. Ram is cheap these days. But that even with 1-2 gb's of ram it lags out horribly a lot of the time. On top of that, for some unknown reason - even with a fresh Windows install - Vista taxes my CPU hardcore. I can easily get a quad core 2.4 ghz up to 40% on all 4 cores even while just idling. I don't understand why. Same thing goes with the hard drive. It's as if it is constantly working even while it shouldn't be. In terms of supporting software...For the most part those issues are fixed now. There are not many programs I can find anymore that won't work on it. At the same time, though, they run much, much slower on Vista than on XP.

As negative as this may make me sound, I have to say that illegal immigrants from Mexico have benefitted us in the United States more than hurt us. Let's consider some facts.Who do you see working on roads and buildings the most often? Generally Mexican men.Who works for the lowest pay in the US? Generally illegal's because they cannot get in with real companies.Think about how many less houses we would have here were it not for the immigrants doing things for us.Therefore, I have to say that we would not be half of what we are today were it not for them.

Yeah, I feel for you...I hate Vista with a passion. The biggest issue that I have with it now is that newer pc's can't even be downgraded. Companies are not making drivers for XP anymore, and are only going with the Vista route. Sure, you could always use generic drivers, but that ends up nullifying the point of having spent a lot for all of your extra features.There are still *some* computers that are coming out now that can be downgraded to XP, but the number of them is quickly diminishing. I would personally rather go to Linux than to sit and mess with Vista, solely because of the taxation it puts on your system. The speed difference of XP and Vista is noticibly different, even when both are on the lowest settings(Not using Aero or whatever it's called for example.)I still don't see why Vista was released in the first place. I have always referred to it as a "downgrade" from XP. I guess it just reconfirms the point that people would much rather "see" than "feel"(Meaning they would rather have the graphics of the system rather than the usability and speed.)I just hope that the next operating system Microsoft releases is better planned than Vista was.

Yeah, honestly I don't see the point of "system restore". Sure it's there so that "in case of a malfunction we can fix your computer back to how it was" but by experience that's NOT how it works. Nearly any issue I've ever had could not be fixed by using system restore.Why? Because it only backs up certain files. It would be much, much more helpful if it were to create an encrypted image file of your computer, like on another hard drive. That would keep virii from infecting it, along with allowing you do to a REAL restore.The one with Windows is just a waste of time and space I feel.

Agreed, but AoE 1 was also pretty easy compared to the rest. I mean, you could sit back for 45 mins and build up your base so you'd have an actual war, or you could opt out of that and just go rush their base within the first 10 minutes and pretty much guarantee your win.I guess that's the only real bad part about npc's. They concentrate on the same thing everytime so when you play against them you can already tell what they're going to do, and when they're going to do it. Against other players, it's a whole different game. Sadly I never really played it online due to my slow ISP.Now I just play mmorpg's instead of rts's, .

I am curious as to if anyone else here experiences random freezing with their routers. It seems to happen to me most when using my D-Link, and I end up having to unplug it and replug it back in every hour or so. The same thing happens at my neighbor's house and we have the same type of router. I don't know the model number off the top of my head but I can go check if it is needed.As for the issue, I do use wifi internet, and so I was assuming maybe that could be the issue? I'm not sure if maybe the internet being disconnected and reconnected extremely fast can cause the router to freeze or not.I've checked the list of other pc's logging into the router and found nothing out of the ordinary..I have also changed the "channel" it was on from 6 to 11, 10, and 9. It seems to happen less when it's on 9 than on any of the others, but I don't understand how that could affect whether or not it is locking up, considering it just affects the wireless connection.In terms of what I mean by "locking up" it means that I can't log back into it, nor get any internet through it. Upon power recycling it, though, it will start working extremely fast again as if nothing had ever happened.Thanks in advance.

I completely agree with this post here. It seems to be this way with most games though. The first one is great, and really builds up anticipation for the next ones, and then BAM! they shoot down our wishes by giving us a piece of crap. If you notice, it is as if the game companies decide that graphics are more important than the gameplay(but then again, a lot of people won't even play games with bad graphics, solely because they just bought their new $3000 pimped out computer and do not want it to go to waste.) As for the cheats thing, I loved making the cars and just pounding buildings in like two or three hits. I think that was in the first Age of Empires at least, might have been the second one. I did like, however, when they upgraded the farms by allowing the villagers to auto remake them. That's probably the best upgrade they ever added to the series. Nothing sucked more than looking at your farms and finding out you had 40+ people just sitting there due to having already cleared their farm out. This all seems to be a little different when it comes to Command and Conquer, though. In my personal opinion Red Alert 2 and Command and Conquer 3 were by far the best of the series(excluding of course Renegade)

Actually your post is a little off in terms of release date. It was supposed to be released on the 23rd in European countries, and the 20th in the USA. They went ahead and decided to allow all servers to open on the 20th though.As for my view of the game, I think it does have a lot of potential. The PvP is so open ended and everything that it is more or less like you are in a first person shooter, but able to do things like manually aim bows, run while blocking in certain directions, etc.One thing I do not like is the way that it loads. When you die, for example, and resurrect, it reloads the entire area again. This allows enemies to spawn-camp you and just kill you nonstop while you are attempting to load your map again.Along with this, the party menu is quite small, and you can only see people on the map if they are like right beside you. This makes grouping with others very inefficient in the case that one of you ends up dying. It's too hard to find one another again.When you die, you also have to reload the area again in order to be resurrected by other players. This is what I completely did not understand, being that you are already in the area in which you died.

Honestly I would say that Vista would be the best operating system for running games, were it not for the fact that it has flaws.The first is that it is still too new. Because of this fact alone it is still full of bugs and issues that are still needing to be resolved. Over time, Microsoft should be able to fix some, if not most of the bugs. Until then, however, it will be XP that is top.The reason Vista would be the better choice were it not for all the bugs are because of how smoothly it runs, along with all of the protection on it file wise. Although some people hate how it requests permission for every file you want to edit(A lot don't know that you can actually disable that protection), I find it to be a great feature. It helps keep people from being able to hack you through games. For example, on some games you can easily implement virii into the maps that are automatically downloaded and ran. Vista would keep that from being able to happen(Unless, of course, you were running the program in Administrator mode).The other great thing about Vista is that you can take things like external hdd's or memory sticks and take some of that space to become like RAM. I have not really messed with that feature yet, so I don't know a lot about it, because I'm already fine ram-wise. It could help those who have a small amount of ram, however.Overall I'd still have to vote Vista as best for gaming, although it does have it's downsides. The positives more than take up for negatives.

I feel that PC's are better than consoles for multiple reasons.First of all is the fact that you have an open ended choice of what you want to do. You can program, you can play games, you can go online, you can chat, with so many different programs that it would literally be impossible to name them all. Plus you even have the ability to choose what type of operating system that you want to run, which you definitely cannot do with consoles.Next is graphics. Some people claim that consoles have the best graphics, and it is true to a point. Yes Playstation 3 has excellent graphics, but that is because it is using a blue-ray disc reader. If computers had the ability to run Blue-Ray then PC games could hold the same graphical capabilities. The difference is that once a console's graphics start to go down, and the new console comes out, your only choice is to live with the old games or go with a brand new system, which in the case of the PS3 ran $599 new, plus tax. With a PC you have the ability to just go buy a new video card for $50-100 and run the newer games. Not to mention with PC's you don't have to sit around waiting until you can even get AHOLD of one of the newer systems in order to play your favorite games. You can just run to the store and buy your new video card.Along with this is controls, especially in RTS's. Well even to a point, FPS's. Using keyboard and mouse has become second nature to me, and for me to go to consoles for games like Halo is significantly harder because I just don't have the ability to swing my mouse left and right to look quickly, and instead am forced to rely on a little stick.Next is the fact that on the PC you aren't being forced to join things like Microsoft Live or whatever it's called(For the Xbox 360) in order to play games online. The only games online with a PC you have to pay for are MMORPG's, and that's still few and far between as well. I find it ridiculous that you have to pay $50 a year just to play Xbox 360 games online...Or is it $70? I'm not completely sure. Either way, on a PC it's free.Bandwidth usage. There are many different games that on consoles require broadband connections in order to play, and lag horribly. On the PC, however, they can usually be played on dial-up with minimal to no lag. Take Halo for example, for the Xbox. Playing online I almost constantly lagged on a DSL connection. Then playing on the PC I was on my dial-up and could play with up to 8 others without ever lagging, even a little. It doesn't make sense but I'm assuming it has something to do with the consoles and the way that they are set up.With all of these points being taken into consideration, I must say that PC will always prevail over consoles. There are just too many reasons. The only reason to buy consoles would be for the games that are not ported to the PC, such as Final Fantasy 12 and 13, and other games of that nature. Those alone may merit buying a PS3, however I seriously doubt it.One game I regret that I cannot play is Bully, for the PS2...They really need to port that onto the PC, because I would not buy a system just for one game.

My question about Unreal Tournament 3 is whether or not there are very many differences. I haven't actually played the demo yet, because I've been tied up in Call of Duty 4 and UT2k4. So far though, most UT games are pretty much the same thing but with a couple new features and enhanced graphics. Is there anything real special about UT3 that makes it worth switching?In my opinion the first UT was the best, before adding shock rifles, multiple jumps, etc. Also, before vehicles.

I enjoy Call of Duty 4 a lot, but there are a few issues that I have with it.The first thing is that it's not realistic enough. They try to make it realistic by using nice graphics, and weapons that we really use in wars, along with having the game placed somewhere that we are currently in battle. The problem, however, is the fact that you can heal just by staying out of battle for a short period of time. It's ridiculously easy to be able to rush in, kill one or two people, then hide behind a wall for the next 10 seconds and repeat it all over again.The second part is that in multiplayer, online, you die way too fast. Pretty much it's based on who sees who first, not by skills.