[steph280]

I started with a console I'd bet many of you have never heard of before: Sears Tele Games 2600. (I actually still have it in storage)
It's basically a rebadged Atari 2600 which I'm sure some of you heard before.
Then I went on to Intellivision, Colecovision, Nintendo, NEC Supergrafix, then several iteration from the Playstation family.

But now I play everything on PC. First person games just feels better to me with mouse and keyboard control.

And 2 years ago I built a dedicated PC for VR use, and have been having a blast with HTC Vive ever since. It's the future of gaming IMO.

 

[canthearyou]

Well, my less than 5 month old Xbox One X crapped out on me the other day. It's off to Microscam for repair then it's being sold. Luckily I have the superior PS4 Pro. I should have never strayed from Sony.

 

[cheungbe]

What's SFF PC case are people buying these days? Should be able to house a 1080. Like the sentry but seems difficult to get your hands on.

 

[BunnyNamedCraig]

Well, my less than 5 month old Xbox One X crapped out on me the other day. It's off to Microscam for repair then it's being sold. Luckily I have the superior PS4 Pro. I should have never strayed from Sony.

dude thats horrible.. less then 5 months is really bad. knock on wood I have no issues and have owned mine a couple months after launch. I hope you get taken care of with no problems.

Edit- btw, I had 2 360's get the red ring of death. That was so annoying back in the day.

 

[canthearyou]

dude thats horrible.. less then 5 months is really bad. knock on wood I have no issues and have owned mine a couple months after launch. I hope you get taken care of with no problems.

Edit- btw, I had 2 360's get the red ring of death. That was so annoying back in the day.

I was on the phone with Microsoft tech support when it bricked.

I had a 360 back in the day. It rrod 3 times in one year. I swore I'd never own another Microsoft product.

 

[raf1919]

Well, my less than 5 month old Xbox One X crapped out on me the other day. It's off to Microscam for repair then it's being sold. Luckily I have the superior PS4 Pro. I should have never strayed from Sony.

I learned that lesson with my xbox 360.. my first and only xbox. I've had ps1 ps2 ps3 ps4, ps4pro never any issues.

 

[canthearyou]

I learned that lesson with my xbox 360.. my first and only xbox. I've had ps1 ps2 ps3 ps4, ps4pro never any issues.

Right there with you! Never a hiccup with PlayStation. But I wanted to see what "The Most Powerful Console" was about. Definitely not worth the extra cash over the Sony. Plus the game line-up sucks! Although I did enjoy streaming 4k Netflix with Dolby Atmos.

 

[BunnyNamedCraig]

I learned that lesson with my xbox 360.. my first and only xbox. I've had ps1 ps2 ps3 ps4, ps4pro never any issues.

my stupid friends were determined to buy the xbox one. Since the majority of gaming I do is online with them it funneled me into getting xbox one... I wanted to get a ps4 (have one now to play the exclusives though). In the end I should have just gotten new friends.

 

[raf1919]

my stupid friends were determined to buy the xbox one. Since the majority of gaming I do is online with them it funneled me into getting xbox one... I wanted to get a ps4 (have one now to play the exclusives though). In the end I should have just gotten new friends.

Hahaha

 

[Dorokun]

Played on PS1, GameBoy Advance SP, PS2, PSP, 3DS, and PC of course, throughout my childhood until my teen years. Now i don't even know where my PS1, Gameboy and PS2 is. PSP and 3DS broke and couldn't be bothered to fix them. Avid PC gamer now that plays mostly 1-2 free games. I do play games on my android phone too, but usually I'd get bored of it in 1 month max and uninstalled them. Currently playing this one Japanese mobage called Princess Connect Reive and don't think I'd get sick of it anytime soon. There are some cool games on console that I'd want to play such as Monster Hunter World, Dragonball Fighterz, etc. But I'd have to buy the PS4 just to play a few games and that's why I'm sticking to my PC.

 

[Rhamnetin]

I had another "Oh man, PC gaming is awesome" moment recently. The other day I got a 21:9 ultrawide monitor, an unusual aspect ratio with a 3440 x 1440 resolution. I tested a bunch of early to mid 2000s games and late 1990s games, and most of them support the resolution with no issue! And the ones I tested that do have issue still run at 2560 x 1440, which I can run with black bars on the sides of the monitor so it's not bad.

 

[saddleup]

I had another "Oh man, PC gaming is awesome" moment recently. The other day I got a 21:9 ultrawide monitor, an unusual aspect ratio with a 3440 x 1440 resolution. I tested a bunch of early to mid 2000s games and late 1990s games, and most of them support the resolution with no issue! And the ones I tested that do have issue still run at 2560 x 1440, which I can run with black bars on the sides of the monitor so it's not bad.

The fact that you are still playing games from the 1990s and 2000s really emphasizes the PCs versatility. I built a gaming PC instead of going next gen consoles so I could still play games like Magic Carpet on GOG.com. Would love to see Black & White on GOG.

 

[Rhamnetin]

The fact that you are still playing games from the 1990s and 2000s really emphasizes the PCs versatility. I built a gaming PC instead of going next gen consoles so I could still play games like Magic Carpet on GOG.com. Would love to see Black & White on GOG.

Yeah, many genres were flat out better in the 2000s and there are plenty of gems from the 1990s as well. 2000s PC games generally had the most content, most emphasis on technological innovation and often even used technology better than today's games. Innovation in gaming was at its highest in the 2000s, also higher in the late 1990s than now, since developers were inspired by all the new major technologies like 3D rendering. One example I like to use to illustrate this point is this one: PC gamers went from considering Unreal Tournament 2003 unacceptable for having too little content (52 maps, 8 game modes, 14 UNIQUE weapons, 100% endless moddability, dedicated server application and SDK included with the game) to being perfectly fine with unmoddable games limited to rent-a-server programs, 8-12 maps, 1-4 unoriginal game modes, only generic guns with mostly the same functionality and poor balance, and hundreds of dollars worth of DLC. Compare even UT2003's amount and quality of content to a PvP shooter from today... no contest.

Other examples I like to use:

Spoiler

Also, games from these past eras were often much more moddable, to the point where people constantly made what equates to their own games belonging to separate genres. Some examples:

http://www.moddb.com/games/unreal-tournament-2004/mods

http://www.moddb.com/games/medieval-ii-total-war-kingdoms/mods

http://www.moddb.com/games/mount-blade-warband/mods

http://www.moddb.com/games/half-life-2/mods

http://steamcommunity.com/workshop/browse/?appid=4000

The list goes on... most of my game time goes to 2000s games. Endless replay value in so many of those games.

 

[Mad Lust Envy]

I had another "Oh man, PC gaming is awesome" moment recently. The other day I got a 21:9 ultrawide monitor, an unusual aspect ratio with a 3440 x 1440 resolution. I tested a bunch of early to mid 2000s games and late 1990s games, and most of them support the resolution with no issue! And the ones I tested that do have issue still run at 2560 x 1440, which I can run with black bars on the sides of the monitor so it's not bad.

Actually, what a lot of the older stuff do is crop out the top and bottom. It's not real 21:9 support. You''re actually getting less of the intended image on screen.

Easily done but putting something like the corner of an object in the top left corner of a 16:9 image, thhen change to 21:9 and check if the view has expanded beyond the corner of the object in either height or width. You should take a picture, and possibly restart after changing the res, as some games need a reboot to properly engage in 16:9 to 21:9 if supported.

You don't need a 21:9 screen to test 21:9 resolutions. Just set custom resolutions if your displays support arbritrary resolutions.

Like on a 1080p screen (1920x1080), you can change to 1920x810 or even 800 or so. For a 2560x1440p screen (1440p), you can set to the ultrawide res of 2560x1080 (which many ultrawide monitors are sold as today). For 4k/uhd (3840x2160 screens), you can set to 3840x1600 which is the newest ultrawides sold today).

In third person games, you can easily tell it's fake ultriwide because your character's body gets more cut off instead of actually expanding your extreme left/right fov.

So yes, make sure it's not just cropping the image from what you can see in 16:9 mode. One example of fake Ultrawide is Castlevania Lord Of Shadows. I get less of an image. Now if I play Tomb Raider, I get the same image PLUS more on the left and right.

In fact, I'm positive you're cropping out the vast majority of those old games because they were made back when 4:3 was the main aspect ratio of video games. As monitors became more and more wide, more games started supporting actual wider fovs instead of cropping out to fit the majority of the image.

Let me give you some examples:

Here's DMC. It supports native 21:9. Disregard the black bars (as obviously I have a 16:9 4k display)

You see on the 1st image that is 21:9 how there's more to see on the left and right? More of the chandelier, more of the bottom of the stairs, while the top and bottom parts of the screen stop in the same places.

Now here's Remember Me, which does NOT have proper 21:9 support. This is how it would look like on your screen (minus the black bars, obviously)

Notice how her feet are cropped out, the top of the screen stops just past the neon sign in 21:9? And how the lest and right sides stop in the same parts as the 16:9? You're getting LESS of an image = not real 21:9 ultrawide support. Just cropping trickery. Real 21:9 should expand on what you see vs 16:9, not the other way around.

 

[BunnyNamedCraig]

Actually, what a lot of the older stuff do is crop out the top and bottom. It's not real 21:9 support. You''re actually getting less of the intended image on screen.

Easily done but putting something like the corner of an object in the top left corner of a 16:9 image, thhen change to 21:9 and check if the view has expanded beyond the corner of the object in either height or width. You should take a picture, and possibly restart after changing the res, as some games need a reboot to properly engage in 16:9 to 21:9 if supported.

You don't need a 21:9 screen to test 21:9 resolutions. Just set custom resolutions if your displays support arbritrary resolutions.

Like on a 1080p screen (1920x1080), you can change to 1920x810 or even 800 or so. For a 2560x1440p screen (1440p), you can set to the ultrawide res of 2560x1080 (which many ultrawide monitors are sold as today). For 4k/uhd (3840x2160 screens), you can set to 3840x1600 which is the newest ultrawides sold today).

In third person games, you can easily tell it's fake ultriwide because your character's body gets more cut off instead of actually expanding your extreme left/right fov.

So yes, make sure it's not just cropping the image from what you can see in 16:9 mode. One example of fake Ultrawide is Castlevania Lord Of Shadows. I get less of an image. Now if I play Tomb Raider, I get the same image PLUS more on the left and right.

In fact, I'm positive you're cropping out the vast majority of those old games because they were made back when 4:3 was the main aspect ratio of video games. As monitors became more and more wide, more games started supporting actual wider fovs instead of cropping out to fit the majority of the image.

Let me give you some examples:

Here's DMC. It supports native 21:9. Disregard the black bars (as obviously I have a 16:9 4k display)

You see on the 1st image that is 21:9 how there's more to see on the left and right? More of the chandelier, more of the bottom of the stairs, while the top and bottom parts of the screen stop in the same places.

Now here's Remember Me, which does NOT have proper 21:9 support. This is how it would look like on your screen (minus the black bars, obviously)

Notice how her feet are cropped out, the top of the screen stops just past the neon sign in 21:9? And how the lest and right sides stop in the same parts as the 16:9? You're getting LESS of an image = not real 21:9 ultrawide support. Just cropping trickery. Real 21:9 should expand on what you see vs 16:9, not the other way around.

This is VERY fascinating to me and something I don’t think about... I do all my gaming on Xbone, so I’m guessing I don’t have much to think about in regards to aspect ratio? I believe my TV is set to “standard” or some equivalent in regards to aspect ratio.

I like when games give you the ability to change the size of the screen. Nice feature!