• Welcome to Autism Forums, a friendly forum to discuss Aspergers Syndrome, Autism, High Functioning Autism and related conditions.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Private Member only forums for more serious discussions that you may wish to not have guests or search engines access to.
    • Your very own blog. Write about anything you like on your own individual blog.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon! Please also check us out @ https://www.twitter.com/aspiescentral

I'm Saving Up For a Snazzy Gaming Setup Once I Get A Part-Time Job

Mr Allen said:
Aye, that's kind of why I pretty much gave up on PC gaming about 17 years ago, couldn't get anything to work under Windows XP.
Click to expand...


I'm going to sorta echo what Joshua said.

The machine you're describing is... well, it's not JUST that it's old. It's that it's from a whole different era. Game specs dont really work the same way they used to. Back closer to 2000, games were alot more... "picky" about your specs. I'm not sure how else to put it.

That has changed though. Now, alot of games will run even on weaker machines. Hell, a friend of mine has a PC that he's had for 2-3 years now, and it was a pretty weak machine to begin with... some low-end thing bought at the freaking Best Buy of all places. He cant afford an expensive one, so, low-end it was. BUT. It will still run most modern games fine. It wont run them at super high settings, but it will indeed run them, and the framerate will be okay. Contrary to what alot of gamers will tell you, you SERIOUSLY dont need to be running games at max bloody settings all the time. Particularly nowadays, when even at lower settings, many games still look great.

Now, there are some exceptions. For example, a machine like his would flip out if he tried to do virtual reality with it... THAT is much too intensive for a machine like that. But normal games, on a normal monitor? No problem!

Not to mention that games have just become easier to run these days. I remember back around 2000, just dealing with these bloody machines was.... so much more unnecessarily complicated. Now, any game from my list is just a couple of clicks away. I may have a blazing hatred for Windows in general... but I cant deny how much easier even that is to use these days. It's actually become easier and faster to use than the consoles (when it used to be the other way around). Takes bloody ages to get any console game started, compared to the "right freaking now" of any remotely recent PC. Even better with an SSD... I dunno how I ever got along with a traditional hard drive.
 
Misery said:
Contrary to what alot of gamers will tell you, you SERIOUSLY dont need to be running games at max bloody settings all the time. Particularly nowadays, when even at lower settings, many games still look great.
Click to expand...
I agree. I have a Dell XPS model that was release somewhere around 2012 or 2013, and it has a Radeon HD 7500 Series GPU in it, which I believe is exclusive to the PC I have, because I can't find it on Amazon, Newegg, or PC Part Picker, along with other online retailers that sell PC parts. However, I run Overwatch on a combination of medium and low settings at 1650x900p (the monitor I use is 1080p, and there isn't ANY option to select a custom resolution), along with some additional addition AMD graphics settings that I created specifically for the game, and it still looks fantastic. However, it does have an average framerate of 45 FPS, but that's the best I can get.
 
Misery said:
That has changed though. Now, alot of games will run even on weaker machines. Hell, a friend of mine has a PC that he's had for 2-3 years now, and it was a pretty weak machine to begin with... some low-end thing bought at the freaking Best Buy of all places. He cant afford an expensive one, so, low-end it was. BUT. It will still run most modern games fine. It wont run them at super high settings, but it will indeed run them, and the framerate will be okay. Contrary to what alot of gamers will tell you, you SERIOUSLY dont need to be running games at max bloody settings all the time. Particularly nowadays, when even at lower settings, many games still look great.
Click to expand...

Really, that is not true. I buy computers that are real cheap so I can upgrade the video card, or add RAM in the case of MMO's (Laziness more than anything, since I could put one together but I don't need to since nowadays I can buy computers with a blank HD and no OS installed). For most "store bought" computers, the proc and MB are usually fine (although there's some sad ones in there...), but the RAM and video card are of the worst variety. Even "high end" store bought computers have crap video cards 9 out of 10 times and will simply not run games with a playable framerate. No, not even on minimum settings.

When my computer was new, it would not run anything new with a playable framerate. With a video card upgrade (don't have one now, since I have no games I want to play that need better than integrated) it would be able to run games very well, but maybe for a year or 2 tops. After that a low end processor can't even handle it, despite that often being the best part of a store bought computer.

Also I never had issues running games a few decades ago. The problems started with Windows Vista. Only had one game I couldn't run no matter what I tried, but other than that it was always some silly little thing like resolution settings and game settings, not the OS or the computer itself. Vista screwed all that up and nothing would run. Now with Windows 7 everything runs. Stuff from 4 decades ago runs just fine, never any issues (apart from playing with settings). Even XP had some hiccups once in a while with old games.

XP was the best OS ever, but Windows 7 tops it in my opinion. A real surprise after that hell that was Windows Vista.
 
AloneNotLonely said:
Really, that is not true. I buy computers that are real cheap so I can upgrade the video card, or add RAM in the case of MMO's (Laziness more than anything, since I could put one together but I don't need to since nowadays I can buy computers with a blank HD and no OS installed). For most "store bought" computers, the proc and MB are usually fine (although there's some sad ones in there...), but the RAM and video card are of the worst variety. Even "high end" store bought computers have crap video cards 9 out of 10 times and will simply not run games with a playable framerate. No, not even on minimum settings.

When my computer was new, it would not run anything new with a playable framerate. With a video card upgrade (don't have one now, since I have no games I want to play that need better than integrated) it would be able to run games very well, but maybe for a year or 2 tops. After that a low end processor can't even handle it, despite that often being the best part of a store bought computer.

Also I never had issues running games a few decades ago. The problems started with Windows Vista. Only had one game I couldn't run no matter what I tried, but other than that it was always some silly little thing like resolution settings and game settings, not the OS or the computer itself. Vista screwed all that up and nothing would run. Now with Windows 7 everything runs. Stuff from 4 decades ago runs just fine, never any issues (apart from playing with settings). Even XP had some hiccups once in a while with old games.

XP was the best OS ever, but Windows 7 tops it in my opinion. A real surprise after that hell that was Windows Vista.
Click to expand...

Windows ME > Windows 7.

Almost everything worked under ME.
 
Mr Allen said:
Windows ME > Windows 7.

Almost everything worked under ME.
Click to expand...

It's all relative to how much legacy software one is trying to run on the most advanced operating system at any given time. The further along a manufacturer upgrades their operating systems, odds are that older software will cease to function properly, if at all. That has never changed over the years.

Windows ME was released in 2000. Windows 7 was released nine years later. Of course it's not going to be as compliant when considering the performance of older software. I could say the same of Windows 98SE versus Windows XP. And Windows 95 versus Windows 98. And Windows 3.1 versus Windows 95.

For me personally Windows 7 seems the least compliant of running much older software, but then I'm applying a 64-bit OS with 64-bit hardware. Very little of my legacy software works on this platform. Though I'm still running Photoshop 5.5 with Extensis plug-ins. It looks like Windows 10 won't run it at all.

Luckily I still have a perfectly running legacy computer that runs about 95% of all my software on Windows XP. A hardware and software system that's indicative of circa 2002. Using Nvidia GeForce drivers no later than ver. 40.
 
Last edited:
Actually, I think age has less to do with it. Windows ME was the final edition of windows that was a DOS shell. So it was backwards compatible with pretty much everything.

Never used ME myself since I hopped from MS-DOS, Windows 95, Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows 7 (Although Windows 10 was already out, lol). With XP I found it was still really compatible with DOS games, I had to go through a few hoops compared with 95, but the OS was overall way better and the backwards compatibility issues were relatively mild.

God, I was stuck with Vista so long. Eventually I just said screw it and bought a new machine. My Vista machine is the only one that I didn't use until it broke down, that's how bad Vista is. Although it does seem to make computers resistant to breaking down. I think Vista lives off the frustration of it's users and feeds that energy back into the computer so it can repair itself. Just a theory, though.
 
AloneNotLonely said:
Actually, I think age has less to do with it. Windows ME was the final edition of windows that was a DOS shell. So it was backwards compatible with pretty much everything.

Never used ME myself since I hopped from MS-DOS, Windows 95, Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows 7 (Although Windows 10 was already out, lol). With XP I found it was still really compatible with DOS games, I had to go through a few hoops compared with 95, but the OS was overall way better and the backwards compatibility issues were relatively mild.

God, I was stuck with Vista so long. Eventually I just said screw it and bought a new machine. My Vista machine is the only one that I didn't use until it broke down, that's how bad Vista is. Although it does seem to make computers resistant to breaking down. I think Vista lives off the frustration of it's users and feeds that energy back into the computer so it can repair itself. Just a theory, though.
Click to expand...

The BC with DOS games was why I liked it, it played all my old games like Duke Nukem 3D, Under A Killing Moon, Wing Commander 3 and 4, Theme Hospital etc.
 
Maybe get another computer, blank HD and install Windows ME on it and all those games? Keep it off the internet (I'm not sure if it would be very easy or very hard to get nuked by viruses with such an old OS, let's keep it safe lol) and play your games on there. There might be hardware problems, though...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Threads

Top Bottom