It sounds like you're a little bit into it. If at this point you are not curious about the Nomai or why you keep dying and finding answers to those questions, then you should stop playing. The game might not be for you. Because it tells a non-linear story and if you don't care about the story then there's nothing there for you.
That being said, my experience with the game was heavily influenced by recent loss in my life and playing it helped me process my grief. Naturally that is a highly personal experience. But there was one point in particular where I read one bit of text and the realization of the implications just made me sit there and cry until I died.
But I was fully invested in the story. If that isn't important to you the gameplay alone isn't going to carry it.
Resident Evil 1 and 2 were the games that I always went over to a friend’s place to play, and when Resident Evil 3 came out I got my own copy, and it felt much more like “my game”.
Those, plus the original Silent Hill games (1 and 2) really helped define my taste in games, and they’ve got something I feel even the more recent throwback Survival Horror games don’t have, in that they, and the original Alone in the Dark, shared some DNA with the old Point and Click adventure games, like Monkey Island, and Myst. Puzzles based on collecting things, and combining or using things on or with other things, often in mind-bending, nonsensical ways.
The Spencer Mansion, RPD Station, Raccoon City, and Silent Hill were all big explorable areas that opened up as you progressed, and you really got to know them. Games these days feel like they’re scared of being accused of “backtracking”, so you never spend long enough in any one area to really get to know it.
What I usually tell people is "set a budget". You can always fall in to the trap of $20 more here, $40 more there...etc and explode your budget.
If you can keep moving the needle, you can keep dumping more into better components in different areas.
Use PCPartPicker to make sure everything is compatible, check the price history to see if there's a similar component available for cheaper or if you're getting a good value, and make decisions on what is necessary. Also, pick a date. You can hang around for MONTHS waiting on a certain part to hit a price drop.
Going back through your specs...bro a 4090 costs basically the same as my whole PC that's running games at 120 FPS+ on a 4k monitor with no issues.
Check out combo deals on Newegg for Mobo+RAM+CPU, or Microcenter if you have one nearby (I don't). Your biggest factor for gaming will be the GPU. You can run 60+ FPS on a 1080P monitor on 5 year old midrange GPUs. If you need 4k res, ask on PCPartPicker forums.
The above build (with a suitable NZXT H7 case) can be built for around £3,800; such a generous budget might be doable but deep down I know this build is over the top and that I cannot really justify ploughing that much into something like this. Thank you for the PCPartPicker recommendation; I will try that.
I got mine for just under $1800 US early this year, with just online deals available at the time, no waiting for better pricing (honestly PSU prices were INSANE at the time and that made a difference). I wouldn't change a single part today. It does everything I need (including video editing/rendering)
Resolution (1080, 1440, etc) will be critical for your high and 60fps qualifier. Is RTX a deal breaker for you? Are you looking to produce content (or edits videos, 3d rendering, stable diffusion, etc)?
Without knowing any of that I can still identify CPU, ram, and GPU you listed are overkill for gaming purposes.
Edit: Gamers Nexus YouTube and Website is a great for getting rundown of current gen hardware and their capabilities. They typically give really good recommendations based on value instead of just raw performance.
I have little doubt that the above setup is overkill for my purposes. My difficulty is that I am so far behind and out of date in my knowledge of what constitutes a decent baseline specification that I am having to approach this from a position of embarrassed ignorance.
A couple of folks have recommended PCPartPicker so I will give that a go.
Short answer: good plan. Check PCPartPicker. Your build is definitely overkill for most people, and you can easily get away with consistent 4k gaming for much cheaper.
First, you want to play on high/60fps but at what resolution? Paying over 1700$CAD for a RTX4090 GPU seems overkill while a RX6800 or a RX7700/7800 would let you play at 1080p/1440p at high settings at a fraction of the price.
SSD is fine.
PSU could be reduced to 850W.
64GB RAM is overkill for gaming right now but potentially useful in the upcoming years.
Bottom line, you could save here and there and still have a capable AM5 machine.
If you want value for your buck, build yourself an AM4 machine. Yes, AM5 is out now but your rig could still last you many many years with the right AM4 components.
Yeah that changes things a bit. What type of games do you plan on playing? 4K or not, if you’re playing eSports or strategy games, it still will be overkill. My wife’s rig is a 5800X (not 3D), and a GTX 1070, and she plays SIMS 4 and Diablo IV at 4K 60+ FPS.
Another data point: I have a Ryzen 5900x and an RTX 3080. In BG3 I average 80-90 fps with 1% lows over 60fps on a 4k screen with ultra settings and DLSS quality setting.
Agreed with the above, especially need to pay attention to your resolution to figure out GPU needs. To add to this, you would probably be fine with a 7800X3D, unless you really need the extra CPU cores for non-gaming related tasks.
For reference, I have a 5800X3D, 32GB RAM, 970 1TB SSD, and a 6700XT, and I’m playing 60+ FPS on high on most games at 3840x1600. Nowhere near the budget you’re looking at. That being said, AM4 socket is EOL’d, so stick with the Ryzen 7000 series if you want AMD.
The samsung 990 is fine, but a bit overpriced. Something like this sabernt is also a high quailty gen 4 drive, and running under $100 for 2TB with a heatsink.
Id actually recommend going for the 4TB of that same model for $210. By far the most bang for your buck.
Simply going one step down from buying every “halo” product would already do wonders for a significant price/performance increase.
That said, when building a new PC I usually start with the recommendations listed at Logical Increments, which has a neat table sorted by budget. Anything at or above the “Suberb” should give you what you want at 1440p.
I’d also very much recommend a high refresh rate monitor, preferably 1440p, which has either GSYNC or FreeSync with a good variable refresh rate range. It really helps with maintaining a smooth presentation as you aren’t forced to keep your game running at a fixed framerate anymore.
Not OP, but as a person who wants to switch to Linux but is worried about being able to play the games I like (and doesn’t generally use Steam), is Nvidia bad for Linux gaming? I’ve heard good things about AMD’s Linux compatibility but I have an Nvidia.
I have an Nvidia GPU and I use it with Linux, even with Wayland, but it’s still not quite there yet, and because all the fixes have to come from proprietary Nvidia driver changes, nobody really knows when/if everything will be fixed. AMD has been much better with support and switching to AMD for your next.card will save you a lot of headaches.
Linux fanboys like to hate on Nvidia, but their GPU’s usually work fine on day one and have performance parity with other OS.
What isn’t good is that they don’t support some newer features that work on the open-source drivers from AMD and Intel, namely Wayland. But even that’s constantly getting better and won’t be a problem for long.
Also, the proprietary drivers made some problems a few years ago that resulted in a black screen after the update. But as I said, that’s been years ago and was simple to fix.
Now I’ve talked about those Linux fanboys like myself and do recommend AMD GPU’s over Nvidia. It’s great that they work ootb without having to install drivers, but that’s only for gaming. E.g. machine learning apps like stable diffusion make the AMD driver situation way worse than Nvidia.
Don’t let yourself be discouraged by overly dramatic comments! Try it for yourself and it’ll probably be fine.
A steam deck works well enough for most games if you want something handheld but dockable into a full computer. Gives you that sort of console feel without a console ecosystem.
High settings for most modern games jump from game to game. I was able to keep high settings with a 1080 and a Ryzen 7 with 64 gb of RAM. I think 16-32 GB ram should be fine but I am also a game developer so I use extra RAM for debug. Nvidia sent me a 3080 for testing last year and I just installed it.
So, the trap of modern game setups is that there is a lot of super high powered hardware out there- but unless you’re driving 4K monitors at 120hz+, or striving for super fast 360hz+ refresh rates for competitive gaming, you don’t need any of it. And people often get too caught up in the flashy new latest-and-greatest to recognize what’s a good deal and what’s just showing off.
Define your use case. What’s your desirable budget? What kind of games do you want to play, do you want to do VR, what kind of display do you plan on using. Because while it’s easy to drop $2800+ on hardware these days (like I did), it is still very possible to end up with a $900-1k machine that is super capable at 1440p and can run most all games you throw at it for at least another 5 years. Dpending on what exactly you want to do with it, prioritizing certain areas of hardware over others will pay off.
These games came out in very late teenage-hood for me, but the amount of nights piled around the TV with the bros, pounding beers and bongers, and scaring ourselves…oh man the memories. Those games were absolute rippers, Parasite Eve 2 especially (except for that end boss)
Sub the 7950x3d for a 7800x3d, and swap the GPU for a 4070 or 7800 xt. You can likely swap the MB, but I’ll let someone else speak to that one.
Where I would spend money is with two NVMe drives. A 1TB drive for the OS and a 2TB game drive. You can add a spinning HD for mass storage if needed.
If you really want to save some money, go with an x570 MB and a 5800x3D. But I’d stay with the GPUs from this gen. Downside is you have no room for upgrades down the line.
For reference, I have an x570 MB, 5800x3D, and a 6750xt GPU. I’m not having issues running games.
Definitely agree that 7800x3D is better value for gaming. Depending on the games played and choice of GPU, the 7600 could provide an even better value option. The 4090 is the only offering from Nvidia that makes sort of sense IMO (and only if you want to spend a lot for the best) with 7900 xtx > 7900 > 7800 the better choices in order of higher to lower performance and lower to higher value.
That being said, all the components are way overkill for 60 fps at 1080p. If you are not going to capitalize on the performance with a higher framerate and resolution monitor, there really is not a need for this tier of components at all. A used B550/B450 board and a 7600 could easily drive modern gamed with lower settings at 60fps/1080p at a fraction of the price.
You’re kidding, right? I wish a bank would be so lenient with me as to let me pay off my interest-free loan with terms of ‘whenever you feel like it, off the money you make as a freelance forager.’
bin.pol.social
Najstarsze