Fungi Forums
Video Games => Video Game Chat => Topic started by: Luigison on October 14, 2011, 05:12:32 PM
-
(https://themushroomkingdom.net/board/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.gizmag.com%2Fgallery_lrg%2Frazer-switchblade-concept.jpg&hash=980b76140e120291862d679beb7fd0e5)
Source: http://www.gizmag.com/razor-switchblade-mobile-pc-gaming-concept/17507/
My first reaction was, "Cool!" But then, it's the mouse and keyboard combo that makes PC gaming cool. Where's the mouse/analog input? "An ultra-sensitive multi-touch screen." Interesting. Oh, this is for casual gamers. So, it's an iPad with a multi-touch/keyboard style input? I'm interested, but not sold.
In a related post: http://themushroomkingdom.net/board/index.php?topic=13836
-
This has been read 32 times without an opinion. I find that hard to believe. I guess I shouldn't have posted it then the PS3 mouse/keyboard post, but still. Would anyone be willing to go back to the pre-analog portable days if it was like this? I think it'd be awesome if it had at least one analog option.
-
I didn't respond because I read about it back when it was announced and didn't care then either.
It's a dumb device, trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist (how many people do you know who want to play PC games on the go and aren't willing to spend $400 or so on a laptop, but would spend that or more on an underpowered gaming-only netbook?), and the keyboard-style inputs most likely won't work well with anything except games that actually support them (which, if previous specialized input devices on PC are any indication, won't be common). And for the touchscreen side of things, a standard tablet PC would be more powerful, would have a bigger touchscreen, and most importantly, would be usable as a standard computer.
And for the record, analog does nothing to help me in most of the games I play (most shmups and fighters don't have analog movement), so its presence or lack thereof doesn't sway me one way or another.
-
I like that that dude is playing Warcraft III.
-
Where are you getting $400 price for a laptop that is remotely game-ready?
As for this thing, sorry, don't have much of an opinion. I don't play very many computer games, and it seems a bit over specialized.
-
An Atom-powered netbook costs $300 and would be able to run WarCraft III and, er, not much else. I know this because I own one and have played WarCraft III on it (though, to be fair, my old netbook with a 900Mhz Celeron processor could run it as well).
$400 would get you a laptop with a dual-core processor and the ability to run most games from 2006 and earlier.
If you go a bit higher, you can get something with an Intel i3 and the ability to run most games from 2009 and earlier.
With the Razor device (also running an Atom processor), you'd probably spend at least $500 and be able to play WarCraft III and, er, not much else.
Atom processors are woefully underpowered, and this device would be far less "game-ready" than the $400 laptop in my example.
-
Yes, but does it play Minecraft?