This is why I love this board

[j_factor]

Out of shooters, I'd rather play TF2

I would also rather play Thunder Force 2.

[KnightWarrior]

COD isn't a true FPS

Try Rage..the Makers of Doom

[sketch]

I wouldn't say my own statement on the subject had "no provocation or reason" though. Sorry if I didn't elaborate enough, but the truth is, no matter how much mac wants its OS to be conveyed as "user-friendly", they're light-years away from the stupid-easy interphase that is (actally, WAS) the PC. Now, Windows Vista and 7, those are just as useless imo. I personally need customizability in my own belongings (I paid an arm and a leg for these computerthingies, might as well actually, you know, be able to own them). These new Operating Systems nowadays are all banking on their marketing value (more like, marketing on Mac's OS marketing value), and give less and less practicality/functionality/customizability/(take-your-pick/make-one-up) with every new one. I know that's not just me, but I know I must make it my own statement; so there you go.

Since there was no discussion of PCs, Macintosh, Apple, Microsoft, or anything related to computers. This thread was just bagging on Call of Duty. Your use of the Mac was thrown in as a comparator, something that's utter garbage on the same level as CoD. So that's unprovoked IMHO. As far as your reasons, maybe you've run into Mac people who were obnoxious or whatever, but I've run into plenty of people who are PC people who just bash the Mac with little or no real knowledge about it. I have reason to bash PC users, but I don't. Why? Because it's pointless. If someone uses a PC, who cares? It's just a tool, like a pocket knife, not a way of life. You're accusing Mac users of being fashionistas and hipsters, making a statement rather than using a useful tool and trying to prove they are cooler. When you come out and bash the Mac without provocation, it would appear that it is you who are trying to establish that, by using a PC, you are somehow superior. The fact is, its just a computer. Mac, PC, whatever. If you like it, use it. They all have their uses.

As far as the Mac being not customizable (compared to Windows), that's true. By the same token, Windows isn't very customizable compared to Linux. It all depends what you want. Personally, I like the Mac interface. It is clean, user friendly, and stable. I've also always found the Mac easier to troubleshoot when I have issues, and more intuitive to use. I use my computer for surfing the web, answering email, writing, and occasionally gaming.

Also, I've always been a notebook user, and Apple makes great notebooks, and has for a long time (their early notebooks were hit or miss). I've used plenty of Windows notebooks, and most felt cheap, were not durable, and were difficult to fix when problems arose.

Now if I wanted to play games on a computer, or I preferred the style of gaming PCs have to offer, sure, I'd have a PC. It's a much better gaming platform. There's also plenty of software for the PC, and if I found myself needing something the Mac didn't offer, then I might use a PC as well (although I don't have to these days since I can just load windows onto my Mac).

I'm thrilled that you're ruling for your own Mac, though; as it's been years since I've heard someone honestly speaking of Mac with such conviction. It's refreshing. I wouldn't at all mind some elaboration on your part, or a desktop picture or two.

I have a 2006, 15" Macbook Pro. Nothing special about the setup. It has a second monitor plugged into it and I have some Bose desktop speakers attached. It's served me well for the past 5 years

P.S.> Don't get me wrong, I want to like Mac and it's OS as much as they want to shove it down my throat, but I just can't digest their marketing strategies (which very much resonates in their own product as "the computer for the computer-illiterate".) So, once again, it's refreshing to hear this from someone with conviction rather than a fresh dude in his early 20s trying to pass-up as cool and hip, or whatever these children call it nowadays.

A friend of mind felt similarly, until they came out with OSX. If you are a UNIX-head, you can do a ton of things with the Mac now. So from that perspective, perhaps the Mac is even more customizable than a Windows box (I can't speak from experience, as I don't really mess with the UNIX underpinnings of my Mac and have only dabbled briefly in Linux a while back). He switched from PC to Mac at that point and hasn't looked back. He never liked Mac people (as he called them), and probably still doesn't, but as a programmer, he finds the Mac to be the superior tool.

I think a lot of people confuse their feelings for Apples marketing and Steve Jobs' arrogance with their feelings for the Mac. I don't know how much experience you have with the Mac, but as I said, I hear people throwing Mac insults into conversations when they've never really touched one, much less dug into one and used it.

Are their aggravations with the Mac OS? Sure. I find any OS to have its down sides. But I've used a PC at work, five days a week, for the last 20 years. Yet I've always preferred the Mac OS.

I've argued this many times, but it's just a matter of personal preference. Saying the PC is better than the Mac is like saying the Genesis is better than the SNES (or vice versa). It's really a matter of taste. One isn't really better than the other at all. For me, the Mac is a better fit. For you, the PC is a better fit. I'm not sure why anyone, Mac or PC user, has to bash the other platform to feel that their platform is better. I like my Mac, and that's it. Everyone else can use what they like with no comments from me.

[Breetai]

The new Call of Duty is out and no one here is talking about it.

Huh? Why talk about something I've never played before? Isn't Call of Duty just one of those Zero Tolerance clones?


edit: come to think of it, I may have seen someone playing Call of Duty 3 on the PS3 a few years ago. Pretty sure it was another World War II Zero Tolerance clone.

[Mr Smith]

The reason I love Sega-16 is that is most threads are derailed on the first page and two forum member often take the subject so seriously they end up writing a post that takes a couple of hours to read - you can just feel the passion resonating from a subject nobody cares about.

All modern FPS are simply reworkings of the original Goldeneye - they take all the elements that made that game so utterly amazing, do their own graphics, name the weapons differently and it still never turns out as good.

[j_factor]

The reason I love Sega-16 is that is most threads are derailed on the first page and two forum member often take the subject so seriously they end up writing a post that takes a couple of hours to read - you can just feel the passion resonating from a subject nobody cares about.

It's funny because it's true! And I've been guilty of that myself, though not as often as certain others...

[Pulstar]

COD isn't a true FPS

Try Rage..the Makers of Doom

Rage was unfulfilled potential. In simple mathematical terms Borderlands > Rage :P

[Kamahl]

Mac laptops have the only usable trackpads, and have great battery life even with wifi on and doing intensive shit like 3D rendering (at least the 13'' models on OSX, the windows drivers are abysmal).
Macs aren't designed to be customizable because consistency used to be a core goal of the system. Apple has always had problems with it though, they were going in the right direction with leopard, but recently they've taken a dump all over that, which is a shame since I agree with the idea of having a consistent user experience.
Snow Leopard is on par with Windows 7.
Lion sucks, and so will Windows 8.

CoD sucks.

[magicalsoundshower]

Not into anything with a military flavor and stopped giving a crap about "pure" shooters when Half-Life came out so I couldn't care less about any Call of Duty or Battlefield or whatever. I think it's a shame -- the first person genre has so much potential and still the really popular ones are about nothing but shooting dudes. But come to think of it, the FPS really is the perfect casual game so no wonder people like it, I guess.

[Cornholio857]

Does anybody know whether Sonic Generation will work on my PC yet? Also, is there a reputable UK seller that will ship it to me for a reasonable price complete in box?

Quite a few users at Retro have been preordering it on Amazon UK.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Sega-Sonic-G...0845457&sr=8-3

Keep in mind it still requires Steam. But at least you'll have a physical copy.

[Pulstar]

And there's a no-Steam "fix" so don't worry about future playability :P

[sheath]

Sweet. I guess I'll wait and pick this up for Christmas. Or maybe I'll wait for the inevitable price drop.

[Genesis Knight]

I picked up both BF3 and MW3, and enjoy them a lot with my friends. I just don't talk about them here, since it's a retro site and retro gamers are good at throwing (humorously) over-the-top hate at modern franchises. I do, however, talk about it over at NeoGAF.

[sketch]

The reason I love Sega-16 is that is most threads are derailed on the first page and two forum member often take the subject so seriously they end up writing a post that takes a couple of hours to read - you can just feel the passion resonating from a subject nobody cares about.

All modern FPS are simply reworkings of the original Goldeneye - they take all the elements that made that game so utterly amazing, do their own graphics, name the weapons differently and it still never turns out as good.

Out of the ton of threads that get derailed by long, involved back-and-forths between 2 or 3 members, and I get tagged for the one time I put in an unrelated long post? Unfair

Agreed about Goldeneye. I think my disinterest in most fps games is that they fail to raise the bar for the genre. Goldeneye moved the bar massively upwards, and it's sort've stayed there since. In fact, that was the last fps I played to death.

[Cornholio857]

The last FPS that I played to death was Halo: Combat Evolved. The Single Player campaign and the story had me hooked for hours. The sequels, not so much.