Delikatessen

It's also set to be the last Witcher game: http://www.joystiq.com/2013/02/05/the-witcher-3-wild-hunt-will-be-the-last-witcher-game/

I don't think I worded my original question well enough. I know that there are no cards that benefit from PCI-e 3.0 yet, but future cards will. Also, the benchmarks I was referring to were gaming benchmarks. Since we have practically identical systems (the only difference is the motherboard, CPU and the fact that I have 4GB of RAM while he has 3GB, but they're the same speed), we compared framerates playing at the same resolution and settings. Skyrim ran 10FPS higher for me. But Skyrim and some older games (pre-2009) are the only games that I can run better than him. Battlefield 3 runs like molasses (12-25FPS) on B2K maps on my computer, while he gets 10FPS more in the same situations. Since we have the same card, I really suspect it's the CPU. Which is why I asked about a replacement for the CPU. So really, I'm going for a system that will be ready for future components, not something that just accommodates current components.

I'm going to build a new system some time after Christmas, probably early next year. The one thing I'm sure is still working perfectly is the Q6600. I compared benchmark scores to one of my friends, and this six year old processor actually outperformed his Phenom X4 II 965. But there is a major problem. Not with the CPU, but with the motherboard. The newer GPUs use PCI-e 3.0, whereas my motherboard only supports PCI-e 2.0, and SSDs use SATA III and my motherboard only supports SATA II. I do realize that these are backwards compatible with each other, but the PCI-e 2.0 slot would cripple a PCI-e 3.0 card, leaving it no room to frolic freely and happily, and the SSD would be shackled to the data transfer technology of 2008. In computer years, four years is like a really long time. The only thing I could really see benefiting from a CPU upgrade is video editing, which I don't do, or software synthesizers. Is there a suitable replacement for gaming? Edit: I accidentally pressed Enter when I was editing the subtitle, resulting in just "It'". Please ignore the seemingly inane subtitle.

Try running the game without DarnUI enabled. Does it work? Edit: Also, exactly what lines did you edit in fallout.ini, and what version of DarnUI did you download?

Have you played Vanilla Terran Conflict yet? Apparently it's somewhat tougher than AP. Many people claim that AP is a lot easier than TC due to the stock trading making it ridiculously easy to get rich fast. I haven't seen this myself yet, as I haven't played AP yet though. Not vanilla TC, but I'm not ridiculously rich because I'm going on a month playing AP, and my main source of income is flying captured/abandoned ships back to shipyards to sell them. I do trading missions sometimes, but the most I've ever made from one of those was 92k Cr. I hardly have enough money at this point to buy a freighter.

Eh, doesn't matter. I got an Xbox 360 last year and I'm still looking for games to fill up my library, so I guess I'll look into that one too :thumbsup:

I've played it, didn't find it as entertaining as X3. X3: Terran Conflict (or more precisely, it's expansion Albion Prelude) was the entire reason I started the thread. There was one tutorial which was entirely optional, and everything else was left up to you.

Alright, thanks for the suggestions. @Vagrant0: The reason I said EVE wasn't worth my time is precisely because it takes way too long to be good at anything. There's also the advantage-taking by high-leveled players and scams like you mentioned, but there's also racketeering and smartbombing. I haven't tried a second playthrough of Borderlands yet, so maybe I'll start again using Lilith. And I'm not all that picky about how games look or what the theme is. Just look at my avatar :D. I'll look into Mabinogi. @Iv000: I have STALKER: Shadow of Chernobyl, but I just couldn't get into it. It's interesting and challenging, but I just couldn't pick it up. I'll look into Mount and Blade, but I tried Thief and didn't really like it. Binding of Isaac looks interesting, though. @gamevsreality: From the reviews it's gotten, it actually looks pretty awesome. I'll look for some gameplay videos and decide if I want it or not.

I wasn't much of a Diablo fan from the start, but I played the first two and thought they were pretty good, especially hardcore mode. But from what I've heard of Diablo III... I don't plan on buying it. And now I find out that there's hand holding in it? Blizzard, I am disappoint. Oh yeah...arrows pointing to where your quest location is, annoying "Quest Completed" "Achievement Unlocked" pop up crap, checkpoints, too linear maps...I could go on. There's a good reason it has a lower rating than Duke Nukem Forever on Metacritic. DII was so fun on hardcore until the jerks came in trying to purposely kill you :( Last I played was on Hardcore Ladder because there's barely any bots on the Hardcore servers. When's the last time you played The Witcher? Before the Enhanced Edition? I believe it's still censored (the Director's Cut might be uncensored) but the animations are a lot smoother and the voice acting is 100x better. TW2 is brutal in Dark Mode. Once you're dead, you're dead...and it's hard not to die in that mode lol. I made it to the first battle in the prologue, got hit by a few arrows...dead :P I bought the original version back when it was just released in the US, broke one of the discs (which is, coincidentally, one of the last disc-based games I ever bought for the PC), then I bought the Enhanced Edition a couple years ago. Yeah, the animations were a LOT smoother here. Also, the last time I installed it, which was some time last year, I immediately installed the Director's Cut, which removes all censorship. If it were released in retail stores, it would get an AO rating. Edit: Please excuse all spelling mistakes. I have insomnia again and it's really making me not think straight.

The Witcher is actually pretty fun. Even after I decided I was done with fantasy games, I contemplated installing it again. There was some hand holding, but it was challenging at the highest difficulty. Although something that broke the game for me was the needless censorship and the animations. I've also considered buying TW2 if I ever beat The Witcher, because it seems like an awesome game.

I have Borderlands, but the entire first five minutes is nothing but hand holding, and you're subject to even more hand holding until you leave Fyrestone to proceed with the rest of the main story. I've only beaten the game using Lilith, and . It's fun, but it still treats you like a baby.

I wasn't much of a Diablo fan from the start, but I played the first two and thought they were pretty good, especially hardcore mode. But from what I've heard of Diablo III... I don't plan on buying it. And now I find out that there's hand holding in it? Blizzard, I am disappoint.

I'm in dire need of games that feature absolutely no hand holding, and punish you when you make a bad move or don't pay attention. Cost doesn't matter at this point because I'm willing to pay anything for a game that doesn't treat you like a baby who's just taking their first steps. It also can't have the words "EVE Online" in the title. Those words are taboo to me (yeah, I want a steep learning curve, but not six-months-to-a-year steep). So in short: I need a REALLY punishing, difficult, unforgiving game. Also, I already know about Dark Souls, but I think I've had a fantasy game overload.

As much as I like Bethesda games, I do not want to see them develop a STALKER game. But we can all agree that at least it's not The-Company-That-Shall-Not-Be-Named that owns it.

http://gifs.gifbin.com/1237811519_chuck-norris-approves.gif of this thread.