Square Enix Approved Final Fantasy XIV PC “Only $3750!”

Anyone with half a brain will know that for less than half the money you could put together a pc that will be just as good. Half the stuff listed isn't even required. They're just throwing in the most expensive parts into the box for the hell of it.

Just like Anon above me suggested, you only need to spend a fraction of that cost to get comparable performance. Buy an i7 930 and oc it past that 3.33Ghz with ease. That alone will save you $700 over that overpriced 980X. 12GB memory? Not necessary; half of that is plenty enough. 80GB SSD? Won't give you additional fps in games, just improve your loading times. Get a WD Black instead and save over $100 and get much more storage space at the same time. Blu-ray drive, extra hdds, Sidewinder m&k, are all unnecessary extras that add to the cost. Swap Win7 Ultimate for Home Premium and save another $80.

That $3750 pc is a waste of money, when you can build a top of the line pc for $1500 or less.

Who spends money on computers, oh my god haven't you heard about pirating? Raid ships to steal computer parts!

Who are you 05:06, the RIAA? Pirating =/= stealing. Copyright violation/infringement yes, stealing, no.

Pirating in the sense of being an actual pirate literal high seas pirate does equal stealing.

@20:22 anon:
Yeah, and you stick it up your ass to power it, you need a PSU asshole.
Also a case (full tower so u can SLI/CROSSFIRE) and a god damn cooler, unless you plan using the 980X on fucking stock frecuency.

to that computers credit, there is a place for it. high end video editing, extreme high rex photoshopping, among other things.

but i have a question to pose.

are there desktop motherboards that support 2 processors anymore? and if there is why not use 2 x6 amd cpus?

i mean i have no doubt that there are things that take advantage of many cores and multiple threads, but wouldnt 12 real cores beat out 6 real and 6 logical?

You could still do that for considerably less, if you can't your are just retarded

An 80GM SSD? 12 GB of ddr3 Memory? Absurd. This is a PC, not a fucking server.

Hardly a damn person needs more than 2GB of RAM even today. Seriously. Otherwise they need a lesson in unloading startup programs and pressing that little X button when they open a trillion useless things.

Oh my god I've never seen a product so worth its price in my whole liiifeee!!!!

I'm interested in what the PC fanboys who were laughing at the PS3's lacking capabilities have to say in light of this. Because yes, the PS3 won't look as good, but the ones who want this game surely won't have to pay more than what? 60 USD and whatever the online fee is worth?

Even with the latest computer parts, to just make your own computer specs to support even the latest gaming won't even cost more then 3.1k... This has to be one of em advertisements for final fantasy fan suckers.

I've never bothered making a computer from scraps. I typically just modify/upgrade a pre-purchased one...

But knowing the prices of some items out there. I'm pretty sure a guy like me could make a PC that's far more reliable then whatever the hell they're trying to sell us with a third of the price tag they have.

I just try on a parts reseller website to how much it would cost to build this pc and it's basically 3000$+taxes+shipping so we're not far from the Square Enix thing.

A PC built with selected hardware for some hundred bucks is already faster than those consoles...

@16:15 lol that was fake. There was no PS3 version at E3. But of course PC version will look better. And the is no XBOX360 version coming at the moment.

you forget that people were able to play the beta on the ps3.

you forget that this generation of consoles is old shit already

My PC will handle this just fine. This is just lukewarm marketing. Any <600$ PC you build yourself will do the number just fine.

plus, why alienware, unless it's for the laptop? and even then it's a ripoff imo. Whoever plays an mmo on a laptop is beyond my logic.

GeForce GTX 465 > $220
Intel i5 760 > $200
and with a fitting motherboard for about $100, it'll feel like you're hopping in Neverland - maybe for even cheaper if you know where to look too. You can also build something similar with AMD parts. That computer is probably to play the game with that panaromic-3D-13260x2260-resolution thing - which I still don't see the point of...

this actually looks pretty close to my computer except the cpu
Intel i7 940
Asus P6x58D
6GB CORSAIR DOMINATOR ram
asus gtx 480
corsair 1000hx
intel 160gb ssd
3x WD 2tb hdd
1x wd 1tb hdd
antec 900 v2 case

You were a fool to buy 480.

You could run Crysis 2 at maximum and possibly with Wakamoto nanosuit on with that hardware, but FF XIV???

Nope.

@ Don't get so high and mighty, Kyorisu.

Fucking Christ, I hate pcfags...

You know, some of us buy consoles because of the awesome exclusives. >_>

And believe me, they're damn well worth it.

yeah I hate those fucking Pcfags too.

@21:00
I have my consoles for the exclusives, but i still prefer my PC over my Consoles ._.

and it's just a $1000 rig i bought 2 years ago (it can still handle almost all new Games at maxed out settings at 1440*900 res) D:

Of course, but this is about power. A console with relatively cheap hardware (even several years old to boot) can only loose here. Clever programming helps, but there are limits.

I could care less about a console's or a PC's power to be quite frank. Games don't ridiculous CPUs, GPUs and whatevers to be enjoyable. The DS is a shining testament to that.

Mang I only had 2 stupid Quadro FX5600 in SLi with Quadro FX4600 on Dedicated Physx. Feels bad mang.

Yes, but will it run Minesweeper?

Oh, they realease game made for top PCs and suddenly consoles arent about how powerful they are but about exclusives? Nice hypocrisy...

You do realize even the DS has a CPU and a GPU, don't you?

@ 01:19

Totally. I bought my Wii because it's a powerhouse and not because of Nintendo's legendary first party titles. Same goes for my PS3. I bought it solely for the 3.2 GHz CBE CPU rather than expecting it to have an awesome library of games like the PS2 did. Oh, I musn't forget the 360. I bought that because the ATI Xenon chip gave me a hard on, XBL means nothing to me.
/SARCASM

@ X_Bacon

You do realize that Anon 21:47 said RIDICULOUS CPUs and GPUs, don't you? The DS uses crappy, outdated technology but devs still manage to crank out great games for it.

Let me put this way: you build a top of the line gaming performance PC. But you then see that games you actually wanna play are scarce for it and are more abundant on the console side. Now what?

That shows that it all comes down the friggin' GAMES. If the games on the console side appeal to you more - awesome - just don't put down the pc side because its games don't, same for the other way around.

Seriously, pcfags like to act the machine they built is like the fucking offspring between them and God and'll go on to save the universe from fuck knows what. Can no one, be they on the Wii, 360, PS3 or PC's side, just enjoy their damn games without taking shots at the other side because theirs don't appeal to them? Am I the only one that finds that to be ridiculously pathetic?

Anyways...

/rant

Games scarce for on the PC? What hole did you crawl out of. Go look at Steam and the hundreds of games on it and more coming constantly for PC. This is an age of digital distribution.

I like how you ignored the "games you actually wanna play are scarce for it". I was implying that the games could be in abundance, but it could turn out that those games aren't for you.

Wow, I can't believe I actually had to clarify that.

learn2readingcomprehension

Also, dd is great. But it's not for everyone. This might surprise you, but a lot of people would prefer to own the physical medium. =/

I don't know if that was a troll post or just unadulterated ignorance and idiocy , but if it was a troll post, crawl back under your bridge. If it's the latter, well, there's not much I can do for you.

Well, I do find most games on Steam to be relevant to my interests, but that's just me.

I agree with your first comment, tho.

Mine's only 1006.

Kick its ass, Nappa!

Unfortunately Eye Infinity is about as retarded as well, down syndrome.

Well, yeah. 10 years ago might be stretching it as far as max-setting running games are concerned.

It's just that gaming PCs are scary-powerful today compared to a decade ago.

as long as the PCs are powerful enough the run the eroge that they keep pumping out, I will be satisfied.

even normal PCs are scary powerful compared to a decade ago. A normal desktop PC has the computing power surpassing that of a supercomputer from 15 years ago! That's just how it goes thanks to Moore's Law.

I plan to found the great nation of Otakutopia.
Otaku from all over the world unite and we can do it! No bans! No censoring! Death penalty for femnazis! ^_^

If you make it so the female underwear is to be shimapan, I'm sold.

We make it mandatory just like the school uniforms. ^_^

I'm all for the school uniforms, but we need to agree on the colors.

Or like Scotland, will they be used for distinguishing between different clans (i.e. fetishes)?

Bragging rights.

Extremly useful for running VMs (running internet browser inside a VM makes lot of sense), allow you to say big fat F U !!! to marvelous microsoft engineers who designed Win7 (how much memory that piece of shit can eat?!) and still have no worries about poorly coded game running out of memory (I could play Fallout3 three times longer without CTD than ordinary folks).

Maybe, but can the software really make full use of it?

Who said anything about making full use of it anyway? They just want moar and moar

it provides faster alt + tab

Red Alert 3 Uprising Maximum resolution
Assassins Creed
Prince of Persia
NBA 2K10
Devil May Cry 4
Blade and Soul
Starcraft II
Team Fortress

Several kick ass graphics hog game

solitaire and minesweeper

all minimized in the background.

If you are sitting at 8GB or even 6GB of RAM and your game is slowing down, it's safe to say your RAM is NOT the system's bottleneck.

Look to upgrade elsewhere.

Windows administers RAM in virtual 2 GB units per running program. 3 GB if you use a certain command.

FF XIV can only use what the OS provides, no matter how much RAM is in the box.

Now that we talk about RAM, I guess it might be interesting to know that 32 bit Windows (up from good old W2K) can address 64GB RAM, not 4 or less like M$ wants you to believe. CPUs use 36 bit to address RAM, not 32. Google for PAE.

INB4 questions: Yes, there are patches out there. I saw them for 7, Vista and XP.

Windows administers RAM in virtual 2 GB units per running program. 3 GB if you use a certain command.

FF XIV can only use what the OS provides, no matter how much RAM is in the box.

Now that we talk about RAM, I guess it might be interesting to know that 32 bit Windows (up from good old W2K) can address 64GB RAM, not 4 or less like M$ wants you to believe. CPUs use 36 bit to address RAM, not 32. Google for PAE.

INB4 questions: Yes, there are patches out there. I saw them for 7, Vista and XP.

There is a patch to make XP 32bit recognize >4GB RAM?

Would you kindly tell me where?

And yea, 32bit CPUs can address more tan 4GB RAM, my server can have up to 16GB and I don't think that Pentium 3 Xeon (the server has 3 of them) is a 64bit CPU.

I'd rather run a native 64bit OS anyway.

X_Bacon, as would I, if I had a new PC with no OS. As it is now, reinstalling the OS and all the software would take a long time and would likely break some things, so I don't do that. When I built my current main PC, I had 4 choices in the OS - XP (32 or 64 bit) and Vista (32 or 64 bit). Vista and XP64 sicks, so I went with XP32, I still use it now, 3 years later.

If I had the choice I probably would have used Win7, now it's too much of a hassle to reinstall Windows for that ~750MB of RAM (Windows sees 3.25GB of my 4GB).

I see...
My WinXP would only address 3GB, yours is being nicer.
Since I kinda like formatting and reinstalling everything (I work doing that, heh), I had no problem with that.

You might wanna try PAE (if it's not enabled already) and 4GT.
Here, these might help:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366796(VS.85).aspx
http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/server/pae/paedrv.mspx
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb613473(v=VS.85).aspx

WTB patch for Windows XP.

I'm pretty sure there aren't any:(

I also format and reinstall for my friends etc, but I do not like doing that to my own computers - after that I forget to install some software ("Oh, I know, I'll just use this program, oh wait, I don't have it anymore since the reinstall, hmm... where is the installer?") - this part takes a long time and during that time there is always something that still "does not work right"...

I think when I need more RAM, I'll just get a 4-8GB DRAM-SSD and put my page file on it, should be much faster than even a 15kRPM hard drive (current setup)...

To the guys asking for patches: I guess links will get deleted, since manipulating the windows kernel is kinda illegal. Try google. They are really easy to find. I saw them for 7, Vista and XP. Not sure about 2K, but who uses that anymore?

Why that patch and not a 64 bit OS? Because there's no need to upgrade, 64 bit lacks drivers and you can still run 16 bit software with a 32 bit OS.

Drivers? Never had a problem with that so far, even my old Geforce 4 MX has 64bit drivers for it. 64bit OSes are getting popular real quick, you can find pretty much any driver you need.
Unless you're using some really old legacy hardware...

As for 16bit software, I run them on a VM. But short of IT professionals and enthusiasts, does anyone still use those?