Malwarebytes Antimalware. Doesn't get everything, but it seems to be better than the two you tried.

I've used Spybot Search and Destroy since my college days, but Malwarebytes does seem to be much better. Thanks for the suggest.

A strategy guide for The Sims..? Seriously?

TBH, I didn't really know there was a strategy guide...didn't assume there wasn't one, just didn't have a reason to look for it....

I thought The Sims was fun on some level, but it never kept my interest for long.

Saw this story and thought of Cutter:

http://tinyurl.com/ljwgc8

PC version was also pretty half-assed but that's another matter entirely.

The 360 version was half-assed too. Looked beautiful, but it was boring. But I only rented that one, so no harm. I ended up buying the Xbox (yes, the first generation Xbox console) edition and it was so much more fun.

The point is that people shouldn't need achievements to challenge themselves or think outside the box.

Most of the ones I've seen don't subtract from the games themselves. Just something extra to do when the central content was completely played through. And to be honest, the games that tack them on for added content tend not to be very good themselves. Coincidentally or not, they also tend to be the ones I notice score poorly on Metacritic.

And an old school RPG player you obviously aren't. Achievements and item collection or state building amount to the same thing. Grind. Grind. Grind. Grind. Go back into town to cash in your collected shit, apply XP. The thing with achievements is they have a pre-packaged goal for a player to reach. If the developer doesn't already have a crappy game they're pushing out, the achievements will just be something else to do, not despite the game.

Such as some of the technological advancements in PC gaming that allow his Xbox360 to exist.

Or that consoles preceded PCs in helping the gaming industry from its crash in the 1980s...how we (or really, just yourself) forget our history.

The back story is so outrageous as to be comedic, but then, the same screenwriter for Red Dawn had to stretch it for that movie. Whatever works, it's just a game.

Red Dawn was made possible because it was the height of the cold war against Russia.

John Milius certainly had a few bones to pick with his 110 minute tirade. Fun film though.

I'm wondering how the games ends already. Maybe you eventually go to NK itself? That's probably left for the inevitable sequel, but it'd be cool to see the Ryugyong Hotel to see if they ever finished that thing.

This comment was edited on May 28, 2009, 00:26.

I bet when it comes out it'll play just like Quake4 did... a consolized port.

No, the game was just inferior for a game in the series.

It is a badly ported console game.

OpFlash Elite is one game I will concede the PC elitists are right - it and it's expansions were better played on the PC.

Arma2 will mainly be an Xbox360 title and the gameplay will fit that.

AFIK, ArmA 2 is PC only. OpFlash 2: Dragon Rising is coming out on the PC, 360, PS3, etc.

My ISP was pretty wobbly yesterday, I blamed it on that, but then it cleared up and Blues was still going out. What was even stranger was this page loaded fine every time on my phone

Here's another article I read a few months ago on the subject:

It's the same one posted in the links above

Ah, see, that's all you had to say. I was under the misconception that you were a PC gamer (this being a PC gaming site and all) and as such, you'd have up-to-date hardware.

Well, in that case I apologize for what I said earlier, 'bro.

I'd hardly call upgraded hardware indicative per se of dedication to the platform.

nVidia and ATI would certainly disagree with you, especially if you were a gamer in the late '90s until a few years ago. In fact, I seem to recall a few debates (where you participated, IIRC) where the whole discussion centered around gamers being a main driving force for technology advancement for the PC.

The past few years haven't given us PC gamers much of a reason to upgrade.

Which is more or less the reason I haven't bought new hardware for my desktop in so long...to be honest, I'm due to buy a new machine regardless.

I think the fact that any of us are here on a (mostly) PC gaming news site is evidence enough.

Shrug. Games are games, regardless the platform.

1) PC has better graphics, framerates and controls.

And the hassles of upgrading, the inconsistencies of developer support, the constant patching, half-baked releases, etc. As for controls, meh. Preference for a keyboard and mouse on a console release of Fallout 3 or Bioshock is desired even by me, but it's negligible.

2) PC has mods.

No argument there.

3) Most 360 and PS3 games inevitably come out on the PC (where they are better most of the time).

Better in what way? Graphically? Again, I could care less. Controls? Depends on how well implemented they are, but on the whole I'd rather play something like GTA IV or MSG (which isn't out on the PC as of yet) than a keyboard. It's just preference.

4) Each console game costs $10-20 more than its PC equivalent. If you buy ten games a year, you're spending least $100 more.

If the release is even available on the PC, then the price comparison applies. As it stands, the vast majority of console games have not made the port to PC. But then, too, that is if you buy brand-new product. Gamestop stores are a great for picking up after-market games.

. With most high-end games being console ports, the need to upgrade your rig on a regular basis is decreasing and a good machine will last you years.

http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=23742

It still seems as if PC-centric FPS are still heading towards needing higher and higher powered machines. System requirements for most games have seemed to level off the last couple of years, though. The thing is, and central to my main point, is I don't have to even consider upgrading anyway. The console's already there, my flat-panel TV can handle a 1080p signal (my only gripe with console graphics being I wish more studios would go beyond 720p, but meh), it's all right there. No tinkering with a potentially faulty PC product. No mods, but it's a trade-off.

Aside from that, a PC isn't just for gaming and serves many other purposes. So no, a brand new $800-1000 gaming PC seems like a much better investment than a $300-500 console + $10-20 extra per game + $60/year if you use Xbox Live.

Eh, I'm guessing you're talking about purposes that are so basic and rudimentary I can, and do, from my phone? Like browse the internet or chat or write email? The phone will never replace my PC or notebook for things like that, but I'm hardly tied down to it either. The $800-$1k "investment" in a computer is something I don't even have to consider, because alas, I already have the equipment for it.

As for Xbox live, I'm sorry, never bought into it and never will, just because of Live. Your statement about that is very true - it simply costs money to use it. On the other hand, it costs nothing to use PSN for multiplayer games, so the point is moot

But Fallout 3 and Bioshock were visually better on the PC

I couldn't tell much difference, TBH. But then I really didn't care at the time (and I still don't). The game played great on the PS3. The only thing I'm heartbroken over is the DLCs exclusive to the 360, but then again...nah, I don't lose that much sleep over it.

Really... what?

Did you honestly forget how to read?

It was an honest question.

I hope not. Bioshock and Fallout 3 were both universally acclaimed FPS on the consoles. If you can't understand why a person may want to play those games on something besides a PC, then you've really become idiotic.

If a shooter comes out on PC and consoles, why would you ever choose the console version?

Money doesn't grow on trees? I've got bills to pay? The last major PC upgrade I did was right at four years ago? Do you still live with your parents? A trust-funder? It's nice to live a life where you don't have money going out and people taking care of you, Jerykk. Live it up while you can.

Sure, upgrading or building a new PC to something decent is not so expensive as even a couple of years ago. But the question is, why? I buy a console and can play the game anyway, and metric shit-ton more. Granted, each game is individually more expensive, but overall, the system has long since payed for itself.

The PS2 version was a lousy port.

Yes, I know, that's what I originally said.

That's what happens when you try to port a demanding PC game onto inferior console hardware.

What was demanding about Mafia? Aside from the better graphics the PC would obviously over the PS2, it was essentially a GTA clone, which that kind of sandbox had been done before. Shoddy port, yes, but it was just a poor port altogether, hardware not necessarily withstanding.

Remember Max Payne?

For what system? The PS2 edition played pretty damn good considering.

I don't understand why you'd even bother playing Mafia on the PS2.

I didn't do as I typically preached - that is, read a plethora of reviews and make sure a game that was supposedly popular and fun on the PC actually makes a decent port. No harm no foul.

If a game is designed for the PC, you should play it on the PC.

Remember your constant tantrums regarding this and Fallout 3? The game plays damn near perfect on both the 360 and PS3, so your famous Jerykk Logic just doesn't have a track history of being reliable.

PC gaming isn't going the direction you want Jerykk. Why are you still here?

I was kind of wondering the same thing. Even though the kid isn't comparable to Riley Pizt, he eventually went away.

This comment was edited on May 27, 2009, 01:20.

...but to say that Mafia is a really bad game is just wrong by any standards.

Apparently you never picked up and played the PS2 port. I understand it was originally a PC game (I shudder to think how that plays) but this was one of those games that just wasn't that fun for the Playstation.

You might want to try hiring real project managers with real skills, and learning how to set and keep deadlines.

Georgy Broussard should hire you to be his coach

I have worked in the private sector long enough to know that these simple things can go along way in helping reduce costs in virtually every project

Or if you do as my company did, offset whatever qualitative gains made by hiring a PM who costs twice as much.

This new guy is pretty good, impressive résumé and a great team player, and will vouch for his employees when/if they mess up. It's just the guy likes his toys. I walked into my office last week and found a package with all new dictionaries, a translation computer, a new netbook, and a notice telling me to collect my "new" Blackberry. WTF? I like what this new PM is trying to do, but I'm afraid the company will figure out he's costing them too much money.

All he needs to do is find a lawyer just as stupid as he...

Hell, I'd love to be his lawyer. This guy has been on his anti-anything morally questionable tirade for so many years a client like him would be golden to rape for hourly charges.

Both Red Dead Revolver and Mafia were bad, bad games, IMO. Since they're actually creating sequels to them the one positive thing is they have nowhere to go but up with either sequel.

On another note, WHAT THE FUCK is up with companies selling these $100+ games ... not to mention the need for a new peripheral to play these games

Are you talking about Guitar Hero X and the Rockband franchise? If so, I'm pretty sure I've seen every game in that series available by itself. Hell, I haven't even picked up a plastic guitar since college.

It's a shame they won't go back to Los Santos. Compared to Vice City and Liberty City it's sadly ignored.

From the article:

"Once the industry goes from its current 64-billion-bit chip to a 256-billion-bit chip (that’s 32 gigabytes), it will hit that brick wall."

Aren't they a bit late to the game? I've got a 32 gig Panasonic SD card in my DSLR right now...I bought the thing at Yodobashi Camera in Tokyo back last December.