Upload
Login or register

ottofan

Last status update:
-
Date Signed Up:4/07/2012
Last Login:8/29/2016
FunnyJunk Career Stats
Comment Ranking:#8761
Highest Content Rank:#1520
Highest Comment Rank:#6661
Content Thumbs: 7217 total,  7902 ,  685
Comment Thumbs: 1437 total,  1664 ,  227
Content Level Progress: 13% (13/100)
Level 172 Content: Soldier Of Funnyjunk → Level 173 Content: Soldier Of Funnyjunk
Comment Level Progress: 50% (50/100)
Level 213 Comments: Comedic Genius → Level 214 Comments: Comedic Genius
Subscribers:2
Content Views:210974
Times Content Favorited:297 times
Total Comments Made:255
FJ Points:8755

Text Posts

latest user's comments

#55 - Are you sure about that? I mean, Star-Lord (Guardians of the G… 08/12/2016 on xxxmen +3
#81 - The biggest reason I play on console is that I never have to w…  [+] (26 new replies) 08/07/2016 on PC +79
#280 - aywrightinglish (08/07/2016) [-]
Ya bet you circle jerk with a bunch of toher stuff. Ypu are in Fj after all.
User avatar
#239 - nathanbiggs (08/07/2016) [-]
>actually thinking high framerates boils down to a circlejerk

t. someone that has never played a game at 144+ FPS
#389 - anon (08/07/2016) [-]
Maybe some people just don't care as much? As long as it doesn't drop under 30 I'm fine, even if I'd like 60 frames. Also don't act like elitists don't turn frames into a stupid pissing contest.
User avatar
#394 - nathanbiggs (08/07/2016) [-]
It's far from a pissing contest, 100+ FPS is objectively better, especially for games with fast paced combat. 30 FPS is only really acceptable in 2 situations. The first being the game has massive amounts of motion blur thrown on it, which just makes the game look horrible and only really goes to hide the 30 FPS at a glance, and the second being in slower paced games like strategy games and the like. 30 FPS should've died a decade ago, with even TVs pushing 60-120hz, people shouldn't accept 30 FPS as a standard anymore.
#336 - anon (08/07/2016) [-]
I don't notice framerate at all when playing, so long as it doesn't suddenly drop to 5 fps. I couldn't tell which of my games run 60fps and which run 30.
User avatar
#490 - markipliergame (08/07/2016) [-]
if you cant notice the difference between 60 and 30 then you physically have something wrong with you
User avatar
#344 - nathanbiggs (08/07/2016) [-]
Then you need to pay more attention, there's a very clear difference between 30, 60, and 120 FPS, especially once you get up to t 120-144 FPS.
#123 - sentinyl (08/07/2016) [-]
You realize that to meet the minimum requirements of almost any game you only need like $200, right? I mean you might not get the highest framerate, so you can't circlejerk about it with some nerds or that kind of shit.
#364 - twentyten (08/07/2016) [-]
200? Used maybe, and it probably wont run very well at all.
#159 - tripelace (08/07/2016) [-]
**tripelace used "*roll picture*"**
**tripelace rolled image**Rather then pay $200 every 2 or 3 years, I'd pay $300 + every 6 or seven years. That's just me though...
User avatar
#345 - nathanbiggs (08/07/2016) [-]
Don't forget the $60 a year for online and (usually) higher prices for games on console. On top of that, you really don't need to upgrade every 2-3 years, especially if you stay at 1080p.
User avatar
#539 - taggz (08/09/2016) [-]
50 now, n ps3 had free multiplayer,
#387 - anon (08/07/2016) [-]
Ya I call bullshit on games being anything more than marginally higher in price. Steam isn't the only thing that has sales, PSN/XBL stores do to, plus regular game stores can have frequent sales, used copies, and the option to bring in games you don't want anymore for cash. It's not like Steam has any unique thing by having sales.
User avatar
#487 - markipliergame (08/07/2016) [-]
#363 - twentyten (08/07/2016) [-]
60 for online? ha, if pc gamers don't pay for full retail why would console players?
User avatar
#369 - nathanbiggs (08/07/2016) [-]
Because the cost for the subscription to Xbox Live/PS+ very rarely go on sale, the same can't be said for full PC games. Consoles are doing better with sales, but they're not as good as PC yet.
#372 - twentyten (08/07/2016) [-]
Please, I can find a 12 month gold sub for less than 2/3 than retail price easily.
User avatar
#377 - nathanbiggs (08/07/2016) [-]
Let me guess, probably from some backwater, shady as fuck, site. The difference between both of these is that the sales on PC come from legitimate retailers. On top of that, 99% of the playerbase is not going to look deeper than Amazon/their console for their subs.
#382 - twentyten (08/07/2016) [-]
Ah yes, eBay shady as fuck. I'm talking about subs here, not games. It's already obvious pc games are cheaper, but I already got a counter argument for that.
User avatar
#383 - nathanbiggs (08/07/2016) [-]
Alright, we'll say you get it for $40 instead of $60, it's still $40 you have to pay each year just to use your own internet to play online. What's this counter argument for PC games being cheaper?
#384 - twentyten (08/07/2016) [-]
I don't have to pay for, the thing people like you don't understand. It's not forced. As for the counter, I can share my digital games and still play them at the same time. Basically cut the cost in half. No need to wait for sales.
User avatar
#385 - nathanbiggs (08/07/2016) [-]
You don't have to pay for it, no. But you also don't have to pay for your games at all on PC because of pirating. To counter something with "w-well I just don't have to pay for it" is stupid. Also, Steam also has family sharing so there goes your point entirely.
#390 - twentyten (08/07/2016) [-]
You must lack some reading comprehension. I never said "w-well I just don't have to pay for it" is a counter argument cheaper games. It's a counter to your remark about "it's still $40 you have to pay each year"... I don't HAVE TO pay anything.

As for the steam family sharing:
"Can two users share a library and both play at the same time?
No, a shared library may only be accessed by one user at a time."

I'm not limited by that on consoles. "so there goes your point entirely." Haha, nope.
User avatar
#393 - nathanbiggs (08/07/2016) [-]
Someone is still essentially tasked with paying for the game, most likely full price. Then, if the game is multiplayer, someone has to have paid for a subscription to XBL/PS+. Then, you have the worse performance, lack of mods, lower resolution, the list goes on. Even if both users have to pay for it on PC, there's a damn good chance it'll come out to be less expensive than going through all these hops to play it on console. And again, you can just pirate the game on PC if this is just a race to the cheapest.
User avatar
#298 - thegamepixel (08/07/2016) [-]
Even if that is true, which it isn't, $200 every 2-3 years or 60$ every year for online + $400 for each console every 4-5 years. The only console generation that was 6-7 years was the 360/PS3 one. All others are shorter and this one's almost over with the Neo and Scorpio. PC gaming is cheaper.
User avatar
#192 - ietam (08/07/2016) [-]
Why do you think that a pc grows obsolete faster? a 300 dollar pc that performs the same as a console will perform the same as a console 6 years later.
#80 - Comment deleted 08/07/2016 on PC 0
#992 - cool 08/01/2016 on Show your flag 0
#142 - THIS GUY ***** 07/28/2016 on Jhonny Sins is to talented +1
#141 - Picture 07/28/2016 on Jhonny Sins is to talented 0
#35 - Can you actually believe that's Henry Rollins, the Black Flag … 03/01/2016 on mark ruffalo on his loss. +2
#488 - Picture 02/07/2016 on berned 0
#21 - *What a great day, hanging out with the boss and ***** 12/22/2015 on Darth Grinch +15
#493 - yeah, you know the drill 12/20/2015 on Scrap & Topheavy #2 0
[ 255 Total ]

channels owned

Subscribe fucking-ironic

user's friends