Computer Diagnosis?

virgil · Post by **virgil** » Mon Apr 05, 2010 6:45 am

I've been getting blue screen crashes on a semi-regular basis while playing Warcraft, the code very roughly stating that it's related to a device or driver, so I started the following regiment to solve it.

* Ran two different virus scanners: No problems, Clean
* Memory Test: No problems, Clean
* Driver checks: Vid card driver fully updated
* Blew out dust from the inside of the case: Now clean
* Repair utility for the game itself: Irrevocable file damage, uinstalled
* Defragged the hard drive: Now clean
* Scan Disk function on hard drive: No problems, Clean

Now, I can't even reinstall the game. Partway through the installation process, it fails because of inability to read a file. Thinking it was maybe the CD I had, I used Blizzard's online download option, and got the same problem.

Username17 · Post by **Username17** » Mon Apr 05, 2010 8:07 am

Sounds like a registry error maybe. Do some Reg Cleaner and purge the old references to Warcraft and it may be able to reinstall.

-Username17

Vnonymous · Post by **Vnonymous** » Mon Apr 05, 2010 3:28 pm

Check your power supply and video card.

This involves testing them in another computer.

Edit: Alternatively, thank the computer gods for stopping you from sinking more time into that game

virgil · Post by **virgil** » Mon Apr 05, 2010 6:21 pm

Turned out that the memory test and scan disk functions didn't actually do anything, almost as if they were too lazy, skipped their jobs, and instantly told me "yeah, yeah, everything's hunky dory". I'm running them a second time, and now they're actually both taking time to run but finding errors all over the place.

K · Post by K » Mon Apr 05, 2010 7:53 pm

virgileso wrote:Turned out that the memory test and scan disk functions didn't actually do anything, almost as if they were too lazy, skipped their jobs, and instantly told me "yeah, yeah, everything's hunky dory". I'm running them a second time, and now they're actually both taking time to run but finding errors all over the place.

Sounds like your disk drive is dying.

PhoneLobster · Post by **PhoneLobster** » Mon Apr 05, 2010 11:09 pm

Or his power supply or motherboard.

How old is this machine?

Edit: And is it a fucking intel?

Ganbare Gincun · Post by **Ganbare Gincun** » Tue Apr 06, 2010 12:21 am

Are you using MemTest86+ and the Hitachi DFT to scan your memory and hard drive respectively?

And why the hate for Intel, PL?

virgil · Post by **virgil** » Tue Apr 06, 2010 1:29 am

I'm using memtest86 and XP's built-in chkdsk function. The computer's three or four years old. I was under the impression that the hard drive wasn't touched when running a memory test (boots from a CD), which would make its dying/undying state not of any import.

Ganbare Gincun · Post by **Ganbare Gincun** » Tue Apr 06, 2010 1:43 am

virgileso wrote:I'm using memtest86 and XP's built-in chkdsk function. The computer's three or four years old. I was under the impression that the hard drive wasn't touched when running a memory test (boots from a CD), which would make its dying/undying state not of any import.

MemTest86 is good - it's just a less current version of MemTest86+ - but you'll definitely want to use the Hitachi DFT to test the physical integrity of the drive and then follow up with CHKDSK to make sure all the data is where it's supposed to be in the NTFS file system.

PhoneLobster · Post by **PhoneLobster** » Tue Apr 06, 2010 2:34 am

Ganbare Gincun wrote:And why the hate for Intel, PL?

I had some very bad experiences with one of the worst incarnations of processor they or anyone else has ever released.

I have also noticed since then that even outside of that particularly heinous generation of processors AMD is incredibly more reliable and long lived in general.

And cheaper, and often faster (certainly faster for you money).

These days all my and my families and my business many and various machines are AMD based architecture. Typically I only get problems similar to those mentioned/have machines blow up when the power sources explode.

That's what AMD gives you. The only components that ever seem to die are Monitors, DVD Drives and of course power sources (which sometimes burn the entire machine to a crisp, but that is what power sources can do when they explode, AMD can't save me from THAT).

If I wanted to be like Crissa has advocated and run the same out of date hardware barring the great month of power surges in '08 I could still be running basically every AMD machine I have ever owned.

virgil · Post by **virgil** » Tue Apr 06, 2010 4:12 am

My bad, I didn't realize there was a difference in the name. It's the Memtest86+. Also, it is an AMD processor. Judging by how the second test went, it's sounding like one of my memory sticks died on me; probably the 1GB one covered in metal (the other three look like normal chips), which according to the label is Corsair brand.

I am now currently running memtest with that stick removed to see if it behaves.

Crissa · Post by **Crissa** » Tue Apr 06, 2010 4:50 am

I had to finally replace my iBook G4, it lived nearly seven years, but repair was about half of replacement.

Why replace what's still working? I still use the same PC that's older than that, but it is now sitting waiting for me to disassemble it.

-Crissa

virgil · Post by **virgil** » Tue Apr 06, 2010 5:25 am

I had systematically removed and replaced so only one stick was out at a time, hoping that it was just one of the four that was showing errors on the memory test, which didn't work. Therefore, there's at least two sticks that are broken, and currently the computer works for everything I use it for except WoW; so I'll just live without that game and work on repairing it some other time, especially since I'm way too poor to be buying replacements anyway.

Ganbare Gincun · Post by **Ganbare Gincun** » Tue Apr 06, 2010 5:29 am

virgileso wrote:I had systematically removed and replaced so only one stick was out at a time, hoping that it was just one of the four that was showing errors on the memory test, which didn't work. Therefore, there's at least two sticks that are broken, and currently the computer works for everything I use it for except WoW; so I'll just live without that game and work on repairing it some other time, especially since I'm way too poor to be buying replacements anyway.

You're better off without WoW, honestly.

ubernoob · Post by **ubernoob** » Tue Apr 06, 2010 5:55 am

virgileso wrote:I had systematically removed and replaced so only one stick was out at a time, hoping that it was just one of the four that was showing errors on the memory test, which didn't work. Therefore, there's at least two sticks that are broken, and currently the computer works for everything I use it for except WoW; so I'll just live without that game and work on repairing it some other time, especially since I'm way too poor to be buying replacements anyway.

Consider yourself lucky then. Incentive to go out for a walk and interact with people.

Seriously, WoW isn't evil, but it is pretty much the best at what it does:
http://www.cracked.com/article_18461_5- ... icted.html

Jacob_Orlove · Post by **Jacob_Orlove** » Tue Apr 06, 2010 6:17 am

There are MMOs in China that make WoW look like Candyland. But yeah, "my computer works fine except it won't play WoW anymore" is about the best technical problem I could imagine.

Cynic · Post by **Cynic** » Tue Apr 06, 2010 5:35 pm

jacob, what mmos are these?

do tell

Starmaker · Post by **Starmaker** » Tue Apr 06, 2010 8:01 pm

Example: ZT Online.

WoW's still worse because of its perceived fairness. You just know that almost every "free" game supports itself with selling loot for money. Blizzard not only stated that they won't do it, evar, but they have actively prevented a secondary market for loot. WoW is so much worse because it's so damn fair.

Jacob_Orlove · Post by **Jacob_Orlove** » Tue Apr 06, 2010 11:02 pm

That's the exact article I was thinking of.

I don't see how "fairness" makes Warcraft worse. There are three basic models here:

1) Time is king. This is the Warcraft model, the idea is that playing longer makes your character better.

2) Money is king. A common asian MMO model, as exemplified by that ZT article. The biggest spenders win.

3) Skill is king. This is more for FPS/RTS games like Counterstrike or Starcraft. There may be a learning curve that requires some time investment but more time != more power.

Each of those models lends itself to a particular gameplay experience, but only the "money is king" model will destroy your bank account. WoW is $180/year, that's about what those players were spending in a single day opening 1000 treasure chests.

Crissa · Post by **Crissa** » Tue Apr 06, 2010 11:16 pm

And even in time is king or skill is king you trade time (practice) to increase skill or use skill (less debts, deaths, etc) to lower the time it takes to do certain tasks, allowing more tasks to be done.

Certainly, I prefer to avoid the money is king model, as I'm not a slots player, and I don't want to have my game be 'less fun' because someone spent money and I didn't.

It's already bad enough in WoW you can spend skill and time to get armor which then allows you to... Not use skill and just 'win' against other players in PvP. Nothing worse than to be playing your game and have some big-dick guy wearing the super armor nuke your quests so you can't spend time.

I swear, most PvP armor should only function in certain places like instances in WoW.

-Crissa

CatharzGodfoot · Post by **CatharzGodfoot** » Wed Apr 07, 2010 5:53 am

Jacob_Orlove wrote:That's the exact article I was thinking of.

I don't see how "fairness" makes Warcraft worse. There are three basic models here:

1) Time is king. This is the Warcraft model, the idea is that playing longer makes your character better.

2) Money is king. A common asian MMO model, as exemplified by that ZT article. The biggest spenders win.

3) Skill is king. This is more for FPS/RTS games like Counterstrike or Starcraft. There may be a learning curve that requires some time investment but more time != more power.

Each of those models lends itself to a particular gameplay experience, but only the "money is king" model will destroy your bank account. WoW is $180/year, that's about what those players were spending in a single day opening 1000 treasure chests.

'Time is money'. If the time you spend to become king isn't actually that fun, in many cases you'd have been better off paying somebody with a lower wage for it. That's why so many companies exist to perform exactly that transaction.

The only way to avoid it is the 'skill is king' paradigm, because if you're paying other people to play the whole game it might as well be progress quest.

Crissa · Post by **Crissa** » Wed Apr 07, 2010 6:22 am

The problem with skill is king games is that there's no ramp up. Very few games actually encourage and enforce a ladder where people of similar skill can be matched and those who have higher skill teach rather than just bully others...

-Crissa

Starmaker · Post by **Starmaker** » Wed Apr 07, 2010 8:56 am

Time is king: time spent is in direct correlation to achievements earned. The crack part of Warcrack.
WoW is basically Soviet socialism. Work moar. Receive systemic qualitative rewards. Get fancy badges. Wait for the utter bliss and paradise of communism (aka full set of top tier loot) that's always just a month of raiding from now. Join komsomol and earn your place in the Party itself. Cheat the system. Report people to the mods for infractions of assorted severity. Unite and fight an external enemy.

Money is king: it attracts people, sure. Cults also attract people. This shit abuses the emotional attachment people feel for their in-game avatar when playing for free doesn't advance them further: it's either pay or kill/an hero the avatar.

Skill is king: perma-losers give up. There's no fun in being a total failure, and people just move on with their lives.

"Money is king" advertizes itself as ZOMG FREE TO PLAY!, "Skill is king" has the no ramp up problem that Crissa pointed out which is not obvious to new players. At some point player realize they've been cheated and leave (yes, this can take time and leave lasting damage, depending on the person). WoW is very upfront about what it constitutes: pay now, pay later, see interesting places, kill interesting people. It's a horrible, horrible waste of time. Which reminds me, raid today at 8pm.

CatharzGodfoot · Post by **CatharzGodfoot** » Wed Apr 07, 2010 2:15 pm

Crissa wrote:The problem with skill is king games is that there's no ramp up. Very few games actually encourage and enforce a ladder where people of similar skill can be matched and those who have higher skill teach rather than just bully others...

-Crissa

Yeah. When you have PvP primary, you'd need to use adaptive algorithms to place players in games of peers. When you're dealing with something more akin to cooperative questing, you actually need to write original and interesting material, and that actually takes work (rather than saying 'kill 100 orcs!').

Jacob_Orlove · Post by **Jacob_Orlove** » Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:57 pm

Crissa wrote:The problem with skill is king games is that there's no ramp up. Very few games actually encourage and enforce a ladder where people of similar skill can be matched and those who have higher skill teach rather than just bully others...

-Crissa

Right. Skill games tend to lend themselves well to tournament play (Street Fighter, Starcraft), or to getting together and playing with some friends (Halo, Smash Bros). But they're less suited to online multiplayer freeform PvP.

There's actually a fourth paradigm, "Imagination is King," but you need a DM for that one, not a computer program.