Better graphics on PC or Xbox 360?

Cannaton said:
That is true dirtydog, I agree completely, i was arguing the price of a decent gaming experience from point zero, ie, no prior hardware.
Click to expand...

If you're assuming that nothing would be owned from the PC perspective, it would only be fair to also assume the same for a console and then you're into the realm of adding a TV.

Basically, the cost of improving a PC (or buying a better one than you would have) to be able to game is not too dissimilar to the cost of buying a console if you already have a TV.

A TV and a PC are both items most people will have/be buying anyway.
 
Its not only the horsepower but also the low amount of RAM onboard the 360/PS3 that means they will never match even a current mid-range PC. There isnt even any point in comparing, but then your average console owner couldnt really give a toss.
 
id say pc gaming. a console cannot put out a high resolution than 1080p where as most graphics cards can output a lot more. this coupled with aa and af would be the winner for me.
 
I used to think there was little difference, then I bought Fallout 3 on PC. I thought it looked pretty good on PS3, but it's SO MUCH better on PC. There's much less slowdown, a higher resolution, better visual quality, and the settings can be configured. Playing it on my PS3 with all the jaggies annoys me now.
 
Realistically the pc is obviously going to look the best if youve got an unlimited budget, however you dont have to upgrade a console as often to keep with the times. Kinda depends on the type of person you are. Pc games for me are more serious, whereas i can relax on an xbox easier :)
 
PC - NO QUESTION

as long as your PC is upto date and high end

games at 1900x1200 with 4xFSAA look so much better than the same games at 1280 ....
 
Guest2 said:
Console games are created using PCs therefore anything for console can be done on PC, and better

end of argument
Click to expand...

True that they are made on pcs, but graphics doesnt necessarily make a game. Personally i would rather have poorer graphics with a constant steady frame rate any day of the week. But pc's in general have much better graphics.
 
4Play said:
True that they are made on pcs, but graphics doesnt necessarily make a game. Personally i would rather have poorer graphics with a constant steady frame rate any day of the week. But pc's in general have much better graphics.
Click to expand...

Yes but PCs have awesome framerates AND awesome graphics. Was watching a buddy play forza 2 the other day and framerates were poosauce.
 
4Play said:
True that they are made on pcs, but graphics doesnt necessarily make a game. Personally i would rather have poorer graphics with a constant steady frame rate any day of the week. But pc's in general have much better graphics.
Click to expand...

This was title though - 'Better graphics on PC or Xbox 360?'

You are correct, graphics doesnt make a game. I play more on my 'new' snes than i do my pc.

On the hardware side of things a console is only a box with pc hardware in anyway, just dedicated to games and nothing else. Need for speed most wanted on 360 drops framerate in quite a lot of places. I remember GTA 3 on PS2 ran crap. (must have been around 20fps in some places) the draw distance was also terrible.
 
NathanT said:
It all depends on what your personal opinion is on looking good.

The PC will edge out the consoles in pure graphical ability (depending on the game) due to the AA/AF and general power that it can throw at a game as other have said.
But sometimes can these be too good? Do you want these crisp clean graphics all the time, there are times where that murky lower res looks better IMO.
Click to expand...

No AA and blurry textures can look better?

I don't care what genre a game is, but lack of AA and AF will never EVER be a factor in giving the game a "feel".
 
Guest2 said:
Console games are created using PCs therefore anything for console can be done on PC, and better

end of argument
Click to expand...

That's a logical fallacy. Just because they're made on PCs doesn't mean anything to how they will perform.

All games are made on PCs, but if it was optimised to run an instruction set that wasn't available on a PC or the CPU simply couldn't run the code, then it's not running on the PC.

PCs are better looking than consoles due to the hardware being more powerful, not what it's made on.

You could make a game on a PC for a PC that no current PC can run at an acceptable frame rate.
 
Jango said:
My PC can play Call of Duty: World at War on highest settings. :)

I was wondering whether highest settings on the PC version would be as good as the graphics on the Xbox 360 version (with HD TV)?
Click to expand...

opened a can of worms there. Also noticing how similar your name is to mine
 
Its not really a level playing field. While console hardware remains static, the pc constantly evolves. The 360 is now 4 years and 2 generations (dx9) behind the pc.

Although the majority of games for the pc is still at dx9, console ports are becoming more common. Games are being held back by the consoles.
 
I was a bit confused why the companies released their so called next gen consoles with old gen graphics. Didnt they release the consoles on the eve of dx 10 ? :S. If they did im guessing it was to save more money .
 
4Play said:
I was a bit confused why the companies released their so called next gen consoles with old gen graphics. Didnt they release the consoles on the eve of dx 10 ? :S. If they did im guessing it was to save more money .
Click to expand...

The 360 was released in late 2005, so around a year before the release of direct x 10, there was no hardware around at the time that supported it.
 
Oooh, a chance for me to voice an obvious opinion, have a load of stangers agree with me, and boost my fragile self worth for oh...at least ten minutes :p

The obvious troll pic made me laugh though, so it wasn't a complete waste of time :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom