-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
G80 specs finally confirmed! NOT old news!
- Thread starter rippling
- Start date
Warbie said:or a 360 - which runs the game just as well
I hope you are not refering to alan wake cos thats in a different league.
360 or PS3 can't Crysis at max and Alan Wake looks like a different ball game to me, even better than Crysis.
sid
rippling said:there is no way an xbox has the power of a quad core conroe! the chip will cost about the same as 4 or 5 xboxes lol
sid said:
http://www.anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2841&p=2
'Markus admitted that being a PC-only developer can easily lead to laziness, and developing for the 360 has improved the efficiency of Alan Wake tremendously. With that said, Markus expects the visual and gameplay experience to be identical on the Xbox 360 and the PC when Alan Wake ships, hopefully without any in-game load screens.'
'The demo ran extremely well on the test system, which was a Core 2 Quad running at 3.73GHz with a GeForce 7900 GTX. Markus said that it would have run just as well if the Core 2 Quad was running at its default clock speed, which we assume was 2.66GHz.'
The developers themselves are saying there will be little, if any, difference in performance between Alan Wake on a 360 and on a Core 2 Quad. I wouldn't be suprised in the slightest if this turned out to be the case. After all, according to Remedy the 360 is the 'main' platform Alan Wake is being developed for:
http://www.alanwake.com/forum/showpost.php?p=18278&postcount=10
Makes you wonder where all the 1000's of pounds we put towards gaming rigs actually goes.
Last edited:
so if xbox can run alan wake identical to the ,what is prob. the fastest pc`ss there has ever been , how come xbox or ps3 cant handle crysis? and alan wake seems to be better graphics wise?Warbie said:
also xbox , doesnt have to shunt the resolutions around a screen that pc has to........
Soldato
rippling said:
Ask the developers.
I don't believe the Xbox will run Alan Wake as good as the PC. I have a 360 and every single game on it has issues - Look at the latest stuff - Oblivion has major slowdown and the detail and draw distance is set to about half of what my pc can do, Saints Row is full of slowdown, Ghost Recon (although looking very nice) drops well below 30fps in places, COD2 looks pants and if full of aliasing and poor framerates, PGR3 has almost no aa and looks like a stairfest plus is locked to 30fps etc..
The developers have major problems getting AA working at a decent level even at 2x and we are only talking about games rendered at a measly 1280x720. Some are rumoured to be rendered higher internally at 1080i (1920x1080) and there is a dashboard patch soon which will support 1080p rendering. Good luck getting games to run like that. I find it very hard to believe that Alan Wake will look as good or play as good as that tech demo when it finally comes out. ID or whoever the developers were said the same things about Quake 4 on the 360 claiming it was the way it was meant to be played and would be identical to the PC version (was on one of the Quake4 videos on marketplace). Looks how that turned out. In Alan Wakes case it reminds me of how good early videos of GRAW looked on the 360 and all the hype surrounding how 1 core was being used for ai and physics. Then they scaled the graphics back by about 25%. Of course as the 360 gets older the developers learn better how to program it, and we will see better games at least graphically. Just like we saw better looking games coming out on the original Xbox after about 3 generations in. However the PC will always have the option of playing at higher res, with more detail and graphical affects if you are willing to spend the cash.
The developers have major problems getting AA working at a decent level even at 2x and we are only talking about games rendered at a measly 1280x720. Some are rumoured to be rendered higher internally at 1080i (1920x1080) and there is a dashboard patch soon which will support 1080p rendering. Good luck getting games to run like that. I find it very hard to believe that Alan Wake will look as good or play as good as that tech demo when it finally comes out. ID or whoever the developers were said the same things about Quake 4 on the 360 claiming it was the way it was meant to be played and would be identical to the PC version (was on one of the Quake4 videos on marketplace). Looks how that turned out. In Alan Wakes case it reminds me of how good early videos of GRAW looked on the 360 and all the hype surrounding how 1 core was being used for ai and physics. Then they scaled the graphics back by about 25%. Of course as the 360 gets older the developers learn better how to program it, and we will see better games at least graphically. Just like we saw better looking games coming out on the original Xbox after about 3 generations in. However the PC will always have the option of playing at higher res, with more detail and graphical affects if you are willing to spend the cash.
Last edited:
Games like Alan Wake and Crysis could easily run on the Xbox 360, but look at The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion. Dumbed-down graphics, no anisotropic filtering, only 2x antialiasing.
They will run, but they will be dumbed down and look nowhere near as good.
They will run, but they will be dumbed down and look nowhere near as good.
Flanno said:
Agreed. Look at any console - the difference between first and 2nd/third generation games is often considerable. We haven't seen what the 360 can do yet, not even slightly.
And yes, the pc will have the option to run at a higher res with more aa/af etc. On similar settings (1280*720, 2/4aa etc) I think there will be next to no difference between Alan Wake on the 360 and on a Quad Core pc.
It's interesting you mention Oblivion - I've played that on a Core 2 Duo with a few X1900xts. It looks lovely, but it still sufers from slow down all the time. Run it at comparable setting to the 360 version and it doesn't run any better. As for Quake 4, that was just an awful port (of a crap game) and no indication of what the machine is capable of.
I'm still suprised by how powerful the last generation of consoles are. If you built a pc with the same specs as a GC, PS2, or Xbox it wouldn't come close to being able to match their level of performance. It'll be the same with this generation. People are going to be suprised when the 360/PS3 come into their own and they have to base decisions on games other than the launch lineup.
That goes without saying because a console doesn't have a proper OS and apps running in the background, and as every console of a particular model (i.e. Xbox 360) has identical specifications it's much easier to optimise code for them.Warbie said:
I disagree with what you said about Oblivion though, I have played the Xbox 360 version and it still suffers from slow-downs even though it has a shorter draw distance, lower quality textures, lower levels of antialiasing, and zero anisotropic filtering. Not a very good track record considering it's so optimised (read: dumbed-down) for the Xbox 360 hardware.
It will be the exact same with Alan Wake, and Crysis if it is released for consoles.
Soldato
I've been saying something very similar... since my XP3200+ Barton and 9800pro was cutting edge! Still waitingWHAT!!! said:Well i can safely say im missing out these new line of card and waitting until later on in the game to get something better for less so to speak with the price wars etc... hehehe
My 3200+ winny + 7800 XFX Extreme Extreme will do nicely for me now i guess, Core 2 Due is very tempting but i'll wait for the quad cores me thinks
I've been to the order page a few times but when I've really thought about there's nothing this system can't do. Though these new Conroe's and new graphics cards would be a pretty hefty upgrade
Ulfhedjinn said:
We'll see. I'll be very interested to see how Alan Wake compares, and also titles like Gears of War, Bioshock etc
Oblivion on the 360 was still very much a first gen game for the machine, and not a good indication of what it can do. There will be games for the 360 which completely blow it away on all counts (as with previous consoles, the difference in visuals between first and last generation games can often be equivalent to the performance boost you'd expect from a new cpu and gfx card on a pc). It could also run at higher settings, but the developers obviously choose those which they thought would give the best visual/performance trade off at the time. I've played Oblivion on the pc, but even with a Core 2 Duo and Crossfire the game doesn't particularly run well (I feel the 360 could easily have done the same job). For the difference in price I certainly wouldn't be happy.
I don't mean to come off sounding like a 360 fanboy either - i'm a disgruntled pc gamer who's annoyed by how much we pay for hardware for performance it gives.
Last edited:
Soldato
Buying latest PC hardware for gaming is such poor value for money, that's why I stopped doing it.Warbie said:
1. You pay a premium for latest generation hardware, especially graphics cards
2. You are basically a beta tester for first gen drivers for your new £500 grfx card!
3. You are basically a beta tester for newest release pre-patch games
So you pay through the nose to play the latest games that are full of bugs and need about 10 patch releases to work properly. This hardware you're paying so handsomely for is poorly optimized both in it's drivers and games aren't coded to make full use of it's power.
I sit back at least a generation now. Not just because everythings so much cheaper, although it's a nice bonus
but because most of the problems have been ironed out that shouldn't have been there in the first place,
Soldato
Chong Warrior said:Buying latest PC hardware for gaming is such poor value for money, that's why I stopped doing it.
1. You pay a premium for latest generation hardware, especially graphics cards
2. You are basically a beta tester for first gen drivers for your new £500 grfx card!
3. You are basically a beta tester for newest release pre-patch games
So you pay through the nose to play the latest games that are full of bugs and need about 10 patch releases to work properly. This hardware you're paying so handsomely for is poorly optimized both in it's drivers and games aren't coded to make full use of it's power.
I sit back at least a generation now. Not just because everythings so much cheaper, although it's a nice bonus
All so very true and wise words at the end.
I say this everytime. I am not upgrading to the latest graphics card this time round because ...... Do I listen to myself? No. Never. I think the people on here are just like me and the latest and greatest is like a drug and like drugs once hooked you can never get enough. Sad but true. We are all PC junkies.
Even though I have convinced myself that my Sli 7900GTO's will serve me well through this round of graphics cards. Will I listen? No. I will no doubt by the top end graphics card and then sell it 3 months down the line for a 50% loss. ummmmm ......
Soldato
The Asgard said:All so very true and wise words at the end.
I say this everytime. I am not upgrading to the latest graphics card this time round because ...... Do I listen to myself? No. Never. I think the people on here are just like me and the latest and greatest is like a drug and like drugs once hooked you can never get enough. Sad but true. We are all PC junkies.
Even though I have convinced myself that my Sli 7900GTO's will serve me well through this round of graphics cards. Will I listen? No. I will no doubt by the top end graphics card and then sell it 3 months down the line for a 50% loss. ummmmm ......
I'm the same. I can't resist the technology. Nothing else compares to the feel of building a machine that's cutting.
Soldato
If they want to make Crysis or alan wake work just as well on a 360 they can, it will take a lot of effort, skill and possibly far too much time.
Its not that they cant do this, its wether they feel its worth it.
Im playing oblivion on the 360 now, I did wonder what was wrong because Ive seen screenshots in the pc section but the upclose conversation graphics are still very good.
If people didnt buy the latest gear, we'd all suffer because thats what pays the R&D bills!
Its not that they cant do this, its wether they feel its worth it.
Im playing oblivion on the 360 now, I did wonder what was wrong because Ive seen screenshots in the pc section but the upclose conversation graphics are still very good.
If people didnt buy the latest gear, we'd all suffer because thats what pays the R&D bills!
Soldato
People have to much money. I can hardly afford the games, let alone the hardware required to run them!!