Is the PC closer graphically compared to "Next Gen" this time round than ever before?

MOOGLEYS said:
Look at what Naughty dog have achieved on PS3 compared to what was out at launch.
Click to expand...

True, but that's exactly the same for PCs, even more so through mods - take a look at Morrowind, Stalker, Skyrim, etc. Have a look at games in 2006 period and have a look at the games now.

By the time developers will get a grip of the hardware and give life to new ways of handling the limits, PCs will be so far of, we wouldn't bat and eye anyway. :)

mmj_uk said:
I wouldn't hold BF4 as any sort of benchmark, even the PC version is a mess. 900P is still 50% more pixels than 720P though.
Click to expand...

Yep, but we can play it at crazy res with current hardware, while "new gen" hw for consoles is already dated. Probably they gonna started holding us back right from the beginning and not just in terms of graphics.
 
Let's look at Assassin's Creed 4. My gtx 770 is a mess of tearing and dropping frame rates - there's no doubt in my mind that I'd be having more fun with the PS4 version. And yes, we can argue that's just down to a bad port, but there are lots of bad ports. Even with the half decent ports we very often get less consistent frame rates. It's not so bad towards the end of a console generation as the gulf of power between the consoles and PCs is huge and we can run the games maxed at super high resolutions. This won't be the case over the next few years and I plan on getting most multi platform games on the PS4 as a result. Less hassle and likely more consistent performance. My PC will be used for the few exclusives that come around and games that really must have a m&k.
 
Calin Banc said:
Just lower the details and enjoy the ride, why so determined on ultra settings if you don't have the muscle?
Click to expand...

But isn't that one of the key things about PC gaming - higher resolutions and better quality? In every of the many PC vs. console threads that pop up on this forum that's what people spout out. That and being able to build a gaming PC that can match current gen consoles for peanuts (which is so obviously untrue!). If I'm going to lower the details and enjoy the ride, why not do it on the consoles? I'd probably enjoy the ride more knowing that the game couldn't run any better, rather than watching it struggle on my £1000+ gaming rig.
 
Warbie said:
But isn't that one of the key things about PC gaming - higher resolutions and better quality? In every of the many PC vs. console threads that pop up on this forum that's what people spout out. That and being able to build a gaming PC that can match current gen consoles for peanuts (which is so obviously untrue!). If I'm going to lower the details and enjoy the ride, why not do it on the consoles? I'd probably enjoy the ride more knowing that the game couldn't run any better, rather than watching it struggle on my £1000+ gaming rig.
Click to expand...

it's ubisoft though
http://www.mcvuk.com/news/read/ubisoft-on-pc-you-don-t-really-care-about-the-performance/0124677
"It's always a question of compromise about the effect, how it looks, and the performance it takes from the system,” Trottier said. “On PC, usually you don't really care about the performance because the idea is that if it's not (running) fast enough, you buy a bigger GPU. Once you get on console, you can't have this approach.”
Click to expand...

ubisoft would rather you buy a better gpu than bother optimising their games
 
Last edited:
Warbie said:
But isn't that one of the key things about PC gaming - higher resolutions and better quality? In every of the many PC vs. console threads that pop up on this forum that's what people spout out. That and being able to build a gaming PC that can match current gen consoles for peanuts (which is so obviously untrue!). If I'm going to lower the details and enjoy the ride, why not do it on the consoles? I'd probably enjoy the ride more knowing that the game couldn't run any better, rather than watching it struggle on my £1000+ gaming rig.
Click to expand...

Not everyone who enjoys PC gaming has that £1000 rig. Mine, in its current iteration, cost a fraction of that.

PC gaming is freedom to do things your way. You choose the hardware, decide the balance between FPS and visuals, etc, etc. You've got mods, you've got more controls (mouse, controller, yoke, peddles, etc).

PC gaming can be cheaper than console gaming too, one you take the price of games into account. Plus you don't need to keep selling your games on, so you can have an ever expanding library at your fingertips (thanks, Steam ;)).

Then you've got the backwards compatibility that PCs have, able to play games from literally decades ago.

PC gaming is not/does not have to be about massaging your e-Peen.
 
Oh lord, not another thread about this.

The new consoles are the equivalent to a mid range PC at best. Considering they are £300-£400 you cant even build a high end PC rig for that money. A PC will always out shine the graphical capabilities of a console. Period.

There is no way on earth that neither the XB1 or the PS4 will even come close to a PC on high to max settings running a multi plat game. Eg, BF4 or AC4 etc etc

Purely console owners will try to convince you differently but all they are doing is convincing themselves.

Dont get me wrong, Im not flaming consoles as I will be buying both the XB1 and the PS4. But mainly for one reason only...the exclusive games. In terms of 'power' in the new consoles, they are what they are but even when the next consoles come out in x number of years time, they will also be inferior to the PC at that time.

Even when we start seeing more console games coming out in the future they will start to look better but can never compete with the levels of AA, texture resolution, shadow effects etc etc that a PC can handle or should I say what a GPU can handle. Just because the console can push out a game at 1080p smoothly dosent mean its going to look fantastic without any AA.

Imagine what the new consoles would be like if they had Nvidia Titans or GTX690's in SLI, but the fact is they dont.

Besides, a console is basically PC technology in a neat box with a very restrictive OS/User interface. Its designed to play games and thats what it does.
 
neoglow said:
There is no way on earth that neither the XB1 or the PS4 will even come close to a PC on high to max settings running a multi plat game. Eg, BF4 or AC4 etc etc
Click to expand...

But I can't run AC4 maxed on my PC - it stutters about! And, on reflection, I'd say that's the case to varying degrees with the majority of multi-platform games - despite always keeping a pretty current gaming spec.
 
Omaeka said:
Because a 770 is more than enough for anything on the market and then some, it's not down to not having the power.
Click to expand...

No, it's not. At least if you wanted to maxed them out.

Warbie said:
But isn't that one of the key things about PC gaming - higher resolutions and better quality? In every of the many PC vs. console threads that pop up on this forum that's what people spout out. That and being able to build a gaming PC that can match current gen consoles for peanuts (which is so obviously untrue!). If I'm going to lower the details and enjoy the ride, why not do it on the consoles? I'd probably enjoy the ride more knowing that the game couldn't run any better, rather than watching it struggle on my £1000+ gaming rig.
Click to expand...

It depends what settings are at play and of course from game to game. Some are better optimized, others not so much. A single clocked 7950 and Sandy Bridge quad with overclock as well, can play games at high settings in 5040x1050 at above 30fps or even 60fps, depending on IQ settings and game. Now that's close to the best single GPU of the last generation, 2 years old now and a mainstream CPU from 2 or 3 years back and it trashes consoles that are out just now.

Couple of years into the future consoles would struggle to run games like the Good Samaritan demo while we'll have something like this - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSm4o1v2YFw . Also, Mantle or other approaches like that, would eliminate most of the overhead of DX.

They are cheaper for a reason and the money you save on them at first buy, you'll spend in other ways.
 
The consoles true lack of power has always been masked by the low resolutions they were outputting.

The move to standardised hdtv resolutions has really stumped the consoles showing that even with gaming specific architecture 1080p with good detail at 60p.
 
Calin Banc said:
No, it's not. At least if you wanted to maxed them out.
Click to expand...

Yes, it is. Any game currently out that will not run at 60fps, 1080p+ maxed out on an i5/7xxGTX combo is badly optimised, simple as that. Until we start seeing graphics on the same level as Squeenix or Nvidia's tech demo, there is no reason for games to drop frames other than laziness.
 
arknor said:
It will be interesting in a few years with regards to what happens with the next gen consoles once 4k tv's are the norm.

how long are these next gen consoles supposed to last? please tell me it's not another 8 years or they will hold gaming back again
Click to expand...

the consoles will probably upscale to 4k and the xbone will say supports 4k on the back of the game boxes to make everyone think they are gaming in 4k just like the 360 has said 1080p on the back of all their game boxes for the last 8 years!
 
Omaeka said:
Yes, it is. Any game currently out that will not run at 60fps, 1080p+ maxed out on an i5/7xxGTX combo is badly optimised, simple as that. Until we start seeing graphics on the same level as Squeenix or Nvidia's tech demo, there is no reason for games to drop frames other than laziness.
Click to expand...

If you keep things simple in order to achieve that, then yeah, you're right. You can cut out SSAA, any advanced stuff and you'll have a perfectly running game at 60fps... in the same way you could be not enabling those effect from the start if the HW is not there yet (of course, presuming the game is not a total train wreck on the "true" optimization side). :)
 
Extremely disappointed that something as bad looking as ghosts can't even go 1080p on the xbone, I mean come on...

1080p is the dealbreaker, I may have been interested if all games were 1080p at a minimum but there's just no way I'll put down launch day cash so I can play games at lower Res and probably lower overall settings than with my 3770k/7970.

It will probably be two years before I buy either console probably second hand.
 
Skyfall said:
Extremely disappointed that something as bad looking as ghosts can't even go 1080p on the xbone, I mean come on...

1080p is the dealbreaker, I may have been interested if all games were 1080p at a minimum but there's just no way I'll put down launch day cash so I can play games at lower Res and probably lower overall settings than with my 3770k/7970.

It will probably be two years before I buy either console probably second hand.
Click to expand...

I'll get a ps4 instead :D
once it gets a GT game anyway

tempted to buy a ps3 for gt5 as I never played any of the GT games since ps1.

don't know if the graphics would put me off actually playing it though :S
 
yeah its closer but still a very long way off. Next Gen consoles are already so far behind what PC is capable of at lunch, it's rather embarrassing. I know they both had to stick to a price range, but I still think they should have raised the bar even higher. IMO I think it was a bad move for MS/Sony to aim for just 1080p, that res is already moving on in PC gaming, in a year or so 1440p will more than likely be the norm funds permitting. Can you imagine how far behind 1080p will be at the end of XB1/PS4 cycle.

A quick comparison here with a next gen title on PS4 and PC. Not sure you can call it next gen for PC because the PC is always improving month after month.

Just look at the definition difference. That where the difference really shows up. XB1/PS4 just will not be able to use high levels of AA/AF. We've already seen the horrible jaggies in FM5. Games will get better for XB1/PS4 for sure, but where it's started I personally think is to far back. And as a gamer on both PC and a console lover, that saddens me quite a bit, because I totally envisage the consoles yet again holding the PC back.

Slightly different time of day on the PC shot, more haze around but you get the picture. PC shot was done at what I think is around the same AA that is being used on the next gen console versions (2xaa I reckon) Of course PC can throw 16xSSAA/16xAF etc etc but that would be unfair in a still comparison shot if you get me.


PS4
10948526284_c046857640_o.jpg


PC 2xmsaa everything else maxed out
11018427904_69f56d9ba0_o.png


PC + SweetFX
11019522696_20ce3105ed_o.png
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom