• 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.

PC Graphics won't improve for 3-4 years.

StarSolitude

StarSolitude

StarSolitude

Associate
Joined
10 Sep 2009
Posts
299
I remember seeing a link about the lead designer of Crysis saying that PC graphics won't take a leap until the next generation of consoles come out, which could be up to 4 years away... Because PC graphics are bound to consoles, even if they are slightly better, they will never be INSANELY better.

This kinda sucks. Crysis 2 will be a small improvement over Crysis' graphics I think, and then we won't see any change for a good 3-4 years.

Well, at least I won't need to buy a new graphics card for a while.

If someone could find that link, it would be good, I can't seem to find it again. If not, do you think it's true that PC graphics are near their current limit for this generation?
 
I don't buy that, there's still plenty of PC only titles that will drive forward visual quality. The only thing holding these back will be what the average GPU is in the target PC market, and even then the ability to customise graphics settings (a PC only feature?) means that they will always be able to make use of the cutting edge of PC hardware.
 
PC graphics are nowhere near where they could potentially be, it's simply that there is more money in console gaming and catering to that market is stifling innovation, we get ports with bells and whistles stuck on and until there's more money in the PC gaming scene developers aren't going be making profitable products with the full power that could be realised. On the small scale if you keep up with graphics theory and developments there are a lot of great things that can only be done with current gen pc hardware that will never go mainstream because of colsole limitations.


[edit]
And the lead designer of Crysis is not someone I would listen to considering how horribly inefficient Cryteks offerings have been so far :mad:
 
RAGE looks really nice and when DX11 is taken up we will see massive advances in lighting useage in games as some of the features allow many more lights to be handled in a single shader pass.

The problem is you really need the resources and budget of a small movie studio these days to pull off a high end visually rich games.
 
Doom 4 seems to be a bit of a dark horse atm... despite knowing 1-2 people at id I've been unable to find out much about it.
 
Agree in general gfx has been very stagnant over the last three years and will remain so untill more powerfull consoles appear

Rage is being developed for the 360 as the lead platform so most decent pcs will handle it no problem

from a game developer point of view the pc is a after thought

half the time it is not a decent port never mind optimized to take advantage of the extra features available

Crysis was the last big pc only release to try and raise the bar and look how that flopped

there next move is a more optimized (less demanding) remake of the engine for the consoles and the pc

like every other studio out there
 
RAGE isn't being targeted to a specific platform as such - the streaming nature of the engine means they can build a game - let the tools do the work - and it should look nice and run well on a wide range of platforms... if you look closely at the way its running on consoles it will be a bit blocky/low-res textures compared to PC.
 
so in a nut shell (with the odd exception) it's wait for the PS4 etc. before we get better games? (graphically speaking)
 
Consoles have surpassed PC's in a lot of ways. PC gaming is not the elite platform it was.

The people behind Nvidia are a lot to blame. They have slowed innovation and had a lot of bright technology hamstrung IMO.
Most of the time I think it would be best for the PC market if they just knobed off and built NV consoles.
 
Last edited:
He's right, while there is really good looking games due out if they're developed or have some relationship with the consoles they would have have had cut backs.

The PC game that was supposed to push the graphical bar on PC other then Crysis was Project Offset and now that's lost track :(

As long as games are developed with console in mind we'll never see the bar on PC pushed.
 
Last edited:
Until consoles get freelook for FPS games its never going to surpass PC in that regard... the real reasons PC gaming is in decline is due to the complexity of setups - your average joe just wants it to work - and the mass of piracy.
 
death to consoles! kill them with fire, nuke them from orbit, punch them in the ovaries, smash their pasties!
 
I think it's unfair to blame either Nvidia or the game developers. Nvidia or ATI aren't going to invest a colossal amount of money in developing a card that will be out of the price range of any home user.

The same is true for games, who in their right mind would spend millions of dollars creating a game, which despite being a technical masterpiece, is only going to be available for the dwindling PC gaming market?

Creating games with the graphics we have at the moment costs huge amounts of money and is incredibly risky as it is.
 
I look at console graphics and puke, the image quality is so bad that I could never leave my ultra sharp MSAA'd PC graphics :D

If the next set of consoles have image quality that can match the PC then and only then will I consider getting one :)
 
I wouldnt mind the graphics improvements slowing down a bit maybe then we can all have pc's that can run the games well instead of 'ok'.

Plus we are getting to the stage where any improvement in the graphics is going to waste really because when you actually play the game, everything just blurs whilst you are moving/aiming/shooting.
 
yeah, when watching some one play on a PS3 on a big TV screen I think, I through these things are supposed to have "decent graphics" but obviously not

also, I too wouldn't mind better graphics but slower frame rates, I don't care if I only get 60 and someone with 4k worth of PC gets 100 as long as I can apply my own personal settings and play the game flawlessly, with just as much eye caddy as them
 
I think with 3D glasses and eyefinity the PC is moving away from the traditional just play on a monitor approach. With resulting hit in performance I think that the card designers are goingt o keeppushing up the specs just to dive these tweaks.

In terms of experience I think this offers a different type of grphics improvement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom