Are you expecting a significant graphical leap with next-gen consoles?

This is next gen: linkActionRemix

RV770 Ruby demo Link

Not at first, but over time I think they could get better. One thing I am looking forward to though is having more realistic emotions/animations in charecters. It would add alot more to the atmosphere and storyiline in games.

This is next gen: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6OHUwDShrD4ActionRemix

I must say that video looks really good, I didn't knew the Wii U could do that.

Basically, look at the Wii U tech demos. That's what you're going to get. I'm impressed with them, but a lot of you are expecting the Samaritan demo and you're not getting that.ActionRemix

It won't be close to the graphical leap of the PS2-PS3 of course. And I am entirely satisfied with how games look today so no.

It won't be close to the graphical leap of the PS2-PS3 of course. And I am entirely satisfied with how games look today so no.

greenskittles

Unlike Xbox1, PS2 doesn't sport a PC based GPU. NVIDIA Geforce 2 or ATI Radeon (R100)was released early in the year 2000.

ATI Radeon (R100) already includes programmable shading capability, but it's not DirectX 8.0 compliant.

[QUOTE="ActionRemix"]This is next gen: linkronvalencia

RV770 Ruby demo Link

Wii U is going to be half as powerful as a good PC from 2011. That's about five times more powerful than the 360/PS3. Half of a generational leap. The Xbox is very likely to be much less powerful than the Wii U and the PS4 shouldn't be far above the Wii U. This is all due to cost concerns. Microsoft and Sony lost a tremendous amount of money this gen.ActionRemix

Xbox 3 will be the most powerful out of the consoles. WiiU to the 360 will be like the Wii was to the PS2 or GC in terms of gfx.

Microsoft is in the power position out of the 3 makers. They have Live and Kinect in full swing. They'll loss-lead once again, so the next Xbox will have a BOM of around $525. That will be a hell of a lot more powerful than what Nintendo can cram into a little Wii-sized box and sell for a profit, or somewhere around there on launch.

[QUOTE="ActionRemix"]Wii U is going to be half as powerful as a good PC from 2011. That's about five times more powerful than the 360/PS3. Half of a generational leap. The Xbox is very likely to be much less powerful than the Wii U and the PS4 shouldn't be far above the Wii U. This is all due to cost concerns. Microsoft and Sony lost a tremendous amount of money this gen.gamecubepad

Xbox 3 will be the most powerful out of the consoles. WiiU to the 360 will be like the Wii was to the PS2 or GC in terms of gfx.

Microsoft is in the power position out of the 3 makers. They have Live and Kinect in full swing. They'll loss-lead once again, so the next Xbox will have a BOM of around $525. That will be a hell of a lot more powerful than what Nintendo can cram into a little Wii-sized box and sell for a profit, or somewhere around there on launch.

PS2's Emotion Engine is not the same type as NVIDIA Geforce 256.

PS2's Emotion Engine is not the same type as NVIDIA Geforce 256.

ronvalencia

Yeah, but the gap in gfx fidelity will be similar.

That Zelda demo just didn't look that much better than some areas of C2 and Gears 3, but I would expect the WiiU to be able to easily outclass the HD Twins given time.

Seeing what a great pc can do, yes it will be a significant graphical leap. As long as Microsoft and Sony don't pull a Wii.

Tech demos never ever look better than the games

how many times do people have to get fooled from fake tech demos to learn this?

the only real tech demos are from PC games, console tech demos always lie

inb4 PC tech demos like aswell

maybe Crysis 1 tech demo, which looks like modded Crysis

but the Half life 2 and Doom 3 demo's that people called fake, well they turned out to be real, cant say the same for any 360/PS3 tech demos can we?

Honestly, if they got rid of jaggies then PS3 graphics would look 2x better, if they got rid of them i would be happy.

I'm not and hope there isn't.

Demonjoe93

Hope there isn't? Doesn't make sense to me. You're going to pay for a new console. Might aswell be worth it.

With what we saw with the Wii U Zelda tech Demo from a console that isn't meant to push graphics... it looks as good as the best looking console games out now. Now we know that the PS4 and Xbox 720 will be more powerful regardless of just how much, you would be a fool to assume that it wouldn't look a lot better then current gen consoles.

Frankly I would be worried if there isn't a graphical leap. If there isn't pc will just pull further and further ahead, I mean look at BF3 on fairly high settings on pc, that is what consoles next gen should be capable of, after effects and all

_Matt_

High END PC are rare which is why NO COMAPNY makes games that uses their full power. NO game takes advantage of the latest GPU and CPU because it can't. As these componets come out every year, and it takes at least a year to make a game from scratch.

True PC games can speed up the frame rate to 120FPS, have MORE detailed visuals where the producer wants it (not on everything!!!) But in every other area the improvements are really lagging!! AI, voice interaction, physics... its just been a graphics increase and Frames race as this is easy to increase over the other game designs.

SO there will be a graphics leap but not mind blowing like High end PC games are not like comparingN64 games to PS3 games!!! It will be comparing great looking games to Better looking games.

[QUOTE="PurpleMan5000"]From the rumors coming out, it doesn't look like it. I'm betting the Wii U will be indicative of the power of both Microsoft and Sony's consoles.Armored_Pillow

If it looks the same as PS3 and Xbox 360 it will cost ONLY 199.00 at the most as the chips, that IBM can make to match either chip is very cheap. TO have more power is not that much more money. So I would expect it to be more powerful with little hit on the cost at all, and still not cost much more to produce. I see a better console than Xbox 360 and PS3 for around $249.00. The main expensive is the controler. Nintendo will have to eat the cost of them. That is where the cost comes in.

[QUOTE="Adversary16"]

With next-gen consoles looming up ahead, I think it's time for some wild speculation! - http://www.computerandvideogames.com/326289/xbox-720-to-arrive-in-2012-edge-source/

Personally, I think launch titles will just look like the best games on PC, or slightly better.

fernandmondego_

PC's will ALWAYS be hindered by consoles!!!

1. Not enough people buy highend and STAY high end. SO not enough money to justify a game that can ONLYbe played with highend PC!!!
2. Piracy is too much on PC's
3. PC only games are made with the middle PC gamer in mind,with visual increases for High end PC users. They must include too many aspects for it to be playable for every part of different PC componets. Then there is the OS and openCL and DX11. Bug fixes, ....

Launch titles will look almost as good as PC games for 6 months untill the next game comes out the next year that is for both PC and console.

Yes? There kind of has to be, considering how long this gen has gone on.

Not as big of a leap as last time, according to most people, but it will be sufficiently impressive when they show it. That's how you sell new hardware (unless you're Nintendo, I guess)

i expect no real leap at bes toyu will still be stuck in dx9 cause dx10 sucked.. and your ahrdware will improve. the problem is console gaming by the time it gets to that point will be as ugly ad archaic as comparing an n64 games to a new boxed pc game.

I'm fine with 1080p and 60fps.LeonSykes10

A very moot statement. Whether or not you get 60fps totally depends on what the developers feel they want or do not want to compromise on. 1080p at 60fps is acheivable even in this gen, but you'll have to deal with washed out and blurry textures. Even for the most powerful PCs currently, that point is still moot. If you have a PC powerhouse, you have anti-aliasing, anisotropic filtering, V-sync, draw distance, shadow quality and resolution to worry about. If you turn off all these things, then of course you'll get 60fps. The irony is that when your hardware is improved, developers will somehow up their ante with even more power consuming textures and such, and it'll be back to square one, where you'll get sub-60 fps.

Basically, if we're all constantly getting 60fps, it means the devs are not pushing their limits far enough.

[QUOTE="LeonSykes10"]I'm fine with 1080p and 60fps.jhcho2

A very moot statement. Whether or not you get 60fps totally depends on what the developers feel they want or do not want to compromise on. 1080p at 60fps is acheivable even in this gen, but you'll have to deal with washed out and blurry textures. Even for the most powerful PCs currently, that point is still moot. If you have a PC powerhouse, you have anti-aliasing, anisotropic filtering, V-sync, draw distance, shadow quality and resolution to worry about. If you turn off all these things, then of course you'll get 60fps. The irony is that when your hardware is improved, developers will somehow up their ante with even more power consuming textures and such, and it'll be back to square one, where you'll get sub-60 fps.

Basically, if we're all constantly getting 60fps, it means the devs are not pushing their limits far enough.

indeed however in pc's understanding of things basically unless theres a problem with the game 60 fps on a pc @ 100 is possible. but i hate to break it to you but you never will get 60fps.

consoles have been tied to v-sync as a default setting since the days of the nes and fps limits of 30-40. the day a console gets 60+ is when they take that barrier down. which they cant given standardization n all.

and dont bring upp aa and af in this thread console gamers cant and wont ever get it.

[QUOTE="LeonSykes10"]I'm fine with 1080p and 60fps.jhcho2

A very moot statement. Whether or not you get 60fps totally depends on what the developers feel they want or do not want to compromise on. 1080p at 60fps is acheivable even in this gen, but you'll have to deal with washed out and blurry textures. Even for the most powerful PCs currently, that point is still moot. If you have a PC powerhouse, you have anti-aliasing, anisotropic filtering, V-sync, draw distance, shadow quality and resolution to worry about. If you turn off all these things, then of course you'll get 60fps. The irony is that when your hardware is improved, developers will somehow up their ante with even more power consuming textures and such, and it'll be back to square one, where you'll get sub-60 fps.

Basically, if we're all constantly getting 60fps, it means the devs are not pushing their limits far enough.

If they give us 60FPS at 1080p with AA and in 3D I don't care how detailed everything is. I expect games to look as good as Battlefield 3 on higher settings, maybe not max because that's going to be expensive for devs. As long as there's not tons of jaggies and the frame rate is solid I'm happy.

At least 1080p

If they give us 60FPS at 1080p with AA and in 3D I don't care how detailed everything is. I expect games to look as good as Battlefield 3 on higher settings, maybe not max because that's going to be expensive for devs. As long as there's not tons of jaggies and the frame rate is solid I'm happy.

RandomWinner

there will be consoles cant use AA. AA is specific to a proper operating system based in linux or unix. to date no console has had AA as a result and they never will. your jaggies are there to stay bro. if they couldnt fix it on todays modern consoles what makes you think the next one shall be different. the next XBOX has like a chance but i guarantee you you wont get it.. again. 3d is also a horrible gimmick

dont you console folk get it? you will never get many of the benefits to being on a pc without becoming a pc yourself. and doing so no longer makes you a console.. DOESNT IT??

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swGM9sfXaL8

If it can look as good as Battlefield 2 on Ultra then it'll be fine.

There is only going to be a significant graphics leap if the manufacturer's have figured out a way to reign in development costs. High-end graphics are largely responsible for the astronomical costs assocaited with developing current AAA titles and have resulted in the "dumbing down" and casualization many people complain about. Developers have to re-coup their costs somehow and the current price increases are unsustainable.

If it can look as good as Battlefield 2 on Ultra then it'll be fine.

The_Gaming_Baby

:P I bet you mean this:

I don't think the graphical leap will be huge but lets hope that Consoles can at least do full HD next gen. Thats my biggest grip going from my PC to my consoles. The SubHD blur and fuzz and terrible video scaling kills console game for me.streetridaz

In 2014 absolutely but in 2012 no I am not.

I expect 5-10x stronger hardware than the best on PC today

I expect 5-10x stronger hardware than the best on PC today

loosingENDS

You expect 5-10x stronger than QuadFire 6990s, and for them to sell it to you at 300-400 dollars!?

Your immense stupidity is showing again saolin.

I expect 5-10x stronger hardware than the best on PC today

loosingENDS

Yeah, that's EXACTLY how they're going to turn out :P

5-10x stronger than the best PC today for only $399.99: Magicbox720, and Miraclestation 4.

[QUOTE="loosingENDS"]

I expect 5-10x stronger hardware than the best on PC today

XVision84

Yeah, that's EXACTLY how they're going to turn out :P

5-10x stronger than the best PC today for only $399.99: Magicbox720, and Miraclestation 4.

Why not ? Xbox 360 was 10x stronger then the best PC hardware 2 years before its release

Why would 720 be any different ?

Depends on your definition of significant. Personally, I don't think so. Graphics can only go so far before we reach a plateau and I honestly don't think the jump will be anywhere near as significant as it has generations prior (N64/PS1 to PS2/Xbox/GC, for example).

I expect 5-10x stronger hardware than the best on PC today

loosingENDS

[QUOTE="XVision84"]

[QUOTE="loosingENDS"]

I expect 5-10x stronger hardware than the best on PC today

loosingENDS

Yeah, that's EXACTLY how they're going to turn out :P

5-10x stronger than the best PC today for only $399.99: Magicbox720, and Miraclestation 4.

Why not ? Xbox 360 was 10x stronger then the best PC hardware 2 years before its release

Why would 720 be any different ?

No....it wasn't.

[QUOTE="loosingENDS"]

I expect 5-10x stronger hardware than the best on PC today

mitu123

No it wouldn't, Sony and Microsoft use Sonite and Micronium that produces consoles better than gaming PC's for only 1% of the cost.

[QUOTE="XVision84"]

[QUOTE="loosingENDS"]

I expect 5-10x stronger hardware than the best on PC today

loosingENDS

Yeah, that's EXACTLY how they're going to turn out :P

5-10x stronger than the best PC today for only $399.99: Magicbox720, and Miraclestation 4.

Why not ? Xbox 360 was 10x stronger then the best PC hardware 2 years before its release

Why would 720 be any different ?

[QUOTE="loosingENDS"]

[QUOTE="XVision84"]

Yeah, that's EXACTLY how they're going to turn out :P

5-10x stronger than the best PC today for only $399.99: Magicbox720, and Miraclestation 4.

mitu123

Why not ? Xbox 360 was 10x stronger then the best PC hardware 2 years before its release

Why would 720 be any different ?

[QUOTE="mitu123"]

[QUOTE="loosingENDS"]

Why not ? Xbox 360 was 10x stronger then the best PC hardware 2 years before its release

Why would 720 be any different ?

04dcarraher

Frankly I would be worried if there isn't a graphical leap. If there isn't pc will just pull further and further ahead, I mean look at BF3 on fairly high settings on pc, that is what consoles next gen should be capable of, after effects and all

_Matt_

The PC is at least 2 gens ahead of consoles in terms of graphics.