Battlefield Bad Company 2 Graphics comparison (PC Vs. Console)

[QUOTE="sikanderahmed"]

the point still remains...console version of BFBC2 holds up well against pc version.

AnnoyedDragon

And my point still remains.

Cross platform games have historically been limited by the capability of the lowest common denominator, only on occasion do the developers choose; or are paid to enhance the PC version in some manner by a stake holder. This results in most cross platform games being a carbon copy across all target platforms, regardless of whether they are capable of more.

This however doesn't mean the PC version cannot still look better, as additional resolution and quality filtering can significantly improve the image quality of what is essentially identical assets. In this case the images being used are far too small to show the resolution difference, for all we know the PC version is running at 1600x1200 and the consoles 1280x720, the images don't show this.

What you and some others are doing are looking at two versions of a console limited game and declaring consoles are being nearly/just as powerful as PC, not recognising that the game was built with console limitations in mind. This is particularly hypocritical if the person making this claim is a console gamer, as they are refusing to recognise PC hardware is going underutilized in this case; while spending days arguing over whether a game is utilizing their console platform fully.

Common sense says PC hardware, even cheap PC hardware, is significantly more powerful because it is 2010 tech vs 2005. If this game doesn't look that better on PC when compared to consoles; it is evidence of under utilization, not that 2005 hardware can magically transcend 5 years of technological progress.

console version may very well be holding back the pc version graphically and yes its common sense that 2010 tech > 2005 tech butall im saying isthat BFBC2 on console is holding well against pc version.

holy crap the console version running on 2005 hardware holds up so well against pc version likely running on latest hardware.

sikanderahmed

console version may very well be holding back the pc version graphically and yes its common sense that 2010 tech > 2005 tech but all im saying is that BFBC2 on console is holding well against pc version.

sikanderahmed

It has already been explained why the material you are using for comparison is unsuitable, not only that but you have just now shown that you recognise the PC version is being held back. Therefore with these in mind; your compliment of the console version does not make sense, not unless you were trying to suggest something along the lines of what I have criticised.

[QUOTE="sikanderahmed"]

console version may very well be holding back the pc version graphically and yes its common sense that 2010 tech > 2005 tech but all im saying is that BFBC2 on console is holding well against pc version.

AnnoyedDragon

It has already been explained why the material you are using for comparison is unsuitable, not only that but you have just now shown that you recognise the PC version is being held back. Therefore with these in mind; your compliment of the console version does not make sense, not unless you were trying to suggest something along the lines of what I have criticised.

hermits claimed that pc version graphics would make the console version look trash, we can see from the pics that pc version really does not make the console version look trash. the comparison is not about which system is more powerful but what BFBC2 looks like on pc and consoles, whether pc version is being held back by console or not, that doesnt matter. what does matter though is pc version doesnt destroy console version graphically like claimed by many hermits that it would thus my point is still valid and the hermits have been owned.

I love the shininess on the PC version. :3

hermits claimed that pc version graphics would make the console version look trash, we can see from the pics that pc version really does not make the console version look trash. the comparison is not about which system is more powerful but what BFBC2 looks like on pc and consoles, whether pc version is being held back by console or not, that doesnt matter. what does matter though is pc version doesnt destroy console version graphically like claimed by many hermits that it would thus my point is still valid and the hermits have been owned.

sikanderahmed

You're using those images again, which if you check aren't even a high enough res to show the console version properly.

As for what "Hermits said" I don't keep track, but I still stand by my previous comments. The game will in fact look better on PC, if not because the game was designed to take advantage of PC; then because PC performance advantages enable us to pump up the resolution and quality filtering far above console capability.

[QUOTE="sikanderahmed"]

hermits claimed that pc version graphics would make the console version look trash, we can see from the pics that pc version really does not make the console version look trash. the comparison is not about which system is more powerful but what BFBC2 looks like on pc and consoles, whether pc version is being held back by console or not, that doesnt matter. what does matter though is pc version doesnt destroy console version graphically like claimed by many hermits that it would thus my point is still valid and the hermits have been owned.

AnnoyedDragon

You're using those images again, which if you check aren't even a high enough res to show the console version properly.

As for what "Hermits said" I don't keep track, but I still stand by my previous comments. The game will in fact look better on PC, if not because the game was designed to take advantage of PC; then because PC performance advantages enable us to pump up the resolution and quality filtering far above console capability.

ive played the pc beta and compared to the 360 version

[QUOTE="AnnoyedDragon"]

[QUOTE="sikanderahmed"]

hermits claimed that pc version graphics would make the console version look trash, we can see from the pics that pc version really does not make the console version look trash. the comparison is not about which system is more powerful but what BFBC2 looks like on pc and consoles, whether pc version is being held back by console or not, that doesnt matter. what does matter though is pc version doesnt destroy console version graphically like claimed by many hermits that it would thus my point is still valid and the hermits have been owned.

sikanderahmed

You're using those images again, which if you check aren't even a high enough res to show the console version properly.

As for what "Hermits said" I don't keep track, but I still stand by my previous comments. The game will in fact look better on PC, if not because the game was designed to take advantage of PC; then because PC performance advantages enable us to pump up the resolution and quality filtering far above console capability.

ive played the pc beta and compared to the 360 version

The ammount of bloom/hdr turns me off so much. I wont get this game for that simple reason. looks really annoying.

What are the specs of your PC ?

anshul89

its a laptop. i ran the game on max to check how it looksthough i was getting horrible framerate but dont think that matters much since i was only checking the vusuals

ive played the pc beta and compared to the 360 version

sikanderahmed

And as with your previous comments I am sure your impression is completely without bias.

I know the difference between 720p and 1080p thank you very much, the question is; do console gamers? I get the impression they don't know what they are looking at. But really how can they? Most of them are sat too far across the room to notice.

I was preparing these for another thread; but I might as well put them to use here.

You see most console gamers think they are looking at this, a 720p image. However they forget that they are viewing this stretched across a 1080p TV, so in fact they are looking at this. Not forgetting that the pixels are spread far apart on televisions in comparison to monitors, so it will look even worse.

And as with your previous comments I am sure your impression is completely without bias.

I know the difference between 720p and 1080p thank you very much, the question is; do console gamers? I get the impression they don't know what they are looking at. But really how can they? Most of them are sat too far across the room to notice.

I was preparing these for another thread; but I might as well put them to use here.

You see most console gamers think they are looking at this, a 720p image. However they forget that they are viewing this stretched across a 1080p TV, so in fact they are looking at this. Not forgetting that the pixels are spread far apart on televisions in comparison to monitors, so it will look even worse.

AnnoyedDragon

so basically what you said is that 720p or 1080p, doesnt matter for console gamers since they are sitting too far to notice it. so yeh whats the problem then when you cant even notice it? lol 720p on 1080p tv doesnt really bother me and even on pc it is slightly annoying when you switch a game from 1080p to 720p but then you get used to it.

also ofcourse my impression is completely without bias.

so basically what you said is that 720p or 1080p, doesnt matter for console gamers since they are sitting too far to notice it. so yeh whats the problem then when you cant even notice it? lol 720p on 1080p tv doesnt really bother me and even on pc it is slightly annoying when you switch a game from 1080p to 720p but then you get used to it.

also ofcourse my impression is completely without bias.

sikanderahmed

So you admit the means of comparison you are using are flawed?

They look the same,stop doing these type of threads,most games look the same on PC and conoles.

[QUOTE="sikanderahmed"]

so basically what you said is that 720p or 1080p, doesnt matter for console gamers since they are sitting too far to notice it. so yeh whats the problem then when you cant even notice it? lol 720p on 1080p tv doesnt really bother me and even on pc it is slightly annoying when you switch a game from 1080p to 720p but then you get used to it.

also ofcourse my impression is completely without bias.

AnnoyedDragon

So you admit the means of comparison you are using are flawed?

max out the game on pc at 1080p and compare it to console version and you'll see console version still looks great and not much worse then pc. thats all im saying.

[QUOTE="AnnoyedDragon"]

[QUOTE="sikanderahmed"]

so basically what you said is that 720p or 1080p, doesnt matter for console gamers since they are sitting too far to notice it. so yeh whats the problem then when you cant even notice it? lol 720p on 1080p tv doesnt really bother me and even on pc it is slightly annoying when you switch a game from 1080p to 720p but then you get used to it.

also ofcourse my impression is completely without bias.

sikanderahmed

So you admit the means of comparison you are using are flawed?

max out the game on pc at 1080p and compare it to console version and you'll see console version still looks great and not much worse then pc. thats all im saying.

max out the game on pc at 1080p and compare it to console version and you'll see console version still looks great and not much worse then pc. thats all im saying.

sikanderahmed

You have admitted that the way consoles games are played prevents you from getting a good impression of the image quality, so why are you continuing to insist they look around the same based on a method that has been identified as flawed? It's like continuing to use the images the OP posted, they are bad for comparison even by console standards because the image is downscaled.

Nope. Bad Company 2 looks terrible on the 360 compared to the PC version.

anshul89

:lol: not at all

[QUOTE="sikanderahmed"]

max out the game on pc at 1080p and compare it to console version and you'll see console version still looks great and not much worse then pc. thats all im saying.

AnnoyedDragon

You have admitted that the way consoles games are played prevents you from getting a good impression of the image quality, so why are you continuing to insist they look around the same based on a method that has been identified as flawed? It's like continuing to use the images the OP posted, they are bad for comparison even by console standards because the image is downscaled.

look all im saying is that pc version is not as superior to console version as hermits would have us believe. it doesnt matter if the game on console is running at 480p, 720p or 1080p. all i do is look at my laptop screen and then look at my tv and say "wow the difference sure aint big enough to make console version look trash. console version is holding up quite well"

look all im saying is that pc version is not as superior to console version as hermits would have us believe. it doesnt matter if the game on console is running at 480p, 720p or 1080p. all i do is look at my laptop screen and then look at my tv and say "wow the difference sure aint big enough to make console version look trash. console version is holding up quite well"

sikanderahmed

Based on a 0.27 x 0.27 pitch size for pixel density; you would need a 24" screen to best show the image quality. There are 22" versions but people have reported issues as the text on the screen is a bit difficult to read.

A laptop because of mobility has to use a small screen, obviously 24"/22" is too large. Therefore laptops using 1080p displays have to use a far higher pixel density than recommended in order to squeeze the resolution in there, something like a 16" screen being typical. The smaller the screen, the denser the pixels become and the further away from the recommended for best image quality. All done not for the best image quality; but just so they can stick a HD stamp on it.

Therefore a 1080p laptop is not suitable for comparing a PC 'desktop' experience to the image on a HDTV, this is of course assuming you are even using a 1080p laptop for comparison.

With all the technical stuff aside... the simple fact that you have a anti PC history in SW and look for every opportunity to bash it, justified or not, makes your opinion untrustworthy.

[QUOTE="sikanderahmed"]

look all im saying is that pc version is not as superior to console version as hermits would have us believe. it doesnt matter if the game on console is running at 480p, 720p or 1080p. all i do is look at my laptop screen and then look at my tv and say "wow the difference sure aint big enough to make console version look trash. console version is holding up quite well"

AnnoyedDragon

Based on a 0.27 x 0.27 pitch size for pixel density; you would need a 24" screen to best show the image quality. There are 22" versions but people have reported issues as the text on the screen is a bit difficult to read.

A laptop because of mobility has to use a small screen, obviously 24"/22" is too large. Therefore laptops using 1080p displays have to use a far higher pixel density than recommended in order to squeeze the resolution in there, something like a 16" screen being typical. The smaller the screen, the denser the pixels become and the further away from the recommended for best image quality. All done not for the best image quality; but just so they can stick a HD stamp on it.

Therefore a 1080p laptop is not suitable for comparing a PC 'desktop' experience to the image on a HDTV, this is of course assuming you are even using a 1080p laptop for comparison.

With all the technical stuff aside... the simple fact that you have a anti PC history in SW and look for every opportunity to bash it, justified or not, makes your opinion untrustworthy.

wait im bashing pc by saying console version of BFBC2 holds up well against pc version? i thought i made it clear that this isnt about which system sucks or is more powerful but how BFBC2 looks on console and pc and to me the console version looks great even with pc version put right next to it. also yes im using 16 inch screen and i honestly dont think playing pc version on bigger screen would make any significant difference.

[QUOTE="alextherussian"]Looks very near the same. Consoles and PC's are very much catching up with each other. Yes PC can inherently do better but even three or four years back the difference between a console game and a PC game was much more drastic. These days you can still tell that the PC version looks better, but the difference, the bridge between the versions is becoming less and less, year in year out...AnnoyedDragon

Why is it people only recognise under-utilization when it comes to consoles?

Call it what you will, what is possible is one story, what is actually the case in practice is another. For whatever reason, PC games had stayed graphically constant for 2 years. Consoles have not. alextherussian

That would be a rather long post to talk about, I've already criticised this area quite a bit, right now I'm focusing on...

wait im bashing pc by saying console version of BFBC2 holds up well against pc version? i thought i made it clear that this isnt about which system sucks or is more powerful but how BFBC2 looks on console and pc and to me the console version looks great even with pc version put right next to it. also yes im using 16 inch screen and i honestly dont think playing pc version on bigger screen would make any significant difference.

sikanderahmed

You're always bashing PC, which is why I said your opinion is biased earlier. I was speaking about you overall, not just in the context of this discussion. In this case you are downplaying the value of PC performance advantages by claiming consoles stand up great in comparison, which is just a subtle way of bashing the platform while attempting to draw little attention.

In regard to what you have said... You ignored my explanations of why the OPs pictures are unsuitable on multiple occasions; and now you are ignoring my explanation as to why a laptops 16" 1080p screen is unsuitable for judging a 24" desktop PC experience. If you are going to repeatedly ignore my reasonable explanations then hold up your opinion high and proud like it is some sort of counter argument; then there is no reason for this conversation to continue.

[QUOTE="alextherussian"]Call it what you will, what is possible is one story, what is actually the case in practice is another. For whatever reason, PC games had stayed graphically constant for 2 years. Consoles have not. AnnoyedDragon

That would be a rather long post to talk about, I've already criticised this area quite a bit, right now I'm focusing on...

wait im bashing pc by saying console version of BFBC2 holds up well against pc version? i thought i made it clear that this isnt about which system sucks or is more powerful but how BFBC2 looks on console and pc and to me the console version looks great even with pc version put right next to it. also yes im using 16 inch screen and i honestly dont think playing pc version on bigger screen would make any significant difference.

sikanderahmed

You're always bashing PC, which is why I said your opinion is biased earlier. I was speaking about you overall, not just in the context of this discussion. In this case you are downplaying the value of PC performance advantages by claiming consoles stand up great in comparison, which is just a subtle way of bashing the platform while attempting to draw little attention.

In regard to what you have said... You ignored my explanations of why the OPs pictures are unsuitable on multiple occasions; and now you are ignoring my explanation as to why a laptops 16" 1080p screen is unsuitable for judging a 24" desktop PC experience. If you are going to repeatedly ignore my reasonable explanations then hold up your opinion high and proud like it is some sort of counter argument; then there is no reason for this conversation to continue.

agreed there is no reason to continue this conversation as you are unable to accept a small fact. bai

The low - medium settings for the PC beta makes sense. 1) For compression issues and 2) why the images look so close. Probably a more accurate representation of what the PC version of the game will look like would be the original trailers put out for Squad Story #2 and the Limited Edition Unlocks. Both those looked better graphically visually and frameratewise and could very well have been taken from the PC.

I wasn't expecting a night and day difference, anyway. The PC version is obviously gonna be best based on the framerate alone. My guess is that the big differences visually will be higher res textures, SSAO (which actually bothered me missing from the console version), and much better AA, you know, like ANY. :P

Wow. I wish funkstation was a word in English.

[QUOTE="AnnoyedDragon"]

[QUOTE="alextherussian"]

You're always bashing PC, which is why I said your opinion is biased earlier. I was speaking about you overall, not just in the context of this discussion. In this case you are downplaying the value of PC performance advantages by claiming consoles stand up great in comparison, which is just a subtle way of bashing the platform while attempting to draw little attention.

In regard to what you have said... You ignored my explanations of why the OPs pictures are unsuitable on multiple occasions; and now you are ignoring my explanation as to why a laptops 16" 1080p screen is unsuitable for judging a 24" desktop PC experience. If you are going to repeatedly ignore my reasonable explanations then hold up your opinion high and proud like it is some sort of counter argument; then there is no reason for this conversation to continue.

sikanderahmed

agreed there is no reason to continue this conversation as you are unable to accept a small fact. bai

The same can be said for you as well.

DICE said that the PC beta was just low/medium textures. They affirmed that the PC version on high will look much better.

andrewt1187

-edit

Noted it was a quoting error, not directed at me.

[QUOTE="shakmaster13"]

The same can be said for you as well.

AnnoyedDragon

I'm already too active in another thread to be starting another conversation here.

However I object to your accusation that our means of proving our arguments are equivalent. I provided explanations, he brought nothing but opinion.

I wasn't accusing you of anything :P. I was just saying that he isn't able to accept one little fact.

EDIT: saw your edit. It's all good.

Why are hermits trying so hard. The game looks amazing no matter what you play it on. The fact that a game looks better on PC shouldnt be a surprise to anyone. I mean seriously, i can still go back and play Bad Company 1 and it still looks awesome. And the destructibles. Hermits rejoice. The multiplat looks better. Gratz? Enjoy God of Wa... O WATEJ-Stantino

[QUOTE="anshul89"]

Nope. Bad Company 2 looks terrible on the 360 compared to the PC version.

sikanderahmed

:lol: not at all

How does it? It looks fine.

Why are hermits trying so hard. The game looks amazing no matter what you play it on. The fact that a game looks better on PC shouldnt be a surprise to anyone. I mean seriously, i can still go back and play Bad Company 1 and it still looks awesome. And the destructibles. Hermits rejoice. The multiplat looks better. Gratz? Enjoy God of Wa... O WATEJ-Stantino

Why are hermits trying so hard.J-Stantino

Interesting how you criticise PC gamers, and only PC gamers, when clearly there is a console biased presence in this thread as well.

[QUOTE="J-Stantino"]Why are hermits trying so hard.AnnoyedDragon

Interesting how you criticise PC gamers, and only PC gamers, when clearly there is a console biased presence in this thread as well.

I know it's a graphics comparison thread, but should we really be comparing a demo that's essentially finished to a visually gimped beta being used to test server load and netcode?

The big underlying point in all this is that obviously the PC is going to have the best version of the game (even if the final differences only end up being slight) and that regardless of your platform it's going to be a great game that's worthy of your time.

[QUOTE="xOMGITSJASONx"]

Pc looks better by a little like every multiplat. When hermits say superior version this is exactly what they mean...which is actually little difference graphic wise. Don't get me wrong, i have a pc.. but pc multiplats NEVER blow away the console versions.. but they do look alittle better graphically.. PS not talking about mods just graphics.

windsquid9000

Quad core with 6 gigs ddr3 and a 4870? I don't need a new pc. If anything i'll just get windows 7 and plug a 5970 inside my antec 900. Truth is i played far cry 2 on ps3 and maxed the game on my pc. Did the pc version look better well duh yes it did. Did the pc version blow away the ps3 version? No. All pc multiplats look alittle better. Thats the truth imo. Just stop all the hermit bull (directed at hemits) on sw that pc versions of games look sooooooooooooooo much better than the 360 and ps3 versions. they don't.

The big underlying point in all this is that obviously the PC is going to have the best version of the game (even if the final differences only end up being slight) and that regardless of your platform it's going to be a great game that's worthy of your time.

Ryan_Som

My presence in the thread, as you can look back and see, was to respond to the people using these comparisons to say something negative about PC. I wasn't here to hammer only the PC version will be good into people's heads, I really don't mind that everyone can enjoy the game, certain people just had to make comments like this.

holy crap the console version running on 2005 hardware holds up so well against pc version likely running on latest hardware.

sikanderahmed

[QUOTE="Ryan_Som"]

The big underlying point in all this is that obviously the PC is going to have the best version of the game (even if the final differences only end up being slight) and that regardless of your platform it's going to be a great game that's worthy of your time.

AnnoyedDragon

My presence in the thread, as you can look back and see, was to respond to the people using these comparisons to say something negative about PC. I wasn't here to hammer only the PC version will be good into people's heads, I really don't mind that everyone can enjoy the game, certain people just had to make comments like this.

holy crap the console version running on 2005 hardware holds up so well against pc version likely running on latest hardware.

sikanderahmed

No no, I read the entire thread and I'm not disagreeing with you. It's obvious that this isn't exactly a fair comparison yet since the PC version is somewhat gimped at the moment. People arguing over insignificant differences between console versions of a game is stupid. However, unless something goes mysteriously wrong with the PC version then it's pretty much inarguable that the PC version is the best.

Well it doesn't look better than MW2.danishkhan

[QUOTE="danishkhan"]Well it doesn't look better than MW2.Rockman999

That still doesnt mean it looks better. It just means it can handle more things on screen