This topic is locked from further discussion.
HL2 was a good example, considering HL2 on highest settings on PC looks better than HL2 on consoles, consoles can't even max a game from 2004. Brainkiller05Heres another good example Prey based on another 2004 Pc engine(Doom 3) that consoles cant even play on high.
Mid ranged Pc from 2006 Below:
Xbox 360 best thing since sliced bread :roll: Below:
This kinda shows how limited consoles areNo. Not all PC games look better. And no hl2 does not look better.
13C
Prey based on another 2004 Pc engine(Doom 3) that consoles cant even play on high. Let alone medium settings.
Mid ranged Pc from 2006 Below:
Xbox 360 best thing since sliced bread 
Below:
This kinda shows how limited consoles are[QUOTE="13C"]
No. Not all PC games look better. And no hl2 does not look better.
04dcarraher
Prey based on another 2004 Pc engine(Doom 3) that consoles cant even play on high. Let alone medium settings.
Mid ranged Pc from 2006 Below:
Xbox 360 best thing since sliced bread Below:
You should do a little more research before you make yourself sound like a fool. All that shows is an example of a god awful port. That game only used one core in a xbox 360. That was a game designed to be used on one core before hpyerthreading and multiple core developement became standard. Hell look at any decent looking console title and run it on a pc from 2006 that could max the doom 3 engine. Most current console games would bring those pcs to shame. Even your high end build of Prey looks horrible by todays console standards.
This kinda shows how limited consoles are[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]
[QUOTE="13C"]
No. Not all PC games look better. And no hl2 does not look better.
TheSterls
Prey based on another 2004 Pc engine(Doom 3) that consoles cant even play on high. Let alone medium settings.
Mid ranged Pc from 2006 Below:
Xbox 360 best thing since sliced bread Below:
You should do a little more research before you make yourself sound like a fool. All that shows is an example of a god awful port. That game only used one core in a xbox 360. That was a game designed to be used on one core before hpyerthreading and multiple core developement became standard. Hell look at any decent looking console title and run it on a pc from 2006 that could max the doom 3 engine. Most current console games would bring those pcs to shame. Even your high end build of Prey looks horrible by todays console standards.
Okay, what about Bioshock, then? Don't tell us that was a poor port. The 360 version was lauded as having great visuals and scored a 9.0, yet we know where the best visuals ended up.This kinda shows how limited consoles are[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]
[QUOTE="13C"]
No. Not all PC games look better. And no hl2 does not look better.
TheSterls
Prey based on another 2004 Pc engine(Doom 3) that consoles cant even play on high. Let alone medium settings.
Mid ranged Pc from 2006 Below:
Xbox 360 best thing since sliced bread Below:
You should do a little more research before you make yourself sound like a fool. All that shows is an example of a god awful port. That game only used one core in a xbox 360. That was a game designed to be used on one core before hpyerthreading and multiple core developement became standard. Hell look at any decent looking console title and run it on a pc from 2006 that could max the doom 3 engine. Most current console games would bring those pcs to shame. Even your high end build of Prey looks horrible by todays console standards.
This proves my point their suppose tohave all this power but yet they cant match even medium settings on a 2004 doom 3 engine even back in 2006 bad port or not. And you know nothing about how pc or how the 360 works cpu cores has nothing to do with graphics. The 360 and PS3 are late 2004 tech that run games at sub 720 resolutions with very limited resources with a total of 512mb of system and video memory. And every other multiplatform game looks better on Pc Even with 2005/2006 hardware.[QUOTE="TheSterls"]
[QUOTE="04dcarraher"] This kinda shows how limited consoles are
Prey based on another 2004 Pc engine(Doom 3) that consoles cant even play on high. Let alone medium settings.
Mid ranged Pc from 2006 Below:
Xbox 360 best thing since sliced bread
HuusAsking
You should do a little more research before you make yourself sound like a fool. All that shows is an example of a god awful port. That game only used one core in a xbox 360. That was a game designed to be used on one core before hpyerthreading and multiple core developement became standard. Hell look at any decent looking console title and run it on a pc from 2006 that could max the doom 3 engine. Most current console games would bring those pcs to shame. Even your high end build of Prey looks horrible by todays console standards.
Okay, what about Bioshock, then? Don't tell us that was a poor port. The 360 version was lauded as having great visuals and scored a 9.0, yet we know where the best visuals ended up. Also what about Gears of War, Fallout 3, or any other 360 focused game that also ends up on Pc looking much better even with $50 Video cards and shows time and time again showing how consoles are limited thatthey really are. Also on Bioshock or UT3, the consoles version look like their running medium settings at best.Heres another good example Prey based on another 2004 Pc engine(Doom 3) that consoles cant even play on high.[QUOTE="Brainkiller05"]HL2 was a good example, considering HL2 on highest settings on PC looks better than HL2 on consoles, consoles can't even max a game from 2004. 04dcarraher
Mid ranged Pc from 2006 Below:
Xbox 360 best thing since sliced bread :roll: Below:
This proves exacltly what the TC is tryng to prove...
There is no way in hell a console game can be compared to a PC game, because consoles DO NOT HAVE the resources to max any current gen game (Aka can't run a game with 8xAA 16xAF and higher textures resolution )
This is a simple concept, yet people find it so hard to understand it
Fact:
Have fun...
Fact is most PC games graphics are crap compared to new console games like UC2 GOWIII and GT5. Games like Aion, WOW, Diablo 3 and Starcraft 2 are generation behind UC2.
Didn't Crysis sold just over 300 copies. Show me a PC game that sold more than million copies that looks better than UC2.
fun-da-mental
You're going down mate...
This kinda shows how limited consoles are[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]
[QUOTE="13C"]
No. Not all PC games look better. And no hl2 does not look better.
TheSterls
Prey based on another 2004 Pc engine(Doom 3) that consoles cant even play on high. Let alone medium settings.
Mid ranged Pc from 2006 Below:
Xbox 360 best thing since sliced bread Below:
You should do a little more research before you make yourself sound like a fool. All that shows is an example of a god awful port. That game only used one core in a xbox 360. That was a game designed to be used on one core before hpyerthreading and multiple core developement became standard. Hell look at any decent looking console title and run it on a pc from 2006 that could max the doom 3 engine. Most current console games would bring those pcs to shame. Even your high end build of Prey looks horrible by todays console standards.
i agree with this guyTurned into one image so I don't attract the wrath of the moderators...
This kinda shows how limited consoles are
Prey based on another 2004 Pc engine(Doom 3) that consoles cant even play on high. Let alone medium settings.
04dcarraher
Basically this is before lowest common denominator targeting came into full effect. Back in 2006 console developers were still relying on PC game projects that were taken over to consoles at some point. The end result is the difference between the PC and console version being very clear.
Of course that was in 2006, developers have come to better understand console hardware since then. More than likely if that was ported today they would be of equal quality with the PC version just being a higher resolution, but PC hardware has moved forward considerably since then; so it would still be significantly ahead on PC.
Provided of course that hardware was actually utilized.
The problem, as with the PS3, is that hardware isn't going to flex it's strength unless it is pushed. A game designed to accommodate console capability which was then later ported to PC isn't going to make that hardware sweat.
It's nice to be able to run every cross platform game at 1920x1200 with AA, but you reach a point were you would like to see something take advantage of what new technology has to offer, which this market sadly does not accommodate these days. Unless someone out there figures out how to drop the development cost of modern games considerably; they are going to keep going cross platform and becoming console limited.
Turned into one image so I don't attract the wrath of the moderators...
[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]
This kinda shows how limited consoles are
Prey based on another 2004 Pc engine(Doom 3) that consoles cant even play on high. Let alone medium settings.
AnnoyedDragon
Basically this is before lowest common denominator targeting came into full effect. Back in 2006 console developers were still relying on PC game projects that were taken over to consoles at some point. The end result is the difference between the PC and console version being very clear.
Of course that was in 2006, developers have come to better understand console hardware since then. More than likely if that was ported today they would be of equal quality with the PC version just being a higher resolution, but PC hardware has moved forward considerably since then; so it would still be significantly ahead on PC.
Provided of course that hardware was actually utilized.
The problem, as with the PS3, is that hardware isn't going to flex it's strength unless it is pushed. A game designed to accommodate console capability which was then later ported to PC isn't going to make that hardware sweat.
It's nice to be able to run every cross platform game at 1920x1200 with AA, but you reach a point were you would like to see something take advantage of what new technology has to offer, which this market sadly does not accommodate these days. Unless someone out there figures out how to drop the development cost of modern games considerably; they are going to keep going cross platform and becoming console limited.
Even with understanding the hardware better only so much gain that can be obtained just because the nature of the hardware being limited.
Log in to comment