Could you play on just a console until 2010?

Yes

Seeing asI couldnt care less about pC gameing.

The next gen of hardware video cards come out in 2010. Could you hold off ALL PC gaming until then and just use a console(s)?Tony-Baxter

What?

You think Nvidia/ATI are just going to sit on their butt a year and produce no improved GPUs? Plus even if they did, why would that result to only playing on a console for a year? Why would you downgrade because of a lack of upgrades?

lol the latest graphic cards out right now own all console as it is so i dont know where your thread is goingsuperjim42

[QUOTE="superjim42"]lol the latest graphic cards out right now own all console as it is so i dont know where your thread is goingTony-Baxter

yes and im saying the ones out at the moment are powerful enough and own all consoles so why would they have to wait for the next ones?

[QUOTE="superjim42"]lol the latest graphic cards out right now own all console as it is so i dont know where your thread is goingTony-Baxter

Again, what?

Do you not know anything about computer gaming or just failing at being a troll?

I think i can do that.Infact,i am planning to go ahead with only my consoles upto 2012/2013 where i think the next graphical break through will take place and consoles will be out dated in terms of graphics.Well yea i do have a 8800GTX,Q9300 and 2GB corsair to keep me up on the PC side aswell.But i dont really use it much for gaming nowadays.

Yes

Seeing asI couldnt care less about pC gameing.

Gh0st_Of_0nyx

lol same here.

I dont know where i would be without PC gaming:roll:.

I could care less about PC gaming. Im all about the consoles.

People; is there really a point in responding if you are already console biased?

The question seams to mostly be aimed at PC players. The OP seems to be under the impression that the present GPU gen does not exceed consoles, therefore would we play consoles if we had to wait until 2010 for better than console graphics?

Of course the main flaw of the question is we exceeded consoles a long time ago.

The next gen of hardware video cards come out in 2010. Could you hold off ALL PC gaming until then and just use a console(s)?Tony-Baxter

[QUOTE="Tony-Baxter"]The next gen of hardware video cards come out in 2010. Could you hold off ALL PC gaming until then and just use a console(s)?blackdreamhunk

Exactly Crytek said that the next Graphical break through will be in 2012/2013 and that is very true ....The next big thing in hardware is Larrabee(some secret project under developement by intel).

I have to agree with this statement... I've compared a handful of games on my 360 to my PC on the same screen (Bioshock, Tomb Raider: Legends, etc) and I have to say my 8800gt w/Q9300 processor kills the 360 usually both in graphics and frame rate.

That's not to say I don't love my 360 - can't play Halo 3, Lost Odyssey, Geometry Wars 2 and the upcoming Fable 2 on the PC. So to answer the question I use both.

People; is there really a point in responding if you are already console biased?

The question seams to mostly be aimed at PC players. The OP seems to be under the impression that the present GPU gen does not exceed consoles, therefore would we play consoles if we had to wait until 2010 for better than console graphics?

Of course the main flaw of the question is we exceeded consoles a long time ago.

AnnoyedDragon

[QUOTE="blackdreamhunk"][QUOTE="Tony-Baxter"]The next gen of hardware video cards come out in 2010. Could you hold off ALL PC gaming until then and just use a console(s)?lesner87

Exactly Crytek said that the next Graphical break through will be in 2012/2013 and that is very true ....The next big thing in hardware is Larrabee(some secret project under developement by intel).

Exactly Crytek said that the next Graphical break through will be in 2012/2013 and that is very true ....The next big thing in hardware is Larrabee(some secret project under developement by intel).

lesner87

Larrabee isn't a break though, it is just Intel's answer to GPGPU.

This thread doesn't make sense. Current cards are already way more powerful than the ones in consoles....Couth_

Let me clear somethings to you.Having raw power is one thing and having a new seperate feature is totally another.The current cards are much powerfull than consoles but consoles have all their features example motion blurr,depth of field,soft boides and PS3 is very up to date as it can even RAY TRACE (A technique which can only be preformed on VERY powerfull cards).Ray tracing can be optimized on a single Cell processor.

So these features can keep PS3 and Xbox 360 up to date for atleast 2012/2013 or in simple words until a next graphical breakthrough like Crysis or Doom 3.

[QUOTE="lesner87"]

Exactly Crytek said that the next Graphical break through will be in 2012/2013 and that is very true ....The next big thing in hardware is Larrabee(some secret project under developement by intel).

AnnoyedDragon

Larrabee isn't a break though, it is just Intel's answer to GPGPU.

I wasnt calling it a break through i was calling it a next big thing in computer hardware.

[QUOTE="Couth_"]This thread doesn't make sense. Current cards are already way more powerful than the ones in consoles....lesner87

Let me clear somethings to you.Having raw power is one thing and having a new seperate feature is totally another.The current cards are much powerfull than consoles but consoles have all their features example motion blurr,depth of field,soft boides and PS3 is very up to date as it can even RAY TRACE (A technique which can only be preformed on VERY powerfull cards).Ray tracing can be optimized on a single Cell processor.

So these features can keep PS3 and Xbox 360 up to date for atleast 2012/2013 or in simple words until a next graphical breakthrough like Crysis or Doom 3.

I wasnt calling it a break through i was calling it a next big thing in computer hardware.

lesner87

Sorry, eyes jumbled up your Crytek sentence with your Larrabee. I still wouldn't call it the next big thing though, it is just the reverse of what has already been done on GPUs.

[QUOTE="lesner87"]

[QUOTE="Couth_"]This thread doesn't make sense. Current cards are already way more powerful than the ones in consoles....Couth_

Let me clear somethings to you.Having raw power is one thing and having a new seperate feature is totally another.The current cards are much powerfull than consoles but consoles have all their features example motion blurr,depth of field,soft boides and PS3 is very up to date as it can even RAY TRACE (A technique which can only be preformed on VERY powerfull cards).Ray tracing can be optimized on a single Cell processor.

So these features can keep PS3 and Xbox 360 up to date for atleast 2012/2013 or in simple words until a next graphical breakthrough like Crysis or Doom 3.

Exactly PCs are always superior in terms of graphics because they are customizable.They are FAR more powerfull than consoles and those raw powers can be put to the use.For example you can take the AA and AF as high as possible which you cant do on consoles.Another example is of the resolution.Than comes the tons of mods.

I will never quite PC gaming.I`ll try my best to enjoy both :) .Consoles are fun to play and so are PCs.But mostly i`ll be using my PS3 just because of my personall taste.Nothing factfull or logical,just my personal choice.

[QUOTE="lesner87"]

I wasnt calling it a break through i was calling it a next big thing in computer hardware.

AnnoyedDragon

Sorry, eyes jumbled up your Crytek sentence with your Larrabee. I still wouldn't call it the next big thing though, it is just the reverse of what has already been done on GPUs.

Exactly,i am not into it that much either.It seems like intel is tryint their best to hype it.

Personally,for me THE NEXT BIG THING would be the next graphical breakthrough.Like Crysis and Doom 3 were.

This thread doesn't make sense. Current cards are already way more powerful than the ones in consoles....Couth_

I really like your Resistance 2 sig :)

[QUOTE="Couth_"]This thread doesn't make sense. Current cards are already way more powerful than the ones in consoles....lesner87

Let me clear somethings to you.Having raw power is one thing and having a new seperate feature is totally another.The current cards are much powerfull than consoles but consoles have all their features example motion blurr,depth of field,soft boides and PS3 is very up to date as it can even RAY TRACE (A technique which can only be preformed on VERY powerfull cards).Ray tracing can be optimized on a single Cell processor.

So these features can keep PS3 and Xbox 360 up to date for atleast 2012/2013 or in simple words until a next graphical breakthrough like Crysis or Doom 3.

Okay, I agree with most of your post except that BS about PS3 RAY-Tracing. If you think some light rays filtering through leaves is RAY-Traycing then you're dead wrong. RAY-Tracing an incredibly RAM intensive technique for using curved reflective surfaces that infinitly reflect and refract every object and/or effect in a scene. If God Rays (3D shafts of light) are to be considered RAY-Tracing, then most graphicaly intensive games since '04 use 'RAY-Tracing'. Seeing as how the Cell isn't even ideal for gaming, it's ridiculous to think only the PS3 could achieve this technique in realtime. That said, it's true to this day that XB360 and PS3s GPUs incorporate a lot of techniques that are used in todays newest PC games. But to a lesser extent.

[QUOTE="lesner87"]

[QUOTE="Couth_"]This thread doesn't make sense. Current cards are already way more powerful than the ones in consoles....BudsMcGreen

Let me clear somethings to you.Having raw power is one thing and having a new seperate featureis totally another.The current cards are much powerfull than consoles but consoles have all their features example motion blurr,depth of field,soft boides and PS3 is very up to date as it can even RAY TRACE (A technique which can only be preformed on VERY powerfull cards).Ray tracing can be optimized on a single Cell processor.

So these features can keep PS3 and Xbox 360 up to date for atleast 2012/2013 or in simple words until a next graphical breakthrough like Crysis or Doom 3.

Okay, I agree with most of your post except that BS about PS3 RAY-Tracing. If you think some light rays filtering through leaves is RAY-Traycing then you're dead wrong. RAY-Tracing an incredibly RAM intensive technique for using curved reflective surfaces that infinitly reflect and refract every object and/or effect in a scene. If God Rays (3D shafts of light) are to be considered RAY-Tracing, then most graphicaly intensive games since '04 use 'RAY-Tracing'. Seeing as how the Cell isn't even ideal for gaming, it's ridiculous to think only the PS3 could achieve this technique in realtime. That said, it's true to this day that XB360 and PS3s GPUs incorporate a lot techniques that are used in todays newest PC games. But to a lesser extent.

1)http://www.gametomorrow.com/blog/index.php/2005/11/30/gpus-vs-cell/

3)http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLte5f34ya8

Before you go talking about 3 PS3s and stuff.Read the details :

"The iRT is totally scalable and only requires one Cell SPE to run."

4)http://www.power.org/swsummit/download/SW_Summit_PS3_Experience_Joaquin.pdf

5)http://graphics.cs.uni-sb.de/~benthin/cellrt06.pdf

"As just shown, the Cell is more powerful than a commodity CPU,but also quite different."

Here is an actual PRE-ALPHA footage of Killzone 2 using Ray-Tracing.

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/34200.html

Here is a video showing us of what cell can do WITH-OUT the RSX (PS3s Graphics Card).This is all rendered in real-time :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ehwFOM4CBKA

I really dont care that much about PCs. They dont have enough titles to keep my attention on them, and most of them suck at delivering a good story, which is the thing I look the most on games. If it wasnt for a handfull of new titles (Gears, Mass Effect, upcoming D3 and Doom 3) I would still be playing old school games, as Doom 1-2. Diablo II, Dino Crisis 2, and some F2P MMORPG (which are the most played games on computers.kenshinhimura10

[QUOTE="kenshinhimura10"]I really dont care that much about PCs. They dont have enough titles to keep my attention on them, and most of them suck at delivering a good story, which is the thing I look the most on games. If it wasnt for a handfull of new titles (Gears, Mass Effect, upcoming D3 and Doom 3) I would still be playing old school games, as Doom 1-2. Diablo II, Dino Crisis 2, and some F2P MMORPG (which are the most played games on computers.blackdreamhunk

And you sir are a closed minded .......

i would miss great first person shooter but i guess with time i would forget how good they were and learn to like console shooters

i would also miss good civ games and total war games

and rts games

but yea i could do it

[QUOTE="kenshinhimura10"]I really dont care that much about PCs. They dont have enough titles to keep my attention on them, and most of them suck at delivering a good story, which is the thing I look the most on games. If it wasnt for a handfull of new titles (Gears, Mass Effect, upcoming D3 and Doom 3) I would still be playing old school games, as Doom 1-2. Diablo II, Dino Crisis 2, and some F2P MMORPG (which are the most played games on computers.blackdreamhunk

Its all a matter of your taste.

[QUOTE="BudsMcGreen"][QUOTE="lesner87"]

[QUOTE="Couth_"]This thread doesn't make sense. Current cards are already way more powerful than the ones in consoles....lesner87

Let me clear somethings to you.Having raw power is one thing and having a new seperate featureis totally another.The current cards are much powerfull than consoles but consoles have all their features example motion blurr,depth of field,soft boides and PS3 is very up to date as it can even RAY TRACE (A technique which can only be preformed on VERY powerfull cards).Ray tracing can be optimized on a single Cell processor.

So these features can keep PS3 and Xbox 360 up to date for atleast 2012/2013 or in simple words until a next graphical breakthrough like Crysis or Doom 3.

Okay, I agree with most of your post except that BS about PS3 RAY-Tracing. If you think some light rays filtering through leaves is RAY-Traycing then you're dead wrong. RAY-Tracing an incredibly RAM intensive technique for using curved reflective surfaces that infinitly reflect and refract every object and/or effect in a scene. If God Rays (3D shafts of light) are to be considered RAY-Tracing, then most graphicaly intensive games since '04 use 'RAY-Tracing'. Seeing as how the Cell isn't even ideal for gaming, it's ridiculous to think only the PS3 could achieve this technique in realtime. That said, it's true to this day that XB360 and PS3s GPUs incorporate a lot techniques that are used in todays newest PC games. But to a lesser extent.

1)http://www.gametomorrow.com/blog/index.php/2005/11/30/gpus-vs-cell/

3)http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLte5f34ya8

Before you go talking about 3 PS3s and stuff.Read the details :

"The iRT is totally scalable and only requires one Cell SPE to run."

4)http://www.power.org/swsummit/download/SW_Summit_PS3_Experience_Joaquin.pdf

5)http://graphics.cs.uni-sb.de/~benthin/cellrt06.pdf

"As just shown, the Cell is more powerful than a commodity CPU,but also quite different."

Here is an actual PRE-ALPHA footage of Killzone 2 using Ray-Tracing.

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/34200.html

Here is a video showing us of what cell can do WITH-OUT the RSX (PS3s Graphics Card).This is all rendered in real-time :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ehwFOM4CBKA

I did not see any RAY-Tracing going on, sorry. For an example of realtime RAY-Tracing look up Quake 3 RAY-Traced mmmkay.