Yeah that's the craziest thing about this gen. Unlike every console generation before it, the games aren't going to look better and better all the time. Everything will just look like cross gen titles for years to come.
I am simply logic based. I only deal in facts and objective data. This is why I have never lost at SW.
I guess it's just a matter of perception, as the general consensus is you always lose arguments in system wars. Also, system wars isn't a game, so you can't lose at system wars. You can lose at being a human, though.... I've said too much....
No, next gen is totally about mobile based CPUs and budget GPUs all the way. Next gen is finally here. Jealous PC gamers cry moar with their weak Nvidia pos grfx chips.
C-Gen (current gen for the non-elite) consoles are supercomputers that eat teraflops for breakfast. Not sure if even a gaming PC from 2018 will be able to run Infamous: SS at med settings in 720p. Time will tell. Maybe Crysis 5 will beat KZ: Shadowfall, but I doubt it. Someone call Factor 5 and ask them how GC launch game Rogue Squadron beat Star Citizen's paltry graphics by light years 13 years ago. The untouchable console dominance will continue as long as Nintendo still makes consoles that make NASA's best PCs sweat and quiver with fear. The OG Xbox version of Doom 3 shows what coding to the metal can do, as it completely obliterated the PC version. John Carmack wasn't squeezing lemons to make lemonade there either. He had a plethora of untapped power left to explore when he moved away from the OG Xbox, he probably only used about 5% of the Xbox's true potential. Don't be jelly, PC gamers. We all know one day the PC will get a good looking game that puts consoles to shame. Whether or not it will be in this millenium, who knows?
Nice to see this thread fulfilling the system wars quota of people talking out of their ass about platforms they don't own and games they've never played.
No, next gen is totally about mobile based CPUs and budget GPUs all the way. Next gen is finally here. Jealous PC gamers cry moar with their weak Nvidia pos grfx chips.
C-Gen (current gen for the non-elite) consoles are supercomputers that eat teraflops for breakfast. Not sure if even a gaming PC from 2018 will be able to run Infamous: SS at med settings in 720p. Time will tell. Maybe Crysis 5 will beat KZ: Shadowfall, but I doubt it. Someone call Factor 5 and ask them how GC launch game Rogue Squadron beat Star Citizen's paltry graphics by light years 13 years ago. The untouchable console dominance will continue as long as Nintendo still makes consoles that make NASA's best PCs sweat and quiver with fear. The OG Xbox version of Doom 3 shows what coding to the metal can do, as it completely obliterated the PC version. John Carmack wasn't squeezing lemons to make lemonade there either. He had a plethora of untapped power left to explore when he moved away from the OG Xbox, he probably only used about 5% of the Xbox's true potential. Don't be jelly, PC gamers. We all know one day the PC will get a good looking game that puts consoles to shame. Whether or not it will be in this millenium, who knows?
Because judging a whole gen based off the first half year is a logical and reasonable thing to do.
Look at last gen, if we wrote that off based on the first few months then it would have looked dumb considering the likes of TLOU and GTA V came out much later showing off fantastic visuals
This and this generation is more like PS1 to PS2 than PS2 to PS3. A large leap, certainly, was made but it was not a giant leap like PS2 to PS3.
Trying to fit gaming into a number's game means you're missing the point of games...FUN. Games are played for the experience....not to sit and pick at graphics and frame rate. You play games for all the wrong reasons dude.....
You missed his point . If we think that way then why don't people stick to PS3 and Xbox 360 .? Why devs don't support those two platforms for next ten years .? The answer is simple ; They want to move forward . They want to make use of more powerful CPUs to make AI more clever , challenging and immersive . They want to make game world more real , alive and bigger to make gameplay more non linear . How exactly is that a bad thing .? Can you do game like Witcher 3 on PS3 and Xbox 360 .?
There isn't really a need for a next gen....the console makers do it for profit. And if they don't up the generation every once in awhile they will be left behind by the other console makers. The two are not necessarily linked. There is nothing wrong with an upgrade....but damn dude gaming isn't meant to be about numbers.
Your answer is wrong. Devs might want more power....the real answer however is profit.
Tell that to cows. They cry and moan about 1080p all the time. Why is it ok in that discussion, but not in the PC discussion?
All these cows saying specs Dont matter. Then, they go back to their Xbox bashing thread making fun of the Xbox for being a tiny bit weaker. Sure specs don't matter but you shouldn't say that when you spend 50 threads debating 900p vs 792p. As soon as you have to compare to PC, you suddenly don't care anymore. Never have I met a more hypocritical group of people.
Thank you. I have said it before. If you settled for less than the best, which is PC, then you have no right to point fingers at anyone else for it. It is so funny that its not about numbers and games are supposed to be fun when compared with a PC, but when with an X1 its a different story. They are the kings of hypocrisy.
Yeah that's the craziest thing about this gen. Unlike every console generation before it, the games aren't going to look better and better all the time. Everything will just look like cross gen titles for years to come.
Thanks Reagan.
I think the average consumer has gotten to a point with the graphics in 360/PS3 where they are satisfied. At least to the point where they wont spend more than a few hundred bucks for a console. I know a few people with one of the aforementioned 7th gen consoles that just doesn't care about the jump in graphics enough to shell out money for these new consoles.
This new gen, at least regarding multiplats, will be about running 7th-gen level quality games at hd on consoles. There wasn't actually a generation leap on them. It was just a hardware update. Nothing changes for us, PC Gamers. If any game slightly touches next-gen, it's immediately a sub-hd game on consoles.
And 30 fps. It's gen 7.5. It's all a bit disappointing tbh.
@melonfarmerz: Oh please. Lemmings were 10x worse last gen. Most Cows just don't care for PC. PC gaming isn't for everyone. Cows boast about having better performance over X1 for revenge from last gen.
I love these PC gamers who cant figure the benefits of a new console generation! They have been playing ports from consoles with 512mb ram for the last 8 years, and in a sudden the lowest common denominator is 10 times more powerful. That must be terrible :o
Personaly, as a console gamer, i couldnt be more happy! 1080p60 or 1080p30 for most games, no multiplayer limitations for games like BF4 and Planetside 2, and most devs are already supporting this new gen. Hell yeah =)
And lol at comparing the graphics of Second Son to Sleeping Dog...
Uh they're not even 7th gen titles if you look at it.
Extremely linear, terrible A.I., terrible stories, incomplete buggy titles that are poorly optimized, no server browsers, no FOV or performance options, long load times. The consoles got stuck way back. Looks prettier then it used to, though. PC will just march on, with or without the marketing games.
@Cloud_imperium: console fanboys are too lazy to look up computer parts and how to build one together so they don't consider it an option. I'm so happy Dynasty Warriors finally came to PC, if this takes off for all Japan vidiya I'll never need a console again!
I always said this and I will always say it if you're a graphic whore and you play on consoles you're doing it wrong but if you're a gamer who likes to play all the latest games with a decent performance for the cheapest price without much hassle + get access to some of the consoles exclusives then consoles are where you should game
go look at games in 2005-2006, come back to the present and compare them to what we got now.
also switching SD to HD help a lot and going HD to 4k isn't happening any time soon so ya you won't see crazy upgrades
Mainly on the PS3 there were huge leaps because it was complex. But the leap wasn't as big on the 360. Ssome of the early RARE games on the 360 looked great. After Gears, the graphics were only incrementally improved on imo. The 360 enjoyed a consistent graphics ceiling last gen, and you'll find that here this gen.
@no-scope-AK47 said:
Hard to build a next gen console when you have to worry about heat and price. The latest tech on pc uses alot of power and generates alot of heat. Sony built a decent box but there is no way they could make money trying to compete with the mighty pc.
I don't think that's really true. They could have used laptop parts to get lower power and heat, and the new Maxwell based GPUs are very power efficient.
I always said this and I will always say it if you're a graphic whore and you play on consoles you're doing it wrong but if you're a gamer who likes to play all the latest games with a decent performance for the cheapest price without much hassle + get access to some of the consoles exclusives then consoles are where you should game
The thing I don't understand is, and I'm NOT aiming this at you. The console gamers bitch about graphics all day long, the cows especially love that, but the second someone mentions PC, they retract their position to, 'it's about the console games and the fun', and then they go back to the graphics war.
Because judging a whole gen based off the first half year is a logical and reasonable thing to do.
Look at last gen, if we wrote that off based on the first few months then it would have looked dumb considering the likes of TLOU and GTA V came out much later showing off fantastic visuals
The situation is kinda different this gen. I don't remember consoles having problems running games right at the start of the gen.
For example, Xbox360 had no problem running Oblivion, one of the most demanding games at the start of the 7th gen. Meanwhile I couldn't run Oblivion on my Pentium 4 3.2 GHZ, 4GB of RAM, and GT7600 at 1024*768 resolutions when it was released.
Your problem might have been your CPU.
I had a 6800gt at the time and it ran Oblivion fine at 1280x1024 with HDR enabled and most settings on high aside from a few on medium.
It actually looked better than the Xbox 360 version and ran just as well if not better aside from the lack of AA at the time.
I had an AMD athlon 64 CPU during Oblivion's release which ran the game much better than the comparable Pentium 4 CPU.
Keep in mind, during the earlier stages the last gen consoles weren't being utilize to their best.
Spec wise they were not overly impressive aside from the fact that they could handle shader intensive games much better than PC tech from 2005 and earlier.
But the majority of devs didn't make shader intensive games until years after the release of the Xbox 360.
This meant weaker PC hardware (like my 6800gt) could compete with last gen consoles for the first few years of last gen.
@HalcyonScarlet: Don't forget when comparing games they compare all console together even though they each only ever get one console. Plus when they compare lists to each other they include every single game which I'm sure play each and every single one but how can they say they can't afford PC gaming when they keep buying $60 priced games on a whim? And on top of that pay for patches and map packs?
Infamous looks quite a bit better than maxed out sleepy dogs, I would know.
Now crawl back under your bridge, feeding times over.
There are quite a few things that ISS does better than Sleeping Dogs.
Such things as model detail and particle effects.
But the thing that bugged me the most about ISS was LOD detail.
The model and texture detail got raped when you went and looked at objects about a block or further away.
Now obviously Sleeping Dogs had some scaling back with LOD but IMO it was not as bad.
So technically ISS was superior overall but when I compared playing ISS with playing Sleeping Dogs I don't really notice a large jump in visuals aside from the parts when you see close ups of important character models which was usually during cutscenes.
And while early console games of the last couple of gens didn't have large jumps in visuals compared to the best of PC at the time, there were advantages in hardware that had yet been utilized.
This gen there is no special Unified shader tech that was ahead of what was in PC hardware. Current consoles are basically utilizing the same tech from earlier PC GPUs.
So while games will continue to look better there will be even larger bottlenecks than before, especially with the very weak console CPUs which will hamper advancements in things such as A.I.
@HalcyonScarlet: Don't forget when comparing games they compare all console together even though they each only ever get one console. Plus when they compare lists to each other they include every single game which I'm sure play each and every single one but how can they say they can't afford PC gaming when they keep buying $60 priced games on a whim? And on top of that pay for patches and map packs?
The thing is they say PC gaming cost more, but let's add it up. I remember the cows loved doing this with the 360 last gen. £350 console, £40 a year to pay for the online part of the games 'held at ransom', £40 - £45 a game. Look how quickly it adds up.
Now let's do PC. £500 - £800 for the PC. £30 a game for those same console games that cost £40 - £45 or... Crazy cheap gaming in the form of Humble bundle games and Steam Sales for more games than you have time for :-D. Which one ends up better value?
Yeah that's the craziest thing about this gen. Unlike every console generation before it, the games aren't going to look better and better all the time. Everything will just look like cross gen titles for years to come.
Thanks Reagan.
I think the average consumer has gotten to a point with the graphics in 360/PS3 where they are satisfied. At least to the point where they wont spend more than a few hundred bucks for a console. I know a few people with one of the aforementioned 7th gen consoles that just doesn't care about the jump in graphics enough to shell out money for these new consoles.
Hermits just don't get it. They'll constantly and wrongly assume tech specs are important to console gamers.
After looking at multiple resolution/frame rate threads on daily basis , I'd say specs DO concern console gamers .
If you think SW is an accurate portrayal of your average console gamer, you're very mistaken. See, I said "hermits" meaning the PC fans WHO POST HERE, not general consumers. There's a big difference.
I always pity the people that can't distinguish the real world from this place.
Yeah that's the craziest thing about this gen. Unlike every console generation before it, the games aren't going to look better and better all the time. Everything will just look like cross gen titles for years to come.
Thanks Reagan.
I think the average consumer has gotten to a point with the graphics in 360/PS3 where they are satisfied. At least to the point where they wont spend more than a few hundred bucks for a console. I know a few people with one of the aforementioned 7th gen consoles that just doesn't care about the jump in graphics enough to shell out money for these new consoles.
Twas a joke.
Admittedly not a funny one.
Maybe you knew that?
I'm wasted.
No, I chuckled. Just spurred a thought none the less
Hermits just don't get it. They'll constantly and wrongly assume tech specs are important to console gamers.
After looking at multiple resolution/frame rate threads on daily basis , I'd say specs DO concern console gamers .
If you think SW is an accurate portrayal of your average console gamer, you're very mistaken. See, I said "hermits" meaning the PC fans WHO POST HERE, not general consumers. There's a big difference.
I always pity the people that can't distinguish the real world from this place.
I always said this and I will always say it if you're a graphic whore and you play on consoles you're doing it wrong but if you're a gamer who likes to play all the latest games with a decent performance for the cheapest price without much hassle + get access to some of the consoles exclusives then consoles are where you should game
The thing I don't understand is, and I'm NOT aiming this at you. The console gamers bitch about graphics all day long, the cows especially love that, but the second someone mentions PC, they retract their position to, 'it's about the console games and the fun', and then they go back to the graphics war.
I dunno. I have a feeling that when we compare Assassin's Creed 4 to Assassin's Creed 10 there will be a pretty significant difference. Gen has just started give them some time.
It'll come down to the games like every gen. The power of the pc didn't do it any good wrangling up a goty exclusive all of gen 7 on gs. Consoles had no problem, though, and I expect history to repeat.
Pc will always be in the shadow of consoles when it comes to exclusives.
If pc wants to be taken seriously as far as gaming goes, it needs to step up its game in the exclusives department.
another xboxdone troll account?
PC had for more AAE and AAAE exclusives.... I'd rather sleep with 2 9s than 1 10... not that journey is close to a 10 ... let alone half the list.... which can be played on PC ;)
Even though PC currently hasn't got one 8th gen game available. All just 360 ports. Lol
For the last 2-3 years pc is getting 8th gen games, 2560x1440, max settings, 60fps etc, NOT 800p-900p, 30fps LOLOLOLOL
Eh nope. I'm pretty sure turning resolution up with AA is not next gen. I can do that to 15 year old PC games. Doesn't make it next gen. Get a clue. PC games as of 2014 are 7th gen ports with added on engine effects. Lol
Thing is, it's always like this at the start of a generation. Look at FIFA 2004/5(I think?) on Xbox360 for example and compare it to the same title on XBOX/PS2. You'd struggle to tell what the difference was, and its the same pattern we see today, especially with multi-plats. I have a laptop with almost similar specs to a X360 on paper that can't run resident evil 6. Point is, I don't know how sony/MS do it but the consoles always punch above their weight somehow. Some might argue about the x86 architecture being similar to PC's etc but a PC has way more things going on in the background andInfamous Second Son showed whats possible with the PS4 but due to watch dogs being made across 5/6 platforms, graphics were never going to be a strong point particularly on consoles. Same for Far Cry 4 unfortunately, but there may still be hope for the Division.
Also, as someone alluded to somewhere in this thread is the issue of PROFIT. Sometimes devs hold back on the best gaming experiences in order to make more money. There is a reason why EA's "Ignite Engine" is not on PC. There's the reason R* havent released current GTA on PC. There's a reason the so-called "next-gen" introduction game (Watchdogs) ironically runs on last gen. Theres a reason another so called next gen gameplay frontrunner (titanfall) runs just well on last gen. Until last gen is shaken off for good even the PC elitists will be held back whether they'd like to admit it or not.
Even though PC currently hasn't got one 8th gen game available. All just 360 ports. Lol
For the last 2-3 years pc is getting 8th gen games, 2560x1440, max settings, 60fps etc, NOT 800p-900p, 30fps LOLOLOLOL
Eh nope. I'm pretty sure turning resolution up with AA is not next gen. I can do that to 15 year old PC games. Doesn't make it next gen. Get a clue. PC games as of 2014 are 7th gen ports with added on engine effects. Lol
These "ports" on the lowest posibel settings look better than 7th gen games on consoles. And with 2560x1440, max settings, 60fps look on par with games from 2020 (ps5 etc)
Log in to comment