Nvidia: It's absolute nonsense to think that consoles are at the cutting edge

[QUOTE="Painballz"]As good as consoles are, they are so far behind the PC gaming experience that there is no comparison.

"In terms of raw processing power, the high-end PCs are at least three times more powerful."

Nvidia provides the graphics grunt for the PlayStation 3, while rival ATI provides the imaging hardware for the Xbox 360.

Mr Taylor points out that the latest graphics cards can draw twice as many pixels, twice the screen resolution, as a PlayStation 3 or Xbox 360.

The latest games are employing DirectX 10 tools developed by Microsoft, which are used by developers to get the best out of the high-end and middle-range graphics cards.

Mr Taylor said the new tools and the new hardware had given developers a library of effects to play with.

Nvidia's latest high-end graphics cards, the 8800 series, can easily produce graphical effects that tax the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3, such as motion blur, depth of field and volumetric smoke.

Playing Crysis with the screen resolution set at 1920x1200 with all effects switched up to very high and anti-aliasing turned on, the game is breathtaking to look at and puts consoles titles like Gears of War and Call of Duty 4 into the shade.

Mr Taylor said: "Fog, smoke or mist in games until now have been flat and don't respond to objects. Volumetric effects mean they are dynamic - a helicopter can now displace cloud or smoke, or a character can step through the fog realistically."

The PC is finally back up where it belongs," said Mr Diemer.

He added: "The innovation is happening on the PC; but that's always been the case."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nvidia just laid down some Justice

blackace

Yeah, it's too bad that most of the games I enjoy are on the XBox 360, PS3 and Wii and NOT ON THE PC. :P

I don't care how powerful the PC is, it's all about the games and the gameplay. It's not just about graphics, which is all we ever hear from Hermits on these forums. I don't give a crap about graphics cards being more powerful. There are games on the DS and PSP that are more entertaining then some of the games on the PC. I can get a DS or PSP handheld system and a few games for the price of a PC's graphic card. :roll: If the PC gaming market was such a happening place, why is it barely reaching the 1 billion in sales each year where as the console and portable gaming market is well over 18 billion. Even with funds from PC downloads over steam, it still doesn't come anywhere close to console gaming in terms of sales and fanbase. Why are PC developers leaving PC gaming and making more games for consoles now. Even Crytek has show an interest in making more console games. Sure Crysis sold over 1 million copies, but then Crytek looked at Halo 3's over 7 million in sales and made their Crytek graphic engine compatible with the PS3 and XBox 360. :shock: So you can preach about the PC all you want, but I'm sticking with game consoles for my #1 source of gaming entertainment.

[QUOTE="blackace"][QUOTE="Painballz"]As good as consoles are, they are so far behind the PC gaming experience that there is no comparison.

"In terms of raw processing power, the high-end PCs are at least three times more powerful."

Nvidia provides the graphics grunt for the PlayStation 3, while rival ATI provides the imaging hardware for the Xbox 360.

Mr Taylor points out that the latest graphics cards can draw twice as many pixels, twice the screen resolution, as a PlayStation 3 or Xbox 360.

The latest games are employing DirectX 10 tools developed by Microsoft, which are used by developers to get the best out of the high-end and middle-range graphics cards.

Mr Taylor said the new tools and the new hardware had given developers a library of effects to play with.

Nvidia's latest high-end graphics cards, the 8800 series, can easily produce graphical effects that tax the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3, such as motion blur, depth of field and volumetric smoke.

Playing Crysis with the screen resolution set at 1920x1200 with all effects switched up to very high and anti-aliasing turned on, the game is breathtaking to look at and puts consoles titles like Gears of War and Call of Duty 4 into the shade.

Mr Taylor said: "Fog, smoke or mist in games until now have been flat and don't respond to objects. Volumetric effects mean they are dynamic - a helicopter can now displace cloud or smoke, or a character can step through the fog realistically."

The PC is finally back up where it belongs," said Mr Diemer.

He added: "The innovation is happening on the PC; but that's always been the case."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nvidia just laid down some Justice

Painballz

Yeah, it's too bad that most of the games I enjoy are on the XBox 360, PS3 and Wii and NOT ON THE PC. :P

I don't care how powerful the PC is, it's all about the games and the gameplay. It's not just about graphics, which is all we ever hear from Hermits on these forums. I don't give a crap about graphics cards being more powerful. There are games on the DS and PSP that are more entertaining then some of the games on the PC. I can get a DS or PSP handheld system and a few games for the price of a PC's graphic card. :roll: If the PC gaming market was such a happening place, why is it barely reaching the 1 billion in sales each year where as the console and portable gaming market is well over 18 billion. Even with funds from PC downloads over steam, it still doesn't come anywhere close to console gaming in terms of sales and fanbase. Why are PC developers leaving PC gaming and making more games for consoles now. Even Crytek has show an interest in making more console games. Sure Crysis sold over 1 million copies, but then Crytek looked at Halo 3's over 7 million in sales and made their Crytek graphic engine compatible with the PS3 and XBox 360. :shock: So you can preach about the PC all you want, but I'm sticking with game consoles for my #1 source of gaming entertainment.

^^^this post says a lot about opinionated people^^^

Halo sold 7 million because its all HYPE, it had a HUGE MULTI MILLION DOLLAR MARKETING CAMPAIGN TO SELL IT. The game isn't even good, says alot about console standardsPainballz

I agree,Halo:CE was a good game,probably the first FPS after Goldeneye that showed console FPS could maybe compete with PC ones.But the Halo 3 is probably the most over-hyped and overated game ever IMO.I just don't get whats so great about it,theres at least half a dozen PC FPS that are just as good if not better,yet don't get half the coverage or hype of Halo 3.

[QUOTE="Painballz"] Halo sold 7 million because its all HYPE, it had a HUGE MULTI MILLION DOLLAR MARKETING CAMPAIGN TO SELL IT. The game isn't even good, says alot about console standardsstvee101

I agree,Halo:CE was a good game,probably the first FPS after Goldeneye that showed console FPS could maybe compete with PC ones.But the Halo 3 is probably the most over-hyped and overated game ever IMO.I just don't get whats so great about it,theres at least half a dozen PC FPS that are just as good if not better,yet don't get half the coverage or hype of Halo 3.

I agree

a PC part manufacturer is saying PCs are better? Stop the presses :Ost1ka

Self-owned.Nvidia made the GPU in the PS3.

But I like JRPG's and Platformers.TheSystemLord1

[QUOTE="st1ka"]a PC part manufacturer is saying PCs are better? Stop the presses :Ostvee101

Self-owned.Nvidia made the GPU in the PS3.

oh wow, gee i wonder which is Nvidia´s main point of interest.... creating graphics cards for the million upon millions of PC users (the business which made nvidia what it is now) or creating the gpus for the PS3? gee you really owned me there :roll:

[QUOTE="blackace"][QUOTE="Painballz"]As good as consoles are, they are so far behind the PC gaming experience that there is no comparison.

"In terms of raw processing power, the high-end PCs are at least three times more powerful."

Nvidia provides the graphics grunt for the PlayStation 3, while rival ATI provides the imaging hardware for the Xbox 360.

Mr Taylor points out that the latest graphics cards can draw twice as many pixels, twice the screen resolution, as a PlayStation 3 or Xbox 360.

The latest games are employing DirectX 10 tools developed by Microsoft, which are used by developers to get the best out of the high-end and middle-range graphics cards.

Mr Taylor said the new tools and the new hardware had given developers a library of effects to play with.

Nvidia's latest high-end graphics cards, the 8800 series, can easily produce graphical effects that tax the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3, such as motion blur, depth of field and volumetric smoke.

Playing Crysis with the screen resolution set at 1920x1200 with all effects switched up to very high and anti-aliasing turned on, the game is breathtaking to look at and puts consoles titles like Gears of War and Call of Duty 4 into the shade.

Mr Taylor said: "Fog, smoke or mist in games until now have been flat and don't respond to objects. Volumetric effects mean they are dynamic - a helicopter can now displace cloud or smoke, or a character can step through the fog realistically."

The PC is finally back up where it belongs," said Mr Diemer.

He added: "The innovation is happening on the PC; but that's always been the case."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nvidia just laid down some Justice

Painballz

Yeah, it's too bad that most of the games I enjoy are on the XBox 360, PS3 and Wii and NOT ON THE PC. :P

I don't care how powerful the PC is, it's all about the games and the gameplay. It's not just about graphics, which is all we ever hear from Hermits on these forums. I don't give a crap about graphics cards being more powerful. There are games on the DS and PSP that are more entertaining then some of the games on the PC. I can get a DS or PSP handheld system and a few games for the price of a PC's graphic card. :roll: If the PC gaming market was such a happening place, why is it barely reaching the 1 billion in sales each year where as the console and portable gaming market is well over 18 billion. Even with funds from PC downloads over steam, it still doesn't come anywhere close to console gaming in terms of sales and fanbase. Why are PC developers leaving PC gaming and making more games for consoles now. Even Crytek has show an interest in making more console games. Sure Crysis sold over 1 million copies, but then Crytek looked at Halo 3's over 7 million in sales and made their Crytek graphic engine compatible with the PS3 and XBox 360. :shock: So you can preach about the PC all you want, but I'm sticking with game consoles for my #1 source of gaming entertainment.

even though i dont like halo, your posts reeks of opinion. there are many people who probably enjoyed halo over half life.

[QUOTE="WMDfreeman99"]yeah well for that 400 to 500 dallor video card from nvidia you still need a 3 to 4 thousand pc. Most gamers can not afford that. gaming on a xbox or PS3 on a 1080p LCD just does not get much better. Dont get me wrong i love my pc games, heck i wish i have the money to build another new one. just cant afford it. Painballz

PC's cost no more than $800

I'm talking about PC's that can run every game on high with 60+ fps

And 8800 gt is $199 so nice try

8800 is not cutting edge anymore and a $800 PC can run good games but can not run Crysis at full specs. So no what you and the TC are talking about is different. TC is talking about cutting edge your talking about standard.

Sorry nice try

[QUOTE="stvee101"]

[QUOTE="st1ka"]a PC part manufacturer is saying PCs are better? Stop the presses :Ost1ka

Self-owned.Nvidia made the GPU in the PS3.

oh wow, gee i wonder which is Nvidia´s main point of interest.... creating graphics cards for the million upon millions of PC users (the business which made nvidia what it is now) or creating the gpus for the PS3? gee you really owned me there :roll:

Haha... so what hardware manafacturer cares about consoles? Obviously, by your categorization, ATI/AMD, Nvidia, Intel, and IBM are all about the PC... so whos left? The person who puts it all together? haha. Interesting.

[QUOTE="Painballz"][QUOTE="blackace"][QUOTE="Painballz"]As good as consoles are, they are so far behind the PC gaming experience that there is no comparison.

"In terms of raw processing power, the high-end PCs are at least three times more powerful."

Nvidia provides the graphics grunt for the PlayStation 3, while rival ATI provides the imaging hardware for the Xbox 360.

Mr Taylor points out that the latest graphics cards can draw twice as many pixels, twice the screen resolution, as a PlayStation 3 or Xbox 360.

The latest games are employing DirectX 10 tools developed by Microsoft, which are used by developers to get the best out of the high-end and middle-range graphics cards.

Mr Taylor said the new tools and the new hardware had given developers a library of effects to play with.

Nvidia's latest high-end graphics cards, the 8800 series, can easily produce graphical effects that tax the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3, such as motion blur, depth of field and volumetric smoke.

Playing Crysis with the screen resolution set at 1920x1200 with all effects switched up to very high and anti-aliasing turned on, the game is breathtaking to look at and puts consoles titles like Gears of War and Call of Duty 4 into the shade.

Mr Taylor said: "Fog, smoke or mist in games until now have been flat and don't respond to objects. Volumetric effects mean they are dynamic - a helicopter can now displace cloud or smoke, or a character can step through the fog realistically."

The PC is finally back up where it belongs," said Mr Diemer.

He added: "The innovation is happening on the PC; but that's always been the case."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nvidia just laid down some Justice

Arjdagr8

Yeah, it's too bad that most of the games I enjoy are on the XBox 360, PS3 and Wii and NOT ON THE PC. :P

I don't care how powerful the PC is, it's all about the games and the gameplay. It's not just about graphics, which is all we ever hear from Hermits on these forums. I don't give a crap about graphics cards being more powerful. There are games on the DS and PSP that are more entertaining then some of the games on the PC. I can get a DS or PSP handheld system and a few games for the price of a PC's graphic card. :roll: If the PC gaming market was such a happening place, why is it barely reaching the 1 billion in sales each year where as the console and portable gaming market is well over 18 billion. Even with funds from PC downloads over steam, it still doesn't come anywhere close to console gaming in terms of sales and fanbase. Why are PC developers leaving PC gaming and making more games for consoles now. Even Crytek has show an interest in making more console games. Sure Crysis sold over 1 million copies, but then Crytek looked at Halo 3's over 7 million in sales and made their Crytek graphic engine compatible with the PS3 and XBox 360. :shock: So you can preach about the PC all you want, but I'm sticking with game consoles for my #1 source of gaming entertainment.

even though i dont like halo, your posts reeks of opinion. there are many people who probably enjoyed halo over half life.

I enjoyed both halo and half life. But i actually prefered playing them on the xbox.

[QUOTE="blackace"][QUOTE="Painballz"]As good as consoles are, they are so far behind the PC gaming experience that there is no comparison.

"In terms of raw processing power, the high-end PCs are at least three times more powerful."

Nvidia provides the graphics grunt for the PlayStation 3, while rival ATI provides the imaging hardware for the Xbox 360.

Mr Taylor points out that the latest graphics cards can draw twice as many pixels, twice the screen resolution, as a PlayStation 3 or Xbox 360.

The latest games are employing DirectX 10 tools developed by Microsoft, which are used by developers to get the best out of the high-end and middle-range graphics cards.

Mr Taylor said the new tools and the new hardware had given developers a library of effects to play with.

Nvidia's latest high-end graphics cards, the 8800 series, can easily produce graphical effects that tax the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3, such as motion blur, depth of field and volumetric smoke.

Playing Crysis with the screen resolution set at 1920x1200 with all effects switched up to very high and anti-aliasing turned on, the game is breathtaking to look at and puts consoles titles like Gears of War and Call of Duty 4 into the shade.

Mr Taylor said: "Fog, smoke or mist in games until now have been flat and don't respond to objects. Volumetric effects mean they are dynamic - a helicopter can now displace cloud or smoke, or a character can step through the fog realistically."

The PC is finally back up where it belongs," said Mr Diemer.

He added: "The innovation is happening on the PC; but that's always been the case."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nvidia just laid down some Justice

Painballz

Yeah, it's too bad that most of the games I enjoy are on the XBox 360, PS3 and Wii and NOT ON THE PC. :P

I don't care how powerful the PC is, it's all about the games and the gameplay. It's not just about graphics, which is all we ever hear from Hermits on these forums. I don't give a crap about graphics cards being more powerful. There are games on the DS and PSP that are more entertaining then some of the games on the PC. I can get a DS or PSP handheld system and a few games for the price of a PC's graphic card. :roll: If the PC gaming market was such a happening place, why is it barely reaching the 1 billion in sales each year where as the console and portable gaming market is well over 18 billion. Even with funds from PC downloads over steam, it still doesn't come anywhere close to console gaming in terms of sales and fanbase. Why are PC developers leaving PC gaming and making more games for consoles now. Even Crytek has show an interest in making more console games. Sure Crysis sold over 1 million copies, but then Crytek looked at Halo 3's over 7 million in sales and made their Crytek graphic engine compatible with the PS3 and XBox 360. :shock: So you can preach about the PC all you want, but I'm sticking with game consoles for my #1 source of gaming entertainment.

Yeah, you keep believing that. That's your opinion. The game is obviously very good as just about everyone rated it 9.0 or higher.

http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages4/926632.asp

Lets see, we have over 50 journalist who play games for living, who loves Halo 3 and gave it high marks. Now who should I believe. Biase fanboy or the experts? :roll:

Says a lot about biase trolls roaming the forums.

***********************************************************

[QUOTE="Painballz"] Halo sold 7 million because its all HYPE, it had a HUGE MULTI MILLION DOLLAR MARKETING CAMPAIGN TO SELL IT. The game isn't even good, says alot about console standardsstvee101

I agree,Halo:CE was a good game,probably the first FPS after Goldeneye that showed console FPS could maybe compete with PC ones.But the Halo 3 is probably the most over-hyped and overated game ever IMO.I just don't get whats so great about it,theres at least half a dozen PC FPS that are just as good if not better,yet don't get half the coverage or hype of Halo 3.

Strange since many gamers said the same thing about Crysis. :roll:

[QUOTE="stvee101"]

[QUOTE="st1ka"]a PC part manufacturer is saying PCs are better? Stop the presses :Ost1ka

Self-owned.Nvidia made the GPU in the PS3.

oh wow, gee i wonder which is Nvidia´s main point of interest.... creating graphics cards for the million upon millions of PC users (the business which made nvidia what it is now) or creating the gpus for the PS3? gee you really owned me there :roll:

I never owned anyone lol.Anyway yeah Nvidia have got a vested interest in the PC market prospering but just about everything they said in that article is true IMO.Even though the making of the PS3 graphics card was sort of a side project for them,I doubt they would want to disparage their work on it for no reason other than to lie about the state of the PC market.

[QUOTE="st1ka"][QUOTE="stvee101"]

[QUOTE="st1ka"]a PC part manufacturer is saying PCs are better? Stop the presses :Ostvee101

Self-owned.Nvidia made the GPU in the PS3.

oh wow, gee i wonder which is Nvidia´s main point of interest.... creating graphics cards for the million upon millions of PC users (the business which made nvidia what it is now) or creating the gpus for the PS3? gee you really owned me there :roll:

I never owned anyone lol.Anyway yeah Nvidia have got a vested interest in the PC market prospering but just about everything they said in that artivle is true IMO.Even though the making of the PS3 graphics card was sort of a side project for them,I doubt they would want to disparage their work on it for no reason other than to lie about the state of the PC market.

i completly agree with your post

[QUOTE="st1ka"][QUOTE="stvee101"]

[QUOTE="st1ka"]a PC part manufacturer is saying PCs are better? Stop the presses :Orimnet00

Self-owned.Nvidia made the GPU in the PS3.

oh wow, gee i wonder which is Nvidia´s main point of interest.... creating graphics cards for the million upon millions of PC users (the business which made nvidia what it is now) or creating the gpus for the PS3? gee you really owned me there :roll:

Haha... so what hardware manafacturer cares about consoles? Obviously, by your categorization, ATI/AMD, Nvidia, Intel, and IBM are all about the PC... so whos left? The person who puts it all together? haha. Interesting.

there is a difference between not caring and main point of interest, im sure you can understand it

[QUOTE="Arjdagr8"][QUOTE="Painballz"]

Halo sold 7 million because its all HYPE, it had a HUGE MULTI MILLION DOLLAR MARKETING CAMPAIGN TO SELL IT. The game isn't even good, says alot about console standardsoldvander

even though i dont like halo, your posts reeks of opinion. there are many people who probably enjoyed halo over half life.

I enjoyed both halo and half life. But i actually prefered playing them on the xbox.

fair enough but i was talking about the half life pc versions. as in half life 1 in 1998 and half life 2 in 2004.

Note to Nvidia: graphics don't matter. If graphics REALLY mattered, then PS2 would have been way behind last gen in sales. AvIdGaMeR444

the same goes for the Wii

Nvidia,

Please stop telling me things I've known for about a decade.Now, clam up, and get to releasing new drivers.

Verge_6

Exactly my thoughts :D

Note to Nvidia: graphics don't matter. If graphics REALLY mattered, then PS2 would have been way behind last gen in sales. AvIdGaMeR444

HAHAH this is the argument here. If graphics don't matter why do you guys bash the wii?

[QUOTE="AvIdGaMeR444"]Note to Nvidia: graphics don't matter. If graphics REALLY mattered, then PS2 would have been way behind last gen in sales. jangojay

HAHAH this is the argument here. If graphics don't matter why do you guys bash the wii?

wii bashing has become a bit more rare now, (at least for the graphics part) and for the most part its usually someone just looking to get banned so...

[QUOTE="AvIdGaMeR444"]Note to Nvidia: graphics don't matter. If graphics REALLY mattered, then PS2 would have been way behind last gen in sales. jangojay

HAHAH this is the argument here. If graphics don't matter why do you guys bash the wii?

Good point

oy dude whats up with so many pc gaming threads latelyjaisimar_chelse

I am PC gamer at heart, but I find a better experience sitting on my couch playing games on a HDTV with a controler then sitting at as computer desk. IMOWMDfreeman99

So what your saying is Moving your thumbs is a better experience than actually aiming a gun with your hand? (Mouse)

Ok, PC has the technology, now show us the GAMES perhaps ??saolin323

.... I cannot believe you just said that. PC has the most AAAs per year...

[QUOTE="saolin323"]Ok, PC has the technology, now show us the GAMES perhaps ??thrones

.... I cannot believe you just said that. PC has the most AAAs per year...

please for the love of god ignore saolin... i love my 360 but if this turns in to another fable thread i swear i will blow my brains out in the most painfull way i can think of

[QUOTE="WMDfreeman99"]I am PC gamer at heart, but I find a better experience sitting on my couch playing games on a HDTV with a controler then sitting at as computer desk. IMOPainballz

So what your saying is Moving your thumbs is a better experience than actually aiming a gun with your hand? (Mouse)

Yes i do

[QUOTE="blackace"]

I agree,Halo:CE was a good game,probably the first FPS after Goldeneye that showed console FPS could maybe compete with PC ones.But the Halo 3 is probably the most over-hyped and overated game ever IMO.I just don't get whats so great about it,theres at least half a dozen PC FPS that are just as good if not better,yet don't get half the coverage or hype of Halo 3.

stvee101

Strange since many gamers said the same thing about Crysis. :roll:

I agree Crysis is overated,but at least it it has cutting edge graphics and tries new things,Halo 3 doesn't take any risks IMO, doesn't even run in HD,and this was suppossed to be MS flagship title.

[QUOTE="Verge_6"]

Nvidia,

Please stop telling me things I've known for about a decade.Now, clam up, and get to releasing new drivers.

vash47

Exactly my thoughts :D

Releasing drivers for the heck of releasing driver's... sounds smart.

They have fun games thoughSonir77

Subjective, where the pc in this arguement is Objective, because argueing a console is better because it's more fun doesn't make sence to a PC gamer. In this case I would argue even the fun games with excellent graphics are on PC. Crysis is far more dynamic than Halo for example, and it comes with better graphics 10 fold.

[QUOTE="stvee101"][QUOTE="blackace"]

I agree,Halo:CE was a good game,probably the first FPS after Goldeneye that showed console FPS could maybe compete with PC ones.But the Halo 3 is probably the most over-hyped and overated game ever IMO.I just don't get whats so great about it,theres at least half a dozen PC FPS that are just as good if not better,yet don't get half the coverage or hype of Halo 3.

stvee101

Strange since many gamers said the same thing about Crysis. :roll:

I agree Crysis is overated,but at least it it has cutting edge graphics and tries new things,Halo 3 doesn't take any risks IMO, doesn't even run in HD,and this was suppossed to be MS flagship title.

No, that was Perfect Dark Zero.

[QUOTE="Painballz"]

[QUOTE="WMDfreeman99"]I am PC gamer at heart, but I find a better experience sitting on my couch playing games on a HDTV with a controler then sitting at as computer desk. IMOWMDfreeman99

So what your saying is Moving your thumbs is a better experience than actually aiming a gun with your hand? (Mouse)

Yes i do

Nobody is keeping you away from pluging your PC on your HDTV and using a controler and sitting on the couch.

[QUOTE="stvee101"][QUOTE="blackace"]

I agree,Halo:CE was a good game,probably the first FPS after Goldeneye that showed console FPS could maybe compete with PC ones.But the Halo 3 is probably the most over-hyped and overated game ever IMO.I just don't get whats so great about it,theres at least half a dozen PC FPS that are just as good if not better,yet don't get half the coverage or hype of Halo 3.

stvee101

Strange since many gamers said the same thing about Crysis. :roll:

I agree Crysis is overated,but at least it it has cutting edge graphics and tries new things,Halo 3 doesn't take any risks IMO, doesn't even run in HD,and this was suppossed to be MS flagship title.

FPS GOTY is OVERRATED? How so

[QUOTE="Painballz"]As good as consoles are, they are so far behind the PC gaming experience that there is no comparison.

"In terms of raw processing power, the high-end PCs are at least three times more powerful."

Nvidia provides the graphics grunt for the PlayStation 3, while rival ATI provides the imaging hardware for the Xbox 360.

Mr Taylor points out that the latest graphics cards can draw twice as many pixels, twice the screen resolution, as a PlayStation 3 or Xbox 360.

The latest games are employing DirectX 10 tools developed by Microsoft, which are used by developers to get the best out of the high-end and middle-range graphics cards.

Mr Taylor said the new tools and the new hardware had given developers a library of effects to play with.

Nvidia's latest high-end graphics cards, the 8800 series, can easily produce graphical effects that tax the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3, such as motion blur, depth of field and volumetric smoke.

Playing Crysis with the screen resolution set at 1920x1200 with all effects switched up to very high and anti-aliasing turned on, the game is breathtaking to look at and puts consoles titles like Gears of War and Call of Duty 4 into the shade.

Mr Taylor said: "Fog, smoke or mist in games until now have been flat and don't respond to objects. Volumetric effects mean they are dynamic - a helicopter can now displace cloud or smoke, or a character can step through the fog realistically."

The PC is finally back up where it belongs," said Mr Diemer.

He added: "The innovation is happening on the PC; but that's always been the case."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nvidia just laid down some Justice

blackace

Yeah, it's too bad that most of the games I enjoy are on the XBox 360, PS3 and Wii and NOT ON THE PC. :P

I don't care how powerful the PC is, it's all about the games and the gameplay. It's not just about graphics, which is all we ever hear from Hermits on these forums. I don't give a crap about graphics cards being more powerful. There are games on the DS and PSP that are more entertaining then some of the games on the PC. I can get a DS or PSP handheld system and a few games for the price of a PC's graphic card. :roll: If the PC gaming market was such a happening place, why is it barely reaching the 1 billion in sales each year where as the console and portable gaming market is well over 18 billion. Even with funds from PC downloads over steam, it still doesn't come anywhere close to console gaming in terms of sales and fanbase. Why are PC developers leaving PC gaming and making more games for consoles now. Even Crytek has show an interest in making more console games. Sure Crysis sold over 1 million copies, but then Crytek looked at Halo 3's over 7 million in sales and made their Crytek graphic engine compatible with the PS3 and XBox 360. :shock: So you can preach about the PC all you want, but I'm sticking with game consoles for my #1 source of gaming entertainment.

*******************************************************************

[QUOTE="TheSystemLord1"]But I like JRPG's and Platformers.drewtwo99

Then you lose! PC GAMING IS THE ONLY TRUE, INNOVATIVE GAMING. /sarcasm

Yeah, tell that to the guy who made Tetris. Very innovative game for it's time and sold over 50 million copies on 10 different systems. Innovation is not all about graphics and CPU processing power. Something Hermits need to learn quickly.

"The innovation is happening on the PC; but that's always been the case."

so you are telling me its not really innovation? b/c its always been there, how can it be innovation?

Nvidia needs to die. Good thing ATI make chips for MS and Wii, at least they are humble.

Fascinating information. In passing, does that guy still think that Fable 2 will be more exceptionally attractive than Crysis in connection with technical graphics? Fondness

That game is just set to flop, lets face it.

I'm confused...why do PC gamers think we actually care? Those numbers of 3x, 10x or whatever, don't literally translate into that same number of times difference in either visual fidelity or gameplay...PC gamers are just fooling themselves if they think all this top of the ranch tech makes that much of a difference, ultimately it doesn't because PC developers have to make games to run stable on mid range machines so they actually have a market to sell their damn games too. And by the time the average machine can run those older games at full spec it's really not that big a deal anymore since graphics have moved on yet again :? And once again, even when the software and technology do meet, it's still not as massive a difference as you would think from numbers alone.

I'm sorry, but I will say the same thing I did in the other thread...please, get a life. Or at least make better topics. Heck I think I will just make that my sig.

I've nothing against PC gaming, but I'm just tired of PC gamers wielding numbers and screenshots that don't even show dramatic enough differences for us to care. We know your PC's can be upgraded and more powerful than consoles...that's because (listen carefully here), their technology isn't static. Any moron that continues to tout this point about PC tech superiority and knows full well the point I have just made is preaching to the choir.

Seriously, drop it, we don't give a **** we never did, we still don't, and increasingly we are going into negative figures in terms of interest, in fact developing "anti-interest" a new breed of interest that isn't dissimilar to boredom or contempt. Actually, yes, "contempt" that is good because I can measure that pretty damn accurately, my contempt is now clocked twice as high as it was last generation, and that's before we bust out the OC tools and add an extra gig of I-DON'T-GIVE-A-CRAP.

"The innovation is happening on the PC; but that's always been the case."

so you are telling me its not really innovation? b/c its always been there, how can it be innovation?

Nvidia needs to die. Good thing ATI make chips for MS and Wii, at least they are humble.

razu_gamer2

Good point there.

[QUOTE="Fondness"]Fascinating information. In passing, does that guy still think that Fable 2 will be more exceptionally attractive than Crysis in connection with technical graphics? leejohnson7

That game is just set to flop, lets face it.

Time will tell.

[QUOTE="stvee101"]

[QUOTE="stvee101"][QUOTE="blackace"]

I agree,Halo:CE was a good game,probably the first FPS after Goldeneye that showed console FPS could maybe compete with PC ones.But the Halo 3 is probably the most over-hyped and overated game ever IMO.I just don't get whats so great about it,theres at least half a dozen PC FPS that are just as good if not better,yet don't get half the coverage or hype of Halo 3.

Painballz

Strange since many gamers said the same thing about Crysis. :roll:

I agree Crysis is overated,but at least it it has cutting edge graphics and tries new things,Halo 3 doesn't take any risks IMO, doesn't even run in HD,and this was suppossed to be MS flagship title.

FPS GOTY is OVERRATED? How so

Hey I'm not a huge FPS fan,I enjoy some COD4 MP but I didn't think Crysis was all it was cracked up to be.Didn't help that my supposed high-end rig was absolutely crushed by the demo.:P

[QUOTE="Painballz"][QUOTE="stvee101"]

[QUOTE="stvee101"][QUOTE="blackace"]

I agree,Halo:CE was a good game,probably the first FPS after Goldeneye that showed console FPS could maybe compete with PC ones.But the Halo 3 is probably the most over-hyped and overated game ever IMO.I just don't get whats so great about it,theres at least half a dozen PC FPS that are just as good if not better,yet don't get half the coverage or hype of Halo 3.

stvee101

Strange since many gamers said the same thing about Crysis. :roll:

I agree Crysis is overated,but at least it it has cutting edge graphics and tries new things,Halo 3 doesn't take any risks IMO, doesn't even run in HD,and this was suppossed to be MS flagship title.

FPS GOTY is OVERRATED? How so

Hey I'm not a huge FPS fan,I enjoy some COD4 MP but I didn't think Crysis was all it was cracked up to be.Didn't help that my supposed high-end rig was absolutely crushed by the demo.:P

The beta completely raped my computer.

Yeah, I would rather play COD4 too.

[QUOTE="stvee101"]

[QUOTE="stvee101"][QUOTE="blackace"]

I agree,Halo:CE was a good game,probably the first FPS after Goldeneye that showed console FPS could maybe compete with PC ones.But the Halo 3 is probably the most over-hyped and overated game ever IMO.I just don't get whats so great about it,theres at least half a dozen PC FPS that are just as good if not better,yet don't get half the coverage or hype of Halo 3.

Painballz

Strange since many gamers said the same thing about Crysis. :roll:

I agree Crysis is overated,but at least it it has cutting edge graphics and tries new things,Halo 3 doesn't take any risks IMO, doesn't even run in HD,and this was suppossed to be MS flagship title.

FPS GOTY is OVERRATED? How so

As good as consoles are, they are so far behind the PC gaming experience that there is no comparison.

"In terms of raw processing power, the high-end PCs are at least three times more powerful."

Nvidia provides the graphics grunt for the PlayStation 3, while rival ATI provides the imaging hardware for the Xbox 360.

Mr Taylor points out that the latest graphics cards can draw twice as many pixels, twice the screen resolution, as a PlayStation 3 or Xbox 360. Painballz

LOL, bad sales? People don't buy 500$ video cards anymore? :D

Why they didn't say anything about 4D graphics and 120 FPS?