Show me these AMAZING console graphics.

For people who thinks resolution doesn't make much of a difference, I have some screenshots of old PC games running at 1080p:

In my opinion resolution and anti-aliasing makes all the difference in the world. ;)

[QUOTE="HaloinventedFPS"]

[QUOTE="pcps360"]

lol! yup, that's a typical screen resize and blow up technic from basement camping hermits to bash "the terrible console gfx", but I don't think that hermit is smart enough to do that himself, he probably just got those screens from another hermits and believed it's what kz2 looked like, as a PC gamer myself, I'm ashamed. and yes, KZ3's graphic easily crap out 90% PC 2011 titles, I will give you that much, but personally I think it's a terrible game compare to KZ2.

This is the same method some hermit did, I can do the same to every images he ever posted

pcps360

i posted 1280x720 direct feed shots of KZ3 and 1080p Doom 3 shots downscaled to 720p

and no, 90% HAHA OH WOW

the average console port in 1080p with AA/AF beats KZ3

in pictures and videos, consoles always have the advantage, but when you actually play it, PC's destroy them, its night and day difference

I never said a thing about resolution.

Just for your reference, everything on your PC looks and runs like crap compare to on my PC and I played or at least stayed little for graphic in every of those games you named, as well as most console titles and sorry to disappoint you, KZ3 does murder 90% 2011 PC titles. and by that retarded 1080P logic, does counter strike in 1080P + 8QAA "destory" a 720 max moded crysis?

actually yeah

CS source looks damn nice

Okay, you hermits have to admit that for such outdated hardware, devs certainly still pump out some pretty impressive looking games. this is mainly due to the fact that console hardware is consistant and devs can utilize the games to the complete potential of the system, unlike PC where hardware is very inconsistant and it is hard to optimize. im not saying that console make better looking games because thats false, but there are still some great looking games on consoles like Gears 3, KZ3, and UC3. hell even multplats look amazing on them like skyrim and crysis 2.

when the next consoles come out, graphics are going to take a huge leap for them, and its gonna take a few years for PC to catch up and surpass again.

This thread made my eyes bleed.

Have you console peasants any shame? Please hide this pics up in the attic with the crazy sister no one talks about.

tenaka2

Unless you happen to be five years old or less, I have no idea how your poor little eyes survived the NES era.

wipeout deserves an honorable mention, if nothing else because its the ONLY console game I know of that runs at native 1080p @60fps. I am not aware of any other console game that does this. BibiMaghoo

Rayman: Origins.

But I'd say Wipeout is more of a technical feat.

The Uncharted direct feed shots look acceptable. The AA is a bit lacking, as the jagginess starts showing in many areas. Killzone looks like a blurry mess.

As a PC gamer only sharp graphics will impress me. Low res or insufficient AA are pretty much instant let-downs for me. Too much blur or dusty effect hiding all the ugly bits/save resource also make a bad impression on me. I don't expect much in terms of texture details or model quality from console games, but decent artstyle combined with decent resolution and AA should provide acceptable visuals.

[QUOTE="BibiMaghoo"]wipeout deserves an honorable mention, if nothing else because its the ONLY console game I know of that runs at native 1080p @60fps. I am not aware of any other console game that does this. balfe1990

Rayman: Origins.

But I'd say Wipeout is more of a technical feat.

This thread made my eyes bleed.

Have you console peasants any shame? Please hide this pics up in the attic with the crazy sister no one talks about.

tenaka2

Kids these days man....
I just don't get them.

99.9% of pc gamers game on a puny 24" monitor don't they? I just can't imagine the experience would be as great as playing on 55" LED TV with 7.1 surround and huge leather couch. All the AF and AA in the world can't get you any where close to it. gpuking

For people who thinks resolution doesn't make much of a difference, I have some screenshots of old PC games running at 1080p:

in my opinion resolution and anti-aliasing makes all the difference in the world. ;)

RyuRanVII

I agree that more resolution is better when all things are equal (as in you are comparing the same game running in resolution A vs resolution B). However, resolution is not the biggest factor. For instance, which looks better, Toy story 1 in 480p (DVD) or Crysis 2 in 1080? I vote for the 16 year old Toy Story running about 1/8 of the resolution of Crysis2. I know they are two different mediums, but the comparison is valid. Quality of the graphics (poly count, texture rate and AA) are much more important than resolution.

Love it how most everyone posting small shots to hide 100 metric tones of jaggies lmao.silversix_

Although the games look good for their specs that they are being ran on :)

mind you hermits would discount that and just shout lol jaggies,framerate and resolution all the time.

[QUOTE="Peredith"]

[QUOTE="dovberg"]

Bayonetta, Red Dead Redmption and Alan Wake all look pretty good to me. TBH when I play PS3 games on a large screen 720p never look very good to me. I know the resolution I'm getting on many 360 games are only marginally better but it does make a difference. Of course Gear1 PC tops everything on all consoles even today.

GTSaiyanjin2

Resolution and AA, maybe textures, sure, but everything else, lolno. Gears 2 stomps it, Gears 3 kills it and Uncharted 2 / 3 eats it for breakfast.

If you actually go play gears 1 on the PC the only thing that holds up is the AA and the extra resolution. From character models,textures, and animations the game is beyond dated. And yeah I agree with you Peredith

PC gamers on this site are so insecure. Claiming Prey / Doom 3 looks better than Uncharted 2 / 3 and Killzone. No wonder why we're the clowns of the gaming industry and get laughed at. I rarely see PC gamers on this site give praise to the consoles visuals, even when they look pretty fantastic even for PC standards. It's pathetic.

Peredith

[QUOTE="Peredith"]

PC gamers on this site are so insecure. Claiming Prey / Doom 3 looks better than Uncharted 2 / 3 and Killzone. No wonder why we're the clowns of the gaming industry and get laughed at. I rarely see PC gamers on this site give praise to the consoles visuals, even when they look pretty fantastic even for PC standards. It's pathetic.

RyviusARC

modded Doom 3 needs a beast of a PC? lol

if a decent PC from 2005 is a beast to you... any old PC can max Doom 3 at 60fps with mods

playstation home

modded Doom 3 needs a beast of a PC? if a decent PC from 2005 is a beast to you... any old PC can max Doom 3 at 60fps with modsHaloinventedFPS

No Bullshots

The only console games that have really impressed me graphically are God of War 3, Final Fantasy XIII and Killzone 3.

I hear people going on and on about how "good" certain console games look, then they post low resolution photos and bullshots.

Well now's your chance to show SW what these games really look like.

Requirements:

1280x720 resolution

No watermarks

Heads-up display (certain games excluded)

No cutscenes (in-game rendered or not)

No bullshots (it's easy to tell)

Go!

Tikeio

Eh, that's okay. I don't have anything to prove to you. I'll just play my games.

Looks good to me

For people who thinks resolution doesn't make much of a difference, I have some screenshots of old PC games running at 1080pRyuRanVII

My favorite game of all time:P

these all look good for 2004, maybe even 2005

sad they play terrible in motion, 30fps and all and having no AA

HaloinventedFPS

You need to stop....everytime you post ts always an automatic EPIC FAIL!!!!:lol:

Awesome game.

The problem with console ccreenshots is that almost no one on these baords has the required equipment to take a proper screenshot.

So everyone just posts shots they find online which are almost 100% of the time:

1. Bull shots either touched up or done with the PC dev tool kit, usually runnign at settings that aren't available on the consoles (rememebr SKyrim so called xbox 360 footage, which Beth later admitted was actually PC runnign at "console settings" Yeah, right, because the cosnoles run the game at 1080p - also rememebr the Uncharted bullshot comparison where the bullshot looked detailed, crisp and runnign proeper anti-aliasing, and the actual thing looked blurry, lackign in detail and with jaggies lal over the place?)).

2. Shots that have been resized. They start with ugly 1080p shots, then make them 500p so they fit ina website, and low and behold! They look much better! Well, duh, that's what FULL SCREEN Antialiasing ona PC essentially does, it renders the frame at a higher rez, then squeezes it down which pretty much removes alisaing and improves the oevrall look dramatically. And related to this...

3. Shots that are two small to tell any sort of detail. A tiny 400x500 pixel image is NOT representative of what the console actually displays ona 1080p screen.

The shots should be RAW shots from a console at 1080p.

I've seen raw shots fo console games at 1080p and they look jaggie, blurry, muddy, ugly. I've also, of course, seen them being played live, and in addition to the other descriptors I mentioned, they also look, sluggish, suffer from screen tearing.

My favorite game of all time:P

Adamantium4k2

Crotch grabbing? O.o

The problem with console ccreenshots is that almost no one on these baords has the required equipment to take a proper screenshot.

So everyone just posts shots they find online which are alost 100% of the time:

1. Bull shots either touched up or done with the PC dev tool kit, usually runnign at settings that aren't available on the consoles (rememebr SKyrim so called xbox 360 footage, which Beth later admitted was actually PC runnign at "console settings" Yeah, right, because the cosnoles run the game at 1080p).

2. Shots that have been resized. They start with ugly 1080p shots, then make them 500p so they fit ina website, and low and behold! They look much better! Well, duh, that's what FULL SCREEN Antialiasing ona PC essentially does, it renders the frame at a higher rez, then squeezes it down which pretty much removes alisaing and improves the oevrall look dramatically. And related to this...

3. Shots that are two small to tell any sort of detail. A tiny 400x500 pixel image is NOT representative of what the console actually displays ona 1080p screen.

The shots should be RAW shots from a console at 1080p.

I've seen raw shots fo console games at 1080p and they look jaggie, blurry, muddy, ugly. I've also, of course, seen them being played live, and in addition to the other descriptors I mentioned, they also look, sluggish, suffer from screen tearing.

Kinthalis

I completely agree but nobody is going to go out of their way to prove something so insignificant to a group of people they don't even know.

And even if people did, there's no way everyone would adhere to the rules. People would still post bullshots posing as direct feeds just to get their arguments across.

F graphics.

You "graphics" people are the reason %98 of games suck, because they're trying to win screenshot contests instead of being good.

You people are the reason I wasted 15 hours of my life on Crysis 2.

I am firmly convinced that the pinnacle of gaming was Duck Hunt.

It all went downhill from there.

Plenty of console games have great graphics.

1. Gears 3
2. Killzone 3
3. Uncharted 2/3

These would be my top picks.

Unfortunatelly majority of console games look pretty damn bad when you take direct feed screenshots from them. Especially for pcgamers, who are used to ultra sharp image. Heck...I noticed even in PC 1366x720 looks bad to me after being spoiled by 1920x1080.

AdrianWerner

Yes, Resolution and AA make a big difference, but to say console games "look pretty damn bad" is an overexaggeration. And more console exclusives look better than PC exclusives. Unless you think games like Dawn of War 2 and Mount and Blade Warband look better than Killzone and God Of War. Most multiplats look the same apart from AA and Resolution

And Uncharted 3s animations blow anything on PC out the water.

All direct feeds:

mitu123

As a PC gamer of 20+ years, I bought a 360 in 2008 and was immediately impressed with how good the graphics look.

I guess I focus more on the aesthetics of the game rather than just resolution.

Resolution wise 720p is always lower than 1080p.

But artwise and talent wise they make up for it in terms of aesthetics, animations, art, etc.

For example WoW is by no means technically advanced game, its graphics are very scalable for low-end systems.

But the artwork and aesthetics, and how everything is placed makes the game look more gorgeous than it should.

That is how I think of games like UC.

It's in 720p so it's nothing to write home about.

But the artwork and animations are incredibly well done, aesthetics wise it can compete with anything on PC.

Plenty of console games have great graphics.

lundy86_4

This is for you happy christmas.

But seriously, yes there are some console titles that do look very good, its just the resolution and scope that let the graphics down.

Wow I just realised that crysis 2 is the only console game that doesn't look bad.

call_of_duty_10

To me Crysis 2 is still the best looking on consoles

Yeah, 55" but you see my point. And what are you playing on that stone age tech known as plasma? Laughable LOL. If you call console gamers dumb then you must be a caveman.gpuking

Only further prove my dumbass point by believing LED-LCDs are better than plasmas.

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

Plenty of console games have great graphics.

tenaka2

This is for you happy christmas.

But seriously, yes there are some console titles that do look very good, its just the resolution and scope that let the graphics down.

I lol'd. The graphics certainly aren't the best, but taken as they are they can be damn impressive. Naturally, i've played better looking PC games though :P

Holy moley. Second shot of UC3 looks like a high end PC game like Metro 2033.

Mozelleple112

How is that even close to comparing with Metro 2033? :?

QUOTE="T-razor1"]

Wow I just realised that crysis 2 is the only console game that doesn't look bad.

call_of_duty_10

To me Crysis 2 is still the best looking on consoles

Those aren't console screens. The PC version can be played with a 360 controller.

This thread made my eyes bleed.

Have you console peasants any shame? Please hide this pics up in the attic with the crazy sister no one talks about.

tenaka2

the irony is, any of those screen shots here are 900 times better looking than the ones from your crappy rig :lol: all along you are playing wii graphic in 1080P.,

Still not seeing those amazing console graphics.

all along you are playing wii graphic in 1080P.,

pcps360

I don't see anything wrong with Wii in 1080p

[QUOTE="Peredith"]

Why are people posting terrible quality screenshots to downplay some of the consoles better looking games? :? Anyways, here you go TC, direct feeds, no bullshots, taken by users of Gametrailers with capture cards:

pcps360

1 question though, can you tell me how you capture screen shots for 360 and ps3?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tB6h6MnzHU&feature=related That looks better than pretty much any PC game unless you're obsessed with resolution and AAPeredith

QUOTE="T-razor1"]

[QUOTE="call_of_duty_10"]

Wow I just realised that crysis 2 is the only console game that doesn't look bad.

Wasdie

To me Crysis 2 is still the best looking on consoles

Those aren't console screens. The PC version can be played with a 360 controller.

Those are some ugly ass pc screens then.

QUOTE="T-razor1"]

[QUOTE="call_of_duty_10"]

Wow I just realised that crysis 2 is the only console game that doesn't look bad.

Wasdie

To me Crysis 2 is still the best looking on consoles

Those aren't console screens. The PC version can be played with a 360 controller.

I know it's hard to believe but it looks that good on consoles :PI understand that a 360 controller can be played on the PC but that's how the game looks on the 360. I mean in some of the shots you can make out some of the jags and the slightly low rez look of it should indicate that it's on console. But whatever...

Just curious but how are you so sure those are PC shots? I mean I've seen some pc shots that have a slightly higher rez and slightly cleaner look.

Anyway just so there is no doubt here are some grabs from the digital foundry face-off

I mean assuming the similar scene and pic related to these shots I posted is a PC shot (which I highly doubt) I'm not seeing the big difference compared to it...

The funny thing is that this pic right here that I grabbed from the web was a ps3 description. Look at the jaggies on the hand and the car. Look at the traffic light. How can you say this is pc :?