So where are all the killer PC graphics hermits talk about?

First he tells everyone to go look at the reviews and now that we found some he says "looks the same to me." What a awesome way to argue.evilbanshee

It clearly said that the 360 version had better antialising and HDR and remember it had a more steady framerate. So they are nearly identical both have ups and downs.

I used to be a pc guy up until nov when I got my ps3. I just got tired of upgrading my pc and my agp pc was maxxed out with a 7600gt. And I had no intention on getting a new pc just yet. So I got my ps3 and have played cod4 to death and maxxed out what the ps3 gives me. But with my pc with 2gigs of ram and a 7600gt i wouldn't have played that with everything on and run at 60fps. I know newer rigs and gpu's can do it but you know for my $499 I got a gaming machine that has shown me better graphics and smoother frame rates then I have ever had on pc, I got a bluray player to watch high definition movies on my 50" samsung hdtv plasma. I know longer have to worry about where I get a patch from, I get demo's that are playable and not glitched up, I get to listen to my music through my home theater surround sound system.

So for the mild graphical differences between my ps3 to pc games I think I made out like a bandit for $499 bascially the price of a good gpu that the pc guys are using to get these graphics on a pc with their 19" screens. Right now only way the pc wins out is because of mods, and all of the other downloadable content. But game for game I'll just relax on my couch and play with my game pad on my 50" screen for now atleast :).

Also pc guys chk your game rack out cause it is a sad day when all new games pretty much coming yalls way is only console ports. But I have to say I saved money by not upgrading but spending a ton more on buying new games every month now lol where as on the pc when I was gaming there it would be 6-8 months before a new decent pc game came out that I wanted.

[QUOTE="evilbanshee"]First he tells everyone to go look at the reviews and now that we found some he says "looks the same to me." What a awesome way to argue.Flexmaster_365

It clearly said that the 360 version had better antialising and HDR and remember it had a more steady framerate. So they are nearly identical both have ups and downs.

Enabling anti-aliasing with HDR is no longer a problem with the current generation of graphics cards. And I like how you neglect the use of high resolutions as a substitute for people who are still using older cards.

[QUOTE="aliblabla2007"][QUOTE="Flexmaster_365"]

[QUOTE="Rob_101"]To the rest of the world it doesn't.Flexmaster_365

Yeah and thats why the 360 version outsold the PC version vastly...

Are you suggesting that sales = graphics? :roll:

If so, then you win an award from me for saying one of the stupidest statements of this millenium.

No it just means that the two games are completely identical so people would rather get a $400 360 and the game than a $2000 PC and the game...

[QUOTE="Flexmaster_365"]

[QUOTE="evilbanshee"]First he tells everyone to go look at the reviews and now that we found some he says "looks the same to me." What a awesome way to argue.evilbanshee

It clearly said that the 360 version had better antialising and HDR and remember it had a more steady framerate. So they are nearly identical both have ups and downs.

Enabling anti-aliasing with HDR is no longer a problem with the current generation of graphics cards. And I like how you neglect the use of high resolutions as a substitute for people who are still using older cards.

Raising the resolution still doesen't remove nearly the alising as aa does. And yeah its not a problem anymore for the few that have the new cards, but to everyone else it is. Plus we had this feature for 2 years now on all 360's. Face it most PC's are still in last gen.

[QUOTE="Rob_101"][QUOTE="Flexmaster_365"]

[QUOTE="Rob_101"]To the rest of the world it doesn't.Flexmaster_365

Yeah and thats why the 360 version outsold the PC version vastly...

I thought we were talking about graphics here :?. Just cause the PC version didn't sell as well as the 360 version doesn't mean it had better graphics ..... Anyways in case you missed it:

Oblivion looks better on a high-end PC than on the Xbox 360. Note the additional foliage visible in the background. We matched up resolutions for screenshot comparison purposes here, but a high-end PC with an AMD Athlon FX-60 CPU and GeForce 7900 GTX graphics card can enable all the settings and take resolutions up to 1600x1200 or more and still maintain smooth frame rates. We noticed that the Xbox 360 version had better antialiasing since our PC version couldn't enable HDR and antialiasing at the same time. Of course on the PC version, you can get rid of jaggies the old-fashioned way by jacking up the resolution.

The 360 version had better antialising and a more steady framrate so its basicaly the same.

No it doesn't. At that time the test that GS ran there was no nvidia card capable of HDR + AA at the same time. There saying the 360 version has better AA compared to the PC not being able to enable AA at all while HDR was enabled. Course after they did that story there was a hot-fix released that allowed ATI users to enable to HDR + AA and then the 8 series of nvidia cards were released which supported HDR + AA. Also like it says just crank up the resolution to get rid of jaggies (try doing that on 360). I don't know where your getting the 360 had better framerate either....

[QUOTE="evilbanshee"][QUOTE="Flexmaster_365"]

[QUOTE="evilbanshee"]First he tells everyone to go look at the reviews and now that we found some he says "looks the same to me." What a awesome way to argue.Flexmaster_365

It clearly said that the 360 version had better antialising and HDR and remember it had a more steady framerate. So they are nearly identical both have ups and downs.

Enabling anti-aliasing with HDR is no longer a problem with the current generation of graphics cards. And I like how you neglect the use of high resolutions as a substitute for people who are still using older cards.

Raising the resolution still doesen't remove nearly the alising as aa does. And yeah its not a problem anymore for the few that have the new cards, but to everyone else it is. Plus we had this feature for 2 years now on all 360's. Face it most PC's are still in last gen.

Few? Last time I checked, 2 million of the 8800 GT models were sold. It sure explained why I had so much trouble finding one.

I used to be a pc guy up until nov when I got my ps3. I just got tired of upgrading my pc and my agp pc was maxxed out with a 7600gt. And I had no intention on getting a new pc just yet. So I got my ps3 and have played cod4 to death and maxxed out what the ps3 gives me. But with my pc with 2gigs of ram and a 7600gt i wouldn't have played that with everything on and run at 60fps. I know newer rigs and gpu's can do it but you know for my $499 I got a gaming machine that has shown me better graphics and smoother frame rates then I have ever had on pc, I got a bluray player to watch high definition movies on my 50" samsung hdtv plasma. I know longer have to worry about where I get a patch from, I get demo's that are playable and not glitched up, I get to listen to my music through my home theater surround sound system.

So for the mild graphical differences between my ps3 to pc games I think I made out like a bandit for $499 bascially the price of a good gpu that the pc guys are using to get these graphics on a pc with their 19" screens. Right now only way the pc wins out is because of mods, and all of the other downloadable content. But game for game I'll just relax on my couch and play with my game pad on my 50" screen for now atleast :).

Also pc guys chk your game rack out cause it is a sad day when all new games pretty much coming yalls way is only console ports. But I have to say I saved money by not upgrading but spending a ton more on buying new games every month now lol where as on the pc when I was gaming there it would be 6-8 months before a new decent pc game came out that I wanted.

GreyFoXX4

Please. This is a near incoherent mess of a post. Proper English please?

And to answer your points:

A 7600 GT is a very outdated card and inferior to the PS3's video card. A real high-ender is a $200 8800-GT.

And you can hook up to your TV using your PC and play the same way as you do on your PS3. I've never done it myself, but VandalVideo or the PC hardware guys can show you the light.

Mild graphical diffrences? I implore you to say the same thing when comparing Crysis to Uncharted. Yes, they may both look really good but the scale / physics is not a contest.

And the PC still has the most announced exclusive games (Check Adrian's thread in the PC games forum) and the most highly rated (GS ratings) titles of this generation alone.

No it doesn't. At that time the test that GS ran there was no nvidia card capable of HDR + AA at the same time. There saying the 360 version has better AA compared to the PC not being able to enable AA at all while HDR was enabled. Course after they did that story there was a hot-fix released that allowed ATI users to enable to HDR + AA and then the 8 series of nvidia cards were released which supported HDR + AA. Also like it says just crank up the resolution to get rid of jaggies (try doing that on 360). I don't know where your getting the 360 had better framerate either.... Rob_101

Are you kidding me no PC could max out Oblivion on the PC when it came out. It was like Crysis, people were complaining left and right.

Also what are you trying to say as long as PC Gamers wait and wait they will get the features we console gamers get on release? Thats pretty pathetic. :lol:

Plus most of you guys cant even take advantage of it as most PC's don't have the high end cards, hell most PC's still can barely even run Oblivion.

Plus yes you can run all 360 games at 480p, 720p or 1080p resolution. Wheras most PC monitors run at lower rsolutions than 1080p. I believe 1280x1024 is still the most used res.

I used to be a pc guy up until nov when I got my ps3. I just got tired of upgrading my pc and my agp pc was maxxed out with a 7600gt. And I had no intention on getting a new pc just yet. So I got my ps3 and have played cod4 to death and maxxed out what the ps3 gives me. But with my pc with 2gigs of ram and a 7600gt i wouldn't have played that with everything on and run at 60fps. I know newer rigs and gpu's can do it but you know for my $499 I got a gaming machine that has shown me better graphics and smoother frame rates then I have ever had on pc, I got a bluray player to watch high definition movies on my 50" samsung hdtv plasma. I know longer have to worry about where I get a patch from, I get demo's that are playable and not glitched up, I get to listen to my music through my home theater surround sound system.

So for the mild graphical differences between my ps3 to pc games I think I made out like a bandit for $499 bascially the price of a good gpu that the pc guys are using to get these graphics on a pc with their 19" screens. Right now only way the pc wins out is because of mods, and all of the other downloadable content. But game for game I'll just relax on my couch and play with my game pad on my 50" screen for now atleast :).

Also pc guys chk your game rack out cause it is a sad day when all new games pretty much coming yalls way is only console ports. But I have to say I saved money by not upgrading but spending a ton more on buying new games every month now lol where as on the pc when I was gaming there it would be 6-8 months before a new decent pc game came out that I wanted.

GreyFoXX4

What do you mean just $499 for the same graphics on PC. You are forgetting the price of the HDTV when comparing price to graphics. If we were to ignore the high price of HDTV's you would be playing on a SDTV in which case the PC version would look FAAAAAR better.

Few? Last time I checked, 2 million of the 8800 GT models were sold. It sure explained why I had so much trouble finding one.

evilbanshee

Link?

Plus thats a fraction of the number of 360's and PS3's.

[QUOTE="Rob_101"]No it doesn't. At that time the test that GS ran there was no nvidia card capable of HDR + AA at the same time. There saying the 360 version has better AA compared to the PC not being able to enable AA at all while HDR was enabled. Course after they did that story there was a hot-fix released that allowed ATI users to enable to HDR + AA and then the 8 series of nvidia cards were released which supported HDR + AA. Also like it says just crank up the resolution to get rid of jaggies (try doing that on 360). I don't know where your getting the 360 had better framerate either.... Flexmaster_365

Are you kidding me no PC could max out Oblivion on the PC when it came out. It was like Crysis, people were complaining left and right.

Also what are you trying to say as long as PC Gamers wait and wait they will get the features we console gamers get on release? Thats pretty pathetic. :lol:

Plus most of you guys cant even take advantage of it as most PC's don't have the high end cards, hell most PC's still can barely even run Oblivion.

Plus yes you can run all 360 games at 480p, 720p or 1080p resolution. Wheras most PC monitors run at lower rsolutions than 1080p. I believe 1280x1024 is still the most used res.

Look I'm just pointing out the fact that the PC version looks better. Plain and simple, no denying it, thats what the thread was about. Better graphics (DOES have better AA) and higher resolution with a very steady and playable framerate.

[QUOTE="Flexmaster_365"]

[QUOTE="Rob_101"]No it doesn't. At that time the test that GS ran there was no nvidia card capable of HDR + AA at the same time. There saying the 360 version has better AA compared to the PC not being able to enable AA at all while HDR was enabled. Course after they did that story there was a hot-fix released that allowed ATI users to enable to HDR + AA and then the 8 series of nvidia cards were released which supported HDR + AA. Also like it says just crank up the resolution to get rid of jaggies (try doing that on 360). I don't know where your getting the 360 had better framerate either.... Rob_101

Are you kidding me no PC could max out Oblivion on the PC when it came out. It was like Crysis, people were complaining left and right.

Also what are you trying to say as long as PC Gamers wait and wait they will get the features we console gamers get on release? Thats pretty pathetic. :lol:

Plus most of you guys cant even take advantage of it as most PC's don't have the high end cards, hell most PC's still can barely even run Oblivion.

Plus yes you can run all 360 games at 480p, 720p or 1080p resolution. Wheras most PC monitors run at lower rsolutions than 1080p. I believe 1280x1024 is still the most used res.

Look I'm just pointing out the fact that the PC version looks better. Plain and simple, no denying it, thats what the thread was about. Better graphics (DOES have better AA) and higher resolution with a very steady and playable framerate.

With todays most expensive hardware that only a few have. Probably.

But when it was released. No.

Console games cant evolve however so this comparisson is unjustified.

[QUOTE="evilbanshee"]

Few? Last time I checked, 2 million of the 8800 GT models were sold. It sure explained why I had so much trouble finding one.

Flexmaster_365

Link?

Plus thats a fraction of the number of 360's and PS3's.

What? You expected everyone to upgrade to that specific model? Do you have any idea how many different 8800 cards there are?

http://www.dvhardware.net/article25241.html

[QUOTE="Flexmaster_365"][QUOTE="evilbanshee"]

Few? Last time I checked, 2 million of the 8800 GT models were sold. It sure explained why I had so much trouble finding one.

evilbanshee

Link?

Plus thats a fraction of the number of 360's and PS3's.

What? You expected everyone to upgrade to that specific model? Do you have any idea how many different 8800 cards there are?

http://www.dvhardware.net/article25241.html

It still doesent change the fact that there are more 360's and PS3's than the super high end PC's.

Plus that card by itself costs close to what a console costs.

[QUOTE="evilbanshee"][QUOTE="Flexmaster_365"][QUOTE="evilbanshee"]

Few? Last time I checked, 2 million of the 8800 GT models were sold. It sure explained why I had so much trouble finding one.

Flexmaster_365

Link?

Plus thats a fraction of the number of 360's and PS3's.

What? You expected everyone to upgrade to that specific model? Do you have any idea how many different 8800 cards there are?

http://www.dvhardware.net/article25241.html

It still doesent change the fact that there are more 360's and PS3's than the super high end PC's.

Plus that card by itself costs close to what a console costs.

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/searchtools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=3606193&Sku=P450-8834&SRCCODE=PRICEGRABBER&CMP=OTC-PRICEGRABBER

Consoles only cost $130 now?

[QUOTE="Flexmaster_365"]

It still doesent change the fact that there are more 360's and PS3's than the super high end PC's.

Plus that card by itself costs close to what a console costs.

evilbanshee

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/searchtools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=3606193&Sku=P450-8834&SRCCODE=PRICEGRABBER&CMP=OTC-PRICEGRABBER

Consoles only cost $130 now?

No but $280. So that means just that video card costs 50% of a 360. This doesent include any of the other many components...

[QUOTE="evilbanshee"][QUOTE="Flexmaster_365"]

It still doesent change the fact that there are more 360's and PS3's than the super high end PC's.

Plus that card by itself costs close to what a console costs.

Flexmaster_365

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/searchtools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=3606193&Sku=P450-8834&SRCCODE=PRICEGRABBER&CMP=OTC-PRICEGRABBER

Consoles only cost $130 now?

No but $280. So that means just that video card costs 50% of a 360. This doesent include any of the other many components...

How much was your computer + console + accessories?

[QUOTE="Rob_101"][QUOTE="Flexmaster_365"]

[QUOTE="Rob_101"]No it doesn't. At that time the test that GS ran there was no nvidia card capable of HDR + AA at the same time. There saying the 360 version has better AA compared to the PC not being able to enable AA at all while HDR was enabled. Course after they did that story there was a hot-fix released that allowed ATI users to enable to HDR + AA and then the 8 series of nvidia cards were released which supported HDR + AA. Also like it says just crank up the resolution to get rid of jaggies (try doing that on 360). I don't know where your getting the 360 had better framerate either.... Flexmaster_365

Are you kidding me no PC could max out Oblivion on the PC when it came out. It was like Crysis, people were complaining left and right.

Also what are you trying to say as long as PC Gamers wait and wait they will get the features we console gamers get on release? Thats pretty pathetic. :lol:

Plus most of you guys cant even take advantage of it as most PC's don't have the high end cards, hell most PC's still can barely even run Oblivion.

Plus yes you can run all 360 games at 480p, 720p or 1080p resolution. Wheras most PC monitors run at lower rsolutions than 1080p. I believe 1280x1024 is still the most used res.

Look I'm just pointing out the fact that the PC version looks better. Plain and simple, no denying it, thats what the thread was about. Better graphics (DOES have better AA) and higher resolution with a very steady and playable framerate.

With todays most expensive hardware that only a few have. Probably.

But when it was released. No.

Console games cant evolve however so this comparisson is unjustified.

So I guess you are admitting that PC's are better then. Sure there probably more expensive than the console it self (not including HDTV, games, XBL, etc.), theres really no denying you can buy a $280 360 core cheaper than a decent gaming PC, but that still doesn't change the fact that PC's are better. You are at least agreeing that the previous games I mentioned are superior on PC right? Along with others not mentioned.

[QUOTE="Flexmaster_365"]

[QUOTE="evilbanshee"][QUOTE="Flexmaster_365"]

It still doesent change the fact that there are more 360's and PS3's than the super high end PC's.

Plus that card by itself costs close to what a console costs.

evilbanshee

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/searchtools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=3606193&Sku=P450-8834&SRCCODE=PRICEGRABBER&CMP=OTC-PRICEGRABBER

Consoles only cost $130 now?

No but $280. So that means just that video card costs 50% of a 360. This doesent include any of the other many components...

How much was your computer + console + accessories?

My computer was close to $1000 assembled by me with a free monitor. 360 was $400 when I bought it. What accessories?

[QUOTE="evilbanshee"][QUOTE="Flexmaster_365"]

[QUOTE="evilbanshee"][QUOTE="Flexmaster_365"]

It still doesent change the fact that there are more 360's and PS3's than the super high end PC's.

Plus that card by itself costs close to what a console costs.

Flexmaster_365

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/searchtools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=3606193&Sku=P450-8834&SRCCODE=PRICEGRABBER&CMP=OTC-PRICEGRABBER

Consoles only cost $130 now?

No but $280. So that means just that video card costs 50% of a 360. This doesent include any of the other many components...

How much was your computer + console + accessories?

My computer was close to $1000 assembled by me with a free monitor. 360 was $400 when I bought it. What accessories?

$1000? Damn. Oh well, at least you got a monitor out of it.

Accessories, as in extra controllers and what not.

$1000? Damn. Oh well, at least you got a monitor out of it.

Accessories, as in extra controllers and what not.

evilbanshee

No I had the monitor allready, I got it before from a friend. I only have 1 extra controller and a battery charge, nothing else.

[QUOTE="evilbanshee"]$1000? Damn. Oh well, at least you got a monitor out of it.

Accessories, as in extra controllers and what not.

Flexmaster_365

No I had the monitor allready, I got it before from a friend. I only have 1 extra controller and a battery charge, nothing else.

I hope next time you can do a little better than $1,000. I can't imagine paying that much anymore. 8)

[QUOTE="Flexmaster_365"][QUOTE="evilbanshee"]$1000? Damn. Oh well, at least you got a monitor out of it.

Accessories, as in extra controllers and what not.

evilbanshee

No I had the monitor allready, I got it before from a friend. I only have 1 extra controller and a battery charge, nothing else.

I hope next time you can do a little better than $1,000. I can't imagine paying that much anymore. 8)

I bought some of the best parts at the time.

AMD X2 3800

7900GT

1GB of ram

It ran most games on high settings but now its a POS for most new games. That is why I hate PC Gaming.

[QUOTE="evilbanshee"][QUOTE="Flexmaster_365"][QUOTE="evilbanshee"]$1000? Damn. Oh well, at least you got a monitor out of it.

Accessories, as in extra controllers and what not.

Flexmaster_365

No I had the monitor allready, I got it before from a friend. I only have 1 extra controller and a battery charge, nothing else.

I hope next time you can do a little better than $1,000. I can't imagine paying that much anymore. 8)

I bought some of the best parts at the time.

AMD X2 3800

7900GT

1GB of ram

It ran most games on high settings but now its a POS for most new games. That is why I hate PC Gaming.

I wouldn't have upgraded if I had that system. Well maybe I would have added an extra gig of ram since it's only $15.

But whatever, I'm not you and everyone has their own level of tolerance when it comes to graphics.

I wouldn't have upgraded if I had that system. Well maybe I would have added an extra gig of ram since it's only $15.

But whatever, I'm not you and everyone has their own level of tolerance when it comes to graphics.

evilbanshee

I can barely play newer games on medium settings and this is a PC I assembled myself from newegg that cost me around $1000. If I had bought it retail it would have been $2000 or more.

And now its outdated within 2 years, thats completely unacceptable, this is why I dislike PC gaming. You would have to spend $3000 or more through the console cycle to be able to run games on high settings. Wheras by spending around $400 on a console I'm set to play for the next 5 plus years.

[QUOTE="evilbanshee"]

I wouldn't have upgraded if I had that system. Well maybe I would have added an extra gig of ram since it's only $15.

But whatever, I'm not you and everyone has their own level of tolerance when it comes to graphics.

Flexmaster_365

I can barely play newer games on medium settings and this is a PC I assembled myself from newegg that cost me around $1000. If I had bought it retail it would have been $2000 or more.

And now its outdated within 2 years, thats completely unacceptable, this is why I dislike PC gaming. You would have to spend $3000 or more through the console cycle to be able to run games on high settings. Wheras by spending around $400 on a console I'm set to play for the next 5 plus years.

Maybe you'll need to spend $3000. I'll be looking at $1500 max to play on high settings during a typical console cycle.

Ha, I've seen Stalker on a high end PC, nothing to write home about and certainly not the light years of advancement I've read about. The other two are RTS games correct? Those games don't impress me. I'm more interested in graphics that try to look realistic than an animated game of risk. RTS games could have polygons out the ass and still look like a game.FerdMertz

It is when you realise, that the engine its being run on was 5 years old when the game released.. and it released... 04 ? that makes the engine 9 years old..... so... it looks amazing using a 9 year old engine....

[QUOTE="evilbanshee"]

I wouldn't have upgraded if I had that system. Well maybe I would have added an extra gig of ram since it's only $15.

But whatever, I'm not you and everyone has their own level of tolerance when it comes to graphics.

Flexmaster_365

I can barely play newer games on medium settings and this is a PC I assembled myself from newegg that cost me around $1000. If I had bought it retail it would have been $2000 or more.

And now its outdated within 2 years, thats completely unacceptable, this is why I dislike PC gaming. You would have to spend $3000 or more through the console cycle to be able to run games on high settings. Wheras by spending around $400 on a console I'm set to play for the next 5 plus years.

Some people like to pay for the better experience. THere's no denying console gaming is cheaper, but I like spending $1000(expensive here) every 2 years, if not more. It's my hobby, I like upgrading/tweaking/modding my pc, I find it fun :)

Btw, since you're so in love with the 360. Name one 360 game that runs in FULL HD resolution, 4xAA 16xAF and 60+fps most of the time? Because the only game that I can't do that with is Crysis(I've only played the demo and the full game has better performance I've heard).

Also, you're arguments are fundamentally flawed. They've gone from

Saying PC games have inferior graphics -> Being proven wrong -> realising you're an idiot -> arguing that PCs cost too much.

Fail?

Flexmaster ruins yet another PC related thread. well done.

Even though I showed him a prebuilt $900 PC on Newegg, he still insist on saying $2000 . that my friend, is a troll.

Whats your obsession with price? your lame justification.

If I bought a 360 instead of a PC since launch, I currently have 21 PC games (Paid for) since Xbox Release, if I had 21 360 games isntead I would be even worse off, yes the hardware difference goes down the toilet when Xbox360 games are rip off prices and its periperals and yearly fee is also a rip off.

Ive paid no more than oyu lemming fanboys and I'm just ":lol:" at your crappy price arguements.

Flexmaster ruins yet another PC related thread. well done.

Even though I showed him a prebuilt $900 PC on Newegg, he still insist on saying $2000 . that my friend, is a troll.

Meu2k7

Well thanks for getting my name out there. I appreciate it.

[QUOTE="Meu2k7"]

Flexmaster ruins yet another PC related thread. well done.

Even though I showed him a prebuilt $900 PC on Newegg, he still insist on saying $2000 . that my friend, is a troll.

Flexmaster_365

Well thanks for getting my name out there. I appreciate it.

Ive added some to it, do read, I would like to see your Excuses :P

world in conflict, Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, bioshock, COD 4, Company of heroes, The Witcher

and the upcoming project origin, alan wake, mass effect

Flexmaster ruins yet another PC related thread. well done.

Even though I showed him a prebuilt $900 PC on Newegg, he still insist on saying $2000 . that my friend, is a troll.

Whats your obsession with price? your lame justification.

If I bought a 360 instead of a PC since launch, I currently have 21 PC games (Paid for) since Xbox Release, if I had 21 360 games isntead I would be even worse off, yes the hardware difference goes down the toilet when Xbox360 games are rip off prices and its periperals and yearly fee is also a rip off.

I've paid no more than you lemming fanboys and I'm just ":lol:" at your crappy price arguements.

Meu2k7

Yeah, I can't believe the mods let this troll get away with 2 pages worth of debating.

Besides that, he argues graphical differences between "HD" consoles and a high-end PC using a mid-end PC. :lol:

World in Conflict.

Stalker

Company of Heroes

ect.

-Any multiplatform game.

Happy now TC?

[QUOTE="FerdMertz"]This is a serious question, I'm a PC noob. I always read comments about how far ahead PC graphics are than the PS3/360, but aside from Crysis I'm not seeing it. Is a hermits idea of graphical dominance one game (Crysis) coupled with minimal performance improvements on games like Assassin's Creed and Bioshock? I ask this because I don't follow PC games closely. Everytime X Play or Gametrailers TV shows a PC exclusive I think the graphics look pretty weak with terrible animations in particular. Then when I come here I always see stuff about how advanced PC graphics are.........and like I said, I just don't see it.dgsag

Company of Heroes, World in Conflict, STALKER, what else do you need? ;)

Stalker has awful graphics. If those Stalker graphics came out on a console you'd be calling it last gen.

Stalker has awful graphics. If those Stalker graphics came out on a console you'd be calling it last gen.

mmogoon

At the highest settings with full dynamic lighting. Hell no.

[QUOTE="dgsag"]

[QUOTE="FerdMertz"]This is a serious question, I'm a PC noob. I always read comments about how far ahead PC graphics are than the PS3/360, but aside from Crysis I'm not seeing it. Is a hermits idea of graphical dominance one game (Crysis) coupled with minimal performance improvements on games like Assassin's Creed and Bioshock? I ask this because I don't follow PC games closely. Everytime X Play or Gametrailers TV shows a PC exclusive I think the graphics look pretty weak with terrible animations in particular. Then when I come here I always see stuff about how advanced PC graphics are.........and like I said, I just don't see it.mmogoon

Company of Heroes, World in Conflict, STALKER, what else do you need? ;)

Stalker has awful graphics. If those Stalker graphics came out on a console you'd be calling it last gen.

In some ways yes, now look at STALKER: Clear Skies (which is what he means I assume). Now that is easily better than any console game graphically.

[QUOTE="dgsag"]

[QUOTE="FerdMertz"]This is a serious question, I'm a PC noob. I always read comments about how far ahead PC graphics are than the PS3/360, but aside from Crysis I'm not seeing it. Is a hermits idea of graphical dominance one game (Crysis) coupled with minimal performance improvements on games like Assassin's Creed and Bioshock? I ask this because I don't follow PC games closely. Everytime X Play or Gametrailers TV shows a PC exclusive I think the graphics look pretty weak with terrible animations in particular. Then when I come here I always see stuff about how advanced PC graphics are.........and like I said, I just don't see it.mmogoon

Company of Heroes, World in Conflict, STALKER, what else do you need? ;)

Stalker has awful graphics. If those Stalker graphics came out on a console you'd be calling it last gen.

Of course there is still a lot of room for improvement and that's what Clear Skies do, but this doesn;t change the fact that on it;s release day STALKER was one of the very best, if not the best looking FPS avaible