Why the best looking PC games don't look that great?

consolite peasants like to be in denial.

Yet you're an irrational Sony fanboy when it suits you.

i use logic 100% of the time to destroy lems bullshit, whoever denies consolites are weak ass pc wannabes is in heavy denial, so feel free to use counter arguments instead of posting useless garbage.

PC wannabes? Nah. They are relatively weak sure, but they aren't trying to be PC's. Games don't install to the HDD because Sony and MS thought, "Oh lets make games have manditory installs to be more like PC". The reason for that is the size of games today and how unfeasable it would be to load that much data from a disc in memory. Games are using better assets all the time and that takes more speed, which a disc drive doesn't have.

Adding more features to a console does not mean it's trying to be more like a PC. If these consoles just booted up and had PS2 level features, the same people complaining about them being 'wannabe PC's' would be complaining about lack of features in 2015. Consoles, much like smartphones are simplified computers that are usable by technophobes. That was always a consoles goal. Just that nowadays even the technophobes at least demand internet, netflix, sports apps etc. This is not trying to be a PC. PC is the opposite thing. It's an open box that you can do whatever you want with.

what?

i'm talking about next gen consoles

For last gen, no ps360 game looks better than Crysis 3 and The Witcher 2 on pc. unsurprsing, since they use pc tech first.

i am not saying they did it on purpose or not, it was a smart decision from a technical stand point, the result however doesn't change the fact that they are weak ass pcs on a closed enviroment, the thing is consolites still keep trying to argue that they will magically overcome machines that are several times stronger, other than that i agree with what you said.

They are as much a PC as what the PS2 and PS3 were. "Weak ass PC's" could be used to describe every console ever. What is it the x86 CPU and the AMD GPU that does it? Or the fact that they actually have an OS? So does the PSP from 2004.

A cheeky console gamer saying their graphics is better than PC is nothing more than a troll. Trolls don't deal with facts nor do they aspire to. But here's a fact, consoles have their place and it's not to mimic a PC.

@Juub1990 said:

@bobrossperm said:

They look good. All multiplatform games look best on PC. PC exclusives don't look as good as console exclusives though, in general. Reason is because PC exclusives don't get the art budget that Naughty Dog for instance gets. A Naughty Dog game costs as much as your average AAA multiplat to develop. Star Citizen is the only PC centric title since Crysis to really push rendering on these new GPU's. Probably as undoable on 8th gen consoles as what Crysis 1 was on the 7th gen consoles.

And I can tell you one thing, if Star Citizen pulls off this high fidelity space game and actually creates a game that is fun to play, I will be stoked to say the least. Those images of the spaceship hovering over a planet and you can see the mountains and clouds rendered in 3D. That blows my mind. If I get to land on those planets in real time it's like the game I always dreamed of. No Mans Sky does that but not to the fidelity of Star Citizen.

That's completely false. PC games don't feature linear games in a closed space that hold your hand. This is why you don't see games like Uncharted or The Order 1886. These games would flop. See what Uncharted looks like now that they trying open-world?

Divinity looks better than Uncharted 4. Crysis 3 still shits on anything consoles have to offer. So does ARMA III. Not even close.

You got balls comparing a heavily compressed YT grab of UC4 with a supersampled Arma3 shot, shows how desperate you are really. UC4 along with The Order, Drive Club, Infamous SS and even Killzone SF take a giant dump on Arma 3 and 99% of PC games out there it's not funny. Right now only AC Unity, Ryse and TW3 on PC are somewhat comparable, yet given the gulf of processing power it's down right embarrassing for PC gamers. This is why I don't bother investing in GTX980 or i7 these days, instead I buy better sound system, bigger HDR, quantum dot TV and comfier couch instead.

Bullshit. Naughty Dog games are cheap compared to the amount of money Blizzard spends on its PC exclusives. Starcraft 2's budget is 5 times bigger than Uncharted 2 (100 million > 20 million). And EA also spent over 200 million dollars on Star Wars: The Old Republic.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/uncharted-sequel-costing-usd-20-million

http://www.gamesradar.com/starcraft-ii-cost-more-than-100-million-to-make/

And saying that PC exclusives don't look better than Console exclusives is a big lie. You are basically pretending that PC didn't exist during Gen 5,6 and 7 or games like Squadron 42, Unreal Tournament, Dreadnought, Warhammer TW etc aren't in development.

I saw The Witcher 3 on ultra on a Asus Rog Swift @60+ fps 2k res with hair stuff enabled and almost melted.

That is next gen. I wonder if consoles will even run at 60 fps 2k resolution standard in 3 years.

you just said "amazing"..I didnt see anything about that being towards just graphics. ALSO when looking at a game its up to each individual as to what looks better. Ive played Crysis 3 and didnt feel it was anything to brag about. NOR the Witcher 2..I simply dont see that big of a leap. Not enough to brag about it and put consoles down. Sorry..

for this gen, no pc game looks better than the order or driveclub

not really, ps2 and ps3 had their own architechture of cpu and gpu made specifically for them, ps2 had this emotion engine i think it was called, and ps3 had "teh almighty cell", even the 360 had a gpu made specifically for it, this gen they went with pc architecture even if a bit tweaked, and thus we arrive at my point, they are very similar to pcs, which, i don't see as a bad thing, pc architecture is very efficient, they are just in a closed environment, but still i don't see why we are even arguing this, to be honest.

Yeah, i love all those last gen games and exclusives that look vastly better than them too.

Just a quick point, it's funny cows like you don't even meantion Uncharted 4 after all that bragging before PSX. Naughty Gods all that.

Anyway, if you mean a racing game and third person shooter, i agree. They're amazing looking games.

With thta said, no. UT4 and SC in a pre-alpha state are already above. Ofcourse, i have to consider that UT doesn't ahve interactable environements, like TO1886 and DC. Also the scale of maps isn't impressive, similar to the pure track based design of DC.

But with SC, not only are the hangars huge as it is, but they'll be connected to the open universe aswell

That is obviously the situation.

System Wars has become a one sided joke, the superiority of PC is stronger than ever, these new consoles have been mediocre at best .... just dying peasants lashing out.

It's GUE though, so what do you expect?

I mean he answered his own damn question ... the draw distance, scale and ammount of units in ARMA 3 etc... meanwhile ... the friggin ORder looks crap in a corridor.

i dont mention U4 because based on the most recent footage, it looks bad(altho not witcher 3 level of bad). pretty simple really.

@m3dude1: bad? hell no. It might have been the graphics god it was hyped up to be. But it looked great. Minus the meh rock textures, the water, facial detail, clothing, lighting, etc all look pretty good. The fooliage in particular was fantastic. Gives the CRYengine (crysis 3, ryse) a run for it's money. And the CE recks vegetation

@deadline-zero0: Arguing with them is a waste of time. Even at the end of last gen they said their HD TVs make TLOU and Uncharted look better than Crysis 3 or any other game. Same will happen this time around as well. I'd say let them live in their fantasy worlds. They are brainwashed by Sony and hopeless at this point. Anyone who still thinks The blur 1886 looks better than PC games is in delusion.

Got to love how delusional Sony ppl can get. But lets put things into perspective. Take a look into a PC running The Witcher 3 all maxed - hair stuff included- and think about it. The next time a console will be able to run something close to that is in about 8 year, when the PS5 is out.

Wow, people are saying Uncharted 4 looks bad, lol

Aye. People argue over the order and ryse, which looks better? I'm just thinking, they both look shit, but super mario sunshine on gamecube still looks fantastic.

In fact, a lot of Devs and artists are kind of sucking right now, ruining games with post processing and not having inspired art. Makes the usual graphics arguments all the more silly to me.

I cant believe the pc master racists. "arma 3 not looking good to you? - well here look at this console game"

Crysis 3? non of you pc morons played it. if you did you will know its more lenear tha Crysis 2 and on pc they look the same.

They really don't look that great, pc gamers are just insecure

ITT

PC Master race: post evidence destroying peasants

Consolite peasants: nah they don't look that good

Another day, same peasant group making bullshit in denial.

@Juub1990: Bahahahaha you are fucking delusional.

@deadline-zero0: Don't forget Infamous.

Says the guy who posts mostly PhotoMode shots.

Consoles are second place in gfx for yet another gen, and get the noticably worse version of multiplats for yet another 8 years.

Amazing for consoles, yeah. They don't hold up well in general:

I said art budget. StarCraft 2 is due to sheer content.

can you tell me what cosole was first?

im a peasnt so i really want to know what console ruined your hermit life

@Chozofication:

The Order has some of the best design concepts to come along in quite some time though. It is probably why the games actual design was so disappointing to many--people wanted the game to be something different.

@bobrossperm: And how do you know details of "art budget"?

I get the impression that Naughty Dog put more money into the art budget. You know, environments and character models, animations and stuff are probably superior. Just a hunch.

Yes they do, be it the multiplats or the rare tech heavy exclusive the PC's best looking games clown the best looking games on consoles. They are more detailed, better shadows, can be played at higher resolutions, have better AA, usually more going on in the physics department, and oh yeah they usually play at twice the frames on good hardware.

Arma 3's character models and art direction leave a lot to be desired, but the sheer scale of that game and how detailed it is more than makes up for that. You're being ignorant if you think the consoles even hold a candle to the PC in the graphics department.

So just a guess??? Anyways,,, The thing is... Blizzard games are top down during gameplay. ND games are third person. All of those things look amazing during real time cutscenes when Starcraft uses high poly models. But yeah, animations in Uncharted games are pretty good.

That's the thing with Blizzard. The PC market isn't as fragmented than the console market (outside Nintendo) and Blizzard has a huge piece of the pie. As do Valve. And the PC audience is massive. Bigger than the console audiences combined. So in Blizzards position, it is feasable to spend that much on content for a complex top down RTS game while still having money to push respectable visuals. Because the vast PC audience gets behind it. But thats where the problem for multiplat developers kicks in. Most people don't have the clout that Blizzard do on PC so when people like CDPR make a large budget game, they need to release it on consoles too so they make the money back on a larger scale. And this is even more important to non PC centric developers like Rockstar who might sell 10-15 times more units on consoles.

Only Nintendo exclusives have the audience backing that Blizzard games do on PC. Mario Kart 8 for instance is approaching 6 million sales on a console with an install base of only 9.5 million. Yet CoD sells 500,000 units on WiiU if it's lucky. That's what I mean by fragmentation. On PS and Xbox, most multiplats have higher chances of being successful than they would on WiiU or PC because their user base isn't largely swayed towards any one franchise or game, or at least to the same extent. Most PC gamers are playing Dota, LoL, SCII and most WiiU owners are playing Mario. PS and XB are more fragmented in their audience. And that's better for most developers needs.

Back to the point of what I say is, most PC exclusives are nothing visually stunning. That's because they are usually genres that don't need super visuals like MOBA/RTS and stuff. Uncharted on the other hand will have more detailed environments and will try harder to mimmick reality. It's an adventure TPS, it's meant to look pretty.

Hi Scott. I see you are still defending the 900pStation. :D

Back in my day, trolling meant something.

@bobrossperm: While I agree with most of your comment, you should keep in mind that graphics are more than just pretty rooms. That said, there are currently games in development for PC that have to look pretty and they ARE pretty. Stuff like Squadron 42 and Unreal Tournament.

@Jankarcop said:

Remember that the OP called this the gfx king:

That's terrible hahahah

They look excellent. But not enough of them push the PC to it's limits. It's capable of some crazy stuff as a platform, I want to see more people make use of it because better looking multiplats doesn't justify it's purchase to me.

I'd love to see the ps4 try and run Total War Attila, just for giggles.

Well, you can't expect to have dozen of them in one year. How many benchmark PS4 games have been confirmed officially so far? I can only think of Uncharted 4. As for hardware pushing PC games; Star Citizen, Squadron 42, Unreal Tournament, TW Warhammer, Umbra, Dreadnought and few others have been confirmed to be in development. More announcements on the way.

Well, you already saw what happen when it try to run AC:U at 900p. C'mon, you can't be that cruel. :P

The PlayStation 4 couldn't even render this shot at 3 FPS.

@nyadc said:

The PlayStation 4 couldn't even render this shot at 3 FPS.

Is there a game that has good trees?

Crysis 3 has some pretty good looking trees.

PC = MadMax:Fury Road. What you see is what you get. A technical marvel. Badass.

Consoles = Tranformers. Smoke and mirrors. CGI rubbish. Cheesy.