This is a thread for discussing tech, not internet personalities or conversations happening on Twitter.
Current Generation Games Analysis Technical Discussion [2023] [XBSX|S, PS5, PC]
- Thread starter BRiT
- Start date
- Status
His analysis isn’t technical?
davis.anthony
Veteran
Actually, no it isn't......
It's certainly too divisive to be included here. NXG needs his own thread if he's to feature at B3DCult.
We are but the tiniest of active forum members among many gaming and tech forums. Lol it’s pretty funny
Inuhanyou
Veteran
I don't know if this is the right place to put it, but I feel like with current gen it's fitting to talk about Deep Down
This game still looks next gen to me and it's almost 10 years later as it's doing things games have yet to accomplish with physics and fluid simulation. And this was supposedly being done on PS4 at the time. And if not the PS5 is definitely stronger than whatever PC build they were running.
If we could get devs to invest in this kinda thing I would be so happy
This game still looks next gen to me and it's almost 10 years later as it's doing things games have yet to accomplish with physics and fluid simulation. And this was supposedly being done on PS4 at the time. And if not the PS5 is definitely stronger than whatever PC build they were running.
If we could get devs to invest in this kinda thing I would be so happy
davis.anthony
Veteran
The fire effect from the Dragon looks cool but the rest of it looks very much 10 years old imo.
davis.anthony
Veteran
@Mods why would you move one of my posts from another thread to this one, then delete it from here because it's not right for this thread? 
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
I still blame you. I really don''t know what you were thinking.@Mods why would you move one of my posts from another thread to this one, then delete it from here because it's not right for this thread?
cheapchips
Veteran
It's a different art style but.....
I highly recommend buying it, it's awesome.
Teardown's lovely levels of destruction and voxel style are interdependent. It'd be nice to see if you could get similar results with different rendering techniques on current gen. Maybe The Finals? That's impressively a mutliplayer title as well. Guess destruction is something to be expected from ex-Dice staff.
.... wat?@Mods why would you move one of my posts from another thread to this one, then delete it from here because it's not right for this thread?
Because the discussion was more fitting to be in this thread than the game thread since it really isn't related to gameplay, which is what game threads should be about.@Mods why would you move one of my posts from another thread to this one, then delete it from here because it's not right for this thread?
Then I can only assume the discussion delved into or became social media persona discussions that doesn't fit anywhere on this site, so the other mods opted for a "nuke from orbit" approach for cleansing.
davis.anthony
Veteran
As I've said before, this is the issue with PC gaming now, people with unrealistic expectations for GPU's.
While $400 is more than a 1080p tier GPU used to cost (As with all performance tiers) that price point these days is for a mainstream 1080p GPU.
But yet people are buying them for 1440p and then crying and bitching when their 1080p tier GPU can't handle 1440p properly.
Channels like HUB need to start setting peoples expectations for GPU performance tiers and their target resolution instead of using the outrage to get more clicks.
Testing 1080p tier GPU's with 8GB VRAM at resolutions and quality settings well above their tier and then saying shit like..."OMFG.....The VRAM is holding the card back" is not helping the PC community.
If you want to test a 1080p tier GPU at 1440p or 4k at unrealistic settings that's fine, but explain to people that it's not meant for those resolutions and settings so to look at the results with the right level of expectation.
While $400 is more than a 1080p tier GPU used to cost (As with all performance tiers) that price point these days is for a mainstream 1080p GPU.
But yet people are buying them for 1440p and then crying and bitching when their 1080p tier GPU can't handle 1440p properly.
Channels like HUB need to start setting peoples expectations for GPU performance tiers and their target resolution instead of using the outrage to get more clicks.
Testing 1080p tier GPU's with 8GB VRAM at resolutions and quality settings well above their tier and then saying shit like..."OMFG.....The VRAM is holding the card back" is not helping the PC community.
If you want to test a 1080p tier GPU at 1440p or 4k at unrealistic settings that's fine, but explain to people that it's not meant for those resolutions and settings so to look at the results with the right level of expectation.
Last edited:
The problem is that even a $999 7900XTX is only good enough for 1440p when you use every option. So this poll doesnt make any sense.
For example a $299 4060 with 8GB performs much better than a Xbox Series S and will be <=20% slower than a PS5 in most games. A PS5 with a disc drive costs $200 (in Europa even 220€) more.
For example a $299 4060 with 8GB performs much better than a Xbox Series S and will be <=20% slower than a PS5 in most games. A PS5 with a disc drive costs $200 (in Europa even 220€) more.
A 4060 should come in around 2080 or better level performance. So it should generally be as fast or faster than the PS5, particularly where RT is involved.
What we need is a way of turning down some memory demanding features down. Like knob turning scale down something, maybe settings of some sort that require memory to create more space to fit in memory requirements. If games could scale like that it would be great.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
If only something like a PC game made by developers who know how to scale graphics existed.
Regards,
SB
The regular 3060 (performs like a 2070) is already pretty close to the PS5 so I doubt the 4060 will be 20% slower. It'll likely be faster actually and should be in the ballpark of a 2080/S.
- Status
Similar threads
