Next-gen console > Current PC? (at launch)
- Thread starter Jedi2016
- Start date
I think Arwin was saying that the PC lacked those exclusives that happen to be great looking, not that the PC didn't have games as great looking as them
terraincognita
Newcomer
Uncharted 2 has a nice art style, but since it always gets brought up when referring to great graphics or Naughty Dog taking "full advantage" of Cell when ports do not (which is not true) it should be held to the same scrutinizing standards as anything else. Uncharted 2 has low res textures even compared to other AAA console games and no AF as far as I can tell. There are parts (if I remember) where a DOF effect was used that can 'hide' it, but the lack of AF is painful. Good art style though. It's kind of weird how some PC games don't have an in-game AF setting. Like Witcher 2 does not and forcing it on messes up some things too.
So regarding the OP, it's impressive how current gen consoles can play versions of PC games that wouldn't be possible on similar PC hardware. While that's definitely an observable fact, I often wonder how true it really is. What's the closest GPU to the 360's GPU? An X1800 or an X1950? Is there even a fair comparison due to the 360's use of unified shaders? An X1800, AFAIK, can't do MSAA in modern games for the same reason Oblivion didn't allow HDR and AA. Which I thought was one of the reasons for the 360's eDRAM since it couldn't either. Could any of the flavors of the X1800 or X1950 play PC games in sub-HD resolution with no AA? Many games can be modified either from a settings file(s) or an in-game command to dumb certain features down. I think part of the reason why modern AAA games can run on consoles but not equivalent PC hardware is because there is no such dumbing down setting. That or the games are totally different engine (Witcher 2 on 360 isn't just a port for example). But I think you can take any of the Call of Duty titles and modify their Quake 3-esque settings file to further dumb them down and run on older hardware, perhaps even console equivalent hardware. Could be wrong though.
I think this next console gen isn't comparable to the current though. Both consoles are more like PCs than ever before (not counting the original xbox which was also a PC). Durango's rumored memory architecture and 'special' stuff is unique compared to other PCs, but will it make a difference years down the line? Since it's mostly a PC, the development path of least resistance is the PC game with little modification during porting. The path of least resistance is the most preferred from a publisher standpoint in most cases.
So regarding the OP, it's impressive how current gen consoles can play versions of PC games that wouldn't be possible on similar PC hardware. While that's definitely an observable fact, I often wonder how true it really is. What's the closest GPU to the 360's GPU? An X1800 or an X1950? Is there even a fair comparison due to the 360's use of unified shaders? An X1800, AFAIK, can't do MSAA in modern games for the same reason Oblivion didn't allow HDR and AA. Which I thought was one of the reasons for the 360's eDRAM since it couldn't either. Could any of the flavors of the X1800 or X1950 play PC games in sub-HD resolution with no AA? Many games can be modified either from a settings file(s) or an in-game command to dumb certain features down. I think part of the reason why modern AAA games can run on consoles but not equivalent PC hardware is because there is no such dumbing down setting. That or the games are totally different engine (Witcher 2 on 360 isn't just a port for example). But I think you can take any of the Call of Duty titles and modify their Quake 3-esque settings file to further dumb them down and run on older hardware, perhaps even console equivalent hardware. Could be wrong though.
I think this next console gen isn't comparable to the current though. Both consoles are more like PCs than ever before (not counting the original xbox which was also a PC). Durango's rumored memory architecture and 'special' stuff is unique compared to other PCs, but will it make a difference years down the line? Since it's mostly a PC, the development path of least resistance is the PC game with little modification during porting. The path of least resistance is the most preferred from a publisher standpoint in most cases.
terraincognita
Newcomer
I had that wrong all these years... Good to know though, thx. Looks like all of the RV5xx cards supported it.
I think the bigger reason why those GPU's can't compare to the current generation consoles in modern games is because they're no longer under developer or driver support.
A better comparison would be to look at how a modern architectre with similar raw power (to an X1950) compares to the consoles in current games. Llano for example.
It's sad that those games weren't given a PC release. GT5 has a lot of problems that could be solved simply by throwing more GPU power at it. A PC version could have replay quality visuals all the time at 60fps.. that would be fantastic!
I play that, have backed it. Promising in the looks department for sure, but a far cry still from a satisfactory package overall. Especially the track models are very flat, not much in the way of detail there.
I get a "free" copy of the final game when it releases, so it's really no different from a pre-order. Except I can play it now.
Ahh... I don't like to preorder unless, well never. The fact that I get to play alpha/beta versions is not so enticing to me
What is this thread about? Oh, next gen consoles? It's probably been said but with the tremendous power and die area advantages PCs have there's no way a reasonably priced ($300-400) console can compete in terms of hardware specs. Maybe they will gain an advantage from the CPU and GPUs being so close together? That will be interesting. Of course we see some "next gen" titles being showcased already and they are clearly running well on current or even slightly outdated PCs so I'm not worried for now.
What is this thread about? Oh, next gen consoles? It's probably been said but with the tremendous power and die area advantages PCs have there's no way a reasonably priced ($300-400) console can compete in terms of hardware specs. Maybe they will gain an advantage from the CPU and GPUs being so close together? That will be interesting. Of course we see some "next gen" titles being showcased already and they are clearly running well on current or even slightly outdated PCs so I'm not worried for now.
Blazkowicz
Legend
yes and no, for you it works that way because you regularly buy high end hardware, other people have to make do with Minecraft and custom Counterstrike/other Valve FPS maps, or playing Skyrim mods on a 8800GT or GT430 or something.
Orion
Regular
1TF is not that much of a difference. It's only 50% faster.
Isn't that 3Tflops. A game that ran at 60fps 1080p, would only have to go at 30fps to run on a 2Tflops console.
I personally find 720p with some AA to provide more than sufficient IQ, with anything more being barely perceptible. I also find 30fps to be acceptable for most genres. So I wouldn't consider the pc experience to be the way its meant to be played, more like minor boosts to IQ and framerate that are barely perceptible.
Regarding how consoles will compare to pcs, I suppose they'd surpass midrange configs as they're coded to the metal. Compared to highend rigs they might not fare that badly considering the resolution(1080) and framerate(30) are likely to be far lower than what's usual for such rigs.
From that comment I can tell your a console gamer (dont worry guys I have the holy water ready)
And with that viewpoint your in a minority of 1 here. I doubt you can buy a lcd monitor with such a low res and the first thing you learn about lcd's is your run them at native res otherwise they dont look good.
barely perceptible - seriously ???
I like how DS3 PC has SMAA built in. SMAA is finally decent post process AA that makes me not miss SSAA that much. There are some other improvements too but nothing major.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-dead-space-3-face-off
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-dead-space-3-face-off
I use the SMAA injector for some games.
http://mrhaandi.blogspot.com/p/injectsmaa.html
It has almost no perceptible performance impact with a recent midrange or better GPU. Lots of extra shader resources to spare in most games.
http://mrhaandi.blogspot.com/p/injectsmaa.html
It has almost no perceptible performance impact with a recent midrange or better GPU. Lots of extra shader resources to spare in most games.
Similar threads
