Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
TheLegendOfMart

Orbis Unmasked: What to expect from next-gen

126 posts in this topic

Are those pics supposed to prove him wrong and say that visuals on console games can compete with the pc? Cause they don't. Not by a long shot.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Read what I said after the pics. You can't expect 6 year old consoles to keep up with PCs considering PCs get new gpus and cpus every 6 months. Compare it to a graphics card of the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Graphics aren't everything. Growing up with consoles like Atari, Nintendo, and so on, I am fine with where console graphics are right now. All I want is better AI, better stories, some originality, and stable frames per second.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Graphics aren't everything. Growing up with consoles like Atari, Nintendo, and so on, I am fine with where console graphics are right now. All I want is better AI, better stories, some originality, and stable frames per second.

+1 for better stories, maybe if developers stopped being so mp first on their titles we'd get just that.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Graphics aren't everything. Growing up with consoles like Atari, Nintendo, and so on, I am fine with where console graphics are right now. All I want is better AI, better stories, some originality, and stable frames per second.

Good luck at getting originality out of the gaming industry nowadays. Publishers tend to be too afraid of funding that kind of thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah......no.

Posting pictures of games without anti-aliasing isn't helping your point. And consoles have a quarter of the resolution available to PC users , which looks particularly bad when you're pumping it through a 40"+ HDTV.

Graphics aren't everything. Growing up with consoles like Atari, Nintendo, and so on, I am fine with where console graphics are right now. All I want is better AI, better stories, some originality, and stable frames per second.

Nobody claimed graphics were everything. But PCs have better controls for a lot of genres (mouse + keyboard, flight sticks, etc) and you can't use "stable frames per second" against the PC, as it's perfectly possible to set all the graphics to low, set the resolution to 720p and use a framerate limiter at 30fps if you want to match the console experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's still early so we may see a slight bump in specs closer to the release date.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posting pictures of games without anti-aliasing isn't helping your point. And consoles have a quarter of the resolution available to PC users , which looks particularly bad when you're pumping it through a 40"+ HDTV.

Nobody claimed graphics were everything. But PCs have better controls for a lot of genres (mouse + keyboard, flight sticks, etc) and you can't use "stable frames per second" against the PC, as it's perfectly possible to set all the graphics to low, set the resolution to 720p and use a framerate limiter at 30fps if you want to match the console experience.

you talk like everyone have easy access to a beast machine like yours ... nope, consoles are a lot easier to use, have excellent graphics and many people are using controllers on PC games, even in shooters, because the controller is ideal for couch gaming on a big TV, KB+mouse not.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
you talk like everyone have easy access to a beast machine like yours

The strength of PC gaming is that people can spend what they want and adjust the game settings to balance performance. My system is way beyond what most PC gamers have but I could still get a better gaming experience than consoles with a fraction of the system.

consoles are a lot easier to use, have excellent graphics and many people are using controllers on PC games

Consoles are certainly easier to use but they in no way have "excellent graphics". As for controllers, that's the strength of the PC - you can use a controller if you want (and I do for many games) but you're not limited by it. And I have my computer hooked up to a 42" HDTV, so I can sit back on my couch with a wireless X360 controller and play games maxed out at 1080p @60fps.

There's a very good video comparison on GameTrailers that shows DmC: Devil May Cry on the PC @ 60fps versus the PS3 @ 30fps. The graphical quality is considerably lower on console (and that's matching the resolution) and the low framerate of the console version is horrible - to me that is unacceptable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The strength of PC gaming is that people can spend what they want and adjust the game settings to balance performance. My system is way beyond what most PC gamers have but I could still get a better gaming experience than consoles with a fraction of the system.

THAT is not a claim you can make, you can say that for yourself you get a better experience on your PC' you can not claim your PC experience is better than someone elses console experience, unless you're able to meld your mind with them and compare.

I know people who would have a better gaming experience on an old SNES than your fancy rig, PC, console, Size of your rig and e-peen has NOTHING to do with gaming experience. Not universally so anyway. Some people are graphics ###### and will not be satisfied with anything but top end PC or Consoles for the first 3 months, others are more into the gameplay and don't care about the graphics, or let it have a secondary seat, and will only enjoy special games like jrpgs or such, others get their most joy out of old retro games.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a very good video comparison on GameTrailers that shows DmC: Devil May Cry on the PC @ 60fps versus the PS3 @ 30fps. The graphical quality is considerably lower on console (and that's matching the resolution) and the low framerate of the console version is horrible - to me that is unacceptable.

I'd have to argue with that being a "very good" comparison video. Mainly because of the ridiculously high amount of compression artifacts plaguing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

unless you're able to meld your mind with them and compare.

Vulcan_Mind_Meld.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah......no.

Uncharted_3_Screen_6-000.jpg

image_killzone_3-13238-2035_0009.jpg

Try running the latest games with nVidia 7900GT graphics. BF3 for example runs at 12FPS on 7900GTX with everything turned off.

Woohoo KILLZONE FTW!

Question.

Going back to something I posted earlier in this thread, has anything new been rumoured or confirmed for the next gen consoles yet?

I know this is probably too much to ask for, seeing as they are rivals, but stuff like cross platform gaming, or at the very least chatting?

Lets face it, you can have an almost infinite combination of hardware and software, and operating systems, and still play some online games (like mmo's) on personal computers, regarldess of personal preference of computer, so why not consoles? (seeing as they are quite similar)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing is confirmed, everything is rumours and guesswork. Probably won't hear anything about services/features of the OS till E3.

I don't think you will ever see cross platform gaming or chatting, a lot of consoles are sold because x amount of friends have an xbox, so to play with your friends you go buy an xbox, if cross gaming/chat was allowed people could get whatever console they wanted, such as people who don't think Xbox Live is worth paying to play online, they could just get a PS3 and still play games with their friends.

It's not a technical reason (well maybe for PS3, it can't even do cross game chat), its just business.

The strength of PC gaming is that people can spend what they want and adjust the game settings to balance performance. My system is way beyond what most PC gamers have but I could still get a better gaming experience than consoles with a fraction of the system.

There's a very good video comparison on GameTrailers that shows DmC: Devil May Cry on the PC @ 60fps versus the PS3 @ 30fps. The graphical quality is considerably lower on console (and that's matching the resolution) and the low framerate of the console version is horrible - to me that is unacceptable.

You are comparing a console that came out 6 years ago with current day PC specs. I'd like to see you play games in 1080p@60 with maxed out settings on a ?350-400 PC (rumoured cost of next gen consoles).

To keep up with graphics PC owners have to upgrade their PC at least every 2 years, with a ?250+ graphics card, that's not even including CPU/Mobo/RAM upgrades.

As I already said, for completely unscientific benchmark, a 7900GTX gpu (being around the same performance of the PS3 RSX GPU) can barely run BF3 with everything on low in 1680x1050 at 12FPS.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are comparing a console that came out 6 years ago with current day PC specs. I'd like to see you play games in 1080p@60 with maxed out settings on a ?350-400 PC (rumoured cost of next gen consoles).

To keep up with graphics PC owners have to upgrade their PC at least every 2 years, with a ?250+ graphics card, that's not even including CPU/Mobo/RAM upgrades.

As I already said, for completely unscientific benchmark, a 7900GTX gpu (being around the same performance of the PS3 RSX GPU) can barely run BF3 with everything on low in 1680x1050 at 12FPS.

I wish console fans would atleast try to get some things right. You don't need to spend ?250/$400 on your gpu every 2 years to remain capable of playing modern games. I think i spent around $180 in 2011 on my current gpu(in the sig), less than half of your claim, and i remain capable of playing modern games just fine here in 2013. And if i were to decide to upgrade soon, it'd be because i want to, not because i strictly have to to be able to keep playing games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why am I a console "fan"?

I've been into PCs since I was a child in the 80s. I don't consider myself a console gamer, I do most if not all of my gaming on PCs, the multiplatform stuff at least.

I agree you don't HAVE to spend ?250 on a GPU but most first models (X850/X870 AMD and X700/ X800 of the Nvidias) of the next generation of GPUs are usually around that mark.

Sure you can spend less but then you have to drop the quality settings much sooner than you would and you end up with console level graphics anyway thanks to the lower image quality settings.

Face it, there is NO way a PC will be able to play the latest games if its using a 6 year old CPU/GPU and its stupid to compare modern day PCs with consoles 6 years old, you are going to have to have upgraded your PC at least twice to play the latest and greatest using image quality settings that are higher than console.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Console Vs PC is just stupid. I like both, and agree that both have their strengths and weaknesses.

I like a PC when it's just ME time. But I like consoles for when its game time with my girl or other friends who come over often.

I like my good speaker set up on my PC, but I love my 7.1 surround sound set up for my PS3 which shakes the house.

But as time passes quicker and quicker as you age... I just can't justify putting that much time into my PC trying to "keep up". I have grown to love the simplicity that a console offers. I still like both equally. Due to the fact that they are both different in ways, but provide me with the same excitement and entertainment.

If you are chosing a side with electronics such as these, you are only losing out. Those who embrace the greatness of each, have more options to enjoy their entertainment with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Console Vs PC is just stupid. I like both, and agree that both have their strengths and weaknesses.

I like a PC when it's just ME time. But I like consoles for when its game time with my girl or other friends who come over often.

I like my good speaker set up on my PC, but I love my 7.1 surround sound set up for my PS3 which shakes the house.

But as time passes quicker and quicker as you age... I just can't justify putting that much time into my PC trying to "keep up". I have grown to love the simplicity that a console offers. I still like both equally. Due to the fact that they are both different in ways, but provide me with the same excitement and entertainment.

If you are chosing a side with electronics such as these, you are only losing out. Those who embrace the greatness of each, have more options to enjoy their entertainment with.

Well said.

Pretty much my biggest reason for not gaming much these days on my PC (I have decided I am going to play both Crysis 3 and Bioshock Infinite on my PC) is at work, I sit in front of a computer all day. Last thing I want to do these days is come home, and sit in front of a computer some more.

And as pointed out, gaming from ones couch is a lovely, lovely thing. Yes, I can hook my beast of a PC tower up to my TV as well, but the thing is not really easy on the eyes, and my wife would not be that happy with this massive tower just sitting next to our entertainment center. Now once Valve's Steam Box comes out, I will be taking a very close look at it.

So consoles offer me the same exact gaming experience, and what I mean by that is once I choose start, I am enjoying the game exactly as much as I would on my PC even if it does in fact have nicer graphics, so take this fact into account with the fact I can sit on my couch, have a 7.1 sound system hooked up to a 55" TV, so yeah, console gaming servers me just fine. In fact, I may even prefer it these days just for the convenience and comfort that it allows. Does not mean I am anti gaming on a PC, just means for my personal preference, consoles are the better way to play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
THAT is not a claim you can make, you can say that for yourself you get a better experience on your PC' you can not claim your PC experience is better than someone elses console experience, unless you're able to meld your mind with them and compare.

What are you talking about? My claim was that with a lesser PC than my current system I could still have a better gaming experience than consoles, which is objectively true. You can use a wireless X360 controller, plug the PC into a HDTV and have better quality visuals (higher resolution, better texture quality, anti-aliasing) at a higher framerate.

I know people who would have a better gaming experience on an old SNES than your fancy rig, PC

That's completely irrelevant to the point I was making, which was comparing the same games on different platforms.

Some people are graphics ###### and will not be satisfied with anything but top end PC or Consoles for the first 3 months, others are more into the gameplay and don't care about the graphics, or let it have a secondary seat, and will only enjoy special games like jrpgs or such, others get their most joy out of old retro games.

It's not about being a "graphics ######" - it's about the PC producing an objectively better gaming experience. It's like choosing between caged-hen eggs and free-range organic eggs - if you're on a budget then caged-hen eggs are fine for a lot of people but most wouldn't opt for them if they had a choice.

I'd have to argue with that being a "very good" comparison video. Mainly because of the ridiculously high amount of compression artifacts plaguing it.

That's what makes the video all the more impressive, as the visual quality was obvious even in such a heavily compressed video!

You are comparing a console that came out 6 years ago with current day PC specs. I'd like to see you play games in 1080p@60 with maxed out settings on a ?350-400 PC (rumoured cost of next gen consoles).

But that's not a fair comparison, is it? The whole point of PC gaming is that you can upgrade and continually improve your gaming experience. You can't overlook one of the primary strengths of the platform. And as I said, if you buy a lot of games then the price difference isn't as substantial because of the mark-up on console games. You have a lower buy-in cost on console but you get a lesser experience, while paying more for games over the entire life of the console.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What are you talking about? My claim was that with a lesser PC than my current system I could still have a better gaming experience than consoles, which is objectively true. You can use a wireless X360 controller, plug the PC into a HDTV and have better quality visuals (higher resolution, better texture quality, anti-aliasing) at a higher framerate.

No it's not, that's extremely subjective. YOU think you get a better experience that way, that doesn't mean everyone does.

gaming experience is a lot more than graphics. that's what you don't understand. all you think about is resolution and framerates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No it's not, that's extremely subjective. YOU think you get a better experience that way, that doesn't mean everyone does.

Same controller. Same display. Better graphics. Better framerate. Better loading times.

I'm talking about the gaming experience itself - that is, from the moment you launch the game. I simply don't see where consoles are subjectively or objectively better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also the only thing you can truly upgrade on a PC today is the graphics card, it's also the part that has any real merit in most cases, except for certain storage medium upgrades, in both cases you're upgrading at the costs of a new console, which is the worth of 2-3 full price games. but then again over here, the big chains usually sell the big triple A games at 40-50% off normal price in the firs few weeks, to get people into the stores (the chains usually rotate which offers it on which games)

For upgrading other parts of the computer, you're looking at a chain reaction of costs, need a new CPU, well then you have to have a new motherboard, you probably need new memory to make use of it, and depending on your graphics card, upgrading the CPU may have no effect. and when you've upgraded all these, you probably need a new PSU as well.

Same controller. Same display. Better graphics. Better framerate. Better loading times.

I'm talking about the gaming experience itself - that is, from the moment you launch the game. I simply don't see where consoles are subjectively or objectively better.

Still missing a whole lot of variables there.

Since yo're talkign about the gaming experience. how about the experience that you can sit back, click on the controller and the gaming machine starts up. instantly putting you where you can launch you game. It automatically gives you the best visuals you can get without need for tweaking and messing about. you get proper surround sound right away, no messing around, no configuration and messing about. Want to play music while you play, well that's also available, right there on your controller, no need to grab a keyboard to alt tab. Friend lists and multiplayer, also on the controller.

Also same display doesn't always apply, unless you are willing to have a huge noisy gaming rig in your living room, or you have an expensive media center box, and/or probably live alone with no GF.

Personally I play PC games on my PC, either laptop ion the living room or my gaming rig in our computer room. and I play my console games in my 55 inch in my living room, I've tried at times to play through the HTPC, but I get bored with it quickly and find the 360 offers a better experience, even thought he HTPC may give better graphics and whatever, Last time I just played some Trackmania simply to test out the 3D in Trackmania on the TV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Since yo're talkign about the gaming experience. how about the experience that you can sit back, click on the controller and the gaming machine starts up.

Computer standby.

instantly putting you where you can launch you game.

Steam Big Picture mode.

It automatically gives you the best visuals you can get without need for tweaking and messing about.

nVidia's GeForce Experience.

Want to play music while you play, well that's also available, right there on your controller, no need to grab a keyboard to alt tab.

Most people wouldn't want to play music over a game but that option is available on PC with a wireless keyboard and mouse.

Friend lists and multiplayer, also on the controller.

Steam Big Picture.

Also same display doesn't always apply, unless you are willing to have a huge noisy gaming rig in your living room, or you have an expensive media center box, and/or probably live alone with no GF.

Computers can be as quiet as you like. At the extreme end, passive coolers and watercooling systems allow for less noise than consoles; with a regular budget you can create a system that makes very little noise, with "silent" fans and sound dampening. As for the last part, way to make baseless insinuations - my last girlfriend really enjoyed gaming with me on PC, using wireless X360 controllers and playing games through my 42" HDTV from my bed.

And you downplay how substantial the visual difference is. Even PC gaming on low settings isn't as bad as console performance. If people want to game at 720p or below at 30fps then that's fine but that's not acceptable to people who are used to what PC gaming can deliver. It's like recommending cassette tapes and earbuds to someone used to 24-bit audio with high-quality speakers - sure you can listen to music but you're not getting the best experience. It may be more convenient (in some respects) and cheaper but it's certainly not acceptable to those who have experienced better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Computer standby.

Steam Big Picture mode.

nVidia's GeForce Experience.

Most people wouldn't want to play music over a game but that option is available on PC with a wireless keyboard and mouse.

Steam Big Picture.

Computers can be as quiet as you like. At the extreme end, passive coolers and watercooling systems allow for less noise than consoles; with a regular budget you can create a system that makes very little noise, with "silent" fans and sound dampening. As for the last part, way to make baseless insinuations - my last girlfriend really enjoyed gaming with me on PC, using wireless X360 controllers and playing games through my 42" HDTV from my bed.

And you downplay how substantial the visual difference is. Even PC gaming on low settings isn't as bad as console performance. If people want to game at 720p or below at 30fps then that's fine but that's not acceptable to people who are used to what PC gaming can deliver. It's like recommending cassette tapes and earbuds to someone used to 24-bit audio with high-quality speakers - sure you can listen to music but you're not getting the best experience. It may be more convenient (in some respects) and cheaper but it's certainly not acceptable to those who have experienced better.

Standby is not what I was talkign about, but anyway

Steam big picture mode, sure.. except you still need to start steam and all that.

yeah, GeForce experience, what about the 99.9% of games that are not supported by it, and the ~50% gamers who use AMD ?

Funny, Xbox has shown that people DO want to play their OWN music over a game instead of listening to a crappy soundtrack, so did the PS3 with all the complaining about how it didn't support this. Since the majority of games I play on my computer will be MMO's, I can tell I'll not be listening to their monotonous repetitive music for years on end, or even months or weeks. generally I have a movie or something going on while playing these though, or an audio book.

And what about the games that are not on steam big picture, oh and... wait a minute.. last I checked, getting the steam overlaye require keyboard shortcuts, NOT the xbox 360 controller.

sure computer can be as expensive... sorry quiet as you like. you can buy a nice looking HTPC case that you can actually put next to the TV and not look terrible, this one alone costs as much as a console, then you can buy another console worth of liquid coling for it(that's the cheaper and easier fully encapsulated ones... oops, need to cover the GPU to, then you pretty much need to build a more expensive custom set...

And seriously, there are MILLIONS of people used to PC gaming, who still game on PC. who still finds console gaming just as enjoyable and even better in many cases to that of PC gaming.

and you're highly over exaggerating the visual difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Steam big picture mode, sure.. except you still need to start steam and all that.

Steam starts with Windows and you can configure Big Picture mode to launch by default, turning your system into a gaming hub. Plus you have numerous additional features, like in-game screenshot functionality and game guides.

yeah, GeForce experience, what about the 99.9% of games that are not supported by it, and the ~50% gamers who use AMD ?

The vast majority of games auto-detect the appropriate resolution and graphical settings anyway. And at least with PC games if you get any slowdown you can simply upgrade your computer; if you get slowdown on console games?and that does happen?then there's nothing you can do about it.

Funny, Xbox has shown that people DO want to play their OWN music over a game instead of listening to a crappy soundtrack, so did the PS3 with all the complaining about how it didn't support this.

As I said, you can achieve the same thing on PC. But it's not directly related to the gaming experience and I've seen nothing to suggest it is used by anything more than a tiny minority of players.

And what about the games that are not on steam big picture, oh and... wait a minute.. last I checked, getting the steam overlaye require keyboard shortcuts, NOT the xbox 360 controller.

Steam Big Picture supports all games. Not all can be installed through it?support is still being added?but having to install games with mouse and keyboard is no more of an inconvenience than having to insert a game disc into the console.

and you're highly over exaggerating the visual difference.

:| Take a game like Black Ops 2 - it runs at 880x720 on X360 (lower on PS3), which amounts to 0.6m pixels; on the PC it can run at 2560x1600, which is 4.1m pixels. That means the X360 version is 15% the resolution of the PC version. Even the games that run at 720p do so at 30fps (half the framerate, possibly a quarter depending on the PC display) and their resolution is only 22% that of the PC. That's without factoring in the inferior performance, lower quality visuals, etc. The PC has?depending on the game?higher resolution textures, hardware tessellation, hardware accelerated physics, 3D-support, higher polygon counts, better anti-aliasing and more.

Reducing the resolution by 85%, halving the framerate and reducing visual fidelity is substantial - there really is no other way to put it. Especially when this discussion is about the next-gen consoles, which are going to be a huge improvement but won't even come close to PC level fidelity. If you're still not willing to accept that the PC has a substantial advantage then there really is nothing more I can say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.