Bluffmaster
Skilled
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:saumilsingh said:
Now this is The limit saumil , please stop posting crap !
Console Gaming Vs Pc Gaming : Round 2 !
- Thread starter Bluffmaster
- Start date
Now this is The limit saumil , please stop posting crap !
^^Nothing crap about it. I'd downloaded that video as well. Its the most amazing graphics+physics I've seen in anything. BTW X360 does use a version of DX that is pretty close to DX Next.
Linky here: http://downloads.guru3d.com/download.php?det=1190
Linky here: http://downloads.guru3d.com/download.php?det=1190
Bluffmaster
Skilled
what are you talking about ?
Blade_Runner
Skilled
bluffmaster said:
No he is serious, we are talking about doing almost everything dynamically i.e. day/night, lighthing etc rather than scripting every event, asset etc. The crytek 2 or Project: Crysis definitely looks good but i don't see why it won't run on next gen consoles with a bit of watering down............
I will mention one thing here - modern gameplay is not so CPU dependent as it is GPU dependent. So while the new consoles may have CPUs more advanced than anything on the desktop (a triple core PPC is cool, the cell is even cooler), and these CPUs are dedicated entirely to gaming (unlike a PC's CPU which must run the OS and so many background processes), it will NOT help that much. Why? Because the CPUs are not used to render gfx, That is handled by the GPU, which solely renders images - ehich is exactly what a computer's GPU does - and is roughly the same power as that of a new 7800 GTX/ x1900Xt.
In fact, the reason why consoles no longer lord over the PC in gaming (unlike the 90s where computer games were nothing compared to console games) is because computers have caught up in the graphics processor department.
In short - since the GPUs are roughly equally powered and equally loaded, the performance of both will be similar.
BTW, was that cry thing realtime rendering, or prerendered?
In fact, the reason why consoles no longer lord over the PC in gaming (unlike the 90s where computer games were nothing compared to console games) is because computers have caught up in the graphics processor department.
In short - since the GPUs are roughly equally powered and equally loaded, the performance of both will be similar.
BTW, was that cry thing realtime rendering, or prerendered?
^^That farcry video is existing working code. Well the big thing about GPUs is that the console GPUs are being supplied by NV and ATI. Now its obvious that they'd not be putting their best tech into the consoles or else their desktop gpu marketshare which is their bread and butter is gonna get eroded. These companies obviously wouldn't wanna go bankrupt 
. Its simply the dynamics of economy that'll keep the console GPU at a much inferior level than the desktop GPUs. I think I'd posted regarding this aspect before in some other thread.
. Its simply the dynamics of economy that'll keep the console GPU at a much inferior level than the desktop GPUs. I think I'd posted regarding this aspect before in some other thread.it'll take at least a year for the PC's games to catch up with ps3's top cream titles (i'm not talking about card testing in exitstance but games)
Besides, its only released yet, X360 doesn't even have a killer app yet. Ps3 hasn't launched, why make speculations now? It'll take time for screen utilising the full GFX of ps3. Fight Night is a good for now but shouldn't be taken as benchmark for what the next-gen could do.
But its a good start, still.
ps2 had the inferior this gen in graphics and stepped over all other systems. Consoles in combined outsell PC market by a big margin, if GFX mattered, that wouldn't have been the case. Plus expect the new HDTV support for the consoles to even hold the graphics of next-gen on par with PC for a longer time than ps2/Xbox held up this gen.
Besides, its only released yet, X360 doesn't even have a killer app yet. Ps3 hasn't launched, why make speculations now? It'll take time for screen utilising the full GFX of ps3. Fight Night is a good for now but shouldn't be taken as benchmark for what the next-gen could do.
But its a good start, still.
ps2 had the inferior this gen in graphics and stepped over all other systems. Consoles in combined outsell PC market by a big margin, if GFX mattered, that wouldn't have been the case. Plus expect the new HDTV support for the consoles to even hold the graphics of next-gen on par with PC for a longer time than ps2/Xbox held up this gen.
Blade_Runner
Skilled
Well you seem to forget that the gpus in the consoles are desktop variants of the 7800gtx and the r600 respectively. However even so they support features upto directx 9.0c or sm 3.0 which is just a rough comparison since consoles gpus arent built around directx. With directx 10 comes sm 4.0 and host of other features which will leave the consoles @ disadvantage. The crysis project and a lot of other projects will be built around this new directx i believe.params7 said:
When solid data is present right now, there is no need to speculate. Developers always have a workaround for newer tech though, but still it lays the consoles at an disadvantage. And i don't think it will be a year since r600 and g80 will release this year end right around the same time as the ps3 and revolution. Only thing consoles can grab onto now are the exclusives which believe it or not are detrimental to gamers even though you might like to hype it as an advantage.
Also when you talk abt the ps2 graphics you often forget that they arent HD, now that consoles have gone HD and will have to sweat quite a bit to output to that resolution i believe we have a level playing field.
Exclsuives is what is driving the consoles? How can it not be hyped as an advantage?
As i said before, PC will always be the forefrunt in graphics be it a year after or before the release of Ps3, but its clear without the good games to play on, the platform can't do much. Nintendo Revolution is said to only have upped the graphics by a little margin from the Gamecube, which wasn't even powerful than the Xbox, and still it is being hyped almost as much as X360 and Ps3!
Consoles will always be in a disadvantage @ graphics. But next-gen will fight back nicely with high-res TV support that would mask the main lows of downgraded graphics.
Lets put it this way - On the consoles, the users can play 90% of good games that release on PC and tons more worth playing exclsives that easily beat the gaming quality provided by thhat 90% with a little sacrifise for high-end graphics.
PC, is a power station, keep upgrading and you're the king. Though, it can't put up a good fight when compared with the games available on consoles. But for those games available, you can play them in a better eyecandy state than the consoles.
Which is not enough for PC, as it looses users and exclusive developers everyday and its fan base. Its already down by a big margin.
As i said before, PC will always be the forefrunt in graphics be it a year after or before the release of Ps3, but its clear without the good games to play on, the platform can't do much. Nintendo Revolution is said to only have upped the graphics by a little margin from the Gamecube, which wasn't even powerful than the Xbox, and still it is being hyped almost as much as X360 and Ps3!
Consoles will always be in a disadvantage @ graphics. But next-gen will fight back nicely with high-res TV support that would mask the main lows of downgraded graphics.
Lets put it this way - On the consoles, the users can play 90% of good games that release on PC and tons more worth playing exclsives that easily beat the gaming quality provided by thhat 90% with a little sacrifise for high-end graphics.
PC, is a power station, keep upgrading and you're the king. Though, it can't put up a good fight when compared with the games available on consoles. But for those games available, you can play them in a better eyecandy state than the consoles.
Which is not enough for PC, as it looses users and exclusive developers everyday and its fan base. Its already down by a big margin.
deathdemon89
Adept
The ring is anything but low-detail.saumilsingh said:
I hadn't heard of CryEngine2 before this,but I poked my nose around and I'm pretty impressed.But tell me Saumil...
What consumer CPU can handle DX10 anyway? There's still plenty of time for that to become mainstream.Just because "that one guy somewhere" has a killer PC you cant consider PC gamers as a whole superior to console gamers.And I also found this...Saumilsingh said:
http://forums.filefront.com/archive/index.php/t-216363.html
Its not like SM 3.0 is obsolete y'know
There's no reason Crysis won't look just as good as the majority of consumer PCs out there.He isn't posting crap.Its true.But...bluffmaster said:
...so I don't see a problem with Crysis running well on consoles too.Chaos said:
:huh: Im sorry Chaos,Im afraid I don't follow you.So what if their main business is r&d on PC GPUs? Its not like they're giving away the GPUs for the consoles for charity or anything is it? I mean,they're getting paid for it right? So how does it matter for them whether consoles or CPUs sell better?Chaos said:
You're missing the point.Video gaming has now reached a certain threshold beyond which marginal improvements in graphics mean nothing.Now its upto the game developers to keep the industry alive by being innovative in their ideas and having a fresh approach towards gaming.And it so happens that most new innovative ideas are exclusive to consoles.Computer graphics will evolve...but to what extent? After a certain limit,it hardly makes a difference.If someone decides to order an X1800XT today,one of the the most powerful cards right now,well,its gonna be obsolete before it even arrives,cuz the X1900 has already been announced!freefrag said:
Lets say that person is me.I have a 15" LCD.Now the max resolution at which I play is 1024*768.At such a resoluion does it even matter whether I'm using an X1800 or an X1900 or anything even better than that? Thats just a small example of course,consider the entire gaming comunity.Its the same condition everywhere.Yes,but they've also stated that they will be supporting everything from SM2.0 and higher,and the DX in consoles apparently is almost similiar to DX10.Also keep in mind that since the PS3 hasn't been released yet,they can still change the hardware specs.Somehow I seriously doubt Sony is just sitting there staring at the PS3's elegant curves.Blade_Runner said:
Ken Kutaragi also stated that the PS3 should be capable of anything new that comes out before launch....45nm processing,120 fps in games(and he actually stated these two as examples..),if its in the market,it should be on the PS3. So Im sure Sony is addressing the GPU thing already.
Blade_Runner
Skilled
Well just saying supporting sm2.0 and higher won't sprout sm 4.0 wings for the console gpus. The final specs havent been finalised yet for sm 4.0 and directx next so you can forget about these gpus supporting beyond SM 3.0/3.0a. Lol you think designing and fabbing a gpu is a day's work. It takes years for doing that. So changing the gpu specs and asking ATi a new gpu will not only significantly delay the ps3 launch but will cost them millions of dollars since ATi doesnt work for free. I actually can't believe you put forward such a ignorant statement after posting good arguments before. About the 45nm and 120fps @ 1080p, bollocks to that. These gpus are almost equivalent to their desktop equivalents especially the RSX in the ps3 to the Nv 7800gtx 512mb. Now 1080p means a resolution of 1920 x 1080 and since the arhictecture is nearly equivalent these console gpus will be churning out the same no of frames as their desktop equivalents since at such high resolutions we normally cancel out other bottlenecks such as CPU etc.deathdemon89 said:Yes,but they've also stated that they will be supporting everything from SM2.0 and higher,and the DX in consoles apparently is almost similiar to DX10.Also keep in mind that since the PS3 hasn't been released yet,they can still change the hardware specs.Somehow I seriously doubt Sony is just sitting there staring at the PS3's elegant curves.
About your counter to chaos's point i think i'll let him answer it since the way business is done with consoles gpus is different than desktop gpus.
About saumils points, well CPUs dont handle dx10 anyways, its the gpus. and like i said it isnt feasible to change specs that easily. You arent building lego block sets you see
. One another thing is once dx10 is finalised all gpus built henceforth will feature a sm 4.0 even the $99 ones . About innovation in gameplay i dont consider button mashing a innovation. For the time i had the ps2 i hated that very feature since my thumb and fingers used to grow sore after rounds of buttons mashing. I'd like you to point out what other innovative mechanisms have been introduced by consoles.
Bluffmaster
Skilled
Platforming ! Titles like god of war , RE4 , Indigo Prophecy, etc these all titles were pretty innovative.The platforming done in these titles was pretty good.
I swear after playing RE4 on the ps2 the controls felt soooo nice that even if given a chance i wont play that game on the pc !
Games Like god of war and devil may cry 3 are great technical accomplishments , even with complex gameplay they are pretty easy to control.Whereas on a PC such kind of gameplay is not possible !
I swear after playing RE4 on the ps2 the controls felt soooo nice that even if given a chance i wont play that game on the pc !
Games Like god of war and devil may cry 3 are great technical accomplishments , even with complex gameplay they are pretty easy to control.Whereas on a PC such kind of gameplay is not possible !
deathdemon89
Adept
bluffmaster said:
Bluffy,platforming is possibly the oldest form of video gaming around.I was talking about games such as Guitar Hero,Mario Party and Ape Escape(both having very innovative minigames),the Katamari series,like Katamari Damacy,Shadow Of The Colossus,and more....and if you get handhelds into the picture the list is unending,especially on the Nintendo DS.Phoenix Wright:Ace Attorney,the smash hit Nintendogs which is still going strong,Animal Crossing....Too many to list,actually.On the PSP front,'PQ' and 'Me And My Katamari' are notable.But I dunno whether handhelds are considered as consoles too,so I'd just like to state that I believe we're gonna see similiar innovation in the Rev' as we are currently seeing in the DS.Button mashing,I'm sure,will be pretty hard with a controller like that lol so no worries about sore thumbs and fingers,Blade.
EDIT:BTW Indigo Prophecy is an adventure game,not a platformer.But its considered as one that breathed new life n the adventure gaming genre which had gotten stale over the years.Kinda like RE4,which,BTW,was also very innovative in its own way,taking survival horror to a whole new level.Metal Gear was the first stealth game ever for the NES.Now that you think about it,Mario was the first platformer ever.How's that for innovation?
Blade_Runner
Skilled
Lol dont be calling genres as innovations now ! That way PC practically invented FPS, online multiplayer, MMO's, deathmatching, Mods community etc.
deathdemon89
Adept
Thats a good point.But check out the games I listed previously.Those are truly innovative.The Mario thing was just an afterthought.
deathdemon89 said:Its not like SM 3.0 is obsolete y'know
He isn't posting crap.Its true.But...
...so I don't see a problem with Crysis running well on consoles too.
:huh: Im sorry Chaos,Im afraid I don't follow you.So what if their main business is r&d on PC GPUs? Its not like they're giving away the GPUs for the consoles for charity or anything is it? I mean,they're getting paid for it right? So how does it matter for them whether consoles or CPUs sell better?
Well the amount of money nvidia or ati gains from console gpus is miniscule compared to what they earn selling desktop parts. So its obvious where their financial interests lie! Its the simple fact that consoles neither have the memory nor bandwidth to handle ports of existing PC games. Look how horribly Q4 runs on x360. On PC its not even the best graphics. The PS3 gpu has less memory bandwidth than a 9800 pro. I wonder what sort of games would actually run on it. 1080p... we've seen what sony hype is... before they released the PS2, sony was trumpeting "cinematic" graphics all over the place. Thats what killed the poor dreamcast which was a much better console overall. They tried to push thru the prerendered MGS2 cinematics as ingame
. Well after looking at those, I really don't have much of an expectation on the graphics front of PS3. Consoles are okay only for platformers, puzzles and fighting games (and maybe racing) as they dont require massive environments. But thats all that can be done properly. Well the amount of horsepower cryengine 2 will require is something consoles can deliver IMHO. Even if it does come out, it'll be a watered down version like farcry for xbox. Invisible walls in the level ouch!!! The best part of farcry was the insane sized levels. If that goes away, what use is the console port . Consoles work on hype and its fanboys of the consoles who create the hype without looking thru the veneer.Consoles work on hype? Wtf. Consoles are preffered for most of the genres. People are taking the analogue for a mouse on FPS's (see Black, Re4 etc), Beat 'em ups is dead on PC (No Mortal Kombat, Soul Calibur, DBZ Budokai's etc, Tekken, WWE SM!), then you got Platformers, Survival horror (RE, Fatal Frame, Siren etc). As for adventure, consoles get what PC get + more (though not for racing i guess due to sims) See Red Dead Revolver, Metal Gear Solid, True Crime SolA, Getaway, Beatdown Fist of vengeance, 007 : Everything or Nothing, Sonic Adventure, God Of War, Devil May Cry, Mercenaries, Shadow of the Colossus, 007 : From Russia with love, Resident Evil Code Veronica...there's no stopping (all of these games got good ratings and not even 20% of the full list, these are from the top of mind in hurry as Seed of Chucky has started on HBO)
its no point arguing PC indeed have the better edge over consoles, cards already exist, its only a matter of how fast they cat6ch up and surpass in the mainstream market and sources say that it'll take a year.
in fact i think grpahics don't do PC shit. if PC couldn't budge ps2 given the visuals it gave compared to 6800 ultra...i don't know how in blue hell can it even compete with powerhouses like the Ps3/X360.
its no point arguing PC indeed have the better edge over consoles, cards already exist, its only a matter of how fast they cat6ch up and surpass in the mainstream market and sources say that it'll take a year.
in fact i think grpahics don't do PC shit. if PC couldn't budge ps2 given the visuals it gave compared to 6800 ultra...i don't know how in blue hell can it even compete with powerhouses like the Ps3/X360.
saumilsingh
Skilled
GOW, RE4 and DMC3 have complex & innovative gamplay and are technical accomplishments? Doesn't take much to impress you, does it?
Unlike what any number of rave reviews might say, they're just another games. (Good? Definitely, Deserving of all the super hype? Far from it.)
Innovations in gameplay don't happen just like that with each new remake or just because a professional reviewer said so - Anyone who has played the truly innovative titles such as Deus Ex, System Shock 2, Warcraft3 will tell you that.
If you go and read the reviews for Deus Ex, they're fairly mellow causing most people to miss which was easily one the best games of the decade.
10 years from now people won't remember GoW or RE4, but Deus Ex for the innovation (and sheer immersion) and Farcry for the technical accomplishment.
As for exclusive titles, while definitely an advantage, they are inherently just marketting and without any real merit to the console itself.
Who better to decide which game will play best on what platform than how many pockets one can stuff.
As Chaos said, it's all hype & marketting. Everyone knows all console games would look/play better on PC if only they would just tear up those exclusivity contracts.
People don't really prefer analog sticks to mice for shooters, they just accept them.
Unlike what any number of rave reviews might say, they're just another games. (Good? Definitely, Deserving of all the super hype? Far from it.)
Innovations in gameplay don't happen just like that with each new remake or just because a professional reviewer said so - Anyone who has played the truly innovative titles such as Deus Ex, System Shock 2, Warcraft3 will tell you that.
If you go and read the reviews for Deus Ex, they're fairly mellow causing most people to miss which was easily one the best games of the decade.
10 years from now people won't remember GoW or RE4, but Deus Ex for the innovation (and sheer immersion) and Farcry for the technical accomplishment.
As for exclusive titles, while definitely an advantage, they are inherently just marketting and without any real merit to the console itself.
Who better to decide which game will play best on what platform than how many pockets one can stuff.
As Chaos said, it's all hype & marketting. Everyone knows all console games would look/play better on PC if only they would just tear up those exclusivity contracts.
People don't really prefer analog sticks to mice for shooters, they just accept them.