What?

As the title suggests - If you're currently an owner of a high end gaming PC and are used to most games running at 1080p or higher over 60fps, you're really not going to be blown away by the next PlayStation and Microsoft consoles (I'm now refusing to refer to them as 'next-gen', for reasons i will explain later).

Why?

Essentially, games are going to run at a higher res, smoother (more often 60fps) and finally, in actual hd resolutions, rather than the sub-hd seen on the ps3 and 360, hopefully most of which will run in full 1080p without trickery, But this is something high end PC owners have been doing for years, on hardware much higher spec than the 360 and PS3

Take the following 720P image for example : http://i.imgur.com/ILlQ6AQ.jpg

It's split three ways across the entire image multiple times, showing the graphical differences between the PC, PS3 and 360 versions of Split Second, quite an old game now but still dramatically better on the PC.

So why don't you want to call the PS4 and 720 "next gen"?

Well, throughout history consoles have provided a decent amount of power compared to PC's of the time at release, the unified configurations and game specific hardware with no driver or os overhead allows hardware which wouldn't be very good in a PC to run much more efficiently - the problem we have at the moment is that the GPU and CPU designs that form the basis of the next consoles is by high end PC standards, already extremely slow when compared side by side against high spec gear - so even if we assume the hardware difference makes the next consoles on par with high end pc's which is in itself a little far fetched - the overall difference between the 360 and PS3 and current PC titles is a fair jump but mainly just resolution, framerate and differences such as anti aliasing and texture filtering, so while things will look better - if the next consoles can only manage the current graphical quality of high end pc's or near to it, people who own and use high end PC's aren't really in for any major shocks as far as graphics go, and will just come away thinking 'okay so the game runs at 1080p 60fps on the console, but 1600x1200 at 90fps on mine..'

So the real kicker is this, if people argue wether or not the WiiU should be labeled "next gen" or not, because it's "only just catching up with the PS3 and 360", when the other "next gen consoles" are being released soon with more power - then why should we also call the PS4 and 720 next-gen if they're "only just catching up with pc", knowing full well the PC hardware market increases in power almost monthly - with major hardware family releases almost every year, and the new GTX7xxx series and AMD GPU on the horizon too, would it be fair then to say that for truly 'next gen' games, we should look towards the PC?

I'm fully expecting a lot of butthurt Sony and /Microsoft fans venting at the thought of their next platform that hasn't even been revealed, be reffered to as 'not next-gen' or 'outdated', but that's basically the long and short of it.

If you don't want to call the WiiU next gen, don't have the audacity to call the PS4 or 720 next gen either.

Yes I do expect to be blown away by the PS4. I have a beast rig:
-GTX670
-i5 3570K
-16GB ram
-watercooled

I run everything at 2560x1440 like BF3 on Ultra, I get around 45fps average.

Eventough I have such a great pc, I'm still amazed when I play ps3 exclusives like Uncharted 3 and God of War.


Nextgen won't just bring more polygons and higher resolutions, the increase in image quality will be tremendous.

I really ROLF everytime pc gamers say "dont expect much of nextgen because we already have high resolutions and whatnots", yeah as if your 2004 pc game looked any better than Uncharted 3.

Image quality buddy, nextgen is not only about them extra resolutions or polygons. As I said in my previous post Im also a pc gamer, I have a beast of a rig running bf3 at Ultra on 2560x1440. What ps4 will offer in terms of iq will be so much better than bf3 on pc, regardless of resolution. Compare Uncharted 3 with a pc game that came out before ps3, it won't even come close.

 And yes, you can play your PC on a big TV on a couch.

Firstly, 360 and PS3 hadn't even released in 2004, neither had the GPU equivolent to the one used in the 360 OR the PS3, Secondly UC3 released in late 2011, and the PS3 released in 2006 - So i will later compare the 2011 game you point to, to 2006 pc games, but lets play by your standards for a second,

PC games in 2004?

http://img202.imageshack.us/img202/9461/doom3b.jpg
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-q17NDOpzlGc/UL-CQG_9FuI/AAAAAAAABac/l63wCwbTdeo/s1600/farcry3+PC_d3d11+2012-12-05+19-01-44-90.jpg
http://i45.tinypic.com/2myt820.jpg

PC games in 2006?

http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100328132210/half-life/en/images/9/9b/LostCoast.jpg
http://blogs-images.forbes.com/erikkain/files/2012/05/half-life-21.jpg
http://techgage.com/articles/graphic_cards/settings/oct_2008/half_life_2_episode_two.jpg
http://images.fanpop.com/images/image_uploads/Oblivion-screenshots-pc-gamer-468662_1024_819.jpg
http://chorrol.com/files/57/obliv19B.jpg

You seem to forget, too that over the years graphical engines are created, perfected, etc, too, Proof of this and how it relates would basically be a case of, Pick any multiplatform game you want and tell me if the console version looks as nice as PC version, because if you try you're only fooling yourself.

So basically you're saying "look at a game made 5 years after the console was made" to prove to me that the new consoles are going to look at good as pc games currently do - when clearly it took developers 5 years to harness the power enough to make UC3 possible - Even uncharted 1 wasn't a launch title - so why you expect the launch titles on the PS4 and 720 to be magically awesome from the get-go, i just don't know.

PC gamers are always on the forefront of graphical technology - the hardware itself is more than capable of running games that outshine the console counterparts - the only difference is over the yeas console developers learn to develop within the limits of the machine, where pushing the sub-720p resolutions and sub 30fps framerates to the limits is the norm - where pc's dont suffer from such limitations so developers don't often push hard - but when they do the games look miles better than console versions (just like developers do with console exclusives).

Either way, you must be pretty new to PC gaming or simply pulling stats out of your backside if you honestly think the next round of consoles are somehow - magically, from the get go, going to do more with the same hardware of low end student PC's than can be done with high end gaming specific gear.

As for Newgroundsguru,

"PCs are for the internet and photoshop. Why pump money into a computer for gaming? With all the hacks and mods the games always feel like bastardised versions anyway. Not to mention that i would rather play my games on the couch with my 47" 1080p Flat screen then in a office chair on a 17" moniter.. But thats just my opinion :3"

That would be because, and has been proven by many, many websites, you can make a perfectly viable gaming system for roughly the same price of a games console, and get much better performance from the PC in the same games, the hacks and mods are option, and frankly at this point in your post you begin to sound like a troll.

You complain about pumping money into a gaming computer, then sit a few meters away from a $600+ 1920x1080 47" monitor which fills more or less the same amount of viewspace as sitting on front of "a 17" monitor" which - would cost sub $100 and have the same resolution - or you could go with a $250 monitor (still less than half the price of your tv) running 1920x200 or higher at 27" and actually fill more viewspace than sitting in front of a TV - and last but not least - if sitting on your ass in front of a tv is such a big draw for you, consider that most games for the past few years have shipped with default configurations for xbox 360 wired and wireless controllers, run a 5m hdmi cable from pc to tv, or a 20m vga/dvi from pc to tv, and use a wireless 360 pad and get the same experience as your console, on your 1080p screen - with games that are actually running at 1080p and not being upscaled from sub-720p.

Why? I overclocked it ofcourse. 16GB ram is also awesome, I don't just game on my pc.

1. Definetly

2. Me too

3. Definetly, multiplat devs make games with consoles in mind

If you look at benchmarks, anything over an i-3570k (or even previous generation) adds at most 1-5 fps, it just isn't worth it at all. There are 1 or 2 exceptions to this, but it is true for 90% of games