J_Allard said: Sounds like they're doing a shit job with the PC port, which is par for the course for EA lately.

^QTF, Shitty pc port =/= ps4 as powerful as PC. I will not support EA if BF4 isn't as impressive as what's been promised.

Any PC running a 7850HD + level graphics card simply cannot look worse than the PS4 unless the PC port is seriously unoptimized. The specs of the said PC would be nice

The game doesn't look all that impressive to begin' with. More like refined ps3 graphics.

And given EA sports treatment of PC versions of their games, I expect nothing else but "lazy" work on the pc counterparts of anything outside DICE. I expect more games from EA to follow suit, were the PS4 version is better because the PC version was done just to recover some costs.

FrancisNobleman said: The game doesn't look all that impressive to begin' with. More like refined ps3 graphics. And given EA sports treatment of PC versions of their games, I expect nothing else but "lazy" work on the pc counterparts of anything outside DICE. I expect more games from EA to follow suit, were the PS4 version is better because the PC version was done just to recover some costs.

I haven't seen any footage of this game on PC but you're exactly right judging from their shitty, lazy PC work on recent sports titles.

PS4 fanboys will be worst than PC elitist I swear to you now.

shloob said: Go build a pc that is the equivalent of the 360 and try running far cry 3 on it. it's not going to happen. period. The fact of the matter is you can get so much more out of a console than you can a pc using less. It's baffling that people havent realized that yet. There will be plenty of games on the new consoles that look better than any game on pc for the next few years and then obviously the pc versions will pull away as hardware gets better. It's no different than gears of war 1 on 360, at the time there was not a game on any console or pc that looked as good. Not even Unreal Tournament 3 that obviously used the same engine. Im not sure how many of yall are pc gamers, but you can run 99.9% of pc games maxxed out right now with a computer that is weaker than the next gen consoles. Hell you can run crysis 3 maxxed out at 1080p with gtx 660 ti and intel i7 3770k and 8 gigs of ram with out a problem. If that can run it fine so can either of these dedicated next gen consoles.

I have to disagree with this, I've seen several direct capture screenshots of shadow fall and several game play videos in full HD and reasonably good quality. The game looks great no doubt. I recently played Crysis 3 on my PC, at the high preset (not ultra). I must say I consider its graphics to be better than Killzone, with larger scale to boot. Looking at any next gen game, any recent PC title that uses Direct X11 effectively looks just as good if not better. Including more ambitious 3D games from indies (The Forest, Roberts Space Industyries etc). Even tech demos like Unigine Valley, beats any large scale environment I've seen on these next gen systems by far, yet runs great on decent hardware. No Titans, SLI or CrossFire required. So no, these systems aren't going to blow any decent gaming PCs out of the water. Over time upgrades will be warranted true, but it comes with the territory. And is not as expensive as people like to make it sound.

Isn't this always the case for EA games (published and/or developed) that aren't called Battlefield? There's no real incentive for them to optimize a PC port (smaller audience than consoles. Even smaller audience that can max out their games on PC).

Ok couple of things to take into account....PC development is not that simple.

1. Too many specs, means that they have to scale the PC version to accommodate different versions. They are not necessarily building it for the best/top range PC's. They are picking a range, and yes you can switch up the quality, but that does not mean they have developed it with the top range in mind.
2. Consoles normally don't have half the hassles of PC's with drivers/OS's apps (though XBO is moving towards that @_@) - so they save a lot of resources which goes straight into the games. As they have one single hardware platform you can also code this better, meaning you can get more out of a console than a PC.

There is no doubt that if developers were only working on a top range PC with Titan graphics cards that it would wee all over the next gen consoles, but thats not how it works ...

Guess the proof will be in the release... don't see why Polygon would lie, they are not necessarily Pro Sony are they.

More from Kotaku.

Need for Speed Rivals Looks Amazing Whether You Play It on PC or PS4

For one moment, the gap between playing a game on PC and on console seemed razor-thin. I played Need for Speed Rivals on both PC and PS4 and the two versions of EA’s upcoming racing game were virtually indistinguishable. What I saw was impressive no matter what machine it was running on.

There are caveats, of course. The footage above was captured from a hands-on demo I played when EA brought Rivals to town last week. It’s from a PC build of the game that was running side-by-side with PS4 builds. (Note that I’m not the one behind the wheel there. The driving in the clip is being done by EA’s Marcus Nilsson. I am in the session, though, playing on PC with a PS4 controller under the Rivals_Whisky username.) There was no Xbox One version on hand at the demo session. And you should keep in mind that specs for the PC version weren't available and I have no way of knowing if Rivals was running on Ultra settings.

For the most part, though, the two looked essentially the same. Take in the videos in this post and you’ll see the kinds of reflective surfaces, chaotic particle effects and dynamic lighting that serve as hallmarks of cutting-edge game-making. The team making the game is made up of creators from the DICE and Criterion shops, meaning that they’ve worked on Battlefield and Burnout games in the past.

http://kotaku.com/need-for-speed-rivals-looks-amazing-whether-you-play-it-1447871333

There is a video.