By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Can we agree that PS4 graphics are in another level!

TheBlackNaruto on 09 July 2014
RazorDragon said:
TheBlackNaruto said:


While I agree that PCS do run the games better it is nowhere near a majority of games. There are more games NOT coming to PC than there are coming(personal preference aside of course). And I feel that PC gaming while growing is still NOWHERE near the levels of console gaming and will more than likely never be. 

Also PC gamers are a minority while console gamers are a majority so the core focus will always go to console gamers as well. Steam/Ps Plus/XB Live are very different in what they offer and who they offer it too. And while Steam may offer more the audience that it is offered to is to small to compare to the audience that Ps Plus/XB Live is offered too. 

So for all the benefits it has compared to console gaming and the console gaming market it is almost irrelevant when looking at then side by side. Not saying that it is at all but compared to consoles and console gamers the PC market is very small. 


PC gamers are a minority? Those 75 million active Steam users would like to talk to you. Also, all of the 7 million WoW players and 32 million League of Legends players out there.

PC has many exclusive games not coming to consoles, it's more of a matter of preference than anything, specially since most multiplats also come to PC and those 4 or 5 that aren't coming will probably come in the future, this is a trend among those console multiplats.

Heck that is less than the PS3 alone....yes compared to console gamers they are indeed the minority. That isn't a bad thing that's just the reality of the situation.  And I agree there are PC exclusives that were not and did not come to consoles as well i would never count them out but still in comparision to consoles they are still in the minority. I wasn't trying to downplay the PC in anyway just making a comparison that's all. 



The absence of evidence is NOT the evidence of absence...

PSN: StlUzumaki23

Around the Network
RazorDragon on 09 July 2014
TheBlackNaruto said:
RazorDragon said:
TheBlackNaruto said:


While I agree that PCS do run the games better it is nowhere near a majority of games. There are more games NOT coming to PC than there are coming(personal preference aside of course). And I feel that PC gaming while growing is still NOWHERE near the levels of console gaming and will more than likely never be. 

Also PC gamers are a minority while console gamers are a majority so the core focus will always go to console gamers as well. Steam/Ps Plus/XB Live are very different in what they offer and who they offer it too. And while Steam may offer more the audience that it is offered to is to small to compare to the audience that Ps Plus/XB Live is offered too. 

So for all the benefits it has compared to console gaming and the console gaming market it is almost irrelevant when looking at then side by side. Not saying that it is at all but compared to consoles and console gamers the PC market is very small. 


PC gamers are a minority? Those 75 million active Steam users would like to talk to you. Also, all of the 7 million WoW players and 32 million League of Legends players out there.

PC has many exclusive games not coming to consoles, it's more of a matter of preference than anything, specially since most multiplats also come to PC and those 4 or 5 that aren't coming will probably come in the future, this is a trend among those console multiplats.

Heck that is less than the PS3 alone....yes compared to console gamers they are indeed the minority. That isn't a bad thing that's just the reality of the situation.  And I agree there are PC exclusives that were not and did not come to consoles as well i would never count them out but still in comparision to consoles they are still in the minority. I wasn't trying to downplay the PC in anyway just making a comparison that's all. 


You're considering that the comparison is between all consoles vs PC gaming, when in reality it shouldn't be. Console gaming isn't one thing only, you have your PS, Microsoft and Nintendo userbase. These userbases don't have the same games and neither the same sales between different genres. The Steam userbase is quite similar in numbers to the PS/MS/Nintendo one, and that's what count for publishers, not even counting other gaming services like GoG, Origin, online games, etc, which contribute a lot to the whole, but can still be counted as separate userbases inside the "PC" label anyway.

I got your point, it's just that I personally can't agree with the comparison you're making, IMO PC gamers aren't in the minority, in fact, I'd say if you count MMOs, this is one of the biggest gaming markets out there.



fatslob-:O on 09 July 2014
VanceIX said:

It certainly has better lighting and textures than Infamous, and while Ryse looks better overall, it's such a compressed world that it's practically a poor model.

Better lighting ? That's a straight up lie ... Better textures ? Even a modded Skyrim wasn't a match made for infamous or ryse. 

Ryse looking better than infamous is subjective for the most part seeing as how one has a slight upper hand on texture quality and the other has the advantages in achieving a crisper image quality with more alpha effects. 

Open world games having less graphical fidelity than linear games are becoming a thing of the past due to the fact that memory bottlenecks have alleviated a lot of the restrictions that were placed on last generation consoles. 



TheBlackNaruto on 09 July 2014
RazorDragon said:
TheBlackNaruto said:

Heck that is less than the PS3 alone....yes compared to console gamers they are indeed the minority. That isn't a bad thing that's just the reality of the situation.  And I agree there are PC exclusives that were not and did not come to consoles as well i would never count them out but still in comparision to consoles they are still in the minority. I wasn't trying to downplay the PC in anyway just making a comparison that's all. 


You're considering that the comparison is between all consoles vs PC gaming, when in reality it shouldn't be. Console gaming isn't one thing only, you have your PS, Microsoft and Nintendo userbase. These userbases don't have the same games and neither the same sales between different genres. The Steam userbase is quite similar in numbers to the PS/MS/Nintendo one, and that's what count for publishers, not even counting other gaming services like GoG, Origin, online games, etc, which contribute a lot to the whole, but can still be counted as separate userbases inside the "PC" label anyway.

I got your point, it's just that I personally can't agree with the comparison you're making, IMO PC gamers aren't in the minority, in fact, I'd say if you count MMOs, this is one of the biggest gaming markets out there.


Yeah that makes sense and I can agree to that. MMOs are indeed VERY huge without a doubt as well. And I know it shouldn't be compared the way I did but I am pretty sure it usually is even if I don't agree with the comparison just like you don't. I don't do any MAJOR gaming on my pC but I love Steam and all the games I can get on it lol. 



The absence of evidence is NOT the evidence of absence...

PSN: StlUzumaki23

Dr.Henry_Killinger on 09 July 2014
fatslob-:O said:
VanceIX said:

It certainly has better lighting and textures than Infamous, and while Ryse looks better overall, it's such a compressed world that it's practically a poor model.

Better lighting ? That's a straight up lie ... Better textures ? Even a modded Skyrim wasn't a match made for infamous or ryse. 

Ryse looking better than infamous is subjective for the most part seeing as how one has a slight upper hand on texture quality and the other has the advantages in achieving a crisper image quality with more alpha effects. 

Open world games having less graphical fidelity than linear games are becoming a thing of the past due to the fact that memory bottlenecks have alleviated a lot of the restrictions that were placed on last generation consoles. 

All Bloom + No Shadows = Superior Lighting

question: in this gen, which is weaker performance wise, the GPUs or the CPUs, I would think that the GPUs would be fundamentally more important.



In this day and age, with the Internet, ignorance is a choice! And they're still choosing Ignorance! - Dr. Filthy Frank

Around the Network
Areaz32 on 09 July 2014
fatslob-:O said:
VanceIX said:

It certainly has better lighting and textures than Infamous, and while Ryse looks better overall, it's such a compressed world that it's practically a poor model.

Better lighting ? That's a straight up lie ... Better textures ? Even a modded Skyrim wasn't a match made for infamous or ryse. 

Ryse looking better than infamous is subjective for the most part seeing as how one has a slight upper hand on texture quality and the other has the advantages in achieving a crisper image quality with more alpha effects. 

Open world games having less graphical fidelity than linear games are becoming a thing of the past due to the fact that memory bottlenecks have alleviated a lot of the restrictions that were placed on last generation consoles. 

Did you just say that openworld games having worse graphics than linear was a thing of the past? Thats bs. It is all about how much is rendered on the screen at once.. open world games need to render way more stuff at any given time.



Scoobes on 09 July 2014
TheBlackNaruto said:
RazorDragon said:
TheBlackNaruto said:

Heck that is less than the PS3 alone....yes compared to console gamers they are indeed the minority. That isn't a bad thing that's just the reality of the situation.  And I agree there are PC exclusives that were not and did not come to consoles as well i would never count them out but still in comparision to consoles they are still in the minority. I wasn't trying to downplay the PC in anyway just making a comparison that's all. 


You're considering that the comparison is between all consoles vs PC gaming, when in reality it shouldn't be. Console gaming isn't one thing only, you have your PS, Microsoft and Nintendo userbase. These userbases don't have the same games and neither the same sales between different genres. The Steam userbase is quite similar in numbers to the PS/MS/Nintendo one, and that's what count for publishers, not even counting other gaming services like GoG, Origin, online games, etc, which contribute a lot to the whole, but can still be counted as separate userbases inside the "PC" label anyway.

I got your point, it's just that I personally can't agree with the comparison you're making, IMO PC gamers aren't in the minority, in fact, I'd say if you count MMOs, this is one of the biggest gaming markets out there.


Yeah that makes sense and I can agree to that. MMOs are indeed VERY huge without a doubt as well. And I know it shouldn't be compared the way I did but I am pretty sure it usually is even if I don't agree with the comparison just like you don't. I don't do any MAJOR gaming on my pC but I love Steam and all the games I can get on it lol. 

Where are you getting your stats from? Globally, PC gaming is bigger than console gaming.

Revenue from 2010:

Software revenue per year up to 2013:

No. of users:




Get your Portable ID!

Zero999 on 09 July 2014
Dr.Henry_Killinger said:
Zero999 said:

first, watch it.

second, when I look at MK8, I do not think: "the resolution should be higher" or "it needs AA" or "it needs better AI". I personally beleive that people wouldn't notice the increase in resolution, let alone this "no AA" because there I can't see Jaggies, although its clearly noticable on screenshots.

Now answer: if I can't notice jaggies, why are you complain about lack of AA? if the resolution is amazing as it is, why complain it's not higher (when I think wouldn't even be noticed)? Thus, I don't believe and don't want to believe those areas  were compromised.

Corrected

Quotee Tree Shortened and User Moderated - Conegamer

I don't play screenshots.



VanceIX on 09 July 2014
fatslob-:O said:
VanceIX said:

It certainly has better lighting and textures than Infamous, and while Ryse looks better overall, it's such a compressed world that it's practically a poor model.

Better lighting ? That's a straight up lie ... Better textures ? Even a modded Skyrim wasn't a match made for infamous or ryse. 

Ryse looking better than infamous is subjective for the most part seeing as how one has a slight upper hand on texture quality and the other has the advantages in achieving a crisper image quality with more alpha effects. 

Open world games having less graphical fidelity than linear games are becoming a thing of the past due to the fact that memory bottlenecks have alleviated a lot of the restrictions that were placed on last generation consoles. 

Bullshit. There's a big difference between accounting for the amount of objects in a dyncamic, open-world game and in a cinematic game where everything is stationary and pre-determined for the most part. 

And no, Skyrim with the best mods available does have better lighting and textures. Neither Infamous nor Ryse can manage 2K or 4K textures the way a modded Skyrim does.

And ENB lighting >>>> Infamous. 

I'm not going to argue this with you though. If you played Skyrim on a powerful PC with a 4K monitor, you wouldn't be saying what you are.



                                                                                                               You're Gonna Carry That Weight.

Xbox One - PS4 - Wii U - PC

Zero999 on 09 July 2014
DerNebel said:
Zero999 said:
DerNebel said:

Oh, so if Nintendo had the possibility to make the game 1080p/60fps with AA, while everything else stayed the way it is right now, they would have opted out of that and kept the game 720/60 with no AA? Jesus, do you even realize what kinda bullshit you sometimes write while trying to up talk Nintendo?

first, watch it.

second, when looking at MK8, one doesn't think: "the resolution should be higher" or "it needs AA" or "it needs better AI". I don't even think people would notice the increase in resolution, let alone this "no AA" because there aren't jaggies.

Now answer: if you can't notice jaggies, why complain about lack of AA? if the resolution is amazing as it is, why complain it's not higher (when it wouldn't even be noticed)? Thus, those areas weren't compromised.

Ok, read this slowly and get it in your head.

If every game had unlimited resources than every game would have the highest possible resolution, framerate and method of AA plus a ton of other stuff going on. But the reality of the matter is that there are always limitations and thus there are always things being compromised. That is a simple, unrefutable fact and Nintendo is not exempt from that no matter how much you want them to be.

And lol at the bolded. So 720p is an amazing resolution? Welcome to 8 years ago, I guess. And there are no jaggies? Who the hell are you trying to kid with this?

yes, it's an amazing resolution. and ps360 can't get close to wii u right now, so 8 years ago had a much bigger difference, including sub hd resolution and ps2ish graphics.

Moderated,

-Mr Khan