PC graphics vs Console graphics

[FrostyTop]

Slimebeast said:

rocketpig said:

The_vagabond7 said:
ok, fine a bit of hyperbole there. Crashes do happen to everyone, regardless of tech savvyness but it's certainly not nigh unplayable or as big of a problem as many console enthusiasts like to paint it as. For the most part I haven't had any game with significant stability issues since Half Life 2 back in the day, and then I learned it was just some patch that valve released that actually screwed something up for me. I don't even have a good rig by todays standards and I still run games like bioshock just fine and better looking than on PS3 or 360.

I don't PC game anymore but I hang with a bunch of people who do. One of my friends last updated his rig in 2007 (a mild update from a 2006 rig) and the visuals on L4D, Bioshock, CoD4, etc. absolutely blow the PS3/360 out of the water.

It's not even funny. The differences are painfully obvious within seconds.

Huh?? Bioshock and COD4 on the PC is exactly the same as on PS360.

The only thing you can do on PC versions is to up the resolution a bit and add some AA/AF.

But the essence of the game is the same - polygons, textures, bump maps, HDR, shadows and so on. <----- these factors are vast amounts more important than resolution and AA.

I have a nice PC with a 24 inch 1920x1200 res screen, but in games like CoD 4-5, Tomb Raider: Underworld, Bioshock, Fallout 3 etc the PC version don't look significantly better even at higher res + everything at max.

 

 

Texure detail is way lower on console versions of Bioshock, same for COD4. I think even gamespot did a photo comparison thing of it a while back with the 360 version and it was blatently obvious.

Also, FRAME RATE.

Bioshock on PC can run at 60fps+ on max with modest hardware = Xbox 360\PS3 - 30fps\lower res\less aa\less af\less detail.

Try plugging your Xbox 360 into your PC LCD with the VGA cable and you will be a convert I promise!