| Reasonable said:
We must different eyes because when I play Fallout 3, or Oblivion or CoD4 on a PC vs 306/PS3 I see a pretty decent difference in overall image quality - doesn't affect gameplay of course, the good bits are still good and the bad bits are still bad. But visuall there is a significant difference so far as I can see. Checking out the site where I think you got the Fallout 3 images their analysis seems to point to a pretty big difference between the PC and console versions. However, as per Squill's point (and I think you echoed the same sentiment) it doesn't seem quite as massive as you'd imagine, which I think is down to the developers rather than the PC platform - i.e. if you're making Fallout 3 or CoD4 would you really sink that much more into the title to make it shine vs PS3/360 or would you simply give it a graphics hike and call it a day? While I see lots of 360 is holding the PS3 version back rubbish I am starting to feel the 360/PS3 versions are holding the PC versions back a tad. For sure they're resulting in less well coded PC versions judging by the high level of bugs present in a lot of recent high profile PC versions of big titles.
. |
http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/
Its more PCs holding back PCs. Why spend the money when the majority of the market has 1-2 CPU cores? A 'typical' steam PCs could probably just play HD console games about as good as the consoles themselves.
Probably the most important trend is -> The rejection of DX10/Vista, there are as many DX10 class GPUs running XP as Vista.
I believe the high end PC gaming market is going to stagnate until the release of Direct X 11 in the west t go alongside Windows 7.
Tease.
