DF article: Sources say Samaritan running on next Xbox dev kit

[averyblund]

NightDragon83 said:

VGKing said:

greenmedic88 said:
Running Samaritan on an HD 6670 is an impressive feat, but I think if anything it will only illustrate the growing gap in visuals and performance between consoles and dedicated gaming PCs that will likely increase a lot faster in the 8th gen than in the 7th.

There's still room for surprises with the Xbox 3, but based on alleged specs alone, it does seem more like a piece of hardware that was designed to stay current for 4-5 years rather than the 7-8 the Xbox 360 is currently coasting with.

Well PC graphics are held back by console. Most games are now developed on console as the lead platform.(This includes the fastest selling title in Steam history, Skyrim)

 

@bold
Yeah, sadly. Doubt we will ever see such a long generation like this one ever again.

I love these kinds of excuses by PC gamers... 5 generations of video cards since the launch of the 360 more than 6 years ago, and the best the PC can do visually is Battlefield 3.  At this point in every previous generation, there was absolutely no comparison between the latest PC games and their current gen console counterparts... they weren't even in the same league.   Go back and compare PS1/N64 games to PC games circa 2000, or PS2/GC/Xbox games to PC games in 2005/6... it's like night and day.

Now... even the best looking PC games are nearly identical to their versions on 6 year old console hardware, unless you have the latest bleeding edge cards in your rig or dual-GPUs of older cards.  Crysis 2, Witcher 2, Battlefield 3... games that a generation ago would have all been PC-exclusive or ported to next-gen consoles at least a year or two after their initial releases are able to run just fine on 6 year old hardware with still awe-inspiring visuals and no impact on gameplay.  Console exclusives like the Gears and Uncharted series routinely blow most PC-exclusive games out of the water in terms of visuals.

Don't worry though, I'm sure in the next year or two PC gamers will finally have games to justify their $1,000-plus rigs' existences, while us console gamers continue to enjoy the same games with almost negligible differences in visuals, all for around $300.

If you can't tell the difference between 720P at 30 or below FPS vs 120+ FPS at well over 1080P then I would say you need better glasses.

 

You are right that PC graphics are not as much better compared to consoles as they were in the past, but I think the argument is that this is based on devs targetting consoles and then porting over the assets with at best a higher res texture pack and some slightly improved geometry. That is very different from coding with PC's being the target where AI can be better, levels can be vast, and physics can be more realistic. Next gen consoles with PC like specs (at launch) will greatly benefit both camps and I for one can't wait. Until those too drag down future faster PCs as is the cycle. Can't blame devs for wanting to make money though, it's really hard to justify making a game that is simply unportable off of the PC even if you know it will be successful PC only.