Munkeh111 said:
Flame said:
Munkeh111 said:
Yes, I understand overclocking, I am well aware that my 670 basically performs as a 680 due to the out of the box overclock put on it by Asus. I am also aware of patches that claim to "improve performace by 30%."
If you actually look at the power of the consoles versus what they produce against the output of a pc, there is a drastic difference, which is why PC games don't look that much better than console games, see the Witcher 2. I fully believe that the games made by Naughty Dog and SCE Santa Monica are going to look as good as anything on PC
|
Optimization does play its part but it's not something mystical. It's not going to make the Wii U anywhere near as powerful as the PS4. It's not going to make the PS4 as powerful as a PC with a high end card.
With current consoles, a lot of devs just scale back the resolution of textures, pixels (sub HD is much less than half of 1080p), lock it at 30 frames and hope you don't get horrible performance drops. In the sense of optimization, it just looks like they're drastically reducing the load by lowering the quality to make it playable. I can crank up Crysis to ultra/1080p and it'll look beautiful yet I get 5 to 7 frames per second. Performance is a huge factor as well.
They did an awesome job with Witcher 2. They basically redid the game, art style and all to make it fit and for it to still look and perform well.
The PS4 will be great for everyone whether people like Sony or not. It's using a familiar architecture, off shelf parts and it's quite the upgrade from the PS3. Sony did good.
|
It is going to cause the gap to shrink between the actual PC power and the console power. I don't know the exact numbers, but it will definitely be very significant
But really, how much can one notice?
Crysis 2 may actually be running on ultra 60fps, but does it look that much better than Uncharted 3?
|
Well A) Yes....
B) That is what's always missed on these arguements... the actual tech specs. Crysis 2 looks better then Uncharted 3... but the difference in their technical achievments goes far beyond that.
And a lot of the time, the best looking stuff is actually really technically unimpressive. Like amazing looking backgrounds, which are likely just 2D sprites with effects applied to them.
The God of War series is consistently some of the "best" looking games graphically... is it one of the best looking games technically? Not really actually, the game is set up specifically limiting a lot of stuff specifically to look nice.
Whether that's a good or a bad thing is really based on WHAT you want out of graphics and what you find interesting.
To use a really biased exapme to drive home the point.. a Picaso is far technically inferor to a 1980's photo... most people would rather look at the picaso though.
