Ruler said:
IFireflyl said:
Ridiculous article. No offense to the OP, but a lot of offense to the content author. I'm not saying consoles don't have any impact, but it definitely isn't the sole, or even the main, reason for the advancements. The advancements come from companies wanting to make money. They're going to keep making better hardware for that to happen. Game developers are going to keep making games that are compatible with the current hardware. |
How is the article redicolous, now we see all of the sudden pc games comming out who need quadcore as minimum system requirements, like The Evil Within who requires an i7 or equilant cpu with 4+ cores. Nvidia, Intel and co. made money before the new consoles came out but now they have actually to deliver instead milking costumers with renaming everything a corei7 like intel does or nvidia with their redicolous overpriced titan series.
If no games are programmed to require better hardware as every game is based on consoles now you wont see them making advancements.
|
@ bolded
That's over-inflated bullshit. I've noticed a few devs say this now about their PC games (Wolfenstein being another) where the "minimum" specs are what you need to run the game with Ultra textures, high res, some ridiculous anti-aliasing solution and 60+ FPS.I'm begining to wonder if Intel, nVidia & AMD are paying them to over-inflate the specs.
Fact is, a half decent i3 with mid-tier GPU can run the majority of games these days at higher graphical fidelity than consoles.
