By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Are people serious ? Oo (Next gen graphics)

there is obviously a difference and it will be even more in the next years but it is the first time where i see the new gen and can still play the old gen without thinking "damn that looks so bad now". i play a lot of halo 4 online right now, i don't think that it looks really great since i'm also used to pc graphics but i don't think that it is ugly. the last generations i instantly felt like the games of the gen before were ugly.

i play even games which look like from 1990 if they have good gameplay so that it doesn't really change what i play but just talking about graphics, even if the jump is as big as last gen i can at least still look on ps360 games without having this "ugly" feeling. now it is more like "good vs. awesome looking"



Around the Network

My laptop:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B005PAJHU4/ref=wms_ohs_product?ie=UTF8&psc=1







VGChartz♥♥♥♥♥FOREVER

Xbone... the new "N" word   Apparently I troll MS now | Evidence | Evidence
_crazy_man_ said:
Mr Puggsly said:
fighter said:

Tbh this gen is not as great of a leap as last gen.


To be fair, you're comparing late 7th gen to launch 8th gen.

We saw a huge leap in graphics throughout the 7th gen.

Big part of that was everyone adjusting to HD development.

SD -> HD was a huge jump

except it wasn't really HD

if you read my original post (full - not the reinterpreted extract of puggsly) the most effective way to measure up leaps is in the costs (development & manufacture)

 

this gen is by no means as big of a leap as last gen, especially considering that the "flop-per-dollar" natural increase (moore's law, etc.) has been slowing down for a decade



I'm still not sure if any console generation will have the effect of the Gran Turismo 2-3 transition ever again, but that being said, I downplayed GT3 to the utmost limits of my imagination until I saw it in the flesh...



d21lewis said:
8th gen games look like what we pretended 7th gen games looked like when we had Xbox vs PS3 threads. I think we can all admit we were lying, now.

Post of the year.



Around the Network
sc94597 said:
hinch said:
We always have the naysayers and PC elitists spount the same thing every generation of consoles and it always turns out the same way. Console titles look barely different from X year titles on PC or hardly a leap on current gen.. "Xbox 1.5!" they say. "PS3.5!" Then we have the Nintendo users go to extrodinary lengths to prove they don't care about graphics.. by getting more involved in more graphics comparison talk. Awesome.

And when the dust settles after the fanboy wars at launch, a few years in when we get great looking games on them. We STILL get well, hur durrr PC iz da best derp welcome to 2013 comments. Its grating. The fact that you have to spend multitudes times in those years to get something remotely close in performance doesn't mean anything at all. Nope.

PS. I also like gaming on PC.

It's only in response to console elitists, you know, those who argue about some marginal difference between the consoles as if it really mattered. *Looks at countless XB360 vs. PS3 performance, resolution, and texture quality threads. ;) Anyway, it's inaccurate to say that this happened every generation, because there was a time when consoles were always BETTER than PC's upon their release (pre-6th generation.) During the 6th generation PC games were comparable at the launch of the consoles. At the advent of the 7th generation; however, the PC had Crysis, and the consoles had nothing comparable. The only thing holding PC gaming back is not technology, but the type of games that demand graphical prowess have transitioned to consoles as their main developing platforms. With the next generation of consoles, so will we see advancements in the technical feats of PC Gaming. 

Got to go out now, but I'll write a full reply when I get back



Mr Puggsly said:
Sleepyprince said:

Ah and a correction I feel necessary : The guy on first page talking about his laptop running games like Shadowfall was factually lying.

There are laptops that can run games like Battlefield 4 and Crysis 3 at highest settings and 1080p.

Those games look at par if not better than Killzone Shadowfall.


You know a lot of laptop can runs those two games ? Even some of the actual cheapest one. But would they run those games fine ? Nope, even an high end laptop pc would take 10 to 15 minutes before overheating like it's KFC sales in Chicago Streeterville. Unless you play with your windows open while it's 7° outside.  

That said, come on mate, Battlefield 4 and Crysis 3 are the only PC typed games you can come with ? They looks nothing like Shadow Fall. Shadow fall is beautiful technical wise but also artistic wise. Crysis 3 and BF4 are bland and fad, it's way more easy to make them looks technical impressive than Shadow Fall. 



I don't think it really matters anymore. Graphics have got to such a good standard that i wonder if developers really need them to be any better



Xbox Series, PS5 and Switch (+ Many Retro Consoles)

'When the people are being beaten with a stick, they are not much happier if it is called the people's stick'- Mikhail Bakunin

Prediction: Switch 2 will outsell the PS5 by 2030

d21lewis said:
8th gen games look like what we pretended 7th gen games looked like when we had Xbox vs PS3 threads. I think we can all admit we were lying, now.


Spot on. This gen feels more like everything last gen should've been. (which isn't a bad thing.)



pbroy said:
My laptop:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B005PAJHU4/ref=wms_ohs_product?ie=UTF8&psc=1


Take some video capture of games that can be compared to SF technical wise, upload them, let's show them to everyone. If everyone agree that they are comparable to Shadow Fall, you earn 100$. Nope, I will give you 150$ right away if you (or someone else) can prove us I am saying shit. You have my word.