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

Forums - Gaming - This is for those who care about "Next Gen" console graphics

amp316 on 29 July 2014

All hail PullusPadus! Master of Nintendo propaganda!

I can't believe what I just typed...

But yeah... I agree that if you really play games that have the most amazing visuals known to man then you should game on a PC. I've been saying this stuff for years and have been called a troll for doing so on several occasions.



Proud member of the SONIC SUPPORT SQUAD

Tag "Sorry man. Someone pissed in my Wheaties."

"There are like ten games a year that sell over a million units."  High Voltage CEO -  Eric Nofsinger

Around the Network
NedStarkLives on 29 July 2014

 

- Removed, Carl



NedStarkLives on 29 July 2014

- Removed, Carl



NedStarkLives on 29 July 2014

- Removed, Carl



Egann on 29 July 2014

How is it that we have to go through this nonsense every week or two on what console power means? We haven't meaningfully added to that discussion in more than a year.

PC is more powerful than consoles...if you pay more than twice as much on hardware twice as often.
RAM adds a lot to graphics...for developers who have never heard of data compression.
Power is important!...for internet geeks like us. Not so much for everybody else.


Personal opinion: power after the PS2 generation was the worst thing which happened to gaming. Developers started spending more time rendering the nicks in the protagonist's armor than designing actual gameplay and content (much less competent enemy AI.) Up to the PS2, graphics were poor enough they could ruin immersion, but after that it really doesn't matter beyond some trailers to get sales. Gameplay and style are king.

Don't get me wrong. Pretty graphics are great, but games derive core value from gameplay, not blood splatter effects or anti-aliasing. Too often discussions about power completely miss this.



Around the Network
torok on 29 July 2014

If you look closely, actually Killzone Shadow Fall is pretty impressive and gets pretty close to Crysis 3. It looks better than Metro LL, Crysis 2 and Witcher 2.

And this list is not equal. Both KZ and the 2 last Crysis games looks considerably better than the closest competitor, that is Metro (this game is so underrated graphically. It breaks my heart when people list good looking games and this one isn't mentioned. It looks absolutely stunning and their attention to the details is superb).



Bet with jetforcejiminy: PS4 will pass the Wii lifetime numbers.

Kane1389 on 29 July 2014
PullusPardus said:
Kane1389 said:


 

And this is just the GPU chart, not accounting the massive difference in RAM and CPU (where even PS360 have a better one than WiiU)

the PS4 and Xbox 1 do not use GTX 7XX or Radeon 7XXX.

also Quadro/Firepro >>>> Geforce/Radeon

those are meant for super computers and are not optomized for games , why are they even on the list? 

PS4's GPU is equivalent to Radeon 7850 actually, maybe slightly ahead

The graph shows  a huge gap betweent WiiU and PS4/Xbone, which you claimed is actually very small

 

 

This post was edited by Viper.



errorpwns on 29 July 2014
Egann said:
How is it that we have to go through this nonsense every week or two on what console power means? We haven't meaningfully added to that discussion in more than a year.

PC is more powerful than consoles...if you pay more than twice as much on hardware twice as often.
RAM adds a lot to graphics...for developers who have never heard of data compression.
Power is important!...for internet geeks like us. Not so much for everybody else.


Personal opinion: power after the PS2 generation was the worst thing which happened to gaming. Developers started spending more time rendering the nicks in the protagonist's armor than designing actual gameplay and content (much less competent enemy AI.) Up to the PS2, graphics were poor enough they could ruin immersion, but after that it really doesn't matter beyond some trailers to get sales. Gameplay and style are king.

Don't get me wrong. Pretty graphics are great, but games derive core value from gameplay, not blood splatter effects or anti-aliasing. Too often discussions about power completely miss this.


Twice as much twice as often? Now that's a downright lie.



Giggs_11 on 29 July 2014
Normchacho said:
Giggs_11 said:
Raziel123 said:

All i'm seeing here is Wii U propaganda
Saying things don't make them true you know

This whole "jump is smaller" thing is nonsense. You can't take the consoles and just place them next to current PCs. This gen the jump is bigger, you know why? Because last gen lasted too long. The consoles were last year more outdated than the other gen ever was. THAT's how you measure a generational jump.


Actually that ain't correct.

PS3/X360 were more powerful than high end PCs at the time of their release. They were also a lot more expensive at the time of their release than PS4/X1 are today even though they were sold at a loss.

PS4/X1 equal medium PCs at best, and even though they are cheaper than PS3/X360 were at the beginning they are sold at a profit.

PS4/X1 are already outdated at the time of their release.

Bolded part also isn't true. I mean if you talk about raw hardware it probabily is, but that's not how you measure a generational leap. SNES to PS1/N64, PS1/N64 to PS2/GC/Xb, PS2/GC/Xb to PS3/Wii/X360 all had bigger leaps than you had this generation. 3D gaming, HD gaming, motion controls, etc all implemented big leaps in past gaming generations. Now all you have is better lightning and textures, and console manufacturers didn't event bothered to build high-end consoles to really improve those textures at the highest standards of today's technology.


https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS543US543&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=diminishing+returns

In order to maintain the same sized gap in graphical output the new consoles would need to grow exponential more powerful and more expensive and they would quickly price themselves out of the market.

How many people would have bought an $800 PS4?

I'm not sure you know what law of diminishing returns is...

Even if the bolded part was true, which we don't have data to know if it is or not, you're saying exactly what I did, the leap was smaller this gen.



AZWification on 29 July 2014
NedStarkLives said:

 

- Removed, Carl

Wow, Carl is pretty fast! I didn't even get to see what Weazel posted!



                
       ---Member of the official Squeezol Fanclub---