Chrkeller said:
LegitHyperbole said:
Not at 120fps no but above 60 on a 1440p monitor. You tout 120fps like it makes a difference to visuals, it makes a difference to movement and for games like this it doesn't matter, there're not twitch based. You just called ND games walking simulators, like. Why would an 'on rails' game need 120 fps.
|
Have you played it on a high ish end PC? Because if you haven't, you haven't seen ultra settings.
And most all games, imh, benefit from 120 fps. Crosshairs are more responsive and more accurate.
And 120 fps does impact visuals, camera panning is ultra smooth.
All I can say is I was console exclusive gamer for decades. I watched videos and read articles and never thought PC was that big of a jump.
I got a good bonus last year and built my first rig with a 4070. And I rebought a number of games I had on Playstation. Doom, eternal, hitman, forbidden west, re4, dead space, etc. I did this so I could compare and see first hand.
Trust me, it isn't close. Ultra settings on PC are way, way, way higher than what consoles run. Then add in higher resolution. Then top off with higher fps.
Consoles have never touched PC in graphics. Doom on PC maxed out across the board is a much different look than what the ps4 had.
Console being on the same level as a PC is a myth that console gamers tell themselves. I know because I was one of them.
Edit
According to DF, RDR2 console settings for lighting is equivalent to PC low settings. Same with reflections, tree quality and volumetric.... most other settings are mix of medium and a few highs.
If I put everything on high, by default I have the much better looking game. Add in better resolution and better framerate on top of the better graphics. Consoles didn't have the better graphics back in the day.
I'm starting to think you two must be joking. I can't believe either of you are serious.
https://youtu.be/mQXfD20rqtc?si=RMv_bvSh8JNzOmMW
The lighting, textures and detail on the PC is clearly way higher on PC. Just look at the buildings and mountains in the background. The ps4 pro has blurry backgrounds, not crisp and sharp like a PC.
|
You can't compare running those games now to how they were back then on a 1080. It's the same experience you're having now with not being able to run WuKong effectively. You mentioned Tomb Raider, I seen one of them at the time on the beefiest rig, the one where she is in Russia for a bit, among other games and tech demos and my mate who owned the rig, 1080ti or some shit and all the bells and whistles was blown away by ps4 games specifically Uncharted 4. We'd contrast and compare all the way up till Horizon which blew minds apart fron the water effects, again with a rig that on paper was multiples times more powerful than ps4 and we were gettinf comfirmation from other beefy rig owners. With Horizon being openworld and all, Still blown away. Haven't talked to him in years but I'm sure he'd have been blown away by TLOU2 as well. Running tech demos that looked like they were from the future, I don't care much for tech demos cause they aren't games. All that was in that PC to me was unrealised potential. The devs on ps4 exceeded the potential they had on there hands. Few devs on PC did.
Talent won the day for the eye of anyone who is not looking for graphical presets and tech stuff. If you sat someone down infront Uncharted 4 or Tomb raider on ultra who wasn't into PC settings they'd and asked which was better, they'd choose Uncharted 4 everytime.
You're coming at this from a PC settings look, I know cause like you I used to play with the settings more than play the games and have fomo of what I was missing out on so I'd go back to the settings on my rig before PS4 whichbwasbmore powerful than base PS4. What's on the screen is more important than those numbers. If a game looks better at 720p than a game at 4k then it simply looks better and there are many cases of this even today if you play indies that go for realism on switch. Your head is all tied and bound by the math and not the end product.
Oh and everyone I know who owned a PC back then were agreeing. Last time I had a proper chat with someone about this was TLOU2 cause after that (or maybe slightly before) their rigs started getting godly and PC games started using the potential power again. The tech out won the talent. We'll probably see the talent outwin the tech again soon with Sony first party and GTA6 (the money 2) when they drop on console first. Yeah, it won't have RT and the bells and whistles but I bet the average person will look at GTA6 for the time it's on console and go, that's the one. That looks better.
No offence to your rig or you and you are rightly justified to assume those games looked like they do on your rig as they did back then but they didn't. Do you know how long it took for hardware to reach the point where doom 3 reached it's potential? A long ass time. Remember you're waiting for a 5090 right now to play WuKongs full potential and likely that won't cover it for your beat all else 120fps.
I mean, that's all I'll say cause we're just wasting time at this point. I wish I had a time machine to show you the point you're not understanding. Before the 2060-90 things weren't the same as they are for you now, PC gamers didn't even have 1440p monitors. It was all 1080p and why bother upgrading. 4k for PC is point less cause a monitor is too small. HDR didn't work on PC properly until recently. Things like DLSS didn't exist. You can't compare unless you buy a rig from back then.
Anyway, it was fun chatting about this, albeit a bit infuriating. Let's agree to disagree man. 👊 let's talk more about this whenever GTA6 drops.
Last edited by LegitHyperbole - on 21 August 2024
