um chysis says hello nothing on the consoles even comes close!! no not even gears 2 or killzone

Unfortunately its just one game + expansion.

This time last generation, there were significant differences between a multitude PC exclusive/Console titles.

Compare games of 2002 on the PC to games on the Xbox 1

------------------------------------------------------------

Compare games of 2008 on PC to games on the Xbox 360

Theres unfortunately a significant difference.

BTW the infamous R300 aka Radeon 9700Pro was released in 2002, it smoked everything and anything.

 Im a lil confused. First I thought this agreed with my claim that this gen is unique in that PC versions are in essence no different in grafical quality (not significantly different) to console games, but then you write the bolded red part.

Oh and the Radeon 9700. Wow what a revolution it was. I loved that card.

dude, again, compare Fallout 3/Oblivion Xbox 360 and PC versions: HUGE difference. Especially when you put mods on the PC version.

And if you think Crysis is the only vastly superior PC exclusive, you're deluded: Dawn of War 2, Empire Total War, Stalker (easily best lightning so far), World in Conflict, Crysis Warhead, Stalker Clear Sky, Warhammer Online (you'll never see an MMO as good looking as this one on consoles), Age of Conan, etc...

 












Not a significant difference. Bump maps, HDR, textures, normal maps, parallax maps, shadows - everything is the same on PC and PS360, xcept for the little cut off in view distance on the PS360 version of Fallout 3. Generally the difference is only in a little AA/AF (and notice that these are hardware effects, not differences in the game versions ifself) and sometimes slightly compressed textures on PS360.

The similarities are closer this generation than they've ever been and for the first time, we're seeing diminishing differences between console and PC versions of games.

Sure, with a current build, you will always get better performance out of multi-platform titles (it's a given) in terms of output resolution, frame rate and smoothing effects, but the same big titles still run on consoles and there is no indication that support for consoles will decrease over time. If anything, it's increasing.

Crytek is the most often referenced developer in terms of the most hardware intensive graphics engines, and their current efforts have been squarely at the console market in the interest of expanding their audience.

Crysis came out in November 2007 and yet it still remains the most used example of hardware benchmarking games. And after two years this November, I'm guessing there still won't be a game to raise the bar that requires serious hardware upgrades for most who want to run it.

I can't think of any big budget studios who have announced they're abandoning the console market due to hardware shortcomings because if a PC game can't play on a console, odds are it won't play on any typical PC built before 2006 either.


In all seriousness, the main merit of playing multi-platform games on the PC currently is if you are very particular about the sharpest native output resolution and the smoothest frame rates and are willing to build or buy a hardware configuration that performs to your liking.

Crysis already beats out everything on consoles, and that game came out in 1986. Granted, only 5 people on the planet had PCs that could run it perfectly at that time, but it still looked better than anything we've seen on consoles yet. PCs will always be more powerful, but they will also be more expensive.

We must different eyes because when I play Fallout 3, or Oblivion or CoD4 on a PC vs 306/PS3 I see a pretty decent difference in overall image quality - doesn't affect gameplay of course, the good bits are still good and the bad bits are still bad.  But visuall there is a significant difference so far as I can see.  Checking out the site where I think you got the Fallout 3 images their analysis seems to point to a pretty big difference between the PC and console versions.

However, as per Squill's point (and I think you echoed the same sentiment) it doesn't seem quite as massive as you'd imagine, which I think is down to the developers rather than the PC platform - i.e. if you're making Fallout 3 or CoD4 would you really sink that much more into the title to make it shine vs PS3/360 or would you simply give it a graphics hike and call it a day?

While I see lots of 360 is holding the PS3 version back rubbish I am starting to feel the 360/PS3 versions are holding the PC versions back a tad.  For sure they're resulting in less well coded PC versions judging by the high level of bugs present in a lot of recent high profile PC versions of big titles.

.

 graphicly no, but both of those are better GAMES then Crysis

Superb, more pc games to pirate lmao, noone pays for pc games these days, this is the reason pc gaming is dying, more people play pirated games on pc than retail games on pc and this is exactly why the developers that matter all now work on console games too or have moved exclusively to consoles,

P.S, I don't condone piracy, say no to pirates!