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

Forums - Gaming - What's going to be the next game to blow you away because of it's graphics?

selnor said:
Ascended_Saiyan3 said:
Squilliam said:
There are estimates that you will be able to get PC graphics cards with over 5 TFlops of shader floating point performance THIS YEAR. Thats more than 5* the shader performance of all current gen consoles combined in one card.

Since you needed to talk about PC performance, I have a question for you.  Have you ever wondered why top PC game characters seem to look and move worse than top 1st/2nd PS3 games?  Look at Alan Wake's body in this pic (PC). 

Now, look at this body (PS3).

Face in Alan Wake (PC)

Face in Heavy Rain (PS3)

Set piece in Alan Wake (PC)

Set piece in Heavy Rain (PS3)

What is your reasoning for this occurance?  So what good is all that extra money, when spent on this 5 TFLOPs GPU?  Where are the results?  GPUs are already past the FLOPs ratings in the PS3, so why are the animations jerky when compared to top PS3 games?  Why are the character models less than top PS3 character models?  It feels like having a car that has 5000 horsepower, but the drivers don't know how to go past 100MPH.

 

 

I'm not gonna post anything, but you are about to seriously get owned in this thread. Alan Wake footage thats 2 years old beats anything the PS3 has now.

I warned you. Someone will own you. Consoles are not capable of modded Crysis graphics for instance. No way.

EDIT: Bugger it. Here it is. The PS3 has not got anything this technically advanced as this engine. Incredible, this is 2007 footage as well.

LOL!  Show me where exactly did the IQ changed over the pics I provided.  My point stands.

 



Around the Network
Reasonable said:

 

If it looks identical on PC (gaming PC level) and 360 apart from resolution then I'd have to assume the developers haven't fully exploited the PC platform.  Mind you I do think that's happening now, which HD consoles as the norm and a bump in resolution and a few tweaks for PC.  Damn annoying - I want my PC exploited to the full!

 

Someone forgot to abolish slavery in your part of the world?

 



Tease.

Squilliam said:
^ Perhaps the reason is that Sony spends more than pretty much everyone else and their pet feature at the moment is animation? Also GPUs aren't being used for animation at this time, give it about 18 months and you'll see something there.

Also Alan Wake isn't the poster child for everything you know...

The spending excuse is VERY lame.  Too Human was $80 million.  Halo 3 was $40 million.  Uncharted was $20 million.  That excuse just makes you look like you don't know what you're talking about.  I, also, mentioned character models as well.  PC guys have to wait 18 months to see better performance in those areas?!  Interesting indeed.  I guess you have to wait for the PC developers skills to improve, huh?  Meanwhile, my PS3 is out-performing my PCs in areas that PC fanboys have claimed ownership over for SO long.  This hasn't happened since the PS1, you know.  And, that's not even talking about audio, DSP effects, etc.

BTW, Alan Wake will be the 1st game to make use of an Intel quad core processor.  The developer walk-through even talked about how great their lighting is.  It's a poster child alright.  I wonder if it will have discrete 7.1 LPCM audio.  Only time will tell.

 



Probably Bionic Commando. The framerate is incredibly good on the 360, I can't imagine the PC! It runs smooth while looking amazing... I mean, what more can you ask?



Random game thought :
Why is Bionic Commando Rearmed 2 getting so much hate? We finally get a real game and they're not even satisfied... I'm starting to hate the gaming community so f****** much...

Watch my insane gameplay videos on my YouTube page!

Squilliam said:
Reasonable said:

 

If it looks identical on PC (gaming PC level) and 360 apart from resolution then I'd have to assume the developers haven't fully exploited the PC platform.  Mind you I do think that's happening now, which HD consoles as the norm and a bump in resolution and a few tweaks for PC.  Damn annoying - I want my PC exploited to the full!

 

Someone forgot to abolish slavery in your part of the world?

 

 

You mean I have to let them go?

 

That did sound a little strange I guess.

 

 

For those with broken sarcasm detectors that's a joke and I'm not saying anything good about slavery.

 

 

 



Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...

Around the Network

The new zelda



Ascended_Saiyan3 said:
Squilliam said:
^ Perhaps the reason is that Sony spends more than pretty much everyone else and their pet feature at the moment is animation? Also GPUs aren't being used for animation at this time, give it about 18 months and you'll see something there.

Also Alan Wake isn't the poster child for everything you know...

The spending excuse is VERY lame.  Too Human was $80 million.  Halo 3 was $40 million.  Uncharted was $20 million.  That excuse just makes you look like you don't know what you're talking about.  I, also, mentioned character models as well.  PC guys have to wait 18 months to see better performance in those areas?!  Interesting indeed.  I guess you have to wait for the PC developers skills to improve, huh?  Meanwhile, my PS3 is out-performing my PCs in areas that PC fanboys have claimed ownership over for SO long.  This hasn't happened since the PS1, you know.  And, that's not even talking about audio, DSP effects, etc.

BTW, Alan Wake will be the 1st game to make use of an Intel quad core processor.  The developer walk-through even talked about how great their lighting is.  It's a poster child alright.  I wonder if it will have discrete 7.1 LPCM audio.  Only time will tell.

 

Crysis cost $22,000,000 to make. It really does depend on your budgets really. God of War for instance has two animators per programmer so Sony is really throwing down the budget in that department. Too human was a farce and I really doubt that Halo 3 cost $40,000,000 to make unless they coded it with solid gold computers.

Also no, the 18 months is not a wait for developers to develop skills its a 6 month wait for Directx 11 and a 12 month wait for enough of a userbase to develop for games to target the technology. Anyway since you're a PS3 fan im sure you're patient enough to wait for untapped potential.

Lastly Alan Wake isn't the first game to use a quad core CPU well. Try Crysis, try Supreme Commander etc and these weren't even the first to really use the cores.

 



Tease.

The next Phantasy Star.







VGChartz♥♥♥♥♥FOREVER

Xbone... the new "N" word   Apparently I troll MS now | Evidence | Evidence
Squilliam said:
Ascended_Saiyan3 said:
Squilliam said:
^ Perhaps the reason is that Sony spends more than pretty much everyone else and their pet feature at the moment is animation? Also GPUs aren't being used for animation at this time, give it about 18 months and you'll see something there.

Also Alan Wake isn't the poster child for everything you know...

The spending excuse is VERY lame.  Too Human was $80 million.  Halo 3 was $40 million.  Uncharted was $20 million.  That excuse just makes you look like you don't know what you're talking about.  I, also, mentioned character models as well.  PC guys have to wait 18 months to see better performance in those areas?!  Interesting indeed.  I guess you have to wait for the PC developers skills to improve, huh?  Meanwhile, my PS3 is out-performing my PCs in areas that PC fanboys have claimed ownership over for SO long.  This hasn't happened since the PS1, you know.  And, that's not even talking about audio, DSP effects, etc.

BTW, Alan Wake will be the 1st game to make use of an Intel quad core processor.  The developer walk-through even talked about how great their lighting is.  It's a poster child alright.  I wonder if it will have discrete 7.1 LPCM audio.  Only time will tell.

 

Crysis cost $22,000,000 to make. It really does depend on your budgets really. God of War for instance has two animators per programmer so Sony is really throwing down the budget in that department. Too human was a farce and I really doubt that Halo 3 cost $40,000,000 to make unless they coded it with solid gold computers.

Also no, the 18 months is not a wait for developers to develop skills its a 6 month wait for Directx 11 and a 12 month wait for enough of a userbase to develop for games to target the technology. Anyway since you're a PS3 fan im sure you're patient enough to wait for untapped potential.

Lastly Alan Wake isn't the first game to use a quad core CPU well. Try Crysis, try Supreme Commander etc and these weren't even the first to really use the cores.

 

Alan Wake has been in development for AT LEAST close to 5 years (they showed some of the actual graphics running on PC at E3 2005). Heavy Rain has been in development for 2 years and look at those pics I provided side by side with Alan Wake.  That speaks volumes.

God of War is no different from other development teams.  MOST of the budget goes to the artists...period.  I would expect the same for Alan Wake as well.  Here is Too Human's budget (go to #7 for Halo 3).

I'm a PS3 owner, so I can wait for untapped potential.  However, PC guys aren't suppose to have to wait to outperform a console at anything, right?  I thought that was what all the hoop-la of paying $600 for a GPU and $1000 for a CPU was about.  Otherwise, what's the point of spending all the money?

Alan Wake IS the 1st game to take advantage of an Intel quad core.  Other PC games aren't truly multi-threaded to take full advantage of a quad core anything.  Other games just break off a trival portions of the code to be run on the 3rd and 4th cores.  Those cores are completely idle most of the time.



Just watched those Lost Planet videos. Co-op is gonna rock hard in that game. Graphics are pretty nice as well. Looks like a good time to be had with that one.