This is still the reality for me. My computer room is upstairs, while my home theatre is in the basement so it would be pretty troublesome to get an HDMI hooked up. I wonder if remote play is fast enough to play street fighter yet.
How big is the difference in visuals/performance between PC and PS4/Xbox really?
- Thread starter MrOogieBoogie
- Start date
poodaddy
Member
Yo my mom drove a Ford fiesta lol.....memories. But yeah pretty much. You get what you pay for with PC, just don't buy some ultrabook with an APU and expect beat the consoles. On topic: my 980 ti makes gaming on my PS4 and Bone seem very unappealing in comparison, but I still they're great for exclusives and PS+ games.
Krappadizzle
Member
Depends on which post you want to cherry-pick. I saw a bit both in this thread so far (as always, really). Like this:
Also:
Guess Batman AK is the 1 out of 10?
I don't really disagree, btw. I play games on my PC too and bought a PS4 for Bloodborne. But my PC is aging and struggles with current-gen games, and I don't feel like investing another couple of hundreds to bring it back to speed, so multiplats are gonna be on the PS4 I already bought for now unless I'm really confident that my PC will run a PS4 game better than the PS4. So yes, there can be many reasons to choose console gaming despite having a moderately decent PC, and it's not about "justifying my purchase".
I also don't get the belittling of the "couch" argument. Yes, you can play PC games on a big TV and a couch. No one said that it was impossible to do so, as far as I know. But it's not always convenient or practical to do so, depending on how your home is set up.
Well yes, your aging PC may not be able to run a game at max or even comparably to a console. I was speaking from the point of view if you have optimal hardware.
Love it.
I think Valve or Nvidia has set up remote play thru home network?
Kageshinzo
Member
Regular Steam sales + backwards compatibility with older PC games AND past console generations via emulation + PC utilization beyond gaming (business, creatives, development, etc).
Sounds like a pretty good investment for $800 ~ $1,000 to me.
DerSchniffles
Member
I would have to disagree. I suppose if you were pro level trying to play something like Dota2 or SC2 then sitting at a desk might be better but for general gaming? No way. I can see how some people might think that, but it really boils down to how far away you are and how you setup your mouse area. You need the right setup for it to be efficient and having your mouse too high or too low or on a small surface that is not hard could prove tiresome.
I guess my point is, if setup properly, it works just fine. Its about how comfy you are. If you can use your mouse easily and comfortably while sitting on a couch, how is it any less optimal? My wrist and back hurt less while on the couch and im not confined to a chair.
Just my opinion.
plasticpassion
Member
Recently I went back to ps4 for Bloodborne after several months of 4K PC gaming with gsync. Playing high IQ 4K games with smooth ~60 fps is stunning to say the least. Needless to say, I had a difficult time adjusting to PS4 - low FPS, poor AA, lack of other high end image boosts.
You probably wouldn't want to know the cost of my PC though. Fortunately the next gen of GPUs + DX12 should make 4K more feasible & cost effective. 4K gsync monitors should start to be more affordable as well.
You probably wouldn't want to know the cost of my PC though. Fortunately the next gen of GPUs + DX12 should make 4K more feasible & cost effective. 4K gsync monitors should start to be more affordable as well.
Atraveller
Banned
Steam's in-homing streaming on wifi is actually decent enough, have you looked into it?
Reading this thread is strange for someone who played Witcher 3 on PC locked at 30fps, but I guess even my experience with the game was at least more stable than the PS4 version. After minimal adjustment I pretty much managed a constant 30 with occasional stuttering.
But that's the real point: PC gaming isn't about always having better graphics so much as it's about always having more options. Do you want an okay-looking 60fps game or an amazing looking 30fps game? On PC you can actually make that choice.
But that's the real point: PC gaming isn't about always having better graphics so much as it's about always having more options. Do you want an okay-looking 60fps game or an amazing looking 30fps game? On PC you can actually make that choice.
Primethius
Banned
The answer's going to be no. Unless you're only doing offline stuff.
CadetMahoney
Member
All I know is those improved framerates will always be superior no matter how far/comfy the couch is.
alexandros
Banned
I wish more people understood that. Even if you have a PC that performs exactly like a console you still have the power to tailor your experience to your liking an that's a huge advantage.
curiouscharles
Member
yup, and i think that's what we like about it!
however, i think that's very much also why some people will never like it.
Steam and Nvidia's streaming solutions are really great
This recent console launch has to be one of the more embarrassing portions of GAF's history.
Lionel Richie
Member
Jawbreaker
Member
Depends on where you are in the game. The difference can be negligible, or it can be pretty large. Durante's comparison wouldn't work as well if he chose the areas where the discrepancies are greater, for example:
"Grassgate" was a thing because these areas were being magnified; people weren't simply splitting hairs over one or two blades of grass.
alexandros
Banned
Completely understandable. It's just that you see so many console gamers in performance of face-off threads complaining about the choices that the developers made and saying stuff like "why didn't they drop the resolution to 900p" or "why didn't they disable some effects to keep the framerate up". It's obvious to me that many gamers want more control over their experience but for various reasons they are hesitant to get into PC gaming. Some times those reasons are perfectly legitimate, other times they are based on assumptions and preconceived notions. It's a weird situation.
I definitey plan on trying those out. I'll wait till I get everything upgraded to wireless ac first, starting with that fancy google router.
It was meant to what Gödel said: differences in console versions get overblown, differences to PC version will get discussed to death because people fail to see it.
Another prominent example was the MGSV-thread with comparison shots between PS4 and PC.
The post was not about whether there was a grassgate or not.
Sanctuary
Member
Visuals vary by game. Usually it's still going to look better on PC due to being able to play at higher resolutions and all of the other post-processing that may or may not be available, but the most noticeable difference is almost always performance. Unless the PC gets a horribly unoptimized port (*cough* Arkham Knight), the consoles don't come remotely close in terms of performance, especially in loading and framerates.
Performance has the largest impact as long as the console versions at least look comparably good. Most people would be satisfied, or not even realize what they are missing by playing a good looking console game, especially if the overall aesthetic looks nice and it's consistent. You can't simply not notice performance issues though.
This is comparative to 30fps being an artistic choice for a cinematic feel.
Performance has the largest impact as long as the console versions at least look comparably good. Most people would be satisfied, or not even realize what they are missing by playing a good looking console game, especially if the overall aesthetic looks nice and it's consistent. You can't simply not notice performance issues though.
This is comparative to 30fps being an artistic choice for a cinematic feel.
Something like this I guess.
PC >>>>>> PS4 >>> Xbox One >>>>>>>>>>> Wii U
But it really depends on what sort of PC rig you have, and what sort of set up you're working with. The bigger the TV or monitor, and closer your viewing distances, the more you're going to notice discrepancies.
If you're not interested in any of the exclusives for the PS4/XBO, I suppose you could omit them and play all your multiplatform games on the PC, but consoles are more about having a platform that's more accessible, with a whole load of additional exclusive games.
PC >>>>>> PS4 >>> Xbox One >>>>>>>>>>> Wii U
But it really depends on what sort of PC rig you have, and what sort of set up you're working with. The bigger the TV or monitor, and closer your viewing distances, the more you're going to notice discrepancies.
If you're not interested in any of the exclusives for the PS4/XBO, I suppose you could omit them and play all your multiplatform games on the PC, but consoles are more about having a platform that's more accessible, with a whole load of additional exclusive games.
Graphics.
taken in a vacuum, the consoles have done excellently according to their HW.
They aren't high end units compared to what you can buy for a PC, and that has been true since the day they released. Its been almost 2 years, so the gap is bound to grow even more.
But they still play mostly the same games(and certain exclusives), with the same assets, so i'd say consoles are more the ball and chain and that makes it harder to actually quantify bigger differences outside of res, framerate and draw distance.
I can't imagine a game like Mad Max for example, which already looks great on every platform, fully built to take advantage of an i7 and a 980. Its just shocking to think about what will be possible years down the line.
But i'm fine for now with what my PS4 is putting out. I'm really just happy that Japanese devs are migrating to PS4 from last gen to begin with instead of going to mobile. That rise in fidelity, even from cross gen titles is really welcome IMO. Persona 5 is gonna look jaw dropping at 1080p
taken in a vacuum, the consoles have done excellently according to their HW.
They aren't high end units compared to what you can buy for a PC, and that has been true since the day they released. Its been almost 2 years, so the gap is bound to grow even more.
But they still play mostly the same games(and certain exclusives), with the same assets, so i'd say consoles are more the ball and chain and that makes it harder to actually quantify bigger differences outside of res, framerate and draw distance.
I can't imagine a game like Mad Max for example, which already looks great on every platform, fully built to take advantage of an i7 and a 980. Its just shocking to think about what will be possible years down the line.
But i'm fine for now with what my PS4 is putting out. I'm really just happy that Japanese devs are migrating to PS4 from last gen to begin with instead of going to mobile. That rise in fidelity, even from cross gen titles is really welcome IMO. Persona 5 is gonna look jaw dropping at 1080p
I compared Witcher 3 on my i7 r9 290 to the PS4 version and found that while the difference was clear and the PC version superior, it wasn't a transformative difference. Honestly, not as much difference as I was expecting. It's still the same game. The main improvement was framerate. The raw fidelity isn't hugely different. Different, yes, but it's not major.
PC vs PS4 There's a pretty big gulf in terms of raw tech specs, but consoles get an inherent boost for their specs since it's easier to maximize the potential of a game on hardware that's completely uniform. Also, to some degree, PC games retain tethered to consoles because most developers feel the need to design games that will work well on them.
For these reasons, while there's definitely a significant difference (varies depending on the game) you're still getting a solid, good experience on the PS4 for the most part.
PC vs PS4 There's a pretty big gulf in terms of raw tech specs, but consoles get an inherent boost for their specs since it's easier to maximize the potential of a game on hardware that's completely uniform. Also, to some degree, PC games retain tethered to consoles because most developers feel the need to design games that will work well on them.
For these reasons, while there's definitely a significant difference (varies depending on the game) you're still getting a solid, good experience on the PS4 for the most part.
You can take advantage of a huge compliment of hardware on any modern game. Resolutions, framerate improvement and post processing isn't free.
Edit: and many Japanese devs are already (or will, unsurprisingly) in support of digital PC storefronts which is doing well for them on that particular growing market.
iamaustrian
Member
Quick PC gaming question:
Last time I seriously played games on PC was around the 486/Pentium era(s).
I remember it being a total pain in the ass. You had to tinker around with tons of settings and even hardware to get games running decently the way YOU wanted.
How is it now?
i.e.: If I decide to buy an off-the-shelf 800 "gaming" PC today, is it less hassle to set it up properly?
Like: turn it on -> insert disk -> game
ps: this isn't a joke question btw. I'm not exactly up to date with PC stuff (typing this on a 10 year old winXP PC...which is also still my main working PC)
Last time I seriously played games on PC was around the 486/Pentium era(s).
I remember it being a total pain in the ass. You had to tinker around with tons of settings and even hardware to get games running decently the way YOU wanted.
How is it now?
i.e.: If I decide to buy an off-the-shelf 800 "gaming" PC today, is it less hassle to set it up properly?
Like: turn it on -> insert disk -> game
ps: this isn't a joke question btw. I'm not exactly up to date with PC stuff (typing this on a 10 year old winXP PC...which is also still my main working PC)
Stuff like Geforce Experience (nVidia) and Steam downloading AMD drivers for you has gone a long way. Auto driver detection settings and prerelease benchmarks and writeups (Hey GTX xxx owners, use these settings) also are nice.
It's not perfect, but if you can google a problem you might run into and work it out and that's okay with you it's a pretty good time to jump in.
alexandros
Banned
You'd think people would have realized that by now. It usually takes all of the PS4's extra graphical horsepower over the XB1 to render the same game at the same level of quality in 1080p instead of 900p. Don't these games take advantage of the hardware?
Ideally, games should be scalable enough to provide good performance for low end PCs and consoles while still offering lots of special eye candy for owners of high end rigs. For various business reasons this isn't always the case but that doesn't mean that you can't take advantage of the available power through high framerates, downsampling, mods and various image quality enhancement methods.
Ah, it's always nice to listen to the classics every now and then. Also, a visit to the Witcher 3 face-off thread will show you that a lot of people really don't feel like they're getting a solid, good experience on PS4.
Atraveller
Banned
I would recommend you to build your own PC, because it's more cost efficient. However if you really want to buy a prebuilt PC, better consult GAF before you make the purchase.
Steam is the go-to platform on PC, just download your games and click launch game then you're golden(easier than consoles, has better server download speed). Don't forget to utilize summer/winter sales and all sorts of bundles to get cheap games.
Like the above said, GeForce Experience will do the tweaking for you, and there's always PCGamingWiki if you need to solve problems.
steam streaming is absolutelyamazing. I stream rocket league occasionally and play with zero issues.
if you can hardwire your network and pick up a steam link/nvidia shield something of the like it's easy to set up PC couch gaming
An open platform like the PC will likely never be as simple as a console, there is more room for things to go wrong but it's 100x easier than it was in those days. You don't need to worry incompatible hardware, you only really need to worry about your GPU drivers which are really easy to get regardless of AMD or NVIDIA, you download and install them once a month (NVIDIA), it takes about 10 minutes, it'll prompt you and do most of it for you.
I think I can only count about 5 instances in the past... 5-7 years where I had trouble with playing a game on PC, personally, I'll accept that for the advantages I get from the platform. It's not for everyone, you probably need to be a little more computer savvy than average, but in my experience most things go smoothly.
I'm a PC gamer. I have a pretty high-end PC that I bought roughly at the same time the current gen consoles released (except for the GPU which I upgraded still not that long after). I went through the last gen with a similarly high-end PC that was built a year or two after the last-gen consoles came out. My experience back then was that I could match console settings or get close to it. When people claimed with the release of current-gen consoles that PCs were already vastly superior I was skeptical and I was expecting that shortly after release the most I could expect would be to again match the console experience. Turns out that people were right this time and I've been consistently able to increase resolution and detail settings on all games well beyond what consoles manage to output while keeping a steady 60FPS. I'm quite happy about it. Of course, I did pay for my PC A LOT more than I would've paid for a PS4. But soon enough that won't even be the case for those building new PCs. Along with the increased number of PC ports that we are getting, Steam prices, Steam itself making downloading, installing and updating games extremely simple; home streaming, PCs and laptops becoming smaller and more eficient... slowly but surely the PC really is becoming the ultimate gaming platform.
It depends on the game and PC. 99% of the time the PC version would be the superior version but I had realised that in this gen, more and more console games are closing the gap to their PC counterparts.
MGS V is a great example, I bought both the Steam and PS4 versions and honestly speaking I can hardly see the difference unless I really take a close look at the PC version (on max setting). Kinda makes me think that spending money on the PC version is a waste.
But most of the time the PC version will be better as there are mods and graphics capability wise it would definitely be better somewhat. The catch is you would need to have a good PC or constantly upgrading your PC every 2~3 years for getting the max settings for most games.
MGS V is a great example, I bought both the Steam and PS4 versions and honestly speaking I can hardly see the difference unless I really take a close look at the PC version (on max setting). Kinda makes me think that spending money on the PC version is a waste.
But most of the time the PC version will be better as there are mods and graphics capability wise it would definitely be better somewhat. The catch is you would need to have a good PC or constantly upgrading your PC every 2~3 years for getting the max settings for most games.
Atraveller
Banned
Please check out Digital Foundry's article about MGSV, the difference is great.
PedroPanache
Member
I'm surprised with how much mileage I'm getting out of my current set-up. This November it will be three years old. It's a i3570k with 2 670s and it runs well optimised games at near max settings for the most part. GTAV looks noticeably better than the PS4 version, after mods and tweaks, and still maintains 60fps. Phantom Pain looks more or less the same. It struggles a little bit in intense fire fights, but other than that, it plays the game at max settings bar the shadows setting. I'm approaching that 3 year window, and at the moment, I don't feel the urge to upgrade yet. My set-up is matching the best the PS4 and XB1 has to offer. I expect it to be surpassed after the next round of big games.
The only reason I went for Phantom Pain on PC rather than PS4 was the fact that I found the end game grind mechanics really shady. Using a trainer takes the sting out of some of the more ridiculous grinding in that game.
MindGamingMantis
Banned
Visuals? Not much. Performance? Twice the difference.
Difference increases with wallet size, favoring PC to substantial degree obvioualy. On investment, consoles are still the most cost efficient. I have a PC and PS4 and they've both felt redundant at one point or another. If something like the PC screenshot threads (raw power) or Steam sale threads (big purchase incentive) don't immediately convince you, just invest in a console.
Daffy Duck
Member
Jawbreaker
Member
Are the same individuals overstating the smaller differences between both consoles the ones downplaying the differences on mid-range + PCs in comparison? If so, that's clearly down to some form of brand loyalty. They're going to see what they wanna see. Is their argument that the differences are small in comparison to the gulf in hardware between a PS4 and capable PC? That the differences between an XBO and PS4, given their prices, are more significant due to the prices being similar? Is it an argument based in value, perceived or otherwise, or is it something else? Are they ignoring frame rate since it's not readily apparent in screens? I'm trying to understand this a little better. It'd be great if one of these people who meet the criteria would chime in.
The problem with PC is that you can fix problems.
If you buy a console game, and it runs at 900p30fps with half the effects off it's fine.
If you buy a PC game and it runs at 900p30fps with half the effects off you start tweaking it to try and get to native resolution/native refresh and with as many effects as possible.
If you buy a console game, and it runs at 900p30fps with half the effects off it's fine.
If you buy a PC game and it runs at 900p30fps with half the effects off you start tweaking it to try and get to native resolution/native refresh and with as many effects as possible.
Auto-Reply
Member
Yep, it's similar to GTAV, one of the games that show more differences than "just" resolution and framerate.
I was also a PC gamer back in the days and it is now lightyears away from where it was. We have true solid plug and play for the most part these days. ..although of course you can quickly end up with a lot of optional tinkering via mods (which are also on its way to be automated these days..) and other stuff like f.ex. emulation.
It also of course depends on how nitpicky you are.. If you feel you need exactly this or that type of antialiasing effect in a game f.ex. then you perhaps need to do some tinkering in the driver settings.
I have my PC on 247 so literally the only thing I do when I want to play a game is to click on its icon (usually in Steam..).
With that said, to ensure smooth sailing I would highly recommend a signature PC without annoying bloatware.. I`m not kidding, build your own from quality parts if you have to.. However. this shouldn`t normally make a difference when actually playing a game.
I think it's closer to 3 1/2 nanometers.
biglittleps
Member
Difference is Consoles have AAA exclusives that PC wont get and Visuals/Performance from Consoles are very good for the price we pay and PnP. Also in PC mostly you cant get retail discs like Consoles which you can sell them after playing or you can rent it. Choose PC or Consoles based on games and experience you want.
PHOENIXZERO
Member
The upfront costs are higher but in the long run you can save so much money on the PC side that it can even out or the PC can be cheaper.