• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Will consoles past PC games graphics?

mckmas8808

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
I say this because it seems to me that the consoles are closer to the PC than it ever has been. And given its multi-threaded architeture maybe that could give the consoles an edge that the PC will take a while to get to.



I understand that the GPU within themselves will be surpassed in the consoles but the overall potential that the X360 and PS3 have in them is amazing. And it seems to me that alot of PC devs could come to the console market and make some real money and do some real great things if they wanted too. I know one key genre that the PC owned was the FPS, but now it seems that may be taken away from them.



I can only imagine what Halo 3 will look and play like and conbine that with COD2, GR:AW which both are supposed to look better on the X360 and also add the unnamed game that could look like it's video and I think the consoles could own the PC world. And I haven't even went into how the PC world domonated the online sense.



But due to MS that is will not hold true anymore. Sony is looking to do next-gen what MS did this generation as far as online gaming is concerned and to me that pretty good and MS is expanding what they have already did. And now MMO games are coming out for next-gen systems that's only another stab in the heart to the PC gaming area.



I guess the only thing that the PC world will clearly have over the consoles is the mod scene. But I believe that I heard that MS is looking towards that too (if I'm not mistaken so) so I don't even know about that either.



What do you guys think?
 
Every generation consoles will start out looking a bit better then most PC titles, 6 months later that changes. A static platform will never exceed a constantly improving one, its stupid to think that is the case.
 
I know that overall, console devs are much better than pc devs(imo).

When you think about how, how many pc games have somewhat decent animations in them compared to console games? How many pc games ignores heavy clipping? Most pc games scream low-budget. If you're not a breakthrough (godly)company like Blizzard or Valve, the easiest money lies within the console crowds.
 
Schafer said:
Every generation consoles will start out looking a bit better then most PC titles, 6 months later that changes. A static platform will never exceed a constantly improving one, its stupid to think that is the case.
Click to expand...

Yeah, static vs. change really defines it.
 
every generation i swear


must we discuss this for each generation of console hardware?
 
First - learn to type.

Second - it's the same damn thing every generation. 2007 PCs will have 4GB of RAM, graphic cards that are 4 times faster than the RSX (or Xenos, take your pick) and lots of CPU power. Of course they will still cost 8-10 times more than a PS3.
 
Neither next generation console will be advanced enough to beat the graphics of a high-end PC loaded with dual video cards. The X360's graphics should be competitive to a single configuration of the latest PC card when it launches, but a more powerful single configuration GPU than the PS3's RSX will supposedly be out by the time Sony releases.

Only one console has ever been so advanced for graphics at release that even the highest end PC configurations running dual cards couldn't touch it: the SEGA Dreamcast. The PVR2DC was the consumer graphics industry's largest jump in capabilities ever.
 
Lazy8s said:
Neither next generation console will be advanced enough to beat the graphics of a high-end PC loaded with dual video cards. The X360's graphics should be competitive to a single configuration of the latest PC card when it launches, but a more powerful single configuration GPU than the PS3's RSX will supposedly be out by the time Sony releases.

Only one console has ever been so advanced for graphics at release that even the highest end PC configurations running dual cards couldn't touch it: the SEGA Dreamcast. The PVR2DC was the consumer graphics industry's largest jump in capabilities ever.
Click to expand...

:lol :lol :lol :lol

keep fighting the good fight lazy.
 
Borys said:
Second - it's the same damn thing every generation. 2007 PCs will have 4GB of RAM, graphic cards that are 4 times faster than the RSX (or Xenos, take your pick) and lots of CPU power. Of course they will still cost 8-10 times more than a PS3.
Click to expand...


Plus the physics cards might take off.
 
All new PC games will require a new video card, just like before. And yeah, those PC games will have better lighting or whatever than console games, so they will look better. They also won't run on your computer, for some reason you'll never be able to figure out.
 
By about 2008, PC graphics and even physics and such could start to look better (on a technical level, anyway), thanks to the newest video cards and other add-ons. Of course, it could start to look that way earlier or later depending...I'm just guessing based on past graphic card and PC CPU evolution.
 
And the obvious problem with past 360 and PS3 PC gaming is will devs really care?

Will they take advantage of the superior PC platform when only 25%, maybe 30% of gamers has it and of those only 5% has the latest hot-$2000-shit?

Nah, most of them didn't bother when Xbox launched why should they when Xbox 2 does?
 
PC will lag behind because, when devs work on an PS3 or Xbox360 game, they have a fast system, you know exactly what you're working on. When you develop for PCs, not all PCs are superfast, so developers would want to not make it so hawt graphics that it won't run on slightly older PCs... But if you look at already existing tech demo's like 3DMark or whatever, that only properly run on fast computers, you can see that the graphics are already next-gen on PCs.
 
As gpu/cpu power increases cost to generate appropriately more complex content increases as well, with the pc market shrinking, and the console market booming. Their budgets and low sales will keep almost every pc title from fully utilizing the h/w. At most they'll get AA/high-rez console ports :lol . Together with the fact consoles have in the past kept up grphx'cally for at least the first few years of the console cycle, the advent of ever increasing content and shrinking market will finally hit them, it seems.
 
PC CPU archetectures simply do not have the FLOP crunching power of even the X360. An athlon 64 pushes 1~2 GFLOP... so you're going to have to buy a physics card or something(once they come out) to compensate, and by "buy" I mean spend even more money than you were initially spending getting that SLI rig together.

Sure, in the end the "moving platform" will once again be performance king if it's that important to your ego, but why spend thousands(and I do mean thousands) of dolllars just to play a handful of games that won't even push your frankenstein's monster of a system.
 
I'm pretty sure the gap won't be as big as it was with previous generations. Devs not utilizing high-end systems will be one factor.

Next generation will be more capable to keep up with new tech like dx10+. Sure it will have some new fancy features but it will be possible to create similar results only in a lesser efficient way.

PC games won't have the advantage of better image quality either.
 
christ here we go again, PC's will have better tech consoles wont be "more powerful" for even a year, but the COST of that system wont be at a mainstream level for like 2 years...unless people all of a sudden tell ati and nvidia we arent paying 600 bucks for the hottest new card.

Even with superior hardware the PC will still suffer the software disadvantage because consoles can be programmed for specifically, where pc's have to use a high level approach.

Next year should be a very exciting year for PC gaming amd's K10 should make its debut hopefully with an integrated southbridge, Intel will finally be back with a new architecture, Serial ATA 2, DirectX10, Direct Physics *suck it down Aegia*, faster HT speeds, addin cache cards for your hdd's, etc etc. Not to mention quad cores will debut*probably only for servers though* and more developers will take advantage of amd64 extentions.

All that said the PS3 is getting MSG4...yeah so make your choice. All that other BS the OP said about pc devs making some money in the console space...HA costs money to even develop in the console space. Where as how much did blizzard pay in fees to make WoW? Oh thats right jack shit and last time i checked, if they find a 50 in that headquaters they use it as toilet paper.
 
Lazy8s said:
Neither next generation console will be advanced enough to beat the graphics of a high-end PC loaded with dual video cards. The X360's graphics should be competitive to a single configuration of the latest PC card when it launches, but a more powerful single configuration GPU than the PS3's RSX will supposedly be out by the time Sony releases.

Only one console has ever been so advanced for graphics at release that even the highest end PC configurations running dual cards couldn't touch it: the SEGA Dreamcast. The PVR2DC was the consumer graphics industry's largest jump in capabilities ever.
Click to expand...

Do you take yourself seriously?
 
Existing PC games (on good PC's of course) will start looking better in 2007. We'll have a new graphics generation there that will definitely have more power than RSX, Xenox or whatever. 2GB RAM in new computers will probably be more or less standard and atleast dual core cpu's will be standard.
 
Every generation consoles will start out looking a bit better then most PC titles, 6 months later that changes.
Click to expand...
I think it is generally a bit more than 6 months, at least in certain aspects.

The DC did exceed PCs at the time and so did PS2. Not in EVERY area, but certainly in some major instances. PS2 was throwing around some pretty high-poly models and loads of effects far before the PC. It wasn't until UT2003 that we saw some console beating, high poly backgrounds (most PC games until then were just incredibly simple in construction and relied on textures and image quality). It took even longer to find PC games with similar looking post processing filters.

XBOX was putting shaders to heavy use a good year or so ahead of the PC. Halo featured gobs of perpixel lighting, and there was nothing comparable on the PC in that regard at the time.

I'd say, for this gen, the game that represented the major leap beyond current consoles was Far Cry (though the XBOX game looks shockingly close to it in a number of ways). That's an important thing to note. Unlike last gen, current console games can still hold up against the best PC titles. MGS3 and Metroid Prime 2 were released on the same day as Half-Life 2...and they were just as lovely IMO. Not as technically impressive, but they did do some thing better than Valve's game (and they were certainly more polished).

Last gen games could not compare to the PC by the end of their lives due to some serious rendering flaws.
 
"Unlike last gen, current console games can still hold up against the best PC titles."

With games of the same scope, not really. And even then Battlefield 2 is far and away above anything on a current console. Games like MGS3 and Metroid Prime 2 don't look as good (technically) *and* have environments as massive.

Art direction is what saves a lot of those games from looking completely outclassed.
 
i wouldve prefered these new consoles a year later but with SM4.0 capabilities.
as soon as WFG2.0/dx10 or whatever releases "next gen" consoles will basically be outdated.
that said, im not sure about Xenos. Dave bauman suggested that it might have beyondSM3.0 capabilities
 
With every console gen, it seems like it takes longer and longer for the PC to catch up...

More and more money from console developers been pumped into the stuff... I think it'll be the longest while before the PC catches up to the PS3 in overall visual quality. Especially in the physics based animation department.
 
Amadeus said:
WTF?! this thing is generated in realtime?!?! O_O on actual PCs???? why is it that all the nextgen-games that were shown so far don't even come close to this?
Click to expand...
I think it's because of beta devkits.
 
Amadeus said:
WTF?! this thing is generated in realtime?!?! O_O on actual PCs???? why is it that all the nextgen-games that were shown so far don't even come close to this?
Click to expand...


well thats not a game i dont think that is interactive you just sorta watch it...i could be wrong tho
 
DonasaurusRex said:
well thats not a game i dont think that is interactive you just sorta watch it...i could be wrong tho
Click to expand...
Yeah, also, it's easier to make something like that without actual environments beyond that of what you're seeing that need to be loaded in the memory. Or something. But I'm not an expert.
 
DonasaurusRex said:
well thats not a game i dont think that is interactive you just sorta watch it...i could be wrong tho
Click to expand...

i've never tried out one of these 3d-marks but AFAIK all the images are generated in realtime.

anyway, this looks like taken directly from a pixar-movie. lets me hope that kameo 2 or something else will look like that. :) should be no problem since 3dmark 05 is based on older tech than xbox360 or ps3.
 
Lazy8s said:
Neither next generation console will be advanced enough to beat the graphics of a high-end PC loaded with dual video cards. The X360's graphics should be competitive to a single configuration of the latest PC card when it launches, but a more powerful single configuration GPU than the PS3's RSX will supposedly be out by the time Sony releases.

Only one console has ever been so advanced for graphics at release that even the highest end PC configurations running dual cards couldn't touch it: the SEGA Dreamcast. The PVR2DC was the consumer graphics industry's largest jump in capabilities ever.
Click to expand...

Of for god's sake you have become a fucking joke. Get the hell back to teamxbox and stop trolling every thread, especially the ones that have nothing to do with the PS3/360 debate.

Anyway I assume that at least the first 2-3 years consoles will prevail. Why? It has to do more with that I can't imagine how far can they go in the graphics, especially PC devs who are aren't so famous for their attention to detail. I mean how much time and money do developers spend now to create a next-gen model? More complex models and backrounds means more money. And since PC gaming isn't so popular anymore I expect very few games to look better than the consoles, especially the first years.
 
@fortified
And since PC gaming isn't popular in the USA and Japan[and has never really been] I expect very few games to look better than the consoles, especially the first years.
Click to expand...

Fixed.

There are quite a few countries(for example Germany and most likely the whole Scandinavia) where PC is by far the number one plattform.
 
Frankfurter said:
@fortified

Fixed.

There are quite a few countries(for example Germany and most likely the whole Scandinavia) where PC is by far the number one plattform.
Click to expand...

Yes but worldwide it's not so popular and that's what matters to the companies. Also iirc sales keep getting worse (with the exception of a couple of games that were released this year and helped somehow).
 
Here is the way it works with PCs and consoles my friend:

At New Console Generation Launch:

Consoles Beat PC

Midway Through Consoles Life:

About Equal

End Of Consoels Life:

PC Pulls Ahead


Pretty Much A Hard Fast Rule There With Only A Few Excpetions
 
hah yeah right, even with the longer 8 month cycles for vid cards it aint that long, PS3 may be trumped at release depending on when Nvidia and ATI plan releasing new parts next spring dont get it twisted. By the time next gen consoles are common place, PC's will already have more advanced hardware availabe as far as gpu's are concerned, Nvidias ceo would be pissed if their follow up to the RSX/G70 wasnt superior come on these guys are egineers with pride.

And who says pc gaming isnt popular? Im sorry is there some console game that had more online players than TFC, CS, WoW, EQ, Battle.net? No there isnt, the shift has been to online multi player in the pc market hence why games with fun online play have dominated the scene. People dont necessarily have to buy a game they could just play at an internet cafe, some games only need one cd for 2 players things like that.

CS at one point had more servers running than any other app in the WORLD , it was the nets largest imprint, WoW has 4 MILLION fucking users, Lineage over 2 million, the sims millions sold, diablo..who the fuck knows, bnet STILL thrives thanks to custom maps and ladder tournaments, 2 million SLI motherboards sold THIS year, 6 MILLION Geforce series cards sold this year yeah ok its "not popular".
 
DonasaurusRex said:
hah yeah right, even with the longer 8 month cycles for vid cards it aint that long, PS3 may be trumped at release depending on when Nvidia and ATI plan releasing new parts next spring dont get it twisted. By the time next gen consoles are common place, PC's will already have more advanced hardware availabe as far as gpu's are concerned, Nvidias ceo would be pissed if their follow up to the RSX/G70 wasnt superior come on these guys are egineers with pride.
Click to expand...
You talk as if GPUs are the only things to be compared, and even then CPU-GPU bandwidth is far less on a PC.

It's not as if PCs won't become powerful in their own way, but we're rapidly reaching the point where differences in specialization show themselves. If the "Gaming PC" is going to continue catching up to what heavily specialized consoles do, you're going to need changes in base cpu/motherboard design that may not be optimal for typical workstation/server use.

...and then there's the whole termal issue...
 
Lazy8s said:
Neither next generation console will be advanced enough to beat the graphics of a high-end PC loaded with dual video cards. The X360's graphics should be competitive to a single configuration of the latest PC card when it launches, but a more powerful single configuration GPU than the PS3's RSX will supposedly be out by the time Sony releases.

Only one console has ever been so advanced for graphics at release that even the highest end PC configurations running dual cards couldn't touch it: the SEGA Dreamcast. The PVR2DC was the consumer graphics industry's largest jump in capabilities ever.
Click to expand...

What the hell is wrong with you? Seek professional help.
 
Pimpbaa said:
What the hell is wrong with you? Seek professional help.
Click to expand...
He's right about one thing, high-end PCs will always be ahead of cosoles. Always.

But in terms of graphics in games... well... developers don't like to develop just for the high-end PCs, but for mainstream as well... that's what's holding back the graphics on PCs.
 
Ruzbeh said:
He's right about one thing, high-end PCs will always be ahead of cosoles. Always.
Click to expand...

That's not true at all. Anyone thinking a high end PC trounces the new consoles coming out is kidding themselves.
 
Dr_Cogent said:
That's not true at all. Anyone thinking a high end PC trounces the new consoles coming out is kidding themselves.
Click to expand...

agreed

i have a 4800+ cpu, 2gb of ddr, and 2 7800gtx running in SLI, and nothing i can run looks like gears of war

if so point it out to me,,

and doom 3 in ultra mode doenst come close so dont say it
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

PC games should have a 'console graphics' preset
Opinion  2
78
2K
Guilty_AI replied
Will consoles eventually become a thing of the past?
2 3 4 5
205
3K
ArtHands replied
How come the UFC games are imprisoned on consoles instead of living free on PC?
12
537
Hawk The Slayer replied
What modern game is worth to play on a high-end PC, with max graphical settings - if you would compare it to the current gen consoles?
2
96
1K
DanielG165 replied
  • Poll
What’s Cooler: Consoles or PC?
2
96
1K
hououinkyouma00 replied
Top Bottom