What will the graphics gap be like

#71overkillwfo1978Posted 3/17/2013 2:16:14 AM(edited)
andrea987 posted...
Lefty128k posted...
Stop being naive, Fanboys.

The PS4 has already destroyed the Wii U, with just what they demoed at the conference.


So you believe demos and footage taken from pc are true reflection of how games will run on ps4. I'm a Sony fan, but I ain't as naive as that.
The pic of diminishing return is just an example, of course. We're already past the last stage, that only shows that the difference will be there, it'll be noticeable for some, but not as huge as it was between last 2 gens. That's logic, but I know when you're so into trolling can be difficult to understand.


Wow. You are very, very misinformed.

1) Killzone is being made on PS4 dev units. It is not and will not ever be on PC. It is very likely that the next Killzone will look just that good and most likely even better, as the early PS4 dev units are gimped RAM wise and probably in other areas also. Console-only people are not used to top of the line graphics and think that the newest 360/PS3 game is the best thing ever. If I showed you Crysis 3 running @ max settings on my living room PC setup, you would probably crap your pants. I know I did when I went from console to PC, the only difference here is that the PS4/720 will come close to a good PC spec-wise for at least a year or so, then PC will shoot ahead again as it always does.

2) That pic of diminishing returns is ridiculous. You can't prove graphics of VIDEO games are falling victim to diminishing returns with a tiny PIC.
---
But the PS4 has GDDR5 RAM. That's 2 more than DDR3! I bet PCs will take at least 5 years to catch up to this beast.
- SUPER3METROIDX
#72andrea987Posted 3/17/2013 3:04:57 AM(edited)
@Lefty
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/df-hardware-spec-analysis-playstation-4

"The problem Sony faced was that final PS4 development hardware is still relatively new and third parties in particular probably would not have had time to move their existing projects onto the system. So games on display at the PlayStation Meeting - like Watch Dogs, above - were running on PC instead."

@Overkill
what's ridiculous is that a 40 yrs old like me is wasting time arguing with obvious trolls on the internet. If you can't comprehend the logical concept behind a pic, and insist in saying 'a pic can't prove anything' that's not my fault.

That's enough of logging in and off to see and respond, good day to you all. Still love you all, of course.
---
Now playing: Dragon's Dogma, Batman AC, Fifa 13, Sonic Racing.
Just finished: Trine 2 DC.
#73overkillwfo1978Posted 3/17/2013 3:07:26 AM
andrea987 posted...
@Lefty
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/df-hardware-spec-analysis-playstation-4

@Overkill
what's ridiculous is that a 40 yrs old like me is wasting time arguing with obvious trolls on the internet. If you can't comprehend the logical concept behind a pic, and insist in saying 'a pic can't prove anything' that's not my fault.

That's enough of logging in and off to see and respond, good day to you all. Still love you all, of course.


Well, I'm 35, but I'm getting paid to argue and I love it :)

I comprehend what the concept behind your pic is and I've already debunked it as false information. That pic doesn't take into consideration any other graphical effects, screen size, resolution or anything else related to graphical quality. Only "triangles" which are only a part of a much, much bigger equation.

Trust me, your pic and it's meaning, while I understand what it's trying to get at, is leaving out very pertinent information and presents a very false statement.

Not everyone who disagrees with you is a troll.

Have a good day.
---
But the PS4 has GDDR5 RAM. That's 2 more than DDR3! I bet PCs will take at least 5 years to catch up to this beast.
- SUPER3METROIDX
#74CyborgSage00x0Posted 3/17/2013 3:30:48 AM
overkillwfo1978 posted...
CyborgSage00x0 posted...

People don't realize that plenty of PS3/360 games could run on the Wii without breaking a sweat. It's how you use power and allocate resources in a game that matters, not raw numbers. Did anyone here have a problem with how Mario Galaxy looked? or MP3, which easily looked as good as any PS3/360 game? (minus the HD). No, no one did. The argument over power is silly because almost no one knows how that actually works when it coems to computing and games, so people naturally assume there will be some collasal difference in WiiU and PS3 graphics. There won't be-in fact, it'll probably be less so than ever before.


Yeah. This is all completely false for the most part.

1) No PS3/360 game could run on the Wii. At all, whatsoever.... at least the 99% of games that were 720p or higher. The Wii was not capable of 720p/1080p resolution and because of that fact the games looked horrible and muddy on it when played on an HDTV. The Wii hardware was literally too weak to run HD games with the detail that the 360/PS3 had because of the raw power difference between the hardware. To deny this is just plain stupidity.

2) "Raw numbers" matter a LOT when talking about the capabilities of the components that make up a system in the long term. Look at the PS3/360 games in 2006 compared to now... WORLDS of difference, because the hardware had lots of room to grow. Now look at Wii games from 2006 til now. A tiny bit more detailed, but still, with horrible, muddy, sub-HD graphics. Anyone who says this doesn't matter is fooling themselves.

3) I will book mark this page and quote it back to you when the PS4 releases. To say that there will be no graphical difference and that "we have reached the limit where these differenced even become noticable" is the height of ignorance.

Example? I am currently playing Sleeping Dogs on my PC, on max settings, 1080p native/60fps. The graphical difference is so remarkable, it is not funny. It looks a generation better than the console versions (I have played the 360 version)

People that keep harping that we have reached the peak of graphics and that graphical upgrades will no longer be noticable are either a) trying to save face of their underpowered platform of choice or b) completely ignorant to how technology advances and the history of video games themselves.

btw.... this opinion comes from someone who has been gaming for 29 years and also a Wii U owner. I remember back in 1989-1990 when people were saying that the NEO-GEO was the pinnacle of graphics and that they would never look better. How foolish does that sound now? Well, your opinion sounds just as bad. Do some research before throwing completely false information out.


You seem to have a poor (misguided) view of how reasource allocation, power, and graphics actually work. predictable, but incorrect nonetheless.
---
Currently playing: Borderlands 2, LoL, Super Mario 3DS, Kid Icarus: Uprising, Pokemon White 2, NSMB3DS.
#75Lefty128kPosted 3/17/2013 3:51:17 AM
andrea987 posted...
@Lefty
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/df-hardware-spec-analysis-playstation-4

"The problem Sony faced was that final PS4 development hardware is still relatively new and third parties in particular probably would not have had time to move their existing projects onto the system. So games on display at the PlayStation Meeting - like Watch Dogs, above - were running on PC instead."

@Overkill
what's ridiculous is that a 40 yrs old like me is wasting time arguing with obvious trolls on the internet. If you can't comprehend the logical concept behind a pic, and insist in saying 'a pic can't prove anything' that's not my fault.

That's enough of logging in and off to see and respond, good day to you all. Still love you all, of course.


I'd say it's a "true reflection", as you put in, of how the P4 games will perform. As the article you posted states the PC they used had same specs as a PS4. And it will probably run even better on launch due to optimization between now and then.
#76overkillwfo1978Posted 3/17/2013 3:52:02 AM
CyborgSage00x0 posted...
overkillwfo1978 posted...
CyborgSage00x0 posted...

People don't realize that plenty of PS3/360 games could run on the Wii without breaking a sweat. It's how you use power and allocate resources in a game that matters, not raw numbers. Did anyone here have a problem with how Mario Galaxy looked? or MP3, which easily looked as good as any PS3/360 game? (minus the HD). No, no one did. The argument over power is silly because almost no one knows how that actually works when it coems to computing and games, so people naturally assume there will be some collasal difference in WiiU and PS3 graphics. There won't be-in fact, it'll probably be less so than ever before.


Yeah. This is all completely false for the most part.

1) No PS3/360 game could run on the Wii. At all, whatsoever.... at least the 99% of games that were 720p or higher. The Wii was not capable of 720p/1080p resolution and because of that fact the games looked horrible and muddy on it when played on an HDTV. The Wii hardware was literally too weak to run HD games with the detail that the 360/PS3 had because of the raw power difference between the hardware. To deny this is just plain stupidity.

2) "Raw numbers" matter a LOT when talking about the capabilities of the components that make up a system in the long term. Look at the PS3/360 games in 2006 compared to now... WORLDS of difference, because the hardware had lots of room to grow. Now look at Wii games from 2006 til now. A tiny bit more detailed, but still, with horrible, muddy, sub-HD graphics. Anyone who says this doesn't matter is fooling themselves.

3) I will book mark this page and quote it back to you when the PS4 releases. To say that there will be no graphical difference and that "we have reached the limit where these differenced even become noticable" is the height of ignorance.

Example? I am currently playing Sleeping Dogs on my PC, on max settings, 1080p native/60fps. The graphical difference is so remarkable, it is not funny. It looks a generation better than the console versions (I have played the 360 version)

People that keep harping that we have reached the peak of graphics and that graphical upgrades will no longer be noticable are either a) trying to save face of their underpowered platform of choice or b) completely ignorant to how technology advances and the history of video games themselves.

btw.... this opinion comes from someone who has been gaming for 29 years and also a Wii U owner. I remember back in 1989-1990 when people were saying that the NEO-GEO was the pinnacle of graphics and that they would never look better. How foolish does that sound now? Well, your opinion sounds just as bad. Do some research before throwing completely false information out.


You seem to have a poor (misguided) view of how reasource allocation, power, and graphics actually work. predictable, but incorrect nonetheless.


lol. No. You are incorrect.

See, I can do what you did also. The difference is that in my post, I explained exactly how you were misguided. You just replied, "hey, you're wrong" without any explanation as to why you believe so.

Coming from a guy that literally said in his post, and I quote "People don't realize that plenty of PS3/360 games could run on the Wii without breaking a sweat."..... yeah. You really know what you're talking about don't you?

You are too funny.
---
But the PS4 has GDDR5 RAM. That's 2 more than DDR3! I bet PCs will take at least 5 years to catch up to this beast.
- SUPER3METROIDX
#77VanderZooPosted 3/17/2013 4:37:28 AM
overkillwfo1978 posted...
andrea987 posted...
http://s2.postimage.org/aw7des57t/299868_481701208551802_1251792628_n.png


lol.

That "triangle" pic would be sooooo true if everyone gamed on the same size and resolution of a tv/monitor forever and ever. Problem is, that screen size, resolution and frames per second regarding monitors continue to advance, making that pic completely false.

Want proof? Take that same 6000 triangle head and the 60000 triangle head and view them in motion, up close on a 65" 1080p LED TV. Oh, wait, they don't show you that, do they? Of course not, that blatantly false information can only be absorbed if you show an incredibly small static image.... /facepalm


I don't see how resolution changes anything. It just makes the picture clearer and brings out more detail, but it doesn't change the fact that going from 6000 to 60,000 isn't as dramatic as going from 60 to 600.

The fact that you need a higher resolution to really see the difference is actually proof of this.
#78ArabrockermanXPosted 3/17/2013 4:45:31 AM
Graphics gap probably won't look that bad but there will be other areas where the Wii U's lack of power shows.
#79ArabrockermanXPosted 3/17/2013 4:50:12 AM
Fusion916 posted...
It will be as big as the last gen (PS3 vs Wii). Maybe even larger this time.


A fanboys opinion at best, the ps4 will look better but besides diminishing returns we also have the fact that the ps4 just isn't as much of a jump as the ps3 was...
#80ArabrockermanXPosted 3/17/2013 4:53:29 AM
FlyinTonite posted...
I'd say dreamcast to xbox at end of life. In the beginning it'll be noticeable enough but not wii-ps3 bad. The gap between those 2 is enormous and the ps4 based on specs is around 5-6 times more capable than the wii u.

Really though, I think the reason the gap thing is being brought up is because sony fans are insecure their ps4 is already outclassed by mid tier PCs.


No they still believe it is better than anything a PC will be able to do for years... I own a ps3 and the level of ignorance with the fanboys is high(like with any system I guess).