This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Is the distance between this generation of consoles and PCs bigger this gen?

#31godplaysSNESPosted 8/14/2014 2:22:07 PM
Lvthn posted...
Bellum_Sacrum posted...
We don't know yet.

Assassin's Creed Unity will probably be a good point to compare.


I would also argue that multiplats are a bad point of comparison since PC ports of console games are notoriously neutered from what they could do. Compare the GOAT on console, your pick, to Metro Last Light, ARMA 3, hell, Witcher 2, games made for PC only or PC first, and most people will cry foul as though this is an unfair point of comparison.


The argument console guys use though, is that a console performs better than a PC with similar specs. It will take time, but that's how it's going to turn out in the end.

On PC, the official minimum requirement for those games you've mentioned is the 8800GT or HD 3870. One could argue that PC's lowest settings for those games aren't as low as the console settings though.

The point with comparing multiplats is that they are the same games running on different platforms, and bode for a direct comparison between them. You can't do that kind of comparison between exclusives.
---
Super Mario Kart is the single best Mario Kart ever!
#32Bellum_SacrumPosted 8/14/2014 2:26:26 PM
mw5178 posted...
Bellum_Sacrum posted...
PC has bridgeless unified RAM architecture or low-level access?


They don't need the first (as much as consoles do), and they already have/will have the second.


Haha, "need". PC's can't have such architectural tweaks to ensure compatibility and retain the modularity that defines what a PC is.

And no, you don't have low-level access on a PC, let alone one running Windows. Even if you managed to do so, whatever you make will only ever work under very specific hardware configurations. You're practically saying that PC games don't require drivers.
---
"Now go ahead and leap ignorantly to the defense of wealthy game companies who don't know or care about you."
#33mw5178Posted 8/14/2014 3:31:43 PM
Bellum_Sacrum posted...
Haha, "need". PC's can't have such architectural tweaks to ensure compatibility and retain the modularity that defines what a PC is.

And no, you don't have low-level access on a PC, let alone one running Windows. Even if you managed to do so, whatever you make will only ever work under very specific hardware configurations. You're practically saying that PC games don't require drivers.


Unified memory is not a new concept for PCs (been there since the 80s, and lots of mainstream PCs in the mid-90s used it), and AMD has also been considering using its hUMA tech for future PCs, so this has nothing to do with "can't do" or modularity. The post before mine nailed it, but the PS4 has this to get the most out its GPU performance at its relatively cheap price level. It also makes programming for the console easier. For PCs that usually have superior hardware (and also have to do more things than consoles), this isn't as needed.

And low-level APIs isn't exclusive to consoles today. Look it up. The industry moves forward.
#34LvthnPosted 8/14/2014 4:40:29 PM
Bellum_Sacrum posted...
PC has bridgeless unified RAM architecture or low-level access?
Seriously now, stop comparing numbers as if you know a thing about computers. Heck if you knew, you wouldn't be comparing numbers in the first place.

A multiplat is the only means of comparison, because this is what you essentially get. What's the point of superior hardware if it performs worse?


Are you really arguing that having shared memory totalling slightly more than what many video cards come with in VRAM is somehow an advantage?

Of course you'd like multiplat to be the point of comparison. As I said, nobody seems to think it's fair to compare what PCs do with games made for PC hardware rather than having awkwardly designed console sludge forced on them. The fact that PCs run games made for consoles better than consoles do should be a complete conversation ender.

I don't even know what ground you think you have to argue from. The multiplats already out blow console ports out of the water, as should be expected. The hardware gap wasn't even close at launch where you could make any kind of argument in favor of consoles.
#35stalemate_666Posted 8/16/2014 5:51:15 AM
Lvthn posted...
Bellum_Sacrum posted...
PC has bridgeless unified RAM architecture or low-level access?
Seriously now, stop comparing numbers as if you know a thing about computers. Heck if you knew, you wouldn't be comparing numbers in the first place.

A multiplat is the only means of comparison, because this is what you essentially get. What's the point of superior hardware if it performs worse?


Are you really arguing that having shared memory totalling slightly more than what many video cards come with in VRAM is somehow an advantage?

Of course you'd like multiplat to be the point of comparison. As I said, nobody seems to think it's fair to compare what PCs do with games made for PC hardware rather than having awkwardly designed console sludge forced on them. The fact that PCs run games made for consoles better than consoles do should be a complete conversation ender.

I don't even know what ground you think you have to argue from. The multiplats already out blow console ports out of the water, as should be expected. The hardware gap wasn't even close at launch where you could make any kind of argument in favor of consoles.


Paying twice as much for a little better resolution isn't blowing out of the water.
---
psn: Stalemate666
#36Linctagon7Posted 8/16/2014 7:54:59 AM
BF4 PC vs BF4 PS4

Crysis 3 PC vs Killzone

'Nuff said.

PS4 gets left in the dust both in terms of graphical fidelity and performance.

The cost comparison is a non-factor. A Ferrari craps on a Prius and does exactly that because it's the more expensive.
---
"He tried to choke someone out but there were too many. Tried to kick-box but they had weapons. And then tapped but there was no ref on the street."
#37Linctagon7Posted 8/16/2014 8:01:49 AM
stalemate_666 posted...
Lvthn posted...
Bellum_Sacrum posted...
PC has bridgeless unified RAM architecture or low-level access?
Seriously now, stop comparing numbers as if you know a thing about computers. Heck if you knew, you wouldn't be comparing numbers in the first place.

A multiplat is the only means of comparison, because this is what you essentially get. What's the point of superior hardware if it performs worse?


Are you really arguing that having shared memory totalling slightly more than what many video cards come with in VRAM is somehow an advantage?

Of course you'd like multiplat to be the point of comparison. As I said, nobody seems to think it's fair to compare what PCs do with games made for PC hardware rather than having awkwardly designed console sludge forced on them. The fact that PCs run games made for consoles better than consoles do should be a complete conversation ender.

I don't even know what ground you think you have to argue from. The multiplats already out blow console ports out of the water, as should be expected. The hardware gap wasn't even close at launch where you could make any kind of argument in favor of consoles.


Paying twice as much for a little better resolution isn't blowing out of the water.


Your ignorance on the subject is showing.

Better resolution.
Better framerates.
Better loading times.
Better particle effects.
Better textures.
Better shading.
Better draw distance.
Better AA.
Post-processing.
AO.
Better rendering.
Higher resolution scales (not the same as resolution).
DOF
Better lighting.

It goes on.

Only a madman would honestly think $400 hardware is only "marginally" behind a $2000 machine. That is insanity.

Crysis 3 on PC is still the best looking game out there in the last 3 years. Nothing on the PS4 competes. And that game is almost a year old now.

The proof is in the pudding. The numbers and comparisons are self-evident. That is all.
---
"He tried to choke someone out but there were too many. Tried to kick-box but they had weapons. And then tapped but there was no ref on the street."
#38stalemate_666Posted 8/16/2014 9:00:29 AM
Linctagon7 posted...
stalemate_666 posted...
Lvthn posted...
Bellum_Sacrum posted...
PC has bridgeless unified RAM architecture or low-level access?
Seriously now, stop comparing numbers as if you know a thing about computers. Heck if you knew, you wouldn't be comparing numbers in the first place.

A multiplat is the only means of comparison, because this is what you essentially get. What's the point of superior hardware if it performs worse?


Are you really arguing that having shared memory totalling slightly more than what many video cards come with in VRAM is somehow an advantage?

Of course you'd like multiplat to be the point of comparison. As I said, nobody seems to think it's fair to compare what PCs do with games made for PC hardware rather than having awkwardly designed console sludge forced on them. The fact that PCs run games made for consoles better than consoles do should be a complete conversation ender.

I don't even know what ground you think you have to argue from. The multiplats already out blow console ports out of the water, as should be expected. The hardware gap wasn't even close at launch where you could make any kind of argument in favor of consoles.


Paying twice as much for a little better resolution isn't blowing out of the water.


Your ignorance on the subject is showing.

Better resolution.
Better framerates.
Better loading times.
Better particle effects.
Better textures.
Better shading.
Better draw distance.
Better AA.
Post-processing.
AO.
Better rendering.
Higher resolution scales (not the same as resolution).
DOF
Better lighting.

It goes on.

Only a madman would honestly think $400 hardware is only "marginally" behind a $2000 machine. That is insanity.

Crysis 3 on PC is still the best looking game out there in the last 3 years. Nothing on the PS4 competes. And that game is almost a year old now.

The proof is in the pudding. The numbers and comparisons are self-evident. That is all.


I said twice. IE 800. If you have to pay 5 times as much then well yeah... Also your not factoring in optimization. Of course on paper pc beats consoles but when it comes to the game, you have to spend alot more to get any noticeable advantages. Which frankly isn't worth it.
---
psn: Stalemate666
#39JKatarnPosted 8/16/2014 9:09:54 AM
shmirlywhirl posted...
jedinat posted...
LOLIAmAnAlt posted...
http://i.imgur.com/cIOnJdZ.jpg

That chart isn't as impressive as it should be, lol... whose idea was it to make the Y axis exponential...


Not to mention it cheats a bit by comparing $400 (or however much consoles cost these days) to the $1,000 Titan.


Yeah, lol, maybe 1% of the PC gaming audience is going to own a titan, and statistically maybe 4% buy high-end cards, the rest are using mid-range or low-end parts.
---
Asus P8Z68-V LE | Core i7 2600K | 8GB G.Skill Ripjaws DDR3 | Gigabyte GeForce GTX 660 Windforce OC
PS3 | PS2 | PSP| Wii | 3DS | DS | X-Box 360 | X-Box | NES
#40The cranky hermitPosted 8/16/2014 9:11:32 AM
The proof is in the pudding

Please don't use this phrase if you don't know what it means. It's embarrassing to those who do.
---
http://thecrankyhermit.wikispaces.com/
Year-by-year analysis of the finest gaming has to offer, and (eventually) more!