Sony Defends PS4 Against Claims of Being Outdated: ‘Specialist Device Architecturally Involved with PC’

With growing PC gaming technology will the PS4 become obsolete in the next few years?

Posted By | On 28th, Sep. 2013 Under News | Follow This Author @GamingBoltTweet


ps4 amd

With PC gaming technology improving every year, it is obvious that many gaming enthusiasts out there believe that next generation consoles will become obsolete in a matter of years and developers will once again start complaining about the technical restrictions and limitations of  consoles.

At the moment, game developers have been extremely positive with the memory budget and unified architecture of the PlayStation 4. Several developers have revealed to us that the PS4 is comparable to a high end PC and have praised the amount of memory that Sony included in its next generation console. However Nvidia believes that with the growing PC tech, consoles will never be able to compete with PC at a graphical level. This is indeed true if we look at the current generation trend. Will this be a concern when the PlayStation 4 comes out? Not at the moment, according to Sony UK’s Fergal Gara.

“It doesn’t look like a concern at the moment. You always have to keep your eyes open to see where potential threats might come from. The only thing we know for sure is that the initial demand, and the initial weeks and months of PlayStation 4 is almost guaranteed to be exceptionally strong. That’s based on pre-order numbers that we’re delighted with. They’re the best we’ve ever seen, so that gives us huge confidence,” he said in an interview with VG247.

He further claimed that the PlayStation 4 is a special device with custom configuration.

“Let’s not forget that PlayStation 4 is a dedicated, specialist device that has become architecturally involved with the PC environment, but it’s configured in a way to deliver a rich experience above all others. It’s designed to deliver gameplay at the best possible level, which wasn’t compromised in terms of the decisions we’ve made,” he added.

Do you agree with Gara’s claim? Do you think that the PS4 will stand the test of time and will not become obsolete. PS4 system architect Mark Cerny and famed developers like Greg Kasavin certainly think so. What about you?

Let us know in the comments section below.

Tagged With: , ,

Awesome Stuff that you might be interested in

  • Nomnom

    Nvidia are acting like losers attacking both MS and Sony nonstop.
    The next time I upgrade my PC, I’m going AMD for sure.

    • SwappingFrom360toPS4

      Nvidia are just butthurt after all that ass-kicking they just recieved from AMD, so they are feeling insecure and need to take it out on others.

    • BeastlyRig

      Nvidia is so but hurt thy told the truth??

      I mean sis they lie??

      Amd Mantle will own consoles.

    • Matt

      AMD and Nvidia are both guilty of flame baiting.

      It’s stupid to put a persona behind them considering they are multi-billion dollar companies being represented by idiots on twitter.

      AMD is Chinese. Nvidia is American (outsourced like everything else of course)

      AMD is able to undermine Nvidia with lower prices due to cheap labor and little to no environmental laws to adhere to… regardless if that phases you or not someones making a buck off of all of us which is how the world works. It’s just ignorant to play sides. I’m sure Nvidia had the decency to raise suicide nets around their manufacturing facilities.

    • AMD Rules

      WOW! What an idiot! “AMD is Chinese. Nvidia is American (outsourced like everything else of course)”.

      Advanced Micro Devices (AMD), Inc. is an American multinational (fabless after GlobalFoundries was spun off in 2009) semiconductor company based in Sunnyvale, California, United States.

      Nvidia Corporation is an American global technology company based in Santa Clara, California.

      Shut fuck up you misinformed twat!

    • Matt
    • extermin8or2

      I cpuld have sworn AMD was a UK company….or is that ARM I am thinking of?

    • Durian

      ARM

    • Kyle898

      I’m a PC and Console (PS3) gamer, and I think the $400 PS4 is a very good price for the amount of performance Sony have stuffed in it, I’m sure you would have to spend a lot more than $400 on a new PC now to match a fully optimised PS4 game. I enjoy PC games but I also really enjoy the Playstation exclusives like Uncharted, Heavy Rain, Journey, Last of Us, etc…

      PC and console gaming have their place, consoles always have the advantage of being one hardware, so easier to optimise against than thousands of different configurations of PC, but PCs have the advantage of being upgradeable.

    • benbenkr

      ………

      First you’re an idiot for saying AMD is Chinese.
      Second, Nvidia’s boss is Chinese but the company isn’t.
      Third, cheap labor? What isn’t made in China these days? The keyboard you’re using to type this crap comment of yours is from China.

    • Matt

      AMD is cheap and Chinese. In fact as we speak they are loading up chemical kill switches into the consoles so that when the time comes they can activate the self destruct module when the massive land invasion of America begins. I personally don’t buy anything made by commie slave labor so that is why I back Nvidia considering they are American and the superior quality speaks for itself. I’m also using an Apple so I don’t support slave labor because I know they are one of the best companies out there in supporting their manufacturing workforce by supplementing them with high wages and quality health care. I just wish more people could possess my intellect when it comes to matters as important as national security considering America is the leading superpower and open and honest with it’s people unlike the Canadians, Brits or Aussies and their fascist Monarchy.

    • benbenkr

      Wow. You are either the best troll of the month or you are the biggest idiot of the month.

      Whatever floats your dreamy mind man.

    • Matt

      You took the bait. Haha.

    • Dakan45

      The console owners gone to nvidia first and nvidia turned them down, so they gone to amd.

      Nvidia is not butthurt for turning down the offer while stating they believe it didnt worth it.

    • Jason Mounce

      I bought an a Gigabyte/AMD card, HD 7970. Am quite happy with it.

      Won’t even consider Nvidia now….while before making my PC, I was on the fence for the sake of Budget/Power.

    • jonam

      I was initially looking for an nvidia upgrade until when I began to hear Nvidia bitching about console GPUs. It completely shows how bitter they are for having lost out both Sony and MS to AMD. I guess I’m AMD for life. Geforce GTX 780 or titan can keep jeering, but guess what AMD always produces over the counter hardware.

    • Dakan45

      but they gone to nvidia first and they turned them down you moron.

    • Dakan45

      aghhh your precious console owners gone to nvidia first and nvidia turned them down.

      Get your facts straiht.

    • Greg Smith

      Actually, Sony showcased both in early development and went with AMD instead you fat fucking moron. If you’re going to insult someone at least spell properly you fucking inbred american loser. I’m on her every 3-4 days but you’re on her everyday. Get a fucking life already.

    • Dakan45

      Omg you compelte retard, sony went to nvidia first and they turned them down.

      I am not american or english speaker and i made a fucking TYPO, do you know what TYPOS are you dumb fuck?

      Finally you are here al lthe time, why dont YOU get a life you pretentious fuck?

  • asd

    sources?

    • SwappingFrom360toPS4

      tip: you click the words with hyperlinks, they are orange in colour

  • Anheuser

    A price drop in 4k tv’s a few years after ps4’s release will be something to look forward to. PS4 will be cutting edge tech until then and beyond.

    • Sacha Salvatore Morgese

      It won’t be good for 1080p gaming though. All the games will have to be scaled and that will lower the image quality. I don’t think today’s hardware is good enough for 4K, unless you can spend money on a SLI of Titans.

    • HelterSkelter

      The PS4 can handle 1080p as long as the framerate is 30fps.

    • Sacha Salvatore Morgese

      The PS4 can handle 1080p/60fps. The PS3 can do that as well (it does, look at Superstardust HD and GT5/6). And the 360 and the Wii U too. I suppose you don’t know what you’re talking about. It’s not about being able to handle, potentially there’s no limit to the fps a game can get, it’s about how good you want your game to look. You can sacrifice details and effects to improve your framerate, or you can slightly cut down the native resolution to improve it.
      Anyway a lot of games on PS4 will be 1080p/60fps, even if I don’t really care since stable 30fps are usually ok for most of the games.

    • HelterSkelter

      The devs are barely able to do 1080p 60fps. Most devs are opting either for 720p 60fps or 1080p 30fps. Also, you probably don’t know but most multi-platform games on the current gen consoles ran at sub-hd resolutions such as 880X720, some even at 540p. I do know what I’m talking about. Obviously, a game on PS4 can be 1080p 60fps but devs will prefer 1080p 30fps for higher visual fidelity. There’s only a few games confirmed to be 1080 60fps. Even Shadowfall, a PS4 exclusive is running at 1080p 30fps and that’s arguably one of the best looking next-gen games so far.Seriously, drop the ego.

    • Sacha Salvatore Morgese

      Sorry dude, PS4 (and of course X1) can do 1080/60fps, period. Developers in many cases prefer to make the game look better instead of giving 60 fps, because people usually care more about the overall quality than fps. Unless you’re on a PC, where suddendly it becomes a matter of life and death. And you’re talking about Shadowfall; do you know that the game is 1080p/30fps in single player and 1080p/60fps in multiplayer. So what? The PS4 can handle 1080p/60fps.
      And please, KS is a first generation game. Try to compare Resistance: Fall of Men to The Last of Us or Beyond: Two Souls to understand what happens on a console 7 years after launch. When you have a fixed hardware you can squeeze every drop out of it instead of dealing with different stuff every year. You call it ego, I call it “stating the obvious”. Peace.

    • HelterSkelter

      I literally wrote that the devs prefer better visuals than resolution and fps so there’s no use repeating yourself. You know Shadowfall’s multiplayer isn’t constant 60fps right? Look it up. Also, this isn’t the same as the previous gen where devs had to figure out the hardware. X86 is a platform that developers are the most familiar with so the excuse of them being unfamiliar with the hardware doesn’t apply. It might have fixed hardware, but it’s much easier to develop for than it’s predecessors.

  • Josiah Grey

    NVIDIA is good they’re wanting to do a lot of great things for PC Gaming. But they’re clearly acting childish just because none of the companies chose them to power their next gen consoles. This has been happening since Day One of the announcements of the consoles, actually I think it was before then. But seriously, NVIDIA needs to grow up. They’re doing really well and they’re making good achievements of their own. Do you NVIDIA just do you

    • Matt

      The company has been acting just fine… you can’t interpret 1 or 2 snirky remarks from some idiots tweeting as the entire attitude of the company. AMD is just as guilty and it’s just flame baiting between the companies to which everyone is just gobbling it up in anticipation for the new consoles. The fact remains that the PC market has more to offer those that want to invest into more than what Sony and Microsoft have to offer. Sony and Microsoft are both trying to capitalize on the industry and the way modern economics work you can bet their in bed with each other. The Blue Ray drive in the XB1 means that their paying out loyalties to Sony and I guarantee and the Devs working for Sony are developing the games on Windows platforms. It’s win/win for both of them and even in the PC market Microsoft currently has a monopoly with DX gaming so that just leaves AMD vs NVIDIA as the only real competition to which the PC crowd backs Nvidia more so than AMD which may change in the coming years depending on what happens.

    • Dakan45

      They gone to them first, nvidia turned them down.

      Its YOU who need to grow up.

    • Josiah Grey

      Why do I need to grow up? I didn’t speak without reason. I just spoke out of all the information I had and perceived the situation. I didn’t know what you just said until you told me.

    • Dakan45

      The information you perceived was a bunch of childish console kiddos saying “nvidia is butthurt”

      No clue, no idea, nothing mature.

      So let me give you the facts, sony gone to nvidia first, nvidia turned them down because it didnt worth it and they wanted to build something powerfull with their name on it. Amd/s finacials are not that good so they took the deal.

      its not like they got a choice there are only 2 companies who can spend billions each year for reserach and development on hardware, amd and nvidia, the console owners cannot build consoles on their own anymore.

      Nvidia will ofcourse lose revenue but they are saying since 2011 that the pc gamer market has grown alot. Apparently they were “butthurt” since 2011 by that logic.

      Nvidia is making other projects with project shield and Steam OS and nearly every game has their new technologies such as physx and TXAA.

      As far as i know nvidia said ps4 is a low end cpu and a mid range gpu, which it is and then they reminded us that the pc market has grown and compared their TFLOPS with ps4.

      Thats it, many months have passed and just like sites interview amd and sony and ms, one happen to interview nvidia where they said that its no longer possible for consoles to beat pc hardware becasue only nvidia and amd can spend billions each year for hardware reserach and development.

      Explain me where nvidia is “childish”

    • Josiah Grey

      Why are you getting so upset over me being wrong about something and admitting it? Jesus.

    • Dakan45

      Because you treat it as fact and others believe it later and we got this huge missconeption that nvidia is childish and butthurt based on a bunch of article TITLES and some comments you read and ofcourse xbox one being 50% less powerfull than the ps4. Which is not proven, but teh internetz treat it as fact.

    • Gman

      @Dakan45 STFU. he admitted he didnt know. get a life.

    • Dakan45

      You STFU, if you dont know, dont talk, that is the reason the “xbox one is 50% weaker than ps4” and “pc gaming needs upgrades every year” are considered “Facts” among clueless morons, because too many of you post comments and then other clueless morons read them and think its a fact.

      I told you what the facts are, you can at the very least give me a thumbs up, but i forgot you wana live under the “nvidia s butthurt” immature bullshit becasue it makes you feel good for some weird reason.

    • My two cents

      Nvidia made alot of money from consoles…they wouldn’t juect say “it’s not worth”. That was just marketing talk by Nvidia. Why not make some extra cash – especially when there is no needed R&D for it for the new few years? AMD was able to provide alot more power for the same price point – that’s why they won. Most IT and Business Analysts are considering this a big win for AMD and a loss for Nividia. Now that consoles are using AMD chips, PC’s with AMD chips will handle ports and multiprts better than nvidia chips. Don’t try to make it seem like “it didn’t matter”.

    • Dakan45

      Sony went to nvidia first.

      They turned them down.

      Amd just used their laptop architecture on next gen consoles, nuff said.

      “That was just marketing talk by Nvidia.”

      Yeah its not like nvidia would knew they go to amd next FACEPALM.

      Kid, NVIDIA makes alot more from selling videocard than ms and sony ever made together.

      “AMD was able to provide alot more power for the same price”

      Alot less for a lower price. But they got x86 so thats one thing.”

      “that’s why they won”

      They won because nvidia stepped back. PERIOD

      Sony gone to nvidia first. GET IT?

      “Most IT and Business Analysts are considering this a big win for AMD and a loss for Nividia.”

      It is a win for amd since they were not doing well finacially but to be a loss for nvidia, they have to assume that they would make profit by making the next gen consoles. In reallity nvidia did not lose anything aside from possible profit. amd finacials however were bad before this.

      “PC’s with AMD chips will handle ports and multiprts better than nvidia chips. Don’t try to make it seem like “it didn’t matter”.”

      Thats just marketing talk from amd.

      People use nvidia for better drivers and working clossely with developers. Thats why amd works on mantle, to dispute that and make games run better on amd hardware.

    • My two cents

      Kid -> learn the difference between going to someone first and winning a deal

      Nvidia could get a good enough margin or extra production without taking a loss somewhere first

      AMD – was doing poorly – they can get better margins for themselves – story

      “Kid, NVIDIA makes alot more from selling videocard than ms and sony ever made together.”

      really> r u retarded? Sony – yes, they made a loss

      Nvidia – aprox $1 B per quarter

      Microsoft – aprox $18 B per quarter

      Even if you consider hardware sales of consoles ->they SELL IT AT A LOSS -> they don’t make money from hardware -> they make money from software (i.e. games). Understand idiot? Sony screwed up last gen and didn’t money until recently. Microsoft made quite a bit of profit.

      “Thats just marketing talk from amd”
      *sigh* its from devs and Nvidia said the same thing a few years back
      Stop acting like a kid and saying “they went to them first”. AMD won the consoles. Nvidia probably tried a higher price point for better margins. Sony looked at other alternatives for next (they went to Nvidia first becuase they made supplies for current gen dumbass) went to AMD…got a better deal.
      In other words for same tech -> AMD was able to provide for less. If AMD wasn’t in the picture, sony may have accpeted Nvidia’s higher price point and made a more expensive console. Its how the world works kid, grow up. No one throws away money.

    • Dakan45

      Nvidia is the leader, they make the most money out of all hardware manufacturers, why would they bother with consoles when they make more money on everywhere else?

      Sony had double the losses xbox had. Sony DOES make money from consoles, if they sell them at such high numbers they get the costs back. How do you think sony pays for exlusives? Obviously most of the profit is from royality fees.

      “Sony screwed up last gen and didn’t money until recently. Microsoft made quite a bit of profit.”

      Pretty much, why you calling me an idiot if you said it yourself you dumb cunt.

      “its from devs and Nvidia said the same thing a few years back”

      Nvidia still handles games better than amd hardware same goes for intel, not sure what is up with you, amd has stated that the pc hardware they make are harder to make, more powerfull than anything on the next gen consoles and thus more expensive.

      “Stop acting like a kid and saying “they went to them first”.”

      They went to nvidia first, that is a fucking fact.

      Nvidia turnedthem down, they gone to amd. Its nvidia who turned down the deal, not sony trying amd as well. Nvidia turned it down because they didnt like the price/perfomance ratio.

      Amd did and there you go bf4 720p on xbox one, 960p on ps4…so “NEXT GEN” ….pathetic.

      “AMD was able to provide for less”

      Amd provided less for less you retarded cuntface.

      ” AMD wasn’t in the picture, sony may have accpeted Nvidia’s higher price
      point and made a more expensive console. Its how the world works kid,
      grow up. No one throws away money.”

      Too fucking bad thats what your precious sony attempted to do with ps3, they were so sure they gonna beat xbox that they gone crazy and decided to screw the consumer in the ass.

      Now you can go ahead and take a look at the mirror and reallize who is the kid and by the looks of it you must be black too, or a delusional rapper kid.

      Grow up, get a job, get some brains.

      Till then GTFO.

  • PSorbisnews

    I agree with Nvidia but forcing on to much power like Nvidia does will lead to their own defect soon. 🙂 PS4 is powerful but it could be more powerful and faster so it can run games in 4K which would be awesome and has two HDMI then one.

    • Durian

      Why would you want 2 hdmi inputs?

      Also forget about gaming at 4k, no ones going to be able to afford a 4k TV for a good few years and even then you’d need a minimum of 90+ inches to be able to notice a difference anyway.

      4k is great but only if you have a projector.

    • Matt

      It benefits monitors more so than televisions… PC gamers are closer to the screen usually so even with a smaller screen the increase in resolution would be noticeable and it would also decrease the effects of aliasing when no AA is being used. Think of the retina displays on the Iphone and transfer that level of clarity over to gaming. Give it another year or 2 and the price of 4k TV’s will tank but I’m sure the focus will tranfer to the Oculus for gaming purposes.

    • Durian

      Sony wouldn’t want to up the price because of a niche market with dual monitor support. The AA bit makes sense but I would rather they focus on gameplay innovation as opposed to a more expensive, more powerful gaming system. They are making an oculus rift type device though.

    • BeastlyRig

      ps4 and 4k games?? never..

      Maybe at 20fps..

  • BrianC6234

    Only a tiny percentage of gamers have those expensive computers so no matter how much better they get it’s a waste of time to make PC games take advantage of the power. Just make PS4 games that push it and you’re better off.

  • Jeffrey Maxson

    Technically the specs are out-dated, but very few people are willing to pay thousands of dollars for a game you can play on PS4 for just 400.

    • Josué B. Hernández

      Some people forget that PS4 is a 399$ device.. for that price You buy a Mid/High GPU from Nvidia and little more…

    • FaggitShit

      the ps4 is $400
      psn plus for 8 years is $400
      games cost $20 more per game
      harcore gamers buy 200 games in 8 years
      $4000 more in games in 8 years for a harcore gamer
      $2000 more for serious gamer
      $1000 more for a casual
      pc is way cheaper, and way better experience
      free mods
      cheaper games
      1080p-4k resolutions natively
      backwards compatibility on nearly every pc game ever made and emulators to play ps1 and ps2 games in native 1080p that the ps4 cannot even do
      also every Nintendo game, genesis, etc
      look at how watch dogs looks now in the latest gameplay videos (like dogsh!t) because they are actually starting to show ps4 gameplay….on pc it will look incredible
      BF4 looks AWFUL on ps4, and deep down that every moron though was “real” gameplay back on 2-20…..looks about on par with dark souls on pc
      ps4 is basically a 3 year old pc that wasn’t even cutting edge in 2010
      no wonder its $400 to buy day one…..in fact…its a little over-priced

    • guest

      Stop talking bullsh*t. The PS4 is sold at a loss at $400, and most fair minded PC people say you would need $800 to $1000 on PC to match optimised PS4 games.

      All the developers have repeatedly said the PS4 has powerful specs, I’ll believe them, not a troll like you.

      All the people who have been hands on on the PS4 at game shows have said the games look and play great, I’ll believe them, not a troll like you.

      BF4 has not even come out on PS4, so how the f*ck do you know what it looks like??? There was one negative report at Gamescom, but the recent report from a PC gamer at the Tokyo Game Show said the PS4 version looked great. That was from someone who played it, not a troll like you.

    • Josué B. Hernández

      I have a mid ranged PC and i play both.. enjoy consoles
      exclusives and some good PC games..

      With cheaper games i’m sure you mean Piracy..

      probably you’re the typical fagg that yearn for PC ports of console games and then pirate everything… A serious gamer would spent 2000$ or more in any platform…

      and a proper Gaming PC for 4k play you’llhave to spend more than 1.500$ that I’m sure…

    • Josué B. Hernández

      PD: I have Spent +500$ this year between Vita, PS3 and PC games 😉 I kickstart a lotof indies.

    • Loser

      your forgetting PS PLUS free games every month.
      Ps4 is for people who loves games and actually live life lol.
      PC is for people who stay in their parents basements.

    • Dakan45

      They are not fre you pay for them.

      Gues how? with THE PLUS SUBRCRIPTION.

      PS4= MORONS WHO DONT KNOW SHIT ABOUT TECHONLOGY AND CHEAP POOR FAGGOTS WITH NO MONEY.

      PC= super system that can do anythign better, that costs more money and UTTERLY DESTROYS YOUR SHITTY CONSOLES YOU DUMB FUCK.

    • Dakan45

      Try a gpu that will last you for 5 years instead.

    • Kamille

      but in the long run you’ll end up paying more than $400 if you want to play online and stuff. And with $600 you could build a pretty beasty PC and buy cheaper games through Steam but if you don’t know how then it makes sense why buying a PS4 would be a better choice than an overpriced pre-build PC.

      Another thing to factor in is the games too because is not all graphics and graphics even though we love pretty looking games too. And just like the PS4 the PC has its own exclusive games too.

    • guest

      Don’t underestimate the PS4, this quote comes from PC expert who build regularly PCs rigs:

      “Now we hear a lot about how the PS4′s specs don’t match up to current PC’s. That what was demoed doesn’t look as gorgeous as Crysis 3 on max settings. I get that, I can understand where they are coming from, I’ve been gaming on a PC all of my life. I’ve played the Decents, Heretics, Dooms, 7th Guests, Wing Commanders, X-Wing and Tie Fighters (where is a sequel at?), every game LucasArts, Valve, Blizzard, and id Software have put out. I have also done all of these on custom built computers that either myself or my dad has put together. Hell I was taught how to install RAM and remove the BIOS battery before riding a bike. However, in all of this, I think there are some unfair comparisons being made. So far there is not a direct way of purchasing a similarly designed system. There is not an 8 core APU for purchase. Most people are just running a quad core setup. Not to mention the PS4 has a second chip for background processes that helps take even more load off the APU. There is no memory available to purchase that provides the same speed as the PS4. Sure you might have 16 GB of DDR3 for your system and 3 GB of GDDR5 for your video, but it’s not the same as the PS4′s unified 8 GB of GDDR5 clocked at 176 GB/s for system and video. Comparatively non-overclocked DDR3-1333 for PC’s transfer data at 10.7 GB/s. Also, unless you’ve built a completely new computer in the last 6 months, you’re probably not running a complete PCI Express 3.0 Setup. Meaning your MOBO, CPU, and GPU all have to be equipped with it. This means your bus speeds could be aiding in the bottlenecking of your system. Even still PCI 3.0 can’t compete with the bus speeds within an APU. I’m not saying that the PS4 is the end all be all machine, but it might be better equipped than it is given credit for. They also have a clear advantage of being able to write to the metal. There is no cumbersome OS or layers that a typical system has to work through. PC development also has to think about the least common factor when developing a title. It doesn’t make sense for a developer just to build a game for the 10%. Not everyone owns a GTX 680 and even comparably that is a card with 2GB of RAM at $500. That alone will probably be more than the price of Sony’s new console. To build a similar spec’d PC you may need to consider the greater sum of it’s parts than low balling it. I helped a friend build a computer last month and he had a budget of around $1100 (the link for parts can be found here.) and I’ll go out on a limb and say that the PS4 still has a distinct edge.”

    • jonam

      A fine analysis. And yeah to round up it’s basically the 8GB unified memory pool(GDDR5) which gives it the edge over custom built PCs with a GDDR5 based GPU+ DDR3 system memory and the price which goes much above PS4’s for a similar performance.Thanks for sharing those info. Many articles have emphasized on this point of PS4’s APU advantage.

    • Dakan45

      No it doesnt, ddr3 is faster for cpu calculations, having only ddr5 bottlenecks the cpu, which doesnt matter since the ps4 cpu is shit.

    • Dakan45

      dan shut the fuck up, i have disproven that claim, stop posting it, it is incorrect.

      The cpu is not an 8 core cpu its a dualcore x4 threads at 1.6ghz, its a small tablet low power cpu, it cannot output as much power as a desktop cpu simply because it doesnt have the power to do it.

      The memory controllers are on the cpu, meaning that since DDR3 has lower latency, DDR3 is better for the cpu than GDDR5. By having GDDR5 and a low end cpu you bottlenck the gpu and can never take advantage of all that ram.

      APU= cheap design for laptops, it will NEVER beat a decent dekstop gaming pc.

      More ram beats faster ram EVERY FREAKING TIME, whoever builds pc knows this and yes if you use 16gb when its not utilized its a bottleneck. Ps4 has 8gb, 5 of them are used in games which means 2 for cpu and 3 for gpu, the rest are consumed by the “cumbersome os”

      A 680 has more power than ps4 will ever hope to achieve. Having more than 2gb ram dedicated on a videocard is used for higher than 1080p resolutions. i also find it funny your info is outdated, a more powerfull GTX 770 4GB costs 450. The GTX 680 costs 350$ right now.

      So yeah you are incorrect.

    • guest

      You have disproven nothing, I’ll believe the PC expert who regularly builds PC gaming rigs, he made the quote, not me, and I believe him, not a troll like you.

      A mult-billion company like Sony has hundreds of engineers who know more about architecting a games system than a pathetic little troll like you.Your pathetic arguments that the cpu will bottleneck the ps4 show you know nothing. The xbox 360 had a tri-core 3.2ghz cpu, so your argument about 1.6ghz on PS4 is just rubbish.

      You go on about tablet cpu, ironic, because every business report I read says that tablets are killing the PC market dead, faster than anyone thought possible. PC sales are at their lowest for decades, and PC trolls like you will be extinct in a few years as tablets destroy your market.

    • Dakan45

      I am a :pc expert who bulilds pc regullary” you dumb fuck.

      i have been in gaming since SNES, i know what i am talking about.

      Sony has hundrends of jap engineers that NEVER make mistakes right?

      WRONG da power of da core? the cell architecture, you remember those you dumb fuck? THEY FAILED.

      FAILED.

      What about ms? you think ms are retards and they are the only ones who can make mistakes? BUT NOOOO YOUR PERCIOUS SONY CANT!!! Despit they dont trust their own tech and egnineers anymore.

      WAKE UP YOU MORON PS4 IS BEING MADE BY AMD, NOT THE RETARDED JAPS WHO FUCKED UP PS3.

      Neither sony or ms can make consoles anymore only amd and nvidia can afford to spend billions on research and development on hardware.

      Ps4 is NOT made by japanesse engineers. They dont know SHIT about x86 architecture, it is made by western enigneers. The ps4 is NOT made in japan, thats why it will be released in japan later and not initially.

      So yeah you are a pathetic retard.

      I proved how the ps4 has TONS of bottlenecks but you dont know SHIT nor have the tehcinical knowledge to disprove em. So you call me a troll, when you are a pathetic fantard.

      WELL GUESS WHAT? Ps3 actually had 8 cores UNLIKE ps4, and x360 had a xenon cpu, 3 Physical cores, 6 of which are threads. Ps4 has 8 cores of which only 2 are physical and at the riddiculus low speed of 1.6ghz and its a tablet cpu.

      Tablets are NOT killng pc market, tablet are killing prebuilt crap like HP, you CANT play games on those,so if you just want to check your email and browse, you will buy them rather a expensive prebuilt.

      On the other hand the gaming hardware sales on pc is higher than ever and more devs work on pc than consoles and pc has more exlusives.

      BUT OFCOURSE RETARDED CONSOLE CUNTS LIKE YOU ONLY READ THE TITLE OF THOSE ARTICLES AND DONT BOTHER UNDERSTANDING WHAT THE REPORTS ACTUALLY SAY.

      Got news for you dipshit, WHAT HARDWARE YOU THINk YOUR SHITTY TRASHBOX USES? PC HARWDARE. WHO MAKES THEM? AMD AND NVIDIA AND INTEL, BECASUE NO CONSOLE MANUFACTURERE CAN AFFORD TO MAKE THEIR OWN HARDWARE ANYMORE. WHERE DO DEVELOPERS MAKE THEIR GAMES? ON HIGH END PC.

      SO HOW THE FUCKING HELL CAN TABLETS KILL PCS YOU COMPLETE EXCUSE OF CUM?

      Seriously KILL YOURSELF kiddo, KILL YOURSELF, you shouldnt even be alive with such stupidity

      OR YOU ARE CLEARLY THE FUCKING TROLL, YOU HAVE PROVEN THAT YOU WASTE OF SPERM, NO GO FUCKING DIE DIPSHIT.

    • Matt

      I’m sorry Dakan but I LOL’ed

      “i have been in gaming since SNES, i know what i am talking about.”

      I know all about that Super Mario Bro’s as well brotha.

    • Dakan45

      This moron started by going to pc articles and saying the following bs “pcs are filled with hackers and pirates that run my multyplayer enjoyment” then he continue with “ps4 is just 350$ the duallshock 4 is 50$” like a fanboy. THen he said “i played kilzlone shadowfall in pax, it plays lovely with the new dualshock 4” OBVIOUSLY a ps4 fanboy to the bone.

      Now how he played the game when he posted the message when pax was taking place. He continued with the typical bullshit “no 400$ pc can beat ps4” and i pointed out that you dont have to buy a 400$ pc, so i called him poor, to which he said that he is “rich” yet the cheap fuck says “ps4 is only 350$ and the controller is 50$”

      RIIIIGHT So either he is a dumb kid or a sony employe.

      Then you found him in a batlefield 4 article saying the console version looks pretty good and somethow trying to make it sound as if it “pwned pc trolls” when in reallity it was just some questionable offscreen footage that could have been running on any setting. Then he keeps copy and paste the same inccorect information which i have disproven.
      Eit

      My point is simple, he claims that pc “pc expert” who “builds pc regullary” and agreed with him about the ps4, is more credible . Greg kasavin who is not a developer and stated that oblivion on pc looked better than the x360 version which was latest tech back then.

      Now Greg says consoles dont get obsolete because he played on consoles and pcs for many years.

      Well guess what, so do i and i know for a fact that the pc version ALWAYS has better graphics. From quake 2 to tomb raider on psx, to hl2 on xbox looking like trash, to ps2/xbox not being able to run far cry or fear, to oblivion looking better on pc, to games running on low settings on x360 and ps3 compared to pc version.

      Consoles were FINE back in the 90s and pretty good on ps2/xbox, but what happened with x360 and ps3 only ruined them. Now all games must sell 10s of millions to be sucesfull, so you got horor games turned into shooters, stealth games into action, tomb raider into gears of war, crysis and hitman going linear and yet FAILING to get those sales. As bioware stated true next gen experiance will cost so much that you will need 10 million sales to cover up the costs.

      So no, they are not getting that “next gen” is about being cheap and they CANNOT HAVE super duper perfomance no matter what, ps4 HAS to sucseed or sony is done for, they have taken so many loses. They are not getting as big of a jump as last time, japan cannot give em nor as high quality games or consoles as in the old days, only amd and nvidia can make powerfull hardawre and spend the money to do it and games will cost wayy too much in order to have amazing graphics.

      I know what i am talking about when it comes to games industry, that dumb kid who cant afford anything higher than 400$ DOES NOT.

    • guest

      COMPARING LIKE FOR LIKE, NO NEW $400 PC WILL COME CLOSE TO THE POWER OF OPTIMISED GAMES ON A $400 PS4. FACT.

      TABLETS ARE GOING TO KILL THE PC MARKET DEAD, STEAM OS WILL FRAGMENT IT FURTHER.

      I’M REALLY GLAD YOU TROLL SO MUCH BECAUSE NASTY PATHETIC PC MASTER RACE TROLLS ARE PUTTING PEOPLE OFF PC GAMING EVEN MORE, YOU ARE THE WORST ADVERT FOR PC GAMING, AND YOU WILL BE EXTINCT SOON.

    • Dakan45

      YOU CONSOLE RETARDS NEED TO REALLIZE THAT UNLIKE YOU WE DONT BUY A 400$ BOX BECAUSE WE ARE POOR AND STUPID RETARDS, WE UPGRADE OUR PCS FOR 400 AND WE BEAT YOUR SHITTYBOXES.

      YOUR GAMES ARE NOT “OPTIMIZED” YOU JUST RUN THEM AT INFERIOR SETTINGS TO MAINTAIN A GOOD FRAMERATE.

      TABLETS CANT KILL PC YOU PATHETIC FAGGOT, IF TABLETS KILL PC, THAT MEANS NVIDIA AND AMD WILL BE OUT OF BUSINESS, IF NVIDIA AND AMD ARE OUT OF BUSINESS, WHO IS GONNA BUILD YOUR SHITTY CONSOLES? HOW GAMES WILL BE MADE WITHOUT HIGH END PCS MAKING 3D MODELS ON 3DSMAX? WITH THE PATHETIC TRASHBOXES?

      DAN YOU ARE A PATHETIC TROLL AND YOU SHOULD KILL YOURSELF BY SHOVING A PS4 UP YOUR ASS, THATS WHY ITS SMALLER THAN THE XBONE, SO YOU CAN SHOVE IT UP YOUR ASS AND DIE.

    • guest

      PC expert, LOL, you are just a pathetic loser PC troll. You have been proved wrong at every turn.

      Every developer article, from proper games developers, not shitty little trolls like you, say there are NO BOTTLENECKS ON PS4.

      Thousands of articles of people who have been hands on PS4 say GAMES LOOK AND PLAY GREAT ON PS4. A PC gamer who went on Battlefield 4 at Tokyo Games Show said it looked great, like high settings on PC.

      So go f*ck yourself you stupid pathetic troll faggot, YOU HAVE PROVEN THAT YOU WASTE OF SPACE, SO PLEASE JUST F*CKING DIE, HOPE YOU GET CUT YOURSELF UPGRADING YOUR PC AND DIE BLEEDING.

    • Dakan45

      I am a pc expert you dumb fuck, i have proven you wrong on your arguments and you cant come up with a excuse because you are a DUMB FUCKING TROLL WITHOTU TECHINICAL KNOWLEDGE.

      Where are the developers who have said ps4 has no bottlenecks? THERE ARENT ANY JUST LIKE NO ONE SAYS THAT XBOX ONE WEAKS BECAUSE YOU DONT BASH SOMEONE YOU WORK WITH.

      IHAVE ALREADY DISPROVEN YOUR SHITY ARTICLES YOU DUMB FUCK,YOU ARE A WASTE OF SPACE AND TIME, STOP POSTING WITH A GUEST POST, STOP POSTING INCORRECT BULLSHIT, STOP BEING A RETARD.

      Until then i will be always here and disproving your shitty trolling arguments and how much of a retarded troll you are.

      Where do you live dan? Tell me so i can deal with this accordingly.

    • Guest

      $400 can net you a 680 now… another $400-500 will build you a decent system to get the most out of it.

    • Dakan45

      try 800$ instead.

  • RealityCheck2013

    Well i can’t get PlayStation Exclusive games if i don’t own a PlayStation Console so i don’t give a F**K about PC gaming!!! LoL:D

    • Guest

      Yeah, you’re a $0N¥ Pauper, we all know that.

    • Loser

      im not in the loser talk lingo… what the hell is $0N¥ Pauper?

    • Dakan45

      and pc has more exlusives than all systems combined, i cant have those on ps4.

      Inafct the sony exlusives are way too overrated.

  • dirkradke

    Everything becomes obsolete. Unfortunately, because a PC generation can last from 3-6 months you can’t build a business model around it other than coming out with the next great thing while still being compatible with the last great thing. The PS4 and X-Box One are unique in that the only thing they really concentrate on is being a specific device for a niche market. They can make great games that keep up more or less with PC for several years because they don’t have to concentrate on multiple memory configurations, operating systems, etc. If you can afford a high end PC and a PS4 and X-Box One you have the best of 3 worlds.

    • Dakan45

      A 5 year old pc can still play games better than the consoles, therefore a generation on pc lasts for quite long thanks to dated consoles.

    • dirkradke

      So what did you pay for that 5 year old PC? And better is a matter of perspective.

    • Dakan45

      Better is not a matter of perspective, if console can run games on 1280x720p with no AA and BARELLY 30 fps, yet that old pc can run at higher graphical setings with higher resolution and fps.

      As for what i paid? Depends, when ps3/x360 came out they did not have the same price the new consoles have now. What i mean by that is that 400 5 years ago was alot cheaper of what 400 is now due to crisis and inflation. The gpu was around 250 and the cpu was around 150. Not the 300-600 cpus gpus that you see in benchmarks. Yes i know you gonna say it was more expensive than a console, but i payed more for more power and customization and i had the ability to gradually upgrade it which means you dont have to pay all at once. Got a 186$ videocard and added 2gb of ram, and i am good for the next 2 years. Then i can spen 700$ and build a pc that will beat next gen by far.

      Think about it, if you are smart you can get good deals.

    • dirkradke

      Better is always a matter of perspective. And you’re talking about spending 2-3 times what I spent on a 360.

    • Dakan45

      is that with the xbox live subscription included or not? Because with all those years you pretty much end spending more money.

    • dirkradke

      No. I don’t care about multiplayer. However, even with the 360 subscription it would still be cheaper.

    • Dakan45

      Nope i found somehwere a user who proved that wrong for both ps3 and x360, where do you base it will be cheaper?

      Its obvious you have missconception about how good and expensive a pc needs to be to complete with consoles….for your information, nowhere near as much as you think.

    • dirkradke

      The misconception is that you must be some sort of expert in your own mind. Based on the numbers you provided you spent $886 and I spent at most $300 on my 360. So your PC is 3 times more expensive. Have you replaced anything on that PC to keep it current? I haven’t bought anything extra for my 360 in 6 years.

    • Dakan45

      props on you brah, but some of us and by us i mean gamers, actually buy stuff like subscriptions, controllers, microphones,etc etc, infact you are lucky that your 360 still works and hasnt prod multiple times and out of warranty.

      “The misconception is that you must be some sort of expert in your own mind’

      Let me read you the article

      “famed developers like Greg Kasavin”

      Greg kasavin is not a developer, he was reviewing games for gamespot, yet now he is “famous developer” way to spred lies and missconcpetions through missinformation

    • dirkradke

      You said you could buy a PC and compete on price with the 360. I said it would be cheaper. By your own numbers you proved yourself wrong. As for Greg Kasavin who cares who he is or what he does? It means exactly nothing to this conversation about how much I paid for my 360 vs. how cheap you think a PC is compared to that.

    • Dakan45

      and how shit your x360 is compared to any pc from 5 years ago because you are a poor fuck.

    • dirkradke

      What matters is the level of enjoyment you received from your purchase. Personally, I don’t see how calling me a “poor f*ck” indicates anything about me or my choice or the fact that the 360 is graphically inferior. I never said it wasn’t graphically inferior. All I said was I paid less for my 360 than you paid for your PC + parts.

    • Dakan45

      Well guess who received the most enjoyment? someone who is playing singleplayer only on an old used up x360 with a broken gamepad, or someon who plays on a decent pc with better graphics, sound, controls, mod and free mp?

      if you are so little invested in gaming? why even bother reading those articles.

    • dirkradke

      Looking at my Live Gamerscore I probably play 15-20 unique video games every year. Well you enjoying your PC more than me enjoying my 360 doesn’t do anything for me. Why does anything have to better than the other? Does it matter so much to you?

    • Dakan45

      So you telling me that by keeping the same hardware for 8 years and not paying subcription you can afford to buy 15-20 games for 60 bucks and buy used.

      Congratulations you end paying more per year than me.

      clap clap clap.

      You balance by not upgrading, i balance by using steam and buying game cheaply.

    • dirkradke

      Once again, why does it matter so much to you? No one has to be right or wrong.

  • gi

    Ps4 $399 alianware pc whit DDR3 costs $1200 ps4 all the way

    • Guest

      Because that’s all you paupers can afford.

    • Stupified

      No, it’s because we have common sense!

  • plcn

    nothing gets old faster than a PC… there’s a certain piece of mind in the parity and consistencies of consoles. but with PC, there’s always that next crysis-like game that invariably feeds some sort of insecurity/anxiety that my machine is no longer up to snuff. and then on top of all that, there’s all the driver management and dealing with windows, etc. PCs are great, but definitely high maintenance and always feeling sort of obsolete so quickly…

    • Dakan45

      Actually that was true in the past, but the fact taht with 5 year old pcs you can play games better than x360/ps3 just shows how consoles have hold the pc back due to their dated and weak hardware.

      This time, it wil be even faster.

    • Guest

      I know it’s a popular thing to say that consoles are holding PCs back, but it’s much more likely that it’s the segmented and varied PC market that holds PCs back. The fact of the matter is the average PC is not necessarily much more powerful than a console; and developers need to be able to sell their software to as many people as possible. Crysis is a great example of a series that is well loved by PC gamers – but if you look at sales figures, it doesn’t actually do nearly as well (on PC) as the titles that are a bit more mainstream in terms of performance requirements… that series coming to console is probably one of the only reasons EA even bothered backing it. so in that case you can argue consoles have pushed PC gaming forward, not held it back…

    • Dakan45

      If your pc is not more powerfull than current consoles, you cant play multiplatform games.

      This next gen is the weakest one yet, you gotta have a pc almost as powerfull to even play those games.

      “Developers need to be able to sell their software to as many people as possible”

      Which is why thay take horror games and turn them into action and try to make their “games” to be more like “interactive movies” and spend 100 million on budget and end up failing.

      Eg dead space 3, wanted 5 million sales so it focused on action and cinematic gamepaly, didnt sell, tomb raider became a cover based shooter, didnt sell, resident evil 6 wanted 7 million sales, got 5 it was officailly a failure.

      The reallity is that games sell bad everywhere NOT on pc. The consoles can no longer support the insanelly high AAA budgets that require crapazilion of sales, so they just make everything play alike and thus get low sales.

      So consoles and their high sale requirments are killing innovation and hold back gameplay.

      “Crysis is a great example of a series that is well loved by PC gamers –
      but if you look at sales figures, it doesn’t actually do nearly as well
      (on PC) as the titles that are a bit more mainstream in terms of
      performance requirements… that series coming to console is probably
      one of the only reasons EA even bothered backing it. so in that case you
      can argue consoles have pushed PC gaming forward, not held it back…”

      Completly incorrect. Crysis 1 on pc sold 3 million back then, which is what games get on all 3 systems and are not happy. When they made crysis 2 multiplatform they KILLED the gameplay with linear maps and dumded down gameplay in order to run on consoles and they got, get this 3 million sales….which crysis 1 on pc alredy had.

      Big freaking deal, obviously both games have sold more on pc and consoles by now. But lets hear what crytek said about crysis 3, “we made the game with the remaining budget from crysis 1 sales, we hope it sucseeds”

      Only it didnt, it sold badly, which result into crytek being back on square 1 and they would have been better off on pc when people actually bought their crysis games.

      So you say its about perfomance and costs?

      Over 150 million ps3 and x360s exist, yet you see games like sleeping dogs selling only 1.5 million.

      Why is that? Games are sturggling to srupass 2 million when so many consoles exist. Yet when steam has 50 million users and many of them buy 1-2 games or play on macbooks you expect a 40 million user fanbase to score 1-2 million sales on CONSOLE PORTS when the audience that its made for, 150 million x360/ps3 cannot give them more than 2-3 million sales and thus justify their high development costs?

      As bioware said “to properly make a AAA game next gen, you gonna need 10 million sales to cover up the costs”

      Yet torchlight 2 sold over 2 million only on pc.

      Pc market is very diffirent now, it has the highest exlusive count, it has the cheapest games, it has the most games and retains and archive of old games that can be sold without having to look at ebay for a expenisve old copy, thanks to digital distrubition,thanks to steam greenlight and early access you can support he devs and help them make their games and patch them.

      Infact pc revenue has reached 20 billion in 2012, which is higher than console revenue. Ea admited they make more money on pc than on ps3.

      Think about those things.

    • Matt

      They only get old when compared with themselves. Any PC meant for gaming that was made past 2007 is more than capable than outperforming a PS3 or 360… it’s only when they are compared with machines made with the latest tech that they aren’t as impressive. Both PS4 and XB1 will eventually fall into this category.

    • plcn

      But that’s my point. What PC gamer compares their machine against a console? Every time I see a new video card reviewed and see new benchmarks, I can’t help but feel like my current setup might need a tweaking/upgrade. I acknowledge it’s very psychological, but it doesn’t necessarily feel good to know that a game I’m interested in can play better on an upgraded version of my machine. I’m not saying consoles don’t ‘age’ but there is a simplicity in playing GTAV or the Last of Us and not feeling that little bit of stress that comes from worries of missing out… don’t get me wrong, I love the process of building and improving PCs, too. But objectively, especially with value in mind, PCs (at least at the enhusiast+ level) just don’t feel as durable/low maintenance. maybe i’ll feel differently after my current machine (3770k+7870) proves its worth in 5 years. but i wont hold my breath…

    • Matt

      Every PC gamer compares their PC to a console. That explains the flame war… LOL.

      The big thing about the PC market is that it’s ever expanding and improving upon itself. Don’t let the hardware industry undermine your investment because it takes the Devs a lot longer to catch up than it takes for the tech to evolve.

      As far as maintenance goes… It’s all up to you. I don’t have any problems but I don’t use my PC for much more than surfing the net and gaming. If your constantly installing new programs or surfing the net in ways which may be questionable then you might face those common misconceptions of PC gaming but not me.

      The biggest thing about PC gaming is being able to max out a game at stable framerates… trust me I know what it’s like. If you can’t max the game out you feel as though your missing out which is why there’s the need to upgrade to begin with. You don’t technically need too as your playing the game in levels far more visceral than what consoles are capable of but you just want the best.

    • plcn

      i guess i’m an exception to that. i do compare for titles that aren’t exclusive, and yeah it was nice to play games like Bioshock Infinite and Xcom, etc on PC. But there’s no way I’d feel like saying PC is so much better or worth it, especially with the exclusives that Sony and others will have.

      and call me a dork, but there is something about those platinum trophies… learned the hard way that Steam doesn’t have such things…

      but if a gamer had $1500 to spend, I think I’d recommend a gamer set aside $500 of it for a PS4 w/ PS+. And then maybe in a couple years let that other $1000 go towards an enthusiast level PC…. that $1000 machine will probably be competitive to or better than today’s $1500 PC and you’ll still have a current gen console with several years of play left in it…

  • Axe99

    Gara’s talk sounds like marketing wish-wash, _but_ the high-level PC cards these days are something else – very expensive and for a very niche audience. If the PS3 struggled at $600 a pop when it launched, imagine trying to market a console with a GPU alone that cost more than that – it would be insanity – and you’d never get the install base to justify the development of games like GTA V.

    However, at launch I’d wager there’ll be very little difference between a PS4/XB1 and a decent PC gaming rig, and it’s got the added bonus of integrated social features and far greater ease-of-use and reliability (console games are optimised for specific console controllers, while PC games often have to support a plethora of control options, adding to the fuss involved when starting a game – I spent my first half an hour in DCS world just going through key mappings – fun! And then there’s driver compatibility issues, OS version compatibility issues and so on.) What consoles lack in sheer power, they make up for in streamlined efficiency. If people want to focus on the power but don’t mind all the messing around to get it to work, then buy a high end PC. If people like to just get down and game, then a console is likely the way to go (unless you’re into MOBAs or strategy). At this stage, I’d bet good money that the consoles will do _very_ well, but that PC gaming will also stay healthy, and everyone will get to be happy :).

    • Dakan45

      You dont need high end stuff, a mid range can also do the job.

    • Axe99

      Agreed, but the PS4/XB1 will do the job as well, and still be cheaper than a mid-range ;). A decent mid-range CPU and GPU alone costs more than a PS4, and you don’t have all the headaches that come with PC gaming, and the AAA games are designed with console specs in mind – there are very few games that can push PCs harder than consoles beyond frame rates/resolution – ie, the consoles will dictate the limits of core gameplay until next gen, because that’s where the money to support AAA games comes from. Not saying you shouldn’t go PC only (I know where your heart lies Dakan ;)), but I’d be very surprised if this console generation didn’t do very well, as there an are a lot of gamers who like to game with the pain-in-the-arse factor that PC brings with it.

    • Dakan45

      The XB1…. meh, the ps4 yes, but you talk about cheapness, compared to what? You dont have to buy a brand new pc, just a small upgrade on your old pc and you are ready for next gen. Dont have 400? Fine buy a 200 videocard and 200 cpu in a year or two. Whats that you can spend more? feel free to do it. A cpu/gpu that cost more than 400$ will give you better graphics for 4-5 years.

      You talk about problems but the pc master race can suprisingly overcome them…yet console gamers cannot?

      Ok then, we are more tech handy, but thanks to steam most of the problems are gone. With steamOS it will be even easier.

      Problems exist on consoles too, whats that? skyrim crashes and stutters on consoles? What can you do? Nothing, just wait for the publisher to authorize a patch that will possibly fix it, while on pc you can fix it yourself thanks to other users having found a fix.

      “and the AAA games are designed with console specs in mind – there are
      very few games that can push PCs harder than consoles beyond frame
      rates/resolution”

      Incorrect, the AAA games have become too expensive, as bioware said true AAA games will take 10 million sales to make profit, do you not see it? How all games became more dumbed down, horror games go action for more sales and so on and on.

      On top of that this gen is the smallest jump yet, pc is so far ahead that its not a problem anymore for specs. Now that pc hardawre and optimization will be what multiplats be based arond, pc perfomane will increase, not to mention mantle and steamOS, pc gaming will become cheaper and more optimized.

      What you mean there are few games that push harder than consoles beyond framerate resolution?

      Most console games nowdays run on low pc settings, bf3 and max payne 3 run on low pc settings, crysis 3 and metrol last light run under the lowest pc settings, hell tomb raider and remember me on pc beat the last of us graphically, thats what happens after all those years of dated hardware,the pc version gets the newer technology and graphics they couldnt put on consoles, while they run on dated graphics.

      Even when oblivion came out on the “next gen” x360 the pc version had better graphics. Which is something that Greg kasavin which is mention on this artilcle, said on this gamespot oblivion review.

      Pc always had better graphics than consoles evne on release due to developers not running games very high resolution, framerates or pushing AA and draw distance as far as they can. Eg watchdogs on ps4 30 fps, or shadowfall using only FXAA, obviously this is not done because it cant be done but because the devs think they its a good enough and satysfing experiane on pc you dont have a limit that devs thought it was good enough.You can increase the graphics according to what you think is “good enough”

      “the consoles will dictate the limits of core gameplay until next gen,”

      Which sucks hard since current consoles didnt have alot of ram so we have been playing generic linear shooters to stream enviroments, back in ps1/n64 ps2/xbox ere we had a great variety of games, now its the same generic trash to get sales and yet failing to get them. For that reason i prefer indie and pc.

      “because that’s where the money to support AAA games comes from.”

      is it? all games fail to get high sales, gta and cod, wont save the industry, crysis3, moh warfighter, dead space 3, syndicate, kingdoms of amalaur, darksiders 2, resistance 3, tomb raider, hitman asbolution, sleepign dogs, resident evil 6, dmc, all those games were failure, apparently consoles cannot support AAA industry anymore.

      Due to economical crisis and the high costs of console R&D the only way to make consoles is go to those who have the money and the hardware and techinical knowledge to do it, such as amd and nvidia and make the consoles as affordable as possible, which means cutting corners and making them weak.

      So i could say “yeah how about making consoles a bit more powerfull for 600$” but no one is gonna pay that, games struggle to get sales, so yeah you gonna have to deal with cheapness on the upcoming gen, HOPEFULY that drivers innovation instead of pouring 100 million in a game and hoping it will sell well.

      Ps the steam controller is far more precise than the crappy thumbsticks both consoles have, how about some innovation in controlling the game and not rellying in the same thumbsticks just because people are used to them…but i forgot, in order to sell well, the console industry has to take safe bets.

    • Matt

      Try all you want Dakan… common people don’t understand Pc’s outside of Fap Machine.

    • Dakan45

      I just facepalm when console fanboys say pc is dying and its full of piracy, and has no games, while it does better than nitendo and it gets nearly every game, and it has more exlusives than all consoles combined and it is the only revenue that has increased the last few yeasr and actually higher than console revenue.

      Not to mention falling for ” ps4 can run planetside 2 better than a 4000$ pc” when you yourself said, its not a demanding game.

      Hell its laughable like that idiot jason mounce who said “hey pc elitists not all of us have your expensive high end pcs, my latop cant run warframe on high”

      REALLY? A game with 2006 requirements, dx9 and dual core only, a game that a 8800GT can max out? Apparently consoles cant run it 1080p 60 fps and that sounds “next gen” but the fact people are fooled by such clueless missconceptions ,its annoying, to them pc is a browsing machine and 4000$ super pcs that consoles somehow manage to beat due to MAGICAL OPTIMIZATION!!

      Just look at how trash crysis is on consoles, consoles- weaker hardware, not magical optimization that beats pc.

    • Axe99

      Haha, monster post there! Short answer is – I can (and have) overcome PC problems – I’ve been gaming on PC since back when we had to write specific config.sys and autoexec.bat files for each game so they’d work best on our system – however, on console I don’t have to – it just works. It’s like which would I choose – the slightly more flashy sports car I have to spend an hour or two fixing every few times I want to go for a drive, or the slightly less exotic car that works every time.

      On the by, Skyrim’s a terrible example – at least on console, while the frame rates weren’t great and the autosave was a mess, it by and large worked. On PC, it was necessary to use console commands to keep the thing going. It’s a great case in point of the pain-in-the-arse factor on PC. Case in point, I had less crashes in 150 hours of Skyrim on PS3 than I did in 10 hours of The Witcher on PC or 25 hours of Oblivion on PC.

      Your claim of generic games is terrible. I assume you would consider Far Cry 3 a linear environment? PC has excellent innovative games as well, of course, but suggesting that they don’t exist on console is having your head in the sand.

      And yes – the money to support AAA games _does_ come, by and large, from the console audience. Do you think devs want to limit their visions of Watch Dogs, AC4 or BF4 by making them designed to function on PS3 or X360? If PC and next-gen was enough, then they wouldn’t be launching there. The list of ‘failures’ you provide is just a list of failures – big games have failed since forever. For every game you provide in that list, I could provide five more with similar or higher budgets that were successful, which is the point I’m making. Cherry-picking doth not analysis make ;).

    • Dakan45

      What you mean at large it worked? it also worked on pc and the familiar issues had the familiar fixes, not kiding same issues and fixes as oblivion.

      What about resistance 3, you had to install patch ,uninstall patch and reinstall the game due to some screw up.

      What are the games that are innovative on consoles? because most of them arent and are driven by high sales so they have to be expensive.

      ” Do you think devs want to limit their visions of Watch Dogs, AC4 or BF4 by making them designed to function on PS3 or X360?’

      They dont have a choice, all “vision” is killed to make it appeal to more people as ubisoft said, if they did not know for certain that watch dogs would sell, they wouldnt make it. They cant risk their finacial state for innovation.

      They just need to sel it as many people as possible.

      Never before have so many games failed and so many studios closed down, there was more innovation in the pat, now its all reboots and dumb down sequels, only indie games grwo.

      Go ahead and provide me with better games that sold well, 5 more for each one as you say.

      I just show you what every company had to offer and how they failed, mass effect 3 and assasin creed 3 sold well, so i did not put them into the list but they are considered horrible games by gamers.

      So yeah show me where are the games you say that sell well, i picked the big offerings of each publisher and show you that they failed. Gta and cod aint gonna save the industry.

      Developers have tried the steam controller, they said it doesnt feel like a laptop touchpad, its more accurate and precise, whats the point to even play fps with thumbsticks if they dont bother to make it controll well? One of the reasons i dont play games on consoels.

    • Axe99

      A lot of it worked, but not as well as console. I had a friend who literally couldn’t play it for weeks without a new bug popping up (played it on PS3 m’self, and it was far, far less of a problem).

      Haven’t played Resistance 3 yet, so can’t comment.

      As for innovation on console, don’t forget that Limbo, Castle Crashers, Shatter, Trials, Fez, Braid, Journey and Flower launched on console, and some haven’t come to PC yet. You deffo get more indie games on PC, and many are great, but there is also indie-level innovation on console. This is just off the top of my head as well – there’s a good deal more out there.

      Successful games is easy – on the by, ME3 and AC3 count, as the metric we’re using here for success is sales. If you want to use quality of game as the metric, then a lot of your examples would have to be removed. So using happiness with sales as a benchmark you have – The Last of Us, the God of Wars, the Uncharted series, the Killzone series, Dishonored, XCOM: Enemy Unknown, Bioshock series, GTA and CoD, the Assassin’s Creed series, Gran Turismo series, Forza series, F1 series all the sports games, the Halos, the Gears, the Fables, Dragon Age: Origins and 2, the Mass Effect series, the Final Fantasy series, Oblivion, Skyrim, Fallout 3 and New Vegas, Red Dead Redemption, Battlefield series (including the Bad Companies and 1943), IL-2 Sturmovik: Birds of Prey, Burnout Paradise, a good number of the Need for Speeds, the first couple of Resistance games, Warhawk, Borderlands 1 and 2, Deus Ex:HR, Red Faction: Guerilla, Far Cry series, DC Universe Online, Skate series, The Orange Box, Just Cause 2, LittleBigPlanet 1 and 2, Metal Gear Solid 4, Infamous series, Batman series…. and I’m just getting started, that’s just me browsing the games I’ve played on Raptr on PS3 – it doesn’t include any of the fighters like DOA5 or Super Street Fighter IV, other successful JRPGs like the Tales series and a whole lot of other stuff. That enough for ya, or should I go on? ;).

      You’ll also note that many of the titles listed above were innovative – LittleBigPlanet, CoD 4, Portal (in the Orange Box), Skate and Burnout Paradise were all unique and highly appreciated experiences.

    • Dakan45

      If a gamestopping bug happens in skyrim, you are fucked…on a console, on pc you can use console commands.

      So you telling me that innovation on consoles comes from indies and the very same low budget “Art” games that console gamers bash saying they are nowhere near the caliber of AAA exlusives.

      You proving my point. AAA= no innovation, same shit to keep buying them.

      You reallize the games you provied are either exlusive “series” or big “series” like cod and gta and they are gathered from across the generation and 7-8 years when i simply pointed out all those games that have failed form the last 2 years from all companies. basicly what ea,thq,capcom, square enix, have offered failed. Apart from bf4 and mass effect 3. Ubisoft is doing well though.

      Ill add some innovative games, like minecraft, papers please, antichamber.

    • Axe99

      Since when did “console gamers” bash indie games? I’ve seen indies praised by gamers of all stripes, and bashed by gamers of all stripes (including plenty of bashing from PC-only gamers). The stereotyping you’ve done here of console gamers is just not right (it may be representative of people in comments sections on the internet, but thank the heavens those people are not representative of the broader gaming community).

      Clearly, most AAA games won’t be terribly innovative, for reasons done to death that actually make a lot of sense. Spending $100 million on an untested idea is stupid, irrespective of platform – but you get small-team innovation everywhere (Tokyo Jungle is another great example). But you did get games like MAG trying something new on console, and for its time Gears of War and Assassin’s Creed were quite different and innovative. Sure, the sequels weren’t, but that’s kind of the point of sequels – you don’t buy Transformers 5 to watch a human drama about old age pensioners – sequels are kind of locked into these things.

    • Dakan45

      since amensia, since f2p, since….basicly since 2008, specificly “hah ha pc gamers dont have real games they got indie shit”

      Actually the broader console community are retards, this is the userbase that ensuers 100 million cosole sales, average joes who play fifa and cod and are dubebro duchebags or clueless non tech savy people.

      Actually we are way past innovation, now games just copy each other, same enviroments, same scripted events, same focus, ps have you noticed how many shooters added a bow lately? its like devs gather up and say” here whats hot, lets all put it in our games”

      So there is no personallity everything plays alike.

    • Axe99

      I game on both, so I see all that console-only gamer rubbish as just that – the equivalent of the PC master race rubbish but from the other side. The platforms are different, but the emotional frailties are the same ;). I’d pay no mind to closed-minded people like that. If you can bring ’em to see reason well and good, but don’t waste too much time on it.

      In terms of innovation, the thing we’re seeing now is more refinement. It’s like anything, early in a thing’s development, changes are more radical, but as they get more developed the relative changes are smaller, until you get things that radically alter things. Planes, cars, trains, story telling, movies, you name it. Things keep innovating, but by less and less. And, when something’s successful people copy it, hence all the bows popping up everywhere, agree it’s a bit lolsworthy!

    • Dakan45

      ps, rockstar advices ps3 users to contact customer support if they experiance an Error number, just saw that yesterday, consoles seem to have issues.

      As for innovation? Killzone shadowfall another generic corridors shooter, hooray another infamous game, whats that? dead rising was turned into a brown and grey action game? What ryse that kinect game is turning into a QTE game?

      Oh look its titanfall, aka cod with mechs, or maybe destiny repeaing off borderlands, or you might wanna check out the new cod and bf along with the upcoming new tomb raider and resident evil game. Everything in e3 was “been there, played that”

    • Axe99

      All the AAA stuff, but there was some quality indie work at E3. Killzone: Shadowfall is a bit more open-plan than past iterations – it’s still not crazy innovative, but it’s not a corridor shooter any more. Infamous is great, not sure what your point is. Ryse is more than just QTEs (although I’m personally not sold on it, or its butchering of Roman history).

      As for the launch of GTA V:
      – It was the biggest entertainment launch in history, I’m not surprised there were some issues.
      – it’s hardly appropriate to use this as a point against PC, given we can’t exactly compare GTA V’s performance on PC yet, and it won’t be comparable then as it’ll be a far smaller launch relative to that on console (well, we don’t _know_ that, but I’d expect it to be).

    • Dakan45

      all i have sen in shadowfall is cover based corridor shooting.

      Another infamous, propably anothe god of war, you know same stuff.

      Ryse was a kinect game originally, that says alot.

      Gta V on pc should perfom very well, keyword being should because gta iv was a glorious screw up.

    • Axe99

      Sounds like you haven’t been paying much attention to Shadowfall then ;). Agree that inFamous is clearly an evolution rather than a revolution, but there really aren’t that many quality superhero open-world games out there, and only one currently announced for next-gen – I’d much rather it was there than wasn’t.

      Don’t forget Sony is where we got Heavy Rain, the Last of Us, Starhawk and MAG, not to mention LittleBigPlanet – all games with substantial budgets that mixed it up. Sure, they didn’t all get a great reception, but you _never_ get 100% of new projects getting great receptions – gamers don’t like change (even on PC – look at the reaction to combat in Civ V) and some changes don’t stick.

      And while MS hasn’t had a lot of innovation in its in-house productions, outside of the Fable series, it has at times been a strong supporter of indies (granted, it’s coming out of a quiet patch for that at the moment).

      Also, don’t forget that Steam Greenlight is seen by many indies as a terrible place to do business. Just head on over to Gamasutra and read what a few actual devs think about it.

      TL;DR – it’s all a mix, on all platforms. Big budget stuff is less risky (on all platforms), but that’s because of the budget, not the platform.

      No argument about Ryse – doesn’t really look anything special at all. That said, I like the look of Crimson Dragon, even though it has the same heritage (Kinect 360 title).

    • Dakan45

      where is the things i didnt saw from shadowfall? Now that sneaking part is not particulary impressive.

      ikaruga and deadly premonition are coming to steam. Wow.

      Devs dont like how they got to get votes to get their games approved. Not a problem, the most famous games get the attention and get approved. Its not like they will finish the game before it gets approved. Its no diffirnet than indie developers that have to make their game more famous than the other dev in order to get attention.

    • Axe99

      PS – as for the Steam controller, it looks like a very innovative piece of kit. However, it’s still to be seen whether it will be a clearly better gamepad, or a jack-of-all trades, master-of-none device – the main concern people have is the lack of resistance from a touchpad, which the haptic feedback can help with but not replace. On the other hand, a thumb on a touchpad will never be as precise as a mouse. I’ll try it out, for sure, but I suspect I’ll stick with my current arrangement of mouse/kb for strategy games and gamepad for everything else.

      Oh, and yes the Steam controller will be more precise for shooters, but only because PC (and most console) shooters go soft and don’t bother to model the physics of aiming and turning. If we had proper aiming/turning physics modelled in games, the difference between a thumbstick and a mouse would be much less noticeable. It’s just mouse FPS gamers are too used to their casualised, accessible control method to let go (case in point, even ArmA 3 won’t model aiming and turning, because BI know most FPS PC gamers can’t cope with dealing it).

  • dipshits

    I can see some idiots saying PC’s are getting outdated fast. Well it’s become hardware is evolving at a faster rate each year, thats why. Maxwell and especially Volta ALONE will fucking destroy PS4 and XboxOne. Volta having stacked DRAM instead of shitty slow limited GDDR as PS4. Not to mention what Intel will offer with new CPU’s. Oh yes and on the memory side, DDR4 will be the last of it’s kind. While PC’s will move on to Hybrid Memory Cube (although it’s not ready yet for consumer PC’s), PS4 and X1 will be stuck with ancient GDDR5 and DDR3.

    • Stupified

      Yes, but can you get all that tech for $400. jackass? How much will it cost? Do you plan on waiting for 5 years when it becomes remotely affordable? You sir are a dumbass!

    • Dakan45

      You are the dumbass, yes you can get that tech for $400 IF you have a pc from 5 years ago that doesnt suck shit. Just UPGRADE IT, thats what pc gamers do, they dont go and buy a 1000$ pc, they buy parts, eg buy a 200 videocard now and a better cpu in 2 years, there you got same price.

      Moron.

    • Stupified

      Dakan, I am also a pc gamer and I’m fully aware of how to upgrade my pc. And yes you can get a decent system by upgrading your current pc for a fraction of the cost. However, that wasn’t the point I was arguing, Dipshit is saying that tech that isn’t even on the market is going to destroy the Xbone and PS4….obviously it is…however..can you get that for $400? No! It’ll cost a hell of alot more…so asking a $400. console to be as powerful as the latest pc tech worth 10x more is a bit ridiculous don’t you think?

    • Dakan45

      judiging by the retarded bullshit i read from you, no you dotn know shit.

      WHY get it for 400$ WHY explain me WHY?

      Ps4 does not cost 400$ they sell it for less and make up the losses from high sales.

      A 200 videocard and a 150 cpu can beat the ps4 and continue to play games at the higher settings for 4-5 years. Put that in an old pc and TA DA ,next gen, no need to unplug your trashbox 4 and plug trashbox 3 in order to play old games.

    • Stupified

      Once again…I KNOW THAT ASSHOLE!!!!! THE POINT I’M ARGUING IS THAT DIPSHIT IS COMPARING A $400. CONSOLE TO TECHNOLOGY THAT ISN’T EVEN ON THE MARKET…..DO YOU GET IT NOW?????? i KNOW A CHEAPER PC CAN ACCOMPLISH ALOT….FOR F**KS SAKE, MY LAST PC WAS RUNNING A GTX260 WITH 8GBS DDR3 RAM, WITH AN I5 CPU AND I WAS RUNNING ALL THE CURRENT GAMES!!!!! NOW IF YOU CAN’T UNDERSTAND ENGLISH, DON’T COMMENT ON MY POSTS YOU STUPID IDIOT!!!!!

    • Dakan45

      WHY YOU FUCKING NEED 400$ CHEAPER PC WHEN YOU CAN JUST UPGRADE YOUR CURRENT ONE FOR LESS YOU PATHETIC RETARD?

      WHY? WHY? WHY?

      ANSWER ME THIS AND THEN I WILL STOP COMMENTING YOU DUMB FUCK.

      You acting like xbox one isnt 500$ and weaker than the ps4, as IF someone cant build a pc for 600$ and beat ps4.

    • Stupified

      WHO GIVES A RAT’S FUCKING ASS IF YOU CAN BUILD A $600. PC THAT CAN BEAT A PS4!!!! CAN YOU GET UNCHARTED, GRAN TURISMO, THE LAST OF US, INFAMOUS, ETC ETC ON A PC????? NO!!!!!!!! SO SHUT THE FUCK UP!!!!!!!! AND FURTHER MORE YOU ILLITERATE JACKASS, THE FUCKING POINT I WAS ARGUING IS THAT YOU CAN’T GET FUTURE….YOU GET THAT….FUTURE….FUCKING FUTURE TECHNOLOGY RIGHT NOW FOR THE COST OF A PS4….READ DIPSHIT’S POST YOU STUPID FUCK!!!! YOU DON’T KNOW WHAT THE FUCK YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT!!!!!!!!! FUCK YOU’RE STUPID!!!! HOW OLD ARE YOU????? 10????????????????

    • Dakan45

      WHO GIVES A RATS ASS IF YOU ARE POOR AND STUPID AND WANT TO BUY A NEW PC FOR 400? WE JUST SPEND 200-300 AND UPGRADE OUR CURRENT PC, NO NEED TO UPLUG IT AND PLUG A PS3 TO PLAY OLD GAMES,WE CAN PLAY EVERYTHING.

      WHY YOU THINK WE CARE ABOUT THOSE OVERHYPED EXLUSIVES? SONY EXLUSIVES ARE JUST FUCKING AVERAGE, NOT AMAZING AT ALL, CAN YOU PLAY ANTICHAMBER, ZENO CLASH 2 AND AMNESIA ON PS4? NOPE. SO SUT THE FUCK UP YOU DUMB FUCK.

      YOU TALK ABOUT FUTURE TECHONLOGY BUT THE TECH ON PS4 IS FROM 2010 WITH THE HORSEPOWER OF 2011 YOU DUMB FUCK.

      KILL YOURSELF YOU PATHETIC FANTARD.

    • Stupified

      You still don’t get it….you never will…….I’ve seen dumb people on the internet…..but you sir…you take the crown….you’re wrong…you were wrong from the start, and you always will be wrong….do with that as you may…I’m out….go suck shit…loser!

    • Dakan45

      How the fuck putting…… is proper punctuation? Is this why you type in caps? Because you are incapable of typing properly?

      The dumb fuck here is you kid, all your posts are utla stupid, which explains your user name of choice.

      So what is what i am not getting? Wtf you want to say?

      Can you get tech that is equivilant to ps4 for 400$ ?

      No you cant because the cpu ps4 uses is so crap you cant find a 8 core cpu as weak, but you can try a 6 core with more power for a low price, you can also get a decent videocard and get the job done, so what is what you are arguing?

      That you want that specific tech for THAT specific price? Juding by your sony exlusives comments, thats what you must mean, which proves you are as sony fanboy and just want a ps4 for 400$ and nothing else.

    • Matt

      In 5 years the consoles will be in the same position that current gen is when compared to PC. They will hold PC back from true Ray tracing and whatever else comes about capability.

  • Dakan45

    It is outdated. That doesnt mean it sucks

    The cpu is a dual core 1.6ghz x4 threads, not an actual 8 core. It is a tablet low power cpu.

    Long story short dont expect the cpu to deliver as much power as a good gaming pc.

    The fact the cpu is so weak, bottlenecks the gpu. Also the GDDR5 perfoms slower for cpu tasks than DDR3.

    But they sony is not gonna stop hyping just like they did with ps3 and ps2.

    The fact they ahve to defend it, means that there is reason to worry, all i am seeing latelly is xbox one and ps4 having to defend themselfs from the downgrades they making and showing that they are not super duper monster systems.

    • HelterSkelter

      What do you mean by dual core? It’s been confirmed that the cpu is a true 8 core. GDDR5 might have higher latency for cpu tasks but the benefits of GDDR5 outweigh the benefits of DDR3 and because it’s a SoC, the latency is reduced even further. It isn’t more powerful than a high-end PC by any means but it also isn’t outdated. Developers have already stated that the system has no bottlenecks.

    • Dakan45

      Is it true 8 core? From what i checked its most defintly not a true 8 core but threaded.

      What developers have stated it has no bottlenecks? Guirella doesnt count. The cpu is garbage it is 100% outdated, we talking about a low power tablet 1.6ghz cpu, its just trash.

    • Matt

      When compared to anything on PC it’s trash but functional trash. It’ll do the job on console fairly well even as a cheap tablet part but don’t expect it to out perform anything decent in the PC market.

      It’s benefits from the way consoles work more so than PC.

    • Dakan45

      No, ps2 was good enough and xbox was quite powerfull back then. Hell x360 and ps3 were pretty powerfull, but now ps4 is average and xbox one is weak as hell.

      Sony has to stop hyping their console with the typical “better than a 4000$ pc” trash i have been hearing since ps2.

      Hey guys “ps2 is so powerfull that it can be used to weapons of mass destruction”

      and the stupid sony fantards fall for this trash.

      This time pc is soooooo far head consoles, super hardawre while the consoles arent even out, xbox one is weaker, games will be optimized for pc hardware, mantle, steam os, pc gaming is gonna get cheaper.

    • Matt

      Ps2 and Xbox were more impressive when it came to the hardware market when compared to the PS4 or XB1. That was over 10 years ago though… sadly. Pc’s could benefit better from Mantle but it’s still to be seen… as someone who invested in an AMD CPU and a Nividia GPU I don’t know what to think about the whole situation. SteamOS might dwindle into a gimmick if they don’t support a complete DX wrapper because windows has such a strangle hold on PC gaming… Valve would also need to have other devs support them to completely undermine Windows. If Origin comes on board then that just might happen but we’ll have to see how it will really work out.

    • Dakan45

      x360 and ps3 were more impressive, now no one can afford to do Research and development on hardware, only amd and nvidia can spend billions every year. Consoles are now the cheap mainstraim versions of a average pc. Not a super next gen system as fanboys think.

      Nvidia is working with steamOS i think.

    • Matt

      True but think of the average dumb people that think consoles are the only way to game.

      I’m still curious about the future of PC gaming. Amd’s Mantle API is quite promising even if it means I have to invest in an amd card. I have a 680 at the moment and I still want to get the most out of my $600 investment so I’m just sitting here watching the industry… mainly waiting for the PC release of GTA V.

    • Dakan45

      http://takhisis.info/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Killzone_Shadow_Fall_001.jpg take a look at this 50gb “next gen”-my ass game.

      I swear multiplats on pc looked like this 2 years ago.

    • Matt

      Clarity is awesome but character models are LOL.

    • Dakan45

      where are the shadows though? i thought it was called shadowfall.

    • Matt

      Shadowfail

    • Dakan45

      no shadows

    • My two cents

      There are shadows…I’m going to get the PS4 for the exclusives anyways which, in the past, have won game of the year. Also, PS3 – exclusives – that ran on crappy hardware – had amazing graphics. The PS4, when optimized, will have the same impact. I’m a PC gamer as well – stop complaining about consoles holding back PCs. Majority of revenues come from console games (that why devs focus on them). Without consoles, there would be no good multiplats. Have fun with your graphics, I’ll be playing games like infamous SS, God of War 4, uncharted 4, etc in the not too distant future.

    • Dakan45

      Amazing graphics? Only kz3, everyone less. NOPE.

      Id rather stick to gameplay.

      if you SERIOUSLY havent get tired of god of war and uncharted by now, i trully feel sorry for you.

      I always thought infamous and killzone were trash.

    • My two cents

      Never said I was waiting for another uncharted or Gof War, they were good or last gen. Waiting for next amazing exclusive. I metioned graphics because that’s waht was being said. Never said it was the only that mattered. Like you, I prefer gameplay more… To each there own. I buying next gen for exlcusives. Nothing more, nothing less

    • guest

      http://daxgamer.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Killzone-Shadow-Fall_08-20-13-5.jpg

      Can see shadows fine – Killzone screenshots look fantastic to me.

    • Dakan45

      I will be honest it looks unimpressive, especailly the weapon model. The onlythink that is impressive is that finally consoles managed to do godrays and that the shadows are not prebaked. Big deal it looks average, i bet titanfall will look better than this on a pc.

    • HelterSkelter

      The cpu is based off AMD’s module architecture so technically it’s not a true 8 core but it’s better than a hyperthreaded core. It’s closer to the real thing than a hyperthreaded quad. As for the cpu itself, it isn’t trash. Sure, it won’t beat an i5 or i7 but it’s good enough for a console. As for the bottlenecks, I don’t think Sony and AMD would spend millions on a console and not notice bottlenecks.It would be stupid and would make no sense. The cpu isn’t great by any means ( the developers are mostly boasting the GPU) but it also isn’t outdated. Also, why doesn’t Guerilla count? They are actually working with the console and so would know if the system has bottlenecks. No developer has stated that the CPU is bottlenecking the GPU.

    • Dakan45

      Nope, its a tablet based cpu, meaning its a lower power and cant outpout enough power to surpass a powerfull quad core.

      Guirella doesnt count for the same reason planetside 2 dev saying that ps4 can run the game better than a 4000$ pc, because they are sony loyalists filled with hype.

      Regarding on devlopers not bashing the cpu, has any developer bashed the xbox one? I havent heard any developer criticizing the xbo one hardware either.

      Its NDAs, you dont bash something you work with.

    • HelterSkelter

      Just because it’s based on a tablet cpu doesn’t mean it will perform identical to a tablet cpu. Obviously, it won’t surpass a powerful quad core. There was a benchmark which put the jaguar architecture at half that of an i5. That isn’t too bad. Look, obviously AMD and Sony wouldn’t design a system which had major bottlenecks like you are claiming. Do think, they just said “hey let’s put this cpu with this gpu and ram and lets not test it”. They obviously did frequent testing to ensure that the system would have no bottlenecks. Also, there were quite a few developers complaining that the X1’s hardware was inferior to the PS4. The funny thing is, those developers said that the PS4 could do 1080p 30fps and X1 could do 900p with 20-ish fps. I don’t know it you heard but Ryse has been confirmed to be 900p. Could be a coincidence or it could not be. The devs are already admitting that the PS4 has an obvious power advantage.

    • Dakan45

      Depends how you see it, its a low power cpu designed for low power consumption, it cant outpout the heat and the speed of a decen gpu. It is good for now but definetly not next gen, it wil be absolute rash in 2 years, which means gpu dependedant games and all of them optimized for 8 cores.

      i dont think that amd and sony can NOT make mistakes but ms can.

      Think about it, how can ms fuck up but sony cannot? Did sony spew their awesome super duper magic on amd in order to make a better console?

      or you are forgetting the fuck up of architecture the ps3 was so now sony doesnt trust nor has the budget to make their own console with japanesse engineers in japan.

      X360 did frequent testing too, didnt save them from PRODs, ps3 did testing too, didnt predicted the horrible architecture and high price point.

      Hell xbox one is having problems with drivers right now and its weaker.

      i would like to know who those developers are becasue from what i heard they are either “anonymous sources” or from the other side, eg some indie xbox one dev claimed that his game uses alot of ram in order to dipsute ps4’s ram.

      We will see.

    • HelterSkelter

      The Xbox did have rrod’s but that doesn’t pertain to the discussion. We are discussing the bottlenecks of the system, not the failure rate. Failure rate applies to many hardware, not just consoles. The PS3 architecture wasn’t necessarily a fuck up. It was technically more powerful than the 360 but developers hated the cell. It was actually stupid on Sony’s part to develop the cell architecture because it wasn’t developer friendly. They fixed this by using the X86 architecture in the PS4 though. The developers have to remain anonymous when bashing another console or else they’ll be in trouble. Dakan, you do know that most PC gamers actually have weaker PC’s than the consoles right? Most opt for the budget cards such as 650’s or 7770’s.The PS4 isn’t so bad like you making out to be.

    • Dakan45

      I am just proving you that console manufacutres can fuck up and they are not all always perfect and mighty, sony took a huge loss from ps3, they had to ramp up the exlusives to get sales.

      Most pc gamers? Which you reffer to exactly? because if you dont have a decent quadcore and atleast 5 series gtx videocard you wont be able to play games next gen. Its not like when the upcoming CROSSGEN games come out, they will completly utilize console hardware. You wont need a system that is as powerful as next gen to play them, especially when you look at the xbox one. BUT that hardware is supposed to be “next gen” when its actually quite weak and it will quickly became outdated, yet consoles suppose to last a gen with that, despite that the more powerfull at the time x360 and ps3 didnt, not to mention xbox and ps2.

      Ps4 is not bad, its average what is bad is sony hyping and ofcourse the xbox one.

    • HelterSkelter

      Yes hardware failures do happen but Sony and AMD won’t develop a bottlenecked system.Sony’s loss were a result of mad development decisions by developing the Cell. To me, it seems that AMD and Sony has been focusing heavily on the GPU and less on the CPU. They developed the CPU to be just enough for the system, not great but enough.

      Most PC gamers do have budget builds because most always opt to build a 400-500 dollar PC. The PS4 is “next-gen”. Next-gen relative to the current-gen consoles that is. This is what many forget. It might not be next-gen relative to a good PC’s performance but it is next-gen relative to current-gen consoles.

    • Dakan45

      How so? they made mistakes in the past, but THIS TIME just THIS TIME they do it right, really?

      Think about it, they wanted to launch with 4gb, initially and suffer the same fate as games do now because of low ram.

      No i dont think anyone who wants to play multiplatform games builds 400-500 pc, you can build one, but the people who build budget pcs are a minority.

      Ps4 cpu is not “next gen” its outdatd and weak, atleat xbox one upgrade its cpu. The good thing about ps4 iss the price.

      Current gen consoles run games on low pc settings, just like ps2/xbox coudlnt run far cry and fear, so you pretty much confirming the only reason its “next gen” is because is more powerfull than 7 year old trashboxes, by that logic wiiu is next gen.

    • HelterSkelter

      Look, I know that they made mistakes in the past but I’m SPECIFICALLY referring to BOTTLENECKS. Sure there were 360’s that had rrod but were there any specific bottlenecks? lol, most people do in fact build budget or medium range PC’s. What, did you think the majority of PC gamers own 680’s or even 670’s. You know there’s still many PC gamers who own dual cores right? Even if you see thousands of posts of people with high-end hardware, the majority of the MILLIONS of PC gamers still use budget builds.

      “Current gen consoles run games on low pc settings, just like ps2/xbox coudlnt run far cry and fear, so you pretty much confirming the only reason its “next gen” is because is more powerfull than 7 year old trashboxes, by that logic wiiu is next gen.”

      No, you have misunderstood what I meant. First of all, there’s a reason why it’s called next-gen “CONSOLES.” Think about it like this. The PS3’s gpu is more or like the 7900gt. The PS4’s gpu is along the lines of a HD7850. The gap between the two GPU’s are pretty huge so the PS4 is next-gen compared to the PS3. Same with the ram, it has 16 times more than it’s predecessor. Of course PC graphics are gonna look better, only a dumbass would argue otherwise and yes I also find it extremely irritating when the Sony fags claim that the PS4 is high-end. So basically, the PS4 is next-gen when you compare it to it’s predecessor which what you should have been doing in the first place.

    • Dakan45

      Dunno brah, how come n64 stuck with cartidges instead of cds? What about dremcast? What about xbox one being, bigger, heavier uglier and weaker. Sony or any other company telling me our console is flawless” doesnt convince me. I did research and the official cpu speed has not being confirmed 100% so i reseve judgement. i got a gtx 660 for 186e uro, those who have 670 and 780 will be fine for 4 years, and they are already dated cards getting cheaper, so they can get a 680 in a year or two.

      Whoever owns dual cores CANNOT play next gen games. Dual cores just barelly work for current games, running games on medium. If you still use a dualcore you either poor or cheap and have a system from 7 years ago or play indie games on laptop. Meaning they are not the same userbase that base multiplats and graphical impressive game.

      MILLIONS of gamers use decent pcs as well as MILLIONS of gamers using buget pcs, that doesnt change the fact you can run games at bazillion times superior graphics than consoles. Consoles are also owned by MILLIONS but the sales are utter dissapointing, so thats not much of a point there.

      My point is the so called “next gen” is a joke, its a cheap low cost affordable generation that will give you some decent power for a few years adn after that they will become horribly dated. As reviewtechusa pointed in one of his articles, this next gen wont be a big jump and he talked with another guy who interviewed developers saying they hit bumps right now and have to downscale resolution.

      Since they suposse to last for 10 years, imagine what will happen in 3-4 years, developers will whine again about consoles being weak. I read somewhere that the jump was always 16 times and developers specificly asked for 16 times more powerfull hardware and initially both consoles were gonna have 4gb. But developers asked for more. Sadly the only one who can make powerfull hardware is amd and nvidia and now both of them are leading graphics techinlogy and consoles will always be their slaves.

      So dont expect a big jump this time around. Which is good, game wont need even higher budgets.

    • HelterSkelter

      “Dunno brah, how come n64 stuck with cartidges instead of cds? What about dremcast? What about xbox one being, bigger, heavier uglier and weaker. Sony or any other company telling me our console is flawless” doesnt convince me. I did research and the official cpu speed has not being confirmed 100% so i reseve judgement. i got a gtx 660 for 186e uro, those who have 670 and 780 will be fine for 4 years, and they are already dated cards getting cheaper, so they can get a 680 in a year or two.”

      A 780 alone costs $650. It’s not worth for a single component. Also, while we are assuming that the PS4’s gpu is a 7850, it actually between a 7850 and 7870. It’s actually more or less comparable to a 660. The thing is, if you took a 7900gt (PS3’s gpu) today and tried to run a multi-platform game, do you think it will run smoothly? Probably not. A console usually has 1.5-2 times more power than an equivalently built PC. If the PS4’s gpu is comparable to a 7870, do you really think the GPU will run at the exact speed as a 7870 during the next few years. It is plausible that the devs could get 7950 or even close to 7970 speeds.

      “Whoever owns dual cores CANNOT play next gen games. Dual cores just barelly work for current games, running games on medium. If you still use a dualcore you either poor or cheap and have a system from 7 years ago or play indie games on laptop. Meaning they are not the same userbase that base multiplats and graphical impressive game.”

      I don’t agree with this. I have an i7 rig that I use but my old E7400 dual core system still runs more than 95% of games at relatively good settings which still blows current-gen consoles out of the water. Hell, the system can even handle some games such as Arkham City at 1080p with 35-45fps. So no, dual cores doesn’t barely cut it for current-gen games. It still runs games at much better settings than the current-gen consoles. The dual-core system runs Skyrim on high at 40-50fps, Tomb Raider on medium at 45fps, Borderlands 2 at high 40fps and many others. I think for next-gen a new i3 dual core should at least run a few of the next-gen games.

      “My point is the so called “next gen” is a joke, its a cheap low cost affordable generation that will give you some decent power for a few years adn after that they will become horribly dated. As reviewtechusa pointed in one of his articles, this next gen wont be a big jump and he talked with another guy who interviewed developers saying they hit bumps right now and have to downscale resolution.”

      I enjoy reviewtechusa’s videos, I subscribed. At the end of the day though, he is still just a guy with an opinion though. The next-gen will be a nice jump over current-gen consoles. Current-gen consoles barely do games at 720p, usually sub-hd resolutions such as 880X720. Hell, some ran at 540p. A PS4 outputting 1080p 30fps over 880X720 and 540p at a choppy 20-30fps sounds like a pretty big jump to me.

      “Since they suposse to last for 10 years, imagine what will happen in 3-4 years, developers will whine again about consoles being weak. I read somewhere that the jump was always 16 times and developers specificly asked for 16 times more powerfull hardware and initially both consoles were gonna have 4gb. But developers asked for more. Sadly the only one who can make powerfull hardware is amd and nvidia and now both of them are leading graphics techinlogy and consoles will always be their slaves.”

      I get what you are saying. If they can just stick to 1080p 30fps, then it should be enough.Native 4K is definitely out of the question though.

      About the slaves part, Dakan, do you really think the 100+ million console gamers care about consoles being Nvidia and AMD’s slaves? At the end of the day, people care about games and games only. This is what many have seem to forgotten these days.

    • Dakan45

      Why buy such an expensive card? Just get the gtx 660 which i got for 186 euro.

      Which will not scale well in the future due to memory bandwith.

      You are comparing apples with oranges, ps3 had a weird architecture based on da power of da core, not on ram and gpu.

      Now however consoles are x86 and they seem to use just as much ram for os as pc does, its a more fair comparison.

      So its a fair comparison. Both ps3 and x360 were pwned by crysis in 2007 and since then no other game came as close. Crysis 2 was linear with less interaction, bf3 was running on low settings and crysis 3 run under the lowest settings.

      Most games can run today with a 8800GT some with 8600GT, the advantage that consoles have is not that big and dont forget that developers improve the shaders and develop on dx api, so the render quality is actually higher by default than consoles.

      So your powerfull INTEL not amd dual core can run games better than the console settings….suprised? Am not, but it would make sense for pc gamers who want to play “next gen” games to upgrade and not use a 7 year old cpu. OR they can just play old games, nothing wrong with that, there are pc gamers with laptops who play old games, but they are NOT the same userbase that buys graphically impressive multiplats, if optimized games like tomb raider and batman run at 40 fps and graphically uinmpressive like borderlands 2 run around that, imagine what will happen when the actual next games pop up, by that i mean NOT watchdogs or black flag or titanfall, actual next gen games. How will a cpu runing tomb raider on medium manage to play next gen games? So yeah will will have to upgrade, cpus are not super expensive, atlaest amd’s. I wont bother mentioning that amd hardware used on next gen consoles will improve perfomance on pc so your argument about consoles being 1.5-2 times more powerfull is shot down due to games not being optimized for the hardware, but this time they will be optimized for amd 8 cores by default.

      Ps skyrim just like oblivion doesnt use alot of cores or more than 2gb ram. Pffffff.

      Its not just reviewtechusa though,that other guy in one of his videos specificly said that he asked the killer instict devs and they said that they techinically run on 720p upscaled to 1080p and everything that lowers the framerate gets removed or optimized.

      That is the glorious “console optimization”

      So this time it will be either 1080p 30 fps or 720p with 60 fps and not 60 at all times like console fanboys believe. There will be slowdowns like far cry 3 going on 24 fps, so big freaking deal about “conole optimizaton” when they cant do the one think they were made for, maintain the same framerate due to having the same hardware.Might as well spend more on a pc upgrade.

      The jump will seem singificant to console only gamers, even seeing cod running on 1080p is a graphical masterpiece compared to current consoles, not so much for pc gamers thought and in the long run the hardware is suprisingly weaker than last time, so its pretty much gonna be a small jump and xbox one holding ps4 back, you gonna end up into dated graphics pretty soon. Dated more like, graphics not improving as much.

      You didnt get the last part, only amd and nvidia can spend money to research and develop hardware, they need to spend billions every year, console owners cant choose to build their consoles alone or somewhere else, they are not gonna be as techonlogically advanced. So basicly amd and nvidia own console hardware and it is IMPOSSIBLE for consoles to be more powerfull than the pc hardware that they provide.

      if pc gamers stop buying amd and nvidia hardware, they wont be able to fund R&D to make new hardware.

    • HelterSkelter

      “Why buy such an expensive card? Just get the gtx 660 which i got for 186 euro.”

      Buy it now then buy a new GPU in 2-4 years. It would cost quite a penny.

      “You are comparing apples with oranges, ps3 had a weird architecture based on da power of da core, not on ram and gpu.”

      I’m not trying to compare anything. I’m just saying that for a GPU based on the 7900gt, it scaled pretty well over the years. Games such as Last of Us and God of War ascension look good considering it’s on console.

      “Now however consoles are x86 and they seem to use just as much ram for os as pc does, its a more fair comparison.”

      It is more fair but don’t think that an equivalently powered PC’s will survive as long as the next-gen consoles. We PC gamers still have to brute force our way to better performance.

      “So its a fair comparison. Both ps3 and x360 were pwned by crysis in 2007 and since then no other game came as close. Crysis 2 was linear with less interaction, bf3 was running on low settings and crysis 3 run under the lowest settings.”

      Crysis still came to the current-gen consoles albeit at much lower settings. The fact that Crysis 3 runs on current-gen consoles is a miracle in itself so of course it wasn’t going to look good compared to PC.

      “So your powerfull INTEL not amd dual core can run games better than the console settings….suprised? Am not, but it would make sense for pc gamers who want to play “next gen” games to upgrade and not use a 7 year old cpu. OR they can just play old games, nothing wrong with that, there are pc gamers with laptops who play old games, but they are NOT the same userbase that buys graphically impressive multiplats, if optimized games like tomb raider and batman run at 40 fps and graphically uinmpressive like borderlands 2 run around that, imagine what will happen when the actual next games pop up, by that i mean NOT watchdogs or black flag or titanfall, actual next gen games. How will a cpu runing tomb raider on medium manage to play next gen games? So yeah will will have to upgrade, cpus are not super expensive, atlaest amd’s. I wont bother mentioning that amd hardware used on next gen consoles will improve perfomance on pc so your argument about consoles being 1.5-2 times more powerfull is shot down due to games not being optimized for the hardware, but this time they will be optimized for amd 8 cores by default.”

      It doesn’t seem like you read my post properly. I wasn’t “surprised” that my e7400 had better performance than the current-gen consoles. I was just telling you that a dual core cpu runs current-gen games fine after you said a dual core can barely run current gen games. I still think an i3 will be the bare minimum to run next-gen games. About the optimization, it probably will be well optimized for AMD components.

      “Ps skyrim just like oblivion doesnt use alot of cores or more than 2gb ram. Pffffff.”

      I know this. That’s why I also included games which are known to use more than 2 cores.

      “Its not just reviewtechusa though,that other guy in one of his videos specificly said that he asked the killer instict devs and they said that they techinically run on 720p upscaled to 1080p and everything that lowers the framerate gets removed or optimized.”

      I read the killer instinct article already.

      “So this time it will be either 1080p 30 fps or 720p with 60 fps and not 60 at all times like console fanboys believe. There will be slowdowns like far cry 3 going on 24 fps, so big freaking deal about “conole optimizaton” when they cant do the one think they were made for, maintain the same framerate due to having the same hardware.Might as well spend more on a pc upgrade.”

      Which is still much more better than sub-hd resolutions such as 880X720, 1024X720 etc. The majority of console gamers will be fine with 1080p 30fps because they are already used to 30fps.

      “The jump will seem singificant to console only gamers, even seeing cod running on 1080p is a graphical masterpiece compared to current consoles, not so much for pc gamers thought and in the long run the hardware is suprisingly weaker than last time, so its pretty much gonna be a small jump and xbox one holding ps4 back, you gonna end up into dated graphics pretty soon. Dated more like, graphics not improving as much.”

      Exactly, which is is the point of a next-gen console. Did you expect a next-gen console to be a jump from PC?! Don’t be ridiculous. A new console is meant to surpass it’s predecessor, not PC. PC’s gen isn’t even the same as next-gen consoles. It constantly evolves.

      “You didnt get the last part, only amd and nvidia can spend money to research and develop hardware, they need to spend billions every year, console owners cant choose to build their consoles alone or somewhere else, they are not gonna be as techonlogically advanced. So basicly amd and nvidia own console hardware and it is IMPOSSIBLE for consoles to be more powerfull than the pc hardware that they provide.”

      Of course it’s impossible for consoles to be more powerful than PC hardware.Also, consoles still bring it’s revenue with games, software etc.

      “if pc gamers stop buying amd and nvidia hardware, they wont be able to fund R&D to make new hardware.”

      I understand what you mean.

    • Dakan45

      But its not based on 7900GT, its diffirent hardwrae and i dont see why its this so weird, most games require a 8800GT to run, take a way the new shaders and driver customizations that developers use and mandatory dx10/dx11 games and you should be able to run the game with a 7900GT.

      Example i could run condemned with a card that was not in the lowest requirments but there were missing textures due to new shaders added in the game, crysis 3 does the same, it has mandatory dx11 and logically you should be able to run it with an old card had that dx11 requirment not being there, the console version just runs the game on lower than the lowest settings. Hell games nowdays are made on console native hardware and api and ported to pc, OBVIOUSLY they wont be as well optimized and will have to change the way those games work, such as streaming and what kind of render methods they use, thus you need superior hardware because developers sure as hell wont bother to make sure a 8 year old pc is capable of running it. They will “optimize” for new hardawre”

      Thats it, i am suposse to praise that ancient locked out specific hardware that the games were SPECIFICLY designed for, can still run the game at low settings?

      isnt that the goddamn point of consoles? Thats what you get, old hardware that games are designed specificly for that hardware and devs dont have to go through diffirent setups, they can run the game at low settings while the pc versions which are ports need newer hardware. Thats it, not consoles being magically capable of kicking it till this very day.

      crysis on consoles was remade on a toned down and more optimized version of the cryengine. Basicly the same version they used for crysis 2-3. I have seen the game, the maps are sightly smaller with invisible walls, there is less physics and destruction, the lighting is consolized,very simplistic console lighting and the characters? Well even on the lower settings, the characters dont look as bas as they look on consoles, koreans have pixelated suits and lacking a radio on top of their shoulders. It feels like they basicly picked a game from ps1, and toned it down for n64.

      Crysis 3 on consoles= under the lowest pc settings, same with metro last light and i know what you think, it must look utter crap on lower than the lowest settings, but even if you set those games to the lowest settings on pc, they dont look trash, they look like console games from 2008. So no suprise consoles can run them.

      I stand correct on the dual core a argument, you wont be able to run upcoming games with that dualcore, they will run at 15-20 fps. Now “true” next gen games, you wont even run them at all.

      Yeah running games at 900p, pathetic, xbox one rusn bf4 at 720p last i heard.

      “id you expect a next-gen console to be a jump from PC”

      well ps3 and x360 were on par on pc if not more powerfull on release, then crysis came and beat them.

    • HelterSkelter

      “But its not based on 7900GT, its diffirent hardwrae and i dont see why its this so weird, most games require a 8800GT to run, take a way the new shaders and driver customizations that developers use and mandatory dx10/dx11 games and you should be able to run the game with a 7900GT.”

      Yeah you are right it’s not based on a 7900gt but in fact a 7800GTX. What ‘m trying to say is that a PC from 2005/2006 won’t be able to run games that the PS3 currently can. Optimizations do exist.

      “Thats it, i am suposse to praise that ancient locked out specific hardware that the games were SPECIFICLY designed for, can still run the game at low settings?”

      There is no low, medium or high settings on console. They just develop the game and make use of what the console can provide. Yes, many games recently released look comparable to the low spec of it’s PC counterparts but there are also console games that look good for it’s hardware. Look at Last of Us. Even you have to admit that the game looks good for a console.

      “I stand correct on the dual core a argument, you wont be able to run upcoming games with that dualcore, they will run at 15-20 fps. Now “true” next gen games, you wont even run them at all.”

      I don’t know what you mean by saying you “stand correct on the dual core argument”. You specifically said that dual-cores can barely run current-gen games. That’s why I told you that it does handle current-gen games relatively smoothly.An i3 might just handle to run next-gen games. Not saying it can, it just might be possible.

      “Yeah running games at 900p, pathetic, xbox one rusn bf4 at 720p last i heard”

      Blame the devs. It’s their fault for deciding to go with the 720p/60fps route where they could just have gone 1080p/30fps. 30fps isn’t bad for the majority of console gamers because it is their standard. The devs should stick with 30fps and crank up the resolution and settings.

      “well ps3 and x360 were on par on pc if not more powerfull on release, then crysis came and beat them.”

      Yes the current-gen consoles were more powerful than top PC’s at the time but the reality is that PC’s have evolved to a state where it is impossible to build a $400 console and expect to outperform a high-end PC. Unless most people are ready to shell out $800 for a console, consoles will never beat high-end PC’s. The jump from PS3 to PS4 is a significant one.

      Just ask yourself this. Do you really think the +100 million console gamers care about the next-gen consoles being weaker than high-end PCs. Honestly, do you? All they care about is if it’s better than the current-gen consoles. They don’t care about PC. You are a PC gamer so why do you care if the next-gen consoles are weaker than high-end PCs? You aren’t gonna change the opinion of the millions of console gamers out there. Just enjoy the games.

    • Dakan45

      What are those games exactly? The graphically impressive ones? It doesnt run them for no reason, its diffirent api and the graphics are worse on the console version even if you playing on the minium settings. Logically a 7800GTX should run bf3, but bf3 has dx11 api with backwards compability to dx10. On top of that bf3 was lead on the ps3 and ps3 has a powerfull cpu, all the load is going to the cpu.

      Yet the LEAD ps3 version run low pc settings and it was designed to utilize the ps3 multicore cpu.

      So you pretty much comparing apples with oranges here.

      Bf3 runs around low pc settings, confirmed by dice, yet you argue about optimizations? Come on, just admit consoles have trash dated graphics and thats why they still are capable of playing games, due to runing them in shit settings and not due to magical optimization.

      The last of us has awful lighting, blurry textures and needs antialising asap. Its the same as uncharted 2, NOT a graphically impressive game but the consoletards dont kow any better. Looks dated thats why it runs on those weak hardawre.

      Killzone 3 on the other hand has amazing texture quality, i dont know how they managed that on ps3, the levels will propably be full of doors closing behind you to stream resources.

      Well guess what, you cant play anything with a dual core from the upcoming graphically impressive games, maybe arkham origins since it has old graphics, but quadcore is the new standard.

      How is the developers fault consoles are weak? If they cant do it now, imagine what will happen in a few years.

      Ps3/x360 were powerfull and pc beat em in 2007, imagine what will happen in 2 years. Just imagine, Now that consoles gets pc’s scraps.

      Obviously the 100+ million care abou a console and only a console, but the ones who argue here like to argue specs when its a proven fact the most powerfull console NEVER won, infact the weakest ones did.

    • HelterSkelter

      “So you pretty much comparing apples with oranges here.”

      You say I’m comparing apples with oranges yet you continue to compare PC hardware with console hardware.

      “Yet the LEAD ps3 version run low pc settings and it was designed to utilize the ps3 multicore cpu.”

      PC was first the lead platform and then they made the PS3 the lead version. The PS3 version wasn’t the lead version from the beginning.

      “Bf3 runs around low pc settings, confirmed by dice, yet you argue about optimizations? Come on, just admit consoles have trash dated graphics and thats why they still are capable of playing games, due to runing them in shit settings and not due to magical optimization.”

      If you don’t believe in optimization, then I really don’t know. If you built a PC with the SAME specs of a PS3, the PS3 would outperform the PC during it’s lifespan. That is not an opinion but a fact. Look at John Carmack. He said that a console is twice more powerful than an equivalently built PC. It might just be his opinion but the guy has invented several graphic techniques and has much more knowledge than you or I would ever have.

      “The last of us has awful lighting, blurry textures and needs antialising asap. Its the same as uncharted 2, NOT a graphically impressive game but the consoletards dont kow any better. Looks dated thats why it runs on those weak hardawre.”

      If you comparing it with a game like Crysis 3, of course the graphics will be crap compared to it. This is why I specifically said that the graphics look good for a console. Also, God Of War Ascension also looks good on console. I played it by a friend and the physics looked really great considering that it was on console. Don’t trust youtube videos or pictures too much. You need to play a game on the console to judge it’s graphics. Obviously PC games blow the console games out of the water. Tomb Raider (2013) looked better than all those PS3 exclusives. I just give credit where it’s due.

      “Killzone 3 on the other hand has amazing texture quality, i dont know how they managed that on ps3, the levels will propably be full of doors closing behind you to stream resources.”

      This was surprising. You actually gave some praise to a console.

      “Well guess what, you cant play anything with a dual core from the upcoming graphically impressive games, maybe arkham origins since it has old graphics, but quadcore is the new standard.”

      Games such as battlefield 4 requires a dual core minimum. Dying light also requires minimum a dual core. Just cause Watch Dogs leaked specs listed quad core only, doesn’t mean that all next-gen games will be able to run on quad core. Lets just wait and see. All those people with core 2 duos and athlon X2’s are gonna feel the pain though.

      “How is the developers fault consoles are weak? If they cant do it now, imagine what will happen in a few years.”

      Read again what I said. I specifically said that the problem is that they choose 720p 60fps whereas they can choose 1080p 30fps of which the latter seems to be the better option. There you go again with the consoles being weak. Didn’t you read what I said. It’s obviously gonna be weaker than PC’s but it’s much better compared to it’s predecessor. The fact that you are comparing a console to a PC is WRONG. Sure, the 360 and PS3 beat PCs at the time but it is extremely unrealistic to expect it to happen again. PCs have evolved too fast for a console to catch up. You can’t blame PC architecture for advancing so fast.

      “Obviously the 100+ million care abou a console and only a console, but the ones who argue here like to argue specs when its a proven fact the most powerfull console NEVER won, infact the weakest ones did.”

      Yes those console fan boys can be irritating but don’t think that all console gamers are ignorant of PC. I have friends who game on consoles but they know that PC’s are more powerful than consoles.The problem, Dakan, is that you care too much. So what if consoles are weaker than PCs? How does it hurt you? You game on a PC. What does it matter to you if consoles are weaker than your PC? Just enjoy your PC and let the console gamers enjoy their console. Leave it at that.

    • Dakan45

      Am comparing relative perfomance, consoles dont keep up, they just run games on highly inferior settings.

      You compare a ps3 as a specific pc videocard, when in reallity most of the power comes from the DA POWER OF DA CORE. Its like you comparing a weird 7-8 core cpu with pc dual cores in 2007.

      From what i heard they switched to lead ps3 version after a while.

      ” If you built a PC with the SAME specs of a PS3,”

      Exactly what specs are that? ps3 cpu does all the work and no such pc thing exists.

      Consoles are not twice as powerfull as a similar pc, infactthe whole argument is flawed. They dont have more power for no reason, its just once specific system with no OS or other things to consume power and no dx api. If thats what you mean by optimization, that developers can provide better perfomance for specs due to having one locked out pretetermined specific hardware and having to make sure the game maintains a good framerate by testing each area and removing objects and graphics from the map, and still not managing to maintain that framerate…then yeah, thats pretty much how console optimization works. Sounds pathetic to me, but alteast you dont see the crazy requirments we been getting lately.

      I am comparing the last of us to tomb raider and remember me, or even spec ops the line, comparisons with crysis 3 are not needed. Infact if cod on consoles looks as good as it does on pc, it will be “Graphics king” take a look at rage, blurry textures, low poly character arms, no lighting or shadows, just HDR to simulate darkening…yet it is considered to look amazing on consoles.

      I also hope the leaked specs are fake, i remember dragon age asking for quad cores and it was proven false later.

      I just find it funny that ryse runs on 900p…”next gen” you could argue ps4 is more powerfull, but it wont help it much on multiplats.

      Its not a matter of pc hardware anymore. sony and ms cant spend billions each year for reserach and development. So they cant advance console hardware, only amd and nvidia can. This is it for consoles, now they are amd’s slaves. They are no longer the giants, if they want to devlop hardware they got to go to the proffersionals who take this kind of contracts, like amd, and what amd did? APU laptop design and tablet low power cpu….clap clap clap…steambox anyome?

      I have a dream, that i will play games with big maps and interaction with physics, then ps3 and x360 with their 30 fps and limited ram came and gaming became about scripted corridors and cinematic slow paced gameplay. Seems to me the weak hardware of next gen is also gonna cause that in 2 years.

      Sad. It also seems to me the best games ever have been made they are in the late 90s, now we play simplified, linear dumbed down version of those games with amazing graphics, which means insanelly high install size and way too high budget on graphics which causes more dumbing down to sell it to more people and ruin gameplay.

      I wonder what “next gen” will be about.

    • HelterSkelter

      “Am comparing relative perfomance, consoles dont keep up, they just run games on highly inferior settings”

      You are comparing the graphics of a fixed platform to an evolving platform. Sounds like apples to oranges to me.

      “Exactly what specs are that? ps3 cpu does all the work and no such pc thing exists.”

      I meant if you built a PC at the time of the console’s release.

      “Consoles are not twice as powerfull as a similar pc, infactthe whole argument is flawed. They dont have more power for no reason, its just once specific system with no OS or other things to consume power and no dx api. If thats what you mean by optimization, that developers can provide better perfomance for specs due to having one locked out pretetermined specific hardware and having to make sure the game maintains a good framerate by testing each area and removing objects and graphics from the map, and still not managing to maintain that framerate…then yeah, thats pretty much how console optimization works. Sounds pathetic to me, but alteast you dont see the crazy requirments we been getting lately.”

      Are you a developer? Did you invent various graphics techniques that is still used to this day? Look, you can’t argue with a guy like Carmack. Even if the consoles aren’t 2X more powerful than an equivalent PC, it still will be more powerful due to the platform being closed. If you take games such as God Of War Ascension, you’ll see that the graphics look really good even for a console game.

      “I am comparing the last of us to tomb raider and remember me, or even spec ops the line, comparisons with crysis 3 are not needed. Infact if cod on consoles looks as good as it does on pc, it will be “Graphics king” take a look at rage, blurry textures, low poly character arms, no lighting or shadows, just HDR to simulate darkening…yet it is considered to look amazing on consoles.”

      This is exactly my point. The fact that you are comparing console graphics to PC graphics is wrong. Even if the current-gen consoles were more powerful than top PCs at the time, it is IMPOSSIBLE to happen again. Did you honestly expect that the purpose of the next-gen consoles were to beat high-end PCs? If you did, then you are mistaken.

      “Its not a matter of pc hardware anymore. sony and ms cant spend billions each year for reserach and development. So they cant advance console hardware, only amd and nvidia can. This is it for consoles, now they are amd’s slaves. They are no longer the giants, if they want to devlop hardware they got to go to the proffersionals who take this kind of contracts, like amd, and what amd did? APU laptop design and tablet low power cpu….clap clap clap…steambox anyome?”

      You don’t need to repeat yourself.I read the article where Nvidia explained why Sony and Microsoft can’t afford to develop GPU’s. The steambox is nothing special, just a small-factor PC with steamOS.

      “I have a dream, that i will play games with big maps and interaction with physics, then ps3 and x360 with their 30 fps and limited ram came and gaming became about scripted corridors and cinematic slow paced gameplay. Seems to me the weak hardware of next gen is also gonna cause that in 2 years.”

      THIS?! This is your biggest gripe?! The fact that you want games to be bigger?! I don’t understand the common misconception that BIGGER=BETTER. lol, how big do you want games to get? Isn’t Witcher 3 enough? There were many games that weren’t big that were good such as the Arkham series, the ME trilogy, etc. Lack of innovation isn’t due to the hardware but the developers. Look at games such as Shadow of the Colossus. That was a great game. Also, the problem with people these days is that they want every game to be unique and different. There’s only so much you can change in a shooter. There’s only so much that can be different in a game. Honestly, think of making a game with unique gameplay and see what you can come up with. Just try.

      “Sad. It also seems to me the best games ever have been made they are in the late 90s, now we play simplified, linear dumbed down version of those games with amazing graphics, which means insanelly high install size and way too high budget on graphics which causes more dumbing down to sell it to more people and ruin gameplay.”

      If you care so much about gameplay, why do you persist to rip on console graphics? I’m sensing a contradiction here.

    • Dakan45

      “You are comparing the graphics of a fixed platform to an evolving platform. Sounds like apples to oranges to me.”

      When i can use old hardware and get marginally better perfomance, doesnt that despute the myth of consoles magically having the ability to compete with pc and for no obvious or logical reason pcs need to upgrade and i quote “every year” bs statements?

      “I meant if you built a PC at the time of the console’s release.”

      Yeah at 2006 no pc as powerfully existed. But when crysis came out and did not utilize quad cores, it beat it. Ps3 fanboys like to believe its “Da power of da core” when in reallity ps3 came a year after x360 and it was more powerfull, thats why they get better graphics on ps3 exlusives, big deal.

      ” Look, you can’t argue with a guy like Carmack.”

      Well, i dont think carmack holds any credability anymore, take a look at rage, first dx game after making opengl games since 2004. Trully awful graphics, id much rather listen to crytek instead. Camark did amazing thing in the 90s, now? He really doesnt hold much up against other devs.

      God of war ascension is a ps3 exlusive. Ps4 will have graphically impressive exlusives as well, but with xbox one holding it back, i seriously doubt that multiplats will look as good as on pc.

      “The fact that you are comparing console graphics to PC graphics is wrong”

      Tell that to the sonytards believing and i quote “no game on pc looks as good as the last of us” try EVERY multiplat instead.

      Consoles never beat high end pcs, but they did surpass mid range pcs. This time they are basicly dated on arrival, weakest gen so far. ps3/x360 specs were amazing back then, ps4/xbox one..meh…and they want it to be a 10 year gen from what i heard, doubtfull but still, its gonna make games more limited especially with under 1080p and struggling to maintain 60 fps….hooray for more corridor linear shooters.

      ” just a small-factor PC with steamOS.”

      According to valve, it could be anything, laptop, low power pc, mid range pc, high end pc with titan, its what sutis you best.

      You didnt get it.

      Check out tomb raider, linear shooter with health regen and cover, no medkits, no secret areas with itmes to collect no climbing stuff and dodging trap.

      When it could have big maps like the old games and secrets and traps and compex gameplay.

      Take a look at future soldier, the game is basicly cod with gears of war controls, no tactics, no choices, nothing, just linear corridor maps and scripted objectives.

      Yet games in the past had big maps, tactics and choices, kinda like arma 3.

      Take a look at crysis big maps, vehicles, then take a look at crysis 2-3 small maps, no vehicles, few physics.

      Thats what consoles have ended up being they kill gameplay in order to put more graphics and cinematic linear and scripted casual gameplay.

      This is it. Games are heading towards that direction, next gen is weak, they want to be 60 fps, so what you think is gonna happen?

      32mb n64 games have more gameplay and innovation than a 50gb next gen game.

      Pathetic, so much wasted potential, BUT HEYYYY games are soooooooooo expensive due to all the graphics, the massive advertisment, like they are movies and all that crap, so they got to sell alot, so they make games to play alike and being generic….and they DONT sell.

      So yeah we need to stop caring about graphics, stop improving graphics and improve gameplay deus and dishonored focus on gameplay and less on graphics more games should be like that.

      As for not beinng able to do diffirent games and not being much that you can change in a shooter.

      Bad company 1 singleplayer was open ended, they codified the sequels, same happened with homefront. Moh airborne had big maps, they codified the other 2 games. GRAW had big maps and tactics, they codified future soldier. Tomb raider had alot of climbing and trap dodging like prince of persia, they turned it into a geneic cover based shooter.

      Seems to me that even animations, weapons and situations are the same. Eg just how many games outhere have bows eh? Seriously why does every game need to have a bow?

      Now check these games, jedi knight, blood, system shock, shadow warrior, citizen kabuto and mechwarrior.

      Those are just variations of the fps genre, now compare them to other games outhere.

      Yeah, its sad, like how they killing off horror, or how they killed flight simulators, or how they killed tactical games.

      So pc has games like antichamber, papers please and shadowrun and consoles have teh gears of warz, teh god of warz, teh generic killzonez and teh unchartedz.

      P-A-T-H-E-T-I-C

      Psx,n64 had more variety and innovation, ps2 and gamecube also had those, you could argue “yeah games now are for mature audience and not for kids so there is less imagination” but pc has been for mature audience that brought games like system shock and doom, and baldur’s gate and now you got papers please and witcher 2 and arma 3 and shadow warrior.

      So yeah, what happened to consoles after 2008….I HATE IT, and it has to stop or the industry will crash.

    • HelterSkelter

      “Well, i dont think carmack holds any credability anymore, take a look at rage, first dx game after making opengl games since 2004. Trully awful graphics, id much rather listen to crytek instead. Camark did amazing thing in the 90s, now? He really doesnt hold much up against other devs.”

      He still holds much more credibility than either you or me.

      Stop contradicting yourself. On one hand you rip on console graphics then you say that graphics isn’t important and that developers should focus on gameplay. If you care so much about gameplay, what do you get out of ripping on console graphics. Also, I agree that games need some more innovation but you simply cannot blame it on the hardware of a console. You yourself said that the ps2 and gamecube also had innovation. This just proves that gameplay innovation doesn’t come down to hardware power. Also, you want bigger maps but bigger doesn’t always = better. About linearity, there are good games out there that aren’t linear. If Witcher 3 is what CD Projekt makes it to be, then it will be a truly new rpg experience. Don’t blame consoles for the lack of innovations in games. The truth is that the mainstream crowd prefers mindless, linear action games over the “hardcore” games. So blame developers for mainly catering to the mainstream audience.

    • Dakan45

      “He still holds much more credibility than either you or me.”

      So does MS.

      That doesnt mean he is right.

      Have you heard? Originally ps3 was not gonna have a gpu.

      No really, the cpu would do all the rendering. Then you wonder why i am saying that ps4 can screw up. Stupid mistakes is nothing new in the industry, its full of it.

      Hell those japs were being huge assholes, they made the architecture a complete mess because they thought they would have as high install base as the ps2, so third party developers would find it very hard to port games to other systems so they wouldnt bother and thus ps3 would have high third party exlusive count.

      This is what people are in charge or sony and playstation.

      “. If you care so much about gameplay, what do you get out of ripping on console graphics.”

      No matter what i do or say, devs and games wont lower the graphics to make bigger maps and more interaction in the levels like dishonored and deus ex, you think that games nowadys being linear corridor shooters, is caused by anthing else other the demand for better visuals and the necessity to fit those visuals into the low ram and overalll weak hardware?

      Nope they just make linear corridor shooters to steam resources. They are not gonna say “Screw it, we will use old graphics because we care about gameplay”

      So the only way is to make sure consoles are powerfull, or devs and gamers and publishers finallly reallize that graphics are expensive and its better to just have a dated looking game than a dumbed down generic trash and spending overblown budgets to advertize it and appeal to everyone with simplistic gameplay in order to make proft and cover the huge development costs.

      Ps2/gamecube games were 60 fps though. X360/ps3 were 30 and by the looks of it in order to achieve 1080p/30fps or 720p/60fps, the developers are gonna have to sacrifice something, i bet they gonna make linear and scripted maps again that erase the area behind you so they can load the area ahead of you to the ram, which means more corridor shooters….horray!!!

    • HelterSkelter

      “Have you heard? Originally ps3 was not gonna have a gpu.”

      Yep I read the article. That would have been a crazy thing to do.

      “No really, the cpu would do all the rendering. Then you wonder why i am saying that ps4 can screw up. Stupid mistakes is nothing new in the industry, its full of it.”

      That’s why the fixed their mistakes with the PS4. Think about it like this. If you worked at AMD and have been developing an APU for the past 5 years, do you really think you wouldn’t notice any bottlenecks? I know they can screw up but that mainly pertains to things such as hardware failure, defects etc.

      “Hell those japs were being huge assholes, they made the architecture a complete mess because they thought they would have as high install base as the ps2, so third party developers would find it very hard to port games to other systems so they wouldnt bother and thus ps3 would have high third party exlusive count.”

      I wouldn’t call the japs assholes and I wouldn’t also call the cell architecture a mess. The truth is that the Cell was indeed a powerful cpu but developers hated it because it was hard to code. I would say that the Cell was ahead of it’s time and Sony did make a mistake by developing an architecture that was basically foreign to developers. I wouldn’t call the Cell weak though. When devs do take full advantage of the Cell though such as Naughty Dog and Santa Monica, they can produce good looking games. This is why the graphics of PS3 exclusives beat the graphics of the 360 exclusives.

      “No matter what i do or say, devs and games wont lower the graphics to make bigger maps and more interaction in the levels like dishonored and deus ex, you think that games nowadys being linear corridor shooters, is caused by anthing else other the demand for better visuals and the necessity to fit those visuals into the low ram and overalll weak hardware?”

      If the devs sacrificed the graphics to better the gameplay, you’d just complain about the graphics. What I’m trying to tell you is that the reason why devs make so many corridor shooters is because that is the main appeal to the mainstream gaming crowd. The fact is that games like COD sell HUGE.

      You yourself said that games such as Dishonored and Deus Ex aren’t linear. Those games are also on consoles. So stop blaming consoles for devs deciding to appeal to the mainstream crowd.

      “Ps2/gamecube games were 60 fps though. X360/ps3 were 30 and by the looks of it in order to achieve 1080p/30fps or 720p/60fps, the developers are gonna have to sacrifice something, i bet they gonna make linear and scripted maps again that erase the area behind you so they can load the area ahead of you to the ram, which means more corridor shooters….horray!!!”

      You continue to complain about corridor shooters. You make it seem that everybody only plays shooters. The reason why there are so many corridor shooters is because most people like it. Look at Witcher 3, the game is huge, interactive and guess what? It’s also gonna be on consoles.

    • Dakan45

      i am just proving that mistakes can happen, from sega, to n64 using catridges, from ps3 architecute to x360 prod,to xbox one drm and so on.

      So i dont expect ps4 to not have any problems. Honestly amd’s APU have bottlenecks from the get go, that is the lack of DDR3 and weak cpus, its fine for laptops, but its not a powerfull system.

      I dont understand why you even bother defending the architecture, it was a mess and made it hard to make games, OBVIOUSLY ps3 exlusives look better since ps3 is more powerfull than x360, the fact that devs cant utilize the extra power and games on x360 looked better for many many years just proves how much of a failure was…along with the price…and the service, but anyway.

      Guess what? cod sells but so does gta, guess what doesnt sell? cod ripoffs and gta ripoffs, because the masses know cod and gta and buy them. No matter how many copies those franchises sell, the rest will not benefit from it and this generation has proven that no matter how much they copy the big sellers, they are not getting high sales. They should just make a diffirent game instead.

      “Those games are also on consoles. So stop blaming consoles for devs deciding to appeal to the mainstream crowd.”

      Wait what? Both dishonored and deus ex have small maps compared to games in the past, they also use streaming, Both of them have sections to go through with loading screens. Also both of them come from pc developers. Deux ex 2 was dumbed down for consoles alot. The people who made those games come from pc and have learned what happens when you try to appeal to a broadier audience. Dishonored creater said specificly “if you like cod, dont buy dishonored, it takes thinking”

      I did not mention those 2 games for no reason.

      Everything is a corridor shooter, tomb raider turned into a corridor shooter, ghost recon turned into a corridor shooter, even dmc levels were far more linear than the previous games. Not to mention sniper elite v2.

      Witcher 2 was far more linear than the first, withcer 3 is on next gen consoles.

      When bad company came out on ps3/x360 it had big maps in the singleplayer because they had the power to do it, then the singleplayer maps became smaller and smaller to fit in the consoles ram.

    • HelterSkelter

      “So i dont expect ps4 to not have any problems. Honestly amd’s APU have bottlenecks from the get go, that is the lack of DDR3 and weak cpus, its fine for laptops, but its not a powerfull system.”

      We’ll just have to wait and see if there are any bottlenecks then. I doubt the lack of DDR3 will be a problem though because the benefits of GDDR5 outweighs that of DDR3.

      “I dont understand why you even bother defending the architecture, it was a mess and made it hard to make games, OBVIOUSLY ps3 exlusives look better since ps3 is more powerfull than x360, the fact that devs cant utilize the extra power and games on x360 looked better for many many years just proves how much of a failure was…along with the price…and the service, but anyway.”

      I’m not defending anything, just stating the facts and the fact is that the Cell architecture was a mess because developers hated coding for it. Sony fixed this by going the X86 route with the PS4.

      “Wait what? Both dishonored and deus ex have small maps compared to games in the past, they also use streaming, Both of them have sections to go through with loading screens. Also both of them come from pc developers. Deux ex 2 was dumbed down for consoles alot. The people who made those games come from pc and have learned what happens when you try to appeal to a broadier audience.”

      The problem is that you blame consoles for developers choosing to appeal to the mainstream crowd. Blame developers. Don’t blame consoles. It sounds like you are looking for a reason to hate consoles.

      “Everything is a corridor shooter, tomb raider turned into a corridor shooter, ghost recon turned into a corridor shooter, even dmc levels were far more linear than the previous games. Not to mention sniper elite v2.”

      What the hell, every game is not a shooter lol, play some non-shooters then.

      “Witcher 2 was far more linear than the first, withcer 3 is on next gen consoles.”

      Or maybe CD Projekt wants to make the game more open and less linear. Even with next-gen there are still gonna be scripted corridor shooters and there are still gonna be games that aren’t. This is because developers choose what type of game they are gonna make.

      “When bad company came out on ps3/x360 it had big maps in the singleplayer because they had the power to do it, then the singleplayer maps became smaller and smaller to fit in the consoles ram.”

      What you are saying doesn’t make sense. if DICE wanted to make a bigger map, then they just would do it. If they could do it in Bad Company, they sure as hell should be able to do it again with it’s sequels. Besides, the next-gen consoles amount of ram should result in bigger maps. Witcher 3 is a prime example. Also, making the game bigger requires more work which, costs etc. It’s not always the consoles fault like you claim it to be. It’s also the devs cutting down on costs. There’s too many things to consider. Sometimes, devs also want to have a strong narrative which is difficult to have in a huge game. This is just one of the many factors why games are not so big. Also, how big do you want games to be?! If the size of Witcher 3 is anything to go by, then games in the future are going to have huge worlds.

    • Dakan45

      “because the benefits of GDDR5 outweighs that of DDR3.”

      What about ms? They had GDDR3 back in 2005, why go to DDR3 now?

      “Blame developers. Don’t blame consoles.”

      I can also blame gamers for wanting graphics over gameplay, but that wont do me any good. If consoles are more powerfull though, devs got more freedom.

      “What the hell, every game is not a shooter lol, play some non-shooters then.”

      They are scripted and linear and dumbed down, no matter the genre. Thats the point.

      “Or maybe CD Projekt wants to make the game more open and less linear.”

      They also maybe had QTE and usesd a multiplatform enigne to appear to the console crowd and get the game running on consoles.

      I am gonna go and say it again, when this gen of consoles launched, the maps were bigger with more interactivity and less linearity, now they are super linear and scripted in order to run on ancient hardware. Witcher 3 has yet to show what it has,so why you pick this one? This is like saying skyrim and gta have a big map, open world games obviously have big maps but linear games are nothing more than corridor shooters in order to fit the level into the low ram.

    • HelterSkelter

      “What about ms? They had GDDR3 back in 2005, why go to DDR3 now?”

      Because GDDR3 is based on DDR2 and GDDR5 is based on DDR3. The benefits of GDDR5 unified memory does outweigh the latency for the cpu. Plus, it being an SoC reduces the latency even further. Most of the effects use the gpu, making the memory better. There isn’t a real trade off.

      “I can also blame gamers for wanting graphics over gameplay, but that wont do me any good. If consoles are more powerfull though, devs got more freedom.”

      They already have gotten more freedom with the next-gen consoles. You can’t obviously expect the size of next-gen games to be the same as current-gen. If the games are the same size though, you’ll see that it’s the devs fault for making games corridor shooters.

      “They are scripted and linear and dumbed down, no matter the genre. Thats the point.”

      Not all of them are scripted though.

      “They also maybe had QTE and usesd a multiplatform enigne to appear to the console crowd and get the game running on consoles.”

      But the fact is they don’t have QTE’s. Also, the engine they are using is there own engine and what’s wrong with wanting to bring the game to the console crowd? I want CD projekt to get as many people as possible to play their game. Isn’t that what’s important, more people playing the game? I game on PC but I’m not gonna get pissed if a dev wants to release a game on consoles. I want the devs’ game to be successful and to reach a huge audience. Yes Crysis 2 became a bit dumbed down but I would say that that’s because Cryek wanted to make their own type of COD.

      “I am gonna go and say it again, when this gen of consoles launched, the maps were bigger with more interactivity and less linearity, now they are super linear and scripted in order to run on ancient hardware. Witcher 3 has yet to show what it has,so why you pick this one? This is like saying skyrim and gta have a big map, open world games obviously have big maps but linear games are nothing more than corridor shooters in order to fit the level into the low ram.”

      And I’m going to say again that if devs wanted to leave the maps bigger, they just could while at the same time reducing graphics. Your whole argument blaming consoles for the quality of games is flawed. You yourself said that games on the n64 and ps2 were innovative but I don’t remember those games being big. The reason why I bring up the Witcher 3 is because the game is massive and it does run on consoles. Even if you say open world games are supposed to have huge maps, it is just proof that the size of such games can be achieved on consoles.Most devs and publishers want to make as much money as possible which in turn causes them to make the games dumbed down games to appeal to the crowd who enjoys games such as COD.You keep on blaming consoles for smaller maps, just admit you hate consoles and are looking for an excuse to rip on it.

    • Dakan45

      By that logic once GDDR6 is out on pc, based on DDR4 which is based on DDR3, then consoles are toast….nope, GDDR3 videocards can still run old games.

      Oh there is a tradeoff the already weak cpu is bottlenecked by the lack of DDR3 and the powerfull videocard, xbox one with DDR3, upgraded cpu and esram…not so much. Still ps4 is more powerfull.

      “You can’t obviously expect the size of next-gen games to be the same as current-gen”

      What you mean by that? That game will be EVEN shorted and more dumbed down and linear?

      Sounds like it thanks to the huge budget they will have wich means more manpower is needed to make those levels.

      Most games are scripted and linear, 9/10 are.

      Witcher 2 had QTEs

      The proble is the engine they used was console based and have you seen witcher 2 on console? It looks diffirent as if they did things to the engine and the way it looks to optimize it for consoles.

      Crysis 2 was linear because of the consoles. They even said in an interview that consoles dont have enough ram for crysis so they got to make games more linear and the maps smaller, which they proceed on doing with crysis 2.

      “And I’m going to say again that if devs wanted to leave the maps bigger,
      they just could while at the same time reducing graphics.”

      But they didnt, because its all about graphics and they wont now due to 60 fps 1080p ane consoles being weak.

      “.Your whole argument blaming consoles for the quality of games is flawed”

      No you just dont get it. I wont bother explaning it again.

      “games on the n64 and ps2 were innovative but I don’t remember those games being big.”

      Wait what? Ps2.n64 didnt have to deal with freamerate isues are small maps, also they were far longer than games have been fro the last 10 years and took skill, now its all samey geneic simplistic trash to get high sales and STILL not getting them.

      “Witcher 3 is because the game is massive and it does run on consoles.”

      So does gta v and skyrim. Those are open world games, they dont have the same detail and variety as linear games, all open world games use tricks to work, they dont magically have large maps for no reason. Compare fallout 3 and metro, i am not talking about the graphics, metro is more detailed. Fallout 3 is the same standard staff recycled all over, same textures, samey enviroments, no cinematics either.

      Take a look at just cause 2, massive map, same resources all over the place ant its achieved through streaming because the consoles cant handle all that due to low ram, so they stream them and use the same resources to save memory.

      “Most devs and publishers want to make as much money as possible which in
      turn causes them to make the games dumbed down games to appeal to the
      crowd who enjoys games such as COD.You keep on blaming consoles for
      smaller maps, just admit you hate consoles and are looking for an excuse
      to rip on it.”

      Yet they dont make money, the games keep flopping and every franchise is turned into a generic piece of trash to get sales. Therefore they are ruin them.

      Thanks consoles and your massive install base of everage joe retards that dont server their purpuse and BUY those games, thanks now all the franchises have turned into the same shit and the likes of capcom whine becasue they trash game sold 5 million instead of 7, riddiculus.

      Ps2/xbox were fine and nitendo was fine with wii, i dont know abot the wiiu, but what has happen on ps3/x360 the last 4-5 years is utterly pathetic. You can blame whoever you want, the developers, the gamers, but if sony and ms didnt make their consoles so hard to makes games on, this wouldnt have been as bad. Might as well splite the blame and blame the devs, then split it again and blame the publishers and then split it again and blame the consoles, but the real problem here are the systems not the developers which are limited by the hardware and as they clain “we need new consoles so we can innovate” or the gamers that have stopped buying those things along time ago, or even the publishers who have to make money somehow to cover the 100 million budgets games have these days.

      Developers wanted x86, there you go ps4/xbox one have it. But as shadowfall developer said, it may be easier to program but it still expensive as hell in order to compute with next gen standards.

    • HelterSkelter

      There isn’t a huge trade off because games mostly use up the gpu than the cpu. The PS4’s gpu also can be used to handle the physics of the games. The PS4 is not bottlenecked, so stop talking about that. Is the cpu better than an i5? No, but it definitely is not bottlenecking the ps4’s gpu. Don’t you think AMD would have found bottlenecks? GDDR5 is better for DDR3 for games, there’s no arguing around that. It’s a fact. How can you even say the system is bottlenecked, did you design the Apu? If not, who do you think holds more credibility, you or AMD? The problem is that you think AMD is directly taking the jaguar cpu and putting it into the PS4. The Cpu is based off the jaguar architecture. The Cpu is NOT 2 cores with 4 threads each like you think, rather it is more or less similar to AMD’s eight core modular architecture.

      Nope, I get exactly what you are trying to say. The problem is that your argument is flawed and filled with contradictions. The fact that open world games the size of Just Cause 2, GTAV etc run on consoles is proof that a bigger map size can be achieved on consoles, regardless if it’s a shooter or not. Devs want to codolize games because they think it will sell. Also, devs and publishers have become stupid in the sense that they expect their games to sell like COD. Look at Tomb Raider, the game sold 3.4 million copies, probably more now, yet Square Enix still wanted more. The problem is that they do make a profit but they are becoming too greedy and are beginning to have unrealistic expectations. The publishers should be realistic and not expect all their games to sell like COD.

      Devs dumb down their games to make sales. It’s not the platform that dumbs down games.

      Just think about it. Even if some of the bigger games were streamed in the backround, all that was achieved with a whopping 512MB of ram. Let’s be realistic, the next-gen consoles have 8gigs, which is the standard on PC’s but still much more than the current-gen consoles. Considering that the size of Skyrim,Just Cause 2, GTAV etc were achieved on 512mb of ram, the safe assumption would be that games will become much bigger next-gen.

      Devs prefer to go the safe route and the safe route is developing streamlined, dumb downed games because they know the majority enjoys that. Most people just wanna come home, sit down and mindlessly shoot, they don’t care about tactics or linearity anymore. if they did, do you really think COD would sell? Hell No.

      So yes, it is the devs fault not consoles.

    • Dakan45

      1.I pointed out how crappy moves have ben made on consoles, xbox prod, dreamcast, n64 cartidges, ps3 architecture, so no i dont think that amd can kill all the bottlenecks and sony is god but mx managed to mess up with xbox one.

      2.Nope you just dont get it, a game like just cause 2 has the same textrues everywhere and constanstly respawns entities and scripts, everything is an instance of another object not a seperate entitiy, thats how open world games are made.

      3.Tomb raider just recently covered their goal, whatever that means, either development cost or sale goal. Still not surpising, they advertize the game like crazy and the original tomb raider games got like 5 million sales.

      4.

      “Devs dumb down their games to make sales. It’s not the platform that dumbs down games.”

      Yet they dont get those sales and the platform actually does hold back. Bioshock and bad company had bigger maps than bioshock infintie and bf3 and more complex gameplay, back then consoles were new so they had the powerfull hardware to pull it off and devs tried new things, then it was the same degrading trash for 4-5 years.

      5. “all that was achieved with a whopping 512MB of ram”

      More like vram. The ps4 cpu handled most of the system functions and ingame ram usages. They were completly diffirent than pc architecture and games were designed on them. If xbox one 3gb for os is any indication and shadowfall using 4.8gb of ram, then its more close to pc.

      6.”Most people just wanna come home, sit down and mindlessly shoot, they don’t care about tactics or linearity anymore.”

      Yet they dont buy enough games, so most people can fuck themselfs since they dont support their purpurse over 160 milion ps3/x360s exist, yet sales are low, might as well focus on gamers again.

    • HelterSkelter

      1. As I said before, technical failures are bound to happen but it isn’t the same as bottlenecks as it is usually unforeseeable. Bottlenecks are and If there were huge bottlenecks, don’t you think devs would have already said so? Even if there is a slight bottleneck, it’s not as huge as you claim.

      2. Nope, I do get it. The problem is that you blame the linearity of games on one aspect of game development. Making a game bigger requires costs, more manpower which in turn highers the costs even further. It also requires more time and devs also work within a timeframe. There’s so many things that contribute to games being linear. It’s safe for developers to keep producing the same linear games because they know the masses enjoys those type of games. Look at Shadowfall. The PS4 has 8gigs of ram yet the game still looks like a corridor shooter. You’d think that with the amount of ram, the games would be bigger right? Well no, as I’ve said even though the next-gen consoles have 8gigs ram, many games will still be linear. Do think Activision has any plans to change up COD and make it less linear? Or do you think they’ll stick with the same formula because they know it will sell? My bet is on the latter.

      3. I honestly don’t know anymore. How the hell can 3.4 million sales be considered to be bad? The devs of Tomb Raider defended the sales. Obviously they wouldn’t defend it if it didn’t make a profit or didn’t sell well. The problem lies with the publishers, or mainly Square Enix. They were dumb to expect that their game will sell much more than it did. Look at Dark Souls, the game might not have been so expensive but the PC version sold a little over 300 000 copies and was still considered to make a profit. Square Enix should start have more realistic expectations.

      4. Just because the games doesn’t sell like COD doesn’t mean the games don’t make a profit. A game that sells a million copies is usually already considered to have made a profit. Obviously not high budget games like GTA V though. If Bioshock and Bad Company had bigger maps at first, shouldn’t it be plausible that it can be achieved with it’s sequels. All they needed to do was lower the graphics or let it remain similar to leave the maps bigger. Oh well but then you’d probably rip on the graphics.

      5. PS3 has 512mb ram, 256 split for system, 256 split for video. 360 has 512mb unified GDDR3 ram. Were you referring to the PS3 when saying that the cpu handled the system functions and ingame ram usages? Because the Cell also handled a lot of the processing.Even if they were different from PC architecture, having it run on 512mb was good. Look at the 360, 512mb GDDR3 ram. Look at the PS4, 8gigs GDDR5 ram. It’s not such a huge difference in architecture. Xbox one uses 3gb because it runs 3 OS’s which is pretty dumb and unecessary. Shadowfall using 4.8 gb is expected as it’s a next-gen game. Throughout this gen, developers cut out many things in the console versions that gamers wouldn’t notice in order to fit the small amount of ram. If next-gen games are still linear even though next-gen consoles have 8gis of ram, then the linearity is obviously the devs fault.

      6. So you think because there are over 160 million consoles, games should have 160 million sales? There’s so many factors to this such as the lending of games, casual gamers who don’t buy a lot of games, piracy etc.I understand what you mean though and I think devs should start to focus on true gamers and make games more interactive and less linear.

    • Dakan45

      1.You proving my point, thinks can screw up no matter what the PROS are doing. So dont say “do you really expect sony to mess up” Because i am certain something will happen as it has with xbox and ps3 and xbox one. Its not as perfect as sony presents it to be.

      2. Nope, shadowfall is a linear cover based shooter because they use streaming i remember seeing a dropship texture pop when the player grabbed it a E3 video. Yet Zenoclash 2 has nonlinear levels. So yeah i blame graphics and mainting 1080p or 60 fps thus consoles. Less graphically impressive games are more open. Guirella said that ps4 is easier to develop, but still its expensive as ever.

      3. Thats my question too, Are those sales REALLY required or are publishers asking to much and intentionaly make the developers to dumb down their games. Have they learned that mistake and will start designing gmaes for games again, or keep going on interactive movie crap for average joes and non gamers?

      4. Yet you see all those screw ups like re6 sold 5 instead of 7 millions…bu hoooo hhooo and now Capcom has only 150 millions in the bank left. Maybe the games cost as much due to graphics, maybe they lie to us, but games keep flopping either way, time to take a diffirent approach.

      5.” Because the Cell also handled a lot of the processing” and originally it was not gonna have a gpu, so comparing ps3 rams with a pc is pointless. Ps4 os will use alot of ram as well, its impossible it wont.

      6. no but how about 20-40?

      Yet the much smaller pc community gets bashed for it.

      Pathetic, makes me wonder how will games on ps4/xbox one make profit wit such small install base.

    • HelterSkelter

      1. Bottlenecks are foreseeable. Technical failures such as the RROD isn’t. This means that AMD, Sony and devs should have known about a bottleneck during testing. Not AMD, Sony or devs has said that there are bottlenecks yet in YOUR OPINION, someone who probably hasn’t even developed on the console, says that there is a bottleneck. Don’t you think that they would have noticed bottlenecks?You are extremely wrong when you say that the PS4 has such a huge bottleneck. Don’t bring up technical failures to substantiate your argument regarding the bottlenecking of a console.

      2. Why are you saying “nope”? I know the game is linear and streamed which is why I said that the devs should’ve been able to make the maps bigger due to the ram yet they continue to make it a streaming corridor linear shooter.

      3. I agree, games are becoming too much like interactive movies.

      4. I don’t know about this. Capcom made some pretty bad decisions during the development of certain games.

      5. Comparing console graphics with pc graphics is pointless too. If you have better hardware, the logical assumption would be that the game will look better on the superior hardware. Comparing console graphics with PC graphics is an extremely stupid thing to do. Are you trying to say that the the upgrade of 512mb to 8gigs isn’t big. Even if there were optimizations for games to run on 512mb ram, 8gigs is still a huge boost. Like I said, devs cut out many unnoticeable things in the games to make it run on the consoles’ low ram.

      6. 20-40 million sales as an average amount of sales is pretty unrealistic in this time. Like I said, there are many things that influence the sales of games such as the lending of games, piracy etc. Also, many console gamers are also casual and don’t buy every major release. PC games sell lower though.

    • Dakan45

      1.ps3 was gonna launch without gpu. Didnt they foresee that? Devs had to inform them about it? Ps4 was gonna have 4gb ram, devs told them to change it. They didnt Foresee that?

      You think ms didnt test the x360s? Newsflash, they even test the controllers to see when the thumbstics stop working. Ps4 seems to freeze latelly, overheating much?

      Mike cerny was on Atari, 3DO and sega, all failed.

      Carmack says both consoles are equally powerfull, so EXCUSEEEEE MEEE for not believing those guys without question just because they are famous in the business.

      Ps have you seen any dev trashing xbox one? Ofcourse not you dont trash someone you work with.

      But i forgot sony is 100% correct all the time. I wonder if ms went “lets see we had GDDR3 in 2005, lets not use GDDR5 and use DDR3 for no reason.” Yet everyone claims that they suck and gone for DDR3 becuase GDDR5 is expensive.

      2.Games are still linear and scripted though and as an rticle showed wiiu has 1080p 60 fps games. So yeah its a matter of graphics and console limitations rather by design.

      3.you dont say?

      4.now you now, ubisoft wants 5.3 millon from watchdogs.

      5. Well they seem to compare wherver the ps3 version of gta v has slightly better aliasing on the shadows than the x360 one, so i think thats the “riddiculus” part. You comparing Cell architecture to x86.

      6.Yet they should sell that much for their huge install base, so its only logical the niche that pc multiplatform market is, would sell far far less, infact i would go as far as saying that a higher percentage of the pc install base buys multiplats than the small percentage of console userbase.

    • HelterSkelter

      1. Exactly my point. If the PS3 launched without a gpu, the system would’ve been heavily bottlenecked. Devs also wanted 8gigs ram instead of 4. Now don’t you think the same applies for the cpu. Don’t you think if the cpu was so weak as you claimed. devs would try and change sony’s mind. You proved my point entirely.

      it seems that you still aren’t getting what I’m saying. The PS4 did overheat ( it was in an enclosed space though) but that is still just a technical failure. I don’t care if Microsoft tested the thumbsticks.

      READ CAREFULLY THIS TIME. If a system has a bottleneck such as the ps3 not initially having a gpu, they will change it because the devs realize that there IS a bottleneck. Same with the 4gigs GDDR5. Devs thought that it would also probably be a bottleneck. The fact that Sony made those changes to please the devs is proof that they would have done the same with the cpu if it was too weak.

      Lastly, The PS4’s cpu IS NOT a dual core with 4 threads. It has 2 quad core modules. It seems like you think they just to the tablet version of the cpu and stuck it in the system lol.

      Carmack didn’t say the systems were equal just very close and guess what? they are pretty close.Also, why do you think Carmack is famous in the business. You think he just got there by luck? Do you think you know more about PCs than him? Did you pioneer many graphics techniques?

      2. Well they should be able to make games bigger now due to the higher ram. 8gigs is still the standard for PC so it should be enough for consoles.

      3. I guess so.

      4. It seems plausible. The game is already becoming so hyped.

      5. What do you mean by “ridiculous”? It’s quite fine if people compare the graphics of console to console such as 360 to PS3. That is actually the sane thing to do. I compared the Cell architecture to X86 but that’s much more reasonable than comparing the graphics on consoles to PC. You always say that the console graphics are outdated, trash etc without considering that you are comparing 7 year old hardware to PCs. You need to give credit where it’s due and games like Ascension does look pretty good on PS3. It just shows that great graphics can be achieved with consoles.

      6. It doesn’t change the fact that games sell more on consoles.

    • Dakan45

      How come xbox doesnt change its gpu and ram though?

      Perhaps the devs only talked about the ram before the system was in development.

      I am not saying ps4 overheat because it was its fault, i am saying that ms ALSO tested x360, they still got prods.

      “. Devs thought that it would also probably be a bottleneck. The fact
      that Sony made those changes to please the devs is proof that they would
      have done the same with the cpu if it was too weak.”

      Nope and nope, back then the system was not in development, so Gearbox said that 4gb ram is not enough and they changed it, thats all. Ps3 still had a horrible cell architecture that everyone hated, i didnt see sony doing anything about it. If devs had a say on the entire system they would change it alot. But no one has time for that, when ps4 was revealed they didnt even show the box, xbox one changed its drm system and the specs are not final, they keep getting upgraded.

      Its all a mess really, they cant tell sony to alter things in the last minute, because the consoles were far from ready.

      You might be right about being a quadcore, but it really is a tablet cpu design, its made for low power consumption and low heat levels, or you gonna claim sony gives a future compact gaming pc for 400$?

      Honestly at this point, carmack is a rellic, id take crytek opnion’s any time instead.

      ” I compared the Cell architecture to X86 but that’s much more reasonable than comparing the graphics on consoles to PC.”

      Pfff, no you comparing pc with cell, they are nothing alike.

      I wonder how games will sell now that the next gen consoles are gonna have such small install bases…wait i know, by releaseing them on x360 and ps3s as well.

    • dirkradke

      Dakan45 doesn’t care. He just wants to be right. Earlier he was arguing it was cheaper to buy an $900 PC than a $300 360 because games are so much better on a PC. He will argue until you give up and then in his own mind claim victory.

    • Matt

      It’s can be interpreted as that…

      Even the FX-8350 (which I own) is technically a quad core per se. Look up the architecture map and it will explain it better than I ever could.

    • HelterSkelter

      Yes, I know AMD’s doesn’t make true 8 cores but instead 4 modules with 8 threads. I thought that the ps4’s jaguar cpu was 2 quad core modules, that’s why I thought it’s a true 8 core.

    • Matt

      It’s has 2 FPU units with four integer cores supporting each one.

    • HelterSkelter

      Has this been confirmed?

    • Matt

      Only in the current iterations of the Jaguar architecture… it’s like everyone comparing the PS4 GPU to the 7850. Everyone is in the same boat when it comes to what’s truly powering the PS4 but there are some realistic guesses.

    • HelterSkelter

      I guess we’ll just have to wait for the PS4 to release to know whats really under the hood. I think the performance of the cpu won’t be exactly the same as the current iterations of the jaguar architecture because while it might be based on it, it has been custom designed. The jaguar architecture in the PS4 will probably be a bit better than the architecture’s current iterations. It’s not great but it should be good enough for a console.

  • The PC King

    All i got to say is the truth console will always be cheaper, and peoples forgetting that the Wii won the last generation so who gives a shit. Graphics don’t matter only gameplay and having fun. So the MasterRace can STFU starting now because Next-Gen is basically a cheap PC, and peoples are going to not care less about spec when Gamerplay is king, and not a million dollar PC with steam.

    • Dakan45

      mehm the “master race” is a term created by console fanboys.

      I agree that wii won and gameplay is important, but look where games are heading, they heading to have as less gameplay as possible and as many cutscenes and narrative and story.

      So all that hardware will be used for those things and not having big maps, physics and good gameplay.

      Million dollar pc my ass, for 800$ i can build you a pc that beats ps4.

    • Matt

      Master Race isn’t an insult…

      Wii started out at a lower price than both 360 and PS3… as far as third party devs go the wii doesn’t exist because people are mainly using it as a cheap hotspot to hook up for netflix or when they have family wii bowling game night. I don’t know of anyone that’s hardcore gaming on wii but my grandparents went out and bought one because all their older buddies were talking about it as well. It exists in my household as a netflix box as of now.

  • neomahi-217

    This kills me every time I hear something like this and its a pointless argument. First and foremost is cost. Not everyone has a ridiculous amount of money to dump into a high end PC. Its expensive and unless you know how to build your own, its even more expensive. Game consoles are designed with the gamers budget in mind and manufacturers have to make sure it meets what gamers are willing to pay. PS3 was ahead of the curve, but nobody wanted to pay $600 for it. Gamers are willing to pay $500 for the Xbone. So, everyone can’t afford to meet Nvidia’s prices unless they’re willing to go to the bank and take out a loan. AMD aren’t super cheap either.

    Secondly, its ease of use. Everything is done for you on a game console and the game is already optimized. You’re not having to worry about anything. Developers have done all the hard work for you. As well, I get to use a Dualshock. I can’t use a dualshock with Steam as its my controller of preference.

    Thirdly, and finally, for once I’m saying its not always about the graphics.PC has some games for it but, they’ll never have the development teams that Sony and Nintendo have. Microsoft are playing both fields and that’s why you’re not seeing a lot of gamers buying both an Xbone and a PS4. Those that have high end PC’s are getting the “Xbone Exclusives” on their PC’s.

    This is dumb argument. You’re not gonna see Zelda, Mario, Metroid, Animal Crossing, Kirby, God of War, Uncharted, The Last of Us, Beyond, or any other games like that that really have talented developers behind them. The PC world really does wish they had Naughty Dog developing for them just as Microsoft cringes every time Naughty Dog announces a new game. PC doesn’t have the developers Nintendo and Sony have.

    • Dakan45

      You dont need a high end pc, i can build you a pc for 800, or upgrade your old for 400 and have better graphics than next gen. it will last you for 3-4 years then graphics wil improve, you will be able to play games at higher than console settngs just not at the higher settings.

      The ease is the whole point of consoles but its slowly fading, eg waiting for patches to fix a problem when on pc you can google it, subscriptions, acounts, or the now dead online passes. Next gen will have browser and social features trying to be more like pc. Obviously if you want to keep things simple things you want to play on consoles, but the entire point of pc is not being simple. Eg you can change the controls to whatever the hell you want, you can get games for cheaper if you are smart, you can change the fps and use mods. Pc has customization, consoles do not.

      PC has more exlusives than all consoles combined. The reason you dont see AAA exlusives is becaue no one is willing to make AAA exlusives, ms, sony and nitendo pays those developers tens of millions each year to make those games. Every developer wants to sell to as many people as possible, exlusives are funded by the console owners to promote their platform, thats the entire point of consoles.

      “we have a new console, buy it so you can play these games”

      Pc doesnt have an owner, no one owns pc, therefore when you make a pc game you are free to release it and all the profit is yours.

      On consoles you have to pay thousands for a license and then for devkits, ms and sony and nitendo have to approve your game and then they want royality fees and they geta cut from each copy sold which makes games mor expensive.

      I would argue that god of war and killzone have been milked to death and it shows just how pathetic the AAA industry is that they will keep milking franchises instead of making new ones.

      “PC doesn’t have the developers Nintendo and Sony have.”

      More like pc doesnt have a multi billion dollar benefactor to pay the talented developers to make pc exlusive games.

      However pc has more exlusives than all consoles cominbed. In recent GDC survey more people worked on pc games than on consoles. Its wrong to write them off just because they are indie, they got wonderfull games and new innovative ideas for a low budget.

      “hose that have high end PC’s are getting the “Xbone Exclusives” on their PC’s.”

      Considerinng xbox one is weak as hell, a low end pc can play the xbone exlusives. Up until this point i was able to play games with a 5 year old pc with far far better graphics than consoles, the histroy will repeat itself in the future.

  • Dakan45

    “and famed developers like Greg Kasavin certainly thin so. What about you?”

    Greg Kasavin was a gamespot reviewer, he did the oblivion video review in which he states that oblivion looks better on pc than on the “next gen” x360.

    Pc always has better graphics than consoles, nvidia knows this, you know this , greg knows this. Greg kasavin is not a “Developer” he is a cretive director on an indie game, he doesnt have the techinical knowledge to talk about advanced optimizations, he only talks about his experiance by playing games on both pc and consoles.

    The problem is that people see this wrong, if consoles do not push the graphics, then pcs cannot show off their capabilities, when consoles became horribly outdated, then the developers push the graphics on the pc version and you get what we got with bf3 and crysis 3.

    BF3 on consoles= low pc settings
    crysis 3 and metro last light on consoles run UNDER the lowest settings.

    Consoles cannot keep delivering graphics for many years due to console optimization, they just deliver inferior graphics and console gamers do not realize it.

    You got a problem with that? Build a pc, you dont have a problem with that? Play on consoles.

    Hell both iw and dice stated that bf4 and cod ghosts will have better graphics on pc than on “next gen” and no you dont need super duper 4000$ pcs to get those graphics.

    Does that statement changed your opinion about which version to buy? Ofcourse not you gonna buy the console version if you play on consoles and you will buy the pc version if you play on pc.

    end of story.

    • reality

      When you say PC, there is no such as one PC version, there thousands of different PC configurations people have, anything from $300 to $4000. So when you compare PCs to consoles, it is not comparing the same thing.

      You could compare a new $400 PC to a new $400 PS4, and the PS4 undoubtedly will be more powerful now, but that may change in few years time when PC part prices come down.

    • Dakan45

      Obviously i am comparing pcs who can play games well.

      Bf3 on current consoles= low pc settings, even a 5 year old pc beats the consoles.

      WHY YOU COMPARE PS4 WITH A 400$ PC? WHY?

      Pc gamers dont buy 400$ pcs they buy a 200$ videocard and a 150$ cpu in a year or two and they are ready for next gen.

      Why you consoletards INSIST in wanting to compare a 400$ pc with a 400$ console?

      WHY? I can just UPGRADE my current pc and play games from the early 90s up until now. Just becasue you gotta buy a new trashbox each time and swamp them in your tv to play old games, doesnt mean that pc gamers have to, we BUILD a pc, we UPGRADE THEM, kinda like a character in a rpg, get it? or do i need to draw it for you?

    • dirkradke

      Can’t you just enjoy what you have and accept people don’t agree with spending what they consider an excessive amount of money for gaming?

    • Dakan45

      yup, because having a 400$ trashbox from 2005-6 and buy used games and dont bother with subscritptions is the pinnacle of how you should play games and how game makes profit.

      You are a cheap fuck.

    • dirkradke

      It’s amazing that this whole conversation started because you wanted PC gaming to be cheaper than Console gaming. I enjoy it so what difference does it make to you? Why do you need to try and make other people feel bad? Me being a cheap f*ck certainly isn’t a problem for me.

  • Ottoman

    Pc is the master race put bf4 on max settings on a 4k monitor and compare it to your little box

  • John

    Why does a “giant” like Sony need to protect their mainstream sh** anyhow?
    That’s just b.s. and hocus sh**, in my own words!


 

Copyright © 2009-2015 GamingBolt.com. All Rights Reserved.