Multiplatform Graphics Discussion [OT]

Status
Not open for further replies.
Not entirely disagreeing with this, but at the same time at least in this current generation you don't need a high end PC to trump these consoles. Going off of raw GPU power and overall system performance a mid-range PC can best what the PS4/XB1 can put out easily.
Console players need to understand this. The only thing that blurs their vision is the fact that console game makers have the advantage of a fixed platform where there aren't thousands of configurations to think about. Hence readily exploitable visual niceties.
Make no mistake. A multiplatform game will ALWAYS run better on a PC with mid-range specs compared to the PS4/XB1. In that same vein a PS4/XB1 game made solely for that system will never see the light of day on a PC, but by using common sense that mid-range spec'd PC would run that PS4/Xb1 exclusive better than the PS4/Xb1 could.

That doesn't really address what I said though, I never said consoles match high end PC's. All I was saying is that all PC's aren't the same and they shouldn't all be lumped together when discussion PC vs Consoles. Who's to say what classifies ad mid range? one person may think something is mid range that you think is low end.
 
That doesn't really address what I said though, I never said consoles match high end PC's. All I was saying is that all PC's aren't the same and they shouldn't all be lumped together when discussion PC vs Consoles. Who's to say what classifies ad mid range? one person may think something is mid range that you think is low end.

Yeah that is why I said I somewhat agree with you.
However, if we are going to showcase the best visually with what the consoles can offer, it is only fair that we showcase the best with what the PC platform can offer as well regardless of if the platform is high end or mid range.
I completely agree that there are some differences to what constitutes low end/mid range/high end, but there is mostly a consensus. A gtx 980 is not considered low/mid range by anyone, but a gtx 680 is still widely considered mid-high range by alot of people.
What I'm stressing is that based on the general consensus and not a universal one to most PC enthusiasts a PC sporting mid-range parts can outperform these consoles. As to what exactly constitutes mid range parts well there are hundreds of possible configurations.
 
Last edited:
Silly me to assume when people compare pc screenshot or videos to consoles, they show max or near max settings on pc.

At full potential,
Good gaming pc>ps4>X1.

Obviously technical edge may not means a game will look better in more powerful platform, things like art direction, game engine, talent all play a part.

RYse is a good example. It look best on pc(high end), because all else equal, more power hardware produce better visuals/smoothness.

Ryse looks better than most( if not all) ps4 games ( it won the best visuals at an award right) because while X11 is weaker, they use an advance engine & the studio had talented artists & designers, among other things.

It's funny how ps fan try to downplay ryse, as they cannot accept the weaker X1 produce the best visuals (period), subjective of course, but it won an award so some experts ( not just hardcore fanboys)think so...

Also funny of x1 fans to keep using Ryse as the benchmark to claim X11 is as powerful or even more than ps4.

Took off the bias glasses & everything can be explained logically.

Just think for a moment, ms claim X1 to be as powerful as 8 x360 & Sony claim ps4 is 10x PS3, yet many people say the jump form last gem to current gen isn't much.

Then think about X11 about 30-40% weaker ( though some may disagree), obviously you are not going to see drastic differences in visuals. Maybe a but better fps, maybe a it higher resolution, or so Extra grass or effect. That's about it. The technical edge can be bridge with a more talented team that optimize the hardware to its limit.
 
Last edited:
Silly me to assume when people compare pc screenshot or videos to consoles, they show max or near max settings on pc.

At full potential,
Good gaming pc>ps4>X1.

Obviously technical edge may not means a game will look better in more powerful platform, things like art direction, game engine, talent all play a part.

RYse is a good example. It look best on pc(high end), because all else equal, more power hardware produce better visuals/smoothness.

Ryse looks better than most( if not all) ps4 games ( it won the best visuals at an award right) because while X11 is weaker, they use an advance engine & the studio had talented artists & designers, among other things.

It's funny how ps fan try to downplay ryse, as they cannot accept the weaker X1 produce the best visuals (period), subjective of course, but it won an award so some experts ( not just hardcore fanboys)think so...

Also funny of x1 fans to keep using Ryse as the benchmark to claim X11 is as powerful or even more than ps4.

Took off the bias glasses & everything can be explained logically.

Just think for a moment, ms claim X1 to be as powerful as 8 x360 & Sony claim ps4 is 10x PS3, yet many people say the jump form last gem to current gen isn't much.

Then think about X11 about 30-40% weaker ( though some may disagree), obviously you are not going to see drastic differences in visuals. Maybe a but better fps, maybe a it higher resolution, or so Extra grass or effect. That's about it. The technical edge can be bridge with a more talented team that optimize the hardware to its limit.

A really good example of the difference in power is the consoles is Tomb Raider Definitive Edition.
 
Got to play DC yesterday at a friends house. IMO the game suffers from Ryse syndrome, all shiny with no soul.
 
A really good example of the difference in power is the consoles is Tomb Raider Definitive Edition.
I would say its the capabilities of the systems ( a combo of tools & hardware) at launch. Kinect & other overhead have been removed, tools refined so if it was launch today, I expect closer performances differences.

if consoles games allow gamers to tune settings and without locking frame rate, then the difference can be determine better. Its only my theory, I think frame rate was locked on consoles (for multiplat) also (not necessery the main reason) as a meant to prevent direct comparsion.
 
I actually take that TR:DE comment back, 2 different devs worked on each console. Different approaches.
 
You think this looks better than DC?

fm5caayn2c3s9x.png


fm5caayn3tas7k.png


fm5caayn4vyswt.png
I'm talking during actually playing the game. There is some real ugly stuff in both games, but DC is far more overblown than Forza is. I wouldn't bring it up at all if the talk that DC is the Best Looking Racer Evar wasn't getting annoying- and after seeing it first-hand, that isn't my impression. I absolutely think it does some things better than Forza(at half the framerate), but I was just pointing out that after seeing them side-by-side, I felt that overall, Forza got my nod. I honestly didn't expect that, but there it is. The game does NOT look as good as the gifs and photo-mode shot would lead you to believe.

And no, I don't think Forza is the best looking racer, either. I'd probably give that to what I've seen of pCars. Still, I actually think the way the physics are represented in something like iRacing make it look more realistic, even if it graphically doesn't fire on all cylinders.
 
Last edited:
Silly me to assume when people compare pc screenshot or videos to consoles, they show max or near max settings on pc.

At full potential,
Good gaming pc>ps4>X1.

Obviously technical edge may not means a game will look better in more powerful platform, things like art direction, game engine, talent all play a part.

RYse is a good example. It look best on pc(high end), because all else equal, more power hardware produce better visuals/smoothness.

Ryse looks better than most( if not all) ps4 games ( it won the best visuals at an award right) because while X11 is weaker, they use an advance engine & the studio had talented artists & designers, among other things.

It's funny how ps fan try to downplay ryse, as they cannot accept the weaker X1 produce the best visuals (period), subjective of course, but it won an award so some experts ( not just hardcore fanboys)think so...

Also funny of x1 fans to keep using Ryse as the benchmark to claim X11 is as powerful or even more than ps4.

Took off the bias glasses & everything can be explained logically.

Just think for a moment, ms claim X1 to be as powerful as 8 x360 & Sony claim ps4 is 10x PS3, yet many people say the jump form last gem to current gen isn't much.

Then think about X11 about 30-40% weaker ( though some may disagree), obviously you are not going to see drastic differences in visuals. Maybe a but better fps, maybe a it higher resolution, or so Extra grass or effect. That's about it. The technical edge can be bridge with a more talented team that optimize the hardware to its limit.

This is about a game looking better, not about the power of the machine, although some people will push a game forward to represent it's power. If a game, say RYSE, looks better than PS4 games, that doesn't mean it's more powerful- it just means that the devs know how to make a good looking game. Crytek is pretty much at the tip-top of graphics gurus. Couple that with the fact that they haven't made a PS4 game, then, well, that makes sense.
 
I'm talking during actually playing the game. There is some real ugly stuff in both games, but DC is far more overblown than Forza is. I wouldn't bring it up at all if the talk that DC is the Best Looking Racer Evar wasn't getting annoying- and after seeing it first-hand, that isn't my impression. I absolutely think it does some things better than Forza(at half the framerate), but I was just pointing out that after seeing them side-by-side, I felt that overall, Forza got my nod. I honestly didn't expect that, but there it is. The game does NOT look as good as the gifs and photo-mode shot would lead you to believe.

And no, I don't think Forza is the best looking racer, either. I'd probably give that to what I've seen of pCars. Still, I actually think the way the physics are represented in something like iRacing make it look more realistic, even if it graphically doesn't fire on all cylinders.

Interesting. I'll remember that when I try out DC. I've played Forza 5 and FH2.
 
I'd also like to point out that this is a thread for graphics discussion, not necessarily a VS thread. although I do get comparisons have do have a place.
 
You're the one who brought up Forza 5 vs DC ;)

It was already a VS thread :p

I did bring up Forza just because of some of the overblown(imo) DC claims. I did that because I had just seen DC myself for the first time and was trying to provide a reference point as I saw the two side by side, essentially( they on different sides of the low wall).
 
Do you know what is an amazing looking videogame but isn't a driving game?

Guilty Gear Xrd



Looks like hand drawn 2D anime but all 3D models doing The Matrix camera s***.

Amazing.
 
It was already a VS thread :p

I did bring up Forza just because of some of the overblown(imo) DC claims. I did that because I had just seen DC myself for the first time and was trying to provide a reference point as I saw the two side by side, essentially( they on different sides of the low wall).

Just remember its the Internetz and more importantly a graphics thread, all reason and logic is immediately tossed out!

DC better graphics than PCars...
 
I actually take that TR:DE comment back, 2 different devs worked on each console. Different approaches.
Still don't matter
One version is 1080p/60 fps and the other is a sub scaled 1080p/30fps.
Another Similar example is Murder Soul Suspect is 1080p/60fps on PS4 and 1080p/30fps on Xbox One.
 
Still don't matter
One version is 1080p/60 fps and the other is a sub scaled 1080p/30fps.
Another Similar example is Murder Soul Suspect is 1080p/60fps on PS4 and 1080p/30fps on Xbox One.

1080p/60/30 that's a huge gulf in visual difference...
 
Well DC does looks better from these scenes. To be fair, FH2 is a cross gen game, open world & running on weaker hardware. Interested to see the next full (maybe) next gen FH3.

But credit where credit is due.

FH2 is not a cross gen game. The "name" of the game is cross gen though.

FH2 isn't running on the same engine on the xbox one as on the 360 so that really had nothing to do with it. Open world and weaker hardware are fair points to bring up though.

Being that the hardware is pretty darn close anyway, it comes down to open world versus corridor.

Agreed here. The PS4 gamers are convinced that the game is the best looking racer out there.

It currently is the best looking racer on the PS4 IMO.

But Quantum Break doesn't look better than Order IMO

Quantum seems to be the one to beat for 2015 from what we have seen.


Yeah, DC doesn't even come close to that. Heck, even FH2 doesn't.

Definitely a step down from DriveClub.

eddie1.gif
 
Last edited:
[QUOTE="Kvally, post: 322918, member: 367"




Yeah, DC doesn't even come close to that. Heck, even FH2 doesn't.



eddie1.gif
[/QUOTE]

Heck FH2 doesn't? well yeah IF the superior to FH2 in visuals DC falls short.
 
I've been thinking about this for awhile now. Ryse is old news. People need to let it go. It's a great looking game but Crytek always delivers. It doesn't prove a whole lot. I think DriveClub and Infamous: Second Son are by far the best looking games out right now.
 
I've been thinking about this for awhile now. Ryse is old news. People need to let it go. It's a great looking game but Crytek always delivers. It doesn't prove a whole lot. I think DriveClub and Infamous: Second Son are by far the best looking games out right now.

I have taught you so much.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.