NextGen Console Graphics And Effects on PC (E3 Coverage!)

[toyota]

lol Tomb Raider is hardly impressive looking and TBH I have never understood why people think Witcher 2 is so good looking on the pc. I have BOTH the pc and 360 version and besides the lower resolution, the pc version is not all that better looking. in fact the first time I fired it up I had to check the settings because I thought the game looked ok at best for game touted for its visuals. Crysis 3 is the ONLY game that has impressed me visually. not only that it runs great for the way it looks as long as you use SMAA and not MSAA.

 

[blastingcap]

http://www.shacknews.com/article/79643/ps4-online-multiplayer-to-require-ps-plus-subscription

Factor that into your cost equations.

 

[mikegg]

lol Tomb Raider is hardly impressive looking and TBH I have never understood why people think Witcher 2 is so good looking on the pc. I have BOTH the pc and 360 version and besides the lower resolution, the pc version is not all that better looking. in fact the first time I fired it up I had to check the settings because I thought the game looked ok at best for game touted for its visuals. Crysis 3 is the ONLY game that has impressed me visually. not only that it runs great for the way it looks as long as you use SMAA and not MSAA.

I actually played Witcher 2 and was able to play it on High on a 1080p screen. It was not at all that impressive. It ran well on high on my 4.2Ghz i5 750 and AMD 4850.

I never played Crysis 3 though. I played Crysis 1 and thought that was jaw dropping at the time. I did not think Crysis 3 was jaw dropping.

I think Destiny and several of the announced games are jaw dropping though.

 

[2is]

The MGS5 trailer was in real time. Did you not see the trailer/press conference? Maybe you should watch it before you do.

There's no way in hell BF3 even comes close to MSG5's graphics right now.

Fox Engine is next-gen. Frostbite 2 is last gen. Try again.

It looked good, but I didn't feel it was as good as you thought it was. I think a maxed out Metro LL and Crysis 3 looks better personally. MGS actually looked pretty much exactly how I expected it to look.

Your 4850 must have also been made by god if you managed to play Witcher 2 on high at 1080p.

And lets get real, you have a 4850 and claim mgs looks better than any PC game.... You don't even know how good they can look, I have a 4850, I have a 5870 and I have SLi 680s. I assure you, there's a difference in now the games look between my different setups. And yes, Crysis 3 on a 4850 isn't jaw dropping.

 

[toyota]

I actually played Witcher 2 and was able to play it on High on a 1080p screen. It was not at all that impressive. It ran well on high on my 4.2Ghz i5 750 and AMD 4850.

I never played Crysis 3 though. I played Crysis 1 and thought that was jaw dropping at the time. I did not think Crysis 3 was jaw dropping.

I think Destiny and several of the announced games are jaw dropping though.

Crysis 3 is most certainly stunning looking in spots and no other game bests it overall. texture resolution and facial detail alone blow any other game away.

 

[alcoholbob]

lol Witcher 2 is nothing more than a DX9 game with high quality textures, there's a reason why the game is over 20GB despite being a relatively small gameworld.

 

[Imouto]

Wow, I see a lot of PC gamers in full denial mode.

 

[2is]

I see a lot if people convincing themselves they can get PC level visuals for $4-500.

 

[tential]

I see a lot if people convincing themselves they can get PC level visuals for $4-500.

I'm not even sure you should do that calculation to be honest. MOST people have a desktop with a good enough processor. The price should be bring a desktop you already own up to PC quality level. Just saying.

Either way this thread was never meant to be a debate on which system is better, but what you thought the future of PC gaming holds now that we got a first look at many of these new engines.

I'm extremely excited for the future of PC gaming after seeing things like Watch Dogs. With all these engines now being showcased, we all know that any game we saw today will be great on PC.

 

[blastingcap]

I'm not even sure you should do that calculation to be honest. MOST people have a desktop with a good enough processor. The price should be bring a desktop you already own up to PC quality level. Just saying.

Either way this thread was never meant to be a debate on which system is better, but what you thought the future of PC gaming holds now that we got a first look at many of these new engines.

I'm extremely excited for the future of PC gaming after seeing things like Watch Dogs. With all these engines now being showcased, we all know that any game we saw today will be great on PC.

I agree but for different reasons, I think graphics are nice but game mechanics matter more, and some showcased games were intriguing to me for the game mechanics. Of course, others just made me roll my eyes because they looked like boring retreads of older games or just simply stupid, but I don't have to buy those so.. whatever. It's games like Watch_Dogs that have me interested. And Watch_Dogs will be released for Windows platform, too.

 

[ShadowOfMyself]

Huh... Crysis 3 doesnt look nearly as good as people claim... I think Bioshock Infinite looks much better

At the point we are right now, art direction matters a lot more than technical feats, and Bioshock has that in spades
The scene right at the start when you enter Columbia was jaw dropping, the lightning, the colors and the textures were all incredible

The only scene that impressed me in Crysis 3 was the first time you enter the dome, when you have that mix of city and jungle, after that it went downhill until the very last part where you go after the Alpha guy, then it picks up again

Sure, it has very detailed faces and stuff (but so does Bioshock), but the game looks so damn boring, it has a completely uninspired art direction

In that sense, most console games shown yesterday were way superior
Of course, any game that runs on Ps4 and X1 will look just as good on the PC with the right hardware, no one can argue with that

Im just happy they are finally coming so we get the huge leap we have been waiting for
The next 2-3 years should be very interesting

 

[Black Octagon]

Huh... Crysis 3 doesnt look nearly as good as people claim... I think Bioshock Infinite looks much better

I agree. And I still think that Crysis 1 at 1440p on PC (even with no AA) looks better than any video of 'next-gen' console footage posted so far in this thread.

For all that, I think the OP raises some good questions. I will be particularly interested to see how TODAY'S GPUs stack up in a year or 2 from now, once the new consoles have been out for a while with premier titles. I predict that they will still perform respectfully at the consoles' own 1080p resolution and 60fps frame rate. For 1440p and/or 120fps one will, most probably, need the 2014/15 cards

 

[zink77]

are you serious?

Hardware convergence, CPU/GPU power has reached a point of diminishing return in terms of graphical fidelity but the PC is superior. All console ports are better looking on PC because of increased horsepower, you can't deny it.

 

[Jacky60]

No way. Graphics definitely look better on the One than any PC games now.

I'm sorry.

Well I think the 'HD' footage I've seen looks distinctly last generation. I really can't believe xbox one will look that bad. Everything is dusty and blurred. If that's what mainstream consoles gamers think is amazing I'm very glad I'm a PC gamer.
I guess if you're used to playing on am old AMD quad core with something like a 5870 then it looks OK but I'm considerably underwhelmed.

 

[Jacky60]

Ok troll. I'm not even a console gamer. I don't own a single console.. I own an i5 750 with an AMD 4850.

I have no bias. I just think that MGS5 looks awesome and better than anything we have out so far.

I'm really sorry if I hurt your your ego. Yes, your 7950 is probably more powerful. Happy?

This: 'I own an i5 750 with an AMD 4850.'

Well obviously you're going to be impressed with your antique system, try using a modern pc with something better than a mid range gpu from over four year ago. Your PC is a turd, no wonder you're excited.

 

[Olikan]

i think we are reaching the point were the developers efforts to make the game is more important, than the hardware required to play the game

 

[Spjut]

For all that, I think the OP raises some good questions. I will be particularly interested to see how TODAY'S GPUs stack up in a year or 2 from now, once the new consoles have been out for a while with premier titles. I predict that they will still perform respectfully at the consoles' own 1080p resolution and 60fps frame rate. For 1440p and/or 120fps one will, most probably, need the 2014/15 cards

I think the biggest issue for the current mid-range cards is the 2GB VRAM. I'll not be surprised if even the 2GB model of the GTX 770 will have aged badly two years from now

 

[Final8ty]

AMD today announced exclusive collaboration with Square Enix to optimize "THIEF" for the Graphics Core Next architecture in select AMD Radeon graphics processors, as well as the x86 and graphics architectures featured in AMD A-Series APUs. Developed in conjunction with the AMD Gaming Evolved program, "THIEF" will extensively leverage the advanced capabilities of AMD Radeon graphics processors, including AMD Eyefinity multi-display technology for panoramic gaming, AMD CrossFire multi-GPU technology for supreme performance, and state-of-the-art DirectX 11 rendering for pristine image quality.

"The 'THIEF' franchise has a storied history that we are proud to join in this latest installment," said Matt Skynner, corporate vice president and general manager, Graphics Business Unit, AMD. "We are even more pleased to work so closely with their development team to realize the vision for these games with the incredible gaming performance of a PC powered by AMD Radeon graphics. And as the exclusive hardware partner for 'THIEF,' we continue to demonstrate that the best experience for gamers and developers lives at AMD with the Gaming Evolved program."

Square Enix is present at this year's Electronic Entertainment Expo (E3) with a wide variety of games and demonstrations to be discovered and experienced hands-on in the South Hall at booth #1647, or online with the Square Enix Presents YouTube channel.

"AMD, Square Enix and Eidos-Montréal have a strong and notable relationship," said Stephane D'Astous, general manager, Eidos-Montréal. "It was only logical that we extend the cooperative efforts of our teams to 'THIEF,' imbuing it with the expertise that made 'Deus Ex: Human Revolution' such a technical achievement. Those efforts include a broad range of exclusive performance optimizations for AMD CPUs, APUs and graphics cards, and we are excited about making our game a technology showcase on the PC platform."

AMD also has a large presence at this year's E3, located in the South Hall booth #423. From an array of gadgets powered by AMD APUs and CPUs, to UltraHD gaming driven by the world's most advanced graphics cards, fans can experience AMD's full commitment to gaming on a diverse range of state-of-the-art computing solutions.
http://www.techpowerup.com/185479/thief-optimized-for-amd-technologies.html

 

[Enigmoid]

Huh... Crysis 3 doesnt look nearly as good as people claim... I think Bioshock Infinite looks much better

At the point we are right now, art direction matters a lot more than technical feats, and Bioshock has that in spades
The scene right at the start when you enter Columbia was jaw dropping, the lightning, the colors and the textures were all incredible

Crysis 3 looks amazing, even on medium. Bioshock looked nothing in comparison.

Bioshock characters look like any other console port characters. Art is good but content is recycled so much (million identical trash cans to scrounge money from), the apples everywhere look meh. The characters are cardboard cutouts (don't really move, do anything dynamic like they do in skyrim). The AI was okay, pretty good for the larger enemies.

 

[toyota]

Huh... Crysis 3 doesnt look nearly as good as people claim... I think Bioshock Infinite looks much better

At the point we are right now, art direction matters a lot more than technical feats, and Bioshock has that in spades
The scene right at the start when you enter Columbia was jaw dropping, the lightning, the colors and the textures were all incredible

The only scene that impressed me in Crysis 3 was the first time you enter the dome, when you have that mix of city and jungle, after that it went downhill until the very last part where you go after the Alpha guy, then it picks up again

Sure, it has very detailed faces and stuff (but so does Bioshock), but the game looks so damn boring, it has a completely uninspired art direction

In that sense, most console games shown yesterday were way superior
Of course, any game that runs on Ps4 and X1 will look just as good on the PC with the right hardware, no one can argue with that

Im just happy they are finally coming so we get the huge leap we have been waiting for
The next 2-3 years should be very interesting

you actually think Cysis 3 does not look all that good and that Bioshock has detailed face like Crysis 3? you need your freaking eyes checked.

 

[toyota]

I agree. And I still think that Crysis 1 at 1440p on PC (even with no AA) looks better than any video of 'next-gen' console footage posted so far in this thread.

For all that, I think the OP raises some good questions. I will be particularly interested to see how TODAY'S GPUs stack up in a year or 2 from now, once the new consoles have been out for a while with premier titles. I predict that they will still perform respectfully at the consoles' own 1080p resolution and 60fps frame rate. For 1440p and/or 120fps one will, most probably, need the 2014/15 cards

BS. get off that nostalgic trip you are on and actually look at Crysis 1 compared to the upcoming games. it is looking very outdated. nothing magical happens at 1440 either as just slightly more ppi will never make much difference. some of you guys should be ashamed for the ignorant comments being made here.

 

[jackstar7]

BS. get off that nostalgic trip you are on and actually look at Crysis 1 compared to the upcoming games. it is looking very outdated. nothing magical happens at 1440 either as just slightly more ppi will never make much difference. some of you guys should be ashamed for the ignorant comments being made here.

The absurdity of people judging completely subjective experiences leaves me amused. At least there's that positive aspect to it.

 

[toyota]

http://calcg.org/files/8/809/21b.gif

The absurdity of people judging completely subjective experiences leaves me amused. At least there's that positive aspect to it.

art direction and style are certainly subjective but saying Crysis 1 looks better than all of the upcoming next gen games is ignorant BS though. same goes for saying that Bioshock Infinite has detailed faces like Crysis 3.

 

[Insomniator]

Its not so much of an opinion though. The game looks old, yet so many still claim its the best. Technically I could say Quake 2 is still the best looking game, but that's clearly a wrong opinion.

 

[Attic]

From Headline article at CNBC regarding failures of XBOX1 pricing and other uppercuts to gamers everywhere.

Sony, however, seized the opportunity to win over consumers—announcing Monday night that the PS4 would cost $399—$100 less than the Xbox One. And undercutting the Xbox One's price was just one of the many shots Sony took at Microsoft at its annual E3 press conference.
To raucous applause, Sony's Jack Tretton also announced that the PS4 would put no restrictions on used games, letting players play used games and lend titles to friends. Additionally, he said, the system will not require any form of Internet connectivity, a direct hit at Xbox One's convoluted online connection requirements.
"If you enjoy playing single player games offline, the PlayStation 4 won't require you to check in online—and it won't stop working if you haven't authenticated within 24 hours," said Tretton, president of Sony Computer Entertainment of America.

Full Article

If this turns out to be the case I think PS4 is going to crush the xBox.

So we have the xbox with mediocore visuals. Can't sell your games or buy used games, system has to authenticate every 24 hours and possible be always online to play games.... gah, to top it off it looks like a VHS player trying to be ahead of it's times in 1985.

For being slightly tilted towards a nextgen console instead of a GPU upgrade, and being heavily tilted towards XBOX1... i'm now more in a PS4 or bust mood if I go the console route and I'm most anticpating the 760ti from nVidia if it can get in at $250.