• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

PC Call of Duty Ghosts using higher-res textures than next-gen console versions

JAYSIMPLE said:
might have thought the specs for next gen were better than they are? so devved on pc to port the game then realised they need to turn bells and whistles off for the weaker than expected consoles?
Click to expand...

I don't think that's the case because the "new" engine looks like crap (COD is one of the worst looking next gen games IMO).

NBtoaster said:
MW3 had better quality shadows and SSAO on PC compared to consoles. Black Ops 2 had DX11 features too.
Click to expand...

But these are minor features. I'm talking differences like BF3 and Metro for example. Something that really makes the games look so much better.
 
MaLDo said:
What? Physx in pc uses gpu compute since Mirror's Edge. Just Cause 2 in pc has gpu compute for water simulation. Tomb Raider has hair physics running on gpu. Gpu compute is not new in pc.
Click to expand...

Sharing address space between gpu and cpu is. The gpu and cpu can both read and write to the same memory pool.

The possibilities are huge compared to how PC's are currently setup.

The PC is going the same way but it will be a while yet.
 
Nextgen CoD only looks marginally better on PS4One than PS360. The devs haven't been exactly touting the nextversion as being superior, infact at the MP reveal they talked about how many nextgen features they put into the currentgen version. Doesn't sound like they put too much effort into it. Lol if some of you actually think OnePS4 can't handle higher res textures of the pc version.


Its BF4 PS4 4 me this year, the upgrades are huge: 60fps over 30fps, 64players vs 24 over the PS3.
 
W!CKED said:
These won't perform on PS4 level. Okay, the SLI 780m one will... but the single-gpu notebooks won't.
Click to expand...

Your point?

The issue at hand was whether one could acquire a laptop with specs that easily outperform a PS4. A dual-card laptop can indeed do so, and not to mention the other components.
 
I dont understand this...
I would have thought PS4/One seemed to have "No limitations"...for now.
Of all games that are graphically impressive, I'd have expected COD to be able to have max on consoles.
 
sp3000 said:
So pretty much what BF3 was on the PC two years ago. Really impressive. Totally worthy of a new 60 dollar sequel.
Click to expand...

I can't wait to see how much of it is recycled assets.

Same vehicle models, weapons, enemy character models watch.

This is merely a map pack with a new crappy campaign.
 
W!CKED said:
The 780m is only slightly above PS4's GPU on paper an even has less bandwidth. PS4 has the advantage of a console development environment (low level API + fixed hardware) and the advantage of the superior architecture (coherent caches, uniform memory access, unified ram pool, no PCIe bus, etc). PS4 will outperform it in real world scenarios.
Click to expand...
Most PS4 games are going to be locked to either 30 or 60fps. The machine would only have to average more than either of those two to outperform it in a real world scenario.
 
MrPresident said:
Higher resolution displacement maps are a possibility but that's a separate area from base textures. In this shot, for example, those aren't individually textured rocks but one flat texture with displacement on top. A higher resolution displacement map would make the geometry of the rocks of higher resolution but not the base texture (which is what people are complaining about whether they know it or not).



Of course, people losing their collective minds over a screenshot demonstrating tessellation and not texturing just misses the point. Each rock may represent 64x64 pixels of a much larger texture. It's meaningless without knowing the context and especially regarding any comparative differences between PC and console.
Click to expand...

Bump map for lighting need calculations for every texel, so a bigger bump texture, more detail, more memory used and more calculations. Displacement map resolution affects calculations too, and memory. Because more detailed displacement map need more pixels and that's memory used too. More detailed tesselated asset need more calculations, but more memory too. And so on.
 
sp3000 said:
So pretty much what BF3 was on the PC two years ago. Really impressive. Totally worthy of a new 60 dollar sequel.
Click to expand...

Did you even read my comment? I said ''over the PS3''. Its a major upgrade from 720p 30fps. Bless you for not bringing BF2 PC version here which did 1080p 64players in 2005, what great upgrades those pc versions have been regarding resolution and player count since BF2, totally worthy of 60 dollar sequels.

BF4 clearly looks superior on nextgen consoles than current gen. I don't see such clear superiority of nextgen CoD Ghost over PS360. The IQ doesn't look that much better than BLOPS2 and CoDs were always 60fps.
 
This is what happens when you have a "Call of Duty Day" "every year". Unoptimized crap shovelware. And it will absolutely be the death of the franchise within 3 more years.
 
kitch9 said:
The consoles will be able to do stuff PC's can't for now thanks to gpu compute and shared memory address space between cpu and gpu.

The PS4 in particular is designed with this in mind. This will not really be leveraged in the first round of titles though, apart from some first party stuff maybe.
Click to expand...

lol even the wiiu has gpu compute and shared memory .
 
kitch9 said:
The consoles will be able to do stuff PC's can't for now thanks to gpu compute and shared memory address space between cpu and gpu.

The PS4 in particular is designed with this in mind. This will not really be leveraged in the first round of titles though, apart from some first party stuff maybe.
Click to expand...

You mean in terms of architecture and how the hardware is designed because when it comes down to showing things on screen consoles do not have a leg up on pc and never will, they just achieve these things in a different way but the end result will still be the same, nothing new or unobtainable (for pc) about it.
 
nOoblet16 said:
The power of the machine has little to do with texture resolution, what it needs is RAM and both consoles have more than enough of it for current standards. There is no excuse for this.


Textures in Uncharted 2 aren't bad, they lack AF that's why far off textures look worse than the ones directly in front of you. And what does double rendering even mean
Click to expand...

whhaaaa?? Texture resolution is one of the main things to have power for.

do you really think it takes the same amount of time to render 64 lines of 64 pixels per texture than it does to render 1028 lines of 1028 pixels?


There are some insane statements going on in this thread.
 
The first thing people should understand about textures is that they are not calculated per frame. They have minimal impact on the ALUs, so no, raw power isn't that important. People also need to understand that the most important step in bringing a texture to the screen is mapping them. For this you need TMUs, at a decent clock. Only platform that seems to be lacking in this regard is the XB1.
 
pixlexic said:
whhaaaa?? Texture resolution is one of the main things to have power for.

do you really think it takes the same amount of time to render 64 lines of 64 pixels per texture than it does to render 1028 lines of 1028 pixels?


There are some insane statements going on in this thread.
Click to expand...
Not this again... no, it doesn't. It hasn't done so for a decade.

Here's the game's closest relative, Black Ops 2:

blackops2-tweak-guide-texture-quality-performance-chart.png


Feel free to go to Geforce.com and check out their other performance guides. They usually account for texture resolution and the result is always the same. If you have enough video memory then texture resolution is 'free'.
 
I really thought IW and Activision would actually take this chance (you know, being the turn of the generation and all) to make a new engine.
 
I got a Wii U for the inevitable insanely awesome 1st party lineup.

And a Gaming rig for the Multiplats. Also best graphics for my 46" TV.

Winning combination IMO.

My gaming PC surely is not the best one but it should have no issues with "next gen". (Heck PC was "next gen" since 2007 when crysis came out and blew everything away easily. But thats just my opinion)
 
MrPresident said:
Not this again... no, it doesn't. It hasn't done so for a decade.

Here's the game's closest relative, Black Ops 2:

[imghttp://www.geforce.com/Active/en_US/shared/images/guides/blackops2-tweak/blackops2-tweak-guide-texture-quality-performance-chart.png[/img]

Feel free to go to Geforce.com and check out their other performance guides. They usually account for texture resolution and the result is always the same. If you have enough video memory then texture resolution is 'free'.
Click to expand...
Memory, Bandwidth and TMUs. This is probably is a more understandable chart for the PC enthusiasts here.
 
Atraveller said:
The new IW was a rushed patchwork of several studios, what do you expect?
Click to expand...

Its not that...

They fear change, thats why COD aint drasticly different they got the masses used to
A certain feel formula...new engine will change that...

They riding this ride until it explodes
 
Ok someone help me understand, the article talks about how the PC version of Ghosts will have higher-res textures than next gen consoles, and that's it, right?

So why are people posting Uncharted and The Last of Us pics? I completely agree that their textures look way better than Ghosts', even without considering it's on old ass hardware, but what does this have to do with texture resolution? They can look like shit and still be high res, don't they?
 
dark_prinny said:
Is inexcusable with better hardware in new consoles.
Click to expand...

So let me get this straight. You expect the game to look better on the new consoles because they have better hardware than the old consoles right ? Yet you are saying it is "inexcusable" for COD to look better on PC's that have better hardware than the new consoles ?
 
CharmingCharlie said:
So let me get this straight. You expect the game to look better on the new consoles because they have better hardware than the old consoles right ? Yet you are saying it is "inexcusable" for COD to look better on PC's that have better hardware than the new consoles ?
Click to expand...

They should be on pair due to the non demanding engine ( graphically speaking ) the game is running on.

Is just laziness.
 
dark_prinny said:
They should be on pair due to the non demanding engine ( graphically speaking ) the game is running on.

Is just laziness.
Click to expand...

Or PCs have a higher ceiling allowing for better effects? Please do not forget this is a 60fps title... on fixed hardware that means limiting your ceiling.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Xbox Gamepass Price Update announced $22.99 - Console $13.99 - PC - No Day One Call of Duty
6 7 8 9 10
460
816
Orionsangel replied
Taylor Sheridan’s ‘Call of Duty’ Movie Lands 2028 Release Date
34
254
vindafarna replied
  • Poll
Will Call of Duty skip Game Pass this year?
2
73
1K
Danny22 replied
Call of Duty advert banned for trivialising sexual violence
2
53
671
uncreativename replied
Call of Duty: Black Ops 7 | Launch Trailer (PC Features Spotlight)
2 3
111
2K
nemiroff replied
Top Bottom