Support NeoGAF

[[Nintex]]

Here's an example from an older game (so it might be more obvious?):

SuperMan on Nintendo 64:

Batman Arkham Asylum on PC is a lot better graphically than SuperMan 64:

But I definitely see what I call the "PC look" in it.

This example is very clear to me, so if you agree/disagree/think I'm full of shit say so. That's about the best I can represent what I'm saying though. Just to be clear, I personally prefer the way SuperMan 64 looks- while acknowledging that technically it's objectively worse.

 

[Boss Man]

Come back with an apples-apples comparison and then we'll talk.


Compare a modern game, at the same resolution, with the same gamma, in the same scene, with the same quality settings (AA/AF etc.) with direct feed images on the same display.

Then we'll talk.

If I could set that up I would. I don't want to see this real or perceived difference, it's just what I see. Do you at least see what I'm talking about in those pictures? In my experience, that is in all PC games I've seen. Are you saying that if you simply scaled down the settings on those two games they would match the console versions?

 

[jim-jam bongs]

wow and now we've entered the stupidest portion of the discussion. this pc look shit is like believing that john edwards talks to dead people levels of stupidity.

I think console gamers, deep down are more jealous of the freedom of games we can play on pc (indie wise) and the ability to alter existing games with more content, or better assests as time goes by. I mean look at how us pc gamers are able to expand awesome games such as new vegas with user mods!

D:

 

[Stop It]

So basically people are unable to recognise an apples-oranges comparison? I guess I overestimated the intelligence of the average GAFer then.

Of course people making these comparisons should be making them on the same display devices at the same resolutions, if you're unable to make that comparison then you shouldn't even be taking part in this debate.

I...er...wait, can I only get quoted/have active participation in this thread if I say something fucking insane or something? Look a few posts up for my take on this (Which I believe/hope he was referring to)?

If you expect people to, by default, do a direct comparison between PC and console on your terms only, then you're going to be disappointed. People will (naturally) use the comparisons they have drawn from personal experience, whether that is "right or wrong" is not for you to judge.

The fact is that this IS an Apple to Oranges comparison, most people DO play console games on a lovely HDTV yet then go onto a PC with a frankly shite (IQ wise) TN panel then wonder why people posting PC screenshots think they look so much better.

Personally, I use the same 1080p HDTV as my main (I do have a 22" monitor as a backup) gaming screen, both for PC and console games and thus can see the IQ issues (Jaggies, muddy textures) that most console games have thanks to the fact that I play them up close as I play my PC games but I know I'm not normal in doing so.

Instead of shouting down all people who disagree with you, even if you really are passionate about it, it's better to try to argue with rational, polite rhetoric rather than bombastic comments. You're actually not too bad but DennisK4 really needs to take a dose of humility.

As i said before, I encourage console gamers, especially ones with...less than perfect PC monitors to go to the PC Screenshot thread, save a few of them to a USB stick and get viewing them on your HDTV.

 

[Yasae]

 

[WillyFive]

The "PC look" thing on a console port comes, I think, from a combination of the different screen resolutions, graphics cards, and just the quality of the port. Different rendering techniques.

It can also be explained by how you typically play a PC game (not on a TV but a monitor close to you, so you end up seeing every detail in the picture that would have been missed if you were playing from 5 feet away). Not to mention a PC monitor might use different color and display settings than what your TV does.

I also get the "PC look" thing because I choose to play a lot of PC ports from consoles instead of it's original console, because it gives me the option to have better graphics in the future.

But if you don't get "PC look", don't expect to ever get it.

It's a trivial thing.

 

[EviLore]

But there's just something there that's "angular" or something.


These examples are very clear to me, so if you agree/disagree/think I'm full of shit say so.

Lemme help you with the PC screen.

 

[EatChildren]

 

[carlosp]

So basically people are unable to recognise an apples-oranges comparison? I guess I overestimated the intelligence of the average GAFer then.

Of course people making these comparisons should be making them on the same display devices at the same resolutions, if you're unable to make that comparison then you shouldn't even be taking part in this debate.

people compare what they see. The average consumer does not have the knowledge to differ between the different kind of displays which means for the averege user a laptop display, a monitor and a TV are more or less just the same, they are all displays.

Now showing them the same game on a Laptop, PC Monitor and a TV and ask them to judge what they see they will never be able to tell you the different between a monitor and a TV and that the one is an apple and the other an orange. you cant even blame them for that because both or monitor devices. If the PC image looks sharper and for that reason the perception of it more negative then the TV image, then thats the basis people build their preferences on. And if thats the fact there will be many people who will tell you GoW 3 is the best looking game ever and for the matter of fact they are right.

 

[brain_stew]

I think I understand what people mean when they talk about the PC 'look'. I think it was more apparant 5-10 years ago, and less so now.

PC games used to (and still are to a degree) focused on resolution and framerate at the expense of everything else.

PC games are only focused on that if the user wants them to be. PCs are quite capable of rendering in fuzzy sub HD blur-o-vision if you want them to. People generally just don't prefer to artificially shit all over the visuals of their games as so many in this thread seem to have a genuine desire to do. They're fully capable of doing it though.

 

[[Nintex]]

It's too angular and has this PC look

PC games are only focused on that if the user wants them to be. PCs are quite capable of rendering in fuzzy sub HD blur-o-vision if you want them to. People generally just don't prefer to artificially shit all over the visuals of their games as so many in this thread seem to have a genuine desire to do. They're fully capable of doing it though.

I'm going to plaster vaseline all over my PC monitor to get the best of both worlds!

 

[jim-jam bongs]

sharp textures, EviLore. pc look strikes again.

 

[EatChildren]

It's too angular and has this PC look

Native:

 

[Fimbulvetr]

Here's an example from an older game (so it might be more obvious?):

GTA3 on PS2:

GTA3 on PC is a lot better graphically than the PS2 version:

But I definitely see what I call the "PC look" in it.

I see what he means.

It's harder to see how blatantly ugly GTA3 is if you smear Vaseline on your eyes and zoom the camera out.

On the smoother, zoomed in PC version it's easier to see how hideous GTA3 is.

Mystery solved.

 

[dr3upmushroom]

people compare what they see. The average consumer does not have the knowledge to differ between the different kind of displays which means for the averege user a laptop display, a monitor and a TV are more or less just the same, they are all displays.

Now showing them the same game on a Laptop, PC Monitor and a TV and ask them to judge what they see they will never be able to tell you the different between a monitor and a TV and that the one is an apple and the other an orange. you cant even blame them for that because both or monitor devices. If the PC image looks sharper and for that reason the perception of it more negative then the TV image, then thats the basis people build their preferences on. And if thats the fact there will be many people who will tell you GoW 3 is the best looking game ever and for the matter of fact they are right.

What does the average consumer have to do with this thread?

 

[EmCeeGramr]

WTF are you people arguing about now?

We're arguing about how game's look is in binary state, like an unobserved quantum particle.

If you're told that it's on a PC, then it becomes a sterile, angular, and weird-looking; whereas if you're told that it's what PS4 games will look like then it's an amazing and organic look at the future of videogames.

 

[Boss Man]

lul

I used the exact same games for a reason. I will say that the Batman: AA pic does not have "the PC look" (lol all you want) as much as I've come to expect all PC games to- but the rope on the ground and the metal on the left wall do show it. Looking at that exactly, what am I actually seeing if it isn't some odd quality of PC games? Just sharp textures and a lack of smoke and mirrors?

 

[brain_stew]

Here's an example from an older game (so it might be more obvious?):

SuperMan on Nintendo 64:

Batman Arkham Asylum on PC is a lot better graphically than SuperMan 64:

But I definitely see what I call the "PC look" in it.

This example is very clear to me, so if you agree/disagree/think I'm full of shit say so. That's about the best I can represent what I'm saying though. Just to be clear, I personally prefer the way SuperMan 64 looks- while acknowledging that technically it's objectively worse.

No one is talking about N64 games.

Take a shot of Batman: AA without MSAA and AF at ~medium/high settings and put it next to a lossless direct feed capture of the PS3 version on the same display and you wouldn't be able to tell the difference.

Learn to make apples-to-apples comparisons. You can prove anything you want if we make it fair game to take apples-to-oranges comparisons as any sort of "evidence."

 

[RustyNails]

so I guess the discussion boils down to blurry textures vs sharp textures?

 

[brain_stew]

I used the exact same games for a reason. I will say that the Batman: AA pic does not have "the PC look" (lol all you want) as much as I've come to expect all PC games to- but the rope on the ground and the metal on the left wall do show it.

Why are you dodging my reply.

Make an apples-to-apples comparison or GTFO. This stupid spin isn't helping anything.

Put up or shut up.

 

[WillyFive]

You guys are so superstitious. Good grief.

 

[Fimbulvetr]

No one is talking about N64 games.

Take a shot of Batman: AA without MSAA and AF at ~medium/high settings and put it next to a lossless direct feed capture of the PS3 version on the same display and you wouldn't be able to tell the difference.

Learn to make apples-to-apples comparisons. You can prove anything you want if we make it fair game to take apples-to-oranges comparisons as any sort of "evidence."

I'm pretty sure he's just making fun of stateofmind's GTA post, at least I hope he is.

 

[McBacon]

Video games are fun, right guys?

 

[Kittonwy]

We're arguing about how game's look is in binary state, like an unobserved quantum particle.

If you're told that it's on a PC, then it becomes a sterile, angular, and weird-looking; whereas if you're told that it's what PS4 games will look like then it's an amazing and organic look at the future of videogames.

That's kind of a stupid argument.

 

[RustyNails]

Here's what I mean by sharp vs blurry:

Definitely prefer the PC "look" here.

 

[EmCeeGramr]

do you think these people get scared when they hook up their systems with component or HDMI cables and suddenly they can see the edges of things and pixels

OUT YOU PC-LOOK DEVILS *returns to sweet sweet composite*

 

[Fimbulvetr]

Video games are fun, right guys?

No they aren't, go away.

 

[LCfiner]

PC version of RE5 is missing the shotgun in that screenshot.

360 wins.

 

[WillyFive]

Wait, so is the "PC look" a good thing or a bad thing here?

 

[[Nintex]]

PC version of RE5 is missing the shotgun in that screenshot.

360 wins.

It's a Jun Takeuchi game, they both fail by default.

Wait, so is the "PC look" a good thing or a bad thing here?

It boils down to what we all know already, NINTENDO ULTRA 64 ROCKS AND RARE EVEN MORE SO!

 

[BuddhaRockstar]

No one is talking about N64 games.

Take a shot of Batman: AA without MSAA and AF at ~medium/high settings and put it next to a lossless direct feed capture of the PS3 version on the same display and you wouldn't be able to tell the difference.

Learn to make apples-to-apples comparisons. You can prove anything you want if we make it fair game to take apples-to-oranges comparisons as any sort of "evidence."

That was a obvious joke post :lol

 

[[Nintex]]

That was a obvious joke post :lol

And so was brain_stew's so we need a shark doing high-fives in here or something.

 

[carlosp]

What does the average consumer have to do with this thread?

i would say 80% of gaf visitors, even if they are on a gaming forum, are averege consumers. They are the guys who go out and buy 1,4 mio. CoD games on the first day. They are the people who actually make any game commercially successful. I would even call my self an average customer, even if I am writing on a gaming forum.

 

[zoukka]

Why are you dodging my reply.

Make an apples-to-apples comparison or GTFO. This stupid spin isn't helping anything.

Put up or shut up.

Can't wait when they make you a mod of shining truth. Anyone who can't perfectly dissect and express why they feel something gets booted to oblivion.

 

[Xun]

Dear god this is a mess of a thread! :lol

 

[Shurs]

PC Games:

Console Games:

 

[zoukka]

Dear god this is a mess of a thread! :lol

It's truly one for the archives :lol

 

[WillyFive]

This is why I stay in the OT :lol

STEALTH EDIT DENIED

Isn't the OT worse with these sort of things? :lol

This is rare in Gaming, but this happens every time there is a controversial thread in the OT!

 

[EmCeeGramr]

man modern consoles have too much of a PC look to them

we need to return to those halycon days when you didn't have texture filtering or z-buffering. it looked so much darker and gritty when the walls and floor were constantly bending, hands were squares, and dithering was the man's transparency.

edit: 32-bit color is for pussies

 

[brain_stew]

I...er...wait, can I only get quoted/have active participation in this thread if I say something fucking insane or something? Look a few posts up for my take on this (Which I believe/hope he was referring to)?

If you expect people to, by default, do a direct comparison between PC and console on your terms only, then you're going to be disappointed. People will (naturally) use the comparisons they have drawn from personal experience, whether that is "right or wrong" is not for you to judge.

Its not about putting things "on my terms" though, its about having the genuine belief that if people are going to make a direct comparison, then they're going to have the decency to make it on an equal footing.

I've done this, and I know that I'm right, so if anyone else is going to offer an alternate perspective, I at least expect them to have the decency to hold themselves to the same standards I do. If you're trying to prove someone wrong, you have to adhere to at least the same standards? Has no one heard of the scientific method? Adding a whole host of variables to the mix, completely invalidates a comparison, and this is widely accepted as common sense, its not an unreasonable request.

Now fine, I understand why people have observed some "difference" but I am making the clear assertion that the only difference is something that is self imposed. I brought up this point in my very first reply, I even highlighted where the difference was being flagged up. Moving on from that, if people are trying to disprove this, I at least expect them to take my suggestion into account.

 

[dr3upmushroom]

Definitely prefer the PC "look" here.

What people are trying to explain here is that the PC doesn't have a "look," the 360 is just incapable of rendering the game at a playable framerate with textures at that high a resolution. If it were able to render the game looking like the PC shot, it would. Developers aren't making console games blurry and non-sterile as an artistic choice, they're limited to what they can do on console so they lower resolutions. That's why people like brainstew are saying that the PC versions of games look objectively better, to get them to run on console they have to be "dumbed down."

So you can subjectively say "I think that Uncharted 2 looks better than Crysis," but then you're talking about "What game do I think has the coolest looking levels," not "Which game has the best graphics."

If the PS3 were more powerful, Uncharted 2 would have the "PC look" too.

 

[Boss Man]

Why are you dodging my reply.

Make an apples-to-apples comparison or GTFO. This stupid spin isn't helping anything.

Put up or shut up.

If I could set that up I would. I don't want to see this real or perceived difference, it's just what I see. Do you at least see what I'm talking about in those pictures? In my experience, that is in all PC games I've seen. Are you saying that if you simply scaled down the settings on those two games they would match the console versions?

Here's what I mean by sharp vs blurry:
Definitely prefer the PC "look" here.

In those pics, I do too actually. The 360 actually looks like it has more "PC look" (I realize how ridiculous this word is, but it's a hard concept to describe) than the PC version does. Apparently I'd really enjoy the PC version of RE5, because I don't really see it at all there.

 

[BlueTsunami]

Some people are actually arguing against anti aliasing and high res textures? Jesus Christ. Playstation fanboys really are the delusional Nintenbots of this generation. I called it in a former thread but aliasing is the new pixels. The console "look"! Haha!

 

[WillyFive]

Oh I got a new explanation!

Imagine a low polygon landscape, like those from N64 and PS1/early Gamecube and PS2.

Now give it the highest res textures you have ever seen.

The result should be an exaggerated version of the 'PC look'.

 

[imtehman]

i hate the PC look too, i'ma go play black ops and put the resolution at 600p BRB!

 

[Dennis]

Some people are actually arguing against anti aliasing and high res textures? Jesus Christ. Playstation fanboys really are the delusional Nintenbots of this generation. I called it in a former thread but aliasing is the new pixels. The console "look"! Haha!

Only until the consoles can do high-res textures, 1080p and AA and 16xAF all at once. Then they will conviently forget everything they used to ramble about.

 

[LCfiner]

there are way too many humourless posters in this thread.

 

[BlueTsunami]

I really like the DS "look" so I had to buy a Wii

 

[zoukka]

So you can subjectively say "I think that Uncharted 2 looks better than Crysis," but then you're talking about "What game do I think has the coolest looking levels," not "Which game has the best graphics."

I'm pretty sure the OP was talking about the whole visual package and not just computer graphics.

 

[Kittonwy]

What people are trying to explain here is that the PC doesn't have a "look," the 360 is just incapable of rendering the game at a playable framerate with textures at that high a resolution. If it were able to render the game looking like the PC shot, it would. Developers aren't making console games blurry and non-sterile as an artistic choice, they're limited to what they can do on console so they lower resolutions. That's why people like brainstew are saying that the PC versions of games look objectively better, to get them to run on console they have to be "dumbed down."

So you can subjectively say "I think that Uncharted 2 looks better than Crysis," but then you're talking about "What game do I think has the coolest looking levels," not "Which game has the best graphics."

If the PS3 were more powerful, Uncharted 2 would have the "PC look" too.

I disagree, because for a first-party game the levels and the detail and overall density of the assets are designed for the hardware, when you up-port something, you end up with higher resolution, better texture resolution but often the level can use more density, more detail. It's not a matter of "PC look", but more of an issue of the game on the PC being an up-port of a game that didn't have the necessary complexity in geometry or variety in details to hold up as well at a higher resolution, you're upgrading some things and not others, you'll get the same "PC look" with the God of War HD remakes or remakes of older games.