Object based motion blur.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Visual Downgrade In Next-Gen Tech Demos Going From PC To Consoles?
- Thread starter Poetic.Injustice
- Start date
Object based motion blur.
I am sorry but what games are those? I dont think there is anything like KZ2 or GOW on pc and i am PC gamer. My last console was ps2.
edit: Closest thing to KZ2 art was some Terminator mod for UT3.
SneakyStephan
Banned
Stallion free having a field day haha
OldAsUrSock
Banned
No the powah of crysis 3 outdoes them all. Everyone better think it alone looks next gen and better than any other game shown so far. It is our duty to pretend to be impressed. Its the least we can do for our pc brethren.
Metalmurphy
Member
A GTX 770 costs $400 and demolishes the PS4 in terms of raw performance
Where do you plug your kb/mouse to?
Not really. If it did we'd get another generation of shit particles on consoles. You can argue about how a console game looks like compared to what a GTX 680 can do, but 2 Titans?
Even though KI went a bit too far, it's nice to see that consoles can handle it, can't wait for KH III, I adore the hitsparks in that series.
Define fine. I'm using a GTX 570 SSC myself and have wondered how well it would run Last Light and at what settings.
Dictator93
Member
Nah, just filled with about 10 million polygons, tons of particles, enemy AI, and drivable vehicles. Nothing too fancy.
At 1080p at the highest settings excludding SSAA I am getting anywhere from 60-80fps with variable SLI scaling. (2X570)
You could probably get 30 plus or so.
Nah, just filled with about 10 million polygons, tons of particles, enemy AI, and drivable vehicles. Nothing too fancy.
At 1080p at the highest settings excludding SSAA I am getting anywhere from 60-80fps with variable SLI scaling. (2X570)
You could probably get 30 plus or so.
But most of that looks inaccessible and barren. Remember that's what some of you said about this lol.
dgrdsv
Member
What the fuck am I reading? Are we seriously comparing art now and somehow arriving to a conclusion that it's better on consoles? Is it better than in Louvre too?
Dictator93
Member
Dont want to be a stickler and prove you wrong.. but basically every area you can see in that Crysis gif (excluding to the tops of the sky scrapers) is accessible by the player and is not barren.
The KZSF areas are most definitely just backdrops
So for you KZ2 & Gow has simpy a dark look & Uncharted is orangy, wow; it's nice to troll.
I'm not sure what the hell you are talking about O_O uh. I'm just saying both art/tech reached on ps3, considering the specs, overtake even its limits.
Between consoles moving to a much more PC-like architecture (x86) and compute becoming the next big thing, I expect this "coding to the metal" advantage (which is horribly misnamed, since it has more to do with algorithms than dirty coding tricks) to shrink dramatically, if not disappear.
Barack Lesnar
Banned
Crysis 3 is barely open, it's just like C2. I'm playing through it now.
30+ fps with a GTX 570 on such a high end looking game? Not bad for a 1.4 Tflops gpu.
Means realistically the PS4/XO should be able to obliterate these visuals given closed platform advantages, significantly more ram and better raw performance.
I was being sarcastic. I know many are (not to the degree you've described mind). Just like the city in Killzone Shadow Fall is too. You'd know as much if you watched the reveal demo where an entire segment takes place flying through it.
Dictator93
Member
Which level are you on? It opens up most definitely in the 2nd and 3rd last level. One could argue also that the previous levels are quite a bit larger i their gameplay areas than C2.
The thing is.. those are 1.4 Nvidia TF... the measurements and realworld performance differences between Nvidia and AMD flops are quite substantial. Usually NV flops have given "more" performance.
Sarcasm in this thread is hard to stomach partially at times. Hard to know when someone is trolling or not... and the disinfomation jsut fuels bad discussion.
Its accessible, except those high skyscrapers.
--
To Yours existing quad core PC, where You put that GPU. Yep, starting point, in terms of price, for PC is higher, but You could build competent PC 5 years ago that would not limit this GPU for the whole next generation, so thats not a great argument.
--
The level from this gif has 3 points that are in about 700-800m distance from each other and You can approach them in any order You want.
Stallion Free
Cock Encumbered
They are just upset they pay so much and all they get is lame multiplats. Exclusives are the real reason to be a gamer and Sony knows that.
That might explain why they have such huge teams -- like, they spend 70% of the budget and people they claim they had working on the game on a fancy teaser, and the remaining on the actual game.
Nah, just filled with about 10 million polygons, tons of particles, enemy AI, and drivable vehicles. Nothing too fancy.
At 1080p at the highest settings excludding SSAA I am getting anywhere from 60-80fps with variable SLI scaling. (2X570)
You could probably get 30 plus or so.
SLI performance gains are that extreme now? used to only be like.. 50-70% if the game was optimized for it, usually around 30%, right?
I'm not that sure a pc with the same specs of ps4, cost less or the same. I have great doubt, to be honest.
alexandros
Banned
Because it helps maintain the illusion that PC gaming is only for the super rich and consoles are a relative bargain, a truly laughable notion.
As we approach the consoles' release date the truth about their power will start to come out. The glitter and glamour of E3's prerendered or bullshotted demos will fade away and these two awesome machines will have to show their actual graphical chops, without the safety net of games running on "PCs with console specs". The coming winter is going to be lots of fun!
Stahsky
A passionate embrace, a beautiful memory lingers.
These sorts of threads pop up at the start of every generation.
I don't understand why people think consoles will be some magical powerhouse each time. The whole idea behind a console is to have an affordable machine. It will never outshine a PC in the long-run.
That's the whole damn point.
I don't understand why people think consoles will be some magical powerhouse each time. The whole idea behind a console is to have an affordable machine. It will never outshine a PC in the long-run.
That's the whole damn point.
I don't think... why will be chopped? I ever though ps4 was a good machine with a competitive price.
30 fps (same as the console games we are comparing to, obviously) average or higher on medium/high at 1080p.
Edit: probably even high, dont have to go medium/high
Well, probably will not have a magical powerhouse, but reading someone here, console will suck compared to pc. I see a lot of extremes on both sides.
Stahsky
A passionate embrace, a beautiful memory lingers.
Stallion Free
Cock Encumbered
Sony has never created anything but magical powerhouses. The exclusives prove it. I don't understand how people can try to refute this.
Dictator93
Member
with most AA-AAA games I get 80-99% GPU USAGE. That is with a heavily overclocked processor though.
If the scaling is poor, then I just change the profiles with Nvidia inspector to get better scaling. Hell I even lobbied Nvidias driver team through AndyB to get a better scaling profile for Natural Selection 2 (and was successful!).
If you're bringing up history as an argument for the PS4 in this case, let me bring up an important point. Remember in the PS4 reveal, when they said that this time around they were going for a much more standardised system? They even called it a Supercharged PC. It's X86, it's an upgraded AMD mobile-grade CPU and an improved version of an already existing customer graphics card; that is a year old even.
This is no magical machine, this is a PC in a smaller box with unifed RAM. Unified RAM has benifits, but those are mostly related to GPU-compute. The raw rendering doesn't gain much from the unified RAM.
something something optimization of complex processes something closed box etc etc
Stallion Free
Cock Encumbered
Who to believe? Cernygod or you?
Dictator93
Member
Horp. Just so you know... I am pretty positive Stallion is taking the piss with you.
Let's see. Both are developers. One of us is a LOT, LOT, LOT more experienced than the other. That's Cerny of course. One of us is also heavily invested in the machine and its success, and is most likely also under direct order from superiors to speak highly about the machine in every regard.
Dictator93:
DAMN. Got me. Awhgh.
alexandros
Banned
It's just an expression, it means that they will have to prove their capabilities.
Those exlusives would look much better on PC but PS4/X1 has a much bigger audience.
/end of story
I agree. I actually think both these consoles are somewhat under powered. Obviously we'll still see amazing visuals and the ram amount is a nice surprise, but here's why I don't mind.
Firstly, $399. That's cheap as hell. And that's including a new improved and far more advanced controller. The console itself looks well designed and built, and I honestly think it's great value for money. The BoM was projected at roughly $300 not including the controller so we're getting a good deal. Hardly any profit in it for Sony from the get go, the same cannot be said when we buy PC parts from etail or retail.
Secondly, I think this will hopefully mean a shorter console cycle. Last one dragged on far too long and the hardware age really started to rear it's ugly head. Especially in multiplatform games. So yea, hopefully the hardware means a 5-6 year cycle instead of 7-10.
I was wondering how long it was gonna take people to catch on, lol
Guess it says a lot about how these conversations usually go that people thought he was serious
that's not through optimization its through brute force number crunching which is different from the original point of the conversation
Also, don't forget that if you adjust for inflation then compare the prices between PS3 and PS4:
PS3: $599
PS4: $351
Thats getting close to half the price. I for one would have prefered a 599 box, but then have nice subscription models to "lower" the price for those that wished.
To be more accurate production of PS3 cost Sony around 1000$. Where PS4 will be probably sell at slight profit.
If they released another $599 console not only would they be fucked in sales (comparative to Microsoft), the hardware would just get dated either way and they'd need to lengthen out the consoles life cycle to recoup more of the losses back. So yea, Sony definitely made the right call with the more affordable console. It's the best balance on all fronts.
Might not be as powerful some of us wanted, but it's still incredible value for money. We're almost paying cost price for it. Which is a damn sight better than paying the 2-3x mark up you often find with PC components.
Cause the cost of PS4 at retail is actually what Sony is paying for it vs what you pay for it.
Always-honest
Banned
There is presentation bythe devs where tHey tell and show how the entire city is rendered. Def. not a backdrop.
PCs aren't getting any slower.
How do you know it? I think it's quite inaccurate, in any case.