Crytek: the PC is "a generation ahead," but PS3 and 360 holding it back

[Guest]

Well what you're suggesting then is that three generations of consoles from now, they'll be equivalent to where PCs are today. Considering this wont be until some time around 2025 at the earliest, that sounds just as outlandish to me.

 

[yRaz]

Guest said:
Well what you're suggesting then is that three generations of consoles from now, they'll be equivalent to where PCs are today. Considering this wont be until some time around 2025 at the earliest, that sounds just as outlandish to me.

Don't be silly. Current PC's are 3 generations ahead of what consoles are relatively. When the next gen consoles come out they will be nearly on par(or at least I hope) with PC's. You must consider the advances in AA, AF, ambient occlusion, soft shadows, and countless other features that are added to every generation. Consoles are still stuck on bloom, 2X AA on Xbox and AF is crap on consoles. Maybe we have misunderstood each others argument. keep in mind, Moore's law does agree with me.

 

[Guest]

It amazes me to read on here, the Childmen whining about PC graphics. Good God its gaming, its not life or death. The problem is the piracy, if they could make good money from a PC only game they would do it.. but the FreeLovers will have it cracked and baked in half a day, so why should they bother? I am glad that Pc games drop in price quickly as otherwise I couldn't afford them. And you can bet that the 80-90% of the next consoles are already designed .. they're just getting the max juice out of the present ones. I have it on Good authorty that there will something fresh and new to buy, on the console front, before Next Christmas. Watch for the new Dev Kits going into the game houses, 100x better graphics, 1080p, 5.1 or better sound and multi-multi cores.
So stop your complaining and fire up a turbo charged PiggyBank. Expect early prices £600 from Sony and £550 from Microsoft.

 

[Vrmithrax]

Guest said:

It's always been the case and it will remain so; image quality on consoles will continue to lag behind that capable on PCs. Also, games are usually far easier to port to consoles (at least for the X360) once they've been developed for the PC.

That was never in question. The dispute was over princeton's eccentric and offbeat ideas about graphics card series being analogous with console generations, as if they're even remotely comparable, and then using that as a basis for some "PC is 3 generations ahead of consoles" argument, which is obviously laughable to anyone. A perfect example for the case that maybe some people should be using a guest account to save embarrassing themselves with hilariously wrong comments. The irony.

Well, you definitely have your walled-in fortress of opinion on the subject. But many of us also see the validity in a basic comparison. Instead of a bull-headed "there's no comparison" mentality, listen to the basics of the argument. Consoles were put together based on basic computer hardware at the time - often specialized or highly modified, but still based on the current PC tech in most respects. That basic hardware has not changed in 5 years. Now look at the changes and enhancements and upgrades in the basic PC technology in the past 5 years. If the consoles were created based on current tech TODAY, they would be vastly superior in performance to those 5 year old consoles. So, in a purely hardware perspective, PCs have leapfrogged console capabilities many times, hence the "generations ahead" comments. Sure, it's an apples-to-oranges comparison in many respects, but there is still an underlying validity to the comparison.

As a game programmer, I'm forced to program to the least common denominator when making something that is intended to be cross-platform. As the original post was trying to explain, that weakest link is the console, since the performance gaps between what the console can do and what the PC is capable of is widening constantly. That growing performance gap is measurable, incontrovertible, and definitely the basis for a valid point. Adamantly denying the obvious, and then say others are "embarrassing themselves" by pointing it out, seems to deserve the "ironic" moniker more than anything else I've seen in this debate so far.

 

[yRaz]

Guest said:
It amazes me to read on here, the Childmen whining about PC graphics. Good God its gaming, its not life or death. The problem is the piracy, if they could make good money from a PC only game they would do it.. but the FreeLovers will have it cracked and baked in half a day, so why should they bother? I am glad that Pc games drop in price quickly as otherwise I couldn't afford them. And you can bet that the 80-90% of the next consoles are already designed .. they're just getting the max juice out of the present ones. I have it on Good authorty that there will something fresh and new to buy, on the console front, before Next Christmas. Watch for the new Dev Kits going into the game houses, 100x better graphics, 1080p, 5.1 or better sound and multi-multi cores.
So stop your complaining and fire up a turbo charged PiggyBank. Expect early prices £600 from Sony and £550 from Microsoft.

They don't bother because the console gamers are dumb and will love any game they make. Black ops is a huge disappointment, CoD is nothing more than a franchise at this point. If you look at all the problems it had at release you can tell they really didn't give half a damn about PC. The campaign feels like it is made for the console because of the way you move. You are almost always facing where the enemy will be. If they release a bad game PC people will just pirate it to see what all the fuss is about. So instead of making a good game that people WANT to buy, they treat the PC gamers like crap and then their market just pirates it. Console gamers get boned a lot of the time too when they release a game too early. Also, it really makes me mad that we usually only have access to betas if we pre-order games, I haven't seen a DEMO in awhile.

They only good games that have come out in the past ~year are:

Fallout new vegas
BFBC2
Borderlands

And I guess I have to give BLOPS some credit. Personally, I hate it, but people do have fun playing it so I guess my opinion doesn't matter

If anyone can think of anymore games they consider "good," tell me. I have been having a hard time finding them so I usually just buy them as they go on sale on steam.

 

[Guest]

Don't be silly. Current PC's are 3 generations ahead of what consoles are relatively. When the next gen consoles come out they will be nearly on par(or at least I hope) with PC's. You must consider the advances in AA, AF, ambient occlusion, soft shadows, and countless other features that are added to every generation. Consoles are still stuck on bloom, 2X AA on Xbox and AF is crap on consoles. Maybe we have misunderstood each others argument. keep in mind, Moore's law does agree with me.

Moore's law isn't relevant here. If you're not defining "generations" as new generations of consoles, then you're just arbitrarily deciding what's meant by it - which is not at all how the term was used in the original article. As I said earlier Yerli was referring to the fact that the PC is currently a generation ahead of consoles as defined by previous jumps from each new console generation, i.e. where the PC is now is approximately where the next generation of consoles are going to be. So if the PC is three generations ahead, then after three new console generations (probably around 2025 or later) consoles are only going to be as graphically capable as a 2010 PC. If you want to define "generations" here as being equivilent to a new version of DirectX or a new Radeon/GeForce series, or a cluster of new features like ambient occlusion then fine, but realise that's not at all relevant to the way it was used in the article.

Fact is, the next generation of consoles will be roughly on par with a mid-range PC at the time of release, same as they've always been (despite being technically inferior which is compensated by being dedicated hardware rather than multipurpose).

 

[stan4]

It's all about the money guys, you shouldn't be struggling with this, of course PC's are more capable, but who cares, it's the way it is.

For now we must be happy with our enhanced resolutions, bigger framerates and multiple screens gaming; but let's not forget that we're playing a console game on our PC.

We are all console gamers... noooooooooooooooo!

 

[treetops]

I always thought the lack of amazing pc games recently has been due to the bad economy. Graphical breakthrough games like age of Conan probably wont be seen again until the economy gets better. Just a hunch. Well also you can point out that game like age of conan are only for pc's, the only games being held back by copnsoles are the games that are realeased on console and pcs. The pc only games are the way to go if you want to actually use your pc's potential. The simple matter that pc gaming resolution goes well beyond 1080p smokes all consoles in graphics.

The real question is if you built a pc gaming console with the same budget a console costs how would it compare? The answer should be the console is better, because computers have way more uses then consoles. Computers aren't as centered around gaming. Which of course makes some money spent on computer parts cost more for the gaming buck because they do more. Do more in the none gaming field.

Consoles are lean gaming computers but they come with the Nike big brand name on them which raises there prices. You cant build your own console .

 

[fpsgamerJR62]

From a gaming standpoint, PCs will always be a generation or two ahead of whatever consoles MS, Sony and Nintendo puts out. As for myself, I prefer PCs for gaming because of 2 reasons, 1) I always custom build my rig, taking time to select each component, and 2 ) No console controller can rival the precision of my Logitech G5 Gen 2, G9 and Roccat Kone laser mice.

 

[Guest]

Sure, Pc's are always getting better, updated cpu's and graphic cards
every 6 - 8 months, but consoles are the install base. Of course game companies will
make the xbox look as good as a pc game they put out, when xbox disc sales will far surpass
pc game sales.
If they didn't, everyone would still be on their pc, instead of the family game room with large flatscreen...

 

[MrAnderson]

I sure Crytek is being modest in their assertion that the PC is a generation ahead. In fact, it is more likely to be 2 to 3 generations ahead where the GPU is concerned. CPU wise, perhaps, it is more likely a generation in this case, as Intel and AMD (up until now) have been happy to just shrink dies, add more cores, and lower TDPs, but we will start seeing some interesting stuff in GPU and GPGPU integration soon.

The consoles do benefit in regard to developers being able to harness the hardware, where the PC is bogged down with the combination of parts and large OSs with background processes running wild.

Nevertheless, I strongly believe that the console market is stalling developer innovation to at least some degree. Also, possibly slowing the rate by which GPU manufacturers feel pressured to advance the technology further and rather focus on growing markets like GPGPU and content creation segments. Don?t get me wrong, they are pressured by their own competition with each other, but the dedication to gaming is less justified where publishes are pushing console titles further and PC ports are closer to (a yes planned, but nevertheless,) an after thought.

I'm no analyst, but I do believe that such stalling of hardware development could affect the development and cost of console generations to come. Developers need to recognize that the PC market is (at least presently) still the tug boat for future console technology.

The mass market of consoles might be content with only minor improvement since there will be few technologies (with examples) to bolster their might over them. Otherwise, greater advancements will have to hit the consumer in the pocketbooks.

Finally, IMHO, backward compatibility will become very important in the next generation, as the investment in games has very much increased. MS and Sony will not want to undo or segment the inroads made into the living room as well rounded entertainment computing devices. Thus, increments on the technology would be more business friendly, something that gave Nintendo a head start. However, the big players will be mindful to be competitive and have their new products with selling points.

 

[yRaz]

No one wants future tech, they want xbox. That is something I have thought for sometime and I do wonder about the long term hardware affects that consoles have. I'm surprised that hardware companies aren't putting more in PC game development. although, I guess xbox has ati and nvidia has PS3

 

[Guest]

I totally agree! When Crysis came out it pushed my computer to the max, I could barley play on highest settings...
3 years down the road, without a hardware upgrade, almost all the games I've played since have been... I dont want t say disappointment (I absolutely love Darksiders) but they could have been far more enjoyable.

I guess we just have to be happy for the boundary pushers out there *coughcoughHL2cough* and a few select others.

In closing I'd just like to say: PC gamers if you like a game PLEASE! buy it. Support our community!

 

[Guest]

There are 2 main reasons why console gaming will always be around: Piracy and Cost.

Most big gamers are the same techies who use torrents and know how to get what they want for free. Sure you can mod an Xbox or Playstation but at the same time you can ruin it, void the warranty, and the updates keep modders from accessing online content.

I say cost is the other reason because who wants to buy a $500 graphics card every year to keep up with the technology? Then every few years you need to upgrade the motherboard to get the faster memory or processor. Lots of gamers are younger people that don't really have that money or have other priorites and needs in life than to waste it on games.

 

[yRaz]

There are 2 main reasons why console gaming will always be around: Piracy and Cost.

Most big gamers are the same techies who use torrents and know how to get what they want for free. Sure you can mod an Xbox or Playstation but at the same time you can ruin it, void the warranty, and the updates keep modders from accessing online content.

I say cost is the other reason because who wants to buy a $500 graphics card every year to keep up with the technology? Then every few years you need to upgrade the motherboard to get the faster memory or processor. Lots of gamers are younger people that don't really have that money or have other priorites and needs in life than to waste it on games.

I have an 8800GT, i plan on upgrading, but it has served me well for 3 years now. I have been able to extend its life with overclocking and a volt mod. Thing about piracy on PC is that people who download it probably wouldn't buy it anyway. Games are too expensive and, like it was said before, they aren't offering anything new to the PC to make it worth buying. The relentless cost of MW2($60) and BLOPS($60). It is insulting to pay tons of money for a PC and then have to pay higher game prices. Also, i get games on steam for $5 and $10 all the time, a fraction of the asking price. Is there any difference between pirating and getting the game for almost free? Developers still lose tons of money to those sales.

 

[Rage_3K_Moiz]

Steam is the main reason PC gaming will be around. Unless game publishers and developers are able to completely shift to a digital-only platform (completely doable), they will keep losing money. Steam-validation games are harder to crack, and more people will prefer buying the game if it's offered for really cheap (like Steam's current give-and-get sale) rather than getting it for free online, especially if it's a game with a multiplayer component.

Maybe that's being too optimistic, but that's just my $0.02.

 

[Guest]

All microsoft wold have to do is market a simple Mobo/CPU package and let you upgrade the graphics cards as you go. And then once every 10 years come out with a new Mobo/cpu package that way they can regulate the modifieers and hackers you get when you play online. Make it like the 360 where they can go in look at the system you hack you out. Thats why microsoft doesnt go to the PC they want X box live to be equal. Well every one has to use the same MOBO/cpu and pick a graphics company probly ATI and bingo bango.

 

[Rage_3K_Moiz]

All microsoft wold have to do is market a simple Mobo/CPU package and let you upgrade the graphics cards as you go. And then once every 10 years come out with a new Mobo/cpu package that way they can regulate the modifieers and hackers you get when you play online. Make it like the 360 where they can go in look at the system you hack you out. Thats why microsoft doesnt go to the PC they want X box live to be equal. Well every one has to use the same MOBO/cpu and pick a graphics company probly ATI and bingo bango.

Sounds like a PC to me.

 

[Guest]

It's about revenue control, Consoles give direct control of the gaming revenue to the console maker. Steam brings the same kind of control to Valve by forcing you to purchase via Steam.


MS and Sony don't give a crap about your gaming experience, It's simply a revenue stream. An off the shelf product they need to upgrade every Christmas to keep people buying.

Example: EA's Madden Football, Back in 2002. The user could setup his own madden online league. It was buggy but it allowed independent madden online leagues to thrive. after 2002 the feature was removed and with madden 2009 EA drops PC support for madden football even though it's ideal for PC users. Why is madden ideal for the PC? Coustomization.

online PC league could setup there own rules. Distribute custom config and player files. The current Madden has removed most of these capabilities based on the *****ic concept of " the game should be played as the Developers intended." which is of course BS.

EA just wants to lock you in for the Money. Game quality? EA is focused on the unwashed masses attempting to sell as much as possible in a given qtr. They just want to keep the game simple and easy to play.

 

[Guest]

It's not that hard guys.

PC games feel OMG UP TO DATE when the newest consoles have been released. Then you guys complain and complain about games not achieving their full potential 2+ years down the road, and it gets worse as time goes on.

Also, $250 vs $2500 .. I think I know where I'm going!

 

[Evabraun2000]

It's not that hard guys.

PC games feel OMG UP TO DATE when the newest consoles have been released. Then you guys complain and complain about games not achieving their full potential 2+ years down the road, and it gets worse as time goes on.

Also, $250 vs $2500 .. I think I know where I'm going!
Reply With Quote

well i mean the way technology is going seems like eventually it will just be PC's in the end.

Consoles are just getting closer and closer to a pc every year. They need to stop all that and just work on pc's instead of these consoles.

 

[Evabraun2000]

It's not that hard guys.

PC games feel OMG UP TO DATE when the newest consoles have been released. Then you guys complain and complain about games not achieving their full potential 2+ years down the road, and it gets worse as time goes on.

Also, $250 vs $2500 .. I think I know where I'm going!

They might as well just stop making consoles which are just getting closer and closer to a PC. Just stop all the console bs and just stick to making computers more user friendly and cost efficient so younger people can use them as well.

 

[Guest]

The ps3 doesnt use DX so why compair these by dx versions?

Lastly the ps3 has the cell which also does gpu work, the RSX was added to make coding easier however the ps3 was made with NO gpu at first.

It also has shared mem between the cell and the gpu.

From a PC tech and ps3 gamer I like both. PC I get 1 or 2 games worth buying a year (nopt graphics wise but game play wise). On ps3 there are many. For me its the games not the hardware. A pretty crappy game might be pretty but if its crappy or buggy its still crap. Then there are games like BFBC2 that are both ugly and buggy lol.

 

[Guest]

I concur, my friend. Us PC gamers are a dying breed.