Crytek: PCs Are a Generation Ahead of Consoles

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT
 

Zeithri:
I think the irony of this is that the PC's aren't capable of handling many of the pretty console games.
This statement is void.

Which PC's

http://www.hardocp.com/images/articles/12788968667K0gVsvzTK_4_2.gif
http://www.hardocp.com/images/articles/1286442355tCXafRvsMc_2_5_l.gif

they do more than handle them

i'm pretty sure the xbox clocks in at a measly 800mhz

Bre2nan:

ph0b0s123:

Oh and before being accused of being a die-hard, fanatic, PC fan-boy. I say this, if console makers allow a mouse controller for certain games on a console - I will drop the PC tomorrow. In fact if console makers did this the PC games market would be dead over night....

You can already connect a keyboard and mouse to the PS3. The hardware is there, it just needs the software to follow suit.

As for this whole debate, I've never been a graphics whore ... ever ... so I fail to see how a slight increase in screen resolution and rendered polygons makes for a better gaming experience. Part of that might be that I've never owned a high-end gaming PC, or even touched one. The hardware was always too expensive for me, and I'd rather spend that money on a one-time console purchase and some games. I'm happy with my current PC, even though I can't run anything newer than Half-Life 2 without it sputtering out.

Really, we're at around the apex of what can be done graphically with the medium, so can we cut this shit out and focus on the games already?!!!

(Puts head in hands) I'm sure on all consoles with USB you can connect a mouse and keyboard, but what's the point without game support. Non-one said consoles are not technically capable of handling mouse input. Which is why it is so annoying that it is not supported. The reason that I belive console makers have blocked this support is a whole other discussion.

And the argument that extra resolution and polygons does not benfit the gaming experience, I am not touching with a barge pole. Except to say it would carry more wieght if you only have a Wii or a previous gen console in your home. But I assume you have a 360 or PS3 and I bet you are not running it off an SD TV....

not to mention modding
fkn luv modding

Super Toast:

ZippyDSMlee:
snip

I disagree with some of your points, and agree with others. Nonetheless, we should probably stop before this turns into a flame war. Agreed?

I dunno PC might be better hardware and even price wise(sorry PS3 but thats what you get for being overly complicated) but they lack focused content from mainstream developers, is the PC dead hell no is it the same as the late 90s hell no.

Instead of a flame war how do you see where the PC is gaming wise? For me I see it as getting sloppy seconds from the mainstream but even with that it has a ton of non mainstream support but its changed vastly from what it was 10ish years ago making it not very semi normal gamer(kinda average kinda not) friendly.

And lets not forget 2ndary support through DLC is 9 times out of 10 console specific and not intended or planed for the PC, for instance TF:War for cybertron mofos did a disservice not selling the DLC not to mention with game matching there is no disparity between PC and console player skills anymore.....bastards need to start picking up the slack....

This is just going to give PC elitists an ego boost...

Super Toast:

MR T3D:
[PC games are rather innovative, but this guy saw 'fanboy rage']

Once again, plenty of people like CoD4. And just because you can do more with a PC doesn't mean that consoles are crap. Consoles are easier to use, less expensive and get more games. If you deny any of these facts, then you're a helpless fanboy. I'm a PC and console gamer, while you've probably never even seen a console. Try both first.

I play both console and PC. Also, its a shame I worded my post in a way that makes it sound to you that I'm just a fanboy whom never touches the PC, because that's just not true. I said that its 'inferior' as in "of less value" which, when I look at it, it is. still of value, but not as much.

Yeah, its easier to press A button to turn on the device, wait for dashboard/XMB to boot up, then sign in, then press play game, than it is to push a button on a PC wait for windows to boot (that does take longer, but I can be patient) then click on the shotrcut to my game. installing a game isn't hard either, neither is doing some option adjustments, and with a digital distribution service, its browse, buy and wait for download, the I'm gravy. for someone like me, the technical competence needed to game on PC isn't really harder than the console

Hell, when stuff goes awry on console, such as 'disk read error' then you're wondering if that game you like now has a scratch on its disk, or your console is broken (my old 360 had done both, break and damage disks). no option tweaks or patches are going to fix it. That's much worse.

Price: this depends on many variables, there are a lot more factors than "200-300 for console is smaller number than gaming PC's price" (Imma use $800 for this, the price of my freind's new tower he bought a couple months ago, it runs games GREAT) to get into the PC gaming.
**the display is a X-factor, so we'll factor that out, as a 3D HDTV could be used, very pricey, or a 20" CRT you had laying around, and an expensive monitor, or a freebie from someone getting new stuff for their office could also be used, its too much of a variable to analyze)**
-You still need a PC that's at least 400$
(oh, my, the difference is down to 100-200$)
-Games: they're cheaper on the PC, many AAA recent titles run for 50$ while new, and price drop faster on PC, and then there are digital retailer sales which can get you that new game for 10$. with stuff like that, getting 15 games will put the two systems at the same cost, with more favouring the PC. I bought 2 very excellent games released this year (STALKER CoP and Starcraft 2) for the price of 1 fairly fun console game (HALO: Reach). the superiour value and gameplay goes to the combo of STALKER and starcraft, from my point of view, the console game is 'inferior'.

um, just no on the 'more games' front, as there is a HUGE number of new games on PC that just aren't on a console. the mountain of flash games, the MMO market, the simulator niche marker (quite a few VERY high-quality games there), RTS's like SC2, and then there are the total conversion mods, free, and which often do more to the original game than many devs change with (bi)annual sequels. check out some of the custom games for SC2, from sentry scramble to star battle, to the numerous DOTA-likes and RPG's (even one just like FF).

So yeah.

ph0b0s123:

(Puts head in hands) I'm sure on all consoles with USB you can connect a mouse and keyboard, but what's the point without game support. Non-one said consoles are not technically capable of handling mouse input. Which is why it is so annoying that it is not supported. The reason that I belive console makers have blocked this support is a whole other discussion.

Oh, guess I should have explained that statement a little more. You can connect a keyboard and mouse to the PS3, and it DOES have game support. Support was put in there mainly for the PS3's web browsing, but there's tons of info and third party tools out there to make it so that you can control games like Resistance with the keyboard and mouse setup.

That said, I do agree that it is not supported enough. If they make something like a PS3 port of Starcraft 2 or some other RTS that exclusively used the setup and have it sell well/get good reviews/break the console RTS stigma, than that might increase awareness of consoles' capabilities in this regard and the confidence of third party developers. However, this will probably not happen, due to some other intervening factors related to the "whole other discussion" you touched on.

The Imp:

TheRightToArmBears:
The thing is, not that many people have super-powered latest tech PCs. You could make a game for such crazy-ass PCs but it wouldn't sell too well.

I bought my PC in summer 2008 for 1300€, haven't changed a single hardware component since and but i still can play every game on the market on highest settings. I wouldn't be able to do that if the developers were pushing the limit in the graphics department.

Same here.

I paid about $2000 Canadian for my computer 2 years ago, and I still have a very good gaming rig. No longer top of the line, but I haven't run into many games that will slow my computer down significantly.

Though, oddly enough, Dragon Age Origins crawled along at times. I suspect though that it was more coding related than hardware issue, since it is one aberation in a respectfully large sample size.

PC or Console?

All the other arguments aside...

GMOD!

Trelmayas:

Flac00:
PC's have been and will always be ahead of the consoles because innovation only seems to appear on PC's. The few games I can think of that brought something significant to the table from consoles was Halo 1's innovations (even though it was originally a Mac game), and Gears of War (the cover system). If you can name others, please do, im not omnipotent. But at this point I can't think of a single other thing.

I assume you're talking only about shooters here, since those are the only games you're naming off. And yes, PC has always been ahead of consoles for shooters. Other genres not so much.

yep, i mean at FPS's for now. Strategy games, and RTS are a PC only style too though

Zeithri:
I think the irony of this is that the PC's aren't capable of handling many of the pretty console games.
This statement is void.

Umm any dual core 2.0Ghz or higher CPU with a 8th generation or so ATI or invida card and 2GB of ram can easily do PS3/360 graphics or better.

There are more mid range PCs capable of doing it with a simple graphic card update than PS3s sold (and 1/8 of that number thats better than a PS3 and 360 put together hardware speaking) the trouble comes from target audience and other nuances which can not be simplified by gray suits or net trolls.

carpathic:

The Imp:

TheRightToArmBears:
The thing is, not that many people have super-powered latest tech PCs. You could make a game for such crazy-ass PCs but it wouldn't sell too well.

I bought my PC in summer 2008 for 1300€, haven't changed a single hardware component since and but i still can play every game on the market on highest settings. I wouldn't be able to do that if the developers were pushing the limit in the graphics department.

Same here.

I paid about $2000 Canadian for my computer 2 years ago, and I still have a very good gaming rig. No longer top of the line, but I haven't run into many games that will slow my computer down significantly.

Though, oddly enough, Dragon Age Origins crawled along at times. I suspect though that it was more coding related than hardware issue, since it is one aberation in a respectfully large sample size.

Don't worry, once Crysis 2 is released you can get your computer's ass kicked again.

Two words: Moore's law:
Every 18 months, computers will have halved in size, doubled in speed, or halved in price.

Consoles are replaced every 2 years at best.

That means that inevitably Pcs will get ahead

Bre2nan:

Oh, guess I should have explained that statement a little more. You can connect a keyboard and mouse to the PS3, and it DOES have game support. Support was put in there mainly for the PS3's web browsing, but there's tons of info and third party tools out there to make it so that you can control games like Resistance with the keyboard and mouse setup.

That said, I do agree that it is not supported enough. If they make something like a PS3 port of Starcraft 2 or some other RTS that exclusively used the setup and have it sell well/get good reviews/break the console RTS stigma, than that might increase awareness of consoles' capabilities in this regard and the confidence of third party developers. However, this will probably not happen, due to some other intervening factors related to the "whole other discussion" you touched on.

Interesting, so the support is more than I thought for the PS3. I suppose Sony and the PS3 don't have the issue Microsft had with the Xbox of trying to differentiate it from the PC by not allowing mouse support.

RTS fine, but I am more interested in having the option for console FPS games. Apart from what I mentioned about the Xbox above, I never quite understood why the choice was not given. For other types of games on consoles you have the option to use different controllers. Wheel controllers for driving games or joystick with lots of buttons for fighting games are two examples that spring to mind. The mouse seems a bit discriminated against.

Yeah but then you have to play with a mouse and keyboard. Thats a sacrifice I will never make.

THEJORRRG:
Yeah but then you have to play with a mouse and keyboard. Thats a sacrifice I will never make.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbDzllo3vtI&feature=related

you can use whatever you like

jamesworkshop:

THEJORRRG:
Yeah but then you have to play with a mouse and keyboard. Thats a sacrifice I will never make.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbDzllo3vtI&feature=related

you can use whatever you like

It can actually be improved by a Wiimote!

THEJORRRG:

jamesworkshop:

THEJORRRG:
Yeah but then you have to play with a mouse and keyboard. Thats a sacrifice I will never make.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbDzllo3vtI&feature=related

you can use whatever you like

It can actually be improved by a Wiimote!

Would you play hack and slash Devil may cry on a keyboard? I think not

ZippyDSMlee:

Zeithri:
I think the irony of this is that the PC's aren't capable of handling many of the pretty console games.
This statement is void.

Umm any dual core 2.0Ghz or higher CPU with a 8th generation or so ATI or invida card and 2GB of ram can easily do PS3/360 graphics or better.

There are more mid range PCs capable of doing it with a simple graphic card update than PS3s sold (and 1/8 of that number thats better than a PS3 and 360 put together hardware speaking) the trouble comes from target audience and other nuances which can not be simplified by gray suits or net trolls.

More or less this. The heart of the matter is that the thing that keeps PC gaming down more than any other is the disparity in hardware. This means that, as a programmer, you're generally forced to compromise efficiency for stability across as many different pieces of hardware as possible. This often means solving problems though brute force when there was often a better (less computationally expensive) way available for a specific hardware configuration.

I thought this was universally understood already.

jamesworkshop:

THEJORRRG:

jamesworkshop:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbDzllo3vtI&feature=related

you can use whatever you like

It can actually be improved by a Wiimote!

Would you play hack and slash Devil may cry on a keyboard? I think not

Touche. Although I would most likely not play it at all

Simalacrum:
I guess the rather long console cycle has also let PC's go even further ahead graphically - since console cycles were shorter before, I guess they might have been able to 'catch up' (so to speak) with PC's more frequently in the past... Though, I hastened to point out this is an amateur speaking who has only really been following the gaming industry since this generation of consoles :P

Still, I remain a console player at heart (even though my PS3 is far away at home and I have no TV at uni... *sniff*) - I honestly don't have 5000 or however much to invest in a big gaming powerhouse of a PC, and my little 13" MacBook Pro can't really compete against my PS3 graphically speaking :P

Also, graphics aren't everything Crytek! In many cases high-end graphics themselves can hold back games too - just look at Minecraft!

I'm going to be honest here, if Crytek are hampered in creativity terms because of the hardware/graphical limitations of the console systems... then I fear for the innovation department in Crytek =\

im sorry 5000? try 1/5 of that (and thats on the high side)
and bear in mind it can do things like photoshop email web design word processing, music editing,music recording have a proper keyboard input and myriad of other things that consoles couldn't hope to do. The reason people are willing to pay a grand is for something that does everything and will do for the forseeable future, and can still be used after its gaming life has ended. Its far from a bad investment and your number was well off.

Eclectic Dreck:

ZippyDSMlee:

Zeithri:
I think the irony of this is that the PC's aren't capable of handling many of the pretty console games.
This statement is void.

Umm any dual core 2.0Ghz or higher CPU with a 8th generation or so ATI or invida card and 2GB of ram can easily do PS3/360 graphics or better.

There are more mid range PCs capable of doing it with a simple graphic card update than PS3s sold (and 1/8 of that number thats better than a PS3 and 360 put together hardware speaking) the trouble comes from target audience and other nuances which can not be simplified by gray suits or net trolls.

More or less this. The heart of the matter is that the thing that keeps PC gaming down more than any other is the disparity in hardware. This means that, as a programmer, you're generally forced to compromise efficiency for stability across as many different pieces of hardware as possible. This often means solving problems though brute force when there was often a better (less computationally expensive) way available for a specific hardware configuration.

..it's a very logical argument, and all that. But.. it's not actually true, you know. It was true. And is true for some specific examples. But mostly it's not true at all.

jamesworkshop:

THEJORRRG:

jamesworkshop:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbDzllo3vtI&feature=related

you can use whatever you like

It can actually be improved by a Wiimote!

Would you play hack and slash Devil may cry on a keyboard? I think not

but you can play on a pc with any console controller of your choice along with hundreds of other types of controllers. Your point is nullified.

Eclectic Dreck:

ZippyDSMlee:

Zeithri:
I think the irony of this is that the PC's aren't capable of handling many of the pretty console games.
This statement is void.

Umm any dual core 2.0Ghz or higher CPU with a 8th generation or so ATI or invida card and 2GB of ram can easily do PS3/360 graphics or better.

There are more mid range PCs capable of doing it with a simple graphic card update than PS3s sold (and 1/8 of that number thats better than a PS3 and 360 put together hardware speaking) the trouble comes from target audience and other nuances which can not be simplified by gray suits or net trolls.

More or less this. The heart of the matter is that the thing that keeps PC gaming down more than any other is the disparity in hardware. This means that, as a programmer, you're generally forced to compromise efficiency for stability across as many different pieces of hardware as possible. This often means solving problems though brute force when there was often a better (less computationally expensive) way available for a specific hardware configuration.

Well I think it would help if they stuck to standards IE DX 8,9 and 10(and the main video cards in those lines),ect they would find it easier than trying to do their own driver support. But you are going to have a more difficult time with PCs( and 360s its just a mess hardware wise as far as each unit being a perfect copy of the other) than consoles.

Still if the industry put their mind to it and covered DX hardware from 8 to 11 and opened up drivers a bit so the community can expand on them as needed I think whatever hardware issues that PC have from a dev stand point would be heavily mitigated, but devs are the lastest things ever.... er or is that programmers :P

bahumat42:

jamesworkshop:

THEJORRRG:

It can actually be improved by a Wiimote!

Would you play hack and slash Devil may cry on a keyboard? I think not

but you can play on a pc with any console controller of your choice along with hundreds of other types of controllers. Your point is nullified.

Re-read my post I had a video of

1. PS3 controller in crysis on PC

2. Wii remote laying Devil may cry 4 on PC

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbDzllo3vtI&feature=related

in a day and age when more sophisticated gamers recognize that graphics don't make the game...whatever (which is why Avatar didn't blow away a lot of gamers...looks nice but the story wasn't stellar the end)

PCs aren't ahead at all
well...jk some are, many are
like they can be
if you put the time and money in the right hands
but not all computers
not the one my parent's have
not the standard issue ones the university has
well okay the one that one of my friend has that he made himself and upgrades it with new parts and specs and-okay yeah I'm done lol

bahumat42:

jamesworkshop:

THEJORRRG:

It can actually be improved by a Wiimote!

Would you play hack and slash Devil may cry on a keyboard? I think not

but you can play on a pc with any console controller of your choice along with hundreds of other types of controllers. Your point is nullified.

I personally enjoy couch gaming on a tv in the living room otherwise I'd still be gaming more on the PC
(that, and unlike my more nerdy-er, techie/computer science buds, I don't know how or have time/money to upgrade a PC to gaming specs)

but yeah my friend used my 360 controller to play some N64 games on his laptop lol

Robert Gerhardt:
i'm pretty sure the xbox clocks in at a measly 800mhz

standard issue has its advantages and disadvantages, mate

I don't really have a problem with that; if it wasn't held back, I 'd have to buy a new graphics card twice a year instead of one ever 6 years.

What was it Goethe said? "Genius shows itself when restrained." Something like that. Crytek should, in fact, be thankful that they are being held back as that forces them to make a better game than they otherwise could have gotten away with.

The true heroes of this story is in fact sony and microsoft, for keeping the 360 and ps3 alive long enough to finally contain true gems. Don't think of it as this generation of consoles being too short, instead remember that earlier generation were given up on before they had reached their fullest.

News just in - water is wet.

Yeah we all know that PCs are more powerful than consoles; why rehash old info?

Also Crytek need to get their hand off it if they reckon Crysis 2 will be the best looking game on both the PS3 and Xbox 360. Gears of War 3 will easily eclipse it on the 360 and Killzone 3 will no doubt kill it on the PS3.

Programmed_For_Damage:
Yeah we all know that PCs are more powerful than consoles; why rehash old info?

..it's still not actually correct, though. As in, not true. "Everyone knows" isn't a good argument to prove something either. Specially when the idea of how the industry standard architecture allowing competition and rapid development, and so on - what that idea is built on - isn't true any longer.

Just as an example - we now have about.. fifty different standard sockets and northbridge solutions. Half of them aim to deliberately circumvent the main bus. DMA on hdd reads and writes is specifically designed towards an interconnector solution.

Why is that, if the ISA is such a brilliant solution that always will perform the best?

Truth is that it doesn't. There are bottlenecks in PC architecture now that forces the next generation platforms to have a different solution.

And since there's no new ISA taking over - specially since peripherals and cpu production is a lucrative business (see intel's spat with nvidia over motherboards with integrated gpu and cpu solutions on one chip) - this means that PCs are lagging behind.

i would be a happy man if platforms didn't exist and gaming as a whole was held to a much higher standard
but no
people gotta have their pablum

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here