Support NeoGAF

[hodgy100]

i have a 3570k
8GB RAM
GTX 560ti

I'm fully expecting to have to upgrade my GPU either next year or the year after to be able to play next gen games at 1080p and higher settings and i don't think many people are denying that (unless they have a monster rig like Dennis)

but you are comparing later games on old hardware, yes the consoles are just as old hardware wise but they have the advantage of optimization for a fixed hardware setup.

early on in the console generation i predict my pc to be absolutely fine until they start doing serious optimizations for each platform at which point i will probably have to upgrade to keep my higher resolutions and framerates. but i dont expect that until a year or two into next gen.

also your skyrim comparison is ridiculous, we already know that originally skyrim was released on pc with a slower dev build that was eventually patched out and its running at a higher resolution than the console versions.

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

So the next time you're thinking of posting something about not needing next gen consoles since you already have a super gaming rig, think of this. Don't set yourself up for some huge disappointment when the new consoles hit and required specs skyrocket.

It's not an overnight thing, though. The multiplatform X360/PC games of today are more taxing on the PC than the multiplatform X360/PC games of 2005. Oblivion's requirements want a 2 GHz processor, 512 MB system memory, and a graphics card with 128 MB RAM. Skyrim wants at minimum a dual core 2 GHz processor, 2 GB system RAM, and a video card with 512 MB RAM.

If somebody cared about building a monster PC in 2012, it seems to me they're the kind of person who will probably enjoy upgrading something when a 2016 game demands it.

 

[Eideka]

well that's the premise of the thread, people who do believe that they won't have to upgrade the entire Gen. It may not pertain to you (or others who will upgrade over time) but that's the topic of discussion as laid out by the OP. Thread whining isn't necessary (plus it's bannable).

Hum....I never saw anyone claiming otherwise, it's pretty much obvious that given PC's architecture you will have to upgrade at some point unless you have a SLI rig.

Hence why I did not understand why people were surprised. Considering the priority given to console development it does not seem fair to me to blame PCs for not being able to run games as well as consoles with similar specs, I have no idea if a similar level of optimization is possible, the API is different and even if that sounds obvious the PC is not a dedicated gaming machine.

With this in mind I'm impressed how far PC has come in terms of performance.

 

[Agent Ironside]

Good thread breh! I've thought about this as well, while they're some differences between generations, a lot of us PC gamers are gonna be butt hurt when next gen games come out and we can't run them with 4aa, 60fps etc on our GTX680's.

 

[cobragt4001]

My 2 gtx 670s get an average of 42fps in the new dawn graphics demo and there is absolutely no way the next gen console will be able to get even in an inch of that. Some PC gamers are starting a new standard of 2560 res or 120hz refresh rate so PCs now will be a gen above next gen consoles. Its so funny that consoles next gen will finally maybe have 1080p 60fps games when that's old news for PCs lol as the next gen consoles get older then you won't see that many 1080p 60fps games because games will a lot better and of course devs will try to make the games comparable to the current PCs of that time so naturally cut backs will have to be made. And PC devs will get better at optimizing their games. Metro Last Light will be as next gen as bit gets in terms of visuals and current PCs will be able to run that. When next gen consoles come out you're not gonna see final fanasty CGI type graphics period.

 

[Wiktor]

PC games are so much cheaper than difference always has been more than enough to cover upgrade costs, so I'm not worried.

 

[Jburton]

Closed box will out perform General purpose machine with higher specs almost all the time, especially when most games are ports from console to PC.

It really comes down to poor optimisation of code, some games are running like in some sort of emulation mode.

Shit looking game compared to PC exclusive / lead dev game runs worse on the hardware, Ghost recon Future Soldier is a prime example of this.

Looks nothing special and requires a lot of grunt to perform to decent framerate.


Anyone who did not realise this and the general gist of the OP is either ignorant or uninterested.

 

[Dictator93]

My 2 gtx 670s get an average of 42fps in the new dawn graphics demo and there is absolutely no way the next gen console will be able to get even in an inch of that.

yep.

 

[cyberheater]

i have a 3570k
8GB RAM

Same here. Just upgraded. I hope the op is wrong as I'm not intending to upgrade my machine any time soon.

I might have to get another GPU but I'll buy that at the very last moment.

I don't think next gen machines will be as powerful as the op thinks they will be. It would be amazing if they were.

 

[Krauser Kat]

Most pc gamers i know usually upgrade mid gen. So like me i built a computer in 08 then upgraded (mobo/cpu/ram/ssd) in 10 and have been kicking ass since. its getting a little long in the tooth but one 300 dollar gpu and i will be hauling ass for well into the next gen. We usally upgrade partly halfway through a gen and kick all sorts of ass for the rest of the generation.

 

[alexandros]

Interesting analysis, however I see two problems with it:

a) Next-gen consoles will be weaker than the 360 was relatively to the top PCs of the time.

b) By mid-gen you'll be able to buy a $100 graphics card that will easily surpass console performance.

 

[JimmyRustler]

The hardware probably won't be better but the games will still look a lot better than anything on PC now. I mean, Far Cry 3 may look very good maxed out on PC but that game needs like 8 Gigs of RAM for those setting right?
I think that's crazy considering the same game, while not looking as good, is running on a console with 256 MB RAM (PS3). I can't imagine the image quality on maxed out PC setting justifies that you need around 30-40 time more RAM.

 

[jaypah]

Hum....I never saw anyone claiming otherwise, it's pretty much obvious that given PC's architecture you will have to upgrade at some point unless you have a SLI rig.

Hence why I did not understand why people were surprised. Considering the priority given to console development it does not seem fair to me to blame PCs for not being able to run games as well as consoles with similar specs, I have no idea if a similar level of optimization is possible, the API is different and even if that sounds obvious the PC is not a dedicated gaming machine.

With this in mind I'm impressed how far PC has come in terms of performance.

I've seen the claim made in some threads, usually next Gen rumor threads. Just drive-by "these specs are shit, I'm set for next Gen!" posts. I assume that's the people that the OP was referring to. Like I said the premise of the thread is in response to those people, not you and me or anyone else who plans to do regular upgrades. Other than that I agree with everything you've said.

 

[Persona86]

My 2 gtx 670s get an average of 42fps in the new dawn graphics demo and there is absolutely no way the next gen console will be able to get even in an inch of that.

Optimization, development tricks etc could be able to make next gen games look close to that. Just look at Beyond: Two Souls and the hardware it's on.

 

[Barack Lesnar]

lol 1080p

I don't think that will be the gold standard you want to be on in so many years. Plenty of PC gamers I know have left that resolution behind already.

Maybe ones that you personally know but that's a bunch of BS overall. 1080p is the high quality standard for 95% of PC gamers. A tiny fraction would go higher.

If most next-gen games end up being native 1080p, we'll have hit the jackpot. I sound like a broken record but that's my only concern for next-gen, the resolution.

 

[nib95]

I agree with OP. If PC gamers think they'll be able to run whatever the entirety of next gen throws them on current hardware, I think they're being naive. Having said that, who actually keeps a GPU for like 4-5 years anyway?

 

[BLACK AMERICAN PSYCHO]

If you have a gtx680 I'm sure you'll be fine for like 2-3 years into next gen. Anything less than that deserves a lol

 

[ekim]

Just stop comparing a closed system to an open one. It's that easy. Look at forza horizon - it looks better (overall IQ) than any racing game on the pc. (Disregarding rendering resolution) now look at shitty pc to console ports like crysis 1 where the 360 barely looks as good as the pc version.
It depends on how much low level optimization was done by the devs.

 

[Eideka]

Just stop comparing a closed system to an open one. It's that easy. Look at forza horizon - it looks better (overall IQ) than any racing game on the pc. (Disregarding rendering resolution)

No, Dirt 3 and Dirt Showdown looks better, so does CARS or Need for Speed Most Wanted on PC.

 

[cobragt4001]

Just stop comparing a closed system to an open one. It's that easy. Look at forza horizon - it looks better (overall IQ) than any racing game on the pc. (Disregarding rendering resolution) now look at shitty pc to console ports like crysis 1 where the 360 barely looks as good as the pc version.
It depends on how much low level optimization was done by the devs.

Project Cars says hey.

 

[drizzle]

I didn't read the entire thread. I did read the OP and the first messages making fun of him.

He's telling the truth. But this is easy to fix: Just buy a midrange PC every 3 years and you're set.

Or buy a kickass top-of-the-line PC every 5 years and suffer those last two.

That's what I've been doing since the 2000s (I was a high end, suffer through the last two at the start, but I've recently converted to a 3 year midrange guy). Never had a problem, and I'm mostly a PC gamer.

 

[Elios83]

People who feel safe because they have spent hundreds of dollars are in for a terrible surprise (at least those who have laughed at the OP).
It will be like playing Crysis in 2007 at max details with the PCs of that time.
Code optimization and coding on the metal on a closed system can do that.

 

[MadScientist]

I bought a 7800 GTX a few months after the 360 launched specifically because I thought it would let me play all console ports. I later realized that that just wasn't the case. My guess is that a 8800 GTX is needed to achieve the same visuals that games achieve on the 360.

Part of it might be poor optimization, part of is also the different architecture. But higher demands are also a factor: Who wants to play sub hd on a PC? In 2012 my old 260 GTX (vastly more powerful than 360's GPU) does not allow me to play many ports at a quality level I desire (Full HD, 4xAA, etc.). And this started with GTA IV back in 2007!

Maybe a 680 ensures to play all games at the quality level a PS4/720 will offer. But the kind of gamer that bought and enthusiast system in 2012 will unlikely want to cope with no AA, 720p or 20-30 fps.

I also expect high-dpi displays to be a thing in a few years. 2013 Apple will introduce them in their imacs, soon after that they will be available for PCs and gamers will want to play at 3840x2160.

 

[ekim]

Project Cars says hey.

It's not released yet and no moving picture of the game looks that amazing like the pics promise.

And Dirt 3 comes close on pc but it's not open world.

What I wanted to say is, that you would need a monster rig to play Horizon on a pc with the same IQ like the 360 version.

 

[Barack Lesnar]

My 2 gtx 670s get an average of 42fps in the new dawn graphics demo and there is absolutely no way the next gen console will be able to get even in an inch of that.

...which is irrelevant because no game will be made for that spec. Like a Ferrari racing around in the suburbs.

Some PC gamers are starting a new standard of 2560 res or 120hz refresh rate so PCs now will be a gen above next gen consoles.

...barely anyone will go higher than 1080p. The average from Valve hardware surveys are even lower than that. Using the fact that 1% or whatever of gamers will go 2560 as a way to discredit the next-gen consoles just doesn't make sense.

 

[Eideka]

What I wanted to say is, that you would need a monster rig to play Horizon on a pc with the same IQ like the 360 version.

What the fuck....Are you even serious or do you have any idea how powerful current gen PC hardware is ?

It's difficult to take you seriously. 720p with MSAA/FXAA is not going to require a monster PC by any stretch of the imagination and regarding your comment on CARS...Oh my God, it looks even better in motion contrary to what you seem to believe.

You know, you are fully entitled to like console games as they are but you are making yourself look like a fool with that kind of post.
Twisting facts so they can fit your narrative is absolutely abhorrent.

 

[cobragt4001]

By the middle of this year, maybe when the 700 series gtx's come out the 600 series will be cheaper so imagine what I will be able to do with 3 gtx 670s in comparison to whatever the next gen consoles might have. Star Wars 1414 is also what I would considered next gen graphics and what was running that....a high end pc and that game has been in development for a while now so I'm not worried at all about the so called next gen consoles. Next gen is already here in a sense with PC. Do people honestly think next gen console games will be visually above games like Star Wars 1414 or Metro Last Light? Get real.

 

[ekim]

What the fuck....Are you even serious or do you have any idea how powerful current gen PC hardware is ?

It's difficult to take you seriously.

I'm dead serious. Have you played Horizon?

 

[teh_pwn]

Beyond heat/power limitations being a big limiting factor of next gen consoles, I don't think this really hurts PC gaming. If next generation goes until 2020, I'll have built 3 PCs by then. One in 2013, 2016, and 2019. I like keeping high end and I reusing older PCs as HTPCs because I don't like closed garden/garbage TV boxes.

...barely anyone will go higher than 1080p. The average from Valve hardware surveys are even lower than that. Using the fact that 1% or whatever of gamers will go 2560 as a way to discredit the next-gen consoles just doesn't make sense.

I feel like monitors are about to break through the 1080p TV chains. Korea already has 1440p 120hz IPS for $300, correct? By 2015 that'll be the cheapo $150 on newegg.

 

[Eideka]

I'm dead serious. Have you played Horizon?

Yep and it does not hold a candle to Dirt 3 maxed out on PC, or even Need for Speed Most Wanted.

Have you played those games on PC ? Apparently not. CARS is on another level entirely.

I'm a bit puzzled, do you believe FXAA/MSAA are not common on PC ?
You seem completely ignorant of PC gaming, that does not help your argument. :/

 

[Vaporak]

I bought a 7800 GTX a few months after the 360 launched specifically because I thought it would let me play all console ports. I later realized that that just wasn't the case. My guess is that a 8800 GTX is needed to achieve the same visuals that games achieve on the 360.
.

Well, you'd be wrong. The 8800GTX stomps the HD twins into the ground and came out at the same time as the PS3. Console Optimization™ counts for far less than the average gaming fanboy thinks it does.

 

[Sianos]

I've got quite a bit of room for upgrading potential: if another $599 console comes down the pipeline I'll upgrade in a few years.

I save much more money from buying games on massive sales anyways.

 

[KKRT00]

Just stop comparing a closed system to an open one. It's that easy. Look at forza horizon - it looks better (overall IQ) than any racing game on the pc. (Disregarding rendering resolution) now look at shitty pc to console ports like crysis 1 where the 360 barely looks as good as the pc version.
It depends on how much low level optimization was done by the devs.

What i'm even reading. Forza Horizon doesnt even has good lighting solution, yet anything dynamic.
And low level optimization can give max 20% performance advantage for the same configuration, so smth that You can beat on PC with just OC, or higher tier GPU.

Even Hot Pursuit looks miles better than Horizon on PC.

Dat graphics.

 

[ekim]

Yep and it does not hold a candle to Dirt 3 maxed out on PC, or even Need for Speed Most Wanted.

Have you played those games on PC ? Apparently not.

I did. And the overall look and feel (I'm missing the right word here - no native speaker) doesn't match Horizons.

 

[Eideka]

I did. And the overall look and feel (I'm missing the right word here - no native speaker) doesn't match Horizons.

That's your opinion and I respect it after all, but I disagree wholeheartedly.

To me Horizon is nowhere near Dirt 3 or the last two NFS games on PC, even disregarding IQ.
Texture work is top notch, lighting is superb, truly Codemasters know how to make the PC shine.

 

[I H8 Memes]

I did. And the overall look and feel (I'm missing the right word here - no native speaker) doesn't match Horizons.

Come on man

 

[Sethos]

My current rig displays imagery like this at 30 fps (at 2560 x 1600p actually).

Are you saying that next gen consoles will spit out better imagery at 30 fps?

Hot damn next gen is going to be a monster!

Only 30 for that? What the hell have you done to your game.

 

[Shadow of the BEAST]

Personally i dont care much about resolution.

I just want to get rid of the defects like jaggies, shimmering etc.

If the tv standard was 720p i would be happy with that, as long as it came without the image defects like jaggies etc.

 

[wazoo]

People who feel safe because they have spent hundreds of dollars are in for a terrible surprise (at least those who have laughed at the OP).
It will be like playing Crysis in 2007 at max details with the PCs of that time.
Code optimization and coding on the metal on a closed system can do that.

Crysis run like shit on console too.

 

[cobragt4001]

Thanks to the advancement of SLI and Crossfire PC gamers will have no problem staying with the current and future games. Buddy of mine is rocking 4 gtx 580s and can play all of his games at 2560x1600 and maintain 80+ fps so imagine what 4 gtx 670 could do if someone chose to do so. Like I said earlier I'm actually looking into getting a third 670 so I won't have to upgrade till the 800 series maxwells roll out.

 

[Jedi2016]

Right now it's all just words in the wind. No one knows a thing. The few scraps we do know actually indicate that the games that we have seen are actually running on today's top-of-the-line PC hardware (i7/GTX-680, etc).

So what we have to decide is this: What's our goal? Over this last console cycle, it's become the norm for PC gamers to be able to play the same games as on the consoles, but at significantly higher quality. High-res assets and textures, at 1080p+ at 60fps.

Do we expect that to continue into next gen? Do I expect to be able to play Watch Dogs at 1080p/60? While I would certainly love to, I'm pretty sure I won't be able to. I imagine my current system will be more or less on par with the consoles, and I would expect roughly the same performance. Maybe, say.. 1080p30 on Watch Dogs. And stereoscopic may be out of the question because of the performance hit (something I can more or less ignore these days).

I've got a i7-2600K, 16GB of RAM, and a single GTX-680. I expect I'll be okay when the launch titles start to hit. But I'd be lying if I said I'd never have to upgrade throughout the entire console cycle. The harder they start to push those consoles, the more my rig is going to be left behind.

 

[Dennis]

Only 30 for that? What the hell have you done to your game.

4x MSAA

 

[99%]

Im pretty sure the OP is only addressing the people that claim they wont need to upgrade, he clearly is a pc gamer himself.

 

[diamount]

Which is why I haven't upgraded my rig since 2008.

 

[ekim]

That's your opinion and I respect it after all, but I disagree wholeheartedly.

To me Horizon is nowhere near Dirt 3 or the last two NFS games on PC, even disregarding IQ.
Texture work is top notch, lighting is superb, truly Codemasters know how to make the PC shine.

Vs.

 

[King_Moc]

Well if you would have clicked on that youtube link in the OP you would have seen the effect. The 7800 GTX can barely run skyrim 15 fps on medium/low while idling, during fights it drops to sub 10 fps.

The only reason for that is that Skyrim was not developed with graphics cards that old in mind. The reason being, that hardly anyone is still using them. If tens of thousands of gamers were still activeley use those cards, then Skyrim may have worked better on them.

My 2 gtx 670s get an average of 42fps in the new dawn graphics demo and there is absolutely no way the next gen console will be able to get even in an inch of that. Some PC gamers are starting a new standard of 2560 res or 120hz refresh rate so PCs now will be a gen above next gen consoles. Its so funny that consoles next gen will finally maybe have 1080p 60fps games when that's old news for PCs lol as the next gen consoles get older then you won't see that many 1080p 60fps games because games will a lot better and of course devs will try to make the games comparable to the current PCs of that time so naturally cut backs will have to be made. And PC devs will get better at optimizing their games. Metro Last Light will be as next gen as bit gets in terms of visuals and current PCs will be able to run that. When next gen consoles come out you're not gonna see final fanasty CGI type graphics period.

The consoles clearly won't be able to do that, but i also can't see PC gamers being able to play nex gen games at insane resolutions and frame rates. Also, with regards to Metro, 2033 still doesn't run too well on top of the line Nvidia cards, so i'm not too sure about that. Though that is mainly because the devs messed up.

Optimization, development tricks etc could be able to make next gen games look close to that. Just look at Beyond: Two Souls and the hardware it's on.

Yeah, and imagine what games with zero AI and physics would look like on PC. Beyond is such a poor comparison, it's basically doing nothing but rendering graphics.

 

[Eideka]

@ekim

Bullshot vs actual screenshot.

I can only assume you are trolling now.

Now for real Horizon shots :

A PC screen from a replay :

From the Neogaf thread :

 

[Durante]

What I wanted to say is, that you would need a monster rig to play Horizon on a pc with the same IQ like the 360 version.

Erm, no. 4xMSAA at 720p/30FPS is something modern PC GPUs do in their sleep. (Quite literally, they could probably do it in their low power state)

 

[Emitan]

I'll most likely last several more years and then buy a $100-$300 graphics card halfway through the generation and blow away the consoles.

 

[Lettuce]

Even better test, see if a X800, 6800 or 7800 will run FarCry 3 @ 1280x720 on medium settings and then compare it to the xbox 360 version