http://gamingtrend.com
December 18, 2014, 06:42:04 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: A watershed moment for PC Gamers  (Read 10841 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Sarkus
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2593


View Profile
« on: May 17, 2005, 10:02:59 PM »

I'm sure many of you have been following the Microsoft and Sony next generation console announcements, and without making this a "PC GAMING IS DEAD" thread, I have to say that as a long-time PC gamer I think this is a watershed moment.  For the first time, the consoles will not only be way cheaper, they will be ahead of the PC hardware curve.  The specs on these two systems are beyond what we have now and beyond what we as PC gamers will have anytime soon,  especially when you consider the prices these things will ship at.

Anyone disagree?
Logged

Roger: And you should know, I have no genitals.
Syndey: That's alright.  I have both.

- American Dad
Doomboy
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 320


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: May 17, 2005, 10:25:25 PM »

When the console users are able to play games like Dawn of War, or Rome: Total War, then I will declare the PC dead.  Until then consoles will still be the home of silly jump around action games, and not serious games.

Until that day arrives, my mouse and keyboard are far better instruments for playing the kind of games I like than any console controller.
Logged

When there's no more room in hell, Jack Thompson will walk the earth.
Big Jake
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1300


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: May 17, 2005, 11:00:24 PM »

Doomboy, I'm not seeing any emoticon to indicate you're joking on that post...
Logged

The price of great bacon is eternal vigilance.
Daehawk
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 11755



View Profile
« Reply #3 on: May 17, 2005, 11:06:06 PM »

I prefer my mouse and keyboard. I prefer the type of games that the pc has. If i want racing,fighting,kiddie,puzzle games Ill get a console. Dont think Ill ever own one.

I also like free forums, patches, online services, addons, mods...etc. Ill stick with my pc thnx.
Logged

---------------------------------------------------
I am Dyslexic of Borg, prepare to have your ass laminated.

Check my trader rating. Im 22+ and zero negs. Trade with me! smile
-Lord Ebonstone-
BANNED
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3428

get naked


View Profile WWW
« Reply #4 on: May 17, 2005, 11:16:17 PM »

As long as PCs as we know them exist, there will be games to play on them.
Logged

xbl tag = cthonic horror

NNNOOOOOO!!
RightBastard
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 528


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: May 17, 2005, 11:40:39 PM »

Look at the specs for the next gen console hardware.  It's all PC architecture underneath.  The console market seems to be pushing towards PCs (not just in hardware and feature sets but in terms of software as some console developers are heading for the PC) so I think it's unfair to say that the PC games market is dying but more that the gaming market in general is heading towards some distant convergance point.
Logged

I am amendable to criticism but only within the sphere of what I am trying to do.
Flannery O'Connor
sclick
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 43


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: May 18, 2005, 12:02:57 AM »

I just like fun games, and don't have any particular prejudices against the consoles. Me and my wife and kids own all 3, as well as a few PC's on a networked LAN. I love strategy and sim games on the PC, and I love action and role-playing on the consoles. A lot of PC gamers tend to look down their nose at the consoles, but truth be told there is some great, immersive, challenging games on every platform.

The original post was correct that the new generation of consoles are going to blow away current high-end PC's in terms of raw graphics power. It makes me feel like a bit of a schmuk for spending $400 on a video card.

That said, the whole PC versus console debate is pretty stupid. Just play the games you like playing, on whatever format.
Logged
Andrew Mallon
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1901


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: May 18, 2005, 12:08:37 AM »

Quote from: "RightBastard"
Look at the specs for the next gen console hardware.  It's all PC architecture underneath.  The console market seems to be pushing towards PCs (not just in hardware and feature sets but in terms of software as some console developers are heading for the PC) so I think it's unfair to say that the PC games market is dying but more that the gaming market in general is heading towards some distant convergance point.


What do you mean by PC architecture? If you're saying that next-gen consoles can do traditional PC-like functions, than maybe. If you're talking about the actual system components and design, the next-gen consoles are actually moving farther away from what's traditionally considered IBM PC/compatible architecture.
Logged
Doomboy
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 320


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: May 18, 2005, 12:08:40 AM »

I'm not joking.  I have consoles, but the only games I consider to be actually serious are the bioware games that actually play like PC games more than console games.

There isn't anything comparable to Rome on any console, and I don't think there ever will be.

Sure the next gen consoles will be able to make better looking games, and the hardware will be cheaper than a comparable PC, but the games will still be more about button mashing than thinking.
Logged

When there's no more room in hell, Jack Thompson will walk the earth.
Sarkus
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2593


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: May 18, 2005, 12:11:10 AM »

Quote from: "RightBastard"
Look at the specs for the next gen console hardware.  It's all PC architecture underneath.  The console market seems to be pushing towards PCs (not just in hardware and feature sets but in terms of software as some console developers are heading for the PC) so I think it's unfair to say that the PC games market is dying but more that the gaming market in general is heading towards some distant convergance point.


There's no doubt that current and next gen consoles are adopting some elements of PC, but that suggests a further marginalization of PC only.  The stand alone PC will always have some uses that a console will not, but for most consumers the PC seems increasingly unnecessary.

From a gaming standpoint, I hardly see PC gaming surviving on a few genre's when the consoles could (and no doubt at some time will) easily steal those types of games as well by simply integrating mouse and keyboard into their control schemes.  

My original point, however, is that PC gaming cannot, at least for now, claim cutting edge technology as one of it's advantages over consoles.  That is the watershed moment.
Logged

Roger: And you should know, I have no genitals.
Syndey: That's alright.  I have both.

- American Dad
Big Jake
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1300


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: May 18, 2005, 12:16:26 AM »

OK, I can think of an easy way to think of this for most people:

Deus Ex:Invisible War wouldn't have happened had the console been much closer to being on par with the PC.  In the coming generation, it won't happen anymore.

(Mull that one for a mintue: what kind of game could that have been if they didn't restrict themselves to low definition textures, small levels, etc.  Imagine Console Port-itis being a thing of the past.)

------------------------------------------
Sarkus, I congratulate you on a great topic.  When I saw that the Xbox360 would have well beyond what any PC has for power in the near future, I began to think of this exact issue.
Logged

The price of great bacon is eternal vigilance.
Randomayhem
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 57


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: May 18, 2005, 12:20:16 AM »

I'll start playing console games regularly (maybe even dust off my Xbox) once they come up with a controller that doesn't leave my hands with blisters and torn ligaments.
Logged
naednek
Global Moderator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Online Online

Posts: 4738



View Profile
« Reply #12 on: May 18, 2005, 12:28:53 AM »

For me, consoles and the PC coexist.  I like both.
Logged
Turtle
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 9485



View Profile WWW
« Reply #13 on: May 18, 2005, 01:06:50 AM »

Cooexistance for me, I like games on all platforms, and eventually everything will become one box anyway.

Besides, we've seen this before.  It won't be long until the PC hardware blows away console hardware.  In fact, we already have stuff on the PC market that can rival these next gen consoles, however it's pretty expensive.

Consoles excel at putting out cutting edge hardware in a concise single platform solution, where games can optimize themselves for it.
Logged
-Lord Ebonstone-
BANNED
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3428

get naked


View Profile WWW
« Reply #14 on: May 18, 2005, 01:19:46 AM »

Quote from: "Doomboy"
I'm not joking.  I have consoles, but the only games I consider to be actually serious are the bioware games that actually play like PC games more than console games.

Ow.  The irony burns, mommy.
Logged

xbl tag = cthonic horror

NNNOOOOOO!!
Interloper
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 600



View Profile
« Reply #15 on: May 18, 2005, 01:32:00 AM »

Good timing, this thread, as I was just talking to my wife about this.  Basically I told her I will no longer be building a new computer every couple years.  I plan on upgrading this one as little as necessary to keep it viable for internet/non gaming applications (music burning/dl'ing, photo printing etc).  Starting with the next gen consoles I plan to leave pc gaming behind.  It's just getting to where I cannot justify the expense of pc gaming over time compared with console gaming, especially now the consoles are narrowing the gap or even surpassing pc's in performance for gaming.
Logged

Dreamshadow
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3038


View Profile WWW
« Reply #16 on: May 18, 2005, 01:42:21 AM »

I still believe that there will be a class of game that just won't see the console.  Consoles are nice, but I still don't see it in the electrons for PCs to just keel over and die.   First point on that - PCs are still to prevalent for that to occur.  Until a company can properly market the set top media center properly, people are not going to drop the PC.  Two, there are too many PCs out there and it's too accessable.  Three: Microsoft is still maintaining the DirectX api and making gaming too readily available.   If legislation passed that barred custom or homebrew apps on a PC (and they've tried to do stuff like that) then there will be people to code on the PC.  The personal computer still has too much going for it as a platform for people to drop it.  

Now with that said,  I'll prolly still game on the PC when the only games I can find are homebrew.  I have my PS2 and my 'cube and the games for them.  And they're great.   I have my PC and its games..none of which appear on those other two systems.  They're good games.  I just don't see it happening yet.  

I believe there has to be a major paradigm shift in how we treat PCs and consoles before one or the other is eliminated.
Logged

Tom "Dreamshadow" Tjarks
Aunt Wu: Care to hear your fortune, handsome?
Iroh: At my age there is really only one big surprise left, and I'd just as soon leave it a mystery.
stimpy
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 814


I'm makin a move!!


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: May 18, 2005, 01:43:46 AM »

I dont know where all this "PC gaming is so expensive" stuff comes from.
I have a E-Machine 2.0ghz  that I bought at Best Buy over 2 years ago for $250 and I am able to play every game that has come out. I did add ram and a video card, but total cost of those was about $150. So for $400 I have been gaming on this PC for over 2 years. Not a bad deal.
BTW I also own all 3 consoles, but I spend WAY more time gaming on my PC.
Logged
Crawley
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1747


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: May 18, 2005, 01:46:26 AM »

Each time a new console comes out people get worried about the end of the PC as the consoles take the next big leap in technology. I recall people freaking out the PC was no longer needed because it was annouced the PS2 was going to have a keyboard and internet capability and be hundreds of dollars cheaper. Somehow I doubt anyone posting here has done away with their computer and is using a PS2 or X-Box as a replacement.

It'll play out like it has always. The consoles will be jaw droppingly beautiful at first. The PC's will once again catch up. Consoles will start looking old compared to the PC's. Then a new console will come out and we'll go through this all again.
Logged
Sarkus
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2593


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: May 18, 2005, 03:10:31 AM »

Quote from: "Crawley"
It'll play out like it has always. The consoles will be jaw droppingly beautiful at first. The PC's will once again catch up. Consoles will start looking old compared to the PC's. Then a new console will come out and we'll go through this all again.


No, it hasn't ever happened this way.  You may be right that the results will be the same, but there has never been a console that launched ahead of the PC tech curve.   Until now.  When the XBox 360 ships this fall it will be more powerful as a game machine than any PC any of us are likely to be able to afford.  In that way this is a different scenario.
Logged

Roger: And you should know, I have no genitals.
Syndey: That's alright.  I have both.

- American Dad
RightBastard
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 528


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: May 18, 2005, 03:16:03 AM »

Quote from: "Andrew Mallon"
Quote from: "RightBastard"
Look at the specs for the next gen console hardware.  It's all PC architecture underneath.  The console market seems to be pushing towards PCs (not just in hardware and feature sets but in terms of software as some console developers are heading for the PC) so I think it's unfair to say that the PC games market is dying but more that the gaming market in general is heading towards some distant convergance point.


What do you mean by PC architecture? If you're saying that next-gen consoles can do traditional PC-like functions, than maybe. If you're talking about the actual system components and design, the next-gen consoles are actually moving farther away from what's traditionally considered IBM PC/compatible architecture.


I was actually pointing to the fact that the guts of the next gen consoles are mostly made by computer hardware manufacturers, especially the graphics hardware.  Also, there's a big push towards "digital convergance" which is a marketing buzzword but with the upcoming capabilities of some of these machines, I guess this is looking more and more likely.  And as some people in this thread pointed out, these things are more powerful than today's PCs, which just highlights again where these consoles are heading.  

I'm not claiming that consoles are on their way to becoming PCs but the companies that are making them seem to be slowly trying to make them as ubiquitous as PCs.  They may never overtake them in terms of productivity but in terms of PCs as entertainment machines, I think the long term plan is to make the lines between consoles blur until you can't tell which is which anymore.
Logged

I am amendable to criticism but only within the sphere of what I am trying to do.
Flannery O'Connor
Daehawk
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 11755



View Profile
« Reply #21 on: May 18, 2005, 03:35:04 AM »

So some of you would rather spend $300-$400 on a console you cant upgrade at all and buy a new one every 2 years than have a PC and spend less on? ok then smile

I think in the last 3 or 4 years Ive spent $80 to go from 512 megs of ram to 1 gig of ram. I may buy a new vid card if I ever have $160. Should do me another 3 or 4 years. So at least 6 years for around $220 is pretty good. Not to mention all the online stuff I do like mmos, patches, mods, msg boards, and tons of other stuff..
Logged

---------------------------------------------------
I am Dyslexic of Borg, prepare to have your ass laminated.

Check my trader rating. Im 22+ and zero negs. Trade with me! smile
Kevin Grey
Global Moderator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 13976


View Profile
« Reply #22 on: May 18, 2005, 03:52:02 AM »

Quote from: "Daehawk"
So some of you would rather spend $300-$300 on a console you cant upgrade at all and buy a new one every 2 years than have a PC and spend less on? ok then smile



?

Consoles typically last 5-6 years if you buy at launch (Xbox not withstanding).  And if you wait a year or two you can typically get it for close to $200.  

I purchased all three consoles at the full price point and soon after launch and I consider it to have been a great investment.
Logged
Turtle
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 9485



View Profile WWW
« Reply #23 on: May 18, 2005, 03:56:06 AM »

Yep, not to play sides, but consoles usually stay out for 5-6 years and it's only in that last year is a next gen announced.

The xbox is an exception because it was released quite a bit later than the other two this last generation.
Logged
Interloper
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 600



View Profile
« Reply #24 on: May 18, 2005, 04:19:12 AM »

In the past 5 years I've spent easily over $4000 dollars on computers (not including software).  This includes building one from scratch, upgrading it, then using scraps of it to build another from scratch, and then keeping that system somewhat upgraded.   The pattern is the neverending upgrades.  It does get damned expensive.  I don't buy the latest and greatest either, I usually wait for video cards, for example, to be out for at least a year and a half before upgrade. And it's getting harder for me to justify to myself spending money like that when a console will last for years with no upgrades and still play the latest games for it just fine, no upgrade needed.  Don't get me wrong, I prefer pc gaming over console gaming.  But unless I get a huge raise in the near future I'm gonna have switch to the dark side   :wink:
Logged

gameoverman
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1422


View Profile
« Reply #25 on: May 18, 2005, 05:05:16 AM »

For someone like me, PCs are a better investment and probably will remain so.  I get a new computer every 3 years, or sometimes longer. Somewhere in there, I'll upgrade my videocard.  Since I don't get the latest and greatest, because I don't mind gaming at a lower setting/resolution, cost is low.  I've been gaming on this GF4ti 4200 since Xmas 2002, for example.  I have no game, not even Doom 3, that was enjoyably playable to me on this card. I have no current plans to get a new videocard because as far as I can tell, I don't need one.

In addition, I'm big into playing game mods, making my own maps and skins, and doing stuff like machinima videos with games.  All these things for me are part of the basic appeal of gaming, if I couldn't do this stuff I wouldn't be gaming.  I can't remember the last time I bought a game with the intention of just playing it as is.  

If a console came to be that allowed gaming online for free(no Live subscriptions for example), allowed for users to create their own content as easy as it is on the computer, and had as much storage as computers- then I'd go for it.

I use Paintshop Pro for photo editing and to do my Half Life 2 skins, will the next gen consoles let me do that?  Can I play my MP3 collection on the console while I game, controlling the musicplayer with hotkeys without interrupting the game, the way I do on my computer? Will the console allow me to record my gameplay, then run video editing software so I can make a movie out of it?

For someone like me, consoles hold no appeal.

One last thing, I'd have to buy a high definition tv to see the graphical advantages of a next gen console, so for me the cost of the console is:
console + hd tv= alot more than a videocard upgrade.
Logged
jpinard
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 611


View Profile
« Reply #26 on: May 18, 2005, 06:10:00 AM »

Quote from: "Sarkus"
I'm sure many of you have been following the Microsoft and Sony next generation console announcements, and without making this a "PC GAMING IS DEAD" thread, I have to say that as a long-time PC gamer I think this is a watershed moment.  For the first time, the consoles will not only be way cheaper, they will be ahead of the PC hardware curve.  The specs on these two systems are beyond what we have now and beyond what we as PC gamers will have anytime soon,  especially when you consider the prices these things will ship at.

Anyone disagree?


It sure as hell isn't ahead of my computer...  And you have to remember those spec potentials are way overblown.  NEVER, have the console makers done an apples to apples comparison, and there's no way either console contains a better processor than my AMD FX-53 and 2 Gig of fast RAM.

Man, I hate it when people start these "consoles are better than all pc's".... "pc's are dead!" threads.  If I were to run SETI@Home on my system and compare it to X-Box 360, my system would blow it away.  Like I said, console makers and marketing experts do the exact same thing as Worldcom and Enron... creative arithmetic.  In fact, one of my game-dev friends has already said the X-Box 360 does not have the cpu horsepower to run the kind of AI they can do on the pc.
Logged
Sarkus
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2593


View Profile
« Reply #27 on: May 18, 2005, 06:23:53 AM »

Quote from: "jpinard"
It sure as hell isn't ahead of my computer...  And you have to remember those spec potentials are way overblown.  NEVER, have the console makers done an apples to apples comparison, and there's no way either console contains a better processor than my AMD FX-53 and 2 Gig of fast RAM.

Man, I hate it when people start these "consoles are better than all pc's".... "pc's are dead!" threads.  If I were to run SETI@Home on my system and compare it to X-Box 360, my system would blow it away.  Like I said, console makers and marketing experts do the exact same thing as Worldcom and Enron... creative arithmetic.  In fact, one of my game-dev friends has already said the X-Box 360 does not have the cpu horsepower to run the kind of AI they can do on the pc.


I seriously doubt, as a game machine, that your system is better than the XBox 360 given it has 3 3.2 Ghz processors and a video card that is more powerful than anything on the market.  The RAM doesn't make up for the massive resources your OS is taking up in the background when you run a game.  Even at $500, the XBox 360 is still a far better value than what you have.

I'm no console apologist (or even fan) but you have your head in the sand if you think anything you can buy for a reasonable price today compares to the hardware capabilities of these new systems.
Logged

Roger: And you should know, I have no genitals.
Syndey: That's alright.  I have both.

- American Dad
-Lord Ebonstone-
BANNED
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3428

get naked


View Profile WWW
« Reply #28 on: May 18, 2005, 06:32:49 AM »

So if they're jamming all that power into these consoles, are they just accepting the gigantic loss on hardware or what?
Logged

xbl tag = cthonic horror

NNNOOOOOO!!
Kevin Grey
Global Moderator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 13976


View Profile
« Reply #29 on: May 18, 2005, 07:11:40 AM »

jpinard, do you think your computer could run Unreal Engine 3.0 at 60 fps?  From what Gamespot posted, they've never seen UE 3.0 demonstrated with a smooth framerate until they saw it running on the Playstation 3 yesterday.  

And don't forget- these consoles don't have the OS overhead that PCs do and use a different memory architecture which doesn't require nearly as much RAM.  The original Xbox, with its 733 Mhz processor and GF3 caliber video card was way inferior to  the PCs of the time when it hit, had comparable visuals to PC titles since devs can devote their resources for developing for a known platform with a single hardware configuration.  This time around devs have hardware that exceeds any personal computers on the market in terms of CPU and GPU.
Logged
Ranulf
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 99


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: May 18, 2005, 07:14:32 AM »

Quote from: "Sarkus"
Quote from: "jpinard"
It sure as hell isn't ahead of my computer...  And you have to remember those spec potentials are way overblown.  NEVER, have the console makers done an apples to apples comparison, and there's no way either console contains a better processor than my AMD FX-53 and 2 Gig of fast RAM.

Man, I hate it when people start these "consoles are better than all pc's".... "pc's are dead!" threads.  If I were to run SETI@Home on my system and compare it to X-Box 360, my system would blow it away.  Like I said, console makers and marketing experts do the exact same thing as Worldcom and Enron... creative arithmetic.  In fact, one of my game-dev friends has already said the X-Box 360 does not have the cpu horsepower to run the kind of AI they can do on the pc.


I seriously doubt, as a game machine, that your system is better than the XBox 360 given it has 3 3.2 Ghz processors and a video card that is more powerful than anything on the market.  The RAM doesn't make up for the massive resources your OS is taking up in the background when you run a game.  Even at $500, the XBox 360 is still a far better value than what you have.

I'm no console apologist (or even fan) but you have your head in the sand if you think anything you can buy for a reasonable price today compares to the hardware capabilities of these new systems.


I'll believe the 360 and ps3 specs and what they can do when I see them first hand. I seem to recall the PS2 being "all that and a bag of chips" when it first came out...
Logged
Kevin Grey
Global Moderator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 13976


View Profile
« Reply #31 on: May 18, 2005, 07:15:22 AM »

Quote from: "-Lord Ebonstone-"
So if they're jamming all that power into these consoles, are they just accepting the gigantic loss on hardware or what?


Yep.  They depend on economies of scale to make the hardware profitable in the later years of the hardware's lifespan.  MS is in a tougher position on that score to an extent since they outsource more of their manufacturing than Sony.  But they are in a much better position to be proftitable with the 360 hardware and deals with the manufacturers than with the original Xbox.
Logged
jpinard
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 611


View Profile
« Reply #32 on: May 18, 2005, 07:21:28 AM »

I'll be the first to say the pc is the worst price-performance gaming system you can have.  What I doubt is the actual usable speed of the system, and I also take terms with the REAL hardware going in.

Sarkus:

* Three symmetrical cores running at 3.2 GHz each  You do realize gigahertz means nothing right?  Or are you in the Intel camp that thinks 1 MHz on Intel = 1 MHz on AMD?  These processors are cheap.  There's no way MS is taking an $800 hit per box sold.

* You say the "video card that is more powerful than anything on the market"?  Ummmm says who?  Microsoft marketing execs?  WOW, you know what?  I remember the EXACT same thing being said when they released the original X-Box.  AND I remember Sony saying the EXACT same thing when they released the PS2.  Well guess what?  They were wrong.  And in fact games for the pc less than 6 months after console release were better looking than their console brethren.

* In fact I bet people will be surprised games don't look "soooooo much better" on X-Box 360 than they do on a system like my own.  Why do you think MS has not shown gameplay footage ONLY.  If it were so unbleievable, why the need to have over 50% of what's shown be cutscenes and pre-rendered stuff?

* I need to re-emphasize these are not apples to apples comparisons.  You would not be to take the new Falcon 4 Allied Force and run it on the X-Box 360 because it will NOT have the kind of processing power needed.
Just like what we saw in the past, the specs stated can be made up in any number of ways, and has never been what's full-on "reality".  

* Bandwidth.  Did anyone get a huge performance boost moving to PCIe with all it's extra bandwidth?  No.  All those bandwidth numbers do not necessarily translate into pure speed.

* Eeek, ok one more last, last thing.  Every game being made will be HDTV ready.  So already, most of that extra power has to go to fill those pixels.  AND, that's to fill pixel numbers that are still only 1/2 what a pc like mine can do (I mean if I want to I can run Lock-On at 2048x1536).

So numbers are just numbers, and mean nothing til you see them in use.  When EA releases Madden for X-Box 360 and PC.  Do you think the X-Box version will look better than the pc version?  Do you think the pc version will have to use lower rez textures than the X-Box version?  Hehe, I thought not.  As has always been the case, what can be done on a console can be done on a pc, and 6 months after a console's release can be done better on a pc... if only given the time and money to not make it a crappy console port.  

Funny thing is, try your best to think back to the X-Box and PS-2 releases.  History repeats itself.
Logged
Kevin Grey
Global Moderator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 13976


View Profile
« Reply #33 on: May 18, 2005, 07:25:44 AM »

Quote
* You say the "video card that is more powerful than anything on the market"? Ummmm says who? Microsoft marketing execs? WOW, you know what? I remember the EXACT same thing being said when they released the original X-Box. AND I remember Sony saying the EXACT same thing when they released the PS2. Well guess what? They were wrong. And in fact games for the pc less than 6 months after console release were better looking than their console brethren.


Not MS and Sony.  Its Nvidia and ATI- you know the same companies making those video cards already in your computer.  The GPUs for 360 and PS3 are way beyond anything they've put on the market and therefore anything you have.

Are you even following the console announcements or are you just making assumptions based on prior launches?    As noted this time its different.  Its not just us- look at any hardware site.  These specs are impressive to everyone.  

I'm sorry, but you're wrong about this.  Yes, you will eventually have a video card in your computer more powerful than those in the 360 and PS3.  But it won't be before those consoles launch.  

Go over to Beyond 3D and read the comments in the Console Forum.
Logged
jpinard
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 611


View Profile
« Reply #34 on: May 18, 2005, 07:34:50 AM »

Quote from: "Kevin Grey"
jpinard, do you think your computer could run Unreal Engine 3.0 at 60 fps?  From what Gamespot posted, they've never seen UE 3.0 demonstrated with a smooth framerate until they saw it running on the Playstation 3 yesterday.  

And don't forget- these consoles don't have the OS overhead that PCs do and use a different memory architecture which doesn't require nearly as much RAM.  The original Xbox, with its 733 Mhz processor and GF3 caliber video card was way inferior to  the PCs of the time when it hit, had comparable visuals to PC titles since devs can devote their resources for developing for a known platform with a single hardware configuration.  This time around devs have hardware that exceeds any personal computers on the market in terms of CPU and GPU.


It depends on where Epic puts their money.  If it's funded by Sony, I'm sure it will be faster on the PS3.  Just like DOOM3 runs better onn NVidia card and Half-Life 2 runs better on an ATI card.  Those companies get dollars to work with.  

You have to remember at the X-Box release, everyone was saying graphics would be way better on the super X-Box than a pc.  The hype was just what it is now, except at that time they used hardware that could more easily be translated and compared to a pc.  Microsoft said at the time of the X-Box release the MHz rating of mem of the X-Box was more than made up for with the amazing architectre the X-Box had.  Though this time around the hardware looks great, is the gulf that much different than what Sony proclaimed when the PS2 was released?  IF IBM was using their old Cyrix technology and ramped it up to 3.2 Gig and added 3 of them... do you think it would outperform the best retail processors available now?

I guess my point is anything done for the X-Box 360, can be done just as well on the PC.  The fact it only has 512 Meg of RAM is a limiting factor if you need more tha that available at once - and their are a LOT of games that need this.

Take a game like Deus Ex 2.  You know how much better than game could have been if Warren Spector had not tailored it to fit on the X-Box?  How much will the 512 Meg hurt open-air environments?  And especially the fact that 512 Meg is shared?

The PS3?  That's a long way away yet,  and with the projected PS3 specs, yes that is better than my pc.  But I disagree wth the X-Box 360.  I think it's competetive and has it's own major strengths, but it's not the pc-killer people are proclaiming.  Cross-platform games will look equally good on pc and X-Box 360, and i time, just liek now all games will have more potential on the pc.  Whether it's designed/developed for or not is another story.
Logged
Kevin Grey
Global Moderator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 13976


View Profile
« Reply #35 on: May 18, 2005, 07:40:27 AM »

Epic isn't putting their money anywhere.  They are supporting PS3, Xbox 360, and PC with Unreal Engine 3.  UE 3.0 isn't being optimized for a specific platform.  

Nevermind, you're clearly not paying attention to what's really happening in both the console and PC markets right now.  We're talking about 2005, not 2000 or 2001.  

And the PS3 isn't that far out- its launching next Spring in Japan.
Logged
jpinard
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 611


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: May 18, 2005, 07:44:12 AM »

But Kevin... NVidia and websites, and news people, everyone else said the NVidia core in the X-Box release was so amazing blah blah blah.

Kevin, you're supposed to help your argument not help mine!  :lol:  Hehehe http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=23015

I was just htere, and they're kind of disappointed with MS's showing at E3.  All fluff just like the MTV special to unveil the console.  

Truth is we won't know 'til the we can play it for real.   biggrin   :wink:   I'll say again, the PS3 will be better than my current system, but the X-Box 360 <shrug> ?   1+ years is sure a long way off in technology and game-time.

----------------

edited to add:

There are very few people as "up" on things in the pc hardware market as myself.  And no one except those that worl with the hardware and the dev kits can know for sure how "supposedly much better" the X-Box 360 will be over high-end pc rigs.  Those numbers mean nothing until you see them in action, and using Unreal 3 engine quotes are nice, but that says nothing for the X-Box 360.

Kevin, we'll just have to agree to disagree - but so far, when you take out the cutscenes - people aren't saying the X-Box 360 stuff looks better than what a high-end pc can do... or are they?
Logged
Kevin Grey
Global Moderator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 13976


View Profile
« Reply #37 on: May 18, 2005, 07:54:36 AM »

I give up.
Logged
jpinard
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 611


View Profile
« Reply #38 on: May 18, 2005, 08:14:21 AM »

Hehe, quote from Beyond3d at E3 from actual gameplay

"So not only does it look very average (at this point in development), it also "chuggs" along at low framerate?

Anyone here still believes that PGR3 video from the announcement was actual real-time, in-game footage?"


Read through everyone's thoughts and the same thing keep being said, "HYPE"

http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=23018
Logged
disarm
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4191


my moral standing is lying down...


View Profile
« Reply #39 on: May 18, 2005, 08:35:34 AM »

Quote from: "jpinard"
Hehe, quote from Beyond3d at E3 from actual gameplay

"So not only does it look very average (at this point in development), it also "chuggs" along at low framerate?

Anyone here still believes that PGR3 video from the announcement was actual real-time, in-game footage?"


Read through everyone's thoughts and the same thing keep being said, "HYPE"

http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=23018

i thought IGN had some interesting comments posted today that they claim come from a developer PR rep...read it here.  
the developer rep claims that current game footage appears to run slowly because a lot of it is still done on alpha hardware kits that aren't up to the full speed of the final system and that final dev kits are expected by july.  the IGN staffer apparently played a little of Top Spin 2 on the alpha hardware...says it stuttered a little and wasn't capable of anti-aliasing yet.  

some interesting information about current xbox 360 footage if it's true...
Logged

*Gamertag - disarm78*
Now Playing: Grand Theft Auto V
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.167 seconds with 104 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.039s, 2q)