The high cost of memory and processors will make it "impossible" for next-gen consoles "to have the same kind of impact on the console business" as the previous generation, Crytek CEO Cevat Yerli has told VideoGamer.com, before suggesting that next-generation horsepower won't be too dissimilar to the current capabilities of top-end PCs.
20°
20°
30°
30°
Ad 
30°
If next-gen consoles dont have 100% of the games in 1080p 30-60fps im legit just gonna upgrade my PC a bit with the money. Its 2012 there's no reason we should have to deal with 720p lol
I rekon Next gen most games will stick with 720p, for most games atleast. So it would be able to achieve alot of DX11 features and implement advance FXAA, MSA never before seen on consoles.
Yes, Next COD will finaly be HD, 720p Native. Locked on 60fps, but dont expect superier anti aliasing ect that will be seen in many top range games such as Uncharted 4 or Gears of War 4 ect.
What you said is only true for video, if you have a 1280 x 720 game and a 1920 x 1080 game side by side the difference is huge no matter what size the screen is.
but what is a "video game"? It is a game in motion at all times. It isnt like the days of Myst where the still images had more clarity and detail (for the time).
If you are playing a game at either res no matter the screen size i can guarantee you , you aint paying attention to anything but keep your ass alive (if its a shooter that is).
Bumnut is right. Among PC games, it's common that when you describe a 720p video game versus a 1080p video game, it's not the near unnoticeable picture quality, it's the view that is portrayed.
Unless it's 720p to 1080p upscaled, you can see two times as much in a 1080p game than you can in a 720p game.
The original Diablo 2 aspect ratio is maxed at 800x600. Here's how it looks in 1080p. If you've played Diablo 2 before this will be quite the noticeable difference.
http://www.youtube.com/watc...
That said, it won't be hard to pull off unless devs want to do some ridiculous things with textures and things on screen.
You cant tell the difference because games on consoles are upscaled to 1080p.
lets say you play a game on PC at 720p and you have a monitor that supports a resolution of 2560x1440, the picture will be so distorted and look like total crap compared to 1080p or the native resolution.
How do i know this? Because i game on my overpriced 27 inch iMac from time to time. lol
That is a lie if I've ever heard one. The only way your $150 video card handles skyrim @ 60 FPS on Ultra is if you are playing at a resolution of like 800X600 and have the lots set to 5 or 3. If you have the lots set to 7 there is absolutely no way you aren't full of shit.
Agreed well said... For current gen i bought my first "HD" TV back in 2005. At that time it said HD not HD Ready if i'm not mistaken as it could play 720p/1080i only. DIdn't come with HDMI input since HD standard was still much in infancy but even though it was a SONY product. The jump from ps2 component input on it to xbox360 component input was like a light year jump for me as far a PQ goes. PDZ and PGR3's graphics blew me away.
Now for next gen, i would want 1080p 60fps with minimum 4xAA, bump mapped (normal mapped), 4xAF textured characters and environments and physics rivaling Phyx or whatever hardware it was i dont have time to google, which got incorporated in NV chips.
I dont care about Quad HD for next gen as it's still way too early for mainstream and probably be acceptable in 5~6 years time plus i'm stuck with 3 1080p TVs, (50", 42" and 42" 3D).
That way if there there are frame drops then the game would still be playable as long as they don't from below 30fps.
And regardless of what graphics lovers say I (and the majority of consumers) will rush out and buy a console for the great exclusives on them. People don't care about power. The fact that more powerful consoles have often been the lower end of the sales proves that.
What you guys should worry about is what he means by systems focusing on something besides specs. Incoming motion controls and multimedia features.
The console business is lead by marketers who think graphics are the most important thing, so games have to compete for graphics (it's the easiest thing to show off in advertisements) - causing reductions in frame rates.
Don't tell me you fell for that "FullHD" Marketing crap.
I laugh when I see full HD on tv ads then go home and play steam games at 1920x1200p.
Next gen console will do 1080p & 30fps as standard. Especially as they get older devs will want extra power and won't worry about 60fps.
I realize as standards get higher consoles will run out of gas even faster.
Also Crytek must really pay to much attention to consoles now. High cost of memeory?
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref...
been awhile since they built a pc I guess.
Yes I know 4K tv's are out, but the cost makes them out of reach.
I agree with the rest of your points though, but high speed custom built memory for consoles could be more expensive than what you pay for "over-the-counter" memory. I've personally got 16GB of DDR3 in my 14" laptop, so...
If anything consoles use/will use memory clocked at a lower speed than desktop computers using so called "over-the-counter memory" e.g. Corsair Vengeance, Kingston Hyper X, both high quality RAM. Desktop memory is miles better, and can be overclocked as well.
Memory can generate a lot of heat too if it's running at high MHz.
Sorry bro tell me when consoles do 1080p standard; then i'll call them 'HD'.
Jaggies make 720 not even worth considering 'HD' on consoles IMO regardless of what the wikis say about HD resolutions.
1080p is Full HD.
let's not just look at 2013 and say/ask what these systems can do in 2013 when they will be in market till 2019, so while you have to have a system that has the now tech and some future proofing would help too
just make development easier and if possible(which its not)cheaper, if these development costs keep up expect a jump for $5-10 in prices
HELL even higher end PC's don't get stable 60s on a lot of newer games in the highest settings with good amounts of filters.
There's only been 3 of us I've read so far who think 720p with stable framerate will be acceptable as long as the effects and other filters MAKE UP for it.
Not running at 1080p@60 FPS =/= Amazing visual impact.
Reserve those 1080p@60 FPS for soon to be "PS3 Classics".
I want MOAR effects, lighting, better textures and new rendering tecnhiques (@ realistic res and fps expectations)!
Jeez.
I never expected a massive jump in the first place if i'm honest. I just hope we see more games like Far Cry 3, Dark Souls, and Red Dead Redemption and less linear shooting galleries.
If you're spend over $1200 on any PC, you're stupid because you either got ripped off or bough a Mac. Both of those options are retarded.
Here in Australia we are still getting ripped off even though our dollar is on parity with the us dollar...
he is exchanging currency
thus if the 360 is twice the cost then it follows that the pc will also be twice the cost.
Not sure why you've been given any agrees because you're both completely mistaken. He lives in Kuwait and that's the exchange rate he has to deal with.
The current top selling software on the PS360, is a third party title (Call of duty).
Exclusives will be more important than ever during the next generation.
It's just them supporting the creation, distribution and marketing of computers bundled with Linux. Same thing MS do for Windows PCs, just with marketing (and likely distribution) differences. Though I can see why the term 'console' almost applies. Most models will be designed for use under a TV, as the desktop market is already saturated with people who would prefer to build their own etc.
But yeah, I'm thinking it will be more expensive at first, then after 1-2 years of next-gen consoles being out, it'd be far better to get a steam box for TV gaming (unless you like building your own computers etc, which will be cheaper and better as usual - hopefully Windows will die and Linux will be the platform of choice because of Valve's efforts).
Though, platform exclusives will be a huge factor so gamers might want/need a sony or MS console, but most multiplats will be cheaper on Steam. MS and Sony will lose money if they don't get enough new games sales - somewhere between 5 and 15 per console (guessing at the moment) to make a profit on the unit as the console is sold at less than manufacture cost - without being sold at a loss they won't even nearly compete with PC price-performance. So there is a reasonable risk posed by Valve, a lot could happen. Sony will continue their route of good quality first party titles, MS will probably find more suckers willing to pay for P2P multiplayer.
So yeah. Next gen, if you want to play Sony or MS exclusives you have to pay out the ass for it. Rather than consoles being the cheaper option they are going to be more expensive. (though, MS's shittiness this gen has made me spend more on 360 than on PC overall)
I will agree however with the fact that we prob will not see the huge graphical leap we saw with the advent of the last gen of console. We will see a huge leap in textures, particle effects, lighting(which IMO will make the biggest difference) and AI. Hopefully they can manage to make 1080 res and 60fps the standard as well.
Guess we will just have to wait and see. I'm hopefull and cant wait for next gen.
It is certainly not expensive in NA though.
I payed $220 for 8GB of 1333Mhz Ripjaws a little over 2 years ago, that same pack of Ram now is around $60.
Newegg Canada currently has a 32GB pack of 1600mhz G-skill Tridents for $230
You do realise that the memory they are talking about is high-speed gddr 5 or an equivalent and not a normal stick that you put in your pc? There are practical concerns like how they are going to put that many chips into the console as they only come in certain memory sizes per chip and your talking new egg LOL.
Also you do realise that the G in GDDR stand for Graphics right?
GDDR5 is Graphics double data rate v5, it is VRam not DIM Ram. Current Ram is DDR3 which is exactly what Sony and MS will be using. All console memory is basically the same as off the shelf PC Ram, they simply build the memory chips and a single controller board directly into the motherboard to save space vs DIM slots.
I guess it is possible Sony may go with XDR ram but it would be alot more expensive than DDR3 and so is highly unlikely.
MS is almost sure to be sticking with DDR3, its either that or design their own new type of Ram from scratch which is even less likely than Sony sticking 8Gb of XDR in the PS4.
The WiiU btw is using 1600Mhz DDR3.
P.S Spelling, Grammar and for F sakes paragraphs. They will be your best friends someday.
I Can give into the notion that Consoles in the upcoming gen won't be a big leap and will probably be just comparable to current top end PCs, but I simply don't agree with the notion that memory is expensive!
Doesn't seem as if Crytek has built a rig on on today's pc specs recently.
By the same Token, Exclusives generally have been the torch bearers this generation for the HD consoles, and its quite amazing to see that 8 and 7 year old consoles are still pushing out software which sits nicely among the top end pc offerings with few concessions. We know textures and resolutions, graphics and ailiasing are of higher fidelity on current pc specs, but you'd be hard pressed to complain about halo 4, gears 3, TLOU, GoW:A, or even games like Watch Dogs, MGS:GZ or Beyond:2S and those are confirmed current gen games.
Dedicated, Closed down hardware like these are still keeping up. Likely, Games on Next Gen will excel the same way without the worry of having its resources split to run Windows/Mac.
And Devs like Rockstar, GG, Sony Santa Monica, ND, Bethesda, Epic, 343, Irrational games will be right at home.
"Consoles in the upcoming gen won't be a big leap and will probably be just comparable to current top end PCs)
current top end pcs are a GIANT leap over 8 year old ps3/360
ps4/nextboxes will not be anywhere near that level, honestly, people are fooling themselves if they thing nextbox and ps4 will be anything even remotely close to an i-7 2600k, gtx 680 and 12 gb ram
consoles next gen will be awesome, i am quite convinced, and will do 1080p at 30 frames with 4x anti aliasing and dx11-like features, the games will look totally amazing,
...but, a 2 year old pc already does that, and a modern pc with the above specs does all that in 2560x1600p or even higher at 60-120 frames with 8x aa and better filtering
next gen consoles are going to be a huge leap over ps3/360, but not even close to a modern gaming pc.
Versus modern PC developers that have to consider 1,000's of CPU and GPU combinations. A modern day GTX 680 isn't even remotely close to being tapped out since developers don't make the game specifically for that GPU.
So of course the next gen consoles wont have modern high end specs of today, if they did it would demolish anything you see on a high end PC today.
And I'm sure console makers are smart enough to see that 2560x1600 is not a house hold TV resolution right now. So they can afford to skimp on the GPU power to offer games at 1080p max. Unless someone decides to change the standard.
But hey, if the next gen consoles launch at about $800 bucks or more (the price of the parts you listed above in a best case scenario in a couple years) then I would expect them to outperform modern day PC's.
No where did I say they did. Have a f***ing seat!
Would you just shut up and work harder, we saw what maxing out the consoles meant for crysis 2.
Is this person an idiot ?
8 GB Ram at Best buy is like $89.99 this week.
They have no excuse.
thats why each system will have a gimmick.vr glasses,vr projector so they can separated there selfs from whats out already.
Looking at high end PC's of today..its basicaly current gen like grapahics with advanced physics, lighting and anti alaising techinques. Not the stupendous revolution some devs and Nvidia/AMD clowns are claiming to be Avatar like near photo realism in next gen console. Not a chance, Sorry.
With fixed hardware, a lot more performance can be unleashed.
Avatar is WAY overrated, we -definitely- will see those kind of real time graphics. Quote me on this, it's just months away.
Killzone 3 Console
http://www.fpsvideogamer.co...
Battlefield 3 PC
http://www.geforce.com/Acti...
Uncharted 3 Console
http://www.abload.de/img/un...
The witcher 2 PC
http://www.abload.de/img/wi...
"It's possible they just need a dual 16 core cpu, 2 gtx 690's, and at least 32GB ram. That $4,000 console will be a beast"
Hahahaha u are either stupid or ill informed. Avatar movie required 10,000 square foot server farm packed with high end CPU and GPU, costing more than 100 million dollars.
No way on earth u will be able to play avatar like graphics in real time let alone pre reder it with a market based PC today, no chance.
Not even close.
"To render Avatar, Weta used a 10,000 sq ft (930 m2) server farm making use of 4,000 Hewlett-Packard servers with 35,000 processor cores with 104 terabytes of RAM and three petabytes of network area storage running Ubuntu Linux, Grid Engine cluster manager, and Pixar's Alfred queue management system. The render farm occupies the 193rd to 197th spots in the TOP500 list of the world's most powerful supercomputers. Creating the Na'vi characters and the virtual world of Pandora required over a petabyte of digital storage, and each minute of the final footage for Avatar occupies 17.28 gigabytes of storage"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...
And even with all that it took several hours to render a single frame.
http://www.geek.com/article...
Why are people, even bothering to debate, avatar graphics as if it's expected.
"Looking at high end PC's of today..its basicaly current gen like grapahics with advanced physics, lighting and anti alaising techinques."
Yeah not hardly, comparing pc graphics to consoles is selling pc's very short. How old is crysis 1, has any console game remotely touched it graphics wise, i seriously doubt it.
Maybe a lower-mid range pc is the best we should expect out of the next gens. Even low end video cards roast the rsx and xenos.
We will achieve similar to avatars graphics eventually do to moores law, likely scaled down considerably do to either storage or memory requirements.
But it will probably after we switch to quantum processors and several other advancements in memory and storage capacity.
So not anytime remotely soon.
Memory is cheap as hell, motherboards and processors(pc) is another story.
Hopefully crysis 3, is alot better than part 2 the graphics were lacking even for a console game, and the gameplay wasn't anything interesting.
And here comes the die hard fact readers. If I posted those specs. (which are obviously far above anything the PS4 or Nextbox would be capable of), don't you think I'm well aware of what was used to render the movie Avatar, especially considering it's been posted on EVERY tech site, over and over (hence your links to a couple of those pages).
Lighten up. No one is expecting next-gen consoles, or PC's to run Avatar level graphics or else we would have seen them by now. The purpose of that post was to show it's not happening no time soon.
1) They know if hardware is 99% maxed out, regardless of what other developers have done. They are the best developers there are, no one can "max" specs over them.
2) In the Crytek Dimension, RAM is not at an all time low price, it's expensive.
A notable mention being Gran Turismo 5, which runs 60fps at 1920x1080p.
Sure it's an example of one game, but at least they didn't lie.
If you're going to count scaling then hell, even CoD 4 can be played at 1080p, but that doesn't mean the game is 1080p.
I'll admit I'm wrong. I double checked and GT5 is running at a sub 1080p native resolution. Still a beautiful game.
But on topic, Wipeout is native 1080p 60fps. There are also a couple downloadable PSN games that support the native 1080p resolution as well.
Btw, not getting the Kool Aid reference if you want to clear that up.
Drinking the kool aid means that you believe the bullsh!t. It means that you believe anything Sony says.
The phrase comes from a real cult from Guyana headed by some American guy named Jim Jones in the late 70's that all killed themselves by drinking cyanide laced kool aid.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...
and p.s. Wipeout does use a dynamic resolution
Personally I don't care for 1080p, I want better Lightning and Textures!
In that sense I'd almost give MS the edge since they run a SW platform first and foremost. Sony would keep the PS4 compatible with the PS3.
But, I'd almost say there is some juice left in a "SuperPS3". Better cell, more mem, better mem bandwidth could push current content easily up to to 1080p, update the GPU, too.
But, with such a thing, games would run on either platform, scaling to the power of the machine opening up one market for developers and different pricing brackets for consumer. A low end PS3 - which can go down to $150 (or so) and than some layers of power boxes, the faster the more pricier letting the choice to the consumer to go with what they can afford but allowing a top end power model for who ever wants it also taking away the pressure to have the lowest price for the manufacturers.
Just look at the retina display vs the ipad mini.
Thats what I don't get about the costs of internal components... when if they are dated by time they debute wouldn't that actually cut costs?
The biggest difference I see is that shadows don't look as pixelated on PC. Textures, polygons and draw distances look pretty much the same.
I'd rather play on my PS3 to be honest. I like the console experience better when given the choice between the two.
LOL.
You can get 8GB of RAM for $60 on Newegg.com.
Rising costs of processors/graphics cards?
Depends what you want.
AMD and NVIDIA have been dropping their prices of video cards due to competition.
You can get either an ATI 7950 or NVIDIA GTX 670 in the $300-$350 range.
By the time the next gen consoles come out in the next few years or so these cards will be affordable to use.
It's impossible to keep up with PC it's a never end growing market.
(If anything I'm glad the consoles are kinda slowing done the process on the PC gaming side because you won't have to upgrade as much and it won't cost a fortune to keep up to get the latest graphical gaming specs.)
Erm... No.
It's the other way around crytek...
I think it is safe to say its not going to be any time soon.