1020°
Submitted by black0o 301d ago | interview

Nvidia boss: “No longer possible” for consoles to have better graphics than PC

Tamasi: It’s no longer possible for a console to be a better or more capable graphics platform than the PC. I’ll tell you why. In the past, certainly with the first PlayStation and PS2, in that era there weren’t really good graphics on the PC. Around the time of the PS2 is when 3D really started coming to the PC, but before that time 3D was the domain of Silicon Graphics and other 3D workstations. Sony, Sega or Nintendo could invest in bringing 3D graphics to a consumer platform. In fact, the PS2 was faster than a PC. (NVIDIA, PC)

« 1 2 3 4 5 »
Irishguy95  +   302d ago
News to me, I always thought PC >>> Console graphics wise. Half life 1 and 2 etc
OlgerO  +   301d ago | Well said
Just leave it to Naughty Dog to show you that games on PS4 can look prettier then any PC game
Hufandpuf  +   301d ago | Well said
And then I'll just show them Crysis 3 running at max settings.
vishmarx  +   301d ago | Well said
you guys cant even play tlou or gta v .
the two best games of the year.
does crysis on max still feel better than actually playing these games.
pc games will always look better.
consoles will always get better games.
_QQ_  +   301d ago
@vishmarx i didn't realize consoles had DOTA2 and Starcraft HOTS, i guess console games aren't better afterall.
Bolts  +   301d ago
GTA 4 on the PC looks better than Watchdog on the PS4. And you don't have to wait for anyone to see that.

Oh and GTA 4 release date? 2008 and you can play this on the TV with Steam Big Picture mode.
starchild  +   301d ago | Well said
Ridiculous. Uncharted and The Last of Us are really fantastic games and they look very good by console standards, but there are MANY games on PC that look better.

And that is despite the fact that the PS3 was more powerful relative to high end gaming PCs than the PS4 is going to be when it launches. No, the truth is, console games, even the very best of them, will still be well behind the visuals that you get on a good PC.

@ vishmarx
I love the way some of you console fanboys try to use something as subjective as taste in games as an attemept to downplay the PC as a gaming platform. There are TONS of exclusives on the PC that I wouldn't have wanted to miss out on.

You guys live in your own little bubble and aren't even aware of the world outside that tiny sphere. I own both a PS3 and a 360 in addition to my PC and honestly there are like maybe a half dozen games that I really love on each of those consoles that I can't get on the PC. There are more exclusives on the PC that I love than on either console.

But beyond all the talk of exclusives, my favorite platform is always going to be the one that offers the best experience with the vast MAJORITY of games, not the platform that has a couple more exclusives than another platform. With the best graphics, smoothest performance and the wonderful world of mods, the PC is hands down that platform.
#1.1.5 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(86) | Disagree(88) | Report
SlapHappyJesus  +   301d ago
The game, you know, needs to exist first.
Then you can talk.
shoddy  +   301d ago | Well said
Damn computer nerds
showtimefolks  +   301d ago | Well said
vishmarx

preety graphics boring/dull gameplay enjoy crysis

lopez_josue

so many FTP MMO's are coming to consoles next gem, while most of consoles exclusives are staying exclusive. don't get me wrong i understand how big PC market is and how much money it makes but like console players miss out on some excellent pc games so do the pc gamers

difference being most console owners say yes those pc games are great, while any game that doesn't end up on PC automatically gets labelled

"WILL BE BETTER ON pc MAX SETTINGS"

how many people can actually run most games in max settings?
Amazingmrbrock  +   301d ago
The real difference between console exclusive games and any games on the pc is funding.

There are no pc manufactures spending the lavish amounts of money on pc exclusive content in the same way console makers do. The closes would be valve, and blizard, as far as spending money to push the pc market in a way thats similar to how the console market gets pushed. Even then valve doesn't put out a whole lot of games compared to sony or even microsoft.

So yeah thats why there are such top notch AAA console games and less of those for the pc. Granted there are still some for pc just less. Where the pc makes up for this difference is in the almost overwhelming amount of indie games. Not just medium sized indie games like ftl, or chivalry, but the thousands of small games that come out of game competitions. There's no comparison to those on consoles and in my view its something consoles are sorely missing out on.
wtopez  +   301d ago | Well said
@ OlgerO

By the time Naughty Dog launch a game on PS4, Titan level GPUs will probably be mid-range $200 video cards. ND has incredible talent but they're still dealing with severely limited hardware that's already old in many PC gamer's homes.
nukeitall  +   301d ago
@OlgerO:

Stop being delusional!

I love Naughty Dog, but you simply cannot outpower a PC even with careful optimization.

Just look at the games, they are all shown on PC then downgraded to console to maybe hit 1080p across the board on console.

On PC we can easily talk about 2k graphics, and best specced rigs can hit 4k with little problem.

Before even release of either console, we got 6 gflops graphics card. That is almost 4 times as much flops as PS4. Even if the PS4 was running on secret sauce and puffing the cloud, it could not outgunn a PC.

Heck a console is simply a PC downgraded with added features (NOTE, ADDED FEATURES). It is not a supercharged PC, nor is it play beyond PC.

Anyone that says otherwise is selling you snake oil!

I love consoles, but we don't buy them for graphics. We buy them for the games, the ease of use and the ease of access to.

My PC can easily play Netflix and I can navigate it even faster, but my console is easier to use on my couch.
#1.1.11 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(40) | Disagree(23) | Report
NewMonday  +   301d ago
the very top PC sure are stronger than next gen in numbers, but the issue is price vs power, how about that BF4 demo on a $2000+ PC, can anyone show us a difference vs the PS4 demo worth over $1600? anyone that brings up the PC without specifying the GPU is being dishonest.

and how many games actually take advantage of the PC power? very few because developers scale down to the most common specs, the one game that is mentioned (Crysis3) is an average game, CryTech push the high end specs to show off their engine.

every developer that brings up the PS4 vs PC say the console is like a high end PC, only those in denial argue otherwise.

I wonder how many of the so called "PC master race" actually have a high end rig.

Nvidia are continuing the trash talk because AMD swept the console deals, and they feel the turning of the tide business wise, they talk like this to stir the fanboys into confrontations.
#1.1.12 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(28) | Disagree(25) | Report
MRMagoo123  +   301d ago
when every pc gamer in the entire world including myself all have the complete max hardware everytime new hardware gets released then we can care about PC having the superior graphics but at most its around 10% that can play everything at its max.
The_Infected  +   301d ago
@EVERYONE

Why can't we all just get along?
Smashbro29  +   301d ago
At 30fps in 720p.
Blackdeath_663  +   301d ago
@Hufandpuf
crysis beyond being a pretty game isn't very good. linear shooter and lameass story
Krosis  +   301d ago
"Just leave it to Naughty Dog to show you that games on PS4 can look prettier then any PC game "

Wow...only on N4G would you read that AND get agrees lol It looks good--for a CONSOLE game lol Christ these kids are deluded.
MuhammadJA  +   301d ago
@vishmarx

And that's always your argument, console fanboys. Everytime someone say a PC game looks better than a console game (which is true all the time), you get defensive and say "we have better games". Games are and always will be SUBJECTIVE, graphics capabilities: PC > Consoles.
#1.1.18 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(20) | Disagree(17) | Report
PeaSFor  +   301d ago
@Hufandpuf

it take more than high resolution and hi res textures to look great, meanwhile OKAMI on ps2 still look better than crysis3 on max setting.
ChrisW  +   301d ago
Considering the dollar to CPU/GPU ratio*, A $399 console is going to out perform a PC of the same price for quite some time.

* GPUs like nVidia's Titan ($1,000 for GPU only) vs PS4 (which has both CPU & GPU), the amount of power per a dollar is darn near equal.
Skips  +   301d ago
"“No longer possible” for consoles to have better graphics than PC"

It doesn't matter much when the VAST majority of PC gamers don't even have PC's as powerful as PS4 and XB1. lol

http://www.cinemablend.com/...

And that probably won't change for a good few years... The majority of PC gamers aren't all gonna upgrade at the same time just because the PS4 and XB1 come out. XD

And "well said" @ showtimefolks...
#1.1.21 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(23) | Disagree(16) | Report
Fluke_Skywalker  +   301d ago
Graphics shmaphics, Crysis 3 (at max settings) is by far the prettiest game of the last well, ever really, but it's absolutely shit!!
#1.1.22 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(16) | Disagree(12) | Report
HardcoreGamer  +   301d ago
SORRY FOR DOUBLE POST
#1.1.23 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report
HardcoreGamer  +   301d ago
im digging the new ps3, but its not the same with ps4, the ps4 is off the shelf pc parts. its not gonna work like the same ps3 in terms of lastability

ps2 took 5 years to maximise
ps3 still not maxed out, but mad there, in 7 years

ps4 will be topping itself in 3 years.

this is the truth. its not like the days of ps2 and ps3, because sony only has to compete and not give away market share to xbox, otherwise ps4 wouldnt of be releasing this year.

its hard now and sony cannot afford the old route. (ps3 was a little too hard to develop for and were too ambitious. but thats what sony is)

thats why your getting alot of dissagrees
TRU3_GAM3R  +   301d ago
Just like crysis 3 did? even on console.
Army_of_Darkness  +   301d ago
I have no problem with 1080p console games on my.... well, 1080p hdtv ;-)
I don't care if my ps4 can't do 2k gaming because for one thing, I don't have/ and can't afford a damn 55" 4k tv anyways!

If pc fannies ain't impressed by killzone:sf yet, then I know they will be when naughty dog shows what they have in store for us.
I'm sure that's when the pc fannies will cry back to crysis max settings once again LMAO! the one series that makes them sleep better at night for purchasing that expensive precious video card.
#1.1.26 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(13) | Disagree(12) | Report
MWong  +   301d ago
I just don't get why Nvidia seems so fixated on consoles now. I mean of late all you hear is them saying console this console that. I mean consoles (PS3, PS4, Wii, Wii-U, XB360 & XBone) range low end gaming to mid-high end pc's with non-interchangeable parts. PC's aren't and are fully customizable as long as you have the money and need for a game. I don't why there is always a debate of which is better. PC and game consoles are both great in their own rights. It will always depend on the gamer and the price they are willing to pay.

To me Nvidia just seems mad that AMD is doing something they aren't.
#1.1.27 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(11) | Disagree(9) | Report
schubacca  +   301d ago
I got love for Naughty Dog, but please stop with this notion that PC graphics are inferior to equal to console graphics.
1Victor  +   301d ago
Well At Least Console Gamers Don't Have To Buy A $300 GraphicsCard To Play The "Latest Game" Every Year And A New CPU Every Other Year .Don't Even Bother To Say But But That Is If You Want To Play The Game On Max Settings
hollabox  +   301d ago
Yeah Naughty Dog can work their magic, the same goes to SCE Santa Monica Studio in the GOW series. Crysis 3 maxed looks good, the PS3 looks ok but I doubt you could run Crysis 3 on 7 year hardware and perform as good as the PS3 or X360 version. Heck my ATI 3870 couldn't even play Crysis War Head at decent frame rates back in 2008.
kurac  +   301d ago
@Krosis

I'm sure he meant ARTISTICALLY better. Of course PCs will always be technically better but it doesn't matter since the best artists and game-designer superstars make games mostly for consoles
saber00005  +   301d ago
@OlgerO I would love to see the PS4, or any console, try to handle Arma3 on max settings, with maximum view distance.. Oh wait.. It's exclusive for PC.

The PS4 WILL be nice, but never will game consoles be more dominate that the PC. And this is coming from a guy who pre-ordered the PS4 as soon as it became available after E3.
RVanner_  +   301d ago
The Last of Us, uncharted series, GTA V are gorgeous for PS3 standards but compared to the vast majority of PC games over the last 2-3 years they look like a game running on low settings and low resolution. PC games have been looking next gen for the last few years. A future release by naughty Dog on PS4 will look amazing no doubt and I will buy it as I play both platforms but still if there was a PC version it would look as good and for those with High end machines they're would be options to exceed the graphical fidelity on the PS4 and Xbox One.
Pintheshadows  +   301d ago
Has no one here played Metro Last Light. Max that out and it is waaaay prettier than Crysis 3, and not only that, it is actually an amzing game. One of the best this year.
The_Con-Sept  +   301d ago
I finally sold my pc and my accessories. PC gaming is dead to me.

So ..!., Nvidia and their pro pc gaming elitist torrenting fanbase. Continue to get games last.
LonDonE  +   301d ago
Only a retard would dispute that a pc priced at £1000 can out perform a console at £350, why nvidia feel the need to point out the obvious just shows how butt hurt they are over Sony,and MS going to amd their rivals!! LOLOL i own and game on all platforms, i love consoles, and i love my gaming pc, but pc guys need to remember that most pc gamers do not own rigs which can play at max settings, this is fact,sorry but its true, i see so many pc fan boys banging on about how great the games look and run on pc on max, when statistically most of these so called pc elitists are not running said games at max!

Consoles are great for what they offer,cheap price of entry, with relatively great performance and bang for buck, you would be hard pressed to build a pc with ps4 level performance, and extra's, if you couple in cost of EVERYTHING in the ps4 no way can you build a pc for the same cost, its not happening!

And i am not talking about just the gpu,cpu etc, i am talking about EVERYTHING in the box,the blue ray drive, the Ethernet port,the wifi adapter,the gpgpu,cpu, operating system, etc, EVERYTHING!!! with the same power consumption rate!

I love my pc for playing games like skyrim with mods etc, and i love my consoles for the console exclusives, like nintendo first party games,and Sony exclusives!

If anything this gen, its the xbox 1 i see no point in buying, i will have my pc and ps4 for all multi plat's, and my wiiu for the nintendo first party, and so i wont get a x1 till later in its life!!!

PC fan boys need to grow up and remember this is not a dick measuring contest, and console fan boys need to realise that consoles can never be more powerful then pc,but when you take into account all factors, it balances out!!
you cannot get a pc for £350 which gives you the same level of performance as a ps4 with everything that is in the ps4 unit!!
And even if you could, you wont have the Playstation or nintendo exclusives so what's the point? ITS ALL ABOUT THE GAMES PEOPLE!!
not graphics, the GAMES AND GAME PLAY!
FamilyGuy  +   301d ago
*clears voice*

PS3
http://ps3hits.ru/wp-conten...

http://24.media.tumblr.com/...

http://i.neoseeker.com/scre...

http://rubix78.files.wordpr...

PS4
http://farm4.staticflickr.c...

http://a.pomf.se/1Jo8.gif

http://images.gamersyde.com...

http://fc00.deviantart.net/...

http://i.minus.com/ibrh9EeD...

http://fc01.deviantart.net/...

http://image.noelshack.com/...

http://abload.de/img/4uwsab...

http://abload.de/img/7scswt...

http://images.gamersyde.com...

http://abload.de/img/dark_s...

I don't get what all the talking is about, PS4 is "mid ranged" yet I'm seeing lots of cases were the characters are looking better than what's been seen on PC, high-end or otherwise.

People bring up Crysis with its dead plastic eyes and freshly starched faces as if it's something to be proud of.

I'll take my PS Exclusives over PC games any day.
#1.1.37 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(17) | Disagree(21) | Report
duplissi  +   301d ago
That is an overstatement if I have ever seen one.

Sure Naughty Dog's skill is well known but they make do with the tools they have, and sure their games are some of the prettiest around (on any platform) there will always be pc games that will look better, sometimes staggeringly so.
Syntax-Error  +   301d ago
OlgerO, Naughty Dog doesnt make graphical masterpieces...they make amazing games and stories. Quantic Dream does a better job graphically than Naughty Dog. I like those developers, but let's be honest here
Chrischi1988  +   301d ago
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha ^^

sorry, but that just made my day^^

This is impossible and everybody knows that, some deny it, but even they know it.
Chrischi1988  +   301d ago
@vishmarx:

Total nonsense. Every so beloved game, that is even worth mentioning, except Zelda and Halo and maybe GOW, are on PCs and will be way better on PCs. GTA V will come to PC and there it will actually look good, not like a modded GTA4 because the Hardware cant deliver.

PC has a ton of exclusives and some of the best games ever, which are not even close to be playable on a console and everyone knows that. That is actually not a thing of opinion, it is pretty much fact and everyone who denies that, just doesnt own a PC capable enough and tries to defend his or hers investment in a console.
Gabnet  +   301d ago
The thing is any game made for that super pc has the potential to look better. The sad thing is, most game devs don't take full advantage of that hardware like naughty dog does for Sony's hardware.
PSX04  +   301d ago
that's super old news for me BTW PC has a great graphics but console have a great games .... I want the games
tachy0n  +   301d ago
@OlgerO

lelelelel

consoles will now be able to do 1080p @60fps

while PC runs @ 2k and has been doing 1080p+ at 60fps+ since years ago......

be realistic and dont be a sheep.
sony sure is going to kick ass next gen but it just cant have better graphics than PC no matter what. PC got far more support from tech companies than all consoles combined (corsair,AMD, INTEL,MSI etc....

watch crysis 1 running at ultra settings thats next gen consoles right now.

but hurr durrr crysis gameplay and story is boring hurr i liked a lot, i have passed the game multiple times.

and TBH i find uncharted boring as hell. IMO...

saying that BS about a game is pretty much invalid since everyone got different opinion
#1.1.44 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(6) | Disagree(2) | Report
Murad  +   301d ago
I don't want to offend you, but I depise your comment. You got a huge flame going underneath you because you had to say something about consoles, and then someone else had to say something about PC. Why can't you guys learn to enjoy both?
Sony360  +   301d ago
"Well said".

Right, right...

You can already get a PC that can out perform the Ps4, and it hasn't even been released yet.

If Naughty Dog made PC games, then we'd see what they can really do.
KazHiraiFTW  +   301d ago
@ FamilyGuy

That's cute you took all that time to link those pics but the reality is none of those PS3 or PS4 games look as good as the best looking games that PC has to offer. Even multi-plat games like Tomb Raider on PC absolutely smash anything you linked. Compare the Tomb Raider PC benchmark to Beyond 2 Souls and you shall be enlightened.

And I love how Naughty Dog is the go to argument for Sony fanboys. It literally is the only reason I use my PS3. The games are great yes, and they look good for console games yes, but compared to PC the graphics are uglier than Kirstie Alley's cellulite riddled ass. There is nothing wrong with that, for some reason fanboys keep trying to defend against there console being like 1/20th the power of a high end PC when nobody in there right mind would ever expect it to compete. Stop with this nonsense
vulcanproject  +   301d ago
PC will always have better graphics. Its a fact. Pointless arguing over it. End of that discussion.

Its also a fact that these new consoles are behind the technology curve before they even hit the shelves unlike generations that preceded them.

Does this really matter? Probably not much.

Should you talk a bunch of crap that only consoles have good games worth playing? Should you make up a load of balls about how much PC gaming costs because you have no clue about it?

Please don't.

Just get over it, these platforms have their strengths and weaknesses and people who love games would embrace whatever platform they can afford.

Typically PC gamers also game on consoles, which in my opinion makes most of the PC gamers more knowledgeable.

Why do console only gamers think PC gamers only play on PC?

Surely you are more likely to have a PC and a console if you can afford a good gaming PC. Its a mystery to me, some of the nonsense people talk on here. Straw man arguments all over the shop.
#1.1.48 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(12) | Disagree(0) | Report
gaffyh  +   301d ago
TECHNICALLY PC games will always look better than console games graphically, because you're paying a ridiculous amount more for it.

ARTISTICALLY/STYLISTICALLY - That's debateable. Uncharted/TLOU and even simple games like Journey look fantastic, and better than almost any PC game I can think of. Yes Crysis 3 looks good blah blah blah, but graphics isn't all about the amount of polygons.
Lisica  +   301d ago
CRYTEK
zippycup  +   301d ago
lol love how they always use crysis series as the best looking pc game although after playing it i can see why its all pretty graphics and crappy story and gameplay
GentlemenRUs  +   301d ago
GTA:V and TLOU look WAY better then no-gameplay-crysis 3
Seafort  +   301d ago
@vishmarx I'm a predominantly PC gamer and I can play GTA5 and The last of us. well I already have done and finished them.

It's good to be a gamer and not have fanboy tendencies hehe.

My PS3 is a nice compliment to my gaming PC :)
blackmagic  +   301d ago
I remember at the beginning of the current generation of consoles when few people had 720p televisions let alone 1080p and tons of people were playing ps360 on tube televisions.

Fast forward to today, 4K televisions have been available for a while now. Seiki has a 39" 4K television for $700 and a 50" 4K television for $944 and TCL has a 50" 4k television for $1000. Those are competitive prices. Even Samsung's UHD display is $3500 for a 55" which is less than I paid for my first 50" 1080p Samsung and that was well after 1080p televisions were established.
http://www.amazon.com/Seiki...
http://www.amazon.com/Seiki...
http://www.amazon.com/TCL-L...
http://www.bestbuy.com/site...

Earlier this month HDMI 2.0 was announced at IFA with an industry wide 4K display standard and Singulus announced 100GB Blu-ray fabrication machines, both of which are a precursor for the upcoming BDA announcement of 4K Blu-ray. CEDIA starts today with tons of 4K announcements expected.
http://www.hdmi.org/manufac...
http://reviews.cnet.com/830...
http://www.techradar.com/ne...

PC gaming at 4K has already arrived. Running an NVidia Titan, 780/770 in SLI or AMD HD 7990, 7970 in Xfire will run just about any game at 4K. And some games will run 30 fps or better on an HD 7950 or 660 which can be easily found for under $200. Meanwhile, both AMD and NVidia are expected to bring a new generation of GPUs either late this year or early next year (ie same timeframe as consoles) which will make 4K gaming even more affordable and accessible.
http://www.tomshardware.com...
http://www.anandtech.com/sh...
http://siliconangle.com/blo...

Meanwhile, in console land, 1080p 60fps is the best you can hope for with many titles already falling to 30fps or worse sub 1080p resolutions.
http://images.anandtech.com...
#1.1.54 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(6) | Disagree(2) | Report
Bobby Kotex  +   301d ago
From the votes it just looks like there are way more console gamers here than PC gamers. The content of your posts are meaningless. I'm glad I game on both.
Dmarc  +   301d ago
Games doesn't look better on my pc.
My laptop has better graphics card and more ram than both PS3 and 360, but I can't even run gta iv on here...
Oh wait. we are talking about modded PC's...
PurpHerbison  +   301d ago
"Just leave it to Naughty Dog to show you that games on PS4 can look prettier then any PC game"

2/10
UltimateMaster  +   301d ago
vishmarx  +   301d ago
207/65(a/d)
for supposed console fanboy on a pc article.
thats a new world record folks.
black0o  +   301d ago
400$ with great games, auto updates, streaming sharing, .....easy UI for malti media and much more features which are pain in the a%# doing it with a PC and always comes with cost and req extra devices .. and every 2 years I gotta update Something in the box, drivers, looking for patches ...etc

PC only got better looking/frame rate on the console which come with extra cost
with the same experience and some times it's better on consoles

Diblo3 says Hi
AuToFiRE  +   301d ago
Im sorry, but you are incorrect. The playstation 4 can pump out 1.6 TFLOPS as a whole., while my 2 year old outdated graphics card pushes 6 TFLOPS on its own.
PopRocks359  +   301d ago
That wouldn't change the PS4 specs you know. PC tech is constantly evolving with new upgrades releasing each year. The PS4 is deadlocked in its current state as of its launch. So at one point or another, PCs will have better specs and therefor the potential for better games.

However, Naughty Dog is an excellent dev. They'll make some damn great looking games; PC specs be damned.
The_HarryEtTubMan  +   301d ago
lol silly console gamers have no clue. Some do, but this comment shows you certainly don't. The Last of Us and Uncharted don't even scratch the surface of how even console ports run on PC.

Higher resolution, way higher framerate, better effects and dynamic lighting/post-processing, way higher-rez textures.

Silly console peasants. ;)
#1.1.63 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(7) | Disagree(2) | Report
buckley  +   301d ago
Not sure if serious... o_0
assdan  +   301d ago
Naughty Dog is an amazing dev, but the PCs are still stronger than PS4. I bet their game will look amazing, but no. Naughty dog games would look even better on PC.
lesrima88  +   301d ago
"Just leave it to Naughty Dog to show you that games on PS4 can look prettier then any PC game "

http://www.youtube.com/watc...

that is all
starchild  +   301d ago
I'm getting a PS4 and I definitely feel that consoles have their place, but some console gamers on here are really grasping at straws.

I keep seeing the same repeated excuses that people use to make themselves feel better about the PC having better graphics. It's funny, too, because a lot of these same people will turn around and talk up the graphics of the PS4 and try to rub it in the faces of Xbox or Nintendo gamers.

Here are the top rationalizations that I keep seeing.

1. "A PC might have better graphics, but it costs like $2000 to get something like that".

False. A $700 PC with something like an HD 7950 will likely generally beat the PS4 and XB1. And a year or two into the generation there is no doubt that you will be able to build a PC for that price that will eclipse the consoles by a wide margin.

2. "The graphics might be technically better on PC, but there is more to graphics than graphics technology...art is just as important".

This one really makes me laugh. Art direction is definitely important, but considering that the PC gets 90% the same games as the consoles it's silly to act like only console games have good art.

Personally, I think games like The Witcher 2 or Castlevania Lords of Shadow have better art than pretty much any console exclusive that I have played. Those games just happen to also have amazing graphics tech as well and they look amazing on the PC.

The point is, there is an equal amount of good art to be found in PC games as there is in console games. PCs just have much higher quality technical graphics as well.

3. "Crysis 3 is the best looking game on PC, but it sucks so it's worth nothing".

Console gamers have really started to latch on to this one. They think if they downplay the Crysis games it will somehow nullify the graphical advantage PC has over consoles.

Well, the fact is, Crysis 3 might be the best looking game on PC, but it is far from the only outstanding looking game on the platform.

Second of all, the Crysis games are good games. They have a higher average score than the Killzone games that are hyped so much. I don't think they are amazing games, but they are still enjoyable games that are well above average.

4. "PCs might have the most powerful hardware, but developers never really use that power".

This is a line of thinking that I see even some PC gamers fall into. Nevertheless, the power in our PCs IS being put to use. It seems some people don't understand how much extra hardware performance it takes to output at much higher resolutions and framerates, with higher quality textures, higher resolution shadows, vastly better texture filtering, high levels of anti-aliasing, and all the other graphical advantages we usually see on PC.

If every developer was pushing the most bleeding edge visuals on PC there would be no performance left over to run the games smoothly at 60fps+, with high quality anti-aliasing and texture filtering, with all quality settings maxed out.

Sure, more optimization would make things even better--and things like SteamOS, the Mantel API, and X86 in consoles will greatly help this--but the extra performance in PCs is still being put to good use even now.
starchild  +   301d ago
Continuing on...

5. "Yeah, yeah PC is more powerful than next gen consoles, but so what?...a majority of PC gamers according to the Steam survey don't have PCs stronger than the PS4".

First of all, the Steam hardware survey is optional and doesn't represent anywhere close to all the people that use Steam. I have an HD 7950 and i5 2500k, but I have never done the Steam hardware survey. It isn't something that just automatically reads all the hardware of every Steam user.

Steam isn't the only way people game on PC anyway. There are lots of other digital distribution sites and other software for connecting gamers. I know a few PC gamers that don't even use Steam.

Furthermore, the PS4 user base is currently zero. I guarantee that even in the first year or two there are gong to be more people with high end PC rigs than there will be with with PS4s.

And the prices on PC parts will only go down. A graphics card more powerful than that in the PS4 will be available for around $100 by the end of 2014. By that time there will be even more PC gamers with rigs more powerful than the consoles.

A lot of PC gamers haven't upgraded simply because they haven't needed to. With more demanding next gen games coming soon you can be sure that many of those PC gamers with weaker rigs will be upgrading.

Lastly, I don't understand what this matters anyway. Most of the PC gamers that are into games enough to spend time on game sites are the kinds of PC gamers that are going to have good gaming PCs.

I have a decently high end gaming PC, so why again should I care how many people are out there with weaker PCs that only enjoy the occasional indie title or whatever? It doesn't matter to me at all.

It's such a silly argument. It would be like saying "who cares that your Lamborghini is far faster than my Camaro? There are more people that own Camaros than who own Lamborghinis...so na na na". The Lamborghini owner would be like "yeah, and?". It doesn't change the fact that the Lamborghini is much faster.

These are a few examples of the mental backflips and illogical rationalizations that console gamers typically use to try and downplay the PC and make themselves feel better.
Fergusonxplainsall  +   301d ago
WTF is Nvidia up to now days..

Of course PC will get better than next gen consoles in time but it will not be the same value of a console.

Then there's the exclusive console games. Sorry but starcraft and DOTA are not in the same level as TLOU and Uncharted.

I also played the Beyond Two Souls demo and that game is gorgeous.. It's really fun to be the entity and do spirit like stuff. It seems it will be a great game. Geez! I'm talking about current gen games again. That's how good they look nowdays.

Nvidia is talking like they made the greatest game ever and it's only on Nvidia GFX cards.

Fauk them!
TekoIie  +   301d ago
@Vishmarx

Nice looking PS4 you got there... Would be awesome if you could play TLOU on it ;)
kevnb  +   301d ago
Witcher 2 is the prettiest game so far.
Mini0510  +   301d ago
LOL
Rageanitus  +   301d ago
umm ND made very nice looking games for the PS3.... having said that there is no way it looks BETTER than games like battlefield.

A pc gaming rig is really that much better, console only players should really open their eyes.

Hell most games last gen could barely do 720 native resolution! and this is a FACT
PoSTedUP  +   301d ago
ill take the critically acclaimed console exclusives for $400, alex.

hell, im almost more psyched for gravity rush 2 for the vita than all ps4 launch titles. and i havent favored a fps like i do KZ:M, in a long time.

gameplay> graphics

but dem multiplats do look mighty pretty on pc. but we all know that most of the money and talent goes into first party devs. right? idk but sure as hell seems like it...
#1.2 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(16) | Disagree(23) | Report | Reply
starchild  +   301d ago
Sure as hell doesn't seem like it to me. Most of my favorite games are multiplatform games.

There are of course a few really talented first party developers like Naughty Dog, but by and large you see the same variability in talent among first party as you do among 3rd party developers--some are good, some are bad, and some are just mediocre.

I'll take a Bioshock Infinite or a Dishonored or a Castlevania Lords of Shadow or a Tomb Raider or a Deus Ex Human Revolution or a Mass Effect or a Far Cry 3 over the majority of first party games on PS3 or 360 any day.

First party games just get over-hyped by those of a fanboyish mentality.
PoSTedUP  +   301d ago
first party games win awards and are the most critically acclaimed by the gaming community for a very good reason, not fanboyism. and this next console gen, oh man, its looking great.
third party's are doing their thing too, i hope most of their games make it to pc.
Kurylo3d  +   301d ago
curious.. where do you see that first party games are the most critically acclaimed. Last I checked grand theft auto 5 is the highest selling most crtically acclaimed game. In fact... i mostly see higher scores for multi plat form... tomb raider, hitman, call of duty, battlefield, batman arkham series... i mean i can make the list go on.. Just cause u get 2 or 3 games on a console that are only for that console .. doesnt make them more critically acclaimed or better in anyway.

I mean as much as i love games like god of war and uncharted... doesn't really make them any more "critically acclaimed"
duplissi  +   301d ago
Gameplay>Graphics, I wholly agree. The problem is is that you assume pc games are only about graphics.... with crysis perhaps, but there is a wealth of pc only games that have insanely deep and rewarding gameplay that cant be found elsewhere.

Ignorance is bliss I suppose.
PurpHerbison  +   301d ago
Right now I am only stoked for Outlast and that is currently on the PC already. Still waiting for a game announcement that caters to my wants.
PoSTedUP  +   301d ago
like the most talked about games are usually that of the console exclusives. halo gears, mario uncharted etc. but yeah youre right ther are more higher rated multiplatform games. there are also more third party devs that do their thing aswell. youre right +bubble.
CrimsonFox13  +   301d ago
Gameplay > Graphics is definitely true. That's the reason I switched from consoles to PC, actually. Maybe I've become a 'hipster' but the majority of games I play nowadays are low-budget PC exclusives that put most of their effort into rewarding gameplay instead of the same dumbed down gameplay designed to appeal to the lowest common denominator rehashed over and over for most AAA games (of course, this applies to PC AAA games as well). Consoles just don't have even close to the indie support the PC has, and to me, that's what matters the most.
Mr Tretton  +   301d ago
I know, this is nonsense, PC has been more advanced than console for longer than is being told here.
badboy776  +   301d ago
Beyond Two Souls on a 7 year old Console says Hi!
Angeljuice  +   301d ago
When PS1 was announced, people were calling it the death of pc gaming (I still have magazine articles from that time). PC's at the time didn't have graphics cards, and had no way of rendering 3d graphics properly.
Then, just before the PSX launched, the first PC graphics cards were announced. These required new motherboards etc and took several years to become the norm.
TekoIie  +   301d ago
@badboy776

I can make ME3 look better on PC.

PC versions of games tend to be more "future proof". I still cant play Arkham City with DX11 features at a good FPS and I've got a GTX 770 :/
#1.3.3 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report
pixelsword  +   301d ago
Nvidia just needs to give it up; all they are doing is smack-talking consoles because they aren't getting paid anymore. One thing they aren't considering is that since consoles aren't using Nvidia, they will likely be not the latter choice for emphasis in terms of detail if it comes down to tweaking to get the best out of one GPU or another; even if they are the better of the two, if no one takes advantage of it, it'll never matter in the long run.
#1.4 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(9) | Disagree(26) | Report | Reply
SlapHappyJesus  +   301d ago
Designing with a custom, console-specific APU in mind says nothing about actual PC tech.
Nvidia was used in consoles last generation, but it was still a game by game situation, dictated by which manufacturer would be allowed first access to the games in order to develop drivers. That's if they even took a side.
Besides, the only reason AMD is in consoles is because the first choice, Nvidia, wouldn't agree to the price that AMD seemed willing to. That's the only reason.
WarThunder  +   301d ago
Well of course they say that because their main competition AMD are on both consoles lol....

I bet if nvidia GPU was on both console they would say consoles are the future. I was a Nvidea user for over 10 years, now i switched to AMD (HD7870) and AMD is way better price/performance graphics card!

Seriously, Consoles on paper are weaker but they are more optimizable, there are lost of dev who can pull good looking games on console that can look as good as PC games.

I mean look at the PS3, look how good Ucharted, last of us look, Beyond Two Souls, these games are running on a platform with a 256 GDDR3 and a 550MHz GPU.

U can NOT run a game like that on a PC that has 256MB GDDR3. even a 1 GB GDDR3 can not run it properly...

Think about it for a sec
#1.4.2 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(12) | Disagree(13) | Report
ChrisW  +   301d ago
Wow Pixelsword,

There are times when you say intelligent things, and there are times when you don't...

Lately, the latter seems to be more prevalent.
pixelsword  +   301d ago
@ Chris,

It could be that I say things that go way beyond everyone's head, so let me give you an example:

When benchmarked,the PS3 was supposed to have the better graphics out of the PS3/360:

http://www.extremetech.com/...

But oftentimes when it came to multiplatform games, the 360 looked and performed better, so why is that when the PS3 had the better performing GPU?

Because Developers make games to the lowest common denominator, which means the PS3 suffered because the more numerous (at the time) 360 had to be the best looking, because they want to make money. Sure, devs want to make a pretty game, but they want to make the prettiest game on what will potentially sell the most; and I can't think of any multiplatform game that sold the most on PC short of games that started on the PC and was on the PC for years.

It's not about stats, it's about money. The same reason why MGS almost jumped ship for the 360, and why FF was destroyed to be put on the 360, and why GTA was put on the 360, and why Insomniac stopped being exclusive to go make a game with EA...

...and it's the same reason why Crysis, whit it's free to roam island, was replaced with the tunnel-board for Crysis 2 and 3.

It ain't about pretty, it's about money.

Does that simplify it enough for you?
Dynasty2021  +   301d ago
Idiot.

90% of gamers have a Nvidia card because AMD's cards suck in comparison.

They always have. This is simple, unarguable fact.

Take the same priced Nvidia card and an AMD card, and I guarantee you, you will see better performance, even if only by 2 or 3 frames, on the Nvidia card.

Gamers should be WORRIED that AMD are in the PS4 and Xbox.

Nvidia beats AMD every time, end of story. AMD may release the world's fastest card, but a few months later, Nvidia beat it.
ChrisW  +   301d ago
@Pixelsword,

What I was saying is that your first comment was crap. nVidia smack-talks because they can. It may seem like a close race between AMD and nVidia, but nVidia always comes out ahead.... just like post-PS2 Sony could smack-talk, because they had the means to.

Your follow-up comment has little to do with your initial one... albeit more intelligent and slightly easier to follow, it still has no correlation.

@Dynasty2021,

Yeeeah... That's why I've always gone with nVidia GPUs. But honestly, AMD should be more worried that their architecture is in both consoles, not gamers.
WarThunder  +   301d ago
@Dynasty2021 Nvidia better than AMD? haha! First Nvidia needs to learn how make a good price/performance card...

Nvidia GTX TITAN price: $1000
http://www.newegg.com/Produ...

AMD Radeon HD 7990 price: $710
http://www.newegg.com/Produ...

Benchs
http://www.eteknix.com/amd-...
http://img1.lesnumeriques.c...

even GTX titan superClocked SLI can NOT beat a HD7990 lol
http://images.tweaktown.com...

HD 7990 is $300 cheaper and 30% faster than than GTX Titan.

Nvidia will never be as fast and as inexpensive as AMD Radeon.

Nvidia cards are overpriced. But if you want to throw your more money on a slower card then thats your prob.

But u know as they say: Dumb people pay more. Smart people pay less...
#1.4.7 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(2) | Report
Persistantthug  +   301d ago
Back in 2005, XBOX 360 was state of the art.

There is no PC from 2005 that can run HITMAN ABSOLUTION, for example.

Today though, the next gen consoles are using high end LAPTOP gpus, basically.
xKugo  +   301d ago
They're using high-end laptop CPUs not GPUs. I don't know where you got that from.
Bolts  +   301d ago
Yup. The PS4 and Xbox 360 back then were truely transcendent devices.

The PS3 was the first to introduce Bluray, and when I first watched a movie in Bluray, Apocalypto, it blew my mind. I knew right then that DVD was dead and that the future of my entertainment center would change. This is something my PC could not do.

I don't think I would have the same experience with the PS4. This is a console that struggles to uphold the 1080p 60 fps standard, a standard that the average gaming PC can blow past with power to spare while bringing along nothing new in the process.

Overall the PS4 and Xbox One isn't nextgen devices, it's the catching up to current gen devices.
MRMagoo123  +   301d ago
@bolts

"I don't think I would have the same experience with the PS4. This is a console that struggles to uphold the 1080p 60 fps standard, a standard that the average gaming PC can blow past with power to spare while bringing along nothing new in the process." The average pc ? the average pc is a lot lower specced than you seem to think, the average pc which i see most every day when i repair them can barely run COD mw2 at mid settings, you would need everything put on low to get 1080p with 60fps.

We all know a good pc will have better performance but most ppl with pcs dont even have a dedicated gpu, they have onboard gpus and they barely run sims 2.
Persistantthug  +   301d ago
@xKugo

A long time ago, many months ago, we were told that the PS4 would be using a 7970M.

The reason Sony and AMD chose a MOBILE gpu is because if they used a full one that was simular to a desktop PC, it would burn up in that small case.

The TDP is the most important factor there and a 7970M only uses 75 watts. The PS4's probably even uses a bit less because it's only 1.8 Teraflops instead of 2.1.

A PC equivalent, 7850 or 7870.....they use 130 watts and 175 watts. That's clearly too much for an enclosed console box.

Again, there was no way they could use a desktop gpu....that's why they chose a mobile....TDP.

Take a look here if you are interested:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...
Gorilla_Killa_X  +   301d ago
@mrmagoo123

He said average gaming pc. PC gamers always say gaming PCs not PCs in general. I am console gamer and have the PS4 preordered but to believe that either console is more capable of running high end graphics over true gaming PCs is delusional.
SilentNegotiator  +   301d ago
Not at the same prices, though.
bumnut  +   301d ago
Whats price got to do with it?

Would I tell my boss his Ferrari isn't better than my VW Bora because the Ferrari costs more?

No
kingduqc  +   301d ago
I disagree.

ps4 cost is 400$
ps4 cost to play online 400$ for 8 years

Right there, today with 800$ you can build a pc that will play games that will look better in 7 years then what the ps4 will be able to do.

­­And that's not considering sale on pc... Usually save 200-300$ vs what the cost of console game PER YEAR on my pc. So yeah, this argument is hands down a lie.
SilentNegotiator  +   301d ago
@king

A lie if you intentionally mixup "price" and "cost" to push your agenda and assume the player someone that plays online.

And saving $300 a year? Why, because you don't know how to find console games on sale?
#1.6.3 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(3) | Report
kingduqc  +   301d ago
Sorry, for me price and cost is kinda the same. I'm not English so I might not know the subtle difference

cost is the value of money that has been used up to produce something

price: the amount of money that you pay for something or that something costs

Yeah, thats what I though. preaty much the same thing.

I buy around 15 games a year, make it 20$ each game you get on pc cheaper and bingo that's 300. But hey you don't belive me cause you got a sony printed into your skull so I'll tell you something that I found really amusing:

Metro last light was 59.99 on release day for every retailer on both console and I got it for 38$ + civ 5 + Xcom.

Now that's 22$ saved + 10-20$ worth off free game. There is a ton of exemple that I got like this.

Bioshock infinite 45$ + bioshock 1 and 2 vs 60$ on console.

But hey the difference is even bigger with older game... Dark souls prepare to die edition was the same price on pc (full game + dlc) then the dlc of ps3 and xbox 360. you had to get the 30$ copy to get the game on top of 15$ for the dlc.

That's just to show how little console gamer know about playing on pc. On top of that we get the better version (imo worth more then a few bucks here and there anyway)
gapecanpie  +   301d ago
Where do people get this dumb idea that it take a $1000 to build a gaming PC, for just $700 you can have a gaming pc that 15x more powerful then x1 and ps4 combine!

Not too mention pc do far more then both systems, also pc games mostly only cost $40-$30 and even lower on steam and not $60 like consoles and you don't have to pay to play online which is just ret*rded($ony coping M$)

Yes $700 I know because I have done it and all my games run on high settings at 1080p on my 50inch TV and too any one who think it can't be done then all I have to say to you is ..... You are very misinformed ....

Oh lord you guys actually took the 15x seriously that or just butthurt because anyone with half a brain knows I was exaggerating with that number and factoring in the cpu and not just gpu it about pretty close to that <.<
In any case it's still don't change the fact my PC can run any game at 1080p all settings on high, lets see if ps4 can do that with the next battlefield :)

I got work tomorrow so night b*tthurt fanboys.
#1.7 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(11) | Disagree(27) | Report | Reply
5h4h4b  +   301d ago
"$700 you can have a gaming pc that 15x more powerful then x1 and ps4"

Pffft hahahah

Titan is 3x more powerful than ps4/x1.

This gentleman is going to give us a 700$ pc 15x more powerful than next gen consoles. Lol. Go ahead. I am listening.

What? Just now you said 700$ pc 15x more powerful than next gen consoles, and you are calling us misinformed? Wow, just wow.
#1.7.1 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(15) | Disagree(6) | Report
SilentNegotiator  +   301d ago
$700 for a PC that is 15 times as powerful as Ps4 and xbox combined?!

HOHOHOHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

PC games only cost $30? Let me guess, you don't think that console games ever go on sale or get cheaper?
#1.7.2 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(12) | Disagree(17) | Report
xKugo  +   301d ago
You will not build a PC for $700 dollars that will outperform a next-gen console. I'm sorry but it's not possible. If you're legitimately building a low-expense rig that can supposedly outperform the new consoles, you're going to need a gaming keyboard, mouse, 300+w psu, a GPU comparable to the 7870 or higher, an i5 or higher CPU(so as to not bottleneck the GPU), you have to buy the OS, you need a fucking gaming monitor because you're not going to be experiencing a game at 1440p/60-120fps if the monitor isn't capable, you need a motherboard, you need RAM, you need a good cooling system, preferable to get an blu-ray drive, HDD or SSD and a case to hold it all. The GPU alone is going to cost you 160 bucks and that's if you buy the cheapest possible on newegg. The OS, lol, is going to jack-up your price even more because the new gen coming in, Windows 8 is going to be necessary to run Windows games. Windows 8 cost around 100 bucks for cheapest variant. So JUST THOSE TWO cost you 260 bucks and that's without tax and shipping.

Lol at 15x more powerful, you must be smoking some crazy shit if you think a $700 dollar rig is even comparable to a next-gen console let alone 15x more powerful. Do you even have a gaming PC because it sounds like you know nothing about it's expenses what so ever.
5h4h4b  +   301d ago
You are playing your pc games in 1080p. Lol "that's so 2005 for pc games". That's what you pc gamers boasts in front of consoles gamers

Shame you still play in 1080p on your mighty pc.

We ain't butthurt bro, but can't say the same about nvidia. Hahaha
gapecanpie  +   301d ago
I don't need a gaming monitor as I clearly wrote I have my pc connected to my 50inch TV and an constant 60fps is just fine for me I don't need 120fps at least not yet, but it's nice to know If I want it I can easily upgrade my hardware to get it. All that other crap you mention I already have from my old PC and besides that if you look hard enough online you can come across some great deals for decent pc parts.

1080p with 16X MSAA :) not that blurry crap that consoles use which make all the difference at 1080p.
#1.7.5 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(4) | Disagree(9) | Report
AndrewLB  +   301d ago
The most hilarious aspect of these b*tthurt fanboy's is that I don't think a single one of them understands the concept of what a PC does. They see a PC as a VERY expensive gaming machine and don't even consider the fact that many of us make a living with our PC, so in reality... they do something a PS4 or Xbone will NEVER be able to do.

Pay for itself.

The fact that my PC can play pretty much any game made at maximum settings @ 1600p, while paying for my home, car, insurance, etc... is such a foreign idea to people who worship Sony or Microsoft.

Oh... and to top things off, I get to write off my PC as a business expense. :)
AndrewLB  +   301d ago
Kugo- Many websites have built an equivalently powerful PC for $500. Here is just one of many http://www.rockpapershotgun...
NewMonday  +   301d ago
@AndrewLB

the price is in British pounds, in dollars it is $840.

also no OS, no BluRay drive, m/k, no 8G of GDDR8

try again
Damageinc84  +   301d ago
I have personally built multiple gaming pcs for both myself and family. 700 bucks you would be hard pressed to make a decent system. I am for cutting costs if need be and doing a Radeon GPU but I couldn't suggest AMD CPU's. If you wanted to make a capable PC you need to aim for around the 1000-1100 mark. And when I say capable I mean atleast 1080P dropping no less than 80 FPS maxed out settings. I think a lot of the issues PC gamers run into is a bloated OS. I run next to nothing on startup and in general I only install what I need to run games.
Irishguy95  +   301d ago
newmonday, PC gamers don't need Blu ray drives. You install games on PC, what is the point in having Blu ray? Watching movies through a Disk is just out of date.
Kleptic  +   301d ago
even with your 'fix' paragraph at the end, you're still full of it, gape...

I built a PC in June...a decent 'enthusiast' PC...currently only running a Richland A10 apu...so, currently, it has NO discrete gpu...

total for the machine was about $700 before factoring in any peripherals, monitors, etc...its running 8 gigs of 2133mhz DDR3, using 64 bit windows 8, and has a great samsung SSD...

There is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY to get any better gaming performance for less money...the current A10 is the best option for budget gaming...the integrated gpu is similar in performance to a higher end 6000 series discrete card, and will handle any modern game...the quad core cpu is also safely in the mid range in terms of performance...so for $150 you get a decent cpu AND gpu, which would be blatantly impossible for that price if purchased separately...

with that said...'handle' is the operative term...I'm looking at the lowest settings possible at 30 to 45fps at 1080p on most titles...this set up will not run crysis 3 AT ALL at 1080p...and you have to run 720p with everything off just to manage about 25 fps average...

So, just pointing out, you're lying...there is no cheaper PC option that will play games better than what i built...I've always intended to get a discrete gpu (which i'm doing, just waiting to see the offers coming with bf4 and today's hawaii announcement)...but the only way you're maxing nearly any modern game with a $700 machine is by doing what annoying pc nerds always do:

"hey hey hey!! My PC can max anything and it was only $700...but i had an extra case, power supply, extra sticks of ram, and a OS disc laying around"...or something along those lines...
Shakengandulf  +   301d ago
Kleptic, not sure why someone would disagree with ya... You basically just spoke the truth.
This is just very sad.
AuToFiRE  +   301d ago
Uhh.. I spent $4000 building my PC.. I play games across 3 HDTVS(a total of 108 inches of screen) on above ultra settings. Your computer sounds like a clone that came from walmart.
SephirothX21  +   301d ago
Try modding in console games. Not really possible. PC gives you choice of operating system. Do you want Linux, SteamOS, Windows or iOS? Steam has far better deals than PS Plus and Xbox Live. PC has complete backwards compatibility and is upgradeable and endlessly customisable. A new graphics API comes out and PC games can take advantage of it almost immediately with driver updates or new gpus on the market. NVidia will release their Maxwell line of gpus next year which will have 14 - 16 teraflops. That is 14 - 16 trillion floating point operations per second. The PS4 gpu has 1.84 teraflops. The PC is the gaming platform for the elite. You can talk about console exclusives all you want but there are many PC exclusives including MMOs like Guild Wars 2, WOW and SW:The Old Republic and RTS games such as Rome: Total War 2, Star Craft 2 and many others. Though multiplatform games have been the best this generation and those on PC play best on PC. When it comes to GTA V releasing later on PC, there are many examples of the same on consoles. Diablo 3 says hello. Diablo 3 was out ages before coming to consoles. So was Half Life 2 and the Witcher 2. PC is the elite gaming platform.
Ohlmay  +   301d ago
Actually once Gaikai comes around, Sony has stated they will stream their Playstation games to PC's, so yes, I'll be able to play all your precious Playstation games and GTA V has been pretty much confirmed coming to PC, it's just the waiting game now.

Next-gen consoles - Battlefield 4 720p
PC - 1440p Ultra Settings, 60+ FPS

lolConsoles
ded1020  +   301d ago
As someone that believed what he read on the interwebs about how hassle-free gaming on PC has become and spent $$$ to build a gaming PC, I have to disagree with you.

My PS3 with PS+ trumps my gaming PC so hard it's almost laughable that people suggest Steam is a valid alternative for the majority.
#1.9.1 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(4) | Disagree(9) | Report
NewMonday  +   301d ago
"PC - 1440p Ultra Settings, 60+ FPS"

that will cost over $2000

lol
#1.9.2 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(15) | Report
limewax  +   301d ago
Actually a GTX will do that on all but a couple games and you can get one for around £200 in the right places now.

Also that's the most expensive component right there. A Sandybridge processor will also do the job while saving a bit of cash. Honestly you could build most of my setup without going anywhere near £1000. I only have 8Gb of RAM and I never have any issues with performance on max settings.

Cheap and powerful PC's are a reality but for some reason N4G are scared of the idea. PC's aren't here to invade your hobby, they're an option kids, and a good one at that too!
#1.9.3 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(4) | Report
NewMonday  +   301d ago
@limewax
again listing the price of GPU only without the dozen other things, add it all up for someone starting with nothing and tell us again how much it costs.

people who believed talk like yours got burned, the first time I followed the same kind of "advice" I ended up with a disappointing setup for the money I spent, as I wised up I built a machine from the top to the bottom costing over $1500, and even with the GTX680+i7 couldn't run tomb raider with everything maxed and 60fps, could only manage 45fps.
sync90  +   301d ago
You sound so childish.
Damageinc84  +   301d ago
@newmonday

If you had a 680/I7 and only pulled out 45 FPS on tomb raider you are doing something wrong. I run an I5 4670k with 660 TI 3GB cards in SLI which compare nicely to a 680. At 1080 maxed settings without the Tressfx hair settings I pull 140+ FPS. With the Tressfx enabled I still manage 80 FPS. The tressfx is a waste to be honest and is optimized for ATI cards. Also something else to keep in mind if you GPU is getting above 70c it will down clock itself. You need a nice case with an aggressive fan profile on your GPU using afterburner or Precision X. Neither of my GPU's go over 55c while playing anything besides the Titan benchmarks. And I didn't spend 2000. Spent MAYBE 1200-1300. I would have to go back thru receipts.
#1.9.6 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(2) | Report
Cryptcuzz  +   301d ago
Who gives a damn about PC visuals being better or not. What's the point of that? Nothing will be gain or lost to each respectIve demographic.

PC gamers only, not those that game on both like myself, will only care that a computer can play games available on a computer with higher visuals.

For you see, consoles do not care to be better in visuals and graphics fidelity compared to computers for that is not its purpose and reason why it is created.

Use your brain cells and contemplate that it shouldn't matter. Consoles serves a purpose and computers for gaming serves another purpose that should be viewed as an extension of console gaming.

Nvidia, I once respect and understand and admit makes great performing video cards. The fact of the matter is they are butt hurt they are not represented in any of the next gen consoles. Why else does anyone that has been gaming for the past two generations cannot understand that when they had their tech in previous consoles did not down play consoles as they have done so adamantly as of late?

My point is, the computer only gamers who are out spoken about superior visuals and graphics are but a minority. Those who game on a PC, and I am one them, are numerous in numbers, but those who game on PC that down play consoles at the same time are but the last of their kind. That is why they are so outspoken. Fear that their kind is dwindling, but oblivious to the fact that it does not have to be as simple as having things either black or white.

Those who game also on consoles and a computer, respect.

Those who game only on computers and yet have a need to downplay consoles at every opportunity they can, wake up.

Those who claim to game on consoles and a computer and yet down play console gamers whenever they can, one word. Delusional. Meaning...seek the definition.
limewax  +   301d ago
That's a mighty fine speech except you only covered one base. If you expect PC only gamers to stop moaning about console gamers then you also have to accept that console gamers need to quit getting on to PC gamers and claiming to have the more powerful setup.

In reality a bit of rational thinking and 5 minutes with Google would teach anybody why all of the options make a great choice, but this is N4G and I don't expect any level of maturity from the community or staff.

On the staff note, for the love of god N4G get Candy Crush the hell off your site! I can't even browse the home page for 5 seconds without getting redirected the the Play Store encouraging me to get Candy Crush Saga
joeorc  +   301d ago
@limewax

"That's a mighty fine speech except you only covered one base. If you expect PC only gamers to stop moaning about console gamers then you also have to accept that console gamers need to quit getting on to PC gamers and claiming to have the more powerful setup. "

On the same token, Many PC gamer's also have to come to grips, that until we can see what Gabe n company are doing @ Valve that any game you buy for PC has a windows performance tax, more so than the console's. enough so that there is quite the number of wasted resources that your PC could have , but instead developer's do not get because the WindowsOS takes them. Unlike PC Console's /performance right now outstrips the same cost in PC due to the fact that the OS overhead. But like i stated Valve is or is trying to take this problem head on in fixing this very issue. until they do, PC's do not get really programmed to the Metal like Consoles do. that is just the blunt truth of the matter. At least Now consumer's $$$ for expensive GPU's and the Resources that those expensive GPU's contain will not be or have going to waste because of an OS that is designed for majority of other tasks but games as the priority.

with Valve heading up this, that OS Tax will or should be reduced by quite a bit. Console's are great, but PC's could be better game machines with a more streamlined OS.

Again that is just the truth, you purchase expensive components but yet you cannot take full advantage of said components due to the OS tax, valve is driving to fix that. It is indeed the one area where Consoles had the main advantage over the PC for price/performance. with Valve releasing their new OS we can see what the performance increase will be.
Kakashi Hatake  +   301d ago
@Bolt,what the hell are you smoking to say that? GTA4 PC better looking than Watch Dogs PS4? So the PC version of a last gen game looks better than a next gen title? Funny you say that since the PC version only has higher resolution, slightly better textures and higher fps over console version. GTA 5 stomps it to hell and back so how does it look better than Watch Dogs PS4? PC fanboys love to exaggerate. Got anymore for us? Like Final Fantasy 8 PC looks better than Killzone Shadowfall?
#1.11 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(5) | Report | Reply
Irishguy95  +   301d ago
I'd say he's counting mods...in that case GTA4 looks better than Watch Dogs
megamanX2  +   301d ago
lol
CRAIG667  +   301d ago
This argument is ridiculous, we all have personal tastes, we're human.
I game on PC/PS3/WII and 360, I have my personal favourite BUT each platform offers something that the others don't hence the reason I game on ALL the major platforms, the same as I will next gen.

The my dick's bigger than your's on N4G will never end, but every once in a while I like to speak up and remind people how ridiculous this argument is.

Hence my 2 bubbles.
Consoldtobots  +   301d ago
in a few years I will have been gaming on PC for 20 years and even I think all these PC elitists sound like a bunch of idiots. A PC will NEVER offer the unified experience that a console does. It's like comparing your non street legal hot rod which sits in your driveway to a racing circuit where you're actually enjoying a great experience.
#1.13 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(5) | Report | Reply
MazzingerZ  +   301d ago
I would care more about PC playing Playstation exclusives
thisismyaccount  +   301d ago
It´s obvious that they are lying about spending 1.5B of dollars yearly for R&D. Simyply because if i was the Boss at Nvidia i would spend that cash into a own propietary console with a Titan built in it.

1.5B per year, not Sony and not Microsoft have spent that much into making their ngen consoles. They already have a great GPU up to Titan, one would think they would be more smart about how to invest their own money.

For 1.5B per year you can compete in the gaming market and have the strongest console with the best GPU.
Sirlancealot  +   301d ago
Let me explain the use of consoles. People make these stupid arguements that PC is greater than consoles...PC's are not uniform, there are those that have low end and high end pc's. When you pay for a console you get uniformity and good graphics albeit not the best. typically with PC gaming you have to upgrade certain parts every now and then, but with a console you can be assured that you'll be able to game for a good 5-10 years on your machine. It's the stability, you never have PC gamer thoughts run through your head, like " can my system run this?". Both have their benefits. But logically it makes sense to get consoles which are devoted to gaming. PC's give you the best graphics, no uniformity, within 10 years in order to max out games available there has to be several upgrades made. Console good graphics, the best games and exclusives, uniformity at a reasonable price.
Azuske  +   301d ago
Word to Nvidia's boss. While graphics do have to look good in games... they don't have to be better than PC graphics to be a better game. Examples: The Last Of Us, Uncharted, SOME Final Fantasy games, Kingdom Hearts, Killzone. Basically exclusives are more than half of the time better than multi platform(not including COD and Battlefield because those games are damn well good on any platform).
gazgriff2k12  +   301d ago
i wish nvidia would STFU and never speak again
bumnut  +   301d ago
Why? They made the GPU for PS3
Honestly this is only true if devs actually use the pc hardware.

I hate when they say "we want every platform to look the same" becuz console players will complain.

But also this is looking to be true! Usually console are neck and neck with pc at first! Now ps4 can't even handle battlefield 4 like pc can.. And next gen is not even here yet!
#1.19 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
Death  +   301d ago
A gaming PC has always had better graphics than consoles. Resolution alone on PC is much, much higher than what consoles can ever do due to HDTV limitations. Reading the article you can see it is 100% damage control by Nvidia since both consoles went with AMD chips. If anything, the next gen of consoles will look better than many PC's with the gap getting more narrow. How this guy thinks PC is jumping ahead now is beyond me.
ala_767  +   301d ago
In the Article it says "Sony and Microsoft and afford to spend that much on Graphics research " LOL These companies are trying to find afordable game console rather than super expensive PC
Tsar4ever  +   301d ago
At first when I saw the title of this post I thought this Nvidia boss was looking for an excuse to take some PR shots at AMD. But after reading this article I for one absolutlly agree with him. I'm glad consoles adopted pc hardware to save cost & make gaming development way less painful then ever. And more console AAA exclusives WILL be ported to pc this gen because of the pc hardware compatibility. As much as I want the next–gen consoles to excel, especially the PS4. I find some of the pathetic responses of some of these console fanboys in such complete DENILE of the gaming PC obvious superior brute power per wattage, really fucking REPULSIVE!!
SDS Gamerfiend  +   301d ago
Plz my Radeon HD 6970 2GB GDDR5 16gb Ripjaws gaming series ram and AMD phenom II X6 1100T Black Edition CPU kills the Xbox one and PS4! PC rules!!! Upgrading to 7990 soon!
Sarick  +   301d ago
How big is your modern games library? I'm asking about about the modern games that utilize that systems full potential and where created in the past few years? Are you able to fully emulate the exclusive games from all major consoles?

Those are nice specs but sometimes we don't have the same access to all games on the PC. To my knowledge some popular exclusives can only be played on consoles.

On another note:

I think this boss is prepping the PC/console market for their super high end SteamBox contracts. I would assume they'd have some agreements with valve and other PC makers to make advanced SteamBox GPU hardware.

When given the recent SteamBox announcement What better way to hype the advantages of PC gaming then to promote the higher potential of PCs? Coincidence or well planned marketing strategy. Only time will tell.
#1.23.1 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report
AD705  +   301d ago
It amazes me that people still use the whole "2000 dollar pc that you have to upgrade every 6-12 months" to hate on the pc. I've been gaming on the pc since 1997 and during that time I've only had to upgrade and buy parts like 3 times and it never costed over 1,000 dollars.

If I had to factor in all the consoles I have bought from the NES to the ps3 it's way over the 1,000-3,000 gaming pc that consoles fanboys always talk about.

If you factor in all the consoles people buy it's wayyyyy over a gaming pc.

As for games it's all suggestive. Personally I didn't even give a damn about the ps3 until uncharted 2 came out in 2009 of october. For almost 3 years it was a dust collector except for playing mgs4. Regardless of the "powa of teh cell and bluray" the ps3 got the short end of the stick when it came to multiplats, the online was shitty. Hell the only things the ps3 had going for it were a handful of exclusives and bluray which it didn't get until years later.

the 360 had halo and gears and that was it. Other than that it was paying for shit you had free somewhere else. A motion sensing camera that didn't do shit for gaming, and the constant hardware problems that plague it for years.

I think we know all about the wii and what a disaster that was save for a few 1st party exclusives. Atleast consoles back then had good shit to play and every library was unique. This gen consoles share 90% of the same games that all play better on the pc.

As for graphics. If console gamers and fanboys don't care for graphics then how can they explain all the talk about how "ps4 is 50% more powerful" and the constant talk about which console has the better graphics that has been happening on this website for the last 8 years? It's not just n4g either.

IGN, gamespot, gametrailers, G4, destructoid, polygon, eurogamer, and every other gaming site out there. Its full of console gamers arguing mostly over console graphics superiority. and pc gamers only care for graphics?
solar  +   301d ago
what really pisses me off about console gamers is they think because we buy $500 graphics cards is because we want to be better. IT IS NOT THAT AT ALL! it is about the technology. not bragging rights
NnT3291  +   301d ago
The thing is PC will never be fully utilized. I agree that consoles are not as powerful, but it still takes developers a lot of effort, time and money to push them to the limit.
mark134uk  +   301d ago
its like having a ferrari and not being able to afford the petrol,you can spend $$$$$ on a pc to make it great but your games are still mostly console ports
TAURUS-555  +   301d ago
and...whos gonna buy a 2,500 pc just to see great graphics...?...no one.

thats why consoles are better. end of story.
solar  +   301d ago
stop talking about graphics. for the last 7 years all ive heard from you console turds about how much graphics matter when your stupid piece of plastic might have an edge.

people pay money for their hobby, whether it be fast cars, gaming PC's, a bad ass camera for photography, who are you to think because someone is paying money into their hobby it is a "waste of money"?

i really wish this website had an age limit
AD705  +   301d ago
LOL what kind of a pc gamer updates his hardware every 2 years? We always hear from console fanboys that you have to upgrade every few years yet I don't know 1 pc gamer who does that at all. Same with having a 2,000 dollar gaming pc as well.

Why don't console fanboys learn a thing or two about pc gaming before they go around spreading falsehoods about it? Because it's clearly obvious that most haven't gamed on the pc at all.
solar  +   301d ago
since the beginning of time consoles mates cry from the rooftops graphics dont matter. yet this thread of 300 comments
d3nworth1  +   301d ago
It not even that. Nvidia is just butt hurt that none of the consoles are using their gpus anymore. If you notice AMD hasnt made any negative statements about the consoles.
kewlkat007  +   301d ago
I'm sure a Mark Cerny says article will come out soon about PS4 doing 4k games and 1080p 60fps on all games...
British_Knight  +   301d ago
I don't understand how this is news. PS4 costs $399 and XBOX One cost $499. People are still criticizing Microsoft for that price. My cousin spent $800 on his PC rig; the bundle was worth near a $1000. His PC is middle of the road and it's extremely powerful. Imagine spending $1500 on a graphics card; that's insane.

I prefer consoles over PC, because consoles get more dev support. Lastly, gaming isn't all about graphics. Gameplay, story, voice work and artistic style are equally as important - I'm speaking in regards to PC exclusives in comparison to console exclusives.

Cross platform titles - CoD, Battlefield, etc, will always look better on a supercharged PC on max settings.
Sephiroushin  +   301d ago
It's possible, it will just take a lot amount of money to make a super strong GPU, CPU this and that for the console, at the end of the day the console will cost something like $2,000? and after 1 or 2 months there will be better parts on PC in the market ... It's possible not likely though, and just a stupid move if done, business wise not profitable because such console won't sell at all and will be destined to fail ...
ErcsYou  +   301d ago
Unless the consoles were 1200 watts with 3 titan gpus and cost $3000 dollars. All i want is a gtx 780 and it costs more than either next gen console. $400 for a next gen console that plays games that look better than last gen is a deal to me.
black0o  +   301d ago
comparing a 300-500 consoles to 1-3k pc is stupid, nividia is just but#%* from the fact that AMD tech will for the few next years thx to AMD support for the consoles
Sony360  +   301d ago
It's never a "1-3k PC", because you can always just upgrade one or two components in a PC for a couple of hundred, and it will run better than any console.
rmatthe5  +   301d ago
You don't need a GTX 780 to play games on pc.
Snakefist30  +   301d ago
Yeah U do need GTX780 for the long run!!
Petro  +   301d ago
Try Arma 3. :P
xKugo  +   301d ago
If you don't want to upgrade in the next few years, it's best you get either a 780 or a dual GPU setup(something like dual GTX 570s SLI).Next-gen consoles are going to drive the bar by a sizable margin, so it's best to make sure that the GPU you have will be able to keep for the duration of this gen if you don't want to upgrade more than once to keep gaming at max-settings.
DoctorJones  +   301d ago
I just bought a gtx 670 for under £180 and it pretty much maxes every game out, it will last me quite a while.

Why would I spend over £500 on a 780 when by the time it comes for me to want or need an upgrade I'll be able to buy a card which is probably more powerful than the 780 for around the same price as what my 670 cost me?

No one HAS to have a 780 at all, that's totally false, and costly. If anything I could game with it for a couple of years and then add another 670 which would probably cost me around £50 on Ebay.

It's a complete falsehood that you have to spend big money or buy the latest cards to enjoy pc gaming, you just have to be a bit sensible with your cash.

EDIT:I'll add as well that the card I had before was a 570 which I sold on Ebay for £85, so the total cost of my 670 was £95.

This is another aspect you need to think of when it comes to cost. Your old card doesn't just go in the bin, it goes towards the cost of your next one. Like trading in an old car.
#3.2.4 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(8) | Disagree(5) | Report
Kenshin_BATT0USAI  +   301d ago
That all aside, I think the ideal experience is a good gaming rig + a console of your choice. Sony tends to deliver the JRPG goodness I want, so things have worked well for me.
The_Infected  +   301d ago
No it's not but consoles gamers have an equal experience. I know I couldn't live without playing Sony's amazing 1st party games. It's not all about graphics Nvidia.

Edit: I bet if Nvidia tech was used in next gen consoles they'd be praising the hell out of them.
#4 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(19) | Disagree(8) | Report | Reply
Pandamobile  +   301d ago
I dunno. You miss out on entire genres of games if you only game on a console.
_QQ_  +   301d ago
exactly,do console only gamers even know what an RTS or MOBA game is?
#4.1.1 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(11) | Disagree(9) | Report
sirwut  +   301d ago
example: hentai games
HeyImBen11  +   301d ago
@lopez_josue

Wow you make no sense. You act like console gamers have no PC. You forget that 99% of all "console" gamers have a PC to play these few games. Even my 7 year old PC could run Dota, Lol and Starcraft 2.

And Where are all these great RTS? Company of Heroes 2 was the last one, and it was months ago. Every good RTS, age of empires, command and conquer etc. are several years old and can even be enjoyed by the worst pc.

And btw, Moba's suck.
#4.1.3 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(6) | Disagree(8) | Report
Volkama  +   301d ago
"I know I couldn't live without playing Sony's amazing 1st party games."

Seek help.
razrye  +   301d ago
U r a dick
d3nworth1  +   301d ago
Exactly AMD hasnt made a negative statement about the consoles.
Pandamobile  +   301d ago
I'm willing to bet that in 3 years, the average home computer (not even specifically a gaming computer) will out power both next-gen consoles by a significant margin.

In 2016, a mid-range laptop will be able to produce graphics at the same level as the PS4, if not more.
Caffo01  +   301d ago
and yet you guys always forget about games optimization on consoles..
pixelsword  +   301d ago
Optimization is key; whereas most PC devs just up the specs, console devs typically optimize to the point that the console can remain competitive up to the end.
Pandamobile  +   301d ago
Yeah, but these are already well-established devices. Many of those optimizations they will make will help out PC as well. The PS3 and 360 were very different machines to PC. They had some power behind them that took 4+ years to surface.

Devs will be near-maxing out PS4 and One with the first couple years of their life cycle.
#5.1.2 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(15) | Disagree(9) | Report
Caffo01  +   301d ago
"Many of those optimizations they will make will help out PC as well"
Yes, but having a fixed hw will help optimizing more on consoles than pc.
LordSane  +   301d ago
Not optimization but mostly hard work of the game designers.
Caffo01  +   301d ago
lol at disagrees..
having all ps4 the same hw, developers can optimize for THAT graphic card, processor etc..
I have a decent pc that can do graphics surely better than ps3, I'm not saying ps4 will outperform every pc, but having THAT hw across all ps4 (or x1) will help developers to not fall too much behind pc in the coming years, just like ps3 and x360. I think everyone can understand that.
ramiuk1  +   301d ago
yep and also hav a 200w psu and draiing national grid
prodg52  +   301d ago
It will cost more too. The majority of console gamers don't care that PC's have better graphics or that they are more powerful. The whole point of a console is accessibility. Cheaper/ Ease of use (controller)/ Plug and play.

KID: "Mom I want a i7 PC with Corsair Vengeance 32GB DDR3, and radeon 7970 3GB video card."
MOM: "How about I get you an XBox?"
Pandamobile  +   301d ago
And this may be where the SteamBox comes in. Curb the whole "PC IS TOO EXPENSIVE :(" mentality.

Also, expensive is relative. Every person needs a computer. It's a necessary part of modern life to either work or communicate on a personal computer. $1000 for a new laptop every 3 or 4 years isn't really that bad. $400 for a new console whose sole purpose is video games - that's bit expensive.
#5.3.1 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(10) | Report
SilentNegotiator  +   301d ago
Let's not kid ourselves; most laptops aren't built to live past 2 years and $1000 laptops aren't the best sellers for a reason (if that's affordable for you, good for you - but it isn't for most).

$400 for a console every 7 years is not bad.
#5.3.2 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(10) | Disagree(4) | Report
Pandamobile  +   301d ago
Yeah, it's not. I'm just saying that a laptop or desktop can be an investment, whereas a gaming console is an entertainment expense.
starchild  +   301d ago
A good Blu-ray player also costs more than a crappy DVD player, but I didn't know the point was always to go for the cheapest thing possible. If that were the case then we should all buy the Ouya or something like that and call it a day.

Sometimes you pay more to get a higher quality experience.

In any case, the PC is only more costly out of the gate. Over the years of ownership the costs swings back in favor of the PC. On console you will end up spending more due to online gaming fees and more expensive games.
SilentNegotiator  +   301d ago
And in 2016, PS4 will cost $200-300 and the computers that outdo it will cost $600+

So what? Same old story as always.
duplissi  +   301d ago
A 600 dollar pc outdoes it now, if only slightly.
MidnytRain  +   301d ago
A rig that outdoes it NOW will cost $600... The same parts will probably cost $400 to $500 by that time.
RyuCloudStrife  +   301d ago
someone is speaking out of their rear again LOL
2pacalypsenow  +   301d ago
yeah a 2016 computer will have 2013 ps4 graphics, while ps4 games will look even better than now compare 2006 game to a 2012 and tell me it looks the same
Pandamobile  +   301d ago
Nah. I'm afraid we aren't going to see that monumental graphical leap any time soon. I don't foresee games in 2018 looking THAT much better than they do today.

For one, it's getting harder and harder to make things look better.

You console guys aren't moving into the HD era all over again. You're going from the HD era to the slightly Higher-Def HD era.
#5.6.1 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(11) | Disagree(8) | Report
SlapHappyJesus  +   301d ago
The $1,500 PC I built seven months ago will be running BF4 at a constant 60 (if the specs are to be any indicator) at 2560x1440 . . .
Why would I need a 2016 PC to outperform the new consoles?
webeblazing  +   301d ago
what???
are you saying pc in 2016 will be weaker than today's pc??? LMAO
layoff the paint chips

see this is what pc gamers be talking about. to think I use defend ps fanboys
#5.6.3 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report
bjmartynhak  +   301d ago
I agree, but should we wait?

Or for how long a $400 PC today is going to be still relevant?
Consoldtobots  +   301d ago
I just had to roll back my manufacturers GPU driver and replace it with the Nvidia version JUST to get FIFA 14 to run AT ALL.

I don't see casual consumers putting up with that kind of crap.
WeAreLegion  +   301d ago
Never has been possible. I game primarily on my PS3/Vita, but I game on my laptop or desktop all the time. I love Steam and all the amazing PC games. Why would anyone only game on PC or only on consoles? Either way, you'd be missing out on some of the best games ever made.
Caffo01  +   301d ago
i agree but consoles are the easier and cheaper way to play.
#6.1 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(12) | Disagree(8) | Report | Reply
rmatthe5  +   301d ago
Games on consoles are 60 dollars a piece so how is that cheaper? And when a new console comes out you have to just buy the new one with no option to upgrade your current console ?
#6.1.1 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(8) | Disagree(7) | Report
pixelsword  +   301d ago
Games on consoles are 60 dollars a piece so how is that cheaper?

2000/60 = 33.3

alienware's top of the line starts off at 2000 smackers
http://www.dell.com/us/p/al...

so I could either get 33 games or alienware.

And will this computer be top of the line in seven years?

How about in the next three?

That's kinda the balance that happens between the two in terms of arguments.
Persistantthug  +   301d ago
@rmatthe5,

Many new AAA budget games on PC are $60 on Steam as well.

Also, having the ability to buy, sell, or trade any game at will because you own the disk is a massive advantage.

Ownership does own.

Just sayin
SilentNegotiator  +   301d ago
"Games on consoles are 60 dollars a piece so how is that cheaper?"

Did you fall back in time 5 years when new PC games weren't $60? Oh no! Follow my voice, rmatthe5! I swear I will get you back to the present!
Caffo01  +   301d ago
ok, games are cheaper... what about the pc itself? i'll buy PS4 for 400 euros and won't upgrade to next-next-gen until PS5 will come out.
What if i pay 600-700 for a mid-range pc? Won't be able to play games on max from the start and 2-3 years from now i'll be stuck playing on low settings if i don't want to upgrade.
#6.1.5 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(5) | Report
rmatthe5  +   301d ago
@ pixelsword Alienware is known to jack up their prices really high. You can build a pc for just 500 dollars.
Kenshin_BATT0USAI  +   301d ago
No it really isn't. You make think it is. But the amount of new releases I've gotten for over %40 off on my PC have been crazy. More than makes up for the cost of a $1500 rig. Which you can spend even less than.
duplissi  +   301d ago
LOL... you dont need a 2000 dollar pc. you guys are delusional. A pc that costs less than half that will be able to max the vast majority of games out there now, and then you factor in that the games are cheaper (not always directly from steam or origin, you want to check cd key sites or game deal sites such as greenmangaming)

I have not spent over 35 dollars on a game at or around launch this year. Some were cheaper (try 5 bucks) but for the most part they were all around 30 bucks.

So lets add up the money I spent on new (at lauch or shortly after) games this year.

Bioshock infinite
Tomb Raider
Far Cry 3
Far Cry 3 Blood Dragon
Splinter Cell Blacklist
Saints Row 4
Crysis 3
Remember Me
Dead Space 3
Hitman absolution

that is about 300 dollars spent on new games this year, and for console that would be about double, and this is not factoring in the games I would buy at sales like the steam summer sale. Now this is not to say I am saving money on games, in fact I just turn around in put that money into my pc to make it better. That 300 is a new monitor, gpu, cpu, keyboard, sound card, headset, etc. so you see the money you save on games can go to maintain your system so it is not out of date.

The real advantage of a console is less maintenance, and initial price of entry. some people cant afford more than 400 or 500 for their gaming habbit, so think of a console like a cell phone contract where the phone's price is subsidized and you pay for it in the long run, and pc gaming like buying your phone outright and going pre paid (overall cheaper but you must be able to afford bigger investments every so often when you need to replace parts.)
#6.1.8 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(1) | Report
bromtown  +   301d ago
Here's the thing. PC's are obviously better and have been for a while, only an idiot would deny it but it's expenditure = experience. Playing modern games on a PC is a fluid investment, graphics cards need updating, RAM needs adding, you have to account for overheads due to OS, and general inefficiency of components over time whereas a console is always going to be favourable to a lot of people because you just plug it in and off you go.

You can build a decent rig for the same price as an Xbox One or PS4 but in a years time it'll be getting tired, and you have to spend another $100 on it. And so on every time a new innovation or manufacturing process appears. Meanwhile that console you bought 5 years ago is still plugging away and is perfectly enjoyable.
rmatthe5  +   301d ago
After the console cycle is over games will stop being made for that console therefore you have to buy another console at 400 dollars or more. An example is the ps3 when it first came out. The ps3 cost 600 dollars so after 10 years its obsolete. Another cost is the games which is 60 dollars per game when they first come out. If you buy 20 games that is 1200 dollars just for games. So now when the new console comes out you will be spending another 400 dollars on the console. So spending 100 dollars is no big deal.
bromtown  +   301d ago
My PS3 isn't obsolete, still play it nearly everyday :)

$400 every 8-10 years is preferable to $100 every 12-18 months to most, but you've got me on games.

Personally I buy very few new retail games, only things like The Last of Us and GTA V, but I do get PS+ games which is a very good deal.
dragonyght  +   301d ago
Lol really now I'm curious for the last 7-8 years of this Ps3/360 consoles circle how many time you had to update your PC or brought a new one. come on enlighten us
Kenshin_BATT0USAI  +   301d ago
@Dragon

Once, one part, recently. Graphics card. Spent $400ish on a new one. Outperforms whatever the PS4 and X1 has by a landslide.
annus  +   301d ago
Meanwhile the money you saved on cheaper games and not paying for online gets to sit in the bank piling up, ready to upgrade for a better experience at less of a cost.
razrye  +   301d ago
Consoles give security. Pc gives damn all
annus  +   301d ago
Security as in what? Limiting what you can do? PSN breach doesn't count as failed security? You saying there aren't hackers on console? I present to you CoD4 and CoD MW. That had hackers out of control. People flying, under the maps, inside of buildings, slow motion, laser bullets, and all other crap. Took WEEKS to fix, and that whole time it basically unplayable. That was on both PS3 and 360. On PC a hacker comes into a match and they get banned straight away by the admin.
ghostrider32  +   301d ago
It's all about graphics and power, until a PC gamer comes into the picture.
_QQ_  +   301d ago
Yup the hypocrisy is hilarious.Then they talk about price and good deal is what matters yet they are willing to pay 250$ extra for 5 years worth of online play on a machine that only does gaming.
#8.1 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(7) | Disagree(4) | Report | Reply
strigoi814  +   301d ago
$400 =\= $1000

Nvidia stop it you are just making yourself stupid, even parents would never consider buying their child or teen a pc that can play games on maxed out settings
Zizi  +   301d ago
I think this statement is misleading. People play videogames (all included; the gameplay, the graphics, the story, and every other thing).

If people buy videogames just to see the graphics, I think we are in a different world here. Haha...
sirwut  +   301d ago
Indie games all the way man.
coolasj  +   301d ago
I mean, when you're running 2 $1000 graphics cards, you better be able to have a prettier game than a console. Seeing as how First Party PS4 games are almost all running at 1080p 60fps, I expect that to hopefully stay that way as they use the hardware more. Or maybe it'll swing the other way, who knows.
Kenshin_BATT0USAI  +   301d ago
You and I both know nothing good looking is in 1080p and 60fps. As games do more things and look better it'll dip lower again, like this gen. That's just how it works. If you want games to look ps3 quality, then it might be possible, otherwise, no, it won't happen.

And don't you dare include indie games, low budget titles with pixelated graphics aren't exactly contenders for best looking game.
aquamala  +   301d ago
with 2 $1000 graphics cards you can play games in 4K, play games in only 1080p 60fps you don't need to spend more than $200-$300.
webeblazing  +   301d ago
its funny cause before the new consoles was announced a lot of people on the site said 1080p game weren't need and the effects and the gfx pc gamers had wasn't that much of a leap but now yall acting like pc gamers never had this or it just don't matter til yall have it.

I remember a lot of times Pandamobile use to try to explain stuff on here and even say games look different when you playing them compare to youtube vid. and now yall using it. yall sad. kinda pathetic

not directed at you commented wrong post
#11.3 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
Tripe_Down  +   301d ago
Look at the PS3 and Beyond what they can do after seven year and then do the same on a seven years old PC.
annus  +   301d ago
I bet a 7 year old PC can play a game and voice chat to someone playing a different game.
krazykombatant  +   301d ago
LOL bubbles for the funny
bumnut  +   301d ago
Playstation Network, the only gaming network where you need a mobile phone by your side :)
sirwut  +   301d ago
Yes, on low setting.
5h4h4b  +   301d ago
Nvidia pffft hahaha

What a bunch of butthurts. Rofl
_QQ_  +   301d ago
They still dominate the mobile market which is 10X bigger than the console market.
5h4h4b  +   301d ago
Here you go bro. Read it!
Http://beta.fool.com/techju...
Bolts  +   301d ago
Nvidia is failing hard with their Tegra 3 because it's basically a giant GPU tasked to compute mobile OS. The result is a slow and power hungry mobile chip, but damn the graphics are good.

Even then their initiatives are taking them into new markets. Because unlike AMD, they understand that when you're tied to the PC and consoles, the only thing there to do is to die a slow and certain death. The very high end PC market is shrinking, and the console business are low margin to the point of subsistence. You can't grow a business there.
_QQ_  +   301d ago
I just read, Sucks for Nvidia,ive always preferd Nvidia cards.
MidnytRain  +   301d ago
People keep calling them butthurt and "too focused on graphics" or something like that... Isn't that what their company is ABOUT?
KruLLit  +   301d ago
Haha, Console fanboys bashes the crap out of Wii U because it has bad graphics but as soon as there is an article about PC vs consoles, they are talking about about how the games are much better on consoles and graphics doesn't matter.
2pacalypsenow  +   301d ago
I dont care i enjou the game with or without good graphics same gameplay
bumnut  +   301d ago
Im a bad graphics whore so I game on PC :)
2pacalypsenow  +   301d ago
i game on pc too just sli two 670's but i stell get some games on consoles
monkeyfox  +   301d ago
nvidia should shut the fk up - trying to get PC and console fans riled up again.. ffs this is a bullshit augment always has been always fkin will be.

Of course a PC can match /better what consoles are doing.. they are an open ended platforms, they are designed to be upgraded every few sodding months.. and at considerable cost i might add

Doesnt stop console devs producing some of the best games this generation however.. and on 7-8 year tech! Just finished the last of us.. bloody awesome and theres nothing like it on PC...
MidnytRain  +   301d ago
"nvidia should shut the fk up"

Wasn't this an interview? What was he supposed to do? Give the interviewer the silent treatment?
GinkgoID  +   301d ago
I struggle to understand why this is even still a conversation.

It is clear that technology is always improving, and that PCs which are released with updates regularly and can be continuously upgraded with the latest tech.

Consoles stuck in time for 6-7 years will always be behind. That is not news.

However, console advantages are numerous and with the release of Next Gen, the current gap between very high end PCs and consoles will be greatly reduced, with only a very small % of people having better PCs. Though clearly that % will grow over time as new tech appears and people upgrade their PCs.

Consoles architecture is streamlined for gaming in ways that PCs aren't (e.g. unified memory). This allows them to punch way above they weight for a lower price-point. You are paying 2-3 times for a more powerful PC.

Consoles are all the same/consistent, so it is much easier to just plug in the disk and it just works (generally).

Few people have PCs in the living room, so consoles are geared towards sitting on the couch playing with a large flat screen, which is awesome. Can be done with a PC sure, but that is not where most people have them, and it sucks to use a mouse on the sofa.

One deciding factor is games. There are way more games on consoles, however, MMOs have been largely the domain of PCs, so if that is your thing then PCs are the only valid choice. However, with the next gen, there are more and more MMOs coming across to console (especially PS4 at this point). So that equations has changed somewhat, though PCs still have the advantage.

If you have the time, money, energy and know-how, to stay up with the latest tech, then PC is the way to go and will ensure that you are always playing at the optimum level available.

For the vast majority who fail at least one or two of those criteria, then consoles offer a great value proposition. Relatively cheap entry cost, just turn on and start playing. Set for 6-7 years without hassle.
JackStraw  +   301d ago
on the internet, anybody who knows of the terms cpu & gpu know all there is to know about computers and how they work, etc. they don't even have to know what the terms mean. silly.

you kids lol. you try so hard to prove "pc > consoles" etc etc. if it was so true, it would need no proof. it would just simply be true, and your knowledge of that truth would suffice. the very fact that you argue so fervently is a subtle admittance of defeat.
Gamingsince75   301d ago | Spam
ziggurcat  +   301d ago
Nvidia can't seem to let go of the butthurt over MS, and Sony going with AMD, can't they...
TheOneEyedHound  +   301d ago
I hate nerdy Mmos, so I'll live :)

I mean, I can't invite my friends to play these games, some of my friends don't even know they exist. I got stuff to do, console gaming is rich and easy, it helps. I come home(Always Drunk)from a party, maybe always around 2-3am and I pop in Uncharted 3, The Last of Us or even Call of Duty for zombies and have some quick matches with my friends. It wouldn't feel the same on PC, believe me I used to game on it 4yrs ago, I played nothing but Runescape and Multiplats(which I really didn't want to play on my pc, I felt better playing them on my ps3 getting trophies) Not bad gaming on PC there's some games that are addicting as hell, but it's not my life style to be on the computer 10-18hours a day.
#19 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(6) | Report | Reply
WitWolfy  +   301d ago
SMH.. The flamebait in this article is astonishing...
#20 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
Mr_Writer85  +   301d ago
This

PC will always have better graphics it's a fact of life.

But the console version of games still look good, it's not like we are comparing a PS3 to Atari 2006 graphics FFS.

More importantly the game plays the same on both platforms. And gameplay always trumps graphics.
boing1  +   301d ago
Hey Nvidia boss, ever heard of art direction?
Soldierone  +   301d ago
Cool story. Graphics don't mean everything. Crisis looks mind blowing, but is one of the most dull shooters on the market. Meanwhile COD has looked like a PS2 game for almost a decade and sells more units than everything out there.

You spent double on your PC, I sure hope you see a benefit somewhere..... now stop bragging and go play games.... geez.
RVanner_  +   301d ago
I definitely agree that we should all get along and just play games.

However graphics do play such an important role in the experience and immersion into the game which forms a large part of the enjoyment.

You can play a game on console, then the same game on PC and find you enjoy it twice as much. Graphics just suck you into the game world that bit more. I admit Crysis is pretty pony!
Soldierone  +   301d ago
Sure it adds to it, but it isn't everything. If I had to choose from the most brilliant looking game in the world, or the most fun game in the world. I pick fun.
iamnsuperman  +   301d ago
And you pay for that privilege.
clouds5  +   301d ago
Guys the article is purely about the graphics. And it's true the consoles have no chance against PC in the graphics department. We don't have to argue about that - as the guy said: Its simple math. PC has more power. End of story.

BUT (big but) since the xbox360 and ps3 consoles have become the main development platform for games. Therefor you have alot of very good games with big budgets on consoles even if the graphics are less impressive than on PC.

Now with xb1 and ps4 we have a completely new situation. Everything is x86. There is NO reason not to release games on PC anymore. How long does it take to "port" a game to PC? They are already optimized for x86, they use more or less the same hardware, they already make use of 8GB ram....
-->Every "next gen" game should be on PC. PC has the biggest install base. Even with piracy it should be a profit, considering you need very little effort to release for it.
tontontam0  +   301d ago
Exclusive first party games would still make me buy the ps4 and the xbox one,if i have the money.

No matter how hard you wish there will still be games exclusive to consoles.
clouds5  +   300d ago
Yes of course. You know I love gaming i dont care on which system I do it (I have a Microsoft Windows PC, a Nintendo WiiU, a Sony PS2 and an android phone with a mobile gamepad).
But I personally hate spending money on different things that all do the same. If exclusives are the only thing that is differentiating gaming systems from each other its kinda lame...
For example WiiU at least has something special to offer^^
But PS4 and Xbox1 (and in some ways PC too) kinda offer the same thing atm right down to the hardware.

In reality there will always be exclusives and I'm fine with that because there are always ways to play these games anyway without spending too much money (borrowed a PS3 for TLOU and I'll get a used 360 for other exclusives after the xb1 launch).

But it would be nice if you could buy one system that does all the games, wouldnt it? I don't think any Gamer (consumer!) would be opposed to that.

The gaming industry is special in this way you know. For example you dont have to buy 2 different TVs to watch movies from Warner Bros and Universal^^ And you dont need seperate cars to drive to different countries...
You see what I mean?
quenomamen  +   301d ago
You BSers wherent saying that last gen when MS was writing you guys checks
ooquis  +   301d ago
"your average consumer": NO LONGER WILL I PAY $500 FOR A FUCKING GRAPHICS CARD EVERY 2 YEARS!!!!!!nVIDIa GO FUCK YOURSELF.
#26 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(4) | Disagree(8) | Report | Reply
rmatthe5  +   301d ago
There is no need to buy 500 dollars graphics cards to play the latest games.
ooquis  +   301d ago
Don't mind my comment. I'm going threw a mid-life crisis so i don't really care about fuckoll.
MultiConsoleGamer  +   301d ago
So what?

If graphics are all that matters to you then play all your games on PC.
Are_The_MaDNess  +   301d ago
its much more than that to PC gaming.
higher framerates
faster respons time
cleaner and less blurry picture
better digital framework (with steam)
more and better control with a mouse a keyboard
faster digital downloads on steam over PSN and Live
be able to sell gun and gear in steam for real money that you can use for games and other things.
MultiConsoleGamer  +   301d ago
Mouse Keyboard gameplay is sh**.

Consoles have better exclusives, are cheaper and easier to use with far less hassle. Most of what you said is still related to eye candy.

Now, don't get me wrong, I own a gaming PC too, despite my name. I just think PC elitists are missing out on all the fun.
ded1020  +   301d ago
As someone that believed what he read on the interwebs about how hassle-free gaming on PC has become and spent $$$ to build a gaming PC, I have to disagree with you.

My PS3 with PS+ trumps my gaming PC so hard it's almost laughable that people suggest Steam is a valid alternative for the majority.
Gamingsince75   301d ago | Spam
ded1020  +   301d ago
It's not that my pc couldn't handle it. My point was more about PS+ and the value proposition.

we've seen many articles showing that it's the shithouse bargain PC market that is contracting due to tablets and what not, not the enthusiast market.

(Almost) no studio cares for the enthusiast PC market except for those that get moneyhatted by Nvidia to implement proprietary eye candy.

Diablo 3, Left4Dead, League of Legends, DOTA, etc. That's PC gaming. Please don't act as if every PC game out there is a graphical powerhouse like Crysis or Battlefield.
#27.1.4 (Edited 301d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(4) | Report
DoctorJones  +   301d ago
It's funny how everyone will only talk about the headline but if you read the interview he does make a lot of sense, and he leaves the interview with this, which I think a lot of people would actually agree with -

'That’s great, because if devs are spending all this time optimising for a PS4 or Xbox One, then a good portion of that will benefit the PC, because they’re basically doing PC architecture optimisation. It’s good for everyone – the developers don’t have all these crazy architectures they have to sort through. 80% of their work is now applicable to all platforms. It’s great for gamers, as games can be better on all platforms. And it’s great for PC, as there’s less weird divergence between consoles and PC, which means a lot more leverage for devs to raise the bar. If there were technological reasons that games weren’t ported to the PC in the past, there are a lot less of those reasons come next-gen.'
Welcome2Die  +   301d ago
I'll take the popularity (more people to play with)
The ease of use.
and the not jumping through hoops to play a multiplat game at 120 fps.
Not to mention the cost. 400 bucks for a console that will last me years to 600-1000 for a rig that will become obsolete in 2 years.
windblowsagain  +   301d ago
Pc's can always be upgraded, but you still need development in other area's in PC, Namely dx etc.

Alot of pc games also rely on older engines because of older gpu's etc. Brute force is where PC gpu's are at.

Gpucompute wise, PS4 is faster then a GTX680. Because amd are faster in this area even with a 7870 etc.

Shader wise, texture wise. Will be close.

Only area i can see PC looking better is REZ,AA.

Crysis 3 in Places does look Awesome on PC.

But i think regardless. Pick what games suit you the most.
« 1 2 3 4 5 »

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
Remember
New stories
30°

Planet Explorers: SteamFirst Impressions

1h ago - SteamFirst: Every Saturday morning as a child, I would be glued to my TV in eager anticipation of... | PC
40°

Let's Play - Trine 2

2h ago - Join Geoff, Jack, and Gavin as they play Trine 2. | PC
20°

Let's Build in Minecraft - Monopoly Part 3

2h ago - Geoff and Gavin are back building in Minecraft for "Monopoly Part 3." | PC
40°

First Hour: Oddworld: New ‘n’ Tasty

2h ago - Abe is BACK in this remake of the Playstation 1 classic! Colin checks out the First Hour of Oddwo... | PC
Ad

Looking for a great Pokemon Community?

Now - Look no further. Join us at the BulbaGarden Forums, the best community for everything Pokemon | Promoted post
30°

United Eleven Gains 300 Players and Spor Toto Super Lig

2h ago - Nexon Europe proudly presents a new addition of available professional soccer players for their b... | PC