With next gen systems rumored to be using AMD based GPUs, a look at what gamers can expect right out of the gate.
i think next gen games will surpass crysis 2 and crysis 3 on ultra settings especially the games like killzone 4 or uncharted 4
Lol I find it hilarious pc gamers think console graphics next gen will look like crysis or battlefield. I remember when half life 2 and fear was classified as next gen standard and microsoft and sony showed gears, killzone, motor storm and resistance. then every pc gamer was like OooKK, then after 3 years they start back their whole I am superior non sense.
I could not agree more! The original Gears of War IMO had better graphics than Half Life 2, FEAR and the original Far Cry all on PC. PS4 and 720 will have much better graphics than Crysis 2 and 3 without a doubt. And easily better graphics than Battlefield 3. If they don't then there is a problem - they can't be 'next gen'.
When they finally utilize 4k Res, and it will happen eventually, you'll see the potential of games. For now it'll be a good jump but the real beauty will be in the 4k. Check out the YouTube vids of it. Especially if they can get a decent fps.
Consoles also had the "pc is dead" phase, I guess it evens out. Both are annoying though.
The beauty of console gaming. It's always evolving as devs learn more and more tricks and push out game updates and system updates. That's why this gen has lasted so much longer IMO. It's nice, no need to try and upgrade my console just to play a game like what tends to happen with PC gamers that just have a more standard PC for gaming.
@Classic200 and stu888 Just to clarify for you two... Half-Life 2 Release date: November 14, 2004 F.E.A.R. Release date: October 18, 2005 Far Cry Release date: March 23, 2004 Killzone Release date: November 2, 2004 Gears of War Release date: November 7, 2006 MotorStorm Release date: December 14, 2006 Resistance: Fall of Man Release date: November 11, 2006 A year or two in game development can make a huge difference in graphics. So it's quite hilarious you all chose games that were released two years after Half-Life 2 and Far Cry to illustrate your point with the exception of Killzone. Which was a PS2 game... if you think a PS2 game looks better than Half-Life 2, you should probably go get an eye exam. I love my consoles but my PC has always had better graphics than any console. It was true back then, and it is true now. Ill give that they have different art styles with are cool, but you cant compare console graphics to PC graphics. One example that still proves my point today, 8x AA. @UnholyLight Thats true of any system. I too like not having to upgrade my console, but Ill tell you now that my current PC was built in November 2008 and hasnt had a single upgrade since then. It can still run all games with the exception of DirectX11 only games, and it still runs almost all games on high settings. Dont underestimate the power of doing research and making a good build. ;)
@MarkusMcNugen I think he meant Killzone 2, which actually had a way later release date, but still at this point, PC gaming has the edge, I think the next gen of consoles will be superior, or at least the PS4 will be, considering what I've been hearing about the next Xbox. Something a lot of PC gamers dont understand (and what a lot of Console gamers understand) is that developers working on the same tech for years enables them to optimize and create better looking games which pc gamers say isn't even possible to begin with, we've seen it with a lot of PS3 exclusives so far, i.e Uncharted series, Last of us, Killzone 2&3, Heavy Rain, God of War, Gran Turismo 5, these games have achieved graphical quality that of a high end PC, and quite frankly the only reason you would deny that is because you have not played them or you choose to ignore it, so yes, I think with next gen, as long as they can pull off better AA and full 1080p games, we should have games on consoles that look just as good if not better than PC's, simply due to the fact that the devs are building games for one setup and one setup only.
Also, u cant use tech straight up to determine the product of consoles. They build the machines to get the most out of the tech. Also, games are built to its strengths. We wont see next gen potential for awhile though so this may be clsoe to initial releases. Look at how graphics have evolved with the same specs in this gen alone. And what about when 4k emerges.
Consoles have a larger maket to target and attain revenue from. Therefore developers will obviously be creating games on the limitations of that hardware. Not the PC or Gtx 680 or whatever. So it comes to the point where games will reach a graphical limit on PC hardware as well because these consoles games are not optimized for high end cards. If you want to see next gen, play The Witcher 2 on PC at max, which was created for PC then ported to 360. Expect the jump to be somewhere near there. You've also forgotten to mention the sub-par hd rendering those games have to have to create a steady frame rate of only 30 if that lol. PC gaming can give you 60FPS in 3D, which is mind blowing. The way I see it is all 3 markets gain something good out of this. Consoles will see prettier graphics with larger environments due to new graphics card, more ram, larger disc size. And PC will also benefit because the lowest norm for graphics will be greater now, boosting the graphics quality of PC games up again. It slowed down quite a bit due to the ever growing limitations of consoles this generation. I hope that all makes sense, you get what I'm saying haha. I'm not too fussed over all of this, I'm just trying to point out certain things. All I want is a third Batman game and a bloody platformer sequel to Banjo Kazooie :(
To the person above me, I've played the witcher 2 on pc with max settings, its not that amazing, sorry, I have a gaming PC, and I've been spending most of my time on my rig rather than consoles lately due to lack of games on consoles as of recent, and yeah, I can max that game out and run it perfectly fine, and it is in no way an amazing looking game, it is a good looking game, but nowhere near next gen.
Better effects != higher quality. The rendering quality, image sharpness and texture sharpness will always be shit on consoles.
Half life 2 was "next-gen" not just in terms of visuals. The A.I. and Story telling were above most games.
Whats Ironic is Console gamers bashing on PC games saying how much Console games look better but as soon as a PC gamer says their PC games look better the Disagree monsters come out to play and console gamers go all superior on the PC gamer. Console gamers are just as bad as PC gamers at the mine is far superior to yours.
@sobekflakmonkey Are you crazy?? If you see some frame rate videos of uncharted 3, it runs at 30 fps with some drops to even 20-22 fps thats horrible, I have played uncharted 3 because i like the game but graphics and fps compared to a game like far cry 3 ultra running at 60 fps it really sucks
I think the last of us is pushing some good graphics that can be close to this , so I feel that the 1st party developers for sony will hit this out the ball park , anything naughtydog does is unbelievable graphic wise from crash bandicoot to the last of us.
Yeah without a doubt!
No doubt they could. But PC tech will get way better after a while than the new systems, but with consoles, developers know everything about them and that everyone has the same thing. Then can exploit that by better optimization and whatnot. For example: Crysis 3 on xbox or ps3. If I had a PC with 512MB of ram and the rest of the innards that these current consoles have, it would just not run!!
Lol at people who think nextgen games will look like that. Nextgen will at least be capable of running that "Lava king" UE4 tech demo. AT LEAST remember how gears used to be a tech demo? Now it looks like crap compared to Halo 4 and Uncharted 3
Ugh. No one seems to understand the cpu's in the new PS and Xbox are based off terrible architecture. Dont get your hopes up too high mates
i know right it said 1.6 ghz..? my laptop has 2.20..and thats below a normal speed of 3 ghz..3 ghz is a standard for gaming
This will probably be the norm though, for 3rd party devs. Sony's first party and a few others will do better.
That's never the case, even when consoles have very powerful CPUs. Let us just look at resolutions (the higher the higher the setting). PS1: 320x240 PC(1994): 640x480 PS2: 640x480 PC(2000): 1024x768 PS3: 1280x720 PC(2006): 1600x1200 PS4: 1920x1080 PC(2013): 2560x1600 That's not to say K4/U4 will end up looking better than Crysis (I've no idea what type of effects they'll try to push, besides look at Oblivion and TLoU, they're both designed around 2006 hardware).
2006 would be 1920x1080
4x increase...2.56x increase(4 years) 3x increase...2.44x increase(6 years) 2.25x increase...2.13x increase(7 years min) Stop trying to create a correlation where there is none. Your completely ignoring too many variables just comparing resolution. Take any 2006 PC that can even run Crysis 2, let alone 3, then take a look at its 2006 price tag. Performance per price, PS3 outdoes it 3x over for sure; same thing every generation. That means expect a $500 PS4 to perform on par with a $1500 PC at at launch. Something like a an Intel Haswell core i7 and a Nvidia Geforce Titan set up. There is a reason why PC gamers shut up for the first three years each generation; that's how long it takes before PC hardware that surpasses consoles become reasonably priced. You can always get more from PC, just a matter of how soon you are willing to fork over for how much more power.
@ZoyosJD Except PCs aren't just to play games and listen to some music and videos. Let the Steam box come out then you can complain about PCs price.
Part 1 Well, for starters, Crysis 2 isn't the best game to show. BF3 would be a better choice(single player), the "enlighten" GI it uses for it's lighting is the best GI to date, it uses pre computed reflector surfaces that can be dynamically changed, the only problem is that it doesn't take into account dynamic objects, on the other hand Enlighten can handle any amount of contributing light sources, while CE3's Light propagating volumes only uses the sun. BF3 has better shaders, much higher poly character models, better textures, but Crysis 2 has higher poly vegetation, and more tessellation. When it comes down to it, BF3 is the closest game to photo-realism, again, I am speaking about its single player, not it's multiplayer, which has 64 people, and massive maps, which means the graphics suffer because of it. But the single player is amazing, the character models and lighting are outstanding. Also, this is coming from a CE3 modder. I love CE3, but FB2 is the one engine I would use over it. Here is a comparison of C2 and BF3 C2 http://earthmachine.home.mc... BF3 http://h12.abload.de/img/ba... More BF3 pics PC Ultra, taken by me http://i.imgur.com/zHJrd.jp... http://i.imgur.com/fmghF.jp... http://i.imgur.com/MVEHu.jp... http://i.imgur.com/4vn0V.jp... http://i.imgur.com/GnW7q.jp... - this one has FXAA mod http://i.imgur.com/cbhqO.jp... http://i.imgur.com/zoSHm.jp... The pc is still capable of much more. When you take modding into account, the pc's possibilities are only limited by your video card. Take this video here, from a small dev team, this looks borderline photo realistic - http://www.youtube.com/watc... Anyone can do this, if you are willing to take the time to learn, and get experience, here is the game I am making, I have made this on my own, now I have a team working on it, which means this is going to get even better, and it already looks pretty realistic, take a look at these photos http://i.imgur.com/kd70O.jp... http://i.imgur.com/1yHMn.jp... http://i.imgur.com/i5aIj.jp... http://i.imgur.com/MOp3u.jp... http://i.imgur.com/KWx7W.jp...
part 2 What I am saying, is that next gen consoles won't reach the level of graphics in that Titanic video, and they won't start with Crysis 3 graphics either. A game that will max out Crysis 3 will cost 300$. Keeping in mind that consoles will use the newest line of graphics cards, this means that they will need a GTX 670 to max out Crysis 3, considering that they are probably going for a price around 400$ for the entire console, that means a card this good is highly unlikely, and something like a GTX 650 TI is much more realistic, and it will barely run the C3 beta. Times have changed, and high end graphics cards are too expensive and too big to work for a 400$ console, in addition, they require 600W power supply's, I just can't see next gen consoles reaching current pc graphics.
I believe a lot of folks are perhaps expecting too much to begin with. Avatar like CGI and photo realism just too examples that aren't going to happen. As a starting point though, the video demonstrates quite a leap over current consoles. Years down the line and with first party developers we'll see bigger improvements that go beyond today's PCs. Although PCs will evolve also. The lowest standard will shift and that's a good thing right now. @Marcus Fenix - "Not amazing developers" you need to expand on this because the way I see it is they produce quality over quantity if that's what you're getting at.
Yeah, current PC games should give a good indication of what to expect visually from the next-gen launch line-up. As with current gen, things should get much better with years.
Not the best Ive seen but still not bad. I expect four years for next gen to show its trtrue potential. The games now are leaps and bounds above the launch games.
Seeing this video makes me wish that Black II was a launch title for the Playstation 4 and Xbox 720.....
Next gen will look better than this. When developers have set specs they can focus more on getting the most out of the hardware, without having to worry about it running on low end pc's
next-gen graphics: http://autoluxpuzzles.com/p...
This is what I'm talking about here. A static photo realistic image that isn't actually in any game atm even on PC. People expect the next Skyrim game to look like this, but I doubt it's going to happen any time soon imo. I'm not saying these visuals are impossible, but certainly not day one like some expect.
That looks better than real life!
haha, that's real life ...i think?0_o
Ok, well compare that to this The Witcher 3 The Hunt image. The Witcher being a game for next year for PC and Next Gen consoles (presumably). The pic you posted is still much better looking. http://www.4news.it/images/... Like your namesake, it's wishful thinking to expect the quality of the image you've posted.
The pic you posted is using a DX9 renderer(soon to be increased to DX11) with unfinished textures(look at the trees, horse tail, etc.). That game is going to use volumetric clouds, physics for ships at port and sea, an overhauled lighting engine that isn't even in that pic, and 4k support for sure on PC(the last game had its infamous "ubersampling" from that resolution). It will be my first next gen game if it launches with the consoles.
I'm a PC gamer myself but I believe that on the 20th of February we'll be shocked with some kind of a teaser which will showcase true next generation visuals...PS4 will shock us. I'm sure about that. Gran Turismo 6 teaser will be the best option to show us what PS4 is capable of IMO. Or Killzone 4 teaser. Or whatever teaser, it doesn't matter because 20th is my day off just for This Event. I'll buy some popcorn and pizza and it'll be a good night :)
Sure, kz2 cgi says halo:-) Many console gamers will be disappointed when they realize crysis 3 is looking waaay better on pc. Delusional console gamers, you get what you pay for ;-)
The thing is that there will be a leap, but no one is expecting the avatar like graphics. We expect multiplats like the Witcher 3 to amaze us and the exclusives to blow our minds away. We will see. Pc gamers have come to love their ultra settings, forgetting that consoles call the shots when it comes to multiplats. You will never be able to see the true potential of your expensive pc.
I like how KZ2 seems to be the only example haters come up with and ignore all other presentations that were real-time. Besides, the final game looked better than the CGI trailer.
@delboy would you stop already your comment history is nothing but "i own ps3" and then you go on to bash ps3 and sony left and right you comments are always wrong and lame and your comment about KZ2...is just one of the many things that prove that you never touched ps3 in your life here Killzone 2 E3 vs Final E3 build on the left and the final build onthe right http://s2d1.turboimagehost.... http://generationdreamteam....
Calm down people, in fact I own two ps3,my first day 60gig model got ylod. This site is full of Sony fanboys, they believe in nothing but cell power, now kz2 looks better than the cgi trailer. And anything I say will be turned against me. Belive what ever you want Sony boys, but educated gamers, gamers that have eyes will definitely be disappointed with ps4 graphics.
@delboy OMG you are like the 100 guy here who said he own 2 ps3s while doing nothing but trolling ps3 every where now i trust you /s and again i put the pics that prove you wrong but again you run your mouth and won't admit you are wrong good thing this site have "Ignore" option
I like to piss off fanboys, there's enough of them here. Especially Sony boys we got plenty of.
Well the only benefits consoles have over PC is the fact that developers can programme Direct to Metal so we should see some impressive looking visuals from the console near the end of its life cycle like we have seen from the PS3 with its exclusives. But it will still be nowhere near PC standards regardless of the API overhead.
Just give me 1080p native at 60fps and i will be happy.
Vid looks a lot like current gen. :-/ Here's a better vid - http://www.youtube.com/watc...
I wish, but I don't think so.
Look at the top comments. he really thinks the ps4 and xbox720 will look THAT good!? Keep dreaming.. We will see a leap, but not a massive leap like the ps2 -> ps3 transision. Mark my words.
The leap might not be massive at first, but we will see the potiental of the machines with exclusives as the gen progresses. Some tech guy even said this, especially with the ps4. I think he said that the rumored specs of the ps4 can blow pcs away when it comes to exlusive games because of how developers can take full advantage of these specifications. We should still expect multiplats to deliver. I think the guy developed fxaa or something like that. So, no, I am not going to mark your words. Lest you know something this guy doesn't.
PS3 is already at the point of the above video, possibly even beyond it (pun intended) and you think it won't get better? http://www.playscope.com/Ws...
Catzilla = next gen :3 It an amusing benchmark if anyone is interesting, im sure someone will complain its not impressive, but theres a lot of stuff in it that completely crushes systems.
Can't wait to see what Naughty Dog is able to pull off with the PS4, especially after a couple of years when they really learn what they can do. Their first game will look great, but their second game will probably blow us away. Just look at the graphical improvements from UC1 to UC2 it's mind blowing. Either way I'm more than ready for next-gen to roll around, and I can't wait until the 20th Ijust wish it would've been aired live like E3 because watching on my computer is nowhere near as comfortable as just relaxing on the couche.
That's good. But I expect to see better graphics from next gen AAA games.
Im kinda dissapointed not that much difference between this generation.
Its a crysis 2 video from a pc. There is nothing to be disaapointed about.
Its mostly going to just be a lot fine details added to games, If its not 1080p, its not really something that you would notice unless your hobby is running around staring at walls and the ground.
Nothing special. I think many people are going to be disappointed by the jump to 'next' gen. It will not be near as evident as the jump from SD to HD was.
http://www.youtube.com/watc... For me this is absolutely spot on , on what next-gen games will look like at launch . Although this seen is a little corridor .
This: http://www.youtube.com/watc... to this: http://www.youtube.com/watc... Oh, they increase the resolution and FPS. You need a reminder of what a next gen difference looks like. GOW 2: http://www.youtube.com/watc... GOW 3: http://www.youtube.com/watc... (looks better than the CGI in GOW 2) That was a 5.5 year difference in hardware. The 7th gen will be 7 years min. If all you expect is 1080p60FPS you better be prepared to replace your $350 console in another two years. The Wii U will do 1080p60FPS at $350 with ~$50 geared towards the controller. I don't want a PS4 to cost $350 and last 2 years.
I feel like people don't know what the principle of diminishing return is. Graphics dont magically double because you add power. Back in the PS1 days, a 100% increase in power would be massive, the difference would be massive. You know what happens when you double a current gens horse power? Maby 720p with real anti aliasing across the board might get a bump in LOD too. Double it again? Throw in Some SSAO and and color correction, maby an extra 10 FPS on top of that. Anyway, my point is that You get less and less for your money the more horsepower you get. If you think a system thats 4-6x as powerful as current gen is going to be $300-400, then your going to be mistaken.
next gen console games will look awesome and with talented devs like naughty dog, 343 industries, insomniac ect...ect....wwe will some some awesome art but if you think ps4/nextbox will beat crysis 2, metro2033, the witcher 2 running on a high end 2011 gaming machine, well, i got some sad news for you they simply cannot put good enough hardware at a sub-$600 price point to achieve that level of grapical quality you will NOT see 16x af in game, 8x anti aliasing, ssao, depth of field, real time soft shadows, hdr lighting, ultra high resolution textures all running in native 1920x1080 on next gen consoles you will get some of that, but not all, on a decent mid spec pc, with a gtx 560ti, i7 920 and 8gb ram you can and notch it up to a i7 2600, gtx 680 and 16gb ram you can do all that in 2560x1600 next gen consoles CANNOT compete with that, but damn if we won't see some simply beautiful and astounding looking games from both consoles, but every multiplat will look even better on a decent pc and multitudes better on a high end 2013 rig heck, when the gtx 780 comes out, (q3 2013) it will cripple ps4/nextbox, though a current gtx 680 will too, and that tasty gtx titan dropping....mmmm....yummmy
"GOW:Ascension/the last of us/beyond: two souls" is done on a system with less than 512mb of RAM at its disposal, which happens to look freckin great without being in [email protected], and a crappy gpu(based on info provided from pc elitist) The rumoured gpu specs in the ps4, is better than the GTX 560 gpu which is more than capable of running BF3 at high settings @60fps at default and at ultra settings minus 10-20fps's (on my pc during intense and online moments) Now putting all these pieces together, I can see the next gen playstation having a visual leap, just the same as ps2 to ps3 transition... With better physics as well.
nxt gen graphics will blow minds. take a google at epic citadel running on a god damn android fone. its frame rates and textures are better than current consoles.i think u guys that dont beleive in nxt gen consoles being leaps n bounds over current are dumb..
I also agree that there will be a huge gap between next gen and its predecessors. But I also think there are many things that will be presented. Some gimmicky and some not. It seems that most peoples area of focus is solely on GPU and RAM.
Desirable but more like wishful thinking. We can probably only expect the same upgradable features that we have now. If we can swap the GPU and RAM then what incentive will we have to purchase the "PS5 & Xbox 1440"? They're in the business for making long term money. And if those parts are upgradable, then it wouldn't take long for compatible after market parts to hit the net.