PC gamers are more intelligent shoppers and tend to avoid games that are crap ports like this. Also, it's just another generic survival game. There's about a million of those already on PC.
Witcher 3 maxed out at 144 fps looks better than uncharted 4 at 30 fps. U4 has impressive tech and in some places an absurd attention to detail but ultimately it is limited by the hardware it's on, with ugly shadows and a framerate that I personally consider terrible (30 fps) although 60 in MP. In that regard witcher 3 with all the bells and whistles activated wins in the visuals department. Aesthetically I think Witcher 3 just has a better look to it too, with the city, monster, and armo...
Better than a titan, but nearly half the price. Seems too good to be true, but if true that's a pretty remarkable hardware advancement. Either way we'll see very shortly when this thing is released into the wild. Good time to upgrade.
Pretty insecure of you to bring up something that is completely irrelevant to the article to defend terrible performance on consoles.
You're not gonna be able to easily tell a big difference in like the texture quality or extra-special effects from a still screen or even a youtube video, you really gotta play both versions and you will see. Sure it looks similar, but the difference is in resolution and performance, when you're actually playing it. PS4 runs at 30 fps, which is abysmal performance especially for a shooter and you can really tell from the video it's choppy garbage. 30 fps vs 144 fps is a world of d...
I'm using it for DX12. I was lucky enough to brush off my student ID and got it for free even though I graduated 1 year ago. Just in time for a new rig, too.
If you were to only pick one the best choice would be PC. Better bang for you buck, biggest library of games, most unique exclusives (not necessarily the biggest AAA exclusives though), best customization, and you can do far more stuff that exceed the basic functions of a console.
I would also like to mention this article is wrong about hardware not mattering. They claim it isn't about the hardware but it very much is, in addition to software being important. Not to menti...
Witcher 3 is the better made game, period. You can tell they took their time with it. They're different in how they're experienced, because Fallout 4 may be more approachable like you can play for an hour or two and complete a simple quest, but witcher 3 demands you to set aside time in order to experience it properly.
This isn't even mentioning the stupid gameplay issues associated with the engine crapping itself if you go over 100 fps in Fallout 4 because they&...
This. The difference in frame rate you people are fanboying over is negligible. I consider 60fps to be the bare minimal standard that I'm willing to play, anything lower is reaching unplayable for me.
But the fact that people can play a game at sub-30 fps just blows my mind. This degrades the gameplay to an unplayable level. I guess you just gotta have low standards with consoles.
"Solid 30 fps"
Lol. People are actually happy playing at this terrible framerate. Next gen, what a joke.
From what I hear it's built on the same engine as Skyrim. As you probably know, if you try going over a certain framerate in Skyrim, the physics completely break and it's unplayable.
I hope to god I can play at 144 fps in fallout 4. They say there are no framerate limitations on PC but that's BS if you can't go over 60 without it breaking on you.
Graphics impact immersion.
Immersion is important to a game like fallout where you are put into a post apocalyptic open world environment to explore.
To claim graphics don't matter to a game like this is just absurd.
I wish they would have picked something other than the beginning segments to show. I don't want to watch this I want to experience it for myself.
I'm really hyped for it but this trailer does a poor job of conveying the ability to choose Corvo or Emily.
Make the major cities actually feel populated and alive.
The actual strip of New Vegas was pitifully empty, and only with mods can you populate it so that it actually looks like a sprawling center of gambling in the post apocalypse.
From the trailer we've seen the cities definitely look a little more fleshed out but obviously only time will tell.
Good new policy.
There is a barely noticeable difference between the versions. If this is ultra on PC, then that should look leaps and bounds better than the console version. The fact that it does not means CDPR were too damn lazy to take advantage of the strengths of the PC and most likely gimped it for the sake of parity.
Never thought I'd see the day when CDPR would be the ones doing this.
Game is gimped significantly because "next-gen" consoles can't handle a true next-gen game.
Pathetic.
"As for the PC version, it looks just like the console versions just with a higher resolution and a lower-form of HairWorks in effect."
Are you freaking kidding me, wow consoles absolutely ruined how potentially beautiful this game could have been. I consider immersion a large part of the gameplay experience and now i...
Because it's humiliating and sad that it is 2016 and only now are Sony and Microsoft able to deliver a console capable of 1080p and 60 fps for the majority of games, and you have to purchase a new console to do it. 4k is just a marketing point to hide behind so they don't have to come out saying "here's a console that finally does native 1080p with 60 fps!!!". Like others have said the 4k is just upscaled, so that too is a lie because it's not practical to play 4k wi...