1. Post #1
    Dennab
    August 2011
    3,724 Posts
    I don't know. It's mostly important because i want my pc to be equal too or better than the next consoles. But also.. i think they need a certain capability to be wanted and a certain price to be buyable. I think many are happy with 360/ps3 graphics and the graphical leap will likely not be as big as the ps2 - ps3 jump.

  2. Post #2
    Gold Member
    tratzzz's Avatar
    March 2010
    7,252 Posts
    From the rumored specs, crappy.

    But optimization and dev. magic amd games will look atleast 2x better (on consoles)

    Your current PC is probably a bit better than the new consoles.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Estonia Show Events Agree Agree x 3Funny Funny x 1 (list)

  3. Post #3
    Tucan Sam's Avatar
    May 2007
    858 Posts
    Judging by the specs ATM decent, but by the time they get out they will be well outdated


    I believe most are x86 based now, which will be good, for ports. The graphics from what the "leaked specs" are should be pretty sizable compared to ps2 => and xbawx => 360.

    Of course once the official specs are released we will know for sure
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Dumb Dumb x 4Disagree Disagree x 1 (list)

  4. Post #4
    Dennab
    August 2011
    3,724 Posts
    radeon 6570 2gb
    4gb ddr2
    athlon II x4

    Probably a little weaker than the next console.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United Kingdom Show Events Disagree Disagree x 3 (list)

  5. Post #5
    ForMod2013
    KnightVista's Avatar
    June 2009
    2,796 Posts
    This may be a little off-topic, but judging in te new iPad's screen resolution; I'm sure that sparked the eye of console makers so I'm sure they'll up the hardware to look better then it does now and be able to do 2000+ resolutions.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply United States Show Events Dumb Dumb x 10Funny Funny x 1 (list)

  6. Post #6
    Dennab
    February 2012
    2,299 Posts
    This may be a little off-topic, but judging in te new iPad's screen resolution; I'm sure that sparked the eye of console makers so I'm sure they'll up the hardware to look better then it does now and be able to do 2000+ resolutions.
    That's all well and good, the current consoles are 1080p capable (not including Wii)
    but most games engines will render at half of that and upscale, so what will be the point?

    You will end up with the odd game that will take advantage of it, and every CoD game will continue to run at a shitty 960x540
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United Kingdom Show Events Agree Agree x 4 (list)

  7. Post #7
    Gold Member
    wraithcat's Avatar
    December 2007
    12,656 Posts
    This may be a little off-topic, but judging in te new iPad's screen resolution; I'm sure that sparked the eye of console makers so I'm sure they'll up the hardware to look better then it does now and be able to do 2000+ resolutions.
    Won't happen until TV's with larger resolutions start showing up. What might happen though, is that the new consoles will support native 1080 on all their titles and won't have to upscale from 720 or even 480.

    And 1080 is the norm and it's going to be the norm for a pretty long time.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 Czech Republic Show Events Agree Agree x 4 (list)

  8. Post #8
    That Dog
    Ehmmett's Avatar
    March 2009
    12,823 Posts
    if 1080 is the norm now, and it's very common for games to render at a quarter of that and upscale, I have a feeling it'll be a while until there's going to be 2k+ games, or even commonplace 1080.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Agree Agree x 1 (list)

  9. Post #9
    Fluttershy Enthusiast
    thelurker1234's Avatar
    June 2011
    4,870 Posts
    Won't happen until TV's with larger resolutions start showing up. What might happen though, is that the new consoles will support native 1080 on all their titles and won't have to upscale from 720 or even 480.

    And 1080 is the norm and it's going to be the norm for a pretty long time.
    1440p TVs are coming... The prices are also dropping.

    I've ran 1440p on my PC and then use a projector on the wall. Looked good.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows Vista United States Show Events Dumb Dumb x 4 (list)

  10. Post #10
    bomp
    Dennab
    March 2012
    1,402 Posts
    The Wii proved you can dump shit hardware on people and make a killing. I expect the other two companies have made note of that.

  11. Post #11
    Gold Member
    Kaabii's Avatar
    February 2009
    7,434 Posts
    1440p TVs are coming... The prices are also dropping.

    I've ran 1440p on my PC and then use a projector on the wall. Looked good.
    TVs aren't shifting to 1440p, there'd be no content for it. Sharp has been working with NHK to make uHD the next step in TV picture quality, with a resolution of 7,680 4,320.

  12. Post #12
    Gold Member
    ManningQB18's Avatar
    April 2009
    9,855 Posts
    TVs aren't shifting to 1440p, there'd be no content for it. Sharp has been working with NHK to make uHD the next step in TV picture quality, with a resolution of 7,680 4,320.
    Yeah, next TV resolution is 4k.

    I'm waiting for monitors to get to that too, that'll be great.

  13. Post #13
    Gold Member
    SGTNAPALM's Avatar
    October 2007
    21,649 Posts
    Yeah, next TV resolution is 4k.

    I'm waiting for monitors to get to that too, that'll be great.
    Don't monitors usually hit those resolutions before TVs?
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Agree Agree x 8 (list)

  14. Post #14
    lady godiva's giant vaginas
    Metalcastr's Avatar
    May 2005
    1,845 Posts
    More powerful than you can possibly imagine.

    Probably at least 3 years behind current PC technology more like it. Make that 5.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Agree Agree x 1 (list)

  15. Post #15
    IT WAS ONLY $1 SO WHY NOT BUY A TITLE?
    Tukimoshi's Avatar
    March 2007
    3,102 Posts
    The Wii proved you can dump shit hardware on people and make a killing. I expect the other two companies have made note of that.
    No, the Wii proved if you are the first person to dump shit hardware on people, you can make a killing.



    Edited:

    I don't know. It's mostly important because i want my pc to be equal too or better than the next consoles. But also.. i think they need a certain capability to be wanted and a certain price to be buyable. I think many are happy with 360/ps3 graphics and the graphical leap will likely not be as big as the ps2 - ps3 jump.
    Oh, and an answer for OP.

    When the new consoles come out, they will be a few months behind the current generation of PC hardware, possibly even more. It'll be middle-range hardware but game optimization will still make games look pretty good (at a low resolution). 1080P will most likely be standard, with a few devs perhaps making forays into higher resolutions (I.E: 1200P, 1440P)

  16. Post #16
    Civil's Avatar
    December 2009
    3,721 Posts
    Yeah, next TV resolution is 4k.

    I'm waiting for monitors to get to that too, that'll be great.
    4k is 4096x2160, not 7680x4320.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 Sweden Show Events Agree Agree x 3Funny Funny x 1 (list)

  17. Post #17
    Gold Member
    superstepa's Avatar
    June 2009
    8,889 Posts
    The new generation may even be able to run the first Crysis on max without any lag
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 Russian Federation Show Events Dumb Dumb x 9Optimistic Optimistic x 4 (list)

  18. Post #18
    IT WAS ONLY $1 SO WHY NOT BUY A TITLE?
    Tukimoshi's Avatar
    March 2007
    3,102 Posts
    The new generation may even be able to run the first Crysis on max without any lag
    I don't think you understand that Crysis is an unoptimized piece of shit and is a horrible benchmark. How can you use a game that was poorly designed in all performance aspects as a benchmark?

    Crysis 2 runs much better and is just as beautiful, if not moreso. The reason is because Crytek learned that your game will just be super pirated if it isn't guaranteed to be playable, so they optimized the fuck out of it.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 Canada Show Events Agree Agree x 3 (list)

  19. Post #19
    Gold Member
    Dennab
    March 2007
    4,426 Posts
    The first Crysis actually looks better on consoles due to the fact they used CryEngine 3 whilst the PC version uses CryEngine 2, however if they updated the PC version with CryEngine 3 then the PC version would look much better. Unfortunately consoles aren't going to die due to their simplicity. Portable consoles are dying because there's plenty of free games on your favorite smartphone that are literally 2 clicks away, however with computers many things need to change before the console crowd is going to be persuaded

  20. Post #20
    Gold Member
    Kaabii's Avatar
    February 2009
    7,434 Posts
    The first Crysis actually looks better on consoles due to the fact they used CryEngine 3 whilst the PC version uses CryEngine 2, however if they updated the PC version with CryEngine 3 then the PC version would look much better. Unfortunately consoles aren't going to die due to their simplicity. Portable consoles are dying because there's plenty of free games on your favorite smartphone that are literally 2 clicks away, however with computers many things need to change before the console crowd is going to be persuaded
    No it doesn't look better. Using Cryengine 3 allowed improvements with lighting and better streaming, but the game doesn't look better. I've played it on the 360 and the resolution alone makes everything look noticeably blurry after playing it at 1920x1080 for years.

  21. Post #21
    Gold Member
    Dennab
    March 2007
    4,426 Posts
    Well if you've been playing it in that resolution for years it's bound to. But under your logic, real life footage shown in standard definition looks worse than the first Half life played at 1920x1080
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 8 United Kingdom Show Events Dumb Dumb x 1 (list)

  22. Post #22
    Bus Driver
    Demache's Avatar
    December 2009
    7,759 Posts
    Well if you've been playing it in that resolution for years it's bound to. But under your logic, real life footage shown in standard definition looks worse than the first Half life played at 1920x1080
    Well it definitely looks muddier. But I see your point.

  23. Post #23
    Zombiespeed's Avatar
    January 2011
    1,112 Posts
    Powerful to run call of duty on 30 fps

  24. Post #24
    Gold Member
    Crumpet's Avatar
    August 2009
    2,731 Posts
    TechRadar posted:
    'Latest rumours suggest that the console will contain a revision of AMD's 7000 series graphics, which is based on its 28nm Graphics Core Next (GCN) Southern Islands tech.
    Anonymous sources are being quoted on VG247 as saying that the graphics setup in the Xbox 720 will be "like two PCs taped together" which sounds like waffle to us. What does that even mean?
    The same sources say that the two GPUs in the Xbox 720 "aren't structured as they are in a normal dual PC set-up," with each chip working separately to draw different items simultaneously'
    Meh, thats for the 720

    http://www.techradar.com/news/gaming...rumours-937167

  25. Post #25
    Gold Member
    Kaabii's Avatar
    February 2009
    7,434 Posts
    Well if you've been playing it in that resolution for years it's bound to. But under your logic, real life footage shown in standard definition looks worse than the first Half life played at 1920x1080
    No actually you just completely twisted my words. I was comparing THE SAME GAME with both the assets running at lower settings and the game itself running at a lower res. It's guaranteed to look worse with the resolution reduction alone.