Are you trembling with fear knowing that gen consoles will be soon lost in oblivion?

  • 200 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
Edited 2 months, 13 days ago

Poll: Are you trembling with fear knowing that gen consoles will be soon lost in oblivion? (99 votes)

Yes 25%
No 75%

http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/nvidia-geforce-gtx-870-and-gtx-880-available-in-november.html

In a few months Nvidia will launch the new GTX 870 and GTX 880, early 2015 we will see the new monster single GPU from AMD 9 TFlops (10 TFlops+ if you OC, that is just crazy). Even single GPU's from january 2012 are 2 times more powerful than the most powerful next gen console. How to you feel about the next gen consoles becoming even more irrelevant? It is time for the console people to switch to PC gameing?

#151 Posted by R4gn4r0k (16343 posts) -

Sigh.. You know what? Forget it.

No, I understand what you said perfectly well.

Crysis 3 is using last gen assets, even on maxed out settings.

While Killzone and Infamous are using assets specifically designed for current gen hardware.

You just never answered my question how and why it matters ? That's all I wonder because I see you bring up that last gen asset thing time after time. What does it matter when Crysis 3 stacks up just fine against Killzone Shadow Fall?

#152 Posted by scottpsfan14 (4078 posts) -
@R4gn4r0k said:

@scottpsfan14 said:

Sigh.. You know what? Forget it.

No, I understand what you said perfectly well.

Crysis 3 is using last gen assets, even on maxed out settings.

While Killzone and Infamous are using assets specifically designed for current gen hardware.

You just never answered my question how and why it matters ? That's all I wonder because I see you bring up that last gen asset thing time after time. What does it matter when Crysis 3 stacks up just fine against Killzone Shadow Fall?

Well, KZSF specifically doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things. I imagine it will be hailed as a minor PS4 game in years to come. Does it look better than Crysis 3? Thats opinion. And there certianly things Crysis 3 does better like real time GI, foliage, water, and PADM etc.

Again, when a later next gen shooter comes, you will see for yourself the difference no PS3/360 development can make to graphics.

#153 Edited by faizan_faizan (7855 posts) -

So this is now a Crysis 3 vs Killzone: Shadow Fall thread? Haven't had these in weeks.

#154 Posted by R4gn4r0k (16343 posts) -

Well, KZSF specifically doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things. I imagine it will be hailed as a minor PS4 game in years to come. Does it look better than Crysis 3? Thats opinion. And there certianly things Crysis 3 does better like real time GI, foliage, water, and PADM etc.

Again, when a later next gen shooter comes, you will see for yourself the difference no PS3/360 development can make to graphics.

At least you can appreciate the things that Crysis 3 does really well.

Because there was this clown in this thread using a crappy compressed image to make it seem like Crysis 3 hardly looks better on PC than on 360. I mean, sure the PC version could've been better if it didn't use lower quality assets. But again I have to bring up developer competence and Crytek is way more competent at developing for PC than on consoles. As shown by the low framerate in 360/PS3 version of Crysis 3 and the overall lower quality of the graphics.

But that's just a minor addition to the point you said and I agree on i.e. it also depends on what platforms you develop on and if it is an exclusive or not. But really all of these games are amazing looking to me: Battlefield 4, Metro Last Light, Crysis 3, Killzone SF and Infamous. Whether they are exclusive or running on last gen or not. And I can't wait to see what the graphics will be in future PC/PS4 shooters.

#155 Posted by scottpsfan14 (4078 posts) -
@R4gn4r0k said:

@scottpsfan14 said:

Well, KZSF specifically doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things. I imagine it will be hailed as a minor PS4 game in years to come. Does it look better than Crysis 3? Thats opinion. And there certianly things Crysis 3 does better like real time GI, foliage, water, and PADM etc.

Again, when a later next gen shooter comes, you will see for yourself the difference no PS3/360 development can make to graphics.

At least you can appreciate the things that Crysis 3 does really well.

Because there was this clown in this thread using a crappy compressed image to make it seem like Crysis 3 hardly looks better on PC than on 360. I mean, sure the PC version could've been better if it didn't use lower quality assets. But again I have to bring up developer competence and Crytek is way more competent at developing for PC than on consoles. As shown by the low framerate in 360/PS3 version of Crysis 3 and the overall lower quality of the graphics.

But that's just a minor addition to the point you said and I agree on i.e. it also depends on what platforms you develop on and if it is an exclusive or not. But really all of these games are amazing looking to me: Battlefield 4, Metro Last Light, Crysis 3, Killzone SF and Infamous. Whether they are exclusive or running on last gen or not. And I can't wait to see what the graphics will be in future PC/PS4 shooters.

Agreed. I think the problem with most people (especailly PC gamers), is that they have a hard time grasping that a PS4 game could possibly compete with a PC game that requires a rig far more powerful than PS4 to max out (Crysis 3). There are many people who actually think Crysis 3 maxed out is already far beyond what next gen consoles will ever achieve.

The problem with that is they think too much in the PC DirectX development mantra. Now that last gen development is coming to an end, games will start looking significantly better. Already there are next gen versions of game franchises such as AC Unity and Batman AK. And you can see the difference right away.

There are many PC gamers who believe optimization is a myth and has no advantage over PC DirectX development. When that attitude is actually ignorant. Did you know that DX11 doesn't detect or use a lot of the GPU tech in modern GPU's? This is why AMD made Mantle, for both CPU draw calls and better access to GCN technology on PC's. No one has really taken full advantage of mantle sadly. But it's there. PS4's API (GNM) is built specifically to max out everything 100%. This is why you can get these games with vastly more advanced rendering pipelines like what we have seen with KZSF, Infamous, The Order, DriveClub, Uncharted 4 etc. The chances are, PS4 exclusives are using some part of the GPU that DirectX11 can't see on PC. So that means a straight port to DX11 on PC would actually be broken with glitches everywhere as the game code would be looking for parts of the GPU DX11 doesn't see.

It's interesting stuff really.

#156 Posted by Vatusus (4510 posts) -

LOL hermits have been saying this for years and guess what? This current gen is the most successfull one thus far. Keep being in denial hermits

#157 Posted by MK-Professor (3755 posts) -

4 pages already, I must have really hit a nerve there. lol

#158 Posted by 04dcarraher (19328 posts) -

@topgunmv said:

You could always get a larger case.

Yeah, I know. I am considering that option. Prior to my 2009 PC, I had full-sized and big midtower cases just like many here. But, I've grown rather fond of minitowers although I had to jerry-rig something for my HEC minitower so that my GTX 770 is cooled adequately.

There are multiple cases that can support those large cards with ease even some mini itx cases lol

#159 Posted by R4gn4r0k (16343 posts) -

Agreed. I think the problem with most people (especailly PC gamers), is that they have a hard time grasping that a PS4 game could possibly compete with a PC game that requires a rig far more powerful than PS4 to max out (Crysis 3). There are many people who actually think Crysis 3 maxed out is already far beyond what next gen consoles will ever achieve.

The problem with that is they think too much in the PC DirectX development mantra. Now that last gen development is coming to an end, games will start looking significantly better. Already there are next gen versions of game franchises such as AC Unity and Batman AK. And you can see the difference right away.

There are many PC gamers who believe optimization is a myth and has no advantage over PC DirectX development. When that attitude is actually ignorant. Did you know that DX11 doesn't detect or use a lot of the GPU tech in modern GPU's? This is why AMD made Mantle, for both CPU draw calls and better access to GCN technology on PC's. No one has really taken full advantage of mantle sadly. But it's there. PS4's API (GNM) is built specifically to max out everything 100%. This is why you can get these games with vastly more advanced rendering pipelines like what we have seen with KZSF, Infamous, The Order, DriveClub, Uncharted 4 etc. The chances are, PS4 exclusives are using some part of the GPU that DirectX11 can't see on PC. So that means a straight port to DX11 on PC would actually be broken with glitches everywhere as the game code would be looking for parts of the GPU DX11 doesn't see.

It's interesting stuff really.

TBH I would like it if console and PC hardware was even closer to eachother, and it's already pretty close this gen.

Multiplats are a good thing. Get the games for your system of choice

#160 Edited by 04dcarraher (19328 posts) -

@scottpsfan14 said:
@R4gn4r0k said:

@scottpsfan14 said:

Well, KZSF specifically doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things. I imagine it will be hailed as a minor PS4 game in years to come. Does it look better than Crysis 3? Thats opinion. And there certianly things Crysis 3 does better like real time GI, foliage, water, and PADM etc.

Again, when a later next gen shooter comes, you will see for yourself the difference no PS3/360 development can make to graphics.

At least you can appreciate the things that Crysis 3 does really well.

Because there was this clown in this thread using a crappy compressed image to make it seem like Crysis 3 hardly looks better on PC than on 360. I mean, sure the PC version could've been better if it didn't use lower quality assets. But again I have to bring up developer competence and Crytek is way more competent at developing for PC than on consoles. As shown by the low framerate in 360/PS3 version of Crysis 3 and the overall lower quality of the graphics.

But that's just a minor addition to the point you said and I agree on i.e. it also depends on what platforms you develop on and if it is an exclusive or not. But really all of these games are amazing looking to me: Battlefield 4, Metro Last Light, Crysis 3, Killzone SF and Infamous. Whether they are exclusive or running on last gen or not. And I can't wait to see what the graphics will be in future PC/PS4 shooters.

Agreed. I think the problem with most people (especailly PC gamers), is that they have a hard time grasping that a PS4 game could possibly compete with a PC game that requires a rig far more powerful than PS4 to max out (Crysis 3). There are many people who actually think Crysis 3 maxed out is already far beyond what next gen consoles will ever achieve.

The problem with that is they think too much in the PC DirectX development mantra. Now that last gen development is coming to an end, games will start looking significantly better. Already there are next gen versions of game franchises such as AC Unity and Batman AK. And you can see the difference right away.

There are many PC gamers who believe optimization is a myth and has no advantage over PC DirectX development. When that attitude is actually ignorant. Did you know that DX11 doesn't detect or use a lot of the GPU tech in modern GPU's? This is why AMD made Mantle, for both CPU draw calls and better access to GCN technology on PC's. No one has really taken full advantage of mantle sadly. But it's there. PS4's API (GNM) is built specifically to max out everything 100%. This is why you can get these games with vastly more advanced rendering pipelines like what we have seen with KZSF, Infamous, The Order, DriveClub, Uncharted 4 etc. The chances are, PS4 exclusives are using some part of the GPU that DirectX11 can't see on PC. So that means a straight port to DX11 on PC would actually be broken with glitches everywhere as the game code would be looking for parts of the GPU DX11 doesn't see.

It's interesting stuff really.

Many pc gamers that actual know what is what understand that the PS4 is a system with mid ranged modern age hardware that may be weak on the cpu front but is a capable system. But some over glorify the PS4'a abilities too. Also with Crysis 3 some effects and assets are beyond what the PS4 can handle smoothly because of the limited cpu power and mid ranged gpu incorporated. But Crysis 3 level design, size and execution was limited by the 360/PS3's hardware and memory constraints.

Optimization isnt a myth but blown out of proportion by many. Direct x isnt limiting graphical abilities but actually its the developers that are doing it because they have to design their games to work with the lowest common denominators. Since now we have consoles that have native hardware with direct x 11 standardized features like shader model 5 etc, will see the discontinued use of direct x 9/10 based limitations caused by multiplatforming direction having to use baseline of last gen console hardware. Also all direct x overhead is handled by the cpu which is why even AMD custom API that bypasses most of the overheads see little to no difference with certain cpu's ie intel based cpu's were they have the grunt to bulldozer right through the extra work created by the need of compatibility checks and sums with DX11.

You think mantle isnt being fully used by the select few developers that are being funded by AMD to use it? Mantle is nothing super special over Direct x 11 because the baseline in abilities are the same your not going to see it producing better graphics etc (shader model 5 is still shader model 5). Mantle's primary role is to allow programs and games etc have more control of the AMD's gcn resources while using less cpu resources while doing it.

Then your over glorifying PS4's abilities... and its API enabling it to use nearly all its resources, that not in question its API allows full control. but its games are not using more "advanced rendering pipelines"..... your just seeing modern native hardware features being used not being influenced and limited by last gen consoles.PS4 is not going to use a part of the gpu that you cant see on pc with dx11 because of the fact that the hardware standards are the same. The only thing you will see is more efficient usage allowing more to be done with less processing resources.

#161 Posted by topgunmv (10193 posts) -

@scottpsfan14 said:
@R4gn4r0k said:

@scottpsfan14 said:

Well, KZSF specifically doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things. I imagine it will be hailed as a minor PS4 game in years to come. Does it look better than Crysis 3? Thats opinion. And there certianly things Crysis 3 does better like real time GI, foliage, water, and PADM etc.

Again, when a later next gen shooter comes, you will see for yourself the difference no PS3/360 development can make to graphics.

At least you can appreciate the things that Crysis 3 does really well.

Because there was this clown in this thread using a crappy compressed image to make it seem like Crysis 3 hardly looks better on PC than on 360. I mean, sure the PC version could've been better if it didn't use lower quality assets. But again I have to bring up developer competence and Crytek is way more competent at developing for PC than on consoles. As shown by the low framerate in 360/PS3 version of Crysis 3 and the overall lower quality of the graphics.

But that's just a minor addition to the point you said and I agree on i.e. it also depends on what platforms you develop on and if it is an exclusive or not. But really all of these games are amazing looking to me: Battlefield 4, Metro Last Light, Crysis 3, Killzone SF and Infamous. Whether they are exclusive or running on last gen or not. And I can't wait to see what the graphics will be in future PC/PS4 shooters.

Agreed. I think the problem with most people (especailly PC gamers), is that they have a hard time grasping that a PS4 game could possibly compete with a PC game that requires a rig far more powerful than PS4 to max out (Crysis 3). There are many people who actually think Crysis 3 maxed out is already far beyond what next gen consoles will ever achieve.

The problem with that is they think too much in the PC DirectX development mantra. Now that last gen development is coming to an end, games will start looking significantly better. Already there are next gen versions of game franchises such as AC Unity and Batman AK. And you can see the difference right away.

There are many PC gamers who believe optimization is a myth and has no advantage over PC DirectX development. When that attitude is actually ignorant. Did you know that DX11 doesn't detect or use a lot of the GPU tech in modern GPU's? This is why AMD made Mantle, for both CPU draw calls and better access to GCN technology on PC's. No one has really taken full advantage of mantle sadly. But it's there. PS4's API (GNM) is built specifically to max out everything 100%. This is why you can get these games with vastly more advanced rendering pipelines like what we have seen with KZSF, Infamous, The Order, DriveClub, Uncharted 4 etc. The chances are, PS4 exclusives are using some part of the GPU that DirectX11 can't see on PC. So that means a straight port to DX11 on PC would actually be broken with glitches everywhere as the game code would be looking for parts of the GPU DX11 doesn't see.

It's interesting stuff really.

Many pc gamers that actual know what is what understand that the PS4 is a system with mid ranged modern age hardware that may be weak on the cpu front but is a capable system. But some over glorify the PS4'a abilities too. Also with Crysis 3 some effects and assets are beyond what the PS4 can handle smoothly because of the limited cpu power and mid ranged gpu incorporated. But Crysis 3 level design, size and execution was limited by the 360/PS3's hardware and memory constraints.

Optimization isnt a myth but blown out of proportion by many. Direct x isnt limiting graphical abilities but actually its the developers that are doing it because they have to design their games to work with lowest the common denominators. Since now we have consoles that have native hardware with direct x 11 standardized features like shader model 5 etc, will see the discontinued use of direct x 9/10 based limitations caused by multiplatforming direction having to use baseline of last gen console hardware. Also all direct x overhead is handled by the cpu which is why even AMD custom API that bypasses most of the overheads see little to no difference with certain cpu's ie intel based cpu's were they have the grunt to bulldozer right through the extra work created by the need of compatibility checks and sums with DX11.

You think mantle isnt being fully used by the select few developers that are being funded by AMD to use it? Mantle is nothing super special over Direct x 11 because the baseline in abilities are the same your not going to see it producing better graphics etc (shader model 5 is still shader model 5). Mantle's primary role is to allow programs and games etc have more control of the AMD's gcn resources while using less cpu resources while doing it.

Then your over glorifying PS4's abilities... and its API enabling it to use nearly all its resources, that not in question its API allows full control. but its games are not using more "advanced rendering pipelines"..... your just seeing modern native hardware features being used not being influenced and limited by last gen consoles.PS4 is not going to use a part of the gpu that you cant see on pc with dx11 because of the fact that the hardware standards are the same. The only thing you will see is more efficient usage allowing more to be done with less processing resources.

I'm pretty sure all future unreal, frostbyte, and cryengine games support mantle by default.

#162 Edited by 04dcarraher (19328 posts) -

@topgunmv said:

@04dcarraher said:

Many pc gamers that actual know what is what understand that the PS4 is a system with mid ranged modern age hardware that may be weak on the cpu front but is a capable system. But some over glorify the PS4'a abilities too. Also with Crysis 3 some effects and assets are beyond what the PS4 can handle smoothly because of the limited cpu power and mid ranged gpu incorporated. But Crysis 3 level design, size and execution was limited by the 360/PS3's hardware and memory constraints.

Optimization isnt a myth but blown out of proportion by many. Direct x isnt limiting graphical abilities but actually its the developers that are doing it because they have to design their games to work with lowest the common denominators. Since now we have consoles that have native hardware with direct x 11 standardized features like shader model 5 etc, will see the discontinued use of direct x 9/10 based limitations caused by multiplatforming direction having to use baseline of last gen console hardware. Also all direct x overhead is handled by the cpu which is why even AMD custom API that bypasses most of the overheads see little to no difference with certain cpu's ie intel based cpu's were they have the grunt to bulldozer right through the extra work created by the need of compatibility checks and sums with DX11.

You think mantle isnt being fully used by the select few developers that are being funded by AMD to use it? Mantle is nothing super special over Direct x 11 because the baseline in abilities are the same your not going to see it producing better graphics etc (shader model 5 is still shader model 5). Mantle's primary role is to allow programs and games etc have more control of the AMD's gcn resources while using less cpu resources while doing it.

Then your over glorifying PS4's abilities... and its API enabling it to use nearly all its resources, that not in question its API allows full control. but its games are not using more "advanced rendering pipelines"..... your just seeing modern native hardware features being used not being influenced and limited by last gen consoles.PS4 is not going to use a part of the gpu that you cant see on pc with dx11 because of the fact that the hardware standards are the same. The only thing you will see is more efficient usage allowing more to be done with less processing resources.

I'm pretty sure all future unreal, frostbyte, and cryengine games support mantle by default.

Yea Crytek is working with AMD to bring Mantle support, Epic has not yet And Frostbite already has Mantle support. Most developers that have used Mantle thus far have been promoted and paid by AMD to use it. Once Direct x 12 comes we will see Mantle's thunder go away since the vast majority of developers dont want to code for multiple API's when one API aka direct x will work with all hardware configurations. With DX 12, it will bring the some of the same advantages as Mantle, so mantle support will be scattered since dx12 is to be backwards compatible with dx11 gpu's bringing more control and less overhead. Another problem with Mantle is that its proprietary based with only GCN architecture and once AMD moves to another architecture all older titles designed to use GCN based gpu with Mantle will need updates to them to allow it to work but chances are those older titles will lose Mantle support with the newer gpus as time goes on

#163 Posted by topgunmv (10193 posts) -

@topgunmv said:

@04dcarraher said:

Many pc gamers that actual know what is what understand that the PS4 is a system with mid ranged modern age hardware that may be weak on the cpu front but is a capable system. But some over glorify the PS4'a abilities too. Also with Crysis 3 some effects and assets are beyond what the PS4 can handle smoothly because of the limited cpu power and mid ranged gpu incorporated. But Crysis 3 level design, size and execution was limited by the 360/PS3's hardware and memory constraints.

Optimization isnt a myth but blown out of proportion by many. Direct x isnt limiting graphical abilities but actually its the developers that are doing it because they have to design their games to work with lowest the common denominators. Since now we have consoles that have native hardware with direct x 11 standardized features like shader model 5 etc, will see the discontinued use of direct x 9/10 based limitations caused by multiplatforming direction having to use baseline of last gen console hardware. Also all direct x overhead is handled by the cpu which is why even AMD custom API that bypasses most of the overheads see little to no difference with certain cpu's ie intel based cpu's were they have the grunt to bulldozer right through the extra work created by the need of compatibility checks and sums with DX11.

You think mantle isnt being fully used by the select few developers that are being funded by AMD to use it? Mantle is nothing super special over Direct x 11 because the baseline in abilities are the same your not going to see it producing better graphics etc (shader model 5 is still shader model 5). Mantle's primary role is to allow programs and games etc have more control of the AMD's gcn resources while using less cpu resources while doing it.

Then your over glorifying PS4's abilities... and its API enabling it to use nearly all its resources, that not in question its API allows full control. but its games are not using more "advanced rendering pipelines"..... your just seeing modern native hardware features being used not being influenced and limited by last gen consoles.PS4 is not going to use a part of the gpu that you cant see on pc with dx11 because of the fact that the hardware standards are the same. The only thing you will see is more efficient usage allowing more to be done with less processing resources.

I'm pretty sure all future unreal, frostbyte, and cryengine games support mantle by default.

Yea Crytek is working with AMD to bring Mantle support, Epic has not yet And Frostbite already has Mantle support. Most developers that have used Mantle thus far have been promoted and paid by AMD to use it. Once Direct x 12 comes we will see Mantle's thunder go away since the vast majority of developers dont want to code for multiple API's when one API aka direct x will work with all hardware configurations. With DX 12, it will bring the nearly the same advantages as Mantle. Another problem with Mantle is that its proprietary based with only GCN architecture and once AMD moves to another architecture all older titles designed to use GCN based gpu with Mantle will need updates to allow it to work but chances are those older titles will lose Mantle with the newer gpus.

If dx12 is exclusive to windows 8 it'll be doa.

#164 Edited by 04dcarraher (19328 posts) -

@topgunmv said:

Yea Crytek is working with AMD to bring Mantle support, Epic has not yet And Frostbite already has Mantle support. Most developers that have used Mantle thus far have been promoted and paid by AMD to use it. Once Direct x 12 comes we will see Mantle's thunder go away since the vast majority of developers dont want to code for multiple API's when one API aka direct x will work with all hardware configurations. With DX 12, it will bring the nearly the same advantages as Mantle. Another problem with Mantle is that its proprietary based with only GCN architecture and once AMD moves to another architecture all older titles designed to use GCN based gpu with Mantle will need updates to allow it to work but chances are those older titles will lose Mantle with the newer gpus.

If dx12 is exclusive to windows 8 it'll be doa.

Chances are dx12 will available to windows 8 and native for 9. If MS allows DX 12 on windows 7 it would be a great day but as MS tactics seen in the past chances are it wont happen. But Windows 8 adoption rate is nearly half of what windows 7 is now based on steam stats as a sample of OS usage.

#165 Posted by jun_aka_pekto (15942 posts) -

There are multiple cases that can support those large cards with ease even some mini itx cases lol

Huh. ITX. I may consider that form factor for my next PC .

#166 Posted by SambaLele (5252 posts) -

Amazing. I guess Sony and MS should have invested more on the systems' GPUs. Would be better for everyone. But I don't really think that the tech advance on PCs will affect consoles sales that much, nor affect console game development. Actually, the contrary is more likely: PC will have more titles being dragged back because of consoles. Better hardware is potential, and the greatest the potential, the harder it is to be realized. In this case, it means higher dev costs, which must be reciprocated with better sales. Let's see how things end up this gen.

#167 Posted by PapaTrop (589 posts) -

@Vatusus said:

LOL hermits have been saying this for years and guess what? This current gen is the most successfull one thus far. Keep being in denial hermits

But will this gen maintain the same level of success for the next 5+ years?

Selling well at/near launch based on hype alone isn't really a true gauge for success.

#168 Edited by scottpsfan14 (4078 posts) -
@04dcarraher said:

@scottpsfan14 said:
@R4gn4r0k said:

@scottpsfan14 said:

Well, KZSF specifically doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things. I imagine it will be hailed as a minor PS4 game in years to come. Does it look better than Crysis 3? Thats opinion. And there certianly things Crysis 3 does better like real time GI, foliage, water, and PADM etc.

Again, when a later next gen shooter comes, you will see for yourself the difference no PS3/360 development can make to graphics.

At least you can appreciate the things that Crysis 3 does really well.

Because there was this clown in this thread using a crappy compressed image to make it seem like Crysis 3 hardly looks better on PC than on 360. I mean, sure the PC version could've been better if it didn't use lower quality assets. But again I have to bring up developer competence and Crytek is way more competent at developing for PC than on consoles. As shown by the low framerate in 360/PS3 version of Crysis 3 and the overall lower quality of the graphics.

But that's just a minor addition to the point you said and I agree on i.e. it also depends on what platforms you develop on and if it is an exclusive or not. But really all of these games are amazing looking to me: Battlefield 4, Metro Last Light, Crysis 3, Killzone SF and Infamous. Whether they are exclusive or running on last gen or not. And I can't wait to see what the graphics will be in future PC/PS4 shooters.

Agreed. I think the problem with most people (especailly PC gamers), is that they have a hard time grasping that a PS4 game could possibly compete with a PC game that requires a rig far more powerful than PS4 to max out (Crysis 3). There are many people who actually think Crysis 3 maxed out is already far beyond what next gen consoles will ever achieve.

The problem with that is they think too much in the PC DirectX development mantra. Now that last gen development is coming to an end, games will start looking significantly better. Already there are next gen versions of game franchises such as AC Unity and Batman AK. And you can see the difference right away.

There are many PC gamers who believe optimization is a myth and has no advantage over PC DirectX development. When that attitude is actually ignorant. Did you know that DX11 doesn't detect or use a lot of the GPU tech in modern GPU's? This is why AMD made Mantle, for both CPU draw calls and better access to GCN technology on PC's. No one has really taken full advantage of mantle sadly. But it's there. PS4's API (GNM) is built specifically to max out everything 100%. This is why you can get these games with vastly more advanced rendering pipelines like what we have seen with KZSF, Infamous, The Order, DriveClub, Uncharted 4 etc. The chances are, PS4 exclusives are using some part of the GPU that DirectX11 can't see on PC. So that means a straight port to DX11 on PC would actually be broken with glitches everywhere as the game code would be looking for parts of the GPU DX11 doesn't see.

It's interesting stuff really.

Many pc gamers that actual know what is what understand that the PS4 is a system with mid ranged modern age hardware that may be weak on the cpu front but is a capable system. But some over glorify the PS4'a abilities too. Also with Crysis 3 some effects and assets are beyond what the PS4 can handle smoothly because of the limited cpu power and mid ranged gpu incorporated. But Crysis 3 level design, size and execution was limited by the 360/PS3's hardware and memory constraints.

Optimization isnt a myth but blown out of proportion by many. Direct x isnt limiting graphical abilities but actually its the developers that are doing it because they have to design their games to work with the lowest common denominators. Since now we have consoles that have native hardware with direct x 11 standardized features like shader model 5 etc, will see the discontinued use of direct x 9/10 based limitations caused by multiplatforming direction having to use baseline of last gen console hardware. Also all direct x overhead is handled by the cpu which is why even AMD custom API that bypasses most of the overheads see little to no difference with certain cpu's ie intel based cpu's were they have the grunt to bulldozer right through the extra work created by the need of compatibility checks and sums with DX11.

You think mantle isnt being fully used by the select few developers that are being funded by AMD to use it? Mantle is nothing super special over Direct x 11 because the baseline in abilities are the same your not going to see it producing better graphics etc (shader model 5 is still shader model 5). Mantle's primary role is to allow programs and games etc have more control of the AMD's gcn resources while using less cpu resources while doing it.

Then your over glorifying PS4's abilities... and its API enabling it to use nearly all its resources, that not in question its API allows full control. but its games are not using more "advanced rendering pipelines"..... your just seeing modern native hardware features being used not being influenced and limited by last gen consoles.PS4 is not going to use a part of the gpu that you cant see on pc with dx11 because of the fact that the hardware standards are the same. The only thing you will see is more efficient usage allowing more to be done with less processing resources.

Ah so good. I would like to know your sources of information please..

BTW I agree with a lot of what you're saying so keep that in mind.

#169 Posted by ivo_ree (103 posts) -

I'm not worried, because I haven't even bought any next-gen console.

#170 Edited by MiiiiV (371 posts) -

Some people here are saying that it's pointless and a waste to buy really powerful hardware, but there are a few games that actually take some advantage of the extra power other than just getting higher frame rate, more responsive gameplay and more rendering effects.
During the last console gen it was Crysis 1 and Crysis Warhead (and a few others) which were both ahead of what the consoles were capable of. And with mods those games still look really good to this day, even exceeding the best looking next-gen shooters in certain aspects.
I'm not saying a pc with 8-10x more power (about the power difference between ps3 and ps4) than the ps4 will give you the same graphics as the ps5 because no games today are solely made to take advantage of such hardware but several upcoming games with mods could a at least provide a taste of the future.

#171 Posted by scottpsfan14 (4078 posts) -
@miiiiv said:

Some people here are saying that it's pointless and a waste to buy really powerful hardware, but there are a few games that actually take some advantage of the extra power other than just getting higher frame rate, more responsive gameplay and more rendering effects.

During the last console gen it was Crysis 1 and Crysis Warhead (and a few others) which were both ahead of what the consoles were capable of. And with mods those games still look really good to this day, even exceeding the best looking next-gen shooters in certain aspects.

I'm not saying a pc with 8-10x more power (about the power difference between ps3 and ps4) than the ps4 will give you the same graphics as the ps5 because no games today are solely made to take advantage of such hardware but several upcoming games with mods could a at least provide a taste of the future.

A Titan SLI setup may well be 8-10 times the raw power of PS4. Maybe the same raw power as PS5 will be. But it still doesn't have shadermodel 6/7/8 or what ever PS5 GPU will have. So there will be rendering tech in GPU's in 2020 that don't exist today. Just like the PS4 has DX11 class effects than the PS3 didn't have. And PS5 games will be fully coded for the GPU.

So in short, PS5 graphics won't be achieved until PS5 comes out. PC will get close with end of the gen multiplats (like Crysis 3 has), but PS5 games will have that something over them. Always. Just like every other gen, consoles will raise the bar.

#172 Edited by Zelda187 (721 posts) -

@blackace said:

@chikenfriedrice said:

I can't play X1 or PS4 exclusives with those cards so no.

This is pretty much the main reason I'm not a big PC gamer. I'd include the Wii U in there as well. If all you care about are multiplat games and NO EXCLUSIVES on any game console at all, then stay on the PC.

Not all PC gamers are strictly PC gamers.

I do the vast majority of my gaming on the PC, but I still have my PS3 for exclusives.

Don't see the use in running out and buying a "next gen" system when there's somewhere between "jack" and "shit" to play on both the PS4 and the XBone right now. What am I going to do, just play Madden and Battlefield (which is better on PC anyway) until Uncharted comes out 10 months from now?

And I love how people talk about how "expensive" it is to build a quality PC when these same people have game libraries that they've spent thousands of dollars on and get nickeled and dimed by the console market constantly. I'm supposed to pay for my monthly internet AND pay for XB Live/PS Network? LOL, go fuck yourselves Microsoft/Sony.

#173 Posted by MiiiiV (371 posts) -

@miiiiv said:

Some people here are saying that it's pointless and a waste to buy really powerful hardware, but there are a few games that actually take some advantage of the extra power other than just getting higher frame rate, more responsive gameplay and more rendering effects.

During the last console gen it was Crysis 1 and Crysis Warhead (and a few others) which were both ahead of what the consoles were capable of. And with mods those games still look really good to this day, even exceeding the best looking next-gen shooters in certain aspects.

I'm not saying a pc with 8-10x more power (about the power difference between ps3 and ps4) than the ps4 will give you the same graphics as the ps5 because no games today are solely made to take advantage of such hardware but several upcoming games with mods could a at least provide a taste of the future.

A Titan SLI setup may well be 8-10 times the raw power of PS4. Maybe the same raw power as PS5 will be. But it still doesn't have shadermodel 6/7/8 or what ever PS5 GPU will have. So there will be rendering tech in GPU's in 2020 that don't exist today. Just like the PS4 has DX11 class effects than the PS3 didn't have. And PS5 games will be fully coded for the GPU.

So in short, PS5 graphics won't be achieved until PS5 comes out. PC will get close with end of the gen multiplats (like Crysis 3 has), but PS5 games will have that something over them. Always. Just like every other gen, consoles will raise the bar.

I didn't say that such a pc will achieve ps5 graphics in all aspects, just that it could very well provide a taste of the future.
It's not that far fetched that future games (probably pc exclusives) with some well made mods could approach ps5 visuals and even exceed early ps5 games in some aspects, just like Crysis 1 did/does with mods.
Even to this day it's been up for debate which is the best looking game between modded Crysis 1 vs Killzone Shadow Fall. And they actually trade some blows.

#174 Posted by scottpsfan14 (4078 posts) -
@miiiiv said:

@scottpsfan14 said:
@miiiiv said:

Some people here are saying that it's pointless and a waste to buy really powerful hardware, but there are a few games that actually take some advantage of the extra power other than just getting higher frame rate, more responsive gameplay and more rendering effects.

During the last console gen it was Crysis 1 and Crysis Warhead (and a few others) which were both ahead of what the consoles were capable of. And with mods those games still look really good to this day, even exceeding the best looking next-gen shooters in certain aspects.

I'm not saying a pc with 8-10x more power (about the power difference between ps3 and ps4) than the ps4 will give you the same graphics as the ps5 because no games today are solely made to take advantage of such hardware but several upcoming games with mods could a at least provide a taste of the future.

A Titan SLI setup may well be 8-10 times the raw power of PS4. Maybe the same raw power as PS5 will be. But it still doesn't have shadermodel 6/7/8 or what ever PS5 GPU will have. So there will be rendering tech in GPU's in 2020 that don't exist today. Just like the PS4 has DX11 class effects than the PS3 didn't have. And PS5 games will be fully coded for the GPU.

So in short, PS5 graphics won't be achieved until PS5 comes out. PC will get close with end of the gen multiplats (like Crysis 3 has), but PS5 games will have that something over them. Always. Just like every other gen, consoles will raise the bar.

I didn't say that such a pc will achieve ps5 graphics in all aspects, just that it could very well provide a taste of the future.

It's not that far fetched that future games (probably pc exclusives) with some well made mods could approach ps5 visuals and even exceed early ps5 games in some aspects, just like Crysis 1 did/does with mods.

Even to this day it's been up for debate which is the best looking game between modded Crysis 1 vs Killzone Shadow Fall. And they actually trade some blows.

Crysis 1 displays far less polygons on screen at once than Killzone SF. It's RP is not as detailed. But I do agree that it's a more fun game and still looks amazing with mods today. Poly count is not the only thing that makes something look better.

#175 Edited by MiiiiV (371 posts) -
@scottpsfan14 said:
@miiiiv said:

@scottpsfan14 said:
@miiiiv said:

Some people here are saying that it's pointless and a waste to buy really powerful hardware, but there are a few games that actually take some advantage of the extra power other than just getting higher frame rate, more responsive gameplay and more rendering effects.

During the last console gen it was Crysis 1 and Crysis Warhead (and a few others) which were both ahead of what the consoles were capable of. And with mods those games still look really good to this day, even exceeding the best looking next-gen shooters in certain aspects.

I'm not saying a pc with 8-10x more power (about the power difference between ps3 and ps4) than the ps4 will give you the same graphics as the ps5 because no games today are solely made to take advantage of such hardware but several upcoming games with mods could a at least provide a taste of the future.

A Titan SLI setup may well be 8-10 times the raw power of PS4. Maybe the same raw power as PS5 will be. But it still doesn't have shadermodel 6/7/8 or what ever PS5 GPU will have. So there will be rendering tech in GPU's in 2020 that don't exist today. Just like the PS4 has DX11 class effects than the PS3 didn't have. And PS5 games will be fully coded for the GPU.

So in short, PS5 graphics won't be achieved until PS5 comes out. PC will get close with end of the gen multiplats (like Crysis 3 has), but PS5 games will have that something over them. Always. Just like every other gen, consoles will raise the bar.

I didn't say that such a pc will achieve ps5 graphics in all aspects, just that it could very well provide a taste of the future.

It's not that far fetched that future games (probably pc exclusives) with some well made mods could approach ps5 visuals and even exceed early ps5 games in some aspects, just like Crysis 1 did/does with mods.

Even to this day it's been up for debate which is the best looking game between modded Crysis 1 vs Killzone Shadow Fall. And they actually trade some blows.

Crysis 1 displays far less polygons on screen at once than Killzone SF. It's RP is not as detailed. But I do agree that it's a more fun game and still looks amazing with mods today. Poly count is not the only thing that makes something look better.

How can you be sure that it has far less polygons on screen. With the reactively small playable areas rendered by the engine in KZSF together with the lod distance that makes everything that's even slightly far away (but still in rock throwing distance) a bit blurry or covered in fog. Not disputing that most things in KZSF that are close up have more geometry, except for maybe the foliage.

#176 Edited by scottpsfan14 (4078 posts) -
@miiiiv said:

How can you be sure that it's far less. With the reactively small playable areas rendered by the engine together with the lod distance that makes everything that's even slightly far away (but still in rock throwing distance) blurry or covered in fog. Not disputing that most things in KZSF that are close up have more geometry, except for maybe the foliage.

Because I have the game and the Cry Engine SDK. And the game regulary displays about 2 million polygons for the whole scene. Obviously, every millisecond, the amount changes, but it averages at about 2.2 million polygons rendered at one time. If you take into account that Infamous SS renders regularly over 11 million polygons for the whole scene, then factor that Killzone is using a similar quality pipeline, it points to being more polys on screen at once. And you can see by looking at the assets and world geometry.

Now Crysis 1 is pretty much open world remember, so It displays actually several times the polygons on screen as Crysis 2/3 on average. As you can see there, the Tris = 2,944,239 at that very still I took. My GPU was rendering that many polygons at that very moment of the still. It very rarely goes beyond that number though. About 3.2 million at most. Crysis 2 barely manages 1.8 million frames even with tessellation enabled.

This is on ultra with tessellation enabled. And this is about the most dense part of the level I could find. That's 1,833,898 polygons as I captured that image. And it's even less on average in that level.

This is an average scenario walking in the level. 1,139,441 polygons was being rendered by my GPU as I captured that image. Again, this is maxed out on ultra. With tessellation enabled. And there are frequent drops under 1 million polys.

Infamous draws far far more polygons to screen at one time. Over 11 million in most scenarios (given that you are not looking up at the sky obviously) Killzone uses a similar rendering pipeline built for PS4. And the assets, character models and props/objects are proven to be significantly more geometrically dense than last gen games of it's kind.

#177 Edited by MiiiiV (371 posts) -

@scottpsfan14 said:
@miiiiv said:

How can you be sure that it's far less. With the reactively small playable areas rendered by the engine together with the lod distance that makes everything that's even slightly far away (but still in rock throwing distance) blurry or covered in fog. Not disputing that most things in KZSF that are close up have more geometry, except for maybe the foliage.

Because I have the game and the Cry Engine SDK. And the game regulary displays about 2 million polygons for the whole scene. Obviously, every millisecond, the amount changes, but it averages at about 2.2 million polygons rendered at one time. If you take into account that Infamous SS renders regularly over 11 million polygons for the whole scene, then factor that Killzone is using a similar quality pipeline, it points to being more polys on screen at once. And you can see by looking at the assets and world geometry.

Now Crysis 1 is pretty much open world remember, so It displays actually several times the polygons on screen as Crysis 2/3 on average. As you can see there, the Tris = 2,944,239 at that very still I took. My GPU was rendering that many polygons at that very moment of the still. It very rarely goes beyond that number though. About 3.2 million at most. Crysis 2 barely manages 1.8 million frames even with tessellation enabled.

This is on ultra with tessellation enabled. And this is about the most dense part of the level I could find. That's 1,833,898 polygons as I captured that image. And it's even less on average in that level.

This is an average scenario walking in the level. 1,139,441 polygons was being rendered by my GPU as I captured that image. Again, this is maxed out on ultra. With tessellation enabled. And there are frequent drops under 1 million polys.

Infamous draws far far more polygons to screen at one time. Over 11 million in most scenarios (given that you are not looking up at the sky obviously) Killzone uses a similar rendering pipeline built for PS4. And the assets, character models and props/objects are proven to be significantly more geometrically dense than last gen games of it's kind.

Thanks for the detailed answer. I wouldn't dispute that Infamous SS has a higher total poly count than Crysis (and I really don't trust the claims devs are making these days) but I still think that there isn't a huge difference in total poly count between KZSF and Crysis. KZSF probably renders more on average probably peaks a bit more than vanilla Crysis, even though the lod distance isn't very good in KZSF. But there are mods that extend the draw distance in Crysis and that would probably generate a real bump in total poly count and together with another mod at the same time for more hi-res vegetation that makes the jungle a lot denser which would also make the total poly count higher as well. I've read that even vanilla Crysis can go up to 4 million polygons at peak times.

#178 Posted by scottpsfan14 (4078 posts) -
@miiiiv said:

@scottpsfan14 said:
@miiiiv said:

How can you be sure that it's far less. With the reactively small playable areas rendered by the engine together with the lod distance that makes everything that's even slightly far away (but still in rock throwing distance) blurry or covered in fog. Not disputing that most things in KZSF that are close up have more geometry, except for maybe the foliage.

Because I have the game and the Cry Engine SDK. And the game regulary displays about 2 million polygons for the whole scene. Obviously, every millisecond, the amount changes, but it averages at about 2.2 million polygons rendered at one time. If you take into account that Infamous SS renders regularly over 11 million polygons for the whole scene, then factor that Killzone is using a similar quality pipeline, it points to being more polys on screen at once. And you can see by looking at the assets and world geometry.

Now Crysis 1 is pretty much open world remember, so It displays actually several times the polygons on screen as Crysis 2/3 on average. As you can see there, the Tris = 2,944,239 at that very still I took. My GPU was rendering that many polygons at that very moment of the still. It very rarely goes beyond that number though. About 3.2 million at most. Crysis 2 barely manages 1.8 million frames even with tessellation enabled.

This is on ultra with tessellation enabled. And this is about the most dense part of the level I could find. That's 1,833,898 polygons as I captured that image. And it's even less on average in that level.

This is an average scenario walking in the level. 1,139,441 polygons was being rendered by my GPU as I captured that image. Again, this is maxed out on ultra. With tessellation enabled. And there are frequent drops under 1 million polys.

Infamous draws far far more polygons to screen at one time. Over 11 million in most scenarios (given that you are not looking up at the sky obviously) Killzone uses a similar rendering pipeline built for PS4. And the assets, character models and props/objects are proven to be significantly more geometrically dense than last gen games of it's kind.

Thanks for the detailed answer. I wouldn't dispute that Infamous SS has a higher total poly count than Crysis (and I really don't trust the claims devs are making these days) but I still think that there isn't a huge difference in total poly count between KZSF and Crysis. KZSF probably renders more on average probably peaks a bit more than vanilla Crysis, even though the lod distance isn't very good in KZSF. But there are mods that extend the draw distance in Crysis and that would probably generate a real bump in total poly count and together with another mod at the same time for more hi-res vegetation that makes the jungle a lot denser which would also make the total poly count higher as well. I've read that even vanilla Crysis can go up to 4 million polygons at peak times.

Sorry but that's pure speculation on your part. And yes Crysis 1 can be 4 million at peak times. That's at the most dense times of course. But we don't even know the peak polys for Infamous or killzone. It just says regulary over 11 million for Infamous.

#179 Posted by farrell2k (5824 posts) -

try spending 400 on a pc and see if you can get better graphics than a ps4 or xbox one.

I mean I've just spent time racking up how much I'll need to spend to truly enjoy PC gaming, and it's going to cost me 2500 I mean seriously, until you can make PCs for around the 300 to 500 mark and get amazing results consoles will always be relevant and dictate the market, I mean all this PC's are amazing rubbish comes down to how much you spend and still then most of the games aren't that much better looking than consoles.

Already possible with current hardware prices. $350 will match a PS4. Myself and others have posted build many times.

#180 Edited by anderswhk (49 posts) -

The deal breaker for me, when it comes to PC vs Console is the controls. I don't like using controllers, I never have, and I never will, despite starting out as a console gamer. I despise the awkward unresponsive turret-like movement that the analog sticks limits you to, and the fact that they a void of any sort of precision you might want. There is also the way that the buttons are placed so you have to move your right thumb off the analog stick to press buttons on the controller that aren't triggers.

I can't think of a single type of game where a controller would be superior. No, not fighting games, 99% of top players use arcade sticks. No, not racing games as anyone serious about racing games has a wheel.

Sadly the consoles do hold some IP's hostage, so you are forced to play with gimped controls if you want the experience. A good example is The Last of Us. I don't mind sitting through bad controls in a game like that, since the game itself is excellent, so i can live with it.

#181 Edited by MiiiiV (371 posts) -

@scottpsfan14 said:
@miiiiv said:

@scottpsfan14 said:
@miiiiv said:

How can you be sure that it's far less. With the reactively small playable areas rendered by the engine together with the lod distance that makes everything that's even slightly far away (but still in rock throwing distance) blurry or covered in fog. Not disputing that most things in KZSF that are close up have more geometry, except for maybe the foliage.

Because I have the game and the Cry Engine SDK. And the game regulary displays about 2 million polygons for the whole scene. Obviously, every millisecond, the amount changes, but it averages at about 2.2 million polygons rendered at one time. If you take into account that Infamous SS renders regularly over 11 million polygons for the whole scene, then factor that Killzone is using a similar quality pipeline, it points to being more polys on screen at once. And you can see by looking at the assets and world geometry.

Now Crysis 1 is pretty much open world remember, so It displays actually several times the polygons on screen as Crysis 2/3 on average. As you can see there, the Tris = 2,944,239 at that very still I took. My GPU was rendering that many polygons at that very moment of the still. It very rarely goes beyond that number though. About 3.2 million at most. Crysis 2 barely manages 1.8 million frames even with tessellation enabled.

This is on ultra with tessellation enabled. And this is about the most dense part of the level I could find. That's 1,833,898 polygons as I captured that image. And it's even less on average in that level.

This is an average scenario walking in the level. 1,139,441 polygons was being rendered by my GPU as I captured that image. Again, this is maxed out on ultra. With tessellation enabled. And there are frequent drops under 1 million polys.

Infamous draws far far more polygons to screen at one time. Over 11 million in most scenarios (given that you are not looking up at the sky obviously) Killzone uses a similar rendering pipeline built for PS4. And the assets, character models and props/objects are proven to be significantly more geometrically dense than last gen games of it's kind.

Thanks for the detailed answer. I wouldn't dispute that Infamous SS has a higher total poly count than Crysis (and I really don't trust the claims devs are making these days) but I still think that there isn't a huge difference in total poly count between KZSF and Crysis. KZSF probably renders more on average probably peaks a bit more than vanilla Crysis, even though the lod distance isn't very good in KZSF. But there are mods that extend the draw distance in Crysis and that would probably generate a real bump in total poly count and together with another mod at the same time for more hi-res vegetation that makes the jungle a lot denser which would also make the total poly count higher as well. I've read that even vanilla Crysis can go up to 4 million polygons at peak times.

Sorry but that's pure speculation on your part. And yes Crysis 1 can be 4 million at peak times. That's at the most dense times of course. But we don't even know the peak polys for Infamous or killzone. It just says regulary over 11 million for Infamous.

Well, we are both speculating since there is no way to know the actual poly count of console games for sure. And to my knowing the devs haven't made any claims about the total polygon count in KZSF. Vanilla Crysis can reach 4 million polygons at peak times and it's not very unlikely that it's much higher with mods that extend the draw distance and simultaneously increase the vegetation density.

#182 Posted by WiCkStaR1 (20 posts) -

To be totally honest this doesn't really matter to me. My favorite game to play for PC was Guild Wars haha. I had some much fun playing that RPG, but to be totally honest, consoles are just so much more fun in my opinion. Even though the technology will never probably exceed that of a PC, I think the true value is in the experience. So whether you prefer PC or Console it shouldn't really matter the technology as long as you're enjoying yourself.

#183 Posted by Cranler (8797 posts) -

@Zelda187 said:

@blackace said:

@chikenfriedrice said:

I can't play X1 or PS4 exclusives with those cards so no.

This is pretty much the main reason I'm not a big PC gamer. I'd include the Wii U in there as well. If all you care about are multiplat games and NO EXCLUSIVES on any game console at all, then stay on the PC.

And I love how people talk about how "expensive" it is to build a quality PC when these same people have game libraries that they've spent thousands of dollars on and get nickeled and dimed by the console market constantly. I'm supposed to pay for my monthly internet AND pay for XB Live/PS Network? LOL, go fuck yourselves Microsoft/Sony.

Well the PS 4 and Xbone are basically sold at cost.

Look how much a similar prebuilt pc would cost http://www.ibuypower.com/Store/Hexa-A

#184 Posted by Zelda187 (721 posts) -
@Cranler said:

@Zelda187 said:

@blackace said:

@chikenfriedrice said:

I can't play X1 or PS4 exclusives with those cards so no.

This is pretty much the main reason I'm not a big PC gamer. I'd include the Wii U in there as well. If all you care about are multiplat games and NO EXCLUSIVES on any game console at all, then stay on the PC.

And I love how people talk about how "expensive" it is to build a quality PC when these same people have game libraries that they've spent thousands of dollars on and get nickeled and dimed by the console market constantly. I'm supposed to pay for my monthly internet AND pay for XB Live/PS Network? LOL, go fuck yourselves Microsoft/Sony.

Well the PS 4 and Xbone are basically sold at cost.

Look how much a similar prebuilt pc would cost http://www.ibuypower.com/Store/Hexa-A

Yeah, prebuilt PC's are a total ripoff. Everyone knows that.

You could shop around and buy the components yourself and build a rig that would beat the breaks off a PS4 or XBone for $500 easily.

#185 Posted by Cranler (8797 posts) -

@Zelda187 said:
@Cranler said:

@Zelda187 said:

@blackace said:

@chikenfriedrice said:

I can't play X1 or PS4 exclusives with those cards so no.

This is pretty much the main reason I'm not a big PC gamer. I'd include the Wii U in there as well. If all you care about are multiplat games and NO EXCLUSIVES on any game console at all, then stay on the PC.

And I love how people talk about how "expensive" it is to build a quality PC when these same people have game libraries that they've spent thousands of dollars on and get nickeled and dimed by the console market constantly. I'm supposed to pay for my monthly internet AND pay for XB Live/PS Network? LOL, go fuck yourselves Microsoft/Sony.

Well the PS 4 and Xbone are basically sold at cost.

Look how much a similar prebuilt pc would cost http://www.ibuypower.com/Store/Hexa-A

Yeah, prebuilt PC's are a total ripoff. Everyone knows that.

You could shop around and buy the components yourself and build a rig that would beat the breaks off a PS4 or XBone for $500 easily.

Prebuilts and consoles are caterign to a demographic you aren't a part of.

Show me this $500 pc that destroys the PS 4.

#186 Edited by Zelda187 (721 posts) -

@Cranler said:

@Zelda187 said:
@Cranler said:

@Zelda187 said:

@blackace said:

@chikenfriedrice said:

I can't play X1 or PS4 exclusives with those cards so no.

This is pretty much the main reason I'm not a big PC gamer. I'd include the Wii U in there as well. If all you care about are multiplat games and NO EXCLUSIVES on any game console at all, then stay on the PC.

And I love how people talk about how "expensive" it is to build a quality PC when these same people have game libraries that they've spent thousands of dollars on and get nickeled and dimed by the console market constantly. I'm supposed to pay for my monthly internet AND pay for XB Live/PS Network? LOL, go fuck yourselves Microsoft/Sony.

Well the PS 4 and Xbone are basically sold at cost.

Look how much a similar prebuilt pc would cost http://www.ibuypower.com/Store/Hexa-A

Yeah, prebuilt PC's are a total ripoff. Everyone knows that.

You could shop around and buy the components yourself and build a rig that would beat the breaks off a PS4 or XBone for $500 easily.

Prebuilts and consoles are caterign to a demographic you aren't a part of.

Show me this $500 pc that destroys the PS 4.

CPU: AMD Athlon X4 760K

MOBO: MSI A78M-E35

GPU: 2GB EVGA GTX 650Ti Boost OR Radeon R7 260X

RAM: 8GB Crucial Ballistix Sport

Hard Drive: 500 GB Western Digital Caviar Blue

PSU: Corsair CX430

Case: Rosewill Challenger

Comes out to less than $500, actually. Around $460

#187 Posted by scottpsfan14 (4078 posts) -
@miiiiv said:

@scottpsfan14 said:
@miiiiv said:

@scottpsfan14 said:
@miiiiv said:

How can you be sure that it's far less. With the reactively small playable areas rendered by the engine together with the lod distance that makes everything that's even slightly far away (but still in rock throwing distance) blurry or covered in fog. Not disputing that most things in KZSF that are close up have more geometry, except for maybe the foliage.

Because I have the game and the Cry Engine SDK. And the game regulary displays about 2 million polygons for the whole scene. Obviously, every millisecond, the amount changes, but it averages at about 2.2 million polygons rendered at one time. If you take into account that Infamous SS renders regularly over 11 million polygons for the whole scene, then factor that Killzone is using a similar quality pipeline, it points to being more polys on screen at once. And you can see by looking at the assets and world geometry.

Now Crysis 1 is pretty much open world remember, so It displays actually several times the polygons on screen as Crysis 2/3 on average. As you can see there, the Tris = 2,944,239 at that very still I took. My GPU was rendering that many polygons at that very moment of the still. It very rarely goes beyond that number though. About 3.2 million at most. Crysis 2 barely manages 1.8 million frames even with tessellation enabled.

This is on ultra with tessellation enabled. And this is about the most dense part of the level I could find. That's 1,833,898 polygons as I captured that image. And it's even less on average in that level.

This is an average scenario walking in the level. 1,139,441 polygons was being rendered by my GPU as I captured that image. Again, this is maxed out on ultra. With tessellation enabled. And there are frequent drops under 1 million polys.

Infamous draws far far more polygons to screen at one time. Over 11 million in most scenarios (given that you are not looking up at the sky obviously) Killzone uses a similar rendering pipeline built for PS4. And the assets, character models and props/objects are proven to be significantly more geometrically dense than last gen games of it's kind.

Thanks for the detailed answer. I wouldn't dispute that Infamous SS has a higher total poly count than Crysis (and I really don't trust the claims devs are making these days) but I still think that there isn't a huge difference in total poly count between KZSF and Crysis. KZSF probably renders more on average probably peaks a bit more than vanilla Crysis, even though the lod distance isn't very good in KZSF. But there are mods that extend the draw distance in Crysis and that would probably generate a real bump in total poly count and together with another mod at the same time for more hi-res vegetation that makes the jungle a lot denser which would also make the total poly count higher as well. I've read that even vanilla Crysis can go up to 4 million polygons at peak times.

Sorry but that's pure speculation on your part. And yes Crysis 1 can be 4 million at peak times. That's at the most dense times of course. But we don't even know the peak polys for Infamous or killzone. It just says regulary over 11 million for Infamous.

Well, we are both speculating since there is no way to know the actual poly count of console games for sure. And to my knowing the devs haven't made any claims about the total polygon count in KZSF. Vanilla Crysis can reach 4 million polygons at peak times and it's not very unlikely that it's much higher with mods that extend the draw distance and simultaneously increase the vegetation density.

I imagine so. I guess you could mod Crysis 1 to display over 11 million polys if you increase the draw distance. That is of course if the level is made up of that much.

#188 Posted by jake44 (1977 posts) -

No, but I do plan to get one of the next Nvidia cards.

#189 Posted by 04dcarraher (19328 posts) -

@miiiiv said:


Well, we are both speculating since there is no way to know the actual poly count of console games for sure. And to my knowing the devs haven't made any claims about the total polygon count in KZSF. Vanilla Crysis can reach 4 million polygons at peak times and it's not very unlikely that it's much higher with mods that extend the draw distance and simultaneously increase the vegetation density.

Also KZSF polygon counts fluctuate because of the dynamic LOD system to have those single up close 40k npc models. Distance and amount of npc's determine the polygon counts and get downgraded quite quickly.

#190 Edited by scottpsfan14 (4078 posts) -
@04dcarraher said:

@miiiiv said:

Well, we are both speculating since there is no way to know the actual poly count of console games for sure. And to my knowing the devs haven't made any claims about the total polygon count in KZSF. Vanilla Crysis can reach 4 million polygons at peak times and it's not very unlikely that it's much higher with mods that extend the draw distance and simultaneously increase the vegetation density.

Also KZSF polygon counts fluctuate because of the dynamic LOD system to have those single up close 40k npc models. Distance and amount of npc's determine the polygon counts and get downgraded quite quickly.

Yeah I imagine so. So let me get this straight, do you think Crysis 1 could be done on PS4 without any compromises?

And I assume from what you said, you know the regular polygon count KZSF do you not?

#191 Edited by 04dcarraher (19328 posts) -
@04dcarraher said:

@miiiiv said:

Well, we are both speculating since there is no way to know the actual poly count of console games for sure. And to my knowing the devs haven't made any claims about the total polygon count in KZSF. Vanilla Crysis can reach 4 million polygons at peak times and it's not very unlikely that it's much higher with mods that extend the draw distance and simultaneously increase the vegetation density.

Also KZSF polygon counts fluctuate because of the dynamic LOD system to have those single up close 40k npc models. Distance and amount of npc's determine the polygon counts and get downgraded quite quickly.

Yeah I imagine so. So let me get this straight, do you think Crysis 1 could be done on PS4 without any compromises?

And I assume from what you said, you know the regular polygon count KZSF do you not?

Hell yeah Crysis 1 can be done on the PS4 it has the processing power and memory, My old pc with Athlon X2 6000, 4gb and SLI 8800GT's maxed out crysis with mods at 1680x1050 with 40+ average.

Killzone's polygon count has never been revealed but we do know its way below 11 million.

#192 Posted by scottpsfan14 (4078 posts) -
@scottpsfan14 said:
@04dcarraher said:

@miiiiv said:

Well, we are both speculating since there is no way to know the actual poly count of console games for sure. And to my knowing the devs haven't made any claims about the total polygon count in KZSF. Vanilla Crysis can reach 4 million polygons at peak times and it's not very unlikely that it's much higher with mods that extend the draw distance and simultaneously increase the vegetation density.

Also KZSF polygon counts fluctuate because of the dynamic LOD system to have those single up close 40k npc models. Distance and amount of npc's determine the polygon counts and get downgraded quite quickly.

Yeah I imagine so. So let me get this straight, do you think Crysis 1 could be done on PS4 without any compromises?

And I assume from what you said, you know the regular polygon count KZSF do you not?

Hell yeah Crysis 1 can be done on the PS4 it has the processing power and memory, My old pc with Athlon X2 6000, 4gb and SLI 8800GT's maxed out crysis with mods at 1680x1050 with 40+ average.

Killzone's polygon count has never been revealed but we do know its way below 11 million.

Yeah, I agree. Killzone SF won't be rendering as many polygons as Infamous SS for a whole scene. No where near 11 million probably. They have increased their content pipeline for PS4 however. So in general, assets are far higher in poly density than a last gen FPS game. But then it's the beginning of the generation. Guerrilla have said that they will double the poly count in their next game. So I guess that's a plus. And they probably haven't fully come to terms with the hardware yet.

Also, are you saying dual or quad SLI 8800's maxed out Crysis 1? Because I'm currently using a 560 (had a 680 that broke) and I get about 25-30FPS in 1080p.

And Crysis tends to have drops in different levels. So I guess they would have to optimize performance bugs to get a steadier framerate.

#193 Posted by Cranler (8797 posts) -

@Zelda187 said:

@Cranler said:

@Zelda187 said:
@Cranler said:

@Zelda187 said:

@blackace said:

@chikenfriedrice said:

I can't play X1 or PS4 exclusives with those cards so no.

This is pretty much the main reason I'm not a big PC gamer. I'd include the Wii U in there as well. If all you care about are multiplat games and NO EXCLUSIVES on any game console at all, then stay on the PC.

And I love how people talk about how "expensive" it is to build a quality PC when these same people have game libraries that they've spent thousands of dollars on and get nickeled and dimed by the console market constantly. I'm supposed to pay for my monthly internet AND pay for XB Live/PS Network? LOL, go fuck yourselves Microsoft/Sony.

Well the PS 4 and Xbone are basically sold at cost.

Look how much a similar prebuilt pc would cost http://www.ibuypower.com/Store/Hexa-A

Yeah, prebuilt PC's are a total ripoff. Everyone knows that.

You could shop around and buy the components yourself and build a rig that would beat the breaks off a PS4 or XBone for $500 easily.

Prebuilts and consoles are caterign to a demographic you aren't a part of.

Show me this $500 pc that destroys the PS 4.

CPU: AMD Athlon X4 760K

MOBO: MSI A78M-E35

GPU: 2GB EVGA GTX 650Ti Boost OR Radeon R7 260X

RAM: 8GB Crucial Ballistix Sport

Hard Drive: 500 GB Western Digital Caviar Blue

PSU: Corsair CX430

Case: Rosewill Challenger

Comes out to less than $500, actually. Around $460

You don't show the prices.

Wouldn't you need at least 2x the power to "beat the breaks off of" as you put it?

This build would simply match the PS 4 at best.

We also don't know what's going to happen when many games start getting coded for 6 cores.

Wheres the os?

#194 Posted by MonsieurX (29737 posts) -

@Zelda187 said:

@Cranler said:

@Zelda187 said:
@Cranler said:

@Zelda187 said:

@blackace said:

@chikenfriedrice said:

I can't play X1 or PS4 exclusives with those cards so no.

This is pretty much the main reason I'm not a big PC gamer. I'd include the Wii U in there as well. If all you care about are multiplat games and NO EXCLUSIVES on any game console at all, then stay on the PC.

And I love how people talk about how "expensive" it is to build a quality PC when these same people have game libraries that they've spent thousands of dollars on and get nickeled and dimed by the console market constantly. I'm supposed to pay for my monthly internet AND pay for XB Live/PS Network? LOL, go fuck yourselves Microsoft/Sony.

Well the PS 4 and Xbone are basically sold at cost.

Look how much a similar prebuilt pc would cost http://www.ibuypower.com/Store/Hexa-A

Yeah, prebuilt PC's are a total ripoff. Everyone knows that.

You could shop around and buy the components yourself and build a rig that would beat the breaks off a PS4 or XBone for $500 easily.

Prebuilts and consoles are caterign to a demographic you aren't a part of.

Show me this $500 pc that destroys the PS 4.

CPU: AMD Athlon X4 760K

MOBO: MSI A78M-E35

GPU: 2GB EVGA GTX 650Ti Boost OR Radeon R7 260X

RAM: 8GB Crucial Ballistix Sport

Hard Drive: 500 GB Western Digital Caviar Blue

PSU: Corsair CX430

Case: Rosewill Challenger

Comes out to less than $500, actually. Around $460

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/XVRhFT

450$ but it's not on par with a PS4 and no Windows included

#195 Edited by 04dcarraher (19328 posts) -

@scottpsfan14 said:
@04dcarraher said:
@scottpsfan14 said:
@04dcarraher said:

@miiiiv said:

Well, we are both speculating since there is no way to know the actual poly count of console games for sure. And to my knowing the devs haven't made any claims about the total polygon count in KZSF. Vanilla Crysis can reach 4 million polygons at peak times and it's not very unlikely that it's much higher with mods that extend the draw distance and simultaneously increase the vegetation density.

Also KZSF polygon counts fluctuate because of the dynamic LOD system to have those single up close 40k npc models. Distance and amount of npc's determine the polygon counts and get downgraded quite quickly.

Yeah I imagine so. So let me get this straight, do you think Crysis 1 could be done on PS4 without any compromises?

And I assume from what you said, you know the regular polygon count KZSF do you not?

Hell yeah Crysis 1 can be done on the PS4 it has the processing power and memory, My old pc with Athlon X2 6000, 4gb and SLI 8800GT's maxed out crysis with mods at 1680x1050 with 40+ average.

Killzone's polygon count has never been revealed but we do know its way below 11 million.

Yeah, I agree. Killzone SF won't be rendering as many polygons as Infamous SS for a whole scene. No where near 11 million probably. They have increased their content pipeline for PS4 however. So in general, assets are far higher in poly density than a last gen FPS game. But then it's the beginning of the generation. Guerrilla have said that they will double the poly count in their next game. So I guess that's a plus. And they probably haven't fully come to terms with the hardware yet.

Also, are you saying dual or quad SLI 8800's maxed out Crysis 1? Because I'm currently using a 560 (had a 680 that broke) and I get about 25-30FPS in 1080p.

And Crysis tends to have drops in different levels. So I guess they would have to optimize performance bugs to get a steadier framerate.

please stop using the "pipeline" phrase lol.

KZ's assets have most of the credit owed to the high quality textures used. But the additions to surface mapping ie bump, Parralax etc gives the game world and items more depth and complexity. Most off the world's base polygon counts haven't increased by insane amounts because there is no point when textures are the key saves processing resources.

it being the beginning of a generation has really nothing to do with not being able to use the hardware since how straight forward the PS4 design is, Its nothing like the PS3 was. As long as they created an engine/game around modern standards ditching the old while using most or all the available memory resources, early gen game will hold up to late gen game. the learning curve this time around is almost not there for the PS4 because of its balanced and straight forward design.

CCC mod for Crysis 1 helps alot... Vanilla Crysis 1 at 1080p is hard to run because the game itself only uses two cores and cant feed stronger gpu's GTX 560 is nearly 3x faster then a single 8800GT. The gpu is being underutilized, the faster the cpu the better you are off.

#196 Posted by MiiiiV (371 posts) -

Yeah, I agree. Killzone SF won't be rendering as many polygons as Infamous SS for a whole scene. No where near 11 million probably. They have increased their content pipeline for PS4 however. So in general, assets are far higher in poly density than a last gen FPS game. But then it's the beginning of the generation. Guerrilla have said that they will double the poly count in their next game. So I guess that's a plus. And they probably haven't fully come to terms with the hardware yet.

Also, are you saying dual or quad SLI 8800's maxed out Crysis 1? Because I'm currently using a 560 (had a 680 that broke) and I get about 25-30FPS in 1080p.

And Crysis tends to have drops in different levels. So I guess they would have to optimize performance bugs to get a steadier framerate.

Sorry to hear that, hopefully you still have warranty on it.

#197 Edited by scottpsfan14 (4078 posts) -
@04dcarraher said:

@scottpsfan14 said:
@04dcarraher said:
@scottpsfan14 said:
@04dcarraher said:

@miiiiv said:

Well, we are both speculating since there is no way to know the actual poly count of console games for sure. And to my knowing the devs haven't made any claims about the total polygon count in KZSF. Vanilla Crysis can reach 4 million polygons at peak times and it's not very unlikely that it's much higher with mods that extend the draw distance and simultaneously increase the vegetation density.

Also KZSF polygon counts fluctuate because of the dynamic LOD system to have those single up close 40k npc models. Distance and amount of npc's determine the polygon counts and get downgraded quite quickly.

Yeah I imagine so. So let me get this straight, do you think Crysis 1 could be done on PS4 without any compromises?

And I assume from what you said, you know the regular polygon count KZSF do you not?

Hell yeah Crysis 1 can be done on the PS4 it has the processing power and memory, My old pc with Athlon X2 6000, 4gb and SLI 8800GT's maxed out crysis with mods at 1680x1050 with 40+ average.

Killzone's polygon count has never been revealed but we do know its way below 11 million.

Yeah, I agree. Killzone SF won't be rendering as many polygons as Infamous SS for a whole scene. No where near 11 million probably. They have increased their content pipeline for PS4 however. So in general, assets are far higher in poly density than a last gen FPS game. But then it's the beginning of the generation. Guerrilla have said that they will double the poly count in their next game. So I guess that's a plus. And they probably haven't fully come to terms with the hardware yet.

Also, are you saying dual or quad SLI 8800's maxed out Crysis 1? Because I'm currently using a 560 (had a 680 that broke) and I get about 25-30FPS in 1080p.

And Crysis tends to have drops in different levels. So I guess they would have to optimize performance bugs to get a steadier framerate.

please stop using the "pipeline" phrase lol.

KZ's assets have most of the credit owed to the high quality textures used. But the additions to surface mapping ie bump, Parralax etc gives the game world and items more depth and complexity.p Most off the world's base olygon counts haven't increased by insane amounts because there is no point when textures are the key saves processing resources.

it being the beginning of a generation has really nothing to do with not being able to use the hardware since how straight forward the PS4 design is, Its nothing like the PS3 was. As long as they created an engine/game around modern standards ditching the old while using most or all the available memory resources, early gen game will hold up to late gen game. the learning curve this time around is almost not there for the PS4 because of its balanced and straight forward design.

CCC mod for Crysis 1 helps alot... Vanilla Crysis 1 at 1080p is hard to run because the game itself only uses two cores and cant feed stronger gpu's GTX 560 is nearly 3x faster then a single 8800GT. Faster the cpu the better you are off.

I don't understand what bothers you about the word 'pipeline' lol.

I use it to explain the game content that has been improved over last generation. And not just in textures and bump/parralax maps lol. In fact, Killzone SF actually uses very little parralax mapping. You see it in bullet holes in walls as an effect of depth. But textures are mainly just bump/specular mapped.

Those dents are not parallax occlusion, they are simply bump maps and specular.

Also, they have in fact increased the poly density quite a bit. It was their main focus into next gen in fact. The main difference we are seeing with 8th gen games are Physically Based rendering and the rendering "pipeline" (of which bothers you for some bizzare reason lol). This means the game art (assets) which the developer/artist sits and creates. The character models are 4x more dense in poly density.

World assets are also more dense.

This goes for every asset on average. Poly count is actually one of the main differences between games of generations. It's what differenciates games like Crysis 3 from 8th gen games. Crysis 3 is reusing the PS3/360 assets.

Watch the first 5 mins of this video.

As for the improvement across the generation, they will likely squeeze more from the PS4 in future, but granted, far quicker than they did PS3.

#198 Posted by scottpsfan14 (4078 posts) -
@miiiiv said:
@scottpsfan14 said:

Yeah, I agree. Killzone SF won't be rendering as many polygons as Infamous SS for a whole scene. No where near 11 million probably. They have increased their content pipeline for PS4 however. So in general, assets are far higher in poly density than a last gen FPS game. But then it's the beginning of the generation. Guerrilla have said that they will double the poly count in their next game. So I guess that's a plus. And they probably haven't fully come to terms with the hardware yet.

Also, are you saying dual or quad SLI 8800's maxed out Crysis 1? Because I'm currently using a 560 (had a 680 that broke) and I get about 25-30FPS in 1080p.

And Crysis tends to have drops in different levels. So I guess they would have to optimize performance bugs to get a steadier framerate.

Sorry to hear that, hopefully you still have warranty on it.

The problem is my GPU was overclocked when it broke. It started crashing shockwave player on the browser at first. I think this is because of OC damage. But I didn't realize at the time. And suddenly my monitor would say 'no signal' randomly lol. I overclocked it and most likely voided the warrenty. I think I could try it but I don't want to look a fool and say so to the technicians at the shop.

But I guess i'm going to upgrade next year any way. To maxwell. I'll be saving up until then.

#199 Edited by MiiiiV (371 posts) -

@scottpsfan14 said:
@miiiiv said:
@scottpsfan14 said:

Yeah, I agree. Killzone SF won't be rendering as many polygons as Infamous SS for a whole scene. No where near 11 million probably. They have increased their content pipeline for PS4 however. So in general, assets are far higher in poly density than a last gen FPS game. But then it's the beginning of the generation. Guerrilla have said that they will double the poly count in their next game. So I guess that's a plus. And they probably haven't fully come to terms with the hardware yet.

Also, are you saying dual or quad SLI 8800's maxed out Crysis 1? Because I'm currently using a 560 (had a 680 that broke) and I get about 25-30FPS in 1080p.

And Crysis tends to have drops in different levels. So I guess they would have to optimize performance bugs to get a steadier framerate.

Sorry to hear that, hopefully you still have warranty on it.

The problem is my GPU was overclocked when it broke. It started crashing shockwave player on the browser at first. I think this is because of OC damage. But I didn't realize at the time. And suddenly my monitor would say 'no signal' randomly lol. I overclocked it and most likely voided the warrenty. I think I could try it but I don't want to look a fool and say so to the technicians at the shop.

But I guess i'm going to upgrade next year any way. To maxwell. I'll be saving up until then.

Maybe you can reset the card to factory settings or something. Hopefully it will work itself out.
I take it you game mostly on playstation and that the 560 will suffice for a while, but it still sucks when things break.

#200 Posted by scottpsfan14 (4078 posts) -
@miiiiv said:

@scottpsfan14 said:
@miiiiv said:
@scottpsfan14 said:

Yeah, I agree. Killzone SF won't be rendering as many polygons as Infamous SS for a whole scene. No where near 11 million probably. They have increased their content pipeline for PS4 however. So in general, assets are far higher in poly density than a last gen FPS game. But then it's the beginning of the generation. Guerrilla have said that they will double the poly count in their next game. So I guess that's a plus. And they probably haven't fully come to terms with the hardware yet.

Also, are you saying dual or quad SLI 8800's maxed out Crysis 1? Because I'm currently using a 560 (had a 680 that broke) and I get about 25-30FPS in 1080p.

And Crysis tends to have drops in different levels. So I guess they would have to optimize performance bugs to get a steadier framerate.

Sorry to hear that, hopefully you still have warranty on it.

The problem is my GPU was overclocked when it broke. It started crashing shockwave player on the browser at first. I think this is because of OC damage. But I didn't realize at the time. And suddenly my monitor would say 'no signal' randomly lol. I overclocked it and most likely voided the warrenty. I think I could try it but I don't want to look a fool and say so to the technicians at the shop.

But I guess i'm going to upgrade next year any way. To maxwell. I'll be saving up until then.

Maybe you can reset the card to factory settings or something. Hopefully it will work itself out.

I take it you game mostly on playstation and that the 560 will suffice for a while, but it still sucks when things break.

Well no. ATM I game more on PC. Nothing out on PS4. I got every trophy in Infamous SS in like a week. Then I haven't played anything since. I spend most of my PC gaming on Crysis SDK tbh. Love modding that game. Was better with my 680 thou :( It's just shit how some of my games like Metro and Crysis are slower now. And I'm not exactly rolling in cash atm. I have other priorities. I'll wait for maxwell (870 or 880 depending on money I'm willing to spend at the time, or wait for 880ti if I have enough). And no I put my card back to normal to see if it was just the overclock, but it broke graphics in games altogether. So it's a gonner :(