@Dannystaples14 They always do this to blind console gamers with fancy terminology and numbers they don't understand. It's like saying a 3rd gen i3 processor is better than a second gen i7 extreme which has been overclocked. Lies. Yeah, we haven't seen the architecture they're using running games on the PC yet, but that doesn't make it better. It has the potential to EVENTUALLY be better. But with the limited hardware specifications of the consoles and the fact that they are non modular and can't be upgraded, the PC will always stay ahead of the curve.
@NightmareP3 @FenixNoT I know, just want it to be clear to everyone, especially console gamers and anyone considering buying the PS4 or Xbox One how full of shit EA and other companies claiming that the new consoles are more powerful than the world's best PC are :).
@Supabul And clearly you are basing this on absolutely nothing. If you owned a PC which could run games at top settings you would have realised you were about to say something stupid, but alas, you went and said it anyway. Off the top of my head, 3 games that look better on PC than Killzone SF looks on the PS4:
Bioshock Infinite, Metro: Last Light and Arma 3.
I not only know this to be true due to the fact that it is visually obvious to anyone with the power of sight, but I guarantee you that the lighting engines, texture sizes and post processing going on in these games and a shit ton of others on the PC is VASTLY superior to the new generation of consoles.
Let's make this very, very clear. EA is lying to you. If anyone says that the new consoles are better than the best PC in the world, the are lying to you.
Anyone who believes that what is essentially a PC with a proprietary operating system that you can buy for less than £500 is superior to a PC running an OS where you have the freedom to mod and tweak your hardware and software is kidding themselves. A top end PC, if we are actually talking top end here, will cost you upwards of £2500. And the difference is clear. I've seen the above games mentioned running on a £1000 PC with seamless 60 FPS and they look INSANE. The PS4 and the Xbox One are NEVER going to beat PC for sheer power and visual fidelity.
I think the new controller looks pretty cool, even if I don't get the console I'll probably pick one up to use. I'm a PC gamer personally, I own a 360 which I still use to play Halo the odd time but for the most part I find the consoles have very little to offer me anymore. I thought the Xbox One reveal was underwhelming too. They confirmed some rumours, debunked others and didn't show anything which made me go "Wow, that's sweet!", which is the least you want from a dedicated event to reveal a new console. Sony revealed a hell of a lot more and showed a ton of gameplay footage which looked really nice. As far as the consoles go I'm leaning toward Sony and the Playstation with regards to overall appeal of the console. To be honest the only thing that put me off the PS3 was their online service. Yeah it's free, but that's because it quite simply isn't as good. If Sony come out with a better online service then I see no reason for them not to do a lot better than the Xbox this time round.
I also like the new Kinect for skype and stuff but I'm not convinced there's really any potential for innovation in games there, it still just seems like a gimmick.
All in all I agree with this article and I'm gonna continue to play kick ass games on a kick ass PC with kick ass graphics and feel very good about the fact that the graphical fidelity of console games will ALWAYS be less than that of my PC :). Watching the console wars take place in the comments of articles like this never fails to make me smile.
@koospetoors Exactly, can you imagine not being able to go back and play Metal Gear Solid, or Super Mario? Always online is a ridiculous notion and we should all just get past it instead of wasting time. If the consumers have shown anything it's that we are NOT ready for anything even remotely like this. Maybe in 50 years if advancements in mobile internet technologies allow high speed wifi everywhere in the world and you can't possibly be disconnected mid game then we might be on to something, but until then I want to be able to play my games when my internet cuts out, and that shouldn't be a privilege for which I have to fight.
@Mercgamer74 @rann89 It can't and won't. No PC specific dev will use it, that's for certain, because it would be complete suicide for their game if they did. Any developer, Ubisoft for example, who chooses to make their game with an online requirement to play will find themselves in a worse position than had they released it DRM free. Online only games get cracked, just like DRM free games. Sure it takes longer, I think it was about a month on Diablo 3 before there were emulated servers being hosted, but it happens and all the dev is left with then is a game being illegally downloaded and a bunch of pissed of customers. The only saving grace for Diablo in that department is that it's a long established title that people wouldn't just pass over, and Blizzard has a huge in built fan base. Always online will die out. Mark my words.
I love the fact that people supporting the always online requirement of new consoles keep coming off with shit like this. They should provide clear benefits for being online? What you really mean is you should deny content to people who paid hundreds of £/$ on your console and games unless they strictly adhere to your blatant attempt at DRM. Haven't we gone past this already? As if Diablo 3 and Sim City weren't shining examples of how this kind of always online requirement drives people away we're now going to have to suffer more restrictions and jump through hoops just to use what we've paid for?
My internet is almost always reliable, it hardly ever cuts out. But SOMETIMES it does, like during road works or when new cables are being put in. When this happens I can play pretty much all of my PC games and all of my Xbox games. I SHOULD BE ABLE TO DO THIS. It shouldn't be a question of whether people are prepared to meet a ridiculous demand in order to use a product they have already paid for. The bottom line is that games don't NEED to be constantly connected in order to be played. FACT. So gamers shouldn't NEED to be connected to use something that THEY FUCKING PAID FOR.
I'm sticking with my PC this gen until I see something seriously game changing come out of Sony or Microsoft regarding their new consoles. Before this whole always online thing cropped up I was all for buying the Next Xbox. If this goes through the only reason I'll buy a console is for Halo 5 - and only if it's good and doesn't traverse the CoD road any further. We already have CoD. Don't need another one.
FenixNoT's comments