PDA

View Full Version : Assassins Creed Unity locked at 900p/30fps "to avoid all the debates and stuff"



Pages : 1 2 3 4 [5]

joelsantos24
10-22-2014, 05:06 PM
The reason why I doubt the longevity of current-gen consoles.
Not really. In my life, I've only known about 2 people with no relevant attachments to console gaming, that is, they played exclusively on PC. On the other hand, pretty much everyone else I know plays on PS, with one or two on an Xbox. And none of them would ever trade a console for playing on PC. This is a general global trend, and that says a lot on it's own.

That is to say, there are countless variables in play, considering PC gaming, in comparison to a console which was built solely or mainly for gaming purposes. Not to mention that technology and gaming requirements change and evolve every year. Which means that, most likely (or definitely), PC gamers will necessarily have to update their hardware in order to play games in a couple of years, whereas we (console owners) won't. And this always goes back to the specifications of both the PS4 and X1: we all know that the PS4 can handle much more than the X1. So, in a couple of years, when all the PC gamers will be busy updating their machines, the X1 will still be struggling to endure, while us PS4 owners will be enjoying games with much more quality (http://www.ign.com/wikis/xbox-one/PS4_vs._Xbox_One_Native_Resolutions_and_Framerates ). :cool:

Fatal-Feit
10-22-2014, 05:46 PM
Not really. In my life, I've only known about 2 people with no relevant attachments to console gaming, that is, they played exclusively on PC. On the other hand, pretty much everyone else I know plays on PS, with one or two on an Xbox. And none of them would ever trade a console for playing on PC. This is a general global trend, and that says a lot on it's own.

That's just the opposite for me. It used to be a global trend around my area, but my friends and relatives, including myself, have been gaming less and less on consoles since the release of the current-gen. Most of them have gone ahead and built their own PCs with the budget they were saving for the latest consoles, or just stuck with their old desktops or laptops. Non of them have regret their decisions, as they've found it to be a lot more affordable, less restrictive, and more convenient than gaming on consoles. Getting together on Steam, Skype, or ooVoo and playing games like Attack on Titan's browser game, TF2, PS2, and Cry of Fear have became the norm around my city. My best friend, who bought the PS4 instead, have regretted it and been gaming on his old laptop a whole lot more, for the same reasons. The current-gen consoles have yet to give people a reason to go back. Exclusives are nice and all, but they're fewer and not as enjoyable as said PC exclusives. --Excluding the Wii U and Nintendo, though, I freaking love them.


That is to say, there are countless variables in play, considering PC gaming, in comparison to a console which was built solely or mainly for gaming purposes. Not to mention that technology and gaming requirements change and evolve every year. Which means that, most likely (or definitely), PC gamers will necessarily have to update their hardware in order to play games in a couple of years, whereas we (console owners) won't. And this always goes back to the specifications of both the PS4 and X1: we all know that the PS4 can handle much more than the X1. So, in a couple of year, when all the PC gamers will be updating their machines, the X1 will still be struggling, while us PS4 owners will be enjoying games with much more quality (http://www.ign.com/wikis/xbox-one/PS4_vs._Xbox_One_Native_Resolutions_and_Framerates ). :cool:

PC owners don't need to uprade, that's just an option, whereas the console-only gamers WILL have to purchase the latest in the market if they want to play the latest games. But speaking of which, upgrading is the best part of PC gaming. You don't need a brand new system, you're just upgrading. The gtx 970, which costs significantly less than current-gen console, has about twice the power of a PS4. PC gamers gets to keep their entire library and, in fact, play the last-gen games at even better quality without having to wait and pay for remakes that may or may not happen. It's a win/win situation.

But back onto the topic of the thread, that's the thing. The PS4 and X1, whether the PS4 is more powerful or not, are still underpowered. PC gamers can easily match the performance significantly less money, and get more out of it. Albeit, we aren't paying for an entirely new system, but that's also the thing. PC gamers don't have to, they get to keep their last-gen library and play it at next-gen level (4k res, 60fps, etc) with the upgrade. Another win/win.

I really, really want to see consoles succeed in their endeavors. The Xbox 360 and PS3 at the time were absolutely amazing. And that's not even mentioning the PS2. This generation have simply been underwhelming.

mmac900
10-22-2014, 07:46 PM
Not really. In my life, I've only known about 2 people with no relevant attachments to console gaming, that is, they played exclusively on PC. On the other hand, pretty much everyone else I know plays on PS, with one or two on an Xbox. And none of them would ever trade a console for playing on PC. This is a general global trend, and that says a lot on it's own.

That is to say, there are countless variables in play, considering PC gaming, in comparison to a console which was built solely or mainly for gaming purposes. Not to mention that technology and gaming requirements change and evolve every year. Which means that, most likely (or definitely), PC gamers will necessarily have to update their hardware in order to play games in a couple of years, whereas we (console owners) won't. And this always goes back to the specifications of both the PS4 and X1: we all know that the PS4 can handle much more than the X1. So, in a couple of years, when all the PC gamers will be busy updating their machines, the X1 will still be struggling to endure, while us PS4 owners will be enjoying games with much more quality (http://www.ign.com/wikis/xbox-one/PS4_vs._Xbox_One_Native_Resolutions_and_Framerates ). :cool:

I will just copy and paste what I wrote earlier today in the PC AC Unity forum:

You dont need "the best hardware available" to make PC gaming better then consoles. You just need "good" hardware which can play games at 1080p guaranteed (something that is very hit and miss with consoles) and to have graphics settings as good as or better then consoles, while having 60 fps( something consoles usually dont have either). Lastly, even if your hardware isn't much better then a console, your games are way way way cheaper! Not just steam sales, which are epic, but when the game is released. I pay half price for the same game as a console owner upon release.

EDIT: Also, no need to have a subscription to play online and pay monthly for the privilleage.

PC gaming is actually cheaper then console gaming, even when you upgrade your graphics card every 2-3 years. I will pay £20-25 for AC Unit. How much will you pay? Dobule that.

Also, 3 years from now you will still be not be achieving 1080p / 60fps, while for us PC gamers, we will be getting 1440p and 4k monitors as they come down in price.

SHADOWGARVIN
10-22-2014, 08:11 PM
You will never know how incredible it feels to unbox something as awesome as the guilotine case!

SlyTrooper
10-22-2014, 08:56 PM
That's just the opposite for me. It used to be a global trend around my area, but my friends and relatives, including myself, have been gaming less and less on consoles since the release of the current-gen. Most of them have gone ahead and built their own PCs with the budget they were saving for the latest consoles, or just stuck with their old desktops or laptops. Non of them have regret their decisions, as they've found it to be a lot more affordable, less restrictive, and more convenient than gaming on consoles. Getting together on Steam, Skype, or ooVoo and playing games like Attack on Titan's browser game, TF2, PS2, and Cry of Fear have became the norm around my city. My best friend, who bought the PS4 instead, have regretted it and been gaming on his old laptop a whole lot more, for the same reasons. The current-gen consoles have yet to give people a reason to go back. Exclusives are nice and all, but they're fewer and not as enjoyable as said PC exclusives. --Excluding the Wii U and Nintendo, though, I freaking love them.



PC owners don't need to uprade, that's just an option, whereas the console-only gamers WILL have to purchase the latest in the market if they want to play the latest games. But speaking of which, upgrading is the best part of PC gaming. You don't need a brand new system, you're just upgrading. The gtx 970, which costs significantly less than current-gen console, has about twice the power of a PS4. PC gamers gets to keep their entire library and, in fact, play the last-gen games at even better quality without having to wait and pay for remakes that may or may not happen. It's a win/win situation.

But back onto the topic of the thread, that's the thing. The PS4 and X1, whether the PS4 is more powerful or not, are still underpowered. PC gamers can easily match the performance significantly less money, and get more out of it. Albeit, we aren't paying for an entirely new system, but that's also the thing. PC gamers don't have to, they get to keep their last-gen library and play it at next-gen level (4k res, 60fps, etc) with the upgrade. Another win/win.

I really, really want to see consoles succeed in their endeavors. The Xbox 360 and PS3 at the time were absolutely amazing. And that's not even mentioning the PS2. This generation have simply been underwhelming.

The day someone can show me a PC that matches the power of a PS4 & also includes all the necessary features (like Windows), but is the same price as a PS4, I will buy it. Until then, I will be saving up for an Xbox One & then seeing if I can save even more money to get this type of PC.

Fatal-Feit
10-22-2014, 09:25 PM
The day someone can show me a PC that matches the power of a PS4 & also includes all the necessary features (like Windows), but is the same price as a PS4, I will buy it. Until then, I will be saving up for an Xbox One & then seeing if I can save even more money to get this type of PC.

Currently, there's no such thing as building a PC from scratch, with all of the necessary features such as M&K and an OS, that matches the power of a PS4 (note - not the X1, as it IS possible) at the affordable price of $400. Don't let Youtube videos and articles tell you otherwise, it's simply not possible. --Until the Steam OS release, that is. However, that doesn't mean it's less expensive. Consoles are purposely cheap because you're shelling out more and more money in the future. e.i online fees, pricier games, less sales, new consoles, more restrictions, etc

That said, the average household should have a desktop(s) and by installing an entry level graphics card, which will run you around $150, or greater, the desktop should have no problem competing with current-gen. That's what I've done for my older siblings and some friends. That, or use some of the parts to save yourself some cash.

SHADOWGARVIN
10-22-2014, 09:31 PM
lol. My cpu alone costs more than my ps4.

Fatal-Feit
10-22-2014, 09:37 PM
^ Your point?

SHADOWGARVIN
10-22-2014, 09:38 PM
^ Your point?

A good gaming pc is much more expensive.

Fatal-Feit
10-22-2014, 09:43 PM
A good gaming pc is much more expensive.

What does a CPU of that price, holy crap <-- if I may add, have to do with a good gaming PC? If you've paid over $800 for a CPU, and its purpose is for gaming, you shouldn't be trusted with your own wallet.

Just to get this cleared:

The PS4 and X1 are an above entry level gaming PCs. They're not considered a good gaming PC, or a low end PC. <-- Just saying.

SHADOWGARVIN
10-22-2014, 09:48 PM
What does a CPU of that price, holy crap <-- if I may add, have to do with a good gaming PC? If you've paid over $800 for a CPU, and its purpose is for gaming, you shouldn't be trusted with your own wallet.

lol. You're right, I really shouldn't. I use my pc for work mostly.

Pc components can get really expensive. Before you know it, you're spending way more money than you should. If you're making a good gaming pc, it will easily cost between €600 to €800. Of course you can buy a pc for around €400, but i don't think it would be a very good gaming pc.

mmac900
10-22-2014, 10:12 PM
lol. My cpu alone costs more than my ps4.

Thank god you said you use it for work and not just for gaming or I would have to flog you! You dont need an amazing cpu for gaming.

Fatal-Feit
10-22-2014, 10:13 PM
lol. You're right, I really shouldn't. I use my pc for work mostly.

If you don't mind me asking, where do you work? An $800 CPU is absolutely insane (never heard of any around the price, either). Your work place should provide you with the tools, not make you pay for your own. --Wherever it is, that's outrageous.


Pc components can get really expensive. Before you know it, you're spending way more money than you should. If you're making a good gaming pc, it will easily cost between €600 to €800. Of course you can buy a pc for around €400, but i don't think it would be a very good gaming pc.

Here's a quote from my last post.


Just to get this cleared:

The PS4 and X1 are an above entry level gaming PCs. They're not considered a good gaming PC, or a low end PC. <-- Just saying.

A gaming PC between 600-800 euros, or more, should be targeting 4k resolution with 60fps. <-- That's considered high-end.

Here's a gaming PC that may compete with the PS4.

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/77WRqs <-- That one is $100 more. But keep in mind that a PC has much, much more uses and flexibility than a current-gen gaming console, which only purpose are for playable gaming during its time period. Until the Steam OS releases, which should be early next year, a new PC gaming rig will remain more expensive, but not as significantly as people may think.

PC components aren't expensive, you just have to be more... shrewd with your spending.

SHADOWGARVIN
10-22-2014, 10:20 PM
If you don't mind me asking, where do you work? An $800 CPU is absolutely insane (never heard of any around the price, either). Your work place should provide you with the tools, not make you pay for your own. --Wherever it is, that's outrageous.

I worked at a court house. I'm a laywer. Now I work at a law firm. Criminal law. I bring my work home and work on my pc.

I gave the store that build my pc a €1500 budget and told them to build a great pc for me.

SlyTrooper
10-22-2014, 10:27 PM
Currently, there's no such thing as building a PC from scratch, with all of the necessary features such as M&K and an OS, that matches the power of a PS4 (note - not the X1, as it IS possible) at the affordable price of $400. Don't let Youtube videos and articles tell you otherwise, it's simply not possible. --Until the Steam OS release, that is. However, that doesn't mean it's less expensive. Consoles are purposely cheap because you're shelling out more and more money in the future. e.i online fees, pricier games, less sales, new consoles, more restrictions, etc

That said, the average household should have a desktop(s) and by installing an entry level graphics card, which will run you around $150, or greater, the desktop should have no problem competing with current-gen. That's what I've done for my older siblings and some friends. That, or use some of the parts to save yourself some cash.

There's a few things I must bring up regarding my current situation:

1. It's not about the amount I save over time. To me, that isn't important. I need to be able to afford the initial price otherwise I can't benefit from this. As a teenager, I don't actually have an income at this point. I rely on money from relatives.
2. About installing a new graphics card, that doesn't benefit me at all. My computer is really, really old. I still use Windows XP. The problem is that it's so old that I need to replace everything. A new graphics card wouldn't even work with my computer according to a specialist I had take a look at it. I need a whole new computer with at least Windows 7 & it needs to be good enough to run most games. I'm not talking about high settings. Medium would suffice for me. I'm expecting to spend around £350-400 when I get one. I'll upgrade after that is done.

Fatal-Feit
10-22-2014, 10:48 PM
2. About installing a new graphics card, that doesn't benefit me at all. My computer is really, really old. I still use Windows XP. The problem is that it's so old that I need to replace everything. A new graphics card wouldn't even work with my computer according to a specialist I had take a look at it. I need a whole new computer with at least Windows 7 & it needs to be good enough to run most games. I'm not talking about high settings. Medium would suffice for me. I'm expecting to spend around £350-400 when I get one. I'll upgrade after that is done.

Yikes. That's true, you will need Win7 or higher. The upcoming Steam OS, though, will be free. I'm uber excited about using that for future budget builds.

SHADOWGARVIN
10-22-2014, 10:52 PM
What's Steam OS?

Fatal-Feit
10-22-2014, 10:57 PM
What's Steam OS?

Skip to 11:40


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGqPnL_i6Cs


It's basically the PC equivalence to what consoles have, using Linux, except web-browsing, etc, are still available. It's what helps make the upcoming Steam Machines more affordable for people who don't trust themselves with building their own computers.

Just like Win10, there's a beta version if you want to test it out.

SHADOWGARVIN
10-22-2014, 11:01 PM
Thanks!

YazX_
10-22-2014, 11:03 PM
It's basically the PC equivalence to what consoles have, using Linux, except web-browsing, etc, are still available. It's what helps make the upcoming Steam Machines more affordable for people who don't trust themselves with building their own computers.

Just like Win10, there's a beta version if you want to test it out.

Yah but it will not run DX games unfortunately which are like 90% of games, but the good news you can format it and install windows or Dual boot.

Fatal-Feit
10-22-2014, 11:31 PM
Yah but it will not run DX games unfortunately which are like 90% of games, but the good news you can format it and install windows or Dual boot.

I'm quite certain Valve are aware and have addressed this problem with an alternative. e.i OpenGL

And they have probably spoken with tonnes of developers about putting their games on it. <-- Which could be one of the reasons for the delays.

Anykeyer
10-23-2014, 09:39 AM
That is to say, there are countless variables in play, considering PC gaming, in comparison to a console which was built solely or mainly for gaming purposes. Not to mention that technology and gaming requirements change and evolve every year. Which means that, most likely (or definitely), PC gamers will necessarily have to update their hardware in order to play games in a couple of years, whereas we (console owners) won't.
I would define it as "cant" rather than "wont". You dont need to upgrade 2006 PC in order to play with xbox360 kind of settings. Core 2 Quad with 8800GTX will do.
If you are happy about falling behind as time goes on then fine. But its not advantage, its a flaw.

And this always goes back to the specifications of both the PS4 and X1: we all know that the PS4 can handle much more than the X1. So, in a couple of years, when all the PC gamers will be busy updating their machines, the X1 will still be struggling to endure, while us PS4 owners will be enjoying games with much more quality (http://www.ign.com/wikis/xbox-one/PS4_vs._Xbox_One_Native_Resolutions_and_Framerates ). :cool:
Enjoying? 30 fps? Oh well....
Thats funny how you talk about PS4 and Xbone like its day and night, when in reality its just +40% GPU power. 30 vs 42fps using same settings. Same crap, different flavor. I dont even consider upgrading my GPU if a new one cant deliver 2 times more power. Thats where you can notice real difference.

The_Kiwi_
10-23-2014, 10:02 AM
I would define it as "cant" rather than "wont". You dont need to upgrade 2006 PC in order to play with xbox360 kind of settings. Core 2 Quad with 8800GTX will do.
If you are happy about falling behind as time goes on then fine. But its not advantage, its a flaw.

Enjoying? 30 fps? Oh well....
Thats funny how you talk about PS4 and Xbone like its day and night, when in reality its just +40% GPU power. 30 vs 42fps using same settings. Same crap, different flavor. I dont even consider upgrading my GPU if a new one cant deliver 2 times more power. Thats where you can notice real difference.

There is nothing wrong with 30fps, that is the perfect framerate for humans to watch videos
45 is too high for most humans, especially ones that don't spend much time in front of screens
I hope you weren't insinuating that you can't enjoy something at 30fps

Anykeyer
10-23-2014, 10:27 AM
This is BS. Plain and simple
30 fps is ok (not perfect lol) for prerendered cutscenes. But its not ok for an actual gameplay. Its all about input lag and its horrible at 30fps. I often get a headache after some time if I try to play at 30fps, especially if its not even stable 30 and frequently drops below. Ofc humans can adapt to anything and you're free to enjoy your 30 fps.

mmac900
10-23-2014, 10:57 AM
There is nothing wrong with 30fps, that is the perfect framerate for humans to watch videos
45 is too high for most humans, especially ones that don't spend much time in front of screens
I hope you weren't insinuating that you can't enjoy something at 30fps

Says the person who clearly doesn't game at 60fps or perhaps never has. Your analogy is like saying that cars are too fast and we should just stick with bicycles. Bicycles have their purpose just like consoles, but if you want to get from A to B the quickest, you go for a car.

The_Kiwi_
10-23-2014, 11:14 AM
Says the person who clearly doesn't game at 60fps or perhaps never has. Your analogy is like saying that cars are too fast and we should just stick with bicycles. Bicycles have their purpose just like consoles, but if you want to get from A to B the quickest, you go for a car.

That's not the best analogy
60fps is like a really fast car; you don't need a car that goes really fast as there is always a speed limit, a car that can go 300km/h is redundant if you can't go faster than 100km/h
I'm not saying that "cars are too fast so we should stick with bicycles", I'm saying "nitrous-fuelled ferraris are unnecessarily fast, so normal cars are perfect for the situation."

Stable 30fps is perfect, no one needs 60fps
Anyone who says that 30fps is horrible is just an elitist

I've gamed in 60fps, and it makes me queezy
I can't tell the difference visually, barely anyone can, but I can tell it's high if I feel nauseated
If I had the choice, I'd go stable 30fps over 60fps any day

And saying "Says the person who clearly doesn't game at 60fps or perhaps never has" is just incredibly stupid
Just because you don't share my view, doesn't mean that I'm making stuff up to prove my case
I don't need to do that

SquareToShoot
10-23-2014, 11:30 AM
This console parity pleases me actually. Now I don't have to make a tough choice between getting the PS4 or X1 version. I prefer to get AC games for Xbox so now there won't be a niggle in the back of my mind that the PS4 version is at a higher res. Obviously it would be better if the idiots at MS hadn't skimped on hardware RAM so that this 1080p issue didn't exist but they did so that's that.

As for frame rate, depends on the game. I have no problem at all with locked 30fps for a game like this. Hell I turn the 30fps lock ON in Infamous Second Son because I dislike unlocked fluctuating frame rates.

Tully__
10-23-2014, 11:47 AM
30 fps is ok (not perfect lol) for prerendered cutscenes. But its not ok for an actual gameplay. Its all about input lag and its horrible at 30fps. I often get a headache after some time if I try to play at 30fps, especially if its not even stable 30 and frequently drops below. Ofc humans can adapt to anything and you're free to enjoy your 30 fps.
Not just input lag (in fact I barely notice that) but jerkiness. Until GPUs can render realistic motion blur in realtime, a higher frame rate is necessary to smooth out fast action motion in the same way that a higher resolution smooths out edges and curves.


I've gamed in 60fps, and it makes me queezy
I can't tell the difference visually, barely anyone can, but I can tell it's high if I feel nauseated
Which goes to show that experiences differ. I and many others don't suffer game induced nausea and as Anykeyer says, some gamers suffer nausea or headaches from low frame rates. To make everyone happy we'd need a system capable of 120 or more fps and capable of rendering motion blur, but running games that have user settings that allow the fps to be voluntarily capped.

Fatal-Feit
10-23-2014, 02:15 PM
Regarding the differences, ...60fps isn't faster, or turbo-like, it's smoother, more pleasant. 30fs is more clunky. It's perfectly playable, but it's an undeniable fact that 60fps is better. It's not questionable, it's factual science. Higher frames = smoother experience. More people have gained headaches and trauma from lower clunky frames, not higher smoother frames. <-- There is no argument. There shouldn't even be one. :p

Anykeyer
10-23-2014, 02:17 PM
That's not the best analogy
60fps is like a really fast car; you don't need a car that goes really fast as there is always a speed limit, a car that can go 300km/h is redundant if you can't go faster than 100km/h
I'm not saying that "cars are too fast so we should stick with bicycles", I'm saying "nitrous-fuelled ferraris are unnecessarily fast, so normal cars are perfect for the situation."

Stable 30fps is perfect, no one needs 60fps
Anyone who says that 30fps is horrible is just an elitist

I've gamed in 60fps, and it makes me queezy
I can't tell the difference visually, barely anyone can, but I can tell it's high if I feel nauseated
If I had the choice, I'd go stable 30fps over 60fps any day

And saying "Says the person who clearly doesn't game at 60fps or perhaps never has" is just incredibly stupid
Just because you don't share my view, doesn't mean that I'm making stuff up to prove my case
I don't need to do that

Speaking of speed limits, Mine is 60 right now, bc I have 60hz display. So naturally I want 60 fps.
I actually would like to have more bc there IS a visible difference between 60 and 120. But there arent many good true 8bit IPS 120hz displays and I realise I wont get more than 60 in most modern games anyway, so I stick to 60, for now. How can anyone defend 30 and say its better or perfect is a mystery to me. Anyone can see the difference http://www.30vs60.com/ and most ppl can actually feel it (not fps itself but input lag) even when they cant see. Thats why most fps (first person shooters in this case) pro (or just competitive) players wouldnt even consider playing with vsync on.

mmac900
10-23-2014, 02:46 PM
That's not the best analogy
60fps is like a really fast car; you don't need a car that goes really fast as there is always a speed limit, a car that can go 300km/h is redundant if you can't go faster than 100km/h
I'm not saying that "cars are too fast so we should stick with bicycles", I'm saying "nitrous-fuelled ferraris are unnecessarily fast, so normal cars are perfect for the situation."

Stable 30fps is perfect, no one needs 60fps
Anyone who says that 30fps is horrible is just an elitist

I've gamed in 60fps, and it makes me queezy
I can't tell the difference visually, barely anyone can, but I can tell it's high if I feel nauseated
If I had the choice, I'd go stable 30fps over 60fps any day

And saying "Says the person who clearly doesn't game at 60fps or perhaps never has" is just incredibly stupid
Just because you don't share my view, doesn't mean that I'm making stuff up to prove my case
I don't need to do that

It's not stupid and it is not a dig at you, it just means you are not used to it so you dont understand the difference. I can imagine myself saying what you are saying if I played consoles all m life and never played pc games.

RinoTheBouncer
10-23-2014, 05:25 PM
Here itís pretty obvious how 60fps is noticeable and better. 30fps wonít make the games any more theatrical than 60fps nor theyíre indifferentiable by the human eye. Just saying.
http://www.30vs60.com/mirrorsedge.php

pacmanate
10-24-2014, 12:06 AM
Anyone who says they cant see 60fps needs to get their eyes checked

joelsantos24
10-24-2014, 09:47 AM
That's just the opposite for me. It used to be a global trend around my area, but my friends and relatives, including myself, have been gaming less and less on consoles since the release of the current-gen. Most of them have gone ahead and built their own PCs with the budget they were saving for the latest consoles, or just stuck with their old desktops or laptops. Non of them have regret their decisions, as they've found it to be a lot more affordable, less restrictive, and more convenient than gaming on consoles. Getting together on Steam, Skype, or ooVoo and playing games like Attack on Titan's browser game, TF2, PS2, and Cry of Fear have became the norm around my city. My best friend, who bought the PS4 instead, have regretted it and been gaming on his old laptop a whole lot more, for the same reasons. The current-gen consoles have yet to give people a reason to go back. Exclusives are nice and all, but they're fewer and not as enjoyable as said PC exclusives. --Excluding the Wii U and Nintendo, though, I freaking love them.
I can't even understand this, as I've never seen it, I mean, I believe you, but it's absolutely unfathomable. Moreover, how can someone buy a PS4 and then just put it in corner and go back to playing on a laptop? As I said, unfathomable.


PC owners don't need to upgrade, that's just an option, whereas the console-only gamers WILL have to purchase the latest in the market if they want to play the latest games. But speaking of which, upgrading is the best part of PC gaming. You don't need a brand new system, you're just upgrading. The gtx 970, which costs significantly less than current-gen console, has about twice the power of a PS4. PC gamers gets to keep their entire library and, in fact, play the last-gen games at even better quality without having to wait and pay for remakes that may or may not happen. It's a win/win situation.
Oh, come on, of course you need to upgrade. If you still want to enjoy the most recent games, that is. My friend the PC gamer, had to, just to be able to play Unity, mind you. Furthermore, his PC was considered to be top of the line. The bottom line is, in a couple of years he'll need to upgrade again, as he admitted himself.


But back onto the topic of the thread, that's the thing. The PS4 and X1, whether the PS4 is more powerful or not, are still underpowered. PC gamers can easily match the performance significantly less money, and get more out of it. Albeit, we aren't paying for an entirely new system, but that's also the thing. PC gamers don't have to, they get to keep their last-gen library and play it at next-gen level (4k res, 60fps, etc) with the upgrade. Another win/win.

I really, really want to see consoles succeed in their endeavors. The Xbox 360 and PS3 at the time were absolutely amazing. And that's not even mentioning the PS2. This generation have simply been underwhelming.
No, they're not underpowered, at least the PS4 isn't. If the industry in general is still trying to cope with the technology and figuring out how to use it more efficiently, that's a totally different thing. And no one can easily match the performance of a PS4 with less money, let alone with significantly less money. The fact will always remain, if you want to build a PC that matches or surpasses the PS4, you'll have to spend more, much more, than it's price. It's inevitable. So I ask, what's the point?

One more thing, forgive me for my lack of profound knowledge in this area, since I'm a Chemist, not an IT, but how on earth can you play old games at next-gen level? Will the games be upgraded by magic, just like that? You can own the greatest PC and monitor that exist, but if a game isn't built for those specifications, it'll never match them.


I will just copy and paste what I wrote earlier today in the PC AC Unity forum:

You dont need "the best hardware available" to make PC gaming better then consoles. You just need "good" hardware which can play games at 1080p guaranteed (something that is very hit and miss with consoles) and to have graphics settings as good as or better then consoles, while having 60 fps( something consoles usually dont have either). Lastly, even if your hardware isn't much better then a console, your games are way way way cheaper! Not just steam sales, which are epic, but when the game is released. I pay half price for the same game as a console owner upon release.

EDIT: Also, no need to have a subscription to play online and pay monthly for the privilleage.

PC gaming is actually cheaper then console gaming, even when you upgrade your graphics card every 2-3 years. I will pay £20-25 for AC Unit. How much will you pay? Dobule that.

Also, 3 years from now you will still be not be achieving 1080p / 60fps, while for us PC gamers, we will be getting 1440p and 4k monitors as they come down in price.
I posted a link that compares games built on PS4 and X1, did you take a look at that? Did you see how many games, actually enjoy 1080p and 60 FPS? And again, no, in order to match a PS4, you'll need to spend much more money and get the very best hardware money can buy.

And subscribing to the following statements, I rest my case:


The day someone can show me a PC that matches the power of a PS4 & also includes all the necessary features (like Windows), but is the same price as a PS4, I will buy it. Until then, I will be saving up for an Xbox One & then seeing if I can save even more money to get this type of PC.


lol. My cpu alone costs more than my ps4.

:cool:

Farlander1991
10-24-2014, 10:09 AM
It's not just about pure 'power', though, it's about the distribution of resources.

When it comes to PS4, it has the specs of an average gaming rig. Heck, there was a time when it lead to an outcry (i.e., the next-gen is too not-next-gen and stupid ******** like that) or people wondering why they don't just buy a PC with PS4 specs. Here's the thing, while it's relatively easy to find a way to match PS4 specs for a cheaper way than PS4, that PC won't have the same performance as a PS4.

Because the truth is: PC is multi-purposed and can consist of different ****tons of parts and configurations. PS4 is a gaming console with fixed hardware. This means two important things:
a) PS4 spends in resources pretty much exclusively for games.
b) Developers can optimize properly for PS4 because they know what the exact specs are and how to use them. Which leads to another point:
b.2) In time, developers will be able to get a bigger advantage of PS4 specs because they will learn to take advantage of every nook and cranny of what the console has to offer (compare early PS3 games with late PS3 games, for example)

A PC won't spend its resources exclusively on games. Hefty amount of resources are allocated to the OS that runs it, and a bunch of background processes that go there too. A developer can never truly optimize properly for a PC, they can only try to do their best, because due to the amount of different configurations, there always will be found a graphics card that messes things up, or a CPU that for some reason doesn't allocate info properly, or any possible or impossible combination of unforeseen consequences.

TLDR:
It's possible to get a PC matching PS4 specs cheaper than a PS4. It's not possible to get a PC matching PS4's performance cheaper than a PS4, as a PC user requires a more powerful rig to actually do that.

All that said, as a PC user I must say I don't upgrade rigs frequently, due to graphical customization options PC versions usually have that allow me to get optimal for me graphics/performance balance.

joelsantos24
10-24-2014, 10:23 AM
It's not just about pure 'power', though, it's about the distribution of resources.

When it comes to PS4, it has the specs of an average gaming rig. Heck, there was a time when it lead to an outcry (i.e., the next-gen is too not-next-gen and stupid ******** like that) or people wondering why they don't just buy a PC with PS4 specs. Here's the thing, while it's relatively easy to find a way to match PS4 specs for a cheaper way than PS4, that PC won't have the same performance as a PS4.

Because the truth is: PC is multi-purposed and can consist of different ****tons of parts and configurations. PS4 is a gaming console with fixed hardware. This means two important things:
a) PS4 spends in resources pretty much exclusively for games.
b) Developers can optimize properly for PS4 because they know what the exact specs are and how to use them. Which leads to another point:
b.2) In time, developers will be able to get a bigger advantage of PS4 specs because they will learn to take advantage of every nook and cranny of what the console has to offer (compare early PS3 games with late PS3 games, for example)

A PC won't spend its resources exclusively on games. Hefty amount of resources are allocated to the OS that runs it, and a bunch of background processes that go there too. A developer can never truly optimize properly for a PC, they can only try to do their best, because due to the amount of different configurations, there always will be found a graphics card that messes things up, or a CPU that for some reason doesn't allocate info properly, or any possible or impossible combination of unforeseen consequences.

TLDR:
It's possible to get a PC matching PS4 specs cheaper than a PS4. It's not possible to get a PC matching PS4's performance cheaper than a PS4, as a PC user requires a more powerful rig to actually do that.

All that said, as a PC user I must say I don't upgrade rigs frequently, due to graphical customization options PC versions usually have that allow me to get optimal for me graphics/performance balance.
Good point on differentiating specifications vs. performance. I generally agree with everything you said. However, I was under the impression you couldn't build a PC that matches or surpasses the PS4 specifications, without spending much more money. Obviously, I won't put my hands on fire for this, but I'd say that's pretty much impossible here in Portugal.

The_Kiwi_
10-24-2014, 10:35 AM
Good point on differentiating specifications vs. performance. I generally agree with everything you said. However, I was under the impression you couldn't build a PC that matches or surpasses the PS4 specifications, without spending much more money. Obviously, I won't put my hands on fire for this, but I'd say that's pretty much impossible here in Portugal.

Impossible for me too
Even worse considering that a PS4 costs close to $700

Dag_B
10-24-2014, 10:41 AM
Oh, come on, of course you need to upgrade. If you still want to enjoy the most recent games, that is. My friend the PC gamer, had to, just to be able to play Unity, mind you. Furthermore, his PC was considered to be top of the line. The bottom line is, in a couple of years he'll need to upgrade again, as he admitted himself.
Unity is a bad example, it is obviously badly optimized and can hardly be used as an example how often one has to upgrade.
I myself would have to upgrade my 3 year old computer - but only for Unity. Dragon Age Inquisition for example, I should be able to play at almost very high settings, as my video card is almost as good as their recommend card. I think I can wait a little bit longer before upgrading will really be needed. I do not need an upgrade when the majority of games is still working fine for me. It's like buying a PS4 because there is one single game for it, not many people will do this, they will wait until there is more and you can get the hardware cheaper and/or better hardware.
Plus there is still a chance that the minimum requirements are too high. Minimum just means, they are pretty sure, that the game will run. Hardware below minimum might still work - but they do not want to guarantee it.

Anykeyer
10-24-2014, 11:31 AM
I can't even understand this, as I've never seen it, I mean, I believe you, but it's absolutely unfathomable. Moreover, how can someone buy a PS4 and then just put it in corner and go back to playing on a laptop? As I said, unfathomable.
Games? PC got that thing called "backwards compatibility"


I Oh, come on, of course you need to upgrade. If you still want to enjoy the most recent games, that is. My friend the PC gamer, had to, just to be able to play Unity, mind you. Furthermore, his PC was considered to be top of the line. The bottom line is, in a couple of years he'll need to upgrade again, as he admitted himself.
Unity isnt a good example at all. PS3 owner needs to upgrade too. Lets take AC4, official requrements are mid-range 2008 PC parts (and it would also run on high end 2006 PC with visuals and performance comparable to PS3).
You do need to upgrade your PC if you really intend to enjoy games on their highest settings, and maximum AC4 PC settings surpass PS4, but its optional.
Thats where PC magic is, you got options. With consoles you pay for online if console makers say so. You play shooters with gamepads bc console makers decided this for you. You play at 900p bc developer wanted to avoid debates and stuff.


I No, they're not underpowered, at least the PS4 isn't. If the industry in general is still trying to cope with the technology and figuring out how to use it more efficiently, that's a totally different thing. And no one can easily match the performance of a PS4 with less money, let alone with significantly less money. The fact will always remain, if you want to build a PC that matches or surpasses the PS4, you'll have to spend more, much more, than it's price. It's inevitable. So I ask, what's the point?
Baseless marketing claims is what it is.
PS4 isnt new technology. Its just a mid-range PC with an OS full of restrictions. Same old x86 CPU, same old GCN GPU, just a few different APIs, nothing really new to explore. Wasnt that actually a reason why Sony switched to PC architecture? They said developers wanted this so they wont have to deal with Cell-like nightmare all over again. So they got it, an architecture that relies on brute force by design, and it got that brute force (even xbone has somewhat decent specs).
Making a PC that beats PS4 isnt very expensive. You just take any decent workstation and add $350 graphics card. Its not right to compare total PC build cost to PS4 unless you dont do anything except playing games.

joelsantos24
10-24-2014, 01:11 PM
Impossible for me too
Even worse considering that a PS4 costs close to $700
Wow... The PS4 costs $700? I bought mine in a special FIFA 15 promotion: the console plus FIFA 15 by €399 (that would make it roughly US $554).


Unity is a bad example, it is obviously badly optimized and can hardly be used as an example how often one has to upgrade.
I myself would have to upgrade my 3 year old computer - but only for Unity. Dragon Age Inquisition for example, I should be able to play at almost very high settings, as my video card is almost as good as their recommend card. I think I can wait a little bit longer before upgrading will really be needed. I do not need an upgrade when the majority of games is still working fine for me. It's like buying a PS4 because there is one single game for it, not many people will do this, they will wait until there is more and you can get the hardware cheaper and/or better hardware.
Plus there is still a chance that the minimum requirements are too high. Minimum just means, they are pretty sure, that the game will run. Hardware below minimum might still work - but they do not want to guarantee it.
I'm not really sure, but I accept that, Unity was the only example I could remember of.


Games? PC got that thing called "backwards compatibility"

Unity isnt a good example at all. PS3 owner needs to upgrade too. Lets take AC4, official requrements are mid-range 2008 PC parts (and it would also run on high end 2006 PC with visuals and performance comparable to PS3).
You do need to upgrade your PC if you really intend to enjoy games on their highest settings, and maximum AC4 PC settings surpass PS4, but its optional.
Thats where PC magic is, you got options. With consoles you pay for online if console makers say so. You play shooters with gamepads bc console makers decided this for you. You play at 900p bc developer wanted to avoid debates and stuff.

Baseless marketing claims is what it is.
PS4 isnt new technology. Its just a mid-range PC with an OS full of restrictions. Same old x86 CPU, same old GCN GPU, just a few different APIs, nothing really new to explore. Wasnt that actually a reason why Sony switched to PC architecture? They said developers wanted this so they wont have to deal with Cell-like nightmare all over again. So they got it, an architecture that relies on brute force by design, and it got that brute force (even xbone has somewhat decent specs).
Making a PC that beats PS4 isnt very expensive. You just take any decent workstation and add $350 graphics card. Its not right to compare total PC build cost to PS4 unless you dont do anything except playing games.
Well, in addition to what I've previously said, and considering Farlander1991's previous post as well, there's not really anything I'd like to add. :nonchalance:

dxsxhxcx
10-24-2014, 02:04 PM
Wow... The PS4 costs $700? I bought mine in a special FIFA 15 promotion: the console plus FIFA 15 by €399 (that would make it roughly US $554).


here in Brazil (thanks to our high taxes) it costs between US$722,34 (around R$1.500) and US$1163,77 (around R$2.899) and (new) games (standard edition) cost US$80,27 (R$200)

Dag_B
10-24-2014, 02:31 PM
I'm not really sure, but I accept that, Unity was the only example I could remember of.
This is because there are no other examples. Unity is by far the most demanding game that comes out. Which is what I mean by "upgrading just for one game". There is no other game that would need such a hardware at the moment...
That is the reason why everyone in the PC forum goes crazy about the specs. They just don't make sense... They are much higher than one would expect and than other recent games.

joelsantos24
10-24-2014, 02:36 PM
here in Brazil (thanks to our high taxes) it costs between US$722,34 (around R$1.500) and US$1163,77 (around R$2.899) and (new) games (standard edition) cost US$80,27 (R$200)
That's just amazing. I know we have a very high life cost (as people usually refer to it), specially considering the low wages (in Portugal, minimum wage is about €480, although social partners are pushing to €500 for next year). So, it's even crazier to speak about building a PC matching PS4 specifications, for an equal or lower price.

Fatal-Feit
10-24-2014, 04:36 PM
I can't even understand this, as I've never seen it, I mean, I believe you, but it's absolutely unfathomable. Moreover, how can someone buy a PS4 and then just put it in corner and go back to playing on a laptop? As I said, unfathomable.

PC gaming have been bombing for the past few years. I'm not exaggerating, many, many people, even your average high-school students, have been jumping onto PC gaming. It's certainly not just my city, as I've been encountering more and more familiar faces around the States in chat rooms, webcams, etc. Hell, my cousin's little brother, who is 13 years old, had me help built him a PC of his own with some of my spare parts instead of buying himself his own PS4 like his older brother have. One of the reasons are because of free indie titles, cheaper games, the wide selection of older titles. Albeit, he won't be able to play Unity at the same level of graphic fidelity as our buddies when it releases, but he'll still be able to play and enjoy it, regardless. You don't need a good rig, or good graphics, PC gaming is simply more convenient.

Regarding my best friend, the PS4 doesn't have enough games that interests him, besides twitch shooters like COD:Ghosts. Because it's a brand new system, there just aren't enough games. He also didn't know he had to pay for online, which is ridiculous. He'd much rather save the $60 yearly fee for a new sweater and just play Cry of Fear or modded L4D2 with his friends.


Oh, come on, of course you need to upgrade. If you still want to enjoy the most recent games, that is. My friend the PC gamer, had to, just to be able to play Unity, mind you. Furthermore, his PC was considered to be top of the line. The bottom line is, in a couple of years he'll need to upgrade again, as he admitted himself.

...No, you don't. You don't need high/ultra setting graphics to play or enjoy the most recent games. Your friend, considering he has the top of the line PC (whatever that means for PC), upgraded for better performance, not to be able to play the game.

There's a difference.

With consoles, you NEED to buy the latest in the market. That is upgrading ''just to be able to play Unity''.


No, they're not underpowered, at least the PS4 isn't. If the industry in general is still trying to cope with the technology and figuring out how to use it more efficiently, that's a totally different thing. And no one can easily match the performance of a PS4 with less money, let alone with significantly less money. The fact will always remain, if you want to build a PC that matches or surpasses the PS4, you'll have to spend more, much more, than it's price. It's inevitable. So I ask, what's the point?

No,no, the industry is NOT still trying to cope with the technology and figure out how to use it more efficiently, it's not. Developers knows how to maximize the performance of hardware. This isn't back during the 360 and PS3 age where these consoles, during release, were top of the line and with never before seen hardware. The PS4 and X1 are practically special PCs (not even top of line, let alone average, if I may add) with a specific OS. What we get now is what we'll get several years later.

And regarding the affordability of a PS4, that's its strong suit. It's affordable, however, that doesn't mean console gaming is cheaper. The console is affordable BECAUSE its restrictive and gaming on it is more expensive. Reread the earlier posts, as I've already explained this.


One more thing, forgive me for my lack of profound knowledge in this area, since I'm a Chemist, not an IT, but how on earth can you play old games at next-gen level? Will the games be upgraded by magic, just like that? You can own the greatest PC and monitor that exist, but if a game isn't built for those specifications, it'll never match them.

The thing about PC is total freedom, the power to modify and change games to your liking. Pretty much, yes, old games can be upgraded to next-gen like magic. Skyrim, L4D2, and Dark Souls(1/2) are a perfect example.

YazX_
10-24-2014, 04:52 PM
PC gaming have been bombing for the past few years. I'm not exaggerating, many, many people, even your average high-school students, have been jumping onto PC gaming. It's certainly not just my city, as I've been encountering more and more familiar faces around the States in chat rooms, webcams, etc. Hell, my cousin's little brother, who is 13 years old, had me help built him a PC of his own with some of my spare parts instead of buying himself his own PS4 like his older brother have. One of the reasons are because of free indie titles, cheaper games, the wide selection of older titles. Albeit, he won't be able to play Unity at the same level of graphic fidelity as our buddies when it releases, but he'll still be able to play and enjoy it, regardless. You don't need a good rig, or good graphics, PC gaming is simply more convenient.

Regarding my best friend, the PS4 doesn't have enough games that interests him, besides twitch shooters like COD:Ghosts. Because it's a brand new system, there just aren't enough games. He also didn't know he had to pay for online, which is ridiculous. He'd much rather save the $60 yearly fee for a new sweater and just play Cry of Fear or modded L4D2 with his friends.



...No, you don't. You don't need high/ultra setting graphics to play or enjoy the most recent games. Your friend, considering he has the top of the line PC (whatever that means for PC), upgraded for better performance, not to be able to play the game.

There's a difference.

With consoles, you NEED to buy the latest in the market. That is upgrading ''just to be able to play Unity''.



No,no, the industry is NOT still trying to cope with the technology and figure out how to use it more efficiently, it's not. Developers knows how to maximize the performance of hardware. This isn't back during the 360 and PS3 age where these consoles, during release, were top of the line and with never before seen hardware. The PS4 and X1 are practically special PCs (not even top of line, let alone average, if I may add) with a specific OS. What we get now is what we'll get several years later.

And regarding the affordability of a PS4, that's its strong suit. It's affordable, however, that doesn't mean console gaming is cheaper. The console is affordable BECAUSE its restrictive and gaming on it is more expensive. Reread the earlier posts, as I've already explained this.



The thing about PC is total freedom, the power to modify and change games to your liking. Pretty much, yes, old games can be upgraded to next-gen like magic. Skyrim, L4D2, and Dark Souls(1/2) are a perfect example.

Couldnt have said it any better, agreed with every single word of it especially with "cope with the technology and figure out how to use it more efficiently", there is a huge misunderstanding in this point since that was the case with last gen consoles, so most people assume its the same case here.

SlyTrooper
10-24-2014, 06:03 PM
PC gaming have been bombing for the past few years. I'm not exaggerating, many, many people, even your average high-school students, have been jumping onto PC gaming. It's certainly not just my city, as I've been encountering more and more familiar faces around the States in chat rooms, webcams, etc. Hell, my cousin's little brother, who is 13 years old, had me help built him a PC of his own with some of my spare parts instead of buying himself his own PS4 like his older brother have. One of the reasons are because of free indie titles, cheaper games, the wide selection of older titles. Albeit, he won't be able to play Unity at the same level of graphic fidelity as our buddies when it releases, but he'll still be able to play and enjoy it, regardless. You don't need a good rig, or good graphics, PC gaming is simply more convenient.

Regarding my best friend, the PS4 doesn't have enough games that interests him, besides twitch shooters like COD:Ghosts. Because it's a brand new system, there just aren't enough games. He also didn't know he had to pay for online, which is ridiculous. He'd much rather save the $60 yearly fee for a new sweater and just play Cry of Fear or modded L4D2 with his friends.



...No, you don't. You don't need high/ultra setting graphics to play or enjoy the most recent games. Your friend, considering he has the top of the line PC (whatever that means for PC), upgraded for better performance, not to be able to play the game.

There's a difference.

With consoles, you NEED to buy the latest in the market. That is upgrading ''just to be able to play Unity''.



No,no, the industry is NOT still trying to cope with the technology and figure out how to use it more efficiently, it's not. Developers knows how to maximize the performance of hardware. This isn't back during the 360 and PS3 age where these consoles, during release, were top of the line and with never before seen hardware. The PS4 and X1 are practically special PCs (not even top of line, let alone average, if I may add) with a specific OS. What we get now is what we'll get several years later.

And regarding the affordability of a PS4, that's its strong suit. It's affordable, however, that doesn't mean console gaming is cheaper. The console is affordable BECAUSE its restrictive and gaming on it is more expensive. Reread the earlier posts, as I've already explained this.



The thing about PC is total freedom, the power to modify and change games to your liking. Pretty much, yes, old games can be upgraded to next-gen like magic. Skyrim, L4D2, and Dark Souls(1/2) are a perfect example.

Fatal, considering you seem to know what you're talking about, would you say it's possible for me to get a PC for £350-400 with Windows 7 that can run most games at medium settings? I'm not trying to be optimistic because I genuinely have no clue. I'll still probably play the more demaning games on my consoles, so I don't need a hardcore PC.

Fatal-Feit
10-24-2014, 06:38 PM
Fatal, considering you seem to know what you're talking about, would you say it's possible for me to get a PC for £350-400 with Windows 7 that can run most games at medium settings? I'm not trying to be optimistic because I genuinely have no clue. I'll still probably play the more demaning games on my consoles, so I don't need a hardcore PC.

It's possible to build one for high settings, but if your target is medium settings, here's the perfect build for that. It's £370. --> Could be £350 if you replace the 1TB storage for 500GB, remove the optical drive since its near useless for PC these days, and got a cheaper case. Personally, I often use this case because, aesthetically, it's pretty cool and is fairly small.

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/Q2dRqs

Judging from this video, the R7 250 Ultimate is designed for running AAA games at 60+ fps in 1080p at medium settings with practically no noise.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gIAt0t9Msg&amp;list=UUkWQ0gDrqOCarmUKmppD7GQ

---------------------------

Here's a build for higher settings. --> http://pcpartpicker.com/p/947Lbv It's at £390

Performance wise, this build should compete the the PS4 (it's stronger than the X1).

SlyTrooper
10-25-2014, 01:24 AM
It's possible to build one for high settings, but if your target is medium settings, here's the perfect build for that. It's £370. --> Could be £350 if you replace the 1TB storage for 500GB, remove the optical drive since its near useless for PC these days, and got a cheaper case. Personally, I often use this case because, aesthetically, it's pretty cool and is fairly small.

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/8D4bVn

Judging from this video, the R7 250 Ultimate is designed for running AAA games at 60+ fps in 1080p at medium settings with practically no noise.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gIAt0t9Msg&list=UUkWQ0gDrqOCarmUKmppD7GQ

---------------------------

Here's a build for higher settings. --> http://pcpartpicker.com/p/XwPrwP It's at £390

Performance wise, this build should compete the the PS4 (it's stronger than the X1).

Any chance you could find a good build on this website (http://www.pcspecialist.co.uk/)? I'm thinking of maybe buying it from here. If you can find one (or make one) that is within my price range, I might consider getting a new PC next year.

Fatal-Feit
10-25-2014, 03:16 AM
Any chance you could find a good build on this website (http://www.pcspecialist.co.uk/)? I'm thinking of maybe buying it from here. If you can find one (or make one) that is within my price range, I might consider getting a new PC next year.

Probably not. Believe me, I've tried before.

With websites, you're looking at spending anywhere between £150-300 more for PCs that can match the builds I posted.

MakimotoJin
10-25-2014, 04:15 AM
here in Brazil (thanks to our high taxes) it costs between US$722,34 (around R$1.500) and US$1163,77 (around R$2.899) and (new) games (standard edition) cost US$80,27 (R$200)

There are still places where they sell it around U$$1,800.

Tully__
10-25-2014, 06:32 AM
One more thing, forgive me for my lack of profound knowledge in this area, since I'm a Chemist, not an IT, but how on earth can you play old games at next-gen level?
Depends on the game how you would interpret that. Certainly for a lot of games, they detect the maximum available resolution on the installed graphics card and display and offer some/all resolution options up to that maximum in the user settings. Also, older games usually run at very impressive frame rates on current high spec PCs. This is especially true of games less than five years old.
For texture and lighting, they don't magically come up to current standards, but in games with an active and capable modding community there are often texture packs and sometimes graphics effects packs and more detailed object model packs you can add to the original game version to bring the general appearance up to a more recent level. In some cases, their work is so impressive and of such high quality that the original publishers release it as an official patch or will buy the rights to the work and sell it as an upgrade pack.

joelsantos24
10-25-2014, 11:14 AM
PC gaming have been bombing for the past few years. I'm not exaggerating, many, many people, even your average high-school students, have been jumping onto PC gaming. It's certainly not just my city, as I've been encountering more and more familiar faces around the States in chat rooms, webcams, etc. Hell, my cousin's little brother, who is 13 years old, had me help built him a PC of his own with some of my spare parts instead of buying himself his own PS4 like his older brother have. One of the reasons are because of free indie titles, cheaper games, the wide selection of older titles. Albeit, he won't be able to play Unity at the same level of graphic fidelity as our buddies when it releases, but he'll still be able to play and enjoy it, regardless. You don't need a good rig, or good graphics, PC gaming is simply more convenient.

Regarding my best friend, the PS4 doesn't have enough games that interests him, besides twitch shooters like COD:Ghosts. Because it's a brand new system, there just aren't enough games. He also didn't know he had to pay for online, which is ridiculous. He'd much rather save the $60 yearly fee for a new sweater and just play Cry of Fear or modded L4D2 with his friends.
That's not what we're seeing here in Europe, at least not in Portugal. And regarding the subscription to play online, I'm not concerned. God, it's €50 for a full year, so it's less than €5 per month. Is it expensive? It's the Xbox argument again: they always payed to play online and always condescendingly praised their own systems and online play, simply because they payed for it so it had to be top grade. It doesn't mean I agree with it, because if I already pay for my internet service, I shouldn't need to pay additionally just to use it for gaming.


...No, you don't. You don't need high/ultra setting graphics to play or enjoy the most recent games. Your friend, considering he has the top of the line PC (whatever that means for PC), upgraded for better performance, not to be able to play the game.

There's a difference.

With consoles, you NEED to buy the latest in the market. That is upgrading ''just to be able to play Unity''.
Yes, he may've upgraded for better performance, but he'll never achieve or match the performance of a PS4 or X1, that's the bottom line. You can go crazy and build a PC that matches or surpasses the PS4 specifications, that shouldn't be hard, provided you have the money and will to spend much more than the price of a console, but it'll hardly ever achieve the performance of a PS4, as Farlander1991 previously said. That's my whole point.


No,no, the industry is NOT still trying to cope with the technology and figure out how to use it more efficiently, it's not. Developers knows how to maximize the performance of hardware. This isn't back during the 360 and PS3 age where these consoles, during release, were top of the line and with never before seen hardware. The PS4 and X1 are practically special PCs (not even top of line, let alone average, if I may add) with a specific OS. What we get now is what we'll get several years later.

And regarding the affordability of a PS4, that's its strong suit. It's affordable, however, that doesn't mean console gaming is cheaper. The console is affordable BECAUSE its restrictive and gaming on it is more expensive. Reread the earlier posts, as I've already explained this.

The thing about PC is total freedom, the power to modify and change games to your liking. Pretty much, yes, old games can be upgraded to next-gen like magic. Skyrim, L4D2, and Dark Souls(1/2) are a perfect example.
But who says I want that freedom? And who says I don't have freedom, in the first place?

Ever since I started playing games, back in the day with a SEGA Master System, I always played solely me favorite games. That's it, I don't go out and just buy whatever I feel like buying and playing, I solely play my favorite games. I'm very fundamentalist in that regard. And it's always been more than enough for me, buying and playing 4-6 games, titles or series.

So, what would I do with that total freedom of yours? And restrictions? What is that? I've always had my favorite games, and playing on consoles never kept me from enjoying my favorite games, so what is that, even? I know Blacklist will, sooner or later, arrive on PS4, and SC7 will be arriving possibly next year or in 2016 for sure; and I know Ubisoft will also definitely release the AC Anthology on PS4, it's inevitable; I've already pre-ordered my copy of the astonishing Project CARS, which will replace Gran Turismo in my list; plus I already have my awesome FIFA 15; the F1 2014 is also coming next year; and Journey on PS4 is just around the corner. Freedom is PC-exclusive? Restrictions? I honestly don't know what you're talking about. :cool:


Depends on the game how you would interpret that. Certainly for a lot of games, they detect the maximum available resolution on the installed graphics card and display and offer some/all resolution options up to that maximum in the user settings. Also, older games usually run at very impressive frame rates on current high spec PCs. This is especially true of games less than five years old.
For texture and lighting, they don't magically come up to current standards, but in games with an active and capable modding community there are often texture packs and sometimes graphics effects packs and more detailed object model packs you can add to the original game version to bring the general appearance up to a more recent level. In some cases, their work is so impressive and of such high quality that the original publishers release it as an official patch or will buy the rights to the work and sell it as an upgrade pack.
Ok, I honestly didn't know about that. Thanks! ;)

Dag_B
10-25-2014, 03:47 PM
Yes, he may've upgraded for better performance, but he'll never achieve or match the performance of a PS4 or X1, that's the bottom line. You can go crazy and build a PC that matches or surpasses the PS4 specifications, that shouldn't be hard, provided you have the money and will to spend much more than the price of a console, but it'll hardly ever achieve the performance of a PS4, as Farlander1991 previously said. That's my whole point.
So you cry when a game looks better on the XBone, because you decided for PS4 and it was not able to reach the level for a certain game?

You can discuss hours, which games look better on which console or on PC, but does it really matter? Important is, that game look good on their system and run fine. And we already have this for most games. I really can't think of a game that looked spectacular on one plattform and was an absolute catastrophe on other plattforms. The gameplay is sometimes a problem, when it was badly ported. But that also goes both ways. sometimes games are clearly ported from console to PC, so the keyboard gameplay is broken (but at least you can still plug a controller into the game) and others were clearly written on PC so that the gameplay port on the consoles is broken, because it is too difficult and you can't really reach all menues easy.
But most times you have to be really picky, to find the differences and often there are up- and downsides. A game might have a better texture pack on PC but the loading times are longer than on consoles. Or there is less tearing on the PS4 and more popups on the XBone. Really, the differences between the three systems are really seldom spectecular so that you miss out on something just because you decided wrong. Sometime you get the better version, sometime a worse but almost every time this is balanced and very seldom it really is a problem. You probably wouldn't even mind if you would not know that the XBone version works better than the PS4 version or the other way around.

All games that come out on PC look good and most times the ports are good enough,that the performance is also more than enough. Console vs. PC is really about other things than graphics or performance:
* Whether or not you would like to play with keyboard and Controller
* Whether or not you like to be able to achieve a better performance for paying again
* Whether or not you are ok with higher game prizes
* Whether or not you like modding
The good thing is: With a PC you can make that choice individually for every game you get. I can play Civ V with mouse and keyboard and plug my PS3-Controller on the PC when I play Assassin's Creed. I can freely chose between all mos Skyrim has to offer. And yes, if your choice is always "I will never use that" you might not need a PC and making thinks overly complicated for your simple gaming needs. (Simple meaning: No need to choice, you would always decide one way.
)

I owned a PS3. I loved, how uncomplicated everything was. I say a game, it was in a PS3 package so I just checked whether it might need additional stuff (PSEye, Move) and if not I could get it, but it into my PS3 and it ran. Sometimes I had to delete games because I ran out of discspace but that was normally the worst that could happen.
The turn point for me was was, when I got Oblivion for PS3 and my boyfriend got it for PC. All the mods he could install, that improved the game... There was no way I could get those. With Neherim you even get a whole new game absolutely free. All you need is the PC version of Oblivion.
When Skyrim was announced I knew immediately that I needed a new gaming PC.

And I definitively spent more money on console gaming, than I do now.
For the PS3 I spend 700€ when it can out and a year ago another 200€ because I had the YLoD. Since the PS4 is unable to play PS3 games and I still wanted to play those (I have a few games, I haven't even finished yet and that I bought not long ago) the new purchase was necessary.
My PC was 1025€. I pay now less for PC games and I have more choices. My PC is three years old and is still able to play every game on high settings. Unity is the first game I know of, where I do not meet the minimum requirements and that is not really because my PC becomes old. All other current games run fine. As I already said, the requirements for Unity are off and many people assume that they are not really true. We have to wait, until we know if Unity is really the most demanding game we ever had or if it has simply a badly stated requirement sheet.

Taking into account that I payed 900€ to be able to still play PS3 it was not really cheaper. The games were always more expensive, so the phase I had a PS3 instead of a PC was more expensive for me than the amount of money I would have spent if I would have invested into a PC earlier. Plus: I bought a PSEye and a seconds controller. So the hardware alone was almost as expensive as my whole PC. Even if you scrap the 200€ for the second PS3 because my first was fried, the difference is not that big. I have more than 20 game, if you assume that I payed for every PS3 version 10€ more that the PC version was (which was most time the prize difference) you have that 200€ back.

PS4 is cheaper, yes, but those online costs will also add up over the years, you pay more for the games... I think it will again be slightly the same amount of money one pays in the same time period. So you pay the same but have less options...

(I still consider getting a PS4 for exclusives, but I will not pay the online fee ^^)

SlyTrooper
10-25-2014, 06:01 PM
Probably not. Believe me, I've tried before.

With websites, you're looking at spending anywhere between £150-300 more for PCs that can match the builds I posted.

So would you recommend I got to a store?

Edit - It turns out my mother knows someone who can build me a new PC. He's helped fix my computer before, so he's trustworthy.

joelsantos24
10-25-2014, 06:05 PM
I still don't understand many gamers' antagonism towards the additional PS+ subscription. Do I agree with it? No, I don't. But is it really that bad? No, it isn't. Furthermore, you get games for free. So, how is that even restrictive? Next month the new update comes on, and we'll be able to play games without even owning them, with the new feature Share Play.

"Those online costs will also add up over the years"? We don't even know if it's a permanent feature, for all we know, Sony can take it back and allow the online play without additional costs or subscriptions. And I don't pay more for games, because I don't buy 20+ games. I've said it before, I'm only interested in my favorite games/titles, nothing more. So, if you think about it, my use of the PS4 might surely be significantly cheaper than most other users'.

Dag_B
10-25-2014, 06:23 PM
You pay more for games from the first game on. That's a fact, prizes are higher. If you would buy the games on PC you would have saved money.

And yes, online fees add up. 50$ this year, 50$ next year and so on, until they stop (which I do not see, they introduced them for good reasons). At the moment you pay and these are additional costs, so yes, they add up over the years. You already payed for it. Even if they stop you will not get all your money back. ^^
And what should I do with games I do not want? It's not like you get your own wishlist games, you get some stuff they want to offer. That's the same argument as options/freedom. What should I do with it, if I do not want it? I will not pay money for random games I'm often not even interested in. They are not free, I pay for them every month and when I stop paying I will loose access.
I will also no pay for online gaming. I seldom use online features and if I really get a PS4, I could do without an online subscription.
I am simply not in need of PS+.

Fatal-Feit
10-25-2014, 07:20 PM
That's not what we're seeing here in Europe, at least not in Portugal. And regarding the subscription to play online, I'm not concerned. God, it's Ä50 for a full year, so it's less than Ä5 per month. Is it expensive? It's the Xbox argument again: they always payed to play online and always condescendingly praised their own systems and online play, simply because they payed for it so it had to be top grade. It doesn't mean I agree with it, because if I already pay for my internet service, I shouldn't need to pay additionally just to use it for gaming.

I'm pretty sure the mass majority of Europe is heading towards PC gaming, more than here in America. Maybe not in Portugal, but definitely Europe, as EU are big in the community. Regarding the online fee, it's not a ridiculous argument. People already pay for their internet, they shouldn't pay an additional $5 more every month, let alone $60 a year. It adds up, and by the end of the consoles' lifetime, you would have already payed a few extra hundreds bucks for something that should be a standard, not a luxury. In 6-7 years, which is the usual life-span of a console, a person would have payed about $400. That could have gone towards a gaming PC that's twice as powerful, 6-7 new AAA titles, or other stuff.

And even after its lifespan, you still have to pay for its online. It's an unarguable robbery. :p


Yes, he may've upgraded for better performance, but he'll never achieve or match the performance of a PS4 or X1, that's the bottom line. You can go crazy and build a PC that matches or surpasses the PS4 specifications, that shouldn't be hard, provided you have the money and will to spend much more than the price of a console, but it'll hardly ever achieve the performance of a PS4, as Farlander1991 previously said. That's my whole point.

Christ, how misinformed are you? Dude, I've been saying it all the time. :rolleyes: ...The PS4 and X1 are NOT powerful. They're entry level PCs. <-- Below average. 792p, 900p, or 1080p with 30fps is NOT next-gen, nor is it a luxury. A $150 graphics card can easily handle said performance. We're at an age where PC gaming have evolved exponentially. This is a fact, not an opinion.

I don't know your buddy, but no offense, he's obviously incompetent if he haven't achieve or match the performance of a PS4 and X1. :nonchalance: Literally, you can pop in a GTX 750 Ti into your average desktop and it'll compete with the PS4 (it will DESTROY the X1). There are benchmarks and videos. Farlander1991 is very misinformed, no offense to him. His argument would be valid 6 years ago. That's about half a decade ago. A 350-400 euros budget PC, as I've proven already, can match the performance of current-gen consoles. And with Steam OS, which is coming out soon, and new budget graphic cards (which you don't need, but I'm including), you can expect $400 PCs that can outmatch the current-gen consoles. <-- Fact.


But who says I want that freedom? And who says I don't have freedom, in the first place?

It doesn't matter if you don't want freedom, you don't have freedom. It's plain and simple.


Ever since I started playing games, back in the day with a SEGA Master System, I always played solely me favorite games. That's it, I don't go out and just buy whatever I feel like buying and playing, I solely play my favorite games. I'm very fundamentalist in that regard. And it's always been more than enough for me, buying and playing 4-6 games, titles or series.

Irrelevant. What's your point? That you're fine? If you're not going to contribute facts, and only opinions, there's no reason for this debate. :p At this point, you prefer less over more, and more power to you. But that's beside the point of a debate between platforms. Weren't you upset over parity between the PS4 and X1? Oh, but because it's a debate between the PS4 and PC, less is better. That's the typical response I always expect to appear in debates as such.

It happens all the time, I swear.


So, what would I do with that total freedom of yours? And restrictions? What is that? I've always had my favorite games, and playing on consoles never kept me from enjoying my favorite games, so what is that, even? I know Blacklist will, sooner or later, arrive on PS4, and SC7 will be arriving possibly next year or in 2016 for sure; and I know Ubisoft will also definitely release the AC Anthology on PS4, it's inevitable; I've already pre-ordered my copy of the astonishing Project CARS, which will replace Gran Turismo in my list; plus I already have my awesome FIFA 15; the F1 2014 is also coming next year; and Journey on PS4 is just around the corner. Freedom is PC-exclusive? Restrictions? I honestly don't know what you're talking about. :cool:

Wishing/wanting =/= having. Nice try. But regardless, you are still restricted. Not only will you have to purchase your games again, you will also be restricted to 1080p, and if you're lucky, 60fps. And what happens after this gen? You certainly won't be able to play those games at 4k with 120fps, or more.

But again, I love how when it's a debate between the PS4 and PC, less is perfectly fine. But when it's between the X1 and PS4, more is better. The most common hypocrisy I see.


So would you recommend I got to a store?

Edit - It turns out my mother knows someone who can build me a new PC. He's helped fix my computer before, so he's trustworthy.

Nope, I highly recommend against it. ...Unless it's for tech support/IT, of course.

Anyway, that's good news. If you need any help or questions with a build, just PM me. As an unemployed teenager who has far too much time on his hands, tech support and PC builds are how I afford my luxuries. (not that I will charge you, of course) :p

Anykeyer
10-26-2014, 08:27 AM
But again, I love how when it's a debate between the PS4 and PC, less is perfectly fine. But when it's between the X1 and PS4, more is better. The most common hypocrisy I see.


Oh, so you did notice? :D

joelsantos24
10-26-2014, 11:47 AM
I'm pretty sure the mass majority of Europe is heading towards PC gaming, more than here in America. Maybe not in Portugal, but definitely Europe, as EU are big in the community. Regarding the online fee, it's not a ridiculous argument. People already pay for their internet, they shouldn't pay an additional $5 more every month, let alone $60 a year. It adds up, and by the end of the consoles' lifetime, you would have already payed a few extra hundreds bucks for something that should be a standard, not a luxury. In 6-7 years, which is the usual life-span of a console, a person would have payed about $400. That could have gone towards a gaming PC that's twice as powerful, 6-7 new AAA titles, or other stuff.

And even after its lifespan, you still have to pay for its online. It's an unarguable robbery. :p
"You're pretty sure"? Show me the sources of your so-called certainty. I mentioned this before, but in my whole circle of friends, I have a single one who is a PC gamer, and it used to be two. And my friends say the same, the crushing majority of their own friends are the same. Furthermore, I have several other friends currently working/studying abroad here in the EU, and their experience is exactly the same. So, for all intents and purposes, do you know what you just wrote? Propaganda, nothing more.

Regarding the PS+ subscription, I don't agree with it, but I don't mind paying, if we're getting higher grade services.


Christ, how misinformed are you? Dude, I've been saying it all the time. :rolleyes: ...The PS4 and X1 are NOT powerful. They're entry level PCs. <-- Below average. 792p, 900p, or 1080p with 30fps is NOT next-gen, nor is it a luxury. A $150 graphics card can easily handle said performance. We're at an age where PC gaming have evolved exponentially. This is a fact, not an opinion.
Regardless of what you say, or what you wish for, the PC will never be fully optimized for gaming, contrary to a console. You'll always have a more unstable OS, with dozens of additional applications forcibly running in the background. As I said before, you can be willing to spend more to match the PS4 specifications, but matching it's performance, will be very hard.


It doesn't matter if you don't want freedom, you don't have freedom. It's plain and simple.
So you say. It's your opinion, not fact. First, I've never been kept from enjoying my favorite games, period; and second, why should I complaint about playing my favorite games in 1080p and 30-60 FPS? And why would I even think of changing said game and specifications? Specially when I have a 1080p HD screen TV. That's non-sensical and irrational.


Irrelevant. What's your point? That you're fine? If you're not going to contribute facts, and only opinions, there's no reason for this debate. :p At this point, you prefer less over more, and more power to you. But that's beside the point of a debate between platforms. Weren't you upset over parity between the PS4 and X1? Oh, but because it's a debate between the PS4 and PC, less is better. That's the typical response I always expect to appear in debates as such. It happens all the time, I swear.
Yes, I'm fine. And no, it's not irrelevant.

You presumptuously keep waving a flag of ultimate freedom, which is obviously based on your own personal concept of the word, and say others don't have it. Well, others may have a different view of the concept. I don't care that you have, as I said earlier, a magic wand that changes your games. God, I play games at 1080p and 30-60 FPS, why on earth should I even complaint? Furthermore, I could never consider playing games on something than can never be fully optimized for gaming, like a console is. I use my PC for work, nothing more, nothing less. And the parity issue concerns what can be considered malpractice, from producers who keep obscure deals with less powerful console makers, in order to limit a game's quality on the rival console. That's what we're discussing here, not the fact that PC gamers might have a magic wand that enables them complete control over a game.


Wishing/wanting =/= having. Nice try. But regardless, you are still restricted. Not only will you have to purchase your games again, you will also be restricted to 1080p, and if you're lucky, 60fps. And what happens after this gen? You certainly won't be able to play those games at 4k with 120fps, or more.

But again, I love how when it's a debate between the PS4 and PC, less is perfectly fine. But when it's between the X1 and PS4, more is better. The most common hypocrisy I see.
But it's not wishing or wanting, and in a few months, possibly a year, you'll get to see it. And it's not restriction, I have a 1080p HD TV, so games at 1080p and 30-60 FPS are just perfect to me. What happens after this generation? I'll sell my console again, get some good money for it and buy a new one. Easy.

But you're right on one thing: this debate is as inconsequential as it is meaningless. I don't consider the PC for anything more than work. To me, the PC doesn't even exist in the context of gaming. Furthermore, this whole discussion was blatantly off-topic and irrelevant, we're talking about the possible bad faith from Ubisoft in limiting the PS4 version of Unity, in order for Microsoft and the X1 to look good.

If you want to reply to this post and some of my statements here, you should probably do so by PM, if you don't mind, as this is getting awfully beside the point.

Fatal-Feit
10-26-2014, 02:03 PM
Regardless of what you say, or what you wish for, the PC will never be fully optimized for gaming, contrary to a console. You'll always have a more unstable OS, with dozens of additional applications forcibly running in the background. As I said before, you can be willing to spend more to match the PS4 specifications, but matching it's performance, will be very hard.

This will be the only point I will tackle, considering it's not bias/opinionated, and you're very, very misinformed in the subject. Seriously, you should just drop this part as you have no idea what you're talking about. If not for your own good, then for others, as you're spreading misinformation in this thread. :nonchalance:

First of all, ''the PC will never be fully optimized for gaming, contrary to a console.'' No, it goes both ways. There are awful console ports as there are awful PC ports. But main difference is, PC is better. Why? Because of the ability of freedom. The ability to modify games to your liking. Not only can you upgrade your hardware for better performance, you can download a mod, find a patch, use console commands. I don't care if this isn't something you're concerned with, it's still a factual truth of the matter. On consoles, you're stuck with what you have. Either you wait for a patch, or, well, nothing. You wait for a patch. It's not in your control. Sometimes a patch never happens. The Elder Scrolls, and Souls series are a perfect example. The latest debacle is with The Evil Within. People are frustrated with the awful frame rate drops, locked frame rate, and immense black borders. On a PC, you don't have to worry about the frame rate drops, as you can adjust the settings yourself. With console commands, you can unlock the frame rate and remove the black borders.

But let's also take Unity into account. This thread wouldn't be a thing if PS4 owners weren't stuck with 900p and 30fps. On PC, it's flexible, more adjustable. :rolleyes:

Second, ''You'll always have a more unstable OS, with dozens of additional applications forcibly running in the background.'' Nope, Windows 7 and Windows 8/8.1 are fine. Patches and fixes are as necessary and frequent as consoles'. I believe what you're trying to point fingers at are the drivers for graphic cards (e.i Nvidia's Geforce / AMD's Catalyst). But they're the same case, patches and fixes are as necessary and frequent as consoles. When a couple new games or improvements comes out, you update. I'm a multi-platform gamer, they all share the same quality of support. But speaking of OS, unlike the consoles, where you may only change a few tidbits in aesthetics, PCs' OSes are fully, completely, customizable. On my laptop, I use this


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gXE5lbECZDE

And onto the other bit, just stop. You have no idea what you're talking about. It's called opening task manager -> right-click whatever program -> close task. Simple and easy. There's no ''forced''. :p But, again, speaking of which, you may also use task manager (or other programs) to check or edit the PC's temperature, performance, start up programs, etc, etc. When I'm about to start a demanding game, I usually make sure my PC is running at 1-2% CPU performance with task manager.

Lastly, ''As I said before, you can be willing to spend more to match the PS4 specifications, but matching it's performance, will be very hard''. What part of the PS4 and X1 being entry level PCs do you NOT understand? The part where you're wrong? Because that's this entire debate in a nutshell. I've already explained it, the PS4 and X1 aren't bad PCs, and they aren't good PCs. They perform at an entry level. --> Budget. 720/900/1080p with 30/60fps is NOT hard to match. In fact, anything less than 1080p is actually, factually, outdated. It doesn't cost an arm and a leg for builders to make a PC that matches said performance. In the last page, I've already proven it. And in some time, give or take a few months, it will be possible to build a PC that can outmatch the X1 and PS4 within the $400 budget.

It's pure fact, stop living in in denial. I'm a multi-platform gamer and I also build budget computers. Some of which, have beaten the PS4 in benchmarkings for no more than a hundred bucks more. What the PS4 does on screen isn't magic, or some form of witchcraft, my friend, ...it's science. ...Computer engineering. It has its numbers and it has its limits.


But you're right on one thing: this debate is as inconsequential as it is meaningless. I don't consider the PC for anything more than work. To me, the PC doesn't even exist in the context of gaming. Furthermore, this whole discussion was blatantly off-topic and irrelevant, we're talking about the possible bad faith from Ubisoft in limiting the PS4 version of Unity, in order for Microsoft and the X1 to look good.

If you want to reply to this post and some of my statements here, you should probably do so by PM, if you don't mind, as this is getting awfully beside the point.

Mhm. :rolleyes:

pacmanate
10-26-2014, 02:05 PM
PC people - Go back to your own forums.

roostersrule2
10-26-2014, 03:08 PM
PC people - Go back to your own forums.Yeah, and get a job.

pacmanate
10-26-2014, 03:16 PM
Yeah, and get a job.

And girlfriends/boyfriends

Dag_B
10-26-2014, 03:26 PM
And girlfriends/boyfriends
How many, per person?


''You'll always have a more unstable OS, with dozens of additional applications forcibly running in the background.''

Isn't one of the new things of the current "NextGen", that there are dozens of applications running side by side so you can chance without loading times?

rprkjj
10-26-2014, 04:14 PM
I think PC and console gaming come down to preference.

Anykeyer
10-26-2014, 06:24 PM
PC people - Go back to your own forums.

But, butt, butt...
Its so funny to see console owners raging because they got no options (see title) and then say (in the same topic) they dont need them.

SHADOWGARVIN
10-26-2014, 07:37 PM
But, butt, butt...
Its so funny to see console owners raging because they got no options (see title) and then say (in the same topic) they dont need them.

.................................................. .................................................. ..:confused:

astaroth1066
10-26-2014, 08:29 PM
Seriouisly this is the FIRST next GENERATION assassins CREED...why can't they just complete it lke it was supposed to and not have to patch it post launch...to make a blunder this deep into the development and NOT fix it is a crime to your company..I know this isn't related but what about other UBSISOFT gaems like Far Cry4...that again is a GIANT game (yes I know this is Assassins creed forums but it begs to differ ladies and gentlemen)...

The_Kiwi_
10-27-2014, 12:03 AM
Seriouisly this is the FIRST next GENERATION assassins CREED...why can't they just complete it lke it was supposed to and not have to patch it post launch...to make a blunder this deep into the development and NOT fix it is a crime to your company..I know this isn't related but what about other UBSISOFT gaems like Far Cry4...that again is a GIANT game (yes I know this is Assassins creed forums but it begs to differ ladies and gentlemen)...

900p 30fps is hardly a blunder


PC people - Go back to your own forums.

I told them to do that once
They told me that "Console Discussion" isn't a rule so they're allowed to be here...
I told them "not to talk about PCs though"
They got aggressive :rolleyes:

RinoTheBouncer
10-27-2014, 12:32 AM
People, you really need to stop with the whole “PC master race" crap. I own an iMac, not a PC and I can afford to buy another separate perfect super PC, but guess what? I don’t want to, because I enjoy gaming on consoles. I made that decision since PS1 days and I don’t regret it. The problem with 1080p/60fps isn’t the inferiority of the Consoles nor the superiority of PCs, it’s about the developers of the game, plain and simple and this is not a blame, this is just pointing a fact.

The PlayStation 4 system was made to handle 1080p for a reason and the fact that the latest update we got about the whole thing (which included an apology about the wrong wording of “to avoid the debates and stuff”) also said that a Day 1 Patch is likely and an article that was written the day the AC:U was delayed from Oct 28th to Nov.11th also said that there will be a day 1 patch, though its purpose was unclear then, so it’s clearly not because the PS4 is so reductive and limited that it can’t handle 1080p. Whether the reason behind that is a parity contract or lack of time or bad management or whatever it is, it has nothing to do with the potential of the PS4.

Whether the PS4 version will be patched on day one to 1080p, which is very likely, or not. I don’t think PS4 users are aggravated or agitated or jealous or whatever. Everybody has their own choices and the reason why we vent the frustration is not because there’s a superior system or anything, it’s because the developers didn’t make it available in a time when it’s possible to make. That’s all. Our beef is not with PC users nor anyone. We’re just voicing our opinion because it’s been a year and no game so far took the console to it’s maximum potential.

I don’t regret buying a PS4 for a second, even though I paid 2x the price everybody paid because I live a continent away away from the US, where it was launched and I got it on launch. What bothers me is how developers of most games aren’t taking the games to the maximum level that the PS4 can handle, first it’s cross-gens (basically PS3 games with more glossy floors when it rains and rain effect that falls on the character not just in front of them LOL) and now it’s games that look kinda better than PS3 but still not 1080p or not 60fps, or both.

I’m not a moderator here so I don’t get to tell people to leave but If you’re so proud that you’re PC user and you think you’re so superior that nobody can match your brilliance, there’s a forum where you’ll probably find others who agree with you, instead of wasting your time on a thread that didn’t even include you or your precious system. I’m sure it’ll be more enjoyable to share your obsession/interest with those agree instead of just desperately trying to spark an argument and piss other people off. C’mon, we’re not 12 here.

SHADOWGARVIN
10-27-2014, 12:55 AM
People, you really need to stop with the whole “PC master race" crap. I own an iMac, not a PC and I can afford to buy another separate perfect super PC, but guess what? I don’t want to, because I enjoy gaming on consoles. I made that decision since PS1 days and I don’t regret it. The problem with 1080p/60fps isn’t the inferiority of the Consoles nor the superiority of PCs, it’s about the developers of the game, plain and simple and this is not a blame, this is just pointing a fact.

The PlayStation 4 system was made to handle 1080p for a reason and the fact that the latest update we got about the whole thing (which included an apology about the wrong wording of “to avoid the debates and stuff”) also said that a Day 1 Patch is likely and an article that was written the day the AC:U was delayed from Oct 28th to Nov.11th also said that there will be a day 1 patch, though its purpose was unclear then, so it’s clearly not because the PS4 is so reductive and limited that it can’t handle 1080p. Whether the reason behind that is a parity contract or lack of time or bad management or whatever it is, it has nothing to do with the potential of the PS4.

Whether the PS4 version will be patched on day one to 1080p, which is very likely, or not. I don’t think PS4 users are aggravated or agitated or jealous or whatever. Everybody has their own choices and the reason why we vent the frustration is not because there’s a superior system or anything, it’s because the developers didn’t make it available in a time when it’s possible to make. That’s all. Our beef is not with PC users nor anyone. We’re just voicing our opinion because it’s been a year and no game so far took the console to it’s maximum potential.

I don’t regret buying a PS4 for a second, even though I paid 2x the price everybody paid because I live a continent away away from the US, where it was launched and I got it on launch. What bothers me is how developers of most games aren’t taking the games to the maximum level that the PS4 can handle, first it’s cross-gens (basically PS3 games with more glossy floors when it rains and rain effect that falls on the character not just in front of them LOL) and now it’s games that look kinda better than PS3 but still not 1080p or not 60fps, or both.

I’m not a moderator here so I don’t get to tell people to leave but If you’re so proud that you’re PC user and you think you’re so superior that nobody can match your brilliance, there’s a forum where you’ll probably find others who agree with you, instead of wasting your time on a thread that didn’t even include you or your precious system. I’m sure it’ll be more enjoyable to share your obsession/interest with those agree instead of just desperately trying to spark an argument and piss other people off. C’mon, we’re not 12 here.

Nicely said, my friend!!
http://replygif.net/i/95.gif

RinoTheBouncer
10-27-2014, 01:07 AM
Nicely said, my friend!!
http://replygif.net/i/95.gif

Much appreciated, my friend. Thanks for the lovely .GIF as well :)

Fatal-Feit
10-27-2014, 01:18 AM
^ It was a console gamer who brought PCs into the debate. And it was console-only people who continued the discussion.





Just saying. :rolleyes:

The_Kiwi_
10-27-2014, 01:18 AM
People, you really need to stop with the whole ďPC master race" crap. I own an iMac, not a PC and I can afford to buy another separate perfect super PC, but guess what? I donít want to, because I enjoy gaming on consoles. I made that decision since PS1 days and I donít regret it. The problem with 1080p/60fps isnít the inferiority of the Consoles nor the superiority of PCs, itís about the developers of the game, plain and simple and this is not a blame, this is just pointing a fact.

The PlayStation 4 system was made to handle 1080p for a reason and the fact that the latest update we got about the whole thing (which included an apology about the wrong wording of ďto avoid the debates and stuffĒ) also said that a Day 1 Patch is likely and an article that was written the day the AC:U was delayed from Oct 28th to Nov.11th also said that there will be a day 1 patch, though its purpose was unclear then, so itís clearly not because the PS4 is so reductive and limited that it canít handle 1080p. Whether the reason behind that is a parity contract or lack of time or bad management or whatever it is, it has nothing to do with the potential of the PS4.

Whether the PS4 version will be patched on day one to 1080p, which is very likely, or not. I donít think PS4 users are aggravated or agitated or jealous or whatever. Everybody has their own choices and the reason why we vent the frustration is not because thereís a superior system or anything, itís because the developers didnít make it available in a time when itís possible to make. Thatís all. Our beef is not with PC users nor anyone. Weíre just voicing our opinion because itís been a year and no game so far took the console to itís maximum potential.

I donít regret buying a PS4 for a second, even though I paid 2x the price everybody paid because I live a continent away away from the US, where it was launched and I got it on launch. What bothers me is how developers of most games arenít taking the games to the maximum level that the PS4 can handle, first itís cross-gens (basically PS3 games with more glossy floors when it rains and rain effect that falls on the character not just in front of them LOL) and now itís games that look kinda better than PS3 but still not 1080p or not 60fps, or both.

Iím not a moderator here so I donít get to tell people to leave but If youíre so proud that youíre PC user and you think youíre so superior that nobody can match your brilliance, thereís a forum where youíll probably find others who agree with you, instead of wasting your time on a thread that didnít even include you or your precious system. Iím sure itíll be more enjoyable to share your obsession/interest with those agree instead of just desperately trying to spark an argument and piss other people off. Címon, weíre not 12 here.

I don't think you've ever said anything that I don't agree with, and I don't think you ever will

SHADOWGARVIN
10-27-2014, 01:24 AM
Much appreciated, my friend. Thanks for the lovely .GIF as well :)

You're welcome!

ze_topazio
10-27-2014, 01:31 AM
I own an iMac

That's even more elitist ;)

MnemonicSyntax
10-27-2014, 05:29 AM
900p 30fps is hardly a blunder



I told them to do that once
They told me that "Console Discussion" isn't a rule so they're allowed to be here...
I told them "not to talk about PCs though"
They got aggressive :rolleyes:

No, you got aggressive. Not everyone is going to agree with what you say and vice versa.

And if you had read deeper into my post, you would have seen that I was trying to make a point about *this* issue and I was actually agreeing with you, not putting down consoles.

But, carry on.

MnemonicSyntax
10-27-2014, 05:39 AM
People, you really need to stop with the whole ďPC master race" crap. I own an iMac, not a PC and I can afford to buy another separate perfect super PC, but guess what? I donít want to, because I enjoy gaming on consoles. I made that decision since PS1 days and I donít regret it. The problem with 1080p/60fps isnít the inferiority of the Consoles nor the superiority of PCs, itís about the developers of the game, plain and simple and this is not a blame, this is just pointing a fact.

Developers of the game and the hardware they have to work with. It's going to get more to the point where 900p will happen, even on the PS4.


The PlayStation 4 system was made to handle 1080p for a reason and the fact that the latest update we got about the whole thing (which included an apology about the wrong wording of ďto avoid the debates and stuffĒ) also said that a Day 1 Patch is likely and an article that was written the day the AC:U was delayed from Oct 28th to Nov.11th also said that there will be a day 1 patch, though its purpose was unclear then, so itís clearly not because the PS4 is so reductive and limited that it canít handle 1080p. Whether the reason behind that is a parity contract or lack of time or bad management or whatever it is, it has nothing to do with the potential of the PS4.

But no one knows this though. You can say "clearly" all you want, but if the horsepower isn't there, it's not there.

I'm not saying it is or isn't. I work with software, building it sometimes from the ground up. But it's not whatever Ubisoft uses, so I won't even pretend to know. So to counter my own statement, I don't know either. It could very well be that cap.


Whether the PS4 version will be patched on day one to 1080p, which is very likely, or not. I donít think PS4 users are aggravated or agitated or jealous or whatever. Everybody has their own choices and the reason why we vent the frustration is not because thereís a superior system or anything, itís because the developers didnít make it available in a time when itís possible to make. Thatís all. Our beef is not with PC users nor anyone. Weíre just voicing our opinion because itís been a year and no game so far took the console to itís maximum potential.

I think PS4 users are actually quite the opposite because they feel they have a superior console that shortcuts happened to save time. That may be true. I don't know.


I donít regret buying a PS4 for a second, even though I paid 2x the price everybody paid because I live a continent away away from the US, where it was launched and I got it on launch. What bothers me is how developers of most games arenít taking the games to the maximum level that the PS4 can handle, first itís cross-gens (basically PS3 games with more glossy floors when it rains and rain effect that falls on the character not just in front of them LOL) and now itís games that look kinda better than PS3 but still not 1080p or not 60fps, or both.

Well, hopefully Unity will be some sort of benchmark. We'll see.


Iím not a moderator here so I donít get to tell people to leave but If youíre so proud that youíre PC user and you think youíre so superior that nobody can match your brilliance, thereís a forum where youíll probably find others who agree with you, instead of wasting your time on a thread that didnít even include you or your precious system. Iím sure itíll be more enjoyable to share your obsession/interest with those agree instead of just desperately trying to spark an argument and piss other people off. Címon, weíre not 12 here.

In the last few pages I didn't really notice anyone trying to start anything, but were stating facts. But, the fact of the matter is that game developers aren't putting forth gaming potential based on the power of consoles, but that's to be expected this early on. Take a look at some of the debut games on PS3/X360 and then look at The Last of Us and GTAV to show that it can take damn near a console's lifetime to use it to it's full potential.

The_Kiwi_
10-27-2014, 06:23 AM
No, you got aggressive. Not everyone is going to agree with what you say and vice versa.

And if you had read deeper into my post, you would have seen that I was trying to make a point about *this* issue and I was actually agreeing with you, not putting down consoles.

But, carry on.

You must be confused with someone else, I don't ever remember getting aggressive with anyone about this and I also don't remember ever talking to you about this issue

The_Prophet2014
10-27-2014, 07:14 AM
First of all guys,

Let's stop the prevail that one console is superior than other. We must stop it. I can always see XBox and Playstation owners fighting with each other, and when a PC enters the arena, they engage further in him. AI's are a dumbastic thing, with the era of the game hauling the new skies, people are not expecting to just kill the enemies, following a random path as dumb, deaf and folically challenged. So far, I have seen the gameplays on Xbox and they are great.

Sorry, if anything hurts you, these are my personal opinions.

Anykeyer
10-27-2014, 07:21 AM
People, you really need to stop with the whole ďPC master race" crap.

There werent any master race crap here. Up untill your post.

You are all PC gamers now. Just different brands :p. Some lock their OS and you get no control over your own device, some dont. No other differences, they are all gone.
If you prefer locked system its perfectly fine. But then thread like this (again, I point at its title) makes no sense.

The_Kiwi_
10-27-2014, 07:25 AM
There werent any master race crap here. Up untill your post.

You are all PC gamers now. Just different brands :p. Some lock their OS and you get no control over your own device, some dont. No other differences, they are all gone.
If you prefer locked system its perfectly fine. But then thread like this (again, I point at its title) makes no sense.

"Forums > Assassin's Creed > Assassin's Creed General Discussion (Console) > Assassins Creed Unity locked at 900p/30fps "to avoid all the debates and stuff""

I don't get what doesn't make sense to you

Anykeyer
10-27-2014, 07:30 AM
Really?
You chose a locked system. A system where almost everything is decided for you. Ok, fine. Then you (not exactly you, just generalisation) complain about it having something locked.

The_Kiwi_
10-27-2014, 07:33 AM
Really?

No :rolleyes:

Don't worry, I'm not an idiot, I'm just a guy who likes to have fun

vutaikt
10-27-2014, 08:04 AM
I'd like to watch my movies @ 3 fps. Why 3 fps? So they have a more photographic style!

The_Kiwi_
10-27-2014, 08:06 AM
You chose a locked system. A system where almost everything is decided for you. Ok, fine. Then you (not exactly you, just generalisation) complain about it having something locked.

It's the resolution and the framerate which is locked, not the console (in this issue)

The issue here isn't about it being locked, it's about the fact that it was locked at an unfair level on the PS4

I don't have an issue with it myself, I just know why people are complaining

Anykeyer
10-27-2014, 08:56 AM
Who said its always fair? All games have locked resolution and visual quality settings on sony and MS branded PCs. Why its 1080p@60 for some games when you got 1440p display and ok with 30 fps? Unfair. Why its 1080@30 when it could run and 40-50 fps. Maybe you have 720p TV, but game is still locked to 30fps for you. Unfair.
ACU probably (just my guess) looks better on PS4 but they dont tell you bc Xbone users wont be happy to know this before release. But thats another thing. Maybe you dont want those little extras and want to sacrifice quality but get 1080p (I would, bc non-native resolutions look bloory). But you cant. No options. Strange that this particular case got over 100 pages when settings are always being locked and they can never be fair to everyone.

Fatal-Feit
10-27-2014, 09:10 AM
In the last few pages I didn't really notice anyone trying to start anything, but were stating facts.

Exactly. It's as though nobody here read the posts. :rolleyes:

PC? FPS? MODS? ZOMG, PC MASTER RACE BEING ELITISTZ!!!

A console gamer brought up PC into the debate, and the same console people were fueling the subject. But, no, let's blame the PC community for getting involved and correcting the misinformation. If they don't want people knowledgeable in the subject, don't bring it up. Or just drop the debate. This thread reeks of hypocrisy.


But, the fact of the matter is that game developers aren't putting forth gaming potential based on the power of consoles, but that's to be expected this early on. Take a look at some of the debut games on PS3/X360 and then look at The Last of Us and GTAV to show that it can take damn near a console's lifetime to use it to it's full potential.

As I said in an earlier post, this is not true. This isn't pre 2010, the developers knows how to push the hardware to their maximum potentials, and they already have on the current-gen consoles. The PS3 and 360 were ahead of their time, and were using unseen hardware. The PS4 and X1 are NOT like the previous generation, they basically custom PCs with a special OS. What we get now is what we'll get in the next 6-7 years. <-- Literally.

And that's the reason why I'm worried about this generation. With hardware this outdated, we can't expect something like Black Flag was to AC:1.


The issue here isn't about it being locked, it's about the fact that it was locked at an unfair level on the PS4

That's still an assumption. 900p and 30fps, does not mean there was parity. For all we know, the developers could have use the extra power to bump up the textures, foliage, etc, etc.


I don't have an issue with it myself, I just know why people are complaining

That's precisely the hypocrisy here. :p


I'd like to watch my movies @ 3 fps. Why 3 fps? So they have a more photographic style!

This guy gets it. 60fps' smoothness gave me a headaches, made me nauseous, killed my family, and gave me ebola.

The_Kiwi_
10-27-2014, 09:26 AM
That's still an assumption. 900p and 30fps, does not mean there was parity. For all we know, the developers could have use the extra power to bump up the textures, foliage, etc, etc.

Yeah I know, I was going to say that it's an assumption that's it's been unfairly capped on the PS4, but I've said that many times already so I didn't think it necessary

Megas_Doux
10-27-2014, 09:38 AM
^ It was a console gamer who brought PCs into the debate. And it was console-only people who continued the discussion.





Just saying. :rolleyes:

Exactly!!!!

RinoTheBouncer
10-27-2014, 01:56 PM
I don't think you've ever said anything that I don't agree with, and I don't think you ever will

Always a pleasure to talk and discuss stuff with you, my friend :D


That's even more elitist ;)

Hahaha! i for el(i)tist :P


Developers of the game and the hardware they have to work with. It's going to get more to the point where 900p will happen, even on the PS4.



But no one knows this though. You can say "clearly" all you want, but if the horsepower isn't there, it's not there.

I'm not saying it is or isn't. I work with software, building it sometimes from the ground up. But it's not whatever Ubisoft uses, so I won't even pretend to know. So to counter my own statement, I don't know either. It could very well be that cap.



I think PS4 users are actually quite the opposite because they feel they have a superior console that shortcuts happened to save time. That may be true. I don't know.



Well, hopefully Unity will be some sort of benchmark. We'll see.



In the last few pages I didn't really notice anyone trying to start anything, but were stating facts. But, the fact of the matter is that game developers aren't putting forth gaming potential based on the power of consoles, but that's to be expected this early on. Take a look at some of the debut games on PS3/X360 and then look at The Last of Us and GTAV to show that it can take damn near a console's lifetime to use it to it's full potential.

Well when you compare the PS4 to the X1, everybody knows that the PS4 is more powerful. Itís not a matter of whoís cooler than who but itís a fact that the PS4 can handle better than an X1, however that wasnít the discussion here. PC users can always upgrade and make the game look better than consoles, thatís for sure, but that wasnít the case either. People here were talking about a game released for a console with less specs than it can handle and on the level of a rival console that cannot handle what this console can. So the main problem was that PS4 users want to make the most out of their system rather than just get better to spite X1 users.

It gets frustrating when you buy a system of any kind and find yourself not able to do or get what you were told that youíd get. Imagine yourself getting an iPhone 6 Plus and you neither have a SIM Card nor an internet connection. The potential is there, in the phone but you just canít feel it cause youíre chained to the same level as phones that cannot connect to a WiFi are on.

Regarding early PS4 games improving through time, I hope that happens, though when you look at early PS3 like AC1, there was a large and noticeable jump forward from PS2 and same about say Tekken Tag Tournament for PS2 compared to Tekken 3 on PS1.

Anykeyer
10-27-2014, 02:44 PM
the main problem was that PS4 users want to make the most out of their system rather than just get better to spite X1 users.
PS4 hardware can do a lot of things you will never be allowed to do.


Imagine yourself getting an iPhone 6 Plus and you neither have a SIM Card nor an internet connection. The potential is there, in the phone but you just can’t feel it cause you’re chained to the same level as phones that cannot connect to a WiFi are on.

Not to mention NFC :o

MnemonicSyntax
10-27-2014, 04:55 PM
Exactly. It's as though nobody here read the posts. :rolleyes:

As I said in an earlier post, this is not true. This isn't pre 2010, the developers knows how to push the hardware to their maximum potentials, and they already have on the current-gen consoles. The PS3 and 360 were ahead of their time, and were using unseen hardware. The PS4 and X1 are NOT like the previous generation, they basically custom PCs with a special OS. What we get now is what we'll get in the next 6-7 years. <-- Literally.

I actually said that too, in regards to the lifespan of the "new" consoles, especially with 4K already here.

As for the development cycle though, I really didn't take into consideration that the consoles are really just entry level gaming PCs with a specific OS and was trying to give console gamers a bit of a peace of mind, but honestly with all these new tech coming around the corner, I'm afraid sugarcoating it may not be appropriate.

Regardless, though I'm a PC gamer, my "stake" in all this is that Ubisoft has said a lot of things and some of them very foot-in-mouth. While I feel for the console gamers on this issue, this isn't the first time Ubi has said something like this, which is *my* issue.

Sushiglutton
10-27-2014, 04:58 PM
As I said in an earlier post, this is not true. This isn't pre 2010, the developers knows how to push the hardware to their maximum potentials, and they already have on the current-gen consoles. The PS3 and 360 were ahead of their time, and were using unseen hardware. The PS4 and X1 are NOT like the previous generation, they basically custom PCs with a special OS. What we get now is what we'll get in the next 6-7 years. <-- Literally.


I'm no expert, but I'm not convinced this is really the case. A game is sooo complex. There are tons of prioritise to be made in terms of how to distribute the available resources. I would think this will take a few years/attempts to figure out.

MnemonicSyntax
10-27-2014, 05:11 PM
I'm no expert, but I'm not convinced this is really the case. A game is sooo complex. There are tons of prioritise to be made in terms of how to distribute the available resources. I would think this will take a few years/attempts to figure out.

With consoles literally being PCs these days, it's not that much different from actual PC. I still think it could take some time to "grasp" but not as long as the previous lifecycle for sure.

Anykeyer
10-27-2014, 05:15 PM
I'm no expert, but I'm not convinced this is really the case. A game is sooo complex. There are tons of prioritise to be made in terms of how to distribute the available resources. I would think this will take a few years/attempts to figure out.

Sure there is some room for improvements. It happens on Windows PC as well, over time manufacturers release new drivers with new optimisations. But there wont be any huge improvements, there are no features like Cell SPEs, hard to use but very powerfull. Its simple, almost dumb, x86 and GCN. Almost all optimisations wouldnt be due to programmers learning how to use this hardware, they will simply be fixing inefficiencies in their own code.

Mr_Shade
10-27-2014, 05:37 PM
Since this is now drifting away from the topic - and into which hardware is better / what system is better / which system is going to be better, I think best to lock.


Thanks to all who have contributed.