My point was if they're trying to increase the power and it only goes up to PS3 power may as well not bother and just do small upgrade and do more *fun* factor. Etc etc.What's the point of the hardware if it's going to be boring?
In terms of flexibility, I'd prefer Wii U over the others. There's a lot more possibilities, and just the fact that they're more able to have 3rd party developers accessibility just nulls the fact that you need to own another console aside from exclusives.
my pc is over 2,5years old now and i still dont have any problems with running todays games, and the speccs arent even that good.. that said, im also not really playing any of those high-end games, like battlefield or call of duty :>
---------- Post added 2012-12-31 at 12:33 AM ----------
Whats it matter if it has a power level of 9001 if it developers can't get above 4000? Honestly I plan on buying the next xbox (and later playstation) because I had fun with the systems and even today still have fun with the consoles.
Its going to get to a point where you don't get a new console cause the games will look better its going to be because it runs games better with the higher CPU/RAM it will have.
Look at games now like the crisis 3 video i linked it looks amazing and is pushing current gen systems to there max.
Realistic, better, improved, whatever.Realistic isn't so much of a hardware as a software, unless you want like billions of flying debris.
Well all the talk of physics. It is nearly impossible to have a true particle to particle, and force to force software. Why? For two reasons: One, we do not completely understand the universe. And Two, there is no way in hell to simulate that. Although we do come pretty close.
Hardware and graphics are irrelevant. It's all about the game play. If the game isn't fun it's going to sink. Obviously companies realize that FPS is a popular gameplay style and they capitalize on that. Call of Duty is a great example. You shouldn't fix something that isn't broken. So they take the old game, polish it more and resell it. Same thing with WoW.
People do not play video games for realism. They play it for the fantasy and fun.
Games look nice on the Wii U, I doubt the PS4 or 720 will be any worse off seing as they will be more powerful. Thing is, they will either have to go with middling hardware if they want a realistic price point without massive loss or massive loss with modern hardware. The graphics cards will most likely be second last generation Radeon or something, with Wii U sitting at third last. The difference between them aren't really noticeable unless you pick something very costly; I could play BF3 on high with a GTX 460 with 30 fps in most maps and with my 560 Ti I can get at least 30 fps in all maps, even the very big ones. What would the difference versus a 660 be? 40 fps? It's nearly negligible in the long run and imo not much cause for worry. Can all three consoles run games in 1080p with at least 30 fps then we will be fine. There's kind of a wall now we're hitting anyway, more pixels won't make your games look much better on TV as you sit so far away, the only time you will notice a resolution improvement is on PC when the monitor is at best at arm's length.
Edit: Also, Skyward Sword on the Wii looks quite nice despite the shortcomings of the Wii, and games on the 360 and PS3 look good in 720p. Compare a PS3 game released in 2006 to say Final Fantasy XIII-3, or why not Last of Us: The improvement is staggering considering that the hardware has always been the same. The same degree improvement over time can and should be expected for the next-gen consoles.
Last edited by vanin; 2012-12-31 at 02:00 AM.
If I get full HD resolution without hiccups, that's good enough for me. Despite playing pcars on a decent PC, I can still enjoy the graphics of Forza 4 on xbox 360. The next iteration will no doubt look alot better. Coming from a guy whose playtime is split 90-95% PC / 5-10% console.
Launch of the PS4 and Xbox 720
2012 saw the launch of Nintendo's Wii U - the first of the eighth generation games consoles.* By late 2013, it is joined by the PS4 and Xbox 720. These new machines offer substantial improvements in graphical power. The PS4, codenamed "Orbis", is built around an AMD x64 CPU and AMD Southern Islands GPU, handling screen resolutions of up to 4000 x 2000 pixels, as well as 3D gaming in full 1080p.* The Xbox 720, codenamed "Durango", is powered by a state-of-the-art IBM Power PC CPU, featuring 16 cores, alongside a Radeon HD 7000-series graphics card.*
Based on that, how much more powerful are they then the current gen consoles?
Sorry, WHAT? This is great I had no clue about this. Just as I begin college too . Nothing constructive to say besides that they probably are much much faster. Look at the difference in the iPhone 4 and iPhone 5. 2 years and there is an insane difference. Computing speed is doubling every 18 months (Moore's Law), so I would count the months from the PS3 and Xbox 360 and do some short math. However, I doubt they use the newest stuff on the market, as I doubt the current consoles were made with the newest stuff on the market back then.
Depending how long the consoles have been in developement, a good chance is that they are already year or half a year behind PC hardware developement cycle
Modern gaming apologist: I once tasted diarrhea so shit is fine.
"I envy Obama, because he can spy on his own people and get away with it." - Putin
Consoles may never rival computers in graphics power, and thats okay. i will still play them as generally pc games get shitty ports and or not ports of the games i love.
OT: They'll be weak as ever, 2-3 years behind PC. But coders will make it look "amazing". I'd say that you'll get Far Cry 3 style graphics, set to High, within a year of launch. By the end of the cycle they might be close to ultra range. Assuming the coding is as "friendly" it was on this generation.