Epic: New Unreal Engine Warrants PS4, Xbox 720

[Vladislaus]

[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]I got my Radeon HD4670 3 years after the Xbox 360 came out, I have had 3 years of usage from it.Before I bought it my PC could not play games as well, aftewards it plays them better.I paid a grand total of £85 for it and every year that goes by with no successor to the Xbox 360 is an extra year of value.Due to the large cycle between consoles you can expect a performance bonus from consoles over PCs but they will age very badly as the cycles between CPUs and GPUs, which also forces down pricing on the generation below significantly, means if you intend to own a PC for the same length of time as the developmet cycle of a console the PC will still be better value for money.also, and this is my favourite part, PCs and consoles are not stand alone, they require games and PC games cost less than console games - the savings for someone who buys X amount of games per year are significant.[/citation]
I guess this would defeat the purpose of buying a console. Then it would be better to just go out and buy a computer.

 

[SteelCity1981]

Integrated graphics are not why they don't make more graphical games? Yeah they are. Matter of fact there was an article on this very same website a few years back explaining why developers had to support Intel IGP's due to licencing contract agreements, which a lot of gaming developers weren't too thrilled about, because they couldn't develope the games that they wanted to due to intels IGP hardware holding them back.

A lot of people could play CGI type games? You do realize how much hardware and resources takes to play such type of game in which would be out of the budget of many people.

Again they can make pc games without losing out on graphics to support consoles. That's not an issue. There are a lot of games that don't support consoles that only support pc's which isn't the consoles fault for the reasons why those developers decided to use not the best graphic engines for games made for the pc's only. Cost is one of the reasons and licencing agreements is another.

APi's won't come close to matching the performance needed to play the games that require a lot of graphics power to support the graphics needed to play visually stunning games. Not unless they figure out a way to cram highend gpu hardware onto a single die while at the same time keeping the TDP rating normal wihtout requiring a much higher psu to support it, which would then defeat the purpose altogether.

 

[back_by_demand]

[citation][nom]Vladislaus[/nom]I guess this would defeat the purpose of buying a console. Then it would be better to just go out and buy a computer.[/citation]
My point exactly, if you already own a PC just stay with it and upgrade your graphics in line with the dev cycle of consoles and you will save money and still get a better performing product at least 75% of the time.

 

[enforcer22]

I didnt say alot of people could play CGI types i just said it would be nice though i didnt expect it.

Intel might have a slight hand in it sure but its not the overall. I also didnt say they couldnt make PC games that support higher end graphics i only stated that many game dev's chose not to because they say it doesnt make sense to make two versions of a game one being for pc and one for console they just make the console version and port it to pc. PC exclusive games do in fact use the higher end API's.

I don't really understand the last paragraph. It doesn't necessarily take a super computer to enhance the graphics.. Correct coding for shader units can enhance a games visuals with out much over head at all. In fact at least two games i have played the performance hit after a couple patches and driver updates was negligible. There are a lot of games that don't support intels integrated graphics engine I'm not sure how they have much to do with it other then a few Intel funded games here and there. From what i have been reading it has nothing to do with licenses rather that they have to support the hardware its self to sell to the largest group of people. I wouldn't be happy with having to do alot of extra work to support something not worth supporting for games either. But it is one of the draw backs to computer gaming.. The level of support for hardware thats in mass use.

While writing this i decided to fire up google and search for reasons of why games are being held back. Nothing ever referred to intel other then lackluster graphics chips. 99.999% of the articles talked about consoles being the main culprit of games being stuck in the past. I just cant find anything that backs up anything you say. Just a lot of articles about how fed up they are about developers sucking on the console "tit" to put it one way and ignoring the fact that there are PC's out there capable of rendering graphics 10x better then a console with current standard of tech in computers in homes. Even coming from the devs them selves. I mean yeah Intels on board graphics can hold back a game but i cant find anything that says that have to support it.. its just smart for them to.

 

[CsG_kieran_2]

Only think holding back the pc is the xbox. The ps3s cell can still hold its own........ for now. A full pc build would have been nice though.

 

[demonhorde665]

[citation][nom]Trialsking[/nom]The Apple iPad 4 will have a more GPU GPU than the crapBox and POS3. Stupid consoles hold everything back.[/citation]

i'm so sick of hearing people say this, it is by far teh most retarded phrase born in more reccent years.

1. consoles arent holding stuff back , publishers and to a lesser extent , developers in general are
2. consoles didnt jump up and tell people NO you cant make a game using newer pc hardware nor ahs it stopped game devs from making a few games that use pc ahrware , you need look no further than crysis 1 to see that this is not the case, a game dev made a game taht to this day still brings comps to thier knees ,it didnt seel as fgood as it could have , so in teh end the market held things back not teh consoles

3. sure better graphics are nice , but really what is so wrong with taking abreather for a bit , do you really wnat to return to teh days of old , where pc gamers had to spend 1000's every year to update thier comp? the pc game market would be hurting much worse if this was the case. as most peopel don't make the kind of money to maintain old school upgrade rates , as it is the les rich pc gamers (like myself) can get by playign modern games witha 3 year old comp

4. every PC gmaer i have heard say "consoles are holdign us back" ad always teh same guys that say (graphics don't matter) so i ask which is it ???? are you amd becasue consoles are holdign shit back , or you really think graphics don't amtter becasue you're really sending a mixed signal

5. as some one that palys both pc games and console games , i avhe to hoenstly say GRAPHICS DONT F----ING MATTER. i remember when i was slapping a single pixel around teh screen and in enjoyign every minute of the game (pong on atari 2600) so again i say GRAPHICS DONT F----ING MATTER get your head out of your rich man's anal cavity and get over it the market goes for the majority not your rich minority. and after all at teh end of the day when you ahve come accustomed to higher quality visuals and they no longer have the first look , awe factor any more the GRAPHICS DONT F----ING MATTER.

 

[SteelCity1981]

Ok would be nice and reality are two diff things. Sure it would be nice but in reality no gaming developer would even consider doing it know the money and time it would take to do it that and they would lose money due to the fact that no one could play those games, unless you had a lot of money and could build an ultra support gaming rig.

Has little to do with that because they use the same game and remove elements of the game to suit consoles, it's not like they are making two entirely diff games so it can be played on a console. All they are doing is making a stripped down copy.

Bingo, you just answered your own question about supporting hardware, in which their is license agreements involved that they have to support hardware.

99.9% of what opinions from people that agree with you on another message board? lol Contact any large gaming developer and ask them that same question. It makes no sense that something like a console which is an entirely diff platform then a pc is holding another platform back. Blame it on the large amount of diff types of hardware that gaming companies have to support on the pc, not something that has no relation to it.

So it's smart for them to support low end hardware but yet you are complaining about how games get held back from becoming a lot visually better but yet you are upset that the console market is holding the gaming market back for pc's So then why isn't it smart for them to do the same for consoles then....

 

[Spoony]

[citation][nom]Gulli[/nom]Most games are made for consoles and then ported to PC, not the other way around.[/citation]

HANG ON SUNSHINE i dont think thats correct, the games are ALL designed on a PC and then made over to console's, you cant design shit on a consoles, they cant handle it there made by PC for PC then turned down to basic settings and put out for sale to the retarded generation.

when are console players going to learn that a PC and its noob gamer will kick your pro console gamer's ass any day.

team Xbox and team Sony both played against noob gamers on a cross platform game setup and got completely OWNED.

dont believe me look it up its on the net and read it and weep.

 

[Griffolion]

[citation][nom]Trialsking[/nom]The Apple iPad 4 will have a more GPU GPU than the crapBox and POS3. Stupid consoles hold everything back.[/citation]

Blimey, the Apple trolls even manage to slip in some unadulterated bile in a topic they have nothing to do with.

 

[nao1120]

@Trialsking
Um, Whatever.

 

[lamorpa]

[citation][nom]Trialsking[/nom]The Apple iPad 4 will have a more GPU GPU than the crapBox and POS3. Stupid consoles hold everything back.[/citation]
What is the purpose of posting an obviously incorrect (and stupid) statement like this?

 

[enforcer22]

@demonhorde.. if you want to be narrow minded in your statements and contradict your self.

"1. consoles aren't holding stuff back , publishers and to a lesser extent , developers in general are"

And they are because of consoles! awesome glad that got cleared up.

I'm not totally sure if hes talking to me but im going to assume steelcity is. Once again i never expected those types of graphics.. If i have to say it again its going to get ridiculous.

I'm going to ignore most of that middle crap because its not important. But as i have said game developers have stated o screw it I'm just speaking to the deff.

Its smart for them to support all kinds of hardware but that doesn't limit anything. Weather to not they want to support higher end hardware is kinda the problem. With their focus on one set of hardware and unwillingness to spend the time to optimize for the PC is kinda the issue. I wasn't talking about message boards but if that makes you feel better in your argument go ahead.

The devs all decided to support Console first because of the morons that think piracy is the reason no one buys their poorly planned poorly made dx9 games they port from their original console oriented coding. make a quality game that supports something beyond what a console has and put a little thought into the game other then this will make a million in a week if we release it for a console. and ignore any other development for a pc version other then compatibility.

I am glad to see dice taking the other approach for their game BF3 making two totally different versions each optimized for the platform they are going on and using the max they can from each platform. Ill leave this "conversation" as it is. You can continue to argue about it but at least for now i can count on one company at least for one game who says "we aren't going to make a crappy console port and ignore the pc like the other developers have on this one, Because we all know how crappy console ports are."

Anyways I'm out of this topic.

 

[xenol]

I don't know if Epic is finally giving a nod to PC gaming again, or they're just trying to tell its new user base to button up so they can ignore PC gamers again.

 

[captaincharisma]

[citation][nom]blibba[/nom]Sorry to double post, but the PS3 has an 8 core CPU...[/citation]

8 cores yes but only 1 core is used for running games the other cores are dedicated to other functions of the system. heck 1 core is only used for the consoles service mode. still though

 

[captaincharisma]

[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]My point exactly, if you already own a PC just stay with it and upgrade your graphics in line with the dev cycle of consoles and you will save money and still get a better performing product at least 75% of the time.[/citation]

but on a PC can i play gran turismo ,god of war, the overrated Halo series, No more heroes, i can go on but no i can't. i need a more varietly of games than FPS, RTS, and MMORPG games so i buy a console

 

[dalta centauri]

[citation][nom]Spoony[/nom]HANG ON SUNSHINE i dont think thats correct, the games are ALL designed on a PC and then made over to console's, you cant design shit on a consoles, they cant handle it there made by PC for PC then turned down to basic settings and put out for sale to the retarded generation.when are console players going to learn that a PC and its noob gamer will kick your pro console gamer's ass any day.team Xbox and team Sony both played against noob gamers on a cross platform game setup and got completely OWNED.dont believe me look it up its on the net and read it and weep.[/citation]
Although designed on pc, their specifically made and optimized for consoles and then brought to the pc. As this is generally easier among being cheaper targetting at a platform with the same hardware as eachother. Nice flaming though, it helps to know that you have articles to link yourself as well.

 

[gm0n3y]

I actually hope that the consoles don't get updates until 2020. That will just allow PC gaming to take over again. Right now we're stuck with ports from consoles, but by even 2012-13 (if the world doesn't end) I'm expecting many gaming companies to start releasing more real PC games which are then ported to the consoles.

 

[BulkZerker]

Yes they are making games foe the coneole. That's why we have games with regenerative health (from deaths door to full health in 10 sec is a joke), games with a cover system, (gow's stupid easy shoulder high cover system, easy mode..) and a obvious lack of puzzles in games (there's the key.... how do I get it? Maybe if I stand over here and shoot it with my pistol it'll fall on thatt conveyor then I just have t go to pick it up.) Sprinting... sprint to prone (dolphin diving) perk giving weapons and perks period. (Removing any inadequacies of the ultra accurate pea shooter, or the innacurate bfg omg super minigun) andneed to even aim.

But what's the worse? Shitty net code so online even with 20 ping you get nailed 10 sec after you dive into a house, climb a ladder, toss a nade down and kill the guy following you, you still die from their knife.

And then theres consoles offering support for 4 controllers.... where's my 4 player local game support asside from castle crashers?

I've owned a snes through the PS3 (no xbox, no post n64, no sega) and I loved the console for its party capabilities. I loved the pc for its long games.

Though it seems the only thing devs make anymore with their 500 strong dev team, every 6 months... is a game I can wax in an afternoon, and not even think "wow that game was good, or funny." (Save rachet and clanks last title, it had a way better story that halo or modern soviet general goes roguefare).

I miss the days of 20 men dev teams that cranked out one game every 5 years. We need those days back for both camps

 

[Guest]

Lazy, untalented developers(waves to Crytek and Epic) complain about hardware. Quality ones find ways to do what no one believed was possible with the hardware available.