2. "the word around town is that the ps4/xbone are already underpowered" In response to Reply # 0 Sun Aug-23-15 03:22 PM by bearfield
and we're not even 2 years into the cycle. currently you can buy a graphics card for < $150 that will be at least as powerful as a ps4/xbone. for around $50-$100 more than entry level stuff for a new console, i.e. console + controllers + 2 games + subscription service, you can build a PC that is more powerful than a ps4/xbone and has access to a game library that is exponentially larger than both consoles combined. i'm fairly certain the lowest priced steam machine is about as much as a new console
developers will likely figure out how to make the most of the consoles' architecture as time goes on so graphics and AI on ps4/xbone will probably improve at a steady clip over the next couple of years, which is fairly standard stuff for consoles. however what happened last generation, going from, say, hitman: blood money to metal gear solid 4 or gears of war 3, is less likely to happen. the graphics ceiling for these consoles seems to be lower than it was for the previous console cycle. this is a result of simple hardware limitations. consoles are never going to be able to handle above 1080p resolution or super high quality textures because of VRAM limitations. as a matter of fact many console games are running in sub-1080p resolutions (mgs V for instance). additionally i don't think there is much more the devs can do with these current consoles since they are basically PC's, or at least way closer to PC's than the 360/ps3 were
but games on ps4/xbone look pretty damn good already. a lot of that is due to better lighting, which doesn't require a ton of processing power. and in most cases running at sub-1080p resolutions isn't that noticeable unless you're doing side-by-side comparisons. i would estimate that an overwhelming majority of people probably can't tell the difference between 900p and 1080p at a glance
games are much cheaper on steam than they are on consoles. this is because there are other places to purchase download codes for PC games. that competition doesn't exist on consoles so they can charge $59.99 for 3 year old games forever if they want to
add to that the fact that there are fewer and fewer console exclusives (meaning only available on ps4 and/or xbone) being made (maybe 10 so far?) and the fact that nearly everything comes to PC eventually, and that the PC port is almost always superior. so games are subjectively better and objectively cheaper on PC/steam machine. that can't be underestimated. saving $10-30 per game purchased really adds up over the course of a console cycle
i think PC gaming is the only way to go these days since the consoles are so underwhelming. but if you only play a handful of games a year then consoles are probably best since they are about as low-maintenance (in the best way possible) as it gets
3. "All fair points" In response to Reply # 2 Sun Aug-23-15 03:47 PM by Nodima
But you can't play arkham knight months after release unless you've gotten lucky, and MGSV does run at 1080 on PS4. It just won't be 60fps. Edit: Wow, apparently it will run at 60 just like Ground Zeroes. The FOX Engine is seriously impressive. Konami should license it out if they're done with big budget games.
We've been through this before, I wouldn't discourage anyone from getting a great or PC, but between my OS X affinity and the considerably less taut safety net for the PC experience, it's worth knowing the pitfalls as well as the perks.
>But you can't play arkham knight months after release unless >you've gotten lucky, and MGSV does run at 1080 on PS4. It just >won't be 60fps. Edit: Wow, apparently it will run at 60 just >like Ground Zeroes. The FOX Engine is seriously impressive. >Konami should license it out if they're done with big budget >games.
i could have sworn MGSV was running at 30 on ps4. the fox engine is crazy. i hope they do license it out, if only to give unreal some competition. then again, it is an engine created by a japanese company. MT framework did amazing things for capcom and iirc they kept it for themselves
>We've been through this before, I wouldn't discourage anyone >from getting a great or PC, but between my OS X affinity and >the considerably less taut safety net for the PC experience, >it's worth knowing the pitfalls as well as the perks.
and i would never fault anyone for going the console route. it's stable, reliable, easy, and will eventually have a ton of games to choose from
7. "A few extras for PC version" In response to Reply # 3
The screenshots are out there.
So far the PC version is looking the best. Arkham Knight is an unfair comparison because they sourced it out for the PC port and they did a horrible job with the port.
Unless you go ape shit crazy for PS exclusives it looks like PC is the way to go this gen.
================= Official Okay-Super Villain™
I only play the games that I win at - Gamertag: Innovator PSN: DurtyGambino Steam: Durty Gambino Twitch.tv/durtygambino
Only because I've played the entire Solid series on the PS and that's how I want to end it. Just feels right. But as soon as it comes down in price for the PC best believe I'll cop for that also to play through again. Supports 4K resolution and they changed a lot of textures for the PC.
Take the dive man. The great thing about owning all of the systems and a PC is that you never miss out on anything lol.
================= Official Okay-Super Villain™
I only play the games that I win at - Gamertag: Innovator PSN: DurtyGambino Steam: Durty Gambino Twitch.tv/durtygambino
11. "Too much stuff and too little time lol" In response to Reply # 10
Like I got damn near every new release for the consoles but haven't had time to dive deep into most of them. Usually in the fall my time frees up and I'm all over a new idea. So this time me thinks me must build. We'll see. lol
14. "RE: Too much stuff and too little time lol" In response to Reply # 11
>Like I got damn near every new release for the consoles but >haven't had time to dive deep into most of them. Usually in >the fall my time frees up and I'm all over a new idea. So this >time me thinks me must build. We'll see. lol
the "buying games and never playing them" thing would actually work better for you if you had PC since prices generally drop really quickly on the various digital distribution sites. if your habit is to buy a game day one on xbone or ps4 and not play it for a few months then you may as well just wait and get it on PC for $30-45 during the next steam/gog/gmg sale
15. "yeah certain ones I'll buy day 1 like this Gears of War, Metal Gear, etc" In response to Reply # 14
But then some g ames like Dying Light I just bought on sale for $20 just cuz it was on sale. I see those steam sales sometimes and I'm like dang, I really do need a gaming PC.
12. "just curious what peripheral set up are you guys running for pcs?" In response to Reply # 2
the 1 or 2 pc gamers i personally know play things like flight sims, sim city, civ, etc basically games you play on a keyboard on a 20in monitor in your office when you're supposed to be working i'm assuming you guys are playing pc games on big 50in tvs with controllers etc i think more console gamers would try running with the pc if it was marketed as a living room thing the way consoles are
13. "RE: just curious what peripheral set up are you guys running for pcs?" In response to Reply # 12 Tue Aug-25-15 10:08 AM by bearfield
>the 1 or 2 pc gamers i personally know play things like >flight sims, sim city, civ, etc >basically games you play on a keyboard on a 20in monitor in >your office when you're supposed to be working >i'm assuming you guys are playing pc games on big 50in tvs >with controllers etc
i'm currently running my PC to my 50" plasma via hdmi and a 21" monitor via dvi. generally speaking i play mouse and keyboard games on the monitor and controller-supported games on the tv. however i'm very close to finishing a new build. when that's done my plan is to run the new PC to the plasma and a new monitor and use the old PC for processing live streams and videos for youtube. i may get an el gato as well for 360 streaming
>i think more console gamers would try running with the pc if >it was marketed as a living room thing the way consoles are
this is basically what the steam machine is. alienware is also producing "living room gaming" PCs. i think there is still a bit too much futzing around with various text files and changing advanced graphics options to get the most out of a game on PC but a lot of that stuff is being automated. it's not quite "just turn it on and play it" status but it's close. plus having more of a specific pre-made PC build would theoretically help devs be able to produce more stable releases since they could focus on making sure the game runs well on alienware/steam machine builds (as opposed to trying to account for the nearly infinite variations of self-built PCs out there)
16. "Cannot see getting a Steam Machine" In response to Reply # 0
I'm not sure any of the steam machines at PS4/XB1 price points look any better than the console counterparts. Probably worse going by some early machine specs. For the price of one with any real power you may as well roll your own PC. PLUS the steam library is mainly MS coded products. Going forward you'll have a lot of titles written directly on SteamOS, but the majority of the back catalogue has to be streamed from a PC (which at its best won't be as smooth as running it natively on the Steam Machine, and at worst, you're running 2 machines to play one game).
Steam Machine seems very niche. There is a subsection of the gaming population that will go all in for one. But I think the majority of folks would be better served just going PC or console, not the hybrid that is the Steam Machine
<-- Dave Thomas knows what's up... __________________________
Jay: Look here homie, any nigga can get a hit record. This here is about respect. Game: Like Gladys Knight. Jay: Aretha Franklin. Game: Word, I like her too. Jay: Nigga...
17. "The cheapest official Steam Machines are too pricey and weak." In response to Reply # 0 Mon Aug-31-15 05:51 PM by IkeMoses
Steam Machines that solidly out power consoles tend to cost twice as much as a current gen console...and then you can only play Linux games out the box. AAA developers are still treating Linux (and Mac) like a stepchild.
Last gen consoles are already missing out on new games, or getting hella gimped versions. MKX for last gen just got canceled this week after hella delays. More of that is going to come in the future.
If I could only get one box today, it would have to be a PS4 or an Xbox One.
The PS4 is the better console with the better library. If I could only get one, it would be that.
But yo, if you got the money to spend on a Steam Machine, you got the money to buy both current gen consoles, and you'd probably be better off doing that.
18. "Ok, I needs yous guys help. I've been messing around building..." In response to Reply # 0
well, trying to match parts together on that link yall were telling me about pcpartpicker. I'm trying to make something that can run the latest and greatest at 4K but I want it to be under a thousand. Here's what I've come up with so far. Hell I just need advice. lol - http://pcpartpicker.com/p/HBkb99
19. "RE: Ok, I needs yous guys help. I've been messing around building..." In response to Reply # 18 Mon Aug-31-15 09:02 PM by obsidianchrysalis
Have you shopped at TigerDirect? They offer good deals on CPU / motherboard / memory combos. You may be able to save some money on your core components by buying the package so that you could use more towards your graphics card or a larger solid state drive.
20. "RE: Ok, I needs yous guys help. I've been messing around building..." In response to Reply # 18
>I'm trying to make something >that can run the latest and greatest at 4K but I want it to be >under a thousand.
this is probably impossible. 4k is tough to do with a 4 GB card as it is and the 970 isn't a really a 4GB card. that card is kind of the de facto "enthusiast PC gamer" entry level card. if you really want something that can do the newest games in 4k you're going to need a better (read: more expensive) graphics card. case in point: i had a 970 for a hot minute (didn't like it and returned it) and it could barely run final fantasy xiii at 4k
there are a lot of resources out there to help guide you through your first PC build. tom's hardware, digital foundry, pc gamer magazine... pcpartpicker even has guides. you're going to need to do a lot of research for yourself if you want a quality build and you want to keep it under a certain budget
the main thing you should keep in mind is that the graphics card is going to be the engine of your PC. if you only have x dollars to spend on a gaming PC you need to designate as much of x as possible to the graphics card. you may not end up with a full bugatti (meaning body, tires, exhaust, interior, etc.) but you could piece together a fiat with a bugatii engine if you're clever and patient
22. "Well, yeah, to a point" In response to Reply # 21
Definitely need a card (or cards) to run 4K at the detail level you're looking for. You'll also need the PSU that can handle that and a decent case to handle the fans you'll need to keep it cool. You'll probably need a decent CPU as well. Doing all that under $1k would be quite tricky.
It's a balancing act as some games are GPU intensive, while others run better on a multi threaded CPU. Plus, you have to consider what games you want and how they are coded going forward. While a good number of games now lean toward the GPU pulling major weight, CPUs will become more and more vital going forward (or that's been the plan the last few years, which may or may not come to fruition sooner rather than later)
TL;DR - it's about balance at the end, though a great GPU for 4K is a must. Will be hard at that price point
<-- Dave Thomas knows what's up... __________________________
Jay: Look here homie, any nigga can get a hit record. This here is about respect. Game: Like Gladys Knight. Jay: Aretha Franklin. Game: Word, I like her too. Jay: Nigga...
23. "these are all good points" In response to Reply # 22
>Definitely need a card (or cards) to run 4K at the detail >level you're looking for. You'll also need the PSU that can >handle that and a decent case to handle the fans you'll need >to keep it cool. You'll probably need a decent CPU as well. >Doing all that under $1k would be quite tricky. > >It's a balancing act as some games are GPU intensive, while >others run better on a multi threaded CPU. Plus, you have to >consider what games you want and how they are coded going >forward. While a good number of games now lean toward the GPU >pulling major weight, CPUs will become more and more vital>going forward (or that's been the plan the last few years, >which may or may not come to fruition sooner rather than >later) > >TL;DR - it's about balance at the end, though a great GPU for >4K is a must. Will be hard at that price point
balance is definitely important. the last thing anyone wants is to have their weak CPU bottleneck their high-powered GPU
however i would argue that while the threat of CPU-intensive games has been happening for a number of years the actual number of CPU-intensive games is currently very low and unlikely to increase any time soon, especially with consoles still driving the AAA game production cycle. and if Lach's post history is any indication, he's likely going to be playing PC versions of console games, not CPU-reliant games like civ v or kerbal space program
Printer-friendly copy 
Email this topic to a friend
High-Tech
(6 votes)
(9 votes)
(1 votes)
