This is what PC game graphics could look like
Futuremark shows off incredible DirectX 11 benchmark video
3D Mark 11 DX11 benchmarch shows PC's potential
This is what PC game graphics could look like
Futuremark shows off incredible DirectX 11 benchmark video
Sorry Tinman. Did not know that you were gonna post this or else i would have not posted it earlier.
CPU: i7 2600k // ASUS Maximus IV EXTREME [email protected] // Corsair 8gig DDR3 @ 1600mhz // ASUS GTX580 DirectCU2 // 9800GT // 2x intel X25-m 40gig SSDs raid0 // Corsair Force 3 SSD
Suddenly my little 980X feels too slow
My ignore list: growing too fast to keep updating.
Upgrade! GAH!!
Time to sell that other kidney.
Upgrade time
I have a question.... in that piece its said that grpahics are no longer being pushed thanks to consoles... yet we will soon be graced by the Idtech4 engine which, in my opinion brings Brilliant graphics to all platforms. Also with Crysis 2 the consoles will also be showing off that it can keep up with their pc counter part. Is this more level playing field maybe not giving developers the chance to better code their engines?
Also isn't it better for the consumer (read PC gamer) that they no longer need to upgrade their GPU once a year to keep pumping out the best visuals?
Damnit!.....He has a point
My ignore list: growing too fast to keep updating.
You make a good point, although, don't you think it would have been better for the "consumers" if the developers started focusing on better coding anyway, regardless of the console restraints?Originally Posted by OmegaFenix22
Well think about it this way: Every GPU by say Nvidia has a similar but slightly differnt
Architecture, which is often while one game will run perfectly with (and this is just an example) a 9800GT but struggles with a 8900GTX. And then everytime a new GPU is released the devs need to work it into the game. Since all Xbox's and all PS3's have the exact same GPU with the same exact architecture the devs now dont need to worry about coding in 500 (Again just an example) differnt possible GPU and can instead focus on getting the best possible visuals out of that one specific gpu.
As a result of this many PC games no longer have the astromonical requirements thus opening up the market a little bit for people who do not have the cash to spend 2K on a GPU once a year.
By your argument I think that there are 2 major culprits for the issue PC gamers have:
1. Graphics card manufacturers who make new graphics cards the whole time whilst completely changing the architecture every time without coming up with something that is actually scalable. That forces consumers to upgrade the whole time, getting nearly the same levels of performance but in a "new" way. This also doesn't make life easier for game developers who can't stop to focus on a single architecture - but instead need to shift focus the whole time.
2. The game developers who support this operation by the card makers. They should simply stop entertaining these new cards and "pick" a card and develop the game as if everyone owns that specific nvidia or AMD card. Then people will get decent performance out of their cards - whilst the manufactures will have no more reason to bombard us with newer, more expensive cards the whole time.
Basically - turning the PC's hardware into a console equivalent.
The flip-side of this argument is that PC users are always at the forefront of gaming technology and if they somehow do standardize PC development for games you'll be screwing other PC gamers who bought new hardware.
Catch 28.
My ignore list: growing too fast to keep updating.
Posting Permissions
