Will console graphics ever beat PC graphics?

[omicron1]

Every new console generation, graphics take a jump ahead of PCs. They'll have similar hardware, but the developers on console (especially during the second cycle on any given platform) are able to optimise to a particular feature set. Then, PCs catch up, and about halfway through the generation the consoles are left in the dust.

Put it this way: Red Dead Redemption could have been released in 2005. Had it been programmed then, it would've worked as a launch title. And it would've looked better than anything else out there at the time. Then, in 2007, we got Crysis - that's still the best-looking game on the market, although the mass market is drawing level with it, and as of 2008-09, it became practical to get a computer to run it on.

However: Launch titles are generally not as good as what comes later. Compare Call of Duty 2 to Call of Duty 4, for instance. Same platform, HUGE difference in graphics. As people use a system, they learn how to make better looking games. It's that simple.

So, in summary, consoles and PCs play leapfrog in capabilities, not so much in actualities.

And as an afterthought, graphics are plateauing. Age of Empires 3 looks just about as good as StarCraft 2, despite them being released FIVE YEARS apart. (RTSs plateaued in 2005 on PC) And there's no real reason to make graphics better than Crysis' graphics, is there? (FPSs plateaued in 2007 on PC)

The graphics arms-race isn't over, but it's in the final few battles. I predict maybe one more console generation, in 2012 or so, unless they find some new dimension of graphical focus to work on. Screenshots from this new generation, crucially, will not wow gamers very much. They'll look almost the same as current-gen screenshots, just with the rough edges removed. Then we'll all settle down and make games based on variety, not on looking better. And I will be happy.

 

[DanielDeFig]

Sure. For the first six months it's released. Then a new, shiny computer with specs that outmatch the console is released to the masses.

 

[JUMBO PALACE]

I don't think the OP will get even one person to vote in favor of consoles. It's such an obvious question. You can upgrade PCs, you can't upgrade consoles, so no.

 

[bz316]

Nah. Not to bash consoles or anything but I think it's been pretty well-summed up so far. Consoles only get a hardware update once per "generation," whereas PC's can be constantly upgraded every time a new and better component comes out. Any advantage consoles ever have hardware-wise (if they ever had or ever will have one), will be extremely temporary at best.

 

[spinFX]

Of course not... Everything in a console is available on a PC and sooner. Like the graphics card that the Xbox's had on release had been available for PCs for like a year.

 

[milkkart]

Depending on your PC, consoles may already be beating it. Just depends on your graphics card. Realistically though, they never will, because it is not feasible to put 4 GPUs in a console- it would be too expensive to sell. There's no comparison and no reason to compare them. PCs are custom built, consoles are built in numbers with the most power for the lowest price. Are people really still having this discussion? Or did PC fanboy elitists just decide they needed to flex their ego?

yup, pretty sure this guy is just waving his e-peen.

 

[Eagle Est1986]

That said, if SONY were to announce tomorrow that the PS4 would have two of those Cell things and an nVidia 480 (or maybe a GTX 500 if such a magical thing existed), then it would be a different story.
If they could find anyone theoretical enough to program for it.

The PS3 has 8 cell processors (though 1 is a back up), so I'd like to think the PS4 would have more. It doesn't really have a very powerful graphics card though, which is why developers can struggle to get the best out of it, most are used to the standard PC setup.
[small]Just thought I'd throw that in there, don't mind me.[/small]

 

[mParadox]

Crysis..is...pretty.....

IN all seriousness, no. Consoles cannot beat PC in terms of graphics. Ever. If they do, then...well...let's just say your time has come again.

Sorry got a bit HL2 there.

 

[lancashirered]

Hmmm, in the current rasterisation graphics card arms race consoles will never beat the pc. Simply because PC's can always be made more up to date, but PC's also can't radically change architecture with each generation, as it would require many large companies to co-operate. Consider the fact that real time ray tracing (true 3d) can be achieved on 3 cell processors (the cell is pretty cheap), consoles may yet be able to innovate ahead of the PC... Now who here would buy a new graphics card that is unable to play anything but the lastest games??

 

[Mechsoap]

it is always the hardware that decides that

 

[jowo96]

No,you can build your own PC or have it built to order, you can specify what your PC has down to its every component, The most you can hope to change in a console is the Hard-drive.

You could argue that consoles may have that some day but that would really defeat the purpose of a console in that you don't have to worry about system requirments. (Unless you count the difference between PSX and PS3)

 

[Tjebbe]

No, and IMO that hasn't mattered since the NES. Graphics are nice, but that's only one of many aspects of a game, and since i'm not a fan of RTS and only like FPS's every once in a while (two genres that I think do much better on PCs), I prefer to play most of my games on consoles.

 

[Nfritzappa]

I got a better question.

Will PC games ever sell more than console games?

 

[jamesworkshop]

Hmmm, in the current rasterisation graphics card arms race consoles will never beat the pc. Simply because PC's can always be made more up to date, but PC's also can't radically change architecture with each generation, as it would require many large companies to co-operate. Consider the fact that real time ray tracing (true 3d) can be achieved on 3 cell processors (the cell is pretty cheap), consoles may yet be able to innovate ahead of the PC... Now who here would buy a new graphics card that is unable to play anything but the lastest games??

http://www.fastcompany.com/1654947/intel-50-core-knights-corner-cpu-chip-massively-parallel-computing

the future is either Software solvers or Cloud computing

 

[Acidwell]

No, consoles will never overtake gaming PCs on graphics. The PC graphics necessarily have to be better, because games are programmed on PCs, as you mention in your post.

The welding torch a guy used to make a Ferrari doesn't go faster than the Ferrari, therefore your argument is invalid. Heck, the entire factory can't even reach more than 5mph without some sort of natural disaster.

I'm sorry but your argument here doesn't make sense, to extend your metaphor: You can't win a formula one race while driving a welding torch, on the other hand you can play games on a pc, your comparison/metaphor is invalid. Therefore the original argument is correct considering most of the early playtesting for console games is done on a pc it is true that the pcs are further ahead.

 

[RUINER ACTUAL]

Depending on your PC, consoles may already be beating it. Just depends on your graphics card. Realistically though, they never will, because it is not feasible to put 4 GPUs in a console- it would be too expensive to sell. There's no comparison and no reason to compare them. PCs are custom built, consoles are built in numbers with the most power for the lowest price. Are people really still having this discussion? Or did PC fanboy elitists just decide they needed to flex their ego?

yup, pretty sure this guy is just waving his e-peen.

I've never heard that before, but it is funny. I think I'll use that now.

 

[lancashirered]

Hmmm, in the current rasterisation graphics card arms race consoles will never beat the pc. Simply because PC's can always be made more up to date, but PC's also can't radically change architecture with each generation, as it would require many large companies to co-operate. Consider the fact that real time ray tracing (true 3d) can be achieved on 3 cell processors (the cell is pretty cheap), consoles may yet be able to innovate ahead of the PC... Now who here would buy a new graphics card that is unable to play anything but the lastest games??

http://www.fastcompany.com/1654947/intel-50-core-knights-corner-cpu-chip-massively-parallel-computing

the future is either Software solvers or Cloud computing

oooh very interesting, thanks...

 

[RatRace123]

No, I don't think they could ever beat them, but as consoles get more and more powerful, they could certainly equal them.
Realistically, I'd say that maybe in 3-4 generations consoles and PCs will be equal in terms of graphics power. We're actually closer now, the PS3 is capable of pumping out sone pretty amazing graphics, so maybe even in 2 generations PCs and consoles will be equal.

But wait, if we're all on equal footing, how will we be able to assert our fanboyishness? How will we justify that we're better than someone else because of our game playing machine choice?
That should be interesting to see.

 

[lostzombies.com]

snip

You're missing the massively obvious point here, gaming PCs will never be as cheap or user friendly as consoles.

It's all about price. The vast majority of gamers have neither the time or rediculous amount of money to spend upgrading their PC every 2 years to play the new games at their best settings.



You're post is basically the same as someone who owns a Ferrari going to a Ford forum, posting a picture of your car and saying 'Will fords ever be able to go as fast as my car?)

 

[willsham45]

consol game graphics are set to work on the consol, but it does not mean the next line of consols when they come out will out compeat pc cards...then only thing is PC grphic cards are always being updated so if you got the money it is no problem.