So after finishing Gears 3 on my 360 I realise..

That the lighting, smoke and fire are as good if not better then the pc games I have played on my high end rig.

Yes I know the textures and resolution of the game arent anything near a PC, AA is lacking but considering how cheap the console is and how old the hardware is it makes me wonder WTF developers are really doing with PC gaming.

If I don't see something substantially improved soon over what I have been playing on PC in the last two years ill be jumping ship all together when the next gen consoles come out. Once they can play in true 1080p that may be enough for me.

Anyone else feel the same?

 

screenshots plx.

 

Lol.

Gears 3 isn't on the PC, so you can't compare. Still, I've seen Gears 3, and it looks like 2008'ish game, at best.

There has been a marathon of better looking games.

 

Higher specs != good grafics

If you can play a few tricks to optimise a cinematic experience, that is a better result than a "playable benchmark" that you will be able to play after 5 generations of hardware.

 

I have seen better in play but just by searching the web:

 

Oh boy. Someone had great fun playing a game that is well designed and thinks it has to do with the gfx.

Wow. :eyes:

Seriously - fire, smoke and lighting are all things that make the atmosphere. So if you enjoyed the atmosphere, it had nothing to do with image quality or resolution at all.


FUN != GFX

 

The game looks great because Epic had 2 other games to work and optimize the engine with the 360 hardware, which it seems works well with. Look at Killzone2/3, Uncharted 2/3, both games are better than some PC games. Imagine these games optimized and ported to the PC....

 

I'll partially agree with this I had a blast, but my gripe is that PC gaming has not come far enough in comparison to console gaming considering *6* years of hardware difference.

 

i can agree, to an extent, about not appearing coming along far despite the age difference but it really depends on the game itself.

the textures on those screens look like crap and i bet the levels aren't designed to have a million things in view, giving the hardware a chance to focus on the things you can actually see.

 

I thought the whole Gears series was kinda crap

 

I agree, and things like the explosions, smoke etc are most likely fully scripted (or have a scripted variation), in other words no realism. Also I see the common trick of adding motion blur, which is not rendering then blurring (performance hit), its effectively rendering at lower details creating the blur. Its NOT there for your enjoyment in the sense of it being blurred, its there to cover up the motion rendering (which uses very much more considerable power than stationary rendering).

The other thing is the use of richer colours, to the point of being unrealistically saturated. This is another method of visual trickery, and if you look at the actual lighting, textures, detail etc, you will see the quality is actually very ordinary. The game developers are just getting better at visual trickery. For the most part, the consoles are pretty 'flat' when it comes to things visually not the centre of attention.

 

Console games have the illusion of looking better than they do because you're watching them on a TV (rather than a monitor) and you're sitting far away. So you can't really see all the imperfections. If you could hook it up to your monitor it wouldn't be so pretty anymore

 

You are not the only one and IMO same goes to Halo.

 

Lol I liked Halo 1, Halo 2 and 3 were okay but Reach was kinda crap I reckon

 

What a f@ck is wrong with you? Have you seen Crysis or Crysis 2, Metro? BFBC2?
And another thing: It's UE3.5. How this sh!t can be bettter than DX10 or DX11 games? uke2:
Just interesting... :nerd:

 

Looks rubbish in my opinion, bulletstorm looked better for a unreal engine game oh and alice looked awesome too.

 

Most PC games are just ports, so of course they don't have vastly improved graphics. Higher potential screen resolutions for sure, but most PC games these days don't even support proper AA anymore, and having PC specific textures seems to be deemed an unnecessary luxury.

 

This. I was going to post exactly this.

The reason why PC games don't look that much better is because they are console games. We just get poorly optimized ports.

 

After playing it myself it looks better than most PC games out there (its on pause as i type this) but then the 360 is one piece of hardware that epic developed the game for, if everones PC's had the same hardware then developers would make some amazing looking games.

Plus you have to wonder how much sony/microsoft pay developers for the big A+ titles, the get big teams and lots of attention, something that PC games dont really get.

Point still stands like ive allways said that games like uncharted 2, killzone and gears look amazing for the hardware the where developed on.

This thread will end up being closed anyway because it seems like the days of mature disccusion are seriously lacking.

 

Yeah. I played the Halo 1 demo on PC and though "Mitä vittua? Is this really it? Is this supposed to be good?"