Fallout 4 Will Be Skipping Xbox 360 and PS3 204
An anonymous reader writes: There's some sad news for those of you looking forward to playing Fallout 4 on your Xbox 360 or your PS3. Bethesda has announced that Fallout 4 will be a current-gen and PC exclusive game and that there will be no last-gen releases in the future. Bethesda global community manager Matt Grandstaff says of the old consoles, "the stuff we're doing will never work there."
Good! (Score:2, Flamebait)
It's bad enough that the game will be crippled by design thanks to compatibility with the underpowered "next get" train wrecks. No need to add even more ballast to waste resources.
Re: (Score:2)
It's bad enough that the game will be crippled by design thanks to compatibility with the underpowered "next get" train wrecks.
Really? I don't see that as a problem. The only part of the PS4/XB1 consoles that is underpowered is the raw power of the CPU/GPU, but on the PC, you can simply have higher res textures and better features...
The benefit to the consoles is that being 8 core chips with 8GB of memory, the game can be set in a true open world.
FO3 for example had all kinds of "tricks" to work in the limited memory of the PS3, so much of Washington DC was really zoned areas with all that rubble to keep you from really exploring
Re: (Score:3)
That said, I don't see much reason to support the PS3 or 360 since both platforms are in their twilight. I doubt sales would justify the effort of making the games run acceptably or the compromises that come to the game design from doing so.
Re:Good! (Score:4, Interesting)
Frankly, though, Bethesda is one of the outfits that I just wouldn't touch on the console. Their specialty is bug-riddled-but-bursting-with-promise, and they've historically had good relations with modders, so you miss out on a whole lot on the console side, even if it isn't a total clusterfuck like Skyrim+expansions on PS3.
With some games you can expect reasonably complete polish and/or hostility to mods on the PC side, so consoles are more or less the same deal; but Bethesda RPGs are not those games.
Re: (Score:2)
Their specialty is bug-riddled-but-bursting-with-promise, and they've historically had good relations with modders, so you miss out on a whole lot on the console side, even if it isn't a total clusterfuck like Skyrim+expansions on PS3.
Even without any expansions, there's a super-shitload of bugs Bethesda hasn't bothered to fix, most of which are addressed in the unofficial patch... which you can't have on a console. And since you can't bring up the console on a console, you can't work around the bugs either. So yeah, Skyrim is pretty much the poster child for doing it wrong. But as you say, I wouldn't trust them with a console game.
Problem is, I bought Fallout 3, and I wouldn't trust them with a PC game, either. Fallout 3 is actually a b
Re: (Score:2)
Problem is, I bought Fallout 3, and I wouldn't trust them with a PC game, either. Fallout 3 is actually a bigger, buggier piece of shit than Skyrim. It's got way more hang and CtD bugs.
Oh? I'd heard that F3 was buggier on PC than it was on the PS3 (and it was bit buggy till the last patch they did on the PS3) For Skyrim it seems it is the other way around. I've had a better experience with F3 on the PS3 than Skyrim
The latest bug I've seen on Skyrim? Killed a dragon just outside a cave, absorbed it's soul, it turned to bones as usual. Entered cave did some stuff, came back out and Dragon was fleshy again. It was still dead and all with the empty inventory I left it with, but fleshy a
Re: (Score:2)
Fallout: NV and Skyrim both don't have that problem, and, while they crash occasionally, are mostly just a medley of Bethesda's beloved broken quests and d
Re: (Score:2)
It's a pity, they know how to build an open world RPG that's great fun; but they really phone it in on QA.
Yes, I am continually amazed by how complex the world of Skyrim is, but I am also continually perplexed by how fragile their scripts are. I would be seriously pissed off if I had paid full price. Lesson learned, and cheaply.
Re: (Score:2)
For some reason, I don't know the gory details, running on 3 or more cores causes hard locks or crash-to-desktop every 15 minutes or so. With that out of the way, it's pretty well behaved.
I actually have the PC version as well (to compare it to the PS3 version), didn't crash for me on a quad core, but I was having issues with VATS with the game being VERY slow, going into VATS, doing things in vats and exiting VATS. Same behavior in both Windows and Wine under Linux.
It's a pity, they know how to build an open world RPG that's great fun; but they really phone it in on QA.
You can say that again, quoted for truth. Fallout 3 is my favorite game on the PS3, got the platinum trophy. I'm looking forward to F4 on the PS4, but god I hope they improve their QA.
Re: (Score:2)
I do touch Bethesda on console, I run Linux on the PC, and prefer console for gaming, but I sure wish they'd improve their QA and bring it up to the quality of other dev houses.
I wonder if Bethesda should have handed over the porting of F3 and Skyrim to 4J like they did with Oblivion, instead of porting in-house. Because for me in terms of bugs and whatnot from least to most it's:
Oblivion>F3>Skyrim>NV (yeah not a Bethesda game but it uses the F3 engine)
Though the last F3 patch fixed most of the F3
I dunno (Score:2)
I've not tried GTA 5 yet but the GTA world is generally very limited to do what it does. A great example would be GTA 3 and Vice City. Open world games that ran on PS2 hardware. Amazing... However they did it by tracking very little. Only things in your FOV and relevant to what was happening (quest NPCs, police chasing you) were handled. Everything else was not there. Turn around and then around again, and traffic would be totally different because it was not tracked off screen. Drops/pickups disappear when
Re: (Score:2)
GTV V doesn't require the same level of detail across the world that FO does.
The cops aren't named across town, the world can be randomly generated as you travel.
Imagine a GTA that kept track of every car in the city. That isn't going to happen in the 256MB of RAM on a PS3.
FO4 will be able to keep track of NPCs far from your line of sight, what they are doing, and your actions can have a real effect on the world.
In FO3, your actions never really extended beyond your line of sight, other than scripted actio
Re: (Score:2)
Was this also the reason for the highly annoying partitioning of The Strip in Fallout: New Vegas?
I never played either Fallout3 or Fallout: NV on a console, and found it quite tiring to have to constantly click through the different sections of such a small area.
Re: (Score:2)
Yep... The Strip was a series of "instanced zones" that didn't actually exist when you were walking around in the outside world.
That the outside world worked as good as it did is impressive, but you couldn't just "walk onto the strip" from the outside world, that is why you had loading screens.
Think back to FO3, remember Megaton? It was an "inside place", you couldn't get in other than through the door and it was a loading screen.
That is because in the world outside, nothing was actually inside the walls.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd rather more companies be willing to say "no, we can't do that, so we won't pretend otherwis
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
which means a 6 year old Phenom X4 or C2Q paired with a sub $180 GPU like the R9 280 3GB should just slaughter the thing both on detail and FPS.
Um no. I have a Phenom X4 and a PS4. I have War Thunder and Diablo 3 on both machines and both games perform better on the PS4.
Hell last I checked neither console can even do native 1080P above 30 FPS consistently
Stop reading Digital Foundry/Eurogamer. It's ran by a bunch of European Master race guys with the typical European anti-console bias, who aren't going to discuss the games that DO run at 1080p/60. All they're going to do is compare dudebro games and a few blockbusters like Witcher or Shadow of Mordor.
Re: (Score:2)
which means a 6 year old Phenom X4 or C2Q paired with a sub $180 GPU like the R9 280 3GB should just slaughter the thing both on detail and FPS.
Um no. I have a Phenom X4 and a PS4. I have War Thunder and Diablo 3 on both machines and both games perform better on the PS4.
You made no mention of your video card. That matters far more than the CPU in most cases.
Also, given identical hardware I'd give the performance advantage to a console for a few reasons:
1. Less stuff running in the background wasting RAM/CPU/VRAM/etc.
2. Game developer is specifically tuning the game to a single hardware configuration.
However, even with those limitations PCs routinely outperform consoles, especially after the consoles have been around for a while. The last XBox 360 ever sold performs exa
Re: (Score:2)
Hey dude, it was hairyfeet that claimed that a Phenom could match a PS4, not me. I'm refuting the guy. And I'm rocking DDR3 PC3-10600 with that Phenom II X4 925.
Re: (Score:2)
Either console could do 1080p/60fps if the developers really wanted to hit that.
But they don't. They cram in bigger textures and more effects, because that makes for pretty screenshots and demo videos, and it sells games.
Nintendo first-party titles run at 1080p/60fps on the WiiU, and that's a much weaker system than the PS4/XBone from a straight 'power' standpoint. But they design their games to play to the hardware's strengths. The games are usually quite pretty, but not at all photorealistic. Splatoon is
Re: (Score:2)
When you say that PC gamers don't have higher quality hardware, I have to assume you are talking about children.
What do you think is the primary driver for new PC hardware purchases? The answer is games as it has been for at least a decade.
People don't buy the newest most expensive hardware to run their word processors on or to watch youtube videos. They don't buy it to run their spreadsheets on or to browse the web. People who are serious PC gamers are the ones that drive the demand for newer and bette
Glad to hear it... (Score:4, Informative)
With respect to the hundreds of millions of people with a PS3/XBox 360, those systems are now 10 years old and have been holding back open world game design.
Yes, games like GTA V are on those systems and work, but that is perhaps the extreme limit of what those systems can do.
Given the jump from less than 1GB of RAM to 8GB of RAM, so much more of the game world can be left in memory, the "tricks" of FO3 no longer have to be used as much, where some items were "sort of" in the game world, but once out of sight, weren't kept track of.
There of course has to be an end to it, there are tons and tons of games for the PS3 and XBox 360, and more will come, but there has to be an end to it.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, games like GTA V are on those systems and work, but that is perhaps the extreme limit of what those systems can do.
Those systems can't really run GTA V. They shit themselves down to 2 FPS or whatever all the time during intense action.
Re: (Score:2)
Good - I didn't install 16GB to watch it sit there idle. If it's there, use it.
Even consoles have 8GB now. If your PC doesn't, add more - it's cheap.
PC is the only one that counts (Score:4, Insightful)
The Bethesda games are crap unless you can install mods on them. And you can only do that on the PC versions.
QED... play the PC version or don't play.
Some games are great on the console. Bethesda games are not amongst them.
Re:PC is the only one that counts (Score:4, Informative)
Well put - they are often complex games that need the controls of a PC, and the mods to customize (and fix) the game environment. Any time a game is brought out for the consoles, they also tend to get dumbed-down to the point of being boring
Re: (Score:2)
I'm surprised that developers have not found some way to do mods on consoles yet. Include a good editor, perhaps with some PC tools that allow you to do some serious editing and then load it into your account for the console. Considering how much they love DLC it seems like mods are an obvious way to generate more revenue, since the locked down nature of consoles would mean you could charge for the tools and then sell the better mods as DLC with the typical profit sharing rip-off.
Didn't I read that someone
Re: (Score:2)
If they let users install unsigned code on the systems then you can undermine the DRM.
Simple as that.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm surprised that developers have not found some way to do mods on consoles yet. Include a good editor,
Therein lies a rub. Skyrim mods are made without a good editor. But mostly, the console experience is locked down on purpose. Some titles are adding in features like this; the last Halo title I bought had a fairly complicated editor, and you could make pretty fancy multiplayer maps with it. But it will be probably another generation or two before anyone really embraces modding, with scripting and so on.
You must DIY (or else you will die) (Score:2)
Would the modding interface look like the Super MakerMatic in Nintendo's WarioWare: DIY?
Re: (Score:2)
No way! Fallout 3, Oblivion, and Skyrim were all amazing games in their own right, and are shining examples of how a sandbox game should be made (except for FO3's game-ending conclusion; booo!). Oblivion had some great mods; even entire NPC-voiced cities and some great new dungeons and storylines. The mods for FO and Skyrim were a bit lack-luster, IMHO, but even so those games shine.
Nonsense (Score:2)
I have played every Bethesda game since Morrowind via a console, and I loved every one of them. Not everyone cares about mods, I like to enjoy the games as Bethesda intended them.
QED play what you enjoy and don't make assumptions on what other people may or may not enjoy based on your own enjoyment.
Re: (Score:2)
Make me?
Re: (Score:2)
hey bingo
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
With Bethesda games that just means you're in for a boring feature poor game with fuck tons of bugs.
They've been making the same game at least since Oblivion, possibly before... but I didn't play any of their earlier titles... They make big giant worlds... and they fill them with boring shite.
The writing is generally bad, the objects and maps are generally just empty and unimaginative.
And what I like about the mods is that it makes the games more interesting. You get play made stuff. Player made quests. And
Re: (Score:2)
With Bethesda games that just means you're in for a boring feature poor game with fuck tons of bugs.
They've been making the same game at least since Oblivion, possibly before... but I didn't play any of their earlier titles... They make big giant worlds... and they fill them with boring shite.
"Bethesda Game Studios" is responsible for Fallout 3 & 4, and the three Elder Scrolls games: Morrowind, Oblibion, and Skyrim.
"Bethesda Softworks" is responsible for all Elder Scrolls games prior to Morrowind, and I'm pretty sure all were from back in the DOS days.
Black Isle as you already said made Fallout 1 & 2.
Obsidian Entertainment made Fallout New Vegas, and ZeniMax made the Elder Scrolls MMO thingie.
Also ZeniMax owns Bethesda Game Studios, and has quite the history of meddling in the Bethesda d
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
black isle had people that could write dialog. Bethesda doesn't.
It was way New Vegas was so much better. Obsidian, who are refugees from Black Isle... they did the development. And it was better.
Even the DLCs were better... Dead Money was excellent.
Re: (Score:3)
FO3 starts off with a tutorial-slash-character-creation that actually gives you a couple snapshots of life in a vault while simultaneously getting you invested in the story. You've interacted with your dad enough for him to be an actual character so you can actually care about him running off. You get a feeling of just
Re: (Score:2)
To each is own, the improved dialog of NV was so far beyond F3 that I have a hard time taking F3 seriously.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I was sorely disappointed with a few things about Fallout3 / Fallout: New Vegas that didn't follow the spirit of the original Fallout / Fallout2: the decision depth.
In the original Fallout titles, you could be the biggest bastard in California, and the game would adapt to that. You could steal anything not bolted down and only have a problem if you got caught, murder random people by sneaking lit dynamite into their pockets or by spamming super-stims on them, pickpocket people and then sell their own shit
Re: (Score:2)
With Bethesda, you often don't get to experience the game as the developer intended because of all the bugs that ship in the product. You experience the game as the product manager intended, and they intended to ship with bugs still in the product that weren't blockers.
No surprise (Score:5, Insightful)
There's been solid data for over a year now showing that the majority of games sales have shifted away from the PS3/360 and towards the PS4/Xbox One/PC. We've seen plenty of current-gen-only releases do just fine (Witcher 3 just had the most successful launch so far in 2015) and plenty of games which spanned both generations have sold a lot more copies on the newer platforms. Meanwhile, developers/publishers who stuck with the older platforms have paid a commercial price for it - the initial release of Borderlands: The Pre-Sequel (which was limited to PC, 360 and PS3) bombed commercially and shifted only a fraction of the copies at launch that Borderlands 2 managed.
The last console generation was the longest we've ever seen and there was a clear appetite among both developers and consumers to move on from it quickly. A lot of the money-men preferred to hedge their bets, not least because the installed bases for the PS3 and 360 were so huge. But what happened in practice was fairly predictable. Core gamers - the people who buy a lot of games - moved to the new platforms quickly and shifted their spending to those platforms. While the installed base of the older consoles remained larger, most of that base was made up of occasional and casual gamers, who don't spend a significant portion of their disposable income on gaming.
The caution in betting on the new generation wasn't entirely irrational. The new platform launches in the years leading up to it had not gone well. EA got burned hard by the Vita's launch flop. Ubisoft got burned even harder when they spent a lot of money supporting the Wii-U launch only for the platform to bomb. But with the PS4 and Xbox One, the developers who could get titles to market fairly soon after launch were generally rewarded (even when those games stunk, as with Watch_Dogs).
The PS3 and 360 will rumble on for a while yet. There's still a market on them for casual games - the Skylanders, Zumbas, FIFAs and whatnot. The PS2 continued getting new releases like that until over 2 years after the PS3 launched. But for major launches, there's no longer any point in targeting anything but PS4, Xbox One and PC.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
It's still a massive PITA to make your game run properly on both PS3 and any other platform, but gamers are split between the platforms so if you don't go multiplatform, your sales will suffer. The similarity of the two new platforms is probably as strong an influence as anything else.
Re: (Score:2)
Which could well be the salvation of the Xbox One. Back in the PS2/Xbox/Gamecube generation, cross-platform development was a PITA because the three platforms were so different from each other.
However, the PS2 had an installed base way that was way larger than either of its rivals. So for a lot of small and mid-sized developers, the obvious solution was to develop only for the PS2; it would give you 90% or more of your sales anyway.
I had a friend who worked at a mid-tier developer during that time who worke
Re: (Score:3)
I'm having a serious blast playing Red Dead Redemption for the first time.
The used market is chock full of great games and new ones can be had for a fraction of a PS4 game.
Re: (Score:2)
It's true that the consoles have a good backlog. This is why I still have my PS3 (well, that and it's a better media player than either of the new consoles). And it's true that if you haven't owned a console before and want one you can get lots of cheap games for, the PS3 and 360 are still worth considering.
But that's different to making them viable platforms to target for new games. People who buy new games tend to want to experience that game with the best experience possible (or in some cases, the best e
Re: (Score:2)
yeah but no game is going to be as good as MGS V: The Phantom Pain.
Even if the gameplay is as good or better, I'm pretty invested at this point in the story line so, I care about that more than just raw gameplay.
If the gameplay is awful then whee hype train just plowed through the terminus and completely derails, but all reports seem to be that yes, it's worth the hype.
Re: (Score:2)
That's why I'm still exclusively playing Commodore 64 games. I've still got tens of thousands to complete and they are basically free.
Re: (Score:2)
The PS3 and 360 will rumble on for a while yet. There's still a market on them for casual games - the Skylanders, Zumbas, FIFAs and whatnot.
Yup.
The PS2 continued getting new releases like that until over 2 years after the PS3 launched.
A lot more than 2 years, the last PS2 game in North America was released in 2013. That thing just wouldn't die as a platform. Something similar happend with the PSone too, the last NA release for it was in 2005. The PSP's last release was this year.
Re: (Score:2)
You want to talk about refusing to die. The Dream cast is getting a game this year.
Re: (Score:2)
Really? Linky please.
That aside, Bethesda needed it (Score:2)
They were having real, real problems getting the kind of game they wanted in to the very limited memory of the last gen consoles. Cutting down graphics only goes so far, there are just limits to how large a world you can easily have, and how many things you can keep track of at once. They did a lot of creative things to manage that, but it was causing issues and they were reaching their limit.
Some games scale more easily but the big open world types that Bethesda likes do not do as well. Hence it makes sens
Last gen systems are still news? (Score:5, Interesting)
I guess readers are too young to remember when the NES, Master System, N64, etc, all were dropped like hot potatoes by the manufacturers once the new ones were released...
Re: (Score:2)
That was back when upgrades actually offered something substantial.
Nowadays, it's mainly all about the "social" bollocks and ways of screwing more money out of the customer.
The 360 is likely the last gaming machine that I'll own.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The NES got a trickle of games for it from 1991, release of the U.S. Super Nintendo, until 1995, U.S. release of the final game for the system.
So it's not been instantly.
Re: (Score:2)
I feel like it's worth noting that the PS3 came out in 2006, and XBox 360 came out in 2005. The original XBox 360 has an optional add-on for HD-DVD. That's how old these things are.
Current-gen? Shit! (Score:2)
So why does it look like crap? (Score:2)
I thought the need to hold it back for last-gen consoles explained the trailer.
But if there's no 360/PS3 version, why does the trailer look like ass?
It's a trailer. It should be the prettiest the game can be, rendered on high-end hardware, with their best bullshots.
The dog looks good, I'll admit, but in general in-game footage from The Witcher 3 looks better than the FO4 trailer.
Perhaps they started to build assets before giving up on the old consoles? The Vault Dweller is especially unimpressive.
Re: (Score:3)
The game hasn't been released yet and I would be surprised that that the storm of negative feedback about crappy graphics hasn't taken them by surprise, meaning they will take another pass at it before its released. But it can't be a revolutionary change this close to release so at best will only result in marginal improvement,
There's also an expectation/myth that won't die floating around, no matter how retarded it actually is, that the latest consoles are now so powerful they should be able to run all ga
Judging by the trailer... (Score:2)
Re:Presumably the bug count... (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't play games on a console, install bug fix packs on the PC. Problem solved.
Re: (Score:2)
They pushed out fixes to the PS3 too. Sadly they didn't seem to fix this.
Re: (Score:3)
Really? Can you tell me where they pushed out the unofficial patch packs and so on. Well we already know they didn't, because there's no way to mod on consoles or fix problems like that. Then again, I suppose if you want to use a console and get taken to the cleaners it's all up to you. But let me point out that a $450 PC built today will crush both consoles in terms of graphics alone, and let you mod, play MP games, and not charge you for it.
Hey! You're that guy from the internet! http://dilbert.com/strip/2015-... [dilbert.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
But let me point out that a $450 PC built today will crush both consoles in terms of graphics alone
I know you're a master-race sort of guy and are thusly severly biased but not for $450 it won't, and it it will run Windows, which comes with it's own issues.
Xbox One runs windows
and let you mod,
Yeah yeah, we all know PC gamers are cheap bastards and euro-pirates. Wasting money on hardware and not wanting pay for software. So they play some F2P FPS or MOBA and play a single map like de_dust or the Warehouse over and over and over or they mod some single player game and play that for 10 years and buy nothing else.
Modding has nothing to do with being cheap. This entire paragraph makes no sense at all in relation to modding.
play MP games, and not charge you for it.
Well since they give you other things besides the multiplayer, you're technically paying for those. I'd have a PS+ subscription even if I didn't play multiplayer the instant game collection is worth the $49.95 a year.
PS+ is really the same thing as Steam on the PC. Except you don't have to pay a yearly fee for the privileged of buying games online or playing multiplayer games. It doesn't come with a stack of crappy free games, but then again, it has real sales where you can get great games for very cheap.
Re:Presumably the bug count... (Score:4, Interesting)
I know you're a master-race sort of guy and are thusly severly biased but not for $450 it won't, and it it will run Windows, which comes with it's own issues.
Yeah, actually it will. [reddit.com] What? You're shocked that consoles built on hardware that's already two years out of date will be beat by a previous hardware generation? It'll run windows? Gee, why do all those builds have no OS as a requirement. I mean it's like a mac where you can't install another OS unless you pay them to do it right? And of course forget about modifying the OS on your console.
Yeah yeah, we all know PC gamers are cheap bastards and euro-pirates. Wasting money on hardware and not wanting pay for software. So they play some F2P FPS or MOBA and play a single map like de_dust or the Warehouse over and over and over or they mod some single player game and play that for 10 years and buy nothing else.
Yeah, since we know that console piracy is rampant, and we can buy exactly the same games at half the price. What? Did you miss the FO4 announcement, where consoles will be paying $59.99-79.99, and PC gamers can already get it at $40 or there about.
Well since they give you other things besides the multiplayer, you're technically paying for those. I'd have a PS+ subscription even if I didn't play multiplayer the instant game collection is worth the $49.95 a year.
Well, I guess the hundreds of free games on the PC are worthless then, and of course we can't forget the wide amount of emulation either, or thousands of abandonware titles out there. After all, you're paying $50/year, and likely going to be getting another credit card next week(just a guess), since Sony's security is at 1999 levels, but I guess if you have to spend 8 minutes searching for legal free games, that's too difficult.
Re:Presumably the bug count... (Score:5, Insightful)
I know you're a master-race sort of guy and are thusly severly biased but not for $450 it won't, and it it will run Windows, which comes with it's own issues.
Yeah, actually it will. [reddit.com] What? You're shocked that consoles built on hardware that's already two years out of date will be beat by a previous hardware generation? It'll run windows? Gee, why do all those builds have no OS as a requirement. I mean it's like a mac where you can't install another OS unless you pay them to do it right? And of course forget about modifying the OS on your console.
The builds ignore the fact that the PS4 uses DDR5 as main memory and the XBOX 360 has 32MB of on-die ESRAM. They also ignore the dedicated sound cards, video-decoders and other chips to offload the CPU's. On the software side of things, the standardized hardware and low level API's allow for performance optimizations that would simply be unthinkable in the PC world, allowing developers to squeeze every bit of theoretical performance out of the systems. Something else to take into consideration is that cross-platform games are almost always developed for the consoles and then (often badly) ported to PC. The hardware requirements for similar levels of performance are usually much higher than the hardware on the consoles would suggest is needed.
Re: (Score:2)
They also ignore the dedicated sound cards, video-decoders and other chips to offload the CPU's
If you buy a dedicated sound card these days, you're retarded. All you need is a motherboard, cpu, ram, and a modern GPU. That's it. Even the lowest end GPUs nowadays include a full suite of HDMI audio support (by full, I mean it can bitstream any format, as well as LPCM, which is best for games.) If you're a headphone kind of person, most of the good ones are USB driven.
the standardized hardware and low level API's allow for performance optimizations
You mean like these kinds of "optimizations"?
http://www.ign.com/wikis/xbox-... [ign.com]
That's NOT a good thing.
Re: (Score:2)
They also ignore the dedicated sound cards, video-decoders and other chips to offload the CPU's
If you buy a dedicated sound card these days, you're retarded. All you need is a motherboard, cpu, ram, and a modern GPU. That's it. Even the lowest end GPUs nowadays include a full suite of HDMI audio support (by full, I mean it can bitstream any format, as well as LPCM, which is best for games.) If you're a headphone kind of person, most of the good ones are USB driven.
HDMI audio, seriously? PC monitor speakers are a joke at best. the Realtek ALC887 chipset on most of these motherboards doesn't have the power to drive even a decent set of speakers or headphones. USB headphones are popular because they sidestep the issue of under-powered on-board audio but few of them can even get close to the quality of a discreet sound card paired with a good set of headphones.
the standardized hardware and low level API's allow for performance optimizations
You mean like these kinds of "optimizations"?
http://www.ign.com/wikis/xbox-... [ign.com]
That's NOT a good thing.
I said it was possible, it is still very much up to the skills and resources available to the developers to imp
Re: (Score:2)
HDMI audio, seriously? PC monitor speakers are a joke at best.
Speakers that are a joke when used with a PC's HDMI output are equally a joke when used with a console's HDMI output.
Re: (Score:2)
I can also back up all my saved games, and I don't require an always-on Internet connection for most single player stuff.
So can I, that's how PSN works. Why did you think single player games require an always on connection? Besides, there are PC games, like Diablo 3 that require a connection for singleplayer when the console version doesn't.
My PC has 32 gigs of memory.
Check the steam stats and you'll see that most PC gaming is done on machines that aren't as capable as a PS4 or Xbox1. You are not the norm of PC gaming.
Well, consoles have a 0% piracy rate... and look how much it costs to buy a game,
$59.99? Which, taking inflation in account is less than Atari 2600 games? Not only that but modern games have MUCh more content. Yo
Re: (Score:2)
PC master race builds from reddit of all places? and those builds still don't take into account the GDDR5 RAM and fast internal busses of the PS4. Yes, it matters. And they don't include the OS, which for gaming, has to be windows. Sure there's a few Linux releases but almost all big releases are Windows only and you know it.
Yeah, since we know that console piracy is rampant,
Not in the US it isn't. Are you from Europe/BRIC or the second or third world?
and we can buy exactly the same games at half the price.
What? Did you miss the FO4 announcement, where consoles will be paying $59.99-79.99, and PC gamers can already get it at $40 or there about.
Citation needed. Pre-orders are not available in the US so we have no official prices. Canada shows
Re: (Score:3)
This $470 dollar pc would blow your console out of the water.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/... [newegg.com]
Not too sure about that. It might compare to last gen, but that GTX 750 is middling, and would probably choke on some games coming out now (Witcher 3, e.g.), much less what's to come later in the current gen. It would probably play most games from 2014 back without blinking, though, kind of putting to lie the consolers' claim that you have to pay $1k+ for a gaming rig.
The old 660 Ti is starting to show its age, and I really wanted to play W3. =\ The damn video cards are still the beast of the cost, though.
Re:Presumably the bug count... (Score:5, Insightful)
But... That 750 will still put any current gen consoles to shame. You just have to turn all the visual goodies down to what you would see on a current gen console and witcher 3 will play just fine.
Re: (Score:2)
Being able to perform on-par with current-gen consoles isn't "putting them to shame" or "blowing them out of the water", though.
The real bitch of the whole PC gaming/GPU scene is that it's a complete PITA to figure out how two cards compare. It's made shopping for an upgrade rather arduous the past few weeks.
Re: (Score:2)
I usually use Tom's guide as a guide. Access with some kind of ad blocker though...
http://www.tomshardware.com/re... [tomshardware.com]
Re: Presumably the bug count... (Score:2)
I didn't mean to say try wee exact equivalent, just PC users have a tendency to turn up the graphic options that simply aren't on the consoles. Considering the current gen consoles are appriximately an ATI 7770, here's a decent comparison: http://gpuboss.com/gpus/Radeon... [gpuboss.com] scroll down to benchmarks and laugh. The 760 blows it away in every benchmark. Just do you don't have to click the provided link, ATI 7770 running crisis 3 @12FPS. 760 running crisis 3 @58FPS. That about sums it up.
Re: (Score:2)
Here's another advantage of that $470 PC - if that GTX 750 isn't cutting it any more, take it out and put it something better. You would still be underneath $1k
Let's see you do that with a PlayStation / XBox.
Re: (Score:2)
Hey, you're preaching to the choir here.
Actually, this conversation has prompted me to order an R9 280 upgrade, finally. Crossing my fingers that it doesn't suck (I haven't gone with ATI in almost 2 decades, but thought I'd give it a try now that I run Linux in VM)
Re: (Score:2)
The AMD 7000 series in the XBox One and PS4 is about the equivalent of a GeForce 580. There are some console based optimizations that may make it faster than an equivalent PC 580 though, which is why W3 requires a 660. The 660 and 660 Ti are close enough performance-wise that the game is fine on either. Also while the Ti is slower on total performance (by a tiny amount), it has quite a few more shaders and texure mapping units (about 30-33% faster). Incidentally, I'm playing Witcher 3 on a 660 Ti and with n
Re: (Score:2)
This $470 dollar pc would blow your console out of the water.
Not with a 750 it won't. Up that to a 970 and then you're talking, but then it wouldn't cost $472. It also doesn't have GDDR5 Main RAM, or the PS4's fast internal busses, and yes that matters.
every single one of them paid for. I do not download video games from torrents,
"YOU" do, but a good portion of the PC Master Race doesn't and even brag about how little they spend.
So you pay in perpetuity for your games, ohh how do I sign up for that. I want to give them money for outdated POS games over and over again.
It's $49.95 a year, less than the cost of one game. And here is the master list of "Instant Game Collection" games:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L... [wikipedia.org]
Besides, PC gamers like you Brag about all the old outdated games the
Re: (Score:2)
It also doesn't have GDDR5 Main RAM, or the PS4's fast internal busses, and yes that matters.
The consoles need that kind of RAM and/or those kind of buses because of the abuse they place on their memory. A PC with a graphics card with a lot of memory attached to it doesn't need that kind of equipment. It does, however, cost a lot more money, which we knew already.
Re: (Score:2)
This $470 dollar pc would blow your console out of the water.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/... [newegg.com]
LOL. The PS4 uses a HD 7870 GPU. You think a system with a GTX 750 will "blow it out of the water"?? Keep dreaming.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I had to learn console commands to tick flags when quests bugged out. ONLY GAME I HAVE EVER played i have had go through such BS.
There were fuckups like that in F3, too.
As for bug fix packs? pfft yea right few and far between when those ever reared up. Would took me 6+ months to beat the f'ing game with that snail pace crap.
Clearly you didn't follow the unofficial patch. Yeah, it's sad you need one, but it's becoming more common. I finally found an unofficial patch for Alpha Centauri that makes the game actually playable; it has always been somewhat reliable about hanging due to a bug in the pathing code. Looks like someone stuck some loop detection in there via a patch. So it's not just Bethesda.
Re: (Score:3)
A good friend of mine bought the PC version of Skyrim even though he had the PS3 version just for the increased detail and the console.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Don't play games on a console, install bug fix packs on the PC. Problem solved.
I don't own a PC, you insensitive clod. And don't intend to, either.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Same here. Bethesda has no QA and none of my money anymore.
Re: (Score:2)
LOL, there's a main quest?
I find I mostly ignore a lot of the quests and just do my own thing. Occasionally I do a quest by accident, or because I want something specific.
I'm probably an outlier, but for me the best thing about Skyrim is a largely don't have to follow a set story or give a damn about the quests.
But then, I pick it up every now and then and play for a few hours.
I think we need more games where
Re: (Score:2)
Re: So... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Unless there are a few units that haven't had their firmware updated already, it ain't ever gonna happen! Firmware killed by design.
It is possible, though arduous, to reflash your PS3 with any firmware you like [psdevwiki.com].
Re: (Score:2)
It would have been a love letter and a great act of goodwill towards the PlayStation enthusiast community if Sony allowed running Linux on it again.
Well yes, that would be nice, but I doubt they're going to do it.
I do miss having Linux on mine, it was a better music player under Linux than it is GameOS (for video it's vice versa), and it was nice having a better web browser on it than the pre-webkit versions of Netfront the PS3 had. And of course it runs a fairly standard Linux distro rather than that wacky Kondara-ized Red Hat the PS2 has. Then again, Linux has pretty much full access to the hardware on a PS2, and doesn't on a PS3. X11 has hardware
Re: (Score:2)
It would be my bet that they see the market as being mostly console not PC, so its the PC users that will get screwed.