127 réponses à ce sujet

[Rannik]

Isn't PS4 somewhere around a Radeon 7850.

Yes, but games are designed for the lowest denominator, which is XBone.
 

And let's be honest. PC graphics haven't really evolved in a meaningful way.

Looks like you haven't played much since 2009 then.
 

My current rig has a GeForce GTX 580 and it can handle just about anything out there currently.

Nah.

Your 580 (which trades blows with the 270x, the cheapest gaming card out there) gets absolutely annihilated by current games at max settings, unless you call 10~15fps in games like Unity, drops to 20~30fps in Watch Dogs, 30~40fps in Ryse or 10 fps in Witcher 3 "handling it".

 

The only cards that can handle "about anything out there" right now are the 980 / Titan X / 980ti / 290x / 390x and the Fury and all of them cost several hundred euro/dollar/whatever.

[LiL Reapur]

Your 580 (which is equivalent to a 270x, the cheapest gaming card out there) gets absolutely annihilated by current games at max settings, unless you call 10~15fps in games like Unity, drops to 20~30fps in Watch Dogs, 30~40fps in Ryse or 10 fps in Witcher 3 "handling it".

 

Wow i'm hurting for twilight god, you just destroyed him..

 

But as for the topic i don't see why they wouldn't since all the other games did. It would be inconsistent if they do...

[Heathen Oxman]

I'm a console kiddie, but I'm hoping the PC port is good considering how PC gamers got screwed by DAI........

[Sanunes]

I'm a console kiddie, but I'm hoping the PC port is good considering how PC gamers got screwed by DAI........

 

I really don't think the PC version was that bad, the controls were a bit problematic and at the same time I felt it was because we kept asking for having the controls completely broken apart.

[Heathen Oxman]

I really don't think the PC version was that bad, the controls were a bit problematic and at the same time I felt it was because we kept asking for having the controls completely broken apart.

 

*shrug*

 

All I know is that I can't stand crap controls.

 

That's the fastest way to get me to quit a game.  While I'm not a PC gamer, I can sense their frustration and sympathize accordingly.

[Sanunes]

*shrug*

 

All I know is that I can't stand crap controls.

 

That's the fastest way to get me to quit a game.  While I'm not a PC gamer, I can sense their frustration and sympathize accordingly.

 

Fair enough, I didn't find the controls to be bad after I spent some time remapping them to my personal taste.  There is just a problem when I use tactical camera, but I rarely use that anyway.

[InterrogationBear]

Btw, DICE is running a Battlefront closed Alpha at the moment. The game looks spectacular and is already very well optimized. People are playing at 1080p, Ultra details, and almost stable 60 fps on pretty modest hardware (i5-2500k, 7970). And that's without special drivers or DX12.

 

Looks like FB3-games won't follow the trend of outrageous hardware requirements for modern games.

[Jester]

The only cards that can handle "about anything out there" right now are the 980 / Titan X / 980ti / 290x / 390x and the Fury and all of them cost several hundred euro/dollar/whatever.

Well, 290x is worse than 970, so it's a bit weird you put it there.

 

But you are absolutely right. A 580 is not even close to running current games on max settings. 

It's basically on a level of minimum requirements for most today games (Witcher 3 requires 660 as minimum, and Arkham Knight required 670 afaik, but that port was broken).

 

On the other hand, it's still faster than what's inside those consoles. 

[Rannik]

Well, 290x is worse than 970, so it's a bit weird you put it there.

 

I put 3 green and red ones, just as an example.

 

But 290x is not necessarily worse than 970, depends on the resolution and the game, 970 tends to perform better at lower resolutions with the 290x pulling ahead at everything higher than 1080p (not to mention when you need more than 3.5GB of VRAM...), I'd still buy a 970 for the reduced power draw but those two are comparable if you only care about performance.

 

I'm just getting a bit sick of the whole "I play everything at high settings on a 450€ potato PC" nonsense.

 

No, you don't, and neither does PS4/XBone... get real.

[N7Jamaican]

I'm getting both on PC and XB1.  I'll more than likely play in on PC.  But yes, there will be a PC version, shouldn't be a console-to-pc port

[The Twilight God]

Yes, but games are designed for the lowest denominator, which is XBone.
 

Looks like you haven't played much since 2009 then.
 

Nah.

Your 580 (which trades blows with the 270x, the cheapest gaming card out there) gets absolutely annihilated by current games at max settings, unless you call 10~15fps in games like Unity, drops to 20~30fps in Watch Dogs, 30~40fps in Ryse or 10 fps in Witcher 3 "handling it".
 
The only cards that can handle "about anything out there" right now are the 980 / Titan X / 980ti / 290x / 390x and the Fury and all of them cost several hundred euro/dollar/whatever.

LOL. What a load of horseshit.

I can play anything currently out on PC. You seem to just be trying to justify the tremendous waste of money you pour into updating your rig because you simply like having the newest toy. Which is fine. That's your prerogative. But you haven't needed an upgrade in quite some time regardless of what the bullshit specs say. Which is what most people go on. Not practical experience. And I guess it works out for the industry because it gets you to by an unnecessary upgrade.

I play everything at max settings with fluid video. The Witcher at 10fps? No, sir.

[Amplitudelol]

As long as those PC users use mouse and keyboard, they will NEVER have good controls for just about any games but top down RTSs or RPGs.

And they will never have it either.

They should buy a wheel or a controller. Much more precise controls; you don't just tell the character/car where to go, but also how fast to go there. And not just by toggling sprint by pressing a button, but by how hard they press the button/stick.





Mouse and keyboard are horrible controls for almost every single genre of games, except:
FPS
RTS
top down RPG
MOBA


Just about everything else will have shitty controls on mouse and keyboard (and vice versa, the mentioned genres of games are vastly superior with mouse and keyboard, and damn near unplayable with a controller)

 

xD

[Rannik]

I play everything at max settings with fluid video.

 

Video or didn't happen.

 

Your computer is not magical, deal with it.

[Spectr61]

Console-ers

http://www.forbes.co...-keep-fighting/

Also, the clusterfux that was DAI ported to PC has gotten even worse, seen how Batman:Arkham was just pulled from PC because of bad porting.

MEA had better have it's shite wired from the outset.

Optimized for all.

[o Ventus]

Yes, but games are designed for the lowest denominator, which is XBone.
 

lel wat

 

The Xbox One and PS4 are practically even in almost every way except for RAM and memory, which is assuredly better on the PS4.

[Ambivalent]

They should make it Android exclusive so maybe "30 fps at consoles lol?" or "Low FPS at GTX 970? Really?!" or "All blame Xbox one at 3. 1...2..." can stop

[SofaJockey]

If there's a PC "port", then I'll be extremely reluctant to buy this game. It needs to be developed with the PC in mind from the word go, not ported over after being made for consoles.

 

It will be made for PC gamers by PC gamers

(runs...)

[The Twilight God]

Video or didn't happen.
 
Your computer is not magical, deal with it.

Ah, your world is crumbling before you. So sad.


Spend your money however you like. Don't let the reality keep you from the latest toys. For some people just having the newest toy gives them joy. Nothing wrong with that.

[Farangbaa]

Ah, your world is crumbling before you. So sad.


Spend your money however you like. Don't let the reality keep you from the latest toys. For some people just having the newest toy gives them joy. Nothing wrong with that.

I thought my pc handled everything fluently (a 5 year old machine). Then I bought a new one and had to adjust to how incredibly fluent everything was.

Your computer is nog magical. You can not play the newest games on highest settings on a years old machine.

[Sanunes]

I thought my pc handled everything fluently (a 5 year old machine). Then I bought a new one and had to adjust to how incredibly fluent everything was.

Your computer is nog magical. You can not play the newest games on highest settings on a years old machine.

 

I have an old Intel 920 i7 with a nVidia 970 and I have been able to play Dragon Age: Inquisition on a combination of a few High setting, but mostly Ultra settings.  Now I figure part of that is because I had to replace my video card shortly after Dragon Age: Inquisition was released, but the majority of my PC is six or so years old.

[They call me a SpaceCowboy]

I thought my pc handled everything fluently (a 5 year old machine). Then I bought a new one and had to adjust to how incredibly fluent everything was.

Your computer is nog magical. You can not play the newest games on highest settings on a years old machine.

 

Yeah, I have a GTX 660, and it can play most new games with no problems, just not on highest settings. if I put DAI on ultra it would choke.

 

(and you mean fluid)

[They call me a SpaceCowboy]

I really don't think the PC version was that bad, the controls were a bit problematic and at the same time I felt it was because we kept asking for having the controls completely broken apart.

 

 

Fair enough, I didn't find the controls to be bad after I spent some time remapping them to my personal taste.  There is just a problem when I use tactical camera, but I rarely use that anyway.

 

There was a whole lot wrong with the PC controls, and controls in general for all platforms, that go beyond the ability to remap to your liking.

 

That said, the game can still be played on mouse and keyboard if you accept the clunkiness and move on to enjoy the story and other aspects of the game.

[Jester]

I have an old Intel 920 i7 with a nVidia 970 and I have been able to play Dragon Age: Inquisition on a combination of a few High setting, but mostly Ultra settings.  Now I figure part of that is because I had to replace my video card shortly after Dragon Age: Inquisition was released, but the majority of my PC is six or so years old.

You have a graphics card, that' more expensive than PS4 alone, and a CPU that's about 2 times as efficient as it's console equivalent. Of course it will run well. 

Graphics card is the most important component, then CPU. Most of other components don't matter all that much (in gaming!), as long as you have enough RAM. 

 

 

lel wat

 

The Xbox One and PS4 are practically even in almost every way except for RAM and memory, which is assuredly better on the PS4.

No, they're not. Xbox One's GPU is about 20% weaker, than PS4's. So Xbox is significantly weaker, when it comes to the most important component. 

[Sanunes]

You have a graphics card, that' more expensive than PS4 alone, and a CPU that's about 2 times as efficient as it's console equivalent.

 

 

 

 

That isn't true.  I paid less then what a PS4 would have cost me for I compared the prices combine that with a $75 rebate and two games that I would have bought eventually I think it worked out to be a reasonable deal. I would agree that my CPU is great, but I am just stating that my CPU I bought in late 2008/early 2009 still is better then what a console uses.

 

I would have also bought a lower end card if the 900 series at the time wasn't the only card that supported full DX12.

Modifié par Sanunes, 05 juillet 2015 - 02:47 .

[o Ventus]

 

No, they're not. Xbox One's GPU is about 20% weaker, than PS4's. So Xbox is significantly weaker, when it comes to the most important component. 

Which is a completely meaningless statement without any context, because that's not how technology works. "20% weaker" doesn't mean anything when you don't describe how it's weaker. About the only thing a PS4 can do graphically better than an Xbox One is render foliage and grass. You literally have to stare at the ground and look at the weeds to see any difference. Models, textures, anti-aliasing, all 99.999999% the same, the other 00.000001% to account for the different chipsets and cards in the consoles. Both consoles are clearly, demonstrably capable of running games at 1080p and at 60 frames per second.

 

Also, what? "Significantly weaker when it comes to the most important component"? For starters it's not significantly weaker for reasons I just described. It's almost identical. Second, who cares either way besides someone who cares about graphics to almost autistic levels? "The GPU is weaker so the Xbox One is worse lol" isn't even a statement made devoid of logic, it's just pure, unfiltered stupid. Take the GPU of the One and compare it to the GPU of the PS4 and how they both render games, and if we set the card of the PS4 as a 10, the card for the One would be a 9.5. No rational human being cares about a difference that minute and unimportant.