Next gen consoles vs pc

[Marcos]

The only next gen I will get is Revolution. Any thing that can be done on a 360 and PS3 can be done on a PC only better. Revolution is totally different so thats why nintendo gets my money, as it has for the last two generations as well.

PC cannot do multiplayer gaming as easily as consoles, not only is it more expensive but also inconvenient

[starbuck]

PC cannot do multiplayer gaming as easily as consoles, not only is it more expensive but also inconvenient

Agree that for multiplayer gaming and pure pick up and play gaming(it when your mates come back after going to pub) consoles are better BUT for online gaming the pc cannot be beaten.

Prob I have is I need a console to be different enough from anything on the pc to make it worthwhile getting.

PC upgrading doesn't bother me as I would upgrade my pc in the natural course of things anyway(it would have to be a majorly mind blowing game(which doesn't happen that often anymore) to cause me to upgrade my pc for a specific game though). The only time I have upgraded my pc specifically for a game was when GTA3 came out(and that's because I had a banshee card at the time).

[GuruJockStrap]

I have a Dell 2005FPW but it won't be compatible with 720p because it has no progressive scan? (or does it?) There is also 720i I think, which means something like interlaced (lol TOTAL HD noob here) but I don't know which - if any - will be compatible with our monitors. Either way I am going to buy a HD-to-DVI cable or something like that if possible.

Current UK TV signals is PAL and is based on a 625 line, 50 field/25 frames a second, 50HZ system.

If you hooked this up to the Dell, you'd get no signal output from the display as it cannot display frequencies that low.

With Progressive scan, the image is displayed on the screen by scanning each line (or row of pixels) in a sequential order rather than an alternate order, as is done with interlaced scan.

So the image lines (or pixel rows) are scanned in numerical order (1,2,3) down the screen from top to bottom, instead of in an alternate order (lines or rows 1,3,5, etc... followed by lines or rows 2,4,6).

By progressively scanning the image onto a screen every 60th of a second rather than "interlacing" alternate lines every 30th of a second.

Frequency needed is 60HZ, which the Dell can handle no problem.

[GuruJockStrap]

iam sticking with PC!! because just after the xbox360 comes out i plan to upgrade to a xfx7800gt 256mb PCI-E - they are on scan for £245 and i expect will be cheaper after christmas. This upgrade should be more than enough to keep up with the next gen consoles, i suspect with a 7800GT that the next gen consoles wont even keep up!

True, but with the XBox360 I don't we'll be seeing the best out of it for a while.

Developers will have to learn to program efficently for the multi core CPU and get the best out of the custom made ATI GPU.

Many of the initial batch of games will only be using a single core and while graphics will be good, it'll be nowhere near what the GPU is capable off.

Look how good the graphics look for Gears of War.

Imagine developers being able to push the mulitcore CPU to its limit and squeezing every last drop of performance out of that ATI, unified shader core with 48 ALU’s for Vertex or Pixel Shader processing.

You can't really compare a desktop GPU like the 7800GTX to a custom built one like that of the XBox360 or PS3 as the latter have been designed from the ground up with gaming in mind.

You also have to consider that when developers are designing games for the PC, not everybody owns a 7800GTX, so they program with the lowest denominator in mind (sub 9800 Pro owners). Imo, I don't even think you'll get the maximum out of a 7800GTX before the end of its life as a result of this.

With the XBox360 developers know the baseline will be 3 CPU cores, 512MB system RAM and a 500MHz custom ATI GPU (Xenos) so games designed and programmed from the ground up with XBox360 in mind will look very impressive (Gears of war again, Halo 3 etc).

[GuruJockStrap]

.....(it would have to be a majorly mind blowing game(which doesn't happen that often anymore) to cause me to upgrade my pc for a specific game though)

And thats my problem.

Purchased HL2. Completed in a day.

Played CS:Source to death online for a good few months. Got bored and not touched it since.

Purchased BF2. Again, played online to death. Not played it for 3 weeks and I have no urge to go back to it again in the near future.

Only upcoming game that interests me is FEAR.

That might require a bit of an upgrade (swap AGP system for PCI-E) and 2GB RAM.

Final straw for me as I'm not going to do a massive expensive overhaul on my rig to play one game.

System handles the rest of my PC needs and will do so easily for a long time.

So its over to console for games as far as I'm concerned. Far more game titles that interest me than PC.

[directhex]

If you hooked this up to the Dell, you'd get no signal output from the display as it cannot display frequencies that low.

odd, my games consoles all work fine (yes, at 50hz) when connected to my dell lcd, via the svideo or composite connectors

[GuruJockStrap]

odd, my games consoles all work fine (yes, at 50hz) when connected to my dell lcd, via the svideo or composite connectors

I'm probably wrong.

I was using an external VGA box that probably couldn't handle the low frequency of 50HZ.

Either way, the Dell and many TFT should be able to handle a progessive scan imagine without any problems.

[oralpain]

I don't like the vast majority of console games and a good number of the ones I do like will also be on PC. These will probably be better on the PC platform (more options, custom content, ect).

I primarily play first person shooters, RPGs, simulations, and strategy games. I don't play sports video games (they are always more fun in real life).

I also don't like to have to settle for 30 or 60 fps (what an NTSC console would give me). Most cosole games look seriously choppy to me (halo and halo 2 are good examples of this).

My computer isn't slow, and games or no, I'd be upgrading it every 3 months anyway. I have a computer to build, tweak, and break a computer, being able to actually use it is just a bonus.

For the cost of one of the new consoles I could get a 7800GT (maybe even a GTX is I shopped around) and move to 2 gigs of ram. My 2.7Ghz venice is a good enough CPU for the near future.

[GuruJockStrap]

.....games or no, I'd be upgrading it every 3 months anyway

Thats great but unfortunately not everybody can afford to do that.

It was either spend £500-700 on switching my system from AGP to PCI-E to play upcoming games like FEAR or £280 on an XBox 360 and play those 14 titles I mentioned previously.

Will allow me to enjoy some cracking games over the next year.

Will upgrade my PC but now it won't be for another year to 18 months minimum. Hell, even till I finish uni in June 2007.

By that time I'll be able to get a cracking system for the money.

[Marcos]

I don't like the vast majority of console games and a good number of the ones I do like will also be on PC. These will probably be better on the PC platform (more options, custom content, ect).

I primarily play first person shooters, RPGs, simulations, and strategy games. I don't play sports video games (they are always more fun in real life).

I also don't like to have to settle for 30 or 60 fps (what an NTSC console would give me). Most cosole games look seriously choppy to me (halo and halo 2 are good examples of this).

My computer isn't slow, and games or no, I'd be upgrading it every 3 months anyway. I have a computer to build, tweak, and break a computer, being able to actually use it is just a bonus.

For the cost of one of the new consoles I could get a 7800GT (maybe even a GTX is I shopped around) and move to 2 gigs of ram. My 2.7Ghz venice is a good enough CPU for the near future.

complaining about 60fps is just bollocks, movies are 25fps and you never hear anyone complaining about them.

Fair enough a PC is currently better at first person shooters, RPGs, simulations, and strategy games. But that is only because of the mouse and keyboard and the high resolution outputs of PC. Like I said before, once Sony and MS realise they have to push the mouse & keyboard compatibility there would be no reason for almost anyone to stick with PC other than they just "prefer" it. The HDTV resolution will also match PC output so thats not a factor anymore.

Its really just resting on the mouse and keyboard.

[directhex]

complaining about 60fps is just bollocks, movies are 25fps and you never hear anyone complaining about them.

Fair enough a PC is currently better at first person shooters, RPGs, simulations, and strategy games. But that is only because of the mouse and keyboard and the high resolution outputs of PC. Like I said before, once Sony and MS realise they have to push the mouse & keyboard compatibility there would be no reason for almost anyone to stick with PC other than they just "prefer" it. The HDTV resolution will also match PC output so thats not a factor anymore.

Its really just resting on the mouse and keyboard.

24. or 23.97. or 48 for imax.

[Marcos]

Exactly

I understand if a game should have slowdown, but fluid 24fps frames are more than competent.

You may be able to pick out a single frame flicker at 60fps, but in motion your eyes cannot physically detect differences above 60fps, probably a lot less

[smtkr]

once Sony and MS realise they have to push the mouse & keyboard compatibility there would be no reason for almost anyone to stick with PC other than they just "prefer" it.

More likely, Sony and M$ will copy the revolution controller.

[Marcos]

I don't see the big deal with the revolution controller, not for the games i play

[unreal]

Well no doubt if the Revolution is somewhat a success, then Microsoft and Sony [i]may not[i] specifically copy the Revolution design, but it will highly influence them somewhat and make them hit the drawing board in the aspect of controllers. We may find that they will try to design a hybrid of gyroscopic controller and the normal controller, so they don't lose any fans who are uncomfortable with a radical change.

Current UK TV signals is PAL and is based on a 625 line, 50 field/25 frames a second, 50HZ system.

If you hooked this up to the Dell, you'd get no signal output from the display as it cannot display frequencies that low.

With Progressive scan, the image is displayed on the screen by scanning each line (or row of pixels) in a sequential order rather than an alternate order, as is done with interlaced scan.

So the image lines (or pixel rows) are scanned in numerical order (1,2,3) down the screen from top to bottom, instead of in an alternate order (lines or rows 1,3,5, etc... followed by lines or rows 2,4,6).

By progressively scanning the image onto a screen every 60th of a second rather than "interlacing" alternate lines every 30th of a second.

Frequency needed is 60HZ, which the Dell can handle no problem.

Wow thanks for that, I kinda understand now, and am glad that you have clarified its compatibility

[Mr Fujisawa]

a lot of the stuff coming out for the xbox 360 is looking like decent pc game stuff, which isnt really good enough tbh.

things will deffinately improve as they get more out of the system. but it wont be long before pc hardware is alraedy significantly better.