Consoles VS PC Gamespot Graphics Comparison

Here is a comparison of the consoles vs PC it is pretty cool the number one thing you notice is that GTA does look WAY WAY WAY better on PC so people who say it doesnt needs to look at these pictures theres quite a huge difference

http://www.gamespot.com/features/6202552/index.html?tag=topslot;img;2

enjoy

 

Hail PC 10char

 

Cool stuff.

Despite their findings, if the games they reviewed weren't designed for a console environment they could look a lot better on PC. Ex: Crysis. Ex: the original Far Cry when it came out (pre-360/PS3).

 

yep this is true what they SHOULD have done was in fallout 3/dead space they should have shown what the Alien/monsters looked like i think that would have given it a better graphical feel.

 

didnt the people's faces in dead space console look like slime? (in these screenies atleast)

 

TBF alot of the differance is because of the higher resolution in gta 4.

Fallout 3 has no anti-aliasing on ps3 though 0.0

 

Should've just done Mass Effect and Gears Of War.

 

yeah but if you did gears of war there would be no PS3 comparison

 

If I had the choice, I would go with the £100 xbox graphics, over the £800 PC graphics

But those images really do show how much more graphical power you can pull out of a PC, for goodness' sake GTA IV looks almost real

 

Seen heavy rain for ps3?

Graphics are pretty impressive as are those on heavenly sword and uncharted.

Heavy rain:
http://www.gametrailers.com/player/38635.html?type=flv

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/43619.html last 10 seconds of this one is insane she looks real.

 

you took the words out my mouth i hate pc vs debates of course pc's are better they cost a lot more to buy!

 

actually can build a desktop with an 9800gtx or 8800 ultra for less than 600$

 

With the exception of the GTA comparison, in which something's either gone wrong with the screenshots of the console versions, or the game is very badly made for the consoles, the difference is negligible. If I had to classify them, I would say the order would generally be PC, then XBox 360, then PS3, but again, negligible.

Look at the spec and cost of the PC in comparison with the 360. It's a Joke.

Comparing the PC to the two consoles graphically is like comparing laptimes of a Pagani Zonda C12 and a Caterham Superlight.

The Zonda JUST has the edge, but for about 10 times the cost.

So the man who has invested £380,000 in his machine spends every given opportunity besmirching the name of the Caterham and poking fun at its' performance (although the difference is almost negligible), to try to convince himself otherwise of his ludicrously unwise investment, especially when he's with his buddies from the online Zonda Owners club.

Not to mention the practicalities of a PC V Console in a TV room environment.

For the record, I own a decent spec PC that can run all games well, but buy all my games on the 360, even though they're 30% more expensive.

 

Although I respect and don't doubt his PC skills (the thrifty little beggar ), I believe actually could be better advised to buy a RROD Xbox 360 for less than £50$, and spend 1/2 an hour and $5 repairing it.

Still more than 10 times the price for up to what might be a 5% graphical improvement.

But, at the end of the day, it's his money.

 

Well the difference isn't really that huge. It's noticeable, but it won't really be any kind of a deal killer. Some games were made for a specific platform and therefore will perform better on said platform.

And I'm not just talking about graphics, but controls and general gameplay. Many people argue FPS and RTS games are really meant for PC, while others argue action games are more console oriented.

But yeah, it's interesting to see the differences. I'm guessing the PC images are of the maxed out settings though.

 

well in reality most hardcore guys could build a pc for only like $500 and itll be two times better i only recently got into pc gaming but the real reason is because i hook it up via hdmi to my LCD for some reason looking at the laptop screen for gaming start to give me a headache

but if i do anything else on the pc im perfecly fine.....weird

 

Ah, but the problem is you're comparing the price of the entire computer to the console. Most everyone needs a computer to do work/internet/school. You should compare the cost of upgrading a computer TO game to the console. In other words, just the price of the videocard, which for a 200$ investment would already give the edge over the consoles mentioned .

 

the comparison is horrible for gta4 that must be fake or photoshopped. i didn't know that the whole game was blurry the whole time during game play on the consoles. anyway PS3 all the way

 

No gta really is that crappy, when i had it one ps3 it always looked blurry and horrid.

 

I wonder what else will people argue when the next console and its game come out fully supporting mouse and keyboard with relatively good looking graphics?

 

Well if they do then they'll have officially separated both worlds(gaming and conventional use), which could be a good step IMO, but at the same time GPU companies like Nvidia and ATI would lose money(since they'd only sell GPUs for said console instead of 50 variants for PC) so idk if that'll happen anytime soon.

Also as a consumer, having to buy 2 machines for 2 separate purposes might not be ideal. Not to mention that consoles rarely come with a TV in a bundle do they? lol

 

Thanks for the reply and not bashing me like what a fan boy does...

You made a good point and I can't agree more, its like attempting to take oil out of the equation of today's world.

However, its tempting to see how a fan boy react although I think the whole argument of proving who is superior is pointless.

 

think about it though you going to need a powerful system to get it to look and run like it does on consoles. Even though GTA 4 was very badly ported even when a patch comes out for it your still going to need a high end gpu and a high end cpu to get it to run like a console will.

 

Yes I agree, price is a factor and perhaps my statement is too general or misleading.

What I'm trying to say is, some people took everything out of consideration (Price for example) and just bash their opponent's system graphics capability. Where today's multi-platform games look very similar to each other in term of graphics, not to mention Wii happily leading the sales in console world.

Thus, I see no point in arguing who looks better instead of which is the best bang for bucks. At least, not until one system shows significant superiority in term of graphics to the others in multi-platform games.

Which again I think is not quite possible as there's people yet to go through the hesitate to develop multi-platform games that really look significant different (I can be wrong). Not just, "Look! Better shadow!" etc.

 

very true, but u can do it for about 700$ total (and thats including monitor). But also it will look superior to the console versions.

This argument is a slippery slope, now were talking about oil. Lets all face it, in the end you PC graphics more than triple that of console in some cases, crysis anyone? But the console is very convenient and is very intuitive. It is definately a plus for casual gamers.

When the next console comes out and has mouse&keyboard support, comes bundled with a monitor, has a sick-nasty CPU and GPU... then wont that be a PC?

 

I don't think consoles will come with mouse and keyboard support for in game. I just don't see that happening lol.

 

Then people will bash it saying it can't do words.

Maybe you get a better picture of what I'm trying to say.

 

heres what WOULD be interesting i'd love to see a video game system that has native gamepad support but also supports any game pad and mouse via usb.

Also if you could change out the GPU, and HDD you wont have to do anything on CPU because this system will come with a quadcore built in with 8gb ram Also the GPU will support crossifre AND SLI

 

Double that and you got yourself a deal.

No, I'm just kidding, seriously.

I would really like to see a Wii with better graphics though.

 

Those screenshots are at like 720x480, show me 1920x1200 of all those and I guarantee the PC will blow all those away with no doubt left in anybody's mind.

 

Well each machine does different things. The console was made mostly as a gaming tool, while the computer's initial purpose was to program and do things too difficult for humans(ex: massive calculations).

Each has their particular use and specialty and there isn't much purpose to try and compare apples and oranges. If you prefer one, then good, go for it. Some things work better with one platform and other things work better with the other platform.

Diversity is key and it's good for the market and for us consumers ^_^

 

Nice comparisons. The PC does constantly come out on top. I was really shocked at how bad the PS3 looked in most of those comparison shots. I had heard it was the most powerful system out there, but clearly it is not. Even with the heavier price tag of the gaming laptop PC, I've always preferred it because I can run such a multitude of programs on the go.

 

thanks

yep that's true actually if you read the comments that people posted they claimed some feature on the ps3's GTA IV was disabled or something like that

 

You cannot play Valkyria Chronicles on a PC, so for the moment atleast, it is an inferior gaming platform.

 

lol that game looks terribad.

 

Then I invite you to go and actually look at some screenshots.

 

I did, and that wasn't a good thing.

 

the trees look so much better in gta 4 pc than console.

 

^^ totally agree.

Brighter and better detail than the Xbox360/ PS3 consoles.

PC ftw!

 

Then your lack of good taste is apparent.

 

Yes, I was very surprised by the PS3's results as well. For the extra price, you would hope you would be getting some beast of a gaming machine

 

Yeah the colour on the PS3 was significantly different from that of the 360 or the PC. I am just wondering if there was something up with the colour settings in that test.

 

you dont need such expensive hardware to render awesome graphics, ATI has cheaper and almost better solutions. their drivers are always up to date and are just as powerful if not more than their Nvidia counterparts.

spending well over 2k$ just to have awesome graphics isnt really the only option. PCs give flexibility and even a tricore with a 4000 series ati radeon can render everything on max of any game at any reso in glorious 50+fps. my desktop rig just cost me a little under 700$ which is pretty cheap since it can do more than game, it can do work too ^^

 

Like i said im not sure if its true but the people in the comments section of gamespot were claiming some feature was off for the ps3 or for GTA IV not sure how true that is.

 

hmmm....




























NO!

 

yeah buy you also cant play some blockbusters on consoles like STALKER, WoW, Warhammer Online, Starcraft, Civilzation, Diablo, etc so there are many games that pc has that is exclusive.

 

Thats why i have both

 

I run PS3 GTA 4 and I also played the Xbox 360 version and the PS3 one looks better. I also turn the display setting on the PS3 from "RGB Full Range: Limited" to "RGB Full Range: Full". The colors are more vivid and not that washed out.

 

Lol, THATS what i was talking about in the thread that is what people were saying wasn't turned on the funny thing is im 100% sure the ps3 looks better because when both games first came out all of the reviewers were saying that the PS# version looked better so i dont know...

 

OK, let's run with this one then ........

I've just been to the Website of scan.co.uk, well known generally as the cheapes source of retail PC components.

The Graphics card specified at the beginning of the comparison test was a NVIDIA 280 GTX. To be as fair as possible I'll quote the cheapest example.

Price £286.67

at the same website, the price of an Xbox 360 Pro System, with a Hard Drive, and Wireless headset etc, is £170. (Don't forget, I could have easily quoted an arcade system for 30% less.)

The 360 comprises a Case, a Mainboard, an optical drive, triple core CPU, Hard Disk, GPU, a fan, a wireless controller, a wireless headset, and AV cables.

Do I need to go on ???