Demanding pc games vs console versions: some consideration

[dark13]

Lately I hear lots of people complaining about hardware needed by demanding games and how xbox360/ps3 version should be preferred. This is NOT true. Let's take 3 scenario:

1: Low-end pc (low-end core2duo or worst), low-end vga: go with xbox/ps3 version

2: High-end pc, high-end vga: go with pc version, your hardware will keep v-sync'ed 60fps.

And... finally number 3: mid end pc (core 2 quad, phenom2 x4, i3) and mid-end vga (650ti boost, 560ti or better). Probably looking at 35-40 fps benchmark you would get so depressed to choose console's version... well, you're wrong. Why? Lets' examine some facts:

Resolution: you're looking at a 1920*1080 pc benchmark. Xbox and ps3 DOES have 1080p output but most games are rendered at 720p (or even lower resolution) and upscaled to 1080p. With a pc you get a REAL 1920*1080.

Image quality: On most games you will have better antialiasing and better ambient occlusion with a pc. Texture quality is a real problem on xbox/ps3, developers have to deal with 512mb ram/vram on consoles while on a mid-end rig you will have 4gb ram and 1gb vram. Optimization makes great things but it will not make you walk on the water.

Mods and patches: many pc games will get "unofficial" patches/mods while console's versions will be limited to what the developers/sony/microsoft will allow you to install.

Settings: Get smart... xbox/ps3 versions usually run near "medium" or "high" settings, you are probably looking at a "very high" or "ultra" benchmark. Use a 2xmsaa or fxaa like the console version, bring down the quality of shadows, don't use demanding tassellation setting and that 35fps will jump to 45fps.

Framerate: Well, after this considerations you will be still screaming: I can't play with 35fps on a pc and I want very high setting!!! This is true. The fact is... well, many AAA xbox/ps3 games runs at 30 fps with adaptative v-sync. What does it means? The framerate is locked at v-sync'ed 30fps BUT if framerate drops below 30fps v-sync will be turned off, when fps will return to 30 fps the v-sync will be active again. What really bugs people on pc gaming is no v-sync's image tearing or v-sync repeatly jumping from 60fps to 30fps. Is there a solution? Yes.

Nvidia some months ago introduced a great innovation to pc gaming that is NOT an innovation at all... adaptative v-sync. The same technology used on consoles. From driver's control panel you can select a game and choose "adaptative v-sync". The even greater news is you can select adaptative v-sync for your monitor refresh (tipically 60fps/60mhz) or adaptative v-sync at half rate refresh, this will lock your framerate at 30fps. 30 costant frame per second with v-sync turned automatically OFF under 30fps is just as smooth as xbox/ps3 and chances are you will get less slowdowns than the console version. The only problem is mouse input will probably be "broken" on many games with 30fps adaptative v-sync then we jump to...

Controller: for some games keyboard and mouse is better than joypad but on ps3/xbox you will be playing with a pad so simply use a pad on your pc. Connect your rig to your LCD tv, launch the game and enjoy a game just as smooth as console's versions (probably better) with better graphic

[onilink55]

I've been a long time console gamer. Love the convenience of putting a game in and knowing it will just work. No downloading a patch, no random sound doesn't work issues. But recently I put together a good computer (never had a true gaming rig) and got Far Cry 3 and Tomb Raider for PC. Set the settings to Ultra and was blown away. And I got the games for half the price due to crazy good Steam sales. I'm still not a mouse and keyboard kinda guy (yet) but console gaming is a tough sell for me these days.

[Trnzaddict]

I think I'm starting to convert. Most games that come out now unless they are console exclusives (God of War 3/Acension/Halo 4/etc.) are on PC and if you have a good pc you will have a better visual experience on it. Plus you will be able to run all your emulators and freeware as well along side the newer games.

[dark13]

I like really the "consoles"... but the real consoles, not these pc-based-media/social oriented stuff. Up to ps2/gc/xbox they were the real deal because of "plug'n'play", today you have to dowload patches, update os, games are released heavily bugged just as in pc world (gt5, skyrim, etc) and hardware is generally unreliable. Basically this gear is a pc with sony/nintendo/microsoft stickers. Next-gen will be even worst... xbox one and ps4 basically will use amd's APUs and will be social-oriented-internet connection dependant. Damn, at this point it's better to use a pc. If you have internet problems you can always crack an original game (it's actuallt illegal in some countries) to bypass stupid drm's stuff. Honestly, I didn't get a current gen console because of decision to get a decent pc rig, the only games i miss are gt5/forza motorsport/tekken/mgs4.

@onilink55

Get a xbox360 pad for pc if you prefer pad's layout. Some games are best played with mouse and keyboard while in others a pad is a better choise... for example i played bioshock infinite with a pad, dual triggers and force feedback are better than mouse's "precision"

[THK]

I'm demanding pc games as well, give me some!

[brolly]

I like really the "consoles"... but the real consoles, not these pc-based-media/social oriented stuff. Up to ps2/gc/xbox they were the real deal because of "plug'n'play", today you have to dowload patches, update os, games are released heavily bugged just as in pc world (gt5, skyrim, etc) and hardware is generally unreliable. Basically this gear is a pc with sony/nintendo/microsoft stickers.

I feel the exact same way, consoles are dead. I hate PC Games when they aren't portable, installing games over and over will only lead to getting problems in your system this is why I have always been a console guy, now those times are over thus I barely play any new stuff unless it's something I'm really looking forward to (which rarely happens these days) or some portable indie games which most of the times are better than most commercial crap.

[Andyman]

I love both. I play on both. Both have things you just can't get on the other. Neither is better, neither is worse. They're just different.

Bottom line... play what you like, where you like, and don't let anyone tell you different.

(and don't be a hipster.)

[THK]

I don't plan on becoming a hipster until get one replaced

[Rain]

I'm for PC all the way, only thing I play more than my PC is A-2600.

[emb]

IBM Tandy... Best system ever. Nothing like making large banners on a dot matrix printer.

Sent from my Galaxy Tab 2 using Tapatalk HD

[dark13]

In 80's-early 90's consoles and personal computer sometimes shared technology and in some case that technology was used even in the arcade (amiga was used for some VR games and arcadia board, capcom cps1 was really close to x-68000, etc). To be honest 8 and 16 bit computer were so popular in jap/eu zones ALSO because they could be used as "consoles", amiga/x68000/fm-town/atariST didn't need any "informatic knowledge" to play games. Back in the days the modern "PC" was "ibm compatible"... and, well, that was a real mess unless windows95 was released. You had to struggle with unsupported videocard/soundcard (usually the "best" hardware got less support ) and dos. The same "fun" you can taste with dosbox but today you can use d-fend frontend and simply change configuration, before you had to BUY new stuff and type command line just to play (ok, windows 3.1 for workgroup was almost decent). Windows95 changed things: you finally got plug and play and hardware became a little more "standard", a revolution that led to windows xp sp2, a "solid" system where the whole hardware asset was standardized. No more "quality or popoularity" choices, no more command-line. In some ways the once "ibm compatibles" became easier to use, you had only to slap a cd into your pc and install the game. Graphic quality obviously depended by your hardware, just like today

In terms of "games"... well, pre-1993 ibm compatibles gaming was a nightmare. I mean... whoever made the CGA palette was obviosly colorblind, EGA was not that great and VGA was too pricey. The sound... wHELLcome to "beep beep" pc speaker. In 1993 you had "doom" a game you could run ONLY on pc hardware while every conversions was inferior... even the late playstation one's (you have plenty levels and some fancy lights but framerate is too jerky). "home computer" such as amiga and 16bit consoles didn't had enough horsepower to deal with it (...and yes, later "doom" got an amiga conversion just as "quake" but you need a serious upgraded system to run them), VGA became a standard just as its "mode-x" for smooth scrolling in platform games. Audio was still a problem only if you were on a budget. 32bit consoles games were superior in terms of playability but PCs dominated some genre such as RTS and FPS in terms of graphic and controls, you also had access to some (generally bugged...) console conversions (metal gear solid, Resident evil, final fantasy VII, etc).

PS2/GC/xbox era saw pc hardware getting better and better and pc conversions became playable and generally better than the "original" (ok, just don't consider RE4...). You still missed some GREAT games but you had something like farcry or doom3 (yes, i'm a big fan of doom3 ).

By now... well, "console" exclusives are rarer, turn-based-jrpg/platforms/fighting-games are dying genres, many games get the same "day 1" on every platforms while most AAA titles on consoles are FPS and FPS/RPG that are best played with keyboard/mouse and does have better visuals on a pc. Moreover consoles version is generally bugged just as pc version and sometimes you even have to install on hard disk.

For the future... well, we are risking connection-dependant consoles, no used market and underpowered pc hardware. PCs are still an expensive investment but the price you pay for a new gaming pc is not that far from a (decent) "office" pc AND a gaming console. Moreover pc games generally cost less...

@brolly

I too LOVE portable games but, honestly, I would be content even with DECENT savegame's folders... every game you install you have to hunt down save location -.- And... yes, furious install/reinstall will mess up your system but seven is bit more resistant than xp. With xp basically a gamer had to reinstall the OS once a year while my old seven installation "survived" crazy stuff (in the very end it was "killed" by a faulty hd on raid0...)

[brolly]

My XP installation is 7 years old, but like I said I don't really install games on it so there's that

[djvj]

Thanks for the trip down memory lane dark13

[relic]

what you said dark is all true all the early technology was amazing and way better even i at young age had a amiga 500 a commodore 64 but even before that we had a pc with games that only coped with 3 colours green red orange thats it even so you had choices like frogger pacman space invaders then even after that when dos games came in with proper colour it was genious i played duke nukem 1 and 2 jetpack bio meanace even commander keen and i still love playing anciant dos games like that more preferd for me then future gaming i would be happy to go back to those days thats the time when everything was simple and ready to play with out to much hassles only doom you had to set thejoystick commands properly otherwise it would spin in circles. BUt the more radical and impressive things about gaming back then any type of gaming was made to be fun even home work types maths spelling it was just so much fun you would want to race home and do your homework on the pc.