#1 Posted by rachelepithet (1392 posts) -

For those considering a gaming PC instead of a new console, I'm wondering if over the next few years PC versions will be upconverted ports of the 360 versions, meaning they'd be like Gun, Need For Speed, and Tony Hawk were at the launch of this generation (PS2 ports but higher res).

NBA2K14 is the first of the PC/360/One titles out this year, so how does the PC version compare to 360, and to footage of the XboxOne game? Meaning, is it just the 360 animations and textures and polygon/triangle/shader count, but at 2560x1440 instead of 640p? Or does it get all the new lighting, faces, cloth rendering promised for the PS4 game only in 1440p instead of 1080p?

Another big issue with sticking with PC is Call of Duty. When talking about what Next Gen capabilities gave Ghosts, it was destructible environments, more complex skin textures and bullet damage, the way more realistic dog, etc. Will the PC version get all those things?

#2 Edited by ArtisanBreads (3985 posts) -

The PC version will be at the max in almost all cases. Games are made on PC, so not like they have to be upped from last gen or something. PC games look way better than 360 or PS3 ones right now.

With NBA 2K you picked the one weird example. They hardly give any effort to PC so they just put out the current gen version on PC, which is a shame since they could do the next gen version, obviously. But I think it's a bizarre case... NBA 2K only costs $30 on PC because all its multiplayer features and a lot of the online connectivity stuff is straight up knowingly broken. I don't play multi so I've loved this situation, but now the lack of care means no next gen version, so I'm probably not buying 2k14 on PC this year, their loss.

Otherwise, PC will be right with or probably past the next gen consoles from the start with basically all other games.

BF 4 for example on next gen consoles is just catching up to what PC could do with player count in BF 3. And for next gen stuff, Watch Dogs is already apparently maxed at 30 fps on consoles, but on PC you'll be able to get past that if you have the power.

#3 Edited by mikey87144 (1806 posts) -

You picked two bad examples. Battlefield and Watch Dogs are going to look best on PC.

#4 Posted by Rowr (5824 posts) -

For those considering a gaming PC instead of a new console, I'm wondering if over the next few years PC versions will be upconverted ports of the 360 versions, meaning they'd be like Gun, Need For Speed, and Tony Hawk were at the launch of this generation (PS2 ports but higher res).

NBA2K14 is the first of the PC/360/One titles out this year, so how does the PC version compare to 360, and to footage of the XboxOne game? Meaning, is it just the 360 animations and textures and polygon/triangle/shader count, but at 2560x1440 instead of 640p? Or does it get all the new lighting, faces, cloth rendering promised for the PS4 game only in 1440p instead of 1080p?

Another big issue with sticking with PC is Call of Duty. When talking about what Next Gen capabilities gave Ghosts, it was destructible environments, more complex skin textures and bullet damage, the way more realistic dog, etc. Will the PC version get all those things?

Either I have no idea what you are trying to say, or you aren't to sure how this works.

From what i understand, games on the next gen consoles are similar if not exact to pc architecture - so porting shouldn't be much of an issue. In fact i'm assuming it will make more sense to build the games for PC and then port them back to consoles for this reason.

Theres no reason to port new games from old console architecture unless you like wasting time or money.

#5 Posted by aceofspudz (935 posts) -

It would be more work to port from 360/PS3 to PC than from PS4/ONE to PC.

This post is FUD.

#7 Edited by MattyFTM (14432 posts) -
@rowr said:

@boocreepyfootdoctor said:

For those considering a gaming PC instead of a new console, I'm wondering if over the next few years PC versions will be upconverted ports of the 360 versions, meaning they'd be like Gun, Need For Speed, and Tony Hawk were at the launch of this generation (PS2 ports but higher res).

NBA2K14 is the first of the PC/360/One titles out this year, so how does the PC version compare to 360, and to footage of the XboxOne game? Meaning, is it just the 360 animations and textures and polygon/triangle/shader count, but at 2560x1440 instead of 640p? Or does it get all the new lighting, faces, cloth rendering promised for the PS4 game only in 1440p instead of 1080p?

Another big issue with sticking with PC is Call of Duty. When talking about what Next Gen capabilities gave Ghosts, it was destructible environments, more complex skin textures and bullet damage, the way more realistic dog, etc. Will the PC version get all those things?

Either I have no idea what you are trying to say, or you aren't to sure how this works.

From what i understand, games on the next gen consoles are similar if not exact to pc architecture - so porting shouldn't be much of an issue. In fact i'm assuming it will make more sense to build the games for PC and then port them back to consoles for this reason.

Theres no reason to port new games from old console architecture unless you like wasting time or money.

FIFA 14 on PC is the old engine and everything rather than the new fancy one for the next generation consoles. EA say that it is to keep the system requirements low because accessibility is so important to FIFA - anyone should be able to pick it up, not just people with gaming rigs. It makes a certain degree of sense, but it's still very disappointing to a lot of PC gamers.

I expect that to be the exception, and the majority of games will use the upgraded engines/assets/everything from the next generation consoles, but it could happen with some other games, too. Especially while we're in this limbo period where some games are coming out on PC and current gen consoles before the next gen consoles are released.

Also, NBA 2K14 is a terrible example, because that game is already seriously gimped on PC. It's only $30 on PC because it is missing many core features that are available on console. I'm not sure why 2K elect not to have feature parity, but they don't.

Moderator
#8 Edited by Rowr (5824 posts) -

@aceofspudz said:

It would be more work to port from 360/PS3 to PC than from PS4/ONE to PC.

This post is FUD.

Nope it's an assumption based on information.

Unless we are talking about a game that's ported up from say 360 to xbone and then to PC. I'm guessing yeh in that case it's going to suck. But to be honest i'm not sure why you would play the shitty games that might intend to do this. As stated above, perhaps some of the sport franchises may do this but PC isn't exactly a go to for those anyway.

Making further assumptions, i'm guessing that they would be more likely to make the games based on PC/next gen and then porting the gimped version back to PS3/360.

Like the op says, in last gens case it was only those few cusp titles like gun and tony hawk that got this treatment. It doesn't seem to me this time around that many high profile games are caught releasing on current gen around the time of next gen. Even then - planning from developers is probably a little bit more ahead this time around.

#9 Posted by Gruebacca (570 posts) -

No. They will not make that mistake again. The PC market today is too big for publishers to release a PC port with previous gen assets and get away with it unscathed.

#10 Posted by rachelepithet (1392 posts) -

I get what you're all saying about games being actually made on PC first and then dumbed down for 360, but in those cases its things like framerate, resolution, texture compression, SSAO, etc.

Think of it this way; if a crossgen FPS game will be DirectX11 with tessellation, larger mulitplayer maps because the new consoles have more ram, have separate actors than the current gen game whose faces were scanned with ten times the "tennis balls", a new physics and animation engine, and so forth. On current gen it will be DirectX 8 or 9, have smaller levels, etc.

Does the PC get a higher res, smoother framerate, SSAO version of the Direct X 9 360 version, or a higher res, smoother framerate, SSAO enabled version of the DirectX11 jumbo map/double-polygons version?

#11 Posted by Hunkulese (2876 posts) -

They're more than likely going to be releasing upressed versions of the 360 version because more people will but it. Right now you'd need a monster pc to match what the One and PS4 are capable of.

#12 Edited by believer258 (12184 posts) -

Um... haven't they been making high resolution textures and then scaling them down for the consoles for ages now?

If you want to see what a console game scaled up to PC standards can look like, take a peek at the PC version of Borderlands 2 or Sleeping Dogs. That's what next gen games are going to look like anyway.

#13 Edited by PandaBear (1384 posts) -

Cool assumptions you've made there. Real cool.

#14 Posted by ArtisanBreads (3985 posts) -

Right now you'd need a monster pc to match what the One and PS4 are capable of.

This is absolutely not the case.

#15 Posted by CrazyBagMan (858 posts) -

PC version gets the options to potentially look the best if your rig can run it.

#16 Posted by ShadowSkill11 (1783 posts) -

They are based on PC assets. Video games are all built on PCs.

#17 Posted by captainduncan (28 posts) -

They're more than likely going to be releasing upressed versions of the 360 version because more people will but it. Right now you'd need a monster pc to match what the One and PS4 are capable of.

That's absurd. I'm running a GTX 660ti and an i5-3570k, which is a generation-old and has modest specs at best. With the exception of 4xMSAA I can max the Battlefield 4 beta, which still is yet to undergo additional optimization and decent driver support. I don't see myself needing to upgrade until 2015 at the earliest.

#18 Posted by Stonyman65 (2869 posts) -

They're more than likely going to be releasing upressed versions of the 360 version because more people will but it. Right now you'd need a monster pc to match what the One and PS4 are capable of.

Nope. Not even close. If anything, it will probably be the exact opposite of that.

The Xbox One and PS4 will be a pretty huge jump in comparison with current gen consoles (we'll see. What I've been hearing recently isn't exactly getting me excited) but you can't compare that to what even a modest PC is capable of, and unlike consoles, that tech improves every 18 months or so compared to the 5+ year console cycle.

When you hear things like Watch Dogs is going to be running at 30FPS, and the dev's aren't even sure if it can run at 720p on next-gen consoles, keep in mind that current PCs are capable of running the same thing right now at a solid 60FPS at 2500x1600. That's a HUGE difference in performance.

#19 Posted by GaspoweR (3489 posts) -

@boocreepyfootdoctor: Also back in the day, the PS2 was also actually a much better optimized gaming platform than the PC was that's why there were a lot of shitty ports. What people consider as "shitty" console-PC ports now a days are a lot better compared to what came out when the 360 launched. Games are being developed on an X86 platform and the next-gen consoles are both powered by parts that run X86 thus multiplatform development would be much better now.

#20 Edited by ArtisanBreads (3985 posts) -

@gaspower said:

@boocreepyfootdoctor: Also back in the day, the PS2 was also actually a much better optimized gaming platform than the PC was that's why there were a lot of shitty ports.

There were a lot of shitty ports just because no one put forth any effort. The platforms were very different from PC and there wasn't perceived to be any market (rightfully so or not) for console esque games on PC. They were seen as two distinct markets.

Not saying you're wrong or anything, just really these were probably the two main reasons. Steam being accepted DRM, digital platforms for sales, and the more widespread use of controllers have all aided the growth of the PC market to include what are thought of as more of console games.

#21 Edited by GaspoweR (3489 posts) -

@stonyman65 said:

@hunkulese said:

They're more than likely going to be releasing upressed versions of the 360 version because more people will but it. Right now you'd need a monster pc to match what the One and PS4 are capable of.

Nope. Not even close. If anything, it will probably be the exact opposite of that.

The Xbox One and PS4 will be a pretty huge jump in comparison with current gen consoles (we'll see. What I've been hearing recently isn't exactly getting me excited) but you can't compare that to what even a modest PC is capable of, and unlike consoles, that tech improves every 18 months or so compared to the 5+ year console cycle.

When you hear things like Watch Dogs is going to be running at 30FPS, and the dev's aren't even sure if it can run at 720p on next-gen consoles, keep in mind that current PCs are capable of running the same thing right now at a solid 60FPS at 2500x1600. That's a HUGE difference in performance.

Yep, I second this. Though to be frank the machines required to run this are more expensive than the next-gen consoles (entire rig) but if you only need to upgrade a PC and you have a pretty decent CPU anyway, you'll probably just have to get a video card and if you spend your money on a single video card that is equivalent in price to a new console (like a GTX 770 or Radeon HD 7970), you are going to get a MASSIVE performance boost. A 200-300 or even under $200 (if you can get a sale from Newegg, NCIX, Amazon, etc.) video card is actually a lot better than the video cards running in the next gen consoles.

#22 Edited by GaspoweR (3489 posts) -

@artisanbreads:

You're right they didn't put in much effort since in the first place they couldn't really justify doing it since there wouldn't be money to be gained from it or at times there wouldn't be a port since they wouldn't even be able to break even in terms or projected sales. Why put in the effort if the dev's themselves aren't going to get compensated for it, right?

It's better now though and at least we can say that most of the multi-plat games are going to perform better on a PC if someone is going to put in the money and partially the effort to troubleshoot if problems arise.

#23 Edited by EXTomar (4943 posts) -

I can't even figure out what is being asked let alone if there is anything to discuss. Why would anyone in the future build a PC game off a "assets" for a dead platform like 360?