I saw this on Tomshardware and just couldn't believe what I was reading. Where do these publishers find these loons. http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/Xbox-One-PlayStation-4-IGNITE-Frostbite-Rajat-Taneja,news-44154.html Lee
He is technically wrong, if there was a level playing field the PC would win out. But as was said... I wonder how a direct to metal game coded for the next gen consoles would run on todays top end rigs at 1080p.
http://www.tweaktown.com/news/30590...p-ahead-of-current-gen-gaming-pc-s/index.html "I have many friends who run quad NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN's in SLI, Intel Core i7-3970X, 32GB or more of high-end DDR3 RAM and several SSD's in RAID 0. Those are what I consider the highest-end gaming PCs you can get your hands on, and there is no possible way that a $500-$1000 console can even come close to the performance of one of those systems, period. "
It's all so much crud. We hear the same bollocks every 10 years when they release a new console. Kiddies everywhere will be regurgitating it and eager to rush out and buy what they think is 8 x faster than the fastest PC in the world.
Direct to metal coding enables alot of the gains that are seen over a consoles lifetime, for example naughty dogs new game coming out looks awesome for a 7 year old console, it would not run on a 7 year old pc that's for sure. Wether they are faster or not is not really relivent, as the games pc gamers will get will be ports not much else, I'm also expecting alot of lazy ports by developers this gen who assume they can just stick there x86 code on a DVD and sell it as a pc game with nothing but minor tweaks. Even the current gen its been down on certain new releases that were unplayable pre patch. The last splinter cell game on AMD hardware is one such example of a shocking port, gta4 is another the list goes on of poor ports. Wether the pc gamers see better graphics because of consoles I have my douts most people do not have the hardware to run the games at max that are already out and I'm expecting the requirements to go up and up in the coming years.
EA VP says "I'm a ****ing nonce. My or team can write this **** for cash all freaking day long. I will be available to sign things off on my mobile whilst I watch the muppets on my tablet which is ten years ahead of the latest magazine. Nonce out. Over."
So existing consoles use direct to metal coding then and the new ones will also? My main beef with consoles is the numpty controller but I think even keyboard and mouse is far from ideal. For the future I'd like to see more natural more realistic controls for FPS using refined motion sensing.
Try running games on the pc hardware that was around when the 360/ps3 was released, that said pc constantly evolves and will continue while consoles just stagnate. At least all new games will be dx11, we were always stuck on dx9 cause of the consoles and the same will happen again....stuck on dx11 when the pc has moved on.
whilst at the start of the life cycle they likely didn't so much , right now devs are coding direct to metal - hence why they can still play the latest games (to the limit of the hardware)
I used to code back in the 80's and always in assembly language. Didn't like using higher level. I wonder how much raw gaming power is lost to direct-x and windows.
My point is, unless it is an actual direct quote, he didn't say that. It is just PR. And if so, he's just as redundant as most I've ever known at that level. In the meantime, stupid statement is stupid regardless of who said it.
So my question is... why isn't anyone attempting direct to metal coding for PC even as an experiment to show the potential difference in performance? You know... taking direct control of a GPU via linux or something...