PC comparison to PS4 MGS - Ground Zero

[Derb]

Stumbled across this while looking for tech reviews.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JbN_o5pK9Ek

I don't care for the youtuber but couldn't believe how much difference there was in that screen. I ain't creating this thread to offend console games/gamers. I would just like to know if what I saw was/is real?

[Wingman1977]

Originally Posted by Derb

Stumbled across this while looking for tech reviews.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JbN_o5pK9Ek

I don't care for the youtuber but couldn't believe how much difference there was in that screen. I ain't creating this thread to offend console games/gamers. I would just like to know if what I saw was/is real?

I've been saying all along that both consoles are way underpowered (the PS4 version looks a bit foggy in comparison to the PC version).

You can build a budget PC with a dual core CPU with a GTX 750 Ti and 8 GB or RAM which will match the PS4 (with some OC) and and a i3 will surpass it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxUPJdcChzE

Just in that still in the vid I posted, you can tell how almost smeared the PS4 version of MGS V: GZ looks compared to the PC one.

I'm still keeping both my PS4 & XB1, but only for their exclusives. Everything else, PC all the way. Everything he's said is spot on.

[Cook]

My PS4 is more than enough for me. I can't justify spending thousands on a powerful gaming PC build.

[RaijinUT]

Yes it is true.

PS4 & Xbox 1 are way underpowered compared to what PC can do these days, but at the same time most people's tv couldn't handle the PC output right now (2k @144 fps or 4k at 60 fps).

Consoles are just a different market ($400/500 vs $1000-$3000), so I understand the difference... but boy I am really interested in what the Steam Machines will do to the console market. Most of those machines will probably put the current consoles to shame and will be around the same price.

And no, I am not hating on the consoles either (I own a Wii U, Ps4, and Xbox1) but I can see huge difference in my gaming between my pc and my consoles. And like Wingman1977, I will play console exclusives on their said platform, but everything else I would play on my pc.

I wish you could seen Witcher 3 at 4k on Ultra Derb. You would think it is a different game than your ps4 game. Any of my friends who have seen me play it are in awe of just how much better and smoother it plays that the ps4 version.

[Wingman1977]

Originally Posted by Cook

My PS4 is more than enough for me. I can't justify spending thousands on a powerful gaming PC build.

That's a myth.

[Nick The Slick]

Originally Posted by RaijinUT

Yes it is true.

PS4 & Xbox 1 are way underpowered compared to what PC can do these days, but at the same time most people's tv couldn't handle the PC output right now (2k @144 fps or 4k at 60 fps).

Consoles are just a different market ($400/500 vs $1000-$3000), so I understand the difference... but boy I am really interested in what the Steam Machines will do to the console market. Most of those machines will probably put the current consoles to shame and will be around the same price.

And no, I am not hating on the consoles either (I own a Wii U, Ps4, and Xbox1) but I can see huge difference in my gaming between my pc and my consoles. And like Wingman1977, I will play console exclusives on their said platform, but everything else I would play on my pc.

I wish you could seen Witcher 3 at 4k on Ultra Derb. You would think it is a different game than your ps4 game. Any of my friends who have seen me play it are in awe of just how much better and smoother it plays that the ps4 version.

I know you're not downing consoles here and I'm trying not to either, but I've got to give my input on this one. I know people get tired of hearing this and regardless of any argument there will always still be reasons for consoles (exclusives, plug-n-play [which, let's be honest, isn't so much so anymore], cool? features like kinect, etc.), but...

While higher than 1080p gaming is a major benefit of PC gaming, it's not the only one. PC gaming can do better than consoles at the same resolutions as well, and as Wingman pointed out (and has been pointed out by several websites time and time again) it can be done for little more than the price of a console (well, at launch anyways) i.e. consoles are underpowered even for the resolutions they currently target. PC gaming doesn't have to be a $1k+ venture (unless you are aiming for those higher 2k+ or multi-monitor resolutions of course. Or you're like me and just enjoy throwing money at the hobby ). Plus I'll bring up the age old argument of game pricing.

Even if you had to go up to $700 for your gaming PC vs $400/$500 of a launch console, just take a gander here and see the gems you can dig up. $36 for Project Cars instead of $60, $35.75 for Arkham Knight (and that's the premium edition) instead of $60, $21.09 for Shadow Of Mordor instead of $40, $29.99 for Wild Hunt instead of $60, etc. That's almost $100 you've save on just four games. Now your $700 PC (which for that price is going to get you much better performance than a console) has only cost you $100 more than a launch priced Xbox One and $200 more than a PS4. That gap will only get closer as you buy more games as well. I just don't see how people can keep playing the price card when it comes to PC vs console these days.

[Derb]

Originally Posted by RaijinUT

Yes it is true.

PS4 & Xbox 1 are way underpowered compared to what PC can do these days, but at the same time most people's tv couldn't handle the PC output right now (2k @144 fps or 4k at 60 fps).

I wish you could seen Witcher 3 at 4k on Ultra Derb. You would think it is a different game than your ps4 game. Any of my friends who have seen me play it are in awe of just how much better and smoother it plays that the ps4 version.

I think my tv can accept 4K @ 60fps but not 2K @ 144fps.

Also noticed your pic posted in the Witcher thread & immediately noticed a difference before seeing the command prompts on the right side of the screen.

For me it's not the learning curve of using a keyboard & mouse. It's the size of the display that would bug me. Since 05 I have not used a 16:9 display under 50" Also... now that wouldn't be good enough for me as for the past 3 or so years my sets have not been under 60"

Thanks for all the input guys.

[Trogdor2010]

Originally Posted by Derb

I think my tv can accept 4K @ 60fps but not 2K @ 144fps.

Also noticed your pic posted in the Witcher thread & immediately noticed a difference before seeing the command prompts on the right side of the screen.

For me it's not the learning curve of using a keyboard & mouse. It's the size of the display that would bug me. Since 05 I have not used a 16:9 display under 50" Also... now that wouldn't be good enough for me as for the past 3 or so years my sets have not been under 60"

Thanks for all the input guys.

You can use PCs on your TV just as you can with a console. Modern PCs can use HDMI, and most of the newer card's can output 4k with HDMI 2.0 (although it's worth looking up the card's performance before you plan to buy) Not only can they be used with any HDTV, but you can also go with almost any modern controller, and you can use a console style IU (such as Steam Big Picture) and have a similar experience as a console. I play alot of my games on PC with a PS4 controller wirelessly on my plasma with 7.1 LPCM audio. I've even gamed on a 2.35:1 cinemascope shaped screen I used to have, which many games can be displayed natively on.

If you're concerned about a learning curve, while it's not completely plug-and-play, you can do it. If it's term of practicality and versatility, I can't really think of a reason to go with a console (other than exclusive games for obvious reasons).

[Derb]

Originally Posted by Trogdor2010

You can use PCs on your TV just as you can with a console. Modern PCs can use HDMI, and most of the newer card's can output 4k with HDMI 2.0 (although it's worth looking up the card's performance before you plan to buy) Not only can they be used with any HDTV, but you can also go with almost any modern controller, and you can use a console style IU (such as Steam Big Picture) and have a similar experience as a console. I play alot of my games on PC with a PS4 controller wirelessly on my plasma with 7.1 LPCM audio. I've even gamed on a 2.35:1 cinemascope shaped screen I used to have, which many games can be displayed natively on.

If you're concerned about a learning curve, while it's not completely plug-and-play, you can do it. If it's term of practicality and versatility, I can't really think of a reason to go with a console (other than exclusive games for obvious reasons).

While I am enjoying The Witcher 3 on PS4, it's clearly the perfect example piece of what I am missing out on if I had the rig to play it on my 4K with next to no glitches. While taking screen grabs, uploading videos, or just watching the games cutscenes I feel something ain't right or off with the game. The devs must of had PC in mind throughout the whole production & it shows on PS4 in a negative way with controls, frame rate, performance & graphic capabilities limited.

The plug n play consoles out are convenient though. Outdated, yes but I do hope the money I invested will not go to waste & they ride out their 5-10 term before announcing a better system that isn't backward compatible & by then, I just may not buy another plug n play console.

[saprano]

Unless you want another $600 console like PS3, you're going to have to deal with it. I wouldn't mind a powerful high end console but you have to understand the general consumer is not going to pay 6 $700 for the generational leap we should of got. Sony and MS made a business choice. At least Sony made the PS4 as powerful as their budget would allow unlike MS.

And frankly, the PS4 is still going to put out some amazing looking games. I think some like to get caught up in "OMG 4K textures global illumination 120fps 10 core cpu 7 teraflop GPU'z consoles sux PC master race" garbage that they forget how far we've come and what games looked like early on PS3 and 360. Infamous SS alone is far advanced than anything we got on last gen consoles. And that's an early gen title. Games will continue to look better. That goes for MGS GZ which i'm sure TPP this year will improve on everything.

People need to stop making consoles out to be this terrible underpowed thing. It's getting tiring.

[Wingman1977]

Originally Posted by saprano

Unless you want another $600 console like PS3, you're going to have to deal with it. I wouldn't mind a powerful high end console but you have to understand the general consumer is not going to pay 6 $700 for the generational leap we should of got. Sony and MS made a business choice. At least Sony made the PS4 as powerful as their budget would allow unlike MS.

And frankly, the PS4 is still going to put out some amazing looking games. I think some like to get caught up in "OMG 4K textures global illumination 120fps 10 core cpu 7 teraflop GPU'z consoles sux PC master race" garbage that they forget how far we've come and what games looked like early on PS3 and 360. Infamous SS alone is far advanced than anything we got on last gen consoles. And that's an early gen title. Games will continue to look better. That goes for MGS GZ which i'm sure TPP this year will improve on everything.

People need to stop making consoles out to be this terrible underpowed thing. It's getting tiring.

Tell that to the Witcher 3 running as low as 19FPS on the PS4.

[Elandyll]

Originally Posted by Wingman1977

That's a myth.

Not entirely.

You can hardly build a PC (made of new brand parts + multi purpose OS + controller + Wifi + Bluetooth) for $399, let alone $349 or soon $299.

Granted a low end gaming PC will probably not cost you a thousand bucks, but you'd be hard pressed to get something decent for under $600 with everything inluded (and not 2nd hand/ used parts/ promos. We're talking MSRP, as this is what we're comparing the console price of).

The best recent shot is the $449 Alienware with SteamOS, and even then it's far more limited than a regular PC.

The point of having a gaming PC has never been to aim for super low budget specs, but actually to have adecent amount of power and being upgrade-able, while also being multi purpose.

And I'm saying that as a PC gamer (who was PC exclusive for years before getting a PS3 and now a PS4) with a $1500 Gaming Laptop.

[RaijinUT]

Originally Posted by Derb

While I am enjoying The Witcher 3 on PS4, it's clearly the perfect example piece of what I am missing out on if I had the rig to play it on my 4K with next to no glitches. While taking screen grabs, uploading videos, or just watching the games cutscenes I feel something ain't right or off with the game. The devs must of had PC in mind throughout the whole production & it shows on PS4 in a negative way with controls, frame rate, performance & graphic capabilities limited.
:

CDRed for sure knows their way around pc programming a lot more than they do the consoles. Their history is with pc more than consoles.

Note CD Red did have to scale back "nerf" the pc version of the Witcher 3 though too to get everything in the console version. The downgrade upset a lot of their pc fans... but the game is still a gorgeous sight to behold.

[prerich]

Originally Posted by Elandyll

Not entirely.

You can hardly build a PC (made of new brand parts + multi purpose OS + controller + Wifi + Bluetooth) for $399, let alone $349 or soon $299.

Granted a low end gaming PC will probably not cost you a thousand bucks, but you'd be hard pressed to get something decent for under $600 with everything inluded (and not 2nd hand/ used parts/ promos. We're talking MSRP, as this is what we're comparing the console price of).

The best recent shot is the $449 Alienware with SteamOS, and even then it's far more limited than a regular PC.

The point of having a gaming PC has never been to aim for super low budget specs, but actually to have adecent amount of power and being upgrade-able, while also being multi purpose.

And I'm saying that as a PC gamer (who was PC exclusive for years before getting a PS3 and now a PS4) with a $1500 Gaming Laptop.

That's actually the beauty of the whole thing (if the person knows how to build). If a person needs a turnkey system - yes, the PS4/XBox One route is the easiest, most practical, and most comfortable. However, if a person is a tech, and very shrewd in their purchases....they could build a monster of a machine for relative pennies on the dollar. I'm not a gamer but I could game....I'm running an old Quad Core extreme qx9650 with 8 gig of ram...I haven't out grown this machine yet for what I do with it, bought most of it with discounted parts too. My next build is an i7 coming in August - Windows 10 machine with 32gb of ram ... with discounted parts (I never buy computer parts immediately when they come out).

[dyne]

Once you have a computer pieced together it should not be more than $400-500 every 4-5 years to keep it up to date, which is the same price and life cycle of a console. If you do it right you should only be upgrading the cpu/mobo and then 4 years later the gpu or vice versa. Anybody that says otherwise has no idea what they're talking about.

So anyway, how about that Ground Zeroes?

[Wingman1977]

Originally Posted by prerich

That's actually the beauty of the whole thing (if the person knows how to build). If a person needs a turnkey system - yes, the PS4/XBox One route is the easiest, most practical, and most comfortable. However, if a person is a tech, and very shrewd in their purchases....they could build a monster of a machine for relative pennies on the dollar. I'm not a gamer but I could game....I'm running an old Quad Core extreme qx9650 with 8 gig of ram...I haven't out grown this machine yet for what I do with it, bought most of it with discounted parts too. My next build is an i7 coming in August - Windows 10 machine with 32gb of ram ... with discounted parts (I never buy computer parts immediately when they come out).

Originally Posted by dyne

Once you have a computer pieced together it should not be more than $400-500 every 4-5 years to keep it up to date, which is the same price and life cycle of a console. If you do it right you should only be upgrading the cpu/mobo and then 4 years later the gpu or vice versa. Anybody that says otherwise has no idea what they're talking about.

So anyway, how about that Ground Zeroes?

Both excellent points. Also, to play online on PC, one doesn't have to pay for a online subscription and the games are genrally cheaper.

[Derb]

Any thoughts on the steam machine?

Is that plug n play?

[detective392]

Originally Posted by Derb

Any thoughts on the steam machine?

Is that plug n play?

Steam machines are plug n play. I've been looking into them myself but have no idea what to get or what's good enough. Also been looking at the Alienware X51's or Alpha which are also plug n plays.

[RaijinUT]

I think the Steam Machines might change the battleground over the next couple of years, but I am wait for the PC press conference at e3 to see what these babies can do.

I am sure Valve will be showing off what these machines do better than the current gen at E3 this years and I am interested to see if buzz they generate.

[Wingman1977]

While the Steam machines will be able to outperform consoles easily, you have to also keep in mind that the GPU won't be upgradeable (while the CPU, HDD and the RAM will be though) at all.