Are consoles holding video games back?

As long as people keep buying trash
Companies will keep producing trash

Corporations don't give a shit about you, so you shouldn't keep eating theirs.

Probably, but PC hardware manufacturers are worse

Is this a fucking smart fridge emulator?

Ghosts was made by incompetent devs you dumbass.

Yeah. Battlefield 3 is like 8 years old and is still the best looking FPS to date, granted the colors are from the one map pack

fpbp

no your just an idiot for expecting any level of craft from Call of Duty. consider that the founders of the series have long since left

based

no, it's just a decade old console game compared to a heavily modded PC game running on modern hardware

Objectively yes. The only other valid opinion is 'i don't care that they are' which is disgustingly braindead.

>your

Attached: 1554490285168.jpg (584x657, 231K)

No consoles are the only reason we get good looking games

Look at the top played pc games like CSGO, DOTA, LOL, PUBG and they all look like SHIT

be grateful you even get half assed ports of our games

Attached: 1423606474967.jpg (1922x1080, 708K)

Yes consoles are for poorfags. Next thread.

This image is fucking retarded.
>HL2 isn't what it looked like in 2004
>Fast(ish) MP gamer vs Slow SP
>Caring about graphics

Nigga I started playing GTAIV again yesterday on the fucking PS3 and it's still fun. The fact it's ugly doesn't change that.

lol no, third world shitters prefer PC

Attached: kXjMpGa.png (4500x2234, 111K)

>No consoles are the only reason we get good looking games

Attached: HBTomcat.webm (1920x1080, 2.95M)

>the only countries that actually matter prefer consoles
feelsgoodman.eatmyass

CPUs hold us back more than anything, since Sony really pushes the no gameplay shit they don't need to have much CPU power so games have stagnated.

No. They have some of the best looking games. Says what you want about Uncharted 4(movie game whatever), but it looks better than PC game, even with mods and 4k texture packs. PC needs devs who put in effort.

>easy to run games are more popular than harder to run game
Very intelligent observation user.

North America, the UK and Japan are the worst of the third world.

Attached: 1400000648778.gif (796x270, 2.76M)

It also runs at a buttery smooth 22 FPS

>no character shadows or reflections in a tiny ass map
>no gameplay
>walking sim
>literal interactive movie
>downgrade of the century
>same as first

Attached: 1553951534329.jpg (514x459, 40K)

This. Absolutely based and truthpilled.

Six years is a decade, wow
Holy shit
Better let my twelve year old crack a beer with his old man
You fucking hyperbolic culture-ruiner

>popular games determine overall quality of games on said platform
I'm glad to see that all platforms are equal in power and graphics with Fortnite leading the industry.

What's the game on the left?

Ace Combat 7 looks better

But i thought consoles were holding pc back, who knew it was actually pc holding its own exclusives back

>Six years is a decade, wow

Attached: 1343075357660.jpg (275x275, 25K)

Attached: UH.png (276x361, 107K)

Nice goalpost moving, still more visually appealing then 99% of PC shovelware

Popular games show most PC fats have shit tier hardware and blaming consoles is retarded

fpbp

Attached: 1540931856360.jpg (249x249, 13K)

F.E.A.R

YOU CAN'T SAY THAT WORD!

>Halo 3 + Reach has 4 player splitscreen campaign
>Halo 4 only has two
>5 has none

And didn’t Black Ops 1 have splitscreen online matchmaking?

Holy shit you are fucking dumb! Must be all the inbreeding you mutts did.

Attached: 1554732191252.webm (540x960, 2.94M)

Beat me to it.

In what way do popular games affect how all games look on a platform? I also never claimed to agree with OP in my post at all, you reaching retard. It is a fact though that PC games have the ability to look much better than console games due to the fact they are objectively more powerful machines.
>Popular games show most PC fats have shit tier hardware and blaming consoles is retarded
Most of the people who play they f2p games are 3rd worlders or poorfags. Equating them to be the entirety of the PC userbase is like saying everyone who owns a PS4 is on welfare just because there is a significant amount of niggers in the ghetto who own ps4s, making it impossible for there to be a wealthy console player.

But those console games barely run at acceptable framerates.

Fucking South Koreans and their mentally I'll obsession with beauty. Even more than murica and they look like goblinas.

No shit, which is why we're all happy they're almost obsolete.

>using the same game twice

why would you delete the truth janny

>not posting the actual goat

Attached: Butcher Bay 2004.webm (1280x720, 2.72M)

This

Attached: RE7 vs Bioshock.jpg (1920x2184, 816K)

Graphic whores are unironically killing the industry.
Games would be far more innovative if Developers focused as little as possible, then games wouldn’t be as safe as possible and could take risks.

it's not the same game though

Oh yeah, that was in feature in BO1. Man, devs just gave up in even giving us cool features

Yes but mods fix everything

youtube.com/watch?v=ohN6DGI8GoQ

>PC games have the ability to look much better than console games due to the fact they are objectively more powerful machines.
Too bad no developers are designing games for GTX 1080 and other high end parts

30 is acceptable to most people, be happy at least when they target 30 on console when you get the port on pc you can use whatever framerate you want

this is such a great fucking troll image. I really didn't think anyone would take the bait - considering the words "alpha footage" are literally in one of the PC screen caps - but they obviously did and its making me laugh audibly.

>leaving out one of the best PS4 titles
youtube.com/watch?v=uM523jjrvf4

Attached: 1402733771871.jpg (2560x1440, 1.17M)

underage and newfag detected

do console fags know their games are made on pc hardware?

Attached: 1536065152403.png (435x468, 103K)

This, specifically western triple A ones.

Do PC turds know games are made with console dev kits

>Too bad no developers are designing games for GTX 1080 and other high end parts
Of course not, they need to make the games playable for as many people as possible, so they base it around low-mid range hardware because they're lazy. Even ports from consoles follow those rules, where even on mid-range hardware they still look better than console versions(graphics+fps). That doesn't stop games that are developed with high-end hardware in mind from looking better than console games and their ports though. With the case of mulitplats, the graphics would have to be based on the largest playerbase(which happen to be the weakest), consoles. Many devs are too lazy to bother creating multiple versions or put effort into the PC version of their game so they base the PC versions off the console one, limiting how much a good PC can push the graphics without outside modifications. So now that I've thought about it, maybe consoles are holding back PC. Only ports and multiplats though. :^)

i know this is a bait image but
>left = ~60h of gameplay max
>right = thousands if not more
really makes you think

Do PCfags actually care about graphics or do they just pretend to validate having spent hundreds of dollars on a machine and not even play games on it.

While everyone is saying fpbp for This is the bigger reason why games fucking suck.

>taking about graphics
>B-BUT LET ME MOVE THE GOALPOST TO GAMEPLAY NOW
Cringe

>That doesn't stop games that are developed with high-end hardware in mind
Such as

Consoles aren't the problem themselves, it's majority console gamers that are. By far the most lucrative market in gaming, outside maybe gacha whales, are 25-40 office worker types. They play console games casually with people from work, drop them in 4-6 weeks, and never spend more than 20 or 30 hours on a single game. They also have the disposable income to buy every new console, multiple games a month, and are willing to spend on microtransactions to skip grinds or get an advantage, and have no interest in actually getting good at a game, learning complex mechanics, or replaying a single-player game after they've beaten it once. That all means that the most profitable option for Western AAA developers is to make short games with flashy cutscenes and visuals and very little gameplay depth, and to avoid introducing new mechanics that have to be mastered or creating situations where a complete casual noob can't beat a skilled player at least some of the time. With the rise of multiplatform games that means most AAA PC games suffer from design decisions aimed at console casuals as well.

It's also probably worth pointing out that this is a big part of why Japanese games tend to be better than AAA Western ones these days. Consoles in Japan are like PCs in the west, mostly the preserve of serious gamers, while casuals over there play on portables or phones if they play games at all.

The only game I really know of that pushes modern PC hardware hard is Star Citizen, and even that isn't that GPU-intensive, it'll run pretty well at 1080p on a 1060 as long as you've got a decent CPU, an SSD, and 16GB+ of RAM.

consoles cost 2x or even 3x the actual prices in shitty countries, for example in my shithole a ps4 pro costs $750 and a switch $450

top
>a high end pc
bottom
>on a 6 year old console

Not to mention even a 8800 couldnt run Bioshock at 30fps in 1080p in 2007 consistently, so unless you loved your silky smooth 20 fps that screen is obviously recent

Off the top of my head, Kingdom Come had some really nice graphics and was a game intended to be PC exclusive until they received more funding from their kickstarter than expected which led to console released, if i'm not mistaken. Even if I was, it had good graphics on PC in mind since conception, as evident in the graphics of the early alpha they released along with many graphical features many multiplats and ports don't include in their PC ports.

Attached: 1527054782440.jpg (2048x1152, 942K)

Technically a combination of all of these things together.

And there it is /thread.

CoD still runs off the same modified id Tech 3 Engine it used for the first game

That was a prerelease bullshot, at least post a real shot

This is the correct answer.

are you retarded? dev kits are for debuging an testing, the games are made on pc.
This like thinking all android, and iphone apps are made on iPhone and android phones.

It isn't hard to make nice looking natural environments when your references are photoscanned from the real world rather than to randomly placed speedtree shatout assets (although speedtree is still great for what it is). Granted, the SVOTI works wonders on that scene too.

Here's something taken during the release of the game.

Attached: 1548142972287.jpg (3840x2160, 842K)

Developers making games FOR consoles and then porting them over to PCs is what is "holding them back". It used to be PC, console, arcade, and portables were ALL SEPARATE and games were developed separately for each of them. Although now portables aren't THAT different from consoles in terms of the games they can run, so I can understand that difference being blurred, but there's still no excuse for PCs getting ports of console games instead of the other way around.

Dev kits have the specs of the console they are targeting, they are making games focused on those specs

This. Unfortunately all the money left PC gaming itself due to piracy, but the money didn't come back after digital distribution more-or-less solved the piracy problem.

amazing looking water in this game

Nice source lmao

bottom would look better without all the dumb filters.