CRank: 5Score: 26690

Nope.

More of a gimmick than 3D TVs.

4295d ago 1 agree5 disagreeView comment

I love how fanboy scum downvote this, when the devs themselves have flat out said the PC version looks and runs best, and looks as good as the E3 reveal.

Console fans are just in denial.

4295d ago 2 agree2 disagreeView comment

" It's looking likely that this will be yet another multiplat that will run best on PS4".

Err, no.

PC is the best version of the game, confirmed by the devs multiple times, with advanced lighting, depth of field and effects. 1080p, 60 FPS.

PS4 is 900p, 30 FPS. Xbox One is 720p, 30 FPS.

And I fully plan to play this on PC using my PS4 controller, as I prefer open-world games played that way.

4295d ago 11 agree10 disagreeView comment

Problem is, MS have blatantly created DX12 because of Xbox.

The leaps from DX9 to 10 and from 10 to 11 are so noticeable.

I can't imagine the DX12 leap will be at all big because it's made for consoles, and not PC.

4295d ago 2 agree12 disagreeView comment

Infamous was a massive disappointment.

4295d ago 15 agree9 disagreeView comment

I love Naughty Dog, but Valve to me are better.

4295d ago 0 agree4 disagreeView comment

When it comes out on PC, which it looks better on of course with more advanced lighting as proven in the Nvidia trailer for the game a while back, mods will be all over it after a month or so.

ENB will have a lighting mod out for it and make it look as good as it did at reveal.

Look at Dark Souls 2 on PC now. With mods, the game looks almost exactly like it did at reveal before the downgrade.

4295d ago 1 agree0 disagreeView comment

This isn't about gameplay. This about hardware and therefore graphics.

Crytek know what they're talking about, what with them producing easily some of the best graphics ever created for games.

But hey, as long as what they say doesn't make this failed generation of consoles look bad, it's all cool right?

4295d ago 1 agree3 disagreeView comment

Sorry, but anyone that says they don't see any lack of AA (aka "jaggies"), at 1080p, is flat out lying.

Only at 1440p and above do you need less AA, and even then you still need it to produce clean, sharp lines.

Infamous SS had a weak-hardware version of AA implemented, and even then there were still jaggies and very very noteable framerate drops.

1080p 100% needs AA, otherwise objects look terrible when in motion. A screenshot...

4295d ago 0 agree2 disagreeView comment

Is Kinect dead?

It has to have been alive to be dead, so technically it's not dead.

Kinect is a joke. So is project Morpheus. We don't want VR because it sucks.

4297d ago 0 agree0 disagreeView comment

I'm sticking to DayZ. Not a single thing has impressed me about H1Z1. I think the graphics look cartoony, and the animations are just WOEFUL, borderline laughable.

People say the development is going too slow. It's been out 6 months you idiots.

"Who pays for an alpha trolololol."

I'll happily pay £20 for a pre-alpha that works, is constantly changing, and I get access to every version of the game from now on forev...

4297d ago 1 agree19 disagreeView comment

The only reason BF4 was released with bugs, is because it WAS released too early.

This is simply not DICE's fault. DICE are up there with the best devs in the industry. Nobody does sound like DICE. Nobody does Battlefield like DICE, a series that changed the way FPS games were played online. You can't take that away from them.

DICE just have EA's MORONS in charge that only care about the monies.

If the game was released 6 mont...

4297d ago 1 agree2 disagreeView comment

No downgrade on the PC version it seems.

The biggest downgrade is the lighting, as everyone is complaining about it, and the lighting is miles better on the PC version due to their work with Nvidia.

Even Ubisoft have flat out said that the PC version looks far better.

Also, 60+ FPS.

It looks fantastic on the PS4, less so on the Xbox (duh), but the jaggies and 30 FPS are annoying, even if it's what you can expect for a go...

4297d ago 0 agree1 disagreeView comment

It's been dying since release.

4299d ago 0 agree0 disagreeView comment

In theory, KIND OF.

Pretty sure MS have said the Kinect uses up less than 10% of the CPU capabilities, so in reality, because the hardware isn't changing, you'd be looking at gains of a few FPS. Like maybe 5. 10 at an absolute massive push.

It's similar to overclocking. A small incremental increase in CPU will only give you a small amount of performance gain.

The biggest gains are when you take a 3.5ghz CPU like, say, an i7 377...

4299d ago 0 agree0 disagreeView comment

BLATANTLY now 30 FPS and not 60.

Looks like I was right all along, and PS4 fans were downvoting me out of denial.

4301d ago 1 agree0 disagreeView comment

Hilarious.

0:59 shows how dumb the engine/AI is.

4302d ago 1 agree0 disagreeView comment

Until CoD goes away and dies in a ditch like it needs to, devs will focus on MP before SP.

A game with a solid MP maintains value even 2nd hand. Seriously, you can pick up CoD MW for like £20 these days. It's ancient, but people still play it.

Thief and Infamous?

Pfft, £15. But then Infamous kinda sucked anyway.

4302d ago 1 agree2 disagreeView comment

60 FPS will be reached, not maintained. They say it will run at 60 FPS, yeah, maybe indoors in a simple cut-scene. Head outside and, just like Infamous, watch those figures almost halve.

It's just false advertising, proven by EVERY console game out so far this generation that isn't an indie game.

As always, PC is the best version though.

4302d ago 0 agree0 disagreeView comment

Hardware limitations on consoles will be the downfall frankly.

Everyone's complaining about generic games that are the same as the last.

It's because, STRAIGHT FROM DEVS MOUTHS, that the lack of bandwidth on consoles is killing gaming as devs can't add things like new AI coding.

But you can't reason with console fans, they think their boxes are perfect.

4302d ago 1 agree15 disagreeView comment