I don't know why Panda got disagrees, you can easily build a $500 budget gaming PC that will run everything out there smoother and look better than the consoles. The only reason I still have a PS3 is because of exclusives, and the fact that the majority of my friends are PS3 gamers.
I play on 1920x1200 on a 27". My 2 GTX 275s are slightly overclocked, and my I7 is overlocked to 3.6Ghz. This whole custom build, including the price of the monitor, cost me around $1800 (US dollars). It's not like a spent all that money just to play Crysis either, as I have many good uses for the I7, somewhat similar uses to Pandamobile except I do professional photography, videos, and CGI. The I7 really speeds things up for rendering and compressing.
Edit: Ok, it's a lit...
One was a bit brighter, the other was a bit darker, and the lighting still doesn't look like it does on PC on either console.
Actually I have 2 GTX 275s in sli with an I7 and I get an average of 50-60 fps on max. Ayways, it looks pretty good for consoles which the equivalent of 7900 GTXs in them. And thats real nice how they can develop for both consoles at once, I can see this taking over UE3 for console multiplatform games.
Actually ATI did the 360s graphics card, not Nvidia. Nvidia only did the PS3s graphics card. And what you said about the price not dropping because of them isn't entirely true, that's a choice made by Sony and Microsoft.
Yeah, ATI always has good prices, although Nvidia has more powerful cards. I'm not sure how well ATI cards run Crysis, but I get around 60 fps average in Crysis with 2 GTX 275s in sli (stock clocks), everything on max.
@HGG
You worded it a bit wrong if that's what you meant to say. So the title should say "Half Life 2: Episode 3 To Have Impact of Microsoft's Halo." And please type in proper English!
EDIT: wrong post
Shbzshar, HHG isn't saying that, read the title carefully. He thinks that Episode 3 is Microsoft's new Halo in the impact it will have, when the game has nothing to do with Microsoft or 360, and will have more of an impact on PC than anything else.
Half-Life 2: Episode 3 has absolutely nothing to do with Microsoft, and will not be a system seller for the 360. The majority of people who buy it will be PC gamers.
"Extra resolutions are just that , extra resolutions . it wont turn an ungly game into something pretty , nor will makes twice more awesome a great game . With now default 720p and 1080p resolutions (native or upscaled) , who really cares if you run the game at 2560 x 1900 ? It's mostly an ego thing . It will only matters for futures games ."
The resolution is a big difference in my eyes. Most console gamers think that 720p is sharp enough, but for PC games, 720p is j...
I've never been a fan of ATI but... I have the feeling they're gonna beat Nvidia in the first wave of DX11 cards.
I've always liked Vista, I never had any problems with it, and when I had it, I was too lazy too install the service packs, and I still had no problems. I guess I'm just lucky though. But after I built a new rig, I switched over to Windows 7 RC 64-bit, and I freakin love it so far. It's everything that Vista should have been. I'm definitely buying it when it comes out in retail.
@cmrbe
No, it's because we all know that Uncharted 2 doesn't look photorealistic at all, and it's not going for that look, it's going for a colorful, viibrant, cartoony look. But there are alot of people saying that it looks like real life. Then we show them the Crysis pics, and they say that the gameplay sucks and it's a glorified tech demo. If they have actually played the game, they would know that it's a very fun game.
This whole rumor that it costs $2000-$3000 to run Crysis decently is completely false. You can easily build an $800-$1000 PC that will run every game out there on max settings smoothly, and Crysis with mostly very high and some high. If that's too much, you can build one for $500 that will still run every game out there on max smoothly, and Crysis at high with about 2 settings at very high.
Well I don't mean for specifically Photoshop as that's always loaded fast on every comp I've had, but I multitask alot and render HD videos through Vegas and I7 is alooot faster at rendering and multitasking than any other processor I've tried.
Well, I think I7 is better for people such as me who don't use the computer for gaming only, since I also do alot of Photoshop, music programs, Fraps recording, and other stuff along with gaming, which is why I have an I7. But for people who use their rigs for gaming and pretty much nothing else, AMDs processors seem to have better bang for the buck if you don't want to spend to much money.
The first one is still unmatched graphically, I can't wait to see what Crytek can pull off if they use DX11 for Crysis 2.
You know that trailer was from the PC version... I doubt it will look that good on consoles.
Wooo, now if only I didn't already have LBP...