Battlefield 3
Evidence That Current Generation Consoles Are Horribly Outdated
by exterminat
©2011 Nicholas Laborde
Battlefield 3 is looking to be shooter of the year, and an all-time classic to set the precedent for what will be a very deciding decade of interactive entertainment.
As a gamer who owns all of the consoles and who builds (and loves) the PC platform, I can’t help but feel pity for those who will be playing the title on a console.
The PC version will run at true 1080p HD visuals, have support for 64-player multiplayer scenarios, and features unrestricted map size.
The console versions, on the other hand, will run at bare minimum-HD 720p, support a maximum of 24-player multiplayer, and have cut-down maps.
Let’s face it: this is clear, blatant evidence that the current generation of consoles are horribly outdated, and are hindering what gaming can aspire to ascertain.
Hold the phone!
Before you get all angry at me “looking down from my high and mighty PC throne”, DICE were the ones who announced what resolution the title would run at.
And if you aren’t familiar with how things work, no console game exists at true 1080p. Modern video cards for computers are designed to run native 1080p resolutions, whereas consoles are designed to run a little under 720p and are upscaled.
Battlefield 3 on consoles will have many smaller features taken out or cut down, such as more detailed anti-aliasing (MLAA), motion blur effects, particle effects among many others, and then the bigger ones such as reduced player count and slightly condensed maps.
In all objective seriousness, Battlefield 3 will be quite a large game, and space constraints for consoles (particularly the 360, the largest portion of their console audience) are undoubtedly hindering the console versions of the game.
As previously stated, they’re making it first and foremost a PC title with features being dumbed down to fit on consoles.
What does this all mean? Those boxes in your living room are pieces of crap, and are holding back what games COULD possibly achieve.
Don’t get me wrong (although I know many will): I love my consoles to death, and my number of [new] console purchases highly outranks that of my PC purchases; I’m going to fall in love with Gears of War 3, Resistance 3, Uncharted 3 and many others this fall just as much as I will with Battlefield 3 on PC.
But, they are representing the ceiling. Imagine if there was more room to work with in terms of power; imagine how much better Gears COULD look, or how much more phenomenal Uncharted COULD be, but are ultimately restrained by the outdated technology that consists of these consoles.
Whereas the PC continues to steadily grow and is far from decline, with little to no technical restrictions.
To provoke the thoughts…
Imagine the next generation of consoles. At this point, look at what the Wii U will be doing: being ‘just’ a little more than current generation boxes.
Is that what we really want? Do we want to doom the next generation to be the embodiment of this modern mentality that seems to be so prevalent these days, of only being that one percent better instead of thirty, sixty, or eighty?
We’re at an impasse never before seen; most console generations have gone five years before successors arrive. We’re entering year six, and no ‘real’ successors are in sight. Developers are straining what is possible on these limited pieces of technology, while others (such as DICE) will continue to honor and enjoy what the PC can offer.
Battlefield 3, to reiterate, is telling us that current generation consoles are horribly outdated, and we need to move forward.
Should Current Gen Consoles Retire? OXCGN Debate here.
How the 3DS is heading the way of the PSP GO! is analysed here.
Why does the 3DS only have 4 Months to Live? Don’t we want new tech? here
©2011 Nicholas Laborde
xxxxxx
Filed under: Console gaming, Game Industry News, Xbox 360 Tagged: | Battlefield 3, Console game, Gears of War 3, History of video game consoles (seventh generation), IBM PC compatible, Resistance 3, Video game console, Wii
I agree 100%. By way of example take Crysis 2, clearly developed with the lowest common denominator,i.e. consoles in mind and then cheaply ported to PC.
I have no doubt anyone who played both Crysis and the PC version of Crysis 2 would agree that the second title is far less immersive and believable than the first. While this makes sense from a business perspective it has most certainly handed the reins over to other forward moving developers to take gaming technology to the next level as evidenced by Battlefield 3′s brilliant looking gameplay demos.
Yeah, but who are you talking to? I certainly can’t get Microsoft or Sony to get their next gen consoles out.
This is dandy another article made probably with good intentions but fell to the way side of biased journalism; really it’s quite unfortunate. Console gaming is where it is right now because this is where it needs to be. With new consoles on the way and graphics and visualization finally being brought to it’s potential in generation 7, I find this article quite indignant to the accomplishments of the aforementioned consoles. What gets me rallied up is the fact that you, the writer are speaking on Battlefield 3′s amazing visuals on the PC (a powerful PC, may I remind you), not the in game mechanics because it’s just a shooter, right? What other new mechanics could it add?
It is quite evident to me that you are benign towards the PC, so tell me why should I take this, farce of an article serious? I find it quite entertaining how you speak in your second paragraph in “To Provoke the Thoughts”, hmm, provoke, yeah you just wanted a reaction, right? I can’t figure out though, did you want the people to get mad at you or the consoles?
Allow me to close this up on a… respectable level, technology moves at about 200 miles per hour, not too many afford a PC, some can’t even fathom the thought of owning a PC, let alone a high end gaming PC. So what you think is holding games back is simply keeping it in mind and in it’s own way moving it forward
Ps3 IS OUTDATED and is a piece of crap, i sold mine 3 months ago.
Stupid Sony invested billions on a processor that could eat everything.
by the raw power numbers they were right, they built a beast.
but the sad true is that the stupid cell cant simply handle hi end graphics, vectorial calculations are way too heavy for a single powerPC core. So, already on the final stages of development they called nvidia to supply a cheap and fast solution. and a miracle has happened they sent them the magnificent 7800 256mb. WOW!!!!
24 pipeline shaders (my gtx580 has 512) i could continue for all nigt long typing the true side of the ps3 but see for yourself.
the 360 didnt came has the hardware queen, it is an older system that competes with the allmigty ps3!!!
and beware ps3fans look at forza 4 and gt5 will be last gen. to me already is kiss
Im a console gamer and i respect PC gamers, they have put alot of money and effort in their PC’s to play their favourite games, not everyone has 900$+ to build a gaming rig (like me hehehe). My computer can barely handle flash based games lol! I think that it’s time for Sony and Microsoft to build the next gen consoles!
Why don’t you “consoles are holding back graphics” type of people look at RAGE?! Seriously. Look at it. Why? Because it looks much better than Battlefield and it runs at 60FPS!
Case and point!
Some of us don’t like gaming on the PC.
Yeah I get it, it’s a great platform for graphics whores who want to pay $500 every 3 months to get the best graphics. I used to love the KB and Mouse, but it just feels very awkward for gaming now.
You are also making assumptions that DICE isn’t prepared to deliver a good experience on the consoles. Battlefield Bad Company 2 was a great game and they didn’t short change anyone there.
If I am chugging along with 24 players on my console and I never played the PC version — WHAT do I care if you can have 1,000 players per map? I am still having fun.
naahh… pc gamers are holding back console games!! all great things came from console games..
troll sighted
If you’re talking about the 360 and Wii than yes, you are correct! As long as visuals and games can still get and look better, the consoles are NOT outdated. The 360 and Wii have gone as far as they can go, but the PS3 still has a whole lot more to offer! (edited due to lack of restraint with insults) And btw, the Wii and 360 were outdated the day they launched!!
Yeah right! Piece of **** 3 fanboys are the most retarded fanboys ever. It’s a nightmare to develop for and everything about it just screams mediocre. Almost all multiplatform games are worst on the PS3 and this will be no different.
Yeah so what , battlefield 3 may look better on pc but Dice are only going to sell 10 copies . The rest will be pirated . Dice will make all their money from all the consoles .
I don’t think you realize just how popular the Battlefield series is on PC. The game will sell quite well, probably close to if not better than the 360 version.
No one doubts what the PC version can achieven and Battlefield may have originated on the PC but it will sell no where near the amount as the Xbox 360/PS3………, you are on crack if you think so otherwise.
Battlefield originated on the PC and only really appeared on consoles with the Bad company series and 1943, all the hardcore BF fans will buy Battlefield 3 for the PC. I think you may find that it will sell very well on the PC
and this i agree with you on this i am a PC gamer, but i also have ps3 first person shooter regardless of which system they are on is always going to be better on PC. i am currently alpha testing the game can not go into details but will say this i will most diffidently be buying it on both ps3 and PC. and will more likely play it more on PC. it makes me feel like i am playing cod4 again not game wise but how fun it is. till this day i still play bfbc2 on PC so fun very supported community, and most importantly on PC everybody is a team player.
Yes I do agree that BF3 will sell really well on the PC… But… Will be pirated just as much or even more than what the PC sells. The PS3 and 360 will sell more than the PC, thats pretty much just how it is. What I would like to see in the future for the next consoles that come out is an upgradeable option similar to what PC’s are now. Every game that comes out will be required to play at the minimum settings of the console, basically how the console comes out of the box. If you want better fps, resolution, etc… Then you have the option to upgrade your console.
Upgrading the next generation consoles. ironic sounds like …. what???? lets hear it a PC
I dont know much about resolution but look at mgs4 for ps3 exclusively and looks like if released. Now it due great on graphics alone
just reading pc will run at 1080p is fail. the game will do 1600 just like other pc games. and there ARE console games that truly run at 1080p, just very few
besides 30 fps at 720 is normal for 90%+ of console games, and 1080+ at 60 fps is normal for pc games so makes bf3 any different?
consoles can still do almost anything a pc can do, 1080, 60 fps, 64 players, same maps whatever, it just means shit graphics. if you believe graphics alone outdate a system fine, but consoles arent holding back anything, its stupid devs who are afraid of having too big of a graphics divide so they limit pc visuals and console features.
PS3 and 360 are indeed holding gaming back. Not all devs want to make PC games, so they stick to the consoles. Problem is, the consoles are still anchored to DX9, have less than 1GB of RAM to work with, are running the equivalent of 3 generations old video cards, and in the 360′s case, are stuck with drastically limited disc space.
There’s a reason why when you go to a store and buy a PC game these days, about 70% of the time the disc just contains an unlock to download the game on Steam. 8GB of DVD space just isn’t enough room to hold modern games.
However, this is nothing new. PC has always been and will always be the true high-performance platform for gaming, simply because the user has the option to upgrade any part of it at any time. A new game coming out that really stresses your video card? Get yourself a newer one for $150.
Want some more RAM? $60 – $100 will get you an additional 4GB. Building a PC isn’t nearly as expensive as many people believe, and it gives you far more freedom and variety in your gaming. Because of this lack of customization and adaptability, consoles will always be restricting what is done with gaming.
Consoles are not outdated. It’s the ideas that are outdated. As dkpatriarch said, publishers are more interested in making money on the next big shooter than pushing new ideas. Now, who can honestly blame them as they ARE businesses? I’d love to see more original content, but that’s not what the consumer dollar argees with. As long as the yearly Call Of Duty copy and paste jobs break sales records, pretty shooters will always be what publishers are interested in. Hell, I imagine Mass Effect, as much as I love both games, would probaly be a very different series if EA hadn’t bought out Bioware.
Either way, we still have plenty of life left in consoles. As much as it seems BF3 will honestly be an amazing game, better graphics and bigger maps does not necessarily a great game make. It doesn’t matter what they cut out of Battlefield 3 to put it on consoles. If it’s a fun game, it will be a fun game, no matter your platform of choice.
I agree 100% with this!! I have been urging the industry to move forward and get on with NEXT GEN! I bored to F’N death with the current gen. I mean really now, enough is a f’n nuff! Jes us cryst!
I agree partly with the article but not everybody can afford a high-end PC
also I feel the same way you do but about the xbox 360 and ps3 where the Blu-ray can hold 6x more data… Imagine if ethesda went Sony exclusive and the next elder scrolls or fallout is 6x bigger than cyrodil or the nuclear wastes of Washington!!! 6x better graphics, weapons, perks, quests… A lot more can be achieved on the ps3. Even gta 4 had to be cut down to fit on a DVD disc. But yes PCs are better but for me are too expensive and I like playing on a big telly =]
You don’t need a ‘high-end’ PC. Just build your own and upgrade it as and when you need to.
Exactly. Imagine if the reversed happened : companies concentrating on PC exclusives instead – the same result would also happen. It’s all about how committed the developers/ publishers are to a certain platform.
It would be ethically wrong if Bethesda suddenly stopped making a PC classic to the PC crowd because of an exclusive deal with Sony or Msoft. It hurts when Alan Wake and Heavy Rain were suddenly yanked out the PC gamers’ hands at the very last moments-2-3 months prior to launch. Not because the PC can’t play them- it’s because Sony and Microsoft need something to one upped each other in the horror survival genre.
We know the unfinished codes of the PC versions are still there in a developer’s hard disk somewhere. Imagine working on something for 3-5 years and suddenly your boss’s boss tells you to delete it. Have any of you seen the GTA4 realism mods?
Stop saying a better graphics doesn’t mean a better game, especially when using it against the PC. How would you feel if the developers of Uncharted, Red Dead Redemption and Resistance decided to use that as their mantra in game development. Why shouldn’t PC games look pretty when those console exclusives looked prettier and prettier with every sequel? It feels like some sort of Cinderella Syndrome.
I’ve connected my PC to the living room’s big telly just to test it’s capabilities. I’ve played a number of games and I get smooth frame rate – not bad for a 4 years old PC. Most of them are console ports! Don’t you get it?! Multiplatforming have allowed me to play better looking versions on my PC without requiring me to constantly upgrade! And still get to enjoy the great story and gameplay that console gamers seem to cherish a lot.
ED: If you have an opinion to voice, please do so in an intelligent manner.
The PS3 is far from horribly outdated. Any PS3 game that looks outdated is most likely a port of a 360 game. If the game is developed for the actual hardware it might not match top of the line PCs but it will be good enough. Far from horrible.
I have to say I disagree that we need new consoles now. Our debate should explain why:
http://oxcgn.com/2011/08/01/should-current-gen-consoles-retire-oxcgn-debates/
I think gaming experiences have to change, not the power or new gimmicks. But as long as we support only the big commercial shooters this will never happen as the publishers want to make money above all else, which is what business does.