Coming from low/medium, going to Ultra - What 3 games?

[Overdriven]

So,

Imagine I've come from a world where I've never had a machine capable of playing above "medium" on most game settings (Alas true..) and I'm soon to build a machine where "Ultra" won't even make the machine blink.

What 3 games would I have to play? Coming out in the near future, out now, or from the past - Just for the way they look?

 

[Raven]

Last of Us
Xcom - Enemy Unknown
GT6

 

[Moriath]

Last of us and gt6 lol.

 

[Madmaxx]

Skyrim

 

[Raven]

Yeah sort of misread the thread. Switch Xcom with Skyrim (PC version, none of your low rez console bollocks though, PC version!)

 

[Scouse]

Skyrim doesn't even push my PC on Ultra, with the extra textures at 1920x1080 - and that's an old AMD Phenom II X3 and a Radeon 7870.

Can't think of a single game that'll push your PC m8.


Maybe Planetary Annihilation will push a good CPU and the Chris Roberts one, erm....


Edit: Star Citizen. When it comes out.

 

[Raven]

Last of us and gt6 lol.

Feel free to provide a better looking driving game (even Xbone 180 lolforza looks like a pile of wank next to GT6!) or a better looking 3rd person game.

Not a lot on PCs is graphically superior than either due to the fact graphics have been (and still are) being held back by consoles.

 

[Moriath]

He is asking for games ona. PC that will push it. Gt6 and the last of us are not on pc only ps3.

I would say games that look good at high gfx. Battlefield four. Far cry three was quite good. The new tomb raider looked good too. Assassins creed four.

They are all based off consoles structures with a boost for pc they generally won't stretch a mid range gfx card at 1080p.

 

[BloodOmen]

Skyrim on Ultra settings with some mods to improve graphics even further, looks breath taking.

 

[Raven]

He is asking for games ona. PC that will push it. Gt6 and the last of us are not on pc only ps3.

I would say games that look good at high gfx. Battlefield four. Far cry three was quite good. The new tomb raider looked good too. Assassins creed four.

They are all based off consoles structures with a boost for pc they generally won't stretch a mid range gfx card at 1080p.

No, he isnt. I don't see the letters P and C in his post.

 

[Raven]

He is asking for games ona. PC that will push it. Gt6 and the last of us are not on pc only ps3.

I would say games that look good at high gfx. Battlefield four. Far cry three was quite good. The new tomb raider looked good too. Assassins creed four.

They are all based off consoles structures with a boost for pc they generally won't stretch a mid range gfx card at 1080p.

All look shit. If it isn't moddable on PC then it looks the same as consoles.

 

[Moriath]

No, he isnt. I don't see the letters P and C in his post.

It's in the pc gaming forum isn't it?

 

[Himse]

BF4.

 

[caLLous]

No, he isnt. I don't see the letters P and C in his post.

Why would he be asking in the PC Gaming forum about games where the quality settings are changeable if he wasn't talking about PC games?

At the moment (and because I'm a bit out of touch with games) I'd say Crysis 3 or Crysis 2 (with the DX11 pack) or Far Cry 3. BF4 I guess, although I'm not sure if it's as taxing on hardware as a fully maxed-out Crysis 2/3.

 

[Overdriven]

No, he isnt. I don't see the letters P and C in his post.

Is most certainly a PC, tis why I posted it in the PC section!

Budget (Mostly 100% sure on max) is set.
Specs are mostly set, waiting on the Feb/March AMD release/announcement before I commit. Likely to be a single 780 TI if it's nothing big, then looking at SLI in about 2-3 years. The AMD thing will also determine processor/mobo - Likely to be an I7k chip otherwise.
Need screen, keyboard, mouse, headset, speakers and desk (Not buying at the same time, I'm not loaded)
White or Black case
Green cabling.

 

[ileks]

Definitely BF4. I've never played the Metro games but people say they look really good. I seem to remember The Witcher 2 looking really nice as well.

 

[Litmus]

BF4
Bioshock
Far Cry 3 maybe

 

[old.Tohtori]

Fallout with mods, same as Skyrim. With big ENB mods it can take down bigger machines too. Mass effect trilogy is another great adventure, though not that massive in needs.

 

[Billargh]

Metro games do look fantastic, although I'm pretty sure they're optimized like shit. I can run most games on ultra @ 60fps, I have to run Metro 2033 on medium to get anywhere close to 60fps

 

[Bahumat]

Gotta say Minesweeper!

 

[- English -]

daoc ofc hehe,

memories of running through camelot looking down with my 32mb geforce 2 back in the days

 

[Scouse]

So, what the above says is that there's not a single game out there that pushes current PC hardware.

Not one.

 

[caLLous]

Define "current PC hardware". If you're talking about SLI/Crossfire or whatever then no there isn't but that's the beauty of PC gaming, you can make your computer more powerful, unlike skanky consoles. I think the listed high-end requirements for Crysis 3 are still above and beyond the "normal" PC setup.

 

[Scouse]

Define "current PC hardware". If you're talking about SLI/Crossfire or whatever then no there isn't but that's the beauty of PC gaming, you can make your computer more powerful, unlike skanky consoles. I think the listed high-end requirements for Crysis 3 are still above and beyond the "normal" PC setup.

We're clearly talking about cutting-edge hardware and the lack of cutting edge games.

In the past there was always a handful of games that maybe 1% of people could run in maximum settings. They were designing games that pushed graphical boundaries to the limits - and PC gaming was great for it. It was incredibly visually exciting.

It simply doesn't happen any more.

 

[caLLous]

Ok, that's true. But unfortunately that's just the nature of the beast. PCs are *so* much more powerful than consoles will ever be that it's just not viable to spend the extra time making PC games super duper. I have a lot of love for Crytek for making the DX11 pack for Crysis 2.

 

[fettoken]

Metro 2033.

 

[old.Tohtori]

We're clearly talking about cutting-edge hardware and the lack of cutting edge games.

In the past there was always a handful of games that maybe 1% of people could run in maximum settings. They were designing games that pushed graphical boundaries to the limits - and PC gaming was great for it. It was incredibly visually exciting.

It simply doesn't happen any more.

That's a good thing. Unless you want to be one of those special people who are the 1% "elite"

Now devs have the freedom to do what they want, without alienating 99% of people. Games have no limits now, and you think it's a bad thing?

 

[Scouse]

That's a good thing.

I wouldn't call the stagnation of development in any area a good thing.

Now devs have the freedom to do what they want, without alienating 99% of people. Games have no limits now, and you think it's a bad thing?

I disagree completely with this. I think games are clearly much more limited nowadays.

The appeal to a broader market has led to not only a decline in pushing graphical boundaries to their limits, but it's also led to a decline in pushing gameplay to it's limits and innovation now only happens in the indi scene.

I'm firmly of the opinion that "peak gaming" was reached in the late 90's and it's stagnated since then.

 

[caLLous]

I'm as "for" pushing the boundaries of what's possible as you are but unfortunately since the "peak" of gaming, the landscape (and the PC's dominant position on said landscape) has changed beyond recognition. I don't think it's fair to blame the developers (less so the publishers but they're a necessary evil: EA can still do one though); they're businesses after all and if there isn't demand for their wares then they will simply cease to exist. They have to aim their products where they're going to make money and unfortunately for us, spending the extra time tinkering to make it super-lovely on the PC just isn't a priority for a lot of them.

 

[old.Tohtori]

I wouldn't call the stagnation of development in any area a good thing.

Didn't mean that, meant that there are top graphics available for more people.

Games have always been the same, but in the 90s you were a lot more quaranteed to get sales since the competition wasn't as fierce. In the 90s we had as many great games as we do today, just look at your top games of 2013(personal preference) and then compare it to your top games of 93. For example that is.

I've always said that there are more good games these days, but it seems less with the amount of games there are available.

In any case, bottom line; i don't think that hardware keeping up/and over the game requirements is a bad thing, or even that connected to the quality of games.