Battlefield 3 PC superiority, PS4 & Xbox 720 needed in 2012

By Posted 26 Jun 2011, 23:18

Recently a very interesting, yet brief, post was published on GamerSheep which debates whether Battlefield 3 will be worth buying on the Xbox 360 or PlayStation 3, when many believe that the game will be far superior on the PC, if this turns out to be true we wonder how much importance this will put on next-gen consoles arriving in 2012.

The video (shown below) says that effectively the need for the next-gen consoles are coming up faster and faster by the month and this is showcased in the release of Battlefield 3. With all things considered for the new game, each aspect of the PC version tops those of the Playstation 3 and Xbox 360 (excluding perhaps online communities and cost of hardware).

It boils down to the specs if you will, as the PC grows rapidly with new technology and hardware outweighing that of current-gen consoles. Nowadays, if you are truly into gaming and you have built or bought a gaming-specific PC, you may find that your gaming experience is amplified by high performance graphic cards, massive processing power and even advanced gaming peripherals. These things, current-gen consoles can not compete with.

In the video, Sanii says that the PC version of BF3 will support 64 online players whilst the Xbox 360 version will only support 24. This will have a huge impact in terms of multiplayer gaming, and if it runs smoothly console gamers will be asking why they are throttled to less than half of the PC’s online capabilities. Sanii also say that the PC version of the game also runs above 60 frames per second (if your PC is up to it) this will result in better animations and smoother visuals, this should make PC version much better in terms of graphics than the PS3 and Xbox 360 releases which are limited to 30 fps.

So is there a need now more than ever for the next-gen evolution to come our way? Maybe this problem only affects the major gamers who are truly passionate about gaming experience. For casual gamers perhaps this is not such an issue, however if console manufacturers do not hurry up we could begin to see hardcore gamers give up on their consoles and jump ship to high-end gaming PCs.

We think that Sony and Microsoft are keeping a close eye on the situation and will have a better idea than anyone as to when the time is right, we have heard that Microsoft’s next-gen console will be revealed at 2012, we worry that if this is not the case console gamers will start lagging behind their PC gaming counterparts, it could potentially mean that every major 2012 title will be best on PC.

  • http://www.facebook.com/jaycook777 Jay Cook

    First off, I had gotten so tired of always upgrading my PC.

    Second; I have a few hours to play, but boom, the game doesn’t work. So I spend all my time finding patches and driver updates, then the time I had to play is gone.

    I love the Xbox 360. You throw in the disc, find your friends and start playing.

    • nigel.speak

      And that is what gaming is all about a bit of fun

    • Akeem Hamilton

      Sounds like you had a shitty PC. I’m a PC gamer and all I do is download the game or throw in the disc and start playing as well.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000769591011 Nick Anteau

      yeah.. you put in the disk in your 360, then get RROD and have to replace the console 9 times :) PCFTW

  • http://www.facebook.com/johnssylvester John Sylvester

    i have the 360 and wii, i already jumped ship to pc. my pc can rock any game with no load time, smoother game play and graphics beyond anything ive seenon any console. upgrading costs a fraction of what a new system costs, and games get real cheap, real fast. plus u have venues such as steam and other online play sources, in addition to live cross overs such as red faction guerilla.

  • Anonymous

    I don’t think people should really spend too much time worry about it, it’s honestly been this way forever, and will likely remain this way.  Consoles simply cannot match up with the hardware inside a PC…even when the consoles were launched, they were still last-gen.  Who cares though?  As you say, those interested, will invest the money and time into building a PC (myself included), those who simply want to turn a console on and play a game, will do so.  The cost to make a console match toe-to-toe for a few years, let alone 5+ years, would simply make it inaccessible to a large portion of the gaming community.

    I won’t lie, it’s not like I bought this PC when I was 10.  I used my dad’s for ages, got a few hand me downs, and such, until I saved up the money for it.  It took 6 months, a Christmas present (processor) and $2300.  That’s way outside the realm of a console.

    The fact that some games developers _still_ put enough thought into their engines, that they are able to utilize excess resources (granted, these aren’t always the most optimized of engines, but their definitely are improvements) should be encouraging to all.  If developers don’t innovate, and expand as new hardware comes out…the industry will stagnate, and stop evolving.

    I don’t really see a need currently for a new set of consoles, what needs to happen is GPU prices need to come down, so that they can afford to toss a DX11 compliant (or…if it’s right around the corner DX12) card in the PS3/720. I think their biggest mistake this gen was having GPU’s developed on aging DX9 tech….around the same time as DX10 cards launched.  

    Keep in mind though, even with aging GPU’s, there are still some pretty brilliant games on the consoles.  The grass is always greener on the other side (heh, unless you have a gaming rig), but you largely get the same games, they’re more than just ‘playable’ and a decent and ever-growing network to enjoy them on.

  • Anonymous

    Love the “excluding perhaps online communities and cost of hardware” – cost, in particular, is chalk and cheese – I’m thinking about upgrading the graphics card on my rig, and the card in question costs the same as the new top-end (ie, large HDD) 360 or PS3.  Were I to run two top-end graphics cards in SLI, then I’d be able to afford two PS3s, two 360s and a couple of Wiis for the same price.  Given this, I’d bloody well want the PC version to look better – I’d be a pretty narky PC gamer if I’d spent the price of a small (used) car on my rig and it looked the same!

    Building on this, for either Sony or Microsoft (or Ninty!) to release a console that could produce the PC visuals we’ve been seeing, it would cost significantly more than the PS3 at launch.  Consoles aren’t about cutting-edge technology, they’re about making affordable technology as good as possible to deliver gaming to a broad userbase.  High-end PC gaming is about smaller numbers of gamers spending a _lot_ of money on their rigs.  They’re different markets, plain and simple.

    As for me, I have a gaming PC (an old one, so only around 30% or so more powerful than the PS3), but despite the fact it’s more powerful than my gaming platform of choice (PS3), I’ll be grabbing BF3 on console, because I find that mouse/kb control for shooters is far too user-friendly and unrealistic (the imprecision of thumbsticks on a gamepad actually ends up meaning that online shootouts on console play out far more realistically than the ridiculously accurate and overly fast rubbish on PC – not an issue for people who aren’t fussed with realism – both options make for very enjoyable gaming, but I prefer realism so consoles are where I go for shooters (I know you can use a gamepad on PC – but MP on PC with a gamepad is just a wee bit unfair ;))).

    • Hilux

      What??? you think moving a gun around with fork lift like control is more realistic, you dont think soldiers can shoot as accurate as someone with a keyboard and mouse then LOL too many movies maybe???

      • Anonymous

        You ever used an assault rifle or LMG Hilux?  I’ve got experience with both ;).  The main issue with mouse/kb though is the turning – you can turn on a dime with no inertia in a split second – try doing that while aiming a fully-loaded M60 (a dash under 10kg) – if you don’t have one to hand, maybe try doing a 180 degree turn while aiming a vacuum cleaner (similar weight) in half a second, while maintaining your aim control.  Even with a lighter (4-5kg loaded, generally) AR, you just can’t adjust your aim IRL like you can with a mouse/kb, it doesn’t work that way – mouse/kb are far, far too precise to be realistic.

    • Juan

      one question buddy. will BF3 support gamepads?  I’m a console player (ps3) but i saw the graphics of the PC version and fell in love with them.I’m just not used to the keyboard and mouse.II hope this game supports gamepads.

      • Anonymous

        I think I heard somewhere that BF3 will have proper gamepad support (BC2′s PC gamepad support was barely functional, and pretty poor) – the issue’ll be the unrealistically fast turning and aiming speeds the mouse/kb users will have, but I may well grab BF3 on PC as well a year or so after launch, when it’s cheaper, to see how the larger maps play.

  • nigel.speak

    No i do not see the point in bringing out a ps4 or  xbox 720 out next year, would they be alot better than what we are playing on now i do not think so. In my eyes the ps3 as still got a lot too give us in the world of gaming why spend more money. I do not know about xbox 360 but i bet it still as got a lot to give.

  • Nike_7688

    PC versions will always have superior graphics.  It has always been that way and always will be that way.  Right now the margin is a little more than people are used to, but that’s the sacrifice you make when you buy one console that doesn’t require upgrading (save maybe a new HD, whoopdie do).

    I don’t understand why people are still talking about this. It’s like they’re mad at DICE for making the game as good as it can be on every platform…it’s AS GOOD AS IT CAN BE ON EVERY PLATFORM lol.  It’s not their fault that one of those platforms is more advanced (and more expensive) than the others.

    ALSO, the video has some false “facts” in there about 30FPS being “pretty bad”.  HD movies run at 24fps and almost every modern game out there for PS3 and Xbox360 runs at 30FPS.  The difference is, most companies don’t tell you about it, and console gamers never know.  if you want to make the “COD Comparison” because that one is supposedly running at 60fps on consoles, think about how old that engine is, AND the fact that it’s running at sub-HD resolutions, and always has.

    This argument is pointless and wasting a lot of time and creating unnecessary confusion to people who just don’t know any better and bought a console so they didn’t have to know any better.

  • Anonymous

    To be honest the only people who seem to worry about the superiority of PC graphics are PC gamers. If it were that important to the average gamer, they would all be playing on high-end PCs and not consoles. The current gen of consoles is fine as far as I’m concerned, and I’m betting Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft think the same way.

    • Anonymous

      Actually, that’s pretty far from the truth.  The reality is, there is a division that exists between 360, PS3, and PC gamer’s.  This division, is exacerbated by publishers, developers and the media.  Some want to push the envelope on hardware A, others B, others C, D etc…  And when a developer points out that something will be better on another set of hardware.  Someone reports on it, in a very inflammatory way (not necessarily the case here, but BF3 has caused a stir amongst console gamer’s, urged on by the media), and a console gamer who thinks they know what they’re talking about, express disbelief and lobs accusations of lies at the thought that somehow…a PC with several thousand dollars more hardware under the hood, outperforms a console.

      Really, it’s more about peoples insecurity.

      Another great division was the piracy issue, but, now that console games show up online faster than PC games, most console owners and developers have gotten off that horse.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_V7VDZ5GW7EPEZNU7Y6M66BMLKY zar

      You’re right – for the _average_ gamer (ie those who enjoy farmville, etc.)

      We are talking, however, about Battlefield players – certainly _not_ average…

      /rolls_eyes

  • Anonymous

    PC has been living under the masses shadow for over half a decade already, consoles have been holding PC development for that long, the proof is on Crysis, there is no console system that will ever be more powerful than a PC, because new consoles take time to learn to develop games and within the time they learn to harness its true potential, the hardware is already behind PC, people who say “Xbox 360 dominated PC’s when it first came out” is smoking crack, games developed at the same time for both platforms (unported and separate development to exploit each’s potential) will only show equality if not better looks by PC, by the time console reaches max results in development PC already has close to twice the hardware available.

    It is sad that greed is holding down the gaming industry.

  • headus

    Comparing pc-version with console-version is the biggest nonsens anyway. If you want to compare you will have to use a pc from 2007 or 2008 with a non-replaceable hardware. Then put in the BF3 disc and lets see how it works.