Hopefully it comes sooner than later, I imagine the high end CPUs & GPUs of today will pretty much breeze through this in comparison to the consoles likely being stuck at 30fps. And next gen CPUs & GPUs are just around the corner too.
Exactly, at least if you have a decent PC and a PS you can play the online games for free on PC, and just use the PS for single player games or something.
I mean if there's any single player Sony games that I actually want that aren't on PC then I would buy said console to play them on. But the ones that I like that aren't on PC are few and far between anyway so no loss for me.
If I game, it's usually multiplayer titles, otherwise I like playing around with some other software.
Meh, I mean in the 90's and early 2000's some games had built in server browsers or built in lobby/chat systems like Worms 2 and it's sequels, if not we had GameSpy or Wireplay to find online players.
Multiple launchers is kind of annoying though, TBH I would prefer just one..
May as well just do a Mario Party crossover, I mean they did have the Olympics games
@ anast uhh, looks like the video is showing last gen (soon to be 2 gen old) GPUs running it pretty well to me? I mean if you can't keep your PC decently current then that's hardly the devs fault now is it?
Still no Quake then.. in fact this sounds like Doom-Quake.
If they made a Mario or cartoony looking game with those graphics it'd probably look great, like Richard of DF said they could make a game that looks like the Mario movie on PC these days pretty much.
They should've had a new L4D like 10 years ago, it can be expanded upon a lot more but they just left it collecting dust.. it was a good game for its time but L4D2 doesn't have nearly enough content these days to keep players engaged, and it needs a serious graphics upgrade
Good multiplayer games that have content updates every so often, or a lot of content to begin with don't need sequels every year, ones that have all that are good for a few years to keep you playing.
Well Nintendo don't need this with some of their games these days, with invincible characters, items, easy bosses etc.. they do the hand holding built in
60 -> 90+ FPS is not a negligible difference, many people can see and feel the extra smoothness, but each to their own.
Exactly, even DF showed Alan Wake 2 running on a 3080 with a 2x performance increase (over 100FPS) vs a PS5 at similar settings.
Devs that focus graphics will always have lower frame rate on consoles, otherwise you need to game on PC. Consoles usually launch with 1-2 year old CPUs as well, they can keep up decently for maybe a couple of years but then they start running into CPU limitations if the game is demanding, so they either make the game less demanding or you get the lower frames.
PS6 will likely = a good mid range PC at time of release, which is usually the case these days. Consoles can still be there for those who want to spend less on a system, they still pay out more than the initial cost for online fees and more expensive games though.
4080 is not in the same league as previous gen where 3080 used the same chip as the 3090 tho.. 4090 is like at least 20-30% faster and at times was discounted to only being not much more expensive than the 4080.
I just sold my 4090 for £1320 in prep for the next gen 5000 series, only lost less than £100 by selling now.
Yes, gamers who can't afford a decent midrange PC or higher will opt for console anyways.
PC players have a choice of better IQ & (usually) performance.
CPU is going to let it down though frame rate wise. Good GPU upgrade and tiny clock increase on a CPU that's been around since 2019. That's a pretty lop sided console.
Yeah, on top of that who wants to buy COD every year? Seriously.. any good MP game should easily be good for 2-3 years before needing a sequel if it has enough content or a few updates here and there.
You can already make your own SFX with text prompts now as well, of course it will lower development cost and time