Current gen PC games aren't only about prettier graphics, it's also about scale. Look at Crysis 2 - compared to the first one's open world environment, it was a series of corridors punctuated by arenas. Why? Because the consoles' 512MB RAM could handle only so much while looking reasonably pretty.bombadilillo said:Lol, current PC standards. Sure. Keep dreaming.
Theoreticly PCs should kick ass but nobody develops strictly for that so the pc standard is laughable. The current warhorse is Witcher2 which doesnt look anything better then many console games.
Sorry, perfect world maybe pc would get some love. But pc graphics are overrated since nothing actually uses them properly. Might as well not even exist.
There's a reason why current gen console will simply not be able run the original Crysis or the PC version of Battlefield 3 (which has bigger maps and 32v32 player support).
Shattered Horizon, ArmA 3, Total War: Shogun 2, X-Rebirth - all PC exclusives that fully utilize current and future gen hardware and will be impossible to port to consoles without being drastically reduced in one manner or other.
TW2 a warhorse? Please. I ran it on 4-year-old hardware (Dual Core, 2GB RAM, HD4350) and the only thing that bugged me was a case of texture-popping. But simulating 1700 AIs in a massive battlefield in ArmA?
Only on the PC.
OT: This is a stupid question, since the only answer is all of them.
Doesn't hurt to have a choice, eh?