There is a company making boxes for Steam blows alienware out of the water only drawback it's 1200 $ I highly doubt there will ever be a console that can match a top shelf PC for 400 - 500 bucks but on the upside I don't have any of the compatibility some of my PC pals do on my Xbox one and FO4 runs absolutely great I have had no problems what so ever

$400 - $500 is not much money for hardware, and keep in mind that consoles are sold at a loss.

Try and put together a list PC components together for $500 w/o including the OS. You will find that amount of money does not get you much in term of performance.

If I was going to pay a few hundred extra dollars for a machine, I'd just buy another PC and not bother with a console. It's why I also don't plan on buying a Steam box since again, might as well just go with the PC. I like consoles because they are far less hassle than dealing with my PC, but cost is definitely a factor.

With that said, game developers are unlikely to put their focus on top of the line machines to develop their games since even a large number (possibly even the majority) of PC owners don't have top of the line machines and don't frequently upgrade components if the old ones are still fine for most of what they do.

As we all know, console spec isn't the best, so most likely it has.


But it really doesn't matter as long as I can sit back playing game properly while sipping warm tea.

..and the rest of us get to suffer because of it

Well it gets to the point when its trying to load everything you have ( loading screen takes 1-2 min )done when your lvl 50+ and your still going strong its about time to upgrade your processor ( put 2 sets of ps4 processors in one console ) lol

It would be beyond [censored] to have pushed the consoles actual limitations................

WHY?

Cause User Made Modifications are going to be on consoles.

If Bethsada didn't preplan enough room by oh say making sacrifices like not making the graphics bleeding edge and say putting severe budget caps on Settlements which we all know about unless your a guy living under a rock...

The game doesn't push the limits...If they planned ahead properly they have a lot of headroom for Modifications, if not well all heck is going to freeze over.

There is huge differences. The difference your failing to realize is it's starting to A. Take to long to make a life like graphical sculpture. (In short graphics won't get much better at least in the sense of the models themselves) And B. Instead of polygons other things are being improved that you aren't noticing.


In skyrim I saw 2d trees. In game and plenty of them. Some trees in the console version of skyrim were 2d and made to look 3d from a far. Just in trees alone fallout 4 they are all bigger, all models, and far more.


And that's just with the little detail of trees. So many more details that are huge improvements graphically

Weather

Rain doesn't come in through the roof and don't kid yourself the Xbox 360 wouldn't be able to handle that.

GodRays, these feature actually costs so much power that there are PC users that do without....Not me but some out ther.

Birds, SkyBirds Mod crashed the heck out of users that downloaded that mod why? Cause ther PC wasn't up to it.

-You get actual birds with package AI in Fo4 that's just plain sick

Better LOD details, way better LOD....its sicking the difference not too mention its 3d LoD...for crying out load ppl are blind or something.

Roughly 10 times the amount of clutter with physics.

-Go play vanilla Skyrim and compare.

2X-4X more NPC's in a Cell at a given time out of the box. You'd have to install a MOD and have Good PC hardware to run that well in Skyrim.

Shadows, are tremendously better...

PhysX from Nvidia, the game makes use of soo much stuff to handle a lot of the special effects that would otherwise not be possible without having to completely spend an entire dev cycle on a new engine set....

->Ya its better cause they used PhysX

So if your PC is choking well get a better CPU or switch to Nvidia Card.

Could go on for pages about the differences between this and Skyrim just on improvements.

Once again,people have to be reminded that a consoles true performance power does not come early in its lifespan.If you guys think Bethesda has tapped into everything the consoles have to offer on fo4 which even a layman like me can tell is badly optimized,you're living in lalaland.

That said,i don't dispute the consoles are lacking,just that you lot think what we have with fo4 is the best they can do...lol

The little stuff. All the little stuff...

I saw a dead cat at Abernathy Farm, over in the dirt, so i walked over to see if I could tell what killed it.

His tail twitched. His ears twitched.

The dumb cat stood up and walked off - all the while looking - and moving - like a real cat.

Darn cats anyway.

Pretty much this. Best looking game on PS3, the Last of Us, came out at the end of the cycle. It does seem like the PS4 and Xbox One could have had abit more power to them though, the last generation lasted way to long and this one will be much shorter.

Yeah,i'd be really surprised if this gen from sony and microsoft lasts 5 years,i think Nintendo could be a big factor in that depending on where they go with their new console.(I'm really hoping they get some real oomph into their machine,not to mention just how much faster computing technology is progressing)

There are a lot of folks who say FO4 does not actually use PhysX. Did you mean GameWorks?

I play on the high setting on my laptop at 1080p and it runs smoother and looks much better than on my ps4. So they aren't even using high graphics entirely on consoles (seems a mix of low draw distances and medium shadows) and it still runs like [censored]. The consoles seem to be struggling so I wouldn't hold any hope for elder scrolls 6.

It's using the full power of their 500 year old engine

PhysX? You sure ?

The Gameworks stuff svcks for AMD users though, nvidia 's aggresive marketing strategy with Gameworks is really frustrating.

Most of the features from Gameworks not only run terrible on AMD but they also run bad on Nvidia hardware.

Gopher (he is a youtuber) has 980ti SLI and even he has set the Godrays to low/medium.

Although, Hairworks in Witcher 3 run not so bad on AMDs, CdProjeck Red somehow managed that , but as of right now Bethesda doesn't seem to care.

A decent graphics card alone costs about $400.

As to the OP, I don't think Fallout 4 is using the full potential of the aforementioned consoles. I used to play a LOT with C64 back in the days... The hardware was always the same, yet graphics and games in general got better as the coders got better.

if they wanted to switch engine they would have done it rather than improved the current one in the 5 year time since Skyrim.

Switching engine is way more work than involved in simply making Fallout 4. its also likely to result in an lot of new problems.

Still Fallout 4 run light, its look like they aimed a bit low on graphic not being sure how the game would run as an complete game.

It should also be possible to improve performance a good deal.

Following the general timetable we should get TES 6 in 2-3 years.

Fallout 4 uses longer to load as its uses larger scenes and textures and hard drives are not much faster than on PS3.

Only benefit is that with all that ram you can keep more in memory, this will probably increase in TES6. Best option is to preload interior cells then near and external then near opening.

Hard to say then next generation comes out, upside is that it will be easy to make the next generation backward compatible.

Downside is that its not many big jumps in CPU or GPU nowdays so an much stronger system will be far more expensive, none want to do this as it will cost to much sales.

PS3 / 360 is able to do pretty good graphic, this makes it harder to see the difference. Far easier to see difference from PS1 to 2 as the figures looks much better.

Compare going from the old crt TV to HD is much more visible than from HD to 4K even if both add 4x as many pixels.

Wut? lol

Lots of games in 360 and PS3 featured "rain doesn't fall through roof".

How long is average Skyrim load times on 360?

On pc the load times are much longer. Main difference is probably that One has far more memory and is able to preload and cache more while 360 was constantly low on memory in Skyrim and had to load much more on cell change.

On pc you tend to have plenty of memory so it was more like playing both Skyrim and FO4 on One. GPU don't affect load times but more memory helps.

Large leaps in personal computing seem to have slowed down. Used to be you'd build a souped up gaming rig and within 6 months some new parts would be released that would leave you in the dust. Now a days I can play most modern games at medium settings on my 3 year old gaming laptop and it handles them pretty well. Even up to 2010 or so, trying to game on a three year old box would have been an exercise in futility at anything but the lowest settings.

lol @ people thinking ES6 isn't coming.

lol @ people thinking this generation will be over in 2 years. We're gonna be here for another 4 at least. There's games being made and the generation is lacking in substantial software for the consoles we bought. Plus, the consoles are selling.

If Bethesda releases their next game at the end of this generation's cycle, it will be a better looking game; it'll just run the same.

I'm not banking on TES in a few years, but rather another New Vegas situation. It's how you keep a flow of your IP's going.

There likely will be an TES:VI especially now that Bethesda has two studios. We do not know what the second studio will be working on. Warcraft is a different story and Blizzard is one of those companies that takes a long time to make a game and also a long time frame for support. Blizzard also became more of Online only games even for games that are based around single player with multiplayer options (Diablo III, It is a lot more fun to play it solo, Multi it just svcks unless you have some real good friends to play with) It took about 10 years or so for Starcraft 2 might even be longer since I never played Starcraft 1. It took about 11 years for Diablo III to be released since Diablo II LoD came out.

Bethesda Game Studios are known for the Single player games and TES is their baby, They might take a break from doing it so it can help them to keep the franchise fresh.

--------------------

The thing is that at the moment the game is using up all of the consoles features or close to it. It usually takes a few years of working on the consoles to learn the tricks on optimizing the consoles, That is why you usually can see quite a bit of changes from the first year or two of games on a console and the last year or two of the consoles. The last gen had a longer shelf life than most of the previous gens except maybe the first one.

Xbox One might get some improvement with the new OS upgrade and maybe DX12 support