ecember 7, 2005 -
When the original Xbox launched, it was derided by some console gamers for being too much like a PC, and chastised by many PC gamers for its wimpy specs. But, despite its lightweight numbers and low cost, the system produced graphics comparable to and in some cases better than big-money gaming PCs of the day. The little green box didn’t necessarily win either party of haters over, but it did succeed in establishing Microsoft in the console gaming market.
That was four years ago, and now that their Xbox 360 is upon us, it’s time to re-address the situation and see just where the 360 stands against its only real competition at the moment: a high-end gaming PC.
THE PROCEDURE
Of the 360 launch titles, ‘Call of Duty 2’ and ‘King Kong’ were two of the most visually stunning. They also happen to be available on the PC as well. For this test we played the PC and Xbox 360 versions of the games back to back and noted any differences related to graphics or gameplay. All games were played on the same high-definition LCD monitor to ensure a level playing field. PC games ran at 1280x768, a close approximation to the 1280x720 the 360 provides when running in 720p. Every graphics option was set to the max in all the games.
The PC running the games was powered by an AMD FX-55 CPU coupled with dual NVIDIA 6800 Ultra video cards running in SLI. Games were stored on dual Western Digital 74 gig 10,000 RPM drives with 8 megs of cache configured in RAID 0.
We also used a Canon 300D camera, a six-megapixel digital SLR, to attempt to capture images of just what the games look like when played. The lens used was Canon’s EF 50mm f1.8 MKII. Taking pictures of television displays is a tricky business to say the least, and the results are admittedly not spectacular, but the images below do help to highlight the differences between the platforms. Any differences in color and contrast are thanks to the difficulties in capturing TV-images rather than differences in the games themselves.
Activision’s ‘Call of Duty 2’ is one of the best looking first-person shooters in existence, and almost certainly the best on a console. It provides an incredibly immersive environment and dramatic scenarios that give you the feel of running through a WWII action movie. We found the PC and 360 versions to look nearly identical, but there were some fairly major differences between the two elsewhere.
Both feature the same impressive explosions and smoke effects, the same detailed player models, and the same impressive terrain. The PC version sports slightly more noticeable muzzle flashes and slightly higher-res textures, but these details are likely to go unnoticed even by the most hardcore gamers. With smooth frame rates being delivered on the console and on the PC, it’d be hard to pick one over the other just by looks.
The games are not the same, however. Load times on the PC are much slower than on the 360, averaging in the 30-35 second range vs. about 10-15 on the 360. Once you’re in a mission, though, difficulty and overall gameplay are identical, with the same objectives, enemies, and elements found in both.
Move into the online realm, though, and here the PC has a strong advantage for those who like many, many opponents. The 360 version is sadly and mysteriously capped at 8 players, while the PC version supports up to 64. On the 360 you get a nicer interface and of course all the functions Xbox Live has to offer, like buddy lists, player rankings, and voice chat. But, with only four on a side in massive online maps, finding people to shoot can be pretty tricky.
And then, of course, there are the controls. The debate between keyboard and mouse vs. controller still rages on, but in this fast-paced arcade-style shooter we didn’t find the control pad be a serious handicap. While a sniping match would likely end in the favor of the player on the PC, playing through the offline levels was just as easy with a thumbstick as with a mouse.
PETER JACKSON'S KING KONG
Ubisoft’s ‘King Kong’ game has shattered some perceptions of what makes a first-person shooter and what makes an adventure game. Its short campaign is occasionally boring and occasionally brilliant, but on a whole the game is an experience not to be missed, regardless of platform. However, while we found the PC and 360 games to play almost identically, they looked drastically different.
Both games feature the same missions, objectives, and overall gameplay. Load-times too were equally quick, with the PC having a slight advantage. In terms of controls, however, the setup on the 360’s controller was far preferable to the default keyboard and mouse setup on the PC.
About half of the game’s levels are in the form of a first-person shooter. Incredible precision is rarely required and so using triggers and thumbsticks felt more natural than WASD plus mouse. When controlling Kong from a third-person perspective, using a controller was definitely preferable. That’s not to say that you couldn’t plug a 360 controller into your PC and be just as comfortable, but the Xbox is the clear victor when it comes to standard controller setups, and when it comes to graphics, too.
While both games feature the same character animations and basic environment layouts, the visuals on the 360 version are far, far more detailed and attractive than those on the PC. Specular highlighting is used extensively on the 360 to give wet rocks and walls a glimmering sheen totally lacking on the PC version. Bump mapping gives otherwise flat textures some depth. These effects make Kong’s scarred face look more realistic and highlight the subtle bumps and ridges on the skin of a T-Rex. While the PC game is far from unattractive, it simply doesn’t compare to the one that runs on the little white box.
CONCLUSION
At this point it’s clear to say that the 360 is capable of delivering graphics at least as impressive as a far more expensive gaming PC. And, while PC hardware will always be progressing, so too will 360 developers be optimizing, and so it can be expected that Microsoft’s new console will keep up at least for the next few y