Will PS4 /Xbox One Graphics Quality Ever Approach Epic Games’ Infiltrator Demo?

Celtoys founder weighs in on the future of video game visuals.

Posted By | On 28th, Dec. 2015 Under News

unreal engine 4 infiltrator demo amd

For all the great games we’ve seen on the Xbox One and PS4, it still feels like ages ago that Epic Games’ Infiltrator demo, developed using Unreal Engine 4, promised us something that would rival CGI-quality visuals. Is the day too far off that we’ll see such quality visuals on current gen consoles, the PS4 and Xbox One?

GamingBolt spoke to Celtoys owner Don Williamson, who is an engine/performance specialist, about when we’ll see visuals from the engine on consoles that could possibly rival big-budget CGI seen in movies.

“Not for a while,” Williamson said to GamingBolt. “Engine choice not-withstanding, we have many years before we’ll catch CGI, if at all. One look down the rabbit-hole of aliasing with an understanding of why movies look so much better at low resolutions than games at higher resolutions will show a little insight.”

“In terms of UE4, it’s massively flexible and gives power to many content authors who have been restricted in the past. While you will see much amazing creative output with limited playing fields in the next couple of years, a lot of that flexibility is being used to simply speed up game creation, rather than add more visual fidelity.”

That being said, there will be a number of titles which will still impress us with their visuals (like Star Wars: Battlefront, The Order: 1886 or Until Dawn or even Forza Motorsport 6) as the years roll on. The current gen consoles have a lot of potential but developers would need to find out of box methods to achieve optimization and improve performance parameters.

What are your thoughts on the matter? Let us know in the comments and stay tuned for our full interview with Don in the coming days.

Awesome Stuff that you might be interested in


    There are games out now that look like CGI movies
    The Order 1886
    Need for Speed 2015
    Star wars battlefront
    Rise of the TombRaider
    Uncharted 4-coming soon
    These games are perfect examples of the PS4 and Xbox One running CGI quality graphics in realtime

    • Psionicinversion

      CGI quality from 10,15, 20 years ago maybe… not CGI quality right now

    • Truth™

      Not even close to the PC versions. Especially since The Order can run full 1080P and 60FPS on PC as RAD showed.

      And Uncharted 4 has already been downgraded 🙂

  • Psionicinversion

    Short answer is no it will not catch up to CGI quality graphics as of right now as they use ridiculously high quality models and stuff which then gets rendered out by server farms and they always step up there game every time. Take Avatar or Jupiter Ascending were quite a way off from that in real time on any PC let alone console.

    No the consoles will not be able to achieve Infiltrator demo at any point in there life, they could do next gen providing they stick to 1080p if they go any higher than that then more power gets expended just rendering the resolution

    • Mark

      Yeah they better not aim for 4k. Drop the res and gimme super high poly counts!

    • Psionicinversion

      i think they might aim for 1440p and upscale to 4K next time… more compromises!

    • Mark

      Ahaha. Just a hackin it away lol

    • nateuc4

      I think they will aim for 4K@30FPS coz by 2020, majority of the household will have a 4K TV.

    • Psionicinversion

      yeah but even look at 980Ti,Fury X, Titan X they struggle on 4K on the more demanding games. If they go APU again theyll probably get about the same performance as that but its still not good enough

    • nateuc4

      Probably. But they should include a gpu equivalent to next year’s pascal series of nvidia and yeah probably a cpu like skylake. Though that setup would be over$1000, but the manufacturing costs can decrease if Sony and MS manufacture their own components rather than using AMD products.

    • Psionicinversion

      They cant manufacture there own products. Only Intel and AMD can make a x86-64 CPU because of licensing so they literally would not be allowed to build there own plus building your own processor from scratch is very very expensive.

      They cant combine nvidia GPU with AMD/Intel CPU cores on an APU because they wouldnt be allowed to so the only thing they can do is a split system.

      MS/sony would need to basically pay amd/intel/nvidia for the chip designs and licensing and then cost of manufacture is down to how many chips per silicon wafer they get out of it. They use an industry standard size so its how many you get out the wafer which depends how big the die size is

      ATM AMD is the only company to go to if you want an APU as both are designed to be integrated together and theyve been working on HSA spec for a long time.

      Pascal will be out of date by the time next consoles come out. If its 2019 nvidia will be on volta 2018, 2019 AMD probably on the 600 series

      edit: Oh Intel and Nvidia would charge ALOT for there designs thats why AMD is the best option in terms of price vs performance

    • nateuc4

      Thanks. I thought that they can manufacture their own products because Sony developed Cell CPU. with IBM and RSX with the help of Nvidia. But you are right about the pricing. That’s why PS3 was sold at a loss when it was launched.

  • Xbox one 2econd gpu unlocking

    When we agree on the layer unlocking it will.
    But we support the NDA been in place to allow Sony’s recovery.
    +12 and we game on

    • Mark

      +37. GameOn. We have.

    • Xbox one 2econd gpu unlocking

      Its +12. To show our support for DX12 layer unlocking.
      We game on

  • Starman

    I’ve seen CG! tech demos alike on XB! hardware that looks just as good or better than this … really ?, we’re not too far ..stop hating ….
    We have games that are really close to this now ..IN REAL TIME

  • Mark

    Man dam I wanted to play this level of beast graphics this gen on console! I’ll have to wait for the Xbox 2 then?

    Also, he made a good point about what aliasing does to picture quality vs resolution…

  • Alistein

    The infiltrator demo looks good but is no where near the new CGI movies. I always hoped the demo was a real work in progress game but oh well there’s always nextgen.

  • Vulcanproject

    These consoles? No chance. PC yes, probably within a year or two. New consoles in another 4/5 years? Yes.

  • DeadChime

    “Will PS4 /Xbox One Graphics Quality Ever Approach Epic Games’ Infiltrator Demo?”
    NOPE, they are reaching the Samaritan Demo as we can almost see in the great Arkham knight. The Infiltrator quality will be for next ten only

    • Mark

      Directly on point with that. Samaritan demo is achievable yes.

    • Truth™

      Nope. High powered PC only 🙂

    • Mark

      Lol! You’re probably right. Even that was nuts.

  • MrSec84 .

    We’re basically there in games like Uncharted 4, The Order 1886, Until Dawn and Ratchet & Clank.
    Battlefront and Need For Speed too.

    Horizon Zero Dawn even comes pretty close and that’s a massive open world title, the cinematic sections shown so far are very close to this level of visual quality seen in The Infiltrator demo.

    Largely it’s a matter of optimizing how portions of assets are streamed in, because you really don’t need to render stuff the player can’t see.
    Achieving the current levels of pre-rendered, CG movie quality detail that’s been achieved by Movies today is not going to be possible, but stuff from the last decade is definitely possible

    • We’re basically there in games like Uncharted 4, The Order 1886, Until Dawn and Ratchet & Clank.Battlefront and Need For Speed too.

      Add Halo 5, Tomb Raider, Forza, and Drive Club to the list and then we’re talking! I’d add in GOW4, but we only saw a tiny snippet of that at E3, so I’ll leave it off for now.

    • MrSec84 .

      Halo 5 hasn’t achieved that, not at all, same goes for Rise of the Tomb Raider and Forza, Driveclub yes.
      Gears 4 maybe, but it’s not clear whether that’s XB1 gameplay or whether it’s running on a higher end PC, since nothing else on XB1 looks that good.

    • CC-Tron

      DriveClub looks better but does much less. Sacrificing frame rate and CPU intensive tasks to boost graphic fidelity. DriveClub can be done on X1 with the same trade offs.

    • MrSec84 .

      The game features a complex weather and physics system, the weather in particular doesn’t just feature rain, it’s got basically every type of weather there can be, all realistically and dynamically working, effecting the tracks as it should.

      Quantum Break didn’t win the Siggraph award for that, it was an invention by Xbox One fanboys. No source for that links back to the actual Siggraph website.

      Horizon Zero Dawn won awards for it’s new cloud technology.
      Dreams was praised by DICE for it’s new rendering techniques.
      Ryse is on PC, if XB1 can run it, then PS4 can run it better, because it has more capable technology.

      In order to get Driveclub to run on XB1 then there would need to be more than a “some” trade-offs. It’s designed to work on a system with a faster, big memory pool. Driveclub has actually now been reworked to run at 60FPS, which is possible because when the launch game released it didn’t really use much in the way of Asynchronous Compute, plus the level of multi-core support for the game wasn’t where it is now. This game was made using a much less optimized version of PS4’s API.

    • CC-Tron

      GDDR5 is not fast memory; it’s slow. That’s it’s short coming.

    • Paul

      No we’re not, not even close, don’t forget that this is 60fps, name me 1 game on the PS4 thats 60fps with graphics like that at the same resolution, I’ve not seen any, not even close, in real time at least, and to think this was done on a 680 gpu, a relic gpu of a by gone era which makes you wonder what a PC could do today without the console shackles holding it back.

    • MrSec84 .

      We’re definitely at the same level of visuals or even beyond it on PS4 games like the ones I mentioned.
      Also frame rate has nothing to with graphics, so you asking me to name a game on PS4 with that level of visuals at 60fps is a pointless thing to do, my point was that we’ve seen that level of visual fidelity.

      The Order’s cut scenes are real time, plus the gameplay looks the same, same goes for Uncharted 4 and Ratchet & Clank.
      PC has nothing to do with this topic, since it’s about whether a console has achieved this level of visual fidelity, which it has.

    • Paul

      We’re not there yet not even on PC never mind consoles, also frame rates has a lot to do with it, so far the vast majority of games on PS4 are 30fps or even less, that Infiltrator demo is running at 60fps on what is a old gpu on pc, I don’t think you realize how bad that sounds for consoles.

      Saying fps doesn’t matter is a joke considering we’re not even getting these graphics on the PS4 at 30fps and 60fps is a lot more demanding.

      The truth is that these consoles are too weak, so much so that I have a gpu that is about 4 years old, a 7970 which is still blowing the consoles out of the water.

      I really hoped these consoles would push gaming forward, 2 years in and nothing really new, consoles holding gaming back even more then before, what a disappointment.

    • MrSec84 .

      Frame rates has nothing to do with the point I was making, graphics are an entirely different thing to performance.
      I don’t think your realize that last gen frame rates weren’t even a stable 30FPS, they actually dipped down to the 20’s, or lower.
      FYI PS4 can be bought for £250, with a game, for the level of hardware you get it’s not weak at all.

      Most people only want to play the games, they couldn’t care less about all of the frame rate nonsense.
      The machines can allow for better physics and animations, which is a lot more important than either resolution or frame rates.
      A locked 30FPS feels much more stable than an unlocked 60FPS.

      Saying this and that is too whatever is all subjective tbh.
      TBH both machines are actually capable of 60FPS, with great graphics, if the developers optimize and yes I’m talking about at 1080p. It’s a matter of how you use the resources you have, optimizing your LOD and what your stream in per frame.
      Moving to a more parallel or wide approach to CPU processing and using GPU processing for more things like Physics and frame prep will actually allow for things to perform better.

      Consoles aren’t holding gaming back, because PC is all about pushing for higher resolutions and frame rates, consoles are the base and you still only have so much performance added on top of that on PC.

      FYI yes that infiltrator demo has been matched for it’s visuals on some PS4 games and multiplats have in some cases too.

    • Psionicinversion

      PC only pushes for higher resolution and framerates because of console inadequiciea.

      imagine a 1080p 30 fps PC game with all th powe of a 980Ti… it would be incredible but its sacrificed to run at most 1080p 30 and hioping they can run a moderate amount of deta8il

    • MrSec84 .

      Nonsense, if PC was the target then sure, but you know what 3rd party developers no where their audience mainly is and that’s on consoles, hence why they target consoles.

      3rd party developers were asked what hardware they wanted, Sony met their needs, MS tried to, too a certain extent, but they had certain areas they made mistakes in, like choosing the wrong memory, which then had a knock on effect on how much die space they could dedicate to their GPU tech.

      You’re forgetting a little important factor of iteration, because developers have to learn from their past choices and discover what’s better moving forward when they develop render technology and decide how they’re going to use hardware.
      You can’t just target one set of specs on PC, not when you have umpteen other set-ups to make sure they run well enough to satisfy the audience on PC.

      Consoles are the developers core target audience, why wouldn’t they be the base point by which developers build their games for?
      Really there are actually limits to what developers can make in each phase of a platform’s life. They can’t just build games with endless amounts of detail, not because systems can’t handle that, but rather because they likely wouldn’t earn their money back from all of the time artists spent working assets.

      There’s no point when likely fewer than a million people have a rig with the specs you use as an example and fewer are likely to buy any game that would take full advantage of those specs.

      When people like you use those kinds of examples you ignore that there’s a little thing called economics and if in business you don’t take that factor into consideration you can potentially end up killing your industry.
      When companies like games publishers constantly push for nothing but fidelity you actually end up forgetting what’s important about games, which is that they’re fun and that they provide something for everyone that will play them.

    • Paul

      I do realize that last gen dip a lot more under the 30fps but thats beside the point, most console gamers was expecting 1080p 60fps for the current gen, at least for the first few years, you say people don’t care about graphics and frame rates but all we’ve seen the last two years from the PS4 and Xbox One is how the PS4 grahics and fps are better then the xbox one from console gamers, developers keep pushing graphics because graphics sells, beside if console gamers don’t care then why upgrade at all, deep down they do care but don’t want to admit that the PC is better, we saw that from console gamers ranting and raving in the early days at how great the graphics are, how sad lol.

      To think things are going to get much worse next year with DirectX 12 and the new microns on the gpus and cpus next year.

    • MrSec84 .

      It’s not besides the point at all, because it’s an improvement over what came before it.
      FYI no most people don’t have a clue about frame rates, because most of the gamers buying these systems aren’t aware of that factor of video games, they do however see the graphics and other things like improved physics or more realistic animations.
      How can most people be expecting something, when they haven’t got any idea what frame rate is or what it means to their gaming experience?

      I’m speaking about the majority of people that have bought a current gen console. They’re not the kinds of people that even consider PCs to game on, they only really know about consoles or mainly Playstation and Xbox these days, maybe a little Nintendo.

      If graphics are what sells then that should show you that most people aren’t bothered about anything besides a smoother experience (by which I mean a snappier console, without the slow down that happened on past consoles), less jumpy than they had on the last generation.

      It’s not a matter of console gamers not wanting to admit that a PC can or often does do better, it’s actually that people don’t consider PC for their gaming needs. They know consoles, there’s no PC platform holder selling the merits of PC and another thing to think about is that the costs are significantly higher, when I have to spend nigh on £400 to get something that can play anywhere near as close to my £250 PS4 at retail right now, with a game, all I can see is that I’d have £150 to spend on more games if I stuck with the console.

      Gaming is only one part of their hobby life, they also have other things they spend their money on, so why put all of their extra cash that is set aside for hobbies into only gaming, when there’s so much more to do in life?

      Even as someone who’s completely educated on the subject of PC gaming, the hurdles to jump through to be able to game are just annoying compared to me just getting my console home, setting it up by plugging a few cables in and maybe doing some software updates that aren’t anywhere near as complicated as on the PC.
      I don’t have to check for hardware compatibility or messing around with this and that program to make sure I get a somewhat OK experience, tbh for the extra money I’m paying it should all be seamless, but it’s not on PC, it’s work and that’s not what I want to be doing when I get home and just want to put a game on, to play.

      As for your DX12 argument, no that’s not going to make things worse, Vulkan and other APIs that will now be able to balance CPU workloads across multiple cores will actually elevate the entire environment of game development, across all systems.
      The thing that actually holds back PC isn’t consoles, it’s the expense, the complicated nature of the ecosystem and the lack of appeal for people that know their friends all game on consoles, mainly Playstation.
      PC is a different audience altogether. As I said before you don’t have a platform holder for PC, not one selling the virtues of that platform. PC isn’t simple, it’s more expensive to get the same level of performance and really it’s just not a consideration for this specific audience.

      New APIs are actually going to allow for more things to be possible on consoles, because it allows for a much more efficient use of that piece of hardware, along with more refined use of CPU and GPU time, along with memory allocations.
      I’m not talking about vs PC, I’m talking generally speaking, it’s only going to benefit PC too.
      You also have to bare in mind that iteration of techniques and overall improvements in how developers work have to happen, just because something becomes possible that doesn’t mean it’s automatically used to it’s absolute best.

    • Truth™

      No they have not.

    • MrSec84 .
    • Truth™

      LOL Photo Mode

      That’s not what it looks like in game, loser 🙂

      And it would only be impressive at 60FPS


    • Psionicinversion

      tbh Project cars looks better and i only run high settings and ive compared them, both side by side myself,… project cars is better

    • Tech junkie

      Frame rates are far more important than graphics in racing games. PC delivers both. Driveclub looks incredible given it’s limited hardware, but game feels slow. Needs 60 frames at least.
      They should release DC for PC so you can really see what the game can look and feel like.

    • MrSec84 .

      Higher frame rates being more important is not a fact. How something feels to you isn’t the same as how it will feel to someone else.

      FYI though Evolution have made a 60FPS version, it’s on Playstation VR, but I disgree, the released game doesn’t feel slow, it’s actually very responsive. Evo worked a lot on the game’s latency and controller responsiveness.

      I doubt you’ve played it.
      It’s a PS4 exclusive, why would Sony put it elsewhere? You make zero sense.

    • Tech junkie

      Except framerates are noticeable and have a huge effect on game pacing and clarity.
      Especially on these POS LED TV’s everyone has. But people run them at 120 and 240hz making the picture even worse which is hilarious.

      Resolution on the other hand takes very good vision, large tv’s and very close viewing distances to seem. Given the average TV in North America is 40″ at a viewing distance of 10′ 720p is better than you need given your eyes ability to resolve the image.

      If 1080p wasn’t the buzzword right now. We would all be happier with 720p, allowing for more texture, detail and lighting.

      But since you are a PS4 fan boy I’m wasting my time explaining to you the actual facts.

    • Tech junkie


    • Truth™

      LMAO none of those Sony games can touch Modded Battlefront, Modded Skyrim or Modded Witcher 3

      Get lost console peasant

    • MrSec84 .

      Since when did I say modded PC games weren’t better visually?
      My god you’re sensitive over your beloved box of electronics, you realize gaming is just a hobby and that life’s about more than just having one thing to fulfill you right?

      Why keep using that faked poster to twist things? Anyone that’s actually looked at full quality direct feed footage from any of the real time PS4 demos of Uncharted 4 SP knows it doesn’t look even remotely close to that fuzzy.

    • Truth™

      Nope. Downgraded graphics and 30FPS. Looks like a PS3 game. Really just embarassing for you sonycucks.

      Where’s the 60FPS? Sony promised there would be 60FPS


  • Tga215


  • JeronimoPW

    The facials animations in Until Dawn is sick. I’ve never seen anything like that in videogame. It’s so natural sometimes.

  • Edonus

    What are we actually looking at here…… This video is a CGI trailer. The graphics are great but the Halo 5 opening seen is easily on par. Are we just talking about resolution and framerates? because in real life those thing together only count for like 10% of what makes a game look good. Everything in this video can be done on the X1 or Ps4 little to no sacrifice.
    I have seen games on both these consoles that are beautiful, I really don’t know what people are looking for? It seem like chasing ghosts to me.

    • GHz

      Yeah, I’m pretty amazed @ what we can do on console in real-time. We al know it’ll get better too. We’re not movie quality CGI, but who cares. @ the end of console lifespan we’ll be getting probably 5X graphic quality in gameplay we got in mission Fall of The Covenant in Halo 5! That mission was insane with what they were able to throw on screen all @ once while looking that good. 😀

    • Joshua Shaw

      None of this is CGI.

      This is all rendered by the hardware.

      The PS4 and Xbox One could NOT do this without some very significant sacrifices.

    • GHz

      You’re right, but it also wasn’t controllable gameplay.

    • Greetingsfriend

      “Everything in this video can be done on the X1 or Ps4 little to no sacrifice”
      Ignoring the Halo opener is pre-rendered when the Infiltrator demo was real-time on a GTX 680. Which is a much, much fatter GPU than either console. Plus it was also an i7 chip, too. To assume this would run with no compromise on console is silly when the first UE4 demo, Elemental, ran with pretty big cutbacks on PS4. Biggest ones being the lighting and particles.
      This is a much denser scene with way more going on. Tonnes of lights and effects.

    • Shelley Lewandowski

      CEO of Yahoo, Marissa Meyer has gone so far as to Support the practice “Work at home” that I have been doing since last year. In this year till now I have earned 84k dollars with my pc, despite the fact that I am a college student. Even newbies can make 38 an hour easily and the average goes up with time. Why not try this.



    • Psionicinversion

      its not CGI trailer you can actually download the infiltrator demo on PC and run it in real time on your pc

    • Tech junkie


  • Tech junkie

    Both consoles are doing now what could be accomplished 5 years ago on a mid of the road gaming PC,
    When the 360 and PS3 were released they were bleeding edge tech.

    This gen is a joke overall graphics wise, it’s so funny to watch fan boys argue over who graphics suck less.

    This console gen is killing gaming, We will be getting new consoles every 2 years soon.
    You fan boys will buy them up like they are going out of style saying PC gamers waste money upgrading. Lol

    • nateuc4

      It has been 2 years since PS4 launch and I haven’t heard about the PS5 until now.

    • Tech junkie

      We will be. Not we are. You can bet we see a console sooner this gen and it will be some weak console equivalent to a gaming PC from last year.

    • Psionicinversion

      you wont get a console every 2 years, if they manage to get something you can plug in to xfire the system they could have upgraded modules every 2 years but not an entirely new console

    • Tech junkie

      Look at the demand for current consoles PS4 is selling at insane rate. Xbox is selling better than any Other Xbox. These companies see that and will leverage it. Even if it means less sales per gen. They won’t care if they pump them out at a profit as opposed to at a loss in the past.

      2021 will be 8 years same as the last xbox. I bet we see a console in 2018, 2019 the latest. Next one 2022 then probably 2025 then 2027. Maybe a bit more spread out but you get the point.

      We seen huge life spans before because they were operating at a loss. Operating at a profit the game will change.

    • Psionicinversion

      people are not going to buy a new console every 2 years and thats a fact. maybe every 4 years but defo not 2

    • Tech junkie

      Well it’s not a fact it’s your opinion just like mine is we will see new consoles every 2 years.

      You aren’t seeing the big picture. These consoles are x86 now and I doubt that will change. Xbox has tied itself to DX12 and Windows. Think about it. Games will all be BC with setting predetermined by what console you have. Your Xbox one will play the same games as an Xbox 2 just at lower setting. No differ than PC only you won’t choose the setting. The console will detirmin the settings.

      My opinion is you will change consoles like you change video cards. You won’t have to your 5 year old rig will still work fine. The newest will work better.

      You seem to be forgetting these companies will do what ever to get your money. It’s turned into a disposable world. With everyone trying to out do the guy beside him. Look what happens when a game has 180 lines of resolution less on Xbox. Something that doesn’t even matter. What happens when they release a console with more resolution or something that actually matters like frame rate textures and detail.

      All these stupid fan boys have done it to them selves and I just laugh.

      Buy the console you like with the games you want and the friends you want to play with have. Master race will win the graphics war everything. Console fan boys will just she’ll out more money for inferior gear year after year.

      Don’t get me wrong I game on my Xbox everyday. But it doesn’t take a genius to see what is happening here.

    • Psionicinversion

      The logistics behind having new consoles every 2 years will be to much. They rely on buying massive quantities of the same component thats why there as cheap as they are. They will need to end up having massive amounts of stock holding… different assembly lines, SKU’s… no one will want the old console so theyll have to end up selling them at a loss to clear house meaning they will ultimately lose money on the consoles.

      The ever changing hardware will mean devs cant really target hardware for 4-5 years in the future and the dev kits will certainly be no where near powerful enough to run there game on.

      Just cus its x86 dont mean nothing, yeah it would be easy to upgrade the hardware but you’ll need alot of behind the scenes stuff to make it happen. Youll have to spend 100’s million every 2 years to tape out the new designs, go through testing etc etc im telling you they will lose money.

    • Tech junkie

      These consoles are already running near peak performance. APIs are getting better. 2 years might be a bit of a stretch but optimizings is not a priority if you just throw hp at it with similar architecture. running x86 and dx12 for example it will be very easy for devs to maximise potential accross multiple platforms.

      They won’t loose money if people buy.
      Sony has set records and is turning huge profit for the first time in years by releasing 5 year old junk as far as hardware is concerned. These fan boys eat it up like it’s some kind of second coming while Sony laughs all the way to the bank.

      People keep buying at this rate and these companies will shovel it in our mouths as fast as we will take it.
      Look what gaming hype and preorders have become. Gamers are ruining gaming.

    • Psionicinversion

      ps4 is selling well because they advertised as more pwoerful than xbox which it is BUT THE MAIN REASON is its been 8 years since the last one…. you start releasing consoles every 2 years no one will care… unless they release them as part of a phone upgrade plan and thats it

    • Tech junkie

      That is your opinion. We live in a world where new is better. If it profits it will happen.

    • Psionicinversion

      this si not the mobile phone industry… lots of people upgrade there mobile phones every 2 years because there phonepla runs out every 2 years orin some cases soooner… i really cant imagine a model where you get a phone plan plus console… i just cant

    • Tech junkie

      Why not? phones are worth more than consoles in general. What about cars? people spend huge money on cars all the time when there is nothing wrong with their current one.
      I’m not one of those people, but I’m even drawn into it, I put less than 500 km a month on my 7 year old truck, yet I think about spending $80k on a new one. Then I think why, mine is perfectly fine. Many people would buy the new truck. What makes you think they wouldn’t buy a new console.
      I recently checked my year in review, I spent over 2000 hours on my xbox why would I not buy a new one for a few hundred dollars when I use it so much.
      I spent way more than that on my PC in the last 2 years and use it less.
      I’m considering spending $80k on a truck that I drive, maybe 100-200 hours a year.

      I’m not sure how old you are or your financial situation, but many gamers are in their 30’s, like me and have disposable income. Maybe not tons, but a few hundred dollars for thousands of hours of entertainment goes a long way. Look how much people spend on entertainment, overall gaming is cheap and eats a lot of time.
      If it proves profitable, it will happen.

    • Psionicinversion

      pjon sr designed to gibe more life with vitiaslioty,

    • Tech junkie


    • Paul

      I don’t see much risk to Sony or Microsoft doing a quicker upgrade cycle if they stick to stranded hardware, it would be like a Steam Machine but with low level access and it’s own interface.

      There is little risk in that, gamers that don’t want to upgrade don’t have too but I bet many will because they want better.

      Funny thing is is that it could be the Steam Machine that could force the issue, If Steam keep pushing it and making it better with more games and making it easier for console gamers, they could end up biting into the console market over the year, if I was to put money on it I think Microsoft will bite first with a quicker upgrade cycle, more so if Steam keeps pushing the Steam Machine and it gets more market share.

    • Tech junkie

      I could see that going with Microsoft’s current model, given all Microsoft studio games require Windows OS. Steam being Linux could potentially have “exclusives” that don’t run on windows or Mac, Although dual booting to Linux or Steam OS would be an option.
      I hope Valve is successful with the console, although as much as people say they aren’t for gamers, Youtube and Netflix are a must, and to my knowledge Steam OS does not support any apps. Browser options simply won’t cut it.

      I personally have a Windows Alpha and love it, more power than both consoles. I run steam big picture mode, and Kodi on it. Rarely go into windows, although I run smartglass in the background so I get notifications when friends are online on Xbox.

      I think we are about to see big changes in gaming, given how “performance” driven the gen is for gaming. PC should be the logical choice, it just needs to be harmonized. I could see MS or Valve doing it at this point. If MS brings cross chat and other xbox features etc to Windows it could blow Valve out the water very quickly. I see big things coming to the Windows 10 Xbox app. It’s already launching your PC games. Xbox app could potentially shut down windows to basic running when gaming prioritizing power for games.
      If Valve wants to win the “PConsole” race they need to come out the gate strong or step up fast.

    • Paul

      I think most people got the wrong impression of the Steam Machine, I don’t think Valve was planning to come out with a bang but bring it to market and improve on it year in year out with the aim of chipping away at the console market and also making it known to console gamers that PC gamer can be cheap, can compeat, can play on the tv, can use any controller you want.

      Funny thing is, if Microsoft didn’t come out with the Xbox in the first place, they could of been where Valve are now but more, they could of gone further and had all hardware drivers update and set up by themselfs as well as games setting setting up to what hardware you have, DirectX 12 would of been out years ago, Sony would of found it hard to compeat I think.

      In any case, things seem to be moving in the PC’s favor the last few years and with next year DirectX 12/Vulcan and the new microns on the gpu’s, cpu’s and VR, the gap could widen a lot next year onward.

    • Paul

      I think thats what they should do, a 2 year cycle with full backwards compatibility so people that play on the newer console play the game with better graphics then the ones that play on the older one.

      Everyone wins, developers get more hardware to play with, gamers get to choose if they want to upgrade or not but still get to play the same game at a different graphic level, games could support around 3 cycles so 6 years, even console gamers should want that, they would have nothing to lose but a lot to gain by competing with the PC better, as a PC gamer I would love that because games will start to move forward.

    • Tech junkie

      I don’t disagree, but it won’t happen unless it’s profitable for Sony and MS. Nintendo will always standalone IMO

  • Kris Crawford

    Whats the point in putting in the effort for these non playable showcases?

    • Greetingsfriend

      It’s a technology showcase. They made an engine and they want to show it off.

  • Truth™

    *Only on PC

    Consoles haven’t got a chance


Copyright © 2009-2017 GamingBolt.com. All Rights Reserved.