Ex-Naughty Dog Dev Explains Why PS4/XB1 Will Never Achieve CGI Visuals, 4K Will Take Two Generations

"Trailers and feature-length movies simply have a much higher budget per second than what the full game can afford," says Filmic Worlds boss John Hable.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
eyeofcore1041d ago

PS4's hardware is 28nm and lowest available in next couple years is 14nm and when foundries are enough experienced with it to reduce initial failure rates to an acceptable level and even on the same as current 28nm then expect two times the performance maximum if you want a console at reasonable performance and power envelope in an acceptable form factor for a home console.

Except everyone is willing to dish out 600$ on a home console.

SourtreeDing1041d ago

im fine with 1080p just make better games that are fun to play.. visuals are at a nice spot.. idk y push for Higher details are great right now. if we want higher get ready to pay more.. but im good with where its at

johndoe112111041d ago


Exactly. They really don't need to push 4k on consoles, all they need to do is max the graphics and get framerates to a locked 60. Imagine an open world game like fallout with the graphics of The Order. Would anyone really care if it was 4k or not?

It's still early in this gen so I expect big things in a few years from these consoles even though I know all games won't be 1080/60 at the end of this gen. The thing is, when next gen comes around we probably will be able to get The order graphics at a steady 60fps an all games. That, as far as I'm concerned, would be perfect. But who knows, it may even be better.

subtenko1041d ago

Just enough time for 12K to come out,lol. At least prices will go down, and maybe,just maybe people will be giving away free 1080p tvs because noone wants them anymore XD

freshslicepizza1041d ago

these machines (xbox one even more so) have a hard time hitting a steady 30 frames at 1080p.

the main issue is consoles need to sell at a reasonable price for it to be a mainstream product. $400 seems to be the highest most are willing to spend. that means it will take a long time to get to 4k with decent frame rates.

the pc is already there but consoles take up the bulk of marketing and therefore in a sense console gaming is holding back technical advancements because most developers use the console market as their main source to sell their games.

johndoe112111041d ago (Edited 1041d ago )


Consoles are NOT holding back technical advancement. The reality is that most pc gamers do not have machines that can run games at 4k. If devs were to make 4k the standard for games then they would be catering to a very small audience.

That is the exact reason that pc games are designed with various settings. They are fully aware that most people cannot run games at max settings so they leave it up to users to adjust for their specific hardware. consoles are standard hardware so adjustable settings are not necessary.

The reality is 4k gaming is expensive for EVERYONE, console and pc gamers alike, so devs cater to both console and pc gamers (the majority of gamers) who cannot run games at 4k. Blaming consoles alone is ridiculous.

Ninjatogo1041d ago

This. Last gen was good, but it was always significantly behind PC. This gen, games are mostly at native 1080p and have most if not all of the graphics effects featured on the PC versions albeit at a lower quality setting. Even though PC is still ahead, console graphics are still in a nice spot now. They're not as clean as PC but, they're not ugly anymore.

SourtreeDing1041d ago (Edited 1041d ago )


well said^^^ PC gamers are blind..

Console Specs are all the same where as PC is all over the Place because everyone has a different rig


we dont care if consoles are behind PC and that will always be the Case..

ProjectVulcan1041d ago (Edited 1041d ago )

When these consoles were launched, there was talk about how they would have a shorter lifespan than the previous machines, which were 7 and 8 years old.

They exceeded the usual expected lifespan of 5 years for various reasons not least because of the worldwide recession making expensive new machines somewhat unpalatable. However I wouldn't be surprised if PS4 and Xbox One were replaced not long after they were 5 years old with new hardware.

Not least because they were somewhat more 'budget' machines in the first place compared to the more advanced technology the previous machines launched with and they will age faster relative to PC hardware IMO. You really can already match and then exceed them with pretty budget PC components.

I still wouldn't expect 4k to be the target resolution of any new machines, but it's several years away anyway. Enjoy what we have right now and don't even START thinking about what new hardware can bring for at least another 2 years.

ABizzel11041d ago

As soon as I saw that the quote was on Gamingbolt I knew that's wasn't exactly what he said, and behold I was right.

He said it'll be another 2 console generations before realtime CG graphics hit consoles and add another if you want to render that in 4k. But even then I think it's only going to take 2 gens to hit 4k gaming with CG visual (so PS6 / XB5), the only reason it wouldn't is because one of the two decides to force the other into an early generation, for money's and competition's sake.

QHD - 4k gaming is coming next console generation. 2015's big GPUs are suppose to be the R9 390 and 980 Ti. Those are 8.5 TFLOPS (+300w) and 6.2 TFLOPS (7.44 in comparison, 250w). Those single GPUs should be more than enough to run many of today's games in 4k @ 30fps, considering the standard 980 and R9 290x (weaker cards) can do just that.

In 5 years time those cards should be mid-range, with significantly lower power draws (likely 50% less), 1/3 of the original price ($200 range), superior technology and software drivers, which makes them viable options for a console in their rebranded forms R9 770x and UGTX 460 (2019/2020).

Now that being said if graphics evolve, which they will, then most graphically demanding games will be in the QHD (1440p) / 2k / 3k range, while smaller games and indies will aim for 4k.

Which means the following generation (PS6 / XB5), will be just like this generation and aim for 4k gaming for the majority of games (this one aims for 1080p). Ultimately resolution will be a non-issue next gen (PS5 / XB4), because QHD (1440p) and above pretty much produces a crystal clear image regardless since it's nearly 2x 1080p. And most importantly the gen after (PS6 / XB5) will be the end of graphics and resolution wars for all but the biggest fanboys, because 4k resolutions and higher will be the norm, and graphics will be good for every major game, meaning gameplay, fun factor, and originality will be the main selling and discussion points of games once again.

garrettbobbyferguson1041d ago

@Johndoe11211 "Imagine an open world game like fallout with graphics of the order"

So how do you propose these consoles do that? The Order is a linear shooter and it can't even achieve 1080p/60.

Also in regards to "no one has a capable PC" I'm just gonna assume you're trolling.


46.94% on windows 7 x64
29.47% on windows 8.1 x64
highest x86 is XP at 3.29%

30.62% on 8gb
21.88% on 4gb
13.36% on 12+gb

32.8% on 1gb vram
23.05% on 2gb vram
12.98% on 970s

44% on quad core
48% on dual core

johndoe112111041d ago


It's pretty obvious that you're here just to disagree or poke fire at some personal issue that you probably have with me for you to completely misquote both my statements. Please read my posts over again, if you have a problem with the english language PM me and i'll try to explain myself better to you privately. I never said I expect The order graphics at 1080/60 from this gen and nowhere did I say "no one has a capable PC". Something is wrong with you.

badz1491041d ago

I am also pretty happy with what the PS4 can achieve at the moment because games like inFamous SS, Driveclub and The Order still manage to amaze me with their visuals. I think we all can agree that these games look amazing!

Sure high end PCs still have the upper hand but 4k is still not a norm today just like how 1080p wasn't in 2006. It will take some more time for it to be mainstream and I am ok with that. I honestly am hoping that next gen, 4k is in the checklist of the PS5 or it will be a disappointment! I think 4-5 years is enough for 4k to mature and for the price of a 4k setup to drop to a more affordable price point.

2 more gen for 4k? That's BS!

mikeslemonade1041d ago

As long as it's 1080p and has AA its fine for now. Because we watch blu-Ray movies on 1080p and they look phemoninal. Resolution is not the bottleneck, it's the graphics.

freshslicepizza1041d ago (Edited 1041d ago )

"Consoles are NOT holding back technical advancement."

yes they are. developers are catering to the larger market. games like destiny also support last generation hardware because of the huge install base which hinders advancements even further. the pc should always be the lead platform but isn't always with multiplat games.

have you seen the requirements for oculus rift? they are quite high and that's good. that is why project morpheus will have an uphill battle when it comes to performance on demanding games. instead you will likely see indie style games being supported. if oculus supported the xbox one and ps4 the games would be held back to accommodate the hardware as would oculus rift from being as advanced as it is.

as long as consoles remain popular the growth going into 4k gaming will be a long route. 4k tv's are still rather expensive, the more popular they get the more prices will come down. that same scenario works with gaming, they will always cater to the most popular userbase. console gamers don't care that much about frame rates either, it's why so few games go above 30 frames and we've even seen some pc games capped at 30 frames because they were designed for consoles. the call of duty franchise could also host more online players than consoles but that franchise has been dumbed down for consoles all due to that is where the largest market is now for it. so tell me again how consoles don't hold back pc gaming.

Revolver_X_1041d ago


While it is true, average pc gamers cant run 4k effectively.

Thanks to DSR technology, an average pc gamer can run 4k downsampled to 1080p. Its still something, and messing around with settings you can get a lot more out of a $350 PC, then a PS4 or X1.

While the argument is always "most pc gamers". Facts are, "most" pc gamers can play games @ 1080p 60fps. Something consoles struggle to do. I suspect "most" pc gamers will regularly play @ 4k before consoles ever adopt it. The best we can hope for is solid 1080p 60fps next gen, then hopefully 2k(1440p) after that. 4k for consoles is more like 3-4 gens from now. I do expect console cycles to become a 5yr standard from now on, so in 15-20 yrs from now. Just my thoughts though. I would love to be wrong, trust me.

BitbyDeath1041d ago (Edited 1041d ago )

@garretbobbyferguson, The Order is 1080p same as how blu-ray movies are 1080p. Do you think they are also not 1080p? The resolutions are the same on both.

awi59511041d ago


PC players very easily have machines that do 60 fps on max setting on pc at 1080P. I cant say that for consoles.

awi59511041d ago


We are not blind we are playing pc and we can see the downgrades clearly.

Locknuts1041d ago

Higher details and higher framerate. 30fps is a joke and some games can't even achieve that.

Dee_911041d ago (Edited 1041d ago )

my pc isn't "there".
What you mean is the technology is there.What's holding back advancements on a mainstream scale is price.Not many people are willing to pay over $800 for prettier graphics.. Unless you want the install base to drop dramatically, creating a domino effect resulting in a handful of games releasing each year or possibly, consoles dying all together... Well, I think that is PC master race's plan for consoles.. so yea. Pony up the dough or gtfo right?

Ike_Broflovski1041d ago

Intels next gen of Core CPUs will be 10-12 nm, I have no clue what eyeofcore is on about and neither does he TBH.

4k will be maxed on budget GPU's by the time this stagnant gen comes to an end.

BeefCurtains1041d ago

Higher and higher resolution can only do so much for gaming right now. Total immersion, that's where it's at. And tech is finally at our fingertips for good VR and AR. I hope to see some major advancements in consumers hands.

4k? Not so much right now. 1080 or 2k VR??? I'll take it, thank you very much.

_-EDMIX-_1041d ago

Johndoe is 100% correct with that notion.

Console gaming is holding no one back. If those teams want to make demanding games ONLY for PC....they are free to do so. No one is stopping them.

@Garrett-"So how do you propose these consoles do that? The Order is a linear shooter and it can't even achieve 1080p/60" Won't, not can't. It does lessor settings because of what the game is and what they focus on...that is a choice. If you game on clearly know that going 1080p, 60fps is nothing more then turning off some effects.....I don't see how the y "can't" if its their own game...they very much can if they really wanted that.

Like I've stated before....if they wanted it SOOOO BAD...they would not make new engines, just use a last gen, dated engine and do 1080p 60fps all day. Clearly...that isn't what all developers want.

1080p and 60fps are NOT ALL the settings to actually judge a game by...I mean...I'm sure we all know that right?

Thats like saying those 2 numbers mean more then a new engine. Soo, HL1 look better then HL2? What if I told you HL1 is in 1080p 60fps and HL2 is in 720p 30fps? I mean...that setting only really means soooo much. Its not a night and day difference and it doesn't go over new engines. Not even slightly.

@Ninjia- "Last gen was good, but it was always significantly behind PC."

All gens generally speaking will always behind PC, but that is generally speaking. All gaming PC's will be behind I mean.. lol, it means very little if that hardware is not being actually used as the minimum in terms of development, ie do we see right now R9's being used as minimum specs?

PC will always have the edge in making a game look "better" by comparison, but PC at the same time won't be making exclusive games that have minimums beyond that of consoles. It has to do with what many have stated already, not enough own those beast PC's to really solely develop for that crowd.

Many on here need to really ask themselves....if this was what developer wanted....whats stopping them from making a PC exclusive that is minimum a titan card? They can crowd fund if they really wanted that too...

You didn't see it in any other gen, you won't see it now. It has to do with MOST don't own such rigs to even justify such development.

I game on both PC and console and can say its a double edged sword. You "can" have the better graphics, but that option to have "better" also means its not exact like console.....which results in less exclusive HIGH END AAA development.

PC gets the hardware price down, console gets the developers working on higher end hardware, that ultimately gets PC versions being made.

I'm sorry but Witcher 3 and AC Unity are only made on PC because a PS4 and XONE exist to justify the engine and development. Yet we didn't see both titles last gen on PC despite the hardware existing.

Dee_911041d ago (Edited 1041d ago )


I have
windows 8
1.8 gb vram
i7 quad core

I can barely run GTA V. My project cars is at medium settings with 30fps and 720p.
You need maybe double the power consoles have on pc to get graphics to look as good as consoles on PC.Optimization>>> Brute power. Don't get me wrong. I may be able to play those games at higher settings, but at 80c temps for long periods of time will drastically shorten the lifespan of my gpu. same for my cpu.Thats why the requirements to play such games require much higher specs than what consoles have.

abstractel1040d ago (Edited 1040d ago )

It's all relative though. Look at CGI 7 years ago. Or 12 years ago. I think gaming has surpassed that :P. Of course offline rendering of CGI will always have the advantage of time, meaning it can take hours per frame and be acceptable. It doesn't need to worry about refreshing at 30 frames per second or more.

So a bit of a duh comment based on the headline alone (yes, I have not read the article).

+ Show (21) more repliesLast reply 1040d ago
umair_s511041d ago

1080p is fine for me too , but they should find a way to make next gen 100% backwards compilable
I dont want to rebuy all games again for next gen

johndoe112111041d ago

I think it will. This gen probably marks the beginning of a standard set of hardware for consoles. It won't be like in the ps2 or ps3 era where hardware design was out of the ordinary. The ps5 and xbox two will probably be designed almost identical to the ps4 and xbox one but with higher specs. if they do that then games will definitely be backwards compatible.

kneon1041d ago

I agree with johndoe11211, now that they have gone with x86 they are unlikely to move on to some other architecture. The only viable one being ARM, and the only reason to do that would be to make it easier to run the same game across mobile and console.

But I find that highly unlikely, they will stay the course with x86, and because of that backwards compatibility will be quite easy. And they may even start releasing new consoles sooner than you'd expect since the development cost is so much lower.

bumnut1040d ago

That is one of the main reasons I stick with PC, no BC troubles.

johndoe112111041d ago


I've read your comment about 15 times and I still don't have a bloody clue what you're trying to say.

NuggetsOfGod1041d ago (Edited 1041d ago )

Next couple years?

AMD "zen" cpu comes next year.
And it's 14nm FinFet.

Also Amd & nvidia gpus next year will be 16nm with HBM2.

4k monitors are in the $500 range now and in 2 years 1440p/4k will be a nominal thing.

If it's gonna take ps6 to do 4k then ps5 is already holding back pc lol

But if console gamers are already willing to wait from 2005 to end of 2013 to move from 720p 30fps to 1080 30fps then it wont be a problem to play 4k 30fps in 2029 lol

My lord two more generations of downgrades.

I hope pc keeps rising.

Paying for multiplayer plus skins and so many things wrong with consoles.

Consoles are lame as fake.

Because it takes place in a shoe box like ps3 games did.

You won't see an open world game that looks like this on ps4.

And before u ask "buh how many pc's can play that??!"

$80M worth.

itisallaboutps1041d ago

Priotities my man. Some people like to spend 400 dollars orthers like to spend 2k in a pc. Nothing wrong with that, but others might want to travel. Or higher a really high end concubine.

Ippiki Okami1041d ago

Gotta love the ignorant PC Enthusiast talking about stuff they don't understand LOL. This dev is talking about rendering game assets in 4k. The only games that have done this so far are Ryse(2k textures I believe) and Dragon Age Inquisition(the shiny armor).

The games on PC that say "4k" are only upscaled 1080p native games. All modern games are rendered at 1080p to display in 1080p. Epic games already said rendering in 4k now adds thousands/millions of dollars to a games budget. The Crysis devs already went near bankrupt thanks to Ryse's expensive 2k rendering costs.

I really wish 'PC Enthusiasts' would learn about games cuz you really look like idiots when you talk about stuff your clueless about.

Revolver_X_1041d ago


Maybe you should educate yourself!

They do exist!

iloveallgames1041d ago (Edited 1041d ago )

This is definitely a case of the pot calling the kettle black!

In context, 2k and 4k are referencing resolutions. For digital display, DCI defines them as 2048x1080 and 4096x2160 where the 2k and 4k are references to the first digit in the resolutions. That's the professional world, the most common consumer equivalents for 2k and 4k are 1920x1080(full hd) and 3840x2160(ultra hd). If a game is running at 1920x1080 then it is displaying a 2k render. If it is running at 3840x2160 then it is displaying a 4k render.

When talking assets, we are talking the resolutions of textures. A 2k asset would be a 2048x2048 resolution texture and a 4k asset would be a 4096x4096 resolution texture. Now here's the catch, these two aren't conjoined. You can run any combinations you like at any resolutions you like. You could run a 2k render with 4k assets, or even higher, if you like.

There aren't a ton of pc games that are shipping with 4k assets but there are some and more are showing up all the time and there are plenty of 4k mods if you really want them. Anyway, modern design is less about single massive texture sizes, and more about multiple smaller textures blended together in the shader.

But what do I know, I'm just a clueless, ignorant pc enthusiast that needs to learn about games so I don't look like an idiot.

wegetsignalx1041d ago

Consoles will remain a part of the industry because most console owners don't want to build and maintain a PC.

ABizzel11041d ago


I see what you were trying to do by replying to NuggetsOfGold (which is a waste of time since he's a 1 bubble troll, and ignorant), but you yourself went off topic with your explanation of what the dev actually said.

He said it's going to take 2 generations (PS6/XB5) before consoles can produce CG quality graphics in real-time similar to what movies use, and possibly another generation (PS7/XB6) before those CG graphics can be rendered at 4K in real-time.

His main point was talking about rendering CG quality visuals on console, not 4k gaming in general.


What @Ippiki was saying is that most games don't develop games with 4K Assets. Many of the tools are still 1080p textures, and the image is simply scaled to 4k, rather than everything being rendered in 4k to begin with.

For example

I know it says 2k texture mod, but that's what he's talking about. Most games are still use 1080p assets, but are rendered in 4k.

clouds51041d ago

@ippiki: dude... sure texture resolution and rendering resolution are different things. But they are not dependant on each other. On PC in almost all cases you can chose your rendering resolution and your texture resolution with different settings. Usually called "resolution" and "texture quality". You can set those to any level you want.
Now your max resolution is determined by your display. If you have a 1080p monitor/TV that is the highest _native_ resolution you can output. You may want to chose it to render at 720p and upscale it to 1080p. Or you want to render at 1440p and downscale to 1080p to increase visuals or save performance.

It's true that most games don't have 4k texture option but that has nothing to do with rendering resolution and not required to output at 4k. There are enough titles that offer 4k textures through mods though.
I personally usually play in 1440p downscaled to 1080p. btw.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 1041d ago
DevilOgreFish1041d ago (Edited 1041d ago )

"well said^^^ PC gamers are blind..

Console Specs are all the same where as PC is all over the Place because everyone has a different rig"

...console specs are all over the place too, some own xbox 360s, ps3s, ps vitas, Wii-Us, Xbox ones, PS4s...and each of them developers have to support too. And PCs are less complicated, they all read the same programming language and support the same APIs. All of the consoles read different languages and support different APIs.

And once again we have people downplaying GC graphics, just 9 years ago people were buying into the FFVII's tech demo. And not to mention people 9 years ago were buying into the 1080p standard, now all of a sudden 4k's too high? ...........i thought 1080p was a bigger leap from 480p SD consoles. 4k is only 2x the leap.

johndoe112111041d ago

"..console specs are all over the place too, some own xbox 360s, ps3s, ps vitas, Wii-Us, Xbox ones, PS4s...and each of them developers have to support too. And PCs are less complicated, they all read the same programming language and support the same APIs. All of the consoles read different languages and support different APIs. "

The absurdity of this comment is mind numbing.

DevilOgreFish1041d ago (Edited 1041d ago )

That's because you're seeing from a console gamer's perspective. you're not seeing it from a developer's.

- PS, Xbox, and Nintendo are a lot different from them selves. If a developer develops on DX all PCs can read it, the only difference is the power capabilities. consoles are different from programming language to hardware.

And At least PC gamers will be able to link up competing GPUs with the next DX. I'd like to see someone linking an Xbox, PS, and WII-U together. ;)

purpleblau1041d ago

the order 1886 is very close to CGI. If we don't need 4K, we might just wait another cycle. It's close

Ike_Broflovski1041d ago

No it's not at all. Average washed out greys at best. Not to mention that the game sucked over all and it's now stuck in the bargain bin where it belongs.

If you want more games like The Order to pop up then you are what's wrong with gaming.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 1040d ago
DarkOcelet1041d ago (Edited 1041d ago )

The Order 1886 already almost look CGI.

Hellsvacancy1041d ago

Some Of God Of War 3 looked CGI

eyeofcore1041d ago

GOW3 achieved CGI levels quality and maybe even exceeded it to what has been available at the time of original God Of War(early 2005).

TRU3_GAM3R1041d ago (Edited 1041d ago )


i know some scenes are pre rendered in engine but hell that pic above look more than cgi. looks real

MasterCornholio1041d ago

Isn't that from a cutscene? As far as I know cutscenes in Ryse are prerendered. Correct me if I'm wrong.

TRU3_GAM3R1041d ago (Edited 1041d ago )


here is DigitalFoundry Frame-Rate Tests these are realtime scenes

skip @2:54 in game shot

wegetsignalx1041d ago

All Ryse cutscenes are pre-rendered including that one. I've played it on PC, it's very easy to spot when the game switches from 60 fps to 30 during cutscenes.

A frame counter during a cutscene doesn't mean it's realtime, it just means the framecounter still is running during the cutscene.

Cy1041d ago

It was also a 4 hour long game. I'd much rather have games like Dragon Age: Inquisition and Witcher 3 at 1080p, 30fps than have a 4 hour, linear action game which looks like a CG movie.

WeAreLegion1041d ago (Edited 1041d ago )

You beat it in 4 hours? My first playthrough clocked in at just over 12 hours.

Transistor1041d ago

What you dislike about the Order doesn't have anything to do with the fact it almost looks like CGI.

Cy1041d ago


Actually it does. My point is that I doubt you can have long, incredibly intricate games that look like a CG cutscene 100% of the time. The Order focused on graphics over everything else, and in a lot of ways it's barely a complete game. I'd much rather have a deep game than a pretty one.

1041d ago
UltraNova1041d ago (Edited 1041d ago )


Not all games need to be open world 100 hr RPGs.

Its called choice and whether some like it or not I love to be able to choose between types and not have to pick between only 100hr open world games with stories so stretched out it becomes a chore to finish them.

Plus not all of us have 15 hrs per day to spent on games anymore...

Look don't get me wrong I love RPGs, you see they're like steak, I love them so much its my favorite type of food but I don't want to eat steak in every single meal because I will be fed up with it sooner rather than later.

You see I love my steak and my chicken and my pork and my salads and everything in between with equal measure.

So you disliking the order like that its you saying no to more choice. Its bad for you and for everyone else you persuade.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 1041d ago
christocolus1041d ago

Cant wait to see that game at E3. Sam Lake says the team has made remarkable progress since the the last time it was shown. also one of the guys working on QB also worked with the team that did the visual effects for the movie "Gravity"

Dirtnapstor1041d ago (Edited 1041d ago )

I've yet to get an Xbone, Quantum Break may be the game that persuades me.

wegetsignalx1041d ago (Edited 1041d ago )

The Quantum Break reveal trailer is pre-rendered CG, including the first screen shot you posted.

jukins1041d ago

Yea those games looked cgi but this article is referring to cgi like visuals at 4k in real time Not even a 40 titan can achieve that

Jalva1041d ago

Lol at all the people who agree that The Order: 1886 and God of War 3 look CGI but disagree that Ryse does, just goes to show that these people don't even know what CGI is and it's just a matter of one-upping Sony and downplaying Microsoft as usual.

wegetsignalx1041d ago (Edited 1041d ago )

Ryse cutscenes are pre-rendered CG. The Order: 1886 cutscenes are realtime. That is the difference. It has nothing to do with your personal attacks.

DevilOgreFish1041d ago (Edited 1041d ago )

@ DarkOcelet "The Order 1886 already almost look CGI."

...CGI of 14 years ago still beats it. Spirits within Used fully rendered hair and of course 400,000 polygons spent on characters.

That being said, Assassin's creed unity is the game at the moment that's actually tried to push for rendered hair on characters and lighting too.

Ike_Broflovski1041d ago

At least you said almost.

To most non hype driven fanboys the order was average at best, even graphics wise. To seasoned PC gamers those "awesome" graphics are laughable. Then there's the fact those console can't render a game with "decent" graphics like The Order and have the game still be fun to play and not over in mere hours.

The Order was nothing more than a bargain bin game that had never before seen levels of hype to sell it to dummies.

One of the worst games I have played in the last 2 years.

DarkOcelet1041d ago

To each his own my friend but The Order 1886 was enjoyed by many people.

Also The Last Of Us looked incredible and had an amazing gameplay and so did Gears Of War 3.

So i am pretty sure Gears 4 and The Last Of Us 2 will reach the graphic fidelity of The Order 1886 and be awesome to play.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 1041d ago
Transistor1041d ago

This just reminded me how excited I am to see Quantic Dream's PS4 game. What they achieved on PS3 was pretty crazy, I could see their PS4 game getting pretty close to CGI.

Tankbusta401041d ago

I'm fine with ps4s hardware...let's develop great games before we sorry about superficial stuff.

Guy is just butt hurt he doesn't work for naughty dog any more