Do you think consoles will be obsolete in 5-8 years?

[ManOfDisguise]

Already obsolete...

[ManOfDisguise]

Imagine the power of 8x GTX 780Ti with Dual 4960X's in the palm of your hands!

The framerate! It would be...OVER 9000!!!

[Lord Pantaloons]

5-8 years? Consoles are already obsolete

[Vitalius]

XBOX says mantle won't be allowed on its console. It's sort of DoA.

... For Xbox. 

But then again, Xbox just looks like a terrible console this generation. Inferior hardware which was supposed to be supplemented by cloud computing, which fell through. A bad starting plan (alllll the TV), which was only replaced with a sub-par "make up for our prior plan" plan. 

Not only does PS4 have stronger hardware, but it now has Mantle too. ... Just saying. Unless Sony has their own API they want to use instead of Mantle. Doubt it. But it's possible.

[Stefken89]

Not yet today, but they will be very soon. 

Right now it's still pretty hard to buy/build a pc for the same price, with the same performance. But, like said on the WANshow, they used to be ahead of pc when they released, now they are already behind "normal budget"-pcs. In a little while you will buy a device that is much more powerful & more versatile for the same price. 

 

I don't agree that the next big thing will be cloud-gaming. My guess: streaming in-house. (1 powerful pc in the house, streaming devices around the house). Cloudbased gaming will come, but internetspeeds - reliability will have to increase first.

 

[TheArcheaon]

 

 

With mobile chips becoming more and more powerful, do you think the days of gaming consoles are coming to an end? With chips like the soon to be released Tegra 6, the graphics performances said to rival that of the Playstation 3.

 

Personally, I think that within a couple of years, you'll have more power in your hands that you can take anywhere and plug into a TV. More than likely, people will choose to have a portable system over a big box.

 

Article: http://www.digitalstormonline.com/unlocked/the-end-of-gaming-consoles-and-rise-of-mobile-and-pc-gaming-idnum112/

 

actually yes. I mean think about this, we're starting to walk into the virtual reality world (who knows maybe in 10 - 20 years we might have VR like Accel World / Sword Art Online)  And if they make more stuff like the NVIDIA Shield (then I plan on buying more portable gaming gear than consoles)

[Sarcasm]

Not if Apple decides to enter the market.

[Nexus]

It really depends on how receptive people are to change. A lot of people enjoy the current console experience. How hard will it be to convince these people that an alternative is in actuality better? Then there are people who find the idea of an "app" that enables gaming, streaming from the house (steam/nvidia shield) or online streaming such as OnLive too complicated. A lot of people wont understand how this works and will prefer the box that they plug into the tv.

 

In terms of hardware and games design consoles have been in my opinion obsolete for a long time. Im a big rts gamer and that lack of titles on the consoles for this genre and the lack of sufficient controls make it obsolete. 

[SirRoderick]

I would be surprised to see another big generation of consoles after this. There's already alternatives to the "TV box" style setup for couch gaming, the next 5 years will push those alternatives to the point where having a dedicated box for it next to your TV makes very little sense. You'll be moving either towards shield like devices that stream from a central hub, a GRID like interface with regional distributions, Cloud gaming....In the end gaming on a TV will be another function of a device you can carry around everywhere OR of a device you can STREAM everywhere.

[digitalnav]

Not if Apple decides to enter the market.

 

Most likely an Apple console will be based on mobile chips anyways. It'll more than likely be portable system as well.

[EpicGeekonFire]

Lets face it. CPU's are becoming more and more powerful and there is virtually no need to have a system for just gaming. I also believe it will be rare to see gaming rigs in the next few years. The performance we have now will be matched with mobile systems. 

[mr moose]

streaming from the house (steam/nvidia shield) or online streaming such as OnLive too complicated. A lot of people wont understand how this works and will prefer the box that they plug into the tv.

 

 

The problem with Nvidia shield and cloud streaming etc is that they not only require either the shield, app on a mobile device or controller to plug into the tv but they also require the main pc connected to the net.  why buy 2 devices when one console does the job.  Consoles will always be behind PC's in terms of frame rates and resolution, that is not the debate, If people want one device on their tv that does not require another device then console will not be obsolete. 

 

Until the day comes when every house has a mainframe style pc that is capable of streaming games and the shield or tv device is significantly cheaper than a console, then they will not become obsolete.

[Zyphera]

I think the next step and death to todays platform of phones as we have them today, desktop computing and consoles will be monitors inform of glasses or lenses you have on your eye. With high enough DPI (500-600) and 10 bit color there will be no need for any other monitors. Think of how little material that will be needed to make monitors that covers your eyes only compared to today. The image will also cover your entire view The image will be ether streamed from a server side service or through parts on you. The experience will be complete when you can control the devices with inputs from your brain.

[TechSage]

FUUUUCCCCK.... Why is the title and poll question 2 contradicting question. I answered "No" to the title, then realized the poll question was "Do you think they're a dying breed" 

 

 

 

FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU

[Frix]

I don't think it will be cloud gaming, but if we can fit more hardware in a phone as we can in a PS4, then what is the point of the PS4, they will only overtake phones if they come out with smaller and more powerful consoles that are actually smaller than phones, however this will not happen because of how often they realease a new console.

[theNejCar]

Not only does PS4 have stronger hardware, but it now has Mantle too. ... Just saying. Unless Sony has their own API they want to use instead of Mantle. Doubt it. But it's possible.

I thought mantle is for the PC. It is supposed to give games better access to hardware to use it more effectively. Consoles already use low level APIs anyways, so they don't really need mantle. Or am i wrong?

[Vitalius]

I thought mantle is for the PC. It is supposed to give games better access to hardware to use it more effectively. Consoles already use low level APIs anyways, so they don't really need mantle. Or am i wrong?

Mantle means that any work that is done on the PC version of the game can be directly ported to the Console versions. Mantle is built to directly communicate with DirectX, so developing with Mantle means developing for everything basically. 

Less time developing for multiple API's means more time optimizing. However, since Xbox will use DirectX and Mantle will have to communicate with that rather than the hardware directly, it won't get the same advantages that PS4 will get.

I could be wrong, but that is how I understand Mantle to be according to everything AMD has said about it. Companies have lied before, and will again, but I have yet to see a reason why this is not true. 

AMD is pitching Mantle as a "Modular API" which directly implies it has to work with DirectX and other APIs if it is meant to be modular (i.e. one part of a game be developed in Mantle and work fine with another part developed in DirectX). 

You can look at AMD's blog if you don't see where they say it's modular. They don't directly say it, but saying "It works with DirectX, not against it." (paraphrased) is close enough imo.

My point is that so long as Mantle has to communicate with DirectX, the machine it's running on (like XB1) will most likely not get the low level API bonuses that a machine that Mantle has direct access to will (like PS4).

Still, I could be wrong. But I don't see anything saying I am. And it makes sense tbh. How else could AMD release an API and still work with Microsoft (who is a direct competitor in the API world) unless they can work together directly and efficiently.

[IPCharger]

The Linus Prophecy will become a reality. (needing a dedicated box for gaming on the couch)

[bob345]

i would be willing to say that they will be obsolete in 2-3 year max. At the rate that mobile electronics are getting better, it wont be long until we have graphics that look as good as these new consoles on a small device. Take a look at nvidia's project logan and how little power that uses.

[digitalnav]

i would be willing to say that they will be obsolete in 2-3 year max. At the rate that mobile electronics are getting better, it wont be long until we have graphics that look as good as these new consoles on a small device. Take a look at nvidia's project logan and how little power that uses.

Yup, thats what really caught my eye. By Tegra 6 we should have console grade graphics on portable devices.

[SirReallySam]

Yes.

[SirRoderick]

Mantle means that any work that is done on the PC version of the game can be directly ported to the Console versions. Mantle is built to directly communicate with DirectX, so developing with Mantle means developing for everything basically. 

Less time developing for multiple API's means more time optimizing. However, since Xbox will use DirectX and Mantle will have to communicate with that rather than the hardware directly, it won't get the same advantages that PS4 will get.

I could be wrong, but that is how I understand Mantle to be according to everything AMD has said about it. Companies have lied before, and will again, but I have yet to see a reason why this is not true. 

AMD is pitching Mantle as a "Modular API" which directly implies it has to work with DirectX and other APIs if it is meant to be modular (i.e. one part of a game be developed in Mantle and work fine with another part developed in DirectX). 

You can look at AMD's blog if you don't see where they say it's modular. They don't directly say it, but saying "It works with DirectX, not against it." (paraphrased) is close enough imo.

My point is that so long as Mantle has to communicate with DirectX, the machine it's running on (like XB1) will most likely not get the low level API bonuses that a machine that Mantle has direct access to will (like PS4).

Still, I could be wrong. But I don't see anything saying I am. And it makes sense tbh. How else could AMD release an API and still work with Microsoft (who is a direct competitor in the API world) unless they can work together directly and efficiently.

In this case you would be mistaken actually. While there's a case to be made for similarities in converting from consoles to PC using mantle, it's still going to take significant work to port over titles. Mantle is an entirely PC rendering API and is only applicable on the PC platform. I mean you even offer up statements that Mantle would work with directX, which doesn't exist on either console. The point of Mantle is simply a low overhead renderer for the PC, nothing more.

 

People seem to be hailing it as a messiah or something while it really is just a more efficient way to render.

[xox]

PCs are too inconveinient for the general consumers.

Something like Roku of Apple TV are not worth it; because by 8 years time, why would someone need such a thing with smart TVs and such.

Plus, the extra functinality of a console is worth a lot more than most think.

[Guest]

No

[SirRoderick]

PCs are too inconveinient for the general consumers.

Something like Roku of Apple TV are not worth it; because by 8 years time, why would someone need such a thing with smart TVs and such.

Plus, the extra functinality of a console is worth a lot more than most think.

But that same functionality will soon be possible in a tablet-type device...so what would be the point?