Comments (29)
danswayuk  +   1100d ago
Graphics will help, but I will likely buy both systems and then get games for each depending on the situation.
Titanz  +   1100d ago
A lot more developing companies may go under next-gen
Either the majority of 3rd party titles won't be console exclusive, or games will lack depth.

Million dollar sales, won't even break even.
danswayuk  +   1099d ago
Interesting line of thought, is this just opinion or do you have sources to back up this possibility?
Letros  +   1099d ago
Game development has went up by an order of magnitude every generation, (why would the next gen be any different?), while game cost has stagnated around $60 (N64 games were $60-80...). Core video games will only get so popular, and the casual Angry Bird stuff isn't really helping that either. I'd say Titanz makes a valid point.
kneon  +   1099d ago
Development costs will not go up an order of magnitude for next gen, that's just not feasible, nor is there any need for it to be that much more expensive.

The only dev that could see a big increase in costs is Nintendo as it will be a big leap for them if they are targeting the same production quality gamers have come to expect on the other consoles.
MidnytRain  +   1099d ago
Lol, why are you analyzing him?
NYC_Gamer  +   1099d ago
i doubt any 3rd party studio will limit themselves to one platform with the price of the production being higher.and we should all expect major publishers to take less risk..
Half-Mafia  +   1099d ago
They barely take risks now, which makes me scared for the next gen consoles.
death2smoochie  +   1099d ago
One can only imagine what the costs for game development next generation will be? It's exceedingly high as it is now, next generation will be substantially more if you see where development is heading.

Maybe this is the reason some developers, especially the smaller software houses are publicly stating there is no need for new consoles at this time.

Seems it's not a desire for more power for some of these developers, but a desire for those companies not to go Chapter 11 like many have this generation due to rising costs of development.
LeShin  +   1099d ago
People may want state of the art graphics, but let's be real, many do not want to spend a lot of money to have it....or everyone would have top graphical spec PC's in their household, which they don't. (I know I certainly don't)
hintonmj  +   1099d ago
It is getting way too expensive and time consuming to make great games. I want to experience photo-realistic interactive emersion as much as the next guy, but until someone invents a way for developers to impose their will without having to go through meticulous programing, we will be left with beautiful, but short and unimaginative experiences.
Inception  +   1099d ago
Next gen, i don't want dev just focusing too much making graphic more detail / realistic. But i want dev offer a new way of gameplay and storytelling without relying too much into gimmicks like motion control / touch screen.
lzim  +   1099d ago
Why?

Have you considered that in some respects PC gaming is severely hampered by just clicking a mouse? and console games the very same by using an imprecise game pad?

Opening up human interface to several standards by default forces game devs to try them all and get used to ones that work best. If only 360 had supported mouse, it might have had more RTS and an OS. Sony would have followed suit. Steam on 360 would have made more sense and more devs would be able to port stuff back and forth.
rizzo-rizzo  +   1099d ago
I rather more talented AI developers & creativity overhaul rather than these damn graphical improvements. everything's too Right-Wing in the gaming world atm & it's all too much cash grab. Why do you think those guys who made CoD don't care about fixing your bugs.
mamotte  +   1099d ago
How about making games that feel new and original, or at least fun, with new ways of play (even if I know 99% will say "it's just a gimmick! Give us the same controller we ever had!") instead of thinking about how graphics will improve?

Games already look technically great, look at Uncharted, for example. If consoles ae powerful, the ¿amazing? outcome will be like actual PC games, nothing new here.

And then, developers will have us busy counting polygons instead of playing the game. And then, I'll spend my money in Indie games, and Nintendo games, because games like Wind Waker or Limbo, look waaaay more amazing, appealing and original, than the entire COD, BF and Uncharted series togheter.

Cant gamers and developers think of anything else?
rizzo-rizzo  +   1099d ago
Simple.. Because it's not lucrative.. To squander the opportunity every sperm-faced company lingers toward is to let a company sink in the face of competition.
thespaz  +   1099d ago
I thought about getting into PC gaming, but then I realized all the best games come out for console only.

Uncharted series
Infamous series
Skate series
Red Dead Redemption
Killzone series

There's not much left to play on PC except for all the different generic first person shooters (which I really, really getting sick of). Plus, not every game supports a controller.
Half-Mafia  +   1099d ago
wow how wrong you are. i get all the console only games on PS3 and everything else on PC. I probably spend 80% PC-20% PS3. let alone how much better the game looks, true 1080p and mods.
iamgoatman  +   1099d ago
"...except for all the different generic first person shooters"

And yet you list the Killzone series, the irony.
CultOfPersonality  +   1099d ago
its funny how people want better graphics yet only 10/15% of devs have optimized this gen for graphics! well in sony 1st party studios!
SugarSoSweet  +   1099d ago
More graphics or no buy have u seen what modern GPU's r capable of?
lzim  +   1099d ago
by themselves not much, but in a gaming system, yes, they are handy for powering high res and high quality scenes at fast frame rate.

better graphics won't polish the turds of crap or non existent AI, garbage physics and generally awful shadows and lighting.

Some games may be fun, and even fun to look at but they are still games which seem to be targeted and people who simply have such low standards that they can ignore how primitive game play generally still is. Re: Need for Speed the Run. Great use of Frostbite 2.. what did it accomplish for a series that's been rolling on its rims for years.

Regardless of that we absolutely do need very deep AI and physics (water, smoke, fire, ragdolls, ray-tracing) to make more realistic scenes at high frame rates. The tech might not be there yet to power enough processing threads effectively in a stable game (for consoles), just yet or in the 8th generation.
Half-Mafia  +   1099d ago
These graphics are not going to be possible on the PS4/720 unless Sony and MS want to sell a console for £800+, which i cant see happening. The GPU's usedin that video are 3 GTX 580s which cost £1200 by themselves let alone the other components.
digger18  +   1099d ago
I'm not interested in the next gen of console's. This is going to be my last gen.

This gen consoles have got to be the saddest ever, what with the childish fanboys and the stupid exclusive DLC on several games going to one console or the other. If somebody has paid full price for the game, they are entitled to ALL the DLC, other wise they should have not paid full price in the first place, as it's not going to be a full product.

Both Microsoft and Sony should be ashamed of themselves, for the underhanded way they run their businesses.

Edit: A bit off topic, but alittle pissed off gamer here
#12 (Edited 1099d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
spacedelete  +   1099d ago
too many devs are focusing on graphics but even then not alot of games this gen have mind blowing graphics this gen.

so we basically have decreased the fun/longevity factor for interactive movies which aren't anything special to look at anyway.

i want fun back for games!!!
#13 (Edited 1099d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
ABizzel1  +   1099d ago
There are tons of fun games, especially on PSN and XBLA. It's just people don't take the time out to look for them. They'd rather buy the blockbuster games for $60, rather than 5+ PSN or XBLA games that are just as fun.

If you want somehting unique and innovative then look at the PSN and XBLA games, because developers aren't going to risk it on a multimillion dollar project.
#13.1 (Edited 1099d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
tigertron  +   1099d ago
The graphics leap will probably be big if next-gen started in 2013. I mean, the PS3 and Xbox 360 must be running on 2004 hardware, since alot of time and effort needs to be spent making these consoles.

I'm going to assume that if the PS4 and the nextbox come out in 2013 then they would be running on 2011 tech; and if we get amazing looking games like Uncharted, Gears, etc etc on ancient hardware, just imagine the graphics and physics current hardware can produce.

7 years is a VERY long time considering Moore's Law.
lzim  +   1099d ago
They both know better and such opinion are unduly tainted by the ridiculous Wii U.

The trip here is connecting UE4 (which is something that Samaritan is hinting at, but is not a game yet) to any launch window titles, never mind it being the jack of all trades engine that powers 80+ of AAA titles for the first few years. And a level of detail for physics and animation (the much more important aspect for gameplay) that simply doesn't exist in 7th generation console games.

Graphics that look like Samaritan is one thing and a thing that won't define the best UE4, Generation 8 games but how they play and how different they are from Generation 7 games.

It is much harder to imagine any studio putting more effort into a UE4, or other nextgen game engine powered masterpiece for the same money and time investment as seriously ruinous projects like LA Noire.

At what cost the game play technologies, animation packages and physics implementation that will yield gen 8 games anything like Samaritan? What was said above is true many studios without a sane business plan will burn money making mediocre games. While some may realise that it will be better to climb up to Samaritan's visual Mount Olympus.. and eventually get to a point where generation 8's LA Noire and, Heavy Rain, and Uncharted make those games that finally showed what was possible with 7th gen tech look like a Wii game. I'm willing to wait a few years for that as long as the first set of games are appropriate for the launch window but not as clearly ass as 360's first set of games. That said, at least UE3/4 and CryEngine 3 won't be the only engines on the block.
#14.1 (Edited 1099d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
lzim  +   1099d ago
After reading the above.. I have a question.

What about those developers we know are terrifyingly rich, talented, and who just weren't interested in consoles (with a limited hardware performance enveloped) even when the biggest PC devs jumped on board, crippling their best in order to support consoles and make money.

What if Blizzard was actually part of the launch lineup for Xbox 3 with something as mind blowing as Ghost. That lookek at least as good as Samaritan. And they decided to make something like Mass Effect from any of their current IP?

Ignoring that they should just port their MMO properties to
console as MMOs this time around and do what it takes, deals with MS, changing the PC game to allow both games to run on the same server platform, rethinking the login and payment systems.

I mean think about it, Samaritan's example is something that only works at a scale where you're presented with puzzles and the character in a highly intimate and cinematic presentation. And highly dynamic as in combat and moving around. We've got tons of action adventure games that have those bases covered so we will see sequels... so I don't think it is a big stretch in 3-4 years to perhaps see new IP because the genre will have healthy representation from all major publishers and their best franchises.

It also would be incredible to see Mirror's Edge treated like Samaritan. You want to imagine something jaw dropping which validates video games as visual art AND functional art? Syndicate 2 at the Samaritan level? Deus Ex 4?

Otherwise there's little to gain from the added resources for detail for characters versus the whole scene, larger more complex scenes and farther draw distances. Visually games might get more impressive, but the biggest gains really might be in how developers make the most use of more resources by stepping up the seriousness and quality of characters and the stories we're being told, not just having mobs of near pointlessly realistic peds to run over.

But that little bit more that developers can push into making the world more real, animated and dynamic, could have an enormous payoff of making the game that much more authentic, and less silly. A launch title I'd be looking for on Xbox 3 is Crackdown, not for Crysis level characters and animation, or much better vehicle physics, but for better characters and an actual story. Plus much more realistic mayhem when interacting with the world and very large crowds. And not if it felt like a rejected sequel pushed to the new hardware platform without the world getting tweaked at all again.

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
Remember