In the 90’s Playstation helped take gaming away from the image of childish plaything to a widely accepted form of mainstream entertainment. Since then gaming has expanded way beyond the boundaries of that box under your TV and into an endless sea of varying devices. Developers have answered the need for smaller more accessible games to capture an audience that play on non-dedicated hardware with limited input options. All of which I consider a great boon to the industry that I love.
Well, that was until these tiny time-waster games starting making more money than some of the big triple-A blockbuster games and with only a fraction of the effort put in by developers. The cheap price and general ease of production has since tempted a lot of developers away from big budget games and onto pointless projects that are never going to see the same success as Angry Birds no matter how much they wish upon a magic star. Of course I’d never name names *cough* Peter Molyneux *cough* Curiosity *cough* , excuse me.
However, the continued popularity of a few out of the millions of these simple games coupled with the down-right genius of the indie dev scene has led to a question being asked. That question is…
“Why do we need better hardware?”
…and although it’s a question that crops up in many different forms it’s almost always echoed by those with diminutive past experience of the industry or little to no imagination. Now I’m not saying all those in opposition of advancements in gaming technology are children with no imagination. There are valid reasons for not wanting new, more advanced hardware but a lot of the time it stems from greed (business interests, i.e. a publisher might make more money if they kept making games for old platforms), jealousy (like if someone cannot afford to upgrade they won’t want to be ‘left behind’) or pride (as in a fanboy not wanting their console of choice to be replaced).
There’s a counter-argument I see pop up regularly and it’s one that, despite being used almost to the point of cliché, is still quite poignant. It goes something along the lines of that if the detractors of advancements in hardware had their way we’d still be gaming on a NES with 2D sprites. This seems to suffer from argument fatigue in that back in the NES days everyone was all for advancements in gaming technology, so what’s different now? As I mentioned above the world is a much different place but that can’t be it, there has to be more to it than that.
It seems to have become much more difficult to distinguish between the advancements in gaming as the critics of the Playstation 4 reveal would have you believe. This is a slightly unfair way to judge the possibilities of upgraded hardware as it’s incredibly difficult to judge anything from 2 minute pre-alpha builds and what were probably very rushed tech demos. To my eye there were many obvious improvements but they seemed to pass over the heads of most of the gaming press, who concentrated on unjust and premature criticisms.
So what exactly are the benefits of better hardware? Well, there’s the obvious ones like:
Graphics - Graphics are downplayed a lot in gaming these days. They seem unimportant to most as they can find just as much enjoyment from simpler looking games, which is a valid opinion to have but let’s not forget that greater visual fidelity can not only aid in immersion but also improve the very gameplay aspects that make a game stand out. For example, back in the N64 days, I remember playing Turok: Dinosaur hunter, which is a pretty standard FPS even by today’s standards but the level of fogging masking the awful draw distance stopped it from becoming as good as the experience I can get from modern shooters. So, draw distance, frame rate and general visual fidelity can lend plenty to the gameplay experience of a game, bottom line graphics DO sometimes matter.
Then there’s the not so blatantly obvious stuff like:
A.I. – A.I or artificial intelligence has become increasingly important in today’s games as worlds grow larger and story becomes a prevalent aspect. Having good A.I. can aid endlessly with the general believability of the game world and help immerse the player in the game. As I understand, A.I. can take up a lot of processing power, which is where advancements in hardware will really start to pay off in the coming generations.
I could go on and on about the advantages of newer hardware in games but most likely you have experienced it first hand for yourselves over the years, whether you recognise it or not. I’d like to re-iterate that I love most of the incredibly imaginative stuff coming out of some of the smaller indie devs such as Journey, Braid, Unfinished Swan, Minecraft etc. I’m aware that better graphics don’t always make a better game but I don’t want to see the Industry become stagnant, we should always strive for better, even if it IS just shinier graphics. Who knows where technology will take us next.
The friendly folks over at Razer recently sent us their full size Kishi Ultra mobile gaming controller, and this thing didn't disappoint.
VGChartz's Mark Nielsen: "Upon finally finishing Devil May Cry 5 recently - after it spent several years on my “I’ll play that soon” list - I considered giving it a fittingly-named Late Look article. However, considering that this was indeed the final piece I was missing in the DMC puzzle, I decided to instead take this opportunity to take a look back at the entirety of this genre-defining series and rank the entries. What also made this a particularly tempting notion was that while most high-profile series have developed fairly evenly over time, with a few bumps on the road, the history of Devil May Cry has, at least in my eyes, been an absolute roller coaster, with everything from total disasters to action game gold."
Me leaving it out should be telling of my thoughts on it. Better than 2 as a DMC game.
Still a good game though.
3,1,4,5 to me, never played 2. 5 gameplay is amazing but level design was really disappointing to me, just a bunch of plain arenas, the story felt like a worse written rehash of the 3rd and the charater models looked weird ( specially the ladies ). Another problem with 5 was that there was not enough content for 3 charaters so I could never really familiarize with any of them
2.
Dmc.
4.
5.
1.
3.
God DMC2 was an awful game.
And in case this isn't obvious it goes worst to best
TSA go hands on with the beta for Inazuma Eleven: Victory Road, but how is the game transitioning to the post-stylus era?
I'm all about the concept of gameplay > graphics. But in this day and age, developers can indeed accomplish both on PCs and the PS4. You cited some good examples of why hardware advancement is indeed important. If a new console comes out, it should be at least a little stronger than the consoles before it, especially if we're talking about a five year gap between it and its predecessor.
Overall, not a bad read.
Over time, you do need better hardware. It's just inevitable for the most part. Things simply change. Hardware improvements does affect gameplay. Before we just had 4 main input buttons and a D-pad, but now we have joysticks, shoulder buttons, and now touch pads/screens. These are all new ways to play with improved graphics/power. More power means more enemies, more lands, and more stuff too.
I do believe that consoles should upgrade every 4-6 years though. This generation seemed to have dragged, IMO. Last year especially showed how old these systems were getting.
The public ride new techology like leeches.
Do they care if some of the pioneers, like bedroom coders, are relatively isolated from the modern industry, unflashy and uncared for?
On the whole no.
It's not the creative minds of games makers that many people admire. It's the lifestyle that it affords them and the ability that it gives any old member of the public to exercise (or exorcise) their ego in public displays of one up man ship.
The brilliant, abstract, minds of some games creators remain as ever much a distant mystery to the fraggers, blaggers, bloggers and downright fools who pay a relatively small amount (if their not pirating like leeches) to enter the minds, converted in to digital entertainment, of people far more gifted than the player is.
Technology, whilst it can sometimes appear nice, is bordering on mistaken narcissism if enjoyed for its own sake. Think of the people who made all of the games that you like happen, their childhoods, their upbringing, their hopes and dreams, their influences, how they may have had to work against the grain of what was fashionable. It's their story really, not yours.