Are console gamers building themselves up for disappointment with their expectations of PS4 and the next Xbox.
It'll be interesting to see the quality of the launch line-up, even some dated 5-yr old cards can punch out the bulk of AAA games on highest settings.
I think I will be satisfied if the graphical capabilities are similar to the level of star wars 1313. If its higher than that and I think it will be then its still a win win. I remember back in the day people think the 360 and PS3 will carry high end games graphics exactly as half life 2 at max setting or F.E.A.R. Then we saw the 360 and PS3 displaying games for all 7 years of their existence far beyond those games. Crysis and battlefield 3 will look dated when next gen consoles appear just like how doom 3, farcry, fear and half life 2 became dated easily.
They will look better than 1313. Star Wars 1313 is only using Unreal 3.
@skate-ak Yup I agree, But I do think for the first year most games will look like 1313 and then they get better as time progress like every gaming console.
Hell imo it stacks up with some of the best Pc games! Look at the last of us
.......ehh? sorry, you were saying? i was busy staring at Chloes ass... wait, what?
Yes because the rumored CPU's in the PS4 and Xbox are junk
no one even knows what those processors can do yet.
If you imagine quality games like TLOU. UC3. Halo 4 in 1080p then no the expectations are valid.
Nah. I'm a PC gamer first and foremost, but I think some people underestimate what the next consoles will be capable of. Even a PC with the rumored specs of the PS4 and Durango will do quite a bit better than run current high end console games at 1920 x 1080 resolution. My HD 7950 can run The Witcher 2 maxed out at a steady 50fps (with monitor set to same refresh rate) and 1080p resolution. It also blasts through virtually every multiplatform game at 60 fps and 1080p. The fact that consoles have less over-head and games can be programmed to the metal without the inefficiency of having to make sure it works on a variety of different hardware setups (as on PC) means that next gen console games will look quite a bit better than TLOU or Halo 4. And it will do it all in 1080p as well. 60 fps will likely be more common than it was this generation, but will probably still come down to the developer and what they are trying to achieve. In the end some people are probably expecting too much, but I think that many people are expecting too little.
No. We're expecting too little. Next-Gen is utterly gonna blow us away. Mark my words.
I back you up.
Yes they are expecting far too much. It will make the reality of things hurt that much more.
So I wonder how good you think next gen will look.
we barely got out of the sdtv times, and vcr's. then went to hdtv's and dvd, then bluray( destroyed hddvd) i would be happy if they just made games bigger. even if it meens 480p
you serious...? welcome to the DAY OF TOMORROW AKA the FUTURE AKA the present
480p would look like mud...
I want the texture detail to be so high that I can zoom into a pimple on a fleas arse.
I just think that most people wont see the graphical difference between PS3 and PS4....PS3 games already look beautiful so no I'm not expecting too much at the moment.
I am hoping for at least the equivalent of 1080p Crysis 1 on Very High PC settings and at best quality that matches the latest 3D Mark Fire Strike demo.
PS4/720 will basically be around the same power as Wii U
Wii U is hardly more powerful than PS3/Xbox, do you know that right?
Actually it's a lot more powerful. But that big power difference won't manifest itself in a radically different way compared to what we've already seen.
Then the Wii U would die pretty fast... most of the WIi U's cost comes from the tablet controller, so even if the PS4 / new Xbox were on par with the Wii U, then they would logically cost a lot less. Needless to say, that would kill the Wii U pretty fast lol.
Probably console gamers are pretty irrational. Almost as bad as Apple vs. Andriod
I want to see what MS is going to do with all them studios they opened.
Make Kinect games
Not funny, most of MS new studios aren't making Kinect games.
What a lot of people don't seem to get is that we're reaching a plateau in terms of real time computer graphics capabilities. Making a game look 10% better to the average gamer requires an absolutely MASSIVE amount of computation power. Long gone are the days in the 90's and early 00's where making a game look better was a simple act of creating higher poly models and higher resolution textures. These days, it's all about lighting and shaders. We've seen a big push towards fully real-time lighting solutions in engines like the CryEngine, Frostbite 2 and Unreal 4. Things like real-time global illumination, subsurface scattering, deferred lighting and more increased physicality in game environments require tons of processing overhead. A lot of these technologies are fairly new in the PC gaming space (2011 and on is when we started seeing this sort of stuff implemented into more and more games). Realistically, what you're going to get out of next-gen consoles (for the first few years at least) will be the sort of stuff we're seeing in PC games of the last year or two. The PC versions of Crysis 2/3 and Battlefield 3 are a pretty good measure of what early next-gen console games will look like.
Unreal 4 is more of a look at what next gen will be... Crysis 2/3 along with BF3 were coded with the x360 and ps3 in mind and even though it was developed on PC (BF3/Crysis3)the console limitations still make themselves known. 1080p, better lighting, and SSAO support are the only benefits were seeing added to the PC version of everything as of lately.
Unreal 4 and CryEngine 3 are pretty close to parity. I used Crysis 3 and Battlefield 3 as examples because they're already out there for everyone to see (almost, I'm aware Crysis 3 comes out in a week).
Technically, that it was I'm expecting. However, the difference is that now we're getting a whole slew of creative developers using technology that has been available on PC for some time. That means Santa Monica, Naughty Dog, Guerilla, Polyphony, Sucker Punch, Media Molecule, and more (as well as multiplatform developers, sorry for seeming PS3-centric atm), working on these updated platforms, What I'm saying is that, yes, games on PC have far surpassed current console tech, but Crysis and Battlefield are absolutely not the most creative or visually interesting projects. That being said, I am looking forward to developers applying that same level of tech. But to see the same developers that have brought us such visually incredible games on last generation consoles (I mean look at The Last of Us) apply themselves on the Orbis and Durango... whew I am excited,
Utterly nonsense Pandamobile(1st comment), just look at 'plateau-less' 'prerendered CGI in movies and u know games are nowhere near that quality in real-time, let alone reaching a 'plateau'. Ha, ultra-real physics simulated down to the molecular interactions & neural networks simulated for real A.I. are nowhere the current state of the art....let alone present in games, so no plateau their either...u sir, lack a vision of the possibilities. Anyways, look @ Watch Dogs/Crysis 3/StarWars 1313 (All shown running on current PCs)and we have a good indication what the 1st NextGen Console games will look like...in my opinion good enough for starters
He means a plateau from stagnation of technology. It's going to be a while until the next breakthrough that revolutionizes chips in such a that we will see a sudden huge leap again. Obviously there is room for improvement. I'm really actually quite surprised your misinterpreted his comments.
Yeah, you don't seem to get what I meant by plateau, pepbizmo. Improving graphics is no longer a linear function like it was 5-10 years ago. That extra 10% of graphics takes like 100% more computation power.
Ok thanks for correcting me stragomccloud & pandamobile...i see what u meant. Than we are in total agreement..I must have been to hasty with my comment this time around. Mon Excuse.
I don't expect it to be Avatar but I mostly expect and better looking, more stable game.
I think quite a few people are expecting too much, especially right at first. It takes time for developers to learn the in's and out's of new hardware and so people will need to be patient. Also, I believe for the first time all three companies will have to release consoles that appeal to more than just one type of gamer right from the start. Nintendo is already trying to attract people with a tablet controller, interesting to see what some of those patents turn up for Sony and Microsoft. When their current consoles released, there wasn't any competition from Smartphones or Tablets, so they will need to entice a wide audience.
im expecting Pc level games at medium to medium-high settings. No one is expecting ultra settings.
Actually I think many people are expecting ultra high settings looking graphics.
i don't really care about the graphics as long as the games themselves are good that being said everyone else cares immensly about graphics and that means devs need more time to make their products look good... and that's why games come out so slow depending on the size of the developer team... and all because you wanted to see the details of dirt on the ground in 1080p.....you should feel bad, you know. regards the voice you hear in your head when you read things
For me it would be having console games look somewhere close or identical to Battlefield 3 for PC on high settings. I'm hoping those kinds of graphics are capable on Next-Gen console games with big/open spaces and not just limited to really linear stuff. In addition to better graphics, even better A.I. and more things going on screen in real-time simultaneously is a MUST. I don't know if this will actually happen on the 8th Gen. consoles and I'm not necessarily expecting it, but I think Full Environment Destructibility should be a Standard for ALL Triple-A games and it shouldn't be something that's limited to just a few games. My expectations probably are pretty high, but those are the kinds of things that I would consider to be fully 'Next-Gen' based on what's possible on PS3/360 right now...Next-Gen consoles only having a small boost in graphics just isn't good enough for me.
Same expectations here, with changes mostly on new features offered by Sony and Microsoft whether they be in or non game related issues.
Im expecting next gen consoles to be able to run games like the Witcher 2 at ultrasettings and a steady framerate. Im clearly not expecting graphics on the level of Avatar though because in my opinion that's a bit absurd at this moment.
Well considering games like Uncharted were running off 2004/5 hardware, then yes, I expect a hell of a lot after all these years. The PS3 gave us excellent looking/playing games, so in 2013, I expect the bar to be raised.
they are exaggerating.
360 and PS3 are producing some really good looking games right now (even compared to PC), it's not like the next consoles are going to be worse or just slightly better. Expectations are valid.
I expect games to be held back due to some console gamers(who really want to be pc gamers) putting a greater value on graphics instead of gameplay. We won't see new experiences until years into the next gen, sort of like how we are now JUST getting quality games focused on better gameplay, though it's only a few...
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.