Delve in to the world of shadows with Cyanide's medieval fantasy stealth game.
Yeah 8Gb of RAM is sufficient but the GPU is starting to show its age. 1080p/30fps is what the AAA games are settling for when they should be aiming for 1080p/60fps.
next gen consoles were clearly rushed which boggles my mind as PS3 and 360 had such a long generation you would think that they would both have enough time to improve the consoles to make them more future proof. its obvious games like Halo MCC, Far Cry 4, GTAV were all suppose to be launch games.
@spacedelete Ummm.. What?? You think Halo mcc was suppose to be a launch game for a next gen console? Why?? Lol! It's a remaster
If those games were supposed to be launch games how is that Sony and MS's fault? That would be on Rockstar etc...
@Amy_of_darkness the Xbox One was suppose to release in late 2014 which is the same time frame as Halo MCC. MS obviously wanted to release the Xbox One with a Halo game so as Halo 5 wasn't ready thats why Halo MCC would be. thats why there haven't been any must have games this year because MS and Sony both didn't expect to launch this soon and didn't expect next gen to be this successful.
Of course 8GB of RAM is more than sufficient. However its the CPU/GPU thats the weak link. Imagine RAM as a highway, sure a wide highway is a good thing. However dont expect a Kia to go very fast on that superwide highway, you are going to need something faster. Same is the case here the CPU and GPU on the new gen consoles are very weak at best. Hardly any next gen games out and they already struggle at 1080p. Hell most games arent even 1080p. Imagine when true next gen games role out (ones are which are no longer supported on the last gen consoles) expect both the new consoles to be back at 720p once true next gen games role out.
When we get dx12 and tiled resources and the such then that will take a big load off the ram, if it wasn't for these upcoming improvements expected in both consoles we might have had a bit of trouble later in the gen when we start seeing the next gen large world skyrim type of games.
I don't get it this gen sucks...it take about 15 hours to complete Styx Master of Shadows. I find this quite surprising to me because I remember the days when a simple cartridge game with a memory size of 4-6 megs offer a lot more playable hours than current gen games.
You do? I don't. Most action games on 16-bit and earlier were pretty short. Some less than an hour. About 6-8 stages usually, each stage about 10 minutes long. RPGs could be pretty long and some adventure games. But those sacrificed graphics data for text and dungeon size, stats, etc., in the memory.
I'm no expert. I think most publishers knows about the statistic and following it to the T. I like for a games to last at least 30 hours long or more, especially if its not an action game. Funny things is, I think indies game has offered way more playable hours than most high budgeted games and that's sad. http://www.cnn.com/2011/TEC...
Man what were you playing? Gaming wouldnt be my hobby of choice if games were less than an hr long.
I don't know how to reply to MeliMel's comments because there's no reply button, but I've played a lot of games from the 16-bit and 8-bit era. Look up almost any walkthrough-type videos of action games from then and you'll find them to be pretty short. For instance, I remember beating Contra in about 18 minutes as a kid. It doesn't mean I returned it or sold it back immediately after. But when players today act as though 10 hours is short it's really a modern expectation. Only graphics-poor RPGs had long playtimes before the CD-ROM era (for the most part). As far as indies go, they tend to be shorter than AAA games. The difference likely is that older games were more enjoyable to replay because there was less story and wait times to get in the way, and the challenge was pretty high. They were often more perfect with less graphics/sound/memory to work with, so it was enjoyable to play them over and over again. And indies try to recapture some of that.
That`s because back then there was no mocapping, voice acting, the graphics and animations were primitive compared to what we have now, and environments were static images. A lot more time is needed to create a game now than before. I bet you if a AAA game came out now with no voice acting and static background images as environments you`d complain. The gaming landscape is different.
With the advancement in computer graphics from sprite to 3d there has been some trade off as far as how games are developed today. Making a sprite game everything has to be drawn in pixel by pixel which can be tedious work depending on the size of the game. In 3d space, things are done once with the use of 3d applications, so in most cases the devs has the option to reuse characters models, props, objects over and over again if they chooses to.. The same can said about sprite games but as a minimal level. Mocap can be reused as well, it just as simple as attaching the animation sequence to an object or character models. I can give more examples, too many to list.
All the original sonic games on the genesis which I love can be beaten in less than 3 hours. I even have a record of beating the original in just under an hour and a half. Don't know what you're smoking.
Obnoxious interview. You ask a bunch of console war fanboy topics instead of really being interested in the game. Even the headline focuses on the 8gb comment.
its more than enough, 8GB of console ram is equivalent of 12GB of pc ram and more........
If the X1/PS4 had better CPU's they'd last for way longer than they are currently projected without devs having to sacrifice much. 8GB of ram is more than enough though, most games only need 3-5 gigs currently
Gameplay is way more important than graphics.
good luck telling it this site lol
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.