The last thing we need next gen is better graphics

Farida from Digitally Downloaded writes: "One of the main evolutions that came with the current-gen was the introduction of HD entertainment to gaming back. While in retrospect it has served to be one of the most significant advances in gaming, it also served to perhaps be a premature push in big technology that heavily impacted both consumers and, most importantly, developers. It is a dreadfully costly endeavour, complex to disseminate during development and it was initially a difficult task to utilise efficiently."

Read Full Story >>
Oculus Quest Giveaway! Click Here to Enter
The story is too old to be commented.
NewMonday2656d ago

RAM will go way up from the current level on consoles, that will bring much more changes to games than graphics

dedicatedtogamers2656d ago

Indeed. Devs need to focus on other features instead of just fancy textures. Physics, size of maps, number of enemies, enemy AI, draw distance, etc.

Akuma-2656d ago (Edited 2656d ago )

the first thing they should focus on is better graphics because people prefer that. a lot of gamers like to pretend like they are suppose to be better gamers who dont care about superficial things and they are gamers. if people didn't care about better graphics then gamers would still be playing ps1 the most.

people use to talk about how dvds arent needed just like cds blu rays and all sorts because they thought a better picture isnt necessary. its pure rubbish. big cinema releases manages to do better when the graphics and resolution are in imax. better quality all around is important from story, graphics, sound, physics, animation. the number one thing gamers will notice first are graphics and if they arent good enough then a game most likely wont sell well.

nes fans are the mostly the ones that says things like graphics dont matter and even myself use to say that. i realize that better graphics creates better immersion and evokes more emotional connections with characters and worlds to make a better experience. would games like heavy rain be as good with graphics like zelda skyward sword?i dont think so. would MAG have done better if it had graphics and animations like bf3 on ultra for pc? i think so.

most nes fans that supposedly dont care about graphics are touting how the wii u games will have better graphics. some have even been touting about the wii u games already have better graphics than 7 year old console to validate their opinion of the wii u being the best console. graphics are very important as well as other things to create a better experience and good graphics are used as a barometer to know if devs made a good game to a lot of gamers

modesign2656d ago

if you dont like all those aspects, go back to board games. unless candy land is too pretty for you, or LIFE is to confusing.

SynGamer2656d ago (Edited 2656d ago )

More RAM and better CPUs and GPUs. We DO need better graphics, but not the huge leap everything is thinking. The rumors surrounding Sony's effort with the PS4 to enable all games to run at 1080p60fps in 3D is actually a smart move. That's all we need. Most us of have nice 1080p HDTVs at home and hardly any games that actually display that high. To have a game that can do 1080p60fps in 3D means games will look better next gen, and will also be smoother too.

What has me excited is that some current-gen games were able to hit 1080p30fps, no 3D on the PS3 already, so it shouldn't take much to enable ALL games to hit these numbers rumors are projecting Sony wants to see. And furthermore, if a game opts not to do 3D (so long as Sony doesn't make this a requirement for PS4 games), we could see some truly amazing games (visually) next-gen that run at 1080p60fps and have numerous amounts of effects on-screen... :D

What really matters is the experience. Sony NEEDS the PSEye 2 but it MUST be similar to the Kinect. Using the Move controllers is just clunky and defeats the purpose after using the Kinect. So I fully concede that MS did one better than Sony there and like everything else in this industry, Sony needs to take the Kinect and evolve it. That already have the PSEye, now make it better.

They also need to hammer home the use of the PS Vita if they want that thing to succeed. 3+ million units so far is good, but they need it to do better. They NEED remote play that works flawlessly between the PS4 and the PS Vita. That feature alone will almost guarantee I buy my multiplatform releases on the PS4.

tehpees32656d ago

No. Sony doesn't need the PS Eye. The only thing that can do for them is "expand" into casual territory and keeping away from it is the reason why they get the most respect from the core.

Camera controllers are far worse then controllers with buttons and core gamers will not accept them. The only thing building on their camera controller would do is be jumping on the bandwagon and they would lose their respect by doing that.

NO CAMERA CONTROLLERS! They will not be accepted. The sooner people realize Kinect is a gimmick the better.

SynGamer2656d ago

If you've actually spent more than 5 minutes with the Kinect, you would understand. Netflix is a great example of this integration (see video below).

It's all about making the consoles feel like a next-gen experience. I want to be able to walk into the room and say "PlayStation/Xbox, ON" and it turns on. I want to be able to tell it to load the current game or whatever while I change out of my work cloths. If I can't find the remote, I want to say "PS/Xbox, PAUSE".

There is no point to a next-gen console if it isn't trying to evolve what we already have.

DA_SHREDDER2656d ago (Edited 2656d ago )

"More RAM and better CPUs and GPUs. We DO need better graphics, but not the huge leap everything is thinking."

Agreed! Tell you one thing that I wish devs would work on is frame rates. I played mario kart 7 on the 3DS, and one thing I have to say about the game is that it runs silky smooth, just like Mario Galaxies on the Wii. I just played Rayman on the WiiU not too long ago, and I gotta say, the graphics on the WiiU , the colors, frame rates, everything I see was so tight that I was envious. Not that the ps3 and 360 can't produce good graphics, but all I know is that this is the first gen that devs put grahics first over frame rates, and our games have suffered in almost every department.

Someone please warn Sony that we don't need 4000k resolutions before they go bankrupt.

Slapshot822655d ago

Thank you for your response!

You absolutely understand (as well as a few others) where our perspective comes from in the article.

Yes, a small graphical upgrade is needed, but anyone who cares to pay attention to the happenings behind their videogames should know that the current cost to produce games is unsustainable. Regardless of what you think about mobile gaming, it's taking a massive financial hit on the gaming industry, and it's only going to get worse - as mobile games continue to improve.

If Sony/Microsoft were to launch their next consoles at $600+ with massive upgrades, yes people would buy them, but very few can afford to develop for them. When the cost to produce a game rises to the 50+ million USD mark, even the giants like Ubisoft become risk-adverse.

Also, take a look at Vita. I bought the early release bundle and really enjoy the system - it's extremely impressive from a technical standpoint. But, people just aren't buying. Why? They're buying things like the iPad and Nexus 7, because they can do so much more than the Vita can.

It's a crazy and exciting time to be a gamer. The next ten years are going to be blast - full of things that go against expectations!

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2655d ago
Eyeco2656d ago

I want better performance if anything,most console games this gen can barely maintain 30 fps

bicfitness2656d ago

Except the cost for "better graphics" isn't as prohibitive these days as technology (core clocks, GPUs) has been relatively less explosive and has hit a bit of a ceiling when compared to previous gens.

So to make a 1080p, 60 FPS box next gen requires minimal financial effort. A few devs have gone on record saying that next gen could be "cheaper" than previous ones, so I'm not sure where the author is getting his information from. If MS and Sony go with off the shelf components and a PC friendly developer environment, costs will be minimal.

And next gen better graphics are ALL that I need. I don't care about motion controls or ridiculous features I never asked for. Video games are a visual medium, so give me cinematic, over the top visuals and games I can't find anywhere else and a standard controller and I'll be just fine.

Snookies122656d ago (Edited 2656d ago )

Eh, I understand where you're coming from and definitely respect it. I just think videogames have much more going for them than visuals. To me, it's all in the storytelling, characters, and gameplay. Seriously, a game these days can look like it's being played on a NES for all I care. As long as I have fun playing it and am intrigued enough by the characters/plot to want to continue, that's all I really need. :]

Although, pretty visuals/cutscenes are a nice added bonus...

bicfitness2656d ago (Edited 2656d ago )

"so give me cinematic, over the top visuals and games" - well made stories and systems are implied but not implicit in that statement; sorry if that wasn't entirely clear. I want all the benefits of narrative, game-play etc from THIS gen, and NEXT gen, just a bump up in graphics. No motion controls, no gimmicks. We have tablets and such for all that crap. No one really uses Move, Kinect has proven stillborn once its launch wore off (like 2 million in a year and a half after the initial 18 million) and the Wii is essentially dead.

Its not all about visuals, obviously. But they certainly are important, at least to me. Otherwise we'd all be playing NES emulators, which while fun are mostly so on account of nostalgia. Visuals and certainly gameplay and storytelling has surely improved since then (with certain exceptions, yes).

SynGamer2656d ago (Edited 2656d ago )

I both agree and disagree with your comment. I agree that games should be about the experience, but I also disagree that the visuals could be NES and it wouldn't matter. We live in the year 2012 (almost 2013), we not only need to stay current technologically, but we deserve the visual treat for the prices we're expecting to pay ($399+).

If people want nostalgia, there are numerous systems that can offer that such as most of the current consoles and the handhelds. Being able to have a great experience should also be possible right along-side being a visually pleasing game.

EDIT: I think people (console gamers) will be surprised at how well COD looks at 1080p60fps with all the bells and whistles. Or how about Final Fantasy, or Mass Effect. I mean, GT5 was able to *kinda* do 1080p~60fps, if they can hit that mark fully and add extra features, I'm sold...

Az1mov2656d ago

Yeah I can't imagine making the jump and paying the price if there isn't a considerable graphical upgrade, otherwise what's the point.

2656d ago Replies(1)
hiredhelp2656d ago

Course graphics is needed how many would go out buy a console example ps4 found out same graphics chip just added memory differnt cpu.
Graphics is what pushes next level of gaming The point is individuals what matters more story or gameplay, visuals or Both? For me mix of all 3.

Blankman852656d ago

I know I'm an advocate for gameplay over graphics, but if next gen doesn't bring better graphics as well as better gameplay then I'll be disappointed.

wishingW3L2656d ago (Edited 2656d ago )

if they don't bring better graphics then they could just keep adding more features through updates. Didn't we get Kinect and Move this same gen? Then they could continue to innovate in the same manner. =/

The thing about power is that it stays the same for at least 4-5 years while all those gimmicks can be added at any time.

Show all comments (38)
The story is too old to be commented.