Inaba finding it “hard to get excited” for next Xbox and PlayStation.
I pretty much expected them to just be more powerful versions. With the exception of Nintendo, the age of truly unique hardware is dead. Sony and MS offer DRM PC's with a custom OS. I'm ok with that. Sure I love the era of unique systems in the 90s and glad Nintendo still does something like that. At the same time, I like that I know what I am getting and just being a better version is ok with me overall. I care most about games and personally if history is anything to go by. Out of Xbox and PS. I think PS5 will have more to offer me.
More powerful hardware > gimmicks like the Wiiu, Wii, and 720p crap screen Switch. Nintendo is holding gaming back. Putting the focus on casual, low budget games, and quick buck games. And this coming from a developer who makes conventional and traditional games. So how does developing it on Nintendo hardware make it better? It makes the games worse.
How is Nintendo holding gaming back? Nothing they do is stopping, or even slowing down MS and Sony from releasing newer, better, and even more powerful hardware. Most cross-plat games come to Nintendo after they've released for MS and Sony. So please, help explain that, because it doesn't look like Nintendo is holding Sony and MS back in the least bit. Is Nintendo holding themselves back? Sure. But not all of gaming. Let's not get over-dramatic here lol.
I wouldn't say they're holding back gaming. They're just going down a different path. I think we're fine as long as we have two companies going at it like Sony and MS pushing for more power, I'm fine with that.
Since PS2 era I have always bought the current Sony and Nintendo consoles. And I think that's a perfect pairing. They are not direct competitors to the main two and do things a bit differently, which is great (most of the time).
Huh... there is room for all sorts of new ideas. And when we're right about to have newer more powerful consoles using cutting edge PC stock how can you say Nintendo has held anyone back? Gaming continues ideas come and go just like the endless cycle of humanity's progression since we started using tools. And saying Nintendo games are are low budget or out to make a quick buck really just shows how little actual knowledge you have about the Nintendo Seal of Quality. In fact the things I can pretty much feel assured about when I buy a Nintendo game is value and polish. And there is more to gaming than graphics, it's sad people have gotten so conditioned to think like that.
I think the fast ssd is a game changer if you implement it correctly. Changing the types of games possible. Current gen games are entirely limited in that regard because if a game required ssd it would not work on of ps4 or a typical gaming pc.
I don't even think Nintendo is holding Nintendo back - why, cause they are super powerful consoles? They are doing they're own thing and doing it well.
Nintendo isnt holding anything back. Their system isnt looked at as a lowest common denominator, so if a game can't run on it, its ignored, and goes to more powerful hardware
Glad other people don't think like you or I wouldn't have the best handheld ever made right now.
Agreed with your first sentence .. any day of the week !
BOTW had about a $120 million dollar budget. Yup super cheap. To figure that out. It needed 2 million to break even.
Everything you just said is wrong IMHO. “More powerful hardware > gimmicks like the Wiiu, Wii, and 720p crap screen Switch.” Nintendo is filling the lower budget void. I own all consoles and a gaming PC so I can play whatever I want but very few people are able to do that. The Switch is a portable so there is no way to keep the price low while giving it comparable horsepower. “Nintendo is holding gaming back. Putting the focus on casual, low budget games, and quick buck games.” The Switch has probably the best single player game in BotW of any console this generation. Nintendo does rely heavily on old franchises but they rarely put out bad games. “And this coming from a developer who makes conventional and traditional games. So how does developing it on Nintendo hardware make it better? It makes the games worse.” That depends entirely on the developer. If they choose to develop a shit port for the Switch, that is on the developer, not Nintendo. Currently playing Dark Souls on Switch which is a decent port. I wish From would have done a little more but overall a good experience.
^ Nintendo started mobile with the gameboy and motion controls. And then now they are trying to argue that weak last gen hardware is okay. Yes Nintendo is to blame for hardcore gaming demise. Since they are directly responsible for putting out hardcore games but E3 after E3 the focus is casual. From E3 2005 to 2015 it was centered on the casual audience.
Nintendo is focusing on casual gamers? So... the community continues to assert that consoles are basically PCs, yet no one can say that about Nintendo consoles; the Switch has first party titles that are easily some of the biggest time sinks of other first party studios, it receives games like The Witcher III, Final Fantasy, the Mana games, and bloody DOOM... and you think Switch was created with casual gamers in mind? I might let you say that about Wii and you'd get a bit more pushback with Wii U, but if you think Switch is a casual device, you're just ignorant. Nintendo is the one who is continuing to push the boundaries of console gaming, and the success of the Switch is a testament to its broad appeal. They continue to do great work in exciting the market, and somehow, that's overlooked because it has less power than its competitors. Right...
Amen... Nintendo have been a shit-show ever since Yamauchi passed the buck.
"Nintendo is holding gaming back. Putting the focus on casual, low budget games, and quick buck games." Yet they have 7/20 games in the highest rated games of all time... pretty much the only exclusive titles that make it. Two of those are on the Nintendo Switch. I hate people who hate on the Switch (primarily as it's the only Nintendo console I've really invested in) when 9/10 times I could bet they don't own one and have probably not invested any real time into it. It doesn't get as much use as my PS4 but it's getting very close now and if you asked me which one I would give away I would have a hard time choosing.
casual low budget games? what are you smoking, i own all 3 consoles and by no means does nintendo have lo budget games (unless by low budget you mean Indie games, which all other consoles have). nintendo has some of the best games this Gen, zelda, mario kart and zelda to name a few and yet you say they a low budget and casual and quick buck games, please do some research before commenting stupid stuff like this. And to the point of you being a developer, can you not see the advantages of being able to take the game with you and continuining to play on the go?. Graphics wise might not be the best but still better than the ps3 and xbox 360 where they were upscale most of the games to 1080p.
Wow, with best games on the market, Nintendo is holding gaming back. Hmm, good :-D This crap is what we can hear from PC gamers. They say PS and Xbox are cheap crap and are holding gaming back. But its nonsense. Companies like Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft are pushing gaming forward! With PSVR there are more reasons for companies to develop VR games, etc...
I've never read something so stupid on the internet, I swear
I agree, Nintendo are the kings of "putting lipstick on a pig" and that includes hardware AND their games!
Most nintendo game are from nintendo partner...exept some port af actual gen game.For me...console are holding gaming back with their weak hardware but solid fan base.Nintendo dont force anybody to devlop on their hardware.
Nintendo is consolidating, streamlining.... Instead of mass producing 2 different units, they have consolidated it into one. We all know they never favor cutting edge hardware, when you dock the switch its 1080 , as a handheld its 720. The system is a culmination of their work since the gamecube days. They have always marched to their own drummer. They dont hold gaming back , I think they just ask to be a part of it.
Your nothing but a Nintendo hater. Grow up!
@mikeslemonade Being able to play 4 extra hours a day on the go on top of my game time at home > resolution any day. There is nothing gimmicky about being convenient for core gamers with limited time. Thats why I buy all multiplats on my Switch, and do not regret it. For the few must have games on the other consoles, I have a PS4 Pro for those so unlike someone who writes having more than one console off, there is nothing I cannot play. I have 8 exclusives for Switch pre ordered right now just for second half of 2019 with Witcher 3 (already played on PS4, will play again on Switch), DOOM Eternal, Wolfenstein Young Blood, and Dragon Quest XI mixed in there as well. There is plenty to keep me busy on Switch making me much more picky with what I buy on PS4. Options never hurt anyone, learn that not all gamers have the same needs.
hmmmmmmm Nintendo, just like the other consoles has very few causal games. Your thinking wii which is two generations ago.
The Switch is incredible and the Wii was revolutionary. Nintendo is the company that pushes what games can be the most of any of the 3 major companies. Not everyone only cares about having the most powerful consoles and that’s not all that makes a console valuable. And before you call me a fanboy, I love Sony just as much if not more than Nintendo and my 3 favorite games of all time are all PS games
^ At the person who said Nintendo have 7/20 of the highest rated games this generation. Nintendo last gen so they’re not graded on the same standard. You subtract 4-6 points per gen. An IOS that scores a 10 isn’t the same as a 10 on Witcher 3. It’s harder to score higher on proper current gen platforms.
@mikeslemonade So you use Witcher 3 as an of example of a 10/10 current gen game as an argument for Switch being a generation behind...when Witcher 3 is about to launch for the Switch itself... Troll logic 😏
Exception of Nintendo? The switch is just the Wii u, and Sony had motion controls before the Wii. So please explain to me how Nintendo is being an exception? And Sony is proving that vr isn't a gimmick.
The switch uses none of the same architecture as the Wii U. Nor the same API. Wii U used a beefed up Wii CPU which was a beefed up Gamecube CPU. Wii U used AMD GPU tech from 2008. It used a GX2 API. Nintendo's own API. An upgraded GX from Gamecube/Wii. The switch uses Nvidia tech Tegra X1 and uses NVN API which supports OpenGL & Vulkan. It's more powerful than Wii U and much more modern architecture and not the same thing at all in function either. Motion controls go back to the 80s in gaming. NES had them in U-Force and Power Glove. Genesis had them in Activator. Dreamcast had them with the Fishing wand. Dreamcast also the first home console to have a camera in Dreameye. Pelican had an adapter for N64 and PS1 for motion controls. You don't know the definition of a gimmick. By definition consoles themselves is a gimmick. Graphics are a gimmick. Playing movies is a gimmick. SSD as a selling point is a gimmick. Everything is a gimmick. A gimmick is just a trick or device to attract attention to sell a product by definition. Google is your friend. I don't care what your narrowminded internet lingo thinks gimmick means but it doesn't mean what you think it means.
When Nintendo had motion control, there was no PlayStation or Xbox.
Sea clearly you lack fundamental reading comprehension skills. I'm not saying bit by bit its the same. I'm saying they took the Wii u controller screen thing, and put the base inside, made it more portable. Only blind Nintendo fans can't understand that.
@Segata You probably should read the article before you comment on it because he specifically includes the Switch in the "next-gen consoles more of the same" category that he has trouble getting excited over. "He added: “Game hardware used to be about custom chips that you couldn’t do on PCs. Now you look at it and they’re just grabbing stuff that already exists. “The Switch, for example, is a Tegra which already existed and the other consoles are using very similar chips and graphics cards to what you see on PCs, but maybe slightly updated. None of it seems unique to that hardware anymore.” The Platinum boss said he’s more excited about the “innovation” presented by cloud platforms such as Google’s Stadia."
He is making Astral Chain for it
The 90's consoles were no different than today's consoles. They weren't unique in comparison. You inserted media and you played it with a controller. I own every consoles dating back to the Atari 2600 and they are all more of the same. Nintendo switched it up with the Wii and have now made it portable. That's really the only change and in the end other than the fact that carry it around 99% of people play the wii just like a typical console.
Chips were different then. Graphics and sound were different. It's why on retro forums people still debate the technicals of SNES VS Genesis to this day. All that is different today is a resolution but back then Mortal Kombat II on SNES vs Genesis looked and sounded very different as an example. SNES sound chip was custom made from Sony. You can't tell me N64 and PS1 were the same as one used cart had less space than CD Roms. They also both rendered graphics very differently. N64 didn't even have a sound chip. Saturn used 2 video processors and didn't use triangles to render games. It used Quads. I have no idea why you are calling the Switch the Wii other than being an idiot troll.
Yeah but a better version of the PS5 will come out in two years that will be capable of running the latest games.
I agree. But Xbox will have more to offer me. Should be good, friend.
"He is making Astral Chain for it" And yet Inaba still called out the Switch as being more of the same by using existing chips found in PCs. Judging by your comments, you either didn't read the article or you did and seeing Inaba say that Google Stadia represents the innovation that excites him - not the Switch - drove you into a fanboy rage and post repeatedly about Nintendo. Do you think that if you repeatedly say that Nintendo is innovative that the words will magically come out of Inaba's mouth?
he's crazy, the SSDs alone is gonna change the game.
nope, pc gaming has had it years and it didn't change a thing, faster load times won't change anything, more advanced ai and worlds ect sure
He probably is talking about PS menus and loading times as well as boot up times.
You lack vision...or maybe you just never saw the spiderman next gen streaming video that was leaked comparing possible travel speeds. Everyone really needs to look at that Spiderman demo to see just how big a difference it makes in-game ( not just loading). SSd's on pc's cant be used this way because games have to be made for current consoles and low end pc's without ssds. Next gen console's wont have this limitation. Best example is instead of going to the world tree in Gow of War...you step through the travel door and the new area has already loaded without you noticing. Think Portal, but an area all the way across the map. instantaneous travel in real time. Forget TFLOPS... SSD's will be the big one followed by the CPU just for reference HDD =100 mb/s max speed about......new generation ssds= 4,000mb/s max speed ( and speculation is that it will be much higher).
The thing is, most PC games don't take advantage of it. because there's a lot of people that play on regular harddrives besides that you're talking about regular SSDs(which is the norm, these consoles will have NVMe SSDs, most PC gamers don't have that). Regular Sata SSDs aren't anywhere close to what these will be capable off. They're gonna be as fast as 3000mb/s compared to 400mb/s in regular SSDs. Now that consoles will come with it equiped there's gonna be more games built with it in mind. https://images.idgesg.net/i...
Movefasta1993 - You can't write a game that specifically uses the SSD to load assets in the game world. Not every PC has one. Also Cerney said it'd be faster than ones currently on the market. We will see how this translates into better looking games in 2021.
I don't' think that is correct, next gen SSD will be faster than current PC access speeds and it will also find its way into PC's as well.
It's going to change the game for me. I hate load screens.
What PC had for years....right, but not in the hands of SONY. Prepare to see a magic show!
PC is held back by the fact that not everyone has the latest hardware and developers have to code for the least common denominators or they risk alienating customers and losing sales. With the next consoles using SSD's it should give a bump to gaming overall as developers won't have to hold back so much for lower power systems as they can recoup the costs from consoles instead of the PC gamers with low end systems. I'm hoping anyway.
Agreed, PC gaming already offers dynamic lighting, realistic clothing, realistic hair (flowing hair), etc. The consoles are barely catching up. By then it will be too late with VR advancements on PC.
If its more of the same that'll be 3 gens in row of the same AI, fetch quests etc.
How? Faster loading? Doesn't seem too game changing to me seeing as how people have been putting their own SSDs in PS4s since launch
But developers have never had access to that as they would of programmed for the standard hdd speed of ps4/xbox etc same with pc, i dont know of any game (correct me if im wrong) that NEEDS an SSD as a requirement. It will be interesting what the developers achieve with this standard access with the consoles
watch the spiderman PS5 demo
I think you are simplifying for effect. Faster access speeds will be better for games overall, from streaming textures, to streaming scenery and so on. Devs can't tale advantage of it at the moment as they have to adhere to the lowest common denominator.
Faster loading plus exceptionally fast virtual memory.
In other words, more of the same. My point is that an SSD is not revolutionizing gaming as we know it but merely improving it marginally. This next gen will be more of the same games with the same controls and the same lengths. Let me know when augmented reality comes along to really change the game.
I have an SSD on my PC and outside things being faster. It's still pretty much the same experience. It's an incremental improvement but not a game changer. Cartridges in the 90s didn't have load times. If it was that big of a deal load times on CD-based systems would have felt like a game breaker.
Again, the thing is. That faster performance is gonna change what games are possible. Just look at the Spiderman PS5 demo. Also i guarentee you that whatever SSD Xbox and PS5 are using. It's gonna be much faster than what you have on your PC. regular cheap SSD are about 400/500mb per second. These SSDs are gonna be faster than 3000mb/s. Look up NVMe SSD vs Sata SSD We know Xbox is using some form of custom NVMe SSD thanks to brad sams. It's safe to assume Playstation is doing the same. https://images.idgesg.net/i...
Play Fallout New Vegas without a SSD then with a SSD. You'll notice less crashes and better frame rate. I don't know why but Fallout New Vegas is the one game that comes to mind when talking how SSDs improve more than just loading times
Depends on what defines as game changing. I think next gen is going to be the same game designs we have now, with better graphics and load times. If time is spent on making better ai or coming up with new ideas, then it can change the game in a meaningful way. The ssd has a lot of potential to make things easier to have big worlds or complex designs, but by itself it doesn't really change anything. To me, a game changer is something that really defines a direction that games are going, how they're distributed, or how they're consumed. The hardware specs are incidental, although can be leveraged to enable those game changing things to be thought of and implemented.
It's nice to see custom architecture. Problem is it takes a while to learn the language. Asian Edward scissorhands may be partially right.
Almost any console that used cartridges (except for modern ones) had virtually no loading times. Loading times started being a common thing in the 2000s. It's nothing new to not have loading screens.
RTX is where the generational leap will come from. It really is quite amazing tech that drastically changes the way games look on a fundamental level.
Not the way they look, just the amount of power that goes directly into the processes involved in rendering the graphics. Graphics themselves are at what I'd call a plateau. While they can look better, especially side by side, it doesn't make something that already looks pretty realistic into something that looks even more realistic. That comes down to art design, and the effort put in by the devs. With enough power, the same could be done on other designs. The rendering process is still an api level event that is disconnected from the GPU itself. The GPU just renders what its told, how its told to. The more that's built into the GPU the easier, and usually faster, it becomes.
Honestly these developers need to step up their art design and effort like you stated. What happened to gaming? Nothing jumps out this gen on any platform that makes me think..."omg I absolutely have to play that or I'll die" like previous generations...16bit era. The plateau is real. Hopefully someone proves us wrong next gen.