Killzone 3 and Uncharted 2 show that there’s no need for a new generation of consoles, according to Witcher 2 Senior Producer Tomasz Gop – but the “whole industry might be shifting toward not making too many hardcore games anymore.”
I agree with the not needing new consoles at this point, but it will be nice to have a system that can output the quality that current PC games can. But for right now the PS3 has some top notch games that aren't far from that level. Its gonna be really hard to get any higher quality than what we currently have (for PC games), unless there is just an endless budget and a ton of production time. I feel games are reaching their peak and the next gen's consoles will be the last ones we'll ever need. (If they put the right hardware in)
? What do you mean technology is always going to improve saying we only need one more console generation is silly
well, there's nothing on PC now that had the gap in quality Half Life 2 had in 2004 with console games
I really don't care anymore about when Sony or MS will upgrade it's hardware. BF3 has proven they'll never be able to keep up with PC hardware upgrade cycle so I'll just build me a gaming rig to be able to play the latest and greatest and keep my PS3 for the exclusives. The best of both worlds.
" so I'll just build me a gaming rig to be able to play the latest and greatest" .. for another year or so, then it probably wont be able to play the latest and greatest maxed out, and have to start lowering resolution/AA etc to keep FPS up, almost like a console?
WhittO Honestly, I didn't upgrade my 8800GT for 2 or 3 years, and it still ran everything I needed it to quite well. Eventually I did get a new because I ended up putting it into someone else's computer, but it can still run pretty much everything. Now, if you're looking to max everything out always, you might not be able to, but you really can stick with a card for a good long time these days.
. I agree...Sony should keep the PS3 going for another ten years until the losses are off the books. I also agree that M$ should definitely release a new console next year and ignore ignorant people like this producer guy that thinks 6-7 year old hardware is not holding the industry back. Anybody out there still have a PC of Phone from 6-7 years ago...exactly. What he is saying is our engine is done and we don't want to change it...o_O I'll go with iD, Epic and Crytek, who have incredible looking game engines ready for the next gen and are READY right now.
Why would we need another console generation? Higher framerates? Better textures? Better AA? Sorry but I consider these minor improvements. If I really cared about these features I would just buy a gaming PC rather than wait for a new console.
@Ravens20 hey you forgot about better: animation AI lighting draw-distance shaders particle effects more action on screen and bigger maps/stages.
depends are we going to get tvs any time soon that pass 1080p because if not put a gpu in there that cab run games max on pc at some weird triple monitor setup in the console and youll only be restricted to 1080p with a huge overhead in what you can do which could pass pc gaming altogether for that time this is assuming that a tv that passes 1080p doesnt come out
With a whole magnitude faster computers and more RAM, a new console generation is going to usher in a dramatic improvement in graphics, game play features and maybe just MAYBE we might get true full 1080p (read 1920x1080 resolution) games! You know, what we were promised 5-6 years ago!!!
It's good to get a new console but it's still up to the developers on how they make the games that take advantage of it. If the new console can offer me games with better graphics, larger maps, destructible environments, better physics and diverse gameplay then I'm all for it. But for now I'd still want to see how developers can push the current gen consoles to the limit. Only the best developers can come out with great games on a lesser hardware.
peak?please I have a friend working on things that no system will be able to handle in the next 10-20 years.We are nowhere near the peak,He started with making a physic engine that works the physic out for single atoms.It allows for much more then you would believe.Especially when combined with a neural controller,then the characters movement is how you decide to move.I am not just talking about joint movement but muscular also.Giving you control of force and even balance. I asked him if this was the peak he just laughed at me calling me a idiot saying there is no peak,our imaginations will forever drive us forwards.
Ya that sounds great and all but trying to implement your friends physics engine into a full-fledged game would cost a truckload and take an extremely long time to make. Like I said, of course we can go even further, but it would cost so much money and take so much time to make that it would be impractical for any game company to develop it. Sure if a developer would spend five years going at the same pace a normal company does with a 2-3 year cycle then the game could be outstanding. Its just no one is going to put that amount of time and money into the game. Your friend is right, technically there isn't a peak, but the cost to reach that high would be too much for any company willing to invest. And as far as that becoming the norm would never happen. Its possible for a one off game, but as far as being a frequent occurrence, keep dreaming. When you have limited resources, money, and time there is only so much you can accomplish in 2-3 years. Now if you had a team of 2000 people and an endless supply of cash then sure, but that's never gonna happen because its nowhere near cost effective.
This all doesn't really matter if nobody buys it because a) nobody can tell the difference and b) it is just not feasible in a general consumer market (= gaming market).
The idea is that the tools will improve and then not cost so much to produce games with greater technology. If one company creates a physics engine(i.e.Havok) and another creates an animation engine(whatever GTA4 used) and these can be incorporated into game engines easily, they can mass market them(as much as this is possible in game development studios) and reduce costs for developers! Game developers should really only be focusing on game design, environment design and story!
Call me crazy, but seeing Uncharted 3 and last night's Battlefield demo running on the PS3 has me convinced these consoles could last another 3 years....and I'm fine with that. As much as I'd like to have games that look like that Unreal demo Epic released a few months ago, I'm in no rush to spend another thousand or so dollars to buy two new consoles, games, etc.
So you're saying hardware is going to become self sufficient and never need an upgrade? The same tech will be enough 20 years from now? And you got mostly agrees. Maybe I'm completely misunderstanding you.
Well, I don't think he means self sufficient as in upgrading it's self, I think he means that there will be a point when technology has hit it's limits (not needing to be upgraded anymore.) It makes sense, because everything has a peak/ending. (Though I doubt we'll reach that peak as early as next gen.)
Nintendo is coming in a year and a half 720- 2 and a half years PS4-3 years Believe me..we will ALL be ready by the time these touchdown.. Evil
Negative captain! The ultimate goal of games is to have photo-realistic characters and environments that change on their own, along with realistic AI that thinks on it's own and can provide a new experience every time you play! None of this can be achieved for at least a few decades and we will have to play them on Ultra HD TV's or higher to truly experience them! If you think it doesn't get much better than this, you have a closed mind, and we shouldn't even consider they have alternate forms of media waiting in the wing like HVD! If we can learn anything from PC's, it's that upgrades are always needed!
Yet nintendo just had to release the WiiU....hmmmmm...I dont like what nintendos doing :/
Just because we're reaching the point where graphics can't go any further doesn't mean there aren't other ways to improve games. Physics, graphics and interfaces can all be improved with more power. I'm all for a new console right now. It's time to move on.
like GT said on their E3 awards: Uncharted 3 at E3 had better graphics than games built for PCs most people can't afford and even if you think Battlefield 3, Witcher 2 or some other PC-first game showed better graphics you can't deny that U3 is on the same level so a new console in the next couple of years won't make the same leap that previous generations changes made, not even close, Sony is right about waiting a few more years
You obviously don't know how game graphics work then. I am also most likely wasting my time replying to you, but I have to try and correct ignorance. Uncharted 3 is not on the same level as Battlefield 3 or the Witcher 2. Sure it may look good, but TECHNICALLY it is not on the same level. There is so much more going on under the hood of the Witcher 2 and Battlefield 3 that it is just silly to say that SCRIPTED levels in Uncharted are on the same level. Battlefield has huge open environments with lots of NPC's or online players all affecting the environment with explosives and bullets and such. Uncharted 3 on the other hand has scripted set pieces, and very narrow levels (Read not huge open environments). This is what allows the game to look good. Try to apply Uncharteds graphics into an environment like BF3, and the graphics will drop drastically. I am not saying that Uncharted 3 is a bad looking game, or a bad game in the slightest, as I will be picking it up later this year. Yet to say it is on the same level as BF3 or anything on the PC for that matter is just plain silly.
I sort of agree. Sony and Microsoft are locked in regardless -- they need to recuperate the mammoth investments that we call Kinect and Move. But Nintendo desperately needs to play catch up. Beyond that, we're golden.
Hardware - yes. Sales - no. @Checkmate So you're implying that "better hardware" equals better sales?
Hardware = Sales
Hardware sales are great for Nintendo. The Wii certainly has been a coup for them. It comes at a cost when you release an underpowered machine with awful, awful online support. Software sales on the other hand are what drives the industry. Nintendo's pathetic 3rd party support is something that must be remedied. My Wii collected dust for a solid year, with me logging a total of 46 minutes of play time. Games on the other systems are just better.
@Titanz No, not at all. My point, which judging by the disagrees was not realized, was that Nintendo has the most hardware sales. So, in that regard, Nintendo does not need to play catch up to anyone. They have the most hardware sales.
'industry might be shifting toward not making too many hardcore games anymore.” " Then it was nice knowing the game industry. Most of us will go back to books whose costs stay constant which is why theyve lasted hundreds of years. Theres also no "wars" which is why writers put out what they want and they make there money. "Development costs are rocket high" Then they need to be lowered which many analysts predict the ceiling has been hit and are going down. @plmkoh borders aside the book industry has never been this good. Theres really no end in site, and thankfully no one saying anything is dying.