Just like crazy budgets last gen killed Acclaim. But wait, who's this Rocksteady games? Where were they last generation? Why didn't I play any MercurySteam games last generation?
Companies are always dying and new ones are coming up.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Epic knows PS4/NEXTXBOX specs - [Giving recommendations w/ commercial mindedness]
- Thread starter mocoworm
- Start date
Just like crazy budgets last gen killed Acclaim. But wait, who's this Rocksteady games? Where were they last generation? Why didn't I play any MercurySteam games last generation?
Companies are always dying and new ones are coming up.
Thunder Monkey
Banned
Just on a lopsided scale.
Vanillalite
Ask me about the GAF Notebook
I'm telling you 4xxx series cards are a big jump for console devs. You'll be getting more than twice the pixel fill rate, higher texture fill rate, a fuck ton more shader ops per second etc... etc...
The 4770 is OLD, and launched for like 100 bones.
Lactose_Intolerant
Member
pretty much, shame this wasn't 1st post.
I'd like to think that Sony isn't stupid enough to destroy its games division by attempting to follow the blueprints of the PS3 for PS4. I think it will have to make compromises especially given the state of current state of the corporation. Sony will have hopefully learned from some if its mistakes and not over engineer the PS4. However, I question whether it will actually be able to make a profit off of its hardware from the get-go. Perhaps Sony will want to go with a plan to reduce the amount of years it will operate at a loss for.
We all know pushing hardware for better graphics and performance will always be important to the industry and to gamers alike. However, while that stuff is beneficial, it has in some ways, taken a toll on how some developers approach game design. Quite frankly, I don't want more games to be like Uncharted. It's a beautiful game with a terrific color palette, but I don't think more players want to feel like games take them to autopilot mode.
You don't think any of the "Indie" designers on psn/xbla will "graduate" to full priced games next generation? I can't remember a time when the industry had so much fresh blood.
Thunder Monkey
Banned
Indie developers have always existed. Hell they are the reason the industry exists as it does today.
I don't see them moving up to replace the losses at a quick enough interval to say anything other than "There have been massive studio closures this past generation, tied to both an unsustainable model and being completely unprepared for changes in the marketplace."
You really think Microsoft and Sony haven't benefited themselves this generation? Sony's current CEO comes from the Playstation division. Xbox is Microsoft's first big success in a decade.
Those are just aesthetics. I don't understand how they improve the game in any way. Infinite amount of resources doesn't necessarily equate to better game design. Talent and creativity of the developer does though. The games might look better but doesn't mean the games themselves will be. I've had fun playing games I've never played before on NES and old PC games today than some games from this generation. I like the possibilities of more resources, but at the cost of what? Higher development costs, high priced hardware and software, more focus on visuals, instead of game design (AI, etc.). We'll see what happens.
I like how you get to decide what constitutes "aesthetics" and what constitutes "game design".
I don't know what you're trying to say here, because i'm not saying we don't have impressive games, and i'm not saying we're good with this HW either, i'd love more and more power like the next guy.
What i am saying is, i'm afraid this time there won't be a significant jump in HW, so it might end up being different from what we've had before, in terms of generation leap; say, HW houses concentrating on side stuff (services, connectivity, motion controls) which i'm not really interested in.
Yeah, i know a straight comparison between PC and Console HW is not sensible so on that front, i can only go by what other say and wait for the results.
I just hope we'll see something relevant in terms of generational leap, that is not side stuff (as mentioned above).
EDIT: On the aesthetic vs game design side, this generation we've definitely seen some improvements on the gameplay possibilities too, from physics to scope.
So power can definitely help on the gameplay front, especially if you're into open world games (like i am).
Nizz
Member
Fixed for me.
civilstrife
Member
Except he's right.
davepoobond
you can't put a price on sparks
we need more powerful hardware so that the companies that are shitty at programming won't have to optimize their code because their stupid angry birds clone doesn't have to spend another day in the programming process.
:dispassionately notes avatar:
Sorry, but I think innovations in how you traverse an environment count as 'gameplay'.
JimmyRustler
Gold Member
Seems to me like you are in the minority. Bad for you.
Thanks, this is my opinion on game design philosophy, what is yours? Sarcasm doesn't really spark interesting debates.
How do you know I"m in the minority again? If it is, then I'm ok with that. No problem.
I agree with this too. Current indie developers will be able to get more ambitious armed with huge hardware overhead and with the benefit of the content-creation tools developed for current gen AAA games.
As I said in another thread (and got absurdly laughed at), there's no fucking way one guy could've made Minecraft 6 years ago.
JimmyRustler
Gold Member
Well, it's pretty easy.... Every time I see a game trying something totally new, I see it fail. To me that means people don't want whole new concepts. And that's for a reason. The existing concepts work.
and just as I'm prepared to move to PC gaming when that occurs I get to not play Diablo 3 for 2 nights because of it's total BS.
... You're not joking, are you?
Flying_Phoenix
Banned
I have been calling that the Xbox 3 and PS4 would be underpowered. Not that the Wii U would be more powerful than them. Separate statements.
MS? Definitely, but only because of Kinect. But that to me echoes a wider and far broader strategy within MS that is far more sound and more focused than, "strictly games".
Sony? No. Just no. The CEO change is just the Japanese board playing old guard. I think Sony would've benefited more to recruit a CEO that was outside "the circle". Stinger was that....but I think the word "competent" would be best suited to the circumstance.
Neither one of them would benefit from Epic's vision, period. Next-generation is going to be all about services and delivery of said services. That is where the money (and entertainment) will be. That is where the greatest expansion of improvements can be made. I see MS going after this vision very intently, and they don't need Epic to deliver on that.
DjangoReinhardt
Thinks he should have been the one to kill Batman's parents.
I've played those games. They're prime examples of how cutting-edge graphics won't magically transform boring design and mechanics. Take away the production value and there's not much left. A shinier coat of paint on the same old crap doesn't interest me at all.
clutch.as.it.gets.
Member
This. We are talking about a device that will last at least 6+ years. I really don`t understand how someone prefers to save a small amount of money to run with an inferior product instead to pay a little bit more upfront to get a much better machine.
faceless007
Member
Yes, that's already happening. It's called mobile/social/iPad gaming. Those are the new opportunities that are arising and where the consumers are going. Is that the direction you think the industry should go? Do you think super-high-end consoles will somehow abate that trend?
I'm not sure why you're assuming a level of supply that is satisfactory to the market. Gamers can demand more, bigger, louder, pixel-pushing titles more frequently every year all they want, that doesn't mean it will be feasible for the industry to produce them.
You're basically arguing for the same model as the Hollywood studios, for which I have roughly the same amount of contempt.** When only a handful of studios all decide to chase after the same market segment and direct their attention to the same shallow, formulaic tripe at the expense of innovation and new concepts, the industry stratifies and stagnates while the money only flows to a few major players. In general, I don't see that as healthy for the industry, or for product.
To which you will say that there are loads of opportunities for low-cost, indie, niche titles on the PC, which is absolutely right. (In fact, I don't even own a console and am unlikely to buy another one as I use a PC, so this discussion is mostly academic to me anyway.) The problem, however, is that the industry is consolidating into a strict two-tier space where the graphical horsepower is becoming increasingly important at the expense of everything else, which relegates developers who can't compete on that front to the indie/XBLA scene, whereas it was previously viable for companies to try somewhat more experimental and unrefined ideas while still maintaining a respectable level of graphical fidelity and still be sold on the same shelves as the AAA blockbusters, and not immediately be written off by gamers as incompetent solely do how the game looks.
**Though, somewhat paradoxically, the root cause there is the exact opposite of the game industry's, in that Hollywood is trying to target the broadest, global audience possible and make films appealing to every culture and audience. Or at least, the male under-25ers in every culture.
Hardware always artificially imposes limitations on developers, by virtue of the fact that it's hardware and it has limitations. There's nothing inherently less artificial about the Wii's hardware than there was in the 360's 3-core, 512 MB design in 2005, when you consider that PCs had quad-core 2GB systems at the same time.
(And this is to say nothing of the physical limitations that will come up with trying to shoehorn the horsepower you want into a console-sized box).
Indeed. That must really suck for them.
It seems to me you're being contradictory. You can't simultaneously argue that the market will decide who wins and who loses and we should just accept that without putting any constraints on anyone, while also arguing that the console makers have an obligation to put out the most powerful, capable machine possible, cost be damned. They play in the same market as well and have an obligation to balance their desire to gain market share and sell product at a cost-effective price point with their desire to make money. If they decide to put less-than-stellar hardware in the PS4 and NextBox due to those concerns, that too will be the market at work.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Did Tim Sweeny really say graphics should mirror Avatar in real time?
Dude please!
So he wants games in 2015 to look like this?
Dude please!
So he wants games in 2015 to look like this?
SentientStone
Member
Yes, give me the power! I'd pay $599 for launch consoles again, screw the consumers!
PS: I am not really joking.
PS: I am not really joking.
I'm not sure what you're getting at or how it relates to what I originally posted. Existing concepts were new at one point.. Standards come from once new concept(s) that stuck because the population accepted them to be great ideas.
I definitively don't want it. I truly don't care. And I don't like the fact he pretends he knows better than me what I would want to see.
I try not to cheerlead, but - this. Great articulation of what I and others have been trying to say.
Gee, an engine developer that wants more powerful hardware and that stresses graphics?
Having just seen the new UE4 screenshots... nope. People honestly wont give a damn about jumps in graphics anymore. I'm willing to bet that most wont even see a diffference. MS and Sony should focus on a low price and a lot of great services. Graphics whore engine developers should stop trying to push for 500 dollar abominations that will hurt the videogame industry.
Having just seen the new UE4 screenshots... nope. People honestly wont give a damn about jumps in graphics anymore. I'm willing to bet that most wont even see a diffference. MS and Sony should focus on a low price and a lot of great services. Graphics whore engine developers should stop trying to push for 500 dollar abominations that will hurt the videogame industry.
crazygambit
Member
Actually I wish they were more alike, to the point of fusing together. It's becoming clear to me that the market is not big enough to support 3 competing consoles.
And before you say competition is always better for the consumer (which is not always true in industries with heave economies of scale), remember the market has never been big enough to support even 2 competing movie formats. Yet we have 4 different hardware formats, not even counting handhelds and we expect them to do well.
Now, i'm against graphics stagnating as much as anyone, but you seem to be suggesting that developers just give up on innovation. If that attitude had always been prevalent, we'd still be stuck with Space Invaders and Pay Man. No disrespect to those games, but things have clearly improved since.
bengraven
Member
it took epic and the gears of war tech-demo to convince ms that its better to give the 360 512mb ram instead of 256mb.
damn mocoworm!
I remember that story. They showed them Gears running on each and MS was convinced.
Apparently Bethesda, working on Oblivion at the time, actually celebrated when they found out as well.
Of course it's more artificial. The 360 was more or less the absolute top end of what you could expect to put into a console-sized box in 2005. The Wii was 1/10th of that.
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
If consumers don't look on the tv and see a reason to buy the new consoles then they're doa. AI doesn't show well in ad spots and it's not hardware limited at the moment anyway.
Epic is fighting for their own survival here. AAA is their main money maker and they're already heavily invested in it for next gen.
krystallinity
Banned
It happened before:
2nd gen: Fairchild vs. Atari vs. Magnavox vs. Mattel vs. Coleco
Out of this competition, only the 2600 emerged as the dominant console throughout the gen.
3rd gen: Nintendo vs. Sega vs. Atari
Out of this competition, only the NES emerged as the dominant console throughout the gen.
It's only really the last couple of gens that the market has been tolerant enough to support multiple systems to a good degree.
We'll see a regression to one system markets soon.
HomerSimpson-Man
Member
lol, "Avatar" level? Yeah in like 2078. Pure market speak.
I still want powerful hardware. If it's just gimped hardware, just stick to the PS3 and 360 longer and have more add on and gimmicks if that's the case, replacing entire skus as the generation grows even longer.
I still want powerful hardware. If it's just gimped hardware, just stick to the PS3 and 360 longer and have more add on and gimmicks if that's the case, replacing entire skus as the generation grows even longer.
JimmyRustler
Gold Member
Come on, that was different. The current gen is actually the first one where many developers have admitted that their visions aren't limited by hardware any more. Therefore I'd say what really works for broad market has been evaluated this gen. I don't see anyone ever coming up with an industry changing idea again. Now it's all about evolution and fusion of the existing genres - IMO.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Here's my problem with the screenshots:
A very sizable portion of the consumer base that buys these consoles will see almost negligible differences between UE4 and the graphics of current-generation consoles.
Are they an upgrade? Yes, especially to those of us tuned in to these things. But are they enough to get average Joe consumer out and buying new consoles? I don't think there is a chance in the world.
This industry is in trouble.
A very sizable portion of the consumer base that buys these consoles will see almost negligible differences between UE4 and the graphics of current-generation consoles.
Are they an upgrade? Yes, especially to those of us tuned in to these things. But are they enough to get average Joe consumer out and buying new consoles? I don't think there is a chance in the world.
This industry is in trouble.
Principate
Saint Titanfall
I don't really get this sentiment. There's plenty of games this generation that have sold well without being the best looking, there's numerous examples of this. Even in generation jumps, people didn't care whether the PS2 was a significant upgrade graphics wise from the PS1, NES to Snes wasn't that big either, in fact, most of the information points to the opposite.
There just needs to be a noticeable increase but it doesn't have to be a massive leap. There's practically no evidence that suggests a big jump in graphics means extra sales because a big jump also means more expensive which limits sales. It also means bigger hardware losses, and will take longer to achieve profitability.
krystallinity
Banned
It's not in trouble of demise, as there will always be gamers who love playing console games.
What is in trouble is the idea that three new consoles can thrive in today's market.
Take a look at how the Vita is floundering as proof of this.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
That's exactly what I mean. There's no way the industry can sustain itself divided among three consoles as well as with devs pushing budgets into the stratosphere.
This. Epic isn't worried about dev costs, most other developers are.
I'm sure the existing specs are fine.