Support NeoGAF

[Principate]

It's perfectly fine to ask for new gameplay experiences. I'd be far more worried if people didn't. AAA games are consolidating into fewer and fewer franchises and those games are playing it safer and safer. Who else is going to push these devs to take risks if not the consumers. it certainly wouldn't be any risk analysis and potential calculated profit.

It's better for consumer to ask for new and get slightly new than deal with the same old crap again and again and again with little difference.

 

[Kratos' 2nd cousin]

I think people are bored.

There's nothing wrong with "last gen gameplay" if its fun. Aren't most platformers last last last last last last last gen gameplay? Still awesome.

 

[Clarkus Darkus]

The carebears care so we should

 

[ricardokenshin]

It's perfectly fine to ask for new gameplay experiences. I'd be far more worried if people didn't. AAA games are consolidating into fewer and fewer franchises and those games are playing it safer and safer. Who else is going to push these devs to take risks if not the consumers. it certainly wouldn't be any risk analysis and potential calculated profit.

It's better for consumer to ask for new and get slightly new than deal with the same old crap again and again and again with little difference.

indies is where you want to look for new gameplay experiences, everywhere else they want a safe investment.

 

[KingSnake]

Pretty much. Until they back up their criticism with their wallets these AAA publishers won't have cause to listen.
It doesn't even matter if COD: Ghosts is the most returned game under the sun if the next COD game still outsells everything else right out of the gates.

That's another interesting discussion, as a lot of games that actually bring something new on the table don't sell that much and become rather niche games/genres. On all the platforms. And I'm not talking here about indie games.

 

[Suzushiiro]

Yeah, in a nutshell people expect next-gen games (new IP in particular) to do things that they've never seen before and that gets harder to do as we go through generational transitions. At this point hardware (at least the hardware in the console itself, as opposed to input/output devices) doesn't really limit what types of gameplay are possible anymore, just the scale and graphical fidelity you can do it at. So while innovations can certainly still happen, they're no more likely to happen at the start of a generation than they are at the middle/end.

 

[CosmicGroinPull]

'Innovation', in my limited experience just means 'gimmicks' most of the time. Either that, or the game does something new, but the dev spent so much time making it work that there's barely a game/experience behind it.

Pretty much all my favorite games don't have 'innovation', they just offered a great gaming experience using mechanics that have been around 1/2 gens ago.

 

[kuroshiki]

I'd be in love with The Order if it was refining anything, but Vanquish exists.

You won't ever be able to impress me new coats of paint on the same house, even if your game is good. If it is, I'll play it and enjoy it, and then promptly forget it afterwards. But I won't be part of the mindless hype machine.

Yeah and vanquish flopped bad.

I would be impressed with very high replay value and great gameplay with awesome graphics.

 

[Unknown One]

I guess the people who are complaining expect some new genre or a genre mixed with several sub-genres.

 

[kuroshiki]

Funny thing is if someone asks exactly what is next gen gameplay, no one knows what it is.

 

[hardcastlemccormick]

I should state my answer to the OP:

I want to want things, but next-gen purchases are not a default buy. A new video game console, no matter how frickin cool it is, is still a pain in the ass. New interfaces, more money spent, more shit in my house.

So when I look at next-gen games and I go, "well, that's pretty damn standard" that's because I want something that makes me want something. I wish I could give a shit about the PS4/Xbone, but right now I can't. Not when a next-gen experience costs me $460 and I can get the same general experience by buying a used PS3 game for $9.

So why be critical? Because I want to want next-gen, but for the love of god I just can't.

 

[GRaider81]

People are obsessed with looks in all aspects of life. All I care about is.. Is it fun?

 

[K.Jack]

Generations always start out with just prettier graphics, but then that FFVII, or Gears of War hits, and we go "ooooooh, that's what we bought new console for..."

Give it time ya'll.

 

[Super Stardust]

It's perfectly fine to ask for new gameplay experiences. I'd be far more worried if people didn't. AAA games are consolidating into fewer and fewer franchises and those games are playing it safer and safer. Who else is going to push these devs to take risks if not the consumers. it certainly wouldn't be any risk analysis and potential calculated profit.

It's better for consumer to ask for new and get slightly new than deal with the same old crap again and again and again with little difference.

Exactly what I wanted to say

 

[Authority]

People like you is the reason we have a slightly more refined Call of Duty game every year. But hey! Who cares about innovation?

Call of Duty is a standard FPS that is, surprisingly, well made. Is this the future of gaming that you want? Standard well-made games in standard genres?

That is the most disgusting type of criticism. What do you even mean "people like you"? He is like what? A second class citizen? So let us say he will buy the latest COD game. You feel good that you bought the revolutionary shooter Titanfall? It is not easy to bring an completely new shooter let alone an IP that goes against the norm or that is so different to the norm. Change takes time and part of it is refining the norm.

Before you disrespect someone like that you should read the OP and how modest he is.

 

[rnaud]

The funny this is that Watch Dogs is one of the game coming out soon where I feel like they've tried something new with the game mechanics. I'm really intrigued.

And then you look at the reactions in the OT vs. the reactions in the gif thread for Driveclub.
Clearly there is an appeal for eye-candy.

 

[Malcolm9]

I would love to know what people expect from games, especially the new gen.

You say games are all standard and the developers play it safe, what are your ideas for making games better.

Can you think of any new genres that we don't have already? How would you improve on what we have?

Obviously AI should be better, and visuals etc, but what more can you do to make games seem "new gen"?

 

[LastNac]

People need to get off their high horses.

That critique could be applied to every game released for every system post PS1.

It's such a dumb argument to make.

 

[tasch]

The funny this is that Watch Dogs is one of the game coming out soon where I feel like they've tried something new with the game mechanics. I'm really intrigued.

And then you look at the reactions in the OT vs. the reactions in the gif thread for Driveclub.
Clearly there is an appeal for eye-candy.

to be fair, DC is trying to do something new too, it's trying to create an interesting online and community ecosystem. Is it completely new? no, but we're finally at the generation where everyone can design for broadband and hd.

The n64 era was the era of 3d, the xbox/ps2 was the era of narrative (games could finally show a story), the 360/ps3 the era of graphics ("cinematic experiences"), the ps4/xb1 the era of online (digital downloads, and online only).

 

[JimiNutz]

Some people want to see big improvements in enemy AI, larger scale battles with bigger levels and destructible environments.

Stuff that is going to give the player more choises ane more things to consider when they're playing.

I dont care if it's 'just another third person cover shooter' so long as the enemy AI looks significantly smarter than last gen and they don't all just stand there waiting for me to kill them.
Or I have more options in terms of level design other than 'run down this corridor and kill everything in this room'.
Or if I have to constantly jump from cover to cover because the environment is falling apart around me.

I'm happy to play more of the same, so long as the formula is actually refined and improved.
I don't want to play exactly the same game, just in a different settings with shinier graphics...

 

[Yagharek]

If a game is cross gen and many seem to be, all we seem to be getting is identical gameplay with a new lick of paint. It's why I'm perfectly happy to get mgsv on ps3 rather than upgrade.

I think if we are asked to spend money on new hardware there either needs to be new ideas, lots of variety and nothing much coming out on the older systems.

None of those criteria have been met.

To me, buying a ps4 or xbone now would be just paying a premium to take part in a beta. I'll wait til a clearer picture emerges with interesting games and a price drop.

 

[Principate]

indies is where you want to look for new gameplay experiences, everywhere else they want a safe investment.

Which is fine but some people would like at some of the larger budget games to take more risks.

I don't see what's inherently wrong with that.

 

[AngryMoth]

I think part of the reason I'm disappointed about the order is that it's a new IP. There is so little innovation in AAA and so many sequels, to see a new IP with cool character designs and an interesting premise completely fail to differentiate itself in terms of mechanics (so far), yes that is very disheartening to me.

Also after last gen I am just pretty burned out on cover shooters at the moment. Same goes for fps's. If I'm going to get excited about a game in those genres it's going to have to do something I haven't seen before.

 

[Malcolm9]

Which is fine but some people would like at some of the larger budget games to take more risks.

I don't see what's inherently wrong with that.

Well if they get it wrong they'll get panned, people may lose their jobs etc, so there is a massive risk, more so these days with games costing a lot more to make.

 

[GobFather]

There's no such thing as "next-gen gameplay". People are just using that term for games they choose to hate.

So true.

 

[Gestault]

This and the other stealth Order thread seem to illustrate part of the answer to the question: People will sometimes make and react to this accusation as part of the justification of their existing outlook on games. Obviously a good set of game mechanics isn't crying out to be changed, but particularly when they've seen others lob the accusation at games they appreciated, they feel justified "returning fire" if they notice the same target in something they think of as "the other side."

Not everything needs to reinvent the wheel, and I'm glad to see as many people as I am supporting that point. Regarding the obvious catalyst for this thread (reactions to the newer Order 1886 footage), if people were already a little tired of the formula/mechanics for something like Uncharted or Gears of War, then the reaction is perfectly rational for them with what little we've seen. I have a feeling some negativity in that thread wasn't quite motivated by perfectly consistent reasoning, but it's a normal impulse in people.

 

[To Far Away Times]

The last console generation was a long one, with many devs being risk averse and focusing on building "franchises" right from the get go to minimize cost over the long haul. When you see more of the same in the next generation it ends up being pretty disappointing.

A refined version of the exact same game you've played three years in a row is not really that exciting any more. Is it really worth playing that new Assassin's Creed even if it's slightly better than last year's? Does it even matter if its a little better? Should you care?

So far, this generation is without the exciting Gears of War/Soul Calibur/Mario 64 type of game that justifies the next gen.

 

[Principate]

Well if they get it wrong they'll get panned, people may lose their jobs etc, so there is a massive risk, more so these days with games costing a lot more to make.

Yes but people aren't obligated to buy their games.

There's always very much the risk of being so generic no one gives a shit especially for a new IP, as most of the bombs last generation will tell you.

Such risk exist with many large budget products the ones that stand out are usually the that take the risk and do it well.

Ultimately your catering to consumer tastes if they don't want the same old from a new IP so be it. Same with if their not. But obviously consumers should air their misgrievances about games if they have them.

 

[simplythebest]

There's no such thing as "next-gen gameplay". People are just using that term for games they choose to hate.

Been seeing that a lot lately, more so for Watch Dogs.

 

[mangochutney]

Cloud used = next gen gameplay and automatic 5/5 review score.
No cloud used = last gen gameplay and automatic 2/5 review score.

Even though said cloud features could be done on last gen.

I learned this from Adam Sessler.

 

[NullPointer]

Funny thing is if someone asks exactly what is next gen gameplay, no one knows what it is.

I think the idea is that one of the many tens of thousands of people paid full time to come up with that would have something to show us.

If anybody wants to cover my rent and bills and discretionary income I'd be more than happy to help.

 

[ICPEE]

Go play some Indie games if you're looking for revolutionary experiences where developers (on small budgets) have nothing to lose and everything to gain. Hence Indies being more creative and taking more risks.

Don't expect AAA studios with millions of dollars pumped into games to reinvent the wheel. Expect fine tuning of gameplay elements based on current-gen gameplay models.

 

[Zeuanimals]

Because the AI is brain dead . improve the AI ffs,

AI tends to scale by difficulty and I'm guessing you're talking about The Order. We don't know what difficulty that little gameplay snippet was shown on or if it has difficulty settings at all, but I'm guessing it does and it was at easy. Devs/publishers tend to show off games on the easiest settings.

If you're talking about all of the games that have been out so far... Yeah, I'm gonna have to agree with you. Ryse, DR3, and Titanfall, really dumb AI. inFAMOUS, Knack, and Killzone, about the same but Killzone has pretty competent AI (if only the latter half of the campaign didn't suck).

Ultimately this time around, the technology hasn't opened any doors to do things that simply weren't possible before, unlike previous generations.

There's VR, but pretty much this. Devs are just gonna improve on what they did last-gen, and make prettier games, which I'm fine with, mostly. Fallout 4/TESVI with seamless transitions from outside into a building and vice versa? Yes please. These consoles need mod support though... Or I need to upgrade my PC.

 

[tasch]

Funny thing is if someone asks exactly what is next gen gameplay, no one knows what it is.

so... have you ever played dead rising? ever tried playing it on the wii? notice those crowd sizes? those are a gameplay mechanic that was only possible thanks to the leap in generational technology. Assassins creed, another game that would've been all but impossible in the ps2/xbox era.

We should be expecting similar things this generation. Remember that at the beginning of last generation, many people did not have highspeed broadband internet, one thing we can expect is interesting online multiplayer components (hence the emphasis on "the cloud"). Games like titan fall are starting to explore this.

We should expect more dynamic and higher simulated worlds on top of more complex ai and unique physics implementations. Games like GTA still have very simple ecosystems in regards to the way the city works. It's not "alive" and doesn't have complicated ai yet. Having more complex economies and more dynamic theft or crime systems, better or predictable weather and traffic that impacts the city would be beneficial sandbox elements (while directly impacting "graphix"). Think GTA but with sim-city running in the background controlling the city itself. CoD fish simulation is touching on these types of systems, but it's becoming more and more prevalent. Think a land mass as living breathing world, where trees grow and rivers shrink and grow during different times of the year.

These are the kind of experiences that I think should come define the ps4/xb1 generation.

 

[ricardokenshin]

Which is fine but some people would like at some of the larger budget games to take more risks.

I don't see what's inherently wrong with that.

it's not wrong, but it ain't happening. These people need to get the money back and they won't with niche experiences. Multi million dollar budgets don't need more risks than they have to take.

 

[Orayn]

so... have you ever played dead rising? ever tried playing it on the wii? notice those crowd sizes? those are a gameplay mechanic that was only possible thanks to the leap in generational technology. Assassins creed, another game that would've been all but impossible in the ps2/xbox era.

We should be expecting similar things this generation. Remember that at the beginning of last generation, many people did not have highspeed broadband internet, one thing we can expect is interesting online multiplayer components (hence the emphasis on "the cloud"). Games like titan fall are starting to explore this.

We should expect more dynamic and higher simulated worlds on top of more complex ai and unique physics implementations. Games like GTA still have very simple ecosystems in regards to the way the city works. It's not "alive" and doesn't have complicated ai yet. Having more complex economies and more dynamic theft or crime systems, better or predictable weather and traffic that impacts the city would be beneficial sandbox elements (while directly impacting "graphix"). Think GTA but with sim-city running in the background controlling the city itself.

These are the kind of experiences that I think should come define the ps4/xb1 generation.

Xbox 360 less powerful than PS2, CONFIRMED!

 

[tasch]

Xbox 360 less powerful than PS2, CONFIRMED!

boids? yawn. Complex ai, not some simple swarm.

 

[Bundy]

I'm always laughing my ass of when I hear "bu... bu... where is the next-gen gameplay". Shit is beyond stupid.

 

[Trago]

If we can have a billion threads dedicated to the graphics of next gen games, then why the hell is it a problem to expect or debate the new gameplay experiences of next gen games and next gen AAA games especially?

Do I know what this magical new next gen gameplay is? No, I'm not a developer, but we have some really smart people in the development community who probably do have those ideas.

There's an argument to be had on what a "next gen" game is setting out to be, but lets not jump on people who want to experience something new in terms of how we PLAY our video GAMES.

 

[twobear]

I don't think the problem with The Order is that it looks like a 'standard TPS'. I think it's that everything shown of the game makes it look boring.

 

[Orayn]

boids? yawn. Complex ai, not some simple swarm.

What about the zombies in Dead Rising is so complex compared to the monsters in this? They pretty much know how to do two things: Shamble around, and lunge at you if you get close enough, which leads to a semi-random grappling animation.

Also, the enemies in Assassin's Creed are about as impressive as Ocarina of Time when you're actually fighting them. They take their turn, swing at you with one of several attacks, and may be able to automatically block some of the things you can do to them.

 

[onanie]

boids? yawn. Complex ai, not some simple swarm.

Changing the goal post after attempting to make a point? Yawn.

 

[BruceLeeRoy]

I know your not specifically talking about The Order but it's a good example.

When I first saw the game it looked like Gears of War with a new coat of paint and now I'm not saying that's all it's going to be but let's just say it is...That sounds awesome to me.

I love Gears of War so the idea a great cover shoot with visuals like that. Sign me the hell up.

 

[TMNT]

Ultimately this time around, the technology hasn't opened any doors to do things that simply weren't possible before, unlike previous generations.

I think you nailed it. Games being rehashed with a new coat of paint isn't going to push the industry forward, or invigorate creativity. It feels like a wall has been hit with regards to where gaming goes next. We all love flashy graphics but that doesn't solve anything.

A game that brings amazing AI, or detailed environmental interaction would be something I'd like to see.

 

[NotTheGuyYouKill]

Preach the word, my brother.

Preach the word.

 

[atr0cious]

The problem isn't having 'standard' games. The problem arises when the standard games are being pointed at as reasons to upgrade to the next generation. Gears was an entirely new experience at the time, graphically and gameplay wise. The Order is more of the same, but has been billed as another exclusive reason to hop on PS4. At least Titanfall tried to differentiate itself, and with Brink bombing into obscurity, that looked fresh to some.

This is why people poopoo Nintendo's output, as their games are usually 'standard' fare, they just happened to be the best at it. After that long generation, people are tired of reheated 'experiences' wrapped in better textures. The regular consumer is smarter than ever, thanks to internet ease of use, so it's getting harder and harder to pin the blame on ignorance. Japan will soon no longer be an outlier, once more and more realize that the current industry output is only going to consolidate even more.

 

[foxuzamaki]

Extended generation whose output gave us two AAA cover-based shooters with three or four games apiece. Sim racers with realistic graphics and a focus on tiny details...also lots of sequels. It's called genre fatigue and these 'new' next-gen/current-gen games, as nice as they look, constantly remind us of the many times we've already experienced them. People want to do new things in a new generation, not just see the old activities with better presentation.

Exactly this, sure there are games with timeless gameplay that whilst can be improved, having better graphics and/or presenation can be enough to experience it all over again, but not every game is like that, infact most games arent like that, especially when presentation takes center stage.

 

[Stylo]

If companies want to buy their $200+ machines in a reasonable time period, I expect them to give me an incentive besides same game, shinier graphics.
What does the new game offer that necessitates a new console and me purchasing said machine?

 

[Yagharek]

I'm always laughing my ass of when I hear "bu... bu... where is the next-gen gameplay". Shit is beyond stupid.

Thats not a compelling rebuttal.

 

[Scrabble]

What games during the 360/ps3 generation had "dat next gen gameplay" relative to the ps2, xbox, and gamecube? Assassin's Creed, Dead Rising, a few others? Perhaps most of the wii catalouge if you want to count motion controls, but I don't think that's what we are talking about. A game having next gen gameplay hardly matters in the grand scheme of things. The Order isn't being criticized for not having next gen gameplay, it's being criticized because it doesn't look to be doing anything interesting.

Gears of War, which by most accounts was last generations true "next gen" game wasn't doing anything that couldn't have been done previously, but had a cover system which at the time was incredibly well done, innovative, and unique,(Yes calm down I know kill switch came out first) and backed by really well designed encounters and pacing. As well as having graphics which blew everything else away at the time.

It's pretty clear when you look at nintendo games like Mario Kart or 3D world that no one deep down really believes having "next gen gameplay" is really that important. People just want to attach a reason and explanation as to why something doesn't look interesting, without actually going in depth explaining why.