• 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.

If Sony and Microsoft stopped caring about graphics and made consoles innovative in other ways, would you still buy consoles?

Would you buy an extremely underpowered console from Sony and/or Microsoft?

  • Yes, games and gameplay matter the most, not the graphics.

    Votes: 116 52.7%
  • No. I would simply stop playing games altogether if that happened.

    Votes: 25 11.4%
  • No. I'd migrate to PC gaming instead.

    Votes: 79 35.9%

  • Total voters
    220

recursive

Member
Let's say by 2027 when the next generation gets released we get consoles that are barely an upgrade over current gen (maybe 20% better). For some reason, they include a cool gimmick with their new console so the games aren't compatible with current gen anymore, meaning you'd have to upgrade to keep playing the latest exclusive games. Let's say whatever gimmick they come up with really enhances gameplay in a different and innovative way. Both machines launch at $349.

Would you still buy Playstation and/or Xbox consoles if they followed Nintendo's strategy?
No.
 

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
Not sure what else you can innovate in gaming. The biggest thing lately is VR, which going by sales is something the majority of gamers dont give a shit about. All major players also tried their motion gaming phase at some point and bailed.

The biggest changes lately on console gaming are:

- Switch handheld/docking
- SSD making loading times during the disc era being fast again like the cartridge days
- Being more open to cross platform gaming
- Being BC with last gen, which I assume is something that will continue going forward
- Lots of 60 fps gaming on MS/Sony now. Pretty close to standard now
- Lots of games with a few graphics/performance options
- Sub plans

If Sony or MS followed Nintendo, I'd avoid them. Nintendo's history since N64 are either weird mediums, weird/faddy gameplay, underpowered by a generation or more, or have a focus on handheld. They cant even play DVDs, BR or 4k discs as an added system feature. Basic media functionality even MS/Sony started doing during the 2000s. Numerous things that are giant setbacks for me.

Add in I don't care about any Nintendo franchises except playing a traditional Mario 2D game and that they scare off third party devs with low powered systems, and that makes it worse. You know third party support is in the toilet when even EA (who'll shotgun any game franchise to any platform to maximize sales) even avoids making many key games for a system.

Nintendo systems are best suited for gamers who focus on their 1st party games, and want to save $100 on hardware. Two key things I don't care about.

I'd rather MS/Sony focus on what they do now. Power, wide breadth of games and system functionality, no weird Nintendo shit.
 
Last edited:

ACESHIGH

Member
I'd buy a Sony console if:

The ps store had proper regional pricing

And Sony had a robust BC system in place from PS1 through ps4 including handhelds. With the ability to enhance old games by playing them at higher resolutions or frame rates 16xAF anti aliasing...

Ps4 pro level of power should be enough. Small form factor though.
 
Last edited:

Closer

Member
If I was a gamer that cared about graphics, buying a console would make no sense at all. I want my games to be fun first and foremost.
 
I play games for gameplay and fun primarily, but if the new presumably rather expensive consoles are not improving visuals and technology considerably, then I kind of feel what’s the point then? Just keep the current consoles around for years and TRY to innovate on those if possible.

Sure, better, newer technology can allow more innovation, but I don’t think most developers or creators are capable of reinventing the wheel when it comes to introducing unique ideas. If graphics weren’t really improved on future consoles, then I would probably just stick to the current consoles for awhile at least until I see a worthwhile reason to upgrade or something innovative that truly mesmerizes me.
 
Last edited:
I'd buy a Sony console if:

The ps store had proper regional pricing

And Sony had a robust BC system in place from PS1 through ps4 including handhelds. With the ability to enhance old games by playing them at higher resolutions or frame rates 16xAF anti aliasing...

Ps4 pro level of power should be enough. Small form factor though.

Same people that say “tHeRe aRe DiMiNiShinG rETuRns” and that last gen graphics are enough will be in another thread whining about how the VRR isn’t as robust as a high end PC or some other dumb shit.

Full circle
 
Last edited:

Knightime_X

Member
We have nintendo for that.
Trash resolution, awful grahpics settings, and subpar framerates has been their specialty since the Wii.

And I fucking hate nintendo for going down this road.
So my short answer is: Fucking GOD NO!
 
Last edited:

Hobbygaming

has been asked to post in 'Grounded' mode.
its not like graphics have take a huge leap forward with Series and PS5. Diminishing returns.

At some point you have to buy them if you want to play new console games, better graphics or not.
This generation has barely started, we'll start to see a bigger leap next year
 
PSVR2 is the innovation Sony needs and I believe they will deliver as they did PSVR1, not every company has to be Nintendo
 
Last edited:

yurinka

Member
Let's say by 2027 when the next generation gets released we get consoles that are barely an upgrade over current gen (maybe 20% better). For some reason, they include a cool gimmick with their new console so the games aren't compatible with current gen anymore, meaning you'd have to upgrade to keep playing the latest exclusive games. Let's say whatever gimmick they come up with really enhances gameplay in a different and innovative way. Both machines launch at $349.

Would you still buy Playstation and/or Xbox consoles if they followed Nintendo's strategy?
I'd stay on PS for the exclusives, but what you mention won't happen.

First because Sony and MS are making an effort to make their consoles forward compatible: grouping their catalog from all generations, streaming, PC-ish architecture... all seems designed to make consoles compatible with all this.

They could do something like to make them hybrid, so the jump in horsepower in that case would be minor, but I don't see it happening. I think they'll continue with tthe same current focus and will leave the portable market for Nintendo and the PC handhelds.

I think in the next gen they'll highly improve streaming, VR, RT, real time illumination and SSD reading speeds. We'll see more (or closer to) native 4K resolution games and more (or closer to) 120fps games. Plus during this gen will increase the F2P GaaS in console and will start migrating thowards the end of the generation P2E (specially in mobile and PC), which will explode (specially in consoles) in the next gen. Well see an additional option to buy any game in PS and Xbox: in addittion to in retail or digittal, to buy games to stream them (as in Stadia or a few Switch games).

I see the innovations in gameplay and game design coming from VR, P2E and the paradigm shifts described by Cerny in his talk about the PS5 tech reveal. These new possibilities I think will start to shine in the next gen. Since both are growing their amount of teams (in the case of Sony, mostly hiring a lot and creating new teams inside their studio, and in the case of MS more via acquisitions), I think they'll release way more games so will also release way more IPs which will lead to new ideas. They will also open more to mobile and (via acquired 3P publishers) to full multiplatfom.

I don't see them getting stagnant like Nintendo on mosty a few IPs from many decades ago and investing on low end visuals. Their money comes from high end AAA games with realistic visuals, so will continue invesiting them. Gimmicks are only gimmicks, by themselves they don't improve gameplay and don't imply innovation. This gen we saw stuff like haptic feedback, 3D audio and adaptative triggers. They are nice additions, an improvement and maybe innovation, but I think they are only a gimming that doesn't change mostly anything.

As an example motion controls meant crappy gameplay to perform actions that could be mapped to a button press or analog direction, and to go back to rail shooters from generations ago. They are starting to shine in VR when properly mapping hands fingers to track more natural and intuitive controls but the related design still has to evolve to take full advantag of them in (VR) games.

Low end visuals only means devs can't show certain level of detail, realism and subtle emotions. Innovation, focus on gameplay etc. can also be made while using top tier visuals, as seen in Dreams, Little Big Planet, Journey or Death Stranding to name a few.
 
Last edited:
I think I expect a certain level of graphic fidelity so if Sony and Microsoft had gone the way of Nintendo in not supporting 4K, HDR, VRR and basic stuff like anti-aliasing and anisotropic filtering (which most Switch games don't use) then I would likely have not bought all three systems.

As it is, I own all three for different reasons because they all fit a certain need, the PS5 for the best exclusive single-player games (in my opinion), the Xbox Series X for the best third-party games option (when it was the only current-gen machine supporting VRR and still is, actually, due to the PS5's lacklustre VRR implementation) and the Switch for OLED portable gaming goodness where the graphical deficiencies look less jarring (most Switch games look awful played on my 55" 4K LG B9 OLED TV though since most them aren't even 1080p!).

I must admit to being a bit disappointed with Nintendo though. Up until the Wii, they were pretty much on a par with Sony and Microsoft technically then they discovered motion-controlled gaming and suddenly everything seemed to change. Sure, they make great games but those games are frequently let down by visual shortcomings, whether it is a low resolution, low framerates or less of AA and AF etc. Third-party games are often terrible on Switch and I often wonder why publishers feel the need to release these PS4 and Xbox One games on the Switch which really isn't powerful enough to do most of them justice but the answer is that it has a large market to sell these games to so even if only a small percentage of those people buy these games then they are likely still profitable (otherwise they would not make them, right?). I'd like to see Nintendo release a console that is at least as powerful as the Xbox One X that targets 1440p and 60 fps with AA and AF used in all games as the bare minimum.
 
Last edited:

ANIMAL1975

Member
Let's say by 2027 when the next generation gets released we get consoles that are barely an upgrade over current gen (maybe 20% better). For some reason, they include a cool gimmick with their new console so the games aren't compatible with current gen anymore, meaning you'd have to upgrade to keep playing the latest exclusive games. Let's say whatever gimmick they come up with really enhances gameplay in a different and innovative way. Both machines launch at $349.

Would you still buy Playstation and/or Xbox consoles if they followed Nintendo's strategy?
I'm a big tech enthusiast so of course i prefer to have a big jump in the next new generation, but having said that where would i play my Playstation exclusives right away if i didn't have one...
 

REDRZA MWS

Member
It’s not that MS and Sony only “care about graphics”. The power of the consoles must be used for everything else too. Physics, AI, effects, etc. I’ll game where traditional consoles are. As long as they keep releasing dedicated hardware with a controller and great looking and playing games that’s where I’ll be. I don’t need gimmicks and tricks.
 
I don't really know what this question is asking. I don't really care about graphics(too much) but if they stopped making higher end machines and went the Nintendo route of underpowered consoles then I'd certainly stop buying them.

I don't mind if the graphics for the games they personally make arnt as fancy. I've preffered stylized games anyway.
 
Last edited:

Amiga

Member
consoles are already underpowered. They are supposed to be affordable streamlined devices. various innovations can be attached. this has always been the case.
Problem with Nintendo is they make the baseline very low to fit their gimmick within the price. Sony choose to have the highest baseline possible for a $400 price. then add the extras like VR later.
 

Sentenza

Member
I'd do what I do now: stick mostly to PC and enjoy the best of both.

P.S. Picked the third option since a "I was ALREADY mostly on PC" isn't contemplated in the poll.
 
Last edited:
its not like graphics have take a huge leap forward with Series and PS5. Diminishing returns.

At some point you have to buy them if you want to play new console games, better graphics or not.
To be fair, we haven't seen a whole lot of new-gen only games. One was a remake, one was a UE4 game and one looked like an enhanced PS4 game with cool fast travel mechanics.
 

ReBurn

Gold Member
To be fair, we haven't seen a whole lot of new-gen only games. One was a remake, one was a UE4 game and one looked like an enhanced PS4 game with cool fast travel mechanics.
True. The lack of fully current gen games is skewing things a bit. But even at that, the real beauty of modern GPU's isn't as much the pretty graphics they display as much as it is the blazing fast frame rates and higher resolutions they're pushing. 3000 series GPU's and equivalents aren't pushing groundbreaking graphics as much as they're providing great performance for good enough graphics. People are existed at how well their 5 year old PC games are playing now. It's a weird time.
 
True. The lack of fully current gen games is skewing things a bit. But even at that, the real beauty of modern GPU's isn't as much the pretty graphics they display as much as it is the blazing fast frame rates and higher resolutions they're pushing. 3000 series GPU's and equivalents aren't pushing groundbreaking graphics as much as they're providing great performance for good enough graphics. People are existed at how well their 5 year old PC games are playing now. It's a weird time.
Well, to be fair, the devs have to make the ground breaking graphics first.

Just playing last gen games with tacked on RTX on a 3000 series GPU isn't really "next gen" to me.
 

ReBurn

Gold Member
Well, to be fair, the devs have to make the ground breaking graphics first.

Just playing last gen games with tacked on RTX on a 3000 series GPU isn't really "next gen" to me.
True. So far we've seen how challenging great graphics with great performance can be in the UE5 demos, even on some current cards. But also to be fair that's new tech and will get better every day as more devs adopt it. I just worry that the consoles we have now may have launched in the pocket where they were a tad too early to make the true next leap. I'm sure they have a lot to give we haven't seen yet.
 
True. So far we've seen how challenging great graphics with great performance can be in the UE5 demos, even on some current cards. But also to be fair that's new tech and will get better every day as more devs adopt it. I just worry that the consoles we have now may have launched in the pocket where they were a tad too early to make the true next leap. I'm sure they have a lot to give we haven't seen yet.
There's never a perfect time to launch new hardware because it's always changing. If they waited, there would still be something right around the corner with way better performance and more efficiency than what they shipped.
 

ReBurn

Gold Member
There's never a perfect time to launch new hardware because it's always changing. If they waited, there would still be something right around the corner with way better performance and more efficiency than what they shipped.
Right. But we're dealing with console hardware specs that will be approaching 3 years old in terms of what's on the silicon by the time the current gen only games start to drop and we're still having conversations about what we'll see from it when the true current gen only games finally start to arrive.

I'm sure the conversation would have been different if not for global supply issues and rising development costs keeping cross gen alive longer. I think it's fair to wonder if, with the 4000 series and equivalent cards coming out soon and us not having seen much of what current consoles can truly do on their own, if pure bad timing might cause us console gamers to be a bit disappointed compared to what we see on PC when the console heavy hitters start to arrive.
 
Right. But we're dealing with console hardware specs that will be approaching 3 years old in terms of what's on the silicon by the time the current gen only games start to drop and we're still having conversations about what we'll see from it when the true current gen only games finally start to arrive.

I'm sure the conversation would have been different if not for global supply issues and rising development costs keeping cross gen alive longer. I think it's fair to wonder if, with the 4000 series and equivalent cards coming out soon and us not having seen much of what current consoles can truly do on their own, if pure bad timing might cause us console gamers to be a bit disappointed compared to what we see on PC when the console heavy hitters start to arrive.
Agreed
 

rodrigolfp

Gold Member
Last innovation I bought was the Wiimote. If some interesting innovation comes then I probably would by it.
 
Last edited:

rodrigolfp

Gold Member
When people do this whole song and dance about how Nintendo are so innovative and pushing boundaries, I honestly don't know what the fuck they're talking about.

If you're always about ten years behind the competition in terms of basic features, "innovation" is not a term I'd be banding around.
Like the Wiimote, dual screens and gyro assist. Meanwhile Sony put gyro on DS4 and Dual Sense but still almost doesn't use it and pathetic aim assists are still present. 🤦‍♂️
 

KXVXII9X

Member
Yes, I would. Advancements such as VR are so much more noticeable to me than just prettier graphics. Same thing as games that would allow for more physics and simulation. Mostly want I need in the visual department is a good polished presentation, great art direction, good lighting, nice animations, and good UI/UX design.

I find the obsession with photorealism really boring since a lot of the developers don't have the resources to do it properly. It needs great animation, lighting, physics, and some creative liberties to make it from being too uncanny. The Switch is really outdated now, but games like Splatoon 2-3 look gorgeous and are fun to play. I would heavily prefer it to something like Halo Infinite, even though it is more graphically demanding.
 

Markio128

Member
It got me thinking about my own personal gaming peaks… for me, traditional gameplay peaked during the N64 period; Mario 64 was magical, as was OOT, heck even Wave Race 64 and Pilotwings were masterful experiences. I don’t think I have experienced the same wonder since then. That’s why I’m so interested in PSVR2 because VR is the only place that has the potential to deliver the next Mario 64 experience.
 

billyxci

Permabanned.
i don't buy consoles for graphics or performance, that's why I have a PC, so it would be nice to see Sony/MS focus on something other than that. That's why I love Nintendo and why Switch is my favourite console of the last 5-10 years. It doesn't have pretty graphics or impressive performance. To be honestly, they are both quite shit but who cares cause the games are so much fun.
 
Last edited:

Gp1

Member
It depends.

If Innovation = Kinect, Move, Virtua boy or Wii, then no
if Innovation = switch, then PC + console as always
 
Top Bottom