Support NeoGAF

[MiguelItUp]

5 years to develop Andromeda and has worse facial animations than PS2 games.
Clearly long time development is due for poor management and leadership, a game that took 5 years to develop shouldn't have day one patches.

AAA game development time and cost has increased over the decades in general. Regardless if the team is being managed well or not. Andromeda's woes were already on its face before the game even released, haha.

 

[Chronicle]

I thought there would be a larger generational leap in graphics, physics and gameplay. Nice but not wowed yet.

 

[charles8771]

People complained about the previous gen as well.

https://www.neogaf.com/threads/opinion-why-this-generation-of-gaming-is-the-worst-youtube.1468674/

Having broken buggy games at day one like Battlefield 4, AC Unity, Mass Effect Andromeda, Halo MCC
Dissapointment games like Watchdogs, Destiny.
I heard someone saying that 2014 was a horrendous years for gaming

 

[Destruction-1002]

I think zelda proves that its the devs who no longer have the passion, the talent or the ambition to pull off these massive leaps we have come to expect. Everyone wondered why the PS4 gen was just an extension of the PS360 gen. People blamed jaguar CPUs. Devs blamed HDDs. Some blamed bigger budgets, open world and gaas trends for a lack of a meaningful upgrade in gameplay which saw little to no innovations gen on gen even last gen. Then zelda comes out with a way worse processor than the jaguar CPUs, no ssd, and a GPU even worse than the PS3, and showed everyone that anything is possible if you actually want to do it.

I always wondered why Far Cry 2 was far more physics based and interactive than anything that came after it. Same with Crysis and to a lesser extent Infamous, GTA4 and Mass Effect 1. We got a pretty decent GPU bump in the PS4 era (9x) and a massive VRAM jump (10-20x), and devs just kinda forgot about interactivity and went all in on graphics and vast (empty) open worlds with no real interactivity or simulations. Surely, some of that couldve been offloaded to the GPU but they didnt even try. Nintendo tried and got it all to run on PS3 era hardware.

No one will convince me that with the massive increase in CPU and SSD bandwidth, we should be expecting incremental upgrades. Some dev said that Nintendo was showing up AAA devs working on 10x more powerful hardware. It's actually 63x if you go by tflops and compare the handheld tflops 0.190 to xbox series x's 12.1 tflops. Just imagine what Nintendo could do with the 3.5 ghz 8 core 16 thread CPUs and then ask why we are getting such incremental upgrades this gen.

Again, not even talking about visual upgrades here. There is so much to do in terms of technological breakthroughs and innovation and so much power at their fingertips and they are just coasting. Thank God for Zelda.

The GPU of PS4 and Xbox One were weak at their launch

Nvidia Claims PS4 Is Only as Good as a "Low-End" PC - The Escapist

www.escapistmagazine.com

NVIDIA called the PS4 low end PC and he say that GPU has 50% perfomance of GTX 680 from 2012.

I bet the folks that called the PS4 and Xbox One underpowered at launch had short memory at all.

 

[DevilHunterX0]

Cause "Mah Freedom"

 

[lestar]

PS4 AAA games already costs 200+ million dollars, let alone this generation's AAA games

 

[Disco Dave]

The 9th generation doesn't start until Nintendo releases the Switch 3.

 

[Muffdraul]

There are soooooo few games that come out these that I want to play, and the ones I do play often fail to knock my socks off the way games used to. But I see this as a "me" problem.

 

[Crayon]

You know what's really great is to expand your horizons. Fighting, VR, retro, etc. They can be pallet cleansers or you might even find a new love.