Are we EVER going to get new consoles?

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Are you ready for the next gen?

  • I'm totally ready, and willing to pay to play. The 360/PS3 are starting to feel old.

  • I'd like to see them sooner rather than later, but I'm not ready to put money on them.

  • I'm completely satisfied now, but I'll probably be ready several years from now.

  • I'm completely ambivalent. Current gen is good enough, and I'll prob never care to pay for more.

  • But if someone we're to buy it for me, I'd totally want it.

  • The kinect and move ARE the next gen, and I'm totally down.

  • I'm more than happy with my Wii/PS2. I dont even have a PS3/360 yet.

  • I'd prefer a world without the 360/PS3 - too much focus on graphics vs gameplay.


Results are only viewable after voting.

BD2003

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
16,815
1
81
Why? Because I'm not mouthing off platitudes about gameplay vs graphics? Or that I'm pointing out the absurdity in someones completely uncalled for personal attack?

I can accept that I'm holding the minority view, and that there is near unanimous disagreement with my POV, but I ain't no troll. So unless you actually have something to contribute, stay out of it.
 

RagingBITCH

Lifer
Sep 27, 2003
17,618
2
76
But, they do. I haven't seen a problem yet and if there are problems with games not running fluidly (60fps consistantly) at full HD then it's a problem with lazy coding and not with the hardware.

Both the 360 and PS3 are fully capable of running games at full HD.

Gene

Gene - I'm sorry but that's crap. There are few games, if any, that can run at 1080P @ 60FPS consistently on the PS3/360. 30FPS, sure. 60? No. I can't find a list except for little/smaller games like Wipeout HD that can run at 1080P @ 60FPS. Even Sony is cracking down on developers coding for 1080P, according to this article:

http://www.gamesrelay.com/features/sony-limits-3d-ps3-games-to-720p-instead-of-1080p.html
 

maxxpower18

Member
Apr 21, 2010
38
0
0
To an extent, I agree with the OP when he says that open world RPGs are suffering this gen, I mean just look at SquareEnix's problems trying to fit FFIV into the PS3, but that's only because I'm huge on RPGs. Also, for those of you that bash HD consoles because they don't have any 2D Castlevanias or Zelda games, I suggest you buy a DS. I honestly play my DS more than my PS3.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,562
9
81
Why? Because I'm not mouthing off platitudes about gameplay vs graphics? Or that I'm pointing out the absurdity in someones completely uncalled for personal attack?

I can accept that I'm holding the minority view, and that there is near unanimous disagreement with my POV, but I ain't no troll. So unless you actually have something to contribute, stay out of it.

So given the confines of a budget, you don't believe that putting more into one area takes from another? Do you believe in the Quality Fairy that comes down and blesses games with perfection?

Troll.
 

BD2003

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
16,815
1
81
Gene - I'm sorry but that's crap. There are few games, if any, that can run at 1080P @ 60FPS consistently on the PS3/360. 30FPS, sure. 60? No. I can't find a list except for little/smaller games like Wipeout HD that can run at 1080P @ 60FPS. Even Sony is cracking down on developers coding for 1080P, according to this article:

http://www.gamesrelay.com/features/sony-limits-3d-ps3-games-to-720p-instead-of-1080p.html

Indeed. Because these consoles simply don't have the bandwidth/fillrate/shaders to run anything that isn't extremely simple at 1080p/60. It's not just lazy coding, there are real life limits - that's why CoD games run at under 720p, cause that's what it takes to push 60fps and still look decent.

In fact, the MW2 developers had to *lower* the level of detail (less specular maps) on the cod4 remake maps in order to squeeze them into the memory space left over. The black ops guys are even talking about camo patterns take up too much memory That's how constrained things are at this point in the lifecycle.

Does every game have to be 1080p@60? No, of course not. That in and of itself won't make a game better. For some it will, but not all. It's just indicative of the fact that the limits of the console have been reached, and there is going to be little improvement from here on in.
 

BD2003

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
16,815
1
81
So given the confines of a budget, you don't believe that putting more into one area takes from another? Do you believe in the Quality Fairy that comes down and blesses games with perfection?

Troll.

Sorry if I don't hold the same simplistic view that you do. A great gameplay mechanic requires inspiration, not necessarily time or money. Those things are necessary, but throwing money at designers will not make a game have better gameplay in the same way that throwing money at artists will make it have better graphics.

You're comparing apples and oranges. You're just plain wrong on this one.
 

Tristicus

Diamond Member
Feb 2, 2008
8,107
5
61
www.wallpapereuphoria.com
I dunno man, I bet that game would have been so much better if they had spent all the money that they did to make it look and sound cool on gameplay. Because it's impossible to do both at the same time...the director on that game should be fired and blacklisted from having a creative career of any sort.

...
 

smackababy

Lifer
Oct 30, 2008
27,024
79
86
Sorry if I don't hold the same simplistic view that you do. A great gameplay mechanic requires inspiration, not necessarily time or money. Those things are necessary, but throwing money at designers will not make a game have better gameplay in the same way that throwing money at artists will make it have better graphics.

You're comparing apples and oranges. You're just plain wrong on this one.

Huh? So, a new innovative idea doesn't require the money and time to refine? How about that new physics engine? All games take are time and money. Money to hire people and time to make it.
 

BD2003

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
16,815
1
81
You know, there was more to that post than just the line you bolded.

It's also far more apples and oranges to compare gameplay vs graphics development time and money in these days of licensed engines and middleware.

In the end, all I'm saying is that the two aren't mutally exclusive. You can have a great game with great graphics, which together make an even better overall experience. The gameplay doesn't need to suffer for the graphics, nor vice versa.

Why does what seems like the most obvious thing in the world to me inspire such hostility?
 

ImpulsE69

Lifer
Jan 8, 2010
14,946
1,077
126
What I find interesting is, while I agree that there can always be advances forward and we need them.....if you are all clamoring for new systems so soon, then this would lead one to believe that the current games are not cutting it. Maybe it's an age thing, but I have the patience to wait. I personally find this generation of games to be generic and boring. Everyone keeps going on about "graphics graphics graphics". You want graphics, watch a movie. I prefer gameplay, and I'm sorry, but it's few and far between that game developers have achieved both great gameplay/story and amazing graphics in one game with this generation of consoles.

The catalogue of games is much smaller this generation as well..or is that my imagination....
 

Fallen Kell

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
6,095
460
126
What I find interesting is, while I agree that there can always be advances forward and we need them.....if you are all clamoring for new systems so soon, then this would lead one to believe that the current games are not cutting it. Maybe it's an age thing, but I have the patience to wait. I personally find this generation of games to be generic and boring. Everyone keeps going on about "graphics graphics graphics". You want graphics, watch a movie. I prefer gameplay, and I'm sorry, but it's few and far between that game developers have achieved both great gameplay/story and amazing graphics in one game with this generation of consoles.

The catalogue of games is much smaller this generation as well..or is that my imagination....

No, it isn't your imagination. What you are describing however, is really "The Revenge of the Clones". None of the big game publishers will make/release anything that hasn't already been done (with just minor tweaks).

Oooo... Halo10 is out! Its got bigger graphics a larger explosions, and the same Halo combat you love.... I mean come on.

(Please note, I am not just picking on Halo there, I could have said Guitar Hero 18, or Gears of War 5, or Medal of Honor 14, or Call of Duty 20....At least with the Guitar Hero you get more/different music, but still....You can do that with download content and not release a new game until there is something really NEW).
 

BD2003

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
16,815
1
81
I agree wholeheartedly. Where I diverge is that I think they need some new hardware, a new challenge, to perk up their imaginations. Better graphics will come as a side effect.

I think there's something to be said about hardware limitations forcing developers to be more creative, but if that were really the case the wii and ds would be the system with the most creative ideas, where gameplay trumps graphics.

Instead it seems to be generally agreed upon that it's s dust magnet full of crap shovelware with the occasional gem. And I personally think the most brilliant Wii titles (boom blox for instance) benefited more from new tech than any sort of creative boost due to hardware limitations. Same with ds and it's dual screen/touchscreen.
 

FeathersMcGraw

Diamond Member
Oct 17, 2001
4,041
1
0
I think there's something to be said about hardware limitations forcing developers to be more creative, but if that were really the case the wii and ds would be the system with the most creative ideas, where gameplay trumps graphics.

Instead it seems to be generally agreed upon that it's s dust magnet full of crap shovelware with the occasional gem.

I don't think you can assert that limited hardware is going to drive creativity any more than you can suggest the opposite (that improved hardware will necessarily result in better games). The hardware is the hardware and the developers are going to do with it what they can within the limits of their skill, budget, and production timelines.

I suspect that the commonly-held belief that Nintendo is a dumping grounds for shovelware is less a fault of the hardware specs than the popularity of the platforms. Both the Wii and the DS are far and away the best-selling hardware in the current generation; developers are simply trying to get even a sliver of the very large pie. The number of titles is driven by economics. The quality (or lack thereof) is still driven by Sturgeon's Law.

That being said, I do think the Wii has some genuinely creative titles, such as the aforementioned Boom Blox and the highly underrated Elebits or Zack and Wiki: The Quest for Barbaros' Treasure. The problem is that creativity isn't always met with popular (read: financial) success.
 

BD2003

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
16,815
1
81
I don't think you can assert that limited hardware is going to drive creativity any more than you can suggest the opposite (that improved hardware will necessarily result in better games). The hardware is the hardware and the developers are going to do with it what they can within the limits of their skill, budget, and production timelines.

I suspect that the commonly-held belief that Nintendo is a dumping grounds for shovelware is less a fault of the hardware specs than the popularity of the platforms. Both the Wii and the DS are far and away the best-selling hardware in the current generation; developers are simply trying to get even a sliver of the very large pie. The number of titles is driven by economics. The quality (or lack thereof) is still driven by Sturgeon's Law.

That being said, I do think the Wii has some genuinely creative titles, such as the aforementioned Boom Blox and the highly underrated Elebits or Zack and Wiki: The Quest for Barbaros' Treasure. The problem is that creativity isn't always met with popular (read: financial) success.

Well put. But as Im understanding it, that line of reasoning is no more against having new consoles than it is for them. If the hardware is irrelevant and it's all up to skill and budget, then a good game is going to be a good game regardless of graphics. So why not have the best graphics as well then?

It would seem easy to say that the budget is the differentiating factor, that spending money on graphics is not spending it on gameplay, but I don't think its that simple. There's plenty of other places to spend money, such as marketing, which can drive sales. Good graphics can also drive sales. The budget is going to be based upon projected sales, and all of these factors interact. So just pitting graphics vs gameplay in terms of budget is taking the easy way out. It's not that simple, and even if it was, pure gameplay to the exclusion of graphic clearly is going too far...but we've already been there.

I've heard a lot of "we don't need them", but I haven't heard any convincing reasons of why we shouldn't *want* new, more powerful consoles.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,562
9
81
There's a lot of shit people want. I want to live on the Moon, in a palace, for free, and have a harem of beautiful women. That doesn't mean it's going to happen.

You think the industry is to blame then make your own. Create a new console that's more powerful than god. Create the greatest game ever, with graphics and story unmatched.

I'll be waiting.
 

BD2003

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
16,815
1
81
There's a lot of shit people want. I want to live on the Moon, in a palace, for free, and have a harem of beautiful women. That doesn't mean it's going to happen.

You think the industry is to blame then make your own. Create a new console that's more powerful than god. Create the greatest game ever, with graphics and story unmatched.

I'll be waiting.

Are you just having a rough day, or are you always like this?
 

FeathersMcGraw

Diamond Member
Oct 17, 2001
4,041
1
0
Well put. But as Im understanding it, that line of reasoning is no more against having new consoles than it is for them. If the hardware is irrelevant and it's all up to skill and budget, then a good game is going to be a good game regardless of graphics. So why not have the best graphics as well then?

Because there's a consumer cost to a new hardware revision (which, admittedly, you've already said you're willing to pay) and diminishing marginal returns for those who are already pleased with the graphical and performance characteristics of the current generation. I happen to think that Assassin's Creed (the original, mind you) is a spectacular-looking game. Does my enjoyment of it increase with double the number of polygons or vertex shaders? Probably not. Does Uncharted 2 become a better game if the game-engine cutscenes suddenly look indistinguishable from actual people?

When (if) you buy a graphics card for your PC, do you go bleeding edge SLI/Crossfire for your PC gaming? Why or why not? There's a price point at which the graphical superiority isn't worth the price premium. For all those people who say that we don't need a new console yet, it's because they're under that marginal utility threshold.

People aren't saying that they don't want prettier graphics or better-performing games. They're saying that they don't want to pay for those features yet.
 

BD2003

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
16,815
1
81
Well it seemed to me that people were saying quite directly that they don't want better graphics, because that would be at the exclusion of gameplay. But putting that aside, I see what you're saying.

I guess I'm just a little frustrated that there's no outlet to improve my console gaming experience as there is with just about every other segment of consumer electronics and computers. It just seems like an odd man out, especially when i feel like they're about due.

OTOH, I don't think people would really know what they want until they're presented an alternative. If move and kinect are that alternative they're being presented, I'm sensing a near total rejection of that alternative.

I'd find it hard to believe that if the xbox3 was sneakily announced at gamescom for $400 that people would be shitting on it. Even if it was a relatively minor upgrade. I'd bet the majority would be excited, at least I know I would. Especially if they showed some games that looked like nothing you could do on the current gen, in real time. But I may also have underestimated the level of cynicism.
 

arredondo

Senior member
Sep 17, 2004
825
37
91
It.would.get.DESTROYED on the internez if Microsoft announced a new HD console to replace the 360. And since good games take years to make these days, it immediately splits up development time and resources for the few remaining 1st/2nd party developers they have, and permanately throws off all serious development for the X360 just before they release their new sub-platform Kinect. Not to mention you force 3rd party companies to research and expand their tech abilities prematurely considering many of them barely make an annual profit on HD consoles this generation.

Japan's development alone is in TERRIBLE shape when it comes to making profitable PS3/X360 games that take full advantage of their abilities, despite the fact that there are now about 80 million units sold combined worldwide. Why in the world would they want to start all over on a PS4/X720 with exactly zero units sold? Where do they get a profit on all of this spending you want them to do? Look at Gran Turismo 5. Look at Crysis 3. There are games out and coming in the near future that take advantage of what we currently own.

Haven't you heard the phrase, "stop to smell the flowers?" Try to enjoy what we do have instead of wishing for something that won't come true for a long time. Ten years ago, were you the same way? Wishing one day you could play HD games with good texture detail instead of the low-poly 480P titles we had instead? Well now that the wish has come true, why continue to look ahead instead of being relatively happy with what we've got?
 
Last edited:

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,562
9
81
Oh, that was sarcasm then? I was under the impression you were just being a dick.

Just because it was sarcastic doesn't mean I don't want you to put your money where your mouth is.

Become a game designer, and design the perfect game under budget constraints. Clearly it's easy, and everyone else is just standing in the way of your gaming utopia.