By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - The standard next gen game's graphics won't be vastly superior to the best of today.

 

The standard game of next gen will be ______ the best of today's games.

Equal to 10 5.49%
 
Marginally superior to 40 21.98%
 
Moderately superior to 90 49.45%
 
Vastly superior to 35 19.23%
 
Inferior to 7 3.85%
 
Total:182
the_dengle on 03 June 2012

Agreed. Most games will look on-par with current-gen games; a small percentage will get the production values required to truely impress.

Guess who hit the nail on the head with this one?

 

"...we are aiming to make a system which shall not be forced into competing with the others where the contenders can fight only with massive developer resources and long development times as their weapons. ...in some software areas, we need to be engaged in the power games. ...When it is necessary, we do not hesitate to roll out our resources."

-Satoru Iwata on Wii U

 

Miyamoto also said a while ago (in so many words) that most of Nintendo's software wouldn't really push the hardware's capabilities; those efforts would be saved for the games that are expected to impress, like Zelda and Metroid.

Not only is this good for Nintendo, it's good for third parties on the same console -- a smaller studio can make games that look as good as or even better than most of Nintendo's first-party titles without having to compete financially with them.

Basically, Nintendo isn't going to play along with the development cost arms race, which is good for everyone.



Around the Network
shinhawk on 03 June 2012

I doubt there will be much of a difference in graphics. There's only so much detail our eyes can really capture. Marginally superior in my opinion.



“I want to live fully, very intensely. I would never want to live partially, suffering from illness or injury. If I ever happen to have an accident that eventually costs my life, I hope it happens in one instant.” - Ayrton Senna

Jay520 on 03 June 2012
the_dengle said:

Agreed. Most games will look on-par with current-gen games; a small percentage will get the production values required to truely impress.

Guess who hit the nail on the head with this one?

 

"...we are aiming to make a system which shall not be forced into competing with the others where the contenders can fight only with massive developer resources and long development times as their weapons. ...in some software areas, we need to be engaged in the power games. ...When it is necessary, we do not hesitate to roll out our resources."

-Satoru Iwata on Wii U

 

Miyamoto also said a while ago (in so many words) that most of Nintendo's software wouldn't really push the hardware's capabilities; those efforts would be saved for the games that are expected to impress, like Zelda and Metroid.

Not only is this good for Nintendo, it's good for third parties on the same console -- a smaller studio can make games that look as good as or even better than most of Nintendo's first-party titles without having to compete financially with them.

Basically, Nintendo isn't going to play along with the development cost arms race, which is good for everyone.



that sounds like a good strategy by Nintendo. The Wii U is believed to be considerably more powerful than current generation consoles. So I think the number of developers who are able AND willing to make a game considerably more powerful than the Wii U will be quite low.

Demensha on 03 June 2012

The next gen will allow current lazy developers make games of upper tier games found today with minimum cost requirements. It will also allow developers whom wish to stand out visually the ability to do so.

Let's not forget 512meg of ram to 1.5-2 isn't really that much, when comparing lower resolution textures to full native 1920x1080. Better animations, more

Me personally, I see next gen looking like battlefield 3 on max (1920x1080) 30fps on wii u and 60 on 720/ps4.
When both the ps3/360 released . their respective custom gpus still had yet to launch, even if just a few months later. If current rumors are true(mid6/7 series ) the next gen gpus will be 2+ years out on the market by then. Yes they will be custom variations of those chips but still based on older technology, which is good for us and our pockets.

If it can do witcher enhanced version, bf3, and skyrim based off high end pc versions I would be happy.



happydolphin on 04 June 2012
greenmedic88 said:
Naturally, the ceiling on the next gen of console hardware will be higher by way of loosening up constraints imposed by current hardware, namely limited memory.

By that merit alone, ignoring the given advances in processing power and in GPU capabilities, next gen consoles should run closer to the typical decent spec gaming PC rig of today (but not of 2-3 years from now) in terms of frame rates (60fps+), resolution (1920x1080) and API effects (DX11). These are almost universally accepted as the "great advances" PC gaming offers over console gaming (UI/M+KB is simply a preference), and in just about every case, these are the exact (read: only) advantages of gaming on any decently built gaming PC.

Personally, I'd be okay with the above plus whatever individual advantages each platform brings to the table (Wii U tablet features, Xbox Durango's Kinect 2.0), with 1920x1080 at a locked 60fps at bare minimum, allowing for the double resolution required for stereoscopic 3D enabled games. If we're still seeing games natively rendering at 1280x720 or 30fps frame rates, then I'm not really sure consoles will have actually been ready for the next gen performance offered by the modest gaming PCs of today.

Beyond the hardware, visuals will be dictated by next gen gaming engines and how well they are optimized to run on next gen console hardware. Assuming engines like UE4 run smoothly on next gen consoles, by that merit alone, the same franchises that were running on UE3 today will look better when developed for UE4.

Recognize that in game development the rule is not "more resources = more cost" but more resources means less time spent optimizing once programmers are familiar with the software engines and hardware capabilities and idiosyncrasies which should be minimized next gen (no more CBE, let's reinvent the wheel sheenanigans). At worst, artists will be making higher res textures (high res textures typically already exist and are scaled down during the process of development) and higher poly count models and characters (high res versions of both already exist almost universally in any given project, which are then scaled down during the process of development).

It goes without saying that by mere merit of being "next gen" games, they will not be longer and larger than the current gen as it's not as though having better hardware to work with suddenly means "let's spend more time in development making longer and larger games."

If nothing else, next gen consoles should help facilitate streamlined development pipelines, allowing for faster and more efficient development.

Next gen, tools (like UE4) will leverage resources and empower teams to build larger and deeper worlds at lesser costs. That's what I wanted to say, and this post gives the details.



Around the Network
VetteDude on 04 June 2012

Consoles suck because of no RAM. Go play a PC game maxed out, then a PS3 game. Besides lower resolution (makes everything blurry), console games have tons of texture pop in from the horribly low draw distance. Needs more RAM



Lostplanet22 on 04 June 2012

Some people call Battlefield 3 PC and Battlefield 3 consoles a big difference in graphics...

Yeah their will be a big leap for me :).



 

endimion on 04 June 2012

there are so much more than graphic to improve upon.... you could have the same leap you had between xb and 360 or ps2 ps3 without touching or improving much the graphic part of it... ai's, animation, physics, number of simultaneous player... sound quality and localisation/spatialisation.... improved tracking etc...and to me games need a serious overhaul in that sector way before touching graphics much especially with physics and ai



StokedUp on 04 June 2012

they will be better but they dont really need to be. what i'd perfer is just far superior running performance. I'd like to see 100 of people of the screen at once and the consoles have no problem dealing with this. Id like a game where you go into a medieval style epic battle and have 100s of people battling it out and the conoles doit with ease, no slow down, no screen tearing just pure smooth running.



PSN ID: Stokesy 

Add me if you want but let me know youre from this website

endimion on 04 June 2012
StokedUp said:
they will be better but they dont really need to be. what i'd perfer is just far superior running performance. I'd like to see 100 of people of the screen at once and the consoles have no problem dealing with this. Id like a game where you go into a medieval style epic battle and have 100s of people battling it out and the conoles doit with ease, no slow down, no screen tearing just pure smooth running.


that even though when you look how people play mmos now a day i doubt they would dusciplined and organised enough to play a real war game where most of the characters are human controled on such a scale.... that'd be bad ass though.... imagine redoing the persian/greek conquest... gengis khan rein of terror.... napoleon megalo mania.... that'd be badass....