I am of the belief that it will not only be because of game development costs, but of companies having continuous losses. How much do they expect people to pay for a console today? Would anyone buy that $599 console? Perhaps some people, but not a mass of people, will investors continue to tolerate Sony's massive losses (which is why I believe they have refused to drop price on the Vita). If the graphical leap is not as great as some are expecting, the console price will not be as high, meaning a lower retail price and the ability to still earn a profit. Also I am sure in terms of MS they will standardize the Kinect with their next console, something they currently charge $149 for separately, what will that do to the cost of a console? I know Microsoft has buckets of money, but if their focus has become the ultimate reinvention of WebTV they will not need that great a leap to keep that in play.

Confident as always, but i think MS will be the topdog next gen. But i asl odoubt we will have a real difference in graphics in the next years, 1080 and 60 fps withh MSAA is still out of question as standard on cnsoles in my opinion, if anything i think devs will stick to 720p and atually make some decent games technically speaking on this res (60fps, no sub 720p, better draw disatance, MAA, better effects). If this happens then the WiiU will be in a very good spot when 720/Ps4 arrives, if they actual set 1080 as standard then it will be a wii again.

Deoz said: Confident as always, but i think MS will be the topdog next gen. But i asl odoubt we will have a real difference in graphics in the next years, 1080 and 60 fps withh MSAA is still out of question as standard on cnsoles in my opinion, if anything i think devs will stick to 720p and atually make some decent games technically speaking on this res (60fps, no sub 720p, better draw disatance, MAA, better effects). If this happens then the WiiU will be in a very good spot when 720/Ps4 arrives, if they actual set 1080 as standard then it will be a wii again.

Except the Wii U is capable of 1080p, just launch games were targeting 720.

jlrx said: Deoz said: Confident as always, but i think MS will be the topdog next gen. But i asl odoubt we will have a real difference in graphics in the next years, 1080 and 60 fps withh MSAA is still out of question as standard on cnsoles in my opinion, if anything i think devs will stick to 720p and atually make some decent games technically speaking on this res (60fps, no sub 720p, better draw disatance, MAA, better effects). If this happens then the WiiU will be in a very good spot when 720/Ps4 arrives, if they actual set 1080 as standard then it will be a wii again. Except the Wii U is capable of 1080p, just launch games were targeting 720.

Yet im sure they wont have the x4MSAA or stick to a constant 60fps if that's the case.

It will be like having current games in higher resolution. No real graphical update, but not a necesity

Deoz said: Confident as always, but i think MS will be the topdog next gen. But i asl odoubt we will have a real difference in graphics in the next years, 1080 and 60 fps withh MSAA is still out of question as standard on cnsoles in my opinion, if anything i think devs will stick to 720p and atually make some decent games technically speaking on this res (60fps, no sub 720p, better draw disatance, MAA, better effects). If this happens then the WiiU will be in a very good spot when 720/Ps4 arrives, if they actual set 1080 as standard then it will be a wii again.

No if devs pick 1080p as standard it will be better for the Wii U as devs can lower the performance required by a lot by just lowering resolution. If Devs go for 720p it means that they will be using much more complex effects etc and desiging the games visuals arround those effects (things like realtime global illumination) which will make it harder to port down. That is why the first games of a generation usally look like last gen games at a higher res because that is the easiest thing to scale. 

Jay520 said: Just because the PS4 & Nextbox will have much higher graphical capabilities than their respective predecessars, that doesn't mean developers will be forced to utuilize these capabilities to their fullest potential. There can still be fair amount of developers who decide to settle for using say 50% of the console's power, which I suspect will be quite sufficient for most gamers. Developers will have access to more graphical power, but they won't be required to use it. Even this generation, many developers have been settling for decent graphics. A lot of developers aren't even capable of utilizing most of the 360's & PS3's power, nor do they care. Gamers have shown that they are more than fine with Call of Duty-like graphics, which I suspect doesn't push current gen consoles much. I suspect it'll become standard next gen for developers to not even try to push the consoles much at all. I'd be happy if they made games as weak as current gen games & I'm sure many others feel the same.

Jay, I don't agree with the idea your 1st paragraph argument is going towards.

Though I agree having higher graphical capabilities doesn't force devs to create such content, what it does do is raise the bar, create a cut-throat market where the weaker devs have the low end of the stick of grphics reasons, as it creates an environment where consumers hunger over the cutting-edge.

It's mostly counter-productive to gaming in general...

Also, having a weaker console creates a cap, above which devs can't go even if they wanted to. Sadly, devs didn't agree with that and Nintendo should have listened because 3rd party support IS important, so thankfully the Wii U is a compromise between Nintendo's philosophy and 3rd party demands. Imho it will be the PS2 of next generation, i.e. the weaker one with just enough edge to get the most support. That's what the Wii should have been.

 

The idea of paragraph 2 is more in line with what I just said, but I don't really agree. Most top games this gen, even COD, had top graphics.

zarx said: Deoz said: Confident as always, but i think MS will be the topdog next gen. But i asl odoubt we will have a real difference in graphics in the next years, 1080 and 60 fps withh MSAA is still out of question as standard on cnsoles in my opinion, if anything i think devs will stick to 720p and atually make some decent games technically speaking on this res (60fps, no sub 720p, better draw disatance, MAA, better effects). If this happens then the WiiU will be in a very good spot when 720/Ps4 arrives, if they actual set 1080 as standard then it will be a wii again. No if devs pick 1080p as standard it will be better for the Wii U as devs can lower the performance required by a lot by just lowering resolution. If Devs go for 720p it means that they will be using much more complex effects etc and desiging the games visuals arround those effects (things like realtime global illumination) which will make it harder to port down. That is why the first games of a generation usally look like last gen games at a higher res because that is the easiest thing to scale.

Well, im giving the wiiU the benfit of doubt, but doesnt looks like it will be such a problem even for wiiU since it does some really nice things already at launch, i dont think we will see also tesselation or anything beyond that, i belive they will be at most a mid tier pc of today.

happydolphin said: Jay520 said: Just because the PS4 & Nextbox will have much higher graphical capabilities than their respective predecessars, that doesn't mean developers will be forced to utuilize these capabilities to their fullest potential. There can still be fair amount of developers who decide to settle for using say 50% of the console's power, which I suspect will be quite sufficient for most gamers. Developers will have access to more graphical power, but they won't be required to use it. Even this generation, many developers have been settling for decent graphics. A lot of developers aren't even capable of utilizing most of the 360's & PS3's power, nor do they care. Gamers have shown that they are more than fine with Call of Duty-like graphics, which I suspect doesn't push current gen consoles much. I suspect it'll become standard next gen for developers to not even try to push the consoles much at all. I'd be happy if they made games as weak as current gen games & I'm sure many others feel the same. Jay, I don't agree with the idea your 1st paragraph argument is going towards. Though I agree having higher graphical capabilities doesn't force devs to create such content, what it does do is raise the bar, create a cut-throat market where the weaker devs have the low end of the stick of grphics reasons, as it creates an environment where consumers hunger over the cutting-edge. It's mostly counter-productive to gaming in general... Also, having a weaker console creates a cap, above which devs can't go even if they wanted to. Sadly, devs didn't agree with that and Nintendo should have listened because 3rd party support IS important, so thankfully the Wii U is a compromise between Nintendo's philosophy and 3rd party demands. Imho it will be the PS2 of next generation, i.e. the weaker one with just enough edge to get the most support. That's what the Wii should have been.   The idea of paragraph 2 is more in line with what I just said, but I don't really agree. Most top games this gen, even COD, had top graphics.

I don't predict an environment where "consumers hunger over the cutting-edge." If that were the case, then games like Minecraft wouldn't be topping the Xbla chartz. Or maybe Journey wouldn't be the best selling PSN title. The Wii as a console wouldn't have been the best selling console of the generation.. And to a lesser extent, CoD probably wouldn't be the best selling HD title. The majority of gamers, casual and hardcore alike, just want to play fun games. I expect developers will realize this & we'll see a lot of developers won't slave focus on graphics so much. So no, I don't think the 'bar' will be raised so high that it forces developers to have a minimum level of graphics in order to be successful. Of course, this is all skepticism & we'll never know how the market will react to certain changes.

Jay520 said: I don't predict an environment where "consumers hunger over the cutting-edge." If that were the case, then games like Minecraft wouldn't be topping the Xbla chartz. Or maybe Journey wouldn't be the best selling PSN title. The Wii as a console wouldn't have been the best selling console of the generation..

These are all part of a separate market. I was talking about full-content games (not XBLA or PSN) on the HD twins in contrast with the Wii. The Wii capped it, so that business dynamics doesn't apply there. Same goes for XBLA or PSN.

And to a lesser extent, CoD probably wouldn't be the best selling HD title.

CoD has top grade graphics. It's pretty necessary for the consumers of it, otherwise the Wii version would have likely sold just as well. The crowd that wanted CoD wanted top graphics imho. The two (its graphics and its popularity) go hand in hand.

The majority of gamers, casual and hardcore alike, just want to play fun games. I expect developers will realize this & we'll see a lot of developers won't slave focus on graphics so much.

After a hard lessoned learnt, yes. It took a gen and maybe more of the dynamics I was talking about for devs to understand that.

So no, I don't think the 'bar' will be raised so high that it forces developers to have a minimum level of graphics in order to be successful.

It's already happened. Lots of companies went belly-up due to it also. The only question remaining is, have the surviving ones learnt, or will they need another such gen to understand. If so, why not just lower the bar and keep things in their time.

Of course, this is all skepticism & we'll never know how the market will react to certain changes.

Of course.

lol I said skepticism, I meant to say speculation. But you already replied now.