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

Forums - Gaming - What games could not have been done last gen?

runqvist said:
cyberninja45 said:
runqvist said:
cyberninja45 said:

If the motion control was used wisely like in wii sports resort for example then that could not have been done.


If I remember correctly, originally WSR worked with a peripheral, Motion+. I don't see any reason why such peripheral could not have been used last gen.


There were no wiimotes last gen, motion+ cannot work on gamecube controllers although I don't have any links or sources to that info but you can try them for yourself and see if they are compatible.

Gee, you must feel very smart now. Good for you!

Just food for thought. Maybe, just maybe it would have been possible to make a... you know... wii mote like peripheral with wm+ specs. Dunno, maybe? Like, not impossible.

But it was not made for the cube although it might be possible who knows? You might have a case for wiiU where the controls are recycled so most of the motion based games that come out would have been possible on wii, unless nintendo makes a more complex control scheme using both the pad and wiimote.



My 3ds friendcode: 5413-0232-9676 (G-cyber)



Around the Network
F0X said:
Lots of online, motion, touchscreen, and downloadable games.


What in the downloadable game could not be done? Or is it the mere fact they are downloadable



My 3ds friendcode: 5413-0232-9676 (G-cyber)



Scoobes said:
I think when most people think of games this gen they think it's simply been an improvement in graphics without thinking about what some games are achieving beyond simply better "visuals".

For instance most games that utilise physics to any significant degree whilst still maintaining other complex factors (AI, complex animation, graphics, large number of characters on screen etc.). That would be the likes of Crysis, Lair, Gran Turismo 5, Forza3/4, Uncharted 2/3, God of War 3, Skyrim and even generic FPS' like the new Call of Duty games.

For specific examples, a number of levels in Uncharted 2/3 and God of War 3 are in complex motion whilst you play. The level in Uncharted 2 where the building is falling apart wouldn't have been possible with the sheer amount of animation, characters and real-time physics combined together.

Play the original Call of Duty and compare it to the current games and you'll realise you only ever see approx 10 allies and 10 enemies in a single map at any given time. In a few levels this was actually jarring from the action as all your allies might be dead and you end up waiting for the game to spawn more.

Lair (poor game that it was) featured numerous physics effects including real-time fluid simulations on the water that wouldn't have been possible last gen.

Skyrim tracks a ridiculously large number of objects in a huge sandbox world that eats up massive amounts of RAM that wasn't present in previous gen consoles.

Crysis acheived such a huge array of things on a technical level it's not even funny.

Even Gran Turismo and Forza, whilst similar to GT4 and Forza 2 have improved the driving physics to beyond what was possible last gen.

Furthermore, most motion control games probably couldn't be done unless there were specific peripherals for them. Even then, I think a lot of Wii and Kinect titles couldn't have been done last gen.

Lastly, networks infrastructure was poor last gen and a number of games probably wouldn't have been possible. Even the likes of Resistance 2 with its 60 player multiplayer, MAG with 256 players or even Left 4 Dead with all the innovative features it introduced.


Are the physics in GT5 really that much improved that it is impossible on last gen tech or is it just better programming and optimization by the developers?

Gow 3 does have impressive scaling when the cameras zooms in and out on the titans when you are on it, but I don't think the size of the titans would really strain a system, as I said in GOW 1 there is a level that you are on a titan, sure its not climbing olympus but I'm sure it could be made to look that way (important part being it could be made to LOOK that way).

While Uncharted does have some levels that do use physics well, I have seen the the Havok engine used on wii, and while that engine might not be as good as the one in uncharted it does pull off some very good physics for levels in game and we can all agree by now that the wii uses last gen tech.

 Kinect games would not have been possible though and probably those large online games.



My 3ds friendcode: 5413-0232-9676 (G-cyber)



cyberninja45 said:
F0X said:
Lots of online, motion, touchscreen, and downloadable games.


What in the downloadable game could not be done? Or is it the mere fact they are downloadable


Pretty much.



3DS Friend Code: 0645 - 5827 - 5788
WayForward Kickstarter is best kickstarter: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1236620800/shantae-half-genie-hero

The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword
Red Steel 2
Wii Sports Resort



Around the Network

FF XIII, half the game is HD CGI in bluray. (still awesome)



cyberninja45 said:
Scoobes said:
I think when most people think of games this gen they think it's simply been an improvement in graphics without thinking about what some games are achieving beyond simply better "visuals".

For instance most games that utilise physics to any significant degree whilst still maintaining other complex factors (AI, complex animation, graphics, large number of characters on screen etc.). That would be the likes of Crysis, Lair, Gran Turismo 5, Forza3/4, Uncharted 2/3, God of War 3, Skyrim and even generic FPS' like the new Call of Duty games.

For specific examples, a number of levels in Uncharted 2/3 and God of War 3 are in complex motion whilst you play. The level in Uncharted 2 where the building is falling apart wouldn't have been possible with the sheer amount of animation, characters and real-time physics combined together.

Play the original Call of Duty and compare it to the current games and you'll realise you only ever see approx 10 allies and 10 enemies in a single map at any given time. In a few levels this was actually jarring from the action as all your allies might be dead and you end up waiting for the game to spawn more.

Lair (poor game that it was) featured numerous physics effects including real-time fluid simulations on the water that wouldn't have been possible last gen.

Skyrim tracks a ridiculously large number of objects in a huge sandbox world that eats up massive amounts of RAM that wasn't present in previous gen consoles.

Crysis acheived such a huge array of things on a technical level it's not even funny.

Even Gran Turismo and Forza, whilst similar to GT4 and Forza 2 have improved the driving physics to beyond what was possible last gen.

Furthermore, most motion control games probably couldn't be done unless there were specific peripherals for them. Even then, I think a lot of Wii and Kinect titles couldn't have been done last gen.

Lastly, networks infrastructure was poor last gen and a number of games probably wouldn't have been possible. Even the likes of Resistance 2 with its 60 player multiplayer, MAG with 256 players or even Left 4 Dead with all the innovative features it introduced.


Are the physics in GT5 really that much improved that it is impossible on last gen tech or is it just better programming and optimization by the developers?

Gow 3 does have impressive scaling when the cameras zooms in and out on the titans when you are on it, but I don't think the size of the titans would really strain a system, as I said in GOW 1 there is a level that you are on a titan, sure its not climbing olympus but I'm sure it could be made to look that way (important part being it could be made to LOOK that way).

While Uncharted does have some levels that do use physics well, I have seen the the Havok engine used on wii, and while that engine might not be as good as the one in uncharted it does pull off some very good physics for levels in game and we can all agree by now that the wii uses last gen tech.

 Kinect games would not have been possible though and probably those large online games.

In GT5, yes, you would not be able to do that on PS2 or even X-box. If you have a look on PC they have a few racing sims that have physics engines that are probably beyond the current HD consoles (e.g. iRacing).

In God of War 3 it's not the scale I was talking about but the fact that the level is actually moving as you traverse it and fight on it. If they were to try it on last gen systems they would have had to be passive background video rather then full interactive motion. The levels on the Titan in GoW1 were virtually static; there were a few standout moments that made you realise you were on a Titan. The only game that comes close last gen is Shadow of the Colossus but even then it's only you, Agro (sometimes) and the Colossus rather then numerous enemies. Even then, the Colossi weren't a full level in their own right.

As for Uncharted 2/3, it isn't just Havok physics but a combination of Havok physics, the large scale motion I described in God of War 3 with numerous items of debris and weapons interacting to said motion on top of a number of characters (both allies and enemies) responding to the large-scale motion, each other and the Havok based flying debris (complex for animation and AI). Whilst Havok based physics has been around since last gen, physics implementations have become far more complex and interactive.



Scoobes said:
cyberninja45 said:
Scoobes said:
I think when most people think of games this gen they think it's simply been an improvement in graphics without thinking about what some games are achieving beyond simply better "visuals".

For instance most games that utilise physics to any significant degree whilst still maintaining other complex factors (AI, complex animation, graphics, large number of characters on screen etc.). That would be the likes of Crysis, Lair, Gran Turismo 5, Forza3/4, Uncharted 2/3, God of War 3, Skyrim and even generic FPS' like the new Call of Duty games.

For specific examples, a number of levels in Uncharted 2/3 and God of War 3 are in complex motion whilst you play. The level in Uncharted 2 where the building is falling apart wouldn't have been possible with the sheer amount of animation, characters and real-time physics combined together.

Play the original Call of Duty and compare it to the current games and you'll realise you only ever see approx 10 allies and 10 enemies in a single map at any given time. In a few levels this was actually jarring from the action as all your allies might be dead and you end up waiting for the game to spawn more.

Lair (poor game that it was) featured numerous physics effects including real-time fluid simulations on the water that wouldn't have been possible last gen.

Skyrim tracks a ridiculously large number of objects in a huge sandbox world that eats up massive amounts of RAM that wasn't present in previous gen consoles.

Crysis acheived such a huge array of things on a technical level it's not even funny.

Even Gran Turismo and Forza, whilst similar to GT4 and Forza 2 have improved the driving physics to beyond what was possible last gen.

Furthermore, most motion control games probably couldn't be done unless there were specific peripherals for them. Even then, I think a lot of Wii and Kinect titles couldn't have been done last gen.

Lastly, networks infrastructure was poor last gen and a number of games probably wouldn't have been possible. Even the likes of Resistance 2 with its 60 player multiplayer, MAG with 256 players or even Left 4 Dead with all the innovative features it introduced.


Are the physics in GT5 really that much improved that it is impossible on last gen tech or is it just better programming and optimization by the developers?

Gow 3 does have impressive scaling when the cameras zooms in and out on the titans when you are on it, but I don't think the size of the titans would really strain a system, as I said in GOW 1 there is a level that you are on a titan, sure its not climbing olympus but I'm sure it could be made to look that way (important part being it could be made to LOOK that way).

While Uncharted does have some levels that do use physics well, I have seen the the Havok engine used on wii, and while that engine might not be as good as the one in uncharted it does pull off some very good physics for levels in game and we can all agree by now that the wii uses last gen tech.

 Kinect games would not have been possible though and probably those large online games.

In GT5, yes, you would not be able to do that on PS2 or even X-box. If you have a look on PC they have a few racing sims that have physics engines that are probably beyond the current HD consoles (e.g. iRacing).

In God of War 3 it's not the scale I was talking about but the fact that the level is actually moving as you traverse it and fight on it. If they were to try it on last gen systems they would have had to be passive background video rather then full interactive motion. The levels on the Titan in GoW1 were virtually static; there were a few standout moments that made you realise you were on a Titan. The only game that comes close last gen is Shadow of the Colossus but even then it's only you, Agro (sometimes) and the Colossus rather then numerous enemies. Even then, the Colossi weren't a full level in their own right.

As for Uncharted 2/3, it isn't just Havok physics but a combination of Havok physics, the large scale motion I described in God of War 3 with numerous items of debris and weapons interacting to said motion on top of a number of characters (both allies and enemies) responding to the large-scale motion, each other and the Havok based flying debris (complex for animation and AI). Whilst Havok based physics has been around since last gen, physics implementations have become far more complex and interactive.

Hmmm I can understand the GOW and Uncharted as some of the things might be hard to replicate on older hardware without some good developer tricks. But GT5 I think is still somewhat debatable as I personally never felt the gran turismo series ever really took into consideration REAL world physics.



My 3ds friendcode: 5413-0232-9676 (G-cyber)



cyberninja45 said:

Hmmm I can understand the GOW and Uncharted as some of the things might be hard to replicate on older hardware without some good developer tricks. But GT5 I think is still somewhat debatable as I personally never felt the gran turismo series ever really took into consideration REAL world physics.

Seriously? The whole series has been about nothing but simulating real-life driving (only limited by the hardware of the generation). When the game came out it was one of the most realistic drving sims around (and still is), realistically simulating suspension, drive train, tyres, track undulations, road surface, body shape, weight distribution, airflow... you get the idea. Put the game onto professional driving physics and it's very similar to the real thing.

The GT academy wouldn't make professional racing drivers out of gamers without having a realistic physics engine.



Scoobes said:
cyberninja45 said:

Hmmm I can understand the GOW and Uncharted as some of the things might be hard to replicate on older hardware without some good developer tricks. But GT5 I think is still somewhat debatable as I personally never felt the gran turismo series ever really took into consideration REAL world physics.

Seriously? The whole series has been about nothing but simulating real-life driving (only limited by the hardware of the generation). When the game came out it was one of the most realistic drving sims around (and still is), realistically simulating suspension, drive train, tyres, track undulations, road surface, body shape, weight distribution, airflow... you get the idea. Put the game onto professional driving physics and it's very similar to the real thing.

The GT academy wouldn't make professional racing drivers out of gamers without having a realistic physics engine.


While it might get things like suspension right I still don't think GT takes into consideration things like gravity, if you drive a real car at over 120kmh (and most cars in GT easily do over this) and hit another car or even the slight mound at the side of the track that are in most GT games the results would not be as pleasant as in gran turismo, I don't think the car hardly ever leaves the ground much in the GT series and when they do it looks floaty more like a glitch .

And if doesn't take into consideration gravity, then realistically speaking other stuff like weight distribution would be off.



My 3ds friendcode: 5413-0232-9676 (G-cyber)