Forums - Gaming Discussion - How much do you care about the graphical leap between consoles at this point?

Obviously, Graphics can always be better as many here have stated. That said, Generation leaps are much smaller now than they were in the past. Seeing footage of Xbox Series X gameplay for example. It looks amazing, but it really isn't that much more impressive than the Xbox One X. If you compare the PS1 to the PS2, THAT was a full generation leap. But from what we've seen from next generation, it's looking like we'll just be going from low settings to high settings. Better, but not earth shatteringly superior.



Around the Network

Well, I for one still care about the graphical leap from Switch to Nintendo's next gen console.



It depends on how much the company is asking me to spend on the hardware...



The_Liquid_Laser said:
Shadow1980 said:
I do.

There's still so much that can still be done when it comes to game visuals. Better lighting. Better draw distances and less noticeable object/texture popping/"LoD-ing." Better animations. Better textures. Just better quality all around, and running at better frame rates and higher resolutions than what was the norm just a decade ago.

I remember a lot of people thinking this gen wasn't going to be much of an improvement over last gen. They were wrong. Sure, some games leave a lot to be desired even by the standards of this generation, but the best-looking games of this generation blow away even the best-looking games of last generation. And it's only going to keep getting better.

When it comes to gameplay, things are mostly just a series of general refinements (most old 3D games had lousy controls and bad cameras, something that's much more rare these days) and games coming up with specific gimmicks to distinguish themselves. We're still basically playing just the same kinds of games we did 20 years ago. The last time we saw a truly major leap forward in game design was the switch from 2D to 3D. Video games have as a medium been marked by evolution, not by frequent radical advances that fundamentally reshape the medium itself. And that's perfectly fine. I'm honestly cool with each successive generation having been basically "better graphics boxes." There's no need to reinvent the wheel.

(Referring to the bold) I have to disagree.  Almost every generation sees signficant avenues of gameplay open up, with generation 8 being the exception.  Generation 6 was the first time we could have open world action games like GTA 3 and Shenmue.  PS1 had a lot of limitations in the action/speed deptartment, and N64 had limitations on game size.  But Gen 6 games could handle both just fine, so we get open world action games.  In Gen 7, motion controls were one obvious new type of gameplay.  However the more important thing was that the internet became commonly used in games.  Mario Kart Wii was the first time I could play Mario Kart on the internet for example.  Internet gaming allowed new types of gaming on consoles.

But Generation 8 really had nothing.  It was just like Generation 7 but with better graphics.  Nothing new.  This is not rule.  It's the exception.  But Generation 8 was the most recent generation and it offered nothing new.  We expect nothing new now.  It's like we expect we're going to be bored at this point.  It's kind of sad.

Gen 7 was also impressive with how many NPCs can be on screen at once. Why Dead Rising was so impressive. The other thing was massive set pieces like so many shooters that gen had massive giant enemies detroying a city. Bullestorm and Killzone 2 and Gears of War all did this.



Bite my shiny metal Cockpit!

The gap is still huge. I recently played both Middle-earth: Shadow of... games on Xbox One and the difference is night and day.
The first being a cross-gen title is immediately noticeable. 900p resolution, lower texture quality, poor face models (except for maybe the main character), empty environments, poor LOD etc.
The second runs at 4k on X1X and features lush and diverse environments and improves upon everything else and yet it still doesn't belong into the top tier of visually impressive games on current gen consoles.



Around the Network

There was a big difference in games like the last of us between PS3 and PS4 version, HUGE difference, especially if you played the PS4/ps4 pro version in a 4K HDR tv.

Other notable mentions are Metal Gear Solid V, The evil within 1 ps3/360 to the evil within 2 ps4/Xbone.

So yeah, it will be a very noticeable difference in ps5/x series X compared to the current consoles.



Mar1217 said:
DonFerrari said:

Talk what you want but even games like Killzone Shadow Fall and Ryse of Rome showed the graphical jump in a very easy to see way, Infamous Second Son is even better at it.

Perhaps you think like that because you weren't actively seeing the release of the systems like PS2 and PS3 when the gap between end gen PS1 games like FFIX jump to launch titles of PS2 or GoW2 on PS2 to launch titles on PS3 weren't as massive as you would believe when trying to compare launch title of PS1 with end of life PS2, etc. Because sometimes looking behind it looks different than what it really was.

Boy, if you think the jump between FF-9 and FF-10 wasn't impressive as to what they could already achieve early on then, I think this line of thinking is mute in the water.

Tell me of a game that could hope to match the graphical and atmospheric tension of REmake on the GameCube during the end of the PS1 era without having to look like a muddy pixel puddle with some ugly flat faced poorly textured model.

Sorry but current gens are not fighting in the same way to make you look at the advancement they've done anymore. It isn't a "in your face shock" .

That simply how I see it though. Subjective as it may be.

Burnout 2 on GC.  Looks just as good today as it was back then.  Oh wait PS1 era.  That's not fair.



And this is one of the problems microsoft and Sony will have if they don't have next gen exclusives within the first year. A very slow uptick driven by only hardware enthusiasts (like Pro and X1X) Its looking like MS won't have any series X exclsuives based on their words so the ball is really in Sony's court.



twintail said:
While graphics don't make r break a game for me (unless performance sucks), they are honestly a big thing when it comes to showing off a new gen.

I also disagree that diminishing returns is a thing. When Sony showed off Killzone ShadowFall, it was most definitely a massive leap in what we had.
I feel it will the the same, in relation to the SSD and just having more things happening.

When they showed it off, I didn't feel it, as the streaming quality was not quite optimal... When I got my hands on it it felt instantly that I plopped into next-gen. It was simply miles ahead of anything I had seen on the PS3 and the same is true for Ryse. I'm pretty much certain that's how we will feel when we get the first next-gen games as well. There are plenty of things to be improved technically and stylistically

And then there are the non-graphical aspects. Man, I used to be impressed by the crowds in Dead Rising on the 360. Then we had AC: Unity for the PS4/One. Can't wait what they will do on next-gen systems :D



The_Liquid_Laser said:
Shadow1980 said:
I do.

There's still so much that can still be done when it comes to game visuals. Better lighting. Better draw distances and less noticeable object/texture popping/"LoD-ing." Better animations. Better textures. Just better quality all around, and running at better frame rates and higher resolutions than what was the norm just a decade ago.

I remember a lot of people thinking this gen wasn't going to be much of an improvement over last gen. They were wrong. Sure, some games leave a lot to be desired even by the standards of this generation, but the best-looking games of this generation blow away even the best-looking games of last generation. And it's only going to keep getting better.

When it comes to gameplay, things are mostly just a series of general refinements (most old 3D games had lousy controls and bad cameras, something that's much more rare these days) and games coming up with specific gimmicks to distinguish themselves. We're still basically playing just the same kinds of games we did 20 years ago. The last time we saw a truly major leap forward in game design was the switch from 2D to 3D. Video games have as a medium been marked by evolution, not by frequent radical advances that fundamentally reshape the medium itself. And that's perfectly fine. I'm honestly cool with each successive generation having been basically "better graphics boxes." There's no need to reinvent the wheel.

(Referring to the bold) I have to disagree.  Almost every generation sees signficant avenues of gameplay open up, with generation 8 being the exception.  Generation 6 was the first time we could have open world action games like GTA 3 and Shenmue.  PS1 had a lot of limitations in the action/speed deptartment, and N64 had limitations on game size.  But Gen 6 games could handle both just fine, so we get open world action games.  In Gen 7, motion controls were one obvious new type of gameplay.  However the more important thing was that the internet became commonly used in games.  Mario Kart Wii was the first time I could play Mario Kart on the internet for example.  Internet gaming allowed new types of gaming on consoles.

But Generation 8 really had nothing.  It was just like Generation 7 but with better graphics.  Nothing new.  This is not rule.  It's the exception.  But Generation 8 was the most recent generation and it offered nothing new.  We expect nothing new now.  It's like we expect we're going to be bored at this point.  It's kind of sad.

Yes, but graphics do add up to making a better game. Processor limitations did come into play this generation, that's a fact. But man I remember booting up The Order 1886 and my jaws dropped. I know that not many people loved or even liked that game, but it blew me out of the water. I think gen 9 will actually be the generation where the lack of loading time, physics, and AI evolution will bring a whole lot to the table. 

Oh, and let's not forget that generation 8 was pretty heavy on how multiplayer evolved in games and how we consume them. It's not a very visible leap, but a leap none the less.