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

Forums - Sony Discussion - As a PS/Xbox gamer would you settle for downgraded graphics...

 

The answer is...

Yes, graphics have gotten... 26 63.41%
 
No, I want better graphics 7 17.07%
 
I would but I'd be bummed out. 5 12.20%
 
Comments. 3 7.32%
 
Total:41

You will get diminishing returns on visuals for a $750 consoles and eventually $70+ games and you will learn to like it, lol.

PS6 will likely be $700+ for the "real" version (they'll likely have a $500-$550 lower end model for the poors with heavily stripped down hardware) and it will probably have cross-gen games with the PS5 for like more than half of its product cycle because very few studios will be able to afford pushing the envelope 2x-3x further as that generally will come will much higher development cost and development time. 

Time of development for these games is an equally big problem, we're getting to the point where maybe a big studio can make one entire big game per 7-8 year generation. 

GTA6 has taken how many years to make? When is the next Skyrim/Elder Scrolls going to be ready? Any time this decade? Maybe? 

This is like binging a TV series in a weekend and then realizing the next season is 2-3 years away except even worse as games are now starting to take a decade for the next installment. 

Last edited by Soundwave - on 13 October 2024

Around the Network
Soundwave said:

You will get diminishing returns on visuals for a $750 consoles and eventually $70+ games and you will learn to like it, lol.

PS6 will likely be $700+ for the "real" version (they'll likely have a $500-$550 lower end model for the poors with heavily stripped down hardware) and it will probably have cross-gen games with the PS5 for like more than half of its product cycle because very few studios will be able to afford pushing the envelope 2x-3x further as that generally will come will much higher development cost and development time. 

Time of development for these games is an equally big problem, we're getting to the point where maybe a big studio can make one entire big game per 7-8 year generation. 

GTA6 has taken how many years to make? When is the next Skyrim/Elder Scrolls going to be ready? Any time this decade? Maybe? 

This is like binging a TV series in a weekend and then realizing the next season is 2-3 years away except even worse as games are now starting to take a decade for the next installment. 

The issue with the next Skyrim / GTA isn't that it takes a long time. It's that it's more profitable to milk them for as long as possible. As long as people keep (re-)buying Skyrim and GTA5, why release the next one... Keep re-releasing it, add DLC, MTX, GAAS instead of making a sequel.

Astrobot took 3 years to make
Spiderman 2, also 3 years
Ratchet and Clank Rift Apart about 4 years with zero crunch

Of course those weren't made to be milked for 15 years, which GTA6 is and likely the next Skyrim as well.

Plus hopefully there won't be a pandemic when the next generation comes along!



SvennoJ said:
Soundwave said:

You will get diminishing returns on visuals for a $750 consoles and eventually $70+ games and you will learn to like it, lol.

PS6 will likely be $700+ for the "real" version (they'll likely have a $500-$550 lower end model for the poors with heavily stripped down hardware) and it will probably have cross-gen games with the PS5 for like more than half of its product cycle because very few studios will be able to afford pushing the envelope 2x-3x further as that generally will come will much higher development cost and development time. 

Time of development for these games is an equally big problem, we're getting to the point where maybe a big studio can make one entire big game per 7-8 year generation. 

GTA6 has taken how many years to make? When is the next Skyrim/Elder Scrolls going to be ready? Any time this decade? Maybe? 

This is like binging a TV series in a weekend and then realizing the next season is 2-3 years away except even worse as games are now starting to take a decade for the next installment. 

The issue with the next Skyrim / GTA isn't that it takes a long time. It's that it's more profitable to milk them for as long as possible. As long as people keep (re-)buying Skyrim and GTA5, why release the next one... Keep re-releasing it, add DLC, MTX, GAAS instead of making a sequel.

Astrobot took 3 years to make
Spiderman 2, also 3 years
Ratchet and Clank Rift Apart about 4 years with zero crunch

Of course those weren't made to be milked for 15 years, which GTA6 is and likely the next Skyrim as well.

Plus hopefully there won't be a pandemic when the next generation comes along!

I wouldn't use Skyrim as a comparison here. Active development on that game ended a while a ago, as did a huge portion of its sales. Since Skyrim Bethesday has released 4 Major Open world games, so it's truly just a case of the developer spreading their resources amongst different IP. If Starfield/Fallout didn't exist, we'd likely be playing the Skyrim follow up around 2016





Soundwave said:

(...)

Time of development for these games is an equally big problem, we're getting to the point where maybe a big studio can make one entire big game per 7-8 year generation. 

(...)

Sounds like it's about time for a different take on a new generation.

Instead of relying on more CPU/GPU performance and RAM, maybe companies should focus on efficiency and other things, like

  • Easier to repair systems
  • Way lower energy usage (sub 200 watts total?)
  • Much improved tools and functionalities to help decrease development times
  • Focus on "software" improvements over "hardware" improvements for additional performance
  • Getting those systems smaller again
  • Getting those systems cheaper again
  • ...

I would like such a directions for once.



I watched the creator of Fallout, Tim Caine talk about why games are taking so long to create. He said it's the devs themselves padding time estimates and having too many meetings. He's noticed in the last 10 years. I know it's only one example and not indicative of the industry as a whole but he may be onto something, too much hummin and hawing over what to do and if decision paralysis and not enough time to get stuff done. He had one example where he pitched a couple of lines of code to be altered and was given an estimate of 4 weeks on a job he thought would be an hour and finally managed to get the devs down to 2 weeks.

Last edited by LegitHyperbole - on 14 October 2024

Around the Network
LegitHyperbole said:

I watched the creator of Fallout talk about why games are taking so long to create. He said it's the devs themselves padding time estimates and having too many meetings. He's noticed in the last 10 years. I know it's only one example and not indicative of the industry as a whole but he may be onto something, too much hummin and hawing over what to do and if decision paralysis and not enough time to get stuff done. He had one example where he pitched a couple of lines of code to be altered and was given an estimate of 4 weeks on a job he thought would be an hour and finally managed to get the devs down to 2 weeks.

That's pretty recognizable. The bigger the teams, the more bosses, the more people want to have a say in every little detail.

When I started work we were a team of two to four. Half hour to max and hour meeting once a week.

Ffwd a few decades, company grown to over 1,000 people, different teams working together on the same projects. Daily meetings, sometimes multiple a day, any changes need to be submitted and pushed up the chain for approval. Every change/fix make a risk assessment, review, notes for test department and a whole lot of email traffic.

What was once a quick easy fix, now could be even be postponed for after release if it was within 2 months of the next release window.
We went to the extreme in the beginning though, re-compiling the code after literally making last minute changes and burning a new disc while the boss was holding up the courier, who was waiting for the disc, to be rushed to the manufacturer to be mass duplicated.


More cooks in the kitchen doesn't necessarily make the work go faster.

Problem is no one has a full overview of all the code anymore. It's too much nowadays for one person to say, this might affect that component. Like using some more memory or CPU cycles in one place could break something else.

And of course, more people, harder to reach agreement over everything. Maybe games need to follow the movie industry more, one director, basically a dictator instead of working by committee. And then you get unique games like Death Stranding and Detroit become Human. (And also TLG that took forever to come out as the director's vision was too ambitious for the ps3, no compromise, postpone until the HW can run it) Those games are polarizing though, and the industry wants to make money from all, so making games by committee for all gamers is the directive from the share holders. And then we end up with jack of all trades, master of none, padded games.




SvennoJ said:
LegitHyperbole said:

I watched the creator of Fallout talk about why games are taking so long to create. He said it's the devs themselves padding time estimates and having too many meetings. He's noticed in the last 10 years. I know it's only one example and not indicative of the industry as a whole but he may be onto something, too much hummin and hawing over what to do and if decision paralysis and not enough time to get stuff done. He had one example where he pitched a couple of lines of code to be altered and was given an estimate of 4 weeks on a job he thought would be an hour and finally managed to get the devs down to 2 weeks.

That's pretty recognizable. The bigger the teams, the more bosses, the more people want to have a say in every little detail.

When I started work we were a team of two to four. Half hour to max and hour meeting once a week.

Ffwd a few decades, company grown to over 1,000 people, different teams working together on the same projects. Daily meetings, sometimes multiple a day, any changes need to be submitted and pushed up the chain for approval. Every change/fix make a risk assessment, review, notes for test department and a whole lot of email traffic.

What was once a quick easy fix, now could be even be postponed for after release if it was within 2 months of the next release window.
We went to the extreme in the beginning though, re-compiling the code after literally making last minute changes and burning a new disc while the boss was holding up the courier, who was waiting for the disc, to be rushed to the manufacturer to be mass duplicated.


More cooks in the kitchen doesn't necessarily make the work go faster.

Problem is no one has a full overview of all the code anymore. It's too much nowadays for one person to say, this might affect that component. Like using some more memory or CPU cycles in one place could break something else.

And of course, more people, harder to reach agreement over everything. Maybe games need to follow the movie industry more, one director, basically a dictator instead of working by committee. And then you get unique games like Death Stranding and Detroit become Human. (And also TLG that took forever to come out as the director's vision was too ambitious for the ps3, no compromise, postpone until the HW can run it) Those games are polarizing though, and the industry wants to make money from all, so making games by committee for all gamers is the directive from the share holders. And then we end up with jack of all trades, master of none, padded games.


Dud ya grow that yourself or were you just in early? 4 to 1000 is pretty epic. 

And aye, I can't imagine what the beurocracy of these companies like Rockstar with 2000+ people and like you said the risk analysis and checking in with every department for problems, no one wants to be the fuck up who fucked up half the teams work. Sony seems to be able to run fairly large teams effectively though and Nintendo too, perhaps they've figured it out. 



LegitHyperbole said:
SvennoJ said:

That's pretty recognizable. The bigger the teams, the more bosses, the more people want to have a say in every little detail.

When I started work we were a team of two to four. Half hour to max and hour meeting once a week.

Ffwd a few decades, company grown to over 1,000 people, different teams working together on the same projects. Daily meetings, sometimes multiple a day, any changes need to be submitted and pushed up the chain for approval. Every change/fix make a risk assessment, review, notes for test department and a whole lot of email traffic.

What was once a quick easy fix, now could be even be postponed for after release if it was within 2 months of the next release window.
We went to the extreme in the beginning though, re-compiling the code after literally making last minute changes and burning a new disc while the boss was holding up the courier, who was waiting for the disc, to be rushed to the manufacturer to be mass duplicated.


More cooks in the kitchen doesn't necessarily make the work go faster.

Problem is no one has a full overview of all the code anymore. It's too much nowadays for one person to say, this might affect that component. Like using some more memory or CPU cycles in one place could break something else.

And of course, more people, harder to reach agreement over everything. Maybe games need to follow the movie industry more, one director, basically a dictator instead of working by committee. And then you get unique games like Death Stranding and Detroit become Human. (And also TLG that took forever to come out as the director's vision was too ambitious for the ps3, no compromise, postpone until the HW can run it) Those games are polarizing though, and the industry wants to make money from all, so making games by committee for all gamers is the directive from the share holders. And then we end up with jack of all trades, master of none, padded games.


Dud ya grow that yourself or were you just in early? 4 to 1000 is pretty epic. 

And aye, I can't imagine what the beurocracy of these companies like Rockstar with 2000+ people and like you said the risk analysis and checking in with every department for problems, no one wants to be the fuck up who fucked up half the teams work. Sony seems to be able to run fairly large teams effectively though and Nintendo too, perhaps they've figured it out. 

I wish lol. I was in early, the 7th to join the company in the 90s (we did have more than one project!) and we later merged with Psion, Netherlands division. Harold Goddijn who was head of Psion in the Netherlands at the time, grew the company to where it is now (TomTom). Great boss, true visionary. His wife was part of the management of Palmtop Software before he took over.

It is quite an epic success story, glad to have been part of it :)

Also the bigger it gets, the more damaging any negative press will get. Early fuck ups went unnoticed, yet once big enough, every little problem is blown up out of proportion. Hence so much trepidation about any changes later on.

Early on we had to do a recall early on as the distributor had mixed up the CDs, Spanish music in the cases instead of our software. Nobody really noticed, heck the internet wasn't even properly up yet. Before that we were so small we did the distribution ourselves. We were mostly making software for Psion devices and at a release all came to the office to mass duplicate SD cards to put in the boxes to send out to stores. From mom and pop shop to mega firm. Quite a journey!




SvennoJ said:
LegitHyperbole said:

Dud ya grow that yourself or were you just in early? 4 to 1000 is pretty epic. 

And aye, I can't imagine what the beurocracy of these companies like Rockstar with 2000+ people and like you said the risk analysis and checking in with every department for problems, no one wants to be the fuck up who fucked up half the teams work. Sony seems to be able to run fairly large teams effectively though and Nintendo too, perhaps they've figured it out. 

I wish lol. I was in early, the 7th to join the company in the 90s (we did have more than one project!) and we later merged with Psion, Netherlands division. Harold Goddijn who was head of Psion in the Netherlands at the time, grew the company to where it is now (TomTom). Great boss, true visionary. His wife was part of the management of Palmtop Software before he took over.

It is quite an epic success story, glad to have been part of it :)

Also the bigger it gets, the more damaging any negative press will get. Early fuck ups went unnoticed, yet once big enough, every little problem is blown up out of proportion. Hence so much trepidation about any changes later on.

Early on we had to do a recall early on as the distributor had mixed up the CDs, Spanish music in the cases instead of our software. Nobody really noticed, heck the internet wasn't even properly up yet. Before that we were so small we did the distribution ourselves. We were mostly making software for Psion devices and at a release all came to the office to mass duplicate SD cards to put in the boxes to send out to stores. From mom and pop shop to mega firm. Quite a journey!


Success story is right, that's proper impressive. You must have gotten a lot of experience and know how just being apart and so close to that, though, I'd reckon. Did they ever go public? 



LegitHyperbole said:

Success story is right, that's proper impressive. You must have gotten a lot of experience and know how just being apart and so close to that, though, I'd reckon. Did they ever go public? 

Yeah they did. My other (original) boss started a charity foundation with the proceeds:
https://www.turingfoundation.org/overons_uk.html

It were stressful times since the foundation had most of its money parked at Goldman Sachs during the 2008 financial crisis :/

TomTom shares crashed as well during that time. They started at 27 Euro (initial offer) peaked at 88, then crashed down to 4 euros in the financial crisis. Slowly recovered to 21 Euro (2015) but then down again to now 5 Euro.

And yes, lot of experience, including being part of a huge patent dispute for which I was grilled for 3 days in Washington DC. Deposition to Garmin's lawyers, defending my work. No we never copied Garmin, ugh, the nerve!
https://casetext.com/case/garmin-ltd-v-tomtom-5
We won that one (or rather it was settled with NDAs, I have no idea what was agreed in the end)
https://www.reuters.com/article/business/tomtom-says-wins-lawsuit-brought-by-garmin-idUSL23104524/

That was a terrible time, Garmin tried to bar us from sale in the USA. (Fighting an injunction) We still had a small company mentality and never bothered with patents, then quickly learned the hard way you need them. So we started filing patents and also buying them from smaller companies to bring a counter suit to Garmin.

Silver lining, now I have my name on a bunch of patents. They're owned by the company however, not mine.