Support NeoGAF

[bitbydeath]

We’ve all heard how PS3 was extremely difficult to code for, and how time to triangle has greatly improved over the gens since.

Why is there no developers spitting out PS3 quality games at an astronomical rate?

PS3 graphics were no slouch and would be perfect for the AA space. From Resistance, Warhawk, Motorstorm, Uncharted, inFamous.

ND made 5 games on PS3, 3 Uncharted games, and Last of Us + the DLC expansion.

In a time where development takes forever it seems like that would be a goldmine.

Or the real reason games are taking forever is due to bloated companies, filled with people who don’t know how to code.

 

[Three]

We’ve all heard how PS3 was extremely difficult to code for, and how time to triangle has greatly improved over the gens since.

Why is there no developers spitting out PS3 quality games at an astronomical rate?

PS3 graphics were no slouch and would be perfect for the AA space. From Resistance, Warhawk, Motorstorm, Uncharted, inFamous.

ND made 5 games on PS3, 3 Uncharted games, and Last of Us + the DLC expansion.

In a time where development takes forever it seems like that would be a goldmine.

Or the real reason games are taking forever is due to bloated companies, filled with people who don’t know how to code.

Because people would complain that it isn't "next gen gameplay" and it would fail like a lot of games people complained about during the PS4 gen. Rest in peace Driveclub, The Order and co.

 

[March Climber]

Part of the problem is open worlds, people being receptive to 8-12 hour games again on the AA front, and…

Or the real reason games are taking forever is due to bloated companies, filled with people who don’t know how to code.

Oh this is one of those threads.

Nevermind.

 

[jshackles]

Making a game quickly doesn't make your game good. The games you mentioned like Resistance, Uncharted, inFamous etc. are good because they have good scripts, good world building, good character designs, and a nice UI (among other things). Those sorts of costs in game development are the same regardless of what the graphics look like.

 

[bitbydeath]

Because people would complain that it isn't "next gen gameplay" and it would fail like a lot of games people complained about during the PS4 gen. Rest in peace Driveclub, The Order and co.

If they churned out in a year or two and priced at an AA level I doubt anyone would complain. That said, I don’t think gameplay has changed a whole lot since PS3.

 

[bitbydeath]

Part of the problem is open worlds, people being receptive to 8-12 hour games again on the AA front, and…

Oh this is one of those threads.

Nevermind.

The games I mentioned weren’t Open World.
Lots of games today aren’t open world either.

 

[bitbydeath]

Making a game quickly doesn't make your game good. The games you mentioned like Resistance, Uncharted, inFamous etc. are good because they have good scripts, good world building, good character designs, and a nice UI (among other things). Those sorts of costs in game development are the same regardless of what the graphics look like.

But they were quick to make compared to today’s games and should be even quicker to make today.

 

[flagdaddy]

how is this a serious thread? oh it must not be

 

[TintoConCasera]

Less talent in the industry, plus games with "no graphix" would have some trouble selling among the masses I guess.

Many indies are opting for low-poly PSX like graphics tho. Which is cool, I like that aesthetic.

 

[bitbydeath]

how is this a serious thread? oh it must not be

Between this and March’s comment I feel like there’s a sensitive elephant in the room that some don’t want to talk about.

 

[Nvzman]

Oh this is one of those threads.

Nevermind.

He's not entirely wrong in a way.

Games back in the PS3 days had way smaller, more focused dev teams, and publishers weren't as focused on maximizing mass appeal as much as they are today. They just weren't as expensive to make and I would genuinely argue part of that is how incredibly bloated game dev teams are now. You really don't need a mega shitton of environment and art devs when maybe 10 extremely competent ones were getting the job done for a game like Halo 3, which had 100 people working on it (and that was considered big at the time).

 

[March Climber]

Between this and March’s comment I feel like there’s a sensitive elephant in the room that some don’t want to talk about.

Unless you are intentionally trying to bait out a new culture war thread, you are looking at this all wrong. You have to decide if you want this to be a technical thread or a thread about office politics and ‘sensitivities’.

I implore you to look at some AA developers. Start with Saber interactive and Teyon. Look at their dev interviews and behind the scenes footage. Research why.

Edit: The key word here is research.

Research.

 

[bitbydeath]

Unless you are intentionally trying to bait out a new culture war thread, you are looking at this all wrong. You have to decide if you want this to be a technical thread or a thread about office politics and ‘sensitivities’.

I implore you to look at some AA developers. Start with Saber interactive and Teyon. Look at their dev interviews and behind the scenes footage. Research why.

No, this thread can look at all sides, and if you don’t know just say that.

 

[Trogdor1123]

I’d personally love to see more like this. Graphics are nice, of course, but I would rather not wait 7-8 years between installments just for a bit prettier. I know it’s more than that but just my general thoughts

 

[Snowdonhoffen]

They still do some things today that they used to do back in the day. Like some games are still reusing assets and mechanics and making sequels that some may call "DLC". We saw that a lot during the PS3 era, and that is one of the big reasons why they were able to pump out so many games. The ND example you have, Uncharted 2 and 3 are reusing a lot of stuff, same with The Last of Us and its DLC. But this is also true for a lot of big games that were thriving during that era, Modern Warfare, Black Ops, Dead Space, Mass Effect, Resistance, Gears of War, Halo, God of War, Bioshock, Batman Arkham, Killzone, Assassins Creed, and a lot others were just taking what they had and built a new game on top of it.
Nowadays is probably more time consuming to create highly detailed models, assets and textures than it was 15 years ago. And for better or worse, people expect more from games too, better details, better graphics, bigger worlds, more content, more of everything.

 

[cireza]

Why is there no developers spitting out PS3 quality games at an astronomical rate?

PS3 and quality are unrelated. Game quality, as you intend it, and visual complexity are unrelated.

Making simpler visuals doesn't mean your game is simple full stop. You simply gained in the visual department, great, but everything else might be more complex or ambitious than your average current gen game.

 

[bitbydeath]

They still do some things today that they used to do back in the day. Like some games are still reusing assets and mechanics and making sequels that some may call "DLC". We saw that a lot during the PS3 era, and that is one of the big reasons why they were able to pump out so many games. The ND example you have, Uncharted 2 and 3 are reusing a lot of stuff, same with The Last of Us and its DLC. But this is also true for a lot of big games that were thriving during that era, Modern Warfare, Black Ops, Dead Space, Mass Effect, Resistance, Gears of War, Halo, God of War, Bioshock, Batman Arkham, Killzone, Assassins Creed, and a lot others were just taking what they had and built a new game on top of it.
Nowadays is probably more time consuming to create highly detailed models, assets and textures than it was 15 years ago. And for better or worse, people expect more from games too, better details, better graphics, bigger worlds, more content, more of everything.

Just to be clear, I’m not arguing AAA be replaced, rather that there should be a lot of money in games made faster and with PS3 quality.

 

[bitbydeath]

PS3 and quality are unrelated. Game quality, as you intend it, and visual complexity are unrelated.

Making simpler visuals doesn't mean your game is simple full stop. You simply gained in the visual department, great, but everything else might be more complex or ambitious than your average current gen game.

By PS3 quality, I’m referring to the entire package. It should be a lot faster to make as opposed to back then, which is a hell of a lot faster compared to today’s games.

 

[Hypereides]

"PS3"-esque games are getting made and released, but they're also getting largely glossed over by most people. You can find them if you take your time to look around.

 

[bitbydeath]

"PS3"-esque games getting made and released, but they're also getting largely glossed over by most people. You can find them if you take your time to look around.

Any examples?

 

[SkylineRKR]

I had the same question for a good while. PS3 was supposed to be a nightmare to develop for. But the rate of output on PS3 (360) is ridiculously good in hindsight. 3 Uncharteds, TLOU and DLC. A Ratchet trilogy, Resistance trilogy and more. Dead Space trilogy, Mass Effect trilogy. etc etc.

I mean its not like Dead Space 1 and 2 are much different than PS5 games. They have worse graphics and lower framerate, but enhance some of that shit, like DS2 on Series X, and the game looks very good. Gameplay wise its still very good. This gen got us Callisto Protocol. Which is a dumbed down version of Dead Space. If you up rez them they still hold up quite well, think of Ninja Gaiden 2, Dead Space, Killzone 2, Mirrors Edge etc.

I play a lot of PS3 games lately and they aren't really different in terms of overall feel (like playing Uncharted 2 for example), they just look worse due to 19 year old tech. In fact I prefer the PS3 library. I can play some Ridge Racer, Virtua Tennis, Infamous 2, Motorstorm, Driver SF. There are a lot of genres covered. Then you realize how one note it has become, or its being reduced to smaller indie projects.

 

[cireza]

It should be a lot faster to make as opposed to back then

Is it really ? I would suspect that it is the same length more or less. Still shorter than many games we see nowadays with more elaborated graphics, sure.

I think that the engines and middlewares help the teams until they actually become a nuisance and slow them down. I suspect that this technical stack was also much smaller back in the PS360 days, while nowadays games embed a ton of features that do not serve any gameplay purpose, but they are simply there by default, and still have to be dealt with, which generates more work.

 

[namenotfound]

I feel like there's a ton of that in JRPG land. I think the same with Souls-like and other action but not souls-like games. I'm pretty sure there's a bunch on Steam that don't have amazing modern graphics but solid for 360 era graphics. They generally have no major publication coverage but on Steam may have thousands to tens thousands of user reviews. Action RGP (Diablo-like) a bunch of those that don't look as good as Diablo IV or Path of Exile 2 but are good games and still look good.

 

[fart town usa]

You bring up a great point.

I'm not entirely sure why. I would point to stuff that THQ Nordic releases but even those games take a while. AiTD was delayed twice, Gothic Remake still doesn't have a release date, etc.

Focus seems like they are a suitable candidate too but I don't know enough about their output and dev cycles.

 

[Ceadeus]

We’ve all heard how PS3 was extremely difficult to code for, and how time to triangle has greatly improved over the gens since.

Why is there no developers spitting out PS3 quality games at an astronomical rate?

PS3 graphics were no slouch and would be perfect for the AA space. From Resistance, Warhawk, Motorstorm, Uncharted, inFamous.

ND made 5 games on PS3, 3 Uncharted games, and Last of Us + the DLC expansion.

In a time where development takes forever it seems like that would be a goldmine.

Or the real reason games are taking forever is due to bloated companies, filled with people who don’t know how to code.

I could totally see the Xbox Live ARCADE section to be back and the equivalent on PS. They were not exactly the same as the independent studios scene we see today.

Indy scene has too much writing, a message, blablabla

XBLA games were press start to play, no BS, gameplay FIRST and generally low price tag.

I know it's not totally what you were talking about but it just made me think about where did this category went?

 

[fart town usa]

Any examples?

I would say THQ Nordic and Focus are the easiest examples.

 

[bitbydeath]

Is it really ? I would suspect that it is the same length more or less. Still shorter than many games we see nowadays with more elaborated graphics, sure.

I think that the engines and middlewares help the teams until they actually become a nuisance and slow them down. I suspect that this technical stack was also much smaller back in the PS360 days, while nowadays games embed a ton of features that do not serve any gameplay purpose, but they are simply there by default, and still have to be dealt with, which generates more work.

According to Mark Cerny.

According to Cerny, the PS1's time-to-triangle was one to two months, while the powerful but more complicated PS2 had a time-to-triangle of three to six months. The PS3's time-to-triangle went up to six months to a year as a result of the complex Cell processor, well documented as turning third-party developers away from prioritizing the system.

In contrast, Cerny said the PS4's time-to-triangle is just one to two months

Cerny: PS4's 'time-to-triangle' to rival PS1

The tech housed inside the PS4 makes it as easy to swiftly bring games to the system as it was to do so for the original PlayStation, according to the PS4 Lead Architect Mark Cerny. Speaking at Spain's GameLab conference this week, Cerny explained how he took Nolan Bushnell's mantra of good...

www.engadget.com

 

[cireza]

According to Mark Cerny.

Cerny: PS4's 'time-to-triangle' to rival PS1

The tech housed inside the PS4 makes it as easy to swiftly bring games to the system as it was to do so for the original PlayStation, according to the PS4 Lead Architect Mark Cerny. Speaking at Spain's GameLab conference this week, Cerny explained how he took Nolan Bushnell's mantra of good...

www.engadget.com

But this is simply the time required before you start having something running. Doesn't mean that your complete dev time is longer.

Basically, if you had to create Uncharted 3 from scratch today on current consoles, I don't think it would be a significantly faster process than back then. My expectations is that it would take pretty much the same time.

 

[diffusionx]

Because the quality of developers is not what it was on PS3.

 

[SkylineRKR]

The problem is the need to chase realism and add useless details.

Compare Andromeda to the original ME trilogy. Andromeda is 3 times as big, but for what reason? Its much worse than the original games. I'd rather have a more focused game like ME2 and Andromeda any day of the week. They wasted a lot of development on that one and it clearly wasn't directed well. And this goes for many games today. The industry wants to constantly up the ante, while development costs and time go through the roof and risks are out of the question. At this rate you get one sequel per generation of consoles.

I'd rather they scale it down. Focus on fun. Like Returnal for example, which is my number one PS5 exclusive next to Astro Bot. But then again, Housemarques output has been one game to date as well.

But this is simply the time required before you start having something running. Doesn't mean that your complete dev time is longer.

Basically, if you had to create Uncharted 3 from scratch today on current consoles, I don't think it would be a significantly faster process than back then. My expectations is that it would take pretty much the same time.

So do it. To me Lost Legacy is far better than UC4.

 

[bitbydeath]

But this is simply the time required before you start having something running. Doesn't mean that your complete dev time is longer.

Basically, if you had to create Uncharted 3 from scratch today on current consoles, I don't think it would be a significantly faster process than back then. My expectations is that it would take pretty much the same time.

Even if it did take 2 years to make with a small team it should generate a lot of profit. Some genres like Burnout/Motorstorm don’t even exist today.

 

[cireza]

Even if it did take 2 years to make with a small team it should generate a lot of profit. Some genres like Burnout/Motorstorm don’t even exist today.

I definitely agree. You would still need a pretty large team though.

Personally I would be good with games like these, I don't need incredible visuals. What matters is having a good resolution and 60fps.

 

[Parazels]

Isn't Switch a modern analog of PS3 hardware wise?

 

[AmuroChan]

The likes of THQ Nordic and Embracer used to fill that space of making mid-tier AA games, but that clearly did not work out well for them financially.

 

[RedC]

 

[Grizzled Ghost]

Why aren't developers putting out 52 Atari quality games a year?

 

[Calverz]

Yep the 360 gen was special. We never knew how good we had it at the time. So much to choose from.

 

[Sophist]

You still need:

• hire a composer and maybe an orchestra
• build or rent a mocap studio
• hire voice actors

these things cost more now than back then.

 

[Madserb2023]

I would be more than happy to play a PS3 level game. Heck, I would have no issue playing a hi res PS2 game. Not going to happen though. Realized this early when people complained that Ragnarok looked like a good PS4 game no matter how polished it was.

 

[Hypereides]

Soulstice, GRIP, Thymesia, Evil West and Tormented souls are some that achieve PS3-like levels of presentation, graphical quality and gameplay, to some degree, that come to mind. These are just a few examples. There's more out there. Games like these come and go. They don't manage to stay in the public awareness long enough to gain traction until something new/next big title comes along and pushes them out, unfortunately. The modern gaming media has done an awful job keeping gamers up to date and informed about games such as these.

Obviously, they look "dated" by todays standards, but I don't worry too much about high fidelity/overly realistic graphics and get more drawn to "charm" and "authenticity" anyway. You're free to disagree if these don't meet your criteria.

I would say THQ Nordic and Focus are the easiest examples.

I'd add Nacon, 505 games, D3 publisher and Maximum games to the bunch.

 

[IDKFA]

Part of the problem is open worlds

Many open world games existed on the PS3.

 

[HerjansEagleFeeder]

Have you seen Nintendo games, OP?

 

[Hollowpoint5557]

Sir, you are describing the indie scene. Welcome, please enjoy it.

 

[Fbh]

I'd be totally down for Ps3/360 tier games.
Games like Vanquish, Killzone 2, Uncharted 2-3, Lost Planet 2 and Dragons Dogma still look great. Specially since modern consoles shouldn't have a problem running them at native 1800p-4K at 60fps.

I think the problem is that outside of a few exception (most of them being multiplayer games) AA games don't tend to do that well. People seem to either want cheap sub $30 indie games or full priced AAA games. If you release Ps3 era games for like $50 you'll get complains about visuals and length.
Also you still need the talent, most of the people that made the good Ps3/360 era games are working on modern AAA games.

 

[LordCBH]

Brother people are bitching endlessly because the Ghost of Yotei trailer looked really close to GoT DC. Imagine all the bitching if PS3 looking games started dropping.

 

[R6Rider]

OP has convinced me.


It's time to create a GAF development studio. With a focus on games that feel like 7th generation titles.

 

[Represent.]

I promise you, the solution is not to go back to PS3 graphics. lol

Just make shorter gamers.

 

[The_Observer]

Talent is gone, that’s obvious.
But the other reason is why would devs try to replicate PS3 level? To produce good PS3 level games still take a lot of effort and they have 2 options: develop their own engine which can only a few do or use midware like Unreal Engine which is far beyond PS3 level now. PS3 games are not that much different than modern games except visual quality.

 

[bitbydeath]

Have you seen Nintendo games, OP?

Yes, they’re a different type of style though.

Sir, you are describing the indie scene. Welcome, please enjoy it.

I feel like they dropped an A somewhere. Either the gameplay is too basic or the graphics are too close to the C64, or both.

 

[bitbydeath]

OP has convinced me.


It's time to create a GAF development studio. With a focus on games that feel like 7th generation titles.

PS3 gen seems to be the peak of graphics + gameplay + speed to develop.