Support NeoGAF

[The Albatross]

The resolution sucks.

To believe 720p or lower is still accepted when you got people using 2560 x 1440 monitors is pretty sad.

Also, a console showing up later takes more time to develop a library whereas if new consoles launched earlier, there would be alot more decent games on the market.

Overall: long gens = a stale industry.

Eh, in 2005 you had far more people playing 480i and 480p games with 720p sets, than you have people playing 720p games with 2560x1440 sets. I'd imagine that fewer than 1% of home TV's are pushing more than 1080p... There really isn't a big push for anything beyond 1080p right now, and if you're expecting that on the Ps4 or XBone, you will be disappointed.

 

[Nightstick11]

What's not too understand? Microsoft forced the PS2 generation one year short prematurely and then prolonged the Wii generation to 8 years in an attempt to recoup the money they guzzled since 2000.

 

[Mister Ribs]

Because some time around 2009 the graphics of Xbox 360 and PS3 started to look like N64 to me.

You sir, have an awesome imagination!

 

[1st Course]

The length of this gen is an indication of diminishing returns, really. With previous consoles, there was a real limitation to what they were physically capable of doing at the hardware level. With the PS3 and 360, there isn't much that can't be actually done, it can only be done better, and faster. That wasn't true of previous consoles. GTA4 was impossible on the PS2/Xbox/GCN. GTA3 was impossible on the PS1/N64. Mario 64 was impossible on the SNES. FZero was impossible on the NES. Mario was impossible on any mainstream console prior to it.

There was no point in new consoles in 2009-2010 because the technology and tools available didn't warrant an new generation. I think we're basically ready now. 8 gigabytes of ANY kind of RAM (be it DDR3 or GDDR5) is an insane upgrade over 512MB. "Megatextures" are more than feasible with that much RAM (and yes, they are the future). GPU/multi CPU core compute operations will also be much faster, opening up the possibility of games having insane physics in the next gen as well. GPU compute and the RAM upgrades we're getting with the new consoles are the biggest deal, but besides that of course we get faster shaders and faster everything else. All that wasn't ready for prime time in 2010; the consoles would have been better for sure, but not drastically.

Graphics will be much improved on the new consoles because of things like megatextures (they only require one to three passes for 90% of the scene to work because multiple textures don't have to be blended together and a megatexture is one texture that can be "batched" unlike having multiple textures). Gameplay will be improved because of better physics and the ability to have many, many more instances in the game because of GPU compute and greater RAM. Plus, the developers now have the tools to take advantage of the hardware unlike 2010. The reason this gen lasted so long was because hardware and tools needed to improve enough to create the generational leap we expected. Also, the consoles were pretty expensive at the start... they had a long way to fall.

I'm not sure about that tbh.

Many people here consider the galaxy and the souls games the principle of gameplay this gen and the devs behind thoese games are probably not the best when it come to tech.

Innovation in gameplay or game desgin really mostly depend on the devs themselves imo.

 

[Mister Ribs]

What's not too understand? Microsoft forced the PS2 generation one year short prematurely and then prolonged the Wii generation to 8 years in an attempt to recoup the money they guzzled since 2000.

Or were they just promoting healthy competition?

 

[Eusis]

What's not too understand? Microsoft forced the PS2 generation one year short prematurely and then prolonged the Wii generation to 8 years in an attempt to recoup the money they guzzled since 2000.

And I really can't help but wonder if they wrecked the industry in doing that and we're only really comprehending that in hindsight.

Though I don't think I could fully blame them given the other half was the PS3 beinga beast to develop for.

Or were they just promoting healthy competition?

Microsoft was BLEEDING money to pull this off, it's definitely competition and there's worse or at least more successful examples out there by far such as maintaining monopolies, but I don't think healthy competition involves everyone hemorrhaging money to stay relevant.

 

[SmoothRunningGun]

1080p tvs have been affordable for quite sometime. I want a console that can atleast handle that. The dashboards on both are slow and clunky (360 is almost unuseable). And graphics and framerates aren't good enough. Gen needs to go.

 

[smr00]

I keep seeing it pop up in GAF threads but I don't understand it. Personally I"m glad that I didn't have to buy a new console back in 2010. The games library for every console just got richer as time goes on and the graphics and sound are still pretty good. So why does it seem like all of GAF wishes that this gen ended early. Do you guys just like spending money? Is it a psychology thing? I just don't get it.

We don't need 10 year consoles. We don't need 8 year consoles. Consoles should last no more than 6 years.

To me, it's about performance. And the last couple of years have been excruciating on consoles. It's 2013 not 1993. It's not 2000-2001. 360/PS3 has overstayed their welcome, we should of gotten PS4/XBONE 2 years ago.

 

[Applecot]

Performance in games has gotten worse as developers have tried to make these old consoles do more stuff. IQ and framerate have suffered enough to convince me that I needed a gaming PC in my life.

I'm looking forward to games not held back by 7-8 year old tech.

This point is valid for anything that's about 1-2 years old +. Opinionative imo.

 

[Sinistral]

Ask yourself this. What were you doing 8 years ago? Still in grade school? Fresh teenager?

Most generations before this lasted 4-6 years before a new system came out.

This one is 8. The sub 720p, claustrophobic FOV and sub 30fps in 2013 is sad. It's about time. Being a PC gamer is the only sanity check here. Console games look like garbage and perform poorly.

For me personally though, 8 years ago I started college, and couldn't really get into this generation. Expensive entry point and slow upswing of questionable hardware (Cell, RROD). I have no attachment to any console franchise. Now however, fully employed and a PS4 on pre-order.

I can't wait. True HD (at least 720p...), easier development platforms, and a chance for some fresh new ideas/ips to emerge. Booming indie scene and a large push for them. What's the problem again?

 

[JordanN]

Eh, in 2005 you had far more people playing 480i and 480p games with 720p sets, than you have people playing 720p games with 2560x1440 sets. I'd imagine that fewer than 1% of home TV's are pushing more than 1080p... There really isn't a big push for anything beyond 1080p right now, and if you're expecting that on the Ps4 or XBone, you will be disappointed.

Well no, I'm not expecting that. It's more about how technology is evolving. 1440p is 4x that of 720p so it's actually quite a leap yet long console cycles hold you back from seeing anymore than 720p.

Even with the TV thing, I think most TV's you look for in a store are now 1080p yet consoles still operate at 720p or lower so it's going to look ugly for new buyers.

I'd like to see technology be in sync with each other or very close instead of sticking with 10 year old trends.

 

[GameGuru59]

I'm not sure about that tbh.

Many people here consider the galaxy and the souls games the principle of gameplay this gen and the devs behind thoese games are probably not the best when it come to tech.

Innovation in gameplay or game desgin really mostly depend on the devs themselves imo.

Depends on the type of game. Nintendo and developers of their ilk don't rely on processing power. Mario Galaxy was probably possible on the N64. However, I believe GTA6 and games like it will be vastly improved over their predecessors on Xbone and PS4. GTA4 couldn't properly render the actual population density of New York, and I think GTA6 will do that. Also, a smaller scale game like Battlefield should be able to render fully procedurally destructible environments on a small to medium scale (not a full city, as is currently being demoed). Also there's the ability to have higher multiplayer limits without sacrificing gameplay elements like physics. Games with 100 players online in a normal game (not like MAG) should be possible next gen. Finally, larger persistent game worlds should be possible. GTA5 being a possible exception, it is currently impossible to have a large open world game with instances that are still running independent of the immediate area around the player (at least with decent graphics, that is).

All of these things are real game design points that are currently very difficult or impossible to do. I don't think the tech was around in 2010 to measurably improve these things in comparison to the 360 and PS3.

 

[Skilletor]

This point is valid for anything that's about 1-2 years old +. Opinionative imo.

Well, yeah, it's my reason for wanting next-gen consoles and PC games.

 

[Mogwai]

I think it's a legitimate complaint. Playing Far Cry 3 on console is the most obvious sign that the console generation lasted too long. The performance of that game was so poor, and the graphics wasn't even cranked up.

 

[Dr. Kitty Muffins]

What's not too understand? Microsoft forced the PS2 generation one year short prematurely and then prolonged the Wii generation to 8 years in an attempt to recoup the money they guzzled since 2000.

That was certainly one element of it. The other was the upcoming expense of making next gen games. I'm not sure the industry will ever be ready for the cost developing PS4/Xbox One games that don't sell 4 million plus.