• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Where is Next Gen Gameplay?

SmokedMeat

Gamer™
Nintendo? Next Gen Gameplay? I thought their premise was to constantly rehash their back catalogue, and force the user into rebuying the same games time & time again? Or have I got that wrong?

No, Nintendo isn’t doing anything new. But they’re one of the only publishers that focus on solid gameplay mechanics.

New experiences can only be found in VR imo.
 
Last edited:
Alone in the Dark: Inferno is a PS3 game that scored low and was discarded by the masses. It also stands leagues above the vast majority of modern AAA games when it comes to gameplay mechanics.

Modern AAA gaming is shallow and boring. These games are created for a homogenized worldwide audience who want a Netflix-style binge watch experience.

Indies are where it's at these days if you want to see unique gameplay mechanics. VR too.
 

Fbh

Member
Nintendo? Next Gen Gameplay? I thought their premise was to constantly rehash their back catalogue, and force the user into rebuying the same games time & time again? Or have I got that wrong?

The reson they can rehash the same franchises is because they actually innovate in terms of gameplay.

It's actually pathetic for the rest of the industry that you have to go to the Switch to find an open world game that feels interactive and has cool physics.
 

RoboFu

One of the green rats
Here.....


zelda-breath-of-the-wild-1655249167687.jpg
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
The last time a game legitimately made me feel like you couldn't have done this on previous generation was Dead Rising all the way back on the X360.
 
Maybe you’ve seen a different trailer. It’s a mindless shooter. Looks fun but nothing next gen about it
jesus rofif....
I just told you that it`s stupid to judge a trailer without knowing what`s behind it and then you double down on "but this trailer....."
Sometimes you baffle me....
New Girl Facepalm GIF by HULU


The point of this game and why I brought it up here is that contrary to UEBS and similar every single one of the 4000+ possible individual soldiers has his own behaviour, physics, animation cycles etc. That was absolutely impossible on something like last gen hardware.
It may or may not boil down to mindless shooting in the end, but the crowd tech is amazing nonetheless.
 
Last edited:

Raven77

Member
The problem with the whole idea of "next-gen gameplay" is that it implies "gameplay" is something that needs to constantly evolve, which isn't necessarely true. Sometimes certain "old" formulas work just fine, perhaps a bit of refinement here and there but still largely playing the same.

Of course, you can create new gameplay concepts and take advantage of new tech to realize such ideas, i can think of many games that do such things, but it isn't really a necessity. If anything, i notice people tent to prefer simpler gameplay loops rather than complex systems and mechanics.

You're making an assumption than NextGen gameplay means more complex. That isn't true at all.

Imagine an FPS where it has real time fluid and glass physics. One of the levels as you rescuing hostages from an aquarium. The emergent next-gen gameplay that just those two physics systems would allow for would be amazing and not increase complexity.

Just about every game released has us doing the exact same things we were doing since the xbox/360 era.

Boring.
 
Isnt PC master race , shouldn’t PC be leading in this space, with high end specs should come Next Gen gameplay….
PC doesn’t even challenge PlayStation to make exclusive games with high end amazing graphics .

PlayStation can’t carry the industry on its Back… games, graphics… bc I feel like it is kinda been doing that for a while…

Xbox can’t even compete anymore
Nintendo is just doing them.

We don’t put enough pressure on PC to compete.
 
It feels like real innovation and advancement in gameplay mostly died down in the PS360 generation. I remember at the start of last gen and throughout people were obsessed with 1080p and graphics, now it’s 60 FPS, graphics, 4K.
 

saintjules

Gold Member
People seem more concerned about graphics and 60fps over gameplay innovation. Sad really.

Then perhaps there's no need for new Consoles. We should stick to the earlier generations.

I definitely want more innovative ideas in conjunction with fidelity and stable framerates, however I think investors and/or whoever is financing these projects don't want to take a big risk on innovative ideas.

Unless you're someone like Kojima of course. And I remember people giving him shit for doing a 'walking simulator'. Death Stranding is miles ahead in terms of innovation. But I'm sure he has unlimited resources to make that vision a reality.
 
Last edited:
Isnt PC master race , shouldn’t PC be leading in this space, with high end specs should come Next Gen gameplay….
PC doesn’t even challenge PlayStation to make exclusive games with high end amazing graphics .

PlayStation can’t carry the industry on its Back… games, graphics… bc I feel like it is kinda been doing that for a while…

Xbox can’t even compete anymore
Nintendo is just doing them.

We don’t put enough pressure on PC to compete.
What kind of utter nonsense is this?....there is no Platform Holder on PC and it is not a walled garden you have to lure people into with exclusives.....
"Put pressure on PC" just wtf.....
You Are Dumb Patrick Star GIF by SpongeBob SquarePants
 

Guilty_AI

Member
Imagine an FPS where it has real time fluid and glass physics. One of the levels as you rescuing hostages from an aquarium. The emergent next-gen gameplay that just those two physics systems would allow for would be amazing and not increase complexity.
Here's the design problem tho:

99% of players would just go for the straighforward solution of shooting the bad guys. The added complexity (Yes, what you described is complexity, ESPECIALLY the fluid physics which our CPUs still aren't at a stage to handle well) would just make the game heavier on the hardware for basically no reason. Can such a thing really be called good design?

And if we're talking about FPSs that incorporate emergent problem-solving skills, we've had that for decades and are called Immersive-sims. And, surprise, they aren't very popular.

Just about every game released has us doing the exact same things we were doing since the xbox/360 era.

Boring.
Boring for you, but the average joe enjoys their headshots and simple platforming, just like how humans have enjoyed chess for millenia.
 
Last edited:
Wow such next gen!!! Hold left mouse buttons and shoot at those straight moving targets!
Uebs already exists.

to op. What would you expect of next gen gameplay?! For game to bj you? This is what gaming is. What else do you expect to do.
Elden ring is the peak.

Once we get next gen ai gameplay you will regret this
While I think it looks cool myself, it kinda just looks like an evolution of Dead Rising....


Which we got nearly....20 years ago.

old danny glover GIF
 

rofif

Can’t Git Gud
jesus rofif....
I just told you that it`s stupid to judge a trailer without knowing what`s behind it and then you double down on "but this trailer....."
Sometimes you baffle me....
New Girl Facepalm GIF by HULU


The point of this game and why I brought it up here is that contrary to UEBS and similar every single one of the 4000+ possible individual soldiers has his own behaviour, physics, animation cycles etc. That was absolutely impossible on something like last gen hardware.
It may or may not boil down to mindless shooting in the end, but the crowd tech is amazing nonetheless.
And it’s stupid for you to defend a trailer which might just as well be fake
 
And it’s stupid for you to defend a trailer which might just as well be fake
So should I for the 3rd time now tell you that the interesting thing is the crowd tech behind it or how many times exactly do I have to spell that out for you until it falls on a lonely neuron in your head? Just give me an estimate.... 🤦‍♂️
 
Last edited:
The higher the fidelity a game has the more difficult it will be to build the gameplay and animation that you would consider next-gen.

The closer we get to diminishing returns in terms of fidelity, the closer we'll get towards a shift back to gameplay.

I keep mentioning it but AI is going to play a huge part in enhancing how games work. The one example I like to consider is you walk into a village and rather than have a pre-scripted message from an NPC you could have a live discussion with AI-generated voice that can change based on circumstance.

Maybe you write a general script for a general character, but how that character exists and responds can be totally unique to someone's gameplay experience.

Maybe the boy in the village would normally grow up to be a soldier but after his mom his killed in attack he becomes a pirate, but in another scenario you're personally responsible for killing his mother, and he becomes a pirate who wants vengeance against you. Maybe that vengeance lands him in prison, and you have the option of helping him escape, and if you do, he forgives you.

That essentially any and every NPC you meet could have their own life story could significantly enhance games.
 

M1chl

Currently Gif and Meme Champion
Playing Stalker makes me think why many of the features in games peaked in 2007.

Even tho best gameplay is in Control, which was release prior to this gen.
 

Generic

Member
You don't like GaaS?! :messenger_face_screaming:

And the latest games have greatly expanded menu systems with sprinkled microtransactions for you to play with!

Don't you enjoy painstakingly thorough content unlocking procedures to progress each time you repurchase with brand new save files that you can start fresh with for each platform you move to?

Don't you enjoy continuing your adventures exploring progressive political insights into you games via social media?
Crossprogression is a thing.
 
What kind of utter nonsense is this?....there is no Platform Holder on PC and it is not a walled garden you have to lure people into with exclusives.....
"Put pressure on PC" just wtf.....
You Are Dumb Patrick Star GIF by SpongeBob SquarePants

No walled garden PSX , PS2, xbox , GameCube so on …. What is your point, don’t get butthurt.
 
Then perhaps there's no need for new Consoles. We should stick to the earlier generations.

I definitely want more innovative ideas in conjunction with fidelity and stable framerates, however I think investors and/or whoever is financing these projects don't want to take a big risk on innovative ideas.

Unless you're someone like Kojima of course. And I remember people giving him shit for doing a 'walking simulator'. Death Stranding is miles ahead in terms of innovation. But I'm sure he has unlimited resources to make that vision a reality.
I mean, you'll need a better CPU and GPU to create better A.I and more innovative gameplay systems. Can't exactly do that on an NES. Framerates are important but consoles will forever chase 60fps and eventually be back to 30fps. It's the nature of hardware.
 

Raven77

Member
Here's the design problem tho:

99% of players would just go for the straighforward solution of shooting the bad guys. The added complexity (Yes, what you described is complexity, ESPECIALLY the fluid physics which our CPUs still aren't at a stage to handle well) would just make the game heavier on the hardware for basically no reason. Can such a thing really be called good design?

And if we're talking about FPSs that incorporate emergent problem-solving skills, we've had that for decades and are called Immersive-sims. And, surprise, they aren't very popular.


Boring for you, but the average joe enjoys their headshots and simple platforming, just like how humans have enjoyed chess for millenia.

I do agree with that to some extent. But Half-Life 2 did a lot of new things with physics and turn the FPS genre on its head.

People were also completely fine with black and white movies until colored stuff started to come out. We're going to have moments like that with gaming over the next 10 years.
 

intbal

Member
Gonna offer an unconventional opinion here, but I think High On Life took steps in the direction of "next gen gameplay". At least for the FPS genre.
The combat is limited. But the traversal mechanics are diverse and inventive. And you have to learn to use them all together to progress in the game.
Anyone who has finished it will know what I'm talking about.
They obviously weren't trying to redefine the FPS since it's basically just a comedy shooter. But with more focus on a greater range of combat tools and enemy types, I think it would have carved out a unique new place in FPS gaming.
 

Kindela

Banned
I'm positive that people that say this have no idea what they want or mean by it. Even the OP says:

I remember the jump from Doom -> Half-Life -> Half-Life 2 feeling crazy. All still first person shooters, but all feeling radically different.
Different how? In all of them you complete linear missions, which have strictly defined win states, and you solve most of them by killing everything on the screen. What's so different about each of them? That HL2 has you move some barrels from time to time with the gravity gun? But then again you still spend 95% of the game walking and shooting.
Going from Far Cry 1 (2004) -> Crysis (2007) with crazy physical interactivity, needing to buy a new CPU just to run the thing. The early open world shooters like STALKER (2007) finding their footing with Far Cry 3 (2012)
Physical interactivity is in the same basket as "graphics advancements". It's there to show off the game, but the game still plays the same. Yeah you can shoot down a tree, grab a box and throw it, but at the end of the day: You get a mission marker, you go there, kill/loot/whatever, go to the next mission, and after X missions you're done. So while I agree there's no "next gen gameplay" now, the examples you gave also don't feel like "next gen gameplay" advancements.
 

SmokedMeat

Gamer™
Part of the problem is insufficient tools or processing power. We can look at games like Dragon's Dogma 2 as an example of this. Even on the all powerful PS5, the game can only run at 30FPS in most scenarios. With the size of the world and sheer amount of calculations it has to make for physics and interactions, the PS5's processor just can't keep up. Not that Xbox is any better. This isn't a GPU issue. The CPU is just not fast enough to process the sheer number of advanced calculations that people want or are expecting from "next gen gameplay."
maxresdefault.jpg



It’s not a hardware issue. It’s a AAA developers don’t bother issue.
 

MikeM

Member
I feel like we are in the refinement stage. Those massive leaps are gone because the tech gen over gen had massive improvements. Back then, number of polygons and triangles matter and would have massive leaps gen on gen, however this is basically irrelevant today.

60fps needs to be the norm. Directstorage needs to be used all the time. RT needs to be standardized. AI upscaling is becoming standard with DLSS/Xess currently and FSR potentially using their GPU AI cores.

All this stuff won’t help bad games though. Helldivers is a rare Gaas done right in a world of terrible priorities from AAA studios. Hell, WB just signalled they want to put out less SP games and focus more on Gaas…
 

poppabk

Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
I'm positive that people that say this have no idea what they want or mean by it. Even the OP says:


Different how? In all of them you complete linear missions, which have strictly defined win states, and you solve most of them by killing everything on the screen. What's so different about each of them? That HL2 has you move some barrels from time to time with the gravity gun? But then again you still spend 95% of the game walking and shooting.

Physical interactivity is in the same basket as "graphics advancements". It's there to show off the game, but the game still plays the same. Yeah you can shoot down a tree, grab a box and throw it, but at the end of the day: You get a mission marker, you go there, kill/loot/whatever, go to the next mission, and after X missions you're done. So while I agree there's no "next gen gameplay" now, the examples you gave also don't feel like "next gen gameplay" advancements.
I don't think we are talking about gaming structure when we talk about next gen gameplay, but ways to play the game that are enabled by more powerful hardware. The ability to use the environment, physics and destruction to approach situations multiple different ways was definitely something that was a significant gameplay advancement. The fact that it has been walked back as hardware has improved is really disheartening.
 

HL3.exe

Banned
I'm positive that people that say this have no idea what they want or mean by it. Even the OP says:


Different how? In all of them you complete linear missions, which have strictly defined win states, and you solve most of them by killing everything on the screen. What's so different about each of them? That HL2 has you move some barrels from time to time with the gravity gun? But then again you still spend 95% of the game walking and shooting.

Physical interactivity is in the same basket as "graphics advancements". It's there to show off the game, but the game still plays the same. Yeah you can shoot down a tree, grab a box and throw it, but at the end of the day: You get a mission marker, you go there, kill/loot/whatever, go to the next mission, and after X missions you're done. So while I agree there's no "next gen gameplay" now, the examples you gave also don't feel like "next gen gameplay" advancements.
Guessing you weren't alive in that era, but those leaps where incredible. Going from arena shooter level design, hunting key cards to finish a level -> to a (at the time) seamless feeling rollercoaster of set piece shooterwith NPC interactions, and combat Ai that could take cover and give call backs to what you were doing felt like an amazing leap forward. After that, nobody wanted to go back to the arena shooter, Half-Life 1 raised the bar. The HL2 leap was bit more measured, mainly leaping on the physics side (I was actually disappointed with HL2 at the time, how strict and linear it felt, believe it or not, hahah). But the physics where a definite leap up. Situation could play out in fun and unpredictable ways that wasn't possible before.

When we refer to "graphics," it often pertains to visual splendor, which, while nice to have, can be static or not directly relevant to gameplay. In contrast, physics provide a means to meaningfully enhance the gaming experience, offering opportunities and interactions that were previously impossible. Think of how much more fun it was to crash a car in GTA IV compared to its earlier versions, thanks to its heavier and more realistic physics. Sidenote: It's why I like the early era of dynamic lighting as developers experimented with combining dynamic lights and physics to create more dynamic environments that players could manipulate, as seen in games like Splinter Cell, Thief 3, and Escape from Butcher Bay.
 

Comandr

Member
maxresdefault.jpg



It’s not a hardware issue. It’s a AAA developers don’t bother issue.
It is a hardware issue. TOTK barely manages to hold its 30fps in more complicated scenarios and doesn’t have anywhere near the complexity of particle effects, density of npcs, weather and cloth simulation, liquid physics simulation, etc. TOTK is a great game. But it’s not even close to what DD2 is doing from a calculations standpoint let’s not be disingenuous.

The latest preview from yesterday mentions that dd2 has over 1000 npcs living their lives and roaming around the world, interacting with the player and each other. Those calculations aren’t free. Their pathing, behaviors, etc, that’s all cpu bound. Let’s not pretend TOTK is doing anything even close to that.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom