Support NeoGAF

[FoxMcChief]

 

[SoloCamo]

We really need to push physics in games, it's like we had Half Life 2 and then no one really pushed the envelope despite us having far more capable cpu's now. Yes, I understand there are games out there that do it better but they are few and far between and don't really focus on it as being critical to the game play. It would also be nice if we actually had remotely intelligent NPC's...

 

[KXVXII9X]

We had a bunch of diehards last year trying to convince us (probably themselves more than anything) that this was the device that would lead the charge in next-gen immersive gameplay. It failed.

Superhot VR still feels more "next gen" than a lot of the current games. Whether it the hardware succeeded or not doesn't take away that feeling.

 

[Ogbert]

You think the CPU workload on both games is "exactly" the same?

Of course not.

But that’s nothing to do with gameplay.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Of course not.

But that’s nothing to do with gameplay.

The CPU workload has nothing to do with gameplay?

 

[KXVXII9X]

We really need to push physics in games, it's like we had Half Life 2 and then no one really pushed the envelope despite us having far more capable cpu's now. Yes, I understand there are games out there that do it better but they are few and far between and don't really focus on it as being critical to the game play. It would also be nice if we actually had remotely intelligent NPC's...

I really think the static game worlds stick out so much this gen. It takes me out of the experience right away when you throw an explosive, but nothing barely moves, and you just have a quick smoke effect that disappears as all the objects are left pristine.

Even games on basic NES and Genesis had physics like the original Mario and Sonic with the momentum-based movement.

There are so many ways to improve upon gameplay we have now and most of the advancements go towards visuals that somehow look worse with poor art direction and all the post processing that messes up the image quality.

Zelda Botw and TotK can run complex physics simulations on a mobile chip from like 2015/2016. I'm having trouble believing it is impossible on these newer systems. I would also like more intelligent NPC behavior too. Most games feel so robotic. It was one aspect I appreciated from TLOU Part 2. It wasn't about making the game challenging but making the NPC feel more believable.

 

[SoloCamo]

I really think the static game worlds stick out so much this gen. It takes me out of the experience right away when you throw an explosive, but nothing barely moves, and you just have a quick smoke effect that disappears as all the objects are left pristine.

Even games on basic NES and Genesis had physics like the original Mario and Sonic with the momentum-based movement.

There are so many ways to improve upon gameplay we have now and most of the advancements go towards visuals that somehow look worse with poor art direction and all the post processing that messes up the image quality.

Zelda Botw and TotK can run complex physics simulations on a mobile chip from like 2015/2016. I'm having trouble believing it is impossible on these newer systems. I would also like more intelligent NPC behavior too. Most games feel so robotic. It was one aspect I appreciated from TLOU Part 2. It wasn't about making the game challenging but making the NPC feel more believable.

I agree. Some of the most fun I've had were in games where physics were well thought out. F.E.A.R., Crysis, Portal series, etc. come to mind for 'recent' titles (and they are all near 20 years old.. wow). With the tech we have now there is no excuse besides lackluster creativity. Graphic improvements aren't going to blow anyone away at this point so why keep focusing there when we can do so much more with interactive environments? Maybe I'm not looking in the right places but these games don't seem to exist anymore from at least any major studios.

 

[KXVXII9X]

imo part of the problem is the huge power gap between console and PC yet we all play the same games. seems it creates kind of thing for console gamers where they become obsessed with pixel counting and comparing against the rival console, places like digital foundry thrive on this, it's practically an entire industry in itself, one which is based solely on comparing weak consoles and graphic quality against each other, so people care less about gameplay and just winning their side.

The Switch has rekindled my love for gaming and not having to obsessively count pixels. I also have a capable gaming laptop as well that I enjoy, but I find I really value gameplay a bit more as long as the overall presentation is good. I wish more of these games focused more on strong art direction instead. Moon Studio's statements about art direction and game design from their upcoming game, "No Rest for the Wicked" is the same philosophy I share when it comes to games.

 

[Ogbert]

The CPU workload has nothing to do with gameplay?

Almost every game this gen will have an increased CPU workload. By that definition, it means all those games have next gen gameplay.

Did you play the original Helldivers? A huge number of reviewers have pointed out how faithfully it recreates the original game, down to the same input mechanics and slightly clunky movement controls.

 

[SoloCamo]

The Switch has rekindled my love for gaming and not having to obsessively count pixels. I also have a capable gaming laptop as well that I enjoy, but I find I really value gameplay a bit more as long as the overall presentation is good. I wish more of these games focused more on strong art direction instead. Moon Studio's statements about art direction and game design from their upcoming game, "No Rest for the Wicked" is the same philosophy I share when it comes to games.

This is why so many go with PC+Nintendo at this point. Sure, going from 4k max settings on a 28" display to the switch is jarring, but if the game is fun I forget about it in 5 minutes and just enjoy the game.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Almost every game this gen will have an increased CPU workload. By that definition, it means all those games have next gen gameplay.

Did you play the original Helldivers? A huge number of reviewers have pointed out how faithfully it recreates the original game, down to the same input mechanics and slightly clunky movement controls.

Not nearly to the extent of Helldivers 2. Most games today could be done on last gen consoles with a modest downgrade in visuals. Helldivers 2 leans too heavily on CPU usage.

 

[Randall365]

This gen is about no load times and 60 fps at 4k. Nobody said anything about gameplay.

 

[SoloCamo]

This gen is about no load times and 60 fps at 4k. Nobody said anything about gameplay.

And it regularly fails to do either of those.

 

[IAmRei]

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?

You got that wrong i think, they innovate a lot, just not full different game. Their game design is quite solid mostly. Even it looks the same because artstyle.

 

[ProtoByte]

We really need to push physics in games, it's like we had Half Life 2 and then no one really pushed the envelope despite us having far more capable cpu's now. Yes, I understand there are games out there that do it better but they are few and far between and don't really focus on it as being critical to the game play. It would also be nice if we actually had remotely intelligent NPC's...

Physics introduces "design problems" and increases asset cost depending on who you ask.

The excuses for the latter run out with AI, imo.

 

[Hugare]

What even is "next-gen gameplay"?

This

Most people crying for "next gen gameplay" dont know that the fuck that means. And they may think they want it, but in reality they dont.

Smarter enemies is possible, for example. But many people would find it frustrating. There are tons of articles/essays and etc about this topic.

Physics/reactivity? It works in a game like Teardown, but imagine having to populate every environment in an open world game like GTA, every room and etc. 'cause the player would be able to destroy walls. Its simply not possible.

Maybe now with AI we will see this jump that people are looking for. But even then, there will still be boundaries.

 

[MarkMe2525]

Next Gen gameplay implies the gameplay would be something other than the "tried and true" mechanics that we have today. In an industry that is constantly hedging their bets, due to high cost of AAA development, it's just not fiscally responsible. That's why you only see "innovative" gameplay in lower budget games, which impacts a dev team's ability to deliver a mainstream product.

 

[GigaBowser]

 

[Umbral]

This

Most people crying for "next gen gameplay" dont know that the fuck that means. And they may think they want it, but in reality they dont.

Smarter enemies is possible, for example. But many people would find it frustrating. There are tons of articles/essays and etc about this topic.

The AI/enemy argument has been heard for years and is true to a degree. I would, however, argue that people playing online pvp multiplayer games is evidence that a portion of people do not want braindead enemies to fight. It’s not necessarily AI, but I would argue that the popularity of From Software games points to this as well, at least when it comes to challenge.

Physics/reactivity? It works in a game like Teardown, but imagine having to populate every environment in an open world game like GTA, every room and etc. 'cause the player would be able to destroy walls. Its simply not possible.

Maybe now with AI we will see this jump that people are looking for. But even then, there will still be boundaries.

There would be limits, of course, but you only get a game like Teardown from in independent studio. The incentives for large studios is to do what has been proven to work and generate revenue, which is antithetical to art and innovation. I would not expect anything from the ”AAA” space beyond McDonald’s level “products.”

I think increasing player freedom and using systems that interact with each other will produce more interesting games. That requires R&D and effort, which is something a large company wants to minimize, until people get bored of what they’re producing. In your example, it would break the game, which is a design argument not to do it. That’s not the reason a lot of companies would not do it though. It‘s a financial decision at its root, with a degree of consideration to both effort and deadlines.

 

[Hugare]

The AI/enemy argument has been heard for years and is true to a degree. I would, however, argue that people playing online pvp multiplayer games is evidence that a portion of people do not want braindead enemies to fight. It’s not necessarily AI, but I would argue that the popularity of From Software games points to this as well, at least when it comes to challenge.

There would be limits, of course, but you only get a game like Teardown from in independent studio. The incentives for large studios is to do what has been proven to work and generate revenue, which is antithetical to art and innovation. I would not expect anything from the ”AAA” space beyond McDonald’s level “products.”

I think increasing player freedom and using systems that interact with each other will produce more interesting games. That requires R&D and effort, which is something a large company wants to minimize, until people get bored of what they’re producing. In your example, it would break the game, which is a design argument not to do it. That’s not the reason a lot of companies would not do it though. It‘s a financial decision at its root, with a degree of consideration to both effort and deadlines.

I knew that someone would mention FROM games. And despite being challenging games, no, their AI is hardly revolutionary. They just hit harder.

Good game AI is just like chess pieces: you memorize their moveset and act accordingly. You hardly defeat enemies (mainly bosses) in FROM games on your first try. You try, you die, then memorize their moves, and try to act fast before they finish their moves to defeat them. Thats's why it feels rewarding, not because its unpredictable, but because you understood its rules and beat it.

About the second part from your post: increasing player freedom is sometimes detrimental to other areas in game design.
See BOTW or TOTK, for example, how they suffer to make a compeling dungeon due to too much freedom.

One example: I reached the water dungeon in TOTK way too early. There was no boss, no cutscenes, and nothing was interactive up there 'cause I wasnt supposed to be there.
And see how the story sucks in both of these games, 'cause making a compelling storyline while giving that much freedom is hard af, borderline impossible.

This is why I enjoy variety: sometimes I wanna play a game that let me do what I want, and others I want to play a game where I follow the storyline in a linear way.

I dont think there will be a videogame that will end all videogames. You cant have it all. When you focus on one aspect, you loose another, there's no way around it.

 

[alucard0712_rus]

Outer Wilds has next-gen gameplay IMO. It will be remembered for a long long time.
Sadly I can't tell you why - because everything in this game is a spoiler, but you can read reviews on Steam - it usually without spoilers.

 

[Chris_Rivera]

Next gen gameplay is a lot of work, higher labor costs. I expect it to be rare.

Neat AI concepts like the Nemeses system don’t feel next gen in my opinion. They should be standard in open world games. Now RDR2 to me is the most advanced game world at the moment, it feels like a truly living and connected world.

 

[Gamerguy84]

The most next gen experience I've had has definitely been VR. You're in a game, stereoscopic 3D 360 degrees. GT7 and RE specifically. GT7 looks real. Plenty of other great experiences. I'd invest in something better if I had space to do room scale.

Other than that it's been relatively the same and that's fine. I'm having a good time right now flipping between Tomb Raider remastered 1 to 3 and FF7 Rebirth. After I get through TR I'm getting Underworld on Steam.

GTA6 will be the next high end experience but not next gen the way I'm defining it anyway.

 

[Esca]

You know I just want good destruction in games. We were starting to get it with battlefield and some other games then all of sudden it was dropped or so minimal that it didn't matter.
When I shoot a rocket at a wall I want that shit to blow the fuck up. I'm a simple man I want to destroy shit having fun

 

[THE DUCK]

Most things have already been tried, it's kind of like saying where is the "new" show or "new" style movies.......you can only do so much........
The next gameplay revolution will come when VR is fully adopted and or a new controller method is invented. Or maybe mind controlled games......

 

[March Climber]

You know I just want good destruction in games. We were starting to get it with battlefield and some other games then all of sudden it was dropped or so minimal that it didn't matter.
When I shoot a rocket at a wall I want that shit to blow the fuck up. I'm a simple man I want to destroy shit having fun

Here:

 

[Belthazar]

dragon dogma 2, next gen 30fps.

You wish.

 

[Belthazar]

We really need to push physics in games, it's like we had Half Life 2 and then no one really pushed the envelope despite us having far more capable cpu's now. Yes, I understand there are games out there that do it better but they are few and far between and don't really focus on it as being critical to the game play.

Yeah... Also I'm really tired of every game having physics based objects that behave like they were made of styrofoam. At this point I would even prefer if everything was static instead of kicking huge metal bars and rocks through the environment like we have in every game now.

 

[Fenix34]

You know I just want good destruction in games. We were starting to get it with battlefield and some other games then all of sudden it was dropped or so minimal that it didn't matter.
When I shoot a rocket at a wall I want that shit to blow the fuck up. I'm a simple man I want to destroy shit having fun

Try Destroy all Humans, Mercenaries,Red faction guirella

 

[Umbral]

I knew that someone would mention FROM games. And despite being challenging games, no, their AI is hardly revolutionary. They just hit harder.

I never claimed it was. I was using it as an example to counter your claim that people would be frustrated with good AI, implying that people do not want a challenge. I think people do want a challenged as evidenced by From’s popularity and the popularity of online multiplayer. Playing against a human is much harder than an AI.

Good game AI is just like chess pieces: you memorize their moveset and act accordingly. You hardly defeat enemies (mainly bosses) in FROM games on your first try. You try, you die, then memorize their moves, and try to act fast before they finish their moves to defeat them. Thats's why it feels rewarding, not because its unpredictable, but because you understood its rules and beat it.

Correct, From enemies are not unpredictable. They have patterns and you simply recognize those patterns and punish accordingly. It is rewarding because it is challenging.

About the second part from your post: increasing player freedom is sometimes detrimental to other areas in game design.
See BOTW or TOTK, for example, how they suffer to make a compeling dungeon due to too much freedom.

This is why I mentioned there is a design argument to not have full player freedom. The goals of the game decide the mechanics and design. This does not mean there should be minimal player freedom. It’s much more nuanced and game specific. As of right now, the majority of AAA games are simply stamped out of a mold with no attempt.

One example: I reached the water dungeon in TOTK way too early. There was no boss, no cutscenes, and nothing was interactive up there 'cause I wasnt supposed to be there.
And see how the story sucks in both of these games, 'cause making a compelling storyline while giving that much freedom is hard af, borderline impossible.

Fully agree here. There is too much to account for once past a certain amount of player freedom and systems.

This is why I enjoy variety: sometimes I wanna play a game that let me do what I want, and others I want to play a game where I follow the storyline in a linear way.

I am the same way. I tend to get bored of linear story games quickly, so they have to be short.

I dont think there will be a videogame that will end all videogames. You cant have it all. When you focus on one aspect, you loose another, there's no way around it.

Yes, there are always sacrifices. The point of the thread, I believe, is that very few developers are even trying. We’re playing the same game templates over and over.

 

[IAmRei]

Everything I've seen from it indicates nothing towards that.

The animation systems seem the same as DG1, the physics and destruction has either been all talk, speculation, or demonstrated in limited/scripted capacity similar to games from last gen and the gen before. AI looks a smidge better, but nothing crazy, because there aren't any mechanics thrown in to accommodate better simulation.

Looks like a fun enough game, but nothing next gen looking about it from a technical or design standpoint as of yet. But it'll surely claim some of those accolades from people looking to get one over on "cinematic" games or Ubisoft-esque open world titles out of spite.

In the contrary, there are lot of things which makes DD series is not as much as open world ubiesque. There is no tower to expand map, there is also non linear stories, there are lot of choices in the stories as well. Even the character editor is top notch. And the pawn system is superb. It is not like any other. Not technically. The gamrplay itself is like against modern game design as well.

I might be agree with one thing, graphic and techical points are not the best. But the game itself is pretty unique.

 

[ProtoByte]

Most people crying for "next gen gameplay" dont know that the fuck that means. And they may think they want it, but in reality they dont.

It's less that people don't know what it means, and more that people who respond to those calls get their sensibilities offended on behalf of their favorite or most hyped games.