Doom Architect "Not Excited" by Next-Gen Consoles

[Scars Unseen]

THANK YOU! Someone needed to say it without fear of being flamed by insecure P.C. nerds desperately trying to justify their $5000 rig. Graphics are not, and have never been, what gaming is all about. As it stands, we're seeing terrible problems with people trying to recoup costs on the games they've made even with current gen graphics. Maybe once we've got beyond the situation where stuff like this [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/117931-EA-Aims-to-Broaden-Dead-Space-Audience] happens, we can think about graphics. But not before then.

It's not just graphics, though. There's severe limitations on other hardware, such as RAM and CPU speed.

For instance, an Xbox 360 trying to play this,

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-0yeT--9fCgY/TlpSXE-2qiI/AAAAAAAABng/XRj-rPNWhS8/s1600/Dwarf_Fortress_Ascii.png

...would still slow to a crawl during an invasion, water routing, volcanic eruption, large explosion, etc. because of the massive amount of calculations it uses.

Then again, it's John Carmack. He'd probably be able to optimize it, if we ignore the zeppelin-crash that was RAGE.

DING DING DING! We have a winner! Anyone who thinks that current consoles, or even PC gaming for that matter, has reached the point where no more technical improvements are relevant to gameplay seriously needs to stretch their imagination a bit. Let me know when a game system can run a game with a Dwarf Fortress level of world(and physics) simulation, at least current gen graphics with far more nonstatic elements drawn on screen, precise spacial positioning of sound, unique AI personalities for every NPC while allowing hundreds of players on LAN or online. When all of this is possible on a console, I'll accept that we've hit the point where further technical advancement is probably not strictly needed to advance the industry.

The capability to create near photorealistic environments and people isn't even half the battle. And it all takes processing power.

 

[Frostbite3789]

Pretty much every single thing you said there was wrong and misinformed.

OT This is pretty hypocritical coming from Carmack seeing as he complained about the PS3 hardware for ages and about how hard it was to hit 60 FPS on the machine.

The reason Carmack complained about the PS3 (just like all developers do) is because the hardware is shit to code for. Seriously I suggest you learn about hardware architecture and how the PS3 is a shit example of it before you criticize a man who knows more about said hardware than anyone else in the industry.

Which would be relevant if he hadn't absolutely shit the bed as far as PC goes with Rage as well.

 

[Something Amyss]

The reason Carmack complained about the PS3 (just like all developers do) is because the hardware is shit to code for. Seriously I suggest you learn about hardware architecture and how the PS3 is a shit example of it before you criticize a man who knows more about said hardware than anyone else in the industry.

But remember, it's a selling point that developers may never tap the full potential.

 

[zefiris]

PC Gamers: Determined to make everything a penis-waving contest.

And yet the fact remains: This fetish for graphics is misguided, and has made gaming in the recent years so bad. I hope that, one day, we go back to actual gameplay as a focus.

Sad.

 

[algalon]

Whatever. After seeing previews of Beyond, I'll be looking forward to us getting well past the uncanny valley next gen.

 

[Harper0341]

PC Gamers: Determined to make everything a penis-waving contest.
And yet the fact remains: This fetish for graphics is misguided, and has made gaming in the recent years so bad. I hope that, one day, we go back to actual gameplay as a focus.

Sad.

Go up 3 posts and read Scars post. It's not about graphical fidelity. The lack of processing power and the poor amount RAM in the current console generation has caused stagnation in everything.

You want better AI, realistic physics or larger maps/levels?

Lol too bad. XBox, PS3 can't do it.

Also Dwarf Fortress FTW.

 

[rapidoud]

He's saying he wants gameplay innovation to triumph over graphical.

I'd rather have the next half-life 2 than the next Crysis is what he's saying.

But then the majority of this thread are stupid and go ZOMG PLATFORM WARZ. So many graphics whores when games are about interactivity; it's really pathetic.

 

[zefiris]

Go up 3 posts and read Scars post. It's not about graphical fidelity. The lack of processing power and the poor amount RAM in the current console generation has caused stagnation in everything.

It hasn't. PC-only games have the exact same problems. You're blaming consoles because they are a convenient scapegoat, and you want to have a misplaced feeling of superiority.

It's silly. You are going nowhere with this, you're helping the industry get away with bad practices, and are, thus, helping to shovel the grave of good game design.

Good job It's your ilk that has allowed this problem to exist in the first place. Consoles? Not even part of the problem.

 

[TheBelgianGuy]

Go up 3 posts and read Scars post. It's not about graphical fidelity. The lack of processing power and the poor amount RAM in the current console generation has caused stagnation in everything.

It hasn't. PC-only games have the exact same problems. You're blaming consoles because they are a convenient scapegoat, and you want to have a misplaced feeling of superiority.

It's silly. You are going nowhere with this, you're helping the industry get away with bad practices, and are, thus, helping to shovel the grave of good game design.

Good job It's your ilk that has allowed this problem to exist in the first place. Consoles? Not even part of the problem.

Too bad everything you said is wrong, and you made yourself look like a huge hypocrite as well. Congrats! Good job
Do some research. Lack of processing power in consoles causes stagnation. Pc gaming does not have the same problem, please try again.

 

[Deadyawn]

I think the guy's got a point. Also I feel obliged to agree with him because he is awesome.

Seriously though, I've never really been a huge proponent of better graphics. Sure, they genrally look better but I never bought a game because it was pretty or didn't buy it because it was eye searingly horendous (indeed some of my favorite games would probably fall under that category). I think he's probably right in that, purely from a graphical fidelity standpoint, we can do just about anything we want. It's also worth noting that good graphics doesn't necesarily mean good looking and that what is important is the aesthetics.

Also, apparently most consoles have low processing power and that the new gen will help with that(according to other posts in this thread). I can safely say I have no idea about that. The point I want to make is that I would rather have a game with good writing and fun gameplay than I would one with pretty graphics and nothing else.

 

[Deadyawn]

I think the guy's got a point. Also I feel obliged to agree with him because he is awesome.

Seriously though, I've never really been a huge proponent of better graphics. Sure, they genrally look better but I never bought a game because it was pretty or didn't buy it because it was eye searingly horendous (indeed some of my favorite games would probably fall under that category). I think he's probably right in that, purely from a graphical fidelity standpoint, we can do just about anything we want. It's also worth noting that good graphics doesn't necesarily mean good looking and that what is important is the aesthetics.

Also, apparently most consoles have low processing power and that the new gen will help with that(according to other posts in this thread). I can safely say I have no idea about that. The point I want to make is that I would rather have a game with good writing and fun gameplay than I would one with pretty graphics and nothing else.

 

[CaptainOctopus]

Yeah sure and 640kb ought to be enough for anybody xD.

Lets say I want to make an online fps similar to Dayz but on steroids with like 1000 player capability and I'm not talking about some shitty static mmo game either. I want smooth controls and solid gameplay mechanics, together with an interactive, changeable open world, with super high detail immersive dx11 environments. No loading times, very advance physics and thousands of smart AI players etc, etc. As well as constant 60+fps and everyone should have less than 50ping at all time.

Oh what's that you say? You can't do that on current hardware? Not even on highend PCs with very high speed internet connection? Really? I'm so freaking shocked.

I still have a lot of respect and admiration for Carmack and what he have done for the industry but honestly maybe it's time for him to make really good games again instead of talking bs about hardware and gamedesign. It certainly doesn't help that the last game he made felt like a glorified techdemo, which when finally released didn't even have that fantastic tech either I might add. A Doom 4 with the spirit of the first games would be nice. You know, very good tech AND great mechanics, fun gameplay, interesting environments, clever leveldesign, imaginative enemies and weapons and so on.

 

[Insideout Ink Demon]

i partly agree, graphics are fine, i think its the sive limitations of the DVD and the limited RAM of current gen that are the major things to update

 

[SpAc3man]

As much of a genius as this guy is I have a feeling his statements a bit off. Sure graphics aren't the only important thing but we have been at a point where devs have had to hold back to make things run well on consoles for a while now. I am also unsure about his idea on virtual reality as that was tried years ago and just ended up making people feel motion sick. Perhaps he really means augmented reality?

 

[ThunderCavalier]

I agree with Carmack in that we seem to believe that 'pushing the envelope' seemed to be all about graphical fidelity, which, and let's be honest here, has gotten to the point where we only get the most minute of changes each passing year.

I'm no graphical connoisseur, and I don't own a HDTV, so maybe I can't get into the 'graphical quality' that other people harp about, but I really do not see the big difference in graphics between Modern Warfare 1 and Modern Warfare 3. I saw some of the changes between Bad Company 2 and Battlefield 3 and Halo 3 and Halo Reach, but... they were pretty small, tbh. Just some more detailed textures and whatnot, stuff that only the most nitpicky of people would whine about without.

What happened to substantially different environments and innovative methods of playing? ... And NO, your physics engine no longer applies. We get it; things realistically fall apart when they blow up. Can you give us something else besides that now?

 

[NinjaMatt2201]

Thank you, finally someone agrees with me that new consoles aren't needed yet. And someone with a lot of cred, too.