I'm thrilled to find out what Nintendo has come up with this time. The 360 and PS3 on the other hand can stay right where they are. Hell, as far as the PS3 is concerned I only just bought one. I'm not ready for it to be outdated yet.
Poll: New Console Generation: Why?
- Thread starter tthor
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I know...but my point is...bob1052 said:
1) We're living in a (mostly) world wide economic depression/recession.
2) Making a game is getting to damn expensive outside of the 'Demi-Gods' - unless the company wants to release a XBL/PSN/WW game.
-Let the generation continue so that cost of making a game goes down and new companies can via for our money.
3) While I realize that DVD-9 isn't 'the bees knees' anymore, why not try and make a DVD-10 (or however it's done).
Or, hell, this is a thought...GO MULTI-DISC - I know this can't be done for ALL games, but I don't see why you can't do it for several non 'open world' types.
4) This is more of a personal preference, but this gen has yet to see its 'experimental' store released titles.
While there are a FEW 'odd ball games on disc' - most seem to be 'Generic TPS/FPS w/BROWN STUFF'.
I want to shoot up aliens like the next guy, but I'd love to do it in a place that's not colored in shades of grey, black, and poop brown.
The 360 is light years behind current hardware technology. It can do some impressive things considering it's limitations, but it doesn't hold a candle to anything you can do with a PC. It's about time for the next generation of consoles.
both Sony and Micrsoft said there looking at a 2014 or 2015 for a new console based on statements made about creating a longer console cycle to reduce the price of losing crap tons of money every 7 years like before, nintendo is just jumping the gun since the wii hit market saturation anyone who wanted one got it and game sales are going to be enough to covee this loss so nintendo needs a new console sooner than anyone else. We might be hearing about Sony and Micrsofts console plans within a year or so but I don't think they'll be foolish enough to be pressured by nintendo's last grasp at being the king I from what little info we have I think it's going to tank hard most traditional gamers will find it over the top gimmicky and all the non gamers already have their wii's and one game theres no reason for them to spend the money on an upgrade oh sure some of them will but I bet it's going to be a small percentage.
Graphics isn't the only thing that can improve from generation to generation. CPU power can improve greatly which would help with AI and things of the like. More RAM and a better graphics card would improve how much could be loaded and stored at one time, thus reducing load times and frequency of loads. Things of that nature can all improve.
I'm more than happy with my PS3.
The quality of games that really push the system is amazing. I just don't have any need for a graphic increase.
The only things I would want from the PS3 is the ability to fully install games to the HDD and to enable modding.
From the rumor I heard, Skyrim will let PS3 gamers use mods, if that's true, it will be amazing.
The quality of games that really push the system is amazing. I just don't have any need for a graphic increase.
The only things I would want from the PS3 is the ability to fully install games to the HDD and to enable modding.
From the rumor I heard, Skyrim will let PS3 gamers use mods, if that's true, it will be amazing.
Keep moving forward. That's the key. If we stay still too long, then we stagnate. Keep pressing forward.
Guys, this is not a whole new generation of console. New generations happen because of major advancements that push beyond what is capable on the current hardware. The 360 and PS3 are nowhere near being outdated, because developers aren't being stifled by the limits of that hardware. The Wii, on the other hand, was a puny piece of tech that has done nothing but limit developers from the get-go. Between that, and the fact that there have been four superfluous hardware updates for their DS handheld, it's highly likely that this new console will just be the Wii restyled with slightly better hardware to address the fact that the original is heavily underpowered.
tldr: Nintendo releasing a slightly powered-up Wii in accordance with their "Buy a new DS every year" business plan is not cause to call this the start of a "next generation".
tldr: Nintendo releasing a slightly powered-up Wii in accordance with their "Buy a new DS every year" business plan is not cause to call this the start of a "next generation".
Pretty much this. And an HD Wii is no more a new generation than the 360 Elite or the flat PS2, in my humble opinion.8bitlove2a03 said:
Damnit, people ...
Allow me to explain why making games exclusively for DirectX 11 (or equivalent) is cheaper.
If you're making 3D models, you start by making it rough, then increase the complexity by adding polygons.
It's time consuming stuff, making your objects look good.
DX11 capable hardware can do this work for you.
You don't need to ship an object that looks like a sphere, you could just ship an icosahedron which becomes increasingly sphere-like depending on the proximity of your in-game camera.
Ok, sure .. it's a different way of doing things, so the initial time investment in order to develop the skills is significant.
But, once it's all going, you could have games being a quarter of the size while still having more complexity.
In fact, there's potentially limitless complexity because you're doing the detail in realtime.
The current spheres you have in games right now? What would you see if you're standing on the surface and zoomed in 1000x?
With hardware tessellation, you can zoom in indefinitely, and you'll always have that smooth round surface.
However, none of this is going to happen so long as devs have to make stuff the old way.
They are already shipping objects that are extremely complex.
They are already limiting camera views etc. so you don't see their low res textures and/or jagged edges.
As of right now, DX11 is about as useful as the woman bits on a nun. It's there, and it helps a little, but actually isn't doing much.
IF a new console generation makes hardware tessellation native, so devs don't have to put up with making shit for those outdated DX9 GPUs, games could potentially be made twice as fast, be half the size, for twice as much content.
Heck, they could possibly be run off of USB 3.0 flash drives.
Games the size of a key-ring, that don't get accidentally scratched, and potentially loading in under 5 seconds.
(disclaimer: that's talking about flash drives with speeds that currently do not exist .. we're only seeing a little over double the speed of a hard drive at present .. BUT, if it's going to use the same interface, it could improve over the life-cycle of the console)
Allow me to explain why making games exclusively for DirectX 11 (or equivalent) is cheaper.
If you're making 3D models, you start by making it rough, then increase the complexity by adding polygons.
It's time consuming stuff, making your objects look good.
DX11 capable hardware can do this work for you.
You don't need to ship an object that looks like a sphere, you could just ship an icosahedron which becomes increasingly sphere-like depending on the proximity of your in-game camera.
Ok, sure .. it's a different way of doing things, so the initial time investment in order to develop the skills is significant.
But, once it's all going, you could have games being a quarter of the size while still having more complexity.
In fact, there's potentially limitless complexity because you're doing the detail in realtime.
The current spheres you have in games right now? What would you see if you're standing on the surface and zoomed in 1000x?
With hardware tessellation, you can zoom in indefinitely, and you'll always have that smooth round surface.
However, none of this is going to happen so long as devs have to make stuff the old way.
They are already shipping objects that are extremely complex.
They are already limiting camera views etc. so you don't see their low res textures and/or jagged edges.
As of right now, DX11 is about as useful as the woman bits on a nun. It's there, and it helps a little, but actually isn't doing much.
IF a new console generation makes hardware tessellation native, so devs don't have to put up with making shit for those outdated DX9 GPUs, games could potentially be made twice as fast, be half the size, for twice as much content.
Heck, they could possibly be run off of USB 3.0 flash drives.
Games the size of a key-ring, that don't get accidentally scratched, and potentially loading in under 5 seconds.
(disclaimer: that's talking about flash drives with speeds that currently do not exist .. we're only seeing a little over double the speed of a hard drive at present .. BUT, if it's going to use the same interface, it could improve over the life-cycle of the console)
Seeing as I got a PS3 mere months ago, I'd really rather not have it become obsolete within the next two years.
Why can't people handle rumours?tthor said:
Jesus, we don't know anything for sure apart from the fact that Nintendo is definitely moving on to screw up another gaming experience. Everything else is just speculation. Learn to deal with it.
A. Nintendo is mainstream and PS3 and X-box are niche. There are more Wii owners then X-box or PS3 owners so the mainstream title goes to Nintendo. You were bass ackwards.
B. There's an interesting story of a patent clerk who said that everything that was worth invited had been invented. [a href="http://www.quotationspage.com/weblog/2005-08-26-239/"]That[/a] was in 1899. Clearly saying that progress has reached an end is an incorrect statement. Technology marches on.
B. There's an interesting story of a patent clerk who said that everything that was worth invited had been invented. [a href="http://www.quotationspage.com/weblog/2005-08-26-239/"]That[/a] was in 1899. Clearly saying that progress has reached an end is an incorrect statement. Technology marches on.
Eeh, money?
As for consumers, we don't really need a new generation, but the thing about new consoles that benefit gamers are not technology, it's forced innovation. It's the one point where everybody can make new and interesting IPs. That said, I don't want to go broke for all the new consoles.
As for consumers, we don't really need a new generation, but the thing about new consoles that benefit gamers are not technology, it's forced innovation. It's the one point where everybody can make new and interesting IPs. That said, I don't want to go broke for all the new consoles.
Other than Nintendo it is still gonna be awhile till we get new consoles. How can I tell? Kinect and PlayStation Move. These took a great deal of time and money to make and neither Microsoft or Sony will move on without serious return on their investment if they can help it.
Consoles are long overdue for a new generation, especially the RAM. 512mb is way too limiting. I think consoles should have a new generation every four years, more or less.
Because all the PC elitists are complaining that us 'console f*ck-tards' are ruining gaming by forcing developers to 'dumb down' their precious games, and so if the industry brings out a new generation of consoles maybe it'll stop them whining for a year or so!tthor said:
Sorry, only joking.
Seriously though, these days technology develops at an astronomical rate, and consoles that are five or six years old just don't cut it any more. There was only three or four years between the release of the original Xbox and the 360, so why have we waited nearly seven years for the replacement of the 360?
Now, part of me is a bit dubious about the next gen of consoles, mostly because I have a horrible feeling that they'll include both motion controls and 3D as standard (both of these are 'advances' that I could happily live without), but it should be interesting to see what Nintendo and Microsoft come up with. Sony, not so much. My plans to buy a PS3 this summer have been well and truly ditched.