How about... More then 10 NPC's on per village in Bethesda games, better textures, less pop-in, further view distance, better/more extensive NPC AI and pathfinding, actual dynamic enviroments... Who knows, something we could not even imagine today. Someone's going to push those boundaries, no doubt.Sylveria said:
Poll: Who really wants a new console?
- Thread starter RickyRich
- Start date
Recommended Videos
From what I've read, much like the newer Xbox 360's, the processor, memory and GPU will be on one die, acting very much like a SoC within phones. This cuts back on space in the device itself and centralises the main core areas that will require cooling.Matthew94 said:
The name of the game with consoles has always been to create a stable, constrained platform to get developers to create the very best within the environment.
Just do what I usually do - cry for two or three years after the console is released, while saving up and waiting for the console and the good games to go down in price. If you think this current gen needs more love, give it just that. Don't let the rest of the world hold you and my impoverished ass back.
My 360 is just about shagged anyway, it was a second-hand, three-time Red-Ring-o'-Death survivor that now clunks like a Howitzer when you turn it on. Hopefully next generation will actually be stressed-tested a little.
My 360 is just about shagged anyway, it was a second-hand, three-time Red-Ring-o'-Death survivor that now clunks like a Howitzer when you turn it on. Hopefully next generation will actually be stressed-tested a little.
If that was the case, wouldn't you want it to come out sooner, so when you finish uni the console will probably be cheaper, and have more games available? Or is the fact you want to buy it when it first comes out that important to you?StBishop said:
I prefer the end of system cycles. People start pushing the limits of the consoles and making the really good games. Not a fan of system launches where it's retarded expensive and the games suck.
Well I have great news for you then, with the amount of time it takes to push production on a few million units of a new console (not to mention produce games for it) you are looking at a couple more years of gaming goodness from your current generation hardware.TheKasp said:
not to mention another year or so grace period where most big budget games are made for both versions, just a crappier version for the older models. to be honest, there is no huge rush anyway, the announcement will literally just be "its official, we are going to make a new console", and maybe detail a couple of features. you might not even get a name. personally i think consoles are due an upgrade in technology. i don't want more features really, just better and faster versions of what already exists, and i'll be very pleasedRickyRich said:
I didn't vote. I would be more than happy for a new console, however, it would have to offer something more than a graphics upgrade that will take months or years to be seen. Smoother online play with more features, better media playback (e.g. blu ray on Xbox or support for more digital video formats.
Interesting, I wasn't aware that was the general opinion among developers, thought it was just Ubisoft crying out.Matthew94 said:
Still, while I see how better hardware could expand the limits for what you can do, I can't help but fell that's just gonna lead to bigger, flashier, more impressive versions of the games we already have. Which isn't bad, but surely there are more ideas for games than just better AI and more complex worlds.
Yeah, I definitely want a new console generation. I'm a PC gamer and I'd just like the power of my PC to be used instead of the visuals of games stagnating on the level they were several years ago. I just tend to think that games that were also released on consoles could probably look better than they do.
I'm interested in seeing what newer tech could do besides better visuals, better or more complex AI routines, better loading times, more complex game systems. I see some amazing potential that we can't touch right now do to hardware limitations. On the other hand costs will have to be lower a 600 dollar console isn't viable in this economy for either the consumer or the manufacturer so I see Sony and Microsoft streching the cycle as far as they can to buffer the huge initial losses they'll see. I think in another year or two well see new consoles before that seems unlikely.
I want a console upgrade... This might stem from the fact that my last console was an NES, though.
Ugh, this is a good example of how at odds my point of view is with the current console crowd, who would scoff at or turn down much needed innovation in favour of sticking to a known comfort zone.
If I could make a harsh stereotype the mindset, I would imagine a lot of this sentiment comes from people around 21 and under. Grew up on the PS2 or Xbox and matured on the PS3/360, found a comfort zone in them and are happy to stay put. Probably more importantly, they will not have the money to by a new console at launch so rather than falling behind in being unable to play the latest and greatest games which they always must have would rather see no one get a new console generation.
The thing that bugs me most is that while I can respect people are entitled to their own opinions the predatory business side of game development would just love to see a stagnant market. To have no risks, knowing exactly what to deliver the market without risks or demands for more, having safely established development times and budgets. Exactly where a guy like Bobby Kotick would want the market to be. I'm pretty sure back in the 90's Intel tried to pull this, saying they could do no better than a 233 GHz CPU until the competition brought out something better.
If I could make a harsh stereotype the mindset, I would imagine a lot of this sentiment comes from people around 21 and under. Grew up on the PS2 or Xbox and matured on the PS3/360, found a comfort zone in them and are happy to stay put. Probably more importantly, they will not have the money to by a new console at launch so rather than falling behind in being unable to play the latest and greatest games which they always must have would rather see no one get a new console generation.
The thing that bugs me most is that while I can respect people are entitled to their own opinions the predatory business side of game development would just love to see a stagnant market. To have no risks, knowing exactly what to deliver the market without risks or demands for more, having safely established development times and budgets. Exactly where a guy like Bobby Kotick would want the market to be. I'm pretty sure back in the 90's Intel tried to pull this, saying they could do no better than a 233 GHz CPU until the competition brought out something better.
I agree onehundred percent. I just went to Microcenter and they still sell PS2 games. Also, they released a new game for the PS2 late November, 9 years after release date of the system and 4 years after the start of the new generation. 360 and PS3 games are going to be made for at least another 2-3 years, no matter what the release dates on the new systems are.capper42 said:
Not really.Matthew94 said:oppp7 said:
Have you read any gaming media recently? Ubisoft themselves said that consoles are EXTREMELY limiting, they can't do good AI because of consoles. They are so outdated at this point that they can't improve things like physics and AI.
I don't get this, people ***** about games having shit AI and framerate issues then staunchly oppose any technological advancement saying "shit's fine for another 2 years, I'm cool with it".
But then again, I haven't had any problems with AI, physics, or framerates on consoles(compared to my laptop which can't run TF2 without reducing the framerate to 5...). And the AI I was referring to was probably different than what they're trying for, or even what anyone will be able to make for a while. Mostly just wishful thinking on my part.