Except that, for small developers, more polygons needs better equipment and longer dev times...which can get pretty expensive if you don't have a Ubisoft-sized budget.The Hairminator said:
Ubisoft: Bring on the PlayStation 4 and Xbox 1492
- Thread starter Greg Tito
- Start date
Have you ever used 3DS Max? seriously, have you used any 3d modeling software and not that pos from google thats like paint is to photoshop? You have no idea what you are talking about. more polygons is way easier to do than less in any studio grade 3d model software, and requires nothing more than a common office PC with a 2 year old video card.gyroscopeboy said:
longer dev times is caused by dumbing things down! snap a picture of a wall with your camera, load that into photoshop and make a seamless tile. tell me how long that took compared to snap the picture, load and make seamless then completly redo it with the brushes and layering so it looks as good but fits on old shit hardware. thats just what the fuck is happening in game studios right now. yes games are costing more because of inflation and the automated tools make the job quicker and easier to make better but the consoles cannot run it so they need to spend more time dumbing the shit down.
Yes Please
Bring the new consoles now because graphics on the consoles now are not good enough
I don't care about the realism and graphical improvements I just want better frames per seconds
Playing under 720p below 30fps on my PS3 pisses me off when I just finished playing on my PC 1920X1200 60fps
Bring the new consoles now because graphics on the consoles now are not good enough
I don't care about the realism and graphical improvements I just want better frames per seconds
Playing under 720p below 30fps on my PS3 pisses me off when I just finished playing on my PC 1920X1200 60fps
No, it has not become stale. Development costs are high enough as it is and we don't need a new generation to worry about all for just slightly better graphics.
The question is what they want to use those consoles for. For me personally, current generation graphics are more than alright. It's the gameplay that often falls short, be it because it's essentially the same for a lot of sequels (most military shooter series have those problems). Pretty looking graphics and extraordinary physics come last and can polish a game that is already good.
Can we push the next generation back until the majority of potentially interested people will actually have the money available?
The consensus here seems to be that there's no need for a new console generation in the next few years and having new consoles out soon would infact be harmful to gamers and the industry. I wonder if that same opinion was generally held in 2004 or if something has changed so that technological advancement is no longer desired.
New consoles aren't going to result in new, exciting games. The only reason we don't have as many exciting games now is because people keep insisting the money is in copying other more popular games.
Honestly, I think we hit a peak in terms of what our consoles can do. If we improve, literally nothing is going to change in terms of the quality of our games. Sure, the graphics might change, but what will that ultimately accomplish?
Honestly, I think we hit a peak in terms of what our consoles can do. If we improve, literally nothing is going to change in terms of the quality of our games. Sure, the graphics might change, but what will that ultimately accomplish?
Please! Don't insult me!Sp3ctre H said:
Can *ANY* game do this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MuWuTc5agVA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GckOkpeJ3BY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g10NDl6HdD4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xrb8PSpkhkQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZNFu9UIkpiQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nlcc9wJAzFQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vz1Y5YkqgyQ
I'll eat my own ass, if you can find a PS3 game that can do all that!
I think it's a stupid idea to try and release a new groundbreaking console when a lot of developers can barely cope with the graphics technology. I'm fine with handheld innovations and smaller upgrades to the existing frames, but right now we need to wait for development teams to catch up.
...except this is from Ubisoft who actually learned to cope early on. Maybe we should just ignore Ubisoft as the outlier and wait for when it doesn't cost an arm, leg, and testicle to try and make an innovative game so we can get some people with genuine talent back into the mainstream instead of another console generation choking to death on Call of Duty clones while the development cost shuts down studios altogether.
...except this is from Ubisoft who actually learned to cope early on. Maybe we should just ignore Ubisoft as the outlier and wait for when it doesn't cost an arm, leg, and testicle to try and make an innovative game so we can get some people with genuine talent back into the mainstream instead of another console generation choking to death on Call of Duty clones while the development cost shuts down studios altogether.
I really do think some developers are being held back by the current generation of consoles. Honestly, Crysis 2 was not "almost" a step backwards, it was a huge leap backwards from the original. Console games run at low resolutions (HD is just a marketing term), at low frame rates, with low or non-existant AA along with other effects, with extremely poor textures. Not only do I find console games graphically ugly but they also run badly, which is very noticeable in FPS games.NLS said:
It is hard to tell how bad consoles currently are until you actually experience something better. Many people struggle to understand how "HD" 1080p television could look any better than the regular resolution before they actually experience it and get used to it.
I just bought a 360 2 weeks ago. I am fine with that (which I mainly got for a media server anyways), and my PC. Focus on the PC a little more, and you don't have to wait for other companies to catch up to where you are/think you are.
Look, we have maybe two generations of consoles left before the graphical output =/= viable financing. So I'm happy to have my 360 for another five or ten years more. I have no complaints about this current generation in terms of graphical quality. I no longer find myself wishing for things to "look more realistic". I'm in my zen here people, leave it alone!
Sure, new technology brings along new toys for developers to play with, and new stuff/physics for us to enjoy.Hyakunin Isshu said:
However, when was the last time you took time out of a round of Capture the Flag or Team Deathmatch and looked at how people's heads explode? When was the last time you stopped to admire how the Heavy's silhouette works so well with his actual skin and design?
The answer is never, because we, as consumers, no longer waste our time looking at the graphics and designs of the worlds we have been put into. Really, the chances of the Lagoa engine impacting our games is literally zero to none. We almost instinctively shut these things out and focus on the enemy, or the objective.
I can't, for the life of me, find the images I'm looking for, but there was an article (Which I think was on the Escapist) here a while back showing what the players saw when they played Modern Warfare 2:
The casual player just saw a jumble of stuff cluttered everywhere, trying to see everything and not understand what they were looking for.
The hardcore player saw the minimap, the bad guy, his weapon, his ammo count, and the score.
We've reached a point where there's absolutely nothing to gain from improving our technology aside from being slightly fascinated with new physics or graphics, because we're going to end up shutting those out around 2 hours into our games. Why bother? We need something, anything, that can prove that this new tech is going to be useful for more than just making everything look a little bit better, otherwise we'll just shut it right out and go back to the exact same routines.
A new console at this moment would be mundane, the 360 and the PS3 were designed to be able to expand their capabilities and in that area they are victorious, the graphics over the years are becoming so much better, and note that this is on the same consoles. We won't need to upgrade consoles for a while now, because right now they work just fine.
plus the games are perfect.
plus the games are perfect.
NO. No, bad Ubisoft.
I JUST friggin bought my PS3! My bank account is STILL trying to recover. I am NOT in the mood to spend MORE money on MORE SHIT, when the shit I've got works just fine.
I really don't see why there'd even BE a next console generation any time soon. Graphics are nearly as good as they can get, and frankly, they'd have to throw in some REEEEEAALY expensive hardware to even make it powerful enough to warrant gamers even CONSIDERING it worth buying another console.
And at that point, the price is going to be so steep, nobody but the richest kids on the block are going to even think twice about buying it. Not exactly the largest demographic.
And then there's the fact that MS and Sony JUST launched the Kinect and Move, and the 360 slim hasn't even been out for a full year yet.
All in all, its just too expensive and foolish for MS and Sony to launch new consoles any time soon. Sure, they're probably working on them as we speak, but I'd say they won't be announced for at least another year or two.
(Watch, I end up eating my words when they all announce new consoles at this year's E3.)
I JUST friggin bought my PS3! My bank account is STILL trying to recover. I am NOT in the mood to spend MORE money on MORE SHIT, when the shit I've got works just fine.
I really don't see why there'd even BE a next console generation any time soon. Graphics are nearly as good as they can get, and frankly, they'd have to throw in some REEEEEAALY expensive hardware to even make it powerful enough to warrant gamers even CONSIDERING it worth buying another console.
And at that point, the price is going to be so steep, nobody but the richest kids on the block are going to even think twice about buying it. Not exactly the largest demographic.
And then there's the fact that MS and Sony JUST launched the Kinect and Move, and the 360 slim hasn't even been out for a full year yet.
All in all, its just too expensive and foolish for MS and Sony to launch new consoles any time soon. Sure, they're probably working on them as we speak, but I'd say they won't be announced for at least another year or two.
(Watch, I end up eating my words when they all announce new consoles at this year's E3.)
Shut up Ubisoft, I can't afford to catch up with gaming as it is. A new console generation will making gaming, for me at least, inaccessible.
First, I like to say "F U Spam Checker!"Sp3ctre H said:
Now back to you, Sp3ctre H.
Instead of talking to you, I'll let my links do the talking for me:
http://www.insomniacgames.com/blogcast/blog/mike_acton/1503082
And if that's not enough, then think about why people paid more then a billion dollars to see awful movies, like Michael Bay's Transformers, and James Cameron's Avatar.
But back to gameplay: IF we didn't care about physics or graphics, then what can we do to make the game better? I'll say the same thing to you that I said in Portal 2: "The problem isn't that we aren't trying new ideas. The problem is we already tried most of them in the 90s(Dungeon Keeper, Populous, Sim(something), X-COM, Star Control, Master of Orion, Syndicate, A Mind Forever Voyaging, Moonbase Commander, Grim Fandango, Sid Meier's Pirates!, Homeworld etc.), But most gamers didn't like them. And Old man Croshaw is ***NOT*** helping to change that! Mr. Croshaw knows about Civilization 5, but he doesn't want to even try it!So what can we do? If you want to try new ideas, then you can't ask the Big Guys to do it, no, you need the smaller makers to do it first."