Ubisoft Says Gamers Are "Starving" for Next-Gen
- Thread starter Cognimancer
- Start date
Uhhh, no. No I'm not Mr Guillemot. The only thing I am starving for is heavy metal and more games like Shadow of The Colossus and Just Cause 2. Unless the next gen can provide this for me, then we are in business. If not, talk to the hand. I'll stick the previous generations thank you very much.
if you want growth and customization you buy a PC. if you want staability and cheap unrealiable hardware you buy consoles. the whole reason consoles exist is because its a united platform and thus way easier to program for and use than technologically superior but more complex PCs.
I hate when game companies tell gamers what they want...9 times out of 10 it's some completely moronic statement. While I'm certain there are plenty that are awaiting this next gen, the majority of people that I've spoken with on the subect are in the same position I am: do we even really NEED a new generation? That question combined with all the shitty details that have come out about the next generation and it's really hard to justify wanting to pick one up.
It's like Sony and Microsoft spent a couple years soaking up information about all the things gamers hate about videogames and decided to try and stuff'em all into one package.
"Always online? No physical games? Not backwards-compatible? Sounds good to me!"
It's like Sony and Microsoft spent a couple years soaking up information about all the things gamers hate about videogames and decided to try and stuff'em all into one package.
"Always online? No physical games? Not backwards-compatible? Sounds good to me!"
I don't believe that many gamers are actually starving for Next-Gen consoles/games. They just want good games and games that everyone has been waiting for/anticipating for years and years.
If developers are literally waiting to give us these titles for the Next-Gen consoles/engines, then so be it. I don't believe everyone will appreciate the fact that they will need to purchase a whole new console to play Kingdom Hearts 3 or the next Halo installment, but some might merit it as a reasonable excuse to grab the console.
If developers are literally waiting to give us these titles for the Next-Gen consoles/engines, then so be it. I don't believe everyone will appreciate the fact that they will need to purchase a whole new console to play Kingdom Hearts 3 or the next Halo installment, but some might merit it as a reasonable excuse to grab the console.
I consider modern games to be remarkably pretty. That's besides the point. They can be better and it only serves our purpose to make them capable of being better. I think you're mistaking developers for story writers here. The plot of the game doesn't change based on graphics, but the ability or platform to tell the story more efficiently can.weirdguy said:
Again, I point to the Occulus Rift as a new potential method of gaming that will require additional processing. Every graphical element of gaming will be improved here. Companies will figure out better methods of generating water, proper lighting, movement, and all other kinds of things that current gen technology is pretty but not perfect in. These new designs will come together to form new game engines that smaller companies will then purchase a license to use as the platform to tell their stories on and the bar gets raised even higher.
Do you honestly have no appreciation for graphical beauty? I consider it an augment of the story.
It does no one any harm for the graphics to be capable of doing more. It DOES harm us when companies like Bethesda can't fit the world they've created in our consoles without significant modifications. The day I figured out what the problem was with Skyrim (within a week, actually, I've done extensive work as a software tester where bloating was an issue), I immediately began buying components for a more poweful machine and within two months was enjoying all Skyrim had to offer while the ps3 users suffered.
You don't know this unless you're a developer. But companies are beginning to have to put significant effort into scaling their work appropriately. A more powerful machine would alleviate significant resources and with the ps3 in particular ports will now be a LOT easier with the proprietary hardware crap done away with.
We're looking at greater efficiencies here. Companies aren't going to be forced to create the most cutting age game here. They've got to figure out how much they can afford to spend given a reasonable forecast of profit and then stick to it. What comes out doesn't have to be what Crysis once was to computers.
I generally disagree with your lament that modern games have bad stories. I see the Bioshocks, inFamous, Fable, Oblivion and Skyrim, the Fallouts, the Portals, the Mass Effects and so many other great games and know that they pushed the limits in their time and still delivered the story. Graphics do not cost plot. So please don't think one necessarily impacts the other.
We're always starving for new games. Just make sure your library makes the purchase of a new console favorable. Learn from the mistakes of the vita.
okay
the point i'm trying to make here is that
by putting the focus on graphical and hardware capability
the big name developers are using this to DODGE THE ISSUE as far as culpability goes for the mistakes we've been seeing recently, which don't have anything to do with visuals or hardware
neither of those things are going to fix the problems we see with current trends
sure, they're going to LOOK better
but it's still going to be a polished turd because they're going to point at the graphics and say that this is why their game is better, while they're still putting the same, tired old shit out
they're just going to spend their whole budget on making it look fancy while not doing anything at all towards the important design decisions that really determine how fun or engaging the game is
like they did with this generation
i don't have anything against better visuals
but this is just a copout and they're not addressing any of the real issues. this won't actually solve the problems we see now. people didn't vote EA worst company of the year because their games were ugly!...
this new generation isn't the magic pill, and it's not going to solve anything
the point i'm trying to make here is that
by putting the focus on graphical and hardware capability
the big name developers are using this to DODGE THE ISSUE as far as culpability goes for the mistakes we've been seeing recently, which don't have anything to do with visuals or hardware
neither of those things are going to fix the problems we see with current trends
sure, they're going to LOOK better
but it's still going to be a polished turd because they're going to point at the graphics and say that this is why their game is better, while they're still putting the same, tired old shit out
they're just going to spend their whole budget on making it look fancy while not doing anything at all towards the important design decisions that really determine how fun or engaging the game is
like they did with this generation
i don't have anything against better visuals
but this is just a copout and they're not addressing any of the real issues. this won't actually solve the problems we see now. people didn't vote EA worst company of the year because their games were ugly!...
this new generation isn't the magic pill, and it's not going to solve anything
thanks for the sweeping generalisation. Some pc gamers love pc gaming because we can keep all our games on one system no matter how old (within reason)JokerboyJordan said:
Although I'll admit my Nzxt Phantom case is OTT
EDIT oh yes n mods. Awesome awesome mods
You should consider that a lot of modern glitches or graphical errors are related to multiple issues including which the difficulties of fitting a modern quality game into a 6 or 7 year old console. It is a feat to make a game as beautiful as some of these new games work. A lot of programming goes in to figuring it out and cutting the fat. For Skyrim, it was really obvious that this was the cause and nearly all of their patches were designed to clean up clutter and stop asset bloating. Heck, dungeons didn't even reset in the first month and nirnroot blooms stacked every time you collected more. But it's also true for other games. I'd say the ability to patch issues post launch has done more to harm game reliability than anything else.weirdguy said:
Systems that are more powerful will be more capable at handling certain types of coding or processing errors and accounting for bloated assets. It should only make things better unless someone overshoots their goals/budgets. If used appropriately, the significant reduction in porting assets to get games playable on the playstation like they had to have for the ps3 will free up developers, time and money that much more.
But I absolutely agree that some issues won't get waived away by better graphics. I just think that enough issues will be alleviated or even mostly resolved to make this upgrade worth your while. If it makes games look better and helps remove the problem some glitches can cause then again, I have to ask, what are we losing by this transition and what makes it worth fighting against? The next generation is mostly standard hardware from what we've seen and the 720 shouldn't randomly deviate from that model. Developers will be using the same kind of code they've been using for normal machines and so there won't be a huge learning curve like the ps3 presented.
Man, I want a future where I put on something like the Oculus Rift and can explore beautiful and detailed landscapes. I want to be astounded and I really want technologies like virtual reality or more dynamic environments to become the norm. But, I'm also a tech nerd with a strong software background. So perhaps it's just more exciting to me than it is to others when I think about the possibilities of the normal system being capable of so much more.
Well, I suppose only time will tell. I just think we should keep a steady grip on things and not look at this as the solution to the most pressing problems, one of which has to do with escalating budget costs for these games...I'll be onboard for tech possibilities when we've resolved sustainability and quality control.
You're making valid points. They do need to do better quality control and budgeting. I'm just pointing out that they're not two mutually exclusive things and more power under the hood can aid them in those endeavors. It's just that limited hardware is a bigger problem than you may think. It is practically becoming an art form in itself to fit ever more beautiful graphics and dynamic scripts in the same box without overburdoning it. Devs not having to focus on scalability while trying to make things more impressive will accomplish more than you may think.weirdguy said:
All the while, it will make games all the more pretty, realistic and detailed. The thing we should be afraid of is any kind of possibility of artistic games disappearing just because realism becomes so possible. Our ultra realistic CODs and MWs are nice and all, but I still love sitting down to things like Limbo and Borderlands that go the way of stylistic art rather than raw realism. But as long as the demand remains, so will the games(*crosses fingers*).
I've seen nothing that impresses me so far. It's Microsoft's game to lose, it really is. They and possibly Valve are the last hope to impress me.
I was prepared to be interested in the iNvidia Shield, until I heard it doesn't have Steam and has to "Stream" PC games, but only after you get a high-end video card for your PC. So what does it even do? Play Android games? Wow! My cell phone does that and it was free with a contract, not $350. Why did they make this thing?
The timing is pretty bad for large corporations to talk about how hungry we are to spend more money for things, when we have less of it than ever. It makes them look oblivious. Meanwhile, publishers are failing to meet their fanciful projections based on wishful thinking. Could it be a coincidence?
Yeah, I know I'm a grump, but a new console seems more like a gamble than a sure thing right now.
I was prepared to be interested in the iNvidia Shield, until I heard it doesn't have Steam and has to "Stream" PC games, but only after you get a high-end video card for your PC. So what does it even do? Play Android games? Wow! My cell phone does that and it was free with a contract, not $350. Why did they make this thing?
The timing is pretty bad for large corporations to talk about how hungry we are to spend more money for things, when we have less of it than ever. It makes them look oblivious. Meanwhile, publishers are failing to meet their fanciful projections based on wishful thinking. Could it be a coincidence?
Yeah, I know I'm a grump, but a new console seems more like a gamble than a sure thing right now.
Just remember that console specs are not equivalent to pc specs. They're optimized entirely differently with consoles being a lot more efficient.cdemares said:
To beat a dead horse, Skyrim/Bioshock Infinite/Mass Effect 3, all very pretty games and all playable on the ps3 which basically has 512MBs of RAM split into two 246MB components and a 6-year old processor that unnecessarily splits assets into seperate categories in which any category being too bloated will crash the system. These are also playable on the 360, a non-partitioned 512MB RAM system with a 7 year old standard processor. The same is not true on the PC version with these kinds of specs.
So an 8GB RAM console with a much newer processor that is also standard (no silly asset categories) is a skip leap and a jump ahead. This console should be multiple times more capable than its predecessor and the 720 will be no different. I wouldn't call them 16 times more capable than the ps3 just because it's 16 times more RAM that also isn't partitioned. Because a lot more than the RAM matters and I haven't entirely quantified or seen quantified how the CPU/GPU compares to the original, it does look impressive comparatively. But based on what I've seen the specs indicate multiple times more processing. If you're not impressed by that, and you may not be, my pc is much more powerful (32gb, new i7 processor with bridged videocards), then that's probably because we haven't had games made to harvest that kind of power yet.
You may not know this, but developer's hands are bound by the consoles. If they're going to make a AAA title then it needs to be playable on the two powerful consoles and pcs. That means the game isn't going to be made beyond the console's capabilities. As such, we've had games that have been able to scale up to utilize more power but we haven't really seen games made at a much higher level yet.
If Watch Dogs wasn't looking so good, I would hate Ubisoft. Far Cry 3 was good also. It's weird, it's like the company has a split personality... But OT, no, I'm not starving for Next Gen. At all. PC holds up fine. This article did make me hungry though... Brb warming up Hungry-man.
Now that is pretty impressive for the consoles, given what they can do now. I'm not paying enough attention to know any of that stuff. Even so, the games have to rise to the occasion and that takes imagination, which just needs time and talent. I still think it's a gamble and I suspect that one of the first parties will spend themselves to death. They need imagination. Ironically, Nintendo actually gets it. They just didn't push far enough ahead technologically to differentiate themselves from the other current consoles.Lightknight said:
You hit the nail on the head. The introduction of greater technology likewise introduces a much greater threat of developers and publishers over-spending. Not because it'll cost more money to make games, it should be the same since the hardware has been standardized, but because the big players have expressed some kind of difficulty understanding how to forecast their sales and then budget accordingly. Lately, it seems as if they thought that HUGE amounts of money for developing and huge amounts for marketing would make customers appear out of thin air. It's like they don't understand that they can make a ton of money if they play their cards right but instead they try to pretend that every game they make is going to make COD money and so they budget for that instead.cdemares said:
But make no mistake, that threat is already there and it is already hurting publishers right now. Nothing will fix poor management except for themselves.
Ideally, we'll see several years of incremental technological improvements in which they can build off one another.