Why Are We So Excited About Next Gen

  • 73 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#51 Posted by Ilovegames1992 (14221 posts) -

[QUOTE="Ilovegames1992"]

[QUOTE="ReddestSkies"]

I give this trolling attempt a 5 out of 10. It sure is an ambitious attempt, but it's too easy for anyone with half a brain to put 2 and 2 together and see why it can't be true.

ReddestSkies

Mario Kart > Burnout Paradise.

Final Fantasy 7 > Final Fantasy XIII

Splinter Cell Chaos Theory > Splinter Cell Conviction

GTA Vice City > GTA 4

Quite simple really...

Here's a very simple way to see it: would GTA Vice City be possible on the SNES, with super super super downgraded graphics, without sacrificing gameplay?

No, but there are better, more fun games on the SNES than were on last generation...

#52 Posted by Bigboi500 (29420 posts) -

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]

[QUOTE="Ilovegames1992"]

Mario Kart > Burnout Paradise.

Final Fantasy 7 > Final Fantasy XIII

Splinter Cell Chaos Theory > Splinter Cell Conviction

GTA Vice City > GTA 4

Quite simple really...

CarnageHeart

Well said. He's the real troll here, calling others trolls. How ironic.

Cherrypicking a handful of examples to support a false conclusion ('All movies are superhero movies, to prove it I'll name five of them!) doesn't make it true, and would get laughed out of Debate 101.

Calling others a troll over a disagreement is what would be bad debating. Read my other comment about the subject for a more detailed view of my opinion on the matter. I don't think it's a clear-cut issue.

#53 Posted by ReddestSkies (4087 posts) -

[QUOTE="ReddestSkies"]

[QUOTE="Ilovegames1992"]

Mario Kart > Burnout Paradise.

Final Fantasy 7 > Final Fantasy XIII

Splinter Cell Chaos Theory > Splinter Cell Conviction

GTA Vice City > GTA 4

Quite simple really...

Ilovegames1992

Here's a very simple way to see it: would GTA Vice City be possible on the SNES, with super super super downgraded graphics, without sacrificing gameplay?

No, but there are better, more fun games on the SNES than were on last generation...

I'd say that every SNES genre that I care about has evolved tremendously gameplay-wise in the last 20 years, far beyond whatever the SNES was capable of. And I'm just talking about genres staying in 2D.

#54 Posted by CarnageHeart (18316 posts) -

[QUOTE="CarnageHeart"]

[QUOTE="Ilovegames1992"]

Mario Kart > Burnout Paradise.

Final Fantasy 7 > Final Fantasy XIII

Splinter Cell Chaos Theory > Splinter Cell Conviction

GTA Vice City > GTA 4

Quite simple really...

Bigboi500

Your first comparison is a very, very strange one. Burnout Paradise is a freeroamer in which racers try to nudge each other into having accidents. A better comparison (perhaps the game you were actually thinking of) is Blur though of course, the most obvious analog is unabashed kart racers such as Sega Allstars Racing Transformed and Modnation Racers.

As for the rest of your examples, sometimes series stumble a bit or even completely collapse. In that case, the ideal is to look elsewhere rather than just kind of keeping buying from a franchises that you have lost interest in and hoping that eventually, maybe the designers rediscover their mojo.

Fans of non-rpg (and rpg for that matter) free roamers who have been willing to look past GTA4 have had a lot of great options this gen (nods towards Assassin's Creed, Red Dead Redemption and Infamous). *Shrugs* But if you're stuck on the last three franchises you named and refuse to look elsewhere, I can see why you are unhappy (though GTA5 does look like it will put the series back on track).

It's not black and white, one way or the other, but he has a strong point. Some think having better ai, physics and graphics automatically translate into better games and that simply isn't the case. I'd like to expand on his examples a bit:

GTA3, GTA: VC, GTA: SA are all miles better than GTA4

FFVIII, FFVIII, FFIX, FFX and FFXII>>>FFXIII and FFXIII-2

RE 1-4>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>RE5 & 6

All TLoZ before TP and SS are much better

Same can be argued for franchises like Devil May Cry and Twisted Metal.

It's split for games like The Elder Scrolls, Metroid and Fallout.

Of course there are lots of examples of game series being better this gen too.

I can say without exaggeration that no one in the history of mankind has made that argument :P. Tech opens up possibilities, it doesn't guarantee an end result.

Hardware is like a canvas and easel (or a drawing progam if you prefer). Better hardware can enable better results, but the best hardware won't make the efforts of a person without talent good (Epic Mickey sucked on last gen tech and it sucks on current gen tech).

#55 Posted by Ilovegames1992 (14221 posts) -

[QUOTE="Ilovegames1992"]

[QUOTE="ReddestSkies"]

Here's a very simple way to see it: would GTA Vice City be possible on the SNES, with super super super downgraded graphics, without sacrificing gameplay?

ReddestSkies

No, but there are better, more fun games on the SNES than were on last generation...

I'd say that every SNES genre that I care about has evolved tremendously gameplay-wise in the last 20 years, far beyond whatever the SNES was capable of. And I'm just talking about genres staying in 2D.

Fair enough, thats a valid opinion.

If i was looking for a 2D platformer however, i'd know i'd rather go to the SNES than the curret gen.

And i'm not even talking about genres, i'm judging each game by its merits, a good game is a good game i my opinion.

For example, finally started having a lot of fun playing Far Cry 3 now, i can be thankful for better tech for that, but i'm not having more fun than i did playing Vice City. You get what i mean?

#56 Posted by CarnageHeart (18316 posts) -

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]

[QUOTE="CarnageHeart"]

Your first comparison is a very, very strange one. Burnout Paradise is a freeroamer in which racers try to nudge each other into having accidents. A better comparison (perhaps the game you were actually thinking of) is Blur though of course, the most obvious analog is unabashed kart racers such as Sega Allstars Racing Transformed and Modnation Racers.

As for the rest of your examples, sometimes series stumble a bit or even completely collapse. In that case, the ideal is to look elsewhere rather than just kind of keeping buying from a franchises that you have lost interest in and hoping that eventually, maybe the designers rediscover their mojo.

Fans of non-rpg (and rpg for that matter) free roamers who have been willing to look past GTA4 have had a lot of great options this gen (nods towards Assassin's Creed, Red Dead Redemption and Infamous). *Shrugs* But if you're stuck on the last three franchises you named and refuse to look elsewhere, I can see why you are unhappy (though GTA5 does look like it will put the series back on track).

Ilovegames1992

It's not black and white, one way or the other, but he has a strong point. Some think having better ai, physics and graphics automatically translate into better games and that simply isn't the case. I'd like to expand on his examples a bit:

GTA3, GTA: VC, GTA: SA are all miles better than GTA4

FFVIII, FFVIII, FFIX, FFX and FFXII>>>FFXIII and FFXIII-2

RE 1-4>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>RE5 & 6

All TLoZ before TP and SS are much better

Same can be argued for franchises like Devil May Cry and Twisted Metal.

It's split for games like The Elder Scrolls, Metroid and Fallout.

Of course there are lots of examples of game series being better this gen too.

Exactly. Don't see what the issue is here.

But the simple fact of the matter is better tech doesn't necessarily mean better games in my opinion.

I think we can all agree on that. My point is that better technology doesn't just allow for linear improvements such as shinier textures (Star Wars 1313), but allows for developers to implement cool ideas that wouldn't have been possible on last gen systems (Watchdogs).

#57 Posted by Ilovegames1992 (14221 posts) -

[QUOTE="Ilovegames1992"]

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]It's not black and white, one way or the other, but he has a strong point. Some think having better ai, physics and graphics automatically translate into better games and that simply isn't the case. I'd like to expand on his examples a bit:

GTA3, GTA: VC, GTA: SA are all miles better than GTA4

FFVIII, FFVIII, FFIX, FFX and FFXII>>>FFXIII and FFXIII-2

RE 1-4>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>RE5 & 6

All TLoZ before TP and SS are much better

Same can be argued for franchises like Devil May Cry and Twisted Metal.

It's split for games like The Elder Scrolls, Metroid and Fallout.

Of course there are lots of examples of game series being better this gen too.

CarnageHeart

Exactly. Don't see what the issue is here.

But the simple fact of the matter is better tech doesn't necessarily mean better games in my opinion.

I think we can all agree on that. My point is that better technology doesn't just allow for linear improvements such as shinier textures (Star Wars 1313), but allows for developers to implement cool ideas that wouldn't have been possible on last gen systems (Watchdogs).

Right. But will that make it more fun? We will see.

I guess i'm just not really geeky about my tech. I buy games and i enjoy them, thats as far is it gets for me. I'm just as happy sitting down playing old school Zelda than i would be entering a virtual reality playing some kind of tron style game haha.

Although you could argue that less is more sometimes, i.e really old crappy stuff forced you to immerse yourself in it and use your imagination.

#58 Posted by ReddestSkies (4087 posts) -

Fair enough, thats a valid opinion.

If i was looking for a 2D platformer however, i'd know i'd rather go to the SNES than the curret gen.

And i'm not even talking about genres, i'm judging each game by its merits, a good game is a good game i my opinion.

For example, finally started having a lot of fun playing Far Cry 3 now, i can be thankful for better tech for that, but i'm not having more fun than i did playing Vice City. You get what i mean?

Ilovegames1992

Personally, when I'm looking for a 2D platformer, I definitely start by checking out indie games I haven't played yet. And I for sure wouldn't be able to play a SNES shoot 'em up ever again, as that is one genre that has evolved to the point of making the old games nearly obsolete.

I agree that a good game is a good game. But gaming is an interactive medium and we need technological progress in order to enable developpers to go to the full extent of their vision.

As much as I liked Vice City, I would have hated it if someone told me "That's it. Free roaming isn't evolving past that point. You'll never, ever, ever play a game in which you can enter any building you want in the city, and in which you can talk to random people. "

#59 Posted by Ilovegames1992 (14221 posts) -

[QUOTE="Ilovegames1992"]

Fair enough, thats a valid opinion.

If i was looking for a 2D platformer however, i'd know i'd rather go to the SNES than the curret gen.

And i'm not even talking about genres, i'm judging each game by its merits, a good game is a good game i my opinion.

For example, finally started having a lot of fun playing Far Cry 3 now, i can be thankful for better tech for that, but i'm not having more fun than i did playing Vice City. You get what i mean?

ReddestSkies

Personally, when I'm looking for a 2D platformer, I definitely start by checking out indie games I haven't played yet. And I for sure wouldn't be able to play a SNES shoot 'em up ever again, as that is one genre that has evolved to the point of making the old games nearly obsolete.

I agree that a good game is a good game. But gaming is an interactive medium and we need technological progress in order to enable developpers to go to the full extent of their vision.

As much as I liked Vice City, I would have hated it if someone told me "That's it. Free roaming isn't evolving past that point. You'll never, ever, ever play a game in which you can enter any building you want in the city, and in which you can talk to random people. "

Fair enough. I guess i like it evolving as a medium too. But i don't think anything would become obselete to me.. Hell give me a pong console and i'll stil enjoy it.

As for 2D platformers specifically. There's been some good ones recentlylike Deadlight for instance, but i think previous gens have better 2D platformers in general.

#60 Posted by MaddenMad92 (9 posts) -
Not me
#61 Posted by GeoffZak (3715 posts) -

I don't get it either. What's there to look forward to?

More expensive games?

More DLC?

More day-one DLC?

More online-passes?

More motion control?

Bleh. Count me out.

Graphics can't get much more detailed. It's pretty ridiculous how detailed they are right now. Bleh, I don't need THAT much detail. PS2 graphics were perfect.

#62 Posted by Ilovegames1992 (14221 posts) -

I don't get it either. What's there to look forward to?

More expensive games?

More DLC?

More day-one DLC?

More online-passes?

More motion control?

Bleh. Count me out.

Graphics can't get much more detailed. It's pretty ridiculous how detailed they are right now. Bleh, I don't need THAT much detail. PS2 graphics were perfect.

GeoffZak

I'm hoping that's more to do with the economy really. We've been in a recession since about 2008 lol.

#63 Posted by DJ_Headshot (6178 posts) -

I game mostly on pc and things look pretty good games sell for cheaper and cheaper prices when there is a sale the longer they have been out(as it should be) and indie gaming is thriving which brings plenty of originality and new ip's to the fold along side the bigger budget titles in established franchises. Seriously you need to expand your gaming horizon if all you consider to exist in the gaming industry is call of duty and assassins creed theres so many other games out there on all systems just need to look. Although now that I think about it I'm actually not that excited about nextgen it will just force me to spend more money to play the latest games. I'm sure the graphics will look amazing and I'll wonder how I didn't want mind not moving on from current gen graphics but current high end pc games already look so good I really just want more good games to play.

To be honest things like OLED 4K auto-stereoscopic displays are more interesting those will enhance the immersion and enjoyment of all 3D games. Oculus rift type tech with head tracking 3D that fully fills your field of vision with just the game world will enhance it even further once that perfected and then we just need to wait for full immersion VR at the level of the matrix where all 5 senses are completely simulated that it will be just like being in the real world that will be the biggest leap in gaming by far and the possibilities and apllications for that type of tech are endless. Full immersion VR is personally the tech I'm most excited about and looking forward to in the future.

#64 Posted by SaudiFury (8707 posts) -

new hardware, new IP's, a way to shake up the industry.

last E3 was just a malaise of seeing games with numbers attached at the end.

but i am cautious, I really don't like some of the rumors i keep hearing, the anti-consumer friendly moves might be too much.

#65 Posted by Ricardomz (2329 posts) -

I'm not excited, just curious.

#66 Posted by GreekGameManiac (6439 posts) -

Because we want new games,new ways to play,and....

OMGZ D00D TEH GRAFIX

:p

#67 Posted by GeoffZak (3715 posts) -

[QUOTE="GeoffZak"]

I don't get it either. What's there to look forward to?

More expensive games?

More DLC?

More day-one DLC?

More online-passes?

More motion control?

Bleh. Count me out.

Graphics can't get much more detailed. It's pretty ridiculous how detailed they are right now. Bleh, I don't need THAT much detail. PS2 graphics were perfect.

Ilovegames1992

I'm hoping that's more to do with the economy really. We've been in a recession since about 2008 lol.

And this generation of games started in 2005. New games were $60 back then. Up $10 since the previous generation. lol

$60 for 8 hours of gameplay is a rip off no matter what state the economy is in.

#68 Posted by svaubel (2448 posts) -

I don't know.

I was so excited to get a PS2 when I was a kid. I was also excited for the PS3 before it came out. But this time around I'm not. It doesn't seem like there will be much of a leap in progress this time around. Also, the rumors of next gen are making it look very bleak. I'm not so eager to shell out hundreds of dollars for a PS4/Wii U/Nextbox this time around. I'm more interested in catching up with all the good games that have come out this gen, as well as seeing what else it has to offer. But that's just me.

Lucky_Krystal

It's well known that the PS4/720 are not going to be a repeat of the massage leap in hardware muscle that the PS3/360 were to the PS2/Xbox. Because dev costs are already skyrocketting again, and unless Sony and MS want to release consoles for 500$+ and games for 80$ base price and put all the dev houses out of business except those under Activision, EA, or Ubisoft, we dont see that happen. So I see next gen as merely an incremental upgrade.

Im also pretty skeptic about next gen anyway, given the route the gaming industry has been going these past few years. Nintendo was smart in that they made a system comparable to the PS3/360. That way dev costs wont go up much and games can keep their current 60$ price for the Wii U. I really think that if the PS4/720 cost more than 400$ it is going to come back and bite them in the ass.

#69 Posted by CarnageHeart (18316 posts) -

[QUOTE="Lucky_Krystal"]

I don't know.

I was so excited to get a PS2 when I was a kid. I was also excited for the PS3 before it came out. But this time around I'm not. It doesn't seem like there will be much of a leap in progress this time around. Also, the rumors of next gen are making it look very bleak. I'm not so eager to shell out hundreds of dollars for a PS4/Wii U/Nextbox this time around. I'm more interested in catching up with all the good games that have come out this gen, as well as seeing what else it has to offer. But that's just me.

svaubel

It's well known that the PS4/720 are not going to be a repeat of the massage leap in hardware muscle that the PS3/360 were to the PS2/Xbox. Because dev costs are already skyrocketting again, and unless Sony and MS want to release consoles for 500$+ and games for 80$ base price and put all the dev houses out of business except those under Activision, EA, or Ubisoft, we dont see that happen. So I see next gen as merely an incremental upgrade.

Im also pretty skeptic about next gen anyway, given the route the gaming industry has been going these past few years. Nintendo was smart in that they made a system comparable to the PS3/360. That way dev costs wont go up much and games can keep their current 60$ price for the Wii U. I really think that if the PS4/720 cost more than 400$ it is going to come back and bite them in the ass.

Well known by who? I read a lot of videogame news and I've never read such a rumor.

The Wii U's hardware sales are 'not bad' (to quote Nintendo) but the hardware itself hasn't captured the imagination of developers (many multiplatform 2013 games including but not limited to Bioshock Infinite, GTA5, Tomb Raider, Dead Space 3, DMC and MGS Revengeance haven't been announced for the Wii U) so while things may change down the line, there's really no grounds to label the Wii U strategy as 'smart' just yet.

I agree that the PS4 or X720 costing more than $400 would be high idiocy.

#70 Posted by Ilovegames1992 (14221 posts) -

[QUOTE="Ilovegames1992"]

[QUOTE="GeoffZak"]

I don't get it either. What's there to look forward to?

More expensive games?

More DLC?

More day-one DLC?

More online-passes?

More motion control?

Bleh. Count me out.

Graphics can't get much more detailed. It's pretty ridiculous how detailed they are right now. Bleh, I don't need THAT much detail. PS2 graphics were perfect.

GeoffZak

I'm hoping that's more to do with the economy really. We've been in a recession since about 2008 lol.

And this generation of games started in 2005. New games were $60 back then. Up $10 since the previous generation. lol

$60 for 8 hours of gameplay is a rip off no matter what state the economy is in.

Well there's a market for it i guess, people don't mind paying that price. I have no problem playing £40 for a good 8-12 hour experience, most games have some kind of replayability fctor though so its not that bad. But i'll only buy new games if i really want them.

I usually wait a few months anyway, most newish games i buy are in the £20 region.

#71 Posted by c_rakestraw (14611 posts) -

Well known by who? I read a lot of videogame news and I've never read such a rumor.CarnageHeart

Not to mention recent rumors and "leaks" suggest that they will be a huge leap if the specs are anything to go by.

#72 Posted by S0lidSnake (29001 posts) -

This thread makes my head hurt.

#73 Posted by Rattlesnake_8 (18374 posts) -
Of course they will have new IP's.. Watch Dogs for one is looking like it'll be a next gen game and it's a new IP.