Platinum executive not very excited by next gen hardware, calls it "more of the same"

  • 82 results
  • 1
  • 2
Avatar image for SolidGame_basic
#1 Posted by SolidGame_basic (24263 posts) -

https://www.gamesradar.com/platinum-games-executive-is-already-bored-by-project-scarlett-and-ps5/

In an interview with Video Game Chronicles at E3, the cofounder of Platinum Games (the devs behind titles like the Bayonetta franchise and Nier: Automata) said that the hardware in the PS5 and Project Scarlett was too by-the-numbers to excite him.

“It’s OK. But it’s more of the same, quite frankly, compared to previous generations. It’s nothing that’s disruptive or super innovative, if you ask me.”

...Inaba goes on to say that he preferred the days when console hardware was based on custom chips that you couldn't get on PC, rather than slightly modified versions of existing components.

I guess this guy is hard to please. I'm still excited. Yea I'm sure it will be another "higher resolution, more framerate" yada yada talk, but innovation comes from the developers. And I think they will find ways to make next gen great. Your thoughts, SW?

Avatar image for adsparky
#2 Posted by adsparky (1408 posts) -

I understand him, but the reason is to make it easier for developers to make games for them and more now that indies have become a really important part of the industry.

Avatar image for boxrekt
#3 Edited by BoxRekt (1732 posts) -

Meh, can't say I agree. The Sega dev had a completely different stance, so opinions..

I prefer straight forward hardware focused on games rather than a bunch of gimmicks. I want video games, not an all you can eat popcorn maker.

Avatar image for BenjaminBanklin
#4 Posted by BenjaminBanklin (4747 posts) -

I mean, they're just weaker PCs. Why would you want to develop for architecture with a weird learning curve? Those days are over.

Avatar image for SecretPolice
#5 Posted by SecretPolice (35330 posts) -

How would PG know? As far as I can see they're only good at applying new paint to old formulas. :P

Avatar image for boxrekt
#6 Posted by BoxRekt (1732 posts) -
@BenjaminBanklin said:

I mean, they're just weaker PCs. Why would you want to develop for architecture with a weird learning curve? Those days are over.

They like putting a lot of their games on the Switch hardware, so I have to take his opinion with a grain of salt.

No hate for Switch but Innovative =/= Better

Avatar image for pc_rocks
#7 Posted by PC_Rocks (2491 posts) -

Way to p*ss all over consolites hopes and dreams. Finally a sensible dev who is calling for things for what they are rather than pure sensation.

Avatar image for scatteh316
#8 Edited by scatteh316 (10252 posts) -

Oh course it's more of the same...... same architecture frame work........just more power...... Sounds to me like he misses the mad custom hardware consoles used to have.

Avatar image for scatteh316
#9 Edited by scatteh316 (10252 posts) -

@pc_rocks said:

Way to p*ss all over consolites hopes and dreams. Finally a sensible dev who is calling for things for what they are rather than pure sensation.

If consoles went custom again PC would die........

Avatar image for musicalmac
#10 Posted by musicalmac (25026 posts) -

Interesting responses to this thread so far, maybe I'm just more willing to trust a dev who's created games I've found more interesting and fun than most others of the sort. The criticism laid here are the same criticisms I shared with regards to the XO and PS4 at their release.

I hope we get a more noticeable and interesting leap in overall fidelity than we're expecting, but maybe not if we're to rely on Platinum's opinion.

Avatar image for uninspiredcup
#11 Posted by uninspiredcup (33666 posts) -

More of the same at a ridiculous price tag and jacked games prices, no doubt.

Exciting stuff.

Avatar image for TheEroica
#12 Posted by TheEroica (18414 posts) -

Probably because he understands that just pumping more flops doesn't equate to a better video game.

You can't innovate an interactive experience with visuals alone.

Avatar image for boxrekt
#13 Edited by BoxRekt (1732 posts) -
@musicalmac said:

I hope we get a more noticeable and interesting leap in overall fidelity than we're expecting, but maybe not if we're to rely on...

Platinum's opinion.

Now, what game of Platinum's impressed you with it's overall fidelity compared to other AAA game studios? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

We're questioning an opinion that would stagnate the development of future next gen games, not their talent to make them.

Most Platinum games aren't technically demanding or pushing the boundaries of graphical superiority.

If Square or even Capcom made these comments I'd be willing to give this more of an ear.

Avatar image for musicalmac
#14 Posted by musicalmac (25026 posts) -

@boxrekt said:
@musicalmac said:

I hope we get a more noticeable and interesting leap in overall fidelity than we're expecting, but maybe not if we're to rely on...

Platinum's opinion.

Now, what game of Platinum's impressed you with it's overall fidelity compared to other AAA game studios? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

We're questioning an opinion that would stagnate the development of future next gen games, not their talent to make them.

Most Platinum games aren't technically demanding or pushing the boundaries of graphical superiority.

If Square or even Capcom made these comments I'd be willing to give this more of an ear.

I was referring to the noticeable increase in overall game fidelity across console generations. Going from an Xbox to a 360 or a PS2 to a PS3 was much more exciting than 360 to XO or PS3 to PS4.

I just happen to enjoy Platinum's games more than most others of the same genre.

Avatar image for princessgomez92
#15 Posted by PrincessGomez92 (5730 posts) -

Can't say I disagree. All this power talk does nothing for me.

Avatar image for Pedro
#16 Posted by Pedro (34916 posts) -

Seriously, what was he expecting? His comments sounds like a fool.

Avatar image for fedor
#17 Posted by Fedor (5148 posts) -

He's not wrong.

Avatar image for Random_Matt
#18 Posted by Random_Matt (4244 posts) -

Yep, always said consoles will be worse off using off the shelve parts and becoming weak PC. At least the switch is different in that respect.

Avatar image for Pedro
#19 Edited by Pedro (34916 posts) -

@Random_Matt: Yep, the Switch uses off the shelf parts from Nvidia Shield. So, different.

Avatar image for scatteh316
#20 Posted by scatteh316 (10252 posts) -

@Random_Matt said:

Yep, always said consoles will be worse off using off the shelve parts and becoming weak PC. At least the switch is different in that respect.

Consoles had to go that way......... With diminishing returns now on new hardware and the cost of designing a GPU/CPU logic circuit being simply too high now to be worth while.

The generation after next (So PS6) will potentially be an even smaller jump as hardware performance jumps are very small.

The golden era of 10x (or higher) the power increase between generations is long gone.

Avatar image for kadin_kai
#21 Posted by Kadin_Kai (502 posts) -

He is kinda correct. The next generation is a boost in numbers. We have not really seen any major innovation for a while.

I guess without thinking too much, open world was the last piece of real innovation in gaming.

Still the next generation open worlds will be nicer!

Avatar image for boxrekt
#22 Edited by BoxRekt (1732 posts) -
@musicalmac said:
@boxrekt said:
@musicalmac said:

I hope we get a more noticeable and interesting leap in overall fidelity than we're expecting, but maybe not if we're to rely on...

Platinum's opinion.

Now, what game of Platinum's impressed you with it's overall fidelity compared to other AAA game studios? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

We're questioning an opinion that would stagnate the development of future next gen games, not their talent to make them.

Most Platinum games aren't technically demanding or pushing the boundaries of graphical superiority.

If Square or even Capcom made these comments I'd be willing to give this more of an ear.

I was referring to the noticeable increase in overall game fidelity across console generations. Going from an Xbox to a 360 or a PS2 to a PS3 was much more exciting than 360 to XO or PS3 to PS4.

I just happen to enjoy Platinum's games more than most others of the same genre.

Yeah no, going to have to agree to disagree on that one. PS3 to PS4 was an enormous leap. Just as big if not bigger than PS2 to PS3

Taking a game from the same franchise:

PS2

PS3

PS4

in motion It's not even close!

If I used an exclusive like God of War for example, you'd see an even a bigger jump.

Maybe you have a nostalgic memory of the leap from PS2 to PS3 but PS4 is leaps and bounds ahead of PS3. Revisit a few PS3 titles then come back to PS4 and you'll realize how far off the mark you actually are.

Avatar image for dzimm
#23 Posted by dzimm (5492 posts) -

This race to higher spec consoles reminds me of 20-years ago when tech companies were making the big push from standard definition television to high definition television. The problem is that all they could promise consumers is that we would be watching the exact same content, just in higher fidelity. It wouldn't make the content meaningfully better, and it wouldn't give us access to new content; it was just a better picture, and literally nothing more. In the US at least, it finally took an act of Congress pulling the plug on standard definition broadcast television to finally force consumers to make the move to HD.

This is why the Switch is selling so well despite being "underpowered", because in every meaningful sense, a game like DOOM, for instance, plays exactly the same whether you're playing on the Switch or on a high-end gaming console, only the Switch allows you play it in a new way by giving you the same experience whether you're on an 80-inch display, or running the console in handheld mode.

Avatar image for evil_loli
#24 Posted by Evil_Loli (160 posts) -

He ain't wrong. I love my Xbox One X and screw Scarlet. It looks to be more the same as how I see it.

Avatar image for boxrekt
#25 Posted by BoxRekt (1732 posts) -
@dzimm said:

This race to higher spec consoles reminds me of 20-years ago when tech companies were making the big push from standard definition television to high definition television. The problem is that all they could promise consumers is that we would be watching the exact same content, just in higher fidelity. It wouldn't make the content meaningfully better, and it wouldn't give us access to new content; it was just a better picture, and literally nothing more. In the US at least, it finally took an act of Congress pulling the plug on standard definition broadcast television to finally force consumers to make the move to HD.

This is why the Switch is selling so well despite being "underpowered", because in every meaningful sense, a game like DOOM, for instance, plays exactly the same whether you're playing on the Switch or on a high-end gaming console, only the Switch allows you play it in a new way by giving you the same experience whether you're on an 80-inch display, or running the console in handheld mode.

Considering the jump in CPUs the next gen systems are bringing, that's a narrow minded perspective.

Avatar image for calvincfb
#26 Edited by Calvincfb (0 posts) -

@pc_rocks: lmao, if anything, PC is the most stale and boring platform.

Avatar image for evil_loli
#27 Posted by Evil_Loli (160 posts) -

@calvincfb said:

@pc_rocks: lmao, if anything, PC is the most stale and boring platform.

And expensive!

Avatar image for Star67
#28 Posted by Star67 (4429 posts) -

@boxrekt: dude those ps2 pics are touched up or fake, I'm play destroy all humans right now on ps2 with component cables and I'm telling you ps2 to ps3 is a much bigger jump than 3 to 4.

Go back and play some ps2 games on a real ps2.

Avatar image for Grey_Eyed_Elf
#29 Posted by Grey_Eyed_Elf (6453 posts) -

@scatteh316 said:
@pc_rocks said:

Way to p*ss all over consolites hopes and dreams. Finally a sensible dev who is calling for things for what they are rather than pure sensation.

If consoles went custom again PC would die........

Very true... It would make multi-platform games near impossible to run on low-medium PC hardware due to the architectural differences.

That said if they did go full custom you would never see a $399 console ever again. Even these coming will more than likely come in at $499.

Avatar image for djoffer
#30 Edited by djoffer (1376 posts) -

@Star67: NOT to mention that the PS4 game he compare with is the ff7 remake that isn’t even out yet... just more boxfail in SW:)

Avatar image for joebones5000
#31 Posted by joebones5000 (2342 posts) -

No one wants to deal with the nonsense of customer chips. It's too much work. How about Platinum games just makes better games?

Avatar image for Silenthps
#32 Posted by Silenthps (7301 posts) -

they should have held off by like 5 more years to allow raytraced gaming to mature more. Or at least to a point where hardware ray-tracing isn't limited to just triangle meshes and allow for some bi-linear patch meshes.

Avatar image for scatteh316
#33 Edited by scatteh316 (10252 posts) -

@Grey_Eyed_Elf said:
@scatteh316 said:
@pc_rocks said:

Way to p*ss all over consolites hopes and dreams. Finally a sensible dev who is calling for things for what they are rather than pure sensation.

If consoles went custom again PC would die........

Very true... It would make multi-platform games near impossible to run on low-medium PC hardware due to the architectural differences.

That said if they did go full custom you would never see a $399 console ever again. Even these coming will more than likely come in at $499.

Yep...bang on!! Custom hardware is exciting...... but is costly to develop and reduces the amount of porting options to other platforms which reduces the money developers can recoup...... which is bad for everyone!

Avatar image for xantufrog
#34 Edited by xantufrog (11513 posts) -
@Star67 said:

@boxrekt: dude those ps2 pics are touched up or fake, I'm play destroy all humans right now on ps2 with component cables and I'm telling you ps2 to ps3 is a much bigger jump than 3 to 4.

Go back and play some ps2 games on a real ps2.

Yeah... and I think choosing FF is a skewed example too. I still play my PS2 regularly and it frankly looks like ass. The PS3 was an enormous transition - it's not just about resolution. We're talking texture quality, lighting effects, and denser environments with a lot more going on in them. The PS2 was groundbreaking when it came out, but compared to the PS3 it's a mess of muddy textures and other limitations. And that's ok - that's what happens when technology progresses. But it is what it is.

Avatar image for musicalmac
#35 Posted by musicalmac (25026 posts) -

@boxrekt: Be careful to assume the experience of whomever it is you're attempting to teach.

Avatar image for osan0
#36 Posted by osan0 (15439 posts) -

i can see where he is coming from on the one hand. it can be an interesting challenge to come up with ways of squeezing more performance out of some odd hardware. if you are into that sort of things: coming up with clever algorithms that exploit the unique elements of bespoke hardware, then the current set of hardware is probably a bit boring.

but cost of development continues to shoot up. less time fighting the hardware means more time on making the actual game. it makes porting between platforms easier. lessons learned on one device can be applied to another. tools are more readily available. this off the shelf approach to console design makes a lot more sense.

i would like to see console makers do more with the stuff outside of processing though. a new gen is like a big reset button...its a great time to try new things.

...so cue nintendo listening to platinum (because they are good pals) and going nuts. a bespoke riscV based cpu backed by a highly customised mali based GPU (with a combination of specialised pixel, vertex, geometry, rtx, tensor, compute, gamecube TEV and VPUs similar to the cell). it's implementation of the riscV instruction set is...er...open to interpretation. anything learnt about GPU development over the last decade doesnt really apply. in some aspects its less powerful than a 3DS and in others it ends up being years ahead of any other console or mobile device.

platinum are happy. nintendo remain unconcerned. the rest of the industry think "what in the actual god dam f*BEEP*". :P

Avatar image for davillain-
#37 Edited by DaVillain- (36911 posts) -

@musicalmac said:

Interesting responses to this thread so far, maybe I'm just more willing to trust a dev who's created games I've found more interesting and fun than most others of the sort. The criticism laid here are the same criticisms I shared with regards to the XO and PS4 at their release.

I hope we get a more noticeable and interesting leap in overall fidelity than we're expecting, but maybe not if we're to rely on Platinum's opinion.

Not much difference as everything is almost maxed nowadays on consoles. Nintendo Switch on the other hand his far different then both PS4/Xbox One combine.

Avatar image for nfamouslegend
#38 Posted by NfamousLegend (365 posts) -

Guess he missis the days of the Cell processor which worked out so well for Bayonetta with it 15fps gameplay. Honestly he sounds like a clown who has no knowledge on computer components. If he is referring to innovation in how we interact with games then I will agree, but if he is purely talking about silicon he is wrong. VR will continue to improve, as will AI, and physics.

Avatar image for dzimm
#39 Posted by dzimm (5492 posts) -

@boxrekt said:
@dzimm said:

This race to higher spec consoles reminds me of 20-years ago when tech companies were making the big push from standard definition television to high definition television. The problem is that all they could promise consumers is that we would be watching the exact same content, just in higher fidelity. It wouldn't make the content meaningfully better, and it wouldn't give us access to new content; it was just a better picture, and literally nothing more. In the US at least, it finally took an act of Congress pulling the plug on standard definition broadcast television to finally force consumers to make the move to HD.

This is why the Switch is selling so well despite being "underpowered", because in every meaningful sense, a game like DOOM, for instance, plays exactly the same whether you're playing on the Switch or on a high-end gaming console, only the Switch allows you play it in a new way by giving you the same experience whether you're on an 80-inch display, or running the console in handheld mode.

Considering the jump in CPUs the next gen systems are bringing, that's a narrow minded perspective.

Will those higher spec CPUs naturally lead to new and better gaming experiences that can't be realized on current generation hardware, or will we still essentially be playing the same games, just with better performance and visuals?

Avatar image for boxrekt
#40 Edited by BoxRekt (1732 posts) -
@dzimm said:
@boxrekt said:
@dzimm said:

This race to higher spec consoles reminds me of 20-years ago when tech companies were making the big push from standard definition television to high definition television. The problem is that all they could promise consumers is that we would be watching the exact same content, just in higher fidelity. It wouldn't make the content meaningfully better, and it wouldn't give us access to new content; it was just a better picture, and literally nothing more. In the US at least, it finally took an act of Congress pulling the plug on standard definition broadcast television to finally force consumers to make the move to HD.

This is why the Switch is selling so well despite being "underpowered", because in every meaningful sense, a game like DOOM, for instance, plays exactly the same whether you're playing on the Switch or on a high-end gaming console, only the Switch allows you play it in a new way by giving you the same experience whether you're on an 80-inch display, or running the console in handheld mode.

Considering the jump in CPUs the next gen systems are bringing, that's a narrow minded perspective.

Will those higher spec CPUs naturally lead to new and better gaming experiences that can't be realized on current generation hardware, or will we still essentially be playing the same games, just with better performance and visuals?

That's just the point, devs will have the opportunity to at least TRY different things not possible on this gen hardware and it will benefit PC development as well.

@musicalmac said:

@boxrekt: Be careful to assume the experience of whomever it is you're attempting to teach.

If you say so, PS2 games still look great. I can't do anything if you're just playing a crappy looking game and referencing that as your mental example.

I thought FF was a good example because it's always been a game that was designed to impress. I can't do anything about the fact that most FFXII shots I try to find are the up resd version, but that just shows how good the game actually looked for a PS2 game. The base GRAPHICS are still exactly the same as the original, it's just minus the low resolution and jags. I could have used MGS2/MGS3 to MGS4 to Death Stranding as another example of a game from the same developer and make my point.

We can agree to disagree but here are ugly games on every gen of consoles, if you're making a comparison you need to find the good looking titles to compare the difference like FF, Kojima games, GOW ect.

Play God of war III on PS3 (one of the best looking PS3 games) then play God of War on PS4, yeah not even going to argue how silly it is to suggest there's anything small about that leap.

Avatar image for fedor
#41 Posted by Fedor (5148 posts) -

@dzimm: Well they could finally get pubg to run at 60fps on console.

Avatar image for r-gamer
#42 Posted by R-Gamer (226 posts) -

I like Platnium games I really do but it would be nice if their games looked better then something out of the PS3/360 era.

Avatar image for vfighter
#43 Posted by VFighter (5005 posts) -

So like every gen every, more powerful console following last console, minus custom chips which developers (mostly) hated? Am I missing something? I love platinum games but is he also,g to make development more difficult?

Avatar image for valgaav_219
#44 Posted by Valgaav_219 (2434 posts) -

@djoffer said:

@Star67: NOT to mention that the PS4 game he compare with is the ff7 remake that isn’t even out yet... just more boxfail in SW:)

Agreed. That was weird. As I scrolled down I just knew he'd use FFXV which is still beautiful btw

Avatar image for dzimm
#45 Edited by dzimm (5492 posts) -
@boxrekt said:

That's just the point, devs will have the opportunity to at least TRY different things not possible on this gen hardware and it will benefit PC development as well.

You're talking as if games are made with love and passion and a genuine interest in creative exploration instead of simply copying what sold before in order to appeal to the lowest common denominator to maximize profits. Thing is, Nintendo does all of that while selling "underpowered" hardware.

Avatar image for fedor
#46 Posted by Fedor (5148 posts) -

@vfighter: Its still custom chips, it's just x86. They aren't just sticking desktop components in these things though.

Avatar image for Steppy_76
#47 Posted by Steppy_76 (2707 posts) -

@boxrekt: ps2 games looked bad next to most xbox 1 games, much less xbox one/ps4 games. I think you are looking back in time with rose colored glasses.

Avatar image for pc_rocks
#48 Posted by PC_Rocks (2491 posts) -

@Grey_Eyed_Elf said:

Very true... It would make multi-platform games near impossible to run on low-medium PC hardware due to the architectural differences.

That said if they did go full custom you would never see a $399 console ever again. Even these coming will more than likely come in at $499.

Wrong on multiple fronts. Consoles would die in a heart beat if they go to custom route. Designing the CPU/GPU from the ground up is way way too costly and even then there would be no surety it's better than PC counter part. Nvidia/Intel/AMD has decades of experience and base to work on. If by some miracle it's possible, it won't be feasible enough to design it specifically for consoles. Sony just partly funded the development of CELL by partnering with IBM and even then the thinking was CELL will be used in everything from PC's, Appliances, TVs, data centers etc. to justify the investments which definitely didn't pan off and it ended up in disaster due to the arrival of GPGPU. Most custom consoles were ended at PS2 because by that time industry matured and you already have your winners and losers of the CPU/GPU. PS2 it self couldn't compete with the arrival of HW T&L.

Another thing is, who would even then design the game for this custom hardware and let go of the large consumer base. It wouldn't make games impossible to run on low-mid PC's but impractical to make games for such hardware. Even PS3 struggled in that regards compared to 360. Factor in the ballooning cost of development and yeah, it's easy to see why it's a no brainer.

Avatar image for pyro1245
#49 Posted by pyro1245 (5055 posts) -

Well they may be boring, but at least development of cross-platform titles will be much easier.

Avatar image for pc_rocks
#50 Posted by PC_Rocks (2491 posts) -

@evil_loli:

Good thing they are or otherwise you will still have graphics like PS2 on your consoles due to economies of scale. Be grateful because it's due to PC gamers that you have some sort of modern architecture in your consoles. Consoles wouldn't be able to justify the cost of R&D required for modern GPUs/CPUs.