Is it time for a new console generation?

[Cronq]

People who think there is very little improvements left to make in the graphics department are morons. I can't wait for this same damn argument to come up in another 8 years with the same damn talking points.

Make pc's the lead platform on every game and this damn cycle will finally end.

 

[Mafoobula]

Yes. Yes it is.

We had 2 Zelda games for the Wii, it's time for the next generation. NES had 2, SNES had 1 (odd gen out), N64 had 2, Gamecube had 2 and the Wii had 2. Yes, the GC and Wii shared Twilight Princess, but I think the theory stands: Two Zelda games to a generation before the next gen. But more than that, all the perks that came with the Wii - Virtual Console, motion controls, etc. - have lost their initial this-is-so-new-and-cool luster, and it's about time for the Wii U to take the stage and show us why that weird controller/screen thing is in fact a really, really cool idea.

The PS3's much touted Cell Processor - did anyone else immediately think of Blast Processing when they heard this? - and its 6 cores is now being handily beaten by modern, ultra-efficient quad-cores, and that's before mentioning AMD's new 8-core CPUs. Also, some of Sony's half-baked ideas - the PS Move comes to mind - can be better fleshed out into controls that finally break from the same design they've been using since the first Playstation. Yes, the Dualshock is a great, simple design that works just fine. It's also closing in on 15 years old, and it's starting to smell like an old man, if you know what I mean.

The 360... well, new hardware might better support the Kinect. There's a LOT to say about the Kinect, but I still absolutely relish the idea of playing a strategy game with hand gestures. Improved networking hardware is always good for the Xbox Live system.

 

[ResonanceGames]

People who think there is very little improvements left to make in the graphics department are morons. I can't wait for this same damn argument to come up in another 8 years with the same damn talking points.

Make pc's the lead platform on every game and this damn cycle will finally end.

You might want to think about what you're saying before you start calling others morons. Are you familiar with the law of diminishing returns? Because it is starting to become a big issue with making games look better, for a multitude of reasons on both the development and hardware sides.

For example, the only realtime tech demo I've seen of game footage that looked significantly better than, say, Cryengine 3 was done with quad SLI using top-of-the-line Nvidia cards. It required a $5,000+ computer. Are you willing to pony up $5,000 for a console? Or say they get it all the way down to $1,000, how about then?

Developers and hardware manufacturers know that they can't release a new console generation until the leap is much bigger than they can afford to make it now. Looking better than the current gen isn't an option, it needs to look VASTLY better.

So to your point, of course games can look better than they do now. No one said they can't. That doesn't mean it's logical or practical to try and make that leap this very second. The industry will be ready in 2-3 years, and that's when I expect to see it happen.

 

[Talshere]

I was talking about this with my friend recently, and we both agreed that it is time for a new console generation, currently this generation has been chugging along for 7 or so years now, and I think we a pushing the bare ends of what these consoles can produce.

But what to do you think?

Spoiler: On a side note

Also I currently have a console survey running for a marketing project worth 10% of my final grade if you could be so kind as to fill it out, I would be very happy. http://tinyurl.com/74rr2zr

It has been due for years now. Im sorry but 7 years is to long. When the 360 was released, the Nvidia GT6800 was a top card... You couldnt pay me to put anything less than a GTX 2xx in my machine and even THAT is considered a fairly low end card now.

6800 GT
Core clock: 350
Memory Clock: 1000
90 nm transistor
GDDR3 memory



GTX 560 (A top mid level card coming in at between £150-£200 ($234-$312))
Core clock: 820-900
Memory clock: 3800-4200
40 nm transistor
GDDR5 memory

They arnt even at release now. In all likelihood before any realy confirmation of the next gen comes out we will be on the GTX 6xx series, probably up to the GTX 8xx series before we actually get the damn thing.

Everyone rages about the quality of graphics in MW3 and Skyrim but the truth is that its hardly pushing the available graphics, only what they are stuck with. They dont even support DX10 which given the PC version of BF3 is mandatory for play on PC says a lot.

 

[Zantos]

I don't think now is the right time to do it. In a more stable economic climate where people have more disposable income then it'd probably be time for something new. Right now though, it'd just result in companies being afraid that a single screw-up could mean the whole thing goes under, which would probably affect the quality and diversity of the games being released.

 

[Ambulo]

I don't know that I'd expect consoles to be any more reasonably priced in another 3 or 4 years. If the economy picks back up again, I think they'll just charge you more money for them.

Question...and maybe this is a stupid one. But wouldn't newer hardware allow for advances in other areas besides graphics? One of the great things about GTA and Assassin's Creed is that they have environments that have a life of their own. What kind of hardware upgrades would allow developers to push this further? Would we see more enter-able buildings, or bigger maps?

Just wondering.

 

[otakon17]

I honestly don't care about the quality of graphics at the moment, they've hit a comfortable plateau for me. I do wish for more stable, energy efficient and less buggy consoles and programming however. So I'd say, yes it is more or less time put out the next version of consoles soon.

 

[Ectoplasmicz]

Yes. It does. Almost desperately.

I'm not one to scream "CONSOLES ARE KILLING PC GAMING", but it has gotten to the point where graphics COULD, and therefore SHOULD, be better.

Or, at the VERY least, we should be entering a generation of supreme optimism with maximum graphics. Games of intense complexity with fantastic graphics and little issues.

But, there's a flip side... it'd restart the graphics race (people may argue that it's still going on, but the way I see it, developers hit the finish line but just keep running in circles now). And that'd be bad. I want good games that look good. Not "meh" games that look amazing.

EDIT: Ok, truth be told, I want OMGAMAZING games that look HOLYSHITTHATSFANTASTIC.

But we're a ways off from that. Skyrim is the closest we have, IMO.

I'm with you on this Zero. Though I've gotten to the point where I feel that it's worth the risk to leap forward. We might lose out a bit, but I'm of the mind it would be the greater good and profit of the industry as the whole. Through they would need a launch title for the new system. Halo was for X-box.

What game do you think would become the launch title for a new system?

NextBox would need Halo 5 or 6. The 360 released without a Halo game, but it'd help them big time now that the PS3 has become a major contender. I feel like they'd also need a couple new IPs. One for adults, one for a wider audience.

PS4 could probably survive on another Uncharted, LBP, or even a Metal Gear. Or Kingdom Hearts 3. Damn, would that be a major selling point.

If the PS4 came out with Kingdom Hearts 3 I would buy Sony, and give everyone a raise and a blowjob. Im not kidding

I dont think we need a new generation just yet, the current consoles are still doing well, with this year being one of the best for gaming ever in my opinion, give it another 3 or 4 years

The fact that this year was so good is why I think we need to make that push. Yeah, next year we have a couple Blizz titles, GTA5, Mass Effect 3, Halo 4, and the inevitable Assassin's Creed sequel... but other than that, I can't think of any BIG NAME releases.

I feel like this generation just hit its peak. It's time to start looking at the next one.

left out Bioshock: Infinite

 

[Ectoplasmicz]

The fact that this year was so good is why I think we need to make that push. Yeah, next year we have a couple Blizz titles, GTA5, Mass Effect 3, Halo 4, and the inevitable Assassin's Creed sequel... but other than that, I can't think of any BIG NAME releases.

I feel like this generation just hit its peak. It's time to start looking at the next one.

Funny, I think there are still some big name titles for everyone (aside from the handful you already mentionned...):

Confirmed:
FFXIII-2
SF X Tekken
Twisted Metal
Resident Evil: Operation Racoon City

Possible:
Borderlands 2
Diablo 3
Dragon Quest X
The Last Guardian
MGS: Rising
Ninja Gaiden 3
Tales of Graces F
Tekken X SF
Torchlight 2
XCOM

Maybe:
FF Versus XIII
FF Type 0

Your argument: flawed as fuck

No love for Bioshock Infinite?

SSX!

 

[eclipsed_chemistry]

Yes, I think it's time for a new console generation. I know consoles are never going to reach the level of graphical fidelity and power that PC's can achieve, but that's not what I want from a new console generation. If the graphics stayed pretty much the same, I would be fine with that. What I want are better framerates, shorter loading times, less jagged edges, and no loss of performance when a crapload of things are going on on-screen. So yes, new console generation, please.

 

[Bad Jim]

wouldn't newer hardware allow for advances in other areas besides graphics? One of the great things about GTA and Assassin's Creed is that they have environments that have a life of their own. What kind of hardware upgrades would allow developers to push this further? Would we see more enter-able buildings, or bigger maps?

Better hardware allows more complicated games, but there are a few issues.

Most people have little respect for AI. Developers put a lot of effort into making NPCs perform very simple tasks. All AIs get caught making incredibly stupid decisions, even grandmaster-beating chess programs. Short of making NPCs smart enough to pass as human, there is little incentive to develop sophisticated AI. Multiplayer games provide intelligent adversaries with much less programming effort.

More RAM allows larger maps, but greater rendering power demands more RAM for more detail. The two tend to cancel out. Devs who want to make large sprawling games will generally have to sacrifice visuals. However, it's much easier to sacrifice detail when you have a lot to sacrifice.

Overall I think a new console generation would be a good thing.

There is the concern that more powerful consoles increase the work involved in making games, thereby making them expensive and entrenching the big publishers. On the plus side however, big budgets make it easier to justify investments in things like AI. And I think the flashy extravaganzas sell well because people want to play them.

 

[ZeroMachine]

Yes. It does. Almost desperately.

I'm not one to scream "CONSOLES ARE KILLING PC GAMING", but it has gotten to the point where graphics COULD, and therefore SHOULD, be better.

Or, at the VERY least, we should be entering a generation of supreme optimism with maximum graphics. Games of intense complexity with fantastic graphics and little issues.

But, there's a flip side... it'd restart the graphics race (people may argue that it's still going on, but the way I see it, developers hit the finish line but just keep running in circles now). And that'd be bad. I want good games that look good. Not "meh" games that look amazing.

EDIT: Ok, truth be told, I want OMGAMAZING games that look HOLYSHITTHATSFANTASTIC.

But we're a ways off from that. Skyrim is the closest we have, IMO.

I'm with you on this Zero. Though I've gotten to the point where I feel that it's worth the risk to leap forward. We might lose out a bit, but I'm of the mind it would be the greater good and profit of the industry as the whole. Through they would need a launch title for the new system. Halo was for X-box.

What game do you think would become the launch title for a new system?

NextBox would need Halo 5 or 6. The 360 released without a Halo game, but it'd help them big time now that the PS3 has become a major contender. I feel like they'd also need a couple new IPs. One for adults, one for a wider audience.

PS4 could probably survive on another Uncharted, LBP, or even a Metal Gear. Or Kingdom Hearts 3. Damn, would that be a major selling point.

If the PS4 came out with Kingdom Hearts 3 I would buy Sony, and give everyone a raise and a blowjob. Im not kidding

I dont think we need a new generation just yet, the current consoles are still doing well, with this year being one of the best for gaming ever in my opinion, give it another 3 or 4 years

The fact that this year was so good is why I think we need to make that push. Yeah, next year we have a couple Blizz titles, GTA5, Mass Effect 3, Halo 4, and the inevitable Assassin's Creed sequel... but other than that, I can't think of any BIG NAME releases.

I feel like this generation just hit its peak. It's time to start looking at the next one.

left out Bioshock: Infinite

Oh, shit you're right. Bioshock has never been majorly on my radar but you're absolutely right, that's a big title.

 

[Samus Aran but a man]

Yes, especially with the Wii U coming out. We don't need a new one; especially with new graphics engines still improving with this generation, but from an economic point of view, it is inevitable that it will happen within the next 2 years at most.

 

[dessertmonkeyjk]

We're at the point that the pursuit for realism has nearly reached it's peak but lacks elbow room to do it on consoles. What I mean is physics accuracy, sound dynamics, adaptive dialogue, adaptive AI, etc. and not just how it looks.

Now what will devs do when they can't push the graphical envelope any further? Hopefully, they look at what is necessary and not what could be pushed further as a retail product. We got benchmarks and other tech demos for that. Keep your boasting out of our games if you don't mind.

A new set of consoles can reveal themselves anytime they like really so I don't really mind. Just make it worth the cash.

 

[Bad Jim]

What I want are better framerates, shorter loading times, less jagged edges, and no loss of performance when a crapload of things are going on on-screen.

You naive fool, if only it worked like that. In the early 90s we had constant 50/60 fps and zero loading time from ROM cartridges. Too much on-screen meant running out of sprites and a horrible mess, but because it was indeed horrible, devs ensured it almost never happened.

It's virtually guaranteed that the next generation, and probably the one after it, will have games which take longer to load than to play, struggle to achieve even 30 fps and chug horribly when there is a lot happening on-screen.

This is because the focus will be on how powerful their graphics hardware is. Better graphics will eat up the extra RAM, take longer to load, and competition will always push devs to improve graphics to the point where the framerate suffers.

Maybe in 50 years consoles will be so darned powerful that devs choose performance over detail, because the eye can no longer see the detail. Until then, framerates and loading times will gravitate towards 'borderline acceptable'. You'll probably get anti-aliasing though.