We Can Still Do More With Xbox 360, Says Bleszinski

[tahrey]

blarg

OK, point by point:

The plug-in thing has been done before, it's nothing new. You just prominently mark the box (or download as) "for 32X" (or "for Genesis with 32X enhancement") or whatever your enhancement thing is called. Much like marking a PC game box as only compatible with XP, or needing 2Gb RAM etc. Or a console one that HAS to install to hard disk, so it won't work with the old 360 Core. Or even that it works with the standard model, but things look so much better with the upgraded one (as was the case with the Gameboy Colour, the Atari STe (very occasionally) or some Amiga and Sinclair games)

(Heck, its gone on almost since the dawn of time... like ZX81 games requiring the 16k RAM pack)


The graphical quality thing is a matter of personal opinion I suppose. If the devs bother to turn on anti aliasing, it doesn't feature close ups of human faces, and you're not pressing your nose against the screen, it can be pretty damn convincing. Heck, it fooled the ITV Tonight programme, didn't it? Some PS2 titles got close, a well made PS3 one is amazing to my eyes. (Having grown up through the days where having more than 32 colours on screen at once alongside pixel-perfect colour accuracy was considered high-falutin', I may be easily impressed, but still...)

Hence the need for TV trailers to put "actual game footage" at the bottom nowadays...


Until the new consoles come out, or at least until they start previewing in something approaching finished condition, there's still motivation for devs to make the best game that they possibly can on the existing systems, because THATS WHAT PEOPLE ARE USING AND WHAT THEY'RE BUYING GAMES FOR. You can't buy a game for a console that isn't on the market yet. And even when the new ones do hit, they'll be insanely expensive at first. What are you going to buy, if you're not an absolute early adopter? A couple new games for your current console at $50ish each, or a whole new console, accessories, and games to play on it for $600 or more? Not everyone is stinking rich enough to do that on a whim.


Modern PCs ARE as powerful as supercomputers of yore, and even some fairly recent ones. A lot of supercomputer research these days actually uses normal PCs, networked up, because as individual nodes they provide so much raw power but rather poor I/O throughput. Including distributed computing projects... particularly those that use GPUs. Their own code is itself highly optimised.

However, given the sheer variety of components - core (CPU, memory, etc) and peripheral (graphics, audio...) hardware, drivers for such, operating systems, accessory programs - that make up a "PC" as it stands, and the necessary abstraction layers that then sit between any program running on one and the hardware, it's nowhere near as easy to really optimise your code. Mathematical routines that run solely in the CPU or the GPU and don't touch much else can be tightened up, but once you have to get various pieces of hardware and threads talking to each other it gets messy. And you have to account for having various amounts of memory or chip time available. A lot of the most impressive modern demos these days will specify a particular computer, or at least a very strict minimum system, that it needs to run on. The last time we were really close to any kind of standard was in the mid 90s where a gaming PC most likely had the fastest available Pentium, maybe 32mb of EDO RAM if the owner was flush, and a Voodoo FX 3D card with a decent Matrox 2D one that could do all standard VGA and VESA SVGA modes. Since then things have diverged massively.

In a console, you don't have this problem. You know absolutely what the CPU is, how fast it goes, and if you're into low level hacking, all the opcodes. You know how much memory there is, how fast it runs and what the latency is. You know the graphics hardware inside out and back to front, by this point in the system's lifetime. You know the bus timings etc. The system software is also a known quantity, and there's far less in the way of abstraction layers. It is, at heart, maybe still a PC, but it's a very standardised one wrapped in less cotton wool. It's closer to the old single-purpose gaming systems at heart than to a desktop which may be used for financial spreadsheets in the day and gaming at night.

 

[Awexsome]

Battlefield 3 at this point is the exception to the rule. When games constantly start coming out as crippled as it is for the console then it would be time to make an upgrade.

Remember the point of consoles is to provide a great gaming experience at a low price. (any console over 400$ is not going to fly with me.) Not give the highest end experience.

PC gamers should stop blaming the consoles for being less powerful and start blaming developers who make PC games (as in not Cliffy B) for making bad games. Kinda ironic too that one of the unanimously considered best PC developers in Valve has terrible graphics even by console standards.

 

[BlackStar42]

While new graphics are nice, I'm pretty skint at the moment. Give it another year or so.

 

[SageRuffin]

Battlefield 3 at this point is the exception to the rule. When games constantly start coming out as crippled as it is for the console then it would be time to make an upgrade.

Remember the point of consoles is to provide a great gaming experience at a low price. (any console over 400$ is not going to fly with me.) Not give the highest end experience.

PC gamers should stop blaming the consoles for being less powerful and start blaming developers who make PC games (as in not Cliffy B) for making bad games. Kinda ironic too that one of the unanimously considered best PC developers in Valve has terrible graphics even by console standards.

I concur with this gentleman/lady.

It's amazing how a simple idea can create a balls-out PC vs Console debate (again). I half ashamed to call myself a gamer from all this.

Only half.

 

[masticina]

Mmm how surprising
Really getting the last few drops of cola out of the bottle takes the hardest work! Same with getting the last drops of performance out of a game console.

As proven by the many late games on some of the now forgotten consoles. They certainly we're able to push the envelope. Take Conkers Bad Fur Day who would thought that possible on the N64. Well Rare did

So yeah there probably is 5% Possible power left.. and with adjustments maybe a few more. Yeah!

 

[Waaghpowa]

Yeah, because they are used in mobile phones they must be rubbish. You really need to check out Nvidia's new Tegra 3 quad core proccessors or know that there are servers being built using these chips. Or as we have already seen that the next version of windows will run on them.

I never said they were rubbish, just not impressed. The Tegra chips are cool and all, but it doesn't change the fact that they're intended for mobile devices. And a mobile chip in a home console? It will probably end up looking like rubbish.

 

[Aprilgold]

Why do people care so much about how a game looks?

Of course, I'm not gonna say that graphics should be completely ignored, but I'm quite happy with how most games look today.

We keep pushing grahpical fidelity, so were advancing our hardware radically fast.
But since the only thing that supports such high end fidelity is the PC, and a little bit more minor on the PS3 and Wii U. So, as you might know, the hardware which the games are being made on is surpassing what its played on. So trying to push a console to its limits seems to be just trying to milk more out of it before death comes.

I know its fun to milk things, but could you just leave this cow alone, shes so broken up and wrecked from all the different stages of this one console, here, lets just go raiser her son.

 

[SergeantAnt]

There will be no notable improvements in game content or mechanics at all because of consoles.. What is sad is that there doesnt NEED to be improvments in graphics., The sum of a games parts are more important to making a truly great game.. but todays casual gamer accepts less, gets all misty about some half ass textures, plays on a console, and it sells.

Cliff and most other developers are going to sell more games, Will they be "better?" .. I highly doubt it.

Whoa there negative nancy! First off not all people who play on consoles are "casual gamers", and we're also not blind.
So anyway sure there will be the devs who will make the same same shit but there are also devs who care about the games they make and come out with some awesome stuff. For example consoles have dark souls, uncharted, and... na fuck it too many good ones im not even gonna bother listing more lol. And these are recent. They're really getting alot of power out of these systems still.

Oh and for the record i have alot of games for the pc so i'm not trying to troll you or sound hostile i swear. It's just i still love my consoles and play them just as much. Ps3 is my favorite though... well after pc :3

 

[The Lugz]

TRANSLAION:

'oh god, please don't make us learn something new it'll cost too much!'

if you really want 'creative programming' go hire the unlimited detail engine guys
and make them code for the xbox, if they can make a mediocre laptop run 70 billion particles, they can do it for the xbox too

plus the new xbox is coming out in '15 as any hardware geek can tell you
so weather it's getting long in the tooth or not is irrelevant, it lasts till then at least
Microsoft officially announced it was going to be a 10 year platform
and if they go back on their word i want a refund!

i'm fairly sure the wii-u will launch next, but i don't expect anything special, apart from the obvious handheld minimap gimmic for adventure games, and mode function ( hold the tiny screen up to the tv and you get an x-ray or a batman inspection vision type overlay, ect if they can manage that then it'll be at-least decent )
and sony may have learned their lesson and launch something that isn't so fat it will engulf your wallet, pets, kids, tv, and living room if you buy it
( but knowing them, they'll have a vr suite hooked into it with a pressure sensative mat and suit.. 'shakes head' )
and actually get a games console out, instead of a tiny supercomputer*

hopefully, when a console refresh does come all the console company's will be completely ready this time and not launch anything half baked, or with so many features it becomes a headache for them
we can only hope.


*the ps3 was dubbed 'the most economical supercomputer building block' by the us defence, who made a big old grid of the things for it's latest supercomputer
http://www.physorg.com/news/2010-12-air-playstation-3s-supercomputer.html

 

[koroem]

Oh hey look, the self proclaimed "Tony Stark of Video Games" is opening is flapper again. Gonna go pretend I care elsewhere. 6 year hardware needs to die, not get another 10 years of second rate uninspired junk. How about some push for real innovation rather than polishing a what is now a turd in terms of hardware specs. That is what the real Tony Stark would do. Clown.

 

[MarsProbe]

Oh hey look, the self proclaimed "Tony Stark of Video Games" is opening is flapper again. Gonna go pretend I care elsewhere. 6 year hardware needs to die, not get another 10 years of second rate uninspired junk. How about some push for real innovation rather than polishing a what is now a turd in terms of hardware specs. That is what the real Tony Stark would do. Clown.

Oooh, such strong feelings of hatred! Sounds like someone is heading for the dark side. If you're only pretending to care, why are you here in the first place? Clown.

I've never really got all the hate for this Cliff Bleszinski fellow (I'm guessing the reason people would quote would be something along the lines of "like, you know, stuff" before they go back for another episode of MLP) - I guess there's just got to be someone you think it's cool to dislike.

I can't really blame game devs (and the console manufacturers) for wanting to spin out the lifespan of the current gen of consoles. Seems it's quite an expensive business, designing consoles and developing games for them these days - nothing wrong with trying to economise a bit, I say.

 

[Something Amyss]

Another idea is that instead of jumping into a new console, with new issues and prices and such...

Why not focus on making quality games that understand the graphical capabilities of the system so that developer can now focus more on creating more solid games?

Because whoever puts out a console with better graphics will get all the graphics whores, and graphics whores=money.

I'm not endorsing it. In fact, I'd like to see bigger games, even if they take a graphical hit. But a lot of people are concerned with graphics, but don't have the tech savvy or K+M skills to join the PC Master Race.

 

[The Wykydtron]

As long as the gameplay doesn't get noticeably effected by how outdated the 360 is i don't really care if they try to extend its life really...

Aesthetics > Graphics after all

 

[ProjectTrinity]

Man I hope we don't start the new generation just yet; we haven't seen the best the PS3 could do. =< I am curious as to what the kind gentleman means when he says the 360 still has some untapped potential in it, though.

 

[OldNewNewOld]

"Stronger" consoles doesn't mean better graphics only. There is much more to games than graphics.
The xBox is weak and there is no way around it. I don't really care about the graphics, as long as the aesthetic is well done. But I do think that the current gen consoles lack memory. Just look at all this games. The world are small. Any bigger OPEN world will lag. If the game is a big open world, it will either lag, or have lower settings and look worse.

Developer have to "sacrifice" to much to get games running smoothly. CoD developers are bragging that they somehow managed to cut so many corners that their game can run on 60fps. That's enough to see how weak the consoles are. Instead of trowing 80% of the budget into optimizing the game to run on ancient consoles, they could have used 20% of it into optimizing and the rest in creating something good.

I'm not saying that optimizing is unimportant. Contrary, I think it is indeed important. The problem is that after some point, optimizing isn't possible in reasonable time with a reasonable budget. It's not liner, but exponential.

(or the Wii-U, which IIRC was only at about their level or *slightly* ahead)

Ummm... what?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27Lf4uVuE50
(youtube tags aren't working for some reason. :S)

This is a tech demo. Not prerendered.
You can't find anything even close to this in current generation.

 

[koroem]

Oh hey look, the self proclaimed "Tony Stark of Video Games" is opening is flapper again. Gonna go pretend I care elsewhere. 6 year hardware needs to die, not get another 10 years of second rate uninspired junk. How about some push for real innovation rather than polishing a what is now a turd in terms of hardware specs. That is what the real Tony Stark would do. Clown.

Oooh, such strong feelings of hatred! Sounds like someone is heading for the dark side. If you're only pretending to care, why are you here in the first place? Clown.

I've never really got all the hate for this Cliff Bleszinski fellow (I'm guessing the reason people would quote would be something along the lines of "like, you know, stuff" before they go back for another episode of MLP) - I guess there's just got to be someone you think it's cool to dislike.

I can't really blame game devs (and the console manufacturers) for wanting to spin out the lifespan of the current gen of consoles. Seems it's quite an expensive business, designing consoles and developing games for them these days - nothing wrong with trying to economise a bit, I say.

Dark side it is for me then. Cliffy Clown is a joke, a jerk, and deserves the hate he gets. The guy is one of the biggest driving forces behind Epic's back turning from the PC platform, and is helping to pioneer a generation of stale, repetitive cash cow game development on console platforms today. My post wasn't about console manufacturers, because it makes sense for them to push a product, but the historical significance Epic has had on gaming has been pissed on and forgotten in favor of a quick buck. His statement only personifies that stance.

Economizing is one thing, being careless about it is another. UE3 engine is a blight on development and hardware and is middle-ware of choice for lazy devs, and Epic's support for it is laughable as it has been pointed out in this thread already. Not one good thing has come from him except for his ability to make Epic and Microsoft money while alienating the fan base that made them. His attitude and self idolizing personality doesn't gain him respect.

Call me a PC elitist if that is what you read from my comments here, but the reality is his and Epics actions and comments like this are everything that is wrong with gaming and it's current beta release, launch day patch, day one DLC, terrible ports, and other bullshit state.

 

[Pyramid Head]

Okay, this shit pisses me off. He's absolutely totally right. I hated Gears of War but goddamnit, every account i see is that Cliffy B is actually smart and cares a lot about the status of the medium as a whole, so i have qualms about making a review about Gears of War. Goddamnit Cliffy B, if you're going to make a bad game stop being a decent human being!!

I kid. Like i said, he's right, there is plenty of life in the 360, and right now development tools still haven't caught up to the current hardware standard, so i'd hold off for a while longer until it's easier for smaller studios to publish games.

 

[qeinar]

thing is there is a new console coming out next year, and that is the wiiu, which will be better than both the xbox and ps3, so it would be bad for both sony and microsoft to not come out with new consoles soonish.

 

[Ghadente]

Xbox 360 more to offer? like a Super Red Ring of Death