Track this topic | Email this topic | Print this topic

Does anyone else, other than me, believe that the videogame industry needs to start slowing down on console development? The effects of an all-out bumrush to get the latest technology out is starting to take effect in many different ways. I think the main way are the games themselves. Im pleased to see that graphics are starting to level themselves out and people are actually playing games with good gameplay again, but development time for the ps2/xbox/cube games is going through the roof, and with this extra time, extra money and resources have to go into each project.

This decreases the total games released for a system, and decreases the amount of creative and risky games because if those games dont sell then said studio will go extinct. Now what you see are average games catering to whats currently hot. While this is sound business practice and makes sense, its not whats best. Gamers are losing out big time right now, I think. Pac-Man, Mario, and Final Fantasy created genres back in the day because they were inexpensive to create and there was little risk involved. When was the last game released that was fresh and new, that created its on genre. The Sims?

Maybe Im out of line, or in my tired rambles I stopped making sense, but I hope the ps3, Wii, and 360 last longer than the current crop of contenders, because if games for the next-gen's take between 1 and 2 years to develop, I wonder how long its going to take the ps4 and xbox 720's games to brew. And if I see some news about a psp 2 anytime in the next 3 years Im probably going to live in the woods and eat larvae paste for a few years.

--------------------

Feeling unknown
And youre all alone
Flesh and bone
By the telephone
Lift up the receiver
Ill make you a believer

I think you have a good point there, we're all forking out loads and loads of money here for consoles, because we don't know which one is actually best. I got an Xbox, PSP Ps2 and Gamecube (got some more aswell but they're the main ones I got in the last few years) . I don't think I'm prepared to do that again with the next-gen consoles, I've alread got a 360 (got it a while ago) and I've gotten no games for it.

I'm kinda going into a retro gamer, currently playing FFV and kinda Zelda Ocarina Of Time.

I don't have much faith in new games at all. You're completely right about how games aren't taking any risks anymore, they're all following the same path.

I'm going to get a Wii but PS3 can wait til they lower the price by about £100-200.

Well, from a business standpoint; looking at it from the corporate point of view, it's smart strategy. For me right now, it kind of sucks as I have purchased a PS2 two years ago and I only have a small handful of games and as of now, I have no intention of getting a PSP; no particular reason why or why not, but I have no need for it. I will eventually want a PS3 being Playstation-oriented from when I bought a Playstation after it became the new thing and everyone had one already at the time; for the new, next-generation games (MK, FF, and many more) in series that I like I will want a PS3, but NOTHING will take me away from the treasures of the past (past PSX FF games in particular) that I love so much.

This post has been edited by FabulousFreebird on 15th May 2006 12:17

--------------------

"Thought I was dead, eh? Not until I fulfill my dream!"
Seifer Almasy


"The most important part of the story is the ending."
Secret Window


"Peace is but a shadow of death."
Kuja

I usually only buy a new system only for a handful of great games for it, although I'm not happy about companies making their consoles multimedia whores either, I have a computer for that. Still, at least Wii doesn't seem to have gone that way yet. Consoles should play games, not be computers. Too much icing on a cake makes it taste bad.

This post has been edited by Zeromus_X on 13th May 2006 03:48

--------------------

OSonic Rave
/ \Last Arcanum
[ ]Strike Raid
XRagnarok

I remember reading an E3 article that this PS3 supposedly is able to last 10 years, as opposed to 5. I'd be inclined to agree, as the only progress in hardware from now is efficieny and speed, not pure graphical power. The human eye can only perceive so much the retina just can't process the light any better. Standardizing online capabilities for consoles gives a little more poundage in console punch.

A friend brought up the point not of periodical console generations, but consistent price. Until this dawning generation, all successful consoles debuted at $300. Technology gapped from consoles as time went on as well. The Famicom was indeed peak technology, the Genesis at the top in its day as well. Then the PSX and N64 just didn't quite deliver the best technology had to offer, the PC market erupted and thrived with much more performance (CPU is the easiest to compare). The PS2, which I own one and have some ground to say, is a piece of junk. Now we're being promised with consoles that deliver true cutting edge performance (again, CPU is the easiest to compare, and it's close this time). We're also seeing the systems break $300 at launch. From observing the trend of the past 15 years, seeing these machines firmly grasp technology implies some serious foward thinking. When you think ahead, you tend to do so because your immediate future isn't looking that different.

Quote (SaintWeapon @ 14th May 2006 04:19)

I remember reading an E3 article that this PS3 supposedly  is able to last 10 years, as opposed to 5. I'd be inclined to agree, as the only progress in hardware from now is efficieny and speed, not pure graphical power. The human eye can only perceive so much the retina just can't process the light any better. Standardizing online capabilities for consoles gives a little more poundage in console punch.

Since the word power is an ambigious measure that typically means the amount of useful 'work' done in a certain timeframe (unless you mean power usage, as in the wattage consumption which I seriously doubt), the statement that speed and efficiency increases but graphical power does not seems in doubt.

In fact, I can't think of many measures in which something on the graphical board does not get upgraded. Speed, memory, primitives, basic capabilities, math engines, physics engines... GPU's are capable of replacing CPU's these days. This will continue to improve.

Perhaps you mean to say that the state of graphics can no longer be improved? But that seems to be in doubt as well, as sheer size of a landscape or mass of characters (see Star Wars III opening space battle or Matrix 2 'Burly Brawl') required dedicated clusters of computers operating for weeks to fully generate the resultant scene. None of this is in real time. So we are far from the apex of graphical display.

As for the PS3 supposedly lasting 10 years, that's a laughable marketing statement. The console will last until Sony builds the next one. It won't be a decade away, I guarantee you that much. It's not good business sense for technology, the most rapidly advancing industry, to sit back for a decade. Windows 95 vs OSX 10 is a laughable comparison.

--------------------

Visions of Peace - Four Generals, One Empire, and the Returners caught in the middle.

Quote (Elessar @ 14th May 2006 16:02)

Perhaps you mean to say that the state of graphics can no longer be improved? But that seems to be in doubt as well, as sheer size of a landscape or mass of characters (see Star Wars III opening space battle or Matrix 2 'Burly Brawl') required dedicated clusters of computers operating for weeks to fully generate the resultant scene. None of this is in real time. So we are far from the apex of graphical display.

Now, I dont disagree with you, obviously processing power has alot more room to improve, but those scenes you spoke of didn't take a long time to create simply because of the computers power at the given time, but also the human resources needed to pull off something like that, the designing, all that stuff. Movies like Finding Nemo and Shrek took ages to produce simply because of the artwork and fine tuning needed, not because technology restricted them. When more and more generations of consoles come around, the same tender love and care will go into these things, the only difference is we're going to be controlling them real time. There's always gonna be that nerd in the office at 2 a.m. trying to get the hair effect on the inside of Tails' nose ready because the latest Sonic is supposed to ship in 3 weeks, I just dont want it to be to the point where videogames are released with a break between titles compared to Disney-Pixar's features.

Right when gameplay started coming back and graphics started cooling off, the next gen bug comes along and starts the cycle all over again. And what's a game going to cost when it exceeds the budget of a motion picture? Maybe they already are...

This post has been edited by TItoJackson on 15th May 2006 03:09

--------------------

Feeling unknown
And youre all alone
Flesh and bone
By the telephone
Lift up the receiver
Ill make you a believer

Wii is going to be the console that probably draws me in. Although PS3 has Metal Gear and (probably) Final Fantasy, I think the general attitude Nintendo has about its system being a *fun* game machine takes the cake. I don't buy consoles to play DVD's, music, store information, and do my taxes -- I buy consoles to have a machine that plays video games.

To me, it looks like Sony and Microsoft are diverging from the initial intent of console games to get some kind of wacky not-as-useful computer. Well, I already have a computer, and I don't see the point in paying more money to do something I can already do.

Elessar, I meant "power" as in how good something looks. I meant "speed and efficiency" as in how fast and how much of something shows. The "limit" I spoke of is firstly resolution. Games usually don't go further than TV resolution at compressed rates. Your eyes cannot sense any better than reality, and current resolutions and rates are so close to that threshold it's not the biggest priority to build on it. If you demand higher display, then you're just a graphics person. This new generation has already come so far on that. Getting this highest resolution and rate into the common household is the challenge. The other graphical aspects you referred to, such as generating the far-out landscapes, would be the technology that will always improve.

Quote (FraudulentTommah @ 14th May 2006 22:31)

Wii is going to be the console that probably draws me in. Although PS3 has Metal Gear and (probably) Final Fantasy, I think the general attitude Nintendo has about its system being a *fun* game machine takes the cake.  I don't buy consoles to play DVD's, music, store information, and do my taxes -- I buy consoles to have a machine that plays video games. 

I'll have you know that that is my gaming motto. It's also the biggest reason that I want a Wii instead of an Xbox 360, and a DS instead of the PSP which, to me, is as Zeromus_X puts it "a multimedia whore"

Quote

To me, it looks like Sony and Microsoft are diverging from the initial intent of console games to get some kind of wacky not-as-useful computer.  Well, I already have a computer, and I don't see the point in paying more money to do something I can already do.

I'm in complete agreement with you there too.

--------------------

Dead Winter. A nice comic.

OK, this is just ludicrous.

Phil Harrison loves the Wii

Peter Moore loves the Wii

In an extremely bizarre set of marketing tactics, both Microsoft and Sony's camps recommend that gamers buy a Wii as a second console. Both companies somehow think that the unique Wii can serve as a foil to take away gamers from their opponent, so both companies are encouraging gamers to give the Wii a shot.

I'm speechless. Has anything quite like this happened before? I mean, even their competitors want Nintendo to win this generation. I won't be getting any of these consoles for at least another two years, but right now I think (surprise, surprise) that the Wii is the most intriguing of the three. I still can't believe I just read those....

--------------------

this is a blog mostly about comics and videogames
END SPOILER

Quote (Barrylocke @ 15th May 2006 11:56)

I'll have you know that that is my gaming motto. It's also the biggest reason that I want a Wii instead of an Xbox 360, and a DS instead of the PSP which, to me, is as Zeromus_X puts it "a multimedia whore"

This is true, the PSP can do alot, but it's absolutely rediculous to automatically shun a console just because it can do those things. I love my PSP, and being stationed on an Aircraft Carrier, I think it's the most versatile videogaming hardware released to this date, but that's because it suits my needs.

I wont say Im buying a Wii for the simple fact that it doesn't have a hard-drive and all that crap, maybe it does, Im not even sure. I wont say Im not buying a ps3 or xbox 360 simply because it has multimedia features. I want the best value for my money. Maybe it's time to let that fanboy thing go. Im not saying you guys are, but I bet some of you wish for Nintendo to prevail simply because of childhood nostalgia, but I could care less if Nintendo stopped making consoles. It'd make it easier to play those great titles acrossed more platforms.

Now lets see the hate posts come on how I want Nintendo to fail. I wish them well, the fathers of modern gaming. But I was a Genesis fan so.. burn em all!

--------------------

Feeling unknown
And youre all alone
Flesh and bone
By the telephone
Lift up the receiver
Ill make you a believer

It's not that I hate those consoles, and certainly not the PSP, it's just that they seem more geared toward multimedia than gaming. (I don't think the PSP has great games, although that's just my opinion.) Although Sony and Microsoft aren't primarily gaming companies anyway. So it's just refreshing to see that the Wii will actually be geared for playing games and innovative ways to play them, rather than putting more icing on the cake.

And, I'd definitely get a PS3, given the opportunity. I'd probably get Wii first though, for the supposedly lower price, and other reasons already given.

--------------------

OSonic Rave
/ \Last Arcanum
[ ]Strike Raid
XRagnarok

Quote (TItoJackson @ 15th May 2006 18:25)

Im not saying you guys are, but I bet some of you wish for Nintendo to prevail simply because of childhood nostalgia, but I could care less if Nintendo stopped making consoles.

Wow, I can't believe that some people are still using that old "Nintendo rides on nostalgia" arguement in the face of the Wii, the most innovative system on the market that is a more evolved console than Sony and Microsoft can boast. If anyone can't let things go, it's Sony, who finally decided on a controller that is exactly the same as it is on their previous console. Kinda wierd, especially since the PS3 itself is just a suped-up PS2.

Quote

In an extremely bizarre set of marketing tactics, both Microsoft and Sony's camps recommend that gamers buy a Wii as a second console. Both companies somehow think that the unique Wii can serve as a foil to take away gamers from their opponent, so both companies are encouraging gamers to give the Wii a shot.

Worst. Marketing. Ever.

--------------------

I find your lack of faith disturbing...

Back in my days, our consoles didn't need weird and innovative concepts to be fun because the games were designed to be entertaining, not impressive. It was good enough for us and generated many fond memories.

Back in my days, handhelds could play games. That's it. Nothing more, nothing less. We cherished them. Most of us still have working Game Boys, and we didn't care that the sound was terrible or that they were in 4 shades of grey.

Back in my days, online games didn't exist. We didn't need them. We had fun with actual physical people who sat next to us, turned around to call us cheaters, and playfully shoved when we'd get owned. We certainly didn't have to prove ourselves by racking up thousands of hours in-game clicking on stuff non-stop and occasionally hitting an F-key.

Today, the new crop of gamers is still just as fresh as we were back then. The difference is, they're being spoiled practically overnight. It took us years to get there, and games stayed fresh and entertaining because of it. We got an SNES game every couple of months and they certainly lasted longer than that - not just a few weeks before we'd lose interest.

Tomorrow? That's a question I'd rather not try to answer.

--------------------

"Judge not a man by his thoughts and words, but by
the quality and quantity of liquor in his possession
and the likelyhood of him sharing."

Quote (Kappa the Imp @ 16th May 2006 00:56)

the Wii, the most innovative system on the market that is a more evolved console than Sony and Microsoft can boast.

The dvd player, the hard-drive, the modems.. aren't those innovations introduced in the current generation of systems? These are all new technologies and they brought new life and new things to consoles that were never done before. It sounds like you're trying to say that Sony or Microsoft never brought anything new to the console world and that is totally not true. Xbox Live, that's not an innovation?


--------------------

Feeling unknown
And youre all alone
Flesh and bone
By the telephone
Lift up the receiver
Ill make you a believer

Quote (TItoJackson @ 15th May 2006 19:14)

Xbox Live, that's not an innovation?

Hm, a bunch of people playing against and with eachother in an online community. Sounds innovative. Except Microsoft didn't invent the internet.

The thing is, none of those things haven't completely changed the way we play and interface with games, or at least none of those things that Sony or Microsoft invented. The point is, I have a computer. A computer that plays music, plays movies, connects to the internet, has a hard drive. It's great that it plays games, but that's not what I really bought it for. It's the opposite with consoles. It's cool if it connects to the internet, has a hard drive, plays music and videos, but I want my console to play games. That's why I'm not getting a PS3 and getting a Wii instead. I might get an Xbox360, not only because that and a Wii is about the price of a PS3, but because it's releasing games I'm genuinely interested in. The fact that the Live service is awesome is just a bonus really. I guess I'm trying to illustrate that I'm getting a Wii not because I'm a nostalgic fanboy (trust me, I never owned anything pre-N64), not because it connects to the internet, not because I hate the other two multi-media consoles, but because it has games that I really just want to play, that play differently as well.

And, to Silverlance, I don't know what you're getting at. It seems you plain just don't want gaming to evolve. Online adds a lot to multiplayer, even if there are some "foul mouths" on games like Halo 2, or addicts in games like World of Warcraft. I know that without B.net function, Starcraft and Warcraft III AND Diablo II would all be less than half as good. It's clear that you don't game a lot, if at all. It seems like you almost bear a grudge to anyone who likes to play post SNES games. I mean, come on. Visuals can make a game better. There's no doubt about it. But it's not always about photo-realism either. I can honestly say that the only PS2 game I'm still excited for is Okami, a game with no photo-realism, but great art design and other concepts. And people don't play games because they're impressive. They play them because they want to. You make it sound like because a console has new, innovative, weird ideas it has no potential. It doesn't matter if the console makes your toast or pours your morning coffee as long as it plays games, and those games are good games that you enjoy playing, whether it has online functions, photo-realism, or more than 4 shades of grey. That's just the reason I'm not getting a PS3 right now. It has only one game I really want to play (MGS4) and no one has even seen that game in action yet, it's impossible to tell whether or not it will play well yet.


--------------------

"We're not tools of the government or anyone else. Fighting... fighting was the only thing I was ever good at, but at least I always fought for what I believed in." - Frank Yeager (a.k.a. Grey Fox)

Quote (FallingHeart @ 15th May 2006 20:50)

It seems you plain just don't want gaming to evolve.

Not quite. I'm mainly saying games have changed in a way that we expect too much out of them. Earlier games were simple, but they kept people occupied for a very long time. Now? It seems like games have been spoiled and are becoming blazé of the whole gaming scene, expecting more than they should while developpers struggle to keep up with their expectations.

"Back then" we weren't just satisfied with cheap graphics, offline play, and simple concepts: we spent months playing the same game just to beat it through and through. Now? Now, it takes a lot more for a game to make the cut. Would you play a game that involves shooting enemies that slowly come down at you, wanderinig in a small maze collecting dots while ghosts chase you, jumping over barrels while climbing girders, or shooting rocks in space, all this without photorealistic graphics or online MMO play?

Probably not. And neither would I. Yet not even 20 years ago they were even bigger than WoW. Sure takes a hell of a lot to please us today, doesn't it?

Gone are the days when you'd play side by side with a buddy, taunting each other face to face. Now? You're both in the comfort of your own homes. In fact, you're probably playing someone you've never seen, and never will see. Yay. Now I can feel proud of having defeated sephiroth_2954 (on the interweb lolz), and not having to worry about a rematch or having fond memories of how I totally knocked him off that cliff and how he owes me one for that next time we decide to chill at his place.

This post has been edited by Silverlance on 16th May 2006 02:07

--------------------

"Judge not a man by his thoughts and words, but by
the quality and quantity of liquor in his possession
and the likelyhood of him sharing."

I agree that Microsoft didn't create the internet (Al Gore did.. joking) but the Xbox Live architecture (spelliing?) was indeed innovative in many ways, I think.

I think the dvd playing is obviously a by-product of using the dvd as a disc format. Obviously if you're using the media take full advantage of it, right? I think the media movement in consoles came from that alone. The PSP can do it all because if it only released straight-up games there's no way it could compete with the Nintendo DS, it needed to have it's own identity. Im not trying to argue or disagree with anyone here, the only thing Im concerned about is the way that consoles are headed. But media does have its place in current consoles whether we like it or not.

As far as console wars... I think it's over. There's enough of a market out there to support 3 consoles.

--------------------

Feeling unknown
And youre all alone
Flesh and bone
By the telephone
Lift up the receiver
Ill make you a believer

Quote

Gone are the days when you'd play side by side with a buddy, taunting each other face to face. Now? You're both in the comfort of your own homes. In fact, you're probably playing someone you've never seen, and never will see.

Uhhh, I own an Xbox 360 and don't even have Xbox Live. Yet I play with my friends and cousins on it ALL THE TIME (like last Friday being the most recent)! Mainly we play four player Call of Duty 2 and Tag Team 4 player Dead or Alive 4, with the occasional Perfect Dark Zero outing.

Online gaming is just a fix so you never have to play against computer AI (not to mention long distance friends and family can play with you). Gone are the days of a computer walking into a wall trying to get to you more like it.

This post has been edited by Phunbaba on 16th May 2006 02:57

Quote

Gone are the days when you'd play side by side with a buddy, taunting each other face to face. Now? You're both in the comfort of your own homes. In fact, you're probably playing someone you've never seen, and never will see. Yay...

Yes...and No. Personally, although I love the convinence of their being a person to play against almost any time, nothing beats playing a racing game or fighting game, and you and your friends all yelling WTF because someone pulls of an unexpected victory, or dies is a spectacular way. Plus, I think I'd rather my friends laugh at me for being unable to do as well as they can in SSB (my last system was a PS) than some random 11-year old yelling at me that I'm a f**n' noob since I am currently incapable of wavedashing.

Quote

This is true, the PSP can do alot, but it's absolutely rediculous to automatically shun a console just because it can do those things. I love my PSP, and being stationed on an Aircraft Carrier, I think it's the most versatile videogaming hardware released to this date, but that's because it suits my needs

Perhaps I was being harsh. The PSP does haves some good games for it, and I guess a mini portable entertainment system would be convineint for a person that can't constantly plug in big stuff, like in an aircraft carrier. So I can see your stand there. To each his own I guess.

Edit

500 posts and counting

This post has been edited by Barrylocke on 16th May 2006 06:59

--------------------

Dead Winter. A nice comic.

Whats a WII? lol...am i embarresing myself?

Oh yeah to the topic------>Yes i agree too much stations,hard to buy all the awesome games for everything.

*if someone said sometin like that,too lazy to read*

Moderator Edit

You're too lazy to read but you care if you embarrass yourself? You speak volumes, my friend. -R51

cool

This post has been edited by Dragon King on 20th May 2006 17:38

--------------------

Kel'Thuzad: She is persistent. Reminds me of you, death knight.

Arthas:Shut up you damned ghost.

-Warcraft III Kel'thuzad comparing Arthas and Sylvanas Windrunner.

No, you aren't. The Wii is the next Nintendo console, and the name is so sorry and sad that it'll probably win the Academy Award for best actress.

--------------------

Feeling unknown
And youre all alone
Flesh and bone
By the telephone
Lift up the receiver
Ill make you a believer

Forbes tells me that Merrill Lynch predicts that the Wii is going to sell for $200 US. And evidently sa Sega rep is saying that it's going for even less. If this is all true (it's still speculation at this point) Nintendo's going to struggle to meet demand. Hell, if a nextgen console is that cheap, I might get one myself way earlier than I thought.

--------------------

this is a blog mostly about comics and videogames
END SPOILER

Quote (TItoJackson @ 16th May 2006 20:52)

No, you aren't. The Wii is the next Nintendo console, and the name is so sorry and sad that it'll probably win the Academy Award for best actress.

I thought the console was called the Revolution and the controller was called the Wii… Anyway, the price for the Revolution/Wii will be $249.

--------------------

And don't drive your car off a cliff like I did. Girl, no man is worth 10 points on your license.

Does Wii mean anything or is it just a funny name? And i dont feel like researching all that much but i guess il google it and see what i find for now...

--------------------

Kel'Thuzad: She is persistent. Reminds me of you, death knight.

Arthas:Shut up you damned ghost.

-Warcraft III Kel'thuzad comparing Arthas and Sylvanas Windrunner.

It's wordplay on the word 'We', as the slogan for the system is 'Wii are the Revolution". Although it doesn't really mean anything in Japanese, that I know of. They probably chose it because that syllable ('Wi') isn't used often in Japanese, so it probably sounds exotic and new and creative, etc.

--------------------

OSonic Rave
/ \Last Arcanum
[ ]Strike Raid
XRagnarok

I read an article on it and they wanted a phrase that didn't exist that would eventually become iconic in nature, similar to Google and Ipod.

Anyways, I wasnt planning on getting a Wii but if it's less than $200 I'll probably get one, as long as they make a normal controller for it as well. Besides, not playing a Mario game since SNES left me in a semi-conscious state. They should make a Bad Dudes remake too, and Caveman Games.

This post has been edited by TItoJackson on 21st May 2006 02:06

--------------------

Feeling unknown
And youre all alone
Flesh and bone
By the telephone
Lift up the receiver
Ill make you a believer

The GC controller is compatible for the Wii, because of SSBB. It depends on the other games having that compatibility.

I think "Wii," while not meaning anything on its own in any language, is a sound that exists in all langauges, like Kodak. It's a marketing strategy, I'll give it that much. My only qualm is that "Wii" sounding already like the umpteenth women's television station, we (did a woman come up with the name wii?).

Well, the controller looks clean and simple, which I like. I don't really care for million button controllers, and all that. But really, I'd think that it'd be easier to play with the Wii controller instead, although maybe that's just me.

--------------------

OSonic Rave
/ \Last Arcanum
[ ]Strike Raid
XRagnarok