Support NeoGAF

[Deadlysword]

Well-done VR is about the only thing that will get me fully invested in the new generation. The expected graphics bump that comes with each new console is no longer enough of a reason for me to invest hundreds and hundreds of dollars in the latest consoles.

 

[DynamoJack]

You don't see a difference between this

and this?

And we're only 5 months into this gen. And the above is an open world game made by a 100ish-man team.

I prefer top pictures art style, more colours, games made in that cell shading style also seem to age better.

Mario Kart 8 same reason, running on dated hardware but still looks great. Probably takes more work to make something look great on dated hardware though, tons of optimizing.

 

[CriterionDog]

Dude, this gen JUST started. Jesus.

 

[Sayter]

The biggest question I have. What are these new machines doing (besides better graphics) that the PS3 or 360 aren't already?

This is the same question I had last gen. From a pure gameplay perspective there was nothing really new except for motion control and taking cover from incoming fire. Speed up and slow down mechanics were introduced as well. But only a few games took advantage of this. And motion control on the Wii got quite tiresome after a while.

 

[Shaanyboi]

Stop looking for games that look different and start looking for games that play different.

 

[Fredrik]

WTF !?!

This explains that ! You can close the thread, all of this after a try at a store on an average tv as it used to be...

Lol I wish that was the reason but look three posts above you, there is nothing wrong with this store's setups, probably a lot better than the one you have at home unless you like to spend all your money on new TVs, they go all in to get you to buy a console, it's not the crappy game store demo stations that barely work.
Besides, if the TV can somehow stop you from seeing the generational leap then it certainly is barely there, last gen I was wowed even when playing on an SDTV for over a year until I finally got my first HDTV. That's the way it should be. And that's what I wanted this time too.

 

[erawsd]

Yeah... Not really. We haven't had that for a while. Stop making this shit up. Far Cry and Half Life 2 on a decent rig where better looking snd running than everything PS3 and 360 had to offer at launch.

So? The first round of Xbox games are certainly not represenative of what the hardware is capable of. Even Nvidia acknowledges consoles being ahead at the start of a generation.

So yes, on a technical level, this is the worst starting point of any console hardware we've ever seen. period.

 

[Deadlysword]

This is the same question I had last gen. From a pure gameplay perspective there was nothing really new except for motion control and taking cover from incoming fire. Speed up and slow down mechanics were introduced as well. But only a few games took advantage of this. And motion control on the Wii got quite tiresome after a while.

For that matter, from a gameplay perspective were 360/ps3 games a fundamental leap from ps2/xbox/gamecube? Most of last gen's improvements came in the form of increased resolutions, a fully realized online marketplace,DLC, making the consoles into complete multimedia devices capable of being the entertainment centerpiece in the living room, and dabbling into motion gaming which seems to have run its course. In terms of controls, gameplay, I would say the 'feel' of games hasn't changed in 2-3 generations, for me anyway. The latest generation so far seems like improving upon concepts introduced last gen. Personally, as I stated before, I'm hoping that VR becomes viable as right now I have no urge to upgrade yet.

 

[Danny Dudekisser]

Dude, this gen JUST started. Jesus.

Yeah, and it's concerning when it stumbles out of the gate.

 

[DynamoJack]

Not really

my memory doesn't remember it looking that bad

 

[DeVeAn]

Is those pics supposed to show the difference? Honestly, I really don't see a generational leap anywhere in those pics.

Performance wise it's night and day.

 

[radyboysmith]

the leap from 360/ps3 to xbone/ps4 is so small that now mobile gaming and ipads is gonna be a real threat .

imagine with mobile phones/ipad getting so powerful that you can play infamous: second son graphics on them , why get a console ????

 

[RedSwirl]

I'm just gaming on PC right now and so far I haven't had the urge to buy a single game that was designed for current hardware as a baseline.

Of course most games so far have been cross-gen. We're not gonna see the real "next-gen" stuff until this fall and next winter. Witcher 3 is actually the first game designed for this level of hardware I absolutely intend to buy. Honestly, I felt the same way when Xbox 360 launched. Back then exclusive 360 games did look way better than PS2 games, but no 360 game looked truly amazing to me until Gears 1.

 

[nkarafo]

the leap from 360/ps3 to xbone/ps4 is so small that now mobile gaming and ipads is gonna be a real threat .

imagine with mobile phones/ipad getting so powerful that you can play infamous: second son graphics on them , why get a console ????

Because the game would be either unplayable or incredibly dumbed down with a touch screen?

Also, big TVs are better?

 

[Eusis]

Japanese release was March 2000.

More importantly almost all of those games came out at about the end of the first year, if anything proving it's EXACTLY the first year that's bad. Then that first year comes to a close and suddenly things turn Awesome.

Hell, even citing the Japanese release Onimusha hit in January there, March NA, so near the end of the first year it got one of it's first really good games.

EDIT: While "the first year is always bad" IS kind of hyperbole, I do feel that the good games are sparse then, mostly growing pains or cheap fodder, then when that year comes to a close the library rapidly comes into its own. Crazily fast perhaps.

 

[maneil99]

my memory doesn't remember it looking that bad

 

[maneil99]

So? The first round of Xbox games are certainly not represenative of what the hardware is capable of. Even Nvidia acknowledges consoles being ahead at the start of a generation.

So yes, on a technical level, this is the worst starting point of any console hardware we've ever seen. period.

Xbox 360 launch titles ran the equivlent to medium on PCs aswell. Call of Duty 2 only support 12 players and ran at medium settings vs PC which had 18-64

 

[maneil99]

Yeah, and it's concerning when it stumbles out of the gate.

So you missed Kameo, PDZ, Resistance FoM?

 

[Eusis]

nVidia had their own agenda with that picture so I'd definitely take it with a grain of salt. The highest end PCs have almost always been ahead of consoles, at worst at least in certain areas (you may not have had smooth scrolling in 80s or 90s PC games, but you usually had much larger and possibly more colorful and detailed games! Nevermind Arcade machines that had both.)

Consoles are ultimately ALWAYS about a reasonable balance between power and affordability, and even those consoles they took a bath on were crushed by higher end PCs. 2006/2007 didn't seem to really be the best time to make a transition and perhaps Nintendo had the right idea then even if it wasn't the right idea to apply to 2012.

Yeah, and it's concerning when it stumbles out of the gate.

Missed this. I can't even remember the last time I went through a launch and had a mind blowing time right away, usually it was a few enjoyable games then just waiting until something really worth caring about hits. The only times I experienced what most people seem to be hoping for with new console launches was the SNES/N64 launches and when I got the PS2 and DS a year after they each came out, and the SNES was at a time you could get a healthy lineup sooner than later, Super Mario 64 was just that damn good on N64 (and Pilotwings that tough so you couldn't really blitz through it), and the PS2 and DS quite readily showed what I was talking about with libraries exploding about a year on the market.

 

[VanCityGamer]

Wow, what a depressing thread. I'm thrilled with next gen. Blown away by the graphics in Infamous: Second Son; game looks absolutely incredible. Love the DS4 controller; it's incredibly comfortable, the headphone jack is a game-changer for me, and I actually enjoy the touchpad and speaker. Meanwhile, Ustream integration on PS4 is super awesome and provides hours of wacky entertainment. The PS4 UI is also very fast and smooth. Finally, I love being able to instantly switch between a game and Netflix. Those are more than enough upgrades to make this system thoroughly next-gen to me.

 

[93xfan]

Battlefield 4's multi player is a massive leap from last gen imo. And this is year 7 & 8 of last gen vs year 1 of this gen.

Maybe people need a refresher on what Oblivion looks like on the 360 vs later games.

 

[StevieP]

Battlefield 4's multi player is a massive leap from last gen imo. And this is year 7 & 8 of last gen vs year 1 of this gen.

Maybe people need a refresher on what Oblivion looks like on the 360 vs later games.

It's just catching up to pcs of yesteryear... Hence not impressive.

the leap from 360/ps3 to xbone/ps4 is so small that now mobile gaming and ipads is gonna be a real threat .

imagine with mobile phones/ipad getting so powerful that you can play infamous: second son graphics on them , why get a console ????

Sorry but no... The laws of physics still exist so this won't happen any year soon. Supporting feature sets isn't the same thing as how capable the output of a 2w or even 10w device really is.

 

[Dediner]

Yeah maybe a better way for you to have phrased this thread is something like "I'm not impressed by this generation so far". Like others have said, it's still very early to rate this generation in it's entirety only a few months in.

Precisely. I am, however, trying to get excited about this generation, and I:SS helped my enthusiasm a bit. Still waiting for some of the horror games, and for the catalogue of games to grow. It will take some time, but I have high hopes that this generation will deliver.

As a side note: I came from a PC to the PS4, and I have to say that the gap between graphical fidelity is so much narrower than it was before. It takes some time to get used to, since I was rocking 2 Titans and maxing everything on a 4k monitor, but the games still do look pretty good. I just feel that the over-the-top PC "master-race" people overplay this so much. And that annoys me. Yar!

 

[King Boo]

the last game to impress me on pc was oblivion. so yeah i guess we are similar

 

[TylerDurden4321]

So? The first round of Xbox games are certainly not represenative of what the hardware is capable of. Even Nvidia acknowledges consoles being ahead at the start of a generation.

So yes, on a technical level, this is the worst starting point of any console hardware we've ever seen. period.

to be fair... unmodded super-high end graphics cards were 400 Euros back when Xbox360 launched, now it's more like 900 Euros.

 

[BigTnaples]

Yeah, and it's concerning when it stumbles out of the gate.

No. It isn't. Every single generation has been like this. It is not a stumble.


Also, if you don't see a huge leap in graphical fidelity you are blind.

 

[Ansatz]

There has been too little originality on the retail side. Note that it doesn't necessarily have to be a new IP. Super Mario 3D Land/World for me falls under the category of brand new even if it's technically part of a series, as everything from art style to level design direction is fresh. And on the other hand you have actual new IPs that aren't really new at all, following a check list.

I should say things are not that bad though, I'm getting my fresh new experiences from indie developers. I like what Nintendo is doing on WiiU and 3DS, sure they are direct sequels in many ways but they almost always have a new gameplay theme/gimmick to keep me interested. Example: Mario Kart 8 is very similar to its predecessors, but the added anti-gravity element changes up things to an extent I get the urge of playing it. I'm very disappointed by western but especially Japanese AAA publishers, they are dead to me. It's not only because their games have become stale, it's that they have changed into a form that just doesn't appeal to me (photo realism, serious tone, etc.) It's all about PC Indies and Nintendo for me, I get the best of both worlds.

 

[TGO]

The biggest jump was PSX to PS2
PS2>PS3>PS4 have jumped equally but not to the levels of the PS2 did over the PS1

Remember this guy, how many times has this been posted due to how impressive it was or to insult a PS3/360 game graphics? Since the PS2 era things have just expanded, improved, more stuff has been added, effects, little particles, higher poly, better textures, AI and more and more capacity added to to the same basic make up that has been going since 1994
But personally I think ya mad if ya can't see the difference, the real difference is that last gen still looks good, but still I think ya mad if you can't see the difference, I thought PC showed me what this gen was gonna be like and was wrong, it only showed what this gen can do at first
I think consoles and PC gamers are in for a treat in the next year or so.

 

[J-Tier]

There has been no major leap, that's why you remain unimpressed. Games have gradually gotten to this point, therefore its evolution has not been very noticeable.

 

[nOoblet16]

Sure, ok.


Are you saying that you can see a similar generation leap between inFamous ans SS?

Hint: Silent Hill 1 doesn't even look as good as the picture on a real PS1...

This is a bad comparison. The improvements that came with PS2 were also because of improvement in rendering techniques, they were using techniques that didn't even exist as concepts back in the PS1 days.

Between PS3 and PS4 it's a lot different, new rendering techniques were invented and improvements over these techniques already existed in concept. For example PS2 to PS3 allowed developers to use shaders and HDR in games (and even then not all games used it), but the quality and precision of HDR and shaders was seriously limited by the hardware but now with PS4 they can use the high precision model.

The goal of achieving photo realistic rendering now depends on improving the quality of rendering technique rather than discovering techniques that will completely replace current techniques, because we finally achieved a point with PS360 where developers didn't have to focus completely on polygonal details to render a realistic image but rather the lighting and other things like the physics.

 

[test_account]

first one has shadows of the player ? ;-)

And it's pretty funny that the first picture has player shadowing and the second doesn't... Or wait maybe it does but its drawn so weirdly there.

Honest question, what is funny about that? There are very different lighting condition in those pictures, one is also at daytime, while one is at night time. Shadows arent casted very clearly in every scenario, that goes for real life too.

it really feels like when you have a iphone 5 and then upgrade to a 5S.

not much different .

in the previous next gens it was instant "OMG , WOW !!!!! "

now its " meh , not much different ???? "

and peeps keep saying "you have to give it some time , give it a couple of years "


WHAT ??? a couple of years ???

the launch of previous consoles was INSTANT ,
now peeps are saying GIVE IT A FEW YEARS ???

I'm sorry but it doesnt make any sense

"I DONT AGREE "

Lol I'm a bit confused by that too, I've been gaming since the early 80's and if it was normal at the start of a new generation to be underwelmed for a few years I would wait for a few years to buy the consoles not be there day 1. At least in my experience this generation is unique.
Super Mario World was impressive day 1
Wipeout was impressive day 1
Super Mario 64 was impressive day 1
Soul Calibur was impressive day 1
Kameo was impressive day 1

With every graphical leap, you get one step closer to photo realisim. This means that when a certain point is hit, the next leap might look less drastic compared to previous leap(s). And like it has been with every console generation, if we compare the launch window games with games that are released a few years later, those later games usually have better graphics. Since we already reach a certain point with PS3/Xbox 360, i would say that it definitelly makes sense that it could take a longer time this time around before we see a more drastic leap.

There is also the factor that it takes longer to develope games in each graphical leaps. To put all that extra details into the games takes more time, unless you increase the work force by a lot, but even then it might take longer time as well.

I have to ask, what exactly did you expect the graphics to look like? Can you give me some PC games as examples to what you expected the graphics to look like? PC is the platform that can produce the best graphics, so it should be possible to come up with some examples with what was expected from PS4 and Xbox One.

Personally i think that the leap is pretty noticeable. Several of games rendering at over twice the resolution can be pretty nice i think.

If people arent impressed by the graphics, i dont think that its possible to argue that much about it because this is completely subjective. Its possible to show comparison pictures, but if that doesnt change people's opinion, then there isnt much more that can be said or done. However, there is no denying that the jump from PS3/Xbox 360 to PS4/Xbox One in terms of calculation power is huge. For example, from PS2 to PS3, we saw an increase of about ~500MB RAM. With the PS3 to PS4, we saw an increase of about 7.5GB RAM. So if people arent impressed by the graphics so far, that is fine, but at least the jump if hardware specs is the biggest we've seen so far on consoles.

 

[test_account]

EDIT: Double post, sorry.

 

[Astral Dog]

Im not impressed either, but give this generation some time and it will have truly incredible games.
Even with a generational leap with Xbox One/PS4, last generation games arent ugly to me,there are some very good looking games on 360,PS3 and even Vita and Wii U

 

[Caayn]

to be fair... unmodded super-high end graphics cards were 400 Euros back when Xbox360 launched, now it's more like 900 Euros.

That comparison isn't really fair. Take for example the strongest AMD GPU (AMD R9 290x) which has a similar MSRP as the ATi X1800 back in 2005.

Back when the 360 launched, it's powered by the ATi X1800, and yet the 360 costed only $400. What do we have now? A weak $100~150 GPU and the same price point as in 2005.

 

[SmokedMeat]

Not a knock against OP but I truly wonder how many people that harp about fps can even tell how many fps a game is running at?

Pretty sad that this is what it takes to please people. I miss the old days.

 

[Boomstick (Coffee Crazy)]

Graphically?

I'd say there have been a few games already that have at least made me acknowledge the improvements in the hardware and such.

Gameplay wise?

Everything feels the same. Hell, the biggest gameplay breakthrough I've played in the past year has been W101, yet judging by its sales, you'd think it was a mediocre pity game for the Wii U that some unknown dev pushed out. Hell, even Infamous: SS, which looks graphically very good, feels like its not a real jump. Its good, it just doesn't "play" like its new.

 

[Melchiah]

to be fair... unmodded super-high end graphics cards were 400 Euros back when Xbox360 launched, now it's more like 900 Euros.

Yep, Radeon 9700 Pro was 400€ in 2002/2003, and beat the PS2 hands down. It didn't stop me from enjoying the PS2 games though, and games like Silent Hill 3 were still impressive even when compared to the likes of UT2003 and Doom 3. The consoles can never compete with the power of GPUs that cost a double what the whole system costs.

The aliasing was the only thing that bothered me back then, after getting used to 2/4xAA on the 9700 Pro. Which is why I love that we finally have jaggie-free graphics on the PS4.

 

[Mugatu]

So far I'm not that impressed either - I know eventually that will change but for now my primary motivation is to play with my online friends who have made the jump.

 

[TGO]

Not a knock against OP but I truly wonder how many people that harp about fps can even tell how many fps a game is running at?

Pretty sad that this is what it takes to please people. I miss the old days.

Yeah, the all PS2 games were 60fps is cringe worthy, a lot had a 60hz mode but 60fps? I don't think so
then again most don't know the difference between them two either.

Tbf when I first got my PS3 the questions I was asked was "so what's different, it looks the same"
Today my sister came to speak to me and stayed to watch infamous, she said the graphics was fascinating watch and she was glued to it because the way it looked and thought a lot of work had gone into it, she's seen most of my games but her jaw dropped with infamous.

 

[Vinc]

Wii U games have been some of the most impressive new gen games I've seen.

 

[farmerboy]

Regarding diminishing returns, I probably had the same reaction to Bluray. When I first sampled it, the higher resolution didn't really grab me and I wondered what all the fuss was about.

However, I noticed the better sound immediately.

I think our brain does a good job of filling in the blanks visually, I'm sure I remember reading about this, I think it has some sort of name that this effect goes by. No doubt as we get used to the new fidelity we will come to appreciate a whole lot more.

Also, I think that the artistic side of the graphics debate will be a lot more prevalent this time around ie Mario Kart 8.

 

[TAJ]

There's nothing wrong with you. Your just getting older.

Yeah, people do tend to start going blind.

 

[GamerJM]

Graphically I'm personally pretty unimpressed, but I honestly can't tell if that's because the games aren't impressive or if it's my aging eyesight getting worse to the point where I can hardly differentiate between graphical differences.

I'm impressed with some of the Wii U's Gamepad usages. Nothing that I really think justifies it extremely well, but it's still neat and nice to have.

 

[Dusk Golem]

I am not judging the new generation as some entirety yet, as we're just at the start, but I do think this console generation is the smallest leap for between generations. Yes, the consoles are stronger and games look better, trust me I don't think otherwise. But I think it's missing any sort of major technical leaps or innovative leaps.

It has technical leaps and innovative leaps obviously, but less so than previous console generation jumps. The 2D graphical leap from NES/Atari to SNES/Genesis was pretty significant, and then jumping into 3D with 64/Saturn/PS1 was a huge innovative leap that also changed how games looked. Then graphically, the Dreamcast/Gamecube/Xbox/PS2 was a huge leap over the previous gen. And then, the graphically leap, while maybe not quite as huge, still was pretty big going into 360/PS3/Wii era, plus there was the innovation of especially online gaming becoming a more established and realized thing, or love them or hate them even things like achievements/trophies, and digital download games.

That's also ignoring the fact that between consoles, the early games even showed huge innovative difference. Donkey Kong and Super Mario Bros were really different from what sort of games previously existed. The likes of Altered Beast, F-Zero, Super Mario World, etc., were very different or felt like major leaps from the NES. Things like Super Mario 64, Virtua Fighter, or Ridge Racer were mind-blowing at the time to be played at home. Sonic Adventure, Soul Caliber, TimeSplitters, Luigi's Mansion, Pikmin, Super Monkey Ball, and the like also felt pretty big. And then all the FPS and sports games that greeted us at the start of last generation.

I think the problem with this generation, at least early on, is that it doesn't really feel like a leap or a bound. It looks prettier, don't get me wrong, it was needed as last generation did last the longest and technology needed updating, but this feels more like updating out of necessity to keep technology up to date right rather than any huge overhaul of games, features, or the like. It feels like an extension of last generation, a prettier extension with some new features sure, but nowhere near the levels of previous generations. Some game changer could come in, and I'm not saying it's exactly the same, but it's a lot less exciting than previous console generation changes, it sort of feels like we only took a step forward as opposed to a leap or a bound.

 

[delta25]

These two images taken from The Order solidified my expectations of what next gen meant to me, and my fucking god is it glorious.

 

[Yagharek]

I can see the graphical leap; I just don't think it is significant or that the games themselves are at all interesting.

Generic action platfomers like Knack, tired sequel shooters like Killzone, Infamous which was never really interesting to begin with on PS4.On XBox One there is Dead Rising 3 which has the same wet noodle controls as Uncharted 3. Forza 5 is glitchy and tedious.

There is absolutely nothing remarkable on any of the systems yet released. None of the announced games really impress me either.

I'm sure interesting games will come; but they haven't yet.

 

["D"]

You have several more years to decide. I am underwhelmed as well on the technical side but I guess that is my problem. The best game I've played so far this generation is Killer Instinct.

Are you talking about gameplay wise? Cause I think the graphics could have been a little better, or maybe its just the 720p talking. I played KI at a friend's house recently, looking forward to it, and sadly it looked very underwhelming. I honestly think it looks better on videos unless my friend's tv need some calibration. Sabrewulf's tufts of fur looked like paper.

I know its still the beginning of this gen, but I thought I was gonna walk away impressed from that game. I've yet to play/see Ryse in person though so my personal jury is still out on that one.

 

[Lion Heart]

I'm absolutely loving the start of this gen, especially when compared to the last which started off with promises but took forever to get going.

This gen is way better from not only the consumers pov but from the developers as well. Games will be made a lot more efficiently (albeit still expensive) and the types of environments we are going to be seeing will blow away what came before.

KZ2 was awesome in 2009 but it took 2.5 years after PS3s launch to release and when you examine the materials being rendered you notice its a lot of concrete, metal railings and so on. KZ SF was a launch game and they managed to create essentially two entire cities and don't hold back or use smoke and mirrors, you can simply see everything. You travel from a forest area to dense city environment to space etc. That would have taken 100 mil and 5 years to create on last gen.

I really can't wait to see the stuff devs come up with in 1-2 years.

 

[StevieP]

I'm absolutely loving the start of this gen, especially when compared to the last which started off with promises but took forever to get going.

This gen is way better from not only the consumers pov but from the developers as well. Games will be made a lot more efficiently (albeit still expensive) and the types of environments we are going to be seeing will blow away what came before.

KZ2 was awesome in 2009 but it took 2.5 years after PS3s launch to release and when you examine the materials being rendered you notice its a lot of concrete, metal railings and so on. KZ SF was a launch game and they managed to create essentially two entire cities and don't hold back or use smoke and mirrors, you can simply see everything. You travel from a forest area to dense city environment to space etc. That would have taken 100 mil and 5 years to create on last gen.

I really can't wait to see the stuff devs come up with in 1-2 years.

Development costs are rising this generation and it's precisely because art (ie those "varied environments" you speak of) costs an astronomical amount at the fidelity most people here want.

 

[delta25]

Development costs are rising this generation and it's precisely because art (ie those "varied environments" you speak of) costs an astronomical amount at the fidelity most people here want.

It's kind of strange because one of the reason for game development on the consoles being so expensive last gen was because of their custom architectures and the RD that was needed to make it work, which is now completely opposite with this generation in regards to streamlined tech and off the self hardware.