I'm certain Nintendo's secretly developing a new type of Wii but with the same size, some sort of cool new feature, and increased graphics. I hope we don't get farther on any of the home consoles aside from the PS 3 (a PS 4 with complete playback ability for all Sony disc mediums).
As for handhelds, go ahead and keep making new types. They just get better and are less of a hassle to get than a new home console. I just wish games wouldn't be 3DS-exclusive; make them DS compatible, too.
I expect a new competitor in the home console market, though, and if it happens they'll certainly take advantage of online play and incredible graphics.
(We really need the return of packaging two corded controls with consoles.)
Now posting as Enzeru, this serves as an emergency avatar backup accountDidn't both Microsoft and Sony state they won't put out next-gens until at least 2014 or so?
In any case, DX11 has quite a few new tricks up its sleeve, and better hardware comes out constantly. Now, DX isn't console tech, but if I'm not mistaken all of its features can be done on processors - they're just coded inside the video cards that support it to take the load off the processor in PCs. Console video cards have the same kind of thing anyway. So no, I don't believe there's some kind of stalemate.
edited 18th Jan '11 11:58:53 AM by Litis
I know there's not a stalemate, but what I'm saying is basically that the current changes are so minimal as far as people can tell, that it would take quite a while for the next visually noticeable leap in graphical tech to be here. The improvements in graphics year after year in PC tech are not huge noticeable compared to what they were a decade ago, and what's more, companies are being conservative in their game design and not designing with such tech in mind all that much.
So, while I don't think we've hit the end by any means, I do think we've hit a current plateau where, as far as the consumer is concerned, there wouldn't be a (noticeable) difference between the PS3 and if a brand new system with the latest tech were released immediately today.
I wish I could rename the topic to "temporary plateau". What I meant to say is that we appear to have reached a moment where, currently, there is not yet any compelling reason to upgrade.
But yeah, once we have 3D that looks like it's coming out of the screen (or going into the screen) on all systems, then people might finally say "it's perfect". Minus that, things look close to perfect unless something massively better looking comes along. Which may not happen for a few more years.
I think 3D will be major point of all new home consoles. But I hope companies are smart enough to wait for way to deploy it that works well.
Maybe after that, holograms will be the next thing. Live holographic video footage has actually been demonstrated, but in monochrome and with significant framerate problems. I don't expect decent holograms for another few decades.
Personally, I'd be fine if I never had to upgrade. As far as I'm concerned, the PS 2 and Gamecube had graphics that were good enough, and current gen systems are going overboard.
One of my few regrets about being born female is the inability to grow a handlebar mustache. -Landstander
Agreed. I still can't help but be slapped by Uncanny Valley every time I watch something realistic and HD. Even if it was live footage.
The problem is, games of current gen graphics are already stupid expensive and take a long time to make...my assumption has always been they're trying to find a way to make the current graphics not so time consuming and expensive to make games from.
"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."We'll probably find some new way to make shit better. I will continue to be satisfied with what I get in terms of graphical horse power and wonder why so many care about making each generation a technical leap in that regard.
New consoles: I like it I guess. I don't particularly care enough to really complain about things like how Twilight Princess didn't push the Wii graphically.
edited 18th Jan '11 12:53:39 PM by Aondeug
If someone wants to accuse us of eating coconut shells, then that's their business. We know what we're doing. - Achaan ChahWe're nearing a point where the cost to make stunning graphics is far to high for anyone to invest in and more importantly, no one cares.
There's a very real argument that we're reaching the point of diminishing returns for graphics. Can they be improved? Undoubtedly. Is it worth it? That's questionable. As graphics improve, they become more difficult to do well — which means more expensive, since you have to hire more artists (and/or take longer) to do the work. The fact that gamers these days demand such graphics (or at least, game developers seem to think they do — witness the success of the graphics-deficient Wii as evidence to the contrary) makes any game an expensive prospect, which in turn makes developers more risk-averse since they've got more at stake if the game bombs.
I think that graphics will continue to improve, but at a slower rate than they have been in the past. What I'd like to see is games that go for a more stylized graphical look rather than a hyperrealistic one (think TF 2, not Call Of Duty), but I'm not holding my breath.
Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.![]()
![]()
Excellent point about cost. We seriously need more middleware. We have SpeedTree for rendering trees, but we could really use something for creating realistic looking people. Some program that can be licensed out to other companies to do the job easily, and reduce the cost for them all.
![]()
![]()
and ![]()
There are US companies who get it, and are making stylized, non-realistic graphics. World Of Warcraft and Torchlight both have a "painted cartoon" look to them, and both sold quite well. I too am tired of everything looking the same.
That's basically what I meant when I asked if we'd reached a plateau - if the graphics quality improved, how many people would notice? There'd have to be a colossal improvement for everyone to stand up and take notice. At least as big as the difference between this generation and last, or last and prior.
edited 18th Jan '11 1:27:00 PM by BonsaiForest
Yeah I'm very fond of the look of World Of Warcraft (not so much the game itself most of the time, I have an odd relationship with it) and Blizzard's other stylized games. I also really liked how Psychonauts looked. That Torchlight thing looks nice. I haven't had much fondness for Western RP Gs, but that looks interesting.
edited 18th Jan '11 1:36:52 PM by Aondeug
If someone wants to accuse us of eating coconut shells, then that's their business. We know what we're doing. - Achaan ChahKind of. The current generation of consoles is still going slow, apart from the 3DSthe big three are only churning out accessories.
There is not much room for graphical improvement. The next step is probably photo-realism.
I don't like the push for increased graphics or motion sensitivity at all. It takes the focus away from storyline and gameplay depth. I wish games developers would just get BACK TO BASICS and if they do want to use motion sensitivity, it should be used thoughtfully not tacked on.
Requiem ~ September 2010 - October 2011 [Banned 4 Life]I rather like motion controls and would love to see them continue to be used. Sadly as you said a lot of the time it just feels like some tacked on thing. Still if the game is controlled mostly with it and a combination of whatever buttons the controller has it can be neat. The Wii version of Twilight Princess was a very pleasant experience I thought and I love Dewy's Adventure though I hated the product placement in the US version.
edited 18th Jan '11 2:35:04 PM by Aondeug
If someone wants to accuse us of eating coconut shells, then that's their business. We know what we're doing. - Achaan ChahLooking at PCs as the trend indicator for consoles (since the arcades are dead) their technology seems to be advancing much slower than it usually has before, grinding to a much lesser pace since about the dawn of the DX9 era. I'm personally of the opinion that fixed-function hardware drawing Gouraud shaded triangles and sprites is reaching its limit as a technique, and there'll only be significant progress again once we move back to general purpose CPUs (either by making CPUs more multithreaded and efficient at vector math, or giving GPUs enough reprogrammability to essentially turn them into CPUs, things could go either way, really. Or both!).
That would free graphics from the shackles of the current regime, allowing for a wider mix of techniques (voxels, fractals, RTRT…) better suited to tasks that triangles and sprites suck at (terrain, hair, trees, water…).
Graphical quality definitely could be improved, but in addition to the issues with cost already mentioned in this thread there's also the fact that the current hardware is rarely being pushed to its limits anyway. We're much more limited by artist man-hours than we are by any sort of technical limitations that would inspire a new generation of consoles. Unless there's some sort of dramatic paradigm shift in how games are made I can't see that changing anytime soon.
edited 19th Jan '11 11:30:03 AM by Clarste
It's not just consoles. I'm a PC gamer and I'm not seeing much (if any) increase in graphical quality in anything new. I think we have reached the limits of what's possible with current techniques. Procedural systems could be the way of the future.
Accidental mistakes are forgivable, intentional ones are not.Uuuuh, I think we have. Whether or not it's any good is another point entirely.
Against all tyrants.

It's been over 5 years since the PS3 and XBox360 came out, and what I find very interesting is that there's no talk from any of the three big companies of a new home console. It used to be that the lifecycle of a game system was ~5 years. But not only are the current generation sticking around longer, but there's not much demand from the public for another upgrade. For a PlayStation4, for instance.
I talked this over with my brother and while he chalked it up partly to the economy - companies being more conservative with money and sticking with what's currently selling, while consumers don't want to buy another system just yet - I brought up the point that if you look at some of the games out there such as Uncharted 2, the graphics look excellent. And if we were to leap to the next system, there wouldn't be much noticeable visual difference.
Think about the graphics of today's games. Yes, there's still pop-up in many of them, and yes, some effects such as shadows aren't drawn until the object is close enough to the camera for the game to bother, and yes, the resolution is 720p far more often than it is 1080p, but overall, the looks are near perfect. There would have to be a phenominally huge difference in graphical quality for us to want to upgrade to a new system, because otherwise, we'd barely see a difference. It would be the same thing except with the minor imperfections that I just mentioned being ironed out.
What is improving massively are handhelds. The Nintendo 3DS has been compared to a Wii or greater, and Sony is saying the PSP2 is on par with a PS3, claims I find easy to believe considering those consoles came out nearly 6 years ago, and handhelds have always been behind current home consoles. That field is still going places, but soon, they too might hit that plateau.
What are your thoughts on this?