-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
I want next gen hardware to take risks. Not be the same. Do something unique.
- Thread starter Bjones
- Start date
The most exotic thing we can hope for is a Nvidia RTX-like hardware support for Ray tracing and that would still be a pipe dream. There is nothing wrong with giving more standardized hardware to developers. Truly exotic hardware would not really be beneficial in today's development environment. With more standard hardware, you allow developers to see results faster, which allows them to reiterate faster, and that allows them to build and improve their games more efficiently.
PS4 U
That is the risk I want. ;)
To me the only company that will take HUGE risks is Nintendo and it doesn't always pay off for them. Buuutt,,. Look at the switch and the Wii. That is it paying off.
I love my PS4/Xbox One. At no point this generation did I say to myself.. man I wish they did something more unique. I just want good games
That is the risk I want. ;)
To me the only company that will take HUGE risks is Nintendo and it doesn't always pay off for them. Buuutt,,. Look at the switch and the Wii. That is it paying off.
I love my PS4/Xbox One. At no point this generation did I say to myself.. man I wish they did something more unique. I just want good games
Considering the fact that the "wow factor" of the switch is the fact that it's a handheld that can play the same kinds of games the competitors can and doesn't have to rely on its own unique library and gimmicks to carry it like previous Nintendo handhelds, I feel like that kinda goes against your point more than supports it.
I would suggest PS4's success was actually elevated by the fact that the console was so incredibly conservative in every way thinkable.
Make a strong piece of hardware and let the developers come up with the magic. No gimmicks required.
Make a strong piece of hardware and let the developers come up with the magic. No gimmicks required.
I'm inclined to agree. I can see the benefits to being conservative on the hardware front. If your stuff is standardised, it'll make it easier for devs to port to your platform, and consumers will have fewer new learning curves that'll challenge their aptitude and cred in the medium. The downside is that it also limits the growth and possibilities. Sometimes feels like AAA gaming is stuck in the mindset that the future of transportation is faster and stronger horses, rather than trying to invent a car.
Things like the Kinect and PSVR were great initiatives, but unless developers can be certain that every player in that ecosystem has access to this hardware, they'll most likely not chose to develop for it.
Things like the Kinect and PSVR were great initiatives, but unless developers can be certain that every player in that ecosystem has access to this hardware, they'll most likely not chose to develop for it.
This isn't going to happen - Nintendo tried that for the previous 2 consoles and got hated by gamers for it.
The irony of all of this is that the introduction of Shaders into console hardware gives developers more flexibility in creating unique and stylised approaches to rendering. All better hardware - whether general or custom - is going to get us is more realistic images and in depth simulations.
Things like Mode 7 worked 25 years ago because hardware could only handle 2D at playable framerates, so ingenious uses of 2D to mimic 3D were required.
The relationship between hardware manufacturers, developers, publishers, retail and consumers needs to be alot more healthier in order for studios to be able to take big creative risks that pay off.
--- ADDITIONAL ---
Actually, if there is one area where hardware is improving is in the addition of extra bumpers and paddles. It's a shame that Nintendo patented scroll wheels on pads because I think they'd be a great addition for all pads too.
I think pads have the right amount of inputs (2 sticks, 14 buttons if you include the d-pad & thumbstick clicks), but the constant swapping of thumbs from sticks to face buttons & dpad and back is annoying.
Replacing the d-pad and face buttons with 4 paddles and 2 scroll wheels would be amazing!
Now I know that'd put off causal gamers, but then I'm hoping the idea of an Elite or Pro controller as part of each console's hardware range continues into the future, and this would be a great fit for that.
Things like Mode 7 worked 25 years ago because hardware could only handle 2D at playable framerates, so ingenious uses of 2D to mimic 3D were required.
The relationship between hardware manufacturers, developers, publishers, retail and consumers needs to be alot more healthier in order for studios to be able to take big creative risks that pay off.
--- ADDITIONAL ---
Actually, if there is one area where hardware is improving is in the addition of extra bumpers and paddles. It's a shame that Nintendo patented scroll wheels on pads because I think they'd be a great addition for all pads too.
I think pads have the right amount of inputs (2 sticks, 14 buttons if you include the d-pad & thumbstick clicks), but the constant swapping of thumbs from sticks to face buttons & dpad and back is annoying.
Replacing the d-pad and face buttons with 4 paddles and 2 scroll wheels would be amazing!
Now I know that'd put off causal gamers, but then I'm hoping the idea of an Elite or Pro controller as part of each console's hardware range continues into the future, and this would be a great fit for that.
Last edited:
Why? What do we the consumer gain from that, we will just be drowned in buzzwords from the platform holders and in the end there will be little to no real benefit and it will just make it a lot harder for the developers, standardization all the way baby.
OP
OP
Who said devs were lazy?!
Also I work in software development.. I know how development works.
Even if they dont have any exotic or custom hardware, I would like them yo sell the tech a bit better.
Similar to how cerny did with the PS4 unveiling but with even more and with touch more hyperbole and enthusiasm.
Not lie, but be better sales ppl by hyping us with cool geek shit.
Similar to how cerny did with the PS4 unveiling but with even more and with touch more hyperbole and enthusiasm.
Not lie, but be better sales ppl by hyping us with cool geek shit.
Have something else that Game box #1 and Game box #2
What made videogames evolve was precisely taking risks in one way or another, from the D-Pad to paid online to motion controls
The point is for consoles to offer unique experiences hardware side AND evolve the medium
not for me. i just want a more powerful console. well for the PS5 i want a better controller and for Sony to stop being dicks about BC/Crossplay.
Panos needs to do the next gen Xbox reveal. He does Surface events.
It's a real shame that the Wii did not push the market to embrace a new control scheme. Instead we went backwards. Yeah the Switch has them, but so few games are built around them it feels like an afterthought.
It'd be nice if the next gen had an edge besides just graphics. Far as I know the PSVR is still using the move controllers from what... 10 years ago? There are a ton of games from the Wii era that feel just... Left behind. No more evolution cuz everyone's too focused on better grafix.
It'd be nice if the next gen had an edge besides just graphics. Far as I know the PSVR is still using the move controllers from what... 10 years ago? There are a ton of games from the Wii era that feel just... Left behind. No more evolution cuz everyone's too focused on better grafix.
I thought I had read someone else calling devs lazy on the previous slide, but on re-read, I was mistaken, so I've removed that from my original post.
Then what is it you're hoping a unique approach to hardware to solve? We're pretty good at building virtual worlds & abstracting interactions nowadays - the biggest problem with trying new things isn't technological limitations, it's recouping costs.
Look at things like The Tomorrow Children or Dreams - unique rendering methods by leveraging GPGPU. The GPU these days is really one big specialised CPU and if you can tap it well, you can do unique things with it. Why have a big lump of silicon dedicated to doing only one thing really well - if 80% of the games don't use it, then its wasted
we already have nintendo to take chances.
just give me a powerful system, with a decent controller (DS4 and xbox one style), and we are happy
just give me a powerful system, with a decent controller (DS4 and xbox one style), and we are happy
Again. Virtual reality. If this doesn't do it, then why in gods name would you think a physics co processor would "offer unique experiences" or "evolve the medium"?
Yeah and since devs are multi-platform then exotic features will just be wasted as they develop for the lowest common denominator anyway. It wouldn't be worth it.
I'm probably one of the few who agree with the OP
I'd like some wow factor too but you know, sales and stuff rule discussion and technicality so you better off hoping google or amazon do something. That way someone can take a risk and no one here will give af but ridicule it. No matter how cool it is.
I'd like some wow factor too but you know, sales and stuff rule discussion and technicality so you better off hoping google or amazon do something. That way someone can take a risk and no one here will give af but ridicule it. No matter how cool it is.
Unnecessary costs added to the consumer that provide gimmicky small benefits and becomes more difficult to develop for as a result for third party platforms. Average joe doesn't give a fuck about physics processor, they want a box that costs $300 that plays games that look good. Sounds like a great idea.
Remember the PS2's Emotion Engine, which was more complicated to develop for and led to even some Dreamcast ports looking better on the Dreamcast since a lot of PS2's games had a lot of jaggies?
I feel like the discussion here is based on a straw man as unique architecture doesn't mean you're going to get a "wow" factor. A lot of PS3's games suffered despite how powerful the system was supposed to be, which I guess wowed me in the wrong way. =P
The main reason this gen is so fucking boring on a game design level is due to the Jaguar cores. There's really no room for experimentation with complex simulation fx to use for new game mechanics so the entire generation has panned out as one long iteration on the last one.
The two main games this gen that leaned hard on cool new sim fx for their game mechanics were Dead Rising 3 and asscreed unity. Both of them ran like dogshit and their sequels cut back on what they tried to do severely.
I'm hoping next gen one of the two goes with a very nicely clocked ryzen and we start seeing devs experiment more with stuff.
lobby for great CPUs
The two main games this gen that leaned hard on cool new sim fx for their game mechanics were Dead Rising 3 and asscreed unity. Both of them ran like dogshit and their sequels cut back on what they tried to do severely.
I'm hoping next gen one of the two goes with a very nicely clocked ryzen and we start seeing devs experiment more with stuff.
lobby for great CPUs
That'll never happen because developers don't want hardware that gives them nightmares. At best, you're going to get a couple of custom tweaks.
Xbox One was going to be drastically different and the community blew up and begged for everything to be the same so yeah easier said than done
Then someone needs to make a console that reduces dev costs because cost/benefit analysis is the biggest limit on originality.
Xbox was going to be different in the services/non-game features provided and the way games were distributed but not in any way relevant to game engine technology, which is what the OP is about.
They're really hyping up this new AI though. That could be something.
We already have it now tho
PS4 pro has dedicated hardware for 2160c while the X has a bigger memory pool and a higher clocked CPU with more cores unlocked
It creates a scenario where devs are given a simple path if they have the performance budget available or just a raw dump of resources that devs can use how they like. It's an interesting dichotomy between the two companies, and gives a personalized flavor to each system behind the scenes even if we don't see it.
I agree OP! I'd like Microsoft to at least throw gyro controls into their next Xbox controller in terms of hardware. Otherwise, the changes I'd want are based on a combination of hardware/software. Bring back aspects of the launch Xbox One that involved digital game sharing for friends/family. Also, find a way that people can play physical discs offline, but also have the option of treating a physical game as a digital copy.
No real point in doing any of that... 3rd party wont make use of it, and it will only make the system more expensive. Ex lastgen with the cell, early in the gen 3rd party devs never made full use of it. This gen the xbox one X has an extra 4gb of ram, and will still see 3rd party games use the same textures used across all systems.
Thats mostly a developer side software and manpower problem and not really a hardware problem. Even if Ms or sony put out a framework for better development scene like a custom engine dedicated to the system or something it wouldn't really matter much because no one would use it as games want to be as platform amorphous as possible to hit a broad audience.
Innovation can be a wonderful thing if directed the right way, though having seen how companies innovate hardware with systems like PS3, i'm not sure if specifications are the thing to focus on here.