Yeah, I never liked the PS3/360 era of overbloomed and desaturated games, but the cheap-looking shadows and mipmapping really made it all look like garbage for me. I generally don't miss that era, with the exception of a few REALLY well-done games.
Anyone else just not impressed with the new generation of consoles? (Rant)
- Thread starter supernintendo128
- Start date
- Views 12,413
- Replies 89
- Likes 21
I mean how many people can honestly say that they had beaten all of Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft exclusive titles? Normally when we jump from one gen to another there are alot of games that never finish. I experienced this with my transition from my PS3 to PS4. I have a huge gaming catalogue to keep me busy for maybe 10-20 years.
Let's not forget something important with each new gen the game content get less and less. PS3 era we had received 2 GOW games , 3 uncharted games , 2 Killzone Games, and PS4 era we only received 1 (with the exception of Uncharted Lost Legacy) GTA is another example we received GTA IV, Episodes of Liberty City and also GTA V on PS3/360 era. PS4/XB1 era all we received was a port so in a way the higher generation we climb the less of the gaming catalogue we are receiving.
We pay more for next gen but we actually receive less
Let's not forget something important with each new gen the game content get less and less. PS3 era we had received 2 GOW games , 3 uncharted games , 2 Killzone Games, and PS4 era we only received 1 (with the exception of Uncharted Lost Legacy) GTA is another example we received GTA IV, Episodes of Liberty City and also GTA V on PS3/360 era. PS4/XB1 era all we received was a port so in a way the higher generation we climb the less of the gaming catalogue we are receiving.
We pay more for next gen but we actually receive less
While I don't like the graphics of that era either, I'd be lying if I said I didn't want to see the surrounding culture of gaming return to simply being about who's console/services/accessories/whatever is better as opposed to the endless cesspool of politics that the industry has become ever since this happened:
Like, ever since the consoles have had what is essentially very similar, if not the same hardware inside of them, just with varying amounts of RAM, CPU speed, cooling, *insert things that used to be reserved exclusively for PCs as an object of concern for gamers*, people stopped caring and the debate moved to everything else.
--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------
It's all about the services now. You buy a game on launch day? Congratulations! You get to foot the bigger bills upfront to access new content made for the game so it'll be like you bought the game two or three times! *coughs in every NRS game after Injustice 1*
Games back then had to ship finished for the most part. Sure, that happened in the 7th generation of consoles too, but there still seemed to be enough of a shit given to QC for most of the generation to where it didn't become a prominent problem until the 8th gen systems and their updates which could take up gigabytes going into the 10's!
@Silent_Gunner
The thing that worries me in the future are those "game updates". If emulators did not exist we wouldn't be able to play 95% of the current retro gaming catalogue. This is why I am a firm believer of unlocking any console at EOL to preserve the catalogue because eventually they can't keep the servers for too long nor transfer game updates into the future. This brings it to the "digital games" how can they guarantee me I can play my PS4 digital games 20 years from now. Sure the PS5 can play PS4 games but what about the PS6 will that carry over the PS4 games or will they do a PS4 more and ditch the PS3 games because the architecture is too complex/different. If the PS3 was never unlocked we would be at the mercy of using PS Now or whatever remake there is to continue to play PS3 games.
This is why companies "cough Nintendo" are so antsy about piracy because why would I need to buy Wind Waker remake when my PC can play the game at 4K 60FPS on CEMU emulator. I hope the PS3 gets 100% emulated and also the PS4 because eventually the physical hardware for consoles will die eventually. If you have a emulator with the proper game updates stored it can last for generations.
To this very day we never received a GBC Classic, GBA Classic , PS2 Classic and if we do all they are going to do is maybe throw you 20 "popular games" this is why emulation is so vital and essential.
The thing that worries me in the future are those "game updates". If emulators did not exist we wouldn't be able to play 95% of the current retro gaming catalogue. This is why I am a firm believer of unlocking any console at EOL to preserve the catalogue because eventually they can't keep the servers for too long nor transfer game updates into the future. This brings it to the "digital games" how can they guarantee me I can play my PS4 digital games 20 years from now. Sure the PS5 can play PS4 games but what about the PS6 will that carry over the PS4 games or will they do a PS4 more and ditch the PS3 games because the architecture is too complex/different. If the PS3 was never unlocked we would be at the mercy of using PS Now or whatever remake there is to continue to play PS3 games.
This is why companies "cough Nintendo" are so antsy about piracy because why would I need to buy Wind Waker remake when my PC can play the game at 4K 60FPS on CEMU emulator. I hope the PS3 gets 100% emulated and also the PS4 because eventually the physical hardware for consoles will die eventually. If you have a emulator with the proper game updates stored it can last for generations.
To this very day we never received a GBC Classic, GBA Classic , PS2 Classic and if we do all they are going to do is maybe throw you 20 "popular games" this is why emulation is so vital and essential.
Last edited by Goku1992A,
In my case, I did not know any better at the time. For example, if you ask me about NFS MW graphics in the PS2 era, I would say it looks good. But if you ask me now, I would say it's too brown or desaturated. I call this ignorance is bliss. If you don't know any better then you would think that is the best. However, after seeing PS4 games, I would say it's not that improved from PS3 games, just higher res and smoother fps. Gameplay-wise almost no change.
Regarding, PS4 to PS5, I still need to wait for the next-gen (>PS5) before giving any conclusion.
RPCS3 is not 100% yet but it works well enough for me. I played Fat Princess on it without any issue on 1060 3GB and a 4 cores i7.
Last edited by r5xscn,
Well it’s bound to be less exciting now. We used to have pretty major technological advancements driving new generations. 8bit > 16bit > 32 Bit > 64bit. Most of those came with customised hardware, unique processor and GPU designs and so on.
We could visibly see the leap from generation to generation, it was amazing. Now, well now we just have PCs in a box. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, but they have to build to a price point - a relatively low price point. So we don’t get quite so dramatic visual changes. Small, but noticeable improvements are where we’re at now.
These can be very welcome, higher frame rates, actual 4K (well, in some cases) instead of upscaled, better visual fidelity in reflections and shadows, significantly faster loading times. These are all welcome, but compared to completely new, custom, significantly more powerful hardware, it’s less of a jump.
We are limited by the technological state of the building blocks of the hardware we use - he said, not wanting to write ten paragraphs on the limitations of modern hardware.
Until there is a fundamental breakthrough in everything from the mediums used to create the microchips, even to the architecture they use, and so on and so on. We won’t see huge generational jumps in visual fidelity. We will see constant, gradual improvements.
A few years from now, you’ll see the real benefits of the hardware that’s just been released. Developers need time to adjust to the new hardware and begin to push it. Although, that’s arguably easier now that it’s just essentially the same as the last generation, just more power to throw around.
We could visibly see the leap from generation to generation, it was amazing. Now, well now we just have PCs in a box. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, but they have to build to a price point - a relatively low price point. So we don’t get quite so dramatic visual changes. Small, but noticeable improvements are where we’re at now.
These can be very welcome, higher frame rates, actual 4K (well, in some cases) instead of upscaled, better visual fidelity in reflections and shadows, significantly faster loading times. These are all welcome, but compared to completely new, custom, significantly more powerful hardware, it’s less of a jump.
We are limited by the technological state of the building blocks of the hardware we use - he said, not wanting to write ten paragraphs on the limitations of modern hardware.
Until there is a fundamental breakthrough in everything from the mediums used to create the microchips, even to the architecture they use, and so on and so on. We won’t see huge generational jumps in visual fidelity. We will see constant, gradual improvements.
A few years from now, you’ll see the real benefits of the hardware that’s just been released. Developers need time to adjust to the new hardware and begin to push it. Although, that’s arguably easier now that it’s just essentially the same as the last generation, just more power to throw around.
I know I'm late on this post but I totally feel the same exact way as you do about these "Next" or "Current" gen consoles. I missed the days when consoles used to actually stand out from each other like the 4th, 5th, and 6th gen consoles have(from SNES/Genesis to PS2/Gamecube/OG Xbox/Dreamcast) and showcased to us that with great exclusive games that actually showed how unique these console hardwares are from each other and even from PC. Now the PS5 feels absolutely nothing different from the Xbox Series X/S. The Nintendo Switch is somewhat the only current gen platform that actually stands out.
Last edited by SithLord,
If you've been around since the Golden Age of gaming obviously you've been there, done that when it comes to watching a new tech evolve and the innovation that creates. All that comes after is iterative and repetitive in nature.
What else can they give you beyond "ooh, shiny!" these days. That and the lack of creativity/risk taking I've spoken of previously, wokeism/politics shoved into every game and ever increasing amounts of corporate greed that seemed to have long since shed the pretense of decency to fleece gamers as hard as they can means its pretty much done and has been for a while.
For younger folks just coming into it now its no doubt mindblowingly amazing but thats more to do with youth and newness whereas older people have seen it all before. Circle of life and all that.
The Wii U flopping and the Switch success proved that gamers on a whole don't want innovation/novel experiences with depth and are happy with surface level progression whilst the underlying gameplay remains the same. That (to me) was the last chance of evolution in gaming and people just didn't get it because developed it could've became something revolutionary that paved the way to totally new experiences that were just as expansive as going from Pong to Super Mario World to Ridge Racer was.
Instead you'll get more of the same from now on as it makes more money with less risk. Same in a lot of creative fields really due to the way corporations work.
Everyone uses the same base and puts on a different garnish then calls it a new dish whereas before it was all cooked up using their own ingredients and a secret recipe and that made it unique.
What else can they give you beyond "ooh, shiny!" these days. That and the lack of creativity/risk taking I've spoken of previously, wokeism/politics shoved into every game and ever increasing amounts of corporate greed that seemed to have long since shed the pretense of decency to fleece gamers as hard as they can means its pretty much done and has been for a while.
For younger folks just coming into it now its no doubt mindblowingly amazing but thats more to do with youth and newness whereas older people have seen it all before. Circle of life and all that.
The Wii U flopping and the Switch success proved that gamers on a whole don't want innovation/novel experiences with depth and are happy with surface level progression whilst the underlying gameplay remains the same. That (to me) was the last chance of evolution in gaming and people just didn't get it because developed it could've became something revolutionary that paved the way to totally new experiences that were just as expansive as going from Pong to Super Mario World to Ridge Racer was.
Instead you'll get more of the same from now on as it makes more money with less risk. Same in a lot of creative fields really due to the way corporations work.
Everyone uses the same base and puts on a different garnish then calls it a new dish whereas before it was all cooked up using their own ingredients and a secret recipe and that made it unique.
I wish it was that, but what I actually see are people who are so accustomed to amazing tech that it's just a normal part of their life and not amazing at all. I really wonder if the current generation will ever get to feel that awe that we felt at the beginning.
Oddly enough, I still find myself taken aback by graphics and sounds from certain games of those early generations.. and I think it might be that perspective that allows me to also be impressed by the current, more advanced consoles.
I find that a lot more of the rudimentary stuff oozed character and thought due to having to creatively get around limitation and prevail to create something awesome. Indys are great at this and keep the spirit alive in the modern age.
This is still being updated? Well, okay.
I'm not impressed with the new generation because I can't get my grubby hands on said generation. Sure, it's not Sony's (or Microsoft's) fault there's a chip shortage, but still quite annoying - why not postpone said new generation until AFTER the shortage becomes a fullage, if not an excess? Sure, it'd mean sticking with years-old consoles for a while more, but it wouldn't create a scenario of haves and have-nots, y'know?
I'm not impressed with the new generation because I can't get my grubby hands on said generation. Sure, it's not Sony's (or Microsoft's) fault there's a chip shortage, but still quite annoying - why not postpone said new generation until AFTER the shortage becomes a fullage, if not an excess? Sure, it'd mean sticking with years-old consoles for a while more, but it wouldn't create a scenario of haves and have-nots, y'know?
Also no real legit way to play old PS2 classics, like Ratchet & Clank or Persona 3 FES and stuff. I don't care if it's emulation or backwards-compatibility; I just want to buy and play my childhood favourite games again.
Yes. I really loath on PlayStation that you can't play older games, Xbox is years ahead in this regard, you could get MW2 or RDR1 on the Xbox store, you can't really say the same for the PSN store, Jim Ryan does not give 10 shits about preservation in that sense.
Now that I have all 3 consoles, I think this Gen is about speed (load times are seconds or instant now) rather than graphics. The ps5 is lacking in a few features, and it's ui is questionable to an extent, the series x has some of those missing Playstation features, but it has some sleep mode problems. The switch has the fewest features, longest loading times, but close to no bugs.
The biggest problem with Nintendo Switch other than being a port dumpster is the garbage hardware that's practically guaranteed to break even from light use. Joy-Con drift is a given, but it eventually happens with Pro Controllers as well.
The PS3 Store is, for the time being, still operational...though the fact THAT is the only way to purchase and play digital PS2 games is damning by itself. Not to mention that it could shutter at any time, like it almost did a year or so ago; player outcry won't keep it open forever.
I'm sorry, but I don't understand what California has to do with anything...could you please elaborate on that?
Jim Ryan makes sense - can't trust corporate leaders to be anything but avaricious - but changing locations doesn't without some kind of explanation.
Similar threads
