Are Next Gen Graphics Really Needed on Next Gen Hardware?

[LightyKD]

I know I might get a lot of BS for this thread but hear me out. Throughout the history of gaming there has always been the war of better "visuals vs more landmass", Sometimes by the end of a console's cycle a medium is found but nobody ever gets to push landmass further. After watching the Xenoblade Chronicles Direct yesterday, I was thinking about this and how much I would love to see a game where you could explore not one but maybe five or six whole planets, complete with different forms of life, societies, ect. If the next console could usually handle 10 or 20 times the game from the previous, why not make a game with previous level graphics but with as much area as you want?

In the case f the Wii U, I'd imagine that such a game would look like Monster Hunter Tri U, I.E. a very sharp Wii game. With the right art direction that wouldn't be bad and there would be plenty of space to create multiple worlds. For once, I would love to see a space exploration game where you travel through space and get to have massive worlds to explore in vein of Xenoblade X. Obviously that game would have the level of interstellar politics as found in Mass Effect and enough action to keep you busy. Such a game might be a daunting task but I'm sure that gamers would appreciate the effort.

 

[The Real Jdbye]

I know I might get a lot of BS for this thread but hear me out. Throughout the history of gaming there has always been the war of better "visuals vs more landmass", Sometimes by the end of a console's cycle a medium is found but nobody ever gets to push landmass further. After watching the Xenoblade Chronicles Direct yesterday, I was thinking about this and how much I would love to see a game where you could explore not one but maybe five or six whole planets, complete with different forms of life, societies, ect. If the next console could usually handle 10 or 20 times the game from the previous, why not make a game with previous level graphics but with as much area as you want?

In the case f the Wii U, I'd imagine that such a game would look like Monster Hunter Tri U, I.E. a very sharp Wii game. With the right art direction that wouldn't be bad and there would be plenty of space to create multiple worlds. For once, I would love to see a space exploration game where you travel through space and get to have massive worlds to explore in vein of Xenoblade X. Obviously that game would have the level of interstellar politics as found in Mass Effect and enough action to keep you busy. Such a game might be a daunting task but I'm sure that gamers would appreciate the effort.

The thing is, with huge game worlds you end up with a lot of empty space, which IMO is just annoying. Creating a huge game world that is as filled with things to do and places to go as any other game would be a massive undertaking and isn't likely to happen. You'd be talking about a play time of possibly 1000+ hours if they pulled that off but the game would have to be prohibitively expensive.

 

[Foxi4]

This is another case of mistaking graphics and aesthetics, and there's a big difference between the two. "Graphics" are the tool set and canvas the developer uses to give the game a certain look, meaning its "aesthetics". There is very little correlation between the complexity of the game for the GPU and its aesthetics, at least on paper. It's true that hyper-realistic games tend to be more intensive on the GPU, but that's not a rule by any stretch of the imagination - there's nothing standing in the way of making a non-realistic game that's graphically-intensive. Simple things like particle effects, life-like physics or real-time lighting were unimaginable just a few generations ago - now they're common in video games and they're only getting better. Consoles should strive for more and more computational power simply because it removes limitations and allows developers to better realize their artistic visions, not because more power allows for more realism - it does, but that's a side effect, not the main goal.

For once, I would love to see a space exploration game where you travel through space and get to have massive worlds to explore

Here you go. Almost everything in this game is procedurally-generated, you can explore forever.

 

[Arras]

For once, I would love to see a space exploration game where you travel through space and get to have massive worlds to explore in vein of Xenoblade X. Obviously that game would have the level of interstellar politics as found in Mass Effect and enough action to keep you busy. Such a game might be a daunting task but I'm sure that gamers would appreciate the effort.

Isn't that sort of what Star Citizen is supposed to be?

 

[FAST6191]

If I want to spend 2 work years tweaking my graphics engine to get the shiniest pixels possible then that works for me, however if I just want to make something shiny, press subsurf a few times and just export that* then grunt also plays a part.


*maybe that is an oversimplification, however art has long been ahead of real time games. Consider


That would be a film from 1995, some stuff I see there I would be impressed to see EA pull off next year.

 

[Guild McCommunist]

Yes.

Stop settling for mediocrity because you buy bad consoles.

 

[FAST6191]

settling

You call that settling? I would have said we sailed past evangelising a few months back and were well into proselytising at this point.

 

[LightyKD]

Yes.

Stop settling for mediocrity because you buy bad consoles.

Wii U and OUYA arent bad consoles. They might not be your cup of tea but they get heavy useage in my household effectively making them good consoles for my family's needs. With that said, EVERY device has its limits and again there will always be that struggle of space over graphics. It's not bad to have a middle-ground.

This is another case of mistaking graphics and aesthetics, and there's a big difference between the two. "Graphics" are the tool set and canvas the developer uses to give the game a certain look, meaning its "aesthetics". There is very little correlation between the complexity of the game for the GPU and its aesthetics, at least on paper. It's true that hyper-realistic games tend to be more intensive on the GPU, but that's not a rule by any stretch of the imagination - there's nothing standing in the way of making a non-realistic game that's graphically-intensive. Simple things like particle effects, life-like physics or real-time lighting were unimaginable just a few generations ago - now they're common in video games and they're only getting better. Consoles should strive for more and more computational power simply because it removes limitations and allows developers to better realize their artistic visions, not because more power allows for more realism - it does, but that's a side effect, not the main goal.


Here you go. Almost everything in this game is procedurally-generated, you can explore forever.

I forgot all about this game. It's looking really good

 

[Taleweaver]

The "as much area as you want" was already possible in previous generations. I forgot how the feature was called...'seamless loading' or something in that vein. The idea is that the game just builds the world around your personal perspective; it adds stuff in the direction you're going and removes it from memory the parts where you're no longer nearby. That and procedural level generation, pretty much allows for endless direction no matter where you go.

The thing is: huge open worlds aren't as fun as they might sound. Jdbye already said it: it just makes things look more empty. That's why developers don't go that route (unless it's randomly generated, which is actually a game mechanic). No man's sky certainly aims to fill that "explore multiple planets" game, but I doubt it'll be more fun than just staying on one planet (Christ...I pity those who wants to collect everything 100% in no man's sky ).

 

[Guild McCommunist]

Wii U and OUYA arent bad consoles. They might not be your cup of tea but they get heavy useage in my household effectively making them good consoles for my family's needs. With that said, EVERY device has its limits and again there will always be that struggle of space over graphics. It's not bad to have a middle-ground.

I'll at least accept an argument for the Wii U but the Ouya is a garbage "console".

If your best argument is "it's not for everyone!" then it's bad.

 

[Depravo]

Wii U and OUYA arent bad consoles.

The OUYA only becomes bad when you describe it as a console. Call it a low-performance android box for hobbyists and it almost sounds interesting. The OUYA is to consoles (PS/Xbox) what the Raspberry Pi is to a gaming PC.

 

[LightyKD]

I'll at least accept an argument for the Wii U but the Ouya is a garbage "console".

If your best argument is "it's not for everyone!" then it's bad.

That's always the argument for every console. Buying a console is also buying a philosophy in game development. I would never tell someone to buy any console that didn't fit into their personal philosophy of gaming. Back on topic, I remember reading about some of these level streaming tactics a few years ago. I'm glad to see that some of them are in use. I do get that a game of such a magnitude could be daunting, hell Oblivion felt that way back in 2005. With that said, I think it works better in a SciFi setting i.e. No Man's Sky or Xenoblade than in a fantasy one.

 

[Foxi4]

Wii U and OUYA arent bad consoles. They might not be your cup of tea but they get heavy useage in my household effectively making them good consoles for my family's needs. With that said, EVERY device has its limits and again there will always be that struggle of space over graphics. It's not bad to have a middle-ground.

They're not good systems though. You're not playing the system, you're playing games. Mario games would be just as fun on a PS4 as they are on the Wii U, Android games would be just as fun on the Xbox One as they are on the OUYA, your personal enjoyment of the content clouds your judgement of the actual hardware.

That's always the argument for every console.

No, it's not - not when the console is meeting the par.

Buying a console is also buying a philosophy in game development.

No, it's buying a piece of plastic electronics that plays games at a certain level of performance - the better the performance the better the plastic you bought. It's all about a balance of performance versus price tag unless you're one of those people who are more interested in buying a narrative than buying a quality product.

I would never tell someone to buy any console that didn't fit into their personal philosophy of gaming.

I still don't see a meaningful link between the console and the software a given user plays. They're two separate entities.

 

[sarkwalvein]

I'll at least accept an argument for the Wii U but the Ouya is a garbage "console".

If your best argument is "it's not for everyone!" then it's bad.

I had an Ouya, fortunately someone stole it from the basement storage room in my building.
And my problem with the Ouya is not poor hardware (though I hate the analog thumpads on the controllers), but the lack of support and good games designed for it that play good on it.
That aside, I don't really think games on new consoles must have "Next-Gen Graphics". Regarding that and my opinion I will quote myself from some other thread:

...
Actually I believe that having very strong hardware that allows for rapid (less optimized) development, and lets the development team concentrate on the game story, art, gameplay, etc. instead of the programming, is good hardware.
People may look at it as "laziness" , but you know, it is a world of limited resources, if you put more effort into the code optimization, you have to take away effort from some other place.
And if you told me you would either give me a 720p60 game with very good and refined gameplay or a 1080p60 game with some buggy not fun gameplay, I would go with the one that plays better.
Also having stronger hardware to give more room to being lazy at optimizations would be better...

I would like interesting games, with new ideas and gameplay...
Even recycled ideas from the past that could be cool after some reworking.

This is another case of mistaking graphics and aesthetics, and there's a big difference between the two. "Graphics" are the tool set and canvas the developer uses to give the game a certain look, meaning its "aesthetics". There is very little correlation between the complexity of the game for the GPU and its aesthetics, at least on paper. It's true that hyper-realistic games tend to be more intensive on the GPU, but that's not a rule by any stretch of the imagination - there's nothing standing in the way of making a non-realistic game that's graphically-intensive. Simple things like particle effects, life-like physics or real-time lighting were unimaginable just a few generations ago - now they're common in video games and they're only getting better. Consoles should strive for more and more computational power simply because it removes limitations and allows developers to better realize their artistic visions, not because more power allows for more realism - it does, but that's a side effect, not the main goal.


Here you go. Almost everything in this game is procedurally-generated, you can explore forever.

I actually knew about that game, and it makes me remember of an alternate take on the infinite universe idea of Elite whose remake I didn't know existed until two minutes ago.
I would really like to get that game, but I don't plan on getting a PS4 until it enters the ~250€ range.

 

[Foxi4]

I actually knew about that game, and it makes me remember of an alternate take on the infinite universe idea of Elite whose remake I didn't know existed until two minutes ago. I would really like to get that game, but I don't plan on getting a PS4 until it enters the ~250€ range.

You can get the game on PC then. Don't expect the PS4 to enter the 250-odd range soon, the PS3 only got there recently. You could get it pre-owned though, it'll probably drop to that level in a year or two.

 

[sarkwalvein]

You can get the game on PC then. Don't expect the PS4 to enter the 250-odd range soon, the PS3 only got there recently. You could get it pre-owned though, it'll probably drop to that level in a year or two.

For some reason I thought that game was a PS4 exclusive, but if there is a PC version I will of course look for it. (talking about No Man's Sky)

 

[the_randomizer]

*Sees the thread about graphics opinions, grabs popcorn as he goes back to playing Wii U gaemz* ;O;

 

[Foxi4]

*Sees the thread about graphics opinions, grabs popcorn as he goes back to playing Wii U gaemz* ;O;

I'd just like to point out that there's nothing wrong with Wii U games, the Wii U on the other hand is a whole different can of beans.

 

[the_randomizer]

I'd just like to point out that there's nothing wrong with Wii U games, the Wii U on the other hand is a whole different can of beans.

And that's a fair enough assessment, I've seen people bash the games themselves far too often, simply for being on a Nintendo console, the console hardware is one thing, how good the games are is quite another piece of the puzzle

 

[LightyKD]

Glad that some people are taking this thread about GRAPHICS seriously. Seriously, this thread wasn't made to be a OUYA bashing thread and if you don't like the OUYA, don't fucking play it. No need to bash those who do. The conversation isn't about which piece of plastic is better it IS about how to better utilize hardware and what might be possible if people were not always focused on graphics but used the extra hardware to make bigger games.