Anyone else just not impressed with the new generation of consoles? (Rant)

[supernintendo128]

Everytime I see talk of the PS5 or the Xbox Series X/S and their fancy new 4k ray-traced 60fps graphics, all I feel is "meh."

I remember when a new console generation was exciting. I remember being amazed at how the Wii U had HD graphics or how sleek and sophisticated the PS4 and its UI looked or just laughing at how Microsoft was putting gamers second with the Xbox One.

Now I just look at the PS5 and lament how it looks like a goddamn wi-fi router or how the Xbox Series X looks like a refrigerator. The last console I was excited for was the Nintendo Switch (which to me was always a "next-gen console"), and even still, Breath of the Wild actually didn't impress me until I actually bought it. Am I getting old? Has PC gaming desensitized me to next-gen graphics!? WHAT IS WRONG WITH ME!?!?

Anyone else feel the same?

 

[Tomobobo]

Well if you're a PC gamer I can see why "next-gen" isn't that exciting. Sony and Microsoft are somehow making their consoles worse each generation, removing features like web browsers, or not having even a single exclusive title to warrant owning the machine. PC gets every Xbox game. It's as if Microsoft is trying to water down the console space and dissolve the idea of owning any specific machine while also trying to sell said specific machines, it's a confusing tactic.

I'm waiting to see if the ray-tracing capabilities of the consoles are even up to the task, I read somewhere that they perform similarly to the lowest end RTX card currently available, the 2070 Super.

 

[Veho]

There is very little innovation in this next generation, and the advances in graphics are beginning to reach diminishing returns, they're not huge leaps any more, just a general "improvement". The new generation is just same old same old, but slightly prettier.

 

[Xzi]

It's the "about time" generation. 3D games running at 30 FPS or less never should have been considered acceptable to begin with. Would be even better if next-gen consoles supported 1440p @ 144 FPS, but I'll take what progress I can get. Spider-Man and God of War can finally be played the way they were meant to be.

 

[RichardTheKing]

Publishers need to focus more on FPS than resolution/graphics; things already looked pretty damn great on the PS4, but being locked to 30 FPS instead of 60+...that's just ridiculous.

 

[SG854]

Well if you're a PC gamer I can see why "next-gen" isn't that exciting. Sony and Microsoft are somehow making their consoles worse each generation, removing features like web browsers, or not having even a single exclusive title to warrant owning the machine. PC gets every Xbox game. It's as if Microsoft is trying to water down the console space and dissolve the idea of owning any specific machine while also trying to sell said specific machines, it's a confusing tactic.

I'm waiting to see if the ray-tracing capabilities of the consoles are even up to the task, I read somewhere that they perform similarly to the lowest end RTX card currently available, the 2070 Super.

More like 2060 super according to digital foundry



--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

It's the "about time" generation. 3D games running at 30 FPS or less never should have been considered acceptable to begin with. Would be even better if next-gen consoles supported 1440p @ 144 FPS, but I'll take what progress I can get. Spider-Man and God of War can finally be played the way they were meant to be.

If they opt to use raytracing then its still the 30fps generation.

 

[godreborn]

well, my gaming habits are kinda weird. I'm more a retro fan than anything else, so I spend the early mornings (even now actually) playing the wii u (wii game at the moment), then spend some time with the switch periodically (kicking some ass too. ). I don't care much about graphics. heck, I don't have a tv or a setup that's good enough to take advantage of 4/8k or whatever, so I feel comfortable with older games.

 

[SG854]

Well if you're a PC gamer I can see why "next-gen" isn't that exciting. Sony and Microsoft are somehow making their consoles worse each generation, removing features like web browsers, or not having even a single exclusive title to warrant owning the machine. PC gets every Xbox game. It's as if Microsoft is trying to water down the console space and dissolve the idea of owning any specific machine while also trying to sell said specific machines, it's a confusing tactic.

I'm waiting to see if the ray-tracing capabilities of the consoles are even up to the task, I read somewhere that they perform similarly to the lowest end RTX card currently available, the 2070 Super.

Raytracing is close to a 2060 super. And rasterized performance is a little bit less then a 2080 non super. So a mid range 3070 outperforms both consoles. So nex gen console are on the low end of pc hardware. Which matches the tradition of them releasing low end pc hardware to reduce total price and make consoles more affordable.

 

[godreborn]

I take that back, I'm playing a wii u game (nsmb u) atm, so it's wii u/switch. I don't like playing it on the switch, because I don't want all those hours to be on my profile. lol

 

[Anxiety_timmy]

imo they aren't as impresive as the leaps from the ps3 to the 4 or the og xbox to the 360. Also i do think framerates should be prioritized or at least offer multiple modes

 

[Xzi]

If they opt to use raytracing then its still the 30fps generation.

They give you the option in each individual game, or you can set a universal preference. Frankly I couldn't care less about raytracing at the moment, the performance cost is just too high. Even on PC.

 

[Tom Bombadildo]

I mean, of course it's not impressive now, it's the start of the generation. Devs haven't even remotely pushed the hardware to its absolute limits yet, and you shouldn't expect them to for another 3-4 years yet. If you're judging a generation already by games that are glorified up-ports from last gen, of course you're not going to see a difference/be disappointed. That Watch Dogs Legion video above is exactly what I mean, the game is unoptimized ass on PC and it looks like it's unoptimized ass on next gen, too, so it's not a good comparison of the actual capabilities of the hardware (especially with Watch Dogs Legion, I can barely get 60fps at 1080p with max settings on a damn 3080, Ubisoft is exceptionally bad at optimization with these kinds of games).

People complained about the same exact thing going from sixth-seventh gen, and from seventh-eighth gen, and they'll complain about it going from this gen to next gen as well, you're just new to the party this time around and have experience with higher end hardware.


Give it a few years when games that are actually designed for this generation's hardware are released, that's when you should really judge if you're impressed or not. It's not like the "good ol days" when you went from 2D sprites -> low polygon 3d models -> high polygon 3D models and the differences in hardware capabilities were obvious. You also need to consider the big leap in performance this time around isn't just "GRAFIX", its things like loading times and DirectStorage implementation and other such technical aspects not possible on previous gen.

 

[Pacheko17]

Improvements are getting less and less noticeable. I just have so many gripes with these new consoles, I'll very likely never buy them.
I am thinking of buying another PS3 though.

 

[Deleted User]

Meh, my gaming senses still stuck in thinking that 720p is HD

 

[Zense]

The thing that exites me the most is that we're already seeing the first examples of 120 fps on console at launch with stuff like Gears 5 and that CoD game... Warzone or whatever... As someone else said this is the gen we should be saying farewell to the 30 fps we've been stuck with since the PS2 generation, generally speaking.

As for innovation I think the only really innovative thing is the DualSense, though time will tell if it'll just be implemented by Sony's first party titles or become common place. I would love for the latter to happen. The haptic feedback could easily find its place in VR controllers in the future imo so hopefully it does well.

As for 4k and ssd, yeah ssd is cool although I feel we were artificially stopped from using the full potential of SSDs in previous gen just so they'd have something to flaunt for PS5 and XSX/S. I still don't see why plugging an SSD into your PS4 Pro or XOX didn't give noticeably better speeds than the old HDD. Heck I've put SSDs into PS2s and gained great loading speed boosts for crying out loud!

To be perfectly honest I feel like the PS5 and XSX are just what we should have gotten instead of the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X, apart from the Ray-tracing tech. Basically if you skipped the last gen entirely you have enhanced versions of those games out of the box (more or less) on the new consoles, yeah even the Xbox Series S seems to improve things although it's hindered by its Xbox One S heritage. Hopefully Microsoft decides to release more of the Series S potential upon its backwards compatible titles.

 

[CMDreamer]

After this "new" generation consoles, the next one will feature 8K graphics and that will be the only "new" on it.

Innovation is long gone on some devs. They keep selling the same idea/concept making "new" levels for a game that has nothing more to offer to the gamer. The problem is that most gamers still buy that business concept, so it will still be around for many years to come.

But, gladly, not all console makers think in the same linear way.

 

[cvskid]

The main times i was impressed with console generations were when we were going from 2D to early 3D, and from early 3D to modern 3D. These days though it doesn't feel like that big of a deal when new consoles get released.

Guessing most people here were too young to experience the changes over time though. It was pretty cool.

 

[SG854]

I mean, of course it's not impressive now, it's the start of the generation. Devs haven't even remotely pushed the hardware to its absolute limits yet, and you shouldn't expect them to for another 3-4 years yet. If you're judging a generation already by games that are glorified up-ports from last gen, of course you're not going to see a difference/be disappointed. That Watch Dogs Legion video above is exactly what I mean, the game is unoptimized ass on PC and it looks like it's unoptimized ass on next gen, too, so it's not a good comparison of the actual capabilities of the hardware (especially with Watch Dogs Legion, I can barely get 60fps at 1080p with max settings on a damn 3080, Ubisoft is exceptionally bad at optimization with these kinds of games).

People complained about the same exact thing going from sixth-seventh gen, and from seventh-eighth gen, and they'll complain about it going from this gen to next gen as well, you're just new to the party this time around and have experience with higher end hardware.


Give it a few years when games that are actually designed for this generation's hardware are released, that's when you should really judge if you're impressed or not. It's not like the "good ol days" when you went from 2D sprites -> low polygon 3d models -> high polygon 3D models and the differences in hardware capabilities were obvious. You also need to consider the big leap in performance this time around isn't just "GRAFIX", its things like loading times and DirectStorage implementation and other such technical aspects not possible on previous gen.

But isn't it a good comparison if they are both optimized ass. If one platform is better optimized then the other then its not a fair comparison. But they are both ass.

Digital Foundry also compared Gears of War and said Series X rasterized performance is slightly less then a 2080. Is Gow an unoptimized game too?

Also Watchdog on pc max settings vs console with reduce settings and many compromises. Thats why digital foundry used the same console settings on pc to make a fair performance comparison. Use the same console graphical settings on a 3080 and performance will be above 120fps. And a pc with 2060 super still edge out with higher resolution and higher res assets then series x

 

[Tom Bombadildo]

But isn't it a good comparison if they are both optimized ass. If one platform is better optimized then the other then its not a fair comparison. But they are both ass.

Digital Foundry also compared Gears of War and said Series X rasterized performance is slightly less then a 2080. Is Gow an unoptimized game too?

Also Watchdog on pc max settings vs console with reduce settings and many compromises. Thats why digital foundry used the same console settings on pc to make a fair performance comparison. Use the same console graphical settings on a 3080 and performance will be above 120fps. And a pc with 2060 super still edge out with higher resolution and higher res assets then series x

I never said the figures weren't right, simply that using a game that's an unoptimized mess isn't a good metric to judge the graphical capabilities of a console. It doesn't matter if both versions are unoptimized. The Sexbox/PS5 are much more capable at providing higher graphical fidelity than just shitty Watch Dogs Legion, so it's a poor metric to say "this is the best it can do this gen, pack it up it's all shit!"...because it isn't at all, and we won't see that for years yet. And given that devs can further optimize games for console hardware than they can PC hardware, it's safe to say in 3-4 years when games actually push the hardware available to them, we'll see whether or not the consoles are actually impressive vs last gen not with shitty up ports like we have now.

Of course they'll never compete with high end PC hardware as it exists now or in the future, but that's a dumb comparison to make anyways given the price point of jumping into a new PC build with equivalent specs vs just buying a next gen console. I'm primarily a PC gamer, it's why I bought a 3080, but I'm not blinded by idiotic PCMR bias and I realize that the consoles this time around aren't garbage tier specs unlike the PS4/XBone (which were very outdated before they even launched), and when pushed to the limit they will certainly push out impressive looking games...just in a few years, as devs get accustomed to the power and features.

 

[SG854]

I never said the figures weren't right, simply that using a game that's an unoptimized mess isn't a good metric to judge the graphical capabilities of a console. It doesn't matter if both versions are unoptimized. The Sexbox/PS5 are much more capable at providing higher graphical fidelity than just shitty Watch Dogs Legion, so it's a poor metric to say "this is the best it can do this gen, pack it up it's all shit!"...because it isn't at all, and we won't see that for years yet. And given that devs can further optimize games for console hardware than they can PC hardware, it's safe to say in 3-4 years when games actually push the hardware available to them, we'll see whether or not the consoles are actually impressive vs last gen not with shitty up ports like we have now.

Of course they'll never compete with high end PC hardware as it exists now or in the future, but that's a dumb comparison to make anyways given the price point of jumping into a new PC build with equivalent specs vs just buying a next gen console. I'm primarily a PC gamer, it's why I bought a 3080, but I'm not blinded by idiotic PCMR bias and I realize that the consoles this time around aren't garbage tier specs unlike the PS4/XBone (which were very outdated before they even launched), and when pushed to the limit they will certainly push out impressive looking games...just in a few years, as devs get accustomed to the power and features.

Not really a dumb comparison when talking about graphical fidelity not price point or value. I don't know anything about PCMR when just looking at raw numbers.

Consoles aren't a value as people think they are. Sony is likely selling at a loss. 5 yr online alone will bring a PS5 to $700 digital only version.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

I never said the figures weren't right, simply that using a game that's an unoptimized mess isn't a good metric to judge the graphical capabilities of a console. It doesn't matter if both versions are unoptimized. The Sexbox/PS5 are much more capable at providing higher graphical fidelity than just shitty Watch Dogs Legion, so it's a poor metric to say "this is the best it can do this gen, pack it up it's all shit!"...because it isn't at all, and we won't see that for years yet. And given that devs can further optimize games for console hardware than they can PC hardware, it's safe to say in 3-4 years when games actually push the hardware available to them, we'll see whether or not the consoles are actually impressive vs last gen not with shitty up ports like we have now.

Of course they'll never compete with high end PC hardware as it exists now or in the future, but that's a dumb comparison to make anyways given the price point of jumping into a new PC build with equivalent specs vs just buying a next gen console. I'm primarily a PC gamer, it's why I bought a 3080, but I'm not blinded by idiotic PCMR bias and I realize that the consoles this time around aren't garbage tier specs unlike the PS4/XBone (which were very outdated before they even launched), and when pushed to the limit they will certainly push out impressive looking games...just in a few years, as devs get accustomed to the power and features.

This argument is too subjective. Even at the end of PS4 lifespan some people are still unimpressed with it. If you have a PS5 that is slightly better looking then a matured PS4 then they are unimpressed with PS4 graphics. And you sure they'll be impressed 3 yrs from now?