"Next-gen" games. 90's resolutions.

[Sava]

With the PlayStation 4 and Xbox One around the corner, and with performance tests of both Call of Duty: Ghosts and Battlefield 4 present and correct, the next generation console power debate is in full force - and there's an early frontrunner.

At the sharp end of comparisons between the PS4 and Xbox One are frame-rate and resolution, the two clearest indicators of next-gen game performance. We've already spoken with Call of Duty: Ghosts developer Infinity Ward to gain insight into the challenge the studio faced creating a cross-platform next-gen launch title - and its response to what has been dubbed "Xbox One Resolutiongate". At an Xbox One preview event yesterday, Eurogamer spoke with other developers working on Xbox One launch titles to get their thoughts on the Xbox One power debate and how it relates to their games. Read on for interviews with Ryse developer Crytek, Dead Rising 3 developer Capcom Vancouver, Forza 5 developer Turn 10 and Kinect Sports Rivals developer Rare.

Dead Rising 3 runs at 720p/30fps.

The last time I used something below 1600x1200... I was running Windows 95.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-11-06-its-less-to-do-with-the-specs-and-more-to-do-with-what-you-do-with-those-specs

The whole debate now seems to swirl around 720p vs 1080p. But even 1080p is a downgrade. 4k is right around the corner. I don't know why anyone would want to game on a console... aside from exclusive titles. My xbox 360 has been disconnected for months. My PS3 is an overpriced netflix machine.

"Next gen" will survive because lots of people don't want to bother with PC's. That's fine. Inferior tech has a place in the market since not everyone is going to be a computer wizard.

But the technology of the "next gen" consoles is beyond so horribly obsolete... console gaming shouldn't even be considered part of gaming.

[MikeH]

My view - the additional graphical development required for 4K gaming is just so ludicrously expensive, and offers so little in extra fun, that it's no big deal.

But I totally agree that the concept of a powerful home console is basically redundant. We're basically ready for slim client streaming games now right?

[Sava]

My view - the additional graphical development required for 4K gaming is just so ludicrously expensive, and offers so little in extra fun, that it's no big deal.

At present, yes. Just using Moore's law to estimate when such hardware becomes comparable in cost to low to mid-range hardware currently available, it will probably be about two-three years before 4k becomes commonplace. For now, yes, it's really only available to high-end users.

The fun factor is debatable. I can still have fun with the first civ title. Graphics don't necessarily change the fundamental design of games. But all things being equal, few people choose to go backwards in that regard. And I say this as someone who is currently playing a lot of Command and Conquer Generals Zero Hour... circa 2003.

But I totally agree that the concept of a powerful home console is basically redundant. We're basically ready for slim client streaming games now right?

Yes.

[MikeH]

It's not the hardware I mean really it's the actual time that artists have to spend drawing textures and stuff.

[MikeH]

re: graphics, lots of people are spending lots of time playing games on things like tablets, at graphical capabilities way below what they can get on console or desktop because of convenience and fun. Even low end devices now are capable of decent graphics.

[Sava]

It's not the hardware I mean really it's the actual time that artists have to spend drawing textures and stuff.

Depends. The technology is rapidly evolving. As demands for higher resolution textures increases, so will the innovation in producing such content. Procedural generation is one way to keep things simple. Also, devices like the Kinect are capable of mapping real world environments and translating them into 3D models, complete with textures.

There will still be a place for 3D artists, but I don't suspect hiring massive teams of them to produce pretty game worlds will be the only method available to game developers and publishers.

[Sava]

re: graphics, lots of people are spending lots of time playing games on things like tablets, at graphical capabilities way below what they can get on console or desktop because of convenience and fun. Even low end devices now are capable of decent graphics.

Agree. High resolution, graphically intense gaming experiences will compete with them in the marketplace.

[Hauldren Collider]

At present, yes. Just using Moore's law to estimate when such hardware becomes comparable in cost to low to mid-range hardware currently available, it will probably be about two-three years before 4k becomes commonplace. For now, yes, it's really only available to high-end users.

The fun factor is debatable. I can still have fun with the first civ title. Graphics don't necessarily change the fundamental design of games. But all things being equal, few people choose to go backwards in that regard. And I say this as someone who is currently playing a lot of Command and Conquer Generals Zero Hour... circa 2003.

That game is the ****ing ****.

[kentonio]

My view - the additional graphical development required for 4K gaming is just so ludicrously expensive, and offers so little in extra fun, that it's no big deal.

Indeed. Look at how many studios are making super high graphical games currently. The cost it getting higher and higher, and more and more studios are realizing they can make cheap to produce mobile and social games and potentially make as much money.

But I totally agree that the concept of a powerful home console is basically redundant. We're basically ready for slim client streaming games now right?

Not quite, give it another 2-5 years.

[Sava]

Higher resolution isn't just restricted to the textures in AAA titles. You can play Minecraft in 2560x1600.

[Al B. Sure!]

No Madden on PC
I prefer the xbox controller to mouse/keyboard for everything but strategy games

[Guynemer]

I prefer the xbox controller to mouse/keyboard for everything but strategy games

This is so colossally wrong-headed I literally had to reread it three times to make sure I hadn't misread it.

[Sava]

No Madden on PC
I prefer the xbox controller to mouse/keyboard for everything but strategy games

Madden 2007-08 are actively supported in the mod community. Custom playbooks. Rosters.

Not coincidentally, Madden has sucked hardcore since it stopped being released on PC.

Also, controllers are only good for racing and flight games. The xbox 360 wired controller has wonderful PC support. I rarely use it.

But, to each his own.

[self biased]

This is so colossally wrong-headed I literally had to reread it three times to make sure I hadn't misread it.

albie is the new oerdin?

[Al B. Sure!]

Madden 2007-08 are actively supported in the mod community. Custom playbooks. Rosters.

Not coincidentally, Madden has sucked hardcore since it stopped being released on PC.

Also, controllers are only good for racing and flight games. The xbox 360 wired controller has wonderful PC support. I rarely use it.

But, to each his own.

Madden 08? They've improved the hell out of Madden the past 6 games.

I can't go back to mouse/keyboard for FPS's. It's so awkward.