Decline PS4 wins the console war against XboxONE, yet it is a hollow victory as Consolesdämmerung is upon us

[dnf]

No women on presentation? Fucking incline of Sony. Goddamn bitches go back to your kitchen, sluts, whores.

Feminazis cries about booth babes showing their bodies brainwashed by the patriarchi, gets his wishes granted by the manboobs. Now, they wonder why there is no wimmin in the coverage of PS4, enters full circle...

 

[Dexter]

I said it before and I'll say it again:
"Next gen" games will look pretty much like current gen.
Higher resolution and/or fps, better textures and fancy stuff like SSAO/AA - basically what you get on pc already with a half-way decent console port.

Unfortunately they likely won't use the hardware for innovative stuff (like, good gameplay for once, or trying something fresh).

In the very first few demos they've shown you could already see some gorgeous vistas of large as shit levels/maps. At least compare that instead of two men standing opposite of each other.

You wouldn't see that in any "current gen" console port, instead you'd have rather small level-sections with lots of loading screens or trade-offs with crazy pop-ins of NPCs and other objects and decreased sight distances.
We've also seen smoke, particles and physics, it's like some of the first things they've shown:



I don't know how you even get the idea that a consoletoy put together at the end of 2013 doesn't have many improved capabilites over one put together over 7 years ago. Haven't you upgraded your PC in all that time? And as was already said several times they were bottlenecked by retarded RAM specifications.

Microsoft even wanted to cheapen out on that last time around and the last Xbawks incarnation barely got the 512MB it had: http://www.qj.net/xbox-360/interviews/gears-of-war-is-responsible-for-360s-512mb-ram.html

But Epic had the last word. Mark's partner, Tim Sweeny, sent the boys upstairs at Microsoft Games Studios a screenshot of how Gears of War would look like with 256MB of RAM. It would have been nice to see the screenshot that squeezed a further billion dollars from Microsoft's budget just to swap out 256MB for 512MB.

Can't imagine how much shittier games would've been if that happened. It might not seem like much of a difference, but it's a huge restriction in what devs can do.

 

[MetalCraze]

I don't give a shit about the consoles themselves, I'll never buy one. But multi-platform's the standard these days and with this new generation, PCs being dragged down by console popamole hopefully won't be quite as blatant anymore. Of course, a pretty turd coated in gold is still a turd at the end of the day. I was so disappointed with the new Hitman - if (when) the new Thief suffers the same treatment, it will be a dark day indeed.

Except they will. If you think that RAM was the problem - think again. There was a shitton of open worlds for X360 with its tiny RAM - sure in games like GTA and Skyrim you still had to teleport inside buildings which existed in a separate dimension but other than that worlds were big.

The thing is - when X360 came out the CPU an average bro used was a moderately fast dual-core. And the GPU was X1600 or 7600. So X360 with its tri-core and X1800/X1900 was current gen (but not top of the line) for 6 months.

Now you have both consoles having shitty laptop CPU (shitty compared to a lot of laptops) that will suck hard compared even to a first gen i5. And GPU is a weakling that can only compete with laptops. Mid-range 7850 and 660 smoke it.

So what this means is because processing power wise consoles are stuck in 2007/2008 but graphics-power wise they are somewhere in 2010 - there will be a ton more corridor-popamole cutscene-"games" because due to shit CPU the large scale games with ok graphics are out of the question. And upping the resolution from 720p to 1080p greatly eliminates whatever advantage the new GPU had.

In the very first few demos they've shown you could already see some gorgeous vistas of large as shit levels/maps.

Is that really PS4 graphics?
Because those vistas look like a PC version of X360 games. Bigger resolution, otherwise nothing special.

 

[ohWOW]

PCs are already better than next-next gen shit.

 

[mindx2]

I said it before and I'll say it again:
"Next gen" games will look pretty much like current gen.
Higher resolution and/or fps, better textures and fancy stuff like SSAO/AA - basically what you get on pc already with a half-way decent console port.

Unfortunately they likely won't use the hardware for innovative stuff (like, good gameplay for once, or trying something fresh).

In the very first few demos they've shown you could already see some gorgeous vistas of large as shit levels/maps. At least compare that instead of two men standing opposite of each other.

My question is: WILL the maps be that large and open? Seems to me that AAA developers tend to shoot for the lowest common denominator and it will STILL be a bunch of linear corridors with waist high cover to keep the console kiddies from getting lost or "frustrated." The only difference now will be fewer loading screens.

 

[sea]

My question is: WILL the maps be that large and open? Seems to me that AAA developers tend to shoot for the lowest common denominator and it will STILL be a bunch of linear corridors with waist high cover to keep the console kiddies from getting lost or "frustrated." The only difference now will be fewer loading screens.

They could be, if the game goes open-world or similar. But if you look carefully, those buildings are actually quite low-poly and there are some surprisingly low-res textures. That wall in the upper-right corner in particular is very clearly a flat 2D image, the "ships" in the harbor are flat bricks, and the city blocks of "minor" buildings are just little "bumps" made up of only a few polygons. In other words, it's still a skybox - a very pretty one, granted, but still non-interactive until proven otherwise.

 

[mindx2]

My question is: WILL the maps be that large and open? Seems to me that AAA developers tend to shoot for the lowest common denominator and it will STILL be a bunch of linear corridors with waist high cover to keep the console kiddies from getting lost or "frustrated." The only difference now will be fewer loading screens.

They could be, if the game goes open-world or similar. But if you look carefully, those buildings are actually quite low-poly and there are some surprisingly low-res textures. They are just hidden very well. In other words, it's still a skybox - a very pretty one, granted, but still non-interactive until proven otherwise.

I thought it was a skybox at first but I didn't watch the presentation so wasn't sure. Those screens certainly don't look as nice as my PC when I want to go all "eye candy" with a FPS!

 

[Tehdagah]

Guerilla knows how to work with aesthetics

Still...

 

[racofer]

I doubt any of these consoles will be able to even come close to 6 years old Crysis.

 

[J_C]

the "ships" in the harbor are flat bricks,

From that distance, those ships would look like flat bricks even in real life.

 

[Morgoth]

Current-gen game on PC looks already about as good (or better, depending on your perspective) as PS4 Killzone (minus the tiny corridor levels):

 

[Morgoth]

Either way, fighting over better graphics at this point has become totally pointless.

It all looks fucking great to me. Now please developers, make good games.

 

[sea]

Either way, fighting over better graphics at this point has become totally pointless.

It all looks fucking great to me. Now please developers, make good games.

I agree, it's just that selling your console on the basis of "next gen graphics" only to be outdone by games and tech demos 6-10 years old is hilarious and sad. They should have shown the power of the PS4 being utilized to do new, innovative things with games and gameplay, instead of just showing the same old shit and a bad-looking Wii Music ripoff. But my guess is Sony have no real plan, no clue and didn't have any games that met that criteria.

 

[J_C]

Either way, fighting over better graphics at this point has become totally pointless.

It all looks fucking great to me. Now please developers, make good games.

I agree, it's just that selling your console on the basis of "next gen graphics" only to be outdone by games and tech demos 6-10 years old is hilarious and sad. They should have shown the power of the PS4 being utilized to do new, innovative things with games and gameplay, instead of just showing the same old shit and a bad-looking Wii Music ripoff. But my guess is Sony have no real plan, no clue and didn't have any games that met that criteria.

It is easier to impress consoletards with shiny graphics. They don't know how advanced the PC graphics can be, so they see this leep on console graphics a huge one.

 

[Tehdagah]

 

[Ninja Destroyer]

Killzone part x - Shallow FPS with regenerating health and covering with insta-killing with knife. No matter how much you put in the graphics you're always stuck with butchered mechanics and no replayability. But that's what the audience loves and gets.

 

[Gord]

I don't know how you even get the idea that a consoletoy put together at the end of 2013 doesn't have many improved capabilites over one put together over 7 years ago. Haven't you upgraded your PC in all that time? And as was already said several times they were bottlenecked by retarded RAM specifications.

Of course they will have massively improved performance. That's not what I want to say.
Rather I think that the problem is that graphics are at a point of diminishing returns. The cost to increase graphical fidelity is growing faster than the aesthetic gain.
SSAO, AA, Tesselation and other modern graphical achievements have a comparatively large performance cost attached to it.
Put higher resolution and higher fps on top of it and the indeed much better hardware might already be at its limits.
On the other hand I'm probably underestimating what can be gained from being able to optimize software to a very limited (in terms of variety) hardware base.
But talking about (fairly) large open worlds and (somewhat) detailed cities, etc., don't forget that we have some of that even on the current consoles - look at Skyrim, AssCreed, Crysis2, etc.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

So, summary of the events...

Also, saving for posterity:
http://archive.foolz.us/v/thread/177351938/
http://archive.foolz.us/v/thread/177341751/
http://archive.foolz.us/v/thread/177351118/

>Infamous
FUCK THE POLICE MUH FREEDOM
>Watch Dogs
FUCK THE POLICE MUH FREEDOM
>PS4
CONTROL, SOCIAL NETWORKS, FRIENDS SEEING WHAT ARE YOU PLAYING 24/7

>save a single woman from a rapist


>kill dozens of cops and civilians in the process

>QTE
>bullet time

Why are people excited for Watch Dogs again?

>Assassins creed in a new city

Fucking kill me now

>stop a mugging
>destroy half the police force in the process
full retard

Seems like it plays itself. Time slows down, you press a button, watch a scene etc

What a trainwreck. Okay, just so this isn't a complete shitpost, here's some interesting info. Developer list below.

Spoiler

pic hosting

 

[Morgoth]

No matter how much you put in the graphics you're always stuck with butchered mechanics and no replayability. But that's what the audience loves and gets.

And that won't likely change from most first-party studios, as they're forced to pop out a blockbuster every 2 years. Most of that time will just be spent on art assets, and putting together an E3 demo. Not enough time to learn new design skills, experiment and re-purpose the tool chain that supports different design avenues.

 

[Xi]

Graphics are going to take a backseat this generation. Developers can freely choose larger level maps, better AI, more bells and whistles, etc (whatever they want) without having to sacrifice technical specs in other areas. This is the great boon for PC players. No more strange loading schemes with Pop-in to deal with console RAM amount. Multi-tasking on consoles now, just like on PCs. The use of keyboard/mouse, and port of more game types to console. Lots of good changes are there.

If anything the consoles are 1 step closer to the PC world. How is this not a good thing? Sure PC's will be crazy fast in comparison to consoles 1 year after there release, but the new defacto standard for game design is quite intriguing. I'm looking forward to fewer corridor shooters, larger world maps, new advanced AI, interesting physics, and more clarity in graphics (AA, AF, higher resolutions). That's all the consoles needed imho. Now PC gamers can enjoy the new standard.

 

[Ninja Destroyer]

No matter how much you put in the graphics you're always stuck with butchered mechanics and no replayability. But that's what the audience loves and gets.

And that won't likely change from most first-party studios, as they're forced to pop out a blockbuster every 2 years. Most of that time will just be spent on art assets, and putting together an E3 demo. Not enough time to learn new design skills, experiment and re-purpose the tool chain that supports different design avenues.

Exactly. And no one will bother to mock next-gen COD, because it looks better and it plays like old COD. So why complain? And the costs of a new games will of course increase, thus safe sequel route will be the best one. New IP will be even much more rare to occur in the future. Only good thing will come for the sandbox games. The rest will be frozen in design schematics.

 

[mindx2]

Graphics are going to take a backseat this generation. Developers can freely choose larger level maps, better AI, more bells and whistles, etc (whatever they want) without having to sacrifice technical specs in other areas. This is the great boon for PC players. No more strange loading schemes with Pop-in to deal with console RAM amount. Multi-tasking on consoles now, just like on PCs. The use of keyboard/mouse, and port of more game types to console. Lots of good changes are there.

If anything the consoles are 1 step closer to the PC world. How is this not a good thing? Sure PC's will be crazy fast in comparison to consoles 1 year after there release, but the new defacto standard for game design is quite intriguing. I'm looking forward to fewer corridor shooters, larger world maps, new advanced AI, interesting physics, and more clarity in graphics (AA, AF, higher resolutions). That's all the consoles needed imho. Now PC gamers can enjoy the new standard.

I just feel your being wayyyyyyy too optimistic here. They will regurgitate what sold last generation and slap it into this generation. They are going to be too scared (monetarily) to innovate*.

*and by innovate, I mean try things that the PC has done for years and years.

 

[Humanity has risen!]

Aren't we limited in ram with 32 bit Windows bottlenecks anyway, something like 3.2 gigs?

 

[Xi]

Aren't we limited in ram with 32 bit Windows bottlenecks anyway, something like 3.2 gigs?

The bulk majority of modern PC gamers are running win7 64bit. So not at all. Also, the new consoles are using AMD 64 CPUs so, there's no real bottleneck.

 

[Gord]

If new consoles mean that finally people are forced to abandon 32bit Windows then that's at least one good thing coming out of it.