Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

Orbis Unmasked: What to expect from next-gen

126 posts in this topic

Posted

The Blu Ray drive massacred the PS3 price. If they stick to mechanical hard drives instead of solid state the new consoles won't be that much to manufacture. Also when it comes to memory, isn't faster RAM better regardless of amount, due to the bandwidth? (unless you compare like 1GB to 8GB) Kind of like comparing a 3ghz celeron to a 1.8ghz dual/quad-core CPU?

edit: Trying to dig up what others say, the intricacies of memory isn't my strong point.

Speed is great but when you're looking at a size difference of up to 2x (3.5GB vs. 5-7GB), it'll show. Developers will be able to make larger maps, add more characters on screen, and use higher-quality assets (e.g. textures).

Read the following quotes:

Might & Magic: Clash of Heroes, Sword & Sworcery developer Nathan Vella, CEO of Capybara Games

Most of all we're hoping for consoles to beat Mode 7 and ratchet it up to Mode 8, and perhaps add way more layers of parallax scrolling.

Seriously though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Speed is great but when you're looking at a size difference of up to 2x (3.5GB vs. 5-7GB), it'll show. Developers will be able to make larger maps, add more characters on screen, and use higher-quality assets (e.g. textures).

They won't though. They always code for the lowest common denominator, do you really think that gamers will be ok with one console having noticeably better graphics for multiplatform games?

You're setting yourself up for a very big let down if you hang onto that idea. Remember just how much more it cost in the UK compared to the rest of the world?

Don't think so, Blu-ray Drive cost Sony $125 in the original PS3, coupled with XDR and a custom CPU from IBM the price all added up.

This time round I wouldn't be surprised if the Jaguar is a standard part, Blu-Ray drives are dirt cheap now, only thing that is expensive is the GDDR5.

I don't think the consoles will cost as much as they did last generation this time around.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

honestly console specs doesn't matter that much; it's all about the games/online and the experience you get (in a consumer perspective) and the easier to program in it the better (from a developer perspective); history has proven that it's not always the powerhorse console that wins, but the one that can deliver a great experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I agree, its just something to talk about until they are properly revealed. We don't know anything about what online services are going to be like yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Speed is great but when you're looking at a size difference of up to 2x (3.5GB vs. 5-7GB), it'll show. Developers will be able to make larger maps, add more characters on screen, and use higher-quality assets (e.g. textures).

Read the following quotes:

http://www.eurogamer...ext-gen-article

http://www.computera...us-more-memory/

If the target of the next gen would end up being 1080p then memory bandwidth will be incredibly important. Think of a pc graphics card, and how adding more ram doesn't make it more powerful, how it doesn't suddenly make it capable of more than it could do with the amount it originally shipped with. The same will apply to the xbox 720/3/whateverthehellyouwannacallit. They can add as much ram as they like, but if the gpu isn't powerful enough to be able to make use of all the extra assets the extra ram would allow, or it's somewhat starved in bandwidth it wont make a difference.

honestly console specs doesn't matter that much; it's all about the games/online and the experience you get (in a consumer perspective) and the easier to program in it the better (from a developer perspective); history has proven that it's not always the powerhorse console that wins, but the one that can deliver a great experience.

Specs are important actually. The low end specs of the current consoles lingering around as long as they have like a bad odor does is the reason why progress in gaming graphics has nearly screeched to a halt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I think 1080p30 is going to be the focus this time around, with performance games locked at 720p60 like the Call of Duties.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I think 1080p30 is going to be the focus this time around, with performance games locked at 720p60 like the Call of Duties.

The Call Of Duty series already runs at 60fps with a slightly lowered resolution (880x720) and that's with the incredibly limited hardware of current gen consoles. The biggest advantage the next-gen consoles have is the resolution bump from 720p to 1080p, so I can't see developers giving that up. I imagine games like Call Of Duty will do something similar for the next gen, picking an non-standard resolution like 1320x1080 and upscaling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I'm curious, have any features been leaked or released for either console?

Probably just naievety on my part, but does anyone know if you can cross platform chat?

(I know cross platform gaming will be most likely out of the question, unfortunately)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I don't look at specs when buying a video game console all I care about is does it have online so I can play with my friends and does it have fun games.

I even pay gamestop like a year before the WiiU release for the system not knowing anything more then it had a touch screen controller.

all these specs do not really matter , sure more hardware better games but people try to hard to compare them to pc specs.

the WiiU does not have super computer specs and it looks amazing and has some really fun games .

just my 2cents

Nintendo have the right ideas; make games fun to play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Nintendo isn't nintendo anymore. all they do is make gimmacks and toys. pleh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Nintendo have the right ideas; make games fun to play.

No reason why they can't have a powerful console and have fun games, Nintendo has always had a problem getting third parties onto their system ever since the Gamecube.

People buy Nintendo to play 1st party games, Marios, Zeldas, etc.. the problem is they are few and far between and lately have just been rehashes of old games.

New Super Mario Bros for example.....

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

the problem is they are few and far between and lately have just been rehashes of old games.

New Super Mario Bros for example.....

You make it sound like it's a bad thing, when it's an awesome thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

You make it sound like it's a bad thing, when it's an awesome thing.

That is a bad thing. Super Mario Bros U looks more like a Facebook game or something you'd play in your browser for free; Wii Fit U looks barely any better than the original version; Nintendo Land has some interesting ideas but it barely looks current-gen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

You make it sound like it's a bad thing, when it's an awesome thing.

To most people it seems rehashes and remakes are only bad when it's nintendo doing them. It's ok when the other guys are doing them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

To most people it seems rehashes and remakes are only bad when it's nintendo doing them. It's ok when the other guys are doing them.

Yeah well done put words in my mouth why don't you.

I don't buy or play the yearly increment games.

NSMBU is the same as NSMBWii 2 which is the same as NSMBWii which is the same as NSMB for DS, they could almost be addon levels for the original game.

Anyway this is getting off the topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

To most people it seems rehashes and remakes are only bad when it's nintendo doing them. It's ok when the other guys are doing them.

I don't see that being the case for the most part, when people moan about yet another CoD or halo or something on the other two then someone will inevitably bring up Nintendo and all the Mario or Zelda games. To me it's all the same, if a series keeps selling they'll keep making more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

They won't though. They always code for the lowest common denominator, do you really think that gamers will be ok with one console having noticeably better graphics for multiplatform games?

[...]

That may be true for multiplatform titles but it'll show with exclusives. And even with the difference in memory, games may still look better on the PS4 (despite its memory limitations).

If the target of the next gen would end up being 1080p then memory bandwidth will be incredibly important. Think of a pc graphics card, and how adding more ram doesn't make it more powerful, how it doesn't suddenly make it capable of more than it could do with the amount it originally shipped with. The same will apply to the xbox 720/3/whateverthehellyouwannacallit. They can add as much ram as they like, but if the gpu isn't powerful enough to be able to make use of all the extra assets the extra ram would allow, or it's somewhat starved in bandwidth it wont make a difference.

Memory bandwidth isn't as important as pixel and texture fillrate. A good example is the Radeon HD 7970. It has less pixel and texture fillrate than the GeForce GTX 680 but more memory bandwidth (264 GB/s vs. 192 GB/s). Even with a difference of 72 GB/s, the GTX 680 slightly outperforms the HD 7970 at resolutions of 1680x1050 and 1920x1080. The only time this isn't the case, with most games, is at a resolution of 2560x1600 where the extra memory bandwidth helps.

With that said, Microsoft only needs a certain amount of memory bandwidth for 1080p. But with a difference of 124 GB/s, the PS4's GPU will definitely have an edge.

Specs are important actually. The low end specs of the current consoles lingering around as long as they have like a bad odor does is the reason why progress in gaming graphics has nearly screeched to a halt.

Agreed. There was a huge push for better graphics hardware and software back in 2004. It all ended when the current-gen consoles were released. Developers stuck to DX9 longer than they should have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

That may be true for multiplatform titles but it'll show with exclusives. And even with the difference in memory, games may still look better on the PS4 (despite its memory limitations).

I don't think it matters, exclusive games always take full advantage of the hardware as they don't have to dumb down for either console. They can probably hide the limitations.

What Naughty Dog did with Uncharted 3 with 256Mb RAM is amazing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

That is a bad thing. Super Mario Bros U looks more like a Facebook game or something you'd play in your browser for free; Wii Fit U looks barely any better than the original version; Nintendo Land has some interesting ideas but it barely looks current-gen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

That may be true for multiplatform titles but it'll show with exclusives. And even with the difference in memory, games may still look better on the PS4 (despite its memory limitations).

Memory bandwidth isn't as important as pixel and texture fillrate. A good example is the Radeon HD 7970. It has less pixel and texture fillrate than the GeForce GTX 680 but more memory bandwidth (264 GB/s vs. 192 GB/s). Even with a difference of 72 GB/s, the GTX 680 slightly outperforms the HD 7970 at resolutions of 1680x1050 and 1920x1080. The only time this isn't the case, with most games, is at a resolution of 2560x1600 where the extra memory bandwidth helps.

With that said, Microsoft only needs a certain amount of memory bandwidth for 1080p. But with a difference of 124 GB/s, the PS4's GPU will definitely have an edge.

Agreed. There was a huge push for better graphics hardware and software back in 2004. It all ended when the current-gen consoles were released. Developers stuck to DX9 longer than they should have.

Memory speed vs memory amount are pretty much intersecting graphs.

in this case, the nextbox has so much more memory, and the base speed of MS' memory is so high that the PS3 really has no advantage, outside of small games with very small levels and frequent loading screens. that are games that will frequent a LOT of ME1/2 style texture streaming technology, texture popping and LOD model popping, because that's awesome.

In general both have enough memory to handle awesome next gen graphics with no problem. But on larger games with large levels, the 360 has an edge. and lets face it. gaming isn't heading far small closed in levels anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

what does any of that have to do with NSMB not being awesome. so it doesn't have incredible photoreal graphics... umm it's MARIO!... and it's got awesome gameplay. it's a great gameplay, arguably the only great game you can only find on the WiiU atm.

The gameplay had been done to death and improved graphics are one of the main reasons people buy new consoles. The trouble is that NSMBU has bad graphics and doesn't compete with contemporary titles, like Rayman Legends. It really is a classic case of a rehash that achieves nothing.

I fully expect the nextbox to have a new Halo, and I fully expect the game to play almost exactly like Halo 4, which basically plays like Halo 3 and so on, just minor tweaks along the way, just like Mario.

And people rightly criticise those games as well, so I'm the last one to defend that sort of behaviour. However, at least each new Halo game pushes the envelope on graphics and art direction - they're offering some new for fans. The original Halo was groundbreaking but each successive game has been less relevant; it's the same with the Call Of Duty series since Modern Warfare. The real sequels are games like Far Cry 3, Crysis 3, The Witcher 2 and Batman: Arkham City - where they substantially improve upon the graphics, gameplay and direction of the previous games.

Personally I think the art direction of NSMBU is worse than that of NSMB for the Wii. It's very sterile, the animations are stiff, the colours very stark - it just doesn't sit well with me. Nintendo used to innovate, used to lead the market - now they're putting out one derivative title after another. Their games sell because of nostalgia, not

NSMBU:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ez3o5pZb15c

Rayman Legends:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

While RayMan seems interesting, it's not Super Mario.

And I actually play(ed) both of them on my WiiU.

Old gameplay or new gameplay, I play games for two reasons, because I like the gameplay, and/or because I like the story and setting.

With Mario I like th egameplay and settings, it's just fun and enjoyable as well as challenging, and they offer me new levels.

with Halo, I like the story, as well as the graphical style more than the gameplay.

in either case I don't want them to modernize and change the games. so many franchises have been ruined by changing, like the horrible MArio 3D games starting wht the N64 where everyone thought all games had to be 3D for no good reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I understand why some of you do but for me I don't care about the specs. I will look at how the games perform on each of them but I dare say they will be reasonably similar in which case it will come down to what else they do. I very much expect the next xbox is going to have some strong interconnectivity features with win8/wp8, as well as the potential of the next connect; both of which may seal the deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The gameplay had been done to death and improved graphics are one of the main reasons people buy new consoles. The trouble is that NSMBU has bad graphics and doesn't compete with contemporary titles, like Rayman Legends. It really is a classic case of a rehash that achieves nothing.

Personally I think the art direction of NSMBU is worse than that of NSMB for the Wii. It's very sterile, the animations are stiff, the colours very stark - it just doesn't sit well with me. Nintendo used to innovate, used to lead the market - now they're putting out one derivative title after another. Their games sell because of nostalgia, not

I really have to ask, have you seen it in person? SMB on the WiiU's graphics are awesome, and I'm not sure how anyone can say otherwise. My only guess is they are just watching YouTube videos of it and have never seen it in action. On my 55" TV it looks brilliant. It is still the same art direction the series is known for, but so much crisper. There is a HUGE difference between it and it's Wii counterpart. This difference is very noticeable when one plays one game then the other on the same TV. Besides, not sure what you expect? It is Mario. A complete departure stylistically would make zero sense.

Sure, Rayman looks better, but it also has a much more painterly style to it. I just cannot see how anyone who has actually seen it in person does not say SMB does not look the best it ever has on the WiiU??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Poor Mario, he's the most milked character in the history of video games. His nipples must be shrivelled.

Anywho, back to the topic at hand. What's the word about compatibility with current gen games?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.