8th gen console speculation

[JFierce]

When it comes to games there's two routes you can go. Focus on Gameplay, or focus on Story. (or any mix of the two obviously) Visuals are the tool to mix those two together.

For instance Shadow of the Colossus at the time had gorgeous visuals. To the point exploring was fun just because it was pretty. But that's not what made the game good. A unique game system that was almost a puzzle in figuring out how to mount and kill these behemoths was. The visuals just helped to that end. But if the gameplay wasn't great the visuals would have meant squat.

On the other hand in the RPG genrethe focus is more on story, you can't make many RPG's good without an interesting story. The gameplay and visuals are what supplement that in how they attach you to the characters.



But once again games nowadays have to blow more of their budget on visuals just to keep up. They're slowly losing their core gameplay and story. It's one reason games have been dumbed down difficulty wise. Because they don't want to lose sales by making it too hard. I think I watched an interview sometime where basically they said they can't afford to put any intricate easter eggs like a hidden scene you see if you beat the game on a really really hard difficulty for instance because that scene would cost like 100+ thousand dollars to make which not all the people playing it would get to see. Where this was almost a standard in old games. Final Fantasy tactics there was so many hidden characters and scenes, little sidequests. But in a lot of modern games that sort of depth is gone it feels like to me. Why add optional shit or depth when its going to cost more. A good example of this is the Star Ocean series. Made by one of my favorite game companies Tri Ace but even they went downhill. Star Ocean 2. 180 endings, the largest amount of hidden characters with plenty of hidden sidequests to do with each of these characters. Many having nothing to do with the main story as you could go through the game 3-4 times and not know these characters exist unless you explore the world more. Star Ocean 3. Far fewer endings, even less characters and sidequests to give them depth, if I remember they all join you through story. Star Ocean 4. I think it had 9 total. No alternate characters at all. They just join you as part of the story, mandatory.


Games are dumbing down their content and complexity because they just can't budget it is how it feels to me.

[FightingSeraph]

Sometimes, it makes me yearn for another video game crash, but that would be too harsh.

[Psychotime]

Games are dumbing down their content and complexity because they just can't budget it is how it feels to me.

It also means they can milk more more with DLC content (followed by updated collectors editions). That's a thing that USED to be a good idea, but greedy asshats corrupted it once they realized the underhanded tricks they could do with it.

[Raoul Duke]

Jfierce- 180 endings is crazy. There's no way the story could be of any dynamic quality. Unless completing a glorified sidequest qualifies as an ending. It's hard enough to write one good ending. Your expecting an irrational standard. I think there could be a future for games with a giant story tree with story trees in the story tree on the iphone. It would require open ended development and dumbed down craftsmanship.

Believe me you want to play New Vegas. That game was too big for me and it only has 4 endings. There is no possible way any two people can play the game the same way. By accepting some missions you close off others. Same goes for Skyrim. I just gave up on that one after I took an arrow to the knee.

[JFierce]

lol missing the point. Not about games nowadays needing 180 endings. Star Ocean was an example of a Tri-Ace slowly declining in gameplay aspects due to the modern budget. 180 endings was based on the relations with the characters. Which played on a unique interactions system that only that game series had. These characters over here could end up with those over there, 2 could be paired, 3, etc. The overall combinations were 180 total on top of the main ending. Hell I've probably only gotten 30 of them tops. The games in the franchise after that said "naaaah fuck that lets do like.... 9". The company went from "Hey lets be unique" to "Lets make a standard J-RPG and take out all the choices and intricacies of the older games". I'm not expecting games to have 180 endings. I'm saying that's the kind of quality old games had. They didn't have to do these unique features. They just did it because it made good gameplay and broke the mold.

A large number of companies now don't want to take risks or work on being unique because they can't afford it. When games have budgets of 40-100 mil+ I'm guessing going outside of the formula is like gambling to them.


Hence why I hope little game studios break out and bring back what players like. Which they do occasionally. It's one of the reasons games like Demon and Dark Souls did well. Because they saw what players miss and they brought back the challenge and in depth gameplay.

[Raoul Duke]

I'll argue that games were always that skittish about new ideas and there are just as many original ideas as ever. Just the same as they've always had to arbitrarily cling onto sequels for brand recognition.

[JFierce]

Going to disagree. Mainly once again due to the development cost. Now in the gaming field it's basically two spectrums. Indie game, and AAA titles. Because it's too costly to do anything in between. Hell I remember reading it costs 40k just to release a single patch on Xbox. But back in the previous generations I think there was like 2.4k+ PSX games, 2k+ PS2 games (Though you could say it's because PSX was the main system out, but there was Sega Saturn and Dreamcast eventually which total was probably around 1.2-4k I'm guessing).

More people were just pumping out games. There were tons of random studios popping up with fresh perspectives. I remember going to game stores back in the day with a friend, he'd pick a random game off the shelf, so would I. Never even heard of them half the time. And there were so many gems. I go into gamestop nowadays and it's just AAA titles lining the wall. Occasionally a few games where I actually have to double take and see what it is because I've never heard of the game or franchise. But it's rare.




On another note good lord time flies I didn't even realize this generation has been around for about 7 years. Longest cycle too.

[Raoul Duke]

Fair 'nuff. Just give it a few years and there will be countless unity games flooding the market. You can count on it if that DRM rumor comes true. There won't be a choice.

[Raoul Duke]

[Velocity Kendall]

Anyone read Halting State by Charley Stross? Or For the Win by Cory Doctorow? They had some interesting ideas re near-term game developments.

[tobbA]

PS4 is rumored to be able to stream PS3 games in order to allow for backward compatibility. If this works well it sounds like a great idea. Might justify buying one for me, since I never had a PS3.

http://www.techradar.com/news/gaming...report-1131598

[ThabisoMhlaba]

Also you say everyone will have different feelings to a game's story but i'd argue that's exactly the same in any other media, although I do get where your coming from to an extent its harder to connect with the character.

Yeah I think what I meant to say is that its much easier to define the overarching narrative of other media than it is in a game. A romance movie is a romance movie, an action movie is an action movie, etc. The difficulty with games is how to mold gameplay to match whatever emotion you are trying to portray with the story. That's just because certain types of gameplay lend themselves to different narratives. God of War, Asura's Wrath have gameplay that perfectly matches their stories, violent and anger fueled. But try taking that same gameplay and infusing it with a character who has a much milder and soft personality, it creates a dissonance that confuses the players and thats simply because you can't control the way someone plays a game. with out limiting their freedom. That's why its hard to have a riveting mainquest in a sandbox game. The way I choose to play my Skyrim character doesn't match up at all with the mainquest so I end up doing the quests just as a way to progress the availability of certain gameplay aspects, the motivation is lost.

In anycase, I think we shouldn't give game companies such a hard time. We can't expect them all to produce top notch products in the limited amount of time they are given with so few resources and a constantly evolving environment. Whether that's tech, or the general interests of gamers. They have to stay profitable, and that means playing the safe bet most of the time.

[Raoul Duke]

I'm not a Halo fan, but this looks interesting. Really diggin the concepts. I'm sure the story is going to be a buncha fiddle fadlle. That's how bungie rolls.

[Psychotime]

God of War and Asura's Wrath have gameplay

Ok, now I know you're just making stuff up.

Asura's Wrath is entertaining, but I'd be hard pressed to call it a game. That's like calling Dragon's Lair or Space Ace "games".

[ThabisoMhlaba]

Ok, now I know you're just making stuff up.

Asura's Wrath is entertaining, but I'd be hard pressed to call it a game. That's like calling Dragon's Lair or Space Ace "games".

I don't see why Asura's Wrath can't be called a game. I played it and had a great time with it. Can you please elaborate? I'd say that it definitely wasn't as interactive as most action games are but I don't think that disqualifies it.

[JFierce]

I don't know how I feel about that controller. Looks kinda ugly to me. But it also looks like it might feel similar to a PSX controller which I liked.

[Psychotime]

I don't see why Asura's Wrath can't be called a game. I played it and had a great time with it. Can you please elaborate? I'd say that it definitely wasn't as interactive as most action games are but I don't think that disqualifies it.

Well I think it does.

The majority of the game is just cut scenes of really awesome over the top stuff happening, and the only game play are short quicktime button presses, simple rail shooters, and barebones brawler stages which do nothing but serve as inbetweens for the cutscenes. But the "game" isn't about any of the parts that ARE gameplay. Those are just there to remind you that you have a controller in your hand while all the insane stuff is going on.

But of course, you're free to disagree with me.

A game with really lengthy cutscenes doesn't disqualify it from being a game. Look at Metal Gear Solid 4. It did have very lengthy cutscenes, but the principal component of the game is still sneaking around, getting items, and fighting terrorists; and the cutscenes never detract from it.

Nothing's wrong with quicktime events. Dead Space and Resident Evil use them all the time in their cutscenes. But again, the principal gameplay is exploring a location, collecting items, and shooting monsters. Quicktime events are a bit of a shorthand, and while I can see some people disliking them on principle, I don't mind them at all, and I think they're used very well in Dead Space for the tense cutscenes, as well as when you need to recover from a monster grabbing onto you.

It's simplistic, but a second or two of frantic button mashing feels very appropriate anytime you're in a situation where you'll be saying "Oh god get it off me!" or "Don't let go of the arm rail! DON'T let go of the arm rail!"

Honestly, it's probably because it takes me back to how I'd do things in fighters or something like Pokemon as a kid, which I'm pretty sure most people (at least people my age) would do. Ended up getting grabbed by Zangeif? Mash buttons to get out of it. Does that really work? The reality is no (you get out of grabs by a timed button press right when they attempt, but can't after it's successful), but it FEELS like it. Just threw your last Ultra Ball at Lugia? Mash all the buttons! Does it really work? The reality is no (the outcome is decided right when you select the item through an algorithm), but it FEELS like it. And it's amusing to see an already enjoyable modern game decide to make that bit of silliness part of the action at times. Just as long as it doesn't go overboard.

Back on topic, with Asura's Wrath, the short points that resemble something of a game are clearly not the reason they wanted you to pop the disc into your console. Like Dragon's Lair or Space Ace, the real reason you "play" is to watch the cutscenes.

What the hell is that thing?

[tobbA]

What the hell is that thing?

It's just a prototype. Not the final design... But the glossy area in the middle is supposed to be touch sensitive.

[Raoul Duke]

I actually like the controller design on the right. It looks like they know what makes the playstation controllers comfortable and embellished a little.
Judging by the touchpad I think the ps3 is going to connect to the actual internet not just some store. So you can watch porn on your TV just like our forefathers. We'll find out tomorrow.

[Psychotime]

...I'm trying to imagine what kind of utility that would have, and I've got nothing. Unless that thing's also screen, then...Wait, even THEN I still wouldn't see a point! It's too damn small!

What's the point of putting a touch screen on a dual shock? Given it's size, it's not like it could have any more utility than just simple buttons.

[Raoul Duke]

Could be another way to play angry birds. Whenever I try a new innnnovatative controller I wind up hating it. So I hope it's just a pad because that would be practical. Touch screens aren't ready for anything practical and reliable. I just dropped $600 on a new smart pc to put 2 and 2 together.

[Deadlyhazard]

When it comes to games there's two routes you can go. Focus on Gameplay, or focus on Story. (or any mix of the two obviously) Visuals are the tool to mix those two together.

For instance Shadow of the Colossus at the time had gorgeous visuals. To the point exploring was fun just because it was pretty. But that's not what made the game good. A unique game system that was almost a puzzle in figuring out how to mount and kill these behemoths was. The visuals just helped to that end. But if the gameplay wasn't great the visuals would have meant squat.

On the other hand in the RPG genrethe focus is more on story, you can't make many RPG's good without an interesting story. The gameplay and visuals are what supplement that in how they attach you to the characters.



But once again games nowadays have to blow more of their budget on visuals just to keep up. They're slowly losing their core gameplay and story. It's one reason games have been dumbed down difficulty wise. Because they don't want to lose sales by making it too hard. I think I watched an interview sometime where basically they said they can't afford to put any intricate easter eggs like a hidden scene you see if you beat the game on a really really hard difficulty for instance because that scene would cost like 100+ thousand dollars to make which not all the people playing it would get to see. Where this was almost a standard in old games. Final Fantasy tactics there was so many hidden characters and scenes, little sidequests. But in a lot of modern games that sort of depth is gone it feels like to me. Why add optional shit or depth when its going to cost more. A good example of this is the Star Ocean series. Made by one of my favorite game companies Tri Ace but even they went downhill. Star Ocean 2. 180 endings, the largest amount of hidden characters with plenty of hidden sidequests to do with each of these characters. Many having nothing to do with the main story as you could go through the game 3-4 times and not know these characters exist unless you explore the world more. Star Ocean 3. Far fewer endings, even less characters and sidequests to give them depth, if I remember they all join you through story. Star Ocean 4. I think it had 9 total. No alternate characters at all. They just join you as part of the story, mandatory.


Games are dumbing down their content and complexity because they just can't budget it is how it feels to me.

This is why I really don't mind games trying to go back to 16-bit or whatever these days. Graphics can still be interesting at that level, but the best thing is you could make a bigger game easier and allow for more depth. I'd love to see a modern day Chrono Trigger or something, but we keep getting games with barely any depth D:.

[Raoul Duke]

I get it you guys just miss jrpgs. Those japanese developers went under because their market was limited to a small island. At face value they don't appear to have any sort of coherent storytelling, so they are impossible to market as a great story driven product. Plus humor is the hardest thing in the world to translate, so jokes fall flat. And a little humor goes a long way.

This is my personal opinion, but most jrpgs don't look like they're telling a deep story, they look like a fashion show at a gay pride parade.

[Psychotime]

This is my personal opinion, but most jrpgs don't look like they're telling a deep story

I love jrpgs, but I don't think most even do at all. Unless you call a competent DnD campaign a "deep story". Maybe I'm just misunderstanding the word, but most jrpg stories are just convoluted, not "deep". And given the slow type of gameplay they have, they NEED to be in order to keep the audience invested and interested. Now, there are a few games that some people INTERPRET as having depth (because religious imagery = deep, not because it's actually supposed to be saying something).

Want an example (of a convoluted jrpg story), look at Chrono Trigger. A mute kid in a small village meets a tomboyish girl at a festival celebrating the new millennium, where the genius neighbor reveals her newly invented teleportation device (fly not included). But when the tomboy enters the device, her pendant suddenly reacts and opens up a time warp to the middle ages.

After uncovering and defeating a hidden den of monsters, followed by a prison break; the mute, the tomboy (who turns out to be a rebellious princess), and the genius learn that far into in the future a huge cataclysm will occur that'll wipe out civilization and bring about mass starvation and desolation, and the group (now consisting of a cursed frog knight, a robot, and a cavewoman) travel through time to find and prevent whatever destroys the future.

But then it gets more convoluted when it's revealed that...yeah. You get stuff like advanced reptile humanoids with psychic powers that lord over dinosaurs and coexist with (and antagonize) primitive cavemen, ruined cities over run with mutants, and conceited magical monarchs who live in the a floating sky city during the ice age. And don't forget the recurring demon lord villain who decides to switch sides and join the team!

Granted, I've never heard a person ever pretend that Chrono Trigger is "deep". I think even the most hardcore jrpg fans would laugh at that, even if it is considered one of the best games of the genre.

Now I'll admit that with Final Fantasy X, for all the story's flaws, it's VERY obvious that the central plot is a satire of organized religion. It's not blatant, but it's not subtle either. That doesn't make the story "deep" in my eyes, let alone competent. But I'd be lying if I said that wasn't an element of that game.

[ThabisoMhlaba]

I get it you guys just miss jrpgs. Those japanese developers went under because their market was limited to a small island. At face value they don't appear to have any sort of coherent storytelling, so they are impossible to market as a great story driven product. Plus humor is the hardest thing in the world to translate, so jokes fall flat. And a little humor goes a long way.

This is my personal opinion, but most jrpgs don't look like they're telling a deep story, they look like a fashion show at a gay pride parade.

I think this is the same thing with anime for a lot of people where visual style gets in the way of the layman's experience. Most people I know who don't like JRPGs avoid them for reasons like that, or the quirky dialogue. But I'd say that once you're used to that a lot of them have very fun gameplay and interesting stories that you won't see out of the western rpgs.

Well I think it does.

The majority of the game is just cut scenes of really awesome over the top stuff happening, and the only game play are short quicktime button presses, simple rail shooters, and barebones brawler stages which do nothing but serve as inbetweens for the cutscenes. But the "game" isn't about any of the parts that ARE gameplay. Those are just there to remind you that you have a controller in your hand while all the insane stuff is going on.

I guess I quite liked the moments of gameplay. Also my experience with games is that I prefer them to be much more of an experience when it comes to a story-centric approach. You did mention MGS4, I was actually going to mention MGS3. Snake Eater had a portion that was 30min of cutscene, and even when I got back to the played aspects of it I forgot that I was playing a game. For me that whole game is top 3, On occasion, I'll watch all the cutscenes in sequence because I enjoyed it so much. I got a similar feeling with Asura's wrath, but not as expansive since it was such a short game. So I guess I'd only be willing to concede that Asura's Wrath isn't a game in the traditional sense, it leans more to interactive media.

[Raoul Duke]

Live coverage for anybody interested
http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/02/...n-event-on-ign

[Psychotime]

Ooh! Great timing!

Still have no idea what use a touch pad that small is.

Knack...looks kinda cheesy to me. I like how it's cartoony (heck, the guy said it's supposed to be a callback to PS1 games) but that doesn't make it look any less cheesy.

I really like the streaming live gameplay to your friends while playing and the recording (with trimming if needed). That's pretty cool.

And then it's got a Netflix style recommendation thing for your account based on the games you play. That might be a good idea or a bad idea, depending on how the account is used.

Digital titles are playable even when you're downloading? Huh?

So technically it has no backwards compatibility? Boo!

[iambanana]

It's official. The name of the PS4 is indeed, PS4. Thanks for the link Raoul.

EDIT: Is it just me or are they beating around the bush? Let's see the thing already. Let's see some insane physics and graphics demos.

EDIT 2: The IGN link stopped working for me, probably overloading their servers. You can also watch at http://bostinno.com/2013/02/20/ps4-e...9_271816_0__ss

[Psychotime]

Here come the Skynet jokes!

[Velocity Kendall]

i think the disc is scratched. its some northern fuck with a cubehead talking in three word bursts..