Next Gen ... is it worth it?

[elmuerte]

First of all, wtf is Next Gen? Games for the new generation of consoles. But that's is apperently a complete lie. Why? Because you hear a lot of people "complain" than Next Gen games are way to expensive to produce. The question is, what makes the games more expensive than the current gen(eration). The only thing I can thing of is graphics. The whole shi(f)t to "High Definition".

But if it's graphics that makes up next gen then a few of the new generation of consoles are not Next Gen: Nintendo Wii, Sony PSP, Nintendo DS. Or will games for the Wii be equally expensive to produce compared to gamecube games.

So we're back at the graphics... ofcourse we all know graphics make the game.</sarcasm>

Apperently it takes way more man hours to produce the graphic content of the next gen games, despite the better tools that have become available. Is it worth putting that much effort into creating high detailed graphic content if it doesn't have an effect on the actual gameplay. It drives up the production cost which is decrease the profit margin.

So in the end, is it worth it? I would say no.

[loonyboi]

Let me see if I can break this down...

Next-gen games cost more money mainly because they require much larger teams and more expensive middleware (and god help you if you don't license an engine). Yes, much of that has to do with the graphics, but that's not the only thing. Audio content has to be in 5.1 surround sound, which means it has to sound really, really good. Next-gen physics requires programmers who understand that sort of thing and so on.

PSP/DS are not generally referred to as next-gen consoles. They have been referred to as next-generation handheld consoles, however. PSP games tend to cost more than GBA games did because they more often than not are 3D. It's similar to the cost increase from SNES to PSX. DS games can be made for pennies, but if you want it to look nice and not dated, it will cost more than a GBA game. Still less than PSP (probably) but more than GBA.

Wii is something else entirely. It does require nice looking graphics, but mostly what you're paying for is a lengthy process of prototyping to make sure the game's actually fun. A game cannot be ported from PS3/360 to Wii without major changes. Wii teams are smaller, but the games do still cost more than say, a handheld game (for either platform).

Is it worth it?

I would say yes. Wii games will rock. 360 games will rock. PS3 games will rock. I like my games pretty. I also like them to sound awesome. Many PS2 games are really starting to show their age. Not ultra-stylized games of course, but your average PS2 game, with chunky textures and uneven framerate is looking a bit old. Given the choice between a PS2 and a 360 game, I don't see that as being a hard decision.

As for handheld games, I still buy the odd GBA game (FFIV is my current handheld game of choice), but the cool features of the DS make me feel like i'm only getting half the game when playing a GBA game on my DS Lite. PSP may not be the greatest gaming platform ever, but it still has some gems.

[miffy495]

I finally got a chance to play a 360 somewhere that wasn't an EB this weekend and I gotta say I was really impressed. The next gen to me is about the ideas that they're coming up with. Not so much from Sony's side at this point, but Ninty and MS are doing pretty well so far. I didn't consider how much of an impact the Live Marketplace would have on things, but after playing a bunch of co-op Gauntlet and vs Joust, demos of DOA4 and Chromehounds, and generally just messing around with the interface, it's really done a lot to change the way I look at the system. Sony doesn't seem to understand that version of "Next-gen" which is why I think the PS3 will be a total cock-up. From a Wii60 perspective, though, I'm now quite looking forward to the next/new generation.

[SiN]

I hate this whole "lets be cynical about the next generation" thing.

The "we don't need more power for games" is crap. GTA3+ would not have been possible with the PS1/N64 era of technology. All that fancy physics work going on with Half-Life 2 would not have been possible either. Even our precious Katamari Damacy wouldn't have been possible, both the CPU and GPU would have been inadequete.

The "graphics dont make games" argument is also not entirely true. For the most part, I agree with it. But a game like Shadow of the Colossus would not have been as amazing without the atmospheric graphics. Even the previously mentioned Katamari Damacy would not have been possible without the new video cards ... there'd simply be too many polys to render, even if they are pretty primitive.

However, despite this, I am a supporter of the Wii and I understand what Nintendo are saying about it. They're saying "we don't need more power for games", but that's only kind of true. Sure, great games can be made with current technology. But even more amazing stuff can be made with the extra power, as I illustrated above. Most games made with new tech end up being old_games + extra_shinyness, but there will be a few games that'll put this technology to good use. With the 360, we've already seen this with two games: Oblivion and Dead Rising.

And beside all of this, I think the real big feature of the next generation is online connectivity. For me, Xbox Live Arcade will be the "killer app" I get a 360 for. Geometry Wars, Street Fighter 2, Llamasofts new game, Castle Crashers, etc are the games I really want. And the fact that Microsoft are really pushing indys to work on XBLA ... I'd say this is going to be the greatest generation for innovative games.

I don't know about you, but the future is looking very bright to me.

SiN

[MrHoatzin]

It is not the extra power that I have a problem with, it is the accompanying need to use it all up which is driving up the cost of creating games exponentially and extending the production cycles. In addition to obvious increases in power and purtiness through the generations, we've always had a shift in the way games are controlled. Every subsequent controller from one generation to the next made for a more refined interaction with the game.

For a while it seemed that this wasn't gonna happen in this generation as 360's controller turned out to be the standard Xbox controller that's been slightly Playstation2ified and PS3's controller was for a long time a bananified Dual Shock and has recently started to reek of eleventh hour panic. If all that the next generation offers is the same shit we've had before only shinier, bloomier and with better lens flairs, we're kinda fucked. Hence, I am more excited about the Wii than I ever was by a console. being as I am a primarily PC-centric gamer.

[Marek]

This time around each console is doing something totally different, having unique features outside of CPU horsepower or game exclusives. (XBLA, Wiimote, Virtual Console, etc.) I think we're in for a great ride.

The 360 has already showed that the increased power is not just used to make games superficially prettier but to make them better as well. Dead Rising, with all those hundreds of zombies on the screen, would not have been possible. It is a perfect example of graphics and gameplay combining to form something new.

Yes, we're at a point graphics-wise where you can't just throw more polygons at it and expect people to be knocked off their chairs. But that doesn't mean the newer hardware unwelcome. Relatively more power can now be spent on better physics, facial animation, NPC crowds, unique shaders, etc.

So basically we're getting the usual overall bump graphics quality (a bit less of a bump this time due to good ol' diminishing returns) plus more power to allocate to other stuff plus unique console features.

In other words, your cynicism is SO last gen.

[elmuerte]

Ok, guess it didn't come out as well as I want it to be.

My point was not about the great new power that the next gen has to offer. My point was about a lot of industry people complaining next gen games are so expensive to create.

Or is it just PR to make people less bad for forking over more money for a next gen game?

[Oath]

Next Gen is always worth it. It might sound melodramatic, but the human race would be nowhere without the will to move forward, as would gaming.

Even if costs are ramping up both for consumers and developers, what we get in return during this coming generation and the generation after that makes it all worthwhile to me. Even if it seems like the jump from the current generation to the next isn't much more than a bit of spit and some polish, DOA4 would be a prime example of this, we'll be getting a few shining examples of why it's worth purchasing a next gen console.

And after that, we'll reap the benefits next time a generational shift rolls around, with the increased developer experience that they'll hopefully earn and perhaps that generation will be a bigger jump or a more progressive one. My point is that whatever happens, the industry's building towards that big leap. Besides, we're getting the Wii now, which to me is a fine example of what the will to progess can yield.

[toblix]

Maybe this is malapropos, but anyone play that Mardi Gras level in Hitman? I tumbled off my chair in amazement, almost.

[SpiderMonkey]

Just like any new generation, there will be a few studios who have the money and the talent to find genuinely worthwhile things to use the extra power for, and there will be studios who just make last generation's games with prettier graphics until those few studios have created some new blueprints for them to copy.

I'm actually glad that there's so much fuss being made in advance of this generational shift about the growing costs of production. Last generation I got the impression it caught a lot of people by surprise. A whole bunch of studios closures and a whole bunch of lost jobs could have been avoided with a bit of anticipation, it seems.

As for $60 games, I don't really care about whatever arguments they need to make. Gaming is already too expensive. No amount of "won't someone think of our balance sheet" is going to make me give over even more money for shorter experiences. £50 ($95 by today's rates) for a game is too expensive, and that's the publisher's problem to solve, not the consumer's.

[Wrestlevania]

The shift to in next-gen should be to new experiences; realistic crowds, more convincing character interactions, new gameplay models facilitated exclusively by new hardware (in the box or connected to it). Two of these three refer to graphics on an immediate level, but, through actual play, it becomes apparent that this is much more meaningful--you can't simply write this off as "higher resolution textures wrapped around more-detailed models."

People have already sighted an excellent example of a 'proper' next-gen game; namely Dead Rising. I'm shocked at just how much this game is bettered by its investment in next-gen technology (primarily the graphics).

I now have very high hopes for Assassin's Creed too.

[SpiderMonkey]

People have already sighted an excellent example of a 'proper' next-gen game; namely Dead Rising. I'm shocked at just how much this game is bettered by its investment in next-gen technology (primarily the graphics).

I've not played the game, so my opinion holds little weight, but still ... I struggle to consider a zombie game - AKA "we don't have to put any real effort into animation, character design or AI" - to be 'proper' next-gen design.

[Marek]

I struggle to consider a zombie game - AKA "we don't have to put any real effort into animation, character design or AI" - to be 'proper' next-gen design.

You might want to play the game then.

[Wrestlevania]

I've not played the game, so my opinion holds little weight, but still ... I struggle to consider a zombie game - AKA "we don't have to put any real effort into animation, character design or AI" - to be 'proper' next-gen design.

And you're quite right to be skeptical, too--so was I. It's in the implementation of sheer numbers that the game shines through.

Yes, you could reasonably argue the AI is cheap, so too the character rendering and animation. But it's in the breadth of possible interactions with these characters - and almost *everything* littering the sprawling and varied environment - that pushes the generational envelope into true next-gen. Couple hundreds of props (all of which can be used as impromptu "weapons"), decent enough physics, and hundreds of independent on-screen targets and things start to add up. Figure in the randomness of every encounter - and therefore every play - afforded by the extra storage and greater horsepower, and things start to look really promising.

Please try to play it if you can--I'm hoping you'll be as pleasantly surprised* as I was.

* Actually that's not strictly true: I had high hopes for the game from the very first time I read about it many months ago. But the automatic skeptic in me didn't want to be suckered in and expect much to come of it. It's the proof that this fear was ill-founded that's been the pleasant suprise--and that a games' company, touting a revolutionary game idea, have actually delivered exactly what they promised.

[loonyboi]

My point was not about the great new power that the next gen has to offer. My point was about a lot of industry people complaining next gen games are so expensive to create.

Or is it just PR to make people less bad for forking over more money for a next gen game?

Except that next gen games are really expensive to create. Games are expensive to create these days. Period.

It takes larger teams and much larger marketing budgets to make a AAA game.

Shader technology requires huge art assets. HUGE art assets. That takes a ton of people.

EA has games with several hundred engineers on it. That boggles the mind (and may not be a good thing...that's a bit extreme).

So yeah, if industry people complain that it costs more to make games now, they're not lying, and it's certainly not PR spin. It really, really does.

[BigJKO]

'Wii is the only true next-gen console'

American McGee talks.

[SpiderMonkey]

American McGee talks.

I'd be interested to know if McGee considers any of this fading generation of consoles to have been "next-gen" compared to their predecessors. "Video card and processor upgrades" and the exponential performance jumps are what "next-gen" is, and always has been (possibly SNES->Playstation aside).

[elmuerte]

Except that next gen games are really expensive to create. Games are expensive to create these days. Period.

Then they shouldn't complain about it. Apperently they are not happy about it, then either start to live with it or change it.