Next Generation Games / Consoles.

[RayOxide]

Well, my other topic got locked because I didn't recognise there was a topic about it. :anxious:

 

 

 

Anyway, I wanted to say, what do you think is good about this generation of gaming, future generations, and past generations...

 

 

 

To me, past generation is very good. Back then, they didn't focus on graphics very much, meaning a better game in the gameplay statistic.

 

 

 

The future generation (In about 10-20 years) Will really only focus on graphics, and war-type games. The Sims won't go any better than The Sims 4/5. War games are everlasting, but not virtuallity games. Yet, this generation still focus on graphics more than anything. You'd see a game with great graphics, making you think it'd be good. You get home and waste around $70 AUD.

 

 

 

Although, I'd say the winner would be past generation games IMO. Mario took over the world, with the help of some other games, with the Sonic games.

 

 

 

Mario: I have to say, Mario took over the world in the 80's - 2000, but ever since I played the NEW Super Mario Bros. For Nintendo DS I worked out, they're destroying Mario! The old games may have lame graphics, but entertained for a long time.

 

 

 

Neverending Games: The Sims, and The Sims 2 (Etc) neverending games, such as then play such an important role in life, and games. The Sims series is the largest selling computer game series in history! Though these are neverending, they will stop soon enough, because only graphics would be updated. What I mean is, if we went into the future, about 30 years, The Sims would be near finished. Reason: Technology will stop us from making new things, and will stop The Sims from having updated furniture, etc.

 

 

 

War Games: All war-type games are usually rated M / MA15+ (Aus) but, in Australia, noone cares about ratings. Anyway, these would get old when you finish it. But, you'd want to play it again in about a week, like Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas.

 

 

 

So, While we're here, we may vote on Genres of games, consoles, etc. To me, the best genre of game is a singular war game. I mean; You don't have to look after anyone, you can shoot anyone, and anywhere.

 

 

 

Discussion open.

 

 

 

Mods, please don't lock >.> It took 20 mins to type this....>.<

[____]

Future of gaming lies within VR, first company to achieve that will essentially win the market. And despite what anyone else says... I highly back Nintendo to pull that off to some degree within the next 10 years.

 

 

 

 

 

As for what genre, meh. There will always be a place for every genre of game ;)

[Mercifull]

More casual gaming devices such as the Wii. Real pick up and play for half hour with your friends rather than the sit on your own in a dark room for hours on end type game.

[Karmastocracy]

If Microsoft incorperates motion control than I think Gaming will go down a different road entirely. However I think that gaming will follow the path that movies have done, good :thumbup: or bad. :thumbdown:

[Faux]

I want more games to have VAST interactive worlds especially for adventure type games.

 

 

 

Imagine Halo and the cliffs? Accidentally fell down while riding the Ghost? Why would you die? You're riding a floating vehicle! You should be able to find a way up.

 

 

 

See those buildings in GTA? I want to be able to go in and destroy some stuff

 

 

 

That's why I can't wait for Assassin's Creed to come

 

 

 

 

 

Making better games isn't just about how the players interact with the game (fancy controllers), it's also about how the game interacts with the player (better AI)

[Nadril]

In my opinion games are getting better as they evolve.

 

 

 

Go back and play some of the classics. Yes, they are great games and were great games of their time. However compare, say, the experience of Doom to that of Half life 2 -- the difference is massive. In doom you are simply running around killing guys. There is little plot and the most you do is collect key cards.

 

 

 

 

 

I am not saying it wasn't a brilliant game, it was. Its one of those games I could go back and play through as well, however half life 2 wins. Even if HL2 had the graphical capabilities of Doom it would still have much more to offer.

 

 

 

An actual storyline and plot, much more capable AI. Better, larger environments to roam around in. There is simply so much 'more' into the experience.

 

 

 

 

 

As technology improves so will games. 10 years ago voice acting in a game was shoddy, if not non existent, at best. As technology has improved we are now able to make these virtual worlds even more engrossing, voice actors playing out the parts of everything in a game. Instead of reading some text of what this person says you can hear it, you can hear the emotion and intent behind it.

 

 

 

 

 

Likewise more computing power means we can continue to create better and better physics engines, or AI, in our games. Look at Crysis -- you are able to knock down trees, buildings... the engine is amazing. Being able to absorb you so much more into the game is a great thing, not a bad one.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There are always bad apples. Yes there are many games with great graphics and piss-poor gameplay, but likewise it was the same exact way back in the day. I remember seeings tons upon tons of horrible games coming out for systems such as the NES/SNES/Genesis/Saturn/ect. Likewise I saw a lot of poor half-attempts of getting into the market on the PC.

 

 

 

 

 

Both ages have had their gems. Tell me, perhaps, what games do you see as iconic back then and now? I'm willing to bet its a fairly even number if not today having more 'big games'. If you talk about it in the same even time period you will probably come up with similar results.

 

 

 

 

 

Like rick said VR is the way of the future. As technology improves so will our ability to be able to further the experience of what a game can offer.

 

 

 

 

 

I also do think that more 'casual' games will come out, they always have. I love nice, large epic storylines and adventures but sometimes just kicking back in a game you can play for maybe an hour - hour and a half is good.

 

 

 

 

 

So yeah, I deffinitly see the future holding great things.

[TotalTalker]

Im pretty sure that the graphics will become better and better, and the gameplay will probably improve as well, since as that is one of the main aspects of a video game.

 

 

 

The technology wasnt as good 10 years ago as it is now, so the graphics wouldnt of been as good, but storylines, etc, didnt take much technology to think of, so were probably quite good back then (I cant really remember how the games were 10 years ago).

[tomdavies90]

If anything we need less games, we need companies to make less games, and put more effort in. Look at this year theres loads of great games coming out, bioshock, halo 3, matroid prime 3, mario galaxy, etc etc, but altogether there are only, what? 15-20, now add onto that number the other games that came out, probably 200-250? now why can't those games all be good, rather than ok, or rubbish, because not enough time was spent.

 

Teams need to realise that spending more time on games means better playing experiences.

 

We also need more different games like Shadow of the Colossus, bought it the other week and the strange gameplay style of only 16 enemies is fantastic. Being the kind of guy who likes smashing stuff and blowing things up I'm amazed at how brilliant such a simple game can be. Oh and when i say different i don't mean some crazy bizzare rave game or something.

[TotalTalker]

If anything we need less games, we need companies to make less games, and put more effort in. Look at this year theres loads of great games coming out, bioshock, halo 3, matroid prime 3, mario galaxy, etc etc, but altogether there are only, what? 15-20, now add onto that number the other games that came out, probably 200-250? now why can't those games all be good, rather than ok, or rubbish, because not enough time was spent.

 

Teams need to realise that spending more time on games means better playing experiences.

 

We also need more different games like Shadow of the Colossus, bought it the other week and the strange gameplay style of only 16 enemies is fantastic. Being the kind of guy who likes smashing stuff and blowing things up I'm amazed at how brilliant such a simple game can be. Oh and when i say different i don't mean some crazy bizzare rave game or something.

 

 

 

Yeh, but they are always thinkking of profit. Without profit a company would collapse.

 

 

 

What if they spent loads of time on a game, and they expected it to sell like mad so they get loads of money, and it doesnt sell?

 

 

 

These non-popular games are probably just to keep the business going.

[Mr_Putter]

I'm almost sure that we're just over the climax of game quality and are on a downward slope, though obviously it's a personal opinion. The 'golden age' I would say ranges from roughly 1997-2000, with a wealth of exceptional games up to about 2004. Games may be getting technically better, but it's just because of bigger budgets, bigger development teams, and better technology.

 

 

 

I think the game designers are less skilled now than they were just 5-10 years ago, as the gaming business becomes saturated with more and more game development teams. Plus, as people have noted, people are crunching out sub-par or even just mediocre games because the publishers are demanding it. The mistakes made now are made because of inadequate time and testing, and the games are mediocre because of the lack of ambition due to the risks involved. Old games show problems because of too much ambition! The games showed so much heart, and they seemed more like the developer sharing a vision than a ploy to get in your wallet.

 

 

 

But I don't dismay. Good games will still come out, especially from places like Blizzard. They seem to weld the polish and big-budget feel of most modern games with a genuine creativity that most devs don't seem to share. I will still play new video games, but at the rate we're headed, we're looking at only 3-4 great games a year as opposed to a dozen or more seen a few years ago.

 

 

 

Essentially, the video game business is turning into the music business. After MTV, it's become all show, with only a limited amount of musicians making quality music. But like the music business, this one also shares the fact that there's enough in the 'back catalogue' to satisfy someone like me for the rest of my life.

[cyco]

Physics will reel me in.

 

 

 

Like Crysis.

[Retefael]

If anything we need less games, we need companies to make less games, and put more effort in. Look at this year theres loads of great games coming out, bioshock, halo 3, matroid prime 3, mario galaxy, etc etc, but altogether there are only, what? 15-20, now add onto that number the other games that came out, probably 200-250? now why can't those games all be good, rather than ok, or rubbish, because not enough time was spent.

 

Teams need to realise that spending more time on games means better playing experiences.

 

We also need more different games like Shadow of the Colossus, bought it the other week and the strange gameplay style of only 16 enemies is fantastic. Being the kind of guy who likes smashing stuff and blowing things up I'm amazed at how brilliant such a simple game can be. Oh and when i say different i don't mean some crazy bizzare rave game or something.

 

 

 

 

 

I agree completely. I would definitely be willing to wait for games longer if it meant that they would be smoother, more playable, etc.

 

 

 

Current gen? Ps3 = Rip-off 360 = Sweet Wii = Sweet also

 

 

 

:twisted:

 

 

 

The future holds great things, if unknown completely. Me, I'm just fine with the present. :)