Next Gen Panel Discussion

Powderkeg said:
I think graphics and gameplay are equally important. Clearly it's the gameplay that makes a game great, but these are video games and your connection to the gameworld is via the graphics.

If gameplay alone was all it took we would all still be playing NES games, and when it comes to truly next-gen games, all games are judged by graphics first and foremost.

How many times have you heard someone complain "That doesn't look next-gen" or "It looks like a PC game"? Those complaints are lost sales, and graphics is the reason why.

I'm not sure I totally agree. Graphics are important, for sure. If a game looks like complete crap it will be hard to play. But, the graphics don't have to be cutting edge, just acceptable, and the gameplay will keep people playing. If you give someone a cutting edge game, that has horrible gameplay, they'll be bored once the tech-demo aspect wears off. Most games that people play over and over and over again have solid gameplay. I can't think of a single game that I've purchased just because of the graphics or played over again just because of the graphics. Graphics are just one small facet of a game along with control, sound, story, uniqueness etc.

I'm not sure why anyone is ripping on the Rev controller. It's pretty hard to pass any kind of judgement until there are some games. If people can't think of any really good uses for it, then it's a failure. If it offers good gameplay then it's a success. I'm interested in trying it, for sure. A lot of people I know are. You can't slam it for being a gimmick, because we haven't seen how people will be using it. Most games are gimmicks anyway. They copy 90% of another game, and then throw in a few new graphics tricks, a couple nifty moves you can do with your character and then tell you it's an entirely new game.
 
Scott_Arm said:
Most games that people play over and over and over again have solid gameplay. I can't think of a single game that I've purchased just because of the graphics or played over again just because of the graphics.
I know I've overlooked a game because of graphics, and I'm sure the majority of gamers have done similarly. When you're in a shop all you have to choose from what's on offer is a blurb that also says it's a great game, and screenshots. Perhaps it's an assumption that quality visuals mean effort has been put into the game = better game overall? Or maybe just because with nothing other than screenshots able to be put into the back of a box, it's the only way to choose unless you're a frequenter of gaming websites.
 
Nintendo's claim that the controller is going to help it reach a new massive audience is hard to believe. It's graphics that gets people excited about every new console generation. ATI and nVidia have soared in value due to the importance of graphics because consummers demand them. Mark Reins main point I thought was Nintendo's extreme focus on the controller, and Nintendo placing a lower value on having a CPU and GPU of comparable power.

To me right now, the Sony Eyetoy 2 information that was released a while back is very intresting. I won't be shocked if the PS3 gamepad in some way has the option to work a bit like the revolution controller, but with Eyetoy 2 in mind. If this turns out to be true, what is Nintendo going to claim that makes there system stand out?
 
Strange that no one has yet mentioned that Rein said that PS3 and Xbox360 are very comparable in power. Guess this got lost in the whole Revolution controller thing ...
 
hadareud said:
Strange that no one has yet mentioned that Rein said that PS3 and Xbox360 are very comparable in power. Guess this got lost in the whole Revolution controller thing ...

That's because most reasonable people expected that much.
 
Brimstone said:
To me right now, the Sony Eyetoy 2 information that was released a while back is very intresting. I won't be shocked if the PS3 gamepad in some way has the option to work a bit like the revolution controller, but with Eyetoy 2 in mind. If this turns out to be true, what is Nintendo going to claim that makes there system stand out?
Intersting idea. They could have the left side of the controller fluorescent green and the right side fluorescent orange for tilt sensitivity... :D
 
I might watch the video later to have a good laugh at Steve Ballmer.. er I mean Mark Rein. Until then though I'll say one thing. So its not hard to see why a big wig at one of the most uncreative and unimaginative developers around wouldn't be interested in the Rev controller. Especially since Mr Rein has never used the Rev controller..
 
Scott_Arm said:
I'm not sure I totally agree. Graphics are important, for sure. If a game looks like complete crap it will be hard to play. But, the graphics don't have to be cutting edge, just acceptable, and the gameplay will keep people playing. If you give someone a cutting edge game, that has horrible gameplay, they'll be bored once the tech-demo aspect wears off. Most games that people play over and over and over again have solid gameplay. I can't think of a single game that I've purchased just because of the graphics or played over again just because of the graphics. Graphics are just one small facet of a game along with control, sound, story, uniqueness etc.

Interesting comparison. A game can have acceptable graphics and be OK, but if it has horrible gameplay it will be bad.

What if it has horrible graphics? Not just mediocre, I'm talking just plain ugly. Would you still be interested? Would you buy Gran Turismo 5 with PSOne quality graphics?

What if it has fantastic graphics and acceptable gameplay? Madden on a next-gen console for instance. The gameplay really isn't any different, it's the graphics that makes it new.

The number of games with truly great gameplay is very very small. For the vast majority of simply "good" games, the gameplay will be acceptable, and the graphics will make or break the game in sales.

I can assure you Looking Glass Studios didn't shut down because their gameplay was lacking in an way. they shut down because their graphics weren't good enough.
 
Mark Rein may be a nice guy, but he's certainly full of shit on this one. He's pissed because Sony and Microsoft courted Epic to get the Unreal Engine 3 tech onto their systems - and to be fair, it's probably the best game engine out there for either next-gen platform right now - but Nintendo don't really care. Nintendo doing well is bad for Epic's business, so Mark has a vested interest in saying that they're shit. That's all there is to this.

Oh, and what was the last innovative game from Epic?
 
hadareud said:
Strange that no one has yet mentioned that Rein said that PS3 and Xbox360 are very comparable in power. Guess this got lost in the whole Revolution controller thing ...
I mentioned it. I believe that multi-console games will look alike and games like MGS4 and Halo 3 will look equally impressive.
 
hadareud said:
Strange that no one has yet mentioned that Rein said that PS3 and Xbox360 are very comparable in power. Guess this got lost in the whole Revolution controller thing ...

Notice how people who develop for both consoles tend to error on the side of "they are close the same amount of power", while developers who develop on one console tend to error on the side of "my console is more powerful than their console!"?

Nite_Hawk
 
Nite_Hawk said:
Notice how people who develop for both consoles tend to error on the side of "they are close the same amount of power", while developers who develop on one console tend to error on the side of "my console is more powerful than their console!"?

Nite_Hawk
The scientific term for this behavior is "Moneyhat-itis".
 
Powderkeg said:
Interesting comparison. A game can have acceptable graphics and be OK, but if it has horrible gameplay it will be bad.

What if it has horrible graphics? Not just mediocre, I'm talking just plain ugly. Would you still be interested? Would you buy Gran Turismo 5 with PSOne quality graphics?

What if it has fantastic graphics and acceptable gameplay? Madden on a next-gen console for instance. The gameplay really isn't any different, it's the graphics that makes it new.

The number of games with truly great gameplay is very very small. For the vast majority of simply "good" games, the gameplay will be acceptable, and the graphics will make or break the game in sales.

I can assure you Looking Glass Studios didn't shut down because their gameplay was lacking in an way. they shut down because their graphics weren't good enough.


Well, graphics cannot overcome a bad game. Good gameplay can overcome bad graphics, or sub-par graphics, at least. Tons of people jumped into the world of mmorpgs when the graphics were quite far behind other games on the market, because the gameplay was something new and exciting. Tons of people still play Tetris, which is in no way visually exciting. Tons of people use emulators to play old NES, SNES, arcade games on their PS2s, Xboxs or PCs because the games are good. You make a good point about box art for people that are window shopping. If all you have to judge the game by is the graphics, then you're probably going to pick the one that looks better. But, a lot of people buy games based on reviews or word of mouth, and games that are fun to play will always benefit from word of mouth. I've never had someone recommend that I buy a game to look at the graphics, even though it wasn't a very good game.
 
The problem these days is that a game with good graphics but bad gameplay will almost always sell much more than a game with bad graphics but good gameplay.
 
london-boy said:
The problem these days is that a game with good graphics but bad gameplay will almost always sell much more than a game with bad graphics but good gameplay.
Which pretty much ties to Mark Rein's comments on graphics being the most important aspect of a game.
 
I do find some holes in his logic though.

Like when he asks who owns a GameCube, and then refines it to who only owns a GameCube because the initial showing was too strong. Well - he makes the implication that the GameCube installed base is thus 10%, and developers are not going to target that - when in fact the installed base is much greater, and I think we can all agree that nobody bought the GameCube for the cross-console titles; they bought it for the exclusives.
 
xbdestroya said:
I do find some holes in his logic though.

Like when he asks who owns a GameCube, and then refines it to who only owns a GameCube because the initial showing was too strong. Well - he makes the implication that the GameCube installed base is thus 10%, and developers are not going to target that - when in fact the installed base is much greater, and I think we can all agree that nobody bought the GameCube for the cross-console titles; they bought it for the exclusives.

I think the intention was to show that, the GameCube by itself was the secondary console for most people, much the way the Rev is setting itself up to be; so as a developer, how much manpower do you want to dump into a console that has (using his numbers) 10% of that crowd that ONLY own the GC. Since that larger showing of hands must have owned an Xbox and/or PS2, you would naturally dev for those, because that larger number didn't even include those that own PS2/Xbox exclusively.
 
When you are in a show(that is targeted toward hardcore gamers) in US (where %27 of the ppl who have xboxes) saying stuff like nintendo missed the boat and rev controller is gimmick is somehow understandable, but could he say the same things if they were in japan or would the things he said make sense?(where xbox has %2-3 of market share)Graphics this, graphics that, blah blah....Okay so i got some questions for him: what is the best selling franchise on pc? Is it the most graphically advanced,most cinematic looking game? Nope It's the sims. How many copies of pokemon has been sold to this day?Tens of millions. How much money ms lost in 4 years with its xbox project ? 4 billion How much nintendo lost? None. Whats nintendo's current market share in console gaming(including handelds) % 40.How much is xbox's ?%22 of console market. How many units a non-traditional "game" like nintendogs sold in a months only in japan? 400.000.
 
Back
Top