PS4 NewsThey Love It Now, But Will Devs Love The PS4 In Five Years? - PS4 News

Members Login: Register | Why sign up? | Forgot Password?

They Love It Now, But Will Devs Love The PS4 In Five Years?

Okay, bear with me through this train of thought. I can only hope it's not a runaway.

Let's see if we can break it down into a simple, somewhat logical progression of events:

We've heard many developers, both first-party and third-party, say how much they love the PlayStation 4 hardware. The highly positive, immensely encouraging feedback must be very rewarding for Sony, because it's clear that they worked hard to produce a console that will be developer-friendly. This is in stark contrast to their usual approach, which is- produce a cutting-edge system that initially baffles developers; devs learn slowly, better-looking games continue to arrive; in the end, late-gen titles look much better than early titles for the same system.

However, although developers did get what they wanted, is there an obvious downside? The system isn't as forbidding, but does that not imply it doesn't have the same growth potential? "Hidden power" became a punch line, but it was always idiotic to laugh about it, because the graphical progression in every PlayStation generation was very, very significant. Hence, that "hidden power" was a very real thing; to this day, there are developers that say they didn't get everything out of the PS2. So, what if they get 90% out of the PS4 (or something like that) right off the bat?

Sure, good news for instant gratification purposes. But what happens in five years time when those same developers are suddenly bored with that hardware? Then what? Will they demand another piece of hardware? Game makers have been calling for a new Xbox for at least two years now, and that ties into my theory. The 360 was much more accessible when it launched but inevitably, there wasn't much left to tap into after four or five years. The PS3, on the other hand...well, as good as Resistance: Fall of Man was, look at the rest of that launch lineup and then look at The Last Of Us. See what I mean? Now, we can't possibly see this sort of progression with the PS4, can we? It doesn't seem like a logical assumption to make.

We can't, if developers are oh so familiar and comfortable before the system even arrives. So, what will the reaction be some years down the road...? And as a result, what will gamers see?

Tags: ps4, playstation 4, ps4 developers, game makers

8/18/2013 9:58:14 PM Ben Dutka

Put this on your webpage or blog:
Email this to a friend
Follow PSX Extreme on Twitter

Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on Google Share on MySpace Share on Delicious Share on Digg Share on Google Buzz Share via E-Mail Share via Tumblr Share via Posterous

Comments (53 posts)

MeXiCaNFiGhTe12
Sunday, August 18, 2013 @ 10:20:24 PM
Reply

Why wouldn't they? (NOT been a Fanboy)

Last edited by MeXiCaNFiGhTe12 on 8/18/2013 10:20:35 PM

Agree with this comment 4 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Sunday, August 18, 2013 @ 10:35:12 PM

Cuz of the reasons in the article?

Agree with this comment 2 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

LegendaryWolfeh
Tuesday, August 20, 2013 @ 9:30:21 PM

Every Developer Can Find A Way To Write And Create More Efficiently.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Sunday, August 18, 2013 @ 10:39:54 PM
Reply

I still think there will be steady progression from the first party studios. Cerny mentioned some extra power hidden in the architecture for devs that aren't hampered by the slowbox.

But since 3rd party exclusives died there's less reason to have all that hidden power and more to have it all accessible right away.

But these 3rd party devs get antsy these days, and they got bored with PS3 even though they never got near tapping it (Hello Ubisoft) so I think yeah they will be calling for a new generation long before it's time for one.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Axe99
Monday, August 19, 2013 @ 6:06:18 PM

Agree - there are some things in the PS4 with GPGPU that are relatively exotic that should keep the advances going, and give something for techies to get their teeth into.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

homura
Sunday, August 18, 2013 @ 10:44:16 PM
Reply

After 5 years,
EA, Ubisoft and Activision: I'm so happy. Games are more cheaper and less needed time to make which equals to more profit.

Naughty Dog, Quantic Dreams and Santa Monica: I'm bored. What else can we do with this hardware?

Agree with this comment 7 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

Ather
Sunday, August 18, 2013 @ 10:47:36 PM
Reply

If the developers want us to upgrade every 5 years, they've got to lower their prices, and convenience the console makers to lower prices too. It's getting to be around $750 to start off with: System, Plus/Gold, couple of games, extra controller. Plus talk of games hitting $80. In a time where money's tight, who are these people to demand such things?

So, systems better have more potential in them, because nobody's lowering prices anytime soon. If not, don't be surprised if PS5 and XBOX All 4 One due poorly by people saying no. And I only see Sony ever figuring this out. Maybe they'll follow Nintendo's lead with added power via an extention plug in, or such, but they'll have to come up with something cheap and new to keep developers interested and consumers buying. at the very least, this is a major factor for the PS5 if it's too late for the PS4 (sure hope not).

Agree with this comment 2 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Sunday, August 18, 2013 @ 11:23:13 PM

"In a time where money's tight, who are these people to demand such things?"

Nobody is demanding anything. If the market can't bear it, the products won't sell. If the products do sell, there is obviously enough money and interest.

Companies are not in business to give things away because "money is tight." Start doing that, and you get Socialism.

Agree with this comment 5 up, 5 down Disagree with this comment

Killa Tequilla
Sunday, August 18, 2013 @ 11:57:29 PM

I hate it when people say the same cliche cliche, "if you dot have money, then you shouldn't buy it in the first place". Who are you to deny greatness? From a business stand point, wouldn't it make more sense to sell a product to as much people as possible?

Agree with this comment 4 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

AcHiLLiA
Monday, August 19, 2013 @ 1:01:33 AM

Is there any mention that we will get a free one year of Plus right out of the box for the PS4?

Last edited by AcHiLLiA on 8/19/2013 1:02:33 AM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Killa Tequilla
Monday, August 19, 2013 @ 1:08:55 AM

I doubt it, maybe a month.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

xenris
Monday, August 19, 2013 @ 9:36:04 AM

Sadly Killa Tequilla business in the corporate sense is making a lot of money while spending the least amount of money. The more people they can get on board to buy their product the better the profits, but if they don't make profits they will find ways to make it either downsizing or milking tactics.

Which is why we saw so much DLC, and the addition of Micros this generation. We also saw publishers making sure they had a big game at least once a year but they tried to have one quarterly.

Its why Battlefield has a method of unlocking all the weapons from the start, its why we get map packs that used to be free(counterstrike, unreal tournament, DoDs, Tribes etc) back in the day.

These systems are not for the consumer or the gamer they are for the publishers shareholders because thats just how corporations work. Its why Steam can do what it does and give the deals it can give because its not a publicly traded company.

As for the price, well its not about deny someone greatness but I do think consoles should come with two controllers, and no game or one controller and one game. Nintendo always puts some sort of game with their system and even if its just Wii sports or whatever still it gives you something to play with.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Monday, August 19, 2013 @ 10:40:03 AM

All of that is meaningless, xenris. Utterly meaningless. If people don't BUY it, there are no PROFITS. Then companies can't charge what they charge. If they CAN and DO, it's YOUR fault for BUYING the products in the first place.

Nobody has a gun to your head. The sooner people figure that out, the sooner we can maybe get back to progress.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Monday, August 19, 2013 @ 10:44:21 AM

Reaganomics don't work.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Monday, August 19, 2013 @ 2:15:37 PM

Has nothing to do with it. There are basic tenets of a market economy and capitalism that don't change due to political affiliation.

If you want a different system, fine. But the bottom line is that the current system reflects the general capability of a populace. If the system begins to falter, it's only because that capability has waned.

Nobody at fault but the people. Nobody.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

xenris
Monday, August 19, 2013 @ 2:33:53 PM

No one is forcing you at gun point, but enough people are buying them at this price point that it is still profitable that was my point. They obviously want a million more people to get their console but as long as the profits are high enough they dont need it, until they company isn't seeing quarterly growth in which they then downsize, or try to add hidden fees to lure in the lowest common denominator which tend to be easily swayed into buying things that are low cost for them high profits like PS+, micros, dlc etc.

Your last line is that a joke though? I have no idea how it fits in with anything anyone is saying here. If anything has stifled progress it is big business getting its hands on gaming, not people who have a problem with DLC and micros.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Monday, August 19, 2013 @ 4:34:17 PM

You're wrong, xenris. "Big business" didn't do anything. The people turned gaming into big business by buying more games. The people bought Call of Duty in droves, which resulted in a clear demand that developers and publishers tried to take advantage of. The people buy that DLC.

This is very, very simple. If the consumer doesn't buy, the product doesn't sell. If the product doesn't sell, the company goes out of business. That's it. It is not the responsibility of the company or the government to take care of the "easily swayed" lowest common denominator. That is nobody's responsibility but their own.

Business in a market economy does not function when we force it to be "socially responsible." Then it's not business. It's welfare. It's not capitalism. It's socialism. It's not progress; it's telling people it's okay to be idiots because we'll protect them from the big bad bullies of business. Doesn't work, my friend...never has, never will.

Last edited by Ben Dutka PSXE on 8/19/2013 4:36:20 PM

Agree with this comment 4 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Ultima
Tuesday, August 20, 2013 @ 10:41:09 AM

I probably should let this go. But I can't.

From Ben:

> This is very, very simple. If the consumer doesn't buy, the product doesn't sell. If the product doesn't sell, the company goes out of business. That's it. It is not the responsibility of the company or the government to take care of the "easily swayed" lowest common denominator. That is nobody's responsibility but their own.

> Business in a market economy does not function when we force it to be "socially responsible." Then it's not business. It's welfare. It's not capitalism. It's socialism. It's not progress; it's telling people it's okay to be idiots because we'll protect them from the big bad bullies of business. Doesn't work, my friend...never has, never will.

The first statement might be true in theory, but it doesn't have much bearing on reality when corporations are free to use their power and might to influence things in their favour such that the 'lowest common denominator" has no real chance of redress. Geography also plays a role. See also: The mini-monopolies in cable and internet in the US.

The second statement is just flat out horseshit wrong. Too many examples to list, but if you corporations weren't forced to be "socially responsible" (to the limited extent that they are, which is a lot less than it used to be), we would all still be using lead paint, have insecticides using DDT, asbestos would still be in widespread use, and pretty much every other environmental safeguard currently in use would not exist.

These two statements show that you either a) don't live in the real world and/or b) don't give a crap about said real world. Which is it?

BTW, you don't know the meaning of the term "socialism". Please stop using that term until you learn what it means, kthxbye.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

xenris
Tuesday, August 20, 2013 @ 6:33:40 PM

I'm glad Ultima said something because your last comment Ben left me in awe. Awe that you have no idea how the real world works, no idea of all the tricks that go into marketing, tricks that you as someone who has an alleged psychology degree should be able to see.

I couldn't have said it better than ultima so I wont add to much anything because there is soooo so so much we can get into about why big business is terrible, show several places in our history where it caused huge problems etc. I mean there isn't enough space here.

I guess Ben is on board with McDonalds being socially irresponsible telling people they could eat a balanced diet if they only ate McDonalds which Super Size me proved false and many other peoples anecdotal evidence, and you are okay with it bullying other local restaurants out of business because of marketing dominance and brand recognition?

You are okay with Wal-Mart and its tactics using slave labor from other countries and putting local stores out of business too because they can always lower the prices more? You were okay with Bell Canada having a monopoly on the cable and phone lines until the government stepped in and stopped it from getting out of hand and price gouging because there was no competition? Because hey its capitalism and its fair game right.


Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

bigrailer19
Sunday, August 18, 2013 @ 10:51:42 PM
Reply

All the developer still seem happy with the Xbox 360 regardless of its lack of anything groundbreaking recently. I think its more of a question will consumers be happy if for instance the PS4 or any next gen console has a metaphorical graphical wall?

Developers are otching for the next generation but I think its more because we know they are coming. Its that exciting moment when you work with something new and see the differences and what you can achieve. Otherwise I dont see this as an issue for developers. Only consumers.

However I dont see this being an issue. Honestly it sounds to me like the potential is almost limitless given the hardware, at the point where we are now with technology.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Sunday, August 18, 2013 @ 11:03:56 PM

Many were harping on Sony and MS even 2 years ago.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

bigrailer19
Sunday, August 18, 2013 @ 11:27:26 PM

Yeah thats why I noted that a lot of developers are anxious for the next generation. But none of the developers are going out of their way saying "the xbox and PS3 have hit a wall". Its just not happening like we are presuming with this conversation. In fact most developers (mostly first party studios) are saying this generation isnt quite over, nor ready to be.

I believe I read somewhere that consumers are forcing the next generation to come sooner than it needs to. Which relates to my next point, which is this will be more of a consumer problem than a developer problem if it happens. I personally don't think it will.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Gabriel013
Monday, August 19, 2013 @ 2:40:58 AM

I haven't seen anything online to suggest this new console generation was being brought on by the consumers rather than the developers/publishers.

If the Pubs/Devs made an assumption because sales are slightly down then that's due to a general lack of money not a genera boredom of the current generation.

If there were a 100 titles out there the quality of TLoU then maybe gamers would be bored.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

bigrailer19
Monday, August 19, 2013 @ 8:51:20 AM

Yeah its probably 50/50 maybe even heavily weighted more for the developers. Im not suggesting this generation is ending now because of consumers., im saying there are developers making claims against the idea that current consoles have hit a wall.

As far as boredom and sales, im not sure if either is playing a significant role either way. Theres still plenty of good titles being released.

Last edited by bigrailer19 on 8/19/2013 8:53:36 AM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

EndZero
Sunday, August 18, 2013 @ 11:18:13 PM
Reply

Some 3rd party devs are just lazy, some aren't as talented as others, and some really can't afford to invest into optimizing for a specific console.

The PS4 doesn't have much hidden power, it all is just gonna depend how efficient devs can be.

This is what Sony went for. Cerny even mentioned that they could have used a better Cell, or eRAM but went with the easy route for the sake of 3rd party devs.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

RobN
Sunday, August 18, 2013 @ 11:19:23 PM
Reply

How close are we to the point where upgrades are smaller and smaller incremental improvements? Brave had a lot more realism in it than Toy Story, and that was really cool - but between Brave and whatever's next, how big a difference is there going to be? And how much extra horsepower is needed for increasingly tiny improvements?

Yes, I'm sure in 5 years time, there will be developers comparing the PS4 and XB1 to budget PCs and complaining that there just isn't enough power there to do what they want - but will we still care about the cool new thing they're trying to do? Or are we approaching the "good enough" stage, where it's harder to make serious improvements that change the immersion level?

I'm just skeptical that more and more horsepower is necessarily the critical thing people think it is. Maybe I'm too pessimistic, but I think we're nearing the stage where each tiny improvements dramatically increases the cost.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

sirbob6
Monday, August 19, 2013 @ 1:22:45 AM

There's still plenty of room to grow, especially when ray tracing becomes viable for gaming. There is also still a tremendous amount of growth that can be done with the size of game, their scope, AI and many other things that will depend greatly on hardware and will impact immersion.

Oh, and there was actually a nice jump between Brave and Monsters University due to Pixar moving from point base rendering to physically based lighting and shading models.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Masszt3r
Sunday, August 18, 2013 @ 11:25:05 PM
Reply

I actually feared this ever since they mentioned the developer-friendly nature of the PS4. One of the (many) reasons I loved the PS3 was precisely that: its difficult hardware. This made first-party developers really sweat and tap into power. The result? GOW3, TLOU, U2, MGS4, etc. Then again, talented developers will always be talented, hopefully.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

PC_Max
Sunday, August 18, 2013 @ 11:51:06 PM
Reply

Well, I expect them to whine and complain in 5 years about the limitations of the hardware. Not sure much the first party debs but the others working on multi plats.

What I think it will come down to is, yes, they know whats under the hood now. They will utilize all the resources.Now.... what the challenge will be for the devs is with the hardware they have and know and love... if they are going to push that hardware or maybe just efficiently use it will mean THEY will have to start coding differently or approaching their coding differently. Maybe new and better engines, etc. Its all up to them.

So if we start hearing their whining again and only in a few years... then its just a bunch of little kids getting bored with their new toys so soon after Santa gave it to them. Spolied. Maybe we are too. But don't we just love them for it. I mean we have to.

Keep playing!

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

godsman
Sunday, August 18, 2013 @ 11:51:42 PM
Reply

Well supposedly PS4 is much more powerful than PS3. If we're happy with Uncharted 3, are we going to be disappointed if it's uncharted 3.5? i dont think so.

In fact the market is going in a trend of Westernizing. The western development teams are far greater than the Japanese. The PS4 architecture is more friendly and approachable. This might be a beginning of JRPG return. Im sure Ben would be happy if it's true.

If PS4 is really doing well, we might see a return to 3rd party exclusivity in PS5. (crossing fingers)


Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

___________
Monday, August 19, 2013 @ 6:42:41 AM

of course people are going to be disappointed with a uncharted 3.5!
well i dunno about you, but i dont go blow 550+ bucks on a new system, which is suppose to be significantly more powerful, to just get a slight improvement!

Agree with this comment 2 up, 3 down Disagree with this comment

Killa Tequilla
Sunday, August 18, 2013 @ 11:53:20 PM
Reply

This is exactly was TheHighlander was trying to explain to all of you guys. But you guys did something and now he's gone. He was right all along.

Agree with this comment 8 up, 3 down Disagree with this comment

AcHiLLiA
Monday, August 19, 2013 @ 12:54:39 AM

Yah he did have some valid points.

"But you guys did something and now he's gone."

I don't understand what you mean by that.

Last edited by AcHiLLiA on 8/19/2013 12:55:10 AM

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Killa Tequilla
Monday, August 19, 2013 @ 1:10:33 AM

I don't either, he just disappeared out of nowhere because everyone was disagreeing with him.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

xenris
Monday, August 19, 2013 @ 9:43:18 AM

It wasn't from that I dont think, I remember him leaving because people wanted him to play Ni No Kuni but he wouldn't because he was boycotting Namcobandai.

Everyone said you would like it just get it used or something and he stubbornly refused. We told him there would be no DLC for NNK and he just got mad at everyone. I even think someone offered to buy it for him.

To make matters worse he then trashed the game without having played it, calling the writing cheesy, and saying the game was for kiddies. When he was called out on it he couldn't handle the backlash I guess.

He came back for the PS4 debate and maybe something there pissed him off too. All I know is he is way too emotional for his own good if he can't handle criticism in a comment section.

Agree with this comment 7 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Gabriel013
Monday, August 19, 2013 @ 2:45:58 AM
Reply

This is something I've said all along. If games look more or less the same then gamers will start to get bored as the most clear cut way of viewing advancement is improved graphics for the cassual gamer and that's the big market.

Many on here will care that GTA6 has a more diverse and realistic AI and "living" environment than GTA5 because of a better understanding of the hardware BUT Joe Public might just see a game graphically the same as the previous title and think Meh..
That said, the COD releases don't look that dissimilar to it's direct predecessor and the casuals buy those by the lorry load so maybe I'm wrong.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Beamboom
Monday, August 19, 2013 @ 3:56:02 AM
Reply

No developer will all of a sudden dislike familiar hardware. But they do hate limitations.

There's plenty on the PS4 for the developers to get familiar with now. They know the basic architecture and that means they can jump right into working on the possibilities.

There are no game made yet built for a 64bit 8 core system with 5-6gb gddr5 available RAM. It has never yet happened. No, not even PC exclusives.

PC games are forced to be able to run on the minimum spec for that game, and that means no 64bit code, no multi-core processing (or at best two core - never eight) and much less available memory.

So now developers can finally unleash the potential of modern day technology... And that'll be years of joy ahead on the consoles, while they still have to struggle with the 32bit OS versions on the PC side.

Last edited by Beamboom on 8/19/2013 4:01:08 AM

Agree with this comment 6 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

sirbob6
Monday, August 19, 2013 @ 2:32:36 PM

Actually, Crysis 3 used all available cores on PC, meaning if you had a FX-8350/8320 it'd use all eight cores and if you had a Titan you had 6Gb of DDR5. In addition, quite a few games do use multiple cores.

But yeah, you're right overall, PC is never really optimized due to the magnitude of different set ups clock speeds, architectures and various other problems consoles do not worry about. (Crysis 3 for example was terribly optimized and cut DX 11 features out of half the levels due to hardware restraints) In that regard, the PS4 should be able to pump out really good performance that scales well over the years as devs figure out how to optimize, especially with the good hardware it has right now.

Agree with this comment 4 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Temjin001
Monday, August 19, 2013 @ 5:56:11 PM

PS2 had a 128-bit cpu!
PC still hasn't even caught up to that!

PC = crap!!!




Last edited by Temjin001 on 8/19/2013 5:56:35 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

amonte64
Monday, August 19, 2013 @ 4:20:27 AM
Reply

The only game devs I've seen say they want new hardware are the biggest, corporate ones. What's funny is that their games have been that great and some have sucked, and they didn't even max out the console so it doesn't make sense why they want new hardware. But a gamer said this and it makes perfect sense: The only companies saying they want new hardware are the richest ones, and they always want the hardware to be better and as soon as possible because only they will be able to make games for it, smaller companies won't be able to or if they do, they still have chance of going out of business. So, the richest ones want that so they will have less and less competition.

It made me think too, the hardware doesn't have to be super duper, there are so many games that are don't require super hardware and are better than most games that do require super hardware.

EDIT: With less powerful hardware, devs would actually have to make the game amazing and not cheat by going with super graphics, super cutscenes or super set pieces. And it's true, almost no game right now has replay value or is a game you would always want to play for years to come, the games that are like that are the games that came before the 7th gen.

Last edited by amonte64 on 8/19/2013 4:22:05 AM

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

___________
Monday, August 19, 2013 @ 6:41:16 AM
Reply

the ps4 may be your basic x86 architecture but that does not mean there wont be progressive improvements in games like weve seen the ps3.
as mark has said over and over again there are technologies built into the system, like GPU compute, which they can expand and build upon in FW updates to try expand and unlock extra potential.
for 2 years after launch ps4 games are not going to be much of a leap over ps3 games simply because 1 there running on old ps3 engines, and two developers are not going to bother coding specifically for the GPU.
you have to remember next gen consoles, and PCs today, are HEAVILY reliant on the GPU which is the complete opposite of what were use to.
developers are not going to be coding that way till they see it worthwhile, which wont be for a while.

so i gotta say yea they will always love it.
yea its not as powerful as it could have been if they stuck with cell, but they have managed to give developers what they want while still managing to hold onto at least some of the hidden potential magic that the family holds so dear.
no where near as much as what the ps1,2,3 had, but its still there.

in the end you have to think of this as a win win.
1 will be getting games at a MUCH faster rate.
2 the games will be far better because developers can spend their time making the game, not learning the ins and outs of the hardware.
3 hopefully budgets will come down, team sizes will come down, so hopefully this will mean more risks on unexplored genres and risky ambitious ideas.
and 4 the biggest one, this helps PC SOOOOOOOOOOOOO much more than it does consoles!
PC has been held back for years simply because of consoles.
now consoles are very much built like a high end PC, no they dont have the raw TFLOP numbers, but architecturally, 8GBs of FAST memory, a high emphasis on GPU rather than CPU, 64bit OS, multithreading on 8 cores.
PC games have been confined to 32bit OS for FAR too long, now consoles are switching that this means games will finally be optimized for 6+ cores, and highly optimized for larger more faster memory.
win for consoles, win for PC, win for everybody!


Last edited by ___________ on 8/19/2013 6:49:40 AM

Agree with this comment 6 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Draguss
Monday, August 19, 2013 @ 7:38:53 AM
Reply

Would it be too much to hope that when they get stuck with consoles they can't push further on a technical level, they start pushing in other ways? Like narrative, level design, atmosphere, etc. Still not enough devs bothering with that.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

FatherSun
Monday, August 19, 2013 @ 9:03:17 AM

Took the words right out of my mouth!

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

shadowscorpio
Monday, August 19, 2013 @ 11:02:17 PM

Second that .

Don't understand why they couldn't do it this gen.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

FatherSun
Monday, August 19, 2013 @ 9:13:07 AM
Reply

If all the power is available developers can concentrate more on the things that matter most. Make me care, make me confused, get me lost in another world, another dimension, another reality. When this current gen started my oldest son said it best. "All games can be pretty now. Doesn't mean they are any good".

I think making it easier to access the PS4s power will allow good storytelling to flourish. Maybe some of those developers that have wonderful ideas simply could not get past the technical puzzle that existed before. I believe that is what Sony hopes to accomplish this generation. Remove the obstacles and get right to the point in creating the best interactive experiences.

I understand the concerns but really, does anyone think that Naughty Dog is going to make a shit game this gen? If they max out the power of the machine they will blow us away with story and immersion.



Last edited by FatherSun on 8/19/2013 9:14:37 AM

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

xenris
Monday, August 19, 2013 @ 9:49:51 AM
Reply

I agree with FatherSun and Dragus 100% If they max out what they can do graphically and get "bored" quicker that will maybe give them time to focus on creative new gameplay ideas.

I used minecraft as an example of what AAA devs are not trying to do and what I want to see more of this generation.

Minecraft used an old engine, and low poly graphics to be able to acheive the sandbox world that it did. Now to make that game look great and be HD would have been way harder and the gameplay would have had to been sacraficed.

I often wonder if first party devs for Sony were told to make a low polygon high definition game that had the poly count of a game from say the PS1 or PS2 but on the PS3, what kind of awesome stuff could they do with all the processing power they had left?

I actually wish I could call Sony and have them hold a competition with all their first party devs, to make a low polygon game that was HD on the PS3 and see what kind of stuff they could do to with all that processing power left over.

Sadly graphics>everything else apparently :(

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Temjin001
Monday, August 19, 2013 @ 10:25:01 AM
Reply

at this point, I think it's likely creativity is the only biggest limiting factor going forward.
When I think of individual roles in game development I cant think of practically any role feeling that they can't produce to the extents of their abilities on the hardware coming forward. Perhaps there's that techincally driven graphics programming guy admist dozens who wish they could have some sort of massive computational advancements from time to time.

I say the corporate cashcow milk machine is the quickest thing devs will get bored of. I can't imagine how guys who have worked something like CoD year in and year out, producing the same sort of stuff again and again for nearly a decade, would be excited about doing more of that for another 8 years before wanting to find another creative team to move on to.

Last edited by Temjin001 on 8/19/2013 10:26:18 AM

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Temjin001
Monday, August 19, 2013 @ 10:47:56 AM

Nolan North: I decided to stop voice acting video games because the PS4 ran out of hidden processing power too early.

Austin Wintory: I just can't compose music on such boring hardware.

Awesome artist lead: I can't paint anymore knowing that the PS4 has been tapped out for two years now.

Playtester: I can't spot bugs or take your money anymore because the PS4 feels boring now. Suppose it's back to Burger King.

Writer: Yah, I just can't write these scripts anymore knowing that the PS4 has been tapped.

Animator: So bored of moving my characters all lifelike. Goodbye

Modeler: I just can't make these hyper realistic characters anymore. I'm tapped.

=p


Last edited by Temjin001 on 8/19/2013 10:48:29 AM

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Ultima
Monday, August 19, 2013 @ 10:55:33 AM
Reply

THere is a false assumption in this article. Namely, that "ease of access" = "hit limitation sooner", which translates into not as impressive games down the line. I don't see why this is necessarily true.

I'm no hardware expert, but I would assume that the real depth of hardware isn't determined by how hard it is to use it. I would think that it depends on the hardware.

People keep forgetting, but the PS1 - y'know, the machine that put Sony on the map? - was the -easiest- system to program in its time. Yet compare the games made in 1995 to, say, Vagrant Story. It's almost like a generational jump. Pretty much what we saw on the PS2 and PS3, but -without- the hardware complexity. Why can't the PS4 do something similar? Just because it's running on non-exotic hardware, doesn't mean that it will -necessarily- get tapped out sooner.

And even if it does, what does "sooner" mean? 5 years instead of 8? If more games in the PS3's library could look like The Last of Us, and could have done so since 2010, is this somehow a -bad- thing?

Frankly, I find this whole topic to be speculative nonsense. Who really cares if programmers get bored with the hardware in 5 years? I think it's more important that the programmers like the system at the *start* of a generation than in the middle or nearer the end.


Agree with this comment 4 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Temjin001
Monday, August 19, 2013 @ 2:02:41 PM

I could name well over two dozen games post Gears of War 2 and Red Faction Guerilla (two games where 'maxing out' the 360 was touted) that show that there's a whole ton more involved in great games other than firing hardware on all cylinders.

The ease of the PS4 has everything to do with driving a car with comfortable features. The days of having to work with 'exotica' or 'alien' hardware is gone. No developer wants it for a reason.
We're way passed technology that significantly hinders creative vision.
I say, any woes of the coming gen will be wrought over other aspects of the industry and not the limitations of technology.

Last edited by Temjin001 on 8/19/2013 2:03:26 PM

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

FatherSun
Monday, August 19, 2013 @ 3:32:34 PM

I have thought of this 5 instead of 8 year concept. What is to keep Sony from "upgrading" the PS4 in 5 years? And why would we NOT want it? Mobile upgrades every year nowadays. Why not a console? Any thoughts?

"I say, any woes of the coming gen will be wrought over other aspects of the industry and not the limitations of technology".

On the same level of what I was just thinking. Soon it will only be a matter of knowing and anticipating what the consumer needs and wants versus the actual ability to deliver a quality product. Only the extraordinary "SERVICES" will excel.

Technology will soon be so powerful that it will seemingly disappear. Do you believe in magic?

Last edited by FatherSun on 8/19/2013 3:38:11 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Temjin001
Monday, August 19, 2013 @ 5:03:05 PM

I'm pretty certain the XboxOne has been designed with hardware upgrades in mind while maintaining complete backwards compatibility. If I'm not mistaken, gamesutra commented that the software powering the XboxOne is housed within a virtual machine, allowing for cellphone-like upgrades whenever needed on the hardware end.
I don't know what's been said about PS4 regarding this.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

PlatformGamerNZ
Tuesday, August 20, 2013 @ 9:57:37 PM
Reply

i think it might be possible but i hope the same will happen and the games will get better bit by bit.

happy gaming =)

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Leave a Comment

Please login or register to leave a comment.

Our Poll

Did Advanced Warfare save Call of Duty?
Yes, CoD is back on track!
Possibly; it was a positive step.
The jury's still out...
No, CoD is still doomed.

Previous Poll Results