Now that we are almost to the historical halfway point of the current generation of consoles, Many gamers will wonder what's in store for the next generation. To get a better idea of what the future may hold, we can start by taking a look backward. Phase two of the Wii is where I believe Nintendo will truly dominate. The Wii 2 will probably be released in 2010. Nintendo can use 5 year old technology, which will be pretty cheap to produce by then, in the new system. What they will end up with is an updated Wii, with PS3/XBOX 360 quality graphics running at 1080p high definition. By using older and cheaper, but still powerful, processors, Nintendo can probably deliver the Wii 2 for around $200-$300. They will already have at least four years of experience in motion sensing games under their belts, while Microsoft and Sony will be playing catch-up if they decide to, and I believe they will have no choice but to, build new consoles around motion sensing technology. In this future scenario, multi-platform games will most likely be developed for the Wii 2 first, then ported to the other systems, which will alleviate one of the current Wii’s Achilles’ heels. Also, casual gamers will be less likely to be burned by bad games in the future because the current Wii market will have made them wiser video game consumers. So, am I predicting doom and gloom for Sony and Microsoft? Quite the opposite. I can certainly envision the XBOX 360 and PS3 both being 10 year machines. The 360 has already established itself as a market leader in the US, and the PS3 will eventually catch up. Two or three years from now, you will probably be able to purchase an XBOX 360 or PS3 for $150-200. Each system will have a huge library of high quality software, most of which will be available for under $20. Imagine walking in to a game store and walking out with a PS3 system, Gran Turismo 5, Metal Gear Solid 4, Killzone 2, Final Fantasy, and Resistance 2 for under $300. It will happen. The PS3 and XBOX 360 will certainly establish themselves in the way that the PS2 has. The current generation will probably be the most successful ever, and it will last the longest. Games have reached a peak that will not be surpassed for a long time. There is still so much potential in the PS3 and XBOX 360. Sony and Microsoft should milk their current consoles for all that they are worth, and not worry about creating the next evolutionary upgrade. Then, when the time is right, they can try to re-define gaming as Nintendo did. I will certainly be along for the ride.
First came the "classic" era of consoles beginning in 1978. Phase one included the Atari 2600 and Intellivision. With the golden age of arcades in full bloom during this time, most games for these systems were ports of popular arcade games, or simple, pick-up-and-play type games. Most games were single screen, simplistic games that lacked any real depth. Phase two of this era brought us the ColecoVision and Atari 5200 systems. Most games for these systems were simply the same games with slightly updated graphics and sounds. Too many poor quality games eventually flooded the market, and the home video game market crashed in 1984.
The next era was the 2-D era. The Nintendo Entertainment System, although not hugely successful at launch in late 1985, was popular enough to convince Americans that home console gaming still had a future. The most popular types of games during this era were platform and action-adventure games that were simply not possible on previous consoles. Sega eventually introduced the Master System, and gaming was reborn. Phase two of this era was dominated by the 16-bit Sega Genesis and Super Nintendo Entertainment System. Many of the franchises that were born on the 8-bit machines were updated on the 16-bit machines, and many publishers provided games for these consoles that were the pinnacle of 2-D gaming. A large number of games from this era are considered classics, and still look great and play well even by today's standards.
Next came the 3-D era. Ushered in by the Sega Saturn and Sony Playstation in 1995, and the Nintendo 64 in 1996, this was the birth of modern gaming. Free-roaming playfields, produced with 3-D polygons instead of sprites, became the norm. However, because the technology was relatively new, most games were produced with low resolution textures, and did not look as good as their arcade counterparts. Still, classic franchises were upgraded to 3-D, and new franchises were created. When phase two of the 3-D era arrived with the introduction of the Sega Dreamcast, the results were absolutely stunning. Home consoles were now more powerful than arcade machines. Games were high resolution, with millions of polygons per second. Soon came the Playstation 2, XBOX, and Gamecube, and gamers were provided with a plethora of games featuring amazing graphics, sound, and a depth and complexity never before possible.
In case you haven't guessed by now, the main point that I am trying to make is that there has always been two phases of each generation of home gaming consoles. The first phase generally introduces a new technology, and the second phase perfects it. We are now in the third phase of the current era, and I believe that a fourth phase will not happen. The third phase was made possible this era for two reasons. First is the advent of High Definition TV, and it's mass acceptance into homes. Although some XBOX games were high definition, they were few and far between. All Playstation 3 and XBOX 360 games are at least 720p resolution. Secondly, online gaming has hit it's peak, and all systems have built-in broadband capabilities.
So, where does gaming go from here? The leap from PS2 and XBOX to PS3 and XBOX 360 was nowhere near as significant as in previous eras. Games look better, but not by a huge margin. Some PS2 and XBOX games look almost as good as games on their updated systems. It is no wonder that the PS2 is still going strong even in the face of more powerful systems. It is a quarter of the price of the new systems, and has hundreds of great games. I simply do not believe that Microsoft and Sony can release new systems in a few years unless they significantly change how their games are played. The law of diminishing returns will rear it's ugly head. Games simply cannot produce much more detail than is already possible, and I just don't envision gamers spending $500-$600 on a new system that will play the same games with a barely distinguishable upgrade in graphics.
This is why I have concluded that Nintendo may very well be the only major player 5 to 10 years from now. They have followed the historical model, and wisely did not try to simply make a more powerful Gamecube. After two phases, they moved on and created a new gaming experience with the Wii. Although the Wii’s motion sensing technology is cutting edge, many have criticized Nintendo for not significantly upgrading the graphics technology. Nintendo seems to understand that graphics do not make games better, and the slightly upgraded Gamecube engine that powers the Wii is more than adequate for producing the Wii experience. It has also allowed Nintendo to price the Wii at half the price of it’s competition and still make a profit on each unit sold. The runaway success of the Wii is proof that there is a huge market for gamers looking for more than simply the same games with better graphics. But, as with most phase one systems, the Wii is not without it’s growing pains. Most games that are ported from other systems do not play well with the Wii’s control scheme. Also, there is a large amount of mediocre and just plain bad software being put on the market, and many people who are new to gaming do not know how to spot bad games.
The Final Fantasy VII Rebirth combat director has expressed that he wants the final part in the trilogy to offer players "even more freedom".
I love the game so far but please don’t make the final part a mini game fest
Everytime I get to a new part in Rebirth it’s “mini game time”
Hope ya don't mind me asking since it seems like you've played it, did it feel like a decent step up from the last game or was it more like the best from the last but more polished?
It makes Remake feel like a demo.
9.5/10 imo. And I think the “mini games” did a great job of adding variety to the gameplay. Purely optional as well.
Here's my thoughts
I think it's a big step up from the first instalment, I'm enjoying it way more.
I thought keeping it just in Midgar was silly, it felt dragged out and it didn't have much variation in terms of the scenery.
However with Rebirth, as soon as you get out of Kalm you have a big world to explore and it's great to just wander round and explore.
Now that I'm half way in though, despite still liking what I'm playing, the gameplay loop is now starting to slow down on me. I've got to a new region and I'm like "Yaaay...need to go and find those towers again, oh look another special beast marker, is that a bird I see in the distance? Better follow it to another Mako Crystal"
It's like....you know how Peter Jackson was only supposed to have two Hobbit films then Warner Bros wanted a third film so he stretched the second film out as much as he could so he could keep stuff for the third film making a trilogy? Yeah it feels like that, so these mini games are a part of that overall gameplay loop to keep us going and stretch the game out overall so they have something for the third and final game.
I personally think you could have had the first instalment get you out of Midgar and through to Grasslands / Junon and the second game finishes things off.
I had a weird cycle of love/hate for all the mini games as I played through. At first I really hated the seeming need to check all these boxes while exploring the grasslands. I didn't enjoy the Gilgamesh quest initially, and thought Queen's blood was fine but didn't want to commit to it. The side quests didn't really grab me either.
Then for some reason everything in Junon region changed my mind and I did pretty much everything. I liked most of the side quests, I actually liked playing fort condor (didn't care for it in the intergrade dlc). And my interest for completing these quests stayed pretty much through to Cosmo Canyon.
Then they added that horrible Lifestream memory/battle mini game and I started getting so burnt out of it all. I just wanted to do the story. I didn't do any side quests in neibleheim and beyond except for the summon. I abandoned Gilgamesh.
So what I'm saying is I would like the third part to go back to the focused progression from remake. Keep the mini games to the gold saucer. Start the game snowboarding if you want, but from there keep the story rolling.
That's funny you say that because I did everything in the Grasslands but once in Junon I started to slow down a little until Corel where by the end I was burnt out. I'm still currently going but I'm just doing what I can while things keep getting thrown at me.
I would have preferred half of these mini game side fillers / collectibles for some really beefy side quests that really adds onto the world of FFVII.
Sounds like they hadn't really figured out what they wanted to do with Remake and this one is more of what they thought of doing which is probably why they're dragging it out to make a trilogy. Disappointed to hear it has towers cause man do i hate towers lol. It's been a while since I've played the first and it'll be a while longer to play the sequel, but it sounds like I'll enjoy it. 7 really impressed me especially after being disappointed with 15, felt like Square finally realized that FF was THEIR big franchise again.
How many hours are you into it at this point?
My friend got like 20-30 in and pretty much quit because of its mini game era. He loved and basically binged through Gran Blue compared to Rebirth
As long as it comes out on PS5 to have the entire series on one platform, do whatever you want
The combat is my favorite thing about Rebirth. Would be really cool if they can improve it even more.
I hope after FF7 Square will either give a new FF game the remake treatment. Or give some of their older titles a remake treatment like Chrono Trigger, Chrono Cross, even Xenogears.
Wccf tech writes: "Kingdom Come Deliverance 2's scope was impacted by the Xbox Series S hardware limitations, as developers could only make a game that was 25% bigger than its predecessor."
This is the issue with things like this
Xbox Series X is apparently to MS the worlds most powerful console
However the Series S is obviously a limitation because it’s underpowered and developers have to go for parity.
So what’s the point of the world’s most powerful console if you are holding third party developers back? They aren’t going to push themselves if they have to think about the weakest console.
The issue wouldn’t be as bad if it was just Xbox but you are also affecting the PS version aswell
I think developers need to start just taking advantage of a console and if one of them can’t do X Y and Z then f*** them…why should the others suffer. What’s MS going to do? The bigger the franchise the least chance MS are going to tell them to f*** off. Baulders Gate 3 seemed to have stood their ground and suddenly their “strict” parity rule didn’t really matter. We suddenly got super optimisation efforts for the Series S that got things sorted.
I agree, and the sad part is use normal folk saw it the second they announced their plans.
Agree 100% this is why I didn’t want the M$ Monopoly, now PS5 version will be held back too.
If PS5 Pro comes out and Series S is still a thing it’ll be interesting what differences and what devs choose to do. Really hoping Rockstar pushes the PS5 pro with GTA6 and we get the best version possible.
More info from the author of the article, I think: https://www.reddit.com/r/ki...
Quote:
"1) I was told this info from the producer of the game Martin Klíma.
2) He specifically said the game will have only one mode.
3) And this mode is 4K 30 on PS5/XSX and 1440p 30 on XSS.
4) He said that the game is already running north of the 30 FPS cap so the performance should be stable on launch, much better than KCD1.
5) The limitation was XSS because of the 10GB memory. He said that's why they wanted to make the game 25% larger.
6) Speculation on my part: the output resolution is probably upscaled and the reason why there won't be a 60 FPS mode is because it'll most likely be very CPU heavy, like Dragon's Dogma 2 for example."
Doesn't seem like they're adding a 40fps mode on PS5/Series X for launch even if they can handle it.
I'd much rather have 1440p/60fps or even 45fps. Having just one, even with the Series S in mind, is disappointing.
Remember when xbots were adamant that the series s won’t hold back the gen?
Microsoft just needs to let go of the mandatory parity. Who cares if your grandma doesn’t understand that a game cannot be played on the S. It’s not like it she can buy you a physical game for it anyway. Before buying the game put up a notice that it only works on series X. If you’re buying for a friend-allow for a refund.
Bam. Everyone is happy. Most series s owners are for casuals that want Game Pass anyway and most likely don’t purchase most games.
If the developers want it to run on S, let them figure it out.
“During the event, the Kingdom Come Deliverance 2 producer also revealed that on PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X, the game will run at 4K resolution and 30 frames per second“
Another “creative decision” right? 🤦♂️
Since you're not an amateur and clearly know more than them, can you over there and help get the game running on the S without having to sacrifice their true vision. Us gamers would really appreciate you using your wisdom for good 🙏
Thousands of games run just fine on S.
But Kingdom Come is the game that can’t. Must be one hell of a game!
Thousands of games run on PS4 and on Switch. If developers want them to run on those systems. Fine. Those two platforms still get new games. Sony isn’t making studios also make a ps4 pro version, or Nintendo a wiiu version. Microsoft technically is.
If games like Alan Wake 2, GTA6, COD, hellblade all run on S, no excuse for this 100x smaller and 100x worse looking game to be held back.
Custom Controller Company HexGaming launched a Kickstarter campaign for their latest pro controller, Hex Phantom. - IS
What interests me the most is how big of a leap in hardware and processing power we will see in the next console cycle. Will we expect huge leaps or just refined architectures or hardware? That's a very interesting question because at the moment the Wii, barely as powerful as the 360/PS3, has been outselling its competition for the past months.
Goodbye to Discs
Really, we've been using discs since the phonograph. Yes, they're that old. I can see flash cards taking their place someday. You make a 5GB game, why pay for 50GB on a Blu-ray? I see Nintendo trying this one first. Microsoft? Maybe, but I see them pushing online game downloads. Sony? Not a chance, disc's have been too good to them.
The Dual GPU
It hasn't been done since the Saturn, but Dual GPU has gotten much better since then. Just ask a PC gamer. Who will do this first? Anyone's ballgame.
Im really glad that you see this generation of consoles as long lasting because this will be the last generation of consoles. Microsoft and Sony this generation of consoles. The market is changing to more PC game oriented so they will have no reason to go through all the trouble to make another generation of consoles. Besides there is no financial reason to. A study shows that "console gamers" spend 18.5 hours play PC games and 13.5 playing console games a month. So im glad these are long lasting because this is the end of console gaming.
I wrote a blog post about this for a little more detail if your curious.
http://www.n4g.com/up/0/Blo...