Will The Race For The Best Graphics Hurt The Industry?

[GennGreymane]

As the title suggests, graphics are becoming the main focus of all games of this generation (Wii U, PS4, Xbone, PC). Graphics have always been a major part of gameing.... "BLAST PROCESSING!" "16 BIT!" this debate has been around for a long time.

But now I think that instead of the race adding to the game industry (with improvements that we can visibly see and designing stronger systems that also added to game play), it is slowly damaging the industry as a whole because now that they pay so much in costs, they must rely on pre orders, DLC, and micro transactions to keep their game moving.

Games are now more expensive to design than ever before. Games are costing more than block buster movies (and this is a good thing overall), but a lot of the cost is now coming from the graphics side. The Order 1886 and Destiny are examples of this, and it is fine to enjoy either game, but the cost does not seem to come in with the length of the game with the Order being 6/7 hours and Destiny not having much in terms of game modes.

The costs of AAA titles (and games in general) has skyrocketed and very few of them can stack up to even lesser funded Indie games.

I think that the huge cost build up caused in development is the leading reason behind DLC, and not the good kinda DLC which was once known as an expansion pack, but the bad kind which is, buying the rest of your unfinished game. What worse is that there are now micro transactions, an addition in free games placed into $60+ games

That is the main issue I see, games are now not only more expensive to make, but are now unfinished at launch and look at how many great looking games came out only to disappoint us.

Meanwhile games like Shovel Knight, Minecraft, and more cost a fraction of the price and are considered better, and look at the graphics.


While I do say all of this above, I do understand that graphics are the easiest way to entice gamers. We make most of the hype ourselves, lets be honest. You cant show gameplay in a trailer, you must experience gameplay.



I think the race for the best graphics should stop being the focus, its no longer adding to the games, its now subtracting.

[Doctor Amadeus]

Yep, it already has, people have finally meet the barrier where content vs details finally been realized. It has also revealed why a lot of company's refuse to move forward on technology that is ALSO because of greed, just as much as it would be not to.


I finally bought a PS4 after debating of finally getting a console again, and based on the reviews and what people say PS4 should have been the clear winner, but I don't know XboxOne might have been a lot more fun, on launch.

[Deleted]

Considering over 70% off all games are still looking worse then for example "Crysis", a game created 8 years ago I think console needs to hurry the fuck up already. Previous gen consoles were doing well I think...but now you get games released at lower then 1080p 30fps which in reality is 10-30fps. This next gen console is terrible, it's the beginning and they can't even create a game that can hold a solid 30 fps without standing still and looking at the sky/ground.

The race for releasing unfinished products is what you should be worried about.

Let me ask you this, why are demanding so little. Games in 2007 could look great, hell they beat the shit out of graphics in released games in 2015 on a lot of games. Why are you not demanding a great story, great gameplay and graphics...why are you only expecting gameplay?

People like you with a mindset of asking so little are the cancer to the game industry, expect more of games and not less and you will get more. If a company knows you are fine with minimum effort, than why the hell would they put in maximum effort?

[GennGreymane]

I'd argue that the only "fun" systems are the PC and Wii U.

At least Nintendo remembers that we have friends for multi player, not just online friends.

[Deleted]

Yes, graphics cost more now than they did when it was sprite based games. What costs even more is paying the talent who does all that VO work. When you have A-list celebrities doing your VO it costs a hell of a lot more for that than it does for the graphics. Just look up the IMDB pages for some of those games you speak of and notice how many of those actors are movie stars. That's a cost that was NEVER in the industry until that last decade or so.

Again, it's not graphics that are hurting things. It's things like expensive ass actors doing VO work and mocap for their characters. Not a cheap prospect. The graphics side is much more affordable in comparison.

We should demand more games like the Mass Effect series, even if the game is not for someone...it's impossible to deny it had it all, amazing story, mechanics, graphics, voice acting, character development.

It's just example, but there are plenty more.

[GennGreymane]

We should demand more games like the Mass Effect series, even if the game is not for someone...it's impossible to deny it had it all, amazing story, mechanics, graphics, voice acting, character development.

It's just example, but there are plenty more.

I just want more fun games, I def cant wait for Fallout 4 or Elder scrolls 6

[Deleted]

I'd argue that the only "fun" systems are the PC and Wii U.

At least Nintendo remembers that we have friends for multi player, not just online friends.

True, even though I think Nintendo is lacking behind on graphics...they stick to something they are good at and keep outclassing other concoles on that area. But I'm then talking about WiiU, I think the DS is a pile of shit with a new crappy rehash every year. I find it sad people support Nintendo in relasing the same handheld console every year.

- - - Updated - - -

I just want more fun games, I def cant wait for Fallout 4 or Elder scrolls 6

I think you are highly underestimating how much graphics mean to a lot of people in terms of fun. It's all about immersion.

[GennGreymane]

I would disagree on the Ds because the 3DS is defiantly a stronger system, the new 3ds however is just a stronger version, the 2ds was just like the game boy micro IMO or the gameboy advance SP.

long live the SP, that sexy little bastard.

[Tech614]

I would disagree on the Ds because the 3DS is defiantly a stronger system, the new 3ds however is just a stronger version, the 2ds was just like the game boy micro IMO or the gameboy advance SP.

long live the SP, that sexy little bastard.

Never compare the atrocity that is the 2DS to the GOAT handheld the GBA SP.

[Aruhen]

This all really started with the death of the B tier game developers at the end of the PS2 era. Now its either AAA or some lesser known indie games.

Personally I believe the handheld scene (3DS and PSV) and the indie scene are the best at the moment when it comes to enjoyment. Games like Shovel Knight, Guacamelee, Axiom Verge, Outland, Dead Nation, Bastion, Transistor, Terraria and and the list goes on. These games don't cost a lot to produce for the most part as they aren't graphically intensive or have VO in most cases. Don't get me wrong games like Uncharted and Final Fantasy 15 are nice to have but I wish more studios followed Ubisoft by releasing games like Child of Light.

It'll be nice to see what the more popular indie developers grow into in the next 5-10 years.

I miss the GBA SP myself. What an amazing system that was with a ton of games compared to the 3DS which is terrible in comparison.

[DarkAmbient]

I wish they'd put more effort into developing better gameplay and in-depth systems than catering for gamers who freak out when puddle reflections aren't photo-realistic.

[Ferocity]

It already did.

I am not even speaking about retro-style games which look like they'd run on 286 processors, but require i5+ and 4 GB RAM. Which is idiot programming taken up to eleven. You can have 9999 THz PC with 9999 TB RAM and still someone will manage to make 2D monochrome tetris which will put such PC on its knees.

This "race" made a lot of developers move towards handheld and smartphone market.

You can also blame extensive DRM for that. Companies release games which require PC from the future (or more than medium spec), and when people don't buy it, who is at fault? Lol, pirates? It doesn't help that their GFX-rich games often are nothing but glorified movies because developers didn't have any resources left to make actual gameplay.

[Aeluron Lightsong]

Considering over 70% off all games are still looking worse then for example "Crysis", a game created 8 years ago I think console needs to hurry the fuck up already. Previous gen consoles were doing well I think...but now you get games released at lower then 1080p 30fps which in reality is 10-30fps. This next gen console is terrible, it's the beginning and they can't even create a game that can hold a solid 30 fps without standing still and looking at the sky/ground.

The race for releasing unfinished products is what you should be worried about.

Let me ask you this, why are demanding so little. Games in 2007 could look great, hell they beat the shit out of graphics in released games in 2015 on a lot of games. Why are you not demanding a great story, great gameplay and graphics...why are you only expecting gameplay?

People like you with a mindset of asking so little are the cancer to the game industry, expect more of games and not less and you will get more. If a company knows you are fine with minimum effort, than why the hell would they put in maximum effort?

Crysis has always been pushing Graphics to their limits anyways and that game is an EXTREME example so I don't see how that helps your point.

Which has less to do with graphics and more to do with paying actors to do all the VO work. They need to stop worrying about hiring people like Peter Dinklage and Nathan Fillion to voice these things and get people who will do the job for a fraction of the price. Those additional resources could then be shifted to actual game development. The only difference would be in how instantly recognizable voices are.

Then we got a problem with "This voice actor sucks...."

Devs can't win.

[Fencers]

No.

I don't know what fantasy game players are under where by they believe a room full of programmers are needed to render Sub-Zero in 4k. It doesn't work like that, like at all. Artists don't necessarily write code for game mechanics- their only job is making stuff look nice. It's why they are first in line for layoffs too.

It actually doesn't cost very much to develop high quality graphics as a game developer. R&D-ing a complete engine is expensive. But that only happens like once a generation and is ultimately a long term investment for both the publisher and developer- where the projected costs are marginal.

Texture work and animation is expensive in man-hours. Though this can be off set by the fact artists work on multiple projects to maximize profit relative to what you have to pay these guys.

The actual high costs of game development are mostly in sound, voice acting, legal and marketing. The latter of which is like most of the budget for a AAA developer.

Legal is expensive as hell too. Especially if you wish to deploy in multiple regions and platforms.

It costs more to make Assassin's Creed because it is a huge franchise launched on everything, everywhere and marketed to the level of a blockbuster film.

That the gameplay of Assassin's Creed is "terrible" has nothing to do with and is no fault of it's fabulous animation rigging or texture work. The game designers are just not very good. Those designers would still produce a "terrible" game with Minecraft graphics.

[ComputerNerd]

I think you are highly underestimating how much graphics mean to a lot of people in terms of fun. It's all about immersion.

Immersion is a personal experience, and can have hugely varying causes.
I think you are over-estimating the role of eye-candy in immersion, as shown by the continued popularity of World of Warcraft which by many standards is outdated in its graphics fidelity.

[Clone]

Immersion is a personal experience, and can have hugely varying causes.
I think you are over-estimating the role of eye-candy in immersion, as shown by the continued popularity of World of Warcraft which by many standards is outdated in its graphics fidelity.

I don't think people play WoW for the immersion.

[Ferocity]

I don't think people play WoW for the immersion.

Tbh, immersion became an overly used word, which lost its former meaning. Now it is an excuse to produce game with super graphics, voice overs, etc., but with sucky gameplay. For players from before 2000 this word has different meaning. Heck, chess are very immersive, but they don't have any graphics, everything in them is quite abstract. Personally, I avoid to use word "immersion" entirely nowadays.

[GennGreymane]

one of the most immersive games ever

Minecraft

[Deleted]

Crysis has always been pushing Graphics to their limits anyways and that game is an EXTREME example so I don't see how that helps your point.




Then we got a problem with "This voice actor sucks...."

Devs can't win.

You call an 8 year old game beating the hell out of 2015 released games or even 2016 soon an extreme example? You might wanna look up how much progress we have made in 8 years and more the 75% of the games still can't beat it, in both graphics and gameplay.

- - - Updated - - -

Immersion is a personal experience, and can have hugely varying causes.
I think you are over-estimating the role of eye-candy in immersion, as shown by the continued popularity of World of Warcraft which by many standards is outdated in its graphics fidelity.

Hence I said to a lot of people and not for everyone. But it's simply retarded to neglect the graphical part. WoWs popularity has nothing to do with it's graphics and everything of being the first in an exploding gaming market. The same goes for TF2 and CS...both games aren't amazing, they just polished and simple.

Brink was a far superior version of TF2...a better game doesn't mean it will be more succesfull. You need to release the right game at the right time and it could be a succesfull game even if it is shit...you can take Dayz as an example for that.

- - - Updated - - -

one of the most immersive games ever

Minecraft

Minecraft didn't became big due it's gameplay, graphics or story. The game allows your mind to go free and create the game for you...

[Deleted]

To be honest, the game industry has always been about graphics and storylines.
I remember the following games for example, Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, WoW, GTA vice city, and Tomb Raider, because it had the story, and it made me go like 'Wow this looks really realistic!'.

Tons of stuff to do, unlocking actually usefull items, puzzle my way out of a situation.

These days with WoW for example, you have PVE, PVP. and lots of optional stuff that does not improve your character one bit.
This is why i think burning crusade was the best, ever.

You quest your way from 60-70. Saving up as much gold as possible to get flying skill which was fucking expensive. Then, you can gear up so you can do the dungeons by doing quests. FIND people to go to X dungeon, and your an hour in, like a mini raid. Feels like though shit, accomplishing stuff.

Meanwhile in the dungeon, tabard gives rep for some kind of reputation. Exalted? AWSOME gear item unlocked, which you can probally use till patch 2.2/3
I was a mage, tailoring gave you some kind of spellfire set. This was equal/better then karazhan raid gear. It really helped your character if you leveled a reputation to exalted or a profession. now its just, optional, and you cant really make money of it either.

TL;DR: Anyway, my point being, industry got lazy. You get a pretty OK story, with awsome graphics. but the story takes u like 2 hours to complete, and then its just online p0wning people.