Well, my dad works at Nintendo and~: Console Wars Horseshit Megathread

[Paelos]

I believe high sales in this round will mean a general lack of BC in the future.  Although I don't really know what the hold-up is at Sony with emulation of some sort.  I'd have a PS4 now if it played PS2 games, let alone PS3 games.

Well the PS3 release was a total boondoggle if I'm remembering correctly, so should we really be shocked by 7M in sales of this console that has the "advantage" over the competition? Also, is 7M in sales that good? Even with the early issues, the PS3 sold 80M units. Granted it was after several price revisions and changes.

[Yegolev]

Yeah, you got me on that.  Good point.

As for BC, the original PS3 had a Emotion Engine in it.  I suppose it's not really feasible to put an entire Cell architecture inside a PS4, but I can emulate a PS2 on my PC.

[Maledict]

I believe high sales in this round will mean a general lack of BC in the future.  Although I don't really know what the hold-up is at Sony with emulation of some sort.  I'd have a PS4 now if it played PS2 games, let alone PS3 games.

Well the PS3 release was a total boondoggle if I'm remembering correctly, so should we really be shocked by 7M in sales of this console that has the "advantage" over the competition? Also, is 7M in sales that good? Even with the early issues, the PS3 sold 80M units. Granted it was after several price revisions and changes.

7 million sales in the first 5 months is  *literally* the fastest and biggest console launch of all time.

Now, in a while the Wii will start to overtake it (due to the Wii's horrendous supply issues when released), but right now the PS4 is in a league of success of its own.

Also, re games - it has over 50 games currently available. Whilst folks here might not be interested, there are a large amount of games available, and it does have the best console versions of the worlds biggest selling games - CoD, Assassins Creed, Fifa. It's not a surprise it's selling at all - it's in a remarkably stronger launch  position than previous console  have been when it comes to games. For those of us who like to play games outside of our PCs, the PS4 gives you the best versions of the biggest games.

[Cyrrex]

While you no doubt have a point - and I am not going to dispute it, really - those games can bite my bag.  I'd also bet my underwear that if I fired any of those games up, they'd look barely any better than what one could get on the previous generation consoles (let alone what you can get on a PC).  So yeah, they had all the soulless sequels lined up right out of the motherfucking gate.  And yet, they have nothing I want to play yet.

I will get a PS4 at some point.  Shit, it's all I can do right now to not go out and buy one, despite having literally nothing I want to play on it.  I would have one now if there was any kind of BC or emulation to be had (and I don't care about the hurdles, they can all go fuck themselves on this point).  As it is now, I need a big ole original blockbuster or two to justify the purchase.  These may be just around the corner.

[Paelos]

7 million sales in the first 5 months is  *literally* the fastest and biggest console launch of all time.

My point isn't if it's good in the sense of fastest launch. That doesn't really mean anything to me. Does the console have the momentum to keep selling 25x that? That should be the mark. With all the changes and all the advances, including the new audiences we've gained in gaming, why shouldn't this console sell more than the PS2?

[Fabricated]

Console Devs always seemed to be able to really wring a lot out of given hardware. The PS3/360 were fairly RAM constrained and the PS3 in particular had a funky architecture and the better dev houses cranked out some really impressive looking stuff. With the PS4/Xbone giving them one of the oldest and most documented architectures out there, a metric shitload of RAM compared to what they've had to put up with before, more storage than they know what to do with (even with BD only it's a lot) and a bunch of cores to play with, I'm kinda hoping we'll see some really cool shit in a year or two once the console devs have their heads wrapped around it.

Once they finally bury the PS3/360 for really big Marquee titles I'm hoping we'll start seeing it.

[Maledict]

7 million sales in the first 5 months is  *literally* the fastest and biggest console launch of all time.

My point isn't if it's good in the sense of fastest launch. That doesn't really mean anything to me. Does the console have the momentum to keep selling 25x that? That should be the mark. With all the changes and all the advances, including the new audiences we've gained in gaming, why shouldn't this console sell more than the PS2?

You're shifting the goal posts now though - you're original query as to whether this launch was any good. Now you're asking for long term trends...

in the long term, I absolutely expect sales to fall off. The Wii was a one-off aberration that probably won't be repeated this generation. The PS2 was fortunate to have no effective competition *and* was a cheap DVD player just as DVD players became affordable items - I know many people who got one for that reason, and the games were a secondary. Blue-Ray just isn't as impressive to folks and hasn't had the same uptake at all.

You have to remember in terms of audiences, the global audience hasn't really increased hugely for consoles and in one big market (Japan) has shrunk massively. In china and Korea its free to play PC games for example.

EDIT: Cyrrex - the games absolutely look noticeably better on the next gen consoles. It's not a minor difference. As an example look at : http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=805887

Those are all ingame shots, that aren't edited, from an open world game. That's more than a minor difference in graphical quality.

[Paelos]

You're shifting the goal posts now though - you're original query as to whether this launch was any good. Now you're asking for long term trends...

I asked is 7M that good, pointing out that the PS3 sold 80M. Perhaps my question wasn't clear, but I was asking if 7M shows us that this is going to beat the PS3 or even the PS2. I had no idea that it was the fastest launch, but I am interested to see if it translates.

I guess it just confused me that less than 10% of prior console sales at launch was the fastest ever.

[Yegolev]

Those pictures were awesome, but they seem to be from the same game.

[Maledict]

Yes, its the first real first party effort from Sony - Sucker Punch's Infamous: Second Son. Graphically its a league ahead of anything else, and they just introduced a "photo mode" which allows you to take photo's from ingame as you see in that thread. Given we are only just into the new generation, and how markedly console graphics tend to improve over time, it's a really good sign for the future. Especially as it's an open world sandbox game, so they aren't relying on corridors and precisely controlled scenes to get those shots.

As fabricated says, console devs can always squeeze an amazing out of the machines given they can code to the metal - the 360 and Ps3 only have half a gig of memory each. The equivalent PC build requires a hell of a lot more.

[Cyrrex]

I guess I was more saying that for the shovelware titles like the Battlefields, CODS, FIFAs, etc., the graphical improvements are not astonishing, and those were being used as the shining examples of launch titles.  I'm not saying there aren't exceptions, nor am I saying that we won't eventually see a lot of huge improvements once they stop developing for two generations at the same time.

[Yegolev]

I'm also sure that the new Madden for the new consoles will still look like something from 2004.

[Cyrrex]

Better yet, make it like something that looks and plays like it was from the early 90s.  At least it would be fun again.  Those games just get less fun with every iteration. 

[Yegolev]

The house has decided on PS4, but there is no date yet.  I'm personally interested to find if there will be a second revision of the unit, even the main board or just the optical drive, if not the whole thing.  Probably won't happen before 2015.  I'll have to get one before the end of this year, I think.

[AcidCat]

I guess I was more saying that for the shovelware titles like the Battlefields, CODS, FIFAs, etc., the graphical improvements are not astonishing, and those were being used as the shining examples of launch titles.

The PS4 version of Battlefield 4 looks significantly better than the 360 version, with higher player counts. For someone like me with an aging PC and a preference for playing these games on console anyway, it's quite a boon.

[Cyrrex]

I guess I was more saying that for the shovelware titles like the Battlefields, CODS, FIFAs, etc., the graphical improvements are not astonishing, and those were being used as the shining examples of launch titles.

The PS4 version of Battlefield 4 looks significantly better than the 360 version, with higher player counts. For someone like me with an aging PC and a preference for playing these games on console anyway, it's quite a boon.

Yes, but see, as the highlighted part suggests, you are obviously sick in the head.

What I am saying as these differences aren't game changing.  As things stand right now, the graphical difference between this generation and the last must be the least significant of any new gen that we've ever seen.  That isn't to say that there is no improvement, because obviously these machines are more powerful.  We just seem to be getting very close to a ceiling where the obvious improvements no longer mean as much.  720p to 1080p is a big technical difference, but not a big visual one (many people cannot tell the difference).  30fps to 60fps is the same way, though I personally think the difference here is more obvious.  Some of the animation and art from the previous generation was already beginning to kill the notion that there was this Uncanny Valley issue that would never be conquered.  They've conquered it.  This generation will probably be fine for at least one of the consoles (PS4, I am betting), but after this they have a HUGE problem.  Once they achieve 1080p and 60fps, with the kind of aliasing and improvements to shadows, lighting, etc., that we will begin to see out of all these titles....where will they go from there?  The next generation, if there is one, is in trouble. 

[AcidCat]

Cyrrex I am going to use BF4 again as an example of how the difference between the new gen and last gen of consoles is a significant upgrade. From your prior comments putting Battlefield in the "shovelware" category I can reasonably assume you are not a fan and not really qualified to use this game as an example of how far this gen of consoles has come vs the last.

Quite simply you are mistaken and are severely downplaying the benefits of new gen vs last gen capabilities. Here I am not including current PC capabilities in the equation because as we all know those fluctuate and the cutting edge is always going to be better than even a brand new console - assuming a player prefers the PC gaming experience to console of course - but that's clearly not what you're arguing.

The PS4 (and I don't know about XBONE but I'd assume it's similar) version of BF4 is 60 fps vs 30 fps on last-gen consoles, higher resolution, and most significantly, 64 total player count vs 24 on PS3 and 360. This last point is significant and a Battlefield enthusiast will intuitively know why. Battlefield is all about the massive combined arms battle, comparing a Conquest game with 12 players per side vs 32 per side - not even considering the graphical upgrades - is simply game-changing. It IS the definition of game-changing which you refute, period. And this is just one game. A launch game. Things will only get better from here, but as a first gen, launch title that is also on previous generations of hardware, BF4 is a fantastic example of how much more capable these new consoles are.

[Margalis]

In terms of graphics we are definitely at the point where things like art direction and the skill of the art team makes as much or more of a difference than specs. There won't be a huge graphical leap until ray tracing becomes a thing. Right now the limiting factor on graphics is fundamentally how rendering is done - lighting, shadows, reflections, transparencies, depth of field, etc, are all faked, and there are limits to what that fakery can achieve.

The number of players thing is a good point, because that's more CPU dependent. There is still a ton of room for CPU power to grow.

In some ways GPU power has a pretty definite ceiling - you need to fill a certain number of pixels at a certain frame rate with a certain shader complexity. Once you can do that you're good. (Again, until you adopt a totally different model like ray tracing) There's not a similar ceiling on CPU power - the more power you have the more onscreen objects you can have, the more you can simulate, the larger worlds can be (or at least with computation applied to them), etc.

The problem these new consoles have is that the way scalable game engines typically work is that they scale the graphics. If you make a cross-platform game you have the same gameplay on each version, then just crank the graphics up or down. But we're at the point where cranking up the graphics isn't that impressive. Cranking up the other stuff would be more impressive but that's a lot harder. So what these consoles need are games that are not cross platform, or are at least cross platform only across PS4, XB1 and decent-or-better PCs.
---

The other huge issue is that publishers have moved even further towards a strategy of a fewer number of megahits. There are just barely any games coming out for these things. It used to be that EA released 80 games a year - now they release 20. This means that there are few games that take advantage of the power these systems offer, since smaller / indie games don't. And it's possible to go for months or more without a single game being released that appeals to you.

The classic Nintendo thing has been that their systems have a low number of games, but that the games they do have are pretty good. That's now everyone's strategy. In many genres you have somewhere between zero to two choices for an entire year or more. Like RPGs? Hope you like Dragon Age, since that's the only one.

[AcidCat]

So what these consoles need are games that are not cross platform, or are at least cross platform only across PS4, XB1 and decent-or-better PCs.

Agreed completely - and this is what we will see more and more. Yes the old consoles have huge install bases. But this is always the way, by next year I'm sure the majority of new games coming out will be PS4/XBONE/PC.

Obviously I'm not even talking about ipad games and shit I'd assume that goes without saying.

In terms of graphics we are definitely at the point where things like art direction and the skill of the art team makes as much or more of a difference than specs.

Yes, and this is why GTA5's world is still considerably more impressive than Infamous Second Son's. Resolution, lighting etc - technical details - still scope and artistry will come out on top. But consider the results if GTA5 had been designed ground-up for next gen consoles.

I feel like I'm harping on this point - but we're just at the beginning. Second Son, I really think the most positive reviews were influenced by how good looking the game is even if its gameplay is a relic of last gen. You just can't help but feel excited for future potential when you play it.

I mean, Witcher 3 on PS4? This is the kind of potential out there, we are just waiting for developers to harness the power and show us something.

[Cyrrex]

Just two simple points in rebuttal...

First, because they are developing a single title for both generations, the new generation is going to suffer.  I am sure you are right about the differences you list, but I still see them as incremental, not game changing.  That probably is because of my second point, which is....

This is shovelware.  There are a list of games out there (COD, Battlefield, Madden, Fifa are the big ones off the top of my head) that have been making the same god damn game for the past 10, 15 or maybe even 20 years.  The graphics get slightly shinier, the feature list gets longer, the fun disappears.  Not one of these games, in my opinion, is significantly better overall than their very early iterations.  COD 4 was probably the sweet spot for that series, everything since has been bullshit.  Battlefield 1942 was probably the most fun game in that series, and it has gone downhill since then.  I don't even want to get started on Madden, which has not been fun since the early nineties.  Fifa has been putting out the exact same game since the early 2000s, for all intents.  These might help move a bunch of consoles for the new generation, but this was low hanging fruit for the big developers.  This isn't compelling new stuff that takes advantage of the new hardware, it is the same shit we've been forced to play since forever.

Anyway, I doubt we will agree for the simple reason that you really like a game like Battlefield 4...where if I play it, I cannot stop wondering what the fuck they are thinking, and why they have moved so far away from what made them different and interesting.  Having 64 players running around on screen doesn't automatically make it more interesting (it often makes it worse).  Pretty sure 1942 did the same thing, with a much more compelling game.  And that was a decade ago, wasn't it?

[Malakili]

I actually thought Bad Company 2 was respectable.  In lacked some of the charm of 1942 (which was actually 12 years ago now  ), but it was a solid game, had good mechanics and maps, and so forth.  The Vietnam expansion was also excellent.

But then they decided to go toe to toe with COD and, as you say, shovel out a new iteration every 5 minutes.  

That is honestly why I've been buying Nintendo's consoles all along.  Say what you want about them, but the Nintendo franchises have continued to put out entertaining games - not to mention games that I don't just want to play on PC anyway.  

I don't have a Wii U, but I am considering picking one up this summer.

[HaemishM]

To be fair, Battlefield 4 is a MUCH better game then BF3, though yes, Bad Company 2 is still better. Of course, none of that has to do with graphics - it's mostly about level design. And having 64 players on a console instead of the 32 on the previous gen IS a difference, especially since 90% of the maps are built to house 64 players.

That said, I'm still totally uninterested in this gen of consoles.

[Margalis]

There are a list of games out there (COD, Battlefield, Madden, Fifa are the big ones off the top of my head) that have been making the same god damn game for the past 10, 15 or maybe even 20 years.  The graphics get slightly shinier, the feature list gets longer, the fun disappears.  Not one of these games, in my opinion, is significantly better overall than their very early iterations. 

My favorite Madden is the N64 game!

I think the low number of total releases is a huge problem here. Most publishers are putting out very few AAA games, and many of those slots are already earmarked for franchises. Here is the EA page for XB1:

http://www.ea.com/xbox-one

It's all franchise titles! If you cut your console releases per year by 70% or more you aren't going to drop your core IP and franchises, and once you factor those in there's not much room left for anything else. It's just a numbers game - the percentage of titles that are stale is much higher.

Typically when a new console launches you have a bunch of fresh games. Some of them are bad, some of them are merely ok but benefit from launch goggles and become new franchises (Ass Creed), some of them come charging out of the gate and change the landscape. (Gears of War) This generation we just don't have those games.

[Maledict]

Without wanting to sound arsey, I think your memories of console launches are slightly out of kilter.

Assassin's Creed was launched 2 years after the 360 launched.

Gears of War was released a year after the 360 launched.


In fact historically most launch games don't go on to spawn anything major - it's generally the games that come out a year or two after launched that make the impact. This generations launch is just like previous generations - a few exclusives that will sink without trace after a year and the big major sellers that sustain the big publishers. Its the games that are coming in the next 12 to 24 months that will herald the new big IPs of this generation. Quantum Break, the Order, Cdprojects cyberpunk game etc,.

[HaemishM]

I think the low number of total releases is a huge problem here. Most publishers are putting out very few AAA games, and many of those slots are already earmarked for franchises. Here is the EA page for XB1:

http://www.ea.com/xbox-one

It's all franchise titles!

To be fair, you picked a really bad example. EA doesn't produce anything but franchise titles anymore. What was their last new IP... Dead Space? And they sequel-fucked 3 games out of that. Army of Two? EA stopped trying a LONG time ago. What should be more worrying for both new consoles isn't that EA is producing nothing but rehashes, it's that not a lot of other developers are lining up to take up the slack. A console needs titles from established, franchise churn houses mixed with enough sleeper hits that come out of nowhere to build buzz, things like Demon Souls or Assassin's Creed that get people to buy the console NOW rather than later.

Watch Dogs may be that kind of title, but I doubt it.

[Fabricated]

Watch Dogs is coming out for everything under the sun too, so I dunno if I'd really count it.

Again, I think the 360/PS3 need to be declared dead for franchise ports and new titles before we really start seeing anyone leverage the Xbone/PS4 hardware to the point that it's clear that the title could not be done on a previous gen system.

[schild]

Watch Dogs is coming out for everything under the sun too, so I dunno if I'd really count it.

Again, I think the 360/PS3 need to be declared dead for franchise ports and new titles before we really start seeing anyone leverage the Xbone/PS4 hardware to the point that it's clear that the title could not be done on a previous gen system.

That's weird, I thought Watch_Dogs was only coming out for the PC.

[Velorath]

I believe high sales in this round will mean a general lack of BC in the future.  Although I don't really know what the hold-up is at Sony with emulation of some sort.  I'd have a PS4 now if it played PS2 games, let alone PS3 games.

Well the PS3 release was a total boondoggle if I'm remembering correctly, so should we really be shocked by 7M in sales of this console that has the "advantage" over the competition? Also, is 7M in sales that good? Even with the early issues, the PS3 sold 80M units. Granted it was after several price revisions and changes.

7 million sales in the first 5 months is  *literally* the fastest and biggest console launch of all time.

Now, in a while the Wii will start to overtake it (due to the Wii's horrendous supply issues when released), but right now the PS4 is in a league of success of its own.

If you're talking about worldwide sales from when the console is first released, there are some things that should be noted:

- PS1 launched in Japan and didn't release in the U.S. and Europe until 10 months later.
- PS2 also launched in Japan and didn't come to the U.S. until 7 months later, and Europe a month after that.
- PS3 had a near simultaneous launch in the U.S. and Japan, and came to Europe 4 months later. It was also $100-200 more at launch than the PS4, and the Wii was launched a week later.
- The Xbox systems have generally had closer releases in the main three territories, although have never really caught on outside the U.S. in the way other consoles have.
- PS4 launched in the same month in the U.S. and Europe. Japan, which is a much smaller market for consoles these days launched 3 months later, so for the first few months the two biggest markets were getting all the PS4's.
- Going back much further, the NES launched in the U.S. over 2 years after the Famicom came out in Japan and almost another year after that in Europe. The SNES came out 9 months later in the U.S. and another 9 months after that in Europe.

[Margalis]

In fact historically most launch games don't go on to spawn anything major - it's generally the games that come out a year or two after launched that make the impact. This generations launch is just like previous generations - a few exclusives that will sink without trace after a year and the big major sellers that sustain the big publishers. Its the games that are coming in the next 12 to 24 months that will herald the new big IPs of this generation. Quantum Break, the Order, Cdprojects cyberpunk game etc,.

It's true that the initial batch of games generally isn't impressive or interesting as a whole, but usually there are a few interesting games in there, and a reasonable number in the first year. Right now Destiny is the only game I can think of coming out in 2014 for the new consoles that has a chance to be one of those games.

Dead Rising for 360 was an August release in the first year, and to me was the first game that really justified the 360. Saint's Row was also an August release.

Edit: Also worth pointing out that games like Quantum Break and The Order don't seem to be bringing much that is fresh to the table. Gears of War, Dead Rising and Assassin's Creed were are relatively new and interesting from a mechanics perspective. The Order appears to be a mishmash of the usual suspects (Gears and Uncharted) and it seems like the main innovation of QB is integrating at TV show...

[Yegolev]

That's weird, I thought Watch_Dogs was only coming out for the PC.

[schild]

That was a PC Master Race joke, Yeg.

[Yegolev]

You mean that picture is real?

[Fabricated]

Hrrrmery

http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9248132/Gates_would_back_Xbox_spin_off?source=rss_keyword_edpicks&google_editors_picks=true

Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates on Monday said he would back any move by current CEO Satya Nadella to spin off the Xbox video game console business.

In an interview on Fox Business alongside his friend and fellow billionaire Warren Buffett, the CEO of Berkshire Hathaway, Gates did not advocate pushing Xbox out on its own. But when asked whether he would support a hypothetical decision by Nadella to make Xbox its own company, Gates simply answered, "absolutely."

"I'm sure Satya and the team will look at that ... and it's up to them," Gates said of a possible spin-off.

[Paelos]

That's a non-committal endorsement.

The XBOX should be run by somebody else, because the current team is fucking it up.

[Fabricated]

They fucked up the instant they cheaped out on the RAM and bottlenecked what would otherwise be a completely comparable system to the PS4. Unless they have Microsoft megabuxx to beg/bribe/cajole devs into not just making the PS4 version better, it will be the inferior multiplat machine.

Well, after the WiiU but that assumes the WiiU will even get multiplats.