Rumination on the future of video game hardware and software
 

Will we eventually reach a point where consoles are so good that they really don't need to be upgraded?

You could (snarkily) argue that this happened with Nintendo, as the Wii is just a control-updated version of the Gamecube. And certainly, as far as high-end blockbuster console games, we've got ways to go. But at some point graphics for 80% of games will be "good enough" and we won't be wowed by them. If you doubt this, remember it has already happened with movies. The event "special effect" movies of the early-to-mid-90s gave way to movies that are filled with special effects that aren't seen for their special effects anymore. Now it's only a tool for filmmakers, as opposed to a way to get people in the door.

Couple this with the problem that awesome special effects / graphics require a lot of extra work on creating the assets on part of artists, and you've a situation where some next-gen games have worse graphics than previous-gen competitors. Not everyone has Rockstar/Bungie money. And when Mario Kart Wii has / may have graphics comparable to the N64 version, you see this threshhold being reached with AAA titles. We've reached the limits of what we need to see in 2D games.

It is unlikely that we'll move beyond HD-based displays in the home in the next ten or fifteen years. The average person is not going to be buying a $50,000 projector so they can play GT6 / Halo Wars 3 / Mario Party 15. So, unlike PC games, which have needed to cope with larger and larger potential increases in resolution, video games will remain fixed.

Surely, there's a lot of places where we can see improvement and get help from more horsepower: AI, physics, loading times, etc. But just like you can still use a 10-year old computer for the tasks that most people use computers for (browse the internet, email, word processing) at some point I think this will happen as well with systems, both handheld and home consoles.

So, my questions to you. Do you think that this is realistic or is there some x-factor that I'm forgetting about that will make this trend different in video game systems? If you see this happening, when will it happen?

If you start counting from the Atari 2600, it took 2D graphics roughly about 20-years to reach their peak. Hardware wise, that could be even less, as the Neo Geo came out in 1990. For all intents and purposes, most games started to be 3D with the PS1/Saturn/N64 era in 1994. (I'm specifically leaving out rogue systems as statistical outliers). Going by this math, it means that by the end of the next generation, we'll see the peak of 3D gaming.

On handhelds, I think we've hit the peak of graphics, considering there's only so much you can see on a little screen. I think handhelds will eventually have to go the way of the iPod and offer small incremental increases in battery life, new colors, etc. (as they are now) to really extend their business model. I see Sony getting into more multimedia stuff (with the PSP2/PSP3 being able to play the equivalent of Blu-ray movies stored on it) but not Nintendo.

Alright, that's enough for now. You drive for a while.

I do predict that this generation of consoles will be longer than the last (especially for Microsoft). All three players are now heavily invested in downloadable content, which I think will help increase the lifecycle. And programming techniques like procedural generation are allowing developers to do more with less.

But really, where can consoles go from here? Most new capabilities can just be patched in. The "next" generation simply won't have that big of a leap.

One thing I can see happening is that the next generation consoles will play the same games as the current gen using the same operating system -- just with better graphics and performance. For example, an Xbox720 owner would buy the same SKU as an Xbox360 owner -- but the Xbox720 would get true 1080p and better textures -- that sort of thing (similar to how games scale on PCs).

2D graphics did not reach their peak in 1997.

Odin Sphere came out in 2007 and it'd still be preposterous to think that it couldn't be improved on.

In fact, BlazBlue is supposed to be 720p 2D.

^ I would assume by peak, sales would be a factor. Sure there are some great 2D games still being made, but it is the exception, not the rule.

I'm with Groucho, this gen will last longer than usual, but I do think next gen will be the peak of "3D" gaming as far as graphics go. The point at which things will change is obviously when characters look too real. I see an even bigger backlash against violent video games when the characters are uber-realistic, and I for one don't want to play that game. I definitely want some kind of line between my graphics and life.

I agree we are getting close to the point where graphics just can't get any better, but I still don't think we're there yet. Even something like Call of Duty 4 isn't exactly like reality, although it's pretty close.

The main area of improvement I can see games going in is depth. As vast as GTA4 is, it's lacking the detail of something like Dead Rising. Now, if you had an enormous playground like Liberty City with the degree of interaction of Dead Rising... wow. This is really more of an issue with storage, though.

I don't know how much storage Dead Rising takes up, but I imagine the engine could be scaled to a city-wide game. All the elements are there -- combat, driving, etc.

The funny thing is I remember all the complaints about the XBox 360 coming too early and shorting the XBox life cycle by a year and people saying how graphics were good enough at the time and the 360 didn't look that much better and what not.

I don't think we're anywhere near reaching the graphics plateau. Games are going to be chasing Pixar's CG for awhile. As much as consoles seem to be functioning more and more like PC's in the living room, I don't see them adjusting life cycles and creating a form of upgradability or scalability anytime soon. Seems like too much confusion for the average Joe.

I think the next big step with be storage. As in everything running off of, say, a huge flash-drive, and perhaps no load times - that's what "next gen" needs to work on: getting rid of load times, which is the thing that seems to have taken a step back each generation.

Not really. Go play a PS1 game if you need your memory refreshed.

I'm one of those that thought the last gen ended prematurely. Ok, maybe prematurely is the wrong word, but those systems certainly had some life left (as the PS2 continues to prove by selling consoles and games rather well). But extending the last generation only made sense for Sony since the Xbox and Gamecube would always trail by a large margin. But just speaking about the graphics and stuff? There was some juice left there.

And while the graphics this generation are much better, the big selling points seem to be more about added functionality rather than graphics. Achievement points, the Wii's control scheme, online play, DLC, leader boards, friends list, all of that stuff seems more important than just better graphical power. And if anything, I see a stronger move in this direction, since the return on creating uber-graphics seems to be getting smaller and smaller.

This is going to be the future of videogames:

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/YxMux4uEkLI&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/YxMux4uEkLI&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

I think it said the devise is coming out in november and the designers have met with game companies to develop games that'll take advantage of the mind control devise.

I disagree. VR goggles never caught on. This is the next iteration of that. The problem (just like VR goggles) is that the tech is nowhere near where it needs to be. I'll be shocked if we see a good, working, mainstream popular version of this in the next decade.

i was doing true VR goggles at Dave & Busters on - well 'heightened' sensory awareness less say(family friendly) - in 1994... VR goggles are old news, and they kinda stink really...

it will be 2-3 years before a game can even take advantage of all the PS3 has in the way of horsepower... no one has even begun to tap the power of that system...

in general i agree with your points Bus... we are at a kind of plateau i think... at least for a good while...

I think there is still much to improve graphically. While flat surfaces like roads and the sides of buildings have very good textures, intricate objects like trees still seem like cutouts. Water could be a lot better, and things like clothing and hair still aren't rendered realistically. Lighting is still developing, and there is also the aspect of making the worlds more organic and lived in, as well as responding to changes made by the player and other factors. Of course, that gets us back to the comment about the money it takes to create all this.

Then there is the framerate to consider. I look forward to the day when all games consistently run at 60fps, but this generation it seems there are fewer 60fps games. Developers continue to push the consoles as far as they can, and 30fps (or less sometimes) is often deemed acceptable. This could be changing as developers get more familiar with the hardware. Last generation's Madden games ran at 60fps, but it wasn't until the third version of the game for the Xbox 360 that it got that to that framerate, and it also looks like the third time will be the charm on the PS3 this year.

That's just with 720p. GTAIV isn't really even HD (it's rendered at 640p and upscaled) and it still runs at 30fps. 1080p games at 60fps are few and far between. So, they have a ways to go.

BTW, I really don't understand the comment about the graphics in Mario Kart Wii being comparable to the N64 version. I think people say these things without actually going back and seeing just what those games looked like. Mario games are cartoony by design and will never look realistic anyway, but I find it hard to believe that someone would not see the progression in graphics.

Yeah, I remember when somebody was saying that Twilight Princess didn't look any better than Ocarina of Time. That sort of thing can be settled with a screenshot.

I agree with you that it would fantastic if we had 1080p games that all ran at 60fps. But I also think that it wouldn't be a significant enough improvement to sell consoles.

From screenshots they looked similar. In practice, actually seeing MKW over component, I can say that it looks a lot better.

Explain it to me in Star Wars.

You can have cartoony graphics and still improve on them, look at the Ratchet series on PS2 and PS3.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...io-Kart-64.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...twii_sslg3.jpg

Actually, those Mariokart images almost prove the posters point of lack of graphical progression (especially in contrast to the Zelda comparison which is much more striking). However, having played both Wii and N64, I know there are a lot more problems with the N64 version such as a chugging frame rate, tearing, clipping, etc.. more than can be discerned from a simple screenshot, that's for sure.

While we've still got a ways to go with graphics, I think the real advancements need to be made in animation and character expression. Look at the SNL sketch on GTA this weekend, one of the main bits was on the characters motion-capped hands and body movements.

While I agree that graphics should go the way of special effects and just be a tool or one aspect of a game (lord knows the story and gameplay of most games could be improved), it's going to take a dramatic shift in audience to make it happen. Maybe the market Nintendo has drawn up in Wii and DS sales kicks it off, maybe it doesn't, but I'm guessing graphics continues to be a huge point of focus for the industry as it moves forward.

Yeah... you're comparing a screen-grab with a promo picture. The game doesn't look near that good. Try this instead:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...io-Kart-64.jpg
http://img369.imageshack.us/img369/4...0425041ph0.jpg
http://img369.imageshack.us/img369/3...0220105ch2.jpg

I hate the fuel the Mario Kart thing further, but here are some comparison videos Gametrailers did:

Wii vs. N64
Wii vs. DS
Wii vs. Gamecube


I realize they are fairly low-quality web videos, but you get a pretty good idea of the main differences. I'm surprised how well the DS version looks, to be honest. For the record, I think MK Wii looks more or less fine (considering the Wii's power).

The Bus, you bring up a topic that I have sen covered in developer publications and at conferences (like GDC and e3).
From your topic you must have read/heard them... or you have good insight into the future of the industry.