PDA

View Full Version : fewer games for next gen of consoles? BBC


bluemagicuk
09-06-2004, 06:12 PM
There are likely to be fewer games for the next generation of
consoles than for the current machines, a games conference
has been told.
This is because it will take a great deal of time and money to produce
games for the new consoles, said independent developer Tameem Antoniades.

The good news is that the games will offer much more than current titles.
"We have the opportunity to elevate games to be the tenth art," said
the co-founder of Just Add Monsters.
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/40039000/jpg/_40039450_sword_woman203.jpg (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3630726.stm)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3630726.stm

Hazdaz
09-06-2004, 06:24 PM
Bah! I don't buy it at all.

They said the same thing for the current generation of consoles, and the generation before that. Sure each new generation brings out way more realistic graphics (and sound and gameplay) - and the added costs/time that go along with that - but along with the new technology that brings about the ability to play such amazing games, there is almost always an advancement of technology that lets these companies create way more advanced games also.

Just like in most previous generation consoles - there might be a small drought in the number of games when they first get introduced, but that quickly gets filled up when these game developers learn how to use the new console hardware to its full potential.

Taiyed
09-06-2004, 06:31 PM
Hazdaz, agreed. Anyone remember the madness about PS2s difficult development process? That seemed to always pop up early-on in this most recent console war. Yet the PS2 still has more titles than any current gen machine.

However, it would be nice if developers/publishers were forced to take more time to make the games better instead of just pushing them out the door as fast as possible...

AndyH
09-06-2004, 06:32 PM
I totally agree with this, and have been saying it for the last year or 2.
Just looking at the shots of the new unreal engine and seeing the complexity of the high-poly models makes you realise that theres a fair bit more work involved than in the old days of simple 2K poly counts.
Cos of increased detail, normal maps, effects, bigger environments, epic storylines, bigger and better cutscenes and longer playing hours means that the amount of time and money spent on next gen game development will increase massively. What with more and more games companies running out of money and time, i think that unless you are a big name developer like konami, capcom or nintendo, other games companies will struggle in the new age of 'better graphics = better sales'

heavyness
09-06-2004, 07:39 PM
good.

there are way to many games out there and quality is suffering. i would rather buy 1 great game then 3 ok ones.

Array
09-06-2004, 08:15 PM
good.

there are way to many games out there and quality is suffering. i would rather buy 1 great game then 3 ok ones.
Except the one "great" game you do end up buying will not be the least bit innovative due to the fact that the big gaming studios will be afraid to sink a lot of $$$ into an untested concept. Kind of like how Hollywood keeps on spewing out sequels/remakes.

raz-0
09-06-2004, 10:38 PM
Frankly, right now I think we are at probably the harshest point for gaming in terms of art assets. We want lots more than we have had before, but we haven't reached that point where all the tools developed for cinema/print/etc. will show dividends for the gaming world.

It will be very cool when that happens. However, just because we are pushing our way there against a lot of inertia doesn't mean we will see less games for the new consoles unless the console makers deliberately shut people out. Just because a machine can have a cinematic gaming experience on it doesn't mean it is required to. A tetris lik epuzzle game with gobs of eyecandy isn't going to be that much mroe labor intense, time consuming, or requiring of vast coding wizardry than any of the last umpteen iterations. Just because it CAN provide vast and complex gaming experiences doesn't mean it MUST.

richcz3
09-06-2004, 11:21 PM
I think its simple economics. If anyone remembers, the PS2 stalled for a while when it first came out. Many developers faulted the complex development, while players saw little graphic improvement with the first tiltles. So, with that in mind, I expect that developers and publishers will stay with the tried and true console systems taking a wait and see how many next gen consoles sell.

Also keep in mind the prices the new consoles are rumored to start well above the $300 price point. Are gamers going to spend $400 or more for a gaming system with 10-20 specific titles available at release? The hardest sell may be the XBox 2 if it can't play XBOX 1 games. At least the PS3 will have three times backward compatability.



richcz3

Hazdaz
09-07-2004, 01:35 AM
I think its simple economics. If anyone remembers, the PS2 stalled for a while when it first came out. Many developers faulted the complex development, while players saw little graphic improvement with the first tiltles. So, with that in mind, I expect that developers and publishers will stay with the tried and true console systems taking a wait and see how many next gen consoles sell.

Also keep in mind the prices the new consoles are rumored to start well above the $300 price point. Are gamers going to spend $400 or more for a gaming system with 10-20 specific titles available at release? The hardest sell may be the XBox 2 if it can't play XBOX 1 games. At least the PS3 will have three times backward compatability.

Development for next-gen games has already started - It's HAD to, seeing as how many games take up to 2 years (some more) to create. If the next gen systems are to be coming out next year (+/-), then games for those systems have probably been in the works for months now - game developers can't just wait to see who is on top and then start working on games for them, cuz by the time that is cleared up, a console's life will be 1/2 over.

Also the whole backward compatibility issue, I feal is a moot point. No other console has ever had backward compatibility, besides the PS-family. Nintendo never had it (except the GBA) and that never was an issue with previous generations, and didn't stop N from dominating the industry for quite a while. Would backward compatibilty be a cool thing to have? Yea, but defintly not a deal breaker. But ofcourse thhis whole issue is probably best left for another thread.

creative destructions
09-07-2004, 01:51 AM
It took what 3 years to make the source art for doom3, and most people can breeze through it in a day. It'll be tougher for artists for sure.

chadtheartist
09-07-2004, 02:12 AM
How is it going to be tougher on artists? IMO, it's looking like artists are going to be more in demand soon, so that's a good thing right? The only way I can see this as being tougher on artists is if companies expect movie quality art, but in the same time frame as game quality art. But I don't think that is going to happen, or at least not for very long.

I can kind of see a shake down in the games industry, as the initial startup of "Next" Gen games is probably going to be very costly, with the only return being years down the line. Maybe that's why we've been seeing so many game companies closing down lately?

creative destructions
09-07-2004, 02:35 AM
I think they'll expect movie quality art with the same salaries as before.

pogonip
09-07-2004, 05:50 AM
I have noticed a huge swell of game companies looking for Senior level game artists and movie industry artists and it's because they know how hard it is going to be to develop for these new systems . It'll be really hard at first but then new and better tools will come along .

Dynamic lights per pixal lighting and shadows takes a lot less time to make look good , then light maps and vertex lighting .

Zbrush 2 is making normal mapping a lot easier !

There will be a lot more tools and techniques for making dev time shorter !

No matter what it is going to mean hiring more artists and raising the price of games a bit ...but like Doom 3 though I had to wait 4 years and it's a pretty short game it was awesome and worth the money !!!

Rahnem
09-07-2004, 06:26 AM
I think there might a 1 or 2 year lag before things pick up and companies adapt to the new tech. The demand for good tools is going to increase. The demand is there, someone just need to fill in the gaps.

Game-boi
09-07-2004, 11:42 AM
i think that unless you are a big name developer like konami, capcom or nintendo, other games companies will struggle in the new age of 'better graphics = better sales'

I think this is where middleware and outsourcing comes in. Look at how Rockstar has used (and abused in some people's opinion) Renderware. In gaming's future, I see smaller companies doing parts of the work with more and more larger companies continuing the current trend to outsource work to other smaller companies. I think what you're questioning is whether a small company will be able to create a game beginning to end. Even there I still think the the fittest of smaller companies will survive. Technical achievement never guaranties a great game or sales.

I'm not saying that smaller companies won't struggle, because they always have and always will. But I am saying that there will always be a place for them at the table. The new age of "better graphics = better sales" has been here since the Super Nintendo/Famicom, and small places continue to exist.

-Chris

baaah888
09-07-2004, 12:03 PM
good graphics does not make a game sell, As long as their is a market for good games with average graphics the number of games will still be fairly high. People like choice and variety not just the same ol same old, EA production line crap, Long live the small studio! viva the revolution ;)

fxgogo
09-07-2004, 01:09 PM
I think we will see bigger, more hollywood style games. At the same time the current model of games development and publishing is probably going to have to change to work to the new demands and cost pressures. As it stands, developers are having a tough time staying afloat and there are too few titles making a decent turn over, with a handfull raking it in big time. In my opinion, one of the most exciting possible options is serializing of games. Making shorter games that come out regularly and are priced cheaper to get in line with other entertainment mediums like the cinema and dvd rental. Just think, you buy a game for 10 and you get a good five hours of gameplay, then if you want to you can buy further episodes for 3 a pop. If the publishers and develops are clever, they will see there is potentially a much bigger and more regular revenue stream to tap. For the consumer it is a cheaper option to buy many games and to play more of what you like.

richcz3
09-07-2004, 03:24 PM
good graphics does not make a game sell, As long as their is a market for good games with average graphics the number of games will still be fairly high. ......Very good point. That's the trapping of Hollywood movies. Excess Cg sans story or in this place game play.

The stakes for game development are huge with the upcoming consoles. Which horse do you bet on. I can't imagine there are any developers and publishers who aren't fretting at their available resources in time, cash, and talent. Not every game produced sells well. I see the dilution of quality at least in the first year after the new consoles are released. If some big bets tank at the outset, I expect more studio closures resulting in more outsourcing.


richcz3

PhilOsirus
09-07-2004, 04:27 PM
It's all ridiculous. There are more gamers than ever before around the world, hence more potential buyers, hence more games will be produced. PERIOD.

richcz3
09-07-2004, 06:38 PM
It's all ridiculous. There are more gamers than ever before around the world, hence more potential buyers, hence more games will be produced. PERIOD.Hmmm with the rash of game studios closing down, laying off and outsourcing in the past few months, it should be so easy to pump out titles because a percieved infinite number of game players out there? Since most games are still sold on retail shelves, you may want to look at the cost and politics of retail shelf space. Shelf space for Console and Computer games at the local stores here have shrunk. If the people don't see it, they can't buy it.

I don't know how well things are going in Canada economicaly, but our economy here in the states has been in a bit of a flat spin. Consoles and games are an impulse buy not a neccesity.


richcz3

CGTalk Moderation
01-19-2006, 04:00 AM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.