From what rumors I've read new consoles will be out in 2014-2015. This confuses me, do we really need the same console for 10 years? Did we really have THAT little technological advancement that a console can even last 10 years and not be outdated? No, that's not right. Consoles are outdated, that's why they need to bring new ones out. Most games are being made for PS3 and Xbox360 and are then ported to PC. It's because of this that a lot of games look worse than they should. PC's are currently far superior to consoles and had recent games been coded for PC's I'm sure they would have been more advanced. Consoles are holding back PC gaming, can you imagine still using DX9 in the year 2015? How many games will be released without DX tessellation if Skyrim doesn't even have it? Then again, it's just my opinion, you can think whatever the fuck you wanna think.
I'm sure there will be an announcement during this upcoming e3 and it'll come out soon afterward, if not, I'm surprised. I wonder how far along the WiiU has come, considering there has been no information since e3. I don't really care too too much because the 360 and PS3 have a little bit of life left in them, and MS wanted to push Kinect as a 'new platform'. Plus when I started going PC I almost entirely stopped playing with consoles.
From what I understand, the economic situation of the world is the reason its taken so long for new consoles, whatever, i enjoy cheap PC parts to play top notch games thanks to consoles holding everything back.
Do we really NEED new consoles? Do we really need to make the games prettier and look better? No, not really. I hate that everyone needs to have better and nicer graphics. We have already pretty neat graphics... I would really like to see new ways of gaming... new methods, new techniques.
this is funny, console gamer doesnt want to play any PC game on thier console while PC gamer want to play console game.. on thier pc. also most game already hit the graphic wall, they cant be any prettier then they already are... so not sure what you are talking about when you mention "holding back".... also PS2 was 8~9 years old before it become out dated... just saying.
Graphics wall? PC games are getting better and better looking, have you looked at The Witcher 2? BF3? Crysis 1 with mods or Crysis 2 with high def textures and DX11? Graphics are going to get better and more technical, there is no 'wall' that you speak of. Not sure what you mean by 'outdated' but Sony basically ditched most support of the PS2 when the PS3 came out in '06, and the PS2 came out in '00. Do the math.
http://games.ign.com/articles/121/1214789p1.html Spoiler With new handhelds coming out I don't companies want to sabotage them self's. Also not everyone has 700 hundred dollars to spend on a semi-casual basis.
Honestly, I have to agree with Jonez. My opinion is that the gameplay and/or story are what matters. I mean, yeah, HD graphics are awesome but not necessary. I'd rather play a game with a fucking bloody awesome story and gameplay and louzy graphics than the other way around. And this is also why I think new consoles aren't needed. And, to add something else here, I think gaming companies should really start thinking about reproducing/remaking old titles. That would be fantastic, old games with an improved gameplay, same story and better graphics. Alot of old timers would enjoy playing games like that on their console or PC
ha no. You're complaining about newer and prettier graphics, but do we really need motioncontrols? Do we really need new ways to play videogames? What's wrong with a normal controller with a dpad/joystick and buttons? And sorry, but that's such a nintendo fanboy thing to say. Before WiiU: "Pffft, who needs graphics anyway." WiiU was announced: "OMG ZELDA IN HD". Sure, gameplay is more important than graphics, but the eye wants some too.
As long as games can get shit done, I'm fine with it. Hell, I can't even wait to play Crash Bandicoot 3 again. I don't care whether it's old or outdated. It gets its shit done.
Agreed. But the thing is, a new console gets announced and they say now it is possible to play Zelda in HD. The HD demo looks fun to play. But I think you are misunderstanding my point here. Good graphics can be done WITHOUT HD. Like shredc0re says that the story must be good. And Akane, I understand your comment. But I think you are mistaken with the something. We fanboys DIDN'T asked for it but because of so many reviewers that gives Sony & Microsoft better points, because their games look "better", has get Nintendo to make a HD console. That was Nintendo's motivation. It wasn't the fans. Besides, how many games are better in HD then in SD? What fun do you loose when you play in SD? If graphics where so important why does the Wii AND the 3DS sell so well? They have worse graphics then their competition. What matters the most for me in the graphics department is the framerate. Do you want to play a beautiful game that lags every now and then? I am not trying to get everyone saying that graphics aren't important, because they are... if you can't see what something represents then well... the game is bad in my eyes. Improved graphics are fine but they shouldn't be they main point of improving. About those motion controls, there is nothing wrong with a standard controller. Why else does the Wii U table have those? And if there was something wrong with, why did Kinect and Sony Move appeared on the scene? My point is that people shouldn't judge a game by graphics alone. There is nothing wrong with playing a game that isn't as beautiful as the other ones. (Don't be mad at me. I am just trying to add my opinion at this debate ~) Agreed.
The main reason why Microsoft and Sony got better reviews is because of third-party support. This year is a really disappointing year for Nintendo because there's lack of it. There's almost no games, mind you. The PS2 lived longer compared to Wii. Why? Third-party support. While Nintendo may have had that, it's not as much as Micro and Sony has.
There was indeed a load of shovelware for the Wii & (3)DS. Nintendo has still the a similar politics since they started with the NES. It has to do with the video game crash of '83.
Exactly, EA even blamed nintendo wii for poor profits on certain games because such series's as madden
I'm sure you won't refuse to play a 3D game would you?? (Real 3D!! not the 3D common shaded games) Just imagine how it would like to play pokémon or final fantasy in 3D, it's my ultimate dream since I was like 7 years old, i didn't even know 3D exists of course, but i always imagined how it would be to see a pokémon next to you. Just imagine for one second you playing FFXII( if you know the game) in 3D, with awsome landscape graphics, 3D HD characters that you can fight at their side, (that's an example, just picture it with any of your favourite games) So HD graphics are awsome but not needed? what about somthing much more amazing than HD and experiences an new way of gameplaying? Don't you think that you would prefer a realistic HD image to the normal image resolution that is in our games now?(yes 1080p is excellent, but something better? yes we can ) I got a psp to play gba games on console, I never touch psp isos though they're available every where. T_T Envy was stronger than I -__-" , I wanted so badly to play gba on console U_u" .... stupid pokemons
Yeah, for 3D I would want that too, but it's different for normal games. But I guess that's just a matter of opinion.. To take your example. Pokemon! Those games are bloody awesome and you can't say they have HD graphics, now can you?
