Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

What is Next-Gen?

Posted by Zonk on from the toaster-oven-console-action dept.

Rosethorn writes "IGN's Sci-Fi Brain has a weekly column covering relevant topics in video games as they relate to science fiction. This week TK-422 defines what it takes to create a 'next-generation' gaming experience. He examines some innovative games from the past, and looks at where innovation will come from in the future." From the article: "Contrary to popular belief, the ability to create more realistic and lifelike graphical environments doesn't always count as innovation. Next-generation graphics should not just rely on a console's or PC's ability to render better visuals. Next-generation graphics should permit players to become completely immersed in the universe that the developers have created for them."

10 of 75 comments (clear)

  1. Silly question... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Next gen is when I can afford it (~ $100 USD). :P

  2. DNF by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 4, Funny

    Duke Nukem Forever is next-gen. Always will...

    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
  3. six years ago... by scenestar · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The ps2 was considered next-gen.

    Next-gen is nothing but a fsckin buzzword.

    --
    perpetually dwelling in the -1 pits
  4. It's a trap! by jclast · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Next-generation graphics should permit players to become completely immersed in the universe that the developers have created for them.

    So next-gen gaming is all about whether I have a good enough imagination to become immersed in a game?

    Attention /. reader! You are being led astray! The true next generation is the Super Nintendo Entertainment System! It has games in which you will become immersed! Final Fantasy IV! Final Fantasy VI! Chrono Trigger! Abandon your XBOX 360s! The next generation of games technology isn't about technology at all!

    Games have always been about story. Technological generations aren't about immersion, they're about the technology. The machine doesn't make me feel. It does math and pushes it to my TV. Video game designers and writers immerse me in the game, not the console itself.

    --
    e2 | LJ
    1. Re:It's a trap! by caffeination · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Games have always been about story.
      I'm not flaming. I can tell you just weren't thinking about what you were saying. That you got modded up is slightly more disturbing.... anyway, onto my point, which I will give in list form:
      1. Pong
      2. Space Invaders
      3. Galaga
      4. Every racing game ever made with a few exceptions
      5. Every fighting game ever made
      6. Bishi Bashi
      7. Mario Party & Clones
      8. That's enough list items
      I'm fairly sure you're not generalising as much as your words themselves indicate, but then there is your use of the words "videogame writers", which makes me wonder if writers-as-in-authors have actually become that ubiquitous now.

      I'm sure we'd both agree, on developing the point further, that the immersion is found mostly in the gameplay, and fun gameplay is not tied to technological advances in the slightest.
  5. Eye of the Beholder by MyLongNickName · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Next-generation graphics should permit players to become completely immersed in the universe that the developers have created for them

    Well, a well designed text MUD could qualify by this definition. Different things float different peoples' boats. In some ways, text adventures have an advantage... energy can be put into building a world, with the user supplying the graphics (imagination).

    --
    See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
  6. Halo -- what about Goldeneye? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    From TFA: "Gameplay innovation could range from the original Halo's ability to create a playable first shooter experience on a console controller."

    It's been a while for me (and I'm basically a PC gamer)...but what about Goldeneye? iirc, that was a pretty "playable" experience for a lot of people. Maybe they mean the total package (and I still think Goldeneye was at least as good--Halo's main bonus here was online play, sort of), but when they elaborate down below:

    "Innovation: Console friendly controls for FPS games."

    Goldeneye was pretty sweet in this department...

    Maybe I'm just a jaded PC gamer who thinks Halo is oversold.

  7. Next Generation by dch24 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    From the article: Gameplay innovation could range from the original Halo's ability to create a playable first shooter experience on a console controller, to the creation of completely new genres such as the first RTS, FPS, or RPG.

    2001: Halo is released (XBOX)
    Innovation: Console friendly controls for FPS games.

    Okay, I'm not trying to start a flamewar here, but I wasn't that impressed by Halo's controls. Now, Splinter Cell on the other hand, had innovation in the way the controller was used. But "Console friendly controls"? 007 Goldeneye for N64 was a console friendly first person shooter. It doesn't matter whether you judge it by number of units sold, or that Goldeneye became the game packaged with the N64... Clearly, it was a Console Friendly FPS.

    Am I just missing something? Did somebody discover that Up-Up-Down-Down-Left-Right-Left-Right-A-B-A-B-Sele ct-Start worked in Halo? Because otherwise, I'm really confused...

  8. Definitely not graphics by ardor · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Graphics reached a "good enough" point. The next major breakthrough is likely to be real-time raytracing and/or real-time global illumination. Also, animation still sucks. Completely believable animation with real-time reactions to environmental changes and to player actions is still far off (it involves physics and AI too).

    An example: A guard patrols an area. You are hidden behind a wall, waiting for the right moment to sneak past the guard to the room's other side. Then, you accidentally hit a bucket. The guard hears the sound, and runs to investigate it. No problem so far, this can be done with premodeled animation sequences (walking, standing, running...)

    But then there is a rock on the ground. The guard hits it with his left foot. What happens? In real life, the guard would fall down. Now this is quite hard since the animation has to change in real-time. It involves physics (rock shape, amount of force, collision location...) and AI (since the animation has to change in a convincing manner, and this is achieved by letting an AI decide what to do next). This further leads to letting the guard stand up, checking himself if there are serious injuries etc. None of this is even remotely possible today.

    So, you want next-gen with "next-gen" being purely technical? Look for advanced animation.

    --
    This sig does not contain any SCO code.
  9. Next Gen Ideals vs. Reality by nick_davison · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "NextGen" sadly - whatever we might hope - doesn't mean anything other than a quantum step in graphics power.

    The author identifies three categories:
    1) Gameplay.
    2) Scope.
    3) Graphics.

    I'll use a simple question: If you added the feature to a game from say the early 90s, would you suddenly call it NextGen?

    Gameplay
    So we're playing Doom on the SNES. The author claims a great control scheme is what makes it work. Would adding Halo's controls to SNES Doom make it NextGen? I'm guessing most people would laugh at the idea.

    Scope
    The author says NextGen games should be bigger. Anyone remember Ultima 7? That thing was freaking huge. Morrowind was also huge. Both are from previous generations. Both are bigger than anything seen on future consoles, even in previews, with the exception of Oblivion. Take a small Ultima type game. Give it a massive game world with lots of cool things to do, you don't get NextGen Ultima, you get Ultima 7.

    Graphics
    Take a fairly typical console racer. Give it 720p graphics and nothing much else. That gets called NextGen pretty quickly. Take a basic beat-em-up and add 720p graphics, again, NextGen.

    We may want Next Gen to mean quantum increases across the board. We may feel a true "Next Gen" game should step up its game in every field not just shiny stuff. They're a whole bunch of nice ideals but the sad truth is, we're judged by our actions and our actions have us simply calling a quantum increase in graphics "NextGen" because it's the only thing that really needs the next generation of systems to be possible.

    Better music, better gameplay, bigger worlds, longer playtimes, [basic] physics systems, improved AI, better control schemes... These are all great things but none of them require the next generation of system - most of them can be done on the system before last (PS1) or even earlier.

    About the only thing that requires the next generation of systems are prettier visuals. It may feel empty, it may not suit our ideals, but, truth is, that's all NextGen really is.

    The only reason people question the "NextGen"ishness of some 360 launch titles is because, as with any new system, many of the launch titles are so inefficient they really aren't that quantum step up from the old one.