Next-Gen Graphics Might Not Sell Games

jayintune writes "2old2play has a great editorial up regarding the next generation of gaming, and suggests that maybe 'next-gen' graphics and sound will not be what sells games this time around. Instead the next-gen champions will be the ones that provide better content and innovation in their games." From the article: "The average gamer is in their mid-thirties. Many of these adult gamers understand the value of a dollar and have a firm grasp on technological trends. The trend is simple: new technology arrives and costs a ton of money, then prices lower as newer technology hits the market. Developers are not screaming for larger removable disk capacity, yet Sony is forcing a consumer (and developer) to purchase a high capacity Blu-ray device 'for the future.' By the time Blu-ray and HD-DVD's are needed for gaming we will be in the 8th generation of console systems. Why force it on us now?"

Comments

Voice acting costs money

[tepples]

Well playing some DS/GBA games I am forced to ask myself when Nintendo will finally pull their games into 1990 and add some bloody speech. It is really a nice change to be able to just listen to your handheld rather then having to read slowly scrolling text.

It's not a technology problem, as even the GBA is perfectly capable of decoding GSM audio at 30 kbps. It's a content production problem. It costs Nintendo money to pay Charles Martinet to speak all of Mario's lines.

Frankly we hear this same discussion about graphics being less important then gameplay every console generation and everytime a new vidcard comes out. So far it doesn't seem to stop people buy the latest console or vidcard.

That's because the console makers stop making the older consoles and stop authorizing titles for them. There are no new NES, Super NES, N64, or Game Boy Color games being produced commercially, and among the three handhelds that Nintendo sells that can play Game Boy Advance games (GBA SPv2, Game Boy micro, Nintendo DS), only one can also play Game Boy Color games.

Re:And HD-DVD is different?

[iainl]

Except that, in practice, BluRay isn't better tech after all. They still haven't cracked commercial replication of dual-layer discs, and there's no prospect of it happening at an affordable price in the next twelve months.

Which leaves at least the first gen of discs stuck at 25Gb, wheras every HD-DVD film I've checked so far has been on a 30Gb disc. Also, DD+ hi-def or TrueHD lossless audio is only optional on BluRay (and Sony don't plan to use them, due to lack of space) wheras at hi-def audio support is mandatory.

BluRay has the theoretical design capability to catch up and overtake HD-DVD, but it's got to make itself look like the winner first, or it won't even get the chance. Meanwhile, nowhere I've checked has any Toshiba A1 players in stock, because they're selling out as fast as they can make them.