Discussion Forums > Gaming
Wii U
Gangster301:
If it's stronger than the PS3, I doubt it will play anything except Blu-ray. Unless, of course, they decide to go the PSP GO route and make every game downloadable and basically ruin the console before its release.
vicious796:
My real concern comes with the controller. Touch screen LCD? At least that's what I've heard so far. I've used enough touch screens in my life to know that's not gonna fly well and it's going to be f'ing expensive. I already think 50-60 for a controller is stupid, what'll that be? 75?
Sosseres:
--- Quote from: Khundes on April 17, 2011, 09:20:47 PM ---Other thing to consider is that we've reached a technological highpoint for which it is economically suicidal to aim higher then. Case in point no game taxes the PS3/XBox 360 to the limit, because it isn't worth it. The most demanding commercial game to date was still Crysis last I checked, and that was made a few years back.
--- End quote ---
A simple thing to push a console to the limit. Multiplayer. The more players, the more it pushes. They have all the textures, the network code, the tools. Everything is there for it, except the computing power. A simple example of this is Bad Company 2. The gameplay could easily support 64 players, yet the limit for PC is 32 and the limit for consoles 24 players. Battlefield 2142 which is a much older game has several servers still running at 64 players. A game such as Joint Operations has had over 200 players on at the same time (was great fun).
What you think is not pushing the envelope is them ramping back in some areas in order to ramp up in others.
edit
When places start saying things like "support for a massive 64 players" you know that the limiter is there all the time.
Not many of the newer FPS games give you that war feeling. They instead give a feeling of a skirmish. :/
TMRNetShark:
--- Quote from: Sosseres on April 20, 2011, 11:04:59 PM ---
--- Quote from: Khundes on April 17, 2011, 09:20:47 PM ---Other thing to consider is that we've reached a technological highpoint for which it is economically suicidal to aim higher then. Case in point no game taxes the PS3/XBox 360 to the limit, because it isn't worth it. The most demanding commercial game to date was still Crysis last I checked, and that was made a few years back.
--- End quote ---
A simple thing to push a console to the limit. Multiplayer. The more players, the more it pushes. They have all the textures, the network code, the tools. Everything is there for it, except the computing power. A simple example of this is Bad Company 2. The gameplay could easily support 64 players, yet the limit for PC is 32 and the limit for consoles 24 players. Battlefield 2142 which is a much older game has several servers still running at 64 players. A game such as Joint Operations has had over 200 players on at the same time (was great fun).
What you think is not pushing the envelope is them ramping back in some areas in order to ramp up in others.
edit
When places start saying things like "support for a massive 64 players" you know that the limiter is there all the time.
Not many of the newer FPS games give you that war feeling. They instead give a feeling of a skirmish. :/
--- End quote ---
I agree, multiplayer is something that is GREAT in games, but only if it's worked in properly. I don't see the real need to have 64 players in most games (Battlefield series needs it, but that's an exception) unless the gameplay dynamics play towards it. For example, you all remember the opening scenes to Star Wars Episode III, right? If not, it was just a big space battle that was erupting with dozens of battle cruisers and star ships. A 32 v 32 game with space battleships would be sweet as hell (Reason why games like Eve Online exist where hundreds of people battle), the only pitfall... lag. If one person's connection isn't up to snuff, everyone suffers. As latency times with internet become non-existent (where everyone in the world can get under 30 ms to and from any point in the world) we can then have massive 100 vs 100 matches and war in videogames can become a reality.
fohfoh:
More powerful than Xbox360 or PS3 means nothing to me. PS2 was the shit. Both aforementioned consoles were also units that spec wise blew the pants off the PS2. I found many games moreso than the PSX and PS2 era lacking in soul and focusing on superficial things like graphics. Don't get me wrong... I like graphics. But overall, it felt like the soul of gaming went into hibernation.
I would hate a touchscreen controller. No feeling IMO. Amalgamate the two, there's a possibility there... but not solely touchscreen.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version