Post by: recoba on July 09, 2003, 09:52:30 AM
Same with Zelda on N64 and the new system etc.
So on the new gamecube does anyone see anything revolutionary happening for games like mario metroid zelda etc?? Or will there just be a barely marginal improvement in graphics etc, like is the case with the N64 and gamecube?
Post by: steve on July 09, 2003, 02:44:39 PM
Post by: ThePerm on July 09, 2003, 08:35:26 PM
There is so much power behind the system that you should have ebnough power to make all games look beutiful. But how do you program several games that all look pretty without spending a gazillian man hours writing the code?
You use the same bloody engine!
Huh? Ok, you know you wonder why alot of people have never used the same engine traditionally. Well the answer is quite simple. Different Genres push hardware differently. Lets take a fighting game for instance and compare it to a platformer game. Fighting games are known for having models with insane number of polygons and high detail textures on the charactyers. But whats this? The levels usually look like crap. Now we look at a platformer. The charactyer has adequate polygons. The character doesnt look bad..he just dopesnt look as good as he does in themanual..he's just not as detailed or smooth. The water looks good, but the levels don't have great textures. You of coarse know which game im talking about. What these games are doing is trying to make a balance. They dont want terrible pop up and they want it to run at a decent framerate. Some sacrifices had to be made.
now with a next gen system these sacrifices dont need to be mnade. You could program one breathtaking 3d engine and use it for all games. The only thing you would need to do is change the controls, rules, and physics. The game uses relatively the same code but appears to the gamer to be a completely different universe.
another thign that will save time is using the same textures in some games, and some of the same objects and models. With a realistic game and anotjher realistc game a brick texture will always look like a brick texture. Solution use the same brick texture. f coarse the levels will be different, but some things that are inside them may be the same. Also say you want a breakable pot in one game, and you need another in another game. use the same pot.
also, lets look at this generation. There are alot of models that can be carried over from this generation to the next. with n64 the models were too low poly gon..to blury..to be used again. Alot of models are refined now and can be re-used. Also fmvs....it will be possible for someone like say Square Enix to take a model from say Final Fantasy 9's fmvs and insert them into a game.
anyonbe who thinks it will be more difficult to dev games in the future is not thinking Frugally. If anythign costs will shrink because the resources will double. Optimization will be less important.
Post by: KDR_11k on July 09, 2003, 09:43:56 PM
Seriously, if say, EA, produces an engine they spend thousands of USD on, they aren't going to share it with anyone outside EA. In fact, nothing will be shared between different dev houses.
The systems definitely won't push hipoly models like those in CG movies, but characters with the detail of a fighting game char will become possible in more and more genres. You barely need more, using more polies (or even normal maps) also means more dev time. Hm, I think I'll try modeling an 8-10k char once...
Post by: ThePerm on July 09, 2003, 10:00:45 PM
heres an example Nintendo makes an engine
Nintendo uses this engine for Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Star fox, F-zero, Pikmin 3, Earth bound, Super Smash Bros 3, Fire Emblem, Wars, etc. Or whatever else. Thier doping a similar thing now. Nintendo always used to program their own engines..but as of now their using middle-ware(alias wavefront) soemthign theyve never done before(may also be the reason why Ninty aint pushing systems liek we expect..but its cheaper and faster)
anyways if people like midway or acclaim were smart they would make one super powerful engine(i mean their own custom engine..you know THE MIDWAY ENGINE and the ACCLAM engine written in assemby language with tons of effects that contains alot of customization and really pushes the system. To do this..what you could do is instead
of dividing all your programmers into several different games(spreading yourself thin)
you put them together and make an engine team. When the engine is awesome and super...then you divide them again so that they can make modifications on each individual game.
also you take that 8-10 polygon character and change his face and his clothes al ittle..even just its hair color...its a different character. Take the resident evil models for Barry and Chris..their exactly alike except ones stomach and face has been stretched. Theres and added beard..and the textures have only been slightly modified from green to red.
there is also a reaosn why i mention final fantasy 9..their not so realistic liek the fmv's in ten but their reasonable...the characters arent too high poly...more processing power was spent on making the effects then the models. Also Toy Story 1 and 2 could be done on next generation systems in real time thanks to shaders and the ability to push more poly's (see half life 2 engine demonstaration on file planet..its using the same type of technology in real time and looks alot better) Now somehting like final fantasy 10's fmvs or final fantasy the movies(damn square and their amazing cg) could not be done. But when you look at things like the toy story movies and think about how graphics will be comparable to that(real phot realism...not buzzword photrealism) then you will realise that we have finally reached a pinacle.
if atari/oddysee/coleco/etc were the start of the 2d era followed by nes/sms and then followed by snes and genesis. Then n64 was the atari age(things are 3d shit), gcn/ps2/xbx(things look alot better), refinement or at least the stretch is one step before reifnement.
Post by: Grey Ninja on July 10, 2003, 01:44:41 AM
Anyways, you bring up a good point, and I agree with you whole heartedly. There really isn't a good reason for upgrading the consoles yet, as the ONLY improvement we are likely to see will be an improvement in graphics. yay. I personally am happy with the GameCube. The graphics look nice, and the console can do just about anything in terms of gameplay. You can make any sort of game that you want at this moment in time. Changing consoles right now is only going to set the industry back, as they will have to write new code, and will have less time to innovate as they will be learning about new hardware.
Nevertheless, changing consoles in 2005 is the smart thing to do from a marketting perspective, as there are millions of idiots out there who only care about graphics. It's truly sad, but it's the truth.
Post by: Uncle Rich AiAi on July 10, 2003, 04:45:29 AM
My latest PC Gamer magazine had an interesting quote from John Carmack:
"There's a real chance the next-generation rendering engine will be a stable, mature technology that lasts for a long time. Programmers will move from being engine coders to technical director in the Pixar style."
Hmmmmmmmmm....did he talk himself out of a job after Doom III?
Post by: ThePerm on July 10, 2003, 01:09:44 PM
For every game all the little things that you were unable to do in other games that you can do in newer games are things that really intrigue me. Have you ever played a game and saw somethign in the level that would solve your puzzle three times faster then that what was the actual coarse of solving the puzzle? Well i hope some games will have that and allow you to solve the same puzzle in multiple ways...logically.
Post by: kennyb27 on July 10, 2003, 06:52:49 PM
"if atari/oddysee/coleco/etc were the start of the 2d era followed by nes/sms and then followed by snes and genesis. Then n64 was the atari age(things are 3d), gcn/ps2/xbx(things look alot better), refinement or at least the stretch is one step before reifnement. "
Then what? I mean, the obvious step from 2D was 3D. But following the next generation of hardware, (assuming the industry doesn't crash) what would be next?
Ah, well, just a thought.
Post by: ThePerm on July 10, 2003, 08:57:07 PM
PS2 is seriously underpowered...but because there are more ps2 owners most the games are made on ps2 and then ported. They remain looking like trash. This holds back gamecube and xbox. Next gen your going to have 3 systems with equal(indistinguishable differences) power.
I can see the next generation lasting for a very long time...but whats next you ask? Online, connectability, editability(games that let you make your own games). It is very important that the next generation consoles will be expandable. By virtue of the power of the systems i cant see any of the three going under. You could always devlop a megahit with advertising and a new gimmick to bring the console back if there was any problems. Price will go down too, but i think it will be a while before new consoles replaces these next sets(damn im talking about a generation after the next..damn it must stop)
but what im thinking is these new consoles will last a long time and peripherals and software will drive them.
Post by: greenwisher on July 11, 2003, 08:18:32 PM
Perm, I agree that software will be a huge issue. Like it's not already. But peripherals? By that are you thinking hardware expansion or interactivity/connectivity hardware? I miss some of the goofy stuff nintendo used to come out with for hardware. What happened to my light gun? & "ROB"- Bring him back N! Back in some crazy way...like he plugs into a port and plays multiplayer games as another player making sick comments while he kicks your @ss around the screen. :-D
Post by: KDR_11k on July 11, 2003, 10:59:29 PM
Post by: HolyPaladin on July 12, 2003, 10:11:15 AM
Post by: ThePerm on July 12, 2003, 11:36:20 AM
hopefully all ocnsoles next gen will have a hard drive. With a hard drive you can do much more with level saves and it gives you the rewriteability that 64dd promised.
Post by: Uncle Rich AiAi on July 13, 2003, 03:37:55 AM
Post by: ThePerm on July 13, 2003, 10:02:41 AM
Post by: Nintendo Gamecube on July 13, 2003, 07:22:00 PM
Imagine playing a 1000 level Mario 2D game....Each with unique and logical puzzles....Just imagine the hours of gaming you could spend on one game. Developing would be easier cuz the graphics are 2D...Viewtiful Joe could be used as an example (but that is still 3D in one sense).
I purely look for gameply in a game. I could give a rats ass about graphics. Imagine playing a 128 player network of Doom (or any other FPS) in 2D graphics. Imagine having a roryal rumble in a wrestling game with 30 wrestlers. I really hope some developer out there can grasp the idea that more polygons does not equal great games.
Post by: ThePerm on July 13, 2003, 10:46:08 PM
imagien that 2d mario looking all snazzy with graphoics liek thta...you could justify being 2d because the graphics would be so damn sick(i love 2d, but the mainstream hates it, if the graphics were like ultra they would love it) In fact if you pushed it i bet the mainstream would think 3d mario was a failure mistake(even though it sold a gazillion coppies) and that that oldskool was dee kool and teh nooskool is dee bomb...
la manistarema isa de fikala
Post by: Nintendo Gamecube on July 14, 2003, 08:40:36 AM
And being one who knows so much about this topic...it could be possible to make a 100 level 2D Mario game on the next gen of consoles, right?
Post by: ThePerm on July 15, 2003, 08:22:29 AM
Post by: Round Eye on July 25, 2003, 07:06:09 AM
A 2D online multiplayer battle game would be so cool, with a top down view like Xenphobe and a bunch of different weapons. With a houndred + people running around, you could do actual war sims and have huge battles. Man the untapped potential of 2D running on a powerfull console is underused to the MAX. Hopefully games like VJ and MARIO128 will bring back a resurgance of creative 2D.
